Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09/03/2013
v1an1Vuu City Council Agenda Tuesday, September 3, 2013 6:30 p.m. - Regular Meeting Diamond Bar City Hall Windmill Room, First Floor 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Jack Tanaka Ron Everett Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Ling -Ling Chang Carol Herrera Steve Tye Council Member Council Member Council Member City Manager James DeStefano City Attorney David DeBerry City Clerk Tommye Cribbins Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Office of the City Clerk, and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please contact the City Clerk at (909) 839-7010 during regular business hours. In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title 11 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or accommodation (s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting, must inform the City Clerk a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Have online access? City Council Agendas are now available on the City of Diamond Bar's web site at www.CityofDiamondBar.com Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking in the Council Chambers. The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper and encourages you to do the same. THIS MEETING IS BEING VIDEOTAPED FOR REBROADCAST ON THE CITY'S GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL AND WEBSITE, BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TELEVISED, THIS MEETING WILL BE REBROADCAST EVERY SATURDAY AND SUNDAY AT 9:00 A.M. AND TUESDAYS AT 8:00 P.M. ON TIME -WARNER CABLE CHANNEL 3, VERIZON FIOS TELEVISON CHANNEL 47, AND AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING VIA ARCHIVED STREAMING VIDEO ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE WWW.DIAMONDBARCA.GOV CITY OF DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA September 3, 2013 CALL TO ORDER: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION: ROLL CALL: APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Next Resolution No. 2013-28 Next Ordinance No. 06(2013) 6:30 p.m. Mayor Pastor Mark Hopper, Evangelical Free Church Council Members Chang, Herrera, Tye, Mayor Pro Tem Everett, Mayor Tanaka Mayor SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS: NEW BUSINESS OF THE MONTH: 1.1 Presentation of Certificate Plaque to Grand Army-Navy Surplus, 1139 Grand Avenue, as New Business of the Month, September, 2013. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time reserved on each regular meeting agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the Council on Consent Calendar items or matters of interest to the public that are not already scheduled for consideration on this agenda. Although the City Council values your comments, pursuant to the Brown Act, the Council generally cannot take any action on items not listed on the posted agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and -give it to the City Clerk completion of this form is voluntary). There is a five-minute maximum time limit Written materials distributed to the City Council within 72 hours of the City Council meeting are available for public inspection immediately upon distribution in the City Clerk's Office at 21810 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California, during normal business hours. September 3, 2013 PAGE 2 when addressing the City Council. 4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT: Under the Brown Act, members of the City Council may briefly respond to public comments but no extended discussion and no action on such matters may take place. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 Diamond Bar Day at the Los Angeles County Fair — September 5, 2013 — Los Angeles County Fair Grounds in Pomona. 5.2 Planning Commission Meeting — September 10, 2013 — 7:00 p.m., Windmill Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive. 5.3 Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting — September 12, 2013 — 7:00 p.m., Windmill Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive. 5.4 City Council Meeting — September 17, 2013 — 6:30 p.m., Windmill Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.1 City Council Minutes: (a) Study Session of August 20, 2013 — Approve as submitted. (b) Regular Meeting of August 20, 2013 — Approve as submitted 6.2 Planning Commission Minutes: (a) Study Session of June 25, 2013 — Receive and File. (b) Regular Meeting of June 25, 2013 — Receive and File. 6.3 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes (a) Regular Meeting of May 23, 2013 — Receive and File. (b) Regular Meeting of June 27, 2013 — Receive and File. 6.4 Treasurer's Statement — July, 2013. Recommended Action: Approve. Requested by: Finance Department September 3, 2013 PAGE 3 6.5 Approval of Contract with Regional Chamber of Commerce—San Gabriel Valley for FY 2013-14 in an Amount Not -to -Exceed $12,000. Recommended Action: Approve. Requested by: City Manager 6.6 Award of Contract with Geronimo Concrete, Inc. for the Construction of the Pantera Dog Park ADA Access Improvement Project in the Amount of $37,200, Plus a Contingency of $3,720 (10%) for a Total Authorization of $40,920; Plus Appropriate $23,000 from General Fund Reserves to Fund the Construction of the Staircase ($7,000), Contingency ($3,720), Plan Check/inspection Services ($5,000), and Costs For the Installation of the Shade Shelters ($7,280). Recommended Action: Award and Appropriate Funds. Requested by: Community Services Department PUBLIC HEARINGS: 6:45 p.m., or as soon thereafter as matters may be heard. 7.1 2008-2014 Housing Element Implementation — Proposed Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL 2013-227). (a) Resolution No: 2013 -XX: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California, Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2012061066), Approving the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Adopting Findings of Fact for the. Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project, Affecting an Area Comprised of Approximately 30 Acres Generally Located Along the West Side, of Chino Hills Parkway South of its Intersection with Diamond Ranch Road/Scenic Ridge Drive, and South of the SR -60 Freeway and Diamond Ranch High School (Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022-273). (b) Resolution No. 2013 -XX: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California, Adopting a General Plan Amendment for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013-227) on Property Located West of Chino Hills Parkway, South of Diamond Ranch High School, Diamond Bar, California (Easterly Portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022-273). September 3, 2013 PAGE 4 (c) Ordinance No. 0X(2013): An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Approving Amendments to the Development Code and Official Zoning Map for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013-227) on Property Located West of Chino Hills Parkway, South of Diamond Ranch High School, Diamond Bar, California (Easterly Portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022-273). (d) Urgency Ordinance No. 0X(2013): An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Approving Amendments to the Development Code and Official Zoning Map for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013- 227) on Property Located West of Chino Hills Parkway, South of Diamond Ranch High School, Diamond Bar, California (Easterly Portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022-273). Recommended Action: Receive Staff's Report, Open Public Hearing, Receive Testimony, Close the Public Hearing, Discuss, and Take the Following Actions: (a) Adopt Resolution No: 2013 -XX: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California, Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2012061066), Approving the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Adopting Findings of Fact for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project, Affecting an Area Comprised of Approximately 30 Acres Generally Located Along the West Side, of Chino Hills Parkway South of its Intersection with Diamond Ranch Road/Scenic Ridge Drive, and South of the SR -60 Freeway and Diamond Ranch High School (Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022-273). (b) Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -XX: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California, Adopting a General Plan Amendment for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013-227) on Property Located West of Chino Hills Parkway, South of Diamond Ranch High School, Diamond Bar, California (Easterly Portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022-273). (c) First Reading by Title Only, Waive Full Reading of Ordinance No. 0X(2013): An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Approving Amendments to the Development Code and Official Zoning Map for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013-227) on Property Located West of Chino Hills Parkway, South of Diamond Ranch High School, Diamond Bar, California (Easterly Portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022-273). September 3, 2013 PAGE 5 (d) Adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 0X(2013): An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Approving Amendments to the Development Code and Official Zoning Map for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013- 227) on Property Located West of Chino Hills Parkway, South of Diamond Ranch High School, Diamond Bar, California (Easterly Portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022-273). Requested by: Community Development Department 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: 8.1 Adopt Ordinance No. 03(A) (2013): Identifying the Location of Regular Meetings of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Amending Ordinance No. 03(2013). Recommended Action: Adopt. Requested by: City Clerk 9. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS: 10. ADJOURNMENT: CITY OF DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AUGUST 20, 2013 Agenda No. 6.1 (a) DR,4F STUDY SESSION: M/Tanaka called the Study Session to order at 5:30 p.m. in the Diamond Bar City Hall Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Present: Council Members Ling -Ling Chang, Carol Herrera, Steve Tye, Mayor Pro Tem Ron Everett, and Mayor Jack Tanaka. Staff Present: James DeStefano, City Manager; David Doyle, Assistant City Manager; David DeBerry, City Attorney; Dianna Honeywell, Finance Director; David Liu, Public Works Director; Bob Rose, Community Service Director; Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Ryan McLean, Assistant to the City Manager; Kimberly Young, Associate Engineer; Ken Desforges, IT Director; Alfredo Estevez, IS Help Desk Support Technician, and Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk. ► TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM UPDATE CM/DeStefano reported that it has been a couple of years since staff updated the City Council on its traffic management system. City Hall has been in the new building for about a year and a half and after this presentation, Council will be introduced to the Traffic Management Center within City Hall. PWD/Liu introduced Erlan Gomez, Transcore; Ben Chan, KOA; and, Christian Malpica, Associate Engineer (Traffic) who operates the City's Traffic Management Center. He stated that the purpose of the Traffic Management System is to provide remote communication between traffic signals at major arterials and the City's Traffic Management System (TMS). This system is operated by managing the TMS, upgrading the system and managing the demand on the TMS. There are four major objectives that staff attempts to adhere to: 1) staff understands Diamond Bar and the system is intended to minimize the delays for residents entering the arterials; 2) maximize traffic flow from the arterials; 3) maximize safety for pedestrians and motorists that travel through the City and, 4) try to improve response times to address signal malfunctions to reduce maintenance costs. The TMS allows staff to observe all of the signal operations in real time while attacking the problems to address the issues proactively; the system allows staff to review signal operation history through the diagnostic tools built into the system; make changes to the signal timings to accommodate traffic flow based on field conditions; and, when there are special events or incidents the system allows staff to stay ahead of the curve. Housed in the Traffic Management Center is the central computer with monitors and traffic control software that brings up the entire system. In the field are the traffic signal controls, firmware and cameras which are all tied back to the TMC through underground infrastructure/interconnect. All of the components of the system are interconnected and function as a unit. The system uses closed circuit TV cameras (CCTV cameras) which have the capability to pan, tilt, and zoom on a 360 degree basis. These are the traffic "eyes" of the system. The system also AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 2 CC STUDY SESSION uses Video Detection Cameras which are fixed location cameras that are used for detection purposes only. There are 16 locations throughout the City which include critical intersections that have large traffic volumes or are in close proximity to schools. The interconnect system lies under major arterials throughout the City. The cabinets contain TV monitors under which sits the controller, two tiers of detection centers, the battery backup system and switches and relays. Battery backup systems are at a total of 19 locations at this time. The TMC also contains a video board with eight video displays which were incorporated when City Hall moved to its present location. Daily operations at the TMC include reviewing the system logs to verify the signal operations in order to respond to timing complaints and operational issues. Staff wants to be responsive and feels it is best to do so by making sure that all data is reviewed on a regular basis and that the mitigation makes sense. Staff is also able to observe traffic flow during City Hall work hours through CCTV and the video detection cameras. Some of the most recent improvements and accomplishments include an almost seamless move from AQMD to the TMC video wall at City Hall and the City's ability to connect to the countywide exchange network, a critical component. By being part of the IEN the City is able to exchange data with participating agencies to enable countywide responses to major events. To date, only about 14 or 15 cities are on the system and the County hopes to see more cities participate. From the beginning staff has worked with the County and taken a very proactive approach with respect to how it sees itself within the regional picture. A few weeks ago the City received word from MTA that it would receive a little over $1.4 million in Fiscal Year 2015-16 to develop and implement an adaptive control system which is significant because no other cities the size of Diamond Bar have this technology. Diamond Bar is unique because it deals with regional freeway traffic. An Adaptive Control System is simply designed to work on auto pilot and respond instantaneously to changing conditions. As a result, many more sensors will be required to be placed in the pavements and cameras. This system does not require specific time plans. It is a "smart" system that monitors everything second by second. For the next couple of years Diamond Bar has a Traffic Responsive System that will be implemented within the next month which will, through pre -determined timing plans, provide a view of the City's three corridors, Grand Avenue, Golden Springs and Diamond Bar Boulevard. Those three corridors will be divided into five sections so that within any given section three specific timing plans will be developed. When a major incident occurs that closes the freeway and spills traffic onto Brea Canyon, for example, there will be a surge of traffic going north on Diamond Bar Boulevard and the system will have established certain thresholds. When those thresholds are met, everything along Diamond Bar Boulevard between Brea Canyon Road and Grand Avenue will be affected by timing that favors northbound traffic and northbound traffic will be given preferential treatment to get through the City to their destinations. AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 3 CC STUDY SESSION Residential neighborhoods will suffer during the surge but it will provide a means to more quickly move traffic out of the City and restore residential traffic flow. In developing the Traffic Responsive System, Diamond Bar Boulevard will be broken up into two sections, Golden Springs Drive will be broken up into two sections and Grand Avenue, because of the uniqueness of the location, will have only one Traffic Responsive System section to balance the traffic volumes. Since all legs of traffic will be affected, one cannot be favored over another and the system will be fine tuned to make sure that ultimately, the City's traffic response plans will be assisting and facilitating the circulation of freeway traffic. In September the Traffic Responsive Plan will be implemented and a few years later the Traffic Responsive System will be installed. When it comes to an adaptive traffic control system, this system is instantaneous and requires only one timing cycle with each timing change versus the Traffic Responsive Plan. Once the thresholds have been met it will take two or three timing cycles before the timing plans are implemented. Some of the ongoing/current improvements to the Traffic Management System include installation of 16 CCTV's, equipping 19 intersections with Battery Backup Systems and during the current FY 15 more locations will be added. As part of the CIP for this year, traffic signal upgrades will be implemented such as updating the wiring, cable, conduits, etc. As a result of next month's implementation of the Traffic Signal Operation Maintenance Plan, upgrades will be looked at very comprehensively so that staff can determine deficiencies and how to maintain all of the necessary parts of the system to make sure the City's Traffic Management System continues to provide the City continued assistance and continue the lifecycle of the City's assets. PWD/Liu talked about recent accomplishments and stated that staff was able to work with Caltrans to install communication units within their controllers and although they do not communicate with local cities, they will be looking to connect with the County and later with the IEN to share data so that the City will be able to closely monitor their data to facilitate local traffic management, especially when a freeway incident occurs. In addition, staff was contacted by the County of Los Angeles to see if the City wanted to be involved in the establishment of an incident management protocol involving CHP and the County Sheriff's Department. Ultimately, the goal is to get all cities along the freeway corridors to discuss what this protocol will look like and how the communication channels will be established. In FY 2016/17 the City expects to receive $1.4 million to use toward the implementation of the Adaptive Traffic Control System. Beginning the next fiscal year, staff will make sure that the City's ongoing investments are upgraded to preserve the equipment infrastructure lifecycle. In summary, staff would like the Council to understand that the City's Traffic Management System enhances the AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 4 CC STUDY SESSION City's mobility and has improved staffs efficiency on a daily basis. Staff understands that public safety is the Council's top priority and with that understanding, attempts to be timely in responding to all requests and incidents with ongoing efforts to minimize traffic delays and congestion to preserve the residents quality of life. Of course, regional traffic issues continue to be a major challenge and the City continues to work with all stakeholders including the County and the State toward continuing improvement. Staff hopes to demonstrate that this is an essential investment for the City and staff recommends and appreciates Council's support in these efforts. MPT/Everett asked what battery backup meant and whether it provided full function capabilities. PWD/Liu responded that when a signalized intersection experiences a power outage the battery backup system kicks in and provides the power to continue the full function of the traffic signal. Generally, to maintain the energy needed to maintain a fully operational traffic signal, the battery backup system will provide about five hours of fully operational traffic signal work with another five hours of red flashing. If the power outage lasts more than 10 hours the system goes dark. MPT/Everett asked how many of the 14 cities involved with IEN are neighboring cities to Diamond Bar and are either making a difference or will make a difference once the City is interacting with them. PWD/Liu responded that currently, Pomona has been connected as long as Diamond Bar has been connected. Another is the unincorporated portion of LA County and the City of Industry is in the pipeline waiting to be connected. MPT/Everett asked if there was a benefit to being connected with Pomona, the County and Industry or is the system still under design with so many variables a benefit cannot be determined at this time. PWD/Liu responded that the County is a bit frustrated because they do not have many players in the system. However, the IEN has been around for about 10 years and unfortunately, when it comes to local jurisdictions, Diamond Bar is one of the few cities that believed from the beginning that because the City understands its traffic issues it needs to look at these issues from a regional perspective. The City decided early on that it is better to be part of the system and have the opportunity to share and exchange data. It takes only one major incident for the City to regret not being part of the system. Remember that the County is looking to get Caltrans to join because Caltrans has their own system. The ultimate goal is that if Caltrans can become part of the IEN it will definitely benefit Diamond Bar because then staff will be able to review the Caltrans data. AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 5 CC STUDY SESSION C/Chang said she really liked the chart comparing the Traffic Responsive System versus the Adaptive Traffic Control System. She suggested adding a third column to compare it to the City's current system to update the City on how the current system is currently monitoring, how fast the sensors work, what is the response time, etc. PWD/Liu said that in September staff will be implementing the Traffic Responsive Plan which is an "incident" management tool and the only time that TRP would be activated would be with a "surge' of traffic when there is a traffic or major incident along one of the City's major arterials so it will be a case by case depending on the type of accident. For each of these plans to be actuated the minimum traffic volume threshold would have to be met. On a day to day basis, time plans are implemented based on the time of day. For example, at any given traffic signal in the City there are three preset timing plans: For the AM peak hours (6:00 to 9:00 a.m.), the PM Hours and noontime depending on traffic conditions at each leg. On the weekends, the signals are not necessarily on a preset timing plan. C/Chang said she looked forward to implementation of the Adaptive Traffic Control System once the grant is forthcoming. C/Tye wanted to know how staff decides where to put the CCTV cameras. For example, why would a CCTV camera be placed at Diamond Bar Boulevard and Sugar Pine rather than Cold Springs or Fountain Springs which is a signal that controls the shopping center on one side and homes on the other side? When Cold Springs flashes red traffic backs up all the way to the freeway for northbound traffic. When Fountain Springs flashes red, it is a problem. PWD/Liu said that was one of his questions when staff recommended the locations. Part of the answer is the question "location." It is a mid -point between Brea Canyon Road and Pathfinder. Cameras can pan, tilt and zoom so ideally, locations are determined to take advantage of the eye for the conditions that are being monitored which is one of the key factors. Also, the topography or curvature of the roadway is a consideration because if you pick the wrong intersection and roadway the camera capabilities are lost. Sugar Pine allows the capture of data from and in both directions and sides. C/Tye said that the response to the red flashing this weekend was that the system did not recognize it because there was "conflicting timing phases." He asked what would happen if glitches were fixed over time and finally it was determined that conflicting timing phases is a problem. The system could be programmed so that it would not be a problem in the future. AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 6 CC STUDY SESSION PWD/Liu responded that C/Tye's observation is pretty close. Part of what happened in this weekend's incident was that the computer was sensing there were cars waiting in the left turn pocket. At the same time another timing phase came up on the computer that allowed through traffic, so as a failsafe because this would create issues, the system shut everything down to avoid a possible conflict in order to protect the City from potential liability issues. It could also be due to physical conditions of some of the equipment because in this example there is no history. Through this process staff wants to be able to zero in to make sure that whatever is ultimately decided, .it is the right decision. On Monday, PWD/Liu asked how many communication failures the City had experienced to date and discovered that it had been a handful. The paging alert system gives two alerts only, red flashes and when the battery backup system is activated. Because of the weekend example, staff's immediate concern is to look into the matter and ultimately determine whether the City could work with Transcore to add the communication loss feature into the paging system, which can be done. Ultimately, additional alerts can be sent to staff once it is determined that it is an efficient use of resources. C/Tye said that emphasis is on Grand Avenue and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Grand Avenue and Golden Springs Drive, and Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard and everyone knows when they are in traffic in the morning and evening those are definitely areas that are impacted, especially by freeway traffic. One that drives him crazy is Diamond Bar Boulevard and Mountain Laurel Drive now that school is back in session. When it takes three or four phases to get through a signal it makes him think there has to be a traffic signal solution for that area. PWD/Liu responded that staff has been looking at that intersection for the past three years. One recommendation was to eliminate the crosswalk at the north leg to give more time to south bound traffic so that kids could use only the south leg to cross Diamond Bar Boulevard. Staff continues to look at options but ultimately, it is a choke point and in terms of drivers entering and leaving the school area there are other options. For whatever reason, most individuals prefer to use Mountain Laurel. ClTye said his thought would be to make it like the area at Lorbeer where there is no right turn on red between specific hours. What if the City installed a "no right turn" at all to move traffic to Maple Hill. PWD/Liu responded that it was an option. The City would have to work with all of the residents and force parents and school administrators to convey the need. Ben Chan, KOA said that unfortunately the problem is that there is not enough green time on Diamond Bar Boulevard it is when they make the turn to drop off the kids the cars are actually backed up to Diamond Bar Boulevard. His AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 7 CC STUDY SESSION suggestion was to lengthen the right turn lane to stack more traffic. With a short right turn a surge of traffic leaves cars stranded on the through lane. C/Tye said that people are using that lane whether it is legal or not. Traffic is backing up and blocking traffic into the condos which is a quarter of a mile further north. He agreed that there were too many cars in too short of a time and space and one of the things he asked Dr. Taylor when he met with him a couple of weeks ago for ideas about improvements the City would like to see, he told Dr. Taylor that if there was anything he could do to start school later (in the morning) it would be ideal and Dr. Taylor is thinking about that suggestion. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered. RECESSED: M/Tanaka recessed the Study Session at 6:15 p.m. for a site visit the Traffic Management Room. RECONVENED: Mayor Tanaka reconvened the meeting at 6:17 p.m. to the Traffic Management Center. AE/Malpica-Perez went on to provide the City Council and guests with a demonstration of how the Traffic Management System works. AE/Malpica-Perez identified the hardware such as the cameras used in different locations as well as the workstations and what is displayed from each one. He also showed how he can go back and access a systems log showing what occurred at a specific intersection at any time. He further stated that he can look at what is happening on the freeway and if need be make adjustments to the signals in the City if a traffic problem arises. PWD/Liu stated that if a problem arises after hours, both he and Christian receive information through e-mails and can, from their homes, access the system and make any necessary adjustments. C/Herrera asked what happens when there is a power failure at City Hall does that affect what goes on in the streets. PWD/Liu stated that City Hall has a battery back-up system and therefore we still have the ability to continue to monitor and make adjustments as needed. Resident, Jack Shah, asked how long the videos are kept and could residents if in an accident come in and request a copy of the video. AE/Malpica-Perez stated that the City does not video tape and that the data is kept here for 3 months then sent to Transcore where it is kept for 2 years. AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 8 CC STUDY SESSION ADJOURNMENT: With no other questions asked, M/Tanaka recessed the Study Session at 6:27 p.m. to the regular City Council meeting. TOMMYE CRIBBINS, City Clerk The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of 2013. Jack Tanaka, Mayor Agenda No. 6.1(b) MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AUGUST 20, 2013 STUDY SESSION: 5:30 p.m., Windmill Room @M)WY 10. Traffic Management System Update Public Comments: None Offered Study Session recessed to Traffic Management Center at 6:15 p.m. Returned to the Windmill Room at 6:28 p.m., and Recessed the Study Session to the Regular City Council Meeting. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jack Tanaka called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Windmill Room, Diamond Bar City Hall, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Tanaka led the Pledge of Allegiance. INVOCATION: Anwar Haq provided the Invocation for Dr. Sakr, Islamic Education Center. ROLL CALL: Council Member Chang, Herrera, Tye, Mayor Pro Tem Everett and Mayor Tanaka. Staff Present: James DeStefano, City Manager; David Doyle, Assistant City Manager; David DeBerry, City Attorney; Dianna Honeywell, Finance Director; Amy Haug, Human Resources Manager; Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; David Liu, Public Works Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Ken Desforges, IT Director; Ryan McLean, Assistant to the City Manager; Kimberly Young, Associate Engineer; Alfredo Estevez, IS Help Desk Support Technician; Cecilia Arellano, Public Information Coordinator, and Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented. 1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS: 1.1 MPT/Everett presented a City Tile to Outgoing Planning Commissioner Steve Nelson. Mr. Nelson stated that he appreciated the recognition for his community service and enjoyed working with his fellow commissioners and City Staff. 2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 CM/DeStefano introduced new City employee Amy Haug who will serve the City as its Human Resources Manager. Amy comes to Diamond Bar from the City of Riverside and has many years of service and expertise in AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL both the public and private sector. HRM/Haug has been with the City for about two weeks and will provide a number of services to the organization and employees including employee benefits, recruitment, selection, training and development, etc. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Pui-Ching Ho, Diamond Bar Acting Librarian, reminded students that the library offers live homework help, a free online service that assists elementary and high school students with English, Math, Social Studies and Science. College students can also get help for their college level courses. Tutors are available for adult career help and offer services including resume review, job search and interview preparation. Tutors can also help with GED and Citizenship preparation and back to school needs. Online help is available through the LA County website. To help students develop critical thinking skills the library will start a Teen Book Club that will meet every Wednesday at 4:00 p.m. For more information, stop by the library or call 909-861-4978. Nancy Lyons, candidate for City Council, asked for an explanation of what is going on with the Shell Station on behalf of her potential constituents. This eyesore appears to be under construction, needs to be cleaned up and needs to be finished and has been an eyesore for more than a year. She and other residents would like for the situation to be taken care of and wondered if the Council was aware of this ugly eyesore. Ms. Lyons asked if the Shell has been contacted, can the City put a lien on the property, can Von's do something about it. Ms. Lyons offered photos for Council viewing. James Price, Pastor, Diamond Canyon Christian Church, invited residents to participate in a program that was started about 10 years ago by a young woman, Candy Chang. This program has spread around the world and it allows people to express what they would like to do before they die. This is a community project that begins at the church on September 8, 2013, 3338 Diamond Canyon Road. 4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS: CM/DeStefano said that as Council is aware, the City and City staff and particularly the Code Enforcement staff and City Prosecutor have been actively working on a plan to eliminate the eyesore that is the Shell Station at the corner of Palomino and Diamond Bar Boulevard. That property was originally approved for a complete rebuild a few years ago. The applicant/property owner/interested parties ran into a variety of financial difficulties and the project was stalled and as a result it has become a public nuisance. Both Code Enforcement and the City Prosecutor became heavily involved and as a result the City has been working through the property owners and the courts for the past couple of years on this matter. The City was successful in getting a judge to appoint a Receiver; successful in getting a General Contractor selected AUGUST 20. 2013 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL by the Receiver and just this past week, staff received additional and very positive information that he asked CDD/Gubman to provide the details since he and his staff have been overseeing this effort. As the property has come under decay during the past year or two staff has worked with the property owner to get the property cleaned up and/or the City has done the cleanup. Everyone in the City and particularly those merchants and customers in the shopping center have been extraordinarily patient through this process. For the first time in many months the City is looking forward to the finish line with the recent action by the court. CDD/Gubman stated that as the Council knows, this has been an ongoing issue that got the City to the point where it had to file suit to take possession of the property and complete the work. He reported that last Friday the hearing on the Receiver's application for authorization for funding, retaining the contractor, listing the property as well as, other authorization was held. The defender of the property, until the Receiver is able to liquidate the property, has been obstructing the City's efforts to seek legal remedies the Court granted. Over the next week the Receiver should be finalizing the funding arrangements with the lender. Thereafter, a contractor is lined up and construction is anticipated to resume under the supervision of the Receiver in about two weeks. MPT/Everett asked if the listing was a real estate listing for sale of the property. CDD/Gubman responded in the affirmative. Once the receiver completes the work and the property is in a turnkey condition it will be listed and once sold, the proceeds of the sale will be used to recover and satisfy the City's attorney's fees and related Code Enforcement efforts, Receiver's fees and all other liens that led to construction stoppage. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 Final Concerts in the Park — August 21, 2013 — 6:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., The Ultimate Stones (Rolling Stones Tribute), Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 Golden Springs Drive. 5.2 Movies Under the Stars — August 21, 2013 — Who Framed Roger Rabbit? — Immediately following Concerts in the Park, Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 Golden Springs Drive. 5.3 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting — August 22, 2013 — 7:00 p.m., Windmill Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive. 5.4 Planning Commission Meeting — August 27, 2013 — 7:00 p.m., Windmill Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive. AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL a III 5.5 Labor Day Holiday — City Offices closed in observance of Labor Day September 2, 2013, City Offices reopen on Tuesday, September 3, 2013 at 7:30 a.m. 5.6 City Council Meeting September 3, 2013 - 6:30 p.m., Windmill Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive. 5.7 Diamond Bar Day at the Los Angeles County Fair — Thursday, September 5, 2013 — Los Angeles County Fair Grounds in Pomona. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Tye moved, C/Herrera seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: 6.1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: Chang, Herrera, Tye, MPT/Everett M/Tanaka None None 6.1.1 Study Session of August 6, 2013 —Approved as Submitted 6.1.2 Regular Meeting of August 6, 2013 —Approved as Corrected. 6.2 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES: 6.2.1 Regular Meeting of May 9, 2013 — Received and Filed. 6.2.2 Regular Meeting of July 11, 2013— Received and Filed. 6.3 RATIFIED CHECK REGISTER — Dated August 1, 2013 through August 14, 2013 totaling $766,649.86. 6.4 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2013-27: APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM THE HABITAT CONSERVATION FUND PROGRAM FOR THE PANTERA PARK TRAIL. 6.5 APPROVED AMENDMENT WITH WARREN C. SIECKE TO UPDATE THE CITYWIDE SPEED ZONE STUDY IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,000. PUBLIC HEARING None 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: 8.1 ADOPT URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 03(A) (2013): IDENTIFYING THE TEMPORARY RELOCATION OF REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF DIAMOND BAR TO DIAMOND BAR CITY HALL LOCATED AT 21810 COPLEY DRIVE AND AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 03 (2013). AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL CM/DeStefano explained that this matter involves an extension of the time staff anticipates the City Council will need to meet in the Windmill Room. CC/Cribbins will present staffs report on this item. CC/Cribbins stated .that as CM/DeStefano pointed out during tonight's presentation of Schedule of Events, the City Council meetings will need to continue being held at City Hall for an extended period of time. On June 4, the City Council adopted an Urgency Ordinance relocating the City Council meetings to the Windmill Room. At that time, staff believed the time period would extend through the months of June, July and August. On Wednesday, July 31, staff received a letter from the AQMD stating they had not yet begun remodeling their audio and video systems in the auditorium and therefore, the City of Diamond Bar would need to continue holding its Council Meetings in the Windmill Room for a little longer. This ordinance is to continue the ordinance that was previously adopted in order to hold City Council meetings in the Windmill Room. Staff is requesting that City Council adopt the Ordinance extending the time through November 5, 2013 by adopting for First Reading the Amended Urgency Ordinance No. 03(A). C/Tye asked if this ordinance was intended to extend the time through the entire month of November or to November 5 as stated in staffs report. CC/Cribbins responded that staff hopes to be able to return to the AQMD after the first meeting of November; however, in the event that does not happen, staff will be coming back to the City Council for another extension of time. C/Herrera said that in the event that the City Council might have to adopt another ordinance extending the time would it be prudent to adopt Ordinance 3A through the month of November and at that point, if the work has been completed, the Council can return to meetings at AQMD in December. CA/DeBerry responded that the ordinance must be date specific and as the ordinance currently reads, meetings will be held in the Windmill Room at City Hall through November 5. If for some reason the second meeting in November has to be held in the Windmill Room it will require another ordinance. C/Herrera moved, C/Tye seconded, to Approve for First Reading, Waive full Reading of Ordinance No. 03(A) (2013): Identifying the Temporary Relocation of Regular Meetings of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar to Diamond Bar City Hall located at 21810 Copley Drive and amend Ordinance No. 03(2013). Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Herrera, Tye, MPT/Everett, M/Tanaka NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 9. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS: C/Chang reminded everyone they could follow her on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest and Foursquare. She attended an event sponsored by Californian's for Affordable and Reliable Energy Care. This coalition is made up of small businesses, community groups, local elected officials, local business organizations, statewide associations and large energy consumers that are advocating for comprehensive state energy plans on fuel and electricity that prioritizes affordability, reliability and adequate supply. With the recent closure of SONGS (San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station) it is something Diamond Bar needs to focus on. The small Hoover Commission study says that what California really needs now is a time-out in terms of energy mandates. Governor Schwarzenegger mandated 33 percent renewable energy but there has been no evaluation of which programs have been effective and the State has failed to develop comprehensive energy strategies with clearly delineated priorities. When discussing environmental sustainability, consideration should be given to the economic sustainability so, an attempt is being made to begin a dialogue with all of the stakeholders to encourage legislators to come up with a comprehensive plan so that California does not find itself having to endure another energy crisis like it did a few years ago. C/Chang stated she was in favor of SB594. Recently, a letter was sent out regarding the City's opposition and that she wanted to be on the record that she supports SB 594. C/Tye congratulated Steve Nelson for 13 1/2 years of outstanding service to this community and for his efforts in always leading a wonderful meeting. He is very insightful and is one of only a handful of people who have changed his opinion on a given issue. He is a very effective communicator and was a wonderful Planning Commissioner. He extended best wishes to Steve and his wife, Marian, in their new location. He attended ribbon -cutting ceremonies for Grand Army-Navy Surplus Store and congratulated owner Frank Gutierrez and wished him every success. Diamond Bar is grateful he chose this City for his business. He joined M/Tanaka and Friends of the Library in celebration of the First Birthday of the Diamond Bar Library. It is hard to believe it has only been a year since the City held the dedication of library and reading garden. Congratulations to the Friends of the Library and all they have done for the library. Also congratulations to Pui-Ching Ho and all of her efforts to make it a wonderful place for people to AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 7 read, study and learn and a wonderful community asset. CITY COUNCIL C/Herrera also thanked Steve Nelson for providing a tremendous service and leadership to the City of Diamond Bar and the Planning Commission. He will be greatly missed. She also congratulated the Diamond Bar Library celebrating its first birthday. Tomorrow night is the Contract Cities dinner sponsored by LA County Sheriff's Department. She is looking forward to joining everyone for dinner and conversation with Sheriff's Department personnel who do such a great job keeping Diamond Bar safe. C/Herrera announced that in a couple of days she will be attending the San Gabriel Valley Council of Government Meeting and will report on the outcome at the next Council meeting. MPT/Everett reported that he attended "National Night Out" as part of the 23`d Annual Concerts and Movies in the Park and that it was a real pleasure to have representatives from the Sheriff's Station and Fire Department. It was a celebration for public safety and for drug abuse and focus on improving public safety. The following day he attended an annual event, hosted by LA County Library Librarian Margaret Todd at the Pasadena Community College, This event was attended by full-time staff representing over 80 branches. The program included training, motivation and recognition. A significant amount of time was spent on library strategic planning to make the best fiscal decisions for the library system as well as provide the best service and resources. That evening it was his pleasure to attend a Neighborhood Watch Meeting at Silver Tip Park along with 20 people from the surrounding neighborhood. The presentation was provided by both retired Reserve Deputy St. Amant and newly assigned Community Deputy Aaron Scheller. The purpose of neighborhood watch is to learn and come together as a community, be aware of what is going on and if there is something that doesn't look right in the neighborhood, notify the Sheriff. He feels that these meetings are going to be taking a much more vital role in public safety and is convinced that arrests have increased because of timely reporting by witnesses within the community. On Saturday, Youth Baseball held their celebration. At the beginning of summer 84 children registered for the 2013 Diamond Bar Summer Youth Baseball program which began with skills evaluations and then games that began on July 1 and concluded with the ever -popular picnic and closing ceremonies at Heritage Park. AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL RS/McKitrick, staff, parents and families focused on progressive skills from T -Ball on up. Most important has been the traditional focus on the sportsmanship trophy at all levels. There is a great spirit and attitude that focuses on sportsmanship, the primary objective — playing ball, learning some skills and having fun. It is a great time for players, coaches and families. Thanks to staff and all of the families who participated. The following Tuesday the Diamond BarNValnut Sheriffs Station conducted an "all station training" at Calvary Chapel/Golden Springs from 7:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. It started promptly at 7:00 a.m. with the Sheriff's Assistant Chief Hellmold and Capt. Scroggin who greeted and challenged the entire group and spoke of his desire to have two training ops each year. It is a phenomenal experience. Council and staff were invited to follow the exercises that were being performed, role playing and then of course followed by lunch sponsored by the City. All of the LA County Sheriff's, Reserves, Explorers, Volunteers participated in serious role plays with related critiques, debriefs and discussions very honestly and very seriously. It was an excellent training experience as he viewed it and heard from the real professionals what great lessons were learned and sharpened and sensitivities by that all day event. Thanks to the Calvary Chapel for providing the venue and Thanks to the Sheriff's Department for organizing and inviting the City to join in and be a part of that training exercise. Friday he joined C/Tye, M/Tanaka, CM/DeStefano, PUSD Superintendent Richard Martinez and local friend, PUSD President Frank Guzman and his partner Daniel at the opening a unique business the Grand Army-Navy Surplus store located at 1139 South Grand. It is a great place to visit and check out the products. He too, was delighted to celebrate the first birthday of the Diamond Bar Community Library on Saturday. Festivities began at 10:00 a.m. Thanks to Pui- Ching Ho, library staff, Ruth Low and the Friends of the Library volunteers and members. It was a great time to see and celebrate Diamond Bar's newest and best treasure, the library. He thanked Steve Nelson for his excellent service. It was his real pleasure to make the presentation tonight and to articulate the contribution that Steve has made as a volunteer to this community. He will be missed. MPT/Everett then stated that the planning commission vacancy has been posted at all of the posting locations where the City posts hearings; as well as being posted on the home page of the City's website. CC/Cribbins is accepting applications until Friday, August 30 at 4:30 at the close of business. Thanks again to Steve and best wishes to Steve and Marian as they start a new chapter. AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL MPT/Everett also welcomed to HRM/Haug. Thank you to all and be safe as everyone moves from summer activities and the last concert and movie tomorrow night and return to school. All of the schools are in session so watch out and be careful. M/Tanaka thanked Steve Nelson. It was approximately 10 years ago that Steve welcomed him on the Planning Commission and made him feel very welcome. Best wishes to Steve and Marian on this new chapter of their lives. The past couple of weeks he has attended Concerts in the Park and Movies Under the Stars. Last week was also National Night Out and he thanked the Sheriff's Department and Fire Department for their participation. He thanked the Target Stores, a national sponsor for National Night Out and thanked the LA County Fair for providing information and freebies. He reminded residents that Diamond Bar Day at the LA County Fair is Thursday, September 5. Entry tickets can be purchased for $5, with a hundred percent of the proceeds going to benefit the Yellow Bus Program which provides transportation to the Fair to grade school children at no charge. On Saturday he attended the Diamond Bar Youth Baseball end of season celebration during which sportsmanship was emphasized. There were games, bounce houses and snow cones and the afternoon ended with teen barbecues. He thanked RS/McKitrick and Brian Billings for doing such an outstanding job and was appreciated by the players, parents and coaches. On Sunday as the Mayor of Diamond Bar he was invited to ride in the 73`d Annual Nisei Week Grand Parade. The Nisei Week committee hosts many different activities and festivities to help celebrate the Japanese culture through Art, Music and Food. It is a good opportunity for folks to gather. Last Monday he welcomed new employee HRM/Haug. Tuesday was the exercise and training held by the Diamond Bar/Walnut Sheriff's Station where there were plenty of scenarios. He thanked Mr. Doss who was present at this evening's meeting for participating in the exercise and training. After Concerts he also attended the Wildlife Corridor Conservation Authority (WCCA) meeting to thank Advisory Committee members and Governing Board members who have gone on to other activities. He extended a special thank you to Stephen Davis for representing Diamond Bar and his service on the Advisory Committee. Friday was the ribbon -cutting for Grand Army-Navy Surplus store and congratulated owner Frank Guzman, a Diamond Bar resident, on the opening of his new store. Saturday was the Diamond Bar Pop Warner Opening Ceremony at Lorbeer Middle School. There were a lot of scrimmage games and the team scrimmaged against the Pop Warner organization from the high desert. He thanked the Diamond Bar High School Leo Team club members for helping with face painting AUGUST 20, 2013 PAGE 10 CITY COUNCIL during that activity. He wished President James Johnson best wishes and fundraising Chair Bernadette Hernandez and the rest of the Board for a successful season. M/Tanaka helped the Diamond Bar Library celebrate their one year birthday. There was plenty of popcorn and cake, face painting, balloon art and regular library activities. M/Tanaka announced that this Sunday, August 25 Diamond Ranch High School will hold a fundraiser for their music program in downtown Pomona off of Garey and Second Avenue that will include a car show. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Tanaka adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:30 p.m. TOMMYE CRIBBINS, CITY CLERK The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of 2013. JACK TANAKA, MAYOR Agenda No. 6.2(a) MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR STUDY SESSION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 25, 2013 CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chairman Torng called the Study Session to order at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. Present: C/Farago and VC/Torng Absent: Commissioners Jimmy Lin, Jack Shah, Chairman Steve Nelson Also Present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; James Eggart, Assistant City Attorney; John Douglas, Housing Consultant, Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Natalie Tobon, Assistant Planner; and Stella Marquez, Administrative Coordinator. 1) Basics of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): CDD/Gubman stated that the California Environmental Quality Act was adopted by the state legislature in 1970 shortly after President Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) into law. CEQA is the state counterpart of the federal regulations. There are four primary objectives that CEQA seeks to fulfill: - One is to inform the government decision makers and the public about the potential environmental effects associated with projects. Following this disclosure, the objective is to identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced. Following the identification of what would be considered mitigation measures to make changes to the project or impose conditions on a project where feasible, to prevent or substantially reduce those environmental impacts. CEQA does not require environmental impacts to be eliminated when a project is up for consideration; it is primarily intended to provide that disclosure of the environmental impacts. Should a government agency elect to approve a project where it is unable to eliminate the environmental effects below what would be considered a "significant" level, it must disclose to the public the reasons why it is going to take an action to approve a project that is going to have significant environmental effects. CEQA guidelines indicate that CEQA is not intended to generate paper but to compel government at all levels to make decisions where they take the environmental consequences in mind along with all of the other policy matters that are part of that decision. Bottom line is that CEQA is intended to be an objective process — an impartial methodology to evaluate the potential environmental impacts for the purpose of disclosing and minimizing environmental damage to the extent that a good faith effort is made and that those mitigation measures are feasible. There are mandates that seek to minimize, eliminate or at least reduce environmental impacts but even if that cannot be done at the very least, CEQA requires that we disclose what the environmental impacts would be if a certain action is taken. CDD/Gubman stated that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is one of many types of environmental documents that can be adopted in conjunction with a project JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION action. It is the most well known type of environmental document and it is also the least frequently used environmental document. Not all projects would require an EIR; in fact, most projects are exempt from CEQA altogether. For example, if a school board candidate applied for a business license to open a campaign office; if one is running for a school board position; CEQA would not apply. Other examples of exempt projects would be room additions or custom homes, Conditional Use Permits for tutoring centers, etc. Another CEQA action that is not elevated to an EIR is a Negative Declaration. The Commission is going to be considering a Negative Declaration tonight for a new office building which is slightly more of an intensive use than a new home or room addition but it still is not a project that would likely have significant environmental effects, so in that case there is a requirement to perform an environmental analysis but because the impacts of that project would not be significant or they can be reduced to levels that would not be significant, a Negative Declaration can be adopted. There is a subset of Negative Declarations called Mitigated Negative Declarations which is where the finding is that the effect is not significant because certain requirements are adopted as conditions of approval to ensure that those environmental effects are mitigated. Another example is an addendum to a previous EIR. In a few months the Commission will be reviewing an EIR Addendum for the Site D project. The EIR has been adopted for that project at a programmatic level based on the level of detail the City had at the specific plan phase. Now that there is a more refined project, the City has to measure it against the adopted EIR and if there are any changes to the project that were not contemplated in the EIR but are relatively insubstantial, the addendum still needs to be adopted to document that those changes were reviewed and findings can be made that those changes are not substantial. According to Sections 15002 and 15151 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines is devoted to providing guidance to the preparers of the EIRs. Unfortunately, relentless legal challenges ensure that theory and practice are two entirely different things. The CEQA Guidelines under Section 15141, states that EIRs should normally be less than 150 pages and for unusually complex projects, should not exceed 300 pages. The EIR that the Commission has this evening is about 400 pages for a relatively simple project and there is another almost 800 pages offering technical background information. Given the susceptibility to legal challenges, there is not likely to be an EIR that is only 150 pages. The executive summary alone is close to 75 pages. Another extreme example is the Santa Anita Mall in Arcadia EIR which was 4,000 pages and one would imagine that something that voluminous would have to be such a major project it would have to have impacts that would extend all of the way out to Diamond Bar but it is just a shopping mall that has no effect on anybody except the property owners and residents surrounding that vicinity — yet, the threat of legal challenge sometimes compels these unwieldy documents to be developed and published. This same section of JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION the CEQA Guidelines recommends and encourages that EIRs be written in plain language with use of appropriate graphics so that decision makers can readily understand the documents. EIR consultants do a pretty good job of making these documents readable but there is no way to get around the certain amount of technical minutia that has to be placed in the document to make it legally defensible. Discussions will include how to deal with the technical minutia and how to navigate through a document more efficiently in light of what needs to be done to provide legal cover. CEQA does not really work in practice the way it was supposed to in that it generates too much paper and in deference to local agencies where the decision making authority is most appropriately placed is often lost because the whole CEQA challenge industry has become the domain of attorneys and often, if a project is controversial, the final decision is not left at the local level. Case law has held that CEQA requires that decisions be informed and balanced. CEQA must not be subverted into an instrument for oppression and delay of social, economic or recreational development or advancement. Basically, this is saying that CEQA should not be misused as a weapon to kill projects. There can be projects that are bad projects that are not good for the community and are bad public policy. They may be in conflict with a city's general plan but for all of those other factors that go into a decision on whether to approve or deny a project, the environmental findings can be perfectly solid and defensible yet that is always the component of the decision that will attract the legal challenge and sometimes, even if the findings can survive a legal challenge, the process of challenging an environmental decision can kill a project. One example in the City of Claremont is an EIR that was prepared for several subdivisions that collectively comprised a single project, and one of the impacts the additional population that the buildout would create was putting more pressure on the city's parks and recreation inventory. So, a mitigation measure required the developer to dedicate 20 acres to the city for the development of a lighted sports -recreational amenity that THE city was lacking. Every homeowner that bought a house in these tracts was given a disclosure and acknowledged that there would be a 20 -acre sports park on this land that was well -designated with fencing and signage. As the development builds out and development impact fees were collected to go toward the actual improvements to the dedicated property, the city eventually went forward with plans to develop the park and the residents who moved into the development who were by their presence triggering the need for additional parkland, mounted an effort to challenge the park even though they acknowledged that it was part of the deal in purchasing the property, and filed a CEQA lawsuit. The matter went to court and eventually the city prevailed but it came at a significant expense and illustrates how the CEQA process is abused for other agendas. A project may be good or bad on factors other than environmental issues but because of the environmental challenge being JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION the easiest to mount against a local decision, this is where the focus of the challenge will be directed. 2) How to review an Environmental Impact Report (EIR): CDD/Gubman stated that to review an EIR efficiently, it is important to know how the document is organized. The best place to start is the table of contents. Every EIR should have the following nine sections: 1. Introduction/Executive Summary - the one section Commissioners need to read thoroughly. It will summarize the project, what the environmental topic areas that were reviewed are and which of those environmental topics are the key environmental issues that need to be further delved into. The Executive Summary further provides a synopsis of what is proposed to mitigate any of those potential impacts and what the significance is after those mitigation measures are adopted. 2. Project Description - lays out in more detail what the project is about. 3. Project Objectives - explains what goals the project is supposed to achieve so if it is a rezone to a higher density multi -family designation, one of the objectives that will be spelled out is that the rezoning effort is being undertaken to ensure that the City fulfills its obligation to provide housing for all economic sectors of the community. 4. Thresholds of Significance - will be discussed. Any project that is going to result in construction impacts where there will be air-quality impacts; there will be quantitative thresholds that can easily be calculated for traffic impacts, number of trips the project generates and how those trips burden certain intersections — these can all be calculated to determine whether a threshold has been tripped. 5. Impact Analysis - is the longest and most intensive discussion that can be found in the EIR. The impact analysis covers a lot of technical issues that may not really warrant thorough reading so this is where the Executive Summary helps direct one's energy when reviewing the impacts. There is going to be a lot of technical discussion on air quality impacts which is also very tedious and technical and is probably not of much interest to go through unless one's agenda is to challenge the EIR. Another example could be paleontological impacts. The EIR could get into a lot of discussion regarding that subject but the bottom line is probably going to be what is contained within the Executive Summary which can be used as a guide on how to focus the reader's efforts. 6. Mitigation Measures JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION 7. Analysis of Ultimate Impact of the Project - if Mitigation Measures are implemented. 8. Cumulative Impacts - is the forest in the midst of the trees. A project could generate some traffic impacts at an intersection. The project itself is probably not going to make the intersection noticeably worse but the totality of all of the projects and all of the activities in the area of interest could have a cumulative and measurable impact. 9. Discussion of Alternatives to the Project Originally Contemplated in the project description, which involves looking at either variations to a project or other types of projects that could meet most of the project objectives and, at the same time, have impacts that are less than those of the project that is being proposed. There is a Draft EIR and a Final EIR. The difference is that the Draft EIR is what is before the Commission at this time — the actual volume one that lays out those nine sections listed above which is subject to a 45 -day review period. A Final EIR will include the Draft EIR and the technical appendices that were published for 45 days. Usually, the only additional component of the Final EIR that makes the Draft EIR a Final EIR is another volume that includes comments and responses to comments that were submitted for the Draft Environmental Impact Report. There are some situations where it is not that simple. Sometimes a Draft EIR needs to be re- circulated or new sections need to be added that may fundamentally change the document to an extent that goes beyond just appending what the Draft EIR had. The following are eight (8) tips for effectively evaluating an EIR: To understand the role that the EIR plays in the. Commission's ultimate decision to approve or deny a project, environmental impacts are just one of several factors that the Commissioners would take into account when making a decision to approve or deny a project; however, the Commission cannot approve a project unless it makes some findings in regards to the environmental impacts. So the Commission has to ultimately come to this decision point: "Will the project have a significant effect on the environment. If not, then the Commission may approve a project. If not, then has the project eliminated or substantially lessened all significant impacts, where feasible and not only that, but has the Commission determined that any of the remaining significant impacts that are found to be unavoidable are acceptable due to overriding considerations." This says that the Commission cannot approve a project subject to an EIR unless it can find that there are feasible ways to reduce all of the environmental impacts and, if the Commission cannot do that it cannot approve the project unless it can adopt some findings that tell the public why it believes there are overriding concerns that warrant approving a project. If it is a Home Depot and the development and operation of that store is going to create JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION significant air quality impacts because that is unavoidable in Southern California where it doesn't take much to create a significant environmental impact because air quality, although improving, is still considered unacceptably high. The decision makers could decide that although that is true, the jobs, the sales tax revenue and all of the secondary benefits that sales tax revenue will bring to the community override that significant effect on air quality that cannot be avoided. So when reviewing the EIR there are questions the Commission wants to ask, and keep in mind that the Commissioners are professionals in their individual fields, but as Commissioners they are considered lay persons and their decisions are based on a whole palette of considerations. Commissioners are not assumed or expected to be authorities on environmental impacts, and should feel confident in the expertise of staff and the consultants who have prepared the EIR so that the Commissioners just really need to use their common sense to see if the questions raised in the EIR have been answered sensibly. So, from a common sense perspective, has the EIR identified each of the significant impacts associated with the project and if so, have those impacts been mitigated or has the roadmap for mitigating those impacts been laid out in the EIR; and if so, do the Commissioners think the mitigation measures are a good idea. And if those impacts have not been mitigated, why haven't they, and is there a good reason that mitigation measures or alternatives are not feasible and/or ultimately will not be adopted. The EIR may be solid, it may say that there are ultimately no significant impacts but looking at compatibility and other factors, it still may not be a project worth approving. But from an environmental perspective, the Commission can get to the point of certifying that the EIR properly disclosed all of the impacts and the environmental issue may not be the weighing factor in determining whether this is a good project. On the other hand, the EIR, as indicated in the Home Depot example, will result in unavoidable impacts but, is the project worthwhile? And that is really what the Commission is eventually getting to and the environmental component of that decision is one of many that the Commissioners are faced with. Some thresholds are provided by other technical resources such as Caltrans, California Fish & Wildlife (formerly Fish & Game), the AQMD — they all provide criteria for determining thresholds of significance. Cities can also adopt their own local CEQA guidelines which define what those thresholds are that are appropriate for the community. Regardless of what criteria are used to determine significance, the Commission needs to be mindful that it needs to use those same criteria, other things being equal, for all projects that are being reviewed. So how are mitigation measures evaluated? State law says that the public agency shall provide that measures that avoid effects are fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. So a mitigation measure cannot just be imposed unless there is some way to monitor or enforce the compliance and implementation of those measures. And when looking at the mitigation measures there are three choices: The Commission can adopt that mitigation measure, it can make a finding that the mitigation measure is not within its jurisdiction but within the JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION jurisdiction of another agency and find a way to ensure that the city is not issuing any permits until it has verification that the project has obtained clearance from those agencies that would oversee such a measure. For example, Fish & Wildlife is going to oversee any type of restoration or mitigation to any wetlands damage and the city wants documentation of that before issuing a grading permit for a development. Third, the Commission wants to determine that the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations including the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make the mitigation measure infeasible. This goes back to whether there are overriding reasons why a project should be approved even if all of the significant impacts cannot be dispensed with. The yardstick is to see whether this mitigation measure is socially acceptable. For example, in discussing the NFL Stadium project, say that to relieve traffic congestion Brea Canyon Road would need to be widened, so all of the parkway design features and walking trails that one finds along Brea Canyon Road to Pathfinder would have to be blown out to add two lanes. While that might relieve traffic congestion it may not be acceptable. So in this instance, it is appropriate to challenge the efficacy of that mitigation measure and to compel the project proponents to find something that is more socially acceptable — maybe something to the lane geometry on the freeway instead, where the city is not giving up something to accommodate the needs of this one project. Focusing on the impact after mitigation, that may be a short discussion in the EIR compared to the analysis of the impact before mitigation, but the Commission should ask if the mitigation will result in a measurable reduction in that impact. When we say "understand the project objectives" we go back to those nine basic outlining criteria in the EIR. Each project should include a statement of objectives sought by the project and the statement of objectives will help the lead agency to develop a reasonable range of alternatives to evaluate in the EIR. This analysis section is a crucial tool in determining the true impacts of the project. The project objectives will be a benchmark and gauge for determining the sufficiency of the alternatives and the alternative analysis is a crucial tool in determining the true impacts of the project ranging from no project whatsoever to a range of other projects that could feasibly occur which would have lesser impacts than the project proposed. The term "no project" as an alternative is a bit confusing. What it is intended to do is to look at the project area, what the existing conditions are at the time the notice was prepared for the project and the "no project" alternative is, in the absence of the project that is being proposed, what is likely to occur if the project was not approved. For the, EIR that the City is in the process of'seeking comments for at this time it is fairly easy. The City is looking at a "zone change" so the "no project' alternative would be to revert to the current zoning which is Agricultural. Other examples that do not involve zone changes would usually be alternatives that look JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION at that same project in a different location or a variation of that project that is usually at a lower intensity. So a no project' alternative is not to mean no development, it is just what development might occur in the absence of the project the Commission is reviewing at this time. Project alternatives need to be feasible and they need to further most of the basic objectives of the project and they need to avoid or substantially lessen the impacts that have been identified with the primary project the Commission is looking at. The "cumulative impact' is the combined impact of the project with other projects that will produce similar impacts such as the typical example of traffic impacts at an intersection. The Final EIR is the Comments and Response to Comments appendix to the Draft EIR - every comment that is submitted during a Draft EIR public review period needs to have a written response in the final EIR. And so, the Commission gets to the point of deciding whether to approve or deny a project and if the Commission is at the point where a project can be approved, if we can adopt overriding considerations to overcome the significant impacts of the EIR, CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance the economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of a project against those potential unavoidable or significant environmental risks. The decision-making authority is fully disclosing and acknowledging what is going to result environmentally with the project but on the other side of the ledger, the benefits would need to be well -articulated in that Statement of Overriding Considerations as part of the final decision. There are other factors for a project that go into the decision making that are not limited to the environmental impacts so all of the other issues that the community would raise — traffic impacts may not be environmentally significant, but they may have some other qualitative issues that lead to a decision to possibly deny a project. So there are other factors that should not be considered environmental such as compatibility, aesthetic and others that are really the true source of whether or not a project merits approval. 3) Tabletop exercise using the Draft EIR for the proposed rezoning and General Plan Amendment for a 78 -acre portion of Tres Hermanos that lies directly south of Diamond Ranch High School. The Zone Change proposes to change the zoning on 30 acres within the study area from Agricultural to Very High Density Residential (RH-30). John Douglas pointed out a couple of items the Commission should be looking at in preparation for the next public hearing. Key question — why are we doing this? Why does the Commission have this EIR in front of it and why is a zone change JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION being proposed? This is an unusual project that is being driven by state law and the Housing Element of the General Plan. State law says that cities have to have adequate sites with appropriate zoning in order to accommodate its "fair -share regional housing need." And this goes to a process whereby every city is assigned its "fair -share." For Diamond Bar, for the current eight-year planning period that is just ending, the fair share was over a thousand units of new housing development. So state law says, the city either has to demonstrate that it has enough capacity for a full range of housing of various densities or it has to rezone. Diamond Bar went through the Housing Element process over the last several years and the city does not have enough available land to meet the numbers of about 466 units of High Density Housing so it has to rezone in order to satisfy a state mandate for local governments to demonstrate they have adequate sites. Some people ask why not just tell the state to go fly a kite. Some cities have gotten on the wrong side of state law and have suffered nasty consequences as a result of courts taking over their planning and building authority. No city wants to see that happen so Diamond Bar is moving forward on the assumption that the city wants to maintain a certified Housing Element and be in compliance with state law. Unlike many EIR projects that the Commission might see, this is not being developer -driven. There is no request from a private developer to rezone property so that they can build houses and make a profit. This is being driven entirely by state law that says Diamond Bar has to have appropriate zoning to accommodate its "fair -share" housing needs. So in this EIR and in the project that comes forward in the next few weeks, the Commission will not see any elevations, drawings of homes, landscape site plans, etc. because there is no real project. All the City is doing is rezoning land that could accommodate development if the property owner, which is the City of Industry, wants to move forward with development. So, this is a City initiated project and not a developer driven process. Because there is no "real' project in front of the Commission, it will not see some technical studies that are often presented as part of a package in an EIR such as a detailed grading plan and a detailed drainage plan, hydrology and those types of things. Those have not been done but they will be required before any development could happen. And so, it is important to keep in mind this "big picture" of what the City is doing and why the City is doing it. In this EIR Executive Summary, the Commissioners will see a large table that goes through topic by topic and itemizes the various categories of impacts and identifies the mitigation measures that have been identified in order to reduce or eliminate impacts. There will be a lot of familiar stuff regarding mitigation measures to reduce air emissions and to address any cultural archeological resources that could be uncovered during grading and those kinds of things. Important to keep in mind is that unlike most EIR projects, this EIR concludes that all of the impacts can be reduced below the level of significance. So, if this project were approved, development goes forward, if all of these mitigation measures are implemented, there would be no significant impacts. Most EIRs find that there is at least one or JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION two significant impacts, which put the projects into the category of having to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Even though there are significant impacts, the City wants to approve the project anyway for these following economic or whatever reasons. In this case it is unusual because staff believes there are no significant impacts. The Project Description chapter lays out what the objectives are and they are closely related to what he just described about why this EIR is being done — it is state mandated. And so, the objectives are very important in comparing what alternatives should be considered and what the best alternative is for the City to approve. In terms of the Impact Analysis, one unusual thing about this particular EIR is on Page 5.1-26. This is in Chapter 5 — Environmental Setting Impacts and Mitigation Measures. This section talks about aesthetics analysis. He asked that the Commissioners focus their attention on "effects — substantially damaged resources including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, etc. and immediately under that it says "Site A or Site B." All of this analysis of impacts is looking at two options for the City to consider. He referred the Commissioners to Page 4-4 (color map) in the Project Description section. This is the map that shows the subject property that is being evaluated. The map has a portion labeled Site A and another portion to the west labeled Site B and the southwestern corner labeled Outlying Parcel. All of the analysis is comparing these two portions of the larger site so that is why the Commissioners will see some sections that list Site A or Site B and that is relevant when there is no difference between A or B — it is the same, so the discussion is the same. But then on Page 5.1-27 there is reference toward the bottom of the page that reads Site A — Middle Ground Receptors. This is different from most EIRs the Commission will see. Some discussion is relevant to both of the portions of the study site and some discussion is particular to either Site A portion or Site B portion. Alternatives — this type of an EIR is where the City is being forced to rezone some land. So the key question is not what type of development. The City is being mandated to rezone for High Density Housing so the question is, where is the best place to put it? So in that sense it might be referred to as an "Alternatives" type of EIR where the key question is "Alternatives" and Chapter 6 describes how the City arrived at the choice of what alternatives should be looked at. And again, it is driven by that state mandate. At the end of the alternatives chapter there is a comparative evaluation of the three primary alternatives that were carried forward for more detailed evaluation and those three are: The first is No Project which is not the same as "no development' — it is development that could happen under the current zoning which is Low Density Single Family Homes. The second alternative is Infill sites which are already developed properties in a Light Industrial portion of the City; and, the third alternative is Another portion of the Tres Hermanos Property that is farther to the south but still within the larger Tres Hermanos property. JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION The key findings of this EIR as previously stated: The EIR concludes that all of the potential impacts can be mitigated "below the level of significance", so there would be no Statement of Overriding Considerations required. Second key point is that other alternatives besides the primary option of Site A or Site B would not meet the basic project objectives because they would not be consistent with the Housing Element which is the key reason for doing this project in the first place. And finally, the `other location" alternative Tres Hermanos South site, the impacts would be very similar to either Site A or Site B that are the primary options in the EIR. VC/Torng thanked CDD/Gubman and Mr. Douglas for a great presentation. The only thing unbelievable is that traffic is less significant because of this project of 490 residences. Mr. Douglas pointed out that there is one mitigation measure for traffic which is off- site in the City of Pomona. It is a relatively minor mitigation measure which is the restriping of a turn pocket. Typically, in an EIR one sees big impacts in traffic but that is not the case here. ACA/Eggart announced that the Commission reached quorum about 6:55 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: VC/Torng adjourned the study session to the regular meeting at 7:03 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 13th day of August, 2013. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman Community Development Director Steve Nelson, Chairman Agenda No. 6.2(b) MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 25, 2013 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Nelson called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chairman Torng led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Frank Farago, Jimmy Lin, Vice Chairman Tony Torng, Chairman Steve Nelson Absent: Commissioner Jack Shah was excused. Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; James Eggart, Assistant City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Natalie Tobon, Assistant Planner; and Stella Marquez, Administrative Coordinator. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 28, 2013. VC/Torng moved, C/Farago seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 28, 2013, as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT 5. OLD BUSINESS: 6. NEW BUSINESS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: None None 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): Farago, Lin, VC/Torng, Chair/Nelson None Shah 7.1 Development Review No. PL2013-123 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48, the applicant and property owner, Razgo Lee, requested Development Review approval to construct a 1,023 square foot second story addition to an existing single family residence on a 0.67 gross acre (29,138 square foot) lot. The subject property is zoned Low Density JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION Residential (RL) with a consistent underlying General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential. PROJECTADDRESS: 24069 Gold Rush Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Razgo Lee APPLICANT: 24069 Gold Rush Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 AP/Tobon presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. PL2013-123, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. VC/Torng said the neighbor's letter referred to City of Glendora's code which calls for a 33 percent roof per 10,000 square feet of land and asked if Diamond Bar had such a code. AP/Tobon responded that the City's Development Standards state that within this zone there is a lot maximum coverage of 40 percent footprint and the proposed project is 24.4 percent coverage. Chair/Nelson opened the public hearing. Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing. VC/Torng moved, C/Farago seconded, to approve Development Review No. PL2013-123, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farago, Lin, VC/Torng, Chair/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Shah 7.2 Tentative Tract Map No 72067 Development Review and Parking Permit No. PL2012-455 — The applicant requested Development Review approval to construct a 21,794 square foot new two-story professional office building on a 42,333 square foot (0.97 acre) Office Professional (OP) zoned parcel with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Light Industrial. A Tentative Tract Map was requested to subdivide air space for an 11 unit office condominium, as well as, a Parking Permit to share driveway access and parking between the proposed development and lot to the north of the project site. PROJECT ADDRESS: 650 Brea Canyon Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION PROPERTY OWNER: Peichin Lee 17528 E. Rowland Street #200 City of Industry, CA 91748 APPLICANT: Brea Canyon Investments, LLC 17528 E. Rowland Street #200 City of Industry, CA 91748 SP/Lee presented staff's report and recommended the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 72067, Development Review and Parking Permit No. PL2012-455, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. C/Lin asked how many leasable spaces are within the existing industrial building and whether the current users require deliveries from semi -trucks. Chair/Nelson opened the public hearing. Peichin Lee responded to C/Lin that the existing industrial building is divided into 10 small units with unit sizes from 800 to 2800 square feet. They are relatively small units and the users are storing compact merchandise, and without permission to have the semi -truck able to deliver their merchandise it is acceptable to the small users since they are not the types of uses that would be served by semi -trucks. Chair/Nelson asked how the Diamond Star development turned out for the applicant and Ms. Lee responded that it was a great success. The location, quality and design are good and she thanked the Commission for approving the project. Sixty percent of the units were sold before they broke ground and the rest of the spaces were sold prior to completion. All of the users are happy with the facility. Obviously, the demand for these types of units is strong for local business owners because they like to own their own units (pride of ownership) and take advantage of the low interest rates. Chair/Nelson asked if Ms. Lee expected the same kinds or types of Industry's users to come into this project and Ms. Lee responded that as a matter of fact, 45 percent of the space is already reserved by professional users. Most of the users are from the City of Diamond Bar or adjacent neighborhoods. Chair/Nelson asked for examples of users and their types of businesses. Ms. Lee responded that there is a wholesale travel agency, a trading company, and a chiropractor who is currently leasing and wish to own. Anthony Gonzales said he owns property in the 852 block of the adjacent townhomes directly across from the proposed project. The building looks great but he is concerned about the parking. He believes at this time they have 10 rentals. He visited the site on Monday and counted about 90 parking spaces JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION and with the 10 rentals 71 parking spaces were filled in the middle of the afternoon on a Monday. He is concerned about overflow parking. If 10 units fill 71 spaces and Ms. Lee intends to add 11 more rental spaces; where will the additional parking come from. He understands that the bulk of parking is supposed to be shared with the northerly parking but the northerly parking is already being occupied. He provided the Commission with photographs. Chair/Nelson said the Commission would review the photographs and present them to the clerk to be entered into the record. During past years, the residents of Windwood Townhomes have had issues with parking overflow from Metrolink which the new multi -tiered structure will alleviate. However, he remains concerned that the overflow parking from the project will flow into his complex. In addition, he is concerned that professional offices will bring come and go traffic and the area is already congested and difficult to maneuver. C/Lin said that in looking at the photographs he noticed an ambulance company that has six or seven ambulance vehicles parked there. Mr. Gonzales said there is a lot of emergency vehicle traffic that goes in and out of the parking lot and each of those vehicles carry one to two individuals so that would mean two to three spaces occupied by employees and the company. The company has been at that location for a number of years. Aside from that, regular employees seem to go to the site and remain there for their eight hour shift. VC/Torng said the speaker mentioned 11 units. Currently, how many units are there and Mr. Gonzales reiterated he believed there were 10 unites at this time and whatever number of units are currently occupied, 71 of the approximately 90 parking spaces were occupied when he visited the site yesterday. The only spaces that were open were those next to the vacant lot which is where the proposed construction is located. VC/Torng said the Commission has a traffic study and asked that the developer address Mr. Gonzales's concerns. Ms. Lee explained that the industrial building consists of 10 units. The applicant signed a two-year lease with the ambulance company in January 2013. Initially, their business was very slow. The construction of the proposed building is set to be completed at about the same time that the ambulance company's lease expires (December 2014). During the past two months the (ambulance) business has grown and in fact, the owner approached the leasing company a couple of weeks ago to let them know that his company was growing at a fast pace and asked the landlord if they would allow him to break his lease. Our response to the owner was that he could break his lease anytime, and that we would help him find a larger place to accommodate his growing business which we are now doing. We believe that by the time the new building is completed the ambulance company's lease will be up and he will have moved to another location which should solve the parking issue. JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Farago said it appeared there may be overflow parking from the Metrolink and asked if the property owner had any type of security to make sure that only tenants parked in the lot. Ms. Lee said she checked with Metrolink and was advised that there is additional parking for users. She does not see overflow parking in their lot from Metrolink. VC/Torng said that according to the previous speaker there are 10 units. With the addition it will become 11 units. Ms. Lee explained that the 10 units are in the existing building. They will build a new 11 -unit office building. The ambulance company occupies 2,800 square feet and is looking for 7,000 square feet. Chair/Nelson asked how the City could be assured that the tenant would be moving and Ms. Lee reiterated that the lease expires in December 2014. Chair/Nelson asked if the ambulance company owner had a right to renew the lease and Ms. Lee said he does not have the option to renew the lease. She said she would be happy to provide a copy of the lease amendment to the Commission, if requested. During construction there are no new tenants and no new users moving to the site so there will be no parking required before the actual building is completed. Chair/Nelson asked if the combined parking allocation met the City's development standard and whether the existing property to the north was in violation of the City's parking standards. Also, does the City have legal recourse to try to remedy the existing condition and, in the event that the ambulance company's lease is renewed, can the City impose tandem parking or such circumstances to accommodate more parking on their property. Despite the property owner's assurances, in the event that a landlord wants to retain a tenant which of course is desirable, could be a workable situation. Ms. Lee said this can happen on any property. When a landlord rents to a tenant a business can grow. The ambulance company owner is in such a position and is in the process of finding another property. Her firm has a reputation for looking out for the best circumstances for all of their users and tenants. The investment company does not want to damage itself by acting against tenants who have legal signed contracts. If for any reason the ambulance service wants to stay, they can stay until December 2014 when their lease expires. To reiterate, the ambulance owner initiated the meeting with the landlord and asked for relief. The investment company has no problem breaking the lease because the building offers a very desirable location and the investment company can easily find other users to take that space. Chair/Nelson asked if the Commission could impose, as a condition of the use permit, a requirement for tandem parking of the ambulance drivers on their property if necessary in order to prevent parking from flowing onto adjacent streets and adjacent properties. ACA/Eggart responded that if it so chooses, JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION the Planning Commission might consider a condition to provide that the City (City Manager, Community Development Director) has the authority to require a parking study or parking management plan in the event that actual parking/circulation problems arise and require the property owner/applicant to implement recommendations from staff to mitigate those actual traffic problems which tends to be effective because the actual impacts are unknown until the building is built and rented out. C/Farago asked how many ambulances are currently at the existing site and Ms. Lee responded 12-15. The number varies day to day and during the daytime they dispatch ambulance service which leaves only staff parking. C/Farago said that if the nature of the business is to house or park vehicles as part of their business, would not that have to be considered as part of the parking study because it is not typical use of the parking lot. Could there be some type of restriction as to the type of business and amount of vehicles that might be parked or impose stacked parking for that area? Ms. Lee said she believed the ambulance company obtained a business license from the City at the time they moved in and it is fortunate/unfortunate that their business is growing. They do intend to move out when they outgrow the space. She believes that the concerns address a potential problem after completion. C/Farago said that if the ambulance service moves out the problem is alleviated unless another ambulance company moves in. CDD/Gubman said the City issued a zoning clearance and a business license for the ambulance use earlier this year. Regrettably, there were no conditions imposed on that issuance to address the number of vehicles and the actual result of having not only the employee vehicles but the ambulances that would have a multiplier effect on the parking demand for this use. At this point, going forward, the City can impose conditions on new tenants coming in and because the property owner owns both parcels it is a feasible way to address the issue. Going forward, there can be a condition applied to the Development Review approval to require a parking management plan, prior to some milestone in the permitting process for this project, to take into account the continued occupancy of the ambulance company, should it not relocate. From the perspective of meeting the parking requirements in the municipal code, calculating the current and new building needs, a total of 91 parking spaces would be required. There could certainly be a condition imposed that provides some limitation on the number of vehicles per tenant and that can be in combination with provisions to require tandem parking or some other doubling of the existing parking. The City would not allow that for customer parking but certainly for employee and service employee vehicles such a condition for a parking plan for the site to address that issue. C/Lin said he did not believe the ambulance business was an issue for this evening because it was a permitted use and the City issued a business license; nevertheless, the City could still have parking problems on this site. The JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION distance between two shared parking lots cannot be greater than 300 feet and it looks to him like some of the parking spaces are more than 300 feet away on the drawing. The shared private driveway is 31 feet wide and really all that is needed is about 11 feet for each lane which would leave 10 feet for additional parallel parking. SP/Lee said that the existing fire plan shows fire lane designations as striped which would require about a 26 foot clearance for a fire truck to be able to access the site. C/Lin said that in his view the parking requirements meet the current regulations. Tenants come and go and it may be the City's negligence in not imposing any regulations for the ambulance company. However, since the lease is over in two years it gives the City an opportunity to properly issue new business permits with the imposition of requirements and perhaps the problem will go away. He said he has a hard time denying an application that follows the City's parking regulations. C/Lin said that Mr. Gonzales made a statement about a left turn. When the traffic study was completed, what was the finding regarding those left turn movements and SP/Lee responded that there is a designated left turn lane that allows access to the subject property which is shown in the attached traffic analysis report. C/Farago asked if there was any way to initiate a trigger that staff can address this issue with future businesses that may conform to the City's code to avoid future use issues that might interfere with the permitted parking. CDD/Gubman stated that since this is a discretionary entitlement, if there was an existing business park elsewhere and they were proposing uses to come and go without any entitlement where the City has discretion there is very little that can be done except through collaborative work with the property owner. In this instance, since the Commission is considering a discretionary action to intensify the use of the property it would be appropriate to impose a condition to address the potential parking issue — perhaps a condition could require or limit the number of commercial vehicles to one commercial vehicle per tenant and if a tenant wanted two commercial vehicles for their place of business the City could require the submittal of a parking plan or some parking management strategy to mitigate the displacement of parking for other clients that might be visiting. Ms. Lee said that as a business developer they are willing to be restricted for the industrial building site with no ambulance service for that particular type of building. Mr. Gonzales said that many times service companies will come in with an F150 or F250 which are commercial vehicles that are often overlooked. With no one else present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing. JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Lin asked if the distance between the parking lots exceeded 300 feet. SP/Lee responded that the distance is measured from property line to property line and not from parking space to parking space. Since the applicant owns both properties and they are contiguous properties the distance is not an issue. C/Lin moved, VC/Torng seconded, to recommend City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 72067, Development Review and Parking Permit PL2012-455 based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Chair/Nelson asked C/Lin to amend his motion to include the condition that "if the existing industrial ambulance service business renews its lease and there is a parking problem that a parking management plan be imposed on the use." C/Lin said he would do so and asked for clarification from the City Attorney about whether the existing warehouse is not a subject of this application and ACA/Eggart responded that the existing warehouse is not before the Commission this evening except for the required "shared parking agreement." So the Commission can require a certain number of spaces to be maintained for the use that is being approved through that shared parking agreement or, proceed with any of the other suggestions provided by CDD/Gubman including allowing the Community Development Director to require a parking management plan if deemed necessary. C/Lin asked what the magic number was and CDD/Gubman suggested that according to the Resolution there is a Condition (d) on Page 9 under Parking Permit where it requires "prior to final map approval of reciprocal parking and access agreement for the use and access of common drives, etc. be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division, the Public Works Engineering Department and the City Attorney' and it requires recordation with the L.A. County Recorder. The Commission could add to that condition the additional provision of "prior to final map approval and recordation of this reciprocal parking requirements that a Parking Management Plan be required for any tenant that contemplates the use of more than one commercial vehicle and commercial vehicle can be defined not in terms of the vehicle code but in the context of being a dedicated vehicle that is on that premises for the purpose of conducting business at that premises. C/Lin suggested the following: "Prior to final approval of the plan, the applicant will submit a Parking Management Plan to the satisfaction of the City." CDD/Gubman concurred. C/Lin said he amended his motion to add the language as stated. VC/Torng seconded the amended motion. The motion was carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farago, Lin, VC/Torng, Chair/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Shah JUNE 25, 2013 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION Chair/Nelson reaffirmed that the amended motion met with the approval of the property owner/applicant. 8. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: Chair/Nelson offered a public apology to C/Lin for referring to him as C/Chin during tonight's proceeding. 9. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. CDD/Gubman stated that the next regular Planning Commission date is July 9; 2013, however, there are no items scheduled for that agenda. Therefore, the next scheduled meeting is July 23, 2013 and at this time there are currently no items scheduled for that agenda but that is subject to change. C/Lin and Chair/Nelson said they would not be available for the July 23, 2013, meeting. 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in tonight's agenda. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairman Nelson adjourned the regular meeting at 8:10 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 13th day of August, 2013. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman Community Development Director 4tevP Nelson, C • irm,,an Agenda No. 6.3(a) CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION DIAMOND BAR CITY HALL -THE WINDMILL ROOM 21810 COPLEY DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 MAY 23, 2013 CALL TO ORDER: Chair/Grundy called the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chairman Owens led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioner Lew Herndon, Vice Chairman Ted Owens, Chairman Dave Grundy. Absent: Commissioners Benny Liang, Dave Roberto were excused Staff Present: Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Anthony Jordan, Parks and Maintenance Superintendent; Christy Murphey, Recreation Superintendent; Crystal Knox, Community Services Coordinator, and Debbie Gonzales, Administrative Coordinator. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE: None CALENDAR OF EVENTS: As presented by CSD/Rose. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1.1 Regular Meeting Minutes of the April 25, 2013 Meeting — Continued to June 27, 2013. 1.2 Chair/Grundy agreed to accept transmittal of Parks and Recreation Month Proclamation from the City Council at its June 18 meeting. 2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 2.1 Recreation Program Update — RS/Murphey C/Herndon asked what high schools held proms at the Diamond Bar Center and RS/Murphey responded that they were not local high schools. She said she would get back to the Commission at its next meeting with the requested information. RS/Murphey responded to VC/Owens that the wait list is a combination of all of the weeks. MAY 23, 2013 PAGE 2 P&R COMMISSION 2.1.1 PowerPoint Presentation on the Contract Classes - CSC/Knox C/Herndon asked how the City promotes contract classes. CSC/Knox responded that staff provides flyers to the schools. Staff has a blanket authorization from the Pomona School District so the flyers are emailed for approval and upon approval, staff drops off flyers at each office for the Pomona Unified School District. These flyers are done at the expense and time of the instructors. She collects flyers from the instructors, sends them out for approval and upon approval, the instructors deliver them to the schools. Walnut Valley Unified School District provides approvals as well and the instructor provides packets for each class. C/Herndon asked if it's possible to utilize the City website to alert coaches when fields are not being used. CSD/Rose responded that the facilities are primarily allocated to the organization so if a coach decides not to use the facility on a particular day, anyone else from that organization could use the field since it is already allocated to them. If an entire organization gives up a field it becomes available to other users. The sports fields can be put on the calendar. RS/Murphey said we could put them up there. There are so many different fields and different configurations with different options at each facility. When the City first got Rec Track and Web Track staff only put the rooms on there, otherwise, there would be a huge list. But it is something staff can look into again. The site is much more navigable now but it will depend on the user groups letting staff know so that it can be lifted off. C/Herndon asked if picnic rentals are available online. CSC/Knox said she did not show it because it is not available now for picnic use. The only way to register for a picnic is by coming into the Diamond Bar Center. Something staff is looking to add is a "Permit Request" so that individuals can go online and put in a Permit Request from the facility calendar and then it will send an email to the office that someone has requested that date which will offer a little more convenience to the individual who can then print the permit. They could do a similar program with the fields; however, there is so much to offer that it gets a little confusing. MAY 23, 2013 PAGE 3 P&R COMMISSION Chair/Grundy commented that for future example demonstrations, staff has Family XXX and when you picked adult, it was Adult XXX. He asked if the comment cards staff has received in the past have indicated why there is a trend in decreased enrollment and CSC/Knox said not specifically. Unless there was actually a complaint on the comment card there have not been any specific reasons why people are not returning. She said she believed that when comment cards are passed out during the classes individuals might be a little more reserved about what they write on a form that they are turning in to an instructor who will read the comment. She believed that by offering the comment cards online it would provide more useful and honest feedback. Chair/Grundy asked if staff had asked other cities what seem to be the hot classes today and CSC/Knox responded "yes." In fact, today she went to a brochure exchange in Fullerton. There were about 50 participants from about 15 different cities and current trends were discussed. The group also discussed different ways cities are getting people to participate. Some cities are doing showcases/previews for their programs which is something she is looking to do for next summer. She plans to have an expo where all of the instructors have booths and demonstration of what their classes have to offer. This expo will be advertised throughout the City and be available to the public so that they will have a preview of what will be offered for the summer. Some of the popular classes that the group discussed were "Polaxi" which is a combination of Pilates and boxing. Staff attends brochure exchange two or three times a year in different locations in order to get a wider variety of what is popular. She has also contacted local cities to see what works for them and what commercial instructors they might be working with and asking questions about what is working and what is not working. C/Herndon asked if the Diamond Bar Foundation was sponsoring a Concerts in the Park again this year and RS/Murphy responded that they were sponsoring the last concert of the year. C/Herndon asked if that fact was promoted in the City's newsletter and RS/Murphy responded that they were. C/Herndon said the Diamond Bar Foundation doesn't seem to have a lot of visibility and wants to get whatever publicity is available for the Foundation. CSD/Rose asked why it is called a "splash" page — CSC/Knox responded that is what the company calls it. It is a splash or splotch page because it splashes or splotches different information on it. MAY 23, 2013 PAGE 4 P&R COMMISSION 2.2 Parks Report — PMS/Jordan 2.2.1 Power Point Presentation on — PMS/Jordan Chair/Grundy suggested that the City send a letter of thanks and commendation to the Diamond Bar High School kids for what they have done. C/Herndon said that when the gallons per minute are reduced does it mean that the City has to water longer and how does the City determine how much the plants need for healthy growth. PMS/Jordan responded that one of the capabilities of the City's irrigation system is the ability to water based on ET (weather). Essentially, there are weather gauges throughout the City that measure evaporation and it communicates with other controllers to tell them that for example, there has been a 3/4 inch loss of water today and the system puts back that amount. Once it is all fine- tuned and dialed in that capability exists. The benefit of these nozzles is that if the City is not careful with its watering times there will be a lot less water thrown with these nozzles and a lot less water will be wasted. Water can still be wasted by overwatering but the nozzles (Rainbird MPR's — Mass Precipitation Rate) that were replaced when Silver Tip was completed a couple of years ago was a pretty precise nozzle. However, Toro Precision nozzles provide a phenomenal water savings. Within a year to a year and a half the technology continues to march forward. If only those nozzles were used the City might have to increase the watering times but by using the ET base just the amount of water the plants require is being put back. 2.3 CIP Projects — CSD/Rose 2.3.1 Dog Park at Pantera Meadow — CSD/Rose reported that construction will begin next Tuesday. All pieces are in and staff will construct the shade shelters, drinking fountains and benches. Staff hopes to have the project completed in two weeks but is allowing a month to give added time to make sure everything is done correctly. Signs are posted showing that the park will be closed beginning Tuesday and staff will post updates on the City's web page and sign the park with the reopening date, once that information is available. 2.3.2 Grandview Trail and Grandview Trail Link — CSD/Rose stated that the conceptual plans are completed and construction documents are about 90 percent complete. Staff will meet with the design firm the second week of June to go over the plans and make sure a final route is agreed upon. At that point, the construction documents will be completed and the project will go MAY 23, 2013 PAGES P&R out to bid. The project is fully funded. The budget was approved Tuesday night and it includes funds to pay for all of the trail work, half of which is through grant funding and half from the City's General Fund. 2.3.3 Site D Public Park — CSD/Rose reported that Lennar Homes held its public park meeting on May 9. Staff believes that the consensus plan was well-received by those in attendance. There is additional research that staff needs to do on the rain garden concept to make sure there are no unknown or hidden issues. It is a relatively unique amenity to this type of park, and staff is looking at sites that are similar and have a detention basin concept built into the park. Part of the design process will be to present the information to the Commission. 2.3.4 Larkstone Park — CSD/Rose stated that staff met with Lewis Homes representatives who are planning to move forward to construct the homes. Lewis Homes will sign on a developer that will actually construct the project. Lewis Homes found an ancient landslide on the site. Apparently, the geotechnical information that was turned over to Lewis Homes contained that information but Lewis Homes just noticed it in the last month or so, so it may require a complete design of the park. As a result, the geotechnical people are looking at the possible solutions to the landslides and how they would need to be repaired in order to construct the park. They may be back in front of staff with anew design and the same process will again take place before the design is approved. VC/Owens said that he read in the paper that the City of Costa Mesa was having problems with the turf in their dog park. They took a survey and found that there were a lot of non-residents using the park so they were thinking about implementing a non-resident fee. He said he hoped that would not be an issue for Diamond Bar. CSD/Rose said that Diamond Bar does not use turf. He is sure that non-residents are using the Diamond Bar Dog Park. For example, Chino Hills does not have a dog park but they are in the design phase for a dog park. San Dimas, Claremont and Fullerton have dog parks so Diamond Bar is surrounded by quite a few cities that have dog parks. Staffs experience is that people travel around to different dog parks but believes that in Diamond Bar and especially Pantera Park which was developed with Prop A funds would have to remain available to non-residents because Prop A funds are countywide funds. CSD/Rose said that he believes it would cost the city more to collect non-resident fees than what would be collected in non-resident fees. MAY 23, 2013 PAGE6 P&R C/Herndon said he was astounded that Lewis Homes was just now working with this (landslide) issue because it seems to him that a year or year and one-half ago during meetings the Commission was discussing this particular problem. It appears someone was not doing his job. CSD/Rose explained that there is an entirely new project team and it was the new project team that discovered this. There was a large landslide on Morning Sun that impacted the homes in Rowland Heights and there was so much time and energy spent on that side that staff thinks that what was going on on the park side was forgotten or lost in thought because the folks in charge of the project turned over a couple of times. Lewis had approved plans to construct the park and now they have to start over. CSD/Rose presented a slide presentation overview of the site proposed for the Grandview Trail Link. C/Herndon said that during previous discussions about trails one of the things that everyone wanted to avoid was switchbacks and he sees it is necessary for this trail. CSD/Rose showed C/Herndon where lodge pole fencing would be installed to attempt to keep hikers from cutting across the system as much as possible. 2.4 List of Pending Commission Requests — CSD/Rose CSD/Rose stated that today he was told that the stage lighting is complete, staff has been trained on its use and it is ready for use. RS/Murphey said that it was used on Saturday night. CSD/Rose said that with respect to Silver Tip Park and the trail connect with Pantera Park the CCC is ready to start walking the area to determine a path. If a reasonable workable path is found there is money in the Prop A Youth at Risk account to allow the CCC to begin cutting a path after staff reviews the proposal and obtains a cost estimate. 2.5 Pony League Baseball Fields — CSD/Rose CSD/Rose reported that staff met with Pony League Baseball representatives on February 20 and their main concern is that fields are being used for only one season per year from January through May. The use during the summer is limited to all-star team practices. The facilities are fully available from end of August/first of September through December depending on how many all-star teams are still practicing. Pony League Baseball is making the fields available to other users due to rising costs to maintain the fields, which at this time, amounts to about $24,000 which includes the use of volunteer labor. The officials were seeking a Lorbeer type agreement with the City wherein the City would pay for all or a portion of the maintenance and the City would then allocate MAY 23, 2013 PAGE 7 P&R COMMISSION the fields to other users. Staff estimated the cost to the City for that type of agreement to be between $8,000 and $12,000 depending on the amount of use and time allocation. Staff compared the Pony League Baseball facilities with park facilities taking into consideration that parks have a much more extensive maintenance specification. The closest park for a comparison was Peterson Park as far as the approximate size to the Pony facility. Peterson Park maintenance amounts to about $56,000 per year which does not include lighting because the Pony facility does not have lights. This comparison would be using the same specifications that the City uses for the Lorbeer agreement which are very similar to the parks specifications. In talking with CM/DeStefano after the meeting, his goal is to have priority for the school facilities and the Parks Master Plan shows that the Youth Sports Facilities needs can be accomplished adding a lighted soccer/baseball field at Lorbeer and three lighted soccer fields and four lighted ball fields at South Point Middle School. At this time, the City Manager has decided to conserve the City's resources for maintenance until these facilities are constructed and not to use it on a privately owned facility. C/Herndon asked if the $56,000 was for the entire year and CSD/Rose responded that it was, in fact, the total cost for 12 months. C/Herndon asked if the $8,000 to $12,000 per year was realistic for the partial use and CSD/Rose responded that it sounds low because there are restroom facilities onsite, there is a snack bar on site and both would have to be maintained. Right now the park facilities are maintained seven days a week plus staff makes rounds, and stops in to double check to make sure the restrooms are stocked. He believes the $8,000 to $12,000 estimate is based on a lot of volunteer assistance. C/Herndon asked about -six months and CSD/Rose said it would likely be $12,000 to $28,000 depending on the details of the agreement. VC/Owens asked if the Pony League had any travel teams that play in the off-season and CSD/Rose said that he was not aware of any. VC/Owens asked what user groups would use the field and CSD/Rose responded that the League would make it available for games so it would be available to all ages during Saturday and daylight savings time. Chair/Grundy felt the cost to the City would be higher even if the City reached an agreement with the League because as reported, they are paying only $24,000 a year and they are not likely to want to pay more to maintain the facility at the same level that the City would and the City would most likely have to take up the slack. C/Herndon asked if staff could come up with a "draft" schedule. MAY 23, 2013 PAGE 8 P&R COMMISSION CSD/Rose responded that it should not be that difficult because the City has Paul C. Grow that has some of the same issues. It has only one soccer field and no lights so staff could look at the use there and compare it to the League field and come up with a "draft" schedule. C/Herndon asked who could use Pony League facilities. CSD/Rose said he says AYSO but there is also the Diamond Bar Soccer League. Pop Warner has used the Little League facility in the past but was not sure whether they use that facility at the present time. At least those two organizations would be interested. He is not sure about softball because there are grass infields at the Pony fields and softball has different pitching distances. Staff can look at how much additional time could be given to those three groups. VC/Owens said he had not been to the site in years. Is it possible the whole site could be laid out differently to maximize the uses? CSD/Rose said that this option was considered during the Parks Master Plan process but found that the first two fields immediately off of Sunset Crossing belong to the YMCA, behind that is the Pony League Complex and behind that is the Lanterman Developmental Center. Staff was looking at the possibility of creating a park at the front side and creating a sports complex in the back with access around the park into the Lanterman Developmental Center. The hiccup is that the City has heard Lanterman is for sale and will be closed. Staff has also heard that CalPoly Pomona has an interest in the facility for growing their educational program. Also, the City of Pomona has eyes on the facility as a possible commercial development. So to reconfigure the area to get maximum benefit would probably need to involve the YMCA to capture the front park access and road circulation. All of this involves large dollar amounts. Chair/Grundy asked if the proposal was to further investigate how Diamond Bar Community Foundation funds could help with the feasibility of a going forward plan. He asked that staff keep in mind that if staff believes it is more than $56,000 per year to maintain he feels that the Pony League should be approached and asked to participate financially on an equal basis. 3. OLD BUSINESS: None 4. NEW BUSINESS: None 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Herndon stated that as always, staff does a great job and he appreciates all of the work staff does and the reports that are forthcoming to the Commission. MAY 23, 2013 PAGE 9 P&R COMMISSION VC/Owens thanked staff for the Power Point Presentations. Chair/Grundy thanked staff for their efforts and all of the great reports and presentations they provide the Commission because it helps the Commissioners to better understand what's going on and more appropriately provide input. ADJOURNMENT: VC/Owens moved, C/Herndon seconded, to adjourn the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. With no one objecting and no further business before the Parks and Recreation Commission, Chair/Grundy adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of 2013. Respectfully Submitted, BOB ROSE, SECRETARY Attest: DAVE GRUNDY, CHAIRMAN Agenda no. 6.3(b) CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PARKS 8, RECREATION COMMISSION DIAMOND BAR CITY HALL - THE WINDMILL ROOM 21810 COPLEY DRIVE,_ DIAMOND_ BAR, CA 91765 JUNE 27, 2013 CALL TO ORDER: Chair/Grundy called the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chairman Owens led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioner Lew Herndon, Dave Roberto, Vice Chairman Ted Owens, Chairman Dave Grundy. Absent: Commissioner Benny Liang was excused. Staff Present: Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Anthony Jordan, Parks and Maintenance Superintendent; Christy Murphey, Recreation Superintendent; Alison Meyers, Community Services Coordinator; Mickey McKitrick, Recreation Specialist, and Debbie Gonzales, Administrative Coordinator. PRESENTATION OF 2013 YOUTH SOCCER SPORTSMASHIP AWARDS: RS/McKitrick. RECESS: Chair/Grundy recessed the meeting at 7:11 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Grundy reconvened the meeting at 7:22 p.m. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE: None CALENDAR OF EVENTS: As presented by CSD/Rose. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1.1 Regular Meeting Minutes of the April 25, 2013 Meeting C/Roberto moved, Chair/Grundy seconded, to approve the April 25, 2013 Regular Meeting minutes as presented. Without objection, the motion was so ordered with C/Herndon and VC/Owens abstaining. 1.2 Correct and Approve "draft' minutes for May 23, 2013 Regular Meeting C/Herndon moved, VC/Owens seconded, to approve the corrected "draft" minutes for the May 23, 2013 Regular Meeting. Without objection, the motion was so ordered with C/Roberto abstaining. June 27, 2013 PAGE 2 P&R COMMISSION 1.3 Transmittal of Thank you Letter to DBHS students for work at Silvertip Mini Park 2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 2.1 Recreation Program Update — RS/Murphey 2.1.1 Power Point Presentation on Grants awarded to the City for various projects — CSC/Meyers C/Herndon applauded CSC/Meyers for a great job on the grants and encouraged her to keep moving forward with her work. He asked if with some of these grants there would be future funds that the City could tap into and CSC/Meyers responded yes, that three of the five grants are annual programs that will have funding available assuming that the monies are appropriated. 2.2 Parks Report — PMS/Jordan C/Herndon asked PMS/Jordan if he had researched the possibility of using a more rugged and durable turf at Lorbeer and whether staff was moving forward and were expecting better results. PMS/Jordan responded that in the past the City used a blend of turf that contained a perennial rye which is nice looking grass but tends to grow in clumps as opposed to a Bermuda which is the creeping variety. Staff has eliminated perennial rye and is now using the Sports Field blend that has more bent grasses and more Bermudas and staff is hoping to get more of the creeping effect from the new blend. Remnants of the perennial rye are still there and the grass is being mowed as short as possible because once it gets a little bit tall it begins to create tripping hazards for the kids. VC/Owens said he noticed that the ball fields at Lorbeer and Pantera closed about the same time and wondered how it affected the field schedule. PMS/Jordan said closing the fields at this time has been a typical practice for the past several years and could not speak to any negative impacts the user groups might be.experiencing. Peterson Park is open. CSD/Rose said the Girls Softball Tournament ends on Father's Day weekend and AYSO does not start until the middle of August so it is a slower period between those dates and to have both parks closed is not a problem. The City Baseball program .uses Peterson and Heritage so it gives staff the opportunity to take care of Pantera and Lorbeer parks at the same time. VC/Owens asked when staff noticed the graffiti at Washington Street Park and PMS/Jordan said it was about three weeks ago. It was not very visible unless one walked right up to it because the tops of the picnic tables and play structures were covered with dark red crayon. C/Owens said he saw teenagers he had never seen there before sitting at the back June 27, 2013 PAGE 3 P&R COMMISSION tables watching him and hoping he would not walk back toward them. 2.2.1 Power Point Presentation on the Pantera Dog Park Improvements — PMS/Jordan C/Herndon asked if staff had an idea of the Dog Park costs to date. CSD/Rose said that as of now, everything including design, construction, etc. amounts to about $265,000. There is additional work to be done to extend the walkways from the existing walkways to the dog parks the cost of which is covered using a combination of CDBG and General Fund monies. In addition, a staircase will be put in at the large dog park near the original drinking fountain at an . engineer's estimate of about $40,000. VC/Owens said that PMS/Jordan has a pretty handy crew. Does the City rent the equipment? PMS/Jordan responded that the equipment is rented and that he has worked at a number of cities and by far this is the most talented crew he has ever been privileged to work with. 2.3 C I P Projects — CSD/Rose 2.3.1 Dog Park at Pantera Meadow — CSD/Rose reported that as previously reported by PMS/Jordan, the shelters, two additional drinking fountains and six additional benches have been installed. It took about three weeks to complete the project. It was amazing to watch the guys work and he was very proud of their effort. There will be one ramp, two walkways and a staircase installed to finish the dog park. Plans and specs are completed and were just reviewed by CDC, so the project will go out to bid and a contract will be obtained to begin this phase of construction about September. This is contemplated as a 35 -day project absent any special circumstances. 2.3.2 Grandview Trail and Grandview Trail Link — CSD/Rose stated that in addition to CSC/Meyers presentation, TKE contacted staff today and will be bringing in the Plans and Specs tomorrow for plan check. This project will go out to bid with an estimated date of bid opening the end of August/beginning of September and construction commencing late September/beginning of October. Staff just found out it received the $89,000 Habitat Conservation Grant which finally completes the funding to build the entire two- part trail before next summer. 2.3.3 Site D Public Park— CSD/Rose reported that Lennar Homes is still working on the concept plan for the park. When staff receives the concept plan it will be presented to the Commission as part of the June 27, 2013 PAGE 4 P&R COMMISSION review process._ One of the issues is the rain garden and the Public Works and Planning Departments are reviewing this portion of the park to determine who will maintain the feature before this project moves forward. 2.3.4 Larkstone Park — CSD/Rose stated that Lewis Homes is working on the redesign to mitigate the ancient landslides and any changes to the plans will come to the Parks and Recreation and Planning Commissions for final approval. 2.3.5 Diamond Bar Center Improvements — CSD/Rose said that the Diamond Bar Center looks completely different as one enters the premises because the offices and front counter areas are under construction. A temporary wall that has been constructed in front of the front counter that extends down the hall to what used to be the Willow room. The construction area is blocked from view for special events. However, people are complimenting staff on the temporary wall which looks very good. It is a steel wall that is covered in drywall which was mudded and painted and has a graphic of and scenes from the Diamond Bar Center itself. Staff has relocated to the Sycamore Room and it looks finished and permanent. The project was scheduled to take 90 days to complete; however, the contractor stated he can complete the project in less than half that time. And now that the project is into its second week the contractor now claims he can finish in a week or two. That said, all of the carpet is being redone and must be installed when the facility is not being used. There is a three day period of non-use after the week of July 4 and the contractor is planning to complete the carpet installation during that time. After construction is completed, it will be a matter of getting the furniture in the facility, part of which will not be available until the first week of August or so. The City was nervous about the very low bid but it turns out that this is an outstanding contractor and work is going very well. VC/Owens asked what staff was trying to address with the construction and CSD/Rose said the biggest issue had to do with office space. When staff moved the computers out of the Willow Room to City Hall it created available space so not only is there an office space, there is a conference room that can be used for staff meetings or as sales office when folks visit the center to reserve the facility. Chair/Grundy commented that the microphones are set a little to the right of each commissioner so perhaps in the future they could be positioned to the left so as they turn to talk they are more naturally positioned to speak into the microphones. June 27, 2013 PAGE 5 P&R COMMISSION C/Herndon asked_ RS/Murphey _-if _she would be returning_ to the Diamond Bar Center when it is finished and she responded that staff would be going back to the Center. 2.4 List of Pending Commission Requests — CSD/Rose 3. OLD BUSINESS: 3.1 Pony Baseball Facility CSD/Rose stated that the written report provided to the Commissioners attempts to show the amount of time that may be available at the Pony League Field should it be available for different organizations. When he met with the Pony League officials they told him the full availability is in the fall and partial availability is in the summer depending on their All-Star schedule and how many games they win. There are many teams that move on to All -Stars and during the summer it limits availability of the Pony Fields. Therefore, he did not list specific hours in his written report. Obviously, during June and July by 8:00 p.m. fields are still light enough to use and by August it probably drops down to 7:30 p.m. The report also includes September until about a 7:00 p.m. average time; October about 6:00 p.m. on average and during November and December it is usually dark by 5:00 p.m. Daylight Savings time ends on November 3 this year so after that date it is pretty much dark at 5:00 p.m. from that date through December. Each field has lots of open time on Saturdays and Sundays so it adds up to about 346 hours per field of available time. CSD/Rose reports that the YMCA has a new director coming in and during the interview process he mentioned he had visited the fields that are across from the Sunset Crossing YMCA and he was interested in those fields being upgraded and possibly being made available for different types of community uses. Of course there is a learning curve before any of that can happen but there may be some opportunity at that site as well. C/Herndon thanked CSD/Rose for the information and asked if it was possible and practical for RS/McKitrick to give the Commission some idea about how he might use these fields during these specific hours. Fall is a critical time when the City has a shortage of fields. He said he was not sure how critical November and December were for AYSO and others. Chair/Grundy said that the peak field use for AYSO is August through October and then high school has to stop playing AYSO so the field usage begins to taper off. In November AYSO goes into playoffs and December is when they are down to the few teams remaining in the playoff structure to get to the finals and semi-finals. June 27, 2013 PAGE 6 P&R COMMISSION Chair/Grundy asked if RS/McKitrick could report back to the Commission on hours of usage and also prepare field overlays to indicate in different configurations how the different fields could be used for different sports. CSD/Rose said that this assumes that the organization would make the fields available for soccer and he does not know that that is the case at this point. He knows that they have allowed Pop Warner to use the facilities so it may require follow up with the Pony League to see what they are willing to do and to first make sure that the City is dealing with the same people or whether staff would need to meet with a new set of officials. As far as configurations, there are grass fields and infields that would probably be similar to Peterson Park's grass fields. Chair/Grundy said he felt it would be helpful to have some discussion with the Pony League to see if the usage could be extended to football and/or soccer because he would like to determine if it is practical to consider scheduling. C/Herndon agreed and said that if it is practical, the Foundation would have to look closely at the cost, etc. He said he is enthused to know that at least this is a possible partial solution to the City's field shortage, if all of the elements can be worked out. 4. NEW BUSINESS: None 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Roberto thanked staff for their reports. Everything that we do in the City from this area of parks and service to teens has been good to see. Parents are very proud and it is kudos all of the time for all of the programs RS/McKitrick runs. Kudos to CSC/Meyers for the work she does on the City's grants. C/Herndon thanked staff. Staff does a fantastic job and he told RS/McKitrick earlier this evening that he was doing a great job. He is very encouraged that the Commission is exploring additional opportunities to eliminate the City's shortage of sports fields and he is getting more and more enthusiastic about what is happening. He received some very positive feedback from a council member that has spurred him on as well. He hopes and feels that at some point the City will resolve this problem and again, thank you to staff. VC/Owens thanked staff for the PowerPoint presentations which are very informative. He asked PMS/Jordan to thank his staff for the fine job and quality work they did on the dog park. Chair/Grundy said he would not be present for the July 25 meeting and will miss all of the Concerts in the Park during July but should be back in August. He added his appreciation to staff, particularly when one sees the reports, the grants that CSC/Meyers is able to get, the programs that RS/Murphey is running, the work that PMS/Jordan's crew was doing, and the heartfelt appreciation that the coach gave for RS/McKitrick. One can really tell what a great staff this City has and how much work they are doing. It really shows and he wanted to thank staff so much for the hard work they put into their jobs. June 27, 2013 PAGE 7 P&R COMMISSION VC/Owens congratulated CSC/Meyers for going after the grants so aggressively and her continuing effort that saves the City a lot of money. ADJOURNMENT: C/Roberto moved, C/Herndon seconded, to adjourn the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. With no one objecting and no further business before the Parks and Recreation Commission, Chair/Grundy adjourned the meeting at 8:35 P.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this _ day of 2013. Respectfully Submitted, BOB ROSE, SECRETARY Attest: DAVE GRUNDY, CHAIRMAN CITY COUNCIL �'ORC'OffittT �. 1959 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Man g TITLE: Preliminary Treasurer's Statement — July 2013 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the July 2013 Preliminary Treasurer's Statement. FINANCIAL IMPACT: No Fiscal Impact BACKGROUND: Agenda # 6_4 Meeting Date: Sept. 3, 2013 AGENDA REPORT Per City policy, the Finance Department presents the monthly Treasurer's Statement for the City Council's review and approval. This statement shows the preliminary cash balances for the various funds, with a breakdown of bank account balances, investment account balances, and the effective yield earned from investments. This statement also includes a separate investment portfolio report which details the activities of the investments. All investments have been made in accordance with the City's Investment Policy. Since there are still adjustments being made to the cash balances between the various funds for the Fiscal 12-13 year end, the statement being presented has been termed preliminary. Once the year end numbers have been finalized a revised July treasurer's statement will be presented to the City Council for approval. PREPARED BY: Susan Full, Senior Accountant REVIEWED BY: L �f Dianna L Honeywell, Finance DiVector Attachments: Preliminary Treasurer's Statement, Investment Portfolio Report CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - CITY TREASURER'S REPORT CASH BALANCE AS OF July 31, 2013 (Preliminary) BEGINNING CASH BALANCE $26,239,439.62 CASH RECEIVED Cash Receipts $1,366,251.49 Total Cash Received $1,366,251.49 $27,605,691.11 EXPENDITURES Checks Written ($2,113,260.91) Payroll Transfers (381,625.12) Wire Transfers (418,370.00) Returned Checks (174.00) Charge Card Fees & Other Adjustments (2,913.47) Total Expenditures ($2,916,343.50) CASH BALANCE AS OF: July 31, 2013 $24,689,347.61 TOTAL CASH BREAKDOWN Active Funds General Account $282,050.71 Payroll Account $201,273.06 Change Fund $1,000.00 Petty Cash Account $500.00 Cash With Fiscal Agent $3.20 Unamortized Discount on Investments $3,885.90 Total Active Funds $488,712.87 Investment Funds: Local Agency Investment Fund $8,046,500.43 Corporate Floating Rate Notes $749,532.13 Federal Agency Callable $8,497,071.86 Bank Negotiable CDs $6,446,510.11 Wells Fargo Advantage Money Market Fund $461,020.21 Total Investment Funds $24,200,634.74 CASH BALANCE AS OF: July 31, 2013 $24,689,347.61 Average Yield to Maturity 0.710% FY2013-14 Year -To -Date Interest Earnings $14,308.36 FY2013-14 Budgeted Annual Interest Earnings $180,950.00 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO SUMMARY REPORT for the Month of July 31, 2013 INVESTMENTS BOOK VALUE PERCENT OF PORTFOLIO TERM DAYS TO MATURITY YIELD TO MATURITY Local Agency Investment Fund $8,046,500.43 33.25% 1 1 0.244 Corporate Floating Rate Notes $749,532.13 3.10% 931 818 0.501 Federal Agency Issues - Callable $8,497,071.86 35.11% 1,612 458 0.847 Negotiable CD's - Banks $6,446,510.11 26.64% 1,377 973 1.186 Wells Fargo Sweep Account $461,020.21 1.90% 1 1 0.010 Total Investments and Averages - $24,200,634.74 100.00% 962 446 0.710 TOTALS $24,200,634.74 100.00% N/A N/A N/A TOTAL INTEREST EARNED I/ JaRfas DeStefan City Treasurer 8/28/2013 Date MONTH ENDING July 31, 2013 $14,308.36 FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE 2013-14 $14,308.36 I certify that this report accurately reflects all City pooled investments and is in conformity with the investment policy of the City of Diamond Bar approved by City Council and on file in the City Clerk's office. The investment program herein provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six months estimated expenditures. Page 1 UN v v m o o o N O O h n 0 .16 z T m n N r n v m m o e o n c v n V O O N O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O N O 0 0 0 0 m r6 c6 h -: O ao m_ m m m m M o a 0 N r (O m yl� Q � N i N N W � E N O W ti o LL Z ? n O O } N d M O N O 1n M W c rn N � 0 m m 6 N N T m n N r n v m m o e o n c v n V O O N O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O N O 0 0 0 0 m r6 c6 D h -: O j O 0 m v M o a 0 v of d o yl� c T � N i N N W � E N O W ti D LL W j O a U a d v > U d o c c T 3 z cm6 LL E Q m W o LL Z ? G 0� K U J c d m O W } W c rn N � u 0� K C Y (Q E CO EN 8 0 j M C G C , N Ecu Ry� M O Y 0 oan .�:. O va°O t O a a m �! m r m r m m m m m m r m m em- .m- ON ON -q N N N N N N N N N _N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. o 0 0 0 0 0 0 N f� r O O N N m N O mO QP o� o\ a N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N .`- m o o 3 o > a > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - O Nm m NN i0 r (O 0 . . LL O a O I� m . .- o 0 0 0 . p N C O •- � � � � � d a f N N m m (p (p T m 1� •- O O (p P O I� m m } O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •- � � O � � 0 0 O N N N m fp N f0 h 0 0 Nm m N N (O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O h O O O O m N (r0 O O m r o p O O M O M O o m N m O O m O) O O O o X 0 0 of of o a o 0 0 Oi o 0 0 m m . o 0 o m rn o o m o m o 0 Q Q N h Q d' YI h t0 m Q m Q 10 m 0 0 0 o p 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 P m O •- m m P m � N �- m O m r. m n m m o m V V m o m m rn o m V b I m I n ' O e' 0' O m O N N N M M M m m m M M N M N N m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N n n `o `o C C C C C N m M m m m m mm 'l Q 4 Q m m m 01 m D d d N d d d v J J J JO JO J U U U U U U U m m a E E E E E E E E E E E E E o o_ N N N N ry ry N O O O O O O N N LL LL— LL LL— Ll $ S S S S S Z Z z Z m m m m m� m m m m m- m m A m o a d a a a a a a v a d v a a a li 11 4� IL li li li Idt LL L� 11 IL IL li Li ti M P O �- m O h I� T O P •- N N a o 0 0 0 0 o p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 U T C d rn rn P m Q �p S LL Y P N r 2 P 4• L Q U U U V U U N N N M M P O O O y W W W W W W W m m m m C7 U C7 C7 C7 a m m m m M M M M m m m m m m m P P m cD a m M M M M m m m m M M P O m P P m c0 r P 0 v r U em- .m- ON ON J a O N N N N N N N N N _N O a f� r O O N N m N O mO QP o� o\ a Z o o 3 o > a > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - O LL O a O I� m N C O •- � � � � � d a Q n N m � lrn0 m M O N M OJ Ori N N N m c0 m N m b N N OO O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 m o o n OOi 'R O (O N V r r O O O O o o O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O p O O O O O O O O airo ro ro ro ai of - - ,o N N N N N N N N N N N N o � ei o ro of ai o o r m of N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d' V V V V m ro ro m --- ro ro ro P Q Q Q P Q P N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N N m N N O N O O O O O O o O O O O O O o O O 0 U o 'I. a \ z> m m m m P r z N mo m> 2 LL >> J M uWi W x Y U J ❑ Y W 2 O Z C O O O O O N N M M I m Cm"1 K 2 Al E u C d a E I Q m m I. r Q . . r ro Q o rl o m m m n <o m m r M m m o co m r o m m m m . mr O N M Q ro O r N 0_ (p_ (p N (O m M m N O Q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 00 00 0 0 0 0 9 O o 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OO O O O W W [O N O M m W W (O 0 OJ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NO N N N N. . N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o M o 0 0 0 7 J m R Z m Q K S T Y Q z U m m m N N M N N m Q n C OO U o0 0 Q 16 d d O y 2 N 0 K N � Q N W ' W W O m w CITY COUNCIL Agenda # Meeting Date: September 3, 2013 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Mkl'( ' 1. TITLE: APPROVAL OF CONTRAC WITH THE REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE—SAN GABRIEL VALLEY FOR FY 2013-14 IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $12,000. RECOMMENDATION: Approve. FINANCIAL IMPACT: This item is included in the Council -approved FY 2013-14 budget and does not require additional appropriations. DISCUSSION: The Regional Chamber of Commerce—San Gabriel Valley (Chamber) serves businesses in Diamond Bar and other cities in the San Gabriel Valley. In addition to working with the Diamond Bar business community, the Chamber must also continue to provide the menu of related services shown in Exhibit A (attached). These include: • Council representation on the Chamber Board of Directors. • A Diamond Bar -based `Business to Business" program • Free small business development workshops and training opportunities • Localized advertising opportunities (on website) • Ribbon cuttings at new Diamond Bar businesses • Regular cooperative meetings with the City Manager to discuss the business climate and economic development opportunities • Submittal of an annual report to the City Manager The City has historically utilized the services of the Chamber as a component of its overall economic development strategy. Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council continue its association with the Chamber and approve the contract in an amount not to exceed $12,000 for FY 2013-14. to the City Manager Attachments: 1. Consulting Services Agreement/Exhibit A. CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made as of , 2013 by and between the City of Diamond Bar, a municipal corporation ("City") and Regional Chamber of Commerce—San Gabriel Valley, ("Consultant). RECITALS A. City desires to utilize the services of Consultant as an independent contractor to provide consulting services to City as set forth in Exhibit "A". B. Consultant represents that it is fully qualified to perform such consulting services by virtue of Its experience and the training, education and expertise of its principals and employees. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of performance by the parties of the covenants and conditions herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Consuttanfs Services. A. Scope of Services. The nature and scope of the specific services to be performed by Consultant are as described in Exhibit "A". B. Level of Services/Time of Performance. The level of and time of the specific services to be performed by Consultant are as set forth in Exhibit "A." 2, Term of Agreement. This Contract shall take effect July 1, 2013, and shall continue until June 30, 2014, unless earlier terminated pursuant to the provisions herein. 3. Compensation. City agrees to compensate Consultant for each service which Consultant performs to the satisfaction of City in compliance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit "A." Payment will be made only after submission of proper invoices in the form specified by City. Total payment to Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall not exceed twelve thousand dollars ($12,000). 4. General Terms and Conditions. In the event of any inconsistency between the provisions of this Agreement and Consultant's proposal, the provisions of this Agreement shall control. 5. Addresses. City: Consultant: James DeStefano, City Manager Steven Ly, Executive Director City of Diamond Bar Regional Chamber of Commerce 21825 Copley Drive 19720 E. Walnut Drive South, Suite 201 Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178 Walnut, CA 91789 6. Status as Independent Contractor, A. Consultant is, and shall at all times remain as to City, a wholly independent contractor. Consultant shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of City or otherwise act on behalf of City as an agent. Neither City nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's employees, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not, at any time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its agents or employees are in any manner agents or employees of City. B. Consultant agrees to pay all required taxes on amounts paid to Consultant under this Agreement, and to indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against City by reason of the independent contractor relationship created by this Agreement. in the event that City is audited by any Federal or State agency regarding the independent contractor status of Consultant and the audit in any way fails to sustain the validity of a wholly independent contractor relationship between City and Consultant, then Consultant agrees to reimburse City for all costs, including accounting and attorney's fees, arising out of such audit and any appeals relating thereto. C. Consultant shall fully comply with the workers' compensation law regarding Consultant and Consultant's employees, Consultant further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless from any failure of Consultant to comply with applicable worker's compensation laws. City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Consultant under this Agreement any amount due to City from Consultant as a result of Consultant's failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this Section 6. D. Consultant shall, at Consultant's sole cost and expense fully secure and comply with all federal, state and local governmental permit or licensing requirements, including but not limited to the City of Diamond Bar, South Coast Air Quality Management District, and California Air Resources Board. Consultant further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless from any failure of Consultant to comply with the requirements in Section 6. Additionally, the City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Consultant under this Agreement for any amount or penalty levied against the City for Consultant's failure to comply with Section 6. 7. Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all work at the standard of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession under similar conditions. 8. Indemnification. Consultant shall indemnify, defend with counsel approved by City, and hold harmless City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against all liability, loss, damage, expense, cost (including without limitation reasonable attorneys fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation) of every nature arising out of or in connection with Consultant 's performance of work hereunder or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this Agreement, regardless of City's passive negligence, but excepting such loss or damage which is caused by the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. Should City in its sole discretion find Consultant's legal counsel unacceptable, then Consultant shall reimburse the City its costs of defense, including without limitation reasonable attorneys fees, expert fees.and all other costs and fees of litigation. The Consultant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City (and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers) covered by this indemnity obligation. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California and will survive termination of this Agreement. 9. Insurance. Consultant shall at all times during the term of this Agreement carry, maintain, and keep in full force and effect, with an insurance company admitted to do business in California and approved by the City (1) a policy or policies of broad -form comprehensive general liability insurance with minimum limits of $1,000,000.00 combined single limit coverage against any injury, death, loss or damage as a result of wrongful or negligent acts by Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, and independent contractors in performance of services under this Agreement; (2) property damage insurance with a minimum limit of $500,000.00; (3) automotive liability insurance, with minimum combined single limits coverage of $500,000.00; (4) professional liability insurance (errors and omissions) to cover or partially cover damages that may be the result of errors, omissions, or negligent acts of Consultant, in an amount of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and at least, $1,000,000 aggregate; and (5) worker's compensation insurance with a minimum limit of $500,000.00 or the amount required by law, whichever is greater. City, its officers, employees, attorneys, and volunteers shall be named as additional insureds on the policy(les) as to comprehensive general liability, property damage, and automotive liability. The policy (ies) as to comprehensive general liability, property damage, and automobile liability shall provide that they are primary, and that any insurance maintained by the City shall be excess insurance only. A. All insurance policies shall provide that the insurance coverage shall not be non -renewed, canceled, reduced, or otherwise modified (except through the addition of additional insureds to the policy) by the insurance carrier without the insurance carrier giving City thirty (30) day's prior written notice thereof. Consultant agrees that it will not cancel, reduce or otherwise modify the insurance coverage. B. All policies of insurance shall cover the obligations of Consultant pursuant to the terms of this Agreement; shall be issued by an insurance company which is admitted to do business in the State of California or which is approved in writing by the City; and shall be placed with a current AM. Best's rating of no less than A VII. C. Consultant shall submit to City (1) insurance certificates indicating compliance with the minimum worker's compensation insurance requirements above, and (2) insurance policy endorsements indicating compliance with all other minimum insurance requirements above, not less than one (1) day prior to beginning of performance under this . Agreement. Endorsements shall be executed on City's appropriate standard forms entitled "Additional Insured Endorsement", or a substantially similar form which the City has agreed in writing to accept. D. Self Insured Retention/Deductibles. All policies required by this Agreement shall allow City, as additional insured, to satisfy the self-insured retention ("SIR") and/or deductible of the policy in lieu of the Owner (as the named insured) should Owner fail to pay the SIR or deductible requirements. The amount of the SIR or deductible shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney and the Finance Director. Owner understands and agrees that satisfaction of this requirement is an express condition precedent to the effectiveness of this Agreement. Failure by Owner as primary insured to pay its SIR or deductible constitutes a material breach of this Agreement. Should City pay the SIR or deductible on Owner's behalf upon the Owner's failure or refusal to do so in order to secure defense and indemnification as an additional insured under the policy, City may include such amounts as damages in any action against Owner for breach of this Agreement in addition to any other damages incurred by City due to the breach. 10. Confidentiality. Consultant in the course of its duties may have access to confidential data of City, private individuals, or employees of the City. Consultant covenants that all data, documents, discussion, or other information developed or received by Consultant or provided for performance of this Agreement are deemed confidential and shall not be disclosed by Consultant without written authorization by City. City shall grant such authorization if disclosure is required by law. All City data shall be returned to City upon the termination of this Agreement. Consultant's covenant under this section shall survive the termination of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent Consultant prepares reports of a proprietary nature specifically for and in connection with certain projects, the City shall not, except with Consultant's prior written consent, use the same for other unrelated projects. 11, Ownership of Materials. All materials provided by Consultant in the performance of this Agreement shall be and remain the property of City without restriction or limitation upon its use or dissemination by City. Consultant may, however, make and retain such copies of said documents and materials as Consultant may desire. 12. Conflict of Interest. A. Consultant covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, director or indirect, which may be affected by the services to be performed by Consultant under this Agreement, or which would conflict in any manner with the performance of its services hereunder. Consultant further covenants that, in performance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it. Furthermore, Consultant shall avoid the appearance of having any interest which would conflict in any manner with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement. B. Consultant covenants not to give or receive any compensation, monetary or otherwise, to or from the ultimate vendor(s) of hardware or software to City as a result of the performance of this Agreement. Consultant's covenant under this section shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 13, Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement with or without cause upon fifteen (15) days' written notice to the other party. However, Consultant shall not terminate this Agreement during the provision of services on a particular project. The effective date of termination shall be upon the date specified in the notice of termination, or, in the event no date is specified, upon the fifteenth (15th) day following delivery of the notice. In the event of such termination, City agrees to pay Consultant for services satisfactorily rendered prior to the effective date of termination. Immediately upon receiving written notice of termination, Consultant shall discontinue performing services. 14. Personnel. Consultant represents that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all personnel required to perform the services under this Agreement. All of the services required under this Agreement will be performed by Consultant or under it supervision, and all personnel engaged in the work shall be qualified to perform such services. Consultant reserves the right to determine the assignment of its own employees to the performance of Consultant's services under this Agreement, but City reserves the right, for good cause, to require Consultant to exclude any employee from performing services on City's premises. 15. Non -Discrimination and Equal Employment Opportunity, A. Consultant shall not discriminate as to race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental handicap, medical condition, or sexual orientation, in the performance of its services and duties pursuant to this Agreement, and will comply with all rules and regulations of City relating thereto. Such nondiscrimination shall include but not be limited to the following; employment, upgrading, demotion, transfers, recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. B. Consultant will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of Consultant state either that it is an equal opportunity employer or that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race; color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental handicap, medical condition, or sexual orientation. C. Consultant will cause the foregoing provisions to be inserted in all subcontracts for any work covered by this Agreement except contracts or subcontracts for standard commercial supplies or raw materials, 16. Assignment. Consultant shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement not the performance of any of Consultant's obligations hereunder, without the prior written consent of City, and any attempt by Consultant to so assign this Agreement or any rights, duties, or obligations arising hereunder shall be void and of no effect. 17. Compliance with Laws. Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of the federal, state, and local governments. 18. Non -Waiver of Terms, Rights and Remedies. Waiver by either.party of any one or more of the conditions of performance under this Agreement shall not be a waiver of any other condition of performance under this Agreement. In no event shall the making by City of any payment to Consultant constitute or be construed as a waiver by City of any breach of covenant, or any default which may then exist on the part of Consultant, and the making of any such payment by City shall in no way impair or prejudice any right or remedy available to City with regard to such breach or default, 19. Attorney's Fees. In the event that either party to this Agreement shall commence any legal or equitable action or proceeding to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action or proceeding shall be entitled to recover its costs of suit, including reasonable attorney's fees and costs, including costs of expert witnesses and consultants. 20. Mediation. Any dispute or controversy arising under this Agreement, or in connec8on with any of the terms and conditions hereof, shall be referred by the parties hereto for mediation. A third party, neutral mediation service shall be selected, as agreed upon by the parties and the costs and expenses thereof shall be bome equally by the parties hereto. In the event the parties are unable to mutually agree upon the mediator to be selected hereunder, the City Council shall select such a neutral, third party mediation service and the City Council's decision shall be final. The parties agree to utilize their good faith efforts to resolve any such dispute or controversy so submitted to mediation, It is specifically understood and agreed by the parties hereto that referral of any such dispute or controversy, and mutual good faith efforts to resolve the same thereby, shall be conditions precedent to the institution of any action or proceeding, whether at law or in equity with respect to any such dispute or controversy. 21. Notices. Any notices, bills, invoices, or reports required by this Agreement shall be deemed received on (a) the day of delivery if delivered by hand during regular business hours or by facsimile before or during regular business hours; or (b) on the third business day following deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, to the addresses heretofore set forth in the Agreement, or to such other addresses as the parties may, from time to time, designate in writing pursuant to the provisions of this section. 22. Governing Law. This Contract shall be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 23. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be the original, and all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. 24. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, and any other documents incorporated herein by specific reference, represent the entire and integrated agreement between Consultant and City. This Agreement supersedes all prior oral or written negotiations, representations or agreements. This Agreement may not be amended, nor any provision or breach hereof waived, except in a writing signed by the parties which expressly refers to this Agreement. Amendments on behalf of the City will only be valid if signed by the City Manager orthe Mayor and attested by the City Clerk. 25. Exhibits. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement are incorporated herein by this reference. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. "City" Kn0 ts CITY OF DIAMOND BAR By: By: Tommye Gribbin, City Clerk Jack Tanaka, Mayor Approved as to form: By: David DeBerry, City Attorney "CONSULTANT" By: Its: parties which expressly refers to this Agreement. Amendments on behalf of the City will only be valid if signed by the City Manager or the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk, 25. Exhibits, All exhibits referred to in this Agreement are incorporated herein by this reference, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. ,.City, ATTEST: By: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk Approved as to form: By: David DeBerry, City Attorney "CONSULTANT" CITY OF DIAMOND BAR By: Jack Tanaka, Mayor EXHIBIT "A" FY 2013-2014 CITY SERVICES CONTRACT REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY SCOPE OF SERVICES July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014 A. Administrative Support: Monthly support for services to the City for promotion of City services, informational distribution and efforts to enhance the development of programs for the public benefit. Included in these programs are: Small Business Seminars, Business Expo, City Birthday Party, Business visitations and community outreach. 8. City shall have a liasion position on the Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors. This position shall be appointed by the Mayor and shall either be a City Council Member including the Mayor or a City staff member. This position shall be a non-voting member of the Board for as long as the contract remains in effect. C. City shall be provided, at no cost, the following; Second Tier Banner Advertising on the Chamber website for as long as the contract remains in effect; and two complimentary passes to each Breakfast and Luncheon event for as long as the contract remains in effect. D, Chamber shall continue development of the "Diamond Bar Business to Business" program to encourage Diamond Bar businesses to purchase items from other businesses in Diamond Bar. At a minimum the program should contain the following elements: marketing information about existing businesses in Diamond Bar that can provide services to other businesses; and/or educational information about how sales tax dollars benefit the community. This program must be available to all businesses in Diamond Bar not just members of the Chamber of Commerce. There may be some difference in level of service for the program between Chamber and non - Chamber businesses. Chamber shall provide the City with quarterly reports indentifying all Diamond Bar Chamber and non -Chamber member businesses participating in the program. Upon request, the City will provide a list of active City businesses to the Chamber twice a year in order to support and enhance economic growth within the City of Diamond. E. In a continued effort to promote businesses in Diamond Bar to the community and surrounding region, the Chamber shall conduct a minimum of 3 grand opening ribbon cutting events in Diamond Bar. F. The Chamber shall conduct at least five (5) meetings/workshops to promote small business development, which may include one-on-one meetings with licensed business counselors, or partnerships with other agencies. The meetings/workshops will be open to the public, widely advertised, and of no charge to participants, The meetings/workshops should provide participants with information about writing a business plan, Small Business Administration financing, and developing a marketing plan. G. The Chamber, through its members and contacts in the commercial real estate business, shall use its best efforts to be knowledgeable of all available commercial and office space in the City. To the extent possible, this commercial space availability shall be provided to the City Manager on a monthly basis. H. The Chamber, through its Professional Development Network, will conduct quarterly training and educational opportunities in Diamond Sar for Diamond Bar businesses. These opportunities shall be available for Chamber and non -Chamber members, Within 30 days following these meetings, the Chamber shall cause a written report to be developed and submitted to the City identifying each concern/issue raised by the business community and the individual or business which raised the issue. 1. Communications; Executive Director and City Manager and/or their designee will meet no less than quarterly to discuss issues impacting the business community including any information on specific businesses leaving the City, ideas to promote business retention and expansion in the City and opportunities to promote Diamond Bar and Diamond Bar businesses. Agenda # 6.6 Meeting Date: 9103/13 CITY COUNCIL \ ' .- AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: James DeStefano, City Mag TITLE: AWARD CONTRACT TO GERON MO CONCRETE, INC FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PANTERA DOG PARK ADA ACCESS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $37,200, PLUS A CONTINGENCY OF $3,720 (10%) FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION OF $40,920; PLUS APPROPRIATE $23,000 FROM GENERAL FUND RESERVES TO FUND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STAIRCASE ($7,000), CONTINGENCY ($3,720), PLAN CHECK/INSPECTION SERVICES ($5,000), AND COSTS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE SHADE SHELTERS ($7,280). RECOMMENDATION: Award contract and appropriate funds. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The City Council authorized $60,000 in CDBG funding in the 2013/14 FY Budget for the construction of ADA access to the Dog Park at Pantera Park. Although the CDBG funding will easily cover the costs for the accessibility portion of this project, CDBG funds cannot be used to pay for the construction of the staircase that is also a part of this project. Staff is requesting the appropriation of $7,000 of General Fund reserves to fund the construction of the staircase. Also, since CDBG funds cannot be used for the contingency or plan check/inspection services, staff is requesting the appropriation of $3,720 of General Fund reserves for the contingency and $5,000 for plan check/inspection services. Plus, staff is requesting the appropriation of an additional $7,280 of General Fund reserves for costs related to the installation of the shade shelters. The total appropriation from General Fund reserves staff is requesting is $23,000. BACKGROUND: The Dog Park at Pantera Park opened in November of 2012. The original construction included an ADA accessible walkway that leads from Pantera Park to dirt paths that then lead to the entry gates of the dog play areas. To improve ADA access, it is necessary to extend the concrete walkway all the way to the gates. This will involve the construction of three ADA accessible walkways to the entry gates. Also, an additional gate will require a set of stairs to provide access. The stairs are not ADA accessible, but to have two gates to each of the dog play areas, a set of stairs is necessary. Improvements now installed at the Dog Park include two shade structures, three drinking fountains, 12 benches and four trash cans. After the new walkways and stairs are constructed, an additional 5 benches will be installed along the accessible route. Total cost for the Dog Park improvements to this point is $270,754. Total appropriation approved by the City Council is $263,474, not including the CDBG funds for the new accessible walkways. In addition to the cost of the contract with Geronimo Concrete, staff is seeking the appropriation of $23,000 from General Fund reserves to complete the funding for the Dog Park. These additional funds will be used for the following four purposes: 1. Project Contingency ($3,720) - CDGB Funds cannot be used for establishing a contingency for a project. However, when unexpected conditions are encountered, staff will submit a request to the CDC of LA County seeking authorization to use additional CDBG funds for any extra costs. General Fund dollars will only be used for expenses deemed ineligible for CDBG funding by the CDC. 2. Staircase ($7,000) — CDBG funds cannot be used to construct the staircase. The contractor bid $7,000 to construct the staircase. $7,000 from the General Fund are needed to construct the staircase. The staircase will allow access to the 2nd gate to the large dog play area. 3. Plan Check/Inspection Services ($5,000) — Plan check and inspection services will be provided by the City's Building & Safety contractor and by Leighton & Associates Geotechnical Engineers. These firms will inspect and approve the work performed by the construction contractor. 4. Shade Shelters Installation ($7,280) — Additional costs were incurred when unexpected conditions were encountered when staff installed the shade shelters. While staff was digging the holes for the footings of the shade shelters, large chunks of concrete and asphalt were found below the surface of the ground. The additional work required to get past these obstacles delayed the project and required the rental of equipment for several days to complete the installation. DISCUSSION: The City released plans and specifications to receive bids for the construction of ADA access to the Dog Park at Pantera Park on July 16, 2013. Proposals were received from 10 contractors that were publicly opened and read on August 22, 2013 at Diamond Bar City Hall. Bids ranged from a low of $37,200 to a high of $69,578.14. Staff has checked the contractor's license of Geronimo Concrete, Inc. with the State of California and the license is active and clear. References have been checked for similar work and City staff has determined that this contractor is qualified to complete the work required of this contract. Staff recommends that the City Council award a contract to Geronimo Concrete, Inc. to complete the construction of this project. If this contract is awarded on September 3, construction by the contractor should begin by early October. The contract allows 35 days to complete the work, so it should be completed by the end of November, 2013, weather permitting. Geotechnical inspection services during construction will be provided by Leighton & Associates. Plan check and building inspection services will be provided by RKA. Claude Bradley, Facilities Maintenance Supervisor, will serve as the Project Manager in the field. REPO T, PLETED AND REVIEWED BY: r 1 B b se Director of Community Services Attachments: Agreement with Geronimo Concrete, Inc. Bid Opening Results dated August 22, 2013 AGREEMENT The following agreement is made and entered into, in duplicate, as of the date executed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk, by and between Geronimo Concrete, Inc. hereinafter referred to as the "CONTRACTOR" and the City of Diamond Bar, California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY." WHEREAS, pursuant to Notice Inviting Sealed Bids, bids were received, publicly opened, and declared on the date specified in the notice; and WHEREAS, City did accept the bid of CONTRACTOR Geronimo Concrete, Inc. and; WHEREAS, City has authorized the Mayor to execute a written contract with CONTRACTOR for furnishing labor, equipment and material for the Pantera Doe Park ADA Access Improvement project in the City of Diamond Bar. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, it is agreed: 1. GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK: CONTRACTOR shall furnish all necessary labor, tools, materials, appliances, and equipment for and do the work for the Pantera Doe Park ADA Access Improvement Project in the City of Diamond Bar. The work to be performed in accordance with the plans and specifications, dated July 16, 2013 (The Plans and Specifications) on file in the office of the City Clerk and in accordance with bid prices hereinafter mentioned and in accordance with the instructions of the City Engineer. 2. INCORPORATED DOCUMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED COMPLEMENTARY: The Plans and Specifications are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof with like force and effect as if set forth in full herein. The Plans and Specifications, CONTRACTOR'S Bid dated August 7, 2013, together with this written agreement, shall constitute the contract between the parties. This contract is intended to require a complete and finished piece of work and anything necessary to complete the work properly and in accordance with the law and lawful governmental regulations shall be performed by the CONTRACTOR whether set out specifically in the contract or not. Should it be ascertained that any inconsistency exists between the aforesaid documents and this written agreement, the provisions of this written agreement shall control 3. TERM OF CONTRACT: The CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work within thirty-five calendar days from the date of the notice to proceed. The CONTRACTOR agrees further to the assessment of liquidated damages in the amount of five hundred ($500.00) dollars for each calendar day the work remains incomplete beyond the expiration of the completion date. City may deduct the amount thereof from any monies due or that may become due the CONTRACTOR under this agreement. Progress payments made after the scheduled date of completion shall not constitute a waiver of liquidated damages. 4. INSURANCE: The CONTRACTOR shall not commence work under this contract until he has obtained all insurance required hereunder in a company or companies acceptable to City nor shall the CONTRACTOR allow any subcontractor to commence work on his subcontract until all insurance required of the subcontractor has been obtained. The CONTRACTOR shall take out and maintain at all times during the life of this contract the following policies of insurance: a. Workers' Compensation Insurance: Before beginning work, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish to the City a certificate of insurance as proof that he has taken out full workers' compensation insurance for all persons whom he may employ directly or through subcontractors in carrying out the work specified herein, in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Such insurance shall be maintained in full force and effect during the period covered by this contract. In accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code, every CONTRACTOR shall secure the payment of compensation to his employees. The CONTRACTOR, prior to commencing work, shall sign and file with the City a certification as follows: "I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of work of this contract." b. For all operations of the CONTRACTOR or any sub -contractor in performing the work provided for herein, insurance with the following minimum limits and coverage: 1) Public Liability - Bodily Injury (not auto) $500,000 each person; $1,000,000 each accident. 2) Public Liability - Property Damage (not auto) $250,000 each person; $500,000 aggregate. 3) CONTRACTOR'S Protective - Bodily Injury $500,000 each person; $1,000,000 each accident. 4) CONTRACTOR'S Protective - Property Damage $250,000 each accident; $500,000 aggregate. 5) Automobile - Bodily Injury $500,000 each person; $1,000,000 each accident. 6) Automobile - Property Damage $250,000 each accident. C. Each such policy of insurance provided for in paragraph b. shall: 1) Be issued by an insurance company approved in writing by City, which is authorized to do business in the State of California. 2) Name as additional insured the City of Diamond Bar, its officers, agents and employees, and any other parties specified in the bid documents to be so included; 3) Specify it acts as primary insurance and that no insurance held or owned by the designated additional insured shall be called upon to cover a loss under the policy; 4) Contain a clause substantially in the following words "It is hereby understood and agreed that this policy may not be canceled nor the amount of the coverage thereof reduced until thirty (30) days after receipt by City of a written notice of such cancellation or reduction of coverage as evidenced by receipt of a registered letter." 5) Otherwise be in form satisfactory to the City. d. The policy of insurance provided for in subparagraph a. shall contain an endorsement which: 1) Waives all right of subrogation against all persons and entities specified in subparagraph 4.e.(2) hereof to be listed as additional insured in the policy of insurance provided for in paragraph b. by reason of any claim arising out of or connected with the operations of CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor in performing the work provided for herein; 2) Provides it shall not be canceled or altered without thirty (30) days' written notice thereof given to City by registered mail. C. The CONTRACTOR shall, within ten (10) days from the date of the notice of award of the Contract, deliver to the City Manager or his designee the original policies of insurance required in paragraphs a. and b. hereof, or deliver to the City Manager or his designee a certificate of the insurance company, showing the issuance of such insurance, and the additional insured and other provisions required herein. f Self Insured Retention/Deductibles. All policies required by this Agreement shall allow City, as additional insured, to satisfy the self-insured retention ("SIR") and/or deductible of the policy in lieu of the Owner (as the named insured) should Owner fail to pay the SIR or deductible requirements. The amount of the SIR or deductible shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney and the Finance Director. Owner understands and agrees that satisfaction of this requirement is an express condition precedent to the effectiveness of this Agreement. Failure by Owner as primary insured to pay its SIR or deductible constitutes a material breach of this Agreement. Should City pay the SIR or deductible on Owner's behalf upon the Owner's failure or refusal to do so in order to secure defense and indemnification as an additional insured under the policy, City may include such amounts as damages in any action against Owner for breach of this Agreement in addition to any other damages incurred by City due to the breach. 5. PREVAILING WAGE: Since this is a Federally assisted construction project, Davis -Bacon will be enforced. If Federal and State wage rates are applicable, then the higher of the two will prevail. The Federal Labor Standards Provisions (Form HUD -4010) and the Federal Wage Determination are attached and made part of this agreement, and compliance will be enforced. Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the CONTRACTOR is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public works is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California, and are available to any interested party on request. City also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. The CONTRACTOR shall forfeit, as penalty to City, not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under this Agreement, by him or by any subcontractor under him. 6. APPRENTICESHIP EMPLOYMENT: In accordance with the provisions of Section 1777.5 of the Labor Code, and in accordance with the regulations of the California Apprenticeship Council, properly indentured apprentices may be employed in the performance of the work. The CONTRACTOR is required to make contribution to funds established for the administrative of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticeship trade on such contracts and if other CONTRACTOR'S on the public works site are making such contributions. The CONTRACTOR and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex -officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. 7. LEGAL HOURS OF WORK: Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract, and the CONTRACTOR and any sub -contractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The CONTRACTOR shall forfeit, as a penalty to City, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any sub- CONTRACTOR under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which the laborer, workman or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of the Labor Code. 8. TRAVEL AND SUBSISTENCE PAY: CONTRACTOR agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreements filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 1773.8. 9. CONTRACTOR'S LIABILITY: The City of Diamond Bar and its officers, agents and employees ("Indemnitees") shall not be answerable or accountable in any manner for any loss or damage that may happen to the work or any part thereof, or for any of the materials or other things used or employed in performing the work; or for injury or damage to any person or persons, either workers or employees of CONTRACTOR, of its subcontractors or the public, or for damage to adjoining or other property from any cause whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the performance of the work. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for any damage or injury to any person or property resulting from defects or obstructions or from any cause whatsoever. CONTRACTOR will indemnify Indemnities against and will hold and save Indemnitees harmless from any and all actions, claims, damages to persons or property, penalties, obligations or liabilities that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm, entity, corporation, political subdivision, or other organization arising out of or in connection with the work, operation, or activities of CONTRACTOR, its agents, employees, subcontractors or invitees provided for herein, whether or not there is concurrent passive negligence on the part of City. In connection therewith: a. CONTRACTOR will defend any action or actions filed in connection with any such claims, damages, penalties, obligations or liabilities and will pay all costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees, expert fees and costs incurred in connection therewith. b. CONTRACTOR will promptly pay any judgment rendered against CONTRACTOR or Indemnitees covering such claims, damages, penalties, obligations and liabilities arising out of or in connection with such work, operations or activities of CONTRACTOR hereunder, and CONTRACTOR agrees to save and hold the Indemnitees harmless therefrom. c. In the event Indemnitees are made a party to any action or proceeding filed or prosecuted against CONTRACTOR for damages or other claims arising out of or in connection with the work, operation or activities hereunder, CONTRACTOR agrees to pay to Indemnitees and any all costs and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in such action or proceeding together with reasonable attorneys' fees. CONTRACTOR'S obligations under this section apply regardless of whether or not such claim, charge, damage, demand, action, proceeding, loss, stop notice, cost, expense, judgment, civil fine or penalty, or liability was caused in part or contributed to by an Indemnitee. However, without affecting the rights of City under any provision of this agreement, Contractor shall not be required to indemnify and bold harmless City for liability attributable to the active negligence of City, provided such active negligence is determined by agreement between the parties or by the findings of a court of competent jurisdiction. In instances where City is shown to have been actively negligent and where City active negligence accounts for only a percentage of the liability involved, the obligation of Contractor will be for that entire portion or percentage of liability not attributable to the active negligence of City. So much of the money due to CONTRACTOR under and by virtue of the contract as shall be considered necessary by City may be retained by City until disposition has been made of such actions or claims for damages as aforesaid. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California. This indemnity provision shall survive the termination of the Agreement and is in addition to any other rights or remedies which Indemnitees may have wider the law. This indemnity is effective without reference to the existence or applicability of any insurance coverage which may have been required under this Agreement or any additional insured endorsements which may extend to Indemnitees. CONTRACTOR, on behalf of itself and all parties claiming under or through it, hereby waives all rights of subrogation and contribution against the Indemnitees, while acting within the scope of their duties, from all claims, losses and liabilities arising out of or incident to activities or operations performed by or on behalf of the CONTRACTOR regardless of any prior, concurrent, or subsequent passive negligence by the Indemnitees. 10. SAFETY STANDARDS: The CONTRACTOR shall comply with sections 103 and 107 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 327A 330) as supplemented by Department of Labor Regulations (29 CFR part 5). This requirement will pertain to construction contracts awarded to Operating Agencies and subcontractors in excess of $2,000, and in excess of $2,500 for other contracts which involve the employment of mechanics and laborers. 11. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The CONTRACTOR, its agents and employees shall comply with all applicable Federal, State and County laws and regulations governing conflict of interest including, but not limited to, 24 CFR Section 570.611 and 24 CFR Part 85, Section 85.36(b). The CONTRACTOR agrees to incorporate the language found in this section in contracts using CDBG funds and subject to compliance with conflict of interest Federal, State and County laws. The general rule shall be that no person described in the Persons covered section below who exercises, or has exercised any function or responsibilities with respect to CDBG activities, or who is in a position to participate in a decision making process or gain inside information with regards to such activities, may obtain a financial interest or benefit from a CDBG-assisted activity, or have a financial interest in any contract, subcontract, or agreement with respect to a CDBG-assisted activity, or with respect to the proceeds of the CDBG-assisted activity, either for themselves or those with whom they have business or immediate family ties, during their tenure or for one year thereafter. Persons covered — The conflict of interest provisions of this section shall apply to any person who is an employee, agent, consultant, officer, or elected official or appointed official of the CONTRACTOR, or of any designated public agencies, or of any subrecipients that are receiving CDBG funds. The CONTRACTOR represents, warrants and agrees that to the best of its knowledge, it does not presently have, nor will it acquire during the term of this Agreement, any interest direct or indirect, by contract, employment or otherwise, or as a partner, joint venture or shareholder (other than as a shareholder holding a one (1%) percent or less interest in publicly traded companies) or affiliate with any business or business entity that has entered into any contract, subcontract or arrangement with the County or Commission. Upon execution of this Agreement and during its term, as appropriate, the CONTRACTOR shall, disclose in writing to the City any other contract or employment during the term of this Agreement by any other persons, business or corporation in which employment will or may likely develop a conflict of interest between the County's and/or Commission's interest and the interests of the third parties. 12. COPELAND "ANTI -KICKBACK" Act: The CONTRACTOR shall comply with the Copeland "Anti -Kickback" Act (18 U.S.C. 874) as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR part 3). These terms shall apply to construction contracts in excess of $2,000. 13. DAVIS-BACON ACT: The CONTRACTOR shall comply with the Davis -Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276a to 276a-7) as supplemented by the Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR part 5). These terms shall apply to construction contracts in excess of $2,000. 14. PATENT RIGHTS: The CONTRACTOR must adhere to federal requirements and regulations relating to patent rights with respect to any discovery or invention which arises or is developed in the course of, or under a federally funded contract. 15. CONTRACTOR'S WARRANTY OF COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY'S DEFAULTED PROPERTY TAX REDUCTION PROGRAM: A. The CONTRACTOR acknowledges that the County has established a goal of ensuring that all individuals and businesses that benefit financially from the County through contract are current in paying their personal and real property tax obligations (secured and unsecured roll) in order to mitigate the economic burden otherwise imposed upon the County and its taxpayers. Unless the CONTRACTOR qualifies for an exemption or exclusion, the CONTRACTOR warrants and certifies that to the best of its knowledge it is now in compliance, and during the term of this Agreement will maintain compliance, with the County's Defaulted Tax Program, found at Los Angeles County Ordinance No. 2009-0026 and codified at Los Angeles County Code, Chapter 2.206. B. Failure of the CONTRACTOR to maintain compliance with the requirements set forth in the "COUNTY's DEFAULTED PROPERTY TAX REDUCTION PROGRAM" shall constitute default under this Agreement. Without limiting the rights and remedies available to the City under any other provision of this Agreement, failure of the CONTRACTOR to cure such default within 10 days of notice shall be grounds upon which the City may suspend or terminate this Agreement pursuant to the County's Defaulted Property Tax Reduction Program found at Los Angeles County Ordinance No. 2009-0026 and codified at Los Angeles County Code, Chapter 2.206. 16. NON-DISCRIMINATION: Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1735, no discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons in the work contemplated by this Agreement because of the race, color or religion of such person. A violation of this section exposes the CONTRACTOR to the penalties provided for in Labor Code Section 1735. 17. CONTRACT PRICE AND PAYMENT: City shall pay to the CONTRACTOR for furnishing all material and doing the prescribed work the unit prices set forth in the Price Schedule in accordance with CONTRACTOR'S Proposal dated August 7, 2013. 18. TERMINATION: This agreement may be terminated by the City, without cause, upon the giving of a written "Notice of Termination" to CONTRACTOR at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of termination specified in the notice. In the event of such termination, CONTRACTOR shall only be paid for services rendered and expenses necessarily incurred prior to the effective date of termination. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement with all the formalities required by law on the respective dates set forth opposite their signatures. State of California "CONTRACTOR'S" License No. TITLE Date CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA By: JACK TANAKA, MAYOR Date ATTEST: By: TOMMYE CRIBBINS, CITY CLERK CONTRACTOR'S Business Phone Emergency Phone at which CONTRACTOR can be reached at any time APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY Date Val LU W U) Y m0 D :ET2 O Z Z Q W 0. 250 O U oLa L F Um z 0 Val LL O W z LU :ET2 O U z LU 0 © ED 0 O D IL (D Eti m O 0 o cq D - .9 C7 Q v �• DST N O y w QC N 1 G_ 3 Q U J c Wo O dS � a S C� C: o co o a Z F- z UW uia0 !� O w® am LL O W W W w J 2 a N Y o 40 m �q o m 0 o? �I ��- Q a E. 0 9 O 00 LL > 0 w �� I 0 CL E co F— N o �♦ Q N Q � 0 Y Q Z Z 00 Z �w o 0 0 c c IL Z ----- w p a m a I OQ C� o LL 0 W Agenda # 7.1 Meeting Date: September 3, 2013 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 98® TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council r VIA: James DeStefano, City Manr, TITLE: Affordable Housing Land Use a d Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013-227) LEAD AGENCY: City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department PROJECT LOCATION: This Project includes components that apply Citywide, and other components that are site specific. The proposed General Plan and Development Code text amendments are non -site specific; whereas the proposed amendments to the General Plan Land Use Map and Official Zoning Map apply to undeveloped land generally located along the west side of Chino Hills Parkway/Philips Ranch Road, just south of Diamond Ranch Road and Scenic Ridge Drive, and adjacent to Diamond Ranch High School, in the northeast portion of the City (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022-273) RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -XX certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report and approving the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -XX approving a General Plan Amendment to establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) land use designation and change the current land use designation for Site A from Planning Area 1/Specific Plan (PA 1/SP) to Planning Area 5/High Density Residential -30 (PA-5/RH-30); Approve for First Reading by title only, waive full reading of Ordinance No. XX(2013): An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Approving Amendments to the Development Code and Official Zoning Map for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013-227) On Property Located West of Chino Hills Parkway, South of Diamond Ranch High School, Diamond Bar, California (Easterly Portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022); and 951822.1 4. Approve for First Reading by title only, waive full reading of Urgency Ordinance No. XX(2013)U: An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Approving Amendments to the Development Code and Official Zoning Map for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013-227) On Property Located West of Chino Hills Parkway, South of Diamond Ranch High School, Diamond Bar, California (Easterly Portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022). SUMMARY: Every city in California is required to adopt a General Plan, which includes a Housing Element. Among other things, the Housing Element must identify adequate sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate new housing development commensurate with the City's assigned share of the region's housing need for all economic segments of the community. A primary purpose of this state law requirement is to provide incentives to development that will increase the availability of affordable housing as defined in state law. Pursuant to its authority under state law, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) prepared a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), which determined that the City's share of regional housing needs for the 2008-2014 period is as follows: Table 1 Income Very Above Category Low Low Moderate Moderate Total Housing units 286 180 189 443 1,098 Source: SCAG 2007 The City's adopted and certified 2008-2014 Housing Element commits the City to establishing a new zoning designation that would permit residential development at a density of 30 dwelling units per acre (hereafter, the "Project"), and to rezone sufficient acreage to this new designation in order to accommodate the development of 466 lower- income housing units.' In addition, the zoning must permit the affordable housing units to be developed by right, meaning not subject to further discretionary City approvals, including additional environmental analysis. The City is required to complete this rezoning by the end of this planning period, which concludes on October 15, 2013, or face significant penalties that are further explained below. ' "Lower income" refers to households with incomes that are less than or equal to 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI), and is the sum of the Very Low and Low income categories in the table above. HCD estimates the 2013 AMI for Los Angeles to be $64,800. 2 951822.1 For the 2014-2021 Housing Element planning period, commencing on October 16th of this year, SCAG has determined Diamond Bar's lower income housing need will be 490 units, as shown in Table 2: Table 2 Income Very Above Category Low Low Moderate Moderate Total Housing units 308 182 190 466 1,146 Source: SCAG 2012 State law establishes a density of 30 units/acre as a "proxy" for housing affordability, operating under the assumption that this density is necessary to make affordable housing development financially feasible. The highest density currently allowed under the City's General Plan and Development Code is 20 units/acre. Therefore, the City is required to amend the General Plan and zoning regulations in order to comply with state law and to accommodate its RHNA-assigned fair share of affordable housing. The four recommended actions listed above (hereafter, collectively, the "Approvals"), would amend the General Plan and zoning regulations to allow development of up to 490 housing units at a density of up to 30 units/acre on the portion of the Tres Hermanos property identified as "Site A" in the EIR (see Figure 1 on the following page). The Approvals would satisfy the City's 2008-2014 affordable housing requirement and also the City's housing requirement for the 2014-2021 period. If the Approvals are not adopted prior to October 15, 2013, the City will be out of compliance with state law, and as a penalty, Government Code Section 65584.9 provides that the City will be required to rezone sites to accommodate both the 2008-2014 requirement (466 units, by October 15, 2014) and the 2014-2021 requirement (490 units, by October 15, 2016), for a total of 956 units. In sum, the City would be required to "make available" nearly twice the number of "adequate sites" for affordable housing units. State law provides for additional penalties for failing to timely complete the rezoning, including limiting the City Council's discretion in approving or disapproving affordable housing projects. It is important to note that while the Approvals are necessary to accommodate the City's assigned share of affordable housing, the law does not mandate that the site be developed with affordable housing. Affordable housing typically requires large financial subsidies, and neither the City nor the Property Owner is required to build or subsidize affordable housing. The actual development of affordable housing is driven by the market and ultimately the financial feasibility. The City's obligation is to adopt General Plan and zoning regulations that would "make available adequate sites" for affordable housing to be built. The Project site is owned by the Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency, and no development plan has been proposed for the site in connection with the Approvals. 3 951822.1 Figure 1 Note: The locations shown as Site A and Site B are approximate based on maps published by the Los Angeles County Assessor. Neither Site A nor Site B is proposed to include any portion of Diamond Ranch _High School property. Prior to any future development, City review and approval of a precise boundary survey and/or subdivision map would be required. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared as part of the Approvals (Attachment 8). The potential environmental impacts that would be expected to occur in connection with any future development of the site are described in the EIR and are summarized in the Analysis section of this report. After holding the public hearing, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions certifying the Final EIR, adopting the MMRP and approving General Plan Land Use Element amendment, and introduce an ordinance to amend the Development Code and Zoning District Map (Planning Case No. PL2013-227). The City Council is being asked to adopt two identical ordinances to amend the Development Code and Zoning District Map, the difference being that one is an urgency ordinance which will become effective upon adoption. Pursuant to Government Code Section 36937, the City Council may, by a four-fifths vote, adopt an urgency ordinance to 4 951822.1 take effect immediately if needed to preserve the public peace, health and safety and if the ordinance contains a declaration of facts constituting the urgency. ANALYSIS: Project Objectives The primary purpose of the Approvals is to identify adequate sites with appropriate land use and zoning designations to accommodate the City's assigned fair share of affordable housing, as specified in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, as summarized in Table 2, above. The Project objectives are as follows: • Prior to October 15, 2013, amend the General Plan land use and zoning designations to allow residential development at a density of 30 units/acre by -right in order to accommodate the City's affordable housing RHNA share in compliance with state law and the City's Housing Element. • Provide sufficient CEQA analysis for the City Council to select either Site A or Site B as the designated area to construct 490 housing units by -right without further CEQA review, to be consistent with state law and the City's Housing Element. • Provide and maintain adequate infrastructure facilities and public services to support development and planned growth. • Maintain traffic Level of Service (LOS) standards on streets and intersections, as specified in the City's Circulation Element. • Preserve natural resources on the Project site and compensate for those natural resources that would be disturbed by the Project. • Ensure land use compatibility between the Project and Diamond Ranch High School to the north, and nearby residential neighborhoods; and • Facilitate the provision of emergency secondary access for Diamond Ranch High School in coordination with development of the Project. These objectives implement specified policies in the Housing, Public Services and Facilities, Circulation, Visions Statement, Resource Management, and Land Use elements of the General Plan. Rationale for Selecting the Tres Hermanos Site for Rezoning As noted above, state law requires the City to rezone property to accommodate 490 additional housing units at a density of 30 units/acre. During the preparation of the draft 2008-2014 Housing Element, a 20 -acre underutilized commercial site near the intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Golden Springs Drive (Kmart center) was proposed as an appropriate site for satisfying the City's RHNA affordable housing obligations. However, in 5 951822.1 its review of the draft Housing Element, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) rejected the Kmart site as unsuitable for affordable housing, notwithstanding evidence provided by the City to support the viability of the property for high-density residential development, including vacant retail space, adjacent multi -family development, proximity to transit and services, and expressed development interest by the property owner. HCD indicated that vacant sites are more conducive to affordable housing development than are sites that require demolition and redevelopment. A finding of Housing Element compliance (referred to as "certification," not to be confused with certification of the EIR) by HCD is an important component of maintaining the legal adequacy of the City's General Plan and zoning regulations. Failure by the City to obtain Housing Element certification can result in litigation, payment of attorney fees for both the City and the opposing party, and judicial intervention in local land use decisions, including suspension of the City's zoning and building permit authority and court -mandated approval of low-income housing developments. This has occurred to cities in the state .2 In recognition of the City's objective of obtaining Housing Element certification and HCD's preference for vacant sites, the draft Housing Element was revised to remove the Kmart site from the list of potential rezoning sites and instead identify a vacant site that would be suitable for higher -density residential use. The only vacant, unencumbered site within the City large enough to accommodate the assigned RHNA share was the Tres Hermanos property. The Project site is located in the portion of Tres Hermanos having the best freeway access, and is also adjacent to existing residential development, a high school, roads, and utilities. All of these characteristics made the site the best available option for rezoning. HCD has accepted the Tres Hermanos site as suitable for accommodating the City's housing need and issued a letter finding the Housing Element to be in compliance with state law based on this location. Surrounding Land Uses and Development Areas to the west of the Project study area located within the City are developed with residential uses (low -medium density). Areas to the south are undeveloped, zoned AG (Agricultural) and designated on the General Plan as Planning Area 1/Specific Plan (PA- 1/SP), as is the Project Study Area. The majority of the Diamond Ranch High School site located to the north of the Project study area is zoned AG (Agricultural), and designated in the City's Land Use Element as School land use. A portion of the high school site is located outside the City. Areas within the City located east of Chino Hills Parkway are undeveloped (with the exception of flood control facilities), zoned AG (Agricultural), and 2 With regard to potential legal risks of failing to adopt zone changes, Mission Viejo provides a recent example that is instructive. In the previous planning period, that city had a RHNA shortfall similar to Diamond Bar, but the City Council was unwilling to adopt the required zone changes. A 3rd party legal aid law firm successfully sued the city and the Superior Court ordered the City Council to adopt the required zone changes within a specified time period. The city's land use permit authority for the rezone sites was also suspended until the city completed the zone changes and brought the Housing Element into compliance. The city's estimated cost in legal fees was $500,000. A 951822.1 are included within the PA-1/SP land use designation in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Residential areas along Scenic Hills Drive to the east of the Project site are located within the cities of Pomona and Chino Hills. Existing Site Characteristics The Project study area is currently undeveloped and is utilized for low -intensity grazing. Proposed General Plan and Zoning Amendments The highest allowable residential density currently permitted under the City's General Plan and Development Code is 20 units/acre. State law identifies a density of at least 30 units/acre that is considered necessary to facilitate affordable housing development. Therefore, the proposed amendments would establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) General Plan land use designation and zoning district, as well as amend the Development Code to establish standards and regulations that would apply to future developments within RH-30. The proposed amendments include an amendment to the Land Use Element map to change the land use designation for the portion of the subject property identified as "Site A" from Planning Area 1/Specific Plan (PA 1/SP) to Planning Area 5/High Density Residential -30 (PA-5/RH-30), and amend the zoning map to change the zoning designation for the portion of the subject property identified as "Site A" from Agricultural (AG) to High Density Residential -30 Dwelling Units per Acre (RH-30), and establish a maximum of 490 housing units for this site. (Note: the previous Planning Commission report for this item incorrectly identified the current General Plan land use designation for the Project site as `Agriculture".) Site A vs. Site B The Housing Element identifies a requirement to rezone property with a net developable area of approximately 16 acres to satisfy the City's RHNA obligation. The Project study area shown in Figure 1 is approximately 78 gross acres in size. Given the topography of the site, it is assumed that a development area of approximately 30 acres is required in order to achieve a net developable area of 16 acres at the state -mandated density of 30 units/acre. Since only a portion of the Project study area is needed to accommodate the City's RHNA obligation, the EIR analysis was structured to identify the portion of the study area that would have the least environmental impact. Preliminary biological surveys indicated that the southwestern portion of the property contained the most valuable ecological habitat, therefore two alternative sites — "Site A" and "Site B" — were established for analytical purposes. The EIR was structured to provide a comparison of the environmental impacts that would be associated with development of Site A or Site B. The primary advantage of Site A is its closer proximity to Chino Hills Parkway, which would require less grading and land disturbance associated with the construction of an access road and other infrastructure. Shorter distance to arterial highways would also allow for quicker emergency response times and shorter walking distance to transit. 7 951822.1 The primary advantage of Site B is its gentler topography compared to Site A. EIR Table 5.1-1 (Slope Analysis of Project Sites) shows that 29% of Site A consists of topography with greater than 40% slopes as compared to 19% for Site B. A disadvantage of Site B is its closer proximity to the SR -60 freeway and associated exposure to air pollutants and noise. Other than these differences, both sites A and B would have similar environmental impacts that are less than significant or can be mitigated below the level of significance through the identified mitigation measures. Based on these differences, staff recommends selection of Site A because of its advantages associated with closer proximity to existing roadways. It should be noted that in recent years, the cities of Industry, Diamond Bar and Chino Hills have discussed the possibility of preparing a large-scale specific plan for the entire Tres Hermanos property, which covers approximately 2,400 acres within both Diamond Bar and Chino Hills. The Approvals would not preclude future adoption of a Tres Hermanos specific plan or relocation of the high density residential designation proposed for Site A to another location on the Tres Hermanos property, or to craft a more inclusionary housing plan. In the event that development of Site A does not take place in the meantime, the rezoning of Site A could provide Diamond Bar with a "placeholder" wherein the City has fulfilled its commitment to set aside sufficient, developable acreage to meet our RHNA obligation through the year 2021, and avoid substantial rollover penalty that would otherwise go into effect on October 16, 2013. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The EIR provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with development of either Site A or Site B, identifies mitigation measures to lessen those impacts, and analyzes a reasonable range of project alternatives. Opportunities for Public Invoivement Outreach efforts to solicit participation from public agencies and interested persons during the EIR process included the following: Notice of Preparation: The City circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to public agencies, special districts, and members of the public requesting such notice for a 30 -day period commencing June 14, 2012 and ending July 17, 2012. A copy of the NOP along with NOP comments are provided in Appendix A of the EIR. Scoping Meeting: During the NOP review period, the City conducted a public scoping meeting on June 21, 2012 at the Pantera Park Community Room. The meeting was intended to facilitate public input. Approximately 75 persons attended the meeting. The majority of attendees were residents of the Hidden Valley condominium complex at the northeast corner of Scenic Ridge Road and Chino Hills Parkways, located in the City of Pomona. Many residents expressed opposition to the Approvals. Issues raised at this meeting included views, noise, traffic, air pollution, crime, school capacity, soil instability, 8 951822.1 wildlife habitat, fire hazard, emergency access, and economic impacts/property values. Many attendees asked that the City consider other sites for rezoning. The EIR analysis of two alternative sites (see EIR Chapter 6) directly responds to this request. Notice of Completion/Availability: A Notice of Completion and Availability of the Draft EIR was filed with the Office of Planning and Research on May 23, 2013. In accordance with CEQA, a 45 -day public review period of the Draft EIR was provided from May 24, 2014 through July 8, 2013. Draft EIR Comments and Responses: Comments received on the Draft EIR are provided in Appendix G of the Final EIR and responses to those comments are provided in Chapter 9 of the Final EIR. The Response to Comments address all comments received during the 45 -day EIR review period, as well as late comments submitted after the close of the comment period. CEQA Guidelines Section 15132(d) requires that the Final EIR include "The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process." Where appropriate, changes to the EIR have been made in response to comments received. Some EIR comments related to economic or social issues such as property values and crime, which absent a physical change in the environment are not issues within the scope of CEQA. For those comments, the Final EIR notes that while decision -makers may consider economic and social factors in the decision whether to adopt the Approvals, since no evidence was received that such factors would cause a physical change in the environment then those issues are not within the scope of CEQA. Having said the above, no substantial evidence has been submitted and City staff is unaware of any substantial evidence, that the Approvals will result in any increase in crime or decrease property values. Key Areas of Impacts Analyzed The EIR addresses potentially significant environmental effects in the areas of aesthetics; agricultural resources; air quality and greenhouse gas emissions; biological resources; cultural resources; geology, soils and mineral resources; hazards and hazardous materials; hydrology and water quality; land use and planning; noise; population and housing; public services; recreation; transportation and traffic; and utilities and service systems. Where potentially significant adverse impacts were identified, the EIR proposed measures to mitigate them. The mitigation measures are set forth in the Table 2.5-1 (Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures) in the Final EIR and in the MMRP included in the EIR certification resolution (Attachment 1). Alternatives to the Proposed Project CEQA requires that EIRs "...shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives". The selection of alternatives and their discussion must "foster informed decision-making and public participation" (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(a)). 9 951822.1 The primary purpose of the Approvals is to ensure that the City's plans and zoning regulations comply with state housing law by making available adequate sites as described in the City's Housing Element. This requirement established the framework for the selection of alternatives, as described in Chapter 6 of the EIR. Other than the "No Project" alternative, which is required by CEQA, only alternatives that could conceivably accomplish the key objective of maintaining compliance with state housing element law were included in the alternatives analysis. These alternatives are summarized as follows: Alternative 1 ("No Project"): The existing General Plan and zoning designations for the property would continue unchanged, which would allow either the continued agricultural use or residential development of up to six homes on the selected 30 -acre site (one unit per five acres under the current zoning). Alternative 2 ("Multiple Infill Sites"): Under this alternative, amendments to the General Plan and zoning would allow development of 490 multi -family units on multiple infill sites currently zoned for light industrial uses in the northwestern portion of the city. Alternative 3 ("Tres Hermanos-South"): This alternative would include General Plan and zoning amendments to allow development similar to the Proposed Project at a location approximately one mile south of the Project Site. Table 3 COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Aesthetics + + _ Agriculture and Forestry Resources + + _ Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions + + _ Biological Resources + + Cultural Resources + + _ Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources + + +/- Hazards + +/- _ Hydrology and Water Quality + + _ Land Use and Planning = Noise + _ + Population and Housing + Recreation + Transportation and Traffic +l- =1- =l - Utilities and Service Systems + Overall +/- + _ Would the Alternative Meet Most of the Project Objectives? No No No Legend: - Inferior to the Proposed Project + Superior to the Proposed Project, even though the Project would not cause significant effects +/- Characteristics both better and worse than the Proposed Project = Similar impact to the Proposed Project 10 951822.1 Selection of Environmentally Superior Alternative: CEQA requires a comparative analysis of the environmental impacts of the alternatives, but at a lesser level of detail than for the Project. Section 6.3 of the EIR presents a comparative description of the environmental impacts that would be expected to occur from the three alternatives. CEQA also requires that the EIR identify the environmentally superior alternative other than the No Project alternative. Table 3 summarizes the relative impacts of the three alternatives compared to the Project. Alternative 2 (Multiple Infill Sites) was considered to be environmentally superior to the Project. Alternative 3 would have similar impacts to the Project. However, none of the three alternatives would meet the key objective of maintaining compliance with state law because the City is required to rezone property acceptable to HCD in order to maintain Housing Element certification. As noted previously, during the preparation of the Housing Element, an underutilized non-residential site was proposed for rezoning to satisfy the City's RHNA housing obligations, but HCD rejected this option. If the City were to select a site other than the Project site for rezoning, HCD may not certify the Housing Element and the City would no longer be considered in compliance with state law. Therefore, only adoption of the Approvals would meet the basic Project objectives. Another purpose of an alternatives analysis is to identify an alternative that would reduce or eliminate significant environmental impacts of the Project. However, the EIR concluded that with the identified mitigation measures the Project would not result in any significant impacts and thus, such an alternatives analysis was unnecessary. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) A MMRP was prepared to identify site-specific conditions for future development that will reduce potential environmental impacts. The purpose of the MMRP is to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures by identifying specific responsibilities for implementation and monitoring. The MMRP is attached as an exhibit to the draft resolution for certification of the Final EIR and approval of the MMRP (Attachment 1). As documented in the Final EIR, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce all potentially significant impacts associated with the Approvals to less -than - significant levels. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On August 13, 2013, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the Approvals. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted resolutions by unanimous vote recommending City Council certification of the EIR and adoption of the Approvals for Site A. During the hearing approximately 90 persons spoke regarding the project. The majority of speakers expressed appreciation for the high quality of life in Diamond Bar and adjacent areas, as well as concerns regarding the potential impacts of an affordable housing project on property values, crime and schools. Concerns were also expressed regarding traffic, 11 951822.1 aesthetics, biological habitat, geological hazards and related issues. Some speakers questioned whether the City is required to approve zoning for affordable housing and whether all options have been exhausted to avoid this requirement. One speaker presented a petition (Attachment 9), signed by several residents of the neighborhood to the west of the Project site, requesting that the Commission recommend that the City Council rezone Site A. During the Commission's deliberations, it was noted that the City is required to prepare a Housing Element update for the 2013-2021 planning period within the next few months. The Commission discussed the possibility of considering other sites to satisfy the City's affordable housing allocation, particularly the option of infill sites or other sites within Tres Hermanos, as part of the Housing Element update. Staff indicated that alternate sites could be studied, and that if an alternate site (or sites) were accepted by HCD, the RH-30 zoning designation could be transferred to the alternate sites as part of the Housing Element update process. The Planning Commission's action to recommend City Council approval of a zoning amendment for Site A included a recommendation to examine alternate sites as part of the 2013-2021 Housing Element update. The Planning Commission also discussed the issue of development standards in the proposed RH-30 district, and recommended that the height limit be established as 3 - stories and 35 feet, rather than 45 feet. The draft City Council Resolution includes this recommended revision. The City's consultant for the Project has advised that the required 30 unit/acre density could be constructed within this height limit. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing notices were mailed on August 23, 2013 to property owners within a 1,000 - foot radius of the Project site, and to all speakers who have previously attended the scoping meeting or Planning Commission hearing, or submitted comments in writing. The notice was also published in a 1/8 page display in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin and San Gabriel Valley Tribune newspapers on August 23, 2013. The project site was posted with a notice display board in two locations (Chino Hills Parkway and Rockbury/Deep Springs Drive), and a copy of the public notice was posted at the City's three designated community posting sites. The Final EIR and Response to Comments were also posted on the City's website, and hard copies were made available for review at City Hall and the Diamond Bar Branch of the Los Angeles County Library. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: 1. Open the public hearing to take public testimony from the public regarding the EIR and all land use entitlements; 2. Close the public hearing; 12 951822.1 3. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -XX (Attachment 1) certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2012061066) and approving the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; 4. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -XX (Attachment 2) approving a General Plan Amendment to establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) land use designation and change the current land use designation on the Land Use Map for the portion of the subject property identified as "Site A" from Planning Area 1/Specific Plan (PA 1/SP) to Planning Area 5/High Density Residential -30 (PA-5/RH-30); 5. Approve for First Reading by title only, waive full reading of Ordinance No. )(X(2013) (Attachment 3): An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Approving Amendments to the Development Code and Official Zoning Map for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013-227) On Property Located West of Chino Hills Parkway, South of Diamond Ranch High School, Diamond Bar, California (Easterly Portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 8701- 022); and 6. Approve for First Reading by title only, waive full reading of Urgency Ordinance No. XX(2013)U (Attachment 4): An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Approving Amendments to the Development Code and Official Zoning Map for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013-227) On Property Located West of Chino Hills Parkway, South of Diamond Ranch High School, Diamond Bar, California (Easterly Portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022). Prepared by: B Grace . Lee Senior Planner Attachments: Reviewed by: Greg Gubman, AICP Community Development Director 1. Resolution No. 2013 -XX (Certifying the Final EIR and Adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) 2. Resolution No. 2013 -XX (Approving General Plan Land Use Element Amendment PL2013-227) 3. Ordinance No. XX(2013) (Approving Development Code and Zoning Map Amendment PL2013-227) 4. Urgency Ordinance No. XX(2013)U 5. Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes Dated August 13, 2013 13 951822.1 6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2013-17 (Recommending City Council Certification of the Final EIR and Adoption the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) 7. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2013-18 (Recommending City Council Approval of Amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element, Development Code, and Zoning Map for Site A) 8. Proposed Final EIR 9. Petition Submitted to the Planning Commission on August 13, 2013 14 951822.1 Attachment 1 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 2012061066), APPROVING THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION PROJECT, AFFECTING AN AREA COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 30 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF CHINO HILLS PARKWAY SOUTH OF ITS INTERSECTION WITH DIAMOND RANCH ROAD/SCENIC RIDGE DRIVE, AND SOUTH OF THE SR -60 FREEWAY AND DIAMOND RANCH HIGH SCHOOL (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 8701-22-273). A. RECITALS 1. On April 19, 2011, the City Council adopted the 2008-2014 Housing Element update, which was found to be in compliance with state law by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on June 14, 2011. The Housing Element identifies Diamond Bar's share of the regional housing need for the 2006-2014 time period as 1,090 units, including 284 very -low income units, 179 low-income units, 188 moderate -income units, and 439 above -moderate units. Housing need allocations are determined by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for each jurisdiction in the six -county SCAG region through a process known as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). 2. Due to a 2009 annexation adjustment, the City's 2006-2014 regional housing allocation increased to 1,098 units, with its lower-income (i.e., very -low and low) share increasing to 466 units. In the 5th Housing Element update cycle for the 2013-2021 planning period, the City has been allocated a need for 1,146 total units, of which 490 are in the very -low and low income categories. State law requires the City to demonstrate that it has adequate sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate development of new housing commensurate with this RHNA allocation. State law does not mandate that new housing units must be built, nor require cities to build or finance new housing. The City's legal obligations are to ensure that zoning is in place such that new housing could be developed in accordance with the RHNA, and to facilitate the planning and development process when property owners seek approval for residential projects that would further the City's progress toward the regional goals established in the RHNA. 3. State law establishes a "default density' of 30 units per acre as the density necessary to facilitate the production of lower-income housing. Since the City does not currently have any land zoned for residential development at greater than 20 units per acre, state law requires the City to amend its zoning regulations to allow multi -family development by -right at 30 units per acre for sites sufficient to accommodate the City's assigned very -low- and low-income share of regional housing need. 948324.1 951513.1 4. A finding of Housing Element compliance (referred to as "certification") by HCD is an important component of maintaining the legal adequacy of the City's General Plan and zoning regulations. Failure of a city to obtain Housing Element certification can result in litigation and judicial intervention in local land use decisions, which have included suspension of cities' zoning and building permit authority and court -mandated approval of low-income housing developments. 5. In recognition of the City's objective of obtaining Housing Element certification, the adopted 2008-2014 Housing Element includes Program 9, which calls for amendments to the City's General Plan and zoning regulations for sufficient land to accommodate the City's fair share of very -low- and low-income regional housing need. The Housing Element identifies land within the Tres Hermanos property for this purpose. The Project is located in the portion of Tres Hermanos having the best freeway access, and is also adjacent to existing residential development, a high school, roads, and utilities. The timing of development of the selected site would depend on market forces and the interests of the property owner. No detailed development plans or schedule are proposed at this time, but any future actions would be addressed by this EIR and obligated to its mitigation measures; no subsequent CEQA analysis is anticipated by the City. 6. The project site was previously owned by the Industry Urban Development Agency. After the statewide dissolution of redevelopment agencies, the property was transferred to the Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency. The Project was initiated solely by the City pursuant to state law, which requires the City Council to amend the General Plan and zoning regulations to accommodate additional multi -family housing commensurate with the City's fair share of regional housing needs. 7. On June 14, 2012, the City's Community Development Department disseminated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study presenting a preliminary assessment of the potential impacts of the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project. The NOP was circulated for a 30 -day review period that ended July 17, 2012. The NOP was delivered to the State Clearinghouse, and posted in the City Clerk's office for 30 days. The City also conducted a public scoping meeting on June 21, 2012. A copy of the NOP as well as comments received during the NOP review period are provided in Appendix A of the Final EIR. 8. As required by CEQA, a Draft EIR (DEIR) was prepared and contained: a) table of contents or index; b) summary; c) project description; d) environmental setting; e) significant impacts (direct, indirect, cumulative, growth -inducing and unavoidable impacts); f) alternatives; g) mitigation measures; and h) irreversible changes. 9. A Public Notice of Availability (NOA) was prepared for the DEIR and the NOA was placed in the Los Angeles County Clerk's office for 30 days, as required by Public Resources Code §21092. The City, as Lead Agency, sent a copy of its NOA to anyone requesting it, per CEQA Guidelines §15087. In addition, public notice of DEIR availability was posted on- and off-site, and was provided through publication in a newspaper of general circulation. The City consulted 2 951513.1 with and requested comments on the DEIR from responsible and trustee agencies, and adjacent cities and counties, as required by Public Resources Code §21104 and §21253. The DEIR was delivered to the State Clearinghouse for review on May 24, 2013. 10. On July 26, 2013, responses to comments were provided to each public agency that submitted comments on the DEIR, per CEQA Guidelines §15088. 11. A Final EIR has been prepared per CEQA Guidelines §15132. The Final EIR includes the DEIR, comments on the DEIR, responses to comments, and revisions to the DEIR. 12. CEQA contains a "substantive mandate" requiring public agencies to refrain from approving projects with significant environmental effects if there are feasible alternatives or mitigation measures" that can substantially lessen or avoid those effects. CEQA guidelines define the term "feasible" as capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors. In accordance therewith, the City Council has determined that, since the Project, as defined in paragraph 15 below, would result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of all potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR, the City Council has identified the Project, as proposed, as the preferred project. 13. The Project evaluated in the Final EIR includes the approval of the following actions (Items (a) through (d) below are collectively referred to as the 'Project']: a) Amendments to the General Plan and Development Code to establish a new High Density Residential -30 units per acre (RH-30) General Plan Land Use Designation and Zone District that allows multi -family development at a net density of 30 units per acre; and b) Site -Specific General Plan Amendment to change the Land Use Map designation for one of the two candidate housing sites from Planning Area 1/Specific Plan (PA 1/SP) to Planning Area 5/High Density Residential -30 (PA-5/RH-30); and c) Site -Specific Zoning Map Amendment to change the Zoning District Map designation for one of the two candidate housing sites from Agriculture (AG) to High Density Residential -30 (RH-30). The Zoning Amendment would limit development to 490 housing units within the selected housing site; and d) Certification of Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2012061066), which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of Site A or Site B within the 78 -acre Project Study Area. The Final EIR includes mitigation measures and alternatives, a MMRP, and identifies Alternative 2 (Infill Sites) as the environmentally superior alternative, however Alternative 2 would not meet the basic objectives of the Project in that it would not maintain consistency with the Housing Element. 14. On August 13, 2013, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals regarding the Final 3 951513.1 EIR and the Project, and adopted a resolution finding that the Final EIR addresses the requirements of CEQA and recommending its certification by the City Council. 15. Notification of the public hearing for the Project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on August 23, 2013. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the parcel on which the zone change is proposed, including all speakers who have previously attended the scoping meeting or submitted comments in writing. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the Project site was posted with two display boards in two locations (Chino Hills Parkway and Rockbury/Deep Springs Drive), and the notice was posted at three other designated community posting sites. 16. On September 3, 2013, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing and solicited testimony from all interested individuals regarding the Final EIR and the Project. After hearing public testimony, the public hearing was closed and the City Council concluded its deliberations on the Final EIR, the MMRP and the Findings of Fact. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. That all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. That Environmental Impact Report (EIR) SCH No. 2012061066 has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 45 -day public review period for the EIR began May 24, 2013, and ended July 8, 2013. 3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the Project constitutes the only feasible alternative in that none of the other alternatives would meet the basic Project objective of maintaining consistency with the Housing Element of the General Plan. Program 9 of the Housing Element, which has been reviewed and found by the Department of Housing and Community Development to be in compliance with state law, includes a commitment to rezone a parcel or parcels selected from Housing Element Table B-2 to accommodate the City's share of regional housing need of 490 housing units for very -low- and low-income households. Failure of the City to rezone a site or sites listed in Table B-2 and/or the rezoning of an alternate site would result in the Housing Element becoming non-compliant with state law, therefore, this option would not accomplish a basic project objective. 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the standard conditions, performance standards, and mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Project, which avoid or substantially lessen significant adverse environmental impacts identified in Final EIR. 5. The City Council hereby certifies the Final EIR to be complete and adequate 4 951513.1 and that it has reviewed and considered the information within the Final EIR prior to approving the Project; that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council; and that it adopts the Findings of Facts and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached hereto, respectively, as Exhibits A and B which are hereby incorporated herein by reference. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. M Jack Tanaka, Mayor I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 3'd day of September, 2013 and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of September, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: Council Members: NOES: Council Members: ABSENT: Council Members: ABSTAIN: Council Members: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 5 951513.1 EXHIBIT A FINDINGS OF FACT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION PROJECT STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2012061066 Section 21081 and 21081.5, California Public Resources Code Sections 15091, 15092, and 15083, Title 14, Chapter 3, California Code of Regulations 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 Project Discretionary Actions The following discretionary actions are proposed as part of the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project, which hereafter shall collectively be referred to as the `Project': Creation of New RH-30 General Plan Land Use Designation and Zone District. The Project would amend the General Plan Land Use Element and the Development Code to create a new RH-30 (High Density Residential -30) district that allows multi -family development at a net density of 30 units per acre. Site -Specific General Plan and Zoning Amendments. The General Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning District Map would be amended to redesignate one of the two candidate housing sites shown in Final EIR Exhibit 4-2 from Agriculture (AG) to RH-30. The Land Use Element Amendment would limit development to 490 housing units within the selected housing site. 1.2 Project Location and Site Description The Project Study Area is located in the City of Diamond Bar ("City"), in the County of Los Angeles. The Project Study Area is composed of approximately 78 acres of undeveloped land generally located along the west side of Chino Hills Parkway just south of its intersection with Diamond Ranch Road/Scenic Ridge Drive, and south of the SR -60 freeway and Diamond Ranch High School, as shown in Final EIR Exhibits 4-1 and 4-2. The Project Study Area is comprised of a portion of Los Angeles County Assessor Parcel Number (APN): 8701-22-273. The Project Study Area under consideration consist of two separate areas, referred to as Site A and Site B. Site A comprises approximately 30 acres and is located immediately south of, and abutting, Diamond Ranch High School with the easterly boundary line extending to Chino Hills Parkway. Site B comprises approximately 30 acres and is located immediately west of, and abutting, Diamond Ranch High School with a portion of the northerly boundary extending to the SR -60 Freeway. Both sites are predominantly vegetated by grasslands, with areas of sage scrub and scattered woodlands, which are typical of undeveloped areas in the project vicinity. Prominent ridgelines cross or border both sites. There are no structures, major rock outcroppings or other unique physical features on either site. Land immediately adjacent to the south and across Chino Hills Parkway to the southeast of the Project Sites is undeveloped. Residential neighborhoods are located east of the Project area along Scenic Ridge Road, as well as to the west. Site A and Site B are currently undeveloped, are used for livestock grazing, and do not contain any sources of light and glare. 6 957513.1 1.3 Environmental Notices Notice of Preparation. On June 14, 2012, the City's Community Development Department (Department) executed and disseminated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study presenting a preliminary assessment of the potential impacts of the project. The NOP was prepared on June 14, 2012, and circulated to the public for a 30 -day review period that ended July 17, 2012. The NOP was provided to the State Clearinghouse, and posted in the City Clerk's office for 30 days. Scoping Meeting. The City also conducted a public scoping meeting on June 21, 2012. A copy of the NOP as well as comments received during the NOP review period are provided in Appendix A of the Final EIR. Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR. A Public Notice of Availability (NOA) was prepared for the Draft EIR ("DEIR") and the NOA was placed in the County Clerk's office for 30 days, as required by Public Resources Code §21092. The Lead Agency sent a copy of its NOA to anyone requesting it, per CEQA Guidelines §15087. Additionally, public notice of DEIR availability was posted on- and off-site, and was provided through publication in a newspaper of general circulation. The City, as Lead Agency, consulted with and requested comments on the DEIR from responsible and trustee agencies, and adjacent cities and counties, as required by Public Resources Code §21104 and §21253. The DEIR was delivered to the State Clearinghouse for review on May 24, 2013. Responses to Comments on the DEIR. As required by CEQA Guidelines §15088, on July 2013 responses to comments were provided to each public agency that submitted comments on the DEIR. Proposed Final EIR. The Final EIR or FEIR was posted for public review on the City website on August 9, 2013. The notices of public hearings for the Planning Commission hearing and City Council hearing for the Project included Notice of the Availability of the Final EIR. 1.4 Project Objectives The underlying purpose of the Project is to provide adequate sites through appropriate land use and zoning designations to accommodate future housing growth, as specified in Goal 3 of the City Housing Element, while providing transportation and circulation improvements that satisfy the City's level of service standards. Specific project objectives are as follows: • Amend the General Plan land use and zoning designations prior to October 15, 2013 for one or more parcels identified in Appendix B, Table B-2 of the City's 2008-2014 Housing Element to allow single-family and multi -family development ata density of 30 units per acre by -right in order to accommodate Diamond Bar's very -low- and low-income Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for the 2008-2014 Housing Element planning period. (Program 9, Housing Element) • Provide sufficient CEQA analysis for the City Council to select either Site A or Site B as the designated area to construct 490 housing units by -right without further CEQA review, consistent with State law. (Government Code §65583.2) • Provide and maintain adequate infrastructure facilities and public services to support development and planned growth. (Objective 1.1, Public Services and Facilities Element) • Maintain traffic Level of Service (LOS) standards on streets and intersections, as specified in the City's Circulation Element. (Circulation Element, Strategy 3.1.1) • Preserve natural resources on the Project Site and compensate for those natural resources that would be disturbed by the project. (Vision Statement, Resource Management Element) 7 951513.1 • Ensure land use compatibility between the Project and Diamond Ranch High School to the north; and nearby residential neighborhoods. (Strategy 2.2.1, Land Use Element) • Facilitate the provision of emergency secondary access for Diamond Ranch High School in coordination with development of the Project. (Circulation Element, Strategies 2.2.3 and 2.2.4) 1.5 Description of the Project Examined in the Final EIR The Project consists of the City Council's selection of one of two candidate housing development sites, each approximately 30 acres, within a 78 -acre Project Study Area, located in the northeast area of the City. Housing Site A is directly west of Chino Hills Parkway just south of Diamond Ranch Road. Housing Site B is located northwest of Housing Site A and west of Diamond Ranch High School. Access to either of the two Sites would take place via an intersection on Chino Hills Parkway south of Diamond Ranch Road. The Project consists of up to 490 multi -family housing units, to be located on either Site A or Site B. The Project also includes limited emergency access and utility improvements to be constructed in the Project Study Area, to serve the site which is ultimately selected for development. No development on either candidate site is currently proposed, and the precise configuration of any future development would be determined through the development review process after submittal of a development application by the property owner (the Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency). Once the FEIR is certified, its adopted Mitigation Measures will be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures incorporated into the subsequent project design, in accordance with §21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. No further environmental review through the CEQA process is anticipated at the development review process stage, consistent with state law. (California Government Code §65583.2) 1.6 Other Alternatives Examined in the Final EIR In addition to the Project, as required under Section 15126.6(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the FEIR examined a reasonable range of alternatives. As stipulated therein: "An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decisionmaking and public participation." Chapter 6 of the Final EIR describes the process by which the City determined the range of alternatives to be evaluated. In addition to the "no project" alternative (Alternative 1), as mandated under Section 15126(e) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the following development -oriented alternatives were also examined therein: Multiple Infill Sites. Multiple infill sites in developed areas would have the potential to reduce impacts such as aesthetics and biological resources since they are located in an area that has previously been developed. This alternative was suggested by interested parties during the scoping process. This alternative is considered environmentally "superior" to the Project, even though the Project would not result in any significant impacts. This alternative is evaluated as Alternative 2. Tres Hermanos-South. This site is part of the Tres Hermanos property, which is also owned by the Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency, and is located approximately 1 mile south of the Project Study Area. While preliminary analysis indicated that this alternative could require more extensive infrastructure work because it is not contiguous to existing development, an alternative location was suggested by interested parties during the scoping process. This alternative is evaluated as Alternative 3. 951513.1 1.7 Project Applicant The City is serving in the dual role of both "Applicant" and CEQA "Lead Agency." This dual role is typical of most public projects and is authorized under CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and established agency practices. Based on the legal and ethical standards to which governmental agencies are held, no inherent conflict is established when a public agency serves in that dual role. The State CEQA Guidelines defines "Applicant" to mean "a person who proposes to carry out a project which needs a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use or financial assistance from one or more public agencies when that person applies for the governmental approval or assistance" (14 CCR 15350). The term "Applicant," as used herein and throughout the project's environmental review record, is intended to apply to not only the City, as the Lead Agency and the proponent of the Project, but also to that (those) subsequent holder(s) of real property interests that will serve as the developer(s) and/or master builder(s) for those uses authorized therein and who may seek discretionary actions from the Lead Agency and from other responsible agencies for those development activities, infrastructure improvements, and other actions and programs that may be authorized under the provisions of the Project, if so adopted. 2.0 INTRODUCTION TO FINDINGS 2.1 Applicable Provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines Section 21001(d) of the State Public Resources Code (California Environmental Quality Act, or "CEQA") codifies the important Statewide policy of "ensur[ing] that the long-term protection of the environment... shall be the guiding criterion in public decisions." In Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1988), the court noted that "[t]he foremost principle under CEQA is that the Legislature intended the act'to be interpreted in such manner as to afford the fullest possible protection to the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory language."' CEQA contains a "substantive mandate" requiring public agencies to refrain from approving projects with significant environmental effects if "there are feasible alternatives or mitigation measures" that can substantially lessen or avoid those effects" (Mountain Lion Foundation v. Fish and Game Commission [1997]). The State CEQA Guidelines define the term "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors" (14 CCR 15364). As noted in Table 2.5-1 of the Final EIR, all potential impacts are found to be less than significant, or would be reduced below the level of significance with the identified mitigation measures as described in §21081(a)(1) of the CEQA. 2.2 Findings of Fact Section 21081 of the State Public Resources Code ("CEQA") provides, in part, that "no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out" unless, among other things, the agency makes one or more of three findings with respect to each significant effect. This document presents the findings of fact and substantial evidence that must be made by the City Council, acting in its capacity as the Lead Agency's decision- making body, prior to determining whether to certify the Final EIR and approve or conditionally approve the Project. The possible findings specified in Section 21081(a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA) and Section 15091(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, which shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record, include: 951513.1 (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines); and/or (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the findings. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency (Section 21081(a)(2) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(2), State CEQA Guidelines); and/or (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR (Section 21081(a)(3) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(3), State CEQA Guidelines). With respect to those significant effects that are subject to finding (1), the City shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the Project or made a condition of Project approval to avoid or lessen significant environmental effects. With respect to those significant effects that are subject to finding (2), the findings shall not be made if the City has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. With respect to those significant effects that are subject to finding (3), the findings shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and alternatives. In accordance with Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council makes the herein referenced findings for each significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Those impacts are categorized under the corresponding topical headings presented in the Final EIR. Reference to numbers assigned to standard conditions, performance standards, and mitigation measures in these findings are as presented therein and may differ from those numbers or notations subsequently assigned by the Lead Agency should the City's decision-making body elect to approve or conditionally approve the Project, or some variation thereof. 2.3 Custodian and Location of Records The following information is provided in compliance with Section 21081.6(a)(2) of CEQA and Section 15091(e) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The documents, studies, reports, correspondence, and other material comprising the administrative record for the project are located at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department (21810 Copley Drive, Second Floor, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178) and are, upon appointment, available for review during the regular business hours of the Department. The Director of the Community Development Department (Director) is the custodian of record for the project. 3.0 GENERAL FINDINGS In addition to the specific findings identified herein, the Council hereby finds that: (1) The Council finds and certifies that the FEIR constitutes a complete, accurate, adequate, and good -faith effort at full disclosure under CEQA. (2) The Council finds and certifies that the FEIR and all environmental notices associated therewith have been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and local guidelines and procedures; (3) The Council has independently reviewed and analyzed the FEIR and the FEIR reflects the independent judgment of the Lead Agency's decision-making body; 10 951513.1 (4) The Council has neither made any decisions nor taken any actions that would constitute an irretrievable commitment of resources toward the project prior to the certification of the FEIR, nor has the Council previously committed to a definite course of action with respect thereto or with regard to the use and utilization of the project site; (5) Under CEQA, the City is the appropriate "lead agency" for the project and, during these proceedings, no other agency has asserted or contested the City's "lead agency" status; (6) In compliance with Section 21092.5(a) of CEQA, at least 10 days prior to the certification of the FEIR, the City provided its written proposed responses to those public agencies that submitted comments to the Lead Agency on the DEIR; (7) The potential environmental impacts of the project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of certification of the FEIR; (8) Each of the issues to be resolved, as identified in the FEIR and/or subsequently raised in comments received by the City during the deliberations of its advisory and decision-making bodies, have been resolved to the satisfaction of the City Council; (9) The Council reviewed the comments received on the FEIR, including, but not limited to, those comments received following the dissemination of the DEIR, and the City's responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses presented add "significant new information," as defined under Section 15088.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines, to the DEIR; (10) The City's analysis of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions complies with the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, inclusive of those changes thereto resulting from the approval of SB 97, as approved by the Governor on August 24, 2007 and which became effective on March 18, 2010; (11) Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the FEIR are and have been available for review during the regular business hours of the City at the office of the Department from the custodian of records; and (12) Having received, reviewed, and considered all information and documents in the record, the Council has or will impose conditions, standards, and mitigation measures and has or will take other reasonable actions to reduce the environmental effects of the project to the maximum extend feasible and makes the findings stated herein. 5.0 FINDINGS REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION PROJECT THAT CAN FEASIBLY BE REDUCED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE With regards to the Project, the City Council has determined that existing statutes, regulations, uniform codes, project design features, in combination with those conditions, standards, and mitigation measures included in the Final EIR and adopted or likely to be adopted by the Council, will result in a substantial reduction of the following environmental effects and that each of the following environmental effects will either occur at or can be effectively reduced to a level that is less than significant. 5.1 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases 5.1.1 Environmental Effect: Construction Impacts on Air Quality Emissions. The emissions of criteria pollutants (mainly fugitive dust and NOx) from the Project during construction are considered a potential significant impact that can be mitigated through feasible control measures. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). 11 951513.1 Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Air Quality impacts are addressed in Section 5.3 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: AQ -1 Prior to approval of a development on the project site the applicant shall develop and submit to the City and the AQMD a Comprehensive Construction Dust Control Program. The Program components shall include but not be necessarily limited to the following: • Scheduling — Minimize repeated disturbance of any area and reduce the time period between disturbance and subsequent construction or stabilize any already disturbed areas; • High Winds — Cease disturbance operations if dust control is not effective • Disturbance Area — Keep disturbance operations if dust control is not effective; • Dust Control — Utilize dust suppression techniques, including: • Water exposed surfaces as needed to avoid visible dust leaving the construction site (typically 3 times/day); • Cover all stockpiles with tarps at the end of each day or as needed; • Provide water spray during loading and unloading of earthen materials; • Minimize in -out traffic from construction zone; • Require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard and cover all trucks hauling dirt or sand; and • Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is carried out from the construction site. • On -Site Road — Pave as soon as possible and restrict travel speed to 15 mph prior to paving; • Revegetation — Revegetate graded areas as soon as possible; and • Fencing — Install perimeter fencing with wind screens. AQ -2 The applicant of any development at the Project site shall develop and use reasonably available control measures for diesel exhaust emissions. Combustion emissions control that shall be applied during construction includes, but is not limited to the following: Utilize well -tuned off-road construction equipment; Establish a preference for contractors using Tier 3 or better heavy construction equipment; and Enforce 5 -minute idling limits for both on -road trucks and off-road construction equipment. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.2 Environmental Effect: Operational Impacts on Air Quality Emissions. The Project's ROG, NOx, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions during its operation are considered potentially significant impacts that can be mitigated through feasible control measures. 12 951513.1 Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Air Quality impacts are addressed in Section 5.3 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: AQ -3 For any permanent fireplaces or stoves shown in any building plans for development on the site, only gaseous -fueled devices as specified by the SCAQMD Rule 445 shall be approved. (c) Since, upon application of this mitigation measure, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.3 Environmental Effect: Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Pollutants — On -Site. Site A is over 1,000 feet from State Route 60 at its closest point, and this distance is sufficient so that diesel exhaust from the highway traffic can disperse and does not represent a significant impact. Because of the proximity of Site B to SR -60 and the associated truck traffic and diesel exhaust on this highway, the potential exposure of future residents within Site B to the adverse effects of diesel exhaust is considered a potential significant impact, which can be sufficiently reduced through mitigation measures. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Air Quality impacts are addressed in Section 5.3 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: AQ -4 Prior to final approval of any development within Parcel B, the applicant shall accomplish one of the following: A. Demonstrate on a site plan for the development that the nearest proposed residential location within Parcel B would be greater than 500 feet from the nearest point on State Route 60. B. In the event that development is proposed within 500 feet of State Route 60, prepare a health risk assessment in accordance with SCAQMD and CARB guidelines to evaluate in detail the effect of exposing residents to diesel exhaust associated with traffic on State Route 60. If indicated by the results of the health risk assessment, provide additional measures to reduce exposure, such as through the use of residential air filtration systems with a "Minimum Efficiency 13 951513.1 Reporting Value" of 12 or higher, and demonstrate through the health risk assessment that the measures will reduce potential exposures below the level of significance, defined as follows. • Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk >_ 10 in 1 million; • Cancer Burden >0.5 excess cancer case (in areas >_1 in 1 million); and • Chronic and Acute Hazard Index >_ 1.0 (project increment). (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2 Biological Resources 5.2.1 Environmental Effect Substantial Adverse Effect on an Endangered or Threatened Species. Construction of the Project could result in impacts to special status plant species and the loss of habitat for special status wildlife species observed or expected to occur in the Project area. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Biological Resources are addressed in Section 5.4 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (a) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Bio -1 Special Status Species — Protocol surveys shall be conducted for the above - noted species within suitable habitat areas on Site A or Site B to determine presence/absence of special status species prior to approval of project design by the City. Subsequent surveys may also be required if development is not initiated within one year after the last surveys. If the surveys determine occupancy by any of the above -noted species, the applicant shall be required to consult with the resource agencies to obtain permit(s) under Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act and/or a Section 2081 concurrence from CDFW under the Endangered Species Act. The consultation process shall include preparation of a mitigation plan to avoid, relocate, or minimize impacts. Resource agency approvals for the project shall be provided to the City prior to the issuance of any grading permit(s). The project applicant shall implement the terms and conditions of the resource agency permits and associated mitigation plan, as defined therein in. Bio -2 Bird Nesting — a. If development within Site A or Site B commences within the bird breeding season, defined as February 15 to September 1, a preconstruction bird nesting survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within seven days prior to the onset of construction activities. The limits of Project disturbance shall be 14 951513.1 surveyed for the presence of any active nests (common or special status). If no active nests are found, no further mitigation would be required. Results of the surveys shall be provided to the City and the resource agencies (if required). b. If nesting activity is present, construction shall not commence within the vicinity of the nest site until nesting activity has ended. Nests found during survey efforts shall be mapped on construction plans. To protect any nest site, the following construction restrictions will be required: 1) clearing limits shall be established a minimum of 300 feet in any direction from any occupied nest, and 2) access and surveying shall be restricted within 200 feet of any occupied nest. Any encroachment into the buffer areas shall only be allowed if it is determined by the biological monitor that the proposed activity shall not disturb the nest occupants. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.2 Environmental Effect: Substantial Adverse Effect on Riparian Habitat or Other Sensitive Natural Community Identified in Local or Regional Plans Policies Regulations or by the CDFW or the USFWS. The Project area includes several CDFW-designated special status plant communities, namely coastal sage scrub (CSS), southern coast live oak woodland, and southern willow scrub. These habitats can support a variety of special status plant and wildlife species and are considered "rare and worthy of consideration." Development of Site A could result in the loss of up to 6.5 acres of native CSS, an additional 2.5 acres of landscaped CSS, and 0.9 acre of southern coast live oak. Development of Site B could result in the loss of up to 0.9 acre of native CSS, an additional 2.7 acres of landscaped CSS, 0.5 acre of southern coast live oak, and 1.6 acres of southern riparian scrub. Impacts on these resources can be reduced to less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Biological Resources are addressed in Section 5.4 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Bio -3 Coastal Sage Scrub — If development encroaches within or adjacent to established coastal sage scrub habitat areas within Site A or Site B, the project applicant shall develop a coastal sage scrub mitigation plan. Mitigation shall include on-site preservation, enhancement, and/or restoration at a 2:1 ratio to offset temporal loss of existing habitat and ensure no net long-term loss of habitat values as a result of the project implementation. The coastal sage scrub mitigation plan shall be approved by the City prior to the issuance of any grading permit. The project applicant shall implement the approved mitigation plan in accordance with the plan's guidelines and performance standards. The 15 951513.1 mitigation plan shall be prepared in accordance with resource agency guidelines (included in Appendix B)and include the following information: responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to implement and supervise the plan, site plan, site preparation, planting and maintenance procedures, schedule, and perpetuity preservation (e.g., conservation easement or deed restriction). Bio -4 Coastal Sage Scrub — Prior to commencement of any grading activities in areas within or adjacent to established coastal sage scrub habitat areas, construction limits shall be marked on grading plans by the construction supervisor and a qualified biological monitor. The biological monitor shall verify earth -moving equipment does not enter open space areas throughout construction phases. Bio -5 Oak Woodland — If the development encroaches within or adjacent to the established oak woodland present within Site A or Site B, the project applicant shall develop an oak woodland mitigation plan prepared by a licensed arborist with specific knowledge regarding oak tree preservation, relocation, and establishment. Mitigation shall include on-site preservation and/or relocation to the extent feasible, and a mitigation replacement ratio of no less than 3:1 for each tree removed, as required under the City's Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance. The mitigation plan shall be prepared in accordance with resource agency guidelines and include the following information: responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to implement and supervise the plan, site plan, site preparation, planting and maintenance procedures, schedule, and perpetuity preservation (i.e., conservation easement or deed restriction). The oak woodland mitigation plan shall be approved by the City prior to the issuance of any grading permit. The project applicant shall implement the mitigation plan as approved by the City and resource agencies in accordance with the plan's guidelines and performance standards. Bio -6 Oak Woodland — Prior to grading, construction limits shall be marked on grading plans by the construction supervisor and the licensed arborist and specify the installation of physical barriers, such as chain link fencing, to prevent encroachment beyond the construction limits. The biological monitor shall verify earth -moving equipment does not enter the oak woodland preservation area throughout construction phases. Bio -7 Riparian Vegetation — Mitigation for project impacts to riparian vegetation located within Site A or Site B shall consist of: 1) avoidance or minimization of impacts to the extent feasible, 2) compensation in the form of on-site expansion of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and the State of California and associated riparian habitat at a minimum or 2:1 ratio within the project's dedicated open space areas, and 3) on-site relocation of existing mature and healthy oak trees and/or replacement at a minimum 3:1 ratio. Any compensation through restoration should be on-site, if possible, and in kind. The mitigation plan shall be prepared in accordance with the City's Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance and resource agency guidelines (included in Appendix B) and include the following information: responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to implement and supervise the plan, site plan, site preparation, planting and maintenance procedures, schedule, and perpetuity preservation (i.e., conservation easement or deed restriction). Upon 16 951513.1 concept approval by the City, the final plan will be developed with, and submitted to, the resource agencies as part of the regulatory permit process. Bio -8 Riparian Vegetation — Additional project -specific requirements may be determined by the resource agencies, namely the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Section 404), the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Section 401), the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Section 1600), and possibly the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Section 7). Resource agency approvals for the project shall be provided to the City prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The project applicant shall implement the terms and conditions of the resource agency permits and associated mitigation plan, as defined therein. Bio -9 Riparian Vegetation — Prior to grading near preserved waters and/or riparian habitat, construction limits shall be marked by the construction supervisor and the qualified biological monitor, and memorialized on the grading plan. The construction supervisor shall ensure the installation of physical barriers, such as chain link fencing, to prevent encroachment beyond the construction limits. The biological monitor shall verify earth -moving equipment does not enter waters and/or riparian preservation areas throughout the construction phase. Bio -10 Invasive Exotic Species - Landscape plans shall be submitted to the City for review and approval by a qualified biologist to ensure that species proposed do not include those known to colonize in adjacent open space areas (e.g., invasive, exotic plants). Landscaping bordering the open space areas shall incorporate species native to the project region (e.g., coast live oak, toyon, lemonade berry, sugar bush) to the extent practicable and shall be consistent with guidelines of the Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County. Bio -11 Human Activity - To limit the amount of human disturbance on open space areas on and adjacent to the project area, signage and lighting plans shall be submitted to the City. Prior to obtaining occupancy permits, signs shall be installed to discourage human encroachment into the open space and habitat mitigation areas. Project street lighting in areas adjacent to open space or habitat areas shall be hooded and directed away from the open space areas to reduce light spillover. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.3 Environmental Effect: Substantial Adverse Effect on Federally Protected Wetlands as Defined By Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Waters of the United States (WoUS) and the state of California are present with the study area. Impacts to these resources would be substantially reduced through mitigation measures. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). 17 951513.1 Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Biological Resources are addressed in Section 5.4 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: [See Mitigation Measures Bio -5 through Bio -11]. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.4 Environmental Effect: Conflict with any Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources. A total of 3.5 acres of southern coast live oak woodland is present within the 78 - acre project area. Development of Site A could potentially impact up to 0.9 acre of this woodland, while development of Site B could impact up to 0.5 acre. The City of Diamond Bar tree ordinance protects native trees greater than eight inches diameter breast height (dbh), including oak, walnut, sycamore, and willow trees, and requires compensatory mitigation for their loss. Applicable City requirements include a minimum 3:1 replacement ratio with a minimum box size of 24 inches. Mitigation Measures Bio -5 through Bio -11 also specifically address potential impacts to native trees. In addition to required compliance with City regulations, these measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Biological Resources are addressed in Section 5.4 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: [See Mitigation Measures Bio -5 through Bio -11] (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.5 Environmental Effect: Cumulative Impacts. Potential cumulative impacts to sensitive and/or special status species and waters of the United States and state, including associated riparian vegetation, that could result from project implementation would be offset by the expansion of like habitat within the project's dedicated open space areas as required by project -specific mitigation measures. 18 951513.1 Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Biological Resources are addressed in Section 5.4 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: [See Mitigation Measures Bio -5 through Bio -11j (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.3 Cultural Resources 5.3.1 Environmental Effect Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of an Archaeological Resource. There is a possibility of cultural resources being located within Site A or Site B. Mitigation measures would assure that no significant adverse impacts to archaeological resources would occur. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to cultural Resources are addressed in Section 5.5 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: CR -1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits for any development on Site A or B, the project proponent shall prepare and submit to the City for review and approval a Cultural Resources Assessment (Phase I Assessment) that covers the entirety of the project site. The Cultural Resources Assessment shall be prepared by personnel determined to be qualified by the City. In the event no potential cultural resources are identified within areas planned for development, no further studies are required. If the site-specific Cultural Resources Assessment identifies potential cultural resources within the area(s) planned for development, Mitigation Measure CR -2 shall apply. CR -2 In areas planned for development in which potential cultural resources have been identified, the project proponent shall submit to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits a Phase II (e.g., test -level) Cultural Resources Report. The Phase II survey shall include, but shall not be 19 951513.1 limited to, the definition of site boundaries, information and analysis on the structure, content, nature, depth of subsurface cultural deposits and features, and site integrity. This information shall be used to address the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historic Resources eligibility requirements for the resource in question, and make recommendations as to the suitability of the resource for listing in either Register. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent shall provide evidence acceptable to the City that the measures required to mitigate impacts to any identified cultural resource have been fully satisfied. In the event any identified cultural resource is determined be eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register, Mitigation Measure CR -3 shall apply. CR -3 If any cultural resource located within an area planned for development is identified as being potentially eligible for listing in either the National Register or the California Register, and project designs cannot be altered to avoid disturbing the resource, a Phase III Cultural Resources Assessment shall be prepared. The survey shall be submitted to the City, the appropriate Native American Tribe (if applicable), and the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) for review and approval. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent shall provide evidence acceptable to the City that the measures required by the city, the state, and/or other authority to mitigate impacts to a National Register or California Register eligible resource have been fully satisfied. CR -4 Prior to the issuance of grading permits for development on any site, the project proponent shall submit evidence to the, City that a qualified archaeologist (as determined by the City) has been retained to monitor ground -disturbing activities. The project proponent shall submit to the City for review and approval a monitoring plan that, at a minimum, establishes the amount, location, and duration of monitoring activities; identifies the authority granted to monitors to halt or redirect grading operations; and identifies the process to be followed in the event a potential cultural resource is detected during grading operations. As determined necessary by the City, the monitoring personnel may include participant-observer(s) from any Native American entity who has responded to consultation request for the project. Prior to commencement of ground - disturbing activities, the project proponent shall further submit evidence to the City that the construction contractor has been provided information regarding the purpose, need, and authority of the on-site monitors, as well as the practices required to safeguard previously identified or potential cultural resources. CR -5 Notwithstanding the results of any cultural resource assessment, in the event potential cultural or archaeological resources are uncovered or discovered during construction activities within any area planned for development on Site A or B, no further excavation or disturbance of the area where the resources were found shall occur until a qualified archaeologist evaluates the find. If the find is determined to be a potentially significant archaeological or paleontological resource, the project applicant shall, consult with the City to determine the appropriate actions as required by Public Resources Code §21083.2(b), (c) and (d). As appropriate, further assessment via the requirements detailed in Mitigation Measures CR -1 through CR -7 shall be required. Prior to the continuation of ground -disturbing activities in the vicinity of the find, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that appropriate measures have been taken to fully satisfy applicable cultural resource protection requirements established by the City, State, and/or other applicable regulatory authority. 20 951513.1 (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.3.2 Environmental Effect: Destroy a Significant Paleontological Resource Site or Unique Geologic Feature. There is a possibility of paleontological resources being located within Site A or Site B. Mitigation measures would assure that no adverse impacts to paleontological resources would occur. Neither Site A nor Site B contains any unique geologic features. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 2.1081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Cultural Resources are addressed in Section 5.5 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: CR -6 Prior to the issuance of grading permits for development on either Site A or Site B, a paleontological resource literature search and field survey shall be conducted by a qualified paleontological investigator. If the survey determines that this area has no potential for paleontological resources, no further studies or mitigation are necessary. If the survey determines that the area has the potential for paleontological resources to be present, then compliance with Mitigation Measure CR -7 shall be required. CR -7 Prior to the issuance of any grading permits for development on either Site A or Site B, the project proponent shall submit to the City for review and approval a plan or program developed to mitigate impacts in the event paleontological resources are identified within the area of planned disturbance. This plan/program shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures: A qualified paleontological monitor shall be on site during grading and excavation operations of areas determined to be of high paleontological sensitivity. The paleontological monitor shall be empowered to halt or divert equipment temporarily in the event suspected paleontological resources are encountered. The qualified monitor shall be equipped to salvage paleontological specimens as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays. The paleontological monitor shall be equipped to collect and remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of small fossil mammals. To avoid significant construction delays, these sediments shall be removed from the area of active grading or off-site for further investigation. All recovered paleontological specimens, including small vertebrates contained in sediment samples, shall be prepared to a point of identification. 21 951513.1 All recovered paleontological specimens shall be identified and curated at an established museum repository with retrievable storage. • A report that documents the findings of the program shall be prepared. The report shall provide an itemized inventory of the recovered specimens. Submission of the final report and inventory shall be made to the City and shall represent completion of the ,Program to Mitigate Impacts to Paleontological Resources. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.3.3 Environmental Effect: Disturb any Human Remains. There is a possibility that human remains could be located within Site A or B. Mitigation measures would assure that no significant adverse impacts to buried human remains would occur. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Cultural Resources are addressed in Section 5.5 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: CR -8 In the event human remains are discovered during excavation, grading or construction activities within Site A or Site B, compliance with state law (Health and Safety Code §7050.5) would be required. These requirements are imposed on any construction activity in which human remains are detected, and include the following provisions: • There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the Los Angeles County Coroner is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required; and, If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. • The NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendant from the deceased Native American. • The most likely descendant may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code §5097.98, or where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further and future subsurface disturbance pursuant to Public Resources Code §5097.98(e). 22 951513.1 The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendant. The most likely descendant is identified by the NAHC, but fails to make a recommendation within 48 hours of being granted access to the site; or The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.4 Geology, Soils and Mineral Resources 5.4.1 Environmental Effect: Consistency with Applicable Plans and Regulations. Grading and development of the project could potentially create unstable geological conditions. Compliance with City standards and mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts below the level of significance. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Geology, Soils and Mineral Resources are addressed in Section 5.6 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Geo -1 Grading Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Grading Plan to the City for review and approval. The Grading Plan and specifications shall be prepared and signed by a licensed civil engineer. The Grading Plan shall show in sufficient clarity the nature and extent of the provisions of the applicable codes and all relevant laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. At a minimum, the Grading Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. Specifically, the Grading Plan shall reflect a preference for landform grading techniques (e.g., contour grading) rather than mass grading and extensive cut slopes. Also, the Grading Plan should reflect a preference to balance grading on-site (to the extent feasible or practical, as determined by the City) for grading associated with the development area, access roads, internal driveways, and off-site improvements. Grading plans shall meet California Building Code Appendix J as adopted in City Municipal Code Section 15.00.310 and amended by Section 15.00.320, Geo -2 Construction Management Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Construction Management Plan to the City for 23 951513.1 review and approval. The Construction Management Plan shall contain sufficient clarity and detail to ensure that soil erosion, fugitive dust, and siltation will be managed in accordance with the provisions of the applicable codes and all relevant laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. At a minimum, the Construction Management Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. Geo -3 Hillside Management Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Hillside Management Plan to the City for review and approval. The Hillside Management Plan shall demonstrate compliance with all hillside development standards regulated by the City's Municipal Code (including Title 22 - Development Code, Article III - Site Planning and General Development Standards, Chapter 22.22 - Hillside Management). The Hillside Management Plan shall be consistent with the recommendations of the approved Geotechnical Report and the approved Grading Plan. At a minimum, the Hillside Management Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. Geo -4 Drainage and Urban Runoff Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Drainage and Urban Runoff Plan to the City for review and approval. The Drainage and Urban Runoff Plan shall .demonstrate that all site runoff is managed in accordance with the provisions of the applicable codes and all relevant laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. At a minimum, the Drainage and Urban Runoff Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. Geo -5 Design and construction of the project shall conform to the California Building Code seismic standards as approved by the City Building and Safety Division as adopted in the City's Municipal Code Section 15.00.310. Geo -6 Location of any earthquake faults shall be identified and risks assessed by the geotechnical engineer. Geo -7 All grading and earthwork shall be performed in accordance with the Grading Ordinances of the City and the applicable recommendations of the approved Geotechnical Report. Geo -8 All earthwork and construction shall be completed in accordance with mitigation as defined in Public Resources Code §2693(c) to ensure that issues of potential liquefaction are addressed. Geo -9 To address potential soil settlement, minimize potential soil movement, and avoid potential damage to structures, all new building construction shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations of the approved Geotechnical Report and Grading Plan. Geo -10 To minimize soil erosion, all construction activity shall be conducted in accordance with the approved Construction Management Plan. Geo -11 A qualified geotechnical engineer shall be present during all site clearing and grading operations to test and observe earthwork construction, as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction and stability of the material. The geotechnical engineer shall reject any material that does not meet compaction and stability requirements per the recommendations and requirements of the approved Geotechnical Report and Grading Plan. 24 951513.1 Geo -12 All excavations shall comply with the current OSHA requirements. All cuts greater than 3 feet in depth should be sloped or shored. Temporary excavations should be sloped at 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter, up to a maximum depth of 10 feet. Heavy construction equipment, building materials, excavated soil, and vehicular traffic should not be allowed within 5 feet of the top (edge) of the excavation. Where sloped excavations are not feasible due to site constraints, excavations shall require shoring. The design of the temporary shoring shall take into account lateral pressures exerted by the adjacent soil, and, where anticipated, surcharge loads due to adjacent buildings and any construction equipment or traffic expected to operate alongside the excavation. Geo -13 Retaining walls shall be constructed according to the structural recommendations of the approved Geotechnical Report, and in accordance with other applicable design standards established by the City Building Official. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.4.2 Environmental Effect: Risk of Life and Property Due to Seismic -Induced Hazards. Ground shaking during earthquakes could expose structures or people to damage or injury. Compliance with Municipal Code requirements and mitigation measures would substantially reduce this impact. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Geology, Soils and Mineral Resources are addressed in Section 5.6 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Geo -14 Emergency and Secondary Access Plan - Prior to approval of the Final Plan, the Applicant shall submit an Emergency and Secondary Access Plan (or equivalent Internal Circulation Plan) to the City of Diamond Bar, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and the Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County for review and approval of the primary and secondary emergency accesses. Primary and secondary emergency access shall connect to off-site streets to allow residents of the Project adequate escape routes in case of a geologic event, soil failure or other major emergency. At a minimum, the Emergency and Secondary Access Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no 25 951513.1 additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.4.3 Environmental Effect: Risk of Life and Property Due to Non -seismic Soil and Slope Hazards. Unstable soil conditions could expose structures or people to damage or injury. Compliance with Municipal Code requirements and mitigation measures would substantially reduce this impact. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Geology, Soils and Mineral Resources are addressed in Section 5.6 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Geo -15 Positive drainage shall be established away from any project structure and shall be maintained throughout the life of the structure. Ponding of water shall not be allowed adjacent to any structure. Over -irrigation within landscaped areas adjacent to any structure shall be avoided. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5.5.1 Environmental Effect: Consistency with Applicable Plans and Regulations. Implementation of the Project would introduce structures and people to an area that is currently unoccupied and undeveloped. Future development would be required to demonstrate compliance with adopted plans, policies, and regulations, including the City's Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan, which would reduce impacts below the level of significance. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Hazards and Hazardous Materials are addressed in Section 5.7 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: 26 951513.1 Haz-1 Landscape Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Landscape Plan to the City for review and approval. The Landscape Plan and specifications shall be prepared and signed by a licensed landscape architect. The Landscape Plan shall show in sufficient clarity the nature and extent of the provisions of the applicable codes and all relevant laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations, including the provisions of City Municipal Code Section 22.24.050 (landscape standards) and Section 22.22.140 (fire protection in hillside area). At a minimum, the Landscape Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. Specifically, the Landscape Plan shall reflect provisions for a fire safety buffer zone and provisions for the long-term maintenance of required landscape at the Project Site. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.2 Environmental Effect: Generate Transport or Exposure to Hazardous Substances. The Phase I report prepared for the project site found no evidence of previous hazardous conditions. Mitigation Measures would ensure and reinforce compliance with standard requirements related to the use and handling of hazard substances during construction. Findings: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Hazards and Hazardous Materials are addressed in Section 5.7 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Haz-2 Construction Management Plan — Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Construction Management Plan to the City for review and approval. The Construction Management Plan shall contain sufficient clarity and detail to ensure that the transport, storage, and use of hazardous substances, including fuels, used during the construction phase will be managed in accordance with the provisions of the applicable codes and all relevant laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. At a minimum, the Construction Management Plan shall meet the performance standards identified in this EIR. Haz-3 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan — Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and in compliance with Los Angeles County and Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements, the Applicant shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City for review. The applicant will be required to submit the SWPPP to the state Water Quality Resources Control Board for review and approval. A copy of the state permit shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. The SWPPP shall contain sufficient clarity and detail to ensure that the transport, storage, and use of 27 951513.1 hazardous substances, including fuels, used during the construction phase will be managed in accordance with the provisions of the applicable codes and all relevant laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. The SWPPP shall contain a contingency program for the containment and management of accidental spills of any hazardous substance. At a minimum, the SWPPP shall meet the performance standards identified in this EIR. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.3 Environmental Effect: Risk Due to Natural Hazards. The project is not located in an area identified by CAL FIRE as being a high fire hazard zone. Municipal Code requirements and mitigation measures would reduce the risk of wildland fire below the level of significance. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Hazards and Hazardous Materials are addressed in Section 5.7 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Haz-4 Construction Fire Protection Plan — Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan to the City and Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County for review and approval. The Construction Fire Protection Plan (which can be a component of the Construction Management Plan) shall show in sufficient clarity and detail provisions for the safe clearance of surrounding brush and storage/removal of combustible materials. The Plan shall also identify temporary emergency access routes and notification procedures in the event of a fire emergency. The Construction Fire Protection Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.6 Hydrology and Water Quality 5.6.1 Environmental Effect: Alteration of Drainage Patterns, Erosion, Siltation, Local Floodina. and Surface Water Quality. The project's effects related to drainage, erosion, sedimentation, and surface water quality are considered a potential significant impact that can be mitigated through the combination of proper planning and design, construction practices, site planning and landscaping, and drainage controls. 28 951513.1 Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Hydrology and Water Quality are addressed in Section 5.8 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Hyd-1 NPDES Construction General Permit - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide evidence of coverage under SWRCB Order No. 2009- 0009-DWQ, the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, or the most current version of that applicable permit. All applicable components from the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan prepared for the permit shall be incorporated into the grading plans. All Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be incorporated into the grading plans and construction activities, and all equipment or improvements related to BMPs shall be installed and maintained in accordance with any relevant manufacturer specifications and good engineering practices. A copy of the SWPPP will be required to be kept on the Project site during construction at an easily accessible location so that it can be made available at the time of an on-site inspection or upon request by a City inspector or other legal authority. The applicant will be required to implement such BMPs from commencement of construction activity until final stabilization of the project site is complete. Hyd-2 Storm Water Mitigation Plan - Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the project, the applicant shall submit to the City for review and approval a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). The SUSMP shall conform to the requirements of the City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 8.12.1695, and requirements of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7 Noise 5.7.1 Environmental Effect: Construction Noise Impacts. Construction activities are expected to meet the applicable criteria from the City's Municipal Code at the nearby residences to the southwest of Site B and at the nearest occupied rooms at the high school (daytime short-term construction noise levels no more than 75 dB(A) on normal work days). However, because the nearest high school rooms are in temporary buildings that are likely to have less noise insulation there could be some disruption of classroom activities from construction noise. This is considered a potential significant impact that can be mitigated with routine construction noise controls and proper scheduling. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the 29 951513.1 significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Noise impacts are addressed in Section 5.10 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: N-1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the project, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the City a Construction Noise Mitigation Plan in order to demonstrate compliance with the numerical criteria in Section 22.28.120 of the Municipal Code relating to allowable construction noise. The plan shall address noise levels during construction to the portable classrooms on the campus of Diamond Ranch High School, as well as noise levels at nearby residential areas, and identify measures to minimize those noise levels. The Construction Noise Mitigation Plan shall include the following construction practices to minimize construction noise levels: • All mobile equipment shall have properly operating and maintained mufflers; • Stockpiles of construction material or waste shall be located as far as possible from existing residences and the Diamond Ranch High School property; • Mobile source equipment during the noisiest grading activities operating within 300 feet of the school shall either occur during school based holidays or after students at Diamond Ranch High School are our for the day; and • Stationary equipment such as generators or dewatering pumps continually operating within 500 feet of any single-family residential home or within 250 feet of any portable classroom on the Diamond Ranch High School campus shall be equipped with a temporary noise barrier as close as possible to the noise source that can reduce noise levels by 10.0 dB(A). (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7.2 Environmental Effect: On-site Operational Noise Impacts. Site A is impacted by traffic noise from Chino Hills Parkway and Site B is impacted by traffic noise from the SR -60 freeway. Mitigation would reduce these impacts below the level of significance. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Noise impacts are addressed in Section 5.10 in the 30 951513.1 Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: N-2 This measure applies only to Site A. Prior to approval of a tentative subdivision map or Development Review for Site A, the applicant shall do one of the following: • Submit a development site plan that shows all areas within Site A intended for residential uses are located at a distance equal to or greater than 150 feet from the centerline of Chino Hills Parkway, OR If development of residential uses is proposed within 150 feet of Chino Hills Parkway, prepare and submit a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements, as specified in Section 22.28.090 of the Municipal Code, in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. The analysis shall include updated estimates of outdoor noise levels, and shall identify measures to reduce outdoor living area noise levels to 65 dB(A) CNEL and demonstrate that indoor living areas will have noise levels no greater than 40 dB(A) CNEL in accordance with California Building Code 1207. Measures to achieve these standards may include, but are not limited to: • Construct a noise wall or berm to shield ground floor living areas from noise; (not effective for upper stories); Situate balconies or patios on the side of the building away from Chino Hills Parkway such that they are noise protected by the building itself; or, • Equip patios or balconies having a line of sight to Chino Hills Parkway with a plexiglass or transparent enclosure or similar noise barrier. N-3 This measure applies only to Site B. Prior to approval of a tentative subdivision map or Development Review for Site B, the applicant shall do one of the following: Submit a development site plan demonstrating that all areas within Site B intended for residential uses are located at a distance equal to or greater than 1,000 feet from the centerline of SR -60, OR If development of residential uses is proposed within 1,000 feet of SR - 60, prepare a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements, as specified in Section 22.28.090 of the Municipal Code, in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. The analysis shall include updated estimates of outdoor noise levels, and shall identify measures to reduce outdoor living area noise levels to 65 dB(A) CNEL and demonstrate that indoor living areas will have noise levels no greater than 40 dB(A) CNEL in accordance with California Building Code 1207. Measures to achieve these standards may include, but are not limited to: Construct a noise wall or berm to shield ground floor living areas from noise; (not effective for upper stories); Situate balconies or patios on the side of the building away from SR -60 such that they are noise protected by the building itself; or, 31 951513.1 Equip patios or balconies having a line of sight to SR -60 with a plexiglass or transparent enclosure or similar noise barrier. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.8 Public Services and Utilities 5.8.1 Environmental Effect: Increased Demand for Fire Protection Services. Development of 490 additional housing units would create additional demand for fire protection services, which can be mitigated to acceptable levels with the measures identified. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Public Services and Utilities are addressed in Section 5.12 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Pub -1 Construction Fire Protection Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan to the City and Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County for review and approval. The Construction Fire Protection Plan (which can be a component of the Construction Management Plan) shall show in sufficient clarity provisions for the safe clearance of surrounding brush and storage/removal of combustible materials. The Plan shall also identify temporary emergency access routes and notification procedures in the event of a fire emergency. The general contractor shall be responsible for carrying out provision of the Construction Fire Protection Plan and communicating it to all subcontractors. The Construction Fire Protection Plan should include, but not be limited to, the following: • Procedures for reporting emergencies to the Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County; • Procedures for emergency notification, evacuation, and/or relocation of all persons in the building under construction on the Project site; • Procedures for hot work operations, management of hazardous materials and removal of combustible debris and maintenance of emergency access roads; • Floor plans identifying the locations of exits, exit stairs, exit routes and portable fire extinguishers; • The name and contact phone number of the person(s) responsible for compliance with the Construction Fire Protection Plan; • Demonstrate that all construction sites shall be accessible by fire department apparatus by means of roadways having an all-weather 32 951513.1 driving surface of not less than 20 feet of unobstructed width and engineered to support the live load of fire apparatus. • Demonstrate that construction vehicles will be parked a minimum of 20 feet from new buildings under construction; • Demonstrate that adequate hydrants or interim fire flow water supply is installed prior to combustible construction materials accumulating on site; • Demonstrate that where automatic fire sprinkler systems are required to be installed in new buildings, the system would be placed in service as soon possible. • Provisions for portable fire extinguishers as directed by the LACFPD. The general contractor shall ensure that an adequate number of individuals are trained in the proper use of portable fire extinguishers. Prohibition of smoking anywhere inside or on the roof of new buildings under construction. • Provisions to ensure that all tanks and containers are marked with the name of the product and "FLAMMABLE -KEEP FIRE AND FLAME AWAY." • Demonstrate that wood, cardboard, packing material, form lumber, and similar combustible debris would not be accumulated within buildings. • Demonstrate that hot work (i.e., including any work involving operations capable of initiating fires or explosions, such as cutting, welding, brazing, soldering, grinding, thermal spraying, thawing pipe, torch applied roofing, or any other similar activity) and use of equipment would be in accordance with pre -site inspection, fire watch, and post - inspection procedures to be defined in the plan. Pub -2 Operational Fire Management Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit an Operational Fire Management Plan to the City and Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County for review and approval. The Operational Fire Management Plan shall show in sufficient clarity provisions for the long-term management and maintenance of the project, including provisions for safe clearance of surrounding brush and storage/removal of combustible materials. The Plan shall also identify permanent emergency access routes and notification procedures in the event of a fire emergency. The Operational Fire Management Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. The Operational Fire Management Plan should include, but not be limited to, the following information and measures to reduce safety risks and frequency of calls to the LACFPD for fire protection and emergency medical service: • Provisions for implementation, maintenance and inspection of all required fire sprinkler systems. • Provisions for adequate primary and secondary access to the Project, including security measures, maintenance, and emergency evacuation planning along such routes. • Identification of emergency exits within the building, stairwells, locations of fire extinguishers and fire alarms, and provisions for period safety inspections and maintenance of such facilities. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 33 951513.1 5.8.2 Environmental Effect: Increased Demand for Police Protection Services. Development of 490 additional housing units would create additional demand for police protection services, which can be mitigated to acceptable levels with the measures identified. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Public Services and Utilities are addressed in Section 5.12 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Pub -3 CPTED — Construction Phase — Prior to initiation of construction activities, the Applicant or Construction Contractor shall provide a CPTED Plan (addressing construction strategies) to the City of Diamond Bar and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. The CPTED Construction Strategies shall outline crime prevention techniques to be implemented throughout the duration of construction activity at the Project Site(s). Such CPTED Construction Strategies shall include but are not limited to: 1) provisions for construction area fencing; 2) provisions to secure, disable or lock up construction equipment stored at the Project Site(s); and 3) provisions for a security firm to patrol on-site or security monitoring providing surveillance during non -construction hours to deter criminal activity at the Project Site(s). Pub -4 CPTED — Project Design and Occupancy — Prior to approval of the Final Plan, the Applicant shall submit a CPTED Strategy Guide that identifies key techniques for residential uses which deter criminal activity that have been incorporated (or will be incorporated) into the Project design and/or future maintenance. The CPTED Strategy Guide shall identify along with each proposed strategy measure the associated program for implementation. For example, the CPTED Strategy Guide should identify which measures would be incorporated into the Landscape Plan that would ensure that the landscape design provides adequate defensible space surrounding buildings. Or the CPTED Strategy Guide would identify which measures would be managed by the property management upon building occupancy (i.e., maintenance of surveillance equipment and coordination of on-site patrols). The CPTED Strategy Guide should incorporate techniques similar or equivalent to, but not limited to, those identified by through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development guidelines for single-family homes and neighborhood development. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9 Traffic and Circulation 34 951513.1 5.9.1 Environmental Effect: Conflicts with Applicable Circulation System Plans and Regulations. The project would generate an estimated 3,259 vehicular trips per day, including 250 trips during the AM peak hour and 304 trips during the PM peak hour. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Traffic and Circulation impacts are addressed in Section 5.14 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: T-1 The applicant of future development on the Project site shall pay a fair -share of the improvement costs at the intersection of Phillips Ranch Road at Village Loop Road. The improvements at this intersection shall include the re -striping of eastbound shared through/right turn lane as an exclusive right -turn lane. Improvements will also include the modification of the existing signal to allow for an eastbound right -turn overlapping phase. The improvement cost at this intersection is estimated at $8,000 (2012 dollars). The Project fair -share percentage (based on greatest peak hour impact) at this impacted intersection for the Year 2034 Cumulative plus Project traffic conditions totals 14.09%. The applicant of future development on the Project site shall therefore pay a fair share of $1,127.20 (2012 dollars) based on the fair share 14.09% contribution. The applicant of future development on the Project site shall pay said fair share of $1,127.20 (2012 dollars) prior to issuance of any building permit on the Project site. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.2 Environmental Effect: Site Access. The Project would require access from Chino Hills Parkway. This intersection is currently projected to operate at an acceptable level of service with an unsignalized intersection. However, future conditions could warrant installation of a traffic signal based on conditions at the time of development. Adequate line of sight is required to ensure safe operation of this intersection. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Traffic and Circulation impacts are addressed in Section 5.14 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. 35 951513.1 (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: T-2 Prior to approval and recordation of a final subdivision map or approval of street improvement plans, a traffic signal warrant analysis shall be prepared by the Project Applicant in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. If a signal is determined to be warranted, the Project applicant shall design and install a signalized intersection prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the development. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.3 Environmental Effect: Proiect Entry Line of Sight Analysis. The sight distance evaluation prepared for the Project entrance was based on the criteria and procedures set forth by Caltrans in the State's Highway Design Manual for "Private Road Intersections." The sight distance evaluation concluded that sight distances would adequate at the Project entrance, provided that landscaping and/or hardscape to the north and south of the Project driveway, and within the median on Chino Hills Parkway, are designed such that a driver's clear line of sight is not obstructed and does not threaten vehicular or pedestrian safety. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Traffic and Circulation impacts are addressed in Section 5.14 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: T-3 Prior to approval and recordation of any final subdivision map or approval of street improvement plans, a note shall be placed on the map identifying sight distance standards in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the proposed development, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City Engineer that the design and installation of the project entry meets all applicable sight distance safety requirements. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.4 Environmental Effect: Emergency Site Access. In order to ensure public safety in the event of an emergency or natural disaster, it is desirable to have a secondary access route for developments. Diamond Ranch High School is immediately adjacent to both Site A and Site B, and a secondary access could potentially be provided to serve both the high school and the Project site. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the 36 951513.1 significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Traffic and Circulation impacts are addressed in Section 5.14 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: T-4 Prior to approval and recordation of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant of future development on the Project site shall develop and submit a Secondary Site Access Plan to the City. This plan shall outline and describe an area that shall be utilized in developing a secondary ingress/egress point onto the Project site. If feasible, the emergency access shall be coordinated with Pomona Unified School District and the Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency so as to also provide emergency access to Diamond Ranch High School. The secondary access point shall be gated and only be used in emergency situations where residents of the Project site need to quickly and safely evacuate. The Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department shall be provided "emergency access keys" for access to the Project site from said secondary access point in the event of an emergency. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.5 Environmental Effect: Hazardous Design Features. The project is required to comply with design standards to ensure public safety. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Traffic and Circulation impacts are addressed in Section 5.14 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: T-5 Prior to the approval of any subdivision map, grading permit or engineering/encroachment permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a site plan demonstrating compliance with all applicable engineering and safety standards for streets, pedestrian walkways and bicycle lanes in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no 37 951513.1 additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.6 Environmental Effect: Temporary Construction Impacts. During construction, temporary traffic impacts could occur. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Traffic and Circulation impacts are addressed in Section 5.14 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: T-6 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant of future development on the Project site shall submit to the City Engineer a Construction Worker Parking and Equipment Staging Plan that shall minimize the disturbance to the surrounding residential neighborhoods and schools to the greatest extent feasible. Unless otherwise authorized, contractors and other construction personnel performing development activities in proximity to the Project site shall be prohibited from parking and/or operating construction equipment, trailers, dumpsters, or other material within a public right-of-way or other public property. T-7 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant of future development on the Project site shall submit to the City Engineer a Construction Traffic Mitigation Plan. The plan shall identify the following: • The travel and haul routes to be used by construction vehicles; • The points of ingress and egress for all construction vehicles; • If applicable, temporary street or lane closures, temporary striping, and temporary signage; • Location of materials storage and construction equipment staging areas; • Maintenance plans to remove spilled debris from roadway surfaces; and • The hours during which construction equipment may be used and brought on/off the Project site. The applicant of future development on the Project site shall keep all of the haul routes clean and free of debris including, but not limited to, dirt and gravel from construction operations. The applicant shall clean adjacent streets and roadways, per the City, of any material that may have been spilled, blown, or tracked onto adjacent streets. Hauling or construction transportation of heavy material shall only be allowed between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, unless authorized differently by the City. No hauling or transport shall be allowed during nighttime hours, weekends, or state/federal holidays. 38 951513.1 T-8 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant of future development on the Project site shall develop and submit to the City a Traffic Control Plan. This plan shall be consistent with the Southern California Chapter of the American Public Works Association's "Work Area Traffic Control Handbook," the California Department of Transportation's "Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones", or any alternative reference accepted by the City. The plan shall describe the applicant's plans to efficiently and safely maintain vehicular and non -vehicular access and movement along local roadways throughout the construction period. The plan shall delineate detour routes, the hours, duration and frequency of such restrictions, and the emergency access and safety measures that will be implemented during closures or restrictions of roadways and lanes. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 6.0 FINDINGS REGARDING THE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION PROJECT THAT CANNOT FEASIBLY BE REDUCED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED With regards to the Project, the City Council has determined that existing statutes, regulations, uniform codes, project design features, conditions, standards, and mitigation measures included in the FEIR will result in a substantial reduction of all of those environmental effects identified in the FEIR to a level that is less than significant. 7.0 FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that Environmental Impact Reports "...shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives". The selection of alternatives and their discussion must "foster informed decision-making and public participation" (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(a). Emphasis added). A fundamental consideration in the selection of alternatives for the Project is the requirement of state housing law that the City rezone property to accommodate development at least 490 new housing units at a density of at least 30 units/acre. Because of this legal requirement, no alternative uses of the site (such as lower -density residential or commercial development) were considered since they would not meet this fundamental purpose of the project. As presented in Section 5 above, all potentially significant effects of the Project have been adequately mitigated to a level below significant. In other words, "changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA); Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). 7.1 Alternative 1 (No Project) Alternative 1 (No Project) Description: Under Alternative 1, future use of the site would continue to be regulated by the existing General Plan land use and zoning regulations. According to General Plan Land Use Element Figure 1-2, the Project site is designated "PA - 39 951513.1 1/SP" (Planning Area 1, Specific Plan Overlay). Strategy 1.6.1 of the Land Use Element (p. I- 16) states that: "A master plan shall be developed for each area of the City designated as a Planning Area (PA). The location of each Planning Area is shown on Figure 1-2. Descriptions of each area and the contemplated land use designations are defined as follows: a) Planning Area 1 PA -1 is located within the incorporated City south of the Pomona Freeway west of Chino Hills Parkway. This 720± acre vacant area is part of the larger Tres Hermanos Ranch property spanning Grand Avenue, including property within the City of Chino Hills. PA -1 incorporates the Agriculture (AG) land use designation permitting single family residential at a maximum density of 1.0 dwelling unit per 5 gross acres. Facilities appropriate for this site should be designed based upon a vision for the future and not merely extend the patterns of the past. Such facilities may include educational institutions, reservoir for practical and aesthetics purposes, commercial developments which are not typical of those found in the area and a variety of residential, churches, institutional and other uses which are complimentary to the overall objective of having a master planned area. Development within the Tres Hermanos area should be designed so as to be a part of the Diamond Bar community as well as compatible with adjacent lands." For purposes of this alternative, a 30 -acre (gross) portion of the Project site would be developed with single-family homes at a density of one unit per five gross acres, and a total of six single-family homes. Finding: For most issues that are related to the disturbance of undeveloped land (e.g., Aesthetics, Biological Resources) this alternative is superior to the Project. However, for Land Use and Planning this alternative is inferior because it would not maintain consistency with regional plans and the City's Housing Element. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City's analysis of Project Alternative 1 is presented in Section 6.3.1 in the Final EIR; this analysis is incorporated by reference herein and summarized below. (b) AESTHETICS: Under this alternative, less grading, landform alteration and disturbance of natural vegetation would be required in order to accommodate six single-family homes as compared to the Project. Therefore, visual impacts resulting from development would be reduced. However, the analysis of the Project concluded that aesthetics impacts would be less than significant, and therefore the No Project alternative would not eliminate or reduce significant impacts of the Project. (c) AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: The only agricultural activity on the site is livestock grazing. Under this alternative, it is assumed that the same amount of land (30 acres) would be removed from grazing activity as for the Project. No forestry resources would be impacted by either this alternative or the Project. Therefore, impacts would be similar for this alternative and the Project, and no significant impacts would be eliminated or reduced. (d) AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Air pollutant emissions are caused during construction and ongoing operations associated with transportation and other types of energy use by new development. Development under this alternative would be expected to generate a reduced quantity of air pollutant and greenhouse gas 40 951513.1 emissions during construction and operation as compared to the Project because less grading would be required and fewer vehicle trips would be generated. No significant impacts associated with air emissions were identified for the Project, and therefore this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts related to this topic. (e) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Sensitive biological resources are present on the Project site. Under this alternative, it is assumed that a similar amount of land would be disturbed to create roadway access and residential lots for six homes as compared to the Project, since owners of the five -acre parcels would be permitted to replace natural vegetation with ornamental landscaping, hardscape, etc. As a result, potential impacts would be similar or potentially greater than for the Project, which could include common areas that encompass sensitive vegetation and remain undisturbed. However, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce the impacts of the Project below the level of significance; therefore, no significant impacts would be eliminated or reduced under this alternative. (f) CULTURAL RESOURCES: Sensitive archaeological or paleontological resources could exist on the Project site. Under this alternative, it is assumed that a reduced amount of land would be disturbed to create roadway access and building pads for six homes as compared to the Project, and as a result, the potential to disturb cultural resources would likely be less. However, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce the impacts of the Project below the level of significance; therefore, no significant impacts would be eliminated or reduced under this alternative. (g) GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Under this alternative, grading to create roadway access and building pads would be reduced in comparison to the Project, and fewer people and structures would be exposed to hazards such as earthquakes and landslides. However, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce the impacts of the Project below the level of significance; therefore, no significant impacts would be eliminated or reduced under this alternative. (h) HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Under the No Project Alternative, the construction period would likely be shorter and fewer people would be exposed to potential risks from hazardous materials used in construction. Also, fewer people would be exposed to wildland fires that could occur on-site after occupancy. However, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce the impacts of the Project below the level of significance; therefore, no significant impacts would be eliminated or reduced under this alternative. (i) HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Under the No Project Alternative, the future development "footprint' from grading to create roadway access and building pads on the Project site would be reduced. As a result, required drainage improvements would also be reduced as compared to the Project. During the public scoping process, comments were submitted regarding existing drainage problems in the residential neighborhood located on Scenic Ridge Drive northeast of the Project site, and concerns were expressed regarding the potential for the Project to exacerbate the existing problems. Mitigation measures have been identified to address potential impacts related to drainage from the Project, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, while the No Project alternative would be expected to require less extensive drainage improvements compared to the Project, it would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts. (j) LAND USE AND PLANNING: The General Plan Land Use Element and zoning regulations would not be amended under this alternative. Consequently, the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan would be internally inconsistent, which 41 951513.1 would be a violation of state law. In addition, the City's General Plan would be inconsistent with regional plans. These land use conflicts would represent a significant adverse impact. In addition, this alternative would not meet the basic project objective of accommodating the City's fair share of regional housing needs. (k) NOISE: Noise impacts are generated during construction and from traffic during long- term operation. This alternative would be expected to result in reduced noise impacts as compared to the Project due to a shorter construction period and substantially less traffic added to the road network. However, with the identified mitigation measures, impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with respect to noise. (1) POPULATION AND HOUSING: This alternative would result in a reduced inducement to population growth compared to the Project since it would allow only six additional homes. However, the impacts of the Project would be less than significant in this regard; therefore, this alternative would not reduce or eliminate any significant impacts. Because the Project site is vacant, neither the No Project alternative nor the Project would result in displacement of people or homes. Therefore, this alternative would be identical to the Project with respect to this potential impact. (m) PUBLIC SERVICES: Under the No Project Alternative, development of six homes would be allowed on the site. Therefore, risks due to police protection, fire or paramedic services would be reduced compared to the Project. However, with the identified mitigation measures, impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this alternative would not reduce or eliminate any significant impacts. (n) RECREATION: Under the No Project Alternative, demand for parks and recreation would be reduced compared to the Project. However, with the identified mitigation measures, impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this alternative would not reduce or eliminate any significant impacts. (o) TRANSPORATION/TRAFFIC: Under the No Project Alternative, traffic generation would be substantially reduced compared to the Project. However, with the identified mitigation measures, impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this alternative would not reduce or eliminate any significant impacts. Since this alternative would not provide an opportunity to provide shared emergency access for Diamond Ranch High School, it is considered inferior to the Project in this regard. (p) UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Under the No Project Alternative, demand for utilities and public services would be reduced compared to the Project. However, with the identified mitigation measures, impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this alternative would not reduce or eliminate any significant impacts. 7.2 Alternative Locations for the Project With regard to alternative locations for a project, CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(f)(2) provides that "The key question and first step in analysis is whether any of the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project in another location. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR." (Emphasis added). The environmental analysis presented in Chapter 5 of the Final EIR concludes that all of the potential impacts of the Project would either be less than significant, or would be reduced below the level of significance by mitigation measures identified in the analysis of each topic. Therefore, according to CEQA, no analysis of alternative site locations is required (§15126.6(f) (2)). However, comments were 42 951513.1 received during the public scoping process requesting that the City consider other locations for the Project. In order to address those public comments and concerns, two alternative locations for the Project have been evaluated and are discussed in Section 6.3 of the Final EIR. These alternative locations include multiple infill sites in a developed light industrial portion of the City, and another location within the Tres Hermanos property approximately one mile south of the Project site. 7.3 Alternative 2 (Infill Sites) Alternative 2 (Infill Sites) Description: Under this alternative, General Plan and zoning amendments for separate infill sites listed in Table 6.3-1 below and shown in Exhibit 6-1 would be adopted to allow development of 490 housing units. These sites are located in the northwestern portion of the city, north of the SR -60 freeway, and most are currently developed with light industrial buildings. Finding: For most issues that are related to disturbance of undeveloped land (e.g., Aesthetics, Biological Resources) this alternative is superior to the Project because the sites have previously been disturbed by development. However, for other impacts such as Recreation and Utilities/Service Systems the impacts of this alternative would be similar to the Project since both alternatives would generate a similar demand for public services and facilities. This alternative would be inferior to the Project with respect to Land Use and Planning because it would not maintain consistency with the Housing Element. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City's analysis of Project Alternative 1 is presented in Section 6.3.2 in the Final EIR; this analysis is incorporated by reference herein and summarized below. (b) AESTHETICS: All the parcels included in this alternative are presently developed, and are surrounded by a fully urbanized area. Some parcels are located adjacent to residential areas while others are adjacent to similar industrial and/or commercial development. There are no natural resources remaining or significant aesthetics views that could be adversely affected by redevelopment of any of the sites for high-density residential use. No designated historic structures exist within the area. Increased lighting could occur with redevelopment; however, exterior lighting already exists on the buildings on these sites, and the City Municipal Code contains provisions to minimize potential impacts of increased lighting on any adjacent sensitive uses. While this alternative would avoid the conversion of vacant land to urban uses, the impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this altemative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts with regard to aesthetics. (c) AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: No agriculture or forestry resources would be affected under this alternative, and therefore, impacts would be less than for the Project. However, no significant impacts to agriculture and forestry resources were identified for the Project; therefore, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts related to this topic. (d) AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Air pollutant emissions are caused during construction and ongoing operations associated with transportation and other types of energy use by new development. While development under this alternative would be expected to generate a similar quantity of air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions during construction and operation as the Project, existing uses on these sites already generate air pollutants; therefore, the net change in emissions would be less than for the Project. However, no significant impacts associated with air emissions were identified for the Project; therefore, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts related to this topic. 43 951513.1 (e) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: All parcels included in this Alternative are currently developed, and are surrounded by urban uses. There are no natural resources remaining on these sites. Subsequent redevelopment of these sites for high-density residential use would have reduced potential to cause biological impacts. While the Project could potentially impact biological resources, the identified mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, while this alternative would be superior to the Project with respect to biological resources, it would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts in this regard. (f) CULTURAL RESOURCES: All the parcels included in this Alternative are presently developed, and are surrounded by urbanized area. Consequently, any archaeological resources that may have existed would likely have been eliminated during construction of the existing uses. Sub -surface paleontological resources could potentially exist in this area; therefore, redevelopment of these sites could impact cultural resources. With the identified mitigation measures, the Project would not result in significant impacts to cultural resources; therefore, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts in this regard. (g) GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Under the Infill Sites Alternative, future development would occur within a previously developed area. Because this alternative is located on land that is relatively flat, previously urbanized and accessible by an existing roadway network, potential impacts related to geology and soils would be reduced in comparison to those anticipated with the Project. Because the Infill Sites are not located in a hillside area, there would be no need for a Hillside Management Plan and hillside, slope stability and landslide concerns would not be anticipated. Mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce potential impacts of the Project with regard to geology and soils to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, while this alternative would be expected to result in reduced potential geological impacts as compared to the Project site, it would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts. (h) HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: While this alternative would be expected to result in reduced potential risk for some natural/manmade hazards (such as wildfires or landslides), the potential risk for other hazards (such as exposure to hazardous substances) would be increased as compared to the Project. With the identified mitigation measures, potential impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts. (i) HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Under the Infill Sites Alternative, future development would occur within a previously developed area in the northwest area of the City. Because this alternative is located in a developed area, existing drainage facilities would be expected to serve the new residential development, and therefore required drainage improvements would be reduced as compared to the Project site. During the public scoping process, comments were submitted regarding existing drainage problems in the residential neighborhood located on Scenic Ridge Drive northeast of the Project site. Mitigation measures have been identified to address potential impacts related to drainage from the Project, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, while this alternative would be expected to require less extensive drainage improvements compared to the Project, it would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts. Q) LAND USE AND PLANNING: CEQA defines land use and planning impacts as the physical division of an established community; conflict with any applicable land use 44 951513.1 plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the General Plan, Specific Plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect; and/or conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. All of the parcels included in this alternative have been previously developed, and are surrounded by urbanized area. The General Plan Land Use Element designates all of these parcels for Light Industrial use, with the exception of a small parcel located adjacent to the SR -60 Freeway at Brea Canyon Road which is designated for Professional Office (OP) use. Surrounding adjacent areas are developed with residential uses varying from 5 to 20 dwelling units per acre. With regard to physical division of an established community, no significant impacts were identified for the Project and this alternative would similarly have no significant impacts. Neither this alternative nor the Project would result in significant conflicts with land use plans or policies, and neither area is within an area covered by a habitat conservation plan. Therefore, impacts for this alternative would be similar to the Project. (k) NOISE: Noise impacts are generated during construction and during long-term operation. Selection of this alternative site would be expected to result in similar noise impacts as compared to the Project because a similar amount of construction would occur and a similar volume of traffic would be generated. However, some of the sites are immediately adjacent to the SR -60 freeway, and would be exposed to a higher level of traffic noise compared to the Project site. With the identified mitigation measures, the impacts of the Project would be less than significant, and this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with respect to noise. (1) POPULATION AND HOUSING: Potential impacts with regard to population and housing include inducement of population growth or displacement of people or homes. This alternative would result in a similar inducement to population growth as the Project since both would allow up to 490 additional homes. Neither this alternative nor the Project would result in displacement of people or homes, and therefore impacts would be similar. (m) PUBLIC SERVICES: As with the Project, it is anticipated that any new development of the Infill Sites would be required to comply with existing regulations to ensure adequate emergency access, construction in compliance with fire safety and building codes, provisions for adequate fire flow and hydrant access. With the identified mitigation measures, the impacts of the Project would be less than significant, and this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with respect to fire and police protection. (n) RECREATION: All residential development must provide for dedication of parkland or pay in -lieu fees in accordance with Section 21.32 of the City's Subdivision Code. No significant impacts to recreation were identified in association with the Project, and anticipated impacts related to this alternative would be similar to the Project. (o) TRANS PO RATION/TRAFFIC: The Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the Project identified one intersection (Phillips Ranch Road at Village Loop Road) where potentially significant impacts would require mitigation to conform to adopted level of service standards. Due to the greater distance between the Infill Sites Alternative and that affected intersection, it is less likely that this impact would occur; however, impacts could occur at other intersections closer to the Infill Sites. 45 951513.1 The amount of vehicular traffic generated would be the same for this alternative as compared to the Project since the same number of new housing units would be anticipated. However, since new housing at the Infill Sites would replace existing industrial uses, the net increase in traffic would likely be less than the Project, since it is a vacant site. However, since mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce impacts of the Project to a less than significant level, the Infill Sites Alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts. (p) UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: The Project and the Infill Sites Alternative would generate similar demand for public services and utilities since both would result in development of 490 additional residential units. Since the Infill Sites are currently served by utilities, it is expected that infrastructure improvements would be less than for the Project site; however, upgrading of water or wastewater lines could be necessary to serve high-density residential development. No significant impacts have been identified for the Project and therefore this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts in regard to utilities and service systems. 7.4 Alternative 3 (Tres Hermanos - South) Alternative 3 (Tres Hermanos - South) Description: This alternative site is located west of Chino Hills Parkway near the intersection of Chino Avenue, approximately one mile south of the Project site. The site is part of the Tres Hermanos property owned by the Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency. Similar to the Project Site, the Tres Hermanos South Site is characterized as gently rolling terrain with distinct hills and valleys. However, this location includes a portion of the ranch that is within a broad valley with less topographical relief as compared to the Project Site. During the scoping process, public comments were received requesting that alternate locations be considered for the Project. Along with the Infill Sites Alternative, this alternative responds to those public comments and addresses CEQA requirements to consider alternatives that might achieve most of the project objectives while reducing or eliminating significant environmental impacts. This site is more than 30 acres in size and could accommodate the project objective of 490 residential units. Finding: For most issues, Alternative 3 (Tres Hermanos-South) would have similar impacts to the Project. However, as with the other alternatives, it would not maintain consistency with the Housing Element and therefore would not meet a basic project objective. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The Lead Agency's analysis of Project Alternative 1 is presented in Section 6.3.3 in the Final EIR; this analysis is incorporated by reference herein and summarized below. (b) AESTHETICS: this site has rolling topography and sparse natural vegetation along Chino Hills Parkway in areas visible to immediately surrounding undeveloped areas. The site is not immediately adjacent to development but may be visible in the distance from surrounding areas. In that respect, view impacts would be considered similar to the Project site. No significant aesthetics impacts were identified relative to the Project, and therefore this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with regard to aesthetics. (c) AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: This alternative would have similar impacts to grazing land as the Project. However, no significant impacts to agriculture and forestry resources were identified for the Project, and therefore this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts related to this topic. 46 951513.1 (d) AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Air pollutant emissions are caused during construction and ongoing operations associated with transportation and other types of energy use by new development. Development under this alternative would be expected to generate a similar quantity of air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions during construction and operation as the Project. No significant impacts associated with air emissions were identified for the Project, and therefore this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts related to this topic. (e) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: No field surveys have been conducted on this alternative site; however, site photographs and aerial photos suggest that sensitive biological resources may exist on-site, similar in character to the Project area. This alternative site is also in closer proximity to a designated Sensitive Ecological Area (SEA) located in the Tonner Canyon area approximately two miles south of the project area. The proximity to this area could increase the potential for indirect impacts to the sensitive biological resources within the SEA due to the increased proximity of human activity and the associated potential for intrusion. No significant impacts to biological resources that could not be mitigated to a less than significant level were found in relation to development at the Project site. This alternative would be considered similar to the Project in terms of impacts related to biological resources. (f) CULTURAL RESOURCES: This alternative site is underlain by the same soil types as the project area. The potential for discovery of both archaeological and paleontological resources exists within the area. No significant impacts to cultural resources that could not be reduced to a less than significant level were found in relation to development on the Project site, and the same level of impact would be expected for this alternative. This alternative would be considered similar to the Project in terms of impacts to cultural resources. (g) GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Compared to the Project site, the Tres Hermanos South Site Alternative would result in slightly greater impacts than the Project because the underlying risks are greater due to the alternate site's location within a drainage area underlain with alluvial fill. However, as with the Project, it is anticipated that with appropriate engineering measures and best management practices, as defined and recommended by qualified geotechnical engineers, impacts related to geology and soils could be reduced to less than significant levels. (h) HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Potential hazards related to the presence or use of hazardous materials on-site would be similar for this alternative as for the Project Site. Both sites have been used as grazing land and have not been previously developed. No significant hazards due to aircraft would occur at either site, and emergency access issues would be similar for the sites. Wildland fire hazards would also be similar for these sites since they are in the same general area and are both adjacent to undeveloped land. For these reasons, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts. (i) HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Impacts to hydrology and water quality associated with development of the Tres Hermanos-South alternative site would be similar to the Project site in that a substantial amount of grading and installation of drainage infrastructure would be required as part of the development. Mitigation measures have been identified to address potential impacts related to drainage from the Project, and impacts would be less than significant. This alternative would not eliminate or reduce significant impacts on hydrology because existing City Code 47 951513.1 requirements and identified mitigation measures applicable to the Project would reduce potential impacts below the level of significance. (j) LAND USE AND PLANNING: The alternative site is undeveloped and utilized for grazing similar to the Project site. The site is designated in the General Plan for Agricultural uses, as is the Project site. Development on this site would not physically divide an established community or conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. This alternative would require General Plan and zoning amendments similar to the Project, and would maintain consistency between the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan, as well as consistency with state law and regional plans. No significant land use and planning impacts were identified with the Project, and none would be anticipated with this alternative. This alternative would be considered similar to the Project in terms of impacts related to land use and planning. (k) NOISE: Noise impacts are generated during construction and during long-term operation. While this site is similarly situated along Chino Hills Parkway, it is not adjacent to the SR -60 freeway and therefore selection of this alternative site would be expected to result in marginally lower noise impacts as compared to portions of the Project site. With the identified mitigation measures, the impacts of the Project would be less than significant, and this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with respect to noise. (1) POPULATION AND HOUSING: Potential impacts with regard to population and housing include inducement of population growth or displacement of people or homes. This alternative would result in a similar inducement to population growth as the Project since both would allow up to 490 additional homes. Neither this alternative nor the Project would result in displacement of people or homes. Therefore, this alternative would be similar to the Project with respect to population and housing impacts. (m) PUBLIC SERVICES: Fire Protection — With the Tres Hermanos South Alternative, future development would occur within an undeveloped area approximately one mile south of the Project site. Similar to the Project site, this alternative would result in the potential for increased fire service calls to an area that currently experiences negligible activity. This impact would be similar to the Project. Both sites have a similar exposure to wildland fire hazards. Mitigation measures identified in the Public Services chapter would reduce impacts of the Project to a level that is less than significant, and this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with regard to fire protection. Police Services — Similar to the Project site, this alternative would result in the potential for increased police service calls to an area that currently experiences negligible activity. This impact would be similar to the Project, and identified mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level that is less than significant. This alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with regard to police services. (n) RECREATION: All new residential development must provide parkland or pay in -lieu fees in accordance with Section 21.32 of the City's Subdivision Code. This requirement would apply to this alternative site as well as the Project site. No significant impacts to recreation were identified in association with the Project, and none would be anticipated related to this alternative. This alternative would be considered similar to the Project in terms of impacts related to recreation, and no significant impacts would be eliminated or reduced. (o) TRANSPORATION/TRAFFIC: The Traffic Impact Analysis for the Project identified one intersection (Phillips Ranch Road at Village Loop Road) where potentially significant impacts would require mitigation to conform to adopted level of service standards. A 48 951513.1 mitigation measure is identified that would reduce that impact below the level of significance. Since this alternate site is located near the Project site, would also take access from Chino Hills Parkway, and would generate the same traffic volume, traffic impacts would be expected to be similar to the Project. Since mitigation measures have been included to reduce impacts of the Project to a less than significant level, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts. (p) UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: The Project and the Tres Hermanos-South Alternative would generate similar demand for utilities since both would result in development of 490 additional residential units. No significant impacts have been identified for the Project and therefore this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts in regard to utilities and service systems. 7.5 Summary and Comparison of Alternatives The comparison, presented in detail in Section 6.4 of the Final EIR, indicates that Alternative 1 (No Project) would result in impacts that are both superior and inferior to the Project. For most issues that are related to the disturbance of undeveloped land (e.g., Aesthetics, Biological Resources) this alternative is superior to the Project. However, for Land Use and Planning this alternative is inferior because it would not maintain consistency with regional plans and the City's Housing Element. It would also not meet the basic Project objective of maintaining consistency with the Housing Element. However, it is considered the environmentally superior alternative. For most environmental impact categories, Alternative 2 (Infill Sites) would result in impacts that are either superior or similar to the Project. For most issues that are related to disturbance of undeveloped land (e.g., Aesthetics, Biological Resources) this alternative is superior to the Project because the sites have previously been disturbed by development. However, for other impacts such as Recreation and Utilities/Service Systems the impacts of this alternative would be similar to the Project since both alternatives would generate a similar demand for public services and facilities. This alternative would be inferior to the Project with respect to Land Use and Planning because it would not maintain consistency with the Housing Element. For this reason, it would not meet a basic Project objective. This alternative is considered the environmentally superior alternative other than the No Project alternative. For most issues, Alternative 3 (Tres Hermanos-South) would have similar impacts to the Project. However, as with the other alternatives, it would not maintain consistency with the Housing Element and therefore would not meet a basic project objective. 49 951513.1 N N M N J C 0.y:: Y R E L c m m � c c O 0 0 0 o > c c 0O C i0 O 0 Cl m m c c QS o 0 m m c <' 0 := 0'; N E 0— CL CL @ s E` a 0 "O O N L 'O N @ U O O r @ 2 > M E o@ V N N t y y D_ :E O` 2 T 'U G N N 0 N OJ - U C N N @ = t o N X N E 0 O wo f O m< m m Q w >> �° 2 o o c E o _ T w a -'. m E U (O T @ "O p Z5 a`> D_ d m u t 'O O_ m C 2 cm `o E d @o OJ O@ @ N «� O N @ @ C@ c y L y d N O_ @ N QO] LL N y N y a C h= N O O O Q 'O 3 p` m N O m am o EmO.3� y L mo w E �, �6 m aci a s d -'o m o a "' am b a o °O > m E E oo Ve5 � o S l.a0 pmmJ3 2 y@ 'oOoQEyJ a m =—o > EE 2 N 2 E LtQo 3 mNOm > E `CO@>C@o ..y E UN@U_I d N N L- vl N � N O Q K LL 2.0 1] (q = @ Q� O O 0 • • • .• Q N U E d g> EU E @ L O m -a E d a o L o N Q Q c 0 @i ;o. a a �< o a va mo U � O ry O a d n d oa `o `o 5mu N in 0 +.... C: U m O o- rT- n. SpO .1C m > c E o E o o m o 0 U 0 a>i U 0 Cc O _- R .O CD y E,0 (D C L n m co L m >o >, o y Q m m d m m `o_ @ N o o@ m n w N m ¢ @ O N _� O_ v N 01 O L_ "N O N "C C_ C CJ O O_ OJ ✓ N U N � @ O � " in d— a m m E d _ O O O O C@ N "o N O_ �m L-, m c � a .: :. T.. o m� y p m m m w U) ... _ 3 O o S p N N 3 O y N@ r N C O L N@? O �.. -O L GJ >@ Al 0 .@�N @ � m Al i� mUo 5L3LLm m�NO`UoT V._ m 0 c L N UCL m 0 o. ¢m o m`mc o c 0 E- n o Nc E -o E m c m> 3 n ' o m m d L m E moa U v@ @o o d" o o w E L E s _ O S] o m o O_ ._ > co L x axi m C o U'O O 0 N N al c 0 N@ d 3 LN.T. o m E at -"(o o >ooa o g c L N s @ m o E¢_ moc moO ai a `>N, yep m m o�U @Et oooO 75 w ° wc2mo O O m@ ms- O ma OaNaE O'dE -4moJ aodE , sEQN o o o E Q $ d V coo U a t m vi m 3 m om U '� d E d 0- o o m ' m- 0 y> g m O O^ &✓ d C U "O O Q d o ¢ Q m N 1 U N 0 CL Eo 00. N C O) c � m� O C N O. C M ui Z O O N C C N 0 C C� D) � N 0 Q O Y : Cc� L : W C � � O O O C o U U C a o U L9 o o U r 0 O w tea. E N c O Y y � Q U Y 0 N O O E::,0: a c� o U CCs _0 � p -� H :� m t `c c `oa To ' W N [0 N d o d y 3 0 O ._ L = U U G m m m O `J 4J @ @ N@@ G N N vl U w O@ -ET_ d T _@ a Q C Z m C O@ G O} O O@ a w Z O L N@ O@ c E 0 mTw U pm o`0 00 E om v¢ a o f , O N—0VO 'O E O N 0 U N N 0 Ln O r _ U L L d Of f L E to .. 0 o h N O' a TO f° ✓C+ m@ mN m@ E0O 0 o o@ 6 000 'a�-@.+. coE D7 N @ o p y ' d @ N E o EEm 0= c o -N E o `n n." m o Tp-oo a` C o c o o o_ m 0 m y A N U y Q y m E j N e O O) N G d L @ C N C N O n L > T L_ L '� L y m j m L G d@c i a h� m 2 .3 � E �= d C@ oo- `° = m'E m O OU@ 0 L-5 P 6� '-- '> 'O @ "O E L.. E��� w tq N O N O- � ,OI m N n O m 00 O_ d U O y 0 ... @ c p U" n O F o -°o iL m a [6 L j@ m U m$ m 3 o m i- @ E m °� ti$ m O U 0 0 0 m m m c `.. 0;: y R E w o >: U `o o = o �E E_ E U - U - m� O m O O) O O m m m T o 0 o U 0 .p 0 p' CL n n 0 m m Nl c c =o a �. 0o CD a>> U O m m U O C E c o c E� o Q.o ao a E Q E - o N o m a ~ m c '2 s E y c a c o C O@, O oc @ @ J O L C L] N E @ E ol'O > C O O E T@ O@ p_ n O d d a E O U d �Q d U U L m d d @ O @ d d= n y_ "' L d E in y c y m E 0- X 4 5 1 'o �L`UU T n O nE@d �dUd"'nad�C-d@ m N d nCOdCd�w rq T m m -O (j @ m U O m C Yo c L U H O d@ w O N wd=*65 Y d E 0 U `. L-. -0@ U pJ C .0 - `p m o ,.�. d E E m N Oc N O O U> E d d@ @ m d a w E c :.- c w a n o N C E J d -O .D @ @@ a i c q, C d n "� O co E C @ Q C p d� d N O m > L T C C U C y [� O@> O O C m: N Cm N @O E d_ _� D) @@ d d n@ .2.0- (on 'd-dpo :.. .. N y O 2" o Nc dmc E oCn -Uc od ooE ao o 0 EmE� oono22 E0 dUa mawm`o 3v M'&5 NEd Mm o 0Mo3-_mo 0 U_ a E an 0 @ 0 0 0 -d>3 2n mo g=,dcod oc m mo=BQmU a m@ U d i- _m E d m a `02 oo 3 m a 0 0 f m an d M U% @ d—@ 'm m _ C U w d N w, O L L L--. N aC w 0 0_ C @ d e5 r w m m@ d O d O L L C Q C w@ m m d m O j' M O C N m U m 3 d >' m co m s, n` m ._ w L .v m L E@ O X m O g d Ow m¢ m Z E LC- e a{Op 3Vm -ommn siOy y0Nd •C�-/! ad '-@C cd` >. aamN w .o`c mmN@ Ed w`LEn m d m :E �O OO >_OL'O O 2- -2 Oi a`d V .oo� O O 3 -N y- mwoT O> -omU _EO ._ mno E U oo m ECO N O N m 'r m O O O .m m m I U a) O IL` E o O C m p_ .N Ol N C � O G N O C N on m ry N o aCJ 6 N d W E W -o a) Ecu @ C � .N cc6 0 O co -O 0 C! V, cR E C- Q O) 0 d7 0 O) U C C C `oma o C r 0- -> > y p_ 0 - U d `o, oo m o= .1 CQ "E m m m .� c 0 o F m c,o a o 0 CL m m m m U) c c c c lo a b a N= m m m C ' 0. m m C' -y O O E...o Q y U .Q U O U O U — o O ¢ <¢ E <¢ E ¢ < C d d p O U N d d@> L @@ @ O @ 7-0,62 E T E @ o -� U m d 0 m m "m E¢ mo Y on v w E m'O o c a s o m a '�" N@ m "? d n o 0J w¢ N cm c' E y W m o@= o L .�. m m 0 o 0o a o. aci E U N 30 a v� o �_ o d@ E �'r @ 0— m 2' E E L m m c v C O@ LL 0 L c o 0 [0 E m N y T� d U •_ � N c O -ET, O �� o O 'Ft ._ ,.., O Emc d T d Lv'Cf d w U dQ @Un d d d Om Vd0 _^Ommt° EO .-5o �og �3- 0 aa E2 o LL w"0d Eo mOa `@ U d a-0 m m 02 u o m — m c c C o`_ mcoo oo Nom o 0.Odd "O O d_ C O O LO QO NdO O Od 'O dE OCNJ d@ m-CNE 0 E 0` =U@� U n d L@ OVL—@O C@� — dN N N C tp C NU O " @ ' O 2 -5O 6 n ONW,0yo + U @Nd J_N. N m 0_ l � C •O -7d@ tdN @ Y C N teaNpn � i n ma U .OEOa'dm @m U 0.- y a E o E@ 0 m0 E—o m mm 0Gm "@°a¢ E 5 2 E ONC U _NM@ ¢0 E L= O. @@ O a S @ C E L C? O O O O O m OJ o1 m LO I U N O d E O CM O 0 m N c mr- O C N 0 0 o 0 � m N o N 9 N d WE M Z 0 -0 N 0 C C) O 'N O 0 � O m 0 Q C= 0:; V E W 0 0 U c r U U U -;. -O o m oo m m m g m g m a m c c 3 m m _T - C 'G'� m m m m C SO O O O o 0 0. m m m m m m m m cT R c rfl N d U U Q Q Q Q m a"iEdm5cm-E@@c mO b3 n G Oo ai p 0 E m- aN( > m m y o `m a .TD d -� o allo�caO��my�o-momvELLv@i m m@. .� _m > LK =� O d E � @ U @ E --L C .�-' N m p N w O'.p y @ L S C�� OJ r (6 y o w N n m C C L Yl = C O -m O-" G C O N C N V! .m N Q'� N= v@i 0" O j U d 2P b- N N N N y amJ 0. o cmi Z E ai m` o" c a m m o w y 5 a p aci -E c v C� End. m Ln com mm Er, �_a m_E" -o@ @m m o-¢ 175 "p E w m c d o -`o m °-' ".'CC...mo-�o�m'-p-o�Eo-o-cai�`om `o a`> m m '`-' v m@ �- - b n >o� °' m a T n L p p m O`>. d m tiE E O) a) .t] @ O@ d N L C G@ T rte- N �O C Y✓ m .� 0 m O n O @@ O m CC ?� N -O p -O C N "O N J O O N = L t� O p" d. N@ `J� @ N nl U .= N '] N -y C U N@ swm,�=U_mn oY mn mo �z.m Now aci�oc¢E mw�hooap'iS .a >` 2 p- m i o o o p " c o n2m-cmo�dcocEj:�N a mp- y�;�:_`n T^LN�°' ad me api@ o'a aci d m m aci m E S .o m m@ 'o m E N m v I U N O IL E o O C O1 CL 'a) �p C_ o O .- N d o Co N o C G J co d W , Z O O N C) C � � VJ m 0 (0 47 o- E 0 o� a m n c p 'O 'O --o M& C. 0 N 0 N 0 'E0 0 0 :p., y m m m m m m ate+: Q d .0 CL U c c (Q U U Q Q Q O = C N N C S r, 0~ L 75 > E N> O p L N -o oQ o o m — u @ .y d 16 t > m ,on s ; o a 6i m 'o j U o 2 o_ c `m o d a m 3 � U ° m m'm m m o -@o p .J N N O C m p N m o@ U L >L.. (A m` C N U OJ Q -O .� d C d" O h U O@ Y @ L O N@ p@ U O p TU @ pV N 1 w O -50 mm a C_ U O 0 L L N 4 N O N L O- O@ U T c OJ U .- N T >@ E U 0 �:.. .o @ O U m E a -o @ m0 N U L O L O U 0 O C fn C N Q d O O' C O m O N(O 07.3 O U O D_ O O. @ C N m - O O N@ 0 O@ s y T Q p d= U m c' OJ ¢� C a> E N OJ O_ L O n m O E .0 m w E 16 g S o m N o- 'm m @ o m 0_ c m m o E m E 3 m @@ a`� a m o Q ='-o M >o o n e 3 o o "� m a m m t o y o o c o L E c coi aoi S c -- o o T c a S ai 2 0 o�-,5 L 0 E a'L E y (O ljp0 "O 'NE OmNN OE O2 O� E @ N E 05 U U U c` a E L C 0..: m G G; 9 O N ca GO O C c_ R C .G c (D CL Q'� U E � �- a m N 'o R m o E m n' g o o o m 3 @ E -- L U > m g 5`R o d 0 o o F2-,5,5 �' `o w E m t6 a E R .°� > .c m a °> w o m en w o- c m E dd o'R aoi R Em o o-E 'o o O m w m � oOc fo o> E 7E oo ED nd m U N OoNvl ORovJ WOd R 'OmO yoC Ow CRmto O hNUN LE a � .n MN,3 RO�N O" O 0 0 2 E _ E —d E O o NL + > Q> sCRN m_ f oN n >NO 0 O E E Or= 0 o C',U >U z 0 p 0 '¢— 0 om o£oo . o o 03 x :O 6 : O O=O E 2 ORd c BR --c co- Ov_ERO O g m EdEC o oa n LE _cEai W o Ea� zS o C5 > 0 0OoE . 0¢ C 0 v> E noE 0.wdm m ooL ¢= m amo °= m'Nh`—o a 0 - a EE soUE oLmmE — °oLom m E0R" rnvRo 4 aQw IE m E> m R o R h E m m K U I U (D 0 a E o O C O) iEc r 0 mr O .- N O 0 Cr O m � N o C C J Xm(a W 0 O o N J(� C � O 'y 0 � O Q r o. C� E --_:0.: c.i,: N @ O O U U r N Q m D O O7 O O) d m a m rn= r� c m E 0 .E:: 0. 0 OOr...0 c 00 G 0� G C1 O] 0] c ' O � C W N E o @;y C G U c U E Q Q Q O l0 C s Y O y OJ C E o @ @ Em E a,,'o m @ 'o > @ T> m @ m v m su > E o E L w -woo a`3 cvLo mGm= L ... m G L c dc 'mm5< E m o p Em 0c E� a o a@@ aca`, N @'wOEO m-`��EN Oc mo mE _ .>E m E w E D N y ... o_ 3 v, o m (7 V N G'E o o ' C I� m@ o= L a' m a, rn a U v v E@ O Q o ami L a o d m y- 'LO NE N U N .` G= N N O Y U wa@ NO@@2NE-."� N @M mz m m 0 Eoo o a_Q -aE E m mO d mEE aa; cz@ EYm, -UY> EE@ tEm m -@o o(o0 '= UMEoj �W oE ao_,d`EMaE d m mNcE o :: ; C.. ao,i °�' '� o °N' E o_ E oa ✓ o `o `o o api m m @ V s"m0 N U U c9 CD O, O O N 0 @ L .Q 15 E O +.. '. G O E2O O, . .M @ C .0 U .` 0 n o m E .p o m a 3 o (/mJ om E_ c_ p m 3 a m m a, p m V a N d@ N N@ -O C O C K G J l0 -O a, N G U N ` �E d L c t N B O T O O U O d. O OG G O L L.• @ m m C jc°i = o o gym•, -o �c c °U' Y 3 D E m@ m c.J -oo N C T O> N T f6 E E O@ 0)'� U (O O O G Z TE o m@ o 'm m ZEE E -p v G. m m m c Biu a, E c rn 0-6 L� b a 0 = E O in L L O L O p .- CC=J N N N 8 U N O E o f6 «. O c m a`a) mp C m O C N O_ C co m Q� N o 'O a N c c J L a N d W ,M O a N 0 c � O 'y M O m O a+ C O Zc r'' o, -w E 0 q U'; 0 0 C O o `o o m o m o 2 J` a c c @ E m `o �o °D E N. c 0 o C. m wm m m m m m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 CL m m m m m m m m m c C c C G C C C C C c .0. C � d C ,N - O. m m m m w G U U U U U m U m U m U m U -.d E'M a a n n n n n a a w J U n n E N dU o�2 m c7a L c @ T E c c O U E U5 O p m C7 U3a a `o o m o vi o a o -� m coi " E a d E .2.. c E c @ c E O N Cp) >O N C m c @ @ N E @ @ [O M O ' @ ._ C _O w O E@ m3 y..:mm@gym—aoi�mom omU @dm�odU :4 d.J nom H3�a.-.� R. m a a L c 0 `o a o@= c- L m m E o .n y E 3 c m o m m aEi o =o d y a s v m o w a m@ m E -0`oc m E�mC7=iZ �mm' c0c��'ct mmrn o'o p mc E c "m m ar0 =m ycmac U m Eo m 6 -- y om O GO mmao c o rcNaEri -UocOo@' amo m=COUU E `E o c 11mc woyo dEaJmE E75 E 'Oa 4 E t 'oa m e3YE m '6 -o @ m¢ v@m m m m E @ V a �_ `@ m EtF5 0 m m m C� 'o @ > c m N 15 'O N@ w C E O O p' n m y _ _ q Q� U m c U 3 @@ C@— N t L &O -2 ¢ me 0 OE yoU m� ALUO O U@ OOaRO ¢o @ ¢ M q ISJ [O I0 Q7 d cD 0 c7 cD cD U O 0 IL` E 0 76 9 .= O C m a� mo Y n O C N O c co mTN- C C J mid w E Mz° O O C 0JU C � O 'y CO 0 m co _0 tr Q C' 0 r:5 R ;.. E C: U m m m m m 0 0 m o m `0 m o v c c c C c r c. a c— c— c .. . a :j.=:: oa LO `0 0 0 m m 9 m E m E 0 m 9 m `0i li m ti m o. d m oa d oa o= m `a m au Fzt�Eo c mo 0`� EFE=- tf= %. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'2 m m m m(D m y c c c Z E5 c LE5 c m m m U U W m c .0. C y N E O )CLC C C G C Q Q Q Q Q = O d m N 'mo` Om C a d m — w cTn d d co E '_ E adi ✓ .o m m o m= LL a d d s 3 w �° ¢ a c 7�5ov — ami aEi E m'o o_m E E o 3 m a y m d .E U � o N 0 m m `o m 1 c o a d d> m.c s a 7"- a ~ m d d O U E m= a o d O w CD E `� `o > �. g o m a"i a m t' .... m o. a o a N d ¢ o m m a .c o .p0 G ami a m o n a= o-cz� L o m o m L CC�n m UONC X ECA mUy dTUJEd ONTO U[OC dd O O d" d a a` O O n 0 y:anim�d Uo ao dmLoa `ohm Y t- n cd o�"5¢a m�3=mm�°m :Cd mcm N a" O^ O O Q N cc O p d d d O� L" O d N m O E U_ m Vi C:O Ooi�-0a" a C VSO L�r-�U N�Oa_O. -0 C7� NW mV d d>G.' dTjm Jr~2 U mN>_m d a> mp iOT o(n cCA_ N0Lmj o m m� > w NON adoO '0OJ Q AOE oM-00 m -0a E ondUd .yC� E.o d 2 C U Md.0 c >j U M�O �p a (J . a m •C U C _ C 2] U X t O m d U" C d N" T E E m 0 p m maai <"° c7ami O>aD wovx Um ZI C 'ao d.'J-a"mm- m0eo ocOcd aa oL=m d��m° E ampcxi d U da 0t `EomB 0:9c E0 0 S�aiEo .c cm dadL.mJ E >E vm nE > d0 5R E ma mOc Q o o m -E ¢ m aE a O O O O (D (D C7 C7 2 C , C @ f9 N O O O C c. cu O m O m O N m A-. y. "v UE 0 0 p.:;CL y c m c w T c Q., o m m m U O r A C: 'y d E o .� Q Qc y c U � U c U G.. Q Q Q L m cc @ o �'� Q E a 8 0 o E a« E« 2 o ti c m o �o @ `o `a . o m °� = 3 `o m 65 o- U E v o` g S 8L m E o y .00 N 1 Q @ c m c U E o o d c oo 0-N o> m om E`@ n«mca@ Ea5 oE E E a ' E Q C po Vl C @ «"@O v o0NE). 0o : L 7LwN naOCw UNo cpO) E = �mm`t0E 10 m E MT c c '_U itc @C Ny ; 2 @ o> E =C0 E�6 M@ LLm o omU 00'. ¢o E toiLa -c6 E N @ooc0 0 @ m 0 -OL@ OU@ N O C O` p O LE W C 0' ` -p N '@N.' a0hd- (dn QO) m Vl OL N@ U@`O@ !OO 2 aE (e0O LL@ O .0Om. @ 'UcO.O O_ c@@ O- N CdLE@ CJ¢. Nwd d C O � M aB 0 C0 o y ` Oa .LLE 0 omaE U=j1 EU . :. -(Oon om Ua°D@«@p� yOC> o UNo.o v�°m-=mm c@ m �w ccm`�3,wN@20drnU a O�Q"��m M.6 @ >; "o m E[O0a ¢ a oO m-O -wOCooLL> 0 0"00 m�M M ='U= rmCon c aac�= CO . O 0 @d Ua U0Omry om@Ccf Lm0o >n Nom O C!ma j C o o_ 00 > («2 t�'Lo@a Em a@0 m >« p 0 W— m . U 2 p U OU .L @ N U E p @ O -O N CJ d N N N S.p Or L) N m £ m `o .. o C U U U a O O'er O C O O y O o. C' 0� m N N o .0-'O o `O m m U W r d' y E o O• � U U U E EN mo o �EC @ i z o f :!E m N --E Nr E O d�Nw m Ol LydC Nm __ au OJ E O D:>7 O w a m K a� a E a c ¢ o-✓ °� 'o a s m m m o @ o m E m m coi m U o `c@NfiI -- coE , dUcOl 0 a Q>m dcG co[O o0. `=oC - waO `o�o_ iJOn L✓U mo w WJfn �o .0`m=N O w5 LiN-. Uo -Eq _ 0dm OUO ioOUs CU U �iooo+ Qi..'.ya 0O OY OJNE O'@C'-mZ dCN C N' O Cp' Omt�O-N�Cd@ NNU UO V .L -N N mivELE 00 C@ a O d 4) m -o jy`- w a -0 `oo�0 &5 �Em¢mmm �coow mho.=EES E�ia�N oa �.EL N E N E o- @ E o E .5oo m O c .� z o m m c> co c o ` O: a mo omn dc0 oc o J E um maNmo w " 0�°m m md E C 0LQEm m o tio cNi CD o o doo Nao -o U mG O ». N E O L U o OC m 0" C O O L N N U O N O) C t m OI � U O � O O U _S .`- @@ ._. [n C (n @ O O= E L L C en Y N O N L o aN 3a@ ro. _ v� EE o E oioNi ¢E mmNUm mm c '> o E >m NC Em S 0 v @m Q m C _a- o a o °J y -L 0 N a�F] .Oc@-@d>"Oc N o ¢C L Em 'wmE@ -L. m Qo 0O5 UO dO a �C;(n 2 N S S Z U N O E o O C m �o C o m^ O ._ N N o M m D: N o -0 a N O G J L (0 CO CL - LU E 0 0 O a N 0 C � O N @ O 0) O = G a Q C 0;.. R E :0 "... 'U m 3 w @ 0 0 C > > o d > a tO F- m E o m o > 0 o o o0 U 0 n o '. o N c� O 0 0 0 W U r' 0 ra 9 C N d E d c c Q N N @ U m U E� a Q Q Q L @ t N c O O O Q C N N E @ L L _ O� pp S n c a O U .0.= E3 E 0. -co 2 E > 'O C n y n N m O@ O n C O m 0 N � N -O T N '� c m OX N - E@ o.'o V c= C 00 NO UO :. E N '@ N C@ U LQ OycOH @> N c N> 'p dV C > E o 0 m @oO n� mo _ L T.r- C N m L @ E O N N Ol U n w - o m m@ o' m o'er - o w £.mo" d o w Go> ¢ @ ata m m W c@m owo O>._ Gmo °@anO d dL• ::.. O3 C O C N Om O OOO (O O(n0 (7 >i @ O Q.� �..., N U m rL-• U c m OJ V N O O `O O'O m p �. N m O .- D7 C h m_ N = 'O N O m m m d m N @ m- n'O J 0 -OO +L• w0 o O E N U@OO N U m0� O t m d i o p' C m O@ o L @>< ,r C G L_ 01 E c o 3 0@ m rn A amc E`m '@ m z 'Em d m UQ m ra@`o.m_ hC@ @ Hy.3T oaNT Nm Cm� mE5 0 N@ 'o mcO 2t UN aE o O2 BOO Z. m == O Ny m E o = m tOo0 n@ .Y ata .m oo o c a o- o m E 3 a`� -mo o m E@ o m L L o m c'y o E m o a@i @ S E p y C o m o 0 wd 65 mti !n s R 4 H op E E@ " o o c -o ,E, 6 m J E U toU c w N ry rL.. E> o aJ m -O D- @@ m Z m O U - m w= d c y -o U m U o• • • F I- N O • L N C7 Z Z I U N O a E o O C m m p C � O C N N O M m 0, N o a c J W 'SD Z 0 �°�U C 0) N 0 m O (6 'O Lo r 0 Es; rw: zc c1; 3 m 0 0 C 0 v c > O - o m 0 >mo c 4 � c C _ N o 0 E o 'O-Cli 0 o a0i m� 0U c m 0 0 .T Q- y r10 , d;N C E'rN Cc>d U E 0 Q O N 00 2 N N 2 2_ O o (a 0 m m E m m L E a - m m 0 m m L c cci 0 d� E m oN 0m >`o 0> m Q o EEmw m oKLa o a 0 a�m g 3 `m N .0 m. 5 Omdo o0Nvmo'i>0 mcNm E0Com>O0- oE m¢ -�[00om? mCmO m"- .._0Vyyon mo-o0c daisiOtNacN0ni o¢C¢m -o o> 3 oU m majH .nN_' mO DO 7 t (O VmVcm M Oy M :: ' VW -n N Ow O ni [O h C O O U O CamTmo0i -(mNO0moO� m O wd-r Eo Lm>ai E3 oUai 2 mo�m N o o ',:.. `o� -an'�> EE2 Z5 P6 E�o Om -0 E —w 2 0 o oim cC•'C7N1d_6i -Dm``o "UEU, w0m n oy 0 2 c 0w � VC m Oj NU�L m Em0o w 2 u~ o0. 0 m O 0 m 0 M _cmO M E o d C O U mN_- o 6 0Nm0 a 5 0 E 0O0 E O TOm 1 ' 0- OO 0dN 0 mo .a0. o'Uv vcmN 0 ioa0 0 m 'c�-l0N°0 > ¢ 2 `- 0 a`u p me NLE 2. mE O O n ONC0 O OU 75 `L° o` _ w c' 0 30 = o E$ o d g• . •¢> 0 fl N _ O O d a Lo r c'; 0 R W tO •E C CC_ C 7 L C_ O a v � a m 0 ma 0 0 E O m U c O r N c'a N d E- o m,Q � Q d U E Q a a o o y� m an d d .c = `o o m a -o n m= o¢ m m E m C5 y¢=n ma==� m��mE a o E 3 m c 0o w o c c> 3 c `o 0 o wca E nmi aEi d m E" >, a `o m` E g n v o E c 2- �n c m L m a o m d . n=" 3 or a o a om` m d Na o E w E D o N " a> 00 `oa O -O N `O C LL y N m= 3 O_ G O LL 0 d... -mom E m EL m oma coo cgdowc"to."� o_m m 0 o o oy E3 E oo c m m m i0 = C C d O m >0 O V Oo O 6mO23nao � p�_ o.co_ !: O O N E _ o 3 E '� m w= mo E L 'o 6�0� m- .Turco `o io�oor`o o. o o f c c m `n `mo otm om bo omnda m aOo `o o c o -ea.. teca' Cm o0 mOo m ON OO EO oco4) �`oU .Lre-mNO O .ocw oL a _ L) O E o 6 5 O C O) m � c � m o C r d 0 N CO m W N O 'O O N Q C C J mid "' m z° o �0 �U S_ lo 0) G G (o 'O 0 Q C ;.I.:0 R E I'L7; jC 3 0:a U, m m `o p m E m ,'E � a o m m c o m � oa d a d w C 9 T T O O m U w m U +T 0 Q n c n Upp(n O m L Up0 U) 0 '« E '.a) ._. ,C _ ¢ a N w O N O N O m OJ C 'O O OI C N N -mU . `O L "O -_'O - NN Ow .O C L 1>] >ECN _ Lm i=dN m w m � ._>+N d "O ai U 6 w 3 a 'O (O > N (O m E o `O (J W (O O L LL n O O N w n.m m m U E L N C C w o o m.� V m - N Zt- m U^ o> E: a> c m o E y v o m M a_ o- no`. m 0 CpWwU7 mMNNmm 20 ,w_ -ao Z6 El 0�E 0,9 oE E -dJ5 ' 3 p�op� om cU 0 m -2 y- N m O U U a E O o5m QoOOEE omawE_COOoo3 CI3mO (DO Om0 M0C0Em_C ) EE N m a0 E omm Eo m`oO u 3 m o Es m - E yU CM o e ° mE dc E�cUNEmmm aCitEm O o NOmN a a >E?E` LEaE L`o 12_d E o ' 0 mU o ma ,�m Lm EU o omccm c `mUm nmoQ mennX Om O 0 0apO rLaam-• N O o 'Oom O o E a¢NNmQO DooU hmcC 'ccaOj c 75 �E o.0'ocO v'001 _�ip�Un- EnEE .L :UcmmC y E O E? F¢ co U� E vi m `o_ � S m o v a` w d oam U '� ¢ N a U o v en 'o U d V m tL 3 c O E a O m V m L a � d � LLa U 0 a` E 0 m m o c m 0 m� c � O E N o O m In N o Lm@d LU c z° `o - E 0 Co C � 'N f6 0 0O co 0 Q I 0 E :0:: 07 0 0O O N N m {= a m o oa o a y a E ' oc a a a> N =o m N @ m d L1 w N N a d N h d d � i O ♦/ U Asa ma :0 ;2E w w o oa>i m U U U 0 O I:+ R C y c d E0 N CL N5 > w NoU @C n 2.0 M- N O (mo 0 To@ E Co Q @ O O O> N@ [0 U n O Y n o n > n�w<»�,�° -m 01-6 vom a@ o aE-o Nm cao6L mm E m y 'm To o E m O d @@ n Y N N O 2m — D@ C -�meOCn UYCad LwN CmO E mN N n m}mnmy a=N@m =Oo tjOcN Nmio E ma 'WN�m -E% > @ OO 2 NN EN @ dN�OO>om@° m m o m o h 6 o o w 0 �' 'c° oo°E°w mm o'Nd. m -mN mU w`.n0y .N`UUQ: y-L0o-@ '...d•C`o@@ �E am0 � c `=� o> w 0 'c�'GC_' O L0 EEa N nUN O LoO .� c -N O@ N ` N '.a.,O>_- O ~ L V 0 dN E m2 L` @ @@nOJ M N-w .ONEV N O N m'- aC@E maa oEEo oE ''..S 'o a -Un@ N o m m o d N:E@ ) L-LO`Oo O OOEN_ OovrOO--EO :`�o OCn7) -@=O Umf6 C' O U0 CLmNm dwL�OET O w`O aLN`Cy c -pNa NO aEEO c n ON p= L m ff.E. ENE > >m. E om mN m m o= mo(pO o w`o cm om amm E EaV co >Lw -(E mN mm'—mO o 0E O OmO @ N N JN N "OO- U BN pmUm "mN'o LC O TE 0a—,g45 O d 3 Q N EHNL @1o m @ � 2 a` `o�-E4-: N [+J y I C P 0: E:, w;- 7r" C m C E o E w a`> U o 0 9 m U e E G c Y E�� m o N N U >0 O O) Si O L— O L M U V = O S O �� m aci aci 3 a` m a m a .E ,a 0 O c c � 0 C W W W U U U o' w a@+ C'N dl p 0 CL c c SQ U @ U U Q Q Q (p ` N QJ (n O L m C c O 'O r✓ -- c @ y 0 25 n 2 0 0 d h@ o m c y U o o n @ UN 'o-5 -ooO O s -0 O 5m5 -55 Of L U M LU p >E E m E d L ,. N; w aVi c ami -o 0 0 0- > v c c' _ o •- c o o Eo..nT o@ c@ •` ami Q of a m w waoi r n 2 _ a o :r2... f E E n •- n �° �@ E o@ o o :o o V o o a_ o -o o :O w o f aS � .o d o f a�'o m E c4 m o c >@ Eo `O `o d oa m m 3 m �oo-2o a"i LLj d' oo aoi m mE@mco 2 2mL=�' -� a"i aci t o m cE -o n o m 0 mo d@ `m mc> �UNnOQ�ON NG'VI TE UORC�O,O@L���O_nUO�L O)UL 2 oN .2 c f-1]@ ps >p U�@LOG OL..�w@Cn r�0 oo 'L-~F-•_NJcG `oam �'H��mamrci.mE ao�y`o `O mod U'- c@ Lo a Oti . . . . . F- N H H � d) r U N O a E o O c � m a� m� c o O r O .- N N O (") �]OfNp C c J L m co 0- x W S= Z 'U cccm �o�U C � co O m Q a o> C� E 1 V' (O O E p m -- c a` m rn •_ C 0;C c 0 m U rOiw G d;Q c coi E m r a E E 2 m n t 'o h cca y O O O@` F m U @ C Emmc O IO C >i OJ O T LL• C T J w c E wN m E m o m o E E c p E om N Oc O N OE 2--6, 0 0 dE2o m -O `J @ O m O L @ j5 L V @ a 0] U -O O @ N O H O rn @L- .2 W H O N Attachment 2 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION PROJECT (PLANNING CASE NO. PL2013-227) ON PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF CHINO HILLS PARKWAY, SOUTH OF DIAMOND RANCH HIGH SCHOOL, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (EASTERLY PORTION OF ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 8701- 022-273). A. RECITALS 1. State housing element law requires each city to make available adequate sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate its fair share of regional housing needs as established in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment; and 2. On April 19, 2011, the Diamond Bar City Council adopted the 2008-2014 Housing Element update, which includes a program to establish a new land use district allowing High Density Residential development at 30 dwelling units per acre and redesignate sufficient sites to accommodate at least 466 lower-income residential units for the 2008- 2014 planning period; and 3. The 2014-2021 Regional Housing Needs Assessment identifies the City's share of regional housing need for lower-income households as 490 units for the planning period; and 4. In order to provide adequate sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate the City's fair share of regional housing need, a General Plan Amendment (hereinafter the "Amendment") is necessary to establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) land use designation and to make corresponding text amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element, as shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and change the land use designation on the Land Use Map for the property identified as "Site A" in Exhibit B, attached hereto, from Planning Area 1/Specific Plan (PA 1/SP) to Planning Area 5/High Density Residential -30 (PA-5/RH-30); and 5. In accordance to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15168 et seq., an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the Amendment and related zoning approvals, which found that the Amendment would not have a significant effect on the environment; and 948305.1 6. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15090 through 15093, the City Council adopted a resolution certifying the EIR and adopting a mitigation reporting and monitoring program for the project; and 7. Notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on August 23, 2013. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the parcel on which the zone change is proposed, as well as all speakers who have previously attended the scoping meeting or the Planning Commission hearing, or who have submitted comments in writing, and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board in two locations (Chino Hills Parkway and Rockbury/Deep Springs Drive) and the notice was posted at three other locations within the project vicinity; and 8. On August 13, 2013, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Amendment and related actions, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date; and 9. The Planning Commission has determined that the Amendment and related zoning approvals represent a consistent, logical, appropriate and rational land use designation and implementing tool that furthers the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan, and has recommended its approval by the City Council; and 10. On September 3, 2013, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Amendment and related actions, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date; and 11. The documents and materials constituting the administrative record of the proceedings upon which the City Council's decision is based are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council as follows: 1. That all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; 2. The City Council hereby approves the proposed General Plan Amendment 2 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013-227) based on the following findings, as required by Section 22.70.050 of the Municipal Code and in conformance with California Government Code Section 65358: Finding: The Amendment is internally consistent with the General Plan and other adopted goals and policies of the City. Facts in Support of Finding: a. The Amendment will establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) designation in the General Plan Land Use Element to allow owner- and renter -occupied multi -family residential development at a density of up to 30 units per acre, as required by Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B); and will amend the Land Use Map (Figure 1-2 of the Land Use Element) to redesignate the property identified as "Site A" in Exhibit B, attached hereto, from Planning Area 1/Specific Plan (PA 1/SP) to Planning Area 5/High Density Residential -30 (PA-5/RH-30) to accommodate the need for lower- income housing commensurate with the Regional Housing Needs Assessment for the City. b. For the reasons set forth below, the Amendment is consistent with the following goals and policies of the 2008-2014 Housing Element: GOAL 2 Provide opportunities for development of suitable housing to meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents. The RH-30 designation will facilitate a greater diversity of housing at higher densities than allowed under current land use regulations, which limit density to 20 units/acre. GOAL 3 Provide adequate sites through appropriate land use and zoning designations to accommodate future housing growth. The Amendment will accommodate future housing growth for all economic segments of the community, including lower-income households. Policy 3.1 Maintain an inventory of potential sites available for future housing development. The Amendment will expand the City's inventory of potential housing development sites. Policy 3.3 Integrate multi -family residential uses within the Tres Hermanos Specific Plan. 3 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 The Amendment will allow multi -family residential uses within a portion of the Tres Hermanos area, and would not constrain the future adoption of a specific plan for the entire Tres Hermanos area. GOAL 4 Mitigate potential governmental constraints which may hinder or discourage housing development in the City. The RH-30 land use designation will serve to mitigate governmental constraints by allowing higher density development than is currently permitted in the City. Policy 4.1 Continue to provide regulatory incentives and concessions to facilitate affordable housing development in the City. The increased density permitted under the RH-30 designation will serve as an incentive to affordable housing development by reducing the per-unit land cost. GOAL 5 Consistent with the Vision Statement, encourage equal and fair housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community. The RH-30 designation will facilitate the production of lower-cost housing, which furthers equal housing opportunities for all economic segments and persons with special needs. C. For the reasons set forth below, the Amendment is consistent with Goal 1 and related strategies of the Land Use Element: Goal 1 Consistent with the Vision Statement, maintain a mix of land uses which enhance the quality of life for City residents, providing a balance of development and preservation of significant open space areas to assure both economic viability and retention of distinctive natural features of the community. The Amendment would expand the mix of land uses in the City to include higher -density residential product types and would also preserve a significant portion of the site for open space as required by the Hillside Management Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 22.22). Strategy 1.2.3 Maintain residential areas which protect natural resources, hillsides, and scenic areas. (a) Development in hillside areas should be designed to be compatible with surrounding natural areas, compatible to the extent practical with surrounding EI GPA and ZC PL2013-227 development, aesthetically pleasing, and provide views from development, but not at the expense of views of the development. (b) Earthwork in hillside areas should utilize contour or landform grading. (c) Minimize grading to retain natural vegetation and topography. All development within the RH-30 area will be required to be consistent with this strategy through required compliance with the Hillside Management Ordinance. Strategy 1.2.6 Broaden the range of, and encourage innovation in, housing types. Require developments within all Residential areas to provide amenities such as common usable, active open space and recreational areas, when possible. The RH-30 designation will facilitate greater innovation in housing types by allowing higher density than currently permitted. New developments will be required to provide amenities such as open space and recreational areas in conformance with zoning regulations. Strategy 1.2.7 Where consistent with the other provisions of the Diamond Bar General Plan, encourage the provision of low and moderate cost housing. The RH-30 land use designation will encourage the provision of low- and moderate cost housing by reducing the land cost per unit compared to lower density development. Strategy 1.5.6 Preserve significant environmental resources within proposed developments, allow clustering or transferring of all or part of the development potential of the entire site to a portion of the site, thus preserving the resources as open space, and mandating the dedication of those resources to the City or a conservancy. The RH-30 land use designation will allow development clustering in order to preserve sensitive resources and open space. Strategy 1.6.4 Encourage clustering within the most developable portions of project sites to preserve open space and/or other natural resources. Such development should be located to coordinate with long-term plans for active parks, passive (open space) parks, and preserve natural open space areas. Site A comprises approximately 30 gross acres, of which a net development area of approximately 16.33 acres is required to 5 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 accommodate 490 units at a density of 30 units/acre. The gross site area allows for clustering development to preserve the most valuable natural resources and open space on the site. Strategy 2.2.1 Require that new development be compatible with surrounding land uses. Zoning regulations for the RH-30 area require design review to ensure that future development is compatible with surrounding uses. Strategy 2.2.2 Prohibit the development of adjacent land uses with significantly different intensities or that have operational characteristics which could create nuisances along a common boundary, unless an effective buffer can be created. Site A is not immediately adjacent to any residential use. Diamond Ranch High School is adjacent to the north of the site, and can be buffered by the difference in elevation as well as placement of development on the site. Strategy 3.2.1 Within the urban residential portions of the City, require the incorporation of open space and recreational areas into the design of new projects. Within topographically rugged and rural areas, emphasize the preservation of natural landforms and vegetation. Required compliance with the RH-30 zoning regulations and the Hillside Management Ordinance will ensure that open space and recreational areas will be incorporated into the design of any new development on Site A. Strategy 3.2. 10 New development shall comply with the City's Hillside Management Ordinance. Any residential development within the RH-30 area will be required to comply with the Hillside Management Ordinance. Strategy 3.3.1 Balance the retention of the natural environment with its conversion to urban form. Site A comprises approximately 30 gross acres, of which a net development area of approximately 16.33 acres is required to accommodate 490 units at a density of 30 units/acre. The gross site area allows for clustering development to preserve the most valuable natural areas on the site. 6 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 Strategy 3.3.2 Promote the incorporation of hillside features into project design. Required compliance with the Hillside Management Ordinance will ensure that hillside features are incorporated into future project design on Site A. d. For the reasons set forth below, the Amendment is consistent with Strategy 1.1.3 of the Resource Management Element: Strategy 1.1.3 Require that dwelling units and structures within hillside areas be sited in such a manner as to utilize ridgelines and landscape plant materials as a backdrop for the structures and the structures themselves to provide maximum concealment of cut slopes. Required compliance with the Hillside Management Ordinance will ensure that any new development within Site A will be sited in conformance with this strategy. e. For the reasons set forth below, the Amendment is consistent with the Circulation Element: Goal 2 Provide a balanced transportation system for the safe and efficient movement of people, goods, and services through the City. Future development within Site A will be required to provide an internal circulation network that includes streets and also accommodates alternative modes of transportation. This site is also adjacent to transit routes along Chino Hills Parkway. Goal Maintain an adequate level of service on area roadways. The EIR prepared for the project included an analysis of project area roadways and levels of service. With the identified mitigation measures, no significant impacts to roadway level of service would occur. f. For the reasons set forth below, the Amendment is consistent with the Public Services and Facilities Element: Goal 1 Provide adequate infrastructure facilities and public services to support development and planned growth. Public services and utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, 7 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 and other utilities are available to serve future development of Site A. 3. The City Council hereby authorizes the Community Development Director to make such other clerical revisions to the General Plan and Development Code text and statistical tables as may be necessary to maintain consistency with the intent of the Amendment. 4. The City Council further directs the Community Development Department, as part of the 5th Cycle (2014-2021) Housing Update, to evaluate sites other than Site A, including "Tres Hermanos South" (as described in the aforementioned EIR under Section 6/Alternatives Analysis as Alternative 3) and the Kmart property, to accommodate the City's fair share of the region's lower-income housing need. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, M Jack Tanaka, Mayor I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 3rd day of September, 2013 and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of September, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: Council Members: NOES: Council Members: ABSENT: Council Members: ABSTAIN: Council Members: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 8 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Land Use Element Text Revisions Exhibit B: Amended Land Use Element Map 0 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 Exhibit A Land Use Element Text Revisions Section E., Strategy 1.1.1 is amended to add a new paragraph (g) as follows: "(g) Designate properties for high-density multi -family use as High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) allowing a maximum net density of 30 units/acre and a minimum net density of 20 units/acre to accommodate the City's share of the regional affordable housing need as required by the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). Net density is the number of dwelling units divided by the net site area. Net site area is comprised of all portions of the project site, prior to site development, except for those portions of the project site which: lie within the setbacks of state or federally designated jurisdictional wetlands; contain plant communities which should be avoided, based on the findings of professional biological surveys; are located within pre-existing public streets, utility easement and drainage channels or basins. Section E., Strategy 1.6.1 is amended to add a new paragraph (e) as follows: (e) Planning Area 5 PA -5 is entirely surrounded by PA -1, adiacent to Diamond Ranch High School. PA -5 incorporates a 30 -acre (gross) area designated RH-30 to accommodate a maximum of 490 high-density multi -family housing units consistent with the Regional Housing Needs Assessment and the Housina Element The first paragraph of Section F.2 is amended as follows: "The Element uses certain terminology to describe the land use designations. The term "density" refers to residential uses and to the population and development capacity of residential land. Density is described in terms of dwelling units per gross acre of land (du/ac) unless stated otherwise. For example, 100 dwelling units occupying 20rg oss acres of land is 5.0 du/ac." 10 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 Exhibit A (continued) Table 1-3, General Plan Land Use (By Category) is amended as follows: Table I-3 General Plan Land Use BY Cate¢orv) Land Use Designations Permitted Density / Gross Acres Gross Acres Total Gross Intensity In the City In Sphere Acres Residential Designations RR Rural Residential (1 ac/du) 1,392 1,392 RL Low Density Residential (up to 3 du/ac) 3,089 3,089 RLM Low -Medium Residential- (up to 5 du/ac) 838 838 RM Medium Density Residential (up to 12 du/ac) 275 275 RMH Medium High Residential (up to 16 du/ac) 197 197 RH High Density Residential (up to 20 du/ac) 66 66 RH-30 Hieh Density Residential (30 (un to 30 du/net ac l 30 30 units/net acrel Subtotal 5,887 5,887 Non -Residential Designations C General Commercial (.25 — 1 FAR) 172 172 CO Commercial /Office (.25 — 1 FAR) 63 63 OP Professional Office (.25—I FAR) 178 178 I Light Industrial (.25-1 FAR) 93 93 Subtotal 506 506 Mixed Use Designations PA Planning Areas (see text) PA -1 690 690 PA -2 401 401 PA -3 55 55 PA -4 82 82 PA -5 30 30 Subtotal 1,258 1,258 Other Designationsial PF Public Facilities 27 27 W Water 19 2 21 F Fire 1 I S School 345 345 PK Park - 158 158 GC Golf Course 178 178 OS Open Space 642 642 PR Private Recreation 15 15 AG Agriculture I du / 5 ac 0 3,589 3,589 Fwy / Major Roads 684 684 Total 9,690 1 3,591 13,281 11 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 Exhibit A (continued) Table 1-3, General Plan Land Use (By Category) is amended as follows: Table I-4 Potential Residential and Commercial Growth Land Use ExistingPotential Units/Sq. Ft. Additional Expected Total Population at General Plan Units/Sq. Ft. Development Buildout Residential City Sphere 18,276 DUS(t) 1 284 DUSO1 7187181 19,560 718 64 92010 2,200 0 Commercial/ 5,865,000 Sq. Ft.() 1,550,000 Sq.Ft.(5) 7,415,000 Industrial o/ Housing units as of 1/1/2007 (Source: California Department of Finance and Citv of Diamond Bar 2008-2014 Housing Element, Adopted April 19, 2011). (2( The Planning Network, 1990 (3) City of Diamond Bar 2008-2014 Housing Element (Table B-1), Adopted April 19, 2011 Residential Densities include Vacant sites and Projects currently approved/not built. ,4) Residential Densities on Vacant Land are assumed at 100% of the maximum permitted density. Includes projects currently under construction (7/94) (5) Based on average development intensifies consistent with current development patterns on vacant land. Includes projects currently under construction (7/94) (6) 9M7 T-1-1 of 17;—... V-1.1;— lk—A n•• 1 111 .•o��....� ..o. 6..••oohAA r � 1 71 9 .,..�...•�.. ..,m (7) Population based on 3.19 persons per household at a 4.5 % vacancy rate. 12 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 City of Diamond Bar General Plan w� Exhibit B CITY OF ,. CHINOHILLS f l� __.LWAnaelesLou1_ Orange County 13 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 Land Use Map N Baa.., ar �na�oo oraFwo Miles M'/ PF UWCF-b ®=r o„ ��:r..:n ®r.- [ism �„o�=w a�.��.„r.,„ Figure I-2 ®d 1nhll Proposed Land Use Map 13 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 Attachment 3 ORDINANCE NO. XX(2013) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION PROJECT (PLANNING CASE NO. PL2013- 227) ON PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF CHINO HILLS PARKWAY, SOUTH OF DIAMOND RANCH HIGH SCHOOL, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (EASTERLY PORTION OF ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 8701-022- 273). THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq. ("CEQX) and the State CEQA Guidelines, 14 C.C.R. § 15000 et seq., an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") has been prepared for the proposed amendments to the Development Code and Zoning Map. The EIR finds that all potential impacts of the amendments are less than significant, or will be mitigated below the level of significance through the mitigation measures described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("MMRP") that is included as Exhibit C to this Ordinance. The City Council, in its independent judgment, hereby finds that the EIR and MMRP satisfy the requirements of CEQA for the proposed amendments. Section 2. The City Council finds that the proposed amendments to the Development Code and Zoning Map are consistent with the General Plan. Section 3. The Development Code of the City of Diamond Bar is hereby amended to establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) zoning designation and development regulations, as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. Section 4. The Zoning Map of the City of Diamond Bar is hereby amended to change the zoning designation for the property identified as "Site A" in Exhibit B, attached hereto, from Agricultural (AG) to High Density Residential -30 Dwelling Units per Acre (RH-30), and establish a maximum of 490 housing units for this site. Section 5. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or any part hereof. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. -1- 951476.1 Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and posted in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. M Jack Tanaka, Mayor I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 3'd day of September, 2013 and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of September, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN ATTEST: Council Members: Council Members: Council Members: Council Members: Tommye Cribbins City Clerk -2- 951476.1 APPROVED AS TO FORM: David A. DeBerry City Attorney Exhibit A Development Code Text Revisions Sec. 22.06.020, Table 2-1 is amended as follows: Sec. 22.08.020. - Purposes of residential zoning districts, is amended to add as follows: 'The purposes of the individual residential zoning districts and the manner in which they are applied are as follows. (7) RH-30 (high density residential -30 dwelling units per acre) district. The RH-30 zoning district is intended for high-density condominium and apartment developments. The maximum allowed density for new residential projects within this zoning district will be 30 dwellings per net acre and the minimum density will be 20 dwelling units per net acre. The RH-30 zoning district is consistent with the High Density -30 residential land use category of the General Plan. When the RH-30 designation is applied to property pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(h) subsequent review of any complete Sec. 22.08.030, Table 2-3, is amended to add the RH-30 land use district, with the same permit requirements as applicable in the RH district. Sec. 22.08.040, Table 2-4, is amended to add the RH-30 land use district, as follows: Development Feature RH-30 Minimum lot area 5 acres Residential density Maximum: 30 dwellings per net site acre Minimum: 20 dwellings per net site acre Setbacks required (same as RH) Lot Coverage 60% Height limit 35 ft. Hillside development (Same as RH) Landscaping (Same as RH) Parking (Same as RH) -3- 951476.1 Exhibit A (continued) Sec. 22.48.020. -Applicability, is amended as follows: (a) Development review. An application for development review is required for commercial, industrial, and institutional development, and residential projects that propose one or more single-family dwelling units (detached or attached) or multiple - family dwelling units and that involve the issuance of a building permit for construction or reconstruction of a structure(s) meeting the following criteria: Sec. 22.22.020. - Applicability, is amended to add as follows: (a) Con"opai use permits. Hillside developmeRts shall be s6ibjeGt to the appreval of -a ,.99th+• al use eFlMi+ iR GGmp'iaRGG •thh- + 2258 Development Review. Hillside developments shall be subject to Development Review in compliance with chapter 22.48, except that residential developments in the RH-30 district shall be subject to non -discretionary development review if required pursuant to Section 22.08.020(7). Sec. 22.22.050. - Hillside development standards and guidelines, is amended as follows: (b) Exceptions. Exceptions to the standards in this chapter may be approved through the ^^^ditlen^' use permi development review process, when the commission determines that the exceptions would not materially affect the intent of the standards and guidelines. In approving a GeRditional use permit development review, the commission shall make appropriate findings supporting the determination in compliance with the chapter 22.58 (GGR.+•+•. nal Use Permits) 22.48 (Development Review). Sec. 22.22.070, Table 3-5 Slope Categories is amended as follows: Slope Category Natural Slope (Percentage) Site Standards 4. 50% and over This is an excessive slope condition and it is anticipated that residential subdivisions will not be developed in these areas. If residential development is pursued in these areas, lot sizes may be considerably larger than the minimum allowed by the underlying zoning district in order to comply with the standards and guidelines of this Chapter. Actual lot size shall be determined through the CnnditiG USP Permit _ 21 Development Review process. -4- 951476.1 Exhibit A (continued) Sec. 22.22.080. — Grading, is amended as follows: (a) Landform grading techniques. The following standards define basic grading techniques that are consistent with the intent of this chapter and avoid unnecessary cut and fill. (Figures 3-10 and 3-14). Limitations on project grading amounts and configurations will be decided on a case-by-case basis under the conditiGRal use permit development review process. Sec. 22.22.150. — Evaluation of GGPdWORal use peFmit development review application, is amended as follows: The commission shall evaluate a GGnditiaRal use ^ '+ development review application for hillside development based on the following objectives and the required findings in compliance with chapter 22.58 (Conditional Use o.,FMft) 22.48 (Development Review). -5- 951475.1 Exhibit B City of Industry City Boundary PH : High Density Residential Zoning RP -30: Proposed Wgh Cal Resfdantll oml6lapre U' AD_Agr¢ollorel RLLow Denstty Re6ldenthl ,.-. C-1: Neighborhood Conresmal RLM: Low MetlWm Denady Rasidentlal o -Z Commonly Commercial ., ° Rig Mention Danslty Residential C- 3'. Regional Commercial RMH-. Mediom Hlgh Doil Y Reslden"I CO'. Commercial Office " RR Rurel Roadentlal L Light l d t y SP r Sp fin Plan Overlay M, OB. off , Btameas Park : SUB PA1'. PI ening Area 1 OP: OffioieProfessional SUB PAS Planning Areal OS'. Opam Space1Conservation SUB-PA3'.Plenning Aree3 REC. Recreation = SUBPiPlamnmgArea4 6 951476.1 City of Pomona o' �19 eZ. I- WEI �„- a C, ,r a GrantlAve - ti 6 yon° City of Chino Hills Zoning Map DO D BAR' 1 1 1 .7 E d R O �a O IL 0 0)w r R QN d UCD� F OC m R O X cN W'c'a O C R CO N G i O C R M J a)tm W � 3 O Ilp C I' f0 c_ II � m � o c c o �....: 76 = o:. e o _ : a N O C Y O On L U _ y ` m: •L 6 @ @ :. 0 O O O 0 C m m m m m m C O R`- 9 C N d 0 0.:.CL a c U c U c U Q Q Q @ N E' a >o a E ¢ B N O) v lO > m N r O W> mE08C > c m O m _(@J O N n n OJ L r O_cC O N LL -O �' U O mO @ O (O N O O Q m 'O o) 'O w O N > U m C)) QJ O m : N N C U n 2 �a m�5 n E'E -217 O' (n C O N iV (+J U m m 2 > c a o iJ o n m m LL 102nNcOcJ O=a 5 No(NoO ¢Oal -a ONm'oy D¢N Cm O N m@ >E i N E ) OcO ny O w O c m m io m Ta i5 m Vc�o` cEoc'ac oQ U cmom o o'o- oo b > wwm-Oc o mm@N to M a E mS m 2E o mud a o@ n3� LNa m U >@@E _ O� O o@ 3 m'@t o o o a` E >m o o aJ w o MME 'O .E o MR N Wb y m aJ O m m o 2 0 w m D E U c E L> $ w oOo>15 U LL ¢ a>iwE .m• =4 d E O N M E O @ O0 .0 3 00ou9m do oO ovcai U 0 m n E >0 E L L !A > C N U E@ O U= m> al O V Mv! LL 'O U U VJ =o O U O a a) � LL C O C H @ U G S W W O 0 LL. ZJ N t�i Q Q Q U o; 0:-. C�' E '.. p.' (D J - U C E C 0: E U O� 6 j > d d N 0 O c � O � O y U U m E r>W E 0 E 0 � c U D U D m C' A C QC U U O O m (O 0 N Q N U t0 A O O V J 'O N l0 QI d CL �° -zO E- 0 t0 .a `ai N O aNi U d L E ca>' — m a m y d o m 0 .-. d ow N � w C O- N m`o�m cEa¢0?� c�U m `L'a o3acna a`maomE -Fu N O- (O f9 T'OC d �p >U ` ... O C O 3 r a E'i a'a_>> .0,— O d O_' N d a d 0 a E E m m 3 m 2-5 C m °� `m m o w m— m a MM— L @. c d c m c E E >m00 OTL IO .�E EVmNd AI UO d �coEm'-'t N✓yN~ m�W��O�U� ¢av'i� ��Na Z. -o ��n sa`�nl�wmm3 E m 5 m n E d y L c m o " -o T 3 m d -o. E m?�."�mo d o v C O c OO >i (7 N �_ tNi� p � O C G y N �Odmm3`�W�� a>i ooc cvi .D o=Op�.S o_c4 dU�o.Um' -n oo dy o zG axi m E I o o 'o 0 N o � VJ c 'o w E 3 m a>> v m� o axi m O N m N mL-. O O L N c L O G .L � N � a� .- N U N E a I- E � L d .O O E C E oA d L G m " dOO'N> cN yN O NC od a . y d o C3 - 75 caa o m -o d m z .`!' x°• 3 0 w E m m Q a m 3mmO LQNE dmd N VR)ad Oa va y j L�E �„C- wO aOdd3NEEO �a CO=Nsc o �E0_' mo�aoN yl >DoNo Q 7�5 E o ` aoo do En aoo Hd Tw oc _dUU E mT d> m doo d o aE m A oHo Y .0 Q o 0 ¢ m m N U m U v c� 10 E 0`; U r; R l4 m N > c w m > y N o w `N O O � h O T O O O Y U U U 0 C w O.0 o- a a 2'�.:..�. E m E a0i E m F o d o m ami U O U D U D 0 T . m m 10 0 =N o :n 0 4 'E`.:.0: CL `o G ..: d cmi v v E a ¢E m -c o L o. d '' L .f o m U(0 N N U Y y ',g C O@ c U O (O O S] o p r- 9 c oo E p m m c c .c E m o L mQm nQO odm0 omG C Y y EE OoQNj 0 N- T- on O0E Na om f0 ipo> 0EmO?-. = o0 M E 2mN E - OLa0- OL ¢O (w E Op o - NOo o o d O E m O Ey 02— pN L` 00 0 m 20 E ¢ 0 A'o 3 - 15 $a m d mtE > o E omopm �o a E 0 O J mom dmam�mO' a M, d y0 m m o `o E 3 0c p m Lo m y— T Ow °m>wm o 5 - > E O nm Em0 m o ELm Ap m oo 0E o.g E o o EYo pwEn OOO `"Eo ` p myoo p> o -v acOcocmNhi o E.> 0 m m E o o am 0 t Nm y Uo pw_ pm E- Y c O Z y m "O - 'mJ om EG '... o `GU> co cci mZ cBN 0N t(O G O ao m m UO Cy JDN• LOJ C'D LNoN� M O L O E Op waNC. Cm -0O 2— E `Nrmd"OO = m N ' r E _ �- OQ N _ y O_ pQO LV- O fmAOi cG (O O OU m E > F -- O i q tO 0 0 0 m m m m U v c� G:c C A' E i o m 2 o m U m> c o c o N C o N O N C o d d oo m m d m d` rn= c: O O O O .C...O. 0 y rn m m m m m m C w a +O 9O U C..� YL "E o O O E o E n CL :Q.H ma U Ul U U V O ¢E @ m IOU n -O o a G N GO 0- p v N m a c -� _ o, co m o E m O E m m " �' mo,.E E '� 'o m E .,o o— co m E a �' w'—o `m > n m m a m `o o.� �_ a E E¢ m r¢ d 2 E m o o 0 c G m a; N m o EaD =m¢ `oc, €oo L=c n oJNo xmco oE , Gc4 °m"m3m2 U E mo 0- 0ao sod o 0 0 Ead `m@ o ocNo c> 3 a odomo =Oc3 o° d L o E m N m 2 o Do . Nwa O ' 2 mao� dm a ca o c" o o oo `—o o I= E o o o t a s o C. cEo P a m a 0 o om m 'LoO o 0 E o d o O d 0 � a�mm m 2`o 95 0a` o,O o `oamL � Nm m m o O O mo cUN oU E JGn -,j5 ig 7E3 D m N L an d @ N d d d `m nNJ 'A N i> m G. o v m =dL�m m ,@ dL _9 m c m¢m w L d c w ,= o `o a o m o o ¢_ v °, Y N o@ °� m L N >, m E E do a 'L-' a) O nL" d C O N m N m :a m y n d co C L o o E o o, >, c> Z m a m m V o •- H c c -Jo m G 8 Z E o !° E No 8 c E m E o; J o ._ o m c m m m a', ai m J a E n -o m E m a s o" o m O a w m 'o m m o `m D7 D-N dO n O O,n6N O a, m'D L OU ao0 _2 Q'-O ON @d'.O _n 0 0 0 0 m m m m v U G9 0;; 1; w N: E' 47 y Ud' m m c a w m m C -o - n >o � y0 c O T c •� c •- n J(> O m 0 O m N N N U o o o� m o o m m O) C °'; o 0 0 o 'C.0 0' m m m m C Ci -o a -o 'o m m m m 0 Y m Y � d'H J o E %O d O. :. Q.d U U U U E� ¢ E m> C O :G Q .'`.maOumCi d.—m o O pEEcCT Om yd Lm w daom4m om W" v o mW Q amZp o o i ao mm_O O> . dw O2 Ns 0 EL m ' m E -O rypm_N-i L_m pryQJj E 0 '>'L@N OdpC-0-O " oU OO m c �m�N G ENUENm�oJON � � m E Y @ o ="UO gc pcE o -E,` OF -- 'o o J:2 no @ o - o - o"o :E 2 E UO J- O N0. _N:_m@ E p n ">ul I wN C dlmd Ir mm 3 N m(COJn YCC N L j O 6N "GC O L YpjJm@ O NOO ¢ da> O d d O E : @ O_ U J t7 OJ C OJ O 0) L N y E N p mN cp� oTmNtq c0EJEa)> .wwO J . y'aacc �+ O 0 LL@UN�UNn rnCoEn U V@ a , 0LO mL O 0 E2 Z .nw WLC>onNoC OEOo(mOJ > y ` • Od> UaN J @ d J 0 N O p Ev2NUmri- 0.2 tdNJDm`o��y y'N% 0-ui DLO FcwEOCON Y.nO :.. LoNCOooaCmG10oi pOc�pOmJ ;`f> o E L ioL mopo LU'oo.' �@>o U.EmEO • 5E<O 75 ) aL m m o . LoE m _ N`f Om N o � m '2 -1Z mcO - c E m ofn > m LZ�CaTi > @ oL 2 KO oma - @m N O O CL U r'' 47:0 `..'. ' C� E c; Cy 0 U C O O � '.:...':...... E a m 0 m o m m C mo 0::0. m m o> o o 0 m fd CO C O .� N.= C d;N E p 'N Q U U U Q Q Q cz tII "' O GJ s> OJ — E m N C m> m OU 'O 0 m N O m aT. T `J C O '� �O d U �' O m o d L N L > V U 1] 3 .m o 3 o E,> p 2' L ry O m- 'U OJ 4' C `. IO E -p 1p N N> O m ry m C U y O m O m U ... NL.. N C v O _N -ow m N O L O m md N�m . m N m O U O m' G�= aI T O 6aoi Oacmi m = 0 U0 m co o'U = _=�mm Oma rC OmmmO na doa C"tadUE — y�nE omo� d p mv oL 2 8 '3T Eo o O U 0 O 0 c -o N-1 0 oO N- O? NN N o ¢ L c m N d m> .�• .- N✓� Co O. m y n m m m m� d m aI o E m E 3 m E m m d "o m o o.�'o d m E2 3 8 m d? m. m> B m aI o g c a N c m 0 0 N a n o " .0 oI m' a m o$ �o — U �° '� o s a m o. m m _ n' o_ m E a a E" O .2 .? d O 0 N 'O -O m U O] O 00.. 0 N 0 0 0- 2 N O_ d O U C `O E O a) _c O G C O` o m m m m y E E ¢ $o o> E m o o E m a0 a 0 0 w Z m 'Z5 C? v u9 U U U N c=' 0 Es 0 o� o m O O) O) O m O p C lO m m c -ca o .c E 0 0 o p m m m m m m C)N E 0 `o m.@c E E 3 o y y `o no o w U✓ a" m m a `o d a Q Ov -2, A E m o ` EoN E� mN LEE aO 'cw od o c c K o SoO 2 Nd > ` ca 2-0 . N N NewON E0 y V '~—E m N mUE E E oUO@- m o o 0 d mrm oCN d m L`a fo0 S O o U O EmE.=QNd ` LdNC LE OLM YOI O n ( c 0TE'_ 0 E d LoU N N O N > O OCYCN_ U TO LO CmOUO L, E - !9. w @ Ow O C ad d nO o 0 o @ @ .6o N NpN Nm @ ON C N0-6 0 E EmN L N O ? U> 0N a w O 0 7 a "' `o mac 0> E L W m w ocoE -cmo mmJ- o m o m h— y 2o m E o E E Eo ommLm mLoc o E .S@ @ O > M- O0 -.o o m oo— '�= OOCO=L 00D OJ cm.J`o pLm�c—L�aoim"oo Nt.mEm mmm��my$inE o E�.� c o p m m o F- N > m car o a E o N _. @ o m -a.o d a@ Lmom p E—.p �o o m Em L m >I i�s- `�> rE ado c o p"EOoap o m` a0°d m m c m in � 2 QH ¢ ¢ c op = m n ¢ ':. K U c�i L Q:;.: m E; .r ;C m m `o `o U U ;E E �E N N N N o m o m `o_ C: :O C EF= i 0 0 0 :0': 0- m m m m L O Cc .0 L1.y N L 0..:y �. .._. a c U c U - a @ _ Q w c c o s E:° m o@ >. 'm �° @ c m E m L E d ._ `0 0 U y '� d d m : m a @ E w m o c �' N' Y `@t v> Q@ '.00L Z @ �Jo N> EO`o MOaoJ >O nN o Nc O a U wEtmm_ m M. CS 8 u a N 0 o °0 m -ONo¢I E o mom oo r2 d _ aN Q -oo LN `o t 3 w 2 o@ U E c `omooo° 'w oo hs m @ 0 o m0 >EQ o aO`N E2 N E OcO Q dN O j dV�m Eh OoO0 @O E O O_ @N m.R O @ NU :D? d O X 0] O 'c' E E @c+� U o -m m 3 m ` oL TccE 0`E E > -3 � Eao v o@ O d 0 o L@ OI C> y O y m 6J N N T@ Q O E E OJ W (O Ol.= .0 •� N �] O@ O M UJ NO N 0 @ O O a 1] C N Q O N w y j F O YN t L L LO R@ O_ U N m> C O. fE0 L N (lJ U M 1- - C� N (7 d U OJ � -O U Q m N -O @ N O N O N C7 C� G'> c 0 c = m o `o 0 o'm `o m o�� o m '� N a) N N N R CaJ 0O m mm O U 'a `o `o `o =o E 'o E `o =o -o E c y c p o p m T C' 'Ca m m m m m m m m m o'er E � � � � F 0 0 0 = 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 pay m m m m m m m m m C C C G C C C m m m In m m m m m O w R 9 C C Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a 'ODc c c �d O 'OcEa d.L O N O _((OO E d w oma ad Em J Ot m O c 7U.� 0 d c L m v C Of t° w0 T, 3 E 0 .0 E T5E c m a a L aRa � o �TR E E 0 O od oOd d— poGO�N_ m Ea L E o = N Mm o — Eo ap mpNcmCCNU O CO O CL C 0 M d> 0 O U a ry0 C Mi W 6-R o c m o "o 'c m N O OO m O m d m t ❑ o _- R C7� 'O tdNt Z c c 0 LO� O Lm OG 0 O `OE 0 "Cmo Um`°l m E odm - 33 02 W m TO o o 3 E °`'EEo mi d� 2 m0 f n.=oamE �E R 0 `) 0 � So c m °Ec E o o c d E cR d U d c om ) 2v00a U E d CEcp`a d [O aci a m N (O (O C C N m m O 0 O 0O C 0R E t0 3 U O p0 EEE(O o m`N (-D n[O 5: 12 o wa0 mUmU B N mC O 00 0., m _ NE N2L.U v m 0 pD ' Q U U m Q OO Q E L N -O (O F- [O Q m c0 M m rn c7 c7 CD 0 c7 c7 c7 CD C W U C;' :. f0 CA: E W U Ir m m m m m 0 0 m 0 m `o m o c c c c ¢ c a h 0 c a N O c a h O c N ¢ m o E5 E o 5 E 4 m E m y: C:9 L m m @ m ��' Q m m O O O O O a '- W m m : Z -2. c c 0 0 o m m m m m m U U m m Cr 0 N c,a U) (D E:.0 fd c c c a om.am- mo �d� mi, my yn�,acimo� p �� n d m `o m ELL c@ a C a c_ o m @ o E L x o v ami M m m �+ ' o- api m aEi O 3 d "Nmo w d U o -@o O y m m 0-,B v iOt gomm�vv.Z.c od'�a�d-om Boc'm�c�cao ` .a U' -o a`mi d o E t- y ¢ N p T ¢ m m o m m o m a? @ G E 2w m '0.0 —-o aXi ¢ r >_ `° m m d @ m a m -o o @ M a`� 'o `o ¢ a` w a w c m ¢ c `@ m m .MQ. c U` N O D- m> ¢ O U a d' m C L O N N �° d `o U] a E 2 ¢m oro ¢ p o@ c x y �° o� E w c@i U J E ... L a m ,� o -- p @ N m _ c W `o c� m N (6 -2 N `J [S/l'pC m V o `_O U M 'D U O_ c C C O N N m O N j@ m c a N O _ E m m E C .� O C a m N` `J O O O E d N a V a Cr) @ W N m@ E O O a 'Y' m T J L- ,O C E m d d o ,C mE E vo vL-o@_ doC m owEmaLmm L -CU oa 75 0o � md roU E. m D asn-Eoop m wd 0 ma @m@ a(O acUmNVi mymE� - mCO OOaccT U� N pc "n L g o@ m 'm dEO cE= d o ^' .- ac- omN m N aci om tE d'mX >aXi � Um mc`m mmo "'-m o - m 0 °o m xm m m E ccO -m�oory > WN 0m E m p ` ¢ E mOOd�Q am N [2 V cD co o _ O r U r; o:; Ei' 0 0 0 `o 0 y n n a n 0 m o m o m o m c c 07 ,ca.. . _ ,L: •Iil U U w U co U w c. E_ E_ EF i0.....:Q O) O) D) >^ Ol H C C C C m m m U m C T 0 +� Cc {a C y d :d0 :'ci. c C C C _ n Q Q Q Q m >E -fo a E dnN zmE oE0 oC- m �a.o ym do Eo m ,E o E aO wLc tN E075 ma m m L m` '� N m ..- E5, E E 5-75-2C E �' m a m a n m m -E n m o OG `LC O m m d L ✓+ -O w O' m t m E c m o c4 E Eo m a L N :. E om 2— ,wL E N N ty '>-cmw -mo NE MCw>m Oo`o o efn mNo 0mE 'm UvZOE`T aU d�mrm EO—NOm pc` o� m �o U-6 C C Q LL N O U O N—O> a� a5 a s m `O -mo (n N Q Q) o w :° u, o" wow C O C'ai m O, m O 0o 0 U O oo "m E U E LL'mO 0 N j. 6 `¢ a N QC O mo�w 1CU ECJC D A L -- aon mt C O LEdd Nc on o o Om E is m o� c o m o g. —`-F c c E o ao'i m <° m 1� m Om E min U0o` [ m EL ELUOm j Y >(mO 'oo=d U _ O LL MaE dLL F o O2LLOEy � 0 00 E _ O0ona=OJ_ ULO3m" Cn i M U J O O L mcr o v Em niaw 0 U0-a3 oo > c m ao>.OO C omnn0 > mCmnE cl� n V N N 2 S S S r U c; ai w o- U m m m 0 0 0 U U m _ 'o N C to m Q o' o- m � � L6 O m O 0)r= `G' m 0 o;. c. o 0 m w E m U U C O C� d `y E< o 0 y c m c m c m Q Q Q U ) UG E m m C =v v L' La o o E0 m .0.= 'a03 00 mo oOo mNa E M- m _ o `¢E D00 0 am i o m E oo m Eo0 6o m> o-c m3 �m°°� 'om aoo5 o - mm _ m.0, ' �m Gom o 2o Nm po mo —.mm0 'E o ocm` o m"m m oNt o o -R!, ... a0i o 0 y o vc m Y y m m o v ..- m E c o aEi o E rn o o=r) - N C� MF0 :.5m O= � 0 - C)5tm Na(? o o aaZm m'E5O,OOo o r o L 0 n E = OCE c O m EO O O ma OOIO J E n ac oO im m E aL L tOa m c a H mQ o QmE (mOn c fOon In G O NO ET d EN m� O ~m EC _ O Ory FLLL O Odd -0 O > mdmp 0 tO m ca o 0 m c o- m O O m UG N a 2 Z Z N r U c 0 E'; w 0 m m N o o_ w m e o a m c E F- ? o o > on > o y b1 s z G •- o T .0,. U U �' a c a c o 0 o N o o a> C E '. 0 W ii O W 0 y C tll d 0 N v E:� a o_ Q N N O O (n E C o� m y I6 L O O N E N pO > N OJ O N .O m L O .� 3 N N� E ou m C L U G C o (J O -O UO U L '� W 0) 0] O C 'O U C d O I— N ? O O j LY O N G y N Z d @ a w p O w t m a�.m t n o m 3 yr. >..` m m E o m m TO 41 to u N C— p— O U N O L td c O N [0 t0 C= O C L Cf] tpi� N N O rL- "¢ im o m p o N c0 N R _ N O.. N m O O '.2-5 N NO .c .� _ (0 n — O C N m O O N N N t0 (7 4:E 2 6. L 0- `O o `O 5 o oy -oov a`> Eo .om -6 aE o N d c ao>CL o � m IM omU oo a� a ai d m ON ON O CE O 0 0 0 C t .O O C o p a n o �Z o0 o -Ea °gym omo d� p.� m w EaLO m 2 o _E m mma oc �o aYoo-Oc c mN -5 m¢p c o -oo a E EE N o ca w N o- m 0 -oo E y= Q mz m p.-.c m w t E aoi aoi °� E m o�°i m> 2 �o.o o��_�'._ aU mU • • • E�oa �o;�nm`E a'Q -oo��o• N o• . H w o• e Z M U r 0 Y; E V.:., (6 O � U C c " o � o � d m `C!A o ii N � Cd U C N 7d 0 c E2 o C`o _ Y o o c m m d E @ O U toat o f i@ o 0.- 75 a 0 N` � mdtooSmE ddO .Nmmv� - E °-:5 o E NE U d@ LL>. LLo U Uc Um Oovi C LLa Vraxli OOo mo SEO N 0 _ �Low c E 6E E `E V— 2 0 U V N CcE @ gy= mo o c d E o '¢ c@mm U5 o- o 0oo`�"m^ `o i 2 Mo U o o d E L m CO E c E c E •R >, om a LL~ coi �' d aci o .v c o o .� o G .m o m `° o m O >, > O D V E .n 0 0 U— C G C N OJ = C` 2 1 2 (J V d C ._• C O a— d C a j om N L j O d O V O _O N L N vl O E -5 yo mNE 7E E m m 0 U Em ` Tm t. h`z! 0=�0oEo rCn 3Y0aL� `mO mC ALL NO-Od o N Q� oE OLN JL C @ O U U N N��QY E O @ O G@ L?O@ O E mm m (n J (7 " N m N@@@ "O ON @ [O d m O C O .«- v c _ E m E • o. >, U c m a aci m 2 0 v' N COO=�'O O Ji OOo O L OmN EL NG U U3w� n -UD O9w Sm O_d Ol� 7 U C E 1, ,. G: m m 0 0 C_ c m `o a m E 0 0 c 0 C p '0y. o� E o pn `o E v c w > m a� m U U C/) c . 0'a 9 C d o d ,y c m � m Q U U � d h -03 O R OI a> N ECJ N c LL C N U d N N m C O7 Vi O N O c O7« mLL O L "0 N U0.5 -6.0 «_ R ` -0 N 1 W O U U T U>m C d Cn > O O0 z.nO J O m , M` 0«m LL m Eo o o 2 m u 'o R O, U 0' -aa? mLwUUc `o o 'OC@ .LL . 21 NOj U00 W.OO E -t@p4 Oc 'ON- o 0 o w E«` 2 E E s « d o cpn' o_ m d o LRR o� .> om'o� > L od mo c`UL0a wZ0 R, o o E O LLo 2 o 90 GnY n mo ma w b5.Eo > it « L No> N¢ O Na oc ¢-O m y 0 _EihX " m mZ@ °=0 o o •{Q o -o _Q=c L mQ 0 7 n5 ym 2 , r m amaa° —cm .-mO p ._ -O L W > T VI WE wm�. Empo-' _mmmm m Q C aEoo Eoi ommt n c o;,°mo ANN m�m>'v`mm� 3 G n (O R O O E C Y= ¢ d G N - U'�OcmOE°5> R c m o 0 o R 0m _ NN mzLtnmc cOm Vg'EO m � cm@O EL NoNOaCc ovEmREoOdo Um C m CmNc tCpTRm E U LL,y= N Rom E` - ON15 15 EafW -« C 000E N i 2>c> y5 ¢.Nn a?UCpUVI mR.VocoI co o R m m a`o omO no0 ommp m 0« oUwEw¢� o o 'L2SaDcmU °-¢yUom ¢ N Q � � N � L � U I V rn 0 E: m m @ m Doc 00 c E o m E c E> 2 E a O i a n o o o m E y doit5o. c 0.:.:0CL a U c c C.:.. VI (D co .... ... U P O N D U U c O w N E -y U_ �Q• Q Q Q Q T O C N T R L w m - N ON Uy� ¢N > U QnR O0R 4 (n NLU F R>ca O N O o d m ¢ O- M do c'o m m -j a m w cRN O0 O N O 0 .v0_a ,>Emc`P Oo "d om�o�O �0 o O .Oc�p ! -O T m YO Eod RO = -0 C15 2 c, aa ma � o -o m co@ c o- " `o 'is a -o 'ao w o' `m o o E E Tin0 .VRc C7 EJ—o -o > o o m e¢ n c d p m -o t° N d m O o ' L `d R c R Q GI o v U Nm mc Wp Oco Oc Mm E C G@ N N N E o C d °� oURcmc@ d vNm v a"Ri c0i > OoRc moM 0L0 d B J E RLoO a� °U o @OL E o O yin R o @ -t5a w Um om;? R>san 0 Rdag c ED U s o o om@- c0 0aO N¢ 0-O NO O- oOO E (` U¢R O 0 O O 4CO5ON E c N m c m c c o¢ ¢ a n @ m o c. C O O O O> U R c O O> EnxNc a.om mai aEo� mN o aR s ¢v UE o�Swv>d v N (�J I V rn c 0 Y C� E '. L ::. C... m m y@ m E E`c `o 0 E U pJ �, G- > N 0 '> m E o E E o m E m E H E y c y0 > c o o a 'o m p p 'p p 'o w n d a a i m aci api 3 d m a m `o Oi __ m s n o ;.+0+:c.. wpaGi ami ami ami Q: a E 00 U U U d °c E 0 o`N m YE m. Cc 'Oc4 . V@jE C5 O O C wOomU oo> co m `m .T• E G C �+ a) S N nl] O L � T.J @ a) T d@ N N O O d.. m@ C _C N O m c o n - c t a) N N p- m O -� i �• O U N OJ N _ �' (@J L w m c@ [O G O N N w et U a) y N n E C pJ S V` `o m e o a^ t m. m m -05.5 ?: m o o�`m @ `o E= v t° :n S m 3 L o N _m m 'O=LO�UTSCCfv p1 d.: O_ON@ �p�Nc 3 O'NLLo�n� @- O) O-UmOU� m @ E 21, C j E 0 Lm' c m c Rm Fa m m m o 0°M a' c aEi E t ccv `° w ... a m m o o Qi CJ •= o m co � L U E � c��� �- n E c 'C: � � N @ m N m �� c :p W o E S a_ .o @ m ;. E m o o-:� o o 'O N OJ E O'O N @ [a @ E d al `� N @ (O m m ENNN OO N��..m_LT�N O v"i0 �N d�C2 a)@mU 0)NLNm✓ N U j d .O .O O G O @ U al 'U aJ aJ O n C d a) a) O N E N E@ N O E n @ L N N, U- E U o a > @O L` C d C N m O N n L c :. `m c@i a L 6 m 3 o N - G `a o- E E o m 'mo o� `a i° s E u. �a 15 m E o_4 y E m@ E a m e m n o d 3 a m m E 'o -N `m 0° y `6 'm E p m °' 2 £ cmi m £ a nm m ti m o o m d � o � o� `o oO Iad o�L..2$n. 3 Ellin 9 a` aci E a` mid m r U \ \ \ . 0 } �} / \ C . { \ In t \�}\fj�){(§\ _ #�\f\2: 1)\\\\\u-ce _�\\\12 \\\ 0-5 � )( © \/)�):\ \\\\\\o\\_c5 \\\\\\\ca \\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\�\\\\\\\\\\\\\ --MM )\\2/)\f \/&°&)3{)\/% -A \ Attachment 4 ORDINANCE NO. XX(2013)(U) AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION PROJECT (PLANNING CASE NO. PL2013-227) ON PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF CHINO HILLS PARKWAY, SOUTH OF DIAMOND RANCH HIGH SCHOOL, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (EASTERLY PORTION OF ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 8701-022- 273). THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES AS FOLLOWS: A. Section 36937 of the California Government Code authorizes the City Council to have an ordinance take effect immediately if it is an ordinance for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety, containing a declaration of the facts constituting the urgency, and is passed by a four-fifths vote of the City Council. B. The City of Diamond Bar is required by State law to accommodate the development of 466 lower-income housing units as its assigned share of the region's housing needs for persons within this income range. C. The California Department of Housing and Community Development ("HCD") is charged with making determinations as to whether the City has fulfilled its State mandate to accommodate its assigned share of lower-income housing units. D. HCD has taken the position that in order to meet the State mandate, that a city must complete the rezoning of sufficient property at 30 dwelling units per acre to accommodate its share of lower-income housing by October 15, 2013. E. Pursuant to Section 36937 of the California Government Code, ordinances typically do not become effective until 30 days after adoption, i.e., 30 days after their second reading. Pursuant to Section 36934 of the California Government Code, ordinances may not be passed except at a regular meeting or at an adjourned regular meeting. F. The next regular meeting of the City Council is September 17, 2013. Thus, if this Ordinance were adopted in the normal course, meaning without a finding of urgency, it would be effective 30 days after that date or October 17, 2013, which is two days after the date that HCD has stated the rezoning must be complete. It is unclear as to whether HCD or some other person would contend that the time in which the rezoning was complete was upon the effective date (October 17, 2013) or upon the date it was adopted by the City Council (September 17, 2013). -1- 951476.1 G. The possible ramifications under State law for failing to have the rezoning complete by October 15, 2013, are significant and include: (1) a near doubling of the number of high density units that the City would have to accommodate; and (2) a possible finding that the City's Housing Element is out of compliance, which could result in litigation, exposure to attorneys' fees and judicial intervention in the City's land use authority, all of which could impact the public peace, health or safety. H. For the reasons stated above and to preserve the public peace, health and safety, this Ordinance XX(2013)(U) is being adopted as an urgency ordinance pursuant to Government Code Section 36973. Concurrently the City Council is adopting Ordinance XX(2013), which is substantively identical and which will become effective thirty days from its adoption and at such time, this Ordinance XX(2013)(U) shall be of no further force and effect. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq. ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines, 14 C.C.R. § 15000 et seq., an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") has been prepared for the proposed amendments to the Development Code and Zoning Map. The EIR finds that all potential impacts of the amendments are less than significant, or will be mitigated below the level of significance through the mitigation measures described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("MMRP") that is included as Exhibit C to this Ordinance. The City Council, in its independent judgment, hereby finds that the EIR and MMRP satisfy the requirements of CEQA for the proposed amendments. Section 2. The City Council finds that the proposed amendments to the Development Code and Zoning Map are consistent with the General Plan. Section 3. The Development Code of the City of Diamond Bar is hereby amended to establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) zoning designation and development regulations, as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. Section 4. The Zoning Map of the City of Diamond Bar is hereby amended to change the zoning designation for the property identified as "Site A" in Exhibit B, attached hereto, from Agricultural (AG) to High Density Residential -30 Dwelling Units per Acre (RH-30), and establish a maximum of 490 housing units for this site. Section 5. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or any part hereof. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or -2- 951476.1 phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 36937, this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon the date it is passed, which date shall be the date of its second reading. It shall be of no further force and effect upon the date that Ordinance No. XX(2013) becomes effective. Section 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and posted in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. niz Jack Tanaka, Mayor I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 3`d day of September, 2013 and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of September, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: Council Members: NOES: Council Members: ABSENT: Council Members: ABSTAIN: Council Members: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins City Clerk 951476.1 -3- APPROVED AS TO FORM: David A. DeBerry City Attorney Exhibit A Development Code Text Revisions Sec. 22.06.020, Table 2-1 is amended as follows: RH-30 I High Density Residential -30 I High Density Residential -30 Sec. 22.08.020. - Purposes of residential zoning districts, is amended to add as follows: "The purposes of the individual residential zoning districts and the manner in which they are applied are as follows. (7) RH-30 (high density residential -30 dwelling units per acre) district. The RH-30 zoning district is intended for high-density condominium and apartment developments. The maximum allowed density for new residential projects within this zoning district will be 30 dwellings per net acre and the minimum density will be 20 dwelling units per net use category of the General Plan. When the RH-30 designation is applied to property pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(h), subsequent review of any complete development application submitted in the same Housing Element planning period shall comply with the requirements of Government Code Sec. 65583.2(i)." Sec. 22.08.030, Table 2-3, is amended to add the RH-30 land use district, with the same permit requirements as applicable in the RH district. Sec. 22.08.040, Table 2-4, is amended to add the RH-30 land use district, as follows: Development Feature RH-30 Minimum lot area 5 acres Residential density Maximum: 30 dwellings per net site acre Minimum: 20 dwellings per net site acre Setbacks required (same as RH) Lot Coverage 60% Height limit 35 ft. Hillside development (Same as RH) Landscaping (Same as RH) Parking (Same as RH) 13 951529.1 Exhibit A (continued) Sec. 22.48.020. –Applicability, is amended as follows: (a) Development review. An application for development review is required for commercial, industrial, and institutional development, and residential projects that propose one or more single-family dwelling units (detached or attached) or multiple - family dwelling units and that involve the issuance of a building permit for construction or reconstruction of a structure(s) meeting the following criteria: Sec. 22.22.020. –Applicability, is amended to add as follows: (a) ,.GRditi9RaI 6i6e PeRnit ; Fnpl;.,RGe with chapter 22.59. Development Review. Hillside developments shall be subject to Development Review in compliance with chapter 22.48, except that residential developments in the RH-30 district shall be subject to non -discretionary development review if required pursuant to Section 22.08.020(7). Sec. 22.22.050. – Hillside development standards and guidelines, is amended as follows: (b) Exceptions. Exceptions to the standards in this chapter may be approved through the conditional ase—peFFn.t development review process, when the commission determines that the exceptions would not materially affect the intent of the standards and guidelines. In approving a re.nditienal wsp permit development review, the commission shall make appropriate findings supporting the determination in compliance with the chapter 22.58 (G^^^"*'^^^" Use PeFFn'ts) 22.48 (Development Review). Sec. 22.22.070, Table 3-5 Slope Categories is amended as follows: Slope Category Natural Slope (Percentage) Site Standards` 4. 50% and over This is an excessive slope condition and it is anticipated that residential subdivisions will not be developed in these areas. If residential development is pursued in these areas, lot sizes may be considerably larger than the minimum allowed by the underlying zoning district in order to comply with the standards and guidelines of this Chapter. Actual lot size shall be determined through the Development Review process. -5- 951529.1 Exhibit A (continued) Sec. 22.22.080. — Grading, is amended as follows: (a) Landform grading techniques. The following standards define basic grading techniques that are consistent with the intent of this chapter and avoid unnecessary cut and fill. (Figures 3-10 and 3-14). Limitations on project grading amounts and configurations will be decided on a case-by-case basis under the GeRditieRal Use permit development review process. Sec. 22.22.150. — Evaluation of GORdWORal use pePg4t development review application, is amended as follows: The commission shall evaluate a ' development review application for hillside development based on the following objectives and the required findings in compliance with chapter 22.59 (Geed tien ,i Use Permits) 22.48 (Development Review). in 951529.1 Exhibit B Glt, Bounder, PH High Oenslty R oodentlal ZOOIOJ ,i. PH SD'. Proposed High Densty Residential PC unitslacre AG. Agnculmrel RL Low pensiry Resltlenuel C -t'. Neighborhood Commensal RLM; Low M.Oar, Density Resldectial C-2 Cona,ort, Commensal '�. RM- Medium Dorsal, Residential C3'. Regional Commercial RMHI Mission, High Denall,Residential CO. Com mereiel Office RR'. Rural Residential I: Light Indesir, ` SP'. Specie Plan Overlay OB'. Once Saone. Park ::SUB -PAI PI 'ng Areal ip,. OP_ Office, Professional SUB-PA2PI ,,,Ae.2 OS Open Space/Conservation loo SU&PA3. Planning Area REC'. Recreation = BUB-PA4. PIanningAree4 -7- 951529.1 '.7 E d � O �a 0 a`0 C � 07 0 N d UWP N -0 C m .O X a W % -0 O O N 2m I' C 0: A ' }`Ef:: a:.0: L) C m m C > a o 0 d O 2 a C U 0 0 2 m o m c c m C 0. m m o . c:-0 o 0 0 zm m m Tp . c'9 C aiN v g o m N E- N N > L O d C o 2] N t a d O U E b 0 > N r E 0 y� 0 m e N m r `m _ p o�` m- O w o m o p_ s a E O N O t m 0 Q- tO O N N w x p O d m �O c a c -mo °� o m a (Cp a E E p U y O m m m -' b_ c� E c o 0 3 o o Q.o aLLo� o— �oM� cm mm2 a' m 2E a n m 0 c c io o '6 m c m `o o .� m 3 m-3 m ami E m'3 o N> o U c c y E E' g n m. v o o c N o � 0 m v+ m rn O o o m o m w m "o m E 0 0 o CUEOLcoo' mQ�aOdEJ UUNmmma •cYcLp% ad3> ::: O ,ampCm O tyNX OOm`O YCEJ U .. _.aaa_` "�waCOm.J ad`N0O° UCm?c U .—CN>l .-E_ OOo O : ymiNmi 0 m w ad F (TminO Oma .. N m ti U g°p >mj Co o o _Ed5cN 'o"dO E m� -mo_m d 'cmN oo inoo a ^ o o m �OaaoJ .O_m m>aD = E LLm e my amC3 UQOLoU o, 2 Q E NmNm c ¢ ao da Uo oo c m o m U �O-da �Z mea �Nn mN p O KLL F- mU � W W 00 LLa m Zp N C? d d CY Q Q Q U N U ,Q R d N 0 n n C _ 0- o - 2 m m o o c 0 O O O O O O d d d Q CL O O 'C T .p r:Qo -: Lo n E g E a E 0 m c E o aw 00 a>i On m p;(.. c: N d E � c � U C R O -O O T N@ N @ -O o m O a m¢ >0 OL-. Al EE : aE d c -) _E mE 'o L a o K vi R a> 3 `> E `m T R E w n E o m `m v 6- c d o `o r a o _ @> m O' O U O C @— m o• o C v� n @ t� N O@ 4] — vl m R� U J d o Emco 3 0� m o � O N N UJ �NOIY' am@ Eoa)N ym GAOL a@iwwc o N o-- o 0 m >@ O C O N Oaci @ L.3 Nm'L O>CO U m ,d Al mc oI@n d.3� ANlOm r m -LoRNR E ym E o 'Cai o ?r mo2 = Tof .:. GOp �@n OOJm0-6 NUBmJ LO U w Lw m E 0 o -moTC 0- o % OO d L O oN� X N O O ! C N Ev`ooOO lo E CCN�pQ LL.E - N dv O O N yN 0 N`° NCO EJ LU N 'E" sfUn >a@O " m m voo .f-✓@om ., o:4 cJo 0oNa 0. aJO UoU@ O—EnU O > w E oO p n 0° a a�c3OO.n.. o" coRo0 i0w �N '� O CD Q °p` u v 0.75 z L c o aal- 0 c awe @ � N Q 0] Qa N U c, o. E d` c;; `o o o N OJ N N O N p� O OJ O � O d7 w N d 07 d m UU 4. m O O O 2� its N N O w N N E E :.y: 2 E E E `�.. o o o a>i 00 0 V 0 0 U D c J O' . w m O O a a E}0 @::d JQ 4) U Erb a .2-S2 a = -a Q ¢ E ¢ E N V O t0 0 N O m E a o.a m o o m `o c E m co m L N c m v C Q O O. m o T w v O V N N O (O N OJ V E O �OcsS H U .O N O >= 0` �' .v U '� >_ Z O N m m ~ d w t o m m �O `o m a0i m a m `o m m m -O m m � m o a m m E m 0 N N OJ c U O N T i/5 t9 UJ C N N vT O_ N c C OJ C O (O oo E O Q d d U O m E z oaa o `o `o o m ao v m E E c '-Sot `m d 0 a, ` m 6 o� a .oc E � o m v -a '� `o T'€ L" m :E E m c '' coi E o E m m T N- o f ;= m m m o p a ... �yoEti¢d0 m w��`-'mEm ac«mQcai moN� 3.0n ��m� m Uc E L. v s m 0 o V 0 wv O =.T� `.O N C .c O _O EE O d tiOc KNOm NE N pN U O -E LgNC UCryo p(CO 'ad0 ( UO N N V0O m0 E O O 12 NO N N U O � aaNCNm`ml oEpc O N ELO > o 0 0 E_m oaN.-62 o aE -0 0_E N O N 0 E OmN U�oo .o a0- >> m OS o O c-aE2° o?— s m m E c m= .o S m m y c °J vi ..- o> d L� E v @' 3o -oN c'ZydNOJ ma`� sOO m=t a'sy timNU 'oo amCOO rNO �QNCTt9-i d_3U 7- o.0>.T. a m t(.Yfl s>E-F fEC6 -oOO ND O L0oN d m ONNOLO .'mmm`O N E = -EcO • y N k E w E aoN-a G N 3 J .mSNU- I d iN 5 Na C U SmC] UO I-mpNj O:�; N O E > _iE m in o O o m m m C7 U N h a V U r rn ,o C�C G , E E o E of c c o m o m o m 2 o m o y a wa o o m a` m U a` m A m o a` m M= r.C.:.. m m m m 0 0 0 O' 0 0 C m m m ao 07 O] D] O] U O E E a N N .0 N N N Q U p) U U U E Qo a Q a= ¢ E O p N@x Om U- O o o mc o CN o o os eo mm o Q E Z5 MaUo O O N U UL N O O r/ oo 0.9 :N ot m m o [Q O L N ?i T� H d (OJ '� N S 3 N NL o S2J o aL 3 c 3� o f o�ai o �c@E >rLONom. �w m� 0 -FO -FO Eao'0m@ oOa-cym _92�oW E 0 o f aE Ut>oJ OS C-3 'mO o o> o oL -0 o .F amm m ra o O�@ 0 E c 0C o� y o EOVEO C EOO ` >L 0oLE OCO L mCoOO,O- Eam o m / o @ c wVmomddtCT o- E Lm E `° o m@rg'N [NOO 0 oL2 _r m [o aoO af.. . o CONO E"mN > O LNm OL O w v� O d C -55 m m m m o m L a� m E E o¢% b c ra m c -o c w O@O_ o U m m 3 0 0. D mo4:Z3 ddM O Om E aO 0 NNd m N 1' @ cV O0I ��oC'`�O�UNccQ�VC Nr;O0 E0 >GdZ m N -O ION@�T� �dncoo.L..a Em@o E@@C E'm 00� m -m d m oEo�' n o f- o �c w d C _ O_ C O D7 N d N _n O X N N N O L@ C o m '- o O o@ -O L U F- CO m O O. o U o .r (/oj o L y K 'O O ma@ '' U N m O_ 'C n r m rn 0 0 0 0 m m m m V U r rn _' 0; E% 0 V, m p O O L p E O O �q 0 O V O U t1 p O CP p pl CL d Mao d m d m C FC C.: 0 O O o 0 P0:::C. m m m m m m m C O w o 0 o d E '0 U U U a E ¢ a NN - N LO @ O U T @ O@N CNc-ONQ@ E d NT C O O N O E (a E O C O- U UJ L-15 (O J E .� @ 'oO' Nc `m 6,M O m N c N Q, o mm E 'awaJI O @ O> > El c d t Lv d N N l0 f/=1 j D N 0) D_ S] "O € O G V O -U N VOI r= L VI O U J L` @ C O -O -O ✓ N i:. G E N C t-�> N N N U J> O@ L C C O N O vl @ d L@ O V �O > d O d@ E ' O- N O O N 2LN C@C aN o.EQa @ 0 O-' O@ EYC MC O Od O _O O ND @m.OJ > �O NO_C O O fJlNp "p _'o MY E U p N U y Q N N :.. d E N .0 N p O UO 'O O L Q UO E C V N O N N L O .= ca O U. L @ S] N S O C J> J C O Cn d hd@ E N J@@ C U O Y @ d 0 3 @ N U .E O O L E N 2 'c NO..J0NacECTm.)Ti NN`oO�NcO- L0NOCO-o OLym-NoON,J�) OoO`OOO) O CJI C N@ @ y c O N f0 U mo OJ Q p EE `EoOC(NE@6l o R COa"NOiJi 0-N -wwOJ6O @ , O 0 E°0 o 0 E 0 oomo0 0, f M >m n ro- fm d o m m @ O 'p@ 0� L @ =pY@U'O N N 15 0OE LKp -p�M CQ-O _27U U@ om mE m`oNo o=cco >A 55 L o o mi d E t > m0i) mO-m a2 o m _a @ U N O O C a Lo U C:: 0'➢; A w. i0-; s. '.L) @ m m c o O =o g m c T C � .0 `0 0 0 0 0 m m m =o =o a m m m C. O 9 C idcN E o m Q Q Q N C N N C n O R O v C y ry m O L dN U .5 L_ R U d d@ n - Z O O N N N ZR O O� T O `o L> C L OI U U R O@ -m> o f c7. @ m o m L y L >> K m U n o N, o o y W 2 o 2 -O E N> R R R R O R O m O R U o u Gi T :_ 01 N m D_'- R m mC2 Y S ._ N O C R@ N L N O N O .--5 R R V% d: �'N lO O `a"J L V 'O .-. R OD_ R O) G N ¢ � � O O C cis — JUCNw, ` d o �:�a,ami UE"aa U E�m'o QE�@Envo�mm`o`c`o�RGmn�`omm -fC'`; .:O o YN d�c om 8.oc cia os cm m oN o- o m 0 �. E (o'QKvawEmam N.om aois a`mi����0�=mo Ea>>E3R mco R�mo3.y-U O�CN'ORj @��CGL N='OR`-'s CL NOO-O RLRd yR m O O-6RlT.O O "t O o2 � QE " $ � mC E i`` m m m y C ti m o a� d a m - 0 o @O O :�mR-mo .gym E�omEo 000 WER oco N R m `o.-o`o @ n v In U U U I G O:;;,.. A ¢j. 0 1 O j O y N r Q O m m d O m 6J 0) @ m m J ca 0 w. p 0 O O O 0-:0. m m m C -o -o CCii o m m m O r N` G d'Q c c c Q.H C; ) Q Q Q O C ho E" w mEOU E a -~O@NO N mmcEm(OU N E > O N m y EU p E m 0 6-6 N?@ Z E 05 m mmm mN O E o m0d mm aC dwmN --a__o m `—UmO o omm mNN >coO o NL wL ' TE Qm 0 -U OO NQ o o3 m >L ° 0- S oEa E T, --S m . oomNO 0 E o aE0N > 2 E on>m o LooVNd O ELO :G mT L'E E ) E O O N h O w L N O d U T J c O- m N@ C m m L_ �- m C d E 'n m 0 0 m c L > @ -O m O 3 p L c. "oJm1Ommr m= m-osco. IIo w3�cE`m� C ry .y U m y E EE—0Lao`mc N" r/i 'O d C m Q p N C N N N O 0] N m U E O. a`�'-O O (n O> O tp w V N O MOO -oUO C TN-0-oo Emmm O'J° oQgyN ) jY aNmmmcf 0 E h~Qm ; cUCG0To o0Umm c mo EE co E N O 0 m N a m E�m O E m O] g oo aNN p- Na U U OG 20 �mO0m 0-,QmN'O m"Nm`m @ E m> 'e-6>N-�O O O Oo VoTaE w0CNm >"o 0m3 . w o o sE o_ m -E ay'EmC m y moo a =om 0 o,E m m o J LOCQmNJ momE oL ami o. m o a a d c w m o m d axi E :E:> m o 0 m o o n m E L o- m E `g N a 0° d t o m m m m d N a w `m d `o m o.m o¢ H ¢ ¢ ¢ 00 _ `m -mo I C R' S cr : os, 0 0 � U C c •- U c •- E-', m E m E o m o m `o_ o p2= m 6 `o =o [O m 0 :t 6 c a d;y E-. o Q Q @IE5p L s O C@ dOC QmO w@E S2 - O O oC E w @@o @C@ @c C N m Cp@ L M. - d@ N- @ E I-ONcc p o o Q mN @ aG 'E ry s o m z `-' oo aci -o'L,°c' a �o a� > E a a �° "w m@ v .- E o o o m _p Q N -O N C -_ m G m G o ami a a d d o d m 3 m d o E 0 o m a- U w m> 'a E m ani y- E m o E'w Q% 'O eE G j E O_ N N `. N O O 'O o O w n OJ o L' E N o=mmL o> E@@@ L¢ LG o`OoZU 0 a w �_? o 3_ dC OpaONE 0DoN N OOoO co iO-6 wm E2 -O O O L m @ @ C m @ a) O N C1 L E O d@ O N m@ w0 12 U U (D 7 N O -O a` > O' y N@> pEo O :E: a d E d L al U ii l0 @ w` 0a woE -G M-o3N di oom .0 15 ` ° pYTp`o n@E U oc c N c✓ -Q om d _ m � -p @ n m m i d m m m`c of � - � � o� m @G c ry -m �@ = m � o m U T c O a a c_ U o a� -p d m E @000 o m L L N Q) @ C> N N N fon Cn N N T C= iq O D O E p E= E c' -c aci c N@ O) N NQ [n @ (O O@ Q 9N 'N 'N z E E E> a C7 G> 'O C T o) pami o c N N m (O N w v -p m N E p> @ a) Q O w@ @E OEc3 .o °c O C7 N y o@ EC 0O o N C'J N O a O (7 UD I C A E Cw =s :0'S? c 0 G U m `o 0 0 m o m o w o m a C m� E h `m of F.: � n N w n N o 0 `o w n m w+ o T c c _ c� > m. an d c .r r2 0 ',C. mm U U m U m U m U m U m U m U m U C .0 O O O O O O O O O =0[ Q O) O) 01 O) Ol O) Ol O) O) c c c c c c c c ac a =o CO m c] CO m m Cfl m m C Y: O a �1 E,'0 d=CL c c c c c c c c a a ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a a G G O G G rU O J N = O N d � t'c aEi y 'E E K .v m U t m e o' .3 c a o m . _ m m s E a3i aEi p o 'off m c v m m o. `° a m d o o c= W a o M o N o 3 0 c d E c R _ vi o E G o 0 .n @ `0 E� 0 a 0'a E m p m C7 N g `o o c o m c o Dc m E � a d m` `. o- `o� o m iO E a z G G R ci 3 a o @ a g R ,'_° m op — E "' o_ d@ m -O E p d m o p d C [D C °D ` N d O m y o m 0 E c" N !p o C m d .D m� A C C _O d O f0 d !E N @ O� QJ � O .� d y p� y C d OI n Q'-' R O O m D_ m N R d> m d ..T. d O -0 C C d d d O_,p m > m mH R ? m m ,a Odd o o a° m= oU o d -p noo d d La> N d 3 d w a>> m m s E E 'o c> 'o L R= m m m E- d 'o E E U O c d R -O >R d m U -p d o ,� c con -o N O C a ~ L m " a a y y N CO — n? v1 U c4) E s ._ o m E m d `° w -@o f° .& 'D E2 EN G ` E G. ' m `� O C_ N C@ S m E 1O d@ ._ M G m U C s R m C o_ L 'D V) R C7 = m C G. m -o x L -- o m o o o c L '� ¢ c m o o o L° m c G � "' o> o" -o o n GO �a L m °� d U o 0 •cGC R d _`o_ o_ a` d L 'p N F- .0 a a�'i 1 n?- d a O_ `. — d _ N R E= 0 m RRU CdEo�-UdOU '-° 3 m...mm m 'r s r o p�O o v NN�OOd o �° mt :. -oo _> 0_ 'c° E E c' E '= m E O E c o N o' o m so0R tu'o ~dO9m mGN G m o6 op m m m 0 0 m >'P Eni O d G 3 L dc L o YO E O_ E O R > a° 0 n C5 a o C 3 d o "5't5 d m d E2 o c m= N m 0] O ' g N m E a E c N d o v N an d p m p" G C`J m d U o `o m m 2 d m@ o o m a -o o. c d c E E` -.o_p o c `° o w L w 16 a o 'oo o d t N o .co- a~oi m m w> c -Ro` Cp C p �'t 0. V N C .� n E N .0 m'10 C Q N (Op 'O d a 'O m N m U G d D7.0 L m d d m p 1 .O 0 m'Q '� E Q� U @ o s ¢ma�¢cNa gmd d D Lv, am EDU m �� ¢ O`o ¢ E H >m -oR R H m ¢ oom omi I? .r Ln co r- m ar 0 aoi 0 w0 0 d waoi 0 C`J 0 C9 U (7 Cf) 0 C9 O1 U C' r; pRp C+ m m m m m `o o m o m `o m o UC O N h 0 N y O .O N N N �. m� O N O N O N -@E O N m n a` m o. a m 1 m m m 0 m m CI:Q O O O y O O 0 CL m Ol m T T m m y c c c c c m m n U U m m C O'a+ F C E O- Q d Q Gl� d d Q Q Q Q Q C N O@ L a OJ U 'O _ @ Np N -o E - mm m'om E ami a L m � =c°3 Q 21 cmi@o '0ow e a o sE am-oc000mmo c`o `o >,m ��m'�E ami =oo •-. ¢m.&5S >' m s n c@ o ' R H C@ m o E d N T..•'N L O •-• -O `J „ mo n c c> N O �p m U@ m n O 2 o mC7 N`J .CEOOHNNQ NOa @mO OI�m.O^ O'aj�>EOmmn"O -O (pm `J m >mU> E 2 0,0 -0-0 oo u._ dc'immc �y ao@UN_ 2 Z`omcmi��m�L� o oE@ nmN mEnEmiC@n oam ` U .OO'C mocON vNNN m O ycoO> J O o O O Ot' O O L dmct�n°i I vm o o E a Eo>mo @ o mYaE E o E�nn0amSo"—ly imoOa� ommvto V O wmN m'om o Um om�aoi N 2Nv O<° aY no N n= Eym O E m Cm O -wJ Um Om NmE E m o o oO o —cO> c@i x— oo L c d m@@ N c m N m @ L N > N @ m m N a N m d h n c n a o w C N m L C i@@ -Ni C- C O @ O L✓ a) N O- U U y W O@@ O@ O d 4 T n C O mcairc—@_@mNmNL'c um, mEa > -amn- °O@mU QmN > m m— o@i - o `fr m moU.E@ OX t 5 c oU > m mao" E a C d C O w E@¢ N maxi E axi g o w' C@ (a m a m m fEQ (n m m m m @ O U Cl R„ m m m m o `0 0 0 E E E E F:, n S2 o m o m o m o m rn- ;L..,O N _m m _m 0 0 m O U o U U C L' EC FC EK 'C,0 o 0 0 o O;:.dy m m m m 2 c m m o m U 0 m C (; 0 a R ) d.c E o< oa Q a o. G Q Q Q Q a @ N G -2 D7 Lv u C N v o O T_OL N a 0 0—� > �O E OOA@ O¢ E .@ O O"CppE O@ CO o@U-ONO- A O] aQl O N h C N@ 01 N '@-�L _ O> r_ E E O_ a m L c E E.- O O _ O_ O a a -C -O @ w>> E @ U U O Gi N y N G .0 O O@ N d r@@ — p C O O d U O L_ N N@ O U ,7:.m omU�mo cd Eaim�E 2Nao'a�¢�� a (C O C L Q"ot`mdava@o Mi EC� omNacmi mo@m 3m aL.Qw@ `o L Oom NC @ N Om E do- C O E 2 oV d@ EL aLoc aL o mcpo -n 00 co D � U od E U amco- o0o ` U E = E a 2N 2� o. '66@m� EcmEmta2o �o U m� Cc�m�yot LaOa yOom � ary o r m o m ami c" m 3 'vo-i `m o iT E vgc Uwn o Ca cpaco mcE U m 9 2D@ Ec .2 @ y O 6 7 c¢C Wow U ¢ @p@ m> m w>co ¢O ao o En- @ Ulm iTo ZNEna N [+J v NN @ @ N @ c a0..r. NII 7:0'.i U=; `o 0 `o {:C c N 76 N N p O N O � O CL rn •= C 0 O p G G m U U O .T• 'w _.' N E CLc c 'o c .� 4i c m R m p> s O LA N Z N d w oM Q m L U d o n c@i o `m o pc E m> @ oc E m o m o E " 'a'm o m o R o E o @ m Y o? o0 o S oc .io s E m o. G o. oo w a `o 'pR- R a ou `o E o b L @ .N o o G" m d mo ._ o N 0, o N m OJ o a c c o R N U N O (� U OJ ��� R�` R� : 1 m m E Y U) .-Rp N C m N Q 75 oc oao c(Dm �d om E:o E �- m d O O R T L N N if, O R@ E Vd0)�L R@ C RR7� O R Rid F5 mEa C -U :2"- E5 �0 UKm C n 1 'E52 E¢2 -1 tORE --2-- R N N CJ O o oa md a0 sUN o(U7 Oit [mryo t'R-0' O Q E 7 OU Y >U o > o m o o� -oR L C LA R E Ol Q N E C }- O In � R U) 2w UF - N � N 7 Z Z N U T rn 3 @ 3 _ >> o > `o m mo @ c o-... o @ c 0E ��E > o o > 0 m > m m o > m -moo IL m .? m-_ •p v U w U 0.p O O N 0 0 C E BUJ C >N m E> Ol '.0 0 .� C W O' USO W O w C 'y N qp- E0 CL d U_ cQ... C � d Q O O a m R] V m d 2w m cOD N d O "O `J O "OO a N N d @ o E M -0o N' o� ra ti o m= m > m m OJ N s m O U Oo m U �° m W c [n = N M aUi d N w e@ N y C d o b n L E o >` m w a U> -moo p- O O LL'J N L N N N L -� @ 3 a m N T V- N O- U N O �� L N C O N @@ O C O C L m N@ OJ O J YN@ O O m yrm Buda d�w�`O�a�im y~`o'am �m o_m m m 0�o.��mo�3� L� w E O¢ -LN DE NOL n` `"ET 0- orat m Nao o rao a a_m> om or: s m_ai E15 _o 0 Uom oo r d n oo o comW EEUN N�U...a O OOC@OO@ S TO Nmm dmN a O= c y m? O d N 4C-' o 3T N o C m C> W > mEo oO m o Z0 0 @ mSm] OOE N2 N m m N 0'` Uo NmOU@ Nd m mo mo ao o N E ammY ¢o ON E @ Oa E m 0 0Lm co 0 L OEE EJ Om N" c -45 1 O h • • • 'm n o m o o a m U E .n m a a E -o o - a a min — o �a min LL C m Z T rn C 0: ` A E' U m 0 U N d O Ol C `o -o ` m a m O) .0 0 o o Q m y a m U C: .0 ;..... id C Q � U Q C O N L._, V`o O E Y p) m O @ O N c O> ry N rGJ- w O O O@ " E o f TJ O .4.J •� U -O @ N O O N 'N O N TO OJ O a N N O E O C O N To . 0° E o oE -V d O T7 Nm 0-2 d LT .J d CO NOa s~@E ca a w= aoi m@co ooco °` =@N Lmm om ooc mm mU E`a= m- am D�>., E ;aom�. 2' d Y0 m -0 0 00 - - 55 ya0 S 2 mh� m o 3 .o3 . - m d@m . U v jE� '> o `U LL N 2 aNi d D o0 m oo a) oy oE mi o o m' o N m mmm v a m d ,a Nai m 2E o Uo E 2 ELUoDvO me m w D -Eo dE' c 6WLL~oo am o do._c g g �cc i.o �2E O L O O -E ' E C C O N N O -E212 O O g Y~ N 0" C a> E) OI N O` o` oncoCUn Ol U C O D .CN y a C C .� @ D a 9�LUEO Uf3OO DE LLN3N tE S2 WUL22U 0-6 -6 EON _�OOOE+ `ON?oON mN(OO �NO x D U omON moaOf OR m •d�N-° ON(O @ O LLy0O O - JwmO �m OCO7 �raONO DomTa @ 'Oc 2 m C N D OO E O "orE LEEON 7 O O d C O L O _ O OOi L-Uc @ OENOOO`` O O O in O in E [Q U TUU 3 N� �I-UI-.L..2U d ad m ELL aH UD m N U.�USU O O aLL mw 0 LL ci' o: m EI w c., I:v @ @ `o `o C c c E H ti n w n o a $ a d `om d a 9`� d n w p C: E o o� CCII c o N - L w U U in 0 co C C` Eo Qr:N U U ¢ ¢ _ d y m y E o m 5 m m 12T.0 E J E o-2 a o C iO� 4c >o`o o -o o o o o @ .0 3 Ea c m- E- @ E.w IE '6 Lo 5 o o o WE iEEcEomw W oEwm-- @, 'DO m�o EN a o ENdai 0 O 0NU -. -E@ O(own Oom E z o 3 3 ._ zz P, occ_>Om D o wo O ENom wUHm o¢ E @m WE 0 _ m. 5.0 O aCNc - (yam o@ m o @ U CU ENuo fa `E_E n o S o o.w @ o E oo o Wm m a mo M oE o m` . E�m E N N N O r N@ U O O @@ O_ a) E al L C y O T@ N E E 01 U EJ @ +J Y C W 'O> c m 4= ✓ O` - @ @ X .- N E @ O O O no a -@, aUi c `o @ m 5 E m= c E o c o n@ aci E 'D N vNi U V 'U B O N G 3 0 M m - @ N> y i c @� d o_ o aJ C o a m a) m E p O o E o n 2 ao 0 O L N 0 O [n p m ` @ @ ?i .L.. N W @ C @ LL n N rT `m > voi `o E a m E¢ E W 1O S Md t c � `o o E c cq v o= m m o c E o ocom.o m'u, E-ccEo m m c m o. �,E o �'_a�'i.�yoo�mUEmo @ o o m"poo is E%v o�oN`o Em:o E U" -o oco .b L- g c o mc000 o mD 2oS 0 o m o Eo qa ¢O c w .. ¢om o amm=oEo�LL'"0do ` oEma�� ai a,c W,o w"m n 5 as @ U$¢ m a U N p M o m a L a LO U c. r C� C [O t6 f6 t6 O O p O G O O N _ N 'E O E > E a Oo n O O- -O O > O O �p O N O N O 0 w W 10 U�0UJ m U U C T O r d r 0 Q Q Q Q O UJ m 'w l0 O > UJ W> d V N L d o d E d C 0 d N (A V 2ha`wam�@E�p»�>'cEE=d N¢-o¢o-io��°�a' Ea _ o`m L m @ o'y m tN a@Eo 'm ddE mo_° > 6a oo p oU E`o Rc sn@E 3 E ommhN a:s NwL. L U aJ- @ O O (6 G N O S "O N U@ C n C O. _ O -= @@S 'S > C -U O O@ W E a 9 O N E O O� m 7 u5 '= c (0 l u o@ o- ry v y @ d 6@ N l0 zs @ O d N. o o .- L T t`A _- m m 0c 3'm 3 "...d...', o �. m o m N a E`a> N E `o6 -cdo c a3 @ -o -O C p > E 3 m� H v o cdi V c >@63 c y E G d d d »= d T n d g a> a s t9 d � j m g d O G m p m *L c E E a o E O o L N c> O C a d O N 0.... N N O O ?i t° O 2 d J Q >i .-SO. O n O 'O G Q -` O E O N @ O C"- C ry N G d O "p o` O W d O" L ? a E o_ H N Ta m -p m d N QG' o ... 61 ' o L 1O n j o U m i4 o w E v a m -do y j d a m E V L m w d d d -2@@ m �- -@o2 @ EN to c E d C7 c-- -o C '� d E @ d- 3 N G o -E L u- c o �+ o o - cc t° O T O = T -C m E@ p 'o d o M o m �. -o w w p E -o @ o d O N O_ N T« L d O m@ @ 0@ `Q 5 N p@ U g@ 2.5 O N o N !` U@ d@ p` Z O= O 3 o 0 c O O U O Q a m aN`> c in t o c o s ar o o@ n o> 05d _ a =_ c o d d �n H o E o 'n a E N w@ E¢ �' a o 0 d fq L (O U O in O O O j U@@ O O> E m O N t d'>.� m.>o� io 0 and oa m m`O o E d o.aa m� c aci `o E n @ U ti c °J E o- o a>>c�Na a> y = o. a "o '0 0° E p-Ew E a a`> To E a E @ a U> y@E> @ m ^ a"i U O t33 L @N 2.0 @p `O O H E@a3O n N ti> U a, o; R; E OLS 'i E 0 C..> o U m E E E c E m E E O O> O m O d7 y O C L N O N wE w n a aJ a m aci aci 3 a` m 2 m T o Y O N O m 0 a C C C p IC o c c c g E w w w 4J EO N U O U U U 0 a+ (a «!a d N E' o E;z a a a a 0 E t E i> y y a o I m E o o �_' m m J > p V OO m m e > o m �UNd 00vi a'� OR E; Th.Q�Nm=T(i C dNU "OO Ci '., iJ O- m 'O N N rn - O ... N N N •' o m m OJV`X `l m N N' O O O N _ _ d O S m tL� O Q o �Lo- a� o m m a"i a m `a H m o- w m m w m �o LL >O O V O OJmwOLE m w,y ✓ O C EQ e.. C Q a-- m 0 V00O n L O o n i U d 7 n O N U m n— .L] n J m T C~ N J n w L o U c -o o a m N C 3 3. N L n m L .J m m o O L m L '�' in E w c N s d .S, a m m m -o °� o m E m- > c m `° w m .- c m E a L`. o m c m n- d `- ,z, c y d o L c m m m c o a`� � j d o. °� m m m E =; �" R �° w o -o �L.Q o m m E'o cLi y of nao'iU Ea c' m � m v U m -o O T:N a'm N >i.0 N .0 C d E N O:c > L m L_ _ E C N d n� 7Rt n L J n U m y O C O -.0 E m ani E °>o .f o> o a c et o a rLn ooh E E o a m a m o m m rLn m m O m s w a w N a v vi o U m QL m m75 m m m m m Cn C a) Eo L Om ~m c m o ET N 0om m a)- ._ ac mmn oaO oa) a L m P m v m g o o N c L d E o 2 0 y v01i c' i9 N CO a) n N 0 N d O E O O Q O a) y a7:N T E m O m U O O d O m O O O> m N L O O 'Et co w - m O O- O m m N O= O Um a aal L C C mjo m=a ry �a . am 0 c J v u? co r U � § } \ � < \ (E . } � § } \ Cc k \ t� \\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/�/\ ) /[ : \\\\\\�\�\\\\ ji \o \\\\\\\\\\\�\\\\\\\\.- � Attachment 5 PLANNING COMMISSION n AGENDA REPORT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21810 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.1 MEETING DATE: August 13, 2013 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013- 227) LEAD AGENCY: City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department PROJECT LOCATION: Undeveloped land generally located along the west side of Chino Hills Parkway/Philips Ranch Road, just south of Diamond Ranch Road and Scenic Ridge Drive, and adjacent to the Diamond Ranch High School, in the northeast portion of the City (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-022-273) APPLICATION REQUEST: To recommend that the City Council take the following actions: 1. Certify the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR"), which includes the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program ("MMRP").The EIR provides an analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed actions. The EIR includes mitigation measures, addresses project alternatives, and identifies the environmentally superior project alternative. In preparing the EIR, all potential impacts are found to be less than significant, or would be reduced below the level of significance with the identified mitigation measures. The MMRP would monitor and report on the implementation of the mitigation measures; and 2. Adopt a General Plan Land Use Element Amendment to establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) land use designation and change the current land use designation on the Land Use Map for the portion of the subject property identified as "Site A" from Agricultural (AG) to Planning Area 5/High Density Residential -30 (PA-5/RH-30); and Page 1 of 12 947906.1 3. Adopt a Development Code Amendment to establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) zoning designation and development regulations; and 4. Adopt a Zone Change to change the zoning district for the portion of the subject property identified as "Site A" from Agricultural (AG) to High Density Residential - 30 Dwelling Units per Acre (RH-30), and establish a maximum of 490 housing units for this site. SUMMARY: Every city in California is required to adopt a General Plan, which includes a Housing Element. Among other things, the Housing Element must identify adequate sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate new housing development commensurate with the City's assigned share of the region's housing need for all economic segments of the community. A primary purpose of this state law requirement is to provide incentives to development that will increase the availability of affordable housing as defined in state law. Pursuant to its authority under state law, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) prepared a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), which determined that the City's share of regional housing needs for the 2008-2014 period are as follows: Table 1 Income Very Above Category Low Low Moderate Moderate Total Housing units 286 180 189 443 1,098 Source: SCAG 2007 The City's adopted and certified 2008-2014 Housing Element commits the City to establishing a new zoning designation that would permit residential development at a density of 30 dwelling units per acre (hereafter, the "Project"), and to rezone sufficient acreage to this new designation in order to accommodate the development of 466 lower-income housing units.' In addition, the zoning must permit the affordable housing units to be developed by right, meaning not subject to further discretionary City approvals, including additional environmental analysis. The City is required to complete this rezoning by the end of this planning period, which concludes on October 15, 2013, or face significant penalties that are further explained below. "Lower income" refers to households with incomes that are less than or equal to 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI), and is the sum of the Very Low and Low income categories in the table above. HCD estimates the 2013 AMI for Los Angeles to be $64,800. Page 2 of 12 947906.1 For the 2014-2021 Housing Element planning period, commencing on October 16t' of this year, SCAG has determined the City's affordable housing need will be 490 units, as shown in Table 2 on the following page Table 2 Income Very Above` Category Low Low Moderate Moderate Total Housing units 308 182 190 466 1,146 Source: SCAG 2012 State law establishes a density of 30 units/acre as a "proxy" for housing affordability, operating under the assumption that this density is necessary to make affordable housing development financially feasible. The highest density currently allowed under the City's General Plan and Development Code is 20 units/acre. Therefore, the City is required to amend the General Plan and zoning regulations in order to comply with state law and to accommodate its RHNA-assigned fair share of affordable housing. The proposed actions listed as 1-4 above (hereafter, collectively, the "Approvals"), would amend the General Plan and zoning regulations to allow development of up to 490 housing units at a density of up to 30 units/acre on the portion of the Tres Hermanos property identified as "Site A" in the EIR (see Figure 1). The Approvals would satisfy the City's 2008-2014 affordable housing requirement and also the City's housing requirement for the 2014-2021 period. If the Approvals are not adopted prior to October 15, 2013, the City will be out of compliance with state law and as a penalty therefore, Government Code section 65584.9 provides that the City will be required to rezone sites to accommodate both the 2008-2014 requirement (466 units, by October 15, 2014) and the 2014-2021 requirement (490 units, by October 15, 2016), for a total of 956 units. In sum, the City would be required to "make available" twice the number of "adequate sites' for affordable housing units. State law provides for additional penalties for failing to timely complete the rezoning, including limiting the City Council's discretion in approving or disapproving affordable housing projects. It is important to note that while the Approvals are necessary to accommodate the City's assigned share of affordable housing, the law does not mandate that the site be developed with affordable housing. Affordable housing typically requires large financial subsidies, and neither the City nor the Property Owner is required to build or subsidize affordable housing. The actual development of affordable housing will be driven by the market and ultimately the financial feasibility. The City's obligation is to adopt General Plan and zoning regulations that would "make available adequate sites" for affordable housing to be built. The Project site is owned by the Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency, and no development plan has been proposed for the site in connection with the Approvals. Page 3 of 12 947906.1 Figure 1 Pursuant to CEQA a Final EIR has been prepared as part of the Approvals (Attachment 3). The potential environmental impacts in connection with any future development of the site are described in the EIR and are summarized in the "Analysis" section of this report. After holding the public hearing, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolutions recommending City Council certification of the Final EIR, adoption of the MMRP and approval of proposed amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element, Zoning Code and Zoning District Map (Planning Case No. PL2012- 227). ANALYSIS: Obiectives The primary purpose of the Approvals is to make available adequate sites with appropriate land use and zoning designations to accommodate the City's assigned Page 4 of 12 947906.1 share of affordable housing, as specified in the RHNA (see Table 2, above). The Approvals' objectives are as follows: • Prior to October 15, 2013, amend the General Plan land use and zoning designations to allow residential development at a density of 30 units per acre by -right in order to accommodate the City's affordable housing RHNA share in compliance with state law and the City's Housing Element. • Provide sufficient CEQA analysis for the City Council to select either Site A or Site B as the designated area to construct 490 housing units by -right without further CEQA review, to be consistent with state law and the City's Housing Element. • Provide and maintain adequate infrastructure facilities and public services to support development and planned growth. • Maintain traffic Level of Service (LOS) standards on streets and intersections, as specified in the City's Circulation Element. • Preserve natural resources on the Project site and compensate for those natural resources that would be disturbed by the Project. • Ensure land use compatibility between the Project and Diamond Ranch High School to the north, and nearby residential neighborhoods; and • Facilitate the provision of emergency secondary access for Diamond Ranch High School in coordination with development of the Project. These objectives implement specified policies in the Housing, Public Services and Facilities, Circulation, Visions Statement, Resource Management, and Land Use elements of the General Plan. Rationale for Selectina the Tres Hermanos Site for Rezoning As noted above, state law requires the City to rezone property to accommodate 490 additional housing units at a density of 30 units/acre. During the preparation of the draft 2008-2014 Housing Element, a 20 -acre under-utilized commercial site at the intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Golden Springs Drive (Kmart center) was proposed as an appropriate site for satisfying the City's RHNA affordable housing obligations. However, in its review of the draft Housing Element, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) rejected the Kmart site as unsuitable for affordable housing, notwithstanding evidence provided by the City to support the viability of the property for high-density residential development, including vacant retail space, adjacent multi -family development, proximity to transit and services, and expressed development interest by the property owner. HCD indicated that vacant Page 5of12 947906.1 sites are more conducive to affordable housing development than are sites that require demolition and redevelopment. A finding of Housing Element compliance (referred to as "certification") by HCD is an important component of maintaining the legal adequacy of the City's General Plan and zoning regulations. Failure by the City to obtain Housing Element certification can result in litigation, payment of attorneys fees for both the City and the opposing party, and judicial intervention in local land use decisions, including suspension of the City's zoning and building permit authority and court -mandated approval of low-income housing developments. This has occurred to cities in the state. In recognition of the City's objective of obtaining Housing Element certification and HCD's preference for vacant sites, the draft Housing Element was revised to remove the Kmart site from the list of potential rezoning sites and instead identify a vacant site that would be suitable for higher -density residential use. The only vacant, unencumbered site within the City large enough to accommodate the assigned RHNA share was the Tres Hermanos property. The Project site is located in the portion of Tres Hermanos having the best freeway access, and is also adjacent to existing residential development, a high school, roads, and utilities. All of these characteristics made the site the best available option for rezoning. HCD has accepted the Tres Hermanos site as suitable for accommodating the City's housing need and issued a'letter finding the Housing Element to be in compliance with state law based on this location. Surrounding Land Uses and Development Areas to the west of the Project study area located within the City are developed with residential uses (low -medium density). Areas to the south are undeveloped, zoned AG (Agricultural) and designated on the General Plan as Planning Area 1/Specific Plan (PA-1/SP), as is the Project Study Area. The majority of the Diamond Ranch High School site located to the north of the Project study area is zoned AG (Agricultural), and designated in the City's Land Use Element as School land use. A portion of the high school site is located outside the City. Areas within the City located east of Chino Hills Parkway are undeveloped (with the exception of flood control facilities), zoned AG (Agricultural), and are included within the PA-1/SP land use designation in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Residential areas along Scenic.Hills Drive to the east of the Project site are located within the cities of Pomona and Chino Hills. Existing Site Characteristics The Project study area is currently undeveloped and is utilized for low -intensity grazing. Proposed General Plan and Zoning Amendments The highest allowable residential density currently permitted under the City's General Plan and Development Code is 20 units/acre. State law identifies a density of at least 30 units/acre that is considered necessary to facilitate affordable housing development. Page 6 of 12 947906.1 Therefore, the proposed amendments would establish a new High Density Residential - 30 (RH-30) General Plan land use designation and zoning district, as well as amend the Development Code to establish standards and regulations that would apply to future developments within RH-30. The proposed amendments include an amendment to the Land Use Element map to change the land use designation for the portion of the subject property identified as "Site A" from Agricultural (AG) to Planning Area 5/Nigh Density Residential -30 (PA-5/RH-30), and amend the zoning map to change the zoning designation for the portion of the subject property identified as "Site A" from Agricultural (AG) to High Density Residential -30 Dwelling Units per Acre (RH-30), and establish a maximum of 490 housing units for this site.. Site A vs. Site B The Housing Element identifies a requirement to rezone property with a net developable area of approximately 16 acres to satisfy the City's RHNA obligation. The Project study area shown in Figure 1 is approximately 78 gross acres in size. Given the topography of the site, it is assumed that a development area of approximately 30 acres is required in order to achieve a net developable area of 16 acres at the state -mandated density of 30 units/acre. Since only a portion of the Project study area is needed to accommodate the City's RHNA obligation, the EIR analysis was structured to identify the portion of the study area that would have the least environmental impact. Preliminary biological surveys indicated that the southwestern portion of the property contained the most valuable ecological habitat, therefore two alternative sites — "Site A" and "Site B" — were established for analytical purposes. For each topical area presented in Chapter 5 of the EIR, the analysis is structured to provide a comparison of the environmental impacts that would be associated with development of Site A or Site B. For instances in which there would be no discernible difference in impacts between the two sites, the analytical discussion is labeled "Site A or Site B." The comparative analysis of potential impacts for Site A and Site B is summarized below. The primary advantage of Site A is its closer proximity to Chino Hills Parkway, which would require less grading and land disturbance associated with the construction of an access road and other infrastructure. Shorter distance to arterial highways would also allow for quicker emergency response times and shorter walking distance to transit. The primary advantage of Site B is its gentler topography than Site A. EIR Table 5.1-1 (Slope Analysis of Project Sites) shows that 29% of Site A consists of topography with greater than 40% slopes as compared to 19% for Site B. A disadvantage of Site B is its closer proximity to the SR -60 freeway and associated exposure to air pollutants and noise. Other than these differences, both sites A and B have similar environmental impacts that are less than significant or can be mitigated below the level of significance through the identified mitigation measures. Page 7 of 12 947906.1 Based on these differences, staff recommends selection of Site A because of its advantages associated with closer proximity to existing roadways. It should be noted that in recent years, the cities of Industry, Diamond Bar and Chino Hills have discussed the possibility of preparing a large-scale specific plan for the entire Tres Hermanos property, which covers approximately 2,600 acres within both Diamond Bar and Chino Hills, The Approvals would not preclude future adoption of a Tres Hermanos specific plan or relocation of the high density residential area elsewhere on the property. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The EIR provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with development of either Site A or Site B, identifies mitigation measures to lessen those impacts, and analyzes a reasonable range of project alternatives. Opportunities for Public Involvement Outreach efforts to solicit participation from public agencies and interested persons during the EIR process included the following: Notice of Preparation: The City circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to public agencies, special districts, and members of the public requesting such notice for a 30 - day period commencing June 14, 2012 and ending July 17, 2012. A copy of the NOP along with NOP comments are provided in Appendix A of the EIR. Scoping Meeting: During the NOP review period, the City conducted a public scoping meeting on June 21, 2012 at the Pantera Park Community Room. Approximately 75 persons attended the meeting. The majority of attendees were residents of the Hidden Valley condominium complex at the northeast corner of Scenic Ridge Road and Chino Hills Parkways, located in the City of Pomona. Many residents expressed opposition to the Approvals. Issues raised at this meeting included views, noise, traffic, air pollution, crime, school capacity, soil instability, wildlife habitat, fire hazard, emergency access, and economic impacts/property values. Many attendees asked that the City consider other sites for rezoning. The EIR analysis of two alternative sites (see EIR Chapter 6) directly responds to this request. Notice of Completion/Availability: A Notice of Completion and Availability of the Draft EIR was filed with the Office of Planning and Research on May 23, 2013. In accordance with CEQA, a 45 -day public review period of the Draft EIR was provided from May 24, 2014 through July 8, 2013. Draft EIR Comments and Responses: Comments received on the Draft EIR are provided in Appendix G of the Final EIR and responses to those comments are provided in Chapter 9 of the Final EIR. The Response to Comments address all comments received during the 45 -day EIR review period, as well as late comments submitted after the close of the comment period. CEQA Guidelines Section 15132(d) requires that the Final EIR include "The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental Page 8 of 12 947906.1 points raised in the review and consultation process." Where appropriate, changes to the EIR have been made in response to comments received. Some EIR comments related to economic or social issues such as property values and crime, which absent a physical change in the environment are not issues within the scope of CEQA. For those comments, the Final EIR notes that while decision -makers may consider economic and social factors in the decision whether to adopt the Approvals, since no evidence was received that such factors would cause a physical change in the environment then those issues are not within the scope of CEQA. Having said the above, no evidence has been submitted and City staff is unaware of any evidence, that the Approvals will result in any increase in crime or decrease property values. Key Areas of Impacts Analyzed The EIR addresses potentially significant environmental effects in the areas of aesthetics; agricultural resources; air quality and greenhouse gas emissions; biological resources; cultural resources; geology, soils and mineral resources; hazards and hazardous materials; hydrology and water quality; land use and planning; noise; population and housing; public services; recreation; and transportation and traffic; and utilities and service systems. Where potentially significant adverse impacts were identified, the EIR proposed measures to mitigate them. The mitigation measures are set forth in the Table 2.5-1 (Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures) in the Final EIR and in the MMRP included in the EIR certification resolution (Attachment 1). Alternatives to the Proposed Project CEQA requires that EIRs "...shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives". The selection of alternatives and their discussion must "foster informed decision-making and public participation" (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(a)). The primary purpose of the Approvals is to ensure that the City's plans and zoning regulations comply with state housing law by making available adequate sites as described in the City's Housing Element. This requirement established the framework for the selection of alternatives, as described in Chapter 6 of the EIR. Other than the "No Project" alternative, which is required by CEQA, only alternatives that could conceivably accomplish the key objective of maintaining compliance with state housing element law were included in the alternatives analysis. These alternatives are summarized as follows: Alternative 1 ("No Project"): The existing General Plan and zoning designations for the property would continue unchanged, which would allow either the continued agricultural use or residential development of up to six homes on the selected 30 -acre site (one unit per five acres under the current zoning). Page 9 of 12 947906.1 Alternative 2 ("Multiple Infill Sites"): Under this alternative, amendments to the General Plan and zoning would allow development of 490 multi -family units on multiple infill sites currently zoned for light industrial uses in the northwestern portion of the city. Alternative 3 ("Tres Hermanos-South"): This alternative would include General Plan and zoning amendments to allow development similar to the Proposed Project at a location approximately one mile south of the Project Site. Table 3 COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Aesthetics + + _ Agriculture and Forestry Resources + + _ Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions + + _ Biological Resources + + _ Cultural Resources + + _ Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources + + + - Hazards + +/_ _ Hydrology and Water Quality + + _ Land Use and Planning = Noise + _ + Population and Housing + Recreation + Transportation and Traffic +/- _ Utilities and Service Systems + Overall +�- + _ Would the Alternative Meet Most of the Project Objectives? No No No Legend: Inferior to the Proposed Project + Superior to the Proposed Project, even though the Project would not cause significant effects d- Characteristics both better and worse than the Proposed Project = Similar impact to the Proposed Project Selection of Environmentally Superior Alternative: CEQA requires a comparative analysis of the environmental impacts of the alternatives, but at a lesser level of detail than for the Project. Section 6.3 of the EIR presents a comparative description of the environmental impacts that would be expected to occur from the three alternatives. CEQA also requires that the EIR identify the environmentally superior alternative other than the No Project alternative. Table 2 summarizes the relative impacts of the three alternatives compared to the Project. Alternative 2: Multiple Infill Sites was considered to be environmentally superior to the Project. Alternative 3 would have similar impacts to the Project. However, none of the Page 10 of 12 947906.1 three alternatives would meet the key objective of maintaining compliance with state law because the City is required to rezone property acceptable to HCD in order to maintain Housing Element certification. As noted previously, during the preparation of the Housing Element, an underutilized non-residential site was proposed for rezoning to satisfy the City's RHNA housing obligations, but HCD rejected this option. If the City were to select a site other than the Project site for rezoning, HCD may not certify the Housing Element and the City would no longer be considered in compliance with state law. Therefore, only adoption of the Approvals would meet the basic objectives. Another purpose of an alternatives analysis is to identify an alternative that would reduce or eliminate significant environmental impacts of the proposed Project. However, the EIR concluded that with the identified mitigation measures the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts and thus, such an alternatives analysis was unnecessary. Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program (MMRP) A MMRP was prepared to indentify site-specific conditions for future development that will reduce potential environmental impacts. The purpose of the MMRP is to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures by identifying specific responsibilities for implementation and monitoring. The MMRP is attached as an exhibit to the draft resolution recommending certification of the Final EIR and approval of the MMRP (Attachment 1). As documented in the Final EIR, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce all potentially significant impacts associated with the Approvals to less -than - significant levels. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing notices were mailed on August 2, 2013 to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the Project site, and to all speakers who have previously attended the scoping meeting or submitted comments in writing. The notice was also published in a 1/8 page display in the Inland Valley Daily Tribune and San Gabriel Valley Tribune newspapers on August 2, 2013. The project site was posted with a notice display board in two locations (Chino Hills Parkway and Rockbury/Deep Springs Drive), and a copy of the public notice was posted at the City's three designated community posting sites. The Draft EIR and Response to Comments were also posted on the City's website, and hard copies were made available for review at City Hall and the Diamond Bar Branch of the Los Angeles County Library. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions Page 11 of 12 9479051 1. Adopt the resolution (Attachment 1) recommending that the City Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report and approve the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program, 2. Adopt the resolution (Attachment 2) recommending that the City Council approve the following: • General Plan Amendment to establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) land use designation and change the current land use designation on the Land Use Map for the portion of the subject property identified as "Site A" from Agricultural (AG) to Planning Area 5/High Density Resdiential-30 (PA-5/RH-30); • Development Code Amendment to establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) zoning district and development regulations; and Zone Change to change the zoning designation for the portion of the subject property identified as "Site A" from Agricultural (AG) to High Density Residential -30 Dwelling Units Per Acre (RH-30) and establish a maximum of 490 dwelling units for this site. Prepared by: G c S. L Senior Planner Reviewed by: Prepared by: John Douglas, AICP Housing Consultant Greg Gubman, AICP Community Development Director Attachments: 1, Resolution No. 2013 -XX (Recommending Certification of the DEIR and Adoption of the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program) 2. Resolution No. 2013 -XX (Recommending Approval of Amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element, Development Code and Zoning Map PL2013-227) 3. Proposed Final EIR Page 12 of 12 947906.1 MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 13, 2013 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Nelson called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Shah led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Frank Farago, Jimmy Lin, Jack Shah Vice Chairman Tony Torng, Chairman Steve Nelson Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; James Eggart, Assistant City Attorney; John Douglas, Housing Element Consultant, Steve Sasaki, City Traffic Consultant; Rich Barretto, Traffic Engineer; and Stella Marquez, Administrative Coordinator. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of the June 25 2013 Study Session. VC/Torng moved, C/Farago seconded, to approve the minutes of the June 25, 2013, study session as requested by ACA/Eggart. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farago, Lin, VC/Torng, Chair/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Shah ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 4.2 Minutes of the June 25 2013 Regular Meeting. VC/Torng moved, C/Farago seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 25, 2013, as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farago, Lin, Shah, VC/Torng, Chair/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7.1 2008-2014 Housing Element Implementation — Proposed Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Proiect PL2013-227— The City of Diamond Bar is the Lead Agency for the proposed affordable housing land use and zoning designation project to implement the 2008-2014 Housing Element Update, which requires the City to process amendments to its General Plan and Development Code to establish a new multiple -family zoning district and designate adequate sites that could accommodate new multi -family affordable housing development commensurate with the City's assigned Fair Share needs. More specifically, the City of Diamond Bar is obligated to rezone at least 16.3 net acres to permit multi -family development at a density of 30 dwelling units per acre by -right in order to satisfy its regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) obligation to accommodate the development of 490 lower income dwelling units. The future development area would be limited to one of two optional Housing Site Areas, each limited to 30 -acres in size and fully within the proposed RH-30 zone boundary area. Although the implementation of the Housing Element would designate specific sites where multi -family housing could be developed in the future, there is no development project associated with the proposed rezoning effort at this time. The Planning Commission is asked to recommend to the City Council, certificate of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR); adoption of the General Plan Amendment; adoption of the Development Code Amendment, and adoption of the Zone change. PROPOSED STUDY AREA: Located within a 78 -acre parcel and comprised of undeveloped hillside generally located along the west side of Chino Hills Parkway just south of Diamond Ranch Road/Scenic Ridge Drive, and adjacent to Diamond Ranch High School in the northeast portion of the City. (Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-22-273 west of Chino Hills Parkway and south of the SR60 Freeway) The two candidate sites being considered within the study area are referred to as Housing Site "A" and Housing Site "B": Housing Site "A" is located immediately west of and accessed directly from, Chino Hills Parkway. Housing Site "B" is located on the western portion of the proposed RH-30 zone boundary area and also accessed from Chino Hills Parkway. PROPERTY OWNER: City of Industry (Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency) LEAD AGENCY/APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION CDD/Gubman stated that this item is a proposed General Plan Amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element and to the Land Use Element General Plan Map, as well as, a Zone Change application and corresponding amendments to the City's Development Code. There is no development project before the Commission this evening. Staff is bringing forward the proposed amendments to the General Plan and to the Zoning Map to facilitate the creation of a new zoning designation and to zone property to accommodate housing at a density of 30 dwelling units per acre. This is based on a state requirement for providing a certain amount of acreage to accommodate high density housing. The state requirement is not a development mandate or to state it another way, this proposed rezoning effort is not the same as saying the City is obligated to seeing that this land is developed. What the City is obligated to do is to provide sufficient land in the City to accommodate such development. Therefore, this effort seeks to fulfill a planning target by making land available, however, this effort is not seeking to meet a development quota but simply providing the means to allow for that target to be met. This item includes General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Development as a whole is controlled by the City's General Plan and the City's Zoning Regulations that are contained within the City's Development Code, which are in a framework established by state law. The General Plan is a policy document that guides future development or the long term visions for the City which are reflected in the City's Land Use Element Map and displays the types of land uses allowed in different areas. This guiding policy is implemented by the City's Development Code which is one component of the City's Municipal Code. The Development Code contains the detailed regulations for uses and development standards. The City's Zoning Map shows what parts of the City specific regulations apply to and more precisely defines how the General Plan is implemented in different areas of the City. The process the City will be following to enact those recommended changes is for staff to present its analysis and recommendation to the Commission based on the facts, laws, regulations and professional experience. The Commission's role, through the Public Hearing process, is to review all of the facts and evidence, deliberate on those facts and evidence and make its recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will consider the Planning Commission's recommendation, hold an additional public hearing and render its decision. If the Zone Change and General Plan Amendment are adopted as proposed by staff, the subsequent steps are not mandated; however, this effort ensures that the City is meeting a planning target. Should development follow, extensive requirements included in the environmental documents, the EIR mitigation program, as well as the criteria set forth in the draft ordinances before the Commission this evening, would provide all of the technical pre -requisites to development that would have to be completed before actual buildout. AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSIOR John Douglas reiterated that the actions before the Planning Commission tonight are to recommend that the City Council Certify the Environmental Impact Report, and to recommend City Council adoption of the General Plan Amendment creating the Residential High Density 30 (RH-30) Land Use Category in the General Plan and change the General Plan Land Use Designation for the selected site; to amend the City's Development Code to create development standards and regulations for the RH-30 District; and, to change the Zoning Map to designate one of the two study sites as RH-30. As discussed in staff's report, the impetus for this project is a state law that requires every jurisdiction within California to adopt zoning regulations that can accommodate the City's assigned Fair -Share of regional housing needs for all economic income levels in the community. This is done through a process called the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). Through this process, Diamond Bar's allocation of the region's housing need for low and very low income households was set at 490 housing units. State law says that within Southern California, in order to have zoning that is considered suitable for low income housing, the City has to allow a density of 30 units per acre. This applies to every jurisdiction in Southern California except for very small jurisdictions with a population of less than 25,000. Pomona, Chino Hills, Brea and other surrounding cities are all subject to this same state law. Through the process of preparing and adopting the Housing Element of the General Plan, the City is required to identify sites where such housing could be built. This is not a mandate - it is to create opportunities for development to occur. Development depends on the interest of the property owner, developers, lenders and everyone who becomes involved in the development process. The City's job is to create the land use plans and regulations that would allow development to occur if all parties are interested in development. Currently, the maximum number of units allowed in Diamond Bar is 20 units per acre and state law requires that some land be zoned to allow 30 units per acre to accommodate that fair -share of low and very low income housing needs._ The State Department of Community Housing Development is the agency that the state legislature has granted the authority to review local governments' Housing Elements and Housing Plans. HCD has a process that is referred to as "Certification" whereby the City submits their Housing Element to HCD and HCD reviews the element to determine whether it meets the requirements of state law. Several years ago when Diamond Bar embarked on preparing the Housing Element recognizing that the City did not have land zoned for 30 units per acre as required by state law, it examined all potential areas in town that could possibly meet this state requirement. The City's initial determination was to move forward with designation of the Kmart property as the appropriate place for high density housing. When the City submitted its Housing Element to state HCD indicating its preference for designating the Kmart site, HCD reviewed the AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION draft Housing Element and rejected that site as not being appropriate for affordable housing. And it is the City's understanding that the reason that site was rejected is because it would be a more complex process to develop because it is already developed and would require demolition, funding source, etc. Redevelopment of a property is a much more costly process than development of vacant land. At that point, the City had a choice to throw in the towel and not obtain state approval or look for an alternative site. As a result of the City's investigation of alternative sites, it was determined that the Tres Hermanos land was the only available portion of the City that had the potential for meeting the state's requirement. The Housing Element that went through review by the Planning Commission and City Council several years ago identified several candidate sites in the vicinity of Diamond Ranch High School as the preferred general area to be rezoned to satisfy the state's requirement. Again, the City is required to rezone sufficient land so that 490 housing units could be developed with a density of 30 units per acre. One of the important aspects of state law that affects Diamond Bar is that because of the time periods that Housing Elements fall under, the end of the planning period, or "Fourth Cycle," is fast approaching. If the City does not implement the requirement from the Fourth Cycle, that requirement will roll over and add to the City's affordable housing requirement for the Fifth Cycle which starts in October 2013, in which case the City's obligation to rezone would increase to 956 units resulting In almost double the amount of land that would have to be rezoned for High Density housing. Important to note is the legal obligation and potential consequences the City would face if it did not move forward to comply with state law. Key to this issue is that other cities in California that have not complied with state law have had lawsuits filed against them and in some cases the Court has taken control of the City's planning process which can include such things as the Court enacting a moratorium on all building permits in the city and can also include the Court ordered approval of building permits for affordable housing and other types of residential uses. In short, it is possible that the City could lose control of its land use planning powers if it fails to act. Mr. Douglas spoke about the proposed project using the Site Vicinity Map with Diamond Ranch High School at the center of the map. The EIR that was prepared studies two possible alternate sites within the study area. The SR60 freeway runs along the north side of the property; Chino Hills Parkway which turns into Phillips Ranch Road on the north side of the SR60 along the east side of the property; Scenic Ridge Drive that changes to Diamond Ranch Drive as it enters the high school area, and what is referred to as Site "A" is the eastern portion of the study area and Site "B" the western side of the study area. The area in the southwest corner of the study area was excluded from consideration AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION as a development site because it has the highest concentration of biological habitat and vegetation within the study area. The proposed project that has been studied in the EIR is a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change that would allow 590 (sic) housing units to be built within either -but not -both, Site "A" or Site "B" at a density of 30 units per acre. No specific development project has been proposed at this point. This is a zoning exercise only to create the opportunity for development. However, there are no development plans, no building architectural designs nor anything of that sort because the property owner has not indicated any interest in pursuing development at this point in time. The proposed site would have primary property access from Chino Hills Parkway which would be the only access to the property other than emergency access that might be required by the Fire Department, Sheriffs Department or other service agencies. Any future development of this property would be subject to all of the regulations and requirements that are contained in the City's Zoning Regulations and Hillside Development Standards, as well as a number of other public agencies including state and federal agencies that have jurisdiction over resources such as biological habitat, water quality, etc., which are described in detail in the various chapters of the EIR. The following points bear repeating: The City is not required to subsidize any low income housing projects as part of this process; development on this site were it to occur in the future, is not required to be low income housing; affordable housing projects typically require a subsidy in the neighborhood of $200,000 to $300,000 per unit which comes from some public source; the City of Diamond Bar has no funds to subsidize this type of housing; in the past, Redevelopment Agencies have sometimes been the source of subsidy funds for affordable housing; the state eliminated Redevelopment'Agencies last year; the source of funds for affordable housing is extremely limited and as a consequence, very little affordable housing is being built; any future development of this property would be dependent on the desires of the property owner which is the City of Industry Successor Agency, the legal entity that took over from the City of Industry's Redevelopment Agency when the state closed Redevelopment Agencies. Also, noteworthy is that before any development occurs, it is possible that the development plan could be reconfigured as part of a larger Master Plan for the Tres Hermanos property which spans both Diamond Bar and the City of Chino Hills. Again, the City's obligation is to adopt zoning regulations that would allow 490 housing units with a density of 30 units per acre. Because there is no specific development proposal to consider, this project lacks things the Commission often sees with this kind of a public hearing. There is no site plan showing where buildings would be located, there is no AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION grading plan; there is no plan to show where roads would enter the property and so forth. All of those kinds of plans would come later if and when the property owner decided to move forward with development and should that occur, there would be a long list of requirements that would be submitted by the property owner and developer and those future requirements which are documented in the EIR are as follows: Additional traffic studies to determine whether a traffic signal and what the geometric configuration of that intersection would be on Chino Hills Parkway; geology, geotechnical and soils studies as part of the grading plan for the project; drainage and hydrology studies required to make sure that the project complied with all of the applicable codes and regulations and would not create problems offsite due to drainage; a storm water pollution prevention plan to ensure that runoff from the project does not pollute waterways; a Cultural Resources Assessment required to survey the property to see if there is any indication of any archaeological or paleontological resources and if so, additional studies would be required to conduct those surveys and specifically identify whether any of those resources exist; a requirement for an emergency access plan which would identify how fire or disaster emergency access would be provided. Typically, fire departments like to have at least two points of entry and exit in case there is an incident that blocks one access point. In this particular situation because there is a public high school next to the property, there is a possibility that emergency access could be coordinated with the high school so that secondary emergency access could be provided for both the high school and any possible future residential development. The Development Plan would be reviewed to make sure it conformed to the Hillside Development standards. There will be a variety of requirements related to the construction process which would include such things as dust control, biological survey to identify the most sensitive portions of the site, a landscape plan identifying landscape materials, and the assurance that the fire department requirements regarding landscape were satisfied, and a construction noise mitigation plan. RECESS: Chair/Nelson recessed the meeting at 7:30 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Nelson reconvened the meeting at 7:45 p.m. Mr. Douglas continued listing the requirements that would be imposed on future development of this property: A Development Plan submitted for the City's review to ensure that the project conforms to all of the regulations regarding zoning, development standards, hillside development and so forth; a required construction dust control program with watering, etc. to minimize dust emissions that would affect neighboring properties; a biological survey at the site to identify the most sensitive areas that would be avoided during construction and development; a landscape plan that would meet the City's standards as well as fire department standards for fire protection and fuel modification to minimize the risk of wild land fires on any future development, and a noise mitigation plan AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION to ensure that a minimum disturbance to neighboring residences would occur during the construction process through the scheduling of deliveries to the site, location of staging areas, ensuring proper mufflers on all equipment, etc. These are standard requirements in all jurisdictions at this time. The project would need to ensure that the design complies with "CPTED" principles (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design); a construction parking and staging plan to show where the construction workers would park; carpooling for construction workers to minimize impacts on the roadway network; similarly, a construction traffic mitigation plan to show how impacts on the road network would be minimized during the construction process; a traffic control plan to show where lane closures would occur and what time of day they would not be allowed to close lanes, etc. All of these requirements would be imposed and any development on this site would have to satisfy all of these requirements before any development would occur. The purpose of the Environmental Impact Report is to identify potential environmental impacts that would occur from a project and identify ways to minimize the impacts either through mitigation measures or through alternatives to the project and still accomplish the objectives of the project. The project was structured for a study area of about 78 acres and only about 30 acres are needed to satisfy the mandate. The EIR was set up to compare two different sites, Site A and Site B, to show which of those sites would have fewer environmental impacts if development of any portion of the site was to go forward. The EIR also evaluated two alternatives to the project in addition to what is called a "no project" alternative, a state law that requires the City to evaluate not doing anything. In this case, no project means the property would either continue in its current state or it could be developed at a very low density of one unit per five acres according to the City's General Plan and Zoning. The two alternatives that were studied in the EIR were 1) infill sites which would be residential development on property in another portion of the City that is currently developed with light industrial uses, and 2) a portion of the Tres Hermanos property about a half mile south of the study area as shown in the EIR. The most important part of the EIR is the Executive Summary which includes a summary table summarizing the impacts studied, whether those impacts are significant, whether there are any mitigation measures necessary as part of the project (requirements that would minimize or reduce environmental impacts), and the level of significance of those impacts after the mitigation measures are imposed. The findings of the EIR are that all of the potential impacts for either Site A or Site B can be reduced below the level of significance through compliance with existing zoning and other standards or through the mitigation measures listed in the EIR. The EIR also, in its study of the alternatives, noted that the infill alternative would require state HCD to approve an amendment to the Housing Element because it is not listed in the Housing Element as a AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION "candidate site" for rezoning since state HCD already rejected a developed site (the Kmart property) as not being feasible for meeting the City's legal requirement. Therefore, it is staffs professional opinion that the agency would also not approve an infill site to satisfy the City's housing requirements. With regard to the alternative on Tres Hermanos to the south of the study area, the EIR concludes that the impacts associated with development on that property would be very similar to the impacts of study Sites A and B and since there were no significant impacts identified, selection of the alternative would not eliminate any significant impacts which is one of the primary purposes of doing an alternative study in the first place. Staff is recommending in the Resolution before the Commission that Site A be identified as the preferred site for rezoning because of its locational advantages. As previously mentioned, the Housing Element called for the rezoning of property to satisfy the state requirement being discussed this evening. The City determined that an Environmental Impact Report was necessary as part of this decision process so a Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report was issued in June 2012. A Scoping meeting was held at Pantera Park in the Community Room in June 2012 which was well attended and provided a good amount of feedback to the City. The City published a Draft Environmental Impact Report in May 2013, collected comments from public agencies and interested citizens, and a Final Environmental Impact Report was published last week that included written responses to public comments that the City received from public agencies and individuals. The public review process culminates with tonight's public hearing, as well as the City Council's public hearing within the next few weeks. To summarize the comments and issued raised, the City received comments from six public agencies. Two of those agencies were the State's Clearinghouse and The City of Industry Successor Agency who had only minor comments. Caltrans issued a letter of concern about traffic impacts because that is their primary responsibility. In response to Caltrans' comments, the City's response indicates that there are a number of mitigation measures in the EIR that address those concerns. The EIR concludes that with these mitigations there would not be any significant traffic impacts. In the context of environmental law, "significant" within the context of traffic means that the project would not cause the level of service at intersections and roadways in the vicinity of the project to exceed established standards. Regarding Air Quality, South Coast Air Quality Management District is responsible for planning for the improvement of air quality in the region and had one specific suggestion with regard to air quality on Site B. Because of its close proximity to the freeway the SCAQMD was concerned about the health hazards of emissions from the high volume of traffic on the freeway and how that could affect future residents of the site so they recommended specific standards that would be required as part of AUGUST 13,2013 PAGE 0 PLANNING O.., lON future analysis of health risk assessments if Site B were selected. Those recommendations have been incorporated into the Final EIR. LA County Fire Department submitted comments regarding fire protection for the site. There are two mitigation measures in the EIR that address the concerns regarding a fire protection plan during construction which has to do with flammable materials being stored on the construction site and how those are managed as well as, what is called an operational fire plan which has to do with the long term protection of the site from structure fires and wildfires after completion of any project. Those, too, have been incorporated into the Final EIR. The City of Chino Hills indicated its concern for future traffic and wanted to be assured that Diamond Bar would continue to coordinate with Chino Hills on any future development of this property. Chino Hills recommended that mitigation measures be adopted that are consistent with Caltrans comments. Mr. Douglas felt it was interesting to note that the City of Chino Hills has also been required to rezone property under this same state law governing the Housing Element, and the City of Chino Hills has also rezoned property for 30 units per acre within a portion of the Tres Hermanos property that lies within Chino Hills. So basically, Diamond Bar and Chino Hills are proposing the same solution to this state mandate. The City received lengthy comments from interested citizens and residents in the vicinity. The topics of those comments were traffic congestion, access to the property, existing traffic problems at the intersection near Diamond Ranch High School, air quality, property values and crime, slope stability, problems with drainage and ground water, concerns about the loss of vegetation and wildlife in the area, aesthetics and visual impacts, concerns about police and fire protection, concerns about maintaining consistency with state law, concerns about development costs particularly because this is a hilly area which increases the cost of development, concerns about the selection of alternatives and why Site A and Site B were chosen for study as opposed to some other site, the proximity of this site to necessary services and amenities that are needed by residents, and impacts on schools. In summary, many of those comments are environmental issues that were previously mentioned and were studied in detail in the Environmental Impact Report. Some of the comments are not issues that are studied in the Environmental Impact report because state environmental law lays out the topics that cities are required to analyze as part of the review process. Some issues that city decision makers and residents are concerned about are not considered to be environmental impacts, they are legitimate policy concerns such as crime prevention, aesthetics, schools, etc. These concerns are not within the purview of the Environmental Impact Report. This does not mean that the Planning Commission and City Council have to ignore those concerns because they are legitimate public policy concerns and legitimate planning AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION concerns. They are not within the scope of the environmental report; however, the Planning Commission and City Council are free to consider all concerns not discussed in the environmental report. Regarding the choice between. Site A and Site B, the EIR concludes that all of the potential impacts can be mitigated for either of the two sites, so it is not a clear choice where one site has significant environmental impacts and the other does not so that the choice is obvious. The selection is a little bit more nuanced in this situation. It is staff's opinion that Site A is preferable primarily because it is closer to Chino Hills Parkway, the main access point and therefore, less grading and disturbance would be required to create the roadway network to get access to the property. If Site B were selected there would need to be roadway and infrastructure construction through Site A in order to provide access to Site B, and if Site B were selected there would still be disturbance within Site A which is the primary reason staff is leaning toward Site A. In addition, Site A is farther from the heaviest traffic and the SR60 and related noise and air quality issues that emanate from that freeway. In general Site B has gentler topography than Site A but again, there would be disturbance of both Site A and B in order to create the access to Site B. The City is required to move forward with this matter according to state law and staff has attempted to do so in such a way that it creates the least amount of environmental damage within the City. The City's first option was the Kmart site which was rejected by the state's Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) which has the ultimate say on whether the City's Housing Element is in compliance with state law. So, the Tres Hermanos property was identified as the best available site that would satisfy the state requirements and be consistent with the Housing Element, as well as minimize environmental damage. The proposed site is closest to freeway access in the Tres Hermanos Ranch. The property is adjacent to a public high school. The City is not required to approve or subsidize any affordable housing on this project site. The site is not required to be developed for affordable housing. The City's obligation is to create zoning regulations that comply with state law and satisfy the City's mandate to accommodate its "fair -share" of housing needs. There is no specific development proposed. If and when a development came forward it would be subject to an extensive list of codes and standards, building regulations, grading regulations, mitigation measures, etc. Any future development on this site, because it is part of a large property ownership under The City of Industry's control, could be reconfigured as part of some future Master Plan. The City's obligation is to adopt zoning to allow 490 dwelling units at a density of 30 units per acre. And, if the City does not follow through on this zone change the City's obligation increase to 956 units in the next planning period. AUGUST 2 0 PAGE 12 PLANNING OM. GA The requested actions before the Planning Commission this evening are to recommend City Council Certification of the EIR and to recommend Council adoption of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to designate Site A for future development. C/Lin thanked Mr. Douglas for a very complete, detailed and informative presentation. C/Lin asked if once the City rezones this site to high density housing and later someone petitions the City to develop low density housing can the property be rezoned and Mr. Douglas responded that state law says that when the City rezones property under these circumstances there is a minimum density of 20 units per acre that the City may not go below unless it designates some alternate site to make up the difference. C/Lin said that once the zoning is in place, the City pretty much needs to stay with it. Mr. Douglas said that zoning can be changed at some future date, if the City Council decides that some other location would be better, or if a Tres Hermanos Master Plan is adopted, this opportunity for high density housing could be shifted to another location. C/Lin asked how this situation would be handled if the City were fully developed and had no vacant parcels. Mr. Douglas said that such a circumstance would fall under the RHNA process whereby each city is assigned its fair -share. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), through its land use planning and forecasting process, would attempt to allocate on a fair -share basis where housing is needed and where it is appropriate. So if a city has no buildable land, presumably that city should not be assigned any future housing growth. That said, there are cities that have no vacant land that have been allocated housing growth. For example, San Gabriel has been assigned a fair - share need of 930 units and there is no vacant land. San Gabriel has high density zoning for mixed use along Valley Boulevard so San Gabriel allows four and five story developments along Valley Boulevard to accommodate additional housing. C/Lin asked why 30 acres. Mr. Douglas stated that the reason the City has targeted a 30 -acre area for rezoning is because this is a hillside area. If this were a flat lot the entire lot would be developable. The City does not have a bare dirt flat lot available. This is a hillside area that has biological resources, drainage channel issues, oak trees, etc. so the thought was that if the City started out with a gross parcel of 30 acres there would be a net developable portion of that site that would accommodate the 490 units. VC/Torng asked if this site has been approved by HCD and Mr. Douglas responded "yes." VC/Torng asked if a Tres Hermanos Master Plan had been published. Mr. Douglas responded that such a plan has not been published and asked CDD/Gubman to speak to the issue of a Master Plan for Tres Hermanos. CDD/Gubman responded to VC/Torng that there is no Specific Plan AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION or Master Plan proposed for Tres Hermanos at this time. The entirety of the area known as Tres Hermanos that lies within the boundaries of Diamond Bar is about 700 acres and there is a possibility that a Master Plan would be foreseeable within the next few years because as Mr. Douglas mentioned, the Tres Hermanos property had been under the ownership of the Industry Redevelopment Agency/Urban Development Agency. With the dissolution of redevelopment, and the City of Industry becoming successor to the redevelopment agency, the City of Industry may be obligated to liquidate its property holdings because there are no longer redevelopment tools for them to hold onto the property. If the property goes to the open market, it is likely to be purchased by a developer or several developers which would put pressure on the market forces to move toward future development of that site. Because of the size of the property and because it is currently zoned for agricultural use, and because although 700 acres lies within the City of Diamond Bar, there are additional several hundred acres of Tres Hermanos within the City of Chino Hills. To realistically plan for future development there would have to be a Master Plan effort. If that is how the scenario plays out, this rezoning of the 30 acres that is being considered this evening could be considered as a placeholder so that the City has met its high density zoning obligation, but through a more comprehensive master planning effort, there would be an opportunity to relocate the high density component or to make it part of a more inclusionary housing plan that has a more diverse palette of housing types that could be more comprehensively planned. At this time, the study area under consideration is the only portion of Tres Hermanos that is available for consideration to rezone. In the future, there may be an opportunity to designate other portions of Tres Hermanos to supplant this site as the City's RHNA obligation high density site. VC/Torng wondered if in the future this property could be included in the Master Plan as apartment units and not low income housing. CDD/Gubman responded that the 30 -units per acre are a "default density" where it is assumed that this density provides economy of scale for housing that would pencil out to be affordable. Although there is the presumption that higher density reduces the lower per-unit cost and maintains compliance status with its RHNA obligation, it is at least true in theory that 30 -unit per acre luxury apartments could be developed. Mr. Douglas reiterated that there is no requirement that affordable housing be developed on this property and presumably, there would be no requirement for affordable housing as part of any Master Plan unless the City Council decided it was a desirable thing to do. The City Council has the authority to establish minimums for affordable housing. Some cities have done that and many have not. VC/Torng asked if the approximate 2,000 residents of the 490 units would become Diamond Bar residents and CDD/Gubman responded that they would. VC/Torng said he believed Site A should have its own entrance and AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 14 PLANNING COMMISSION Mr. Douglas confirmed that it would be a new intersection and not the access to the high school. C/Shah thanked Mr. Douglas for his presentation. He asked if the units must be built on one site or could be split into two or three sites. Mr. Douglas responded that it could be split into two or three lots under state law as long as the total equaled the 490 units. C/Shah asked if the City investigated the possibility of several small parcel sites. Mr. Douglas asked if C/Shah was referring to sites not within the study area and C/Shah indicated his affirmative response. Mr. Douglas said that as part of the environmental review process several alternatives were studied and the EIR describes the process the City went through to decide what alternatives should be studied. The result was the two alternatives in Tres Hermanos and infill sites in other parts of the City that are already developed with light industrial uses. Through that process it was determined that there was not any collection of vacant sites that would add up to the 490 number except for the Tres Hermanos property because the City is mostly developed and that is why the alternatives in the proposal were selected. The infill (light industrial) property would have lower environmental impacts in some respects but the main concern is that the state would not approve it because the state has already rejected another site staff felt was even better, the Kmart site. C/Shah asked if it was staff's opinion that other sites would not be approved but they had not been submitted to the state. Mr. Douglas said C/Shah was correct. The site that was submitted to the state was the Kmart site and it was staff's judgment, based on experience and working with staff at HCD, that they wanted to see a vacant site. C/Shah asked why the City of Chino Hills had the same site as Diamond Bar. Mr. Douglas responded that the Tres Hermanos Ranch spans both sites at the City boundary, a portion of which lies in Diamond Bar and another portion that lies in Chino Hills. Chino Hills has identified a site within their city that is part of the Tres Hermanos ownership and is within the City of Chino Hills. C/Shah asked what happens if Site A is submitted and the state denies it and whether the City would then have to provide the 956 units or, would the state give Diamond Bar an extension of time for further study. Mr. Douglas responded that the current planning period ends on October 15, 2013, so every city within southern California is required to comply with their obligation prior to that date. If Diamond Bar were to switch to another alternative the City would have to amend the Housing Element, process that through the state, process it through the Planning Commission and through the City Council and by then it would be past the October 15 deadline. The effect would be that the City's obligation would add on to the next cycle and instead of 490 the City would have to rezone for 956 units. AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 15. PLANNING COMMISSION C/Shah asked if relocation of the site within Tres Hermanos happened in the future would the Planning Commission and City Council be required to go through a similar process all over again. Mr. Douglas responded that if the property owner (City of Industry) wanted to move forward with a Master Plan for Tres Hermanos it is likely it would be done via a Specific Plan which is a form of zoning regulations. For anything of that scale and magnitude, there would undoubtedly be an Environmental Impact Report, public workshops, scoping meetings, public hearings with the Planning Commission and the City Council, and if it truly spanned the entire property it would also involve a similar process with Chino Hills. CDD/Gubman said that we are currently making a recommendation to rezone one of two 30 -acre subareas within a 78 -acre parcel that lies within Tres Hermanos. The portion of the Tres Hermanos Ranch which lies within Diamond Bar is 700 acres. If there was the opportunity to plan for the future for the entirety of Tres Hermanos, there would be this process but clearly, given the enormity and complexity of the site the planning process would realistically take two, three or even five years to complete. C/Shah asked if consideration for the 30 acres was based on two, three, four or five story buildings. Mr. Douglas responded that the proposed regulations that are part of the resolution package before the Commission would have a height limit of 45 feet maximum. Typically, cities see projects that are 30 -units per acre as being somewhere between two and four stories depending on the configuration of the buildings, topography and so forth. C/Shah asked if a developer could build a 10 -story building to accommodate the required number of units and use the remainder of the property to build other types of units. Mr. Douglas responded that a 10 -story building could not be built because it would not meet the standard of a 45 -foot height limit. As previously mentioned, the proposed height regulation establishes a building cap of 45 feet and nothing could exceed that without special approval of a variance which is not envisioned. C/Farago thanked Mr. Douglas for an excellent presentation. He asked if there were any developers that staff was aware of that would be interested in developing the property as it currently exists and CDD/Gubman responded that staff was not aware of any interest in developing this site. C/Farago asked if staff knew where the Chino Hills parcel was proposed and its proximity to this project. Mr. Douglas responded "no" because he just discovered what Chino Hills' plan was tonight as he was preparing for this meeting. He has not worked with Chino Hills and does not know the particulars but the details could most likely be easily and quickly discovered. CDD/Gubman said the parcels would not be back to back because the property Diamond Bar is looking at is in the northwest corner of Tres Hermanos and the city limits go east of Chino Hills Parkway out to the existing homes already developed up Scenic Ridge Drive. AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 16 PLANNING COMMISSION Using the map, he pointed out the development site and the extent of the City limits in relationship to the Chino Hills portion which is beyond Longview in the open grazing area. C/Lin said his understanding of "affordable housing" is that it is subsidized housing. One can make it as luxurious as one cares to but it is subsidized. Mr. Douglas said that technically, what is considered a low-income affordable housing two-bedroom unit in Los Angeles today would be about $1500-$1600 a month and a very low income apartment would be about $1000 to $1100 a month. There are some affordable housing projects that are subsidized to a lower level than that for those whose incomes are even less. Chair/Nelson said that conceptually, this EIR is a good faith effort on the part of the City to set aside land and zone it accordingly so that if someone wanted to build affordable housing they could do so, but development is not required. With the certification of this EIR, does that mean that any future developments require only ministerial review or could the project go through additional public and environmental review? Mr. Douglas responded that if a development application came forward on this site, the process would be that the City would review that application for its conformance with all of the standards discussed this evening and all of the mitigation measures that are contained in the EIR. However, under state law, the environmental review would not start over again but it would focus on confirming that the project is in conformance with the zoning and the mitigation measures and all of the standards that presumably would be approved. This is what is referred to in state law as "by right" processing which allows all of those things just mentioned confirming the projects conformance with all of those requirements and a design review. So the project would come to the Planning Commission for its scrutiny of the physical design, the placement of the buildings, the site plan arrangement, where parking is located relative to the buildings, the height of buildings as part of the design review. In the sense of environmental review, all of the studies such as geological, biological and hydrology are characterized as environmental studies but are confirming what would already be required and it was not require a restart of the process all over again. Chair/Nelson said the project would come before a body such as the Planning Commission, the public would be notified and residents could come to the Commission and comment on the project. Mr. Douglas confirmed that Chair/Nelson's assessment was correct- Chair/Nelson asked if the Chino Hills affordable housing requirement was taken into consideration in the cumulative impact analysis for this project. Mr. Douglas said he does not know the answer to that question because he cannot remember the items that were on the list of cumulative projects. However, if Chino Hills is in the same position as Diamond Bar, Chino Hills does not have a development application; they are only addressing a AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 17 PLANNING COMMISSION requirement to rezone, and there is not a plan that is imminent in Chino Hills. Chair/Nelson said that Chino Hills would not be considered reasonably foreseeable at this time and Mr. Douglas said he thought Chair/Nelson's assessment was correct. Chair/Nelson said that a lot of public comments had to do with the correlation between low income housing and crime and asked if Mr. Douglas was aware of any statistics that substantiate that concern. Mr. Douglas said he was not aware of any studies that confirm a correlation between low income and crime. C/Shah asked if upon approval of this resolution a future developer would be required to meet the 30 -unit -per -acre requirement when developing this site. Mr. Douglas responded that the zoning would allow up to 30 units per acre. There is a minimum density in state law of 20 units per acre so any future project would have to fall within that range. C/Shah asked if Mr. Douglas knew of any study that shows low income housing adversely affects other property values. Mr. Douglas said he was not aware of any studies that confirm any correlation between low-cost housing and adjacent property owners. In fact, he could take the Commissioners to low-income housing projects in Beverly Hills, Santa Monica and Irvine and places like that and show low income housing projects that blend into the community. He again emphasized that low income housing is not required to be built here. In order for low income housing to be built there would have to be a very large subsidy that some public entity would have to come up with and it is very difficult these days to find that sort of subsidy. C/Shah said he has lived in many states from the east coast to the west coast and seen low cost housing next to median and high income housing co -existing. RECESS: Chair/Nelson recessed the meeting at 8:36 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Nelson reconvened the meeting at 8:45 p.m. Chair/Nelson opened the public hearing. Denton Mosier, 4 Quiet Hills Road, Pomona, explained that while he is the Chair of the Planning Commission in his city he is speaking on his own behalf only. For the residents of Phillips Ranch, he believes this project is very bad planning. In his opinion, both Site A and Site B will negatively affect the area and neighborhood. The project will increase traffic along Chino Hills Parkway and the environment will be negatively impacted. He was also concerned about overcrowding in and around the Diamond Ranch High School campus. He does not want this project in his neighborhood and he urged the Planning Commission to rethink the project. AUGUST 13, 20113 PAGE 18 PLANNING COMMISSION Brian McGurty, 24419 Top Court, Diamond Bar said he was speaking on behalf of the Diamond Bar homeowners on the west side of the proposed development which represents about 200 homes within 1500 feet of proposed Site B which amounts to about 500 Diamond Bar homeowners. The homeowners have written letters and signed a petition objecting to this location. He said he believed that a full and complete alternate site analysis had not been done because underground springs and erosion concerns make Site B difficult. If homes were built they could not be sold for what it would cost to build them and traffic would be a problem for Pomona for both Site A and Site B. He thanked the Commissioners for their thoughtful and probative questions following the presentation and presented the signatures to SP/Lee. Sylvia Merrill, 650 Rainbow Place, Diamond Bar, said she would feel the impact of traffic and growth in the area. Nevertheless, while she is not present to argue for Site A or Site B, she agrees with all of the points presented by the first speaker. She was pleased with the questions the Commissioners asked. One of her biggest concerns is that she has heard over and over again that even if the area is rezoned the City does not have to build affordable housing which tells her that the City is rezoning this property so a developer can do whatever he wishes to do even though there are density requirements. She read on the state site that this is an eight year cycle and every eight years the state will determine whether Diamond Bar and other cities have truly met all of the density requirements. She wanted to know what would happen in eight years if Diamond Bar did not meet the high density housing requirement. She has lived in Diamond Bar since 1987 and she knows that the City incorporated because some of the residents felt there was overgrowth in the area because Diamond Bar becomes a traffic jam when the SR57/60 is busy. The vision was to incorporate Diamond Bar in order to have proactive planning and she has not seen that in the last 10 years. She is very disappointed that she was not aware of the public hearings at the state level that residents could actually attend to express their opinions. She asked the City to urge residents to participate in the state public hearings to prevent what is happening now. All she hears is a threat that if the City Council does not pass this resolution the requirement will double in the next cycle which means further encroachment. Larry Taylor, 11 Knoll Ridge Drive, Phillips Ranch, echoed the last speakers' comments. He feels there is a correlation between the type of housing that is being proposed and crime. Crime is a huge problem, especially within the City of Pomona and with Site A most of those folks will be using resources in Pomona. In his opinion, there is a big difference between renters and homeowners, a big difference in the way properties are kept and the way community looks in general by itself. He hoped the Commission would consider the crime aspect of this proposal. AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 19 PLANNING COMMISSION Anabel Dorion, 48 Los Felis Drive, Pomona, said she agreed with everything that had been said. Her son interned with a private real estate equity firm in Connecticut this summer which specializes in low-income housing. The owner is becoming a multi -millionaire because it is guaranteed money from the state. While staff says who will not come in and buy that property and build low income housing, somebody will come in and build for the guaranteed income. Donna Houston, P.O. Box 4884, Diamond Bar, said she appreciated and agreed with previous speakers. However, during the past hour she Googled information about low income housing and surrounding communities and with all due respect, there is information available. Within minutes she found the information which prompts her to ask what due diligence has been done. She is a resident of Phillips Ranch and wants to know how the City of Pomona has responded to this rezoning because she believes the upper income residents of Phillips Ranch will be negatively impacted. Pomona has low income housing that spills over into Phillips Ranch. She is concerned about the impact of this project and would like for the Commission to reconsider this matter. Benjie Cho, 2 Wilderness Place, Philliips Ranch, said he appreciated the Commission's burden. Zoning changes are required with the passage of AB 2348. He sees that punitive sanctions are required for non-compliance with this law. It is unfortunate that the state, with its unlimited powers, is put in a position of less accountability than this Planning Commission. Staff mentioned significant building and environmental requirements; however, the site selection that is proposed was based on the site that was easiest to develop. The significant requirements implied that this development is not imminent and it is not moving forward and he believes that the building requirements are standard practices required for any site. There is nothing special about the requirements. Staff talked about 30 -units per acre but did not hear about a cap and if the site were leveled there is a potential for many more units than the minimum required by the state. He urged the Commission to place a cap on the number of units, if possible. He said he was glad to hear there was a 45 foot cap on the height of the buildings because visual impact is within the purview of the environmental process. The developers are a "for profit" business and if they are allowed to build a high rise, this site may become profitable and if it does become profitable it will be developed. He recommended that the Commission cap the number of units per site, not consider height variance to allow higher buildings on the site, consider a maximum roadway grade for traffic safety concerns and require soils stability analysis and geotechnical analysis. He urged the Commission not to go above and beyond the state requirements and meet the minimum state requirements only, to preserve the community. Ginna Escobar, 68 Sundance Drive, Pomona, and Council Member for Phillips Ranch and Westmont neighborhoods, said that she believes everyone's input matters and she wanted to know what type of outreach effort was made for this AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 20 PLANNING COMMISSION meeting. Only one to two percent of the community that will be affected is present and she believes there need to be town hall meetings and better advertising. She was notified about this meeting yesterday. She is not representing the Pomona City Council; she is present as a neighbor and resident. She has heard about Diamond Bar and Chino Hills but has not heard about any outreach to Pomona. She is disappointed and hurt because whenever Diamond Bar needs Pomona, they respond and whenever Pomona needs Diamond Bar they are left out. There are about 24,000 people in the Pomona neighborhoods that are directly adjacent to this project and the notification process of notifying people that live within 1000 feet does not include those folks. She also wanted to know what type of outreach effort was made to the Pomona Unified School District. She believes the high school parents should have been notified. She urged the City to please continue to meet with Pomona and do more in-depth and cohesive research. She asked the City to please be more proactive and demand more information and please listen to the community and the neighbors and include them in the process. Terry Allen, Phillips Ranch, said it seems like the City is putting all of the bad stuff as far away from the City as possible. How can the City of Diamond Bar zone something they do not own? He agreed with the other speakers. There is an empty space where Diamond Bar Honda was located which he believed would be a good place for this project. He thanked the Commission for the opportunity to express his opinion. Martha Reaga, 20 Oak Cliff Drive, Phillips Ranch, said that one of her main concerns is the schooling and the number of children that will be in these new housing facilities. She estimates there would be a minimum of three children per household in a low-income home which means another 1500 children that will not fall under the care and maintenance of Diamond Bar. That site is one hundred percent under the Pomona Unified School District which means that the City of Pomona will pay for the education of school aged children for this site that is being developed — not Diamond Bar and not Chino Hills. She Googled the crime statistics for low-income housing and found statistics to support the opinion that crime will migrate to Phillips Ranch. She wanted to know what plans have been made to adequately provide for education for all of those children that will be in those units because she would not want her tax dollars to go toward the education of children who live in another community. Vic Menendez, Diamond Bar, said he is from the streets and has been in and out of prison. Diamond Bar has no clue what will come into the Phillips Ranch neighborhood and residents and their children will be affected. A low-income project was built in Pomona for seniors and after two years kids, grandkids and boyfriends moved in and forced the seniors out and that hurt Pomona. There were different gangs from different territories from something small that was created to help the people which it did not. The children will suffer. What the AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 21 PLANNING COMMISSION City is asking for is a nightmare that is coming and the people who live in the area will suffer for it. He asked the Commission to reconsider this project. Roberta Perlman, 3 Navajo Trail Lane, Pomona Unified School District Board Member, said that the district will educate any child that comes to the district. Her comments do not reflect the beliefs of her colleagues and she is speaking as a resident only. Pomona Unified has received very little information about this project. The district received a CD about the EIR but other than that the district has not been kept up to date. This is the first time she heard about the Pantera Park meeting and other meetings. Site A looks like it runs directly through the Diamond Ranch High School parking lot and this project will back up to the school and the plan shows it will be incredibly close to the campus. State environmental law has been addressed in the EIR but the public policy concerns have not. There will be someone who will want to come and do this project. There are public safety concerns because of fire, police, etc. There is only one road up and down and traffic would be intensified with more development. The district takes safety of its students very, very seriously. Pomona Unified serves students from both Pomona and Diamond Bar. We are neighbors and we are friends so approving a zoning change without input from the school district is really not reflective of collaboration among the cities. She urged the City to evaluate sites further away from a school and investigate other alternatives for this project. Jerry Mestas, 22416 Top Court, raised his kids and coached kids in Diamond Bar. He also came from a bad area but when he married and had kids he moved to Diamond Bar because he felt it was a safe community. He knows firsthand that crime and low income go hand in hand. Quality of life is very important to him and his kids and if this project is built next to a school it will be difficult to keep kids on the campus. While he understands that everyone needs a place to live this does not seem to him to be a good place to build this type of project. Except for sports, Diamond Bar is a "bed and breakfast area" and he wants the Commission to keep the area safe for the kids and find different areas to build on that might be more suitable for the tenants moving into those areas. Doug Tan, 22418 Top Court, said staff's report did not address the socio- economic effects of having low income housing near schools. If the quality of schools is degraded, property values in the surrounding areas of Pomona, Phillips Ranch, Diamond Bar, etc., will be degraded. He appreciates the schools in Diamond Bar and the City should consider the quality of its schools and other socio and economic effects of this project. C/Lin felt that some of the public comments needed to be clarified. A few speakers spoke about the announcement and notification. State law requires that people within certain distances be notified and he believes that Phillips AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 22 PLANNING COMMISSION Ranch is outside of the area of legal notification. He asked if there was any outreach effort for the folks in Phillips Ranch. SP/Lee responded that a public notice was sent to the Pomona Unified School District, and public notices were printed in two newspapers, the Inland Valley Daily Tribune (sic) and The San Gabriel Valley Bulletin (sic). Public notices were also mailed to property owners within a 1000 foot radius of the proposed zone boundary area. The rezoning site was published on Chino Hills Parkway and at the cul-de-sac of Rockbury and Deep Springs Road. In addition, all notices, agendas and staff reports were also posted at the City's website and all documents were and are made available at City Hall and the Diamond Bar Library. Public notices were not mailed to the Phillips Ranch area but the City has done public noticing beyond what the state requires for this type of rezoning project. C/Lin asked about the speaker's question regarding soil stability in the area of the project and asked if that subject could be addressed. Mr. Douglas said there is no geologist present this evening. Staff will attempt to answer all questions from a planning requirement standpoint. As he mentioned in his presentation, there is a long list of requirements any developer would have to comply with, one of which is a geotechnical study that would be reviewed by the City's engineer or consultants hired by the City to review that study to demonstrate that the grading plan and development satisfies all of the requirements of the City's Ordinances and the state grading codes and building codes and so forth if and when a project is built. Most of Diamond Bar is hillside development and sometimes problems do occur with hillside development. However, most of the hillside environment of Diamond Bar has been developed. There are technical, engineering and construction techniques that can typically overcome hillside sites. In some cases, extensive remedial grading is required and those questions would be answered as part of the technical.and geological studies that would be required before any development happens and remedial grading, etc., if necessary to address any geological issues, would be a requirement of that project. VC/Torng said he was concerned about the current cycle requirement of 490 units and whether Diamond Bar would have another requirement in the next cycle. Mr. Douglas reiterated that the current cycle covers 2008 to October 2013. The next cycle runs from October 2013 to 2021 (eight years). If the City rezones property to accommodate 490 units it would satisfy the City's obligation to 2021. It is not possible for anyone to know what the obligations will be beyond 2021 because that process has not yet begun. That process is done by Southern California Association of Governments in consultation with the member jurisdictions. The key points to keep in mind is that the City's obligation for this current planning period that ends in October was identified as 466 units and for the next period it is 490 units. If the City rezones property for 490 units it is allowed to use that site again next time for the 490 units to the year 2021- If the City does not rezone property now, the 466 units required to AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 23 PLANNING COMMISSION accommodate this cycle carries forward and adds on to the 490 units making the City's designated obligation for the next cycle 956 units. VC/Torng said that Mr. Douglas mentioned it would be very difficult to find a buyer (developer) because of the subsidy of this size. According to one of the speakers it seems like a profitable business. Mr. Douglas said that this question asks for an opinion and the City is not aware of any buyer for this property today. The real estate development business is a complicated business and a lot of factors are taken into consideration. He cannot speculate on the marketability of the site or the likelihood of it being developed in the near future. His point was that affordable housing is different from ordinary housing development because it requires big public subsidies and his point is that after the loss of Redevelopment Agencies in the state, which Diamond Bar did not have on a broad scale there is less money today to subsidize affordable housing than there was in the past. And in the case of Diamond Bar, a small City that does not have any resources to bring to the table for an affordable housing development, it is, in his opinion, very unlikely that a non-profit developer would be able to put together an affordable housing project on this site. If HCD heard him say that, they might lift their eyebrows and ask what is being done here and the answer is that the City is trying to find a site that satisfies their requirements. One of the speakers mentioned the Kmart property as being a better site. The City fully agrees and that was its first proposal that the state turned down so the City was forced to go back to the drawing board. VC/Torng asked if the City could put a cap on various items such as the 30 -units per acre, the 45 foot height, and the number of units per site and two stories suggested by a speaker to make sure this project would be very difficult to become a low-income project. Mr. Douglas said the question from a speaker was "what is the maximum that could occur here if the City rezones this property" and under the regulations that are in front of the Commission tonight, the rezoning would establish a maximum cap of 490 units regardless of the project design. Talking about making the project "difficult" is a fine line to walk because the state requires the City to not only rezone property but actually use its powers to facilitate and assist development to the extent that the City has those powers. And as discussed, the fact that the City does not have any money that could be put into the project is one matter. The state looks at other issues as well. The details of a Housing Element and Zoning include the state looking at development standards, height limits, parking requirements, setback requirements and all of the standards that go into zoning. So in addition to looking to see that the City has zoning, the state looks at those items as well and if the height limit were set at two stories, the state, based on his experience working with other jurisdictions in the same situation would say that was not sufficient. And so the 45 height limit has been suggested so that it does not become an issue with state HCD and also because this is a hillside situation where the measurement of building height on a slope may be 45 feet in the AUGUST 13,2013 PAGE 24 PLANNING COMMISSION front and less in the back. The 45 foot height limit would be a maximum cap that the City can argue is sufficient to facilitate the development. With respect to geological requirements, there is a body of law and regulations that govern items such as grading and slope stability and.cities are required to follow those standard requirements. If a City were to deviate from those standards they would then be vulnerable to a challenge from the development side for making the development process too difficult and in essence prohibiting development through development standards that are unnecessarily strict. VC/Torng said he believes the City has to find ways to make all kinds of limitations on this project. CDD/Gubman said there are several houses in "The Country Estates" that because they are on descending slopes may look like they are one or two stories in the front but are actually four stories. Some of the hillside slopes that this Commission has reviewed require elevators and there is already a precedent for residential development at increased heights. VC/Torng said that overall the hillside management height is 35 feet continuously. CDD/Gubman said that this resolution proposes a maximum height of 45 feet so from the point that the building hits grade to the top of the building is 45 feet. With respect to the geotechnical issues and making development too difficult for affordable housing, Diamond Bar is, by its nature of topography and geology, very expensive to develop. The City encounters landslides on virtually every large property that is being developed. The Site D property the Commission will be considering later this year has a landslide that will need to be dealt with to technically meet minimum safety factors. There may be landslides on this site that are discovered through the geotechnical borings and the analysis that moves forward, and those landslides would have to be remediated to comply with code requirements for construction. The South Point West project is full of landslides. It should be presumed that development would also be expensive on this site and that is where the higher density requirement adds on the presumption of economies of scale that make it at least more feasible to develop than would otherwise be the case. On the question of subsidies, an important point to reiterate is that Diamond Bar has never had a Redevelopment Agency and without what is called tax increment that would have been generated from development, the City would have been obligated to set aside 20 percent of that tax increment for subsidizing affordable housing or to act as the developer of affordable housing. The good news/bad news is that Diamond Bar's efforts to establish a Redevelopment Agency were squashed and as a result, there are no set-aside funds available to put toward subsidizing affordable housing. Truly, the City of Diamond Bar is not going to be a resource for a developer "for profit" or "non-profit" from which to seek assistance. He cautioned that great care should be taken to hot make comments about making the site too difficult. The City cannot be disingenuous and it cannot create obstructions to development. The City is not obligated to roll out the red carpet AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 25 PLANNING COMMISSION or facilitate development where no subsidies are available, but state law mandates that the City certainly cannot obstruct development. State law does not require the City to meet a quota it only requires the City to meet a planning target which is what the Commission is looking at tonight. VC/Torng asked if the EIR received comments from the Pomona Unified School District and SP/Lee responded that the City did not receive any comments from the school district. VC/Torng felt the City should solicit comments from the. school district because of the potential effect of an additional 1000 students. He agreed that Site A is the best site but began to feel awkward about it being so close to the Diamond Ranch High School which is one of the high schools in Diamond Bar and is important to the City. He hopes it does not become a low income housing project. The other site has the same environmental impact and is further from the school and the highway. Mr. Douglas reiterated that the EIR concluded that the impacts would be similar for Site A and Site B. Site B is farther from freeway access which is a negative. There is slightly less steep topography on Site B which is positive so the impacts are kind of a wash. VC1Torng asked if Mr. Douglas had any doubt the state would approve this site. Mr. Douglas responded that there is a timing problem and if the zone change is not approved right away by HCD the deadline that the state legislature has established will be adhered to and there is no grace period in that deadline. If the City does not rezone the property prior to the deadline the numbers roll over. People may differ on whether to allow the numbers to roll over and continue looking for another site even though it means the zoning would have to be twice the amount of land so it is a judgment call for the Planning Commission and City Council. It is staff's responsibility to tell the Commission and Council what the rules are as they are understood and what is likely to happen based on different scenarios. VC/Torng asked how long it would take to get approval if the Council agreed to rezone the south side property. Mr. Douglas said he believed the process was that if it was the pleasure of the Planning Commission to go with a different site such as the south site, it would be the Commission's recommendation to the Council and it would then be the Council's decision to take the Commission's recommendation or decide otherwise. If the Council agreed with the Commission's recommendation to switch from Site A or B, it would require an amendment to the Housing Element because the Housing Element does not now include in it that alternate south site and it would have to go back up to HCD for review (a 60 day process at a minimum extending the time to October 15) and by that time the City would be in the 956 unit territory. VC/Torng said he believes the south site is more suitable. CDD/Gubman said that VC/Torng was correct on the building envelope height issue of 35 feet for any structure on the hillside. The 45 foot height limit is AUGUST 13, 2093 PAGE 26 PLANNING COMMISSION 10 feet higher than what would be allowed in "The Country Estates" for example. VC/Torng said that he was hoping the Commission could impose the 35 foot height limit for this project in accordance with the Hillside Ordinance. Mr. Douglas said that if it is the Commission's pleasure to modify the height to three stories or 35 feet it could be included in its recommendation to the City Council. C/Shah thanked the speakers who brought up a lot of good and thought provoking points. He asked why the City is already at the deadline and why the process was not started before a gun was held to its head to make a decision. Mr. Douglas acknowledged that this was a frustrating position for the Commission but this process was started in 2008. A lot of the last five years was consumed by going back and forth negotiating with the state. Staff started out with an initial position of recommending the Kmart site and it took quite a bit of time to go through those negotiations and come to the point of public hearings with the Commission and City Council and back to adopting a document that was not really what the City wanted but felt it had to do. Another big part of the process is the environmental review process which he believes takes too long but is state law. There are a number of requirements and the document is very voluminous. The process is long and arduous. There are several other cities that are in the exact same position Diamond Bar is in today being forced with a deadline to rezone property because of the state mandate. This is a widespread issue and a widespread problem. Many cities including Colton and Malibu have found themselves in these circumstances. Everyone regrets that there is not more time to deliberate but unfortunately, the City must deal with what is in front of it and not behind it. C/Shah agreed that the process takes time but it still frustrates him when faced with a do or die situation. If several cities are in a similar predicament, has Diamond Bar talked with those cities and HCD about granting additional time to solve these issues? Mr. Douglas said that cities have bonded together to approach the state numerous times over the years. In fact, several years ago the City of Irvine went so far as to sue the state and the regional government (SCAG) because they were not happy with their fair -share housing allocations. They lost in the trial court and lost in the appellate court and the Court said that Irvine had no standing to raise this question, it is settled and the state legislature has ordered that cities proceed accordingly. Political options lie with the state legislature and the state legislature is made up of elected representatives who live in Diamond Bar, Chino Hills, Pomona and other jurisdictions and they are the ones that write the state laws. That is the political system and political pressure has been applied by cities, counties and others over the years but this issue has largely fallen on deaf ears. C/Shah wanted to know if Diamond Bar had attempted to get a response from the City of Pomona. Mr. Douglas responded that yes, Diamond Bar had done AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 27 PLANNING COMMISSION so. The City of Pomona was sent a notice at the beginning of the process and staff from the City of Pomona attended the public scoping meeting at Pantera Park last year. Staff knows for a fact that the City of Pomona is fully aware of this project. C/Shah asked if staff considered five acre parcels with smaller units to fill the requirement instead of a 30 -acre lot for all of the units. Mr. Douglas said that in order for that option to be a viable alternative the City would need four to six five -acre sites and he is personally not aware of that many vacant sites of that size in the City. CDD/Gubman responded that staff conducted an inventory of the vacant sites through the Housing Element process and there simply is not the aggregation of acreage that would meet the requirement that has been placed upon the City. There are other larger undeveloped sites but they are restricted by covenants and other land use regulations that preclude them from consideration. There is about 60 vacant acres on the edge of Summitridge Drive south of Grand Avenue which has a General Plan Land Use designation of Open Space and to consider any land that has an open space dedication would require a vote of the people through an election process that would place this issue on the ballot to ask the voters to consider changing the land use designation on a property from Open Space to High Density Residential which is most likely a non-starter to even consider. There are other properties that are similarly restricted because they were part of a development where all of the development rights were transferred to a cluster location and the land those development rights were transferred to have that same kind of restriction as open space to be preserved in perpetuity. So what is left are smaller infill sites that through the process of evaluation took staff to the Kmart site which staff felt had tremendous potential for mixed-use redevelopment that would accommodate the density requirement. As the Commission knows, that option was rejected by HCD which was another in a continuum of events through the City's dealings with HCD that pushed the City out and made this a very long and frustrating process. Frankly, staff worked at an accelerated rate to get this EIR completed so that the City had a chance to meet its deadline and avoid a rollover penalty. Mr. Douglas asked the Commission to consider during its deliberations that if the City goes forward with the zone change as proposed, it gets the City through this planning process without penalty. The next Housing Element is due in the next few months and must be adopted by February 2014- As a separate action, if it is the Commission's pleasure to move forward with this zone change, as a separate action the Commission might consider something such as recommending to the Council that as part of the new Housing Element, the City explore other alternatives besides the site before this body tonight. He is not guaranteeing that some alternative would be successful in the next planning period but at the very least it would allow the City to fight with the state another day. So as part of the next Housing Element update over the next several months, staff could take another look at possible sites and perhaps try again to fight for the Kmart or some other underutilized site or scattered sites. But in order to avoid the penalty it would have to be done after the zone change and as part of the next Housing Element. C/Farago asked if there was anything proposed about the proposed three sites to attempt to negate the "all or nothing" A, B or the South site, to divide it amongst the three and make it a smaller impact to the local environment. Mr. Douglas said there were many options discussed at staff level as this process unfolded. The short answer is that staff was brought to a standstill in its efforts to work with the state and needed to get something approved, saw a path to the state approval and took it which is to designate one single vacant site. The state has a preference for larger sites because there are economies of scale with development as opposed to a few units here and there. C/Farago said that knowing the Commission is considering only the zoning issue and not any type of development, what type of discretion would the City be able to exercise should a developer propose to develop the site as far as requiring it to be a "gated" community, for example, to prevent a lot of in -traffic, or to make it a 55 and older requirement. Mr. Douglas said that with regard to the age restriction issue, the rules are pretty clear that if a senior housing developer comes to the City and proposes that, the City can approve it. But if the City were to impose a condition up front as part of the zoning it had to be only a senior project, the state would not maintain the City's Housing Element under those conditions. C/Farago asked if the City considered a bounty to attract that type of a project. Mr. Douglas responded yes, if there was an agreement between the City and a senior housing developer and it was a mutual agreement that would be fine in terms of state housing law. C/Farago asked for an explanation of Mr. Douglas's suggestion that the Commission could request that upon approval of this zoning change that the City Council look at other alternatives for the future Housing Element. Mr. Douglas responded that if the City were to explore other options as part of the next planning process and if the state were to give the thumbs up on some alternate site, this site could be rezoned to a lower density or back to what it was. Zoning can be changed by the City Council but the key would be to have the state's blessing on an alternate to this site. Chair/Nelson asked if staff considered the potential impacts on the Pomona Unified School District adequately,- if there had been any precedent that a project was ever turned down because of a perceived or documented correlation between low-income housing and crime- and, how realistic it was that the state would consider or reconsider an alternative such as the Kmart site for re-evaluation in this regard. RECESS: Chair/Nelson recessed the meeting at 10:20 p.m. AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 29 PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENE: Chair/Nelson reconvened the meeting at 10:29 p.m. Mr. Douglas responded to Chair/Nelson that with regard to school impacts, they were considered in this process and the EIR addresses the issue of school impacts. Two key points: 1) the state legislature has decreed that school districts are governed by a separate branch of government from cities. The City Council has no control over what goes on at Pomona Unified School District just as the Pomona Unified School Board has no say over land use in the City of Diamond Bar. State legislature has said that in terms of impacts on schools from new development new students, the only authority the City has is to require its developers to pay fees to the school district. And that is the extent of the City's authority on that point and 2) through the EIR process staff identified a secondary access that could also serve the high school as an objective of this project so that if Site A or Site B were developed the City would work cooperatively with the school district to try to establish a second way out of the school property in the event of an emergency. With respect to Chair/Nelson's third question regarding the likelihood of the state's approving some alternate site it would take a crystal ball to know for sure whether the state would approve some alternate site be it Kmart or something else, but his suggestion is that it couldn't hurt and so as part of the next Housing Element over the next few months, he and staff could work to try and convince the state that some alternate site would be acceptable, which they would be happy to do. Regarding Chair/Nelson's second question about whether any jurisdiction has denied a project based on a finding that low-income residents would create crime and therefore be a suitable reason for denying the project ACA/Eggart stated that he could not say whether any jurisdiction had disapproved a project on that particular basis, but state law Government Code §65008 as well as, Government Code §12955 prohibits local agencies including cities from discriminating against a residential development on the basis of the development's method of financing, the very low, low or moderate income status of the intended occupants or the source of income of the intended occupants. So an express finding denying a specific residential project on the basis of perceived correlation between increased crime and the income level of the occupants would be legally suspect. Chair/Nelson said "and subject to lawsuit" to which ACA/Eggart responded "correct." Roberta Perlman returned to the podium to state in response to the concept that a developer would have to pay school fees to educate these children the proximity of this project to the existing school still needs to be considered. It literally crosses into the parking lot from what she can determine from the plan. She believes the close proximity to the school is an inappropriate placement for this project. She is president of the school board and understands that these AUGUST 13, 2013 f PLANNING 1 •N decisions are heavily weighed but she never does something that does not feel right in spite of the fact that there is a deadline. She encouraged the Commission to consider the safety and welfare of the students. Benjie Cho returned to the podium to say he appreciates the position this Commission is in and he is not a stranger to state and federal requirements. Decisions have consequences and no one wants to exacerbate the problem. The state requirement is not going to go away and the best solution is to mitigate the problems as best as possible. His personal opinion is that the system of government is not sustainable. He recommended that the Commission get more information on splitting the site and as a separate action, relook at the circulation element and ordinance changes for geological investigations so that it is clear for future developments. An unidentified speaker asked the Commission to clarify the next steps in the process after the Commission sends its recommendation to the City Council. CDD/Gubman responded that the City Council hearing that would be held to consider the Commission's recommendation is subject to the same notification process as this Planning Commission meeting which includes notification to property owners within a 1000 foot radius of the project, publication of legal ads in the two newspapers (Tribune and Daily Bulletin) and posting of the 4x6 foot notification boards on the property identifying the date, time and location of the City Council meeting. The City Council meeting is a new public hearing and the process begins anew with the City Council_ An unidentified speaker asked how long it takes the state to make its decision after the approved resolution is forwarded to them. Mr. Douglas explained that what the state HCD expects is, upon adoption of a zone change by the City Council, that staff will send evidence of that adoption to the state. Shortly thereafter (there is no deadline) the state would inform staff as to whether that zone change complied with the commitment set forth in the Housing Element. There is no official notice required as part of that action and it would most likely be brought back to the Planning Commission and City Council as an Information Item as soon as staff receives the information back from the state. Terry Allen said he hoped that the Planning Commission would take all comments into consideration and consider all options. Did staff look at any other sites including the Diamond Bar Honda site and Ralph's Market? Mr. Douglas reiterated that staff conducted a thorough evaluation of possible sites. The reason Kmart was the first choice is because it is an underperforming center and was considered by staff to be ripe for redevelopment. In the past the Kmart property owner and staff have had discussions about the redevelopment of that property and for a myriad of reasons staff felt it was a good option that the state should approve but for their own reasons, chose not to. AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 31 PLANNING COMMISSION Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing at 10:44 p.m. Chair/Nelson reopened the public hearing at 10:45 p.m Sylvia Merrill returned to the podium and commented that she is very disappointed at the level of homework and preparation from city staff of this matter. This matter has been under consideration for a long time and even before 2008. In 2006 things were submitted which states the reasons the Kmart site was declined. She encouraged everyone to get educated by going to the City's website and the state's website. There is a lot of information that residents were not aware of and providing the minimum level of communication of 1000 feet is not enough. She believes this is a very serious issue for all Diamond Bar residents that all voters should be aware of. She does not feel that publishing information in newspapers that she calls junk mail is sufficient. The Commission needs to take this very seriously because it is not an issue that will go away after October. Had she known about this sooner she would have participated in the state's public hearings. When she went to the website there was documentation about what happened at the hearings and there were public comments from other cities but no public comments from Diamond Bar. Diamond Bar employees need to communicate to the voters what is happening in their community. Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing. Chair/Nelson asked CDD/Gubman to reiterate that the City has met its statutory obligations for public hearing notification. CDD/Gubman responded that staff met and far exceeded the minimum requirements in accordance with Diamond Bar's Municipal Code mandates. In addition to the aforementioned, the information has been posted on the City's website. What is frustrating to him is that in the past the newspapers, primarily The Tribune, contacted him for comments during the Housing Element process so there was more media publicity given to that but they have not taken the opportunity through this process. The City has made genuine efforts to provide public notification through mailers, newspaper advertising, websites, property postings, etc. Chair/Nelson said the City cannot mandate what articles the newspapers chose to publish. C/Lin responded to the last speaker that the reason he and others serve as Commissioners is because they are all professionally associated with the City's Land Use process. The Commissioners have spent the last six months going through the EIR and EIS documents. Tonight there were a lot of good public comments every one of which is valid although some of the issues raised cannot legally be considered in the rezoning process such as, property values, correlation of crime to low-income, etc. C/Lin said he lived in the Midwest for a long time. This City is not building a project in the middle of downtown Chicago. AUGUST 13,20113 PAGE32 PLANNING COMMISSION He spoke about a low-income project that was built in Leawood, Kansas, across the street from million dollar homes when he served as Council person in that city. 300 residents spoke in opposition to the project that was approved in 1989 and that project turned out to be one of the best housing projects in the City of Leawood. He encouraged everyone to look at that city's website. C/Lin said he takes pride in the fact that Diamond Bar is a good planning community. The City has a good staff, very tight planning regulations and guidelines, and any project that comes before the City gets fine scrutiny before it is approved. He has confidence in the City's process that any project that comes before the Commission and Council would be a high quality project. Today, the Commission is considering only the rezoning of the land, not a development project. When a development project comes before the Commission there will be another very comprehensive and detailed review before this body recommends approval or denial to the City Council. Again, all the Commission is considering is a rezoning of a site which may not be developed given the economic conditions. Most affordable housing receives a subsidy from the federal government and it is well known that the federal government does not have money that is trickling down to the states and cities. It could be 20 years before any type of project is considered. And subsidized housing typically requires a big chunk of funding from the agencies as in the case of a 490 unit development that would require a subsidy of $10, 20 or 30 million. The rezoning may be approved but he feels that within the next 10 or 20 years nothing will happen on this particular site. He likes Mr. Douglas's suggestion that if the Commission recommends City Council approval of the rezoning that it include in its recommendation consideration of an alternate location when reviewing the new Housing Element and asked for staff's help with language to be included in a motion. ACA/Eggart stated that the Commission could direct staff to include the recommendation in the written staff report provided to the City Council. In addition to the resolutions before the Commission, it can request this recommendation be added expressly to staff's report to the City Council. ACA/Eggart responded to C/Lin that this would be recommendation #4. C/Lin asked whether a certification was a "receive and file" or an "approval" and CDD/Gubman responded that certification of the FIR would be a resolution recommending City Council certification of the document. The City Council could then adopt a resolution that certifies the EIR. ACA/Eggart said that "certify" means that if the City Council were to certify the EIR it is certifying that it is complete and adequate. C/Lin moved to adopt a resolution recommending City Council certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report and approve the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program; and, Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the following: General Plan Amendment to establish a new AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 33 PLANNING COMMISSION High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) land use designation and change the current land use designation on the Land Use Map for the portion of the subject property identified as "Site A" or alternatively "Site B" from Agricultural (AG) to Planning Area 5/High Density Residneital-30 (PA-5/RH-30); Development Code Amendment to establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) zoning district and development regulations; and, Zone Change to change the zoning designation for the portion of the subject property identified as "Site A" or alternatively "Site B" from Agricultural (AG) to High Density Residential -30 Dwelling Units Per Acre (RH-30) and establish a maximum of 490 dwelling units for this site with the addition of recommendation #4; that staff include a recommendation that the City Council consider alternative sites, to be written expressly in staff's report to the City Council. C/Shah stated that the City's staff works very hard and they always above and beyond their duties and although the public may have a perception, he is sorry that it is a wrong perception. He knows staff and he wants to go on record as stating that staff works diligently and very hard. He asks the hard questions and staff has always shown that they have done all of the work and due diligence on every project that they have brought to the Commission. With heavy heart he will second the motion and hope that recommendation #4 will establish a goal that can be reached. C/Shah seconded C/tin's motion. CDD/Gubman reminded the Commission that VC/Torng suggested a 35 -foot height limit in the Development Code amendment and asked C/Lin if he wished to amend his motion to include this amendment. C/Lin asked Mr. Douglas if that was in consultation with the state's requirement and Mr. Douglas responded that his opinion is that 35 feet would probably be okay although he cannot speak for the state. C/Lin amended his motion to include the 35 -foot maximum height limit. C/Shah seconded the amended motion. VC/Torng said his intention was to include the alternate Tres Hermanos south site as well. VC/Torng said he has also worked with staff for many years and wanted to commend their efforts. This process has gone on for a long time and he believes that all of the Commissioners are very concerned for the future of the City and this is an important issue for Diamond Bar and while it is a difficult decision, it must be done to alleviate a bad situation. AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 34 PLANNING COMMISSION Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farago, Lin, Shah, VC/Torng, Chair/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 8. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: C/Farago thanked staff for their diligence in putting together the rezoning recommendation. C/Lin thanked the audience for their patience. Tonight's item was a difficult decision but the right decision under the circumstances. VC/Torng echoed C/Lin's comments and spoke to the attendees that they would have an opportunity to speak to the City Council. He thanked the participants, Commissioners and staff for their hard work. Chair/Nelson advised participants they could find the City Council agenda on the City's website. Chair/Nelson announced this would be his last meeting with the Planning Commission for the City of Diamond Bar. He will be moving out of the City at the end of the month and has served on the Planning Commission since 1988 with about a six month hiatus during those years. To his colleagues, he stated that the staff at the City of Diamond Bar has been spectacular. It has been such that he no longer has to complain about the landscape plans excluding invasive plant species next to open space habitats. He thanked everyone present — fellow commissioners present and past, City Council present and past, CDD/Gubman present and past, AC/Marquez especially because she has kept him on the road, and SP/Lee. He appreciates everything everyone has done. Diamond Bar is a top notch City and is run exceptionally well especially when compared to cities that are going bankrupt. Diamond Bar is not and will not go bankrupt. He has lived in Diamond Bar since 1977, has been involved with all of the schools, all of the recreational activities, he has coached kids in softball, soccer and volleyball, etc. It has been an absolutely fantastic place to live and, he was really disappointed recently when Walnut got 49 out of 50 in the country. Diamond Bar is right there with them. It's all going on and will continue to go on in Diamond Bar and it is the participation of the public that the Commission witnessed tonight that creates that atmosphere. If the whole City were here he would say the same thing — thank you very much for your concern, thank you to his fellow commissioners and thank you to staff for their hard work. 9. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: CDD/Gubman stated that at next Tuesday's City Council meeting August 20 the City Council will recognize Chair/Nelson's years of service to the community in his many AUGUST 13, 2013 PAGE 35 PLANNING COMMISSION capacities. Staff expressed gratitude and CDD/Gubman thanked Chair/Nelson for his exemplary service to the community. It has been a pleasure serving as his staff and it has been an honor for all of staff to work with all of the Commissioners. CDD/Gubman thanked Chair/Nelson for his leadership and guidance and mentoring to commissioners as they come on board. He is confident that in Chair/Nelson's wake the commission is going to continue the caliber of service he has provided through his example and his leadership. He wished Chair/Nelson the best as he moves to the next phase of his life. 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future proiects. CDD/Gubman stated that the next regular Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 27 with four items scheduled for the agenda including the Conditional Use Permit for the ARCO/ampm at Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard which comes back to the Commission. The City Council approved the Code Amendment addressing the distance criteria for alcohol sales so staff is bringing the matter back to the Commission as a new public hearing to consider the Conditional Use Permit to upgrade the ABC License from Beer and Wine to Alcohol. As staff is required to do every year, it will submit for the Commission's review to "receive and file" the General Plan Status Report that the City is required to file with state. Two development projects, an addition at a home on Ridgeline in "The Country Estates" and potentially, a new single family residence on a vacant lot on Rusty Pump. 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in tonight's agenda. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairman Nelson adjourned the regular meeting at 11:13 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 27th day of August, 2013. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman Community Development Director TorLy-T-orng, Vice Chairman ' Attachment 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2013-17 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF DIAMOND BAR CERTIFY THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 2012061066) AND APPROVE THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND ADOPT FINDINGS OF FACT FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION PROJECT, AFFECTING AN AREA COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 30 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF CHINO HILLS PARKWAY SOUTH OF ITS INTERSECTION WITH DIAMOND RANCH ROAD/SCENIC RIDGE DRIVE, AND SOUTH OF THE SR -60 FREEWAY AND DIAMOND RANCH HIGH SCHOOL (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 8701-22-273). A. RECITALS 1. On April 19, 2011, the City Council adopted the 2008-2014 Housing Element update, which was found to be in compliance with state law by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on June 14, 2011. The Housing Element identifies Diamond Bar's share of the regional housing need for the 2006-2014 time period as 1,090 units, including 284 very -low income units, 179 low-income units, 188 moderate -income units, and 439 above -moderate units. Housing need allocations are determined by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for each jurisdiction in the six -county SCAG region through a process known as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). 2. Due to a 2009 annexation adjustment, the City's 2006-2014 regional housing obligation increased to 1,098 units, with its lower-income (i.e., very -low and low) share increasing to 466 units. In the 5th Housing Element update cycle for the 2013-2021 planning period, the City has been allocated a need for 1,146 total units, of which 490 are in the very -low and low income categories. State law requires the City to demonstrate that it has adequate sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate development of new housing commensurate with this RHNA allocation. State law does not mandate that new housing units must be built, nor require cities to build or finance new housing. The City's legal obligations are to ensure that zoning is in place such that new housing could be developed in accordance with the RHNA, and to facilitate the planning and development process when property owners seek approval for residential projects that would further the City's progress toward the regional goals established in the RHNA. 3. State law establishes a "default density" of 30 units per acre as the minimum density necessary to facilitate the production of lower-income housing. Since the City does not currently have any land zoned for residential development at greater than 20 units per acre, state law requires the City to amend its zoning regulations to allow multi -family development by -right at 30 units per acre for sites sufficient to accommodate the City's assigned share of regional housing need. 948324.1 4. A finding of Housing Element compliance (referred to as "certification") by HCD is an important component of maintaining the legal adequacy of the City's General Plan and zoning regulations. Failure of a city to obtain Housing Element certification can result in litigation and judicial intervention in local land use decisions, which have included suspension of cities' zoning and building permit authority and court -mandated approval of low-income housing developments. 5. In recognition of the City's objective of obtaining Housing Element certification, the adopted 2008-2014 Housing Element includes Program 9, which calls for amendments to the City's General Plan and zoning regulations for sufficient land to accommodate the City's fair share of regional housing need. The Housing Element identifies land within the Tres Hermanos property for this purpose. The Project is located in the portion of Tres Hermanos having the best freeway access, and is also adjacent to existing residential development, a high school, roads, and utilities. The timing of development of the selected site would depend on market forces and the interests of the property owner. No detailed development plans or schedule are proposed at this time, but any future actions would be addressed by this EIR and obligated to its mitigation measures; no subsequent CEQA analysis is anticipated by the City. 6. The project site was previously owned by the Industry Urban Development Agency. After the statewide dissolution of redevelopment agencies, the property was transferred to the Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency. The Project was initiated solely by the City pursuant to state law, which requires the City Council to amend the General Plan and zoning regulations to accommodate additional multi -family housing commensurate with the City's fair share of regional housing needs. 7. On June 14, 2012, the City's Community Development Department disseminated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study presenting a preliminary assessment of the potential impacts of the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project. The NOP was circulated for a 30 -day review period that ended July 17, 2012- The NOP was delivered to the State Clearinghouse, and posted in the City Clerk's office for 30 days. The City also conducted a public scoping meeting on June 21, 2012. A copy of the NOP as well as comments received during the NOP review period are provided in Appendix A of the Final EIR. 8. As required by CEQA, a Draft EIR (DEIR) was prepared and contained: a) table of contents or index; b) summary; c) project description; d) environmental setting; e) significant impacts (direct, indirect, cumulative, growth -inducing and unavoidable impacts); f) alternatives; g) mitigation measures; and h) irreversible changes. 9. A Public Notice of Availability (NOA) was prepared for the (DEIR) and the NOA was placed in the Los Angeles County Clerk's office for 30 days, as required by Public Resources Code §21092. The City, as Lead Agency, sent a copy of its NOA to anyone requesting it, per CEQA Guidelines §15087. In addition, public notice of DEIR availability was posted on- and off-site, and was provided through publication in a newspaper of general circulation. The City consulted with and requested comments on the DEIR from responsible and trustee 2 EIR PL2013-227 agencies, and adjacent cities and counties, as required by Public Resources Code §21104 and §21253. The DEIR was delivered to the State Clearinghouse for review on May 24, 2013. 10, On July 26, 2013, responses to comments were provided to each public agency that submitted comments on the DEIR, per CEQA Guidelines §15088. 11. A Final EIR has been prepared per CEQA Guidelines §15132. The Final EIR includes the DEIR, comments on the DEIR, responses to comments, and revisions to the DEIR. 12. CEQA contains a "substantive mandate" requiring public agencies to refrain from approving projects with significant environmental effects if there are feasible alternatives or mitigation measures" that can substantially lessen or avoid those effects. CEQA guidelines define the term "feasible" as capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors. In accordance therewith, the Planning Commission has determined that, since the Project, as defined in paragraph 15 below, would result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of all potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR, the Planning Commission has identified the Project, as proposed, as the preferred project. 13. The Project includes the approval of the following actions [Items (a) through (d) below are collectively referred to as the "Project"): a) Amendments to the General Plan and Development Code to establish a new RH-30 (High Density Residential -30 units per acre) General Plan Land Use Designation and Zone District that allows multi -family development at a net density of 30 units per acre; and b) Site -Specific General Plan and Zoning Amendments to change the General Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning District Map to redesignate one of the two candidate housing sites from Agriculture (AG) to RH-30. The Zoning Amendment would limit development to 490 housing units within the selected housing site; and c) Certification of Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2012061066), which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of Site A or Site B within the 78 -acre Project Study Area. The Final EIR includes mitigation measures and alternatives, a MMRP, and identifies Alternative 2 (Infill Sites) as the environmentally superior alternative, however Alternative 2 would not meet the basic objectives of the Project in that it would not maintain consistency with the Housing Element. 14. Notification of the public hearing for the Project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on August 2, 2013. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the parcel on which the zone change is proposed, including all speakers who have previously attended the scoping meeting or submitted comments in writing. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the Project site was posted with two display boards in two locations (Chino Hills 3 EIR PL2013-227 Parkway and Rockbury/deep Springs Drive), and the notice was posted at three other designated community posting sites. 15. On August 13, 2013, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals regarding the Final EIR and the Project. 16. On August 13, 2013, the Planning Commission also considered the Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program (MMRP) and Findings of Fact for the Project. After hearing public testimony, the public hearing was closed and the Planning Commission concluded its deliberations on the Final EIR, the MMRP and the Findings of Fact. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. That Environmental Impact Report (EIR) SCH No. 2012061066 has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 45 -day public review period for the EIR began May 24, 2013, and ended July 8, 2013. Furthermore, the Planning Commission has reviewed the EIR and related documents in reference to the Project, and on August 13, 2013, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council certify the Final EIR referenced herein. 3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the Project constitutes the only feasible alternative in that none of the other alternatives would meet the basic Project objective of maintaining consistency with the Housing Element of the General Plan. Program 9 of the Housing Element, which has been reviewed and found by the Department of Housing and Community Development to be in compliance with state law, includes a commitment to rezone a parcel or parcels selected from Housing Element Table B-2 to accommodate the City's share of regional housing need of 490 housing units for very -low- and low-income households. Failure of the City to rezone a site or sites listed in Table B-2 and rezoning of an alternate site would result in the Housing Element becoming non-compliant with state law, therefore, this option would not accomplish a basic project objective. 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the standard conditions, performance standards, and mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Project, which avoid or substantially lessen significant adverse environmental impacts identified in Final EIR. 5. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council certify the Final EIR to be complete and adequate, find that the Final FIR reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and adopt the Findings of Facts and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached hereto as Exhibits A and B and hereby incorporated by reference. 4 EIR PL201 3-227 The Planning Commission Secretary shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution to the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13th DAY OF AUGUST 2013, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. By: &�— — Steve A".—elson, hai an I, Greg Gubman, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of August, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST:�� Greg Gubman, Secretary Farago, Lin, Shah, VC/Torng, Chair/Nelson None None None 5 EIR PL2013-227 EXHIBIT A FINDINGS OF FACT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION PROJECT STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2012061066 Section 21081 and 21081.5, California Public Resources Code Sections 15091, 15092, and 15083, Title 14, Chapter 3, California Code of Regulations 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 Project Discretionary Actions The following discretionary actions are proposed as part of the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project, which hereafter shall collectively be referred to as the "Project': Creation of New RH-30 General Plan Land Use Designation and Zone District. The Project would amend the General Plan Land Use Element and the Development Code to create a new RH-30 (High Density Residential -30) district that allows multi -family development at a net density of 30 units per acre. Site -Specific General Plan and Zoning Amendments. The General Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning District Map would be amended to redesignate one of the two candidate housing sites shown in Final EIR Exhibit 4-2 from Agriculture (AG) to RH-30. The Land Use Element Amendment would limit development to 490 housing units within the selected housing site. 1.2 Project Location and Site Description The Project Study Area is located in the City of Diamond Bar ("City"), in the County of Los Angeles. The Project Study Area is composed of approximately 78 acres of undeveloped land generally located along the west side of Chino Hills Parkway just south of its intersection with Diamond Ranch Road/Scenic Ridge Drive, and south of the SR -60 freeway and Diamond Ranch High School, as shown in Final EIR Exhibits 4-1 and 4-2. The Project Study Area is comprised of a portion of Los Angeles County Assessor Parcel Number (APN): 8701-22-273. The Project Study Area under consideration consist of two separate areas, referred to as Site A and Site B. Site A comprises approximately 30 acres and is located immediately south of, and abutting, Diamond Ranch High School with the easterly boundary line extending to Chino Hills Parkway. Site B comprises approximately 30 acres and is located immediately west of, and abutting, Diamond Ranch High School with a portion of the northerly boundary extending to the SR -60 Freeway. Both sites are predominantly vegetated by grasslands, with areas of sage scrub and scattered woodlands, which are typical of undeveloped areas in the project vicinity. Prominent ridgelines cross or border both sites. There are no structures, major rock outcroppings or other unique physical features on either site. Land immediately adjacent to the south and across Chino Hills Parkway to the southeast of the Project Sites is undeveloped. Residential neighborhoods are located east of the Project area along Scenic Ridge Road, as well as to the west. Site A and Site B are currently undeveloped, are used for livestock grazing, and do not contain any sources of light and glare. 6 EIR PL2013-227 1.3 Environmental Notices Notice of Preparation. On June 14, 2012, the City's Community Development Department (Department) executed and disseminated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study presenting a preliminary assessment of the potential impacts of the project. The NOP was prepared on June 14, 2012, and circulated to the public for a 30 -day review period that ended July 17, 2012. The NOP was provided to the State Clearinghouse, and posted in the City Clerk's office for 30 days. Scoping Meeting, The City also conducted a public scoping meeting on June 21, 2012. A copy of the NOP as well as comments received during the NOP review period are provided in Appendix A of the Final EIR. Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR. A Public Notice of Availability (NOA) was prepared for the Draft EIR ("DEIR") and the NOA was placed in the County Clerk's office for 30 days, as required by Public Resources Code §21092. The Lead Agency sent a copy of its NOA to anyone requesting it, per CEQA Guidelines §15087. Additionally, public notice of DEIR availability was posted on- and off-site, and was provided through publication in a newspaper of general circulation. The City, as Lead Agency, consulted with and requested comments on the DEIR from responsible and trustee agencies, and adjacent cities and counties, as required by Public Resources Code §21104 and §21253. The DEIR was delivered to the State Clearinghouse for review on May 24, 2011 Responses to Comments on the DEIR. As required by CEQA Guidelines §15088, on July 2013 responses to comments were provided to each public agency that submitted comments on the DEIR. Proposed Final EIR. The Final EIR or FEIR was posted for public review on the City website on August 9, 2013. The notices of public hearing for the Planning Commission hearing for the Project included Notice of the Availability of the Final EIR. 1.4 Project Objectives The underlying purpose of the Project is to provide adequate sites through appropriate land use and zoning designations to accommodate future housing growth, as specified in Goal 3 of the City Housing Element, while providing transportation and circulation improvements that satisfy the City's level of service standards. Specific project objectives are as follows: a Amend the General Plan land use and zoning designations prior to October 15, 2013 for one or more parcels identified in Appendix B, Table B-2 of the City's 2008-2014 Housing Element to allow single-family and multi -family development at a density of 30 units per acre by -right in order to accommodate Diamond Bar's very -low- and low-income Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for the 2008-2014 Housing Element planning period. (Program 9, Housing Element) ® Provide sufficient CEQA analysis for the City Council to select either Site A or Site B as the designated area to construct 490 housing units by -right without further CEQA review, consistent with State law. (Government Code §65583.2) Provide and maintain adequate infrastructure facilities and public services to support development and planned growth. (Objective 1.1, Public Services and Facilities Element) Maintain traffic Level of Service (LOS) standards on streets and intersections, as specified in the City's Circulation Element. (Circulation Element, Strategy 3.1.1) ® Preserve natural resources on the Project Site and compensate for those natural resources that would be disturbed by the project. (Vision Statement, Resource Management Element) 7 EIR PL2013-227 • Ensure land use compatibility between the Project and Diamond Ranch High School to the north; and nearby residential neighborhoods. (Strategy 2.2.1, Land Use Element) • Facilitate the provision of emergency secondary access for Diamond Ranch High School in coordination with development of the Project. (Circulation Element, Strategies 2.2.3 and 2.2.4) 1.5 Description of the Project Examined in the Final EIR The Project consists of the City Council's selection of one of two candidate housing development sites, each approximately 30 acres, within a 78 -acre Project Study Area, located in the northeast area of the City. Housing Site A is directly west of Chino Hills Parkway just south of Diamond Ranch Road. Housing Site B is located northwest of Housing Site A and west of Diamond Ranch High School. Access to either of the two Sites would take place via an intersection on Chino Hills Parkway south of Diamond Ranch Road. The Project consists of up to 490 multi -family housing units, to be located on either Site A or Site B. The Project also includes limited emergency access and utility improvements to be constructed in the Project Study Area, to serve the site which is ultimately selected for development. No development on either candidate site is currently proposed, and the precise configuration of any future development would be determined through the development review process after submittal of a development application by the property owner (the Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency). Once the FEIR is certified, its adopted Mitigation Measures will be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures incorporated into the subsequent project design, in accordance with §21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. No further environmental review through the CEQA process is anticipated at the development review process stage, consistent with state law. (California Government Code §65583.2) 1.6 Other Alternatives Examined in the Final EIR In addition to the Project, as required under Section 15126.6(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the FEIR examined a reasonable range of alternatives. As stipulated therein: "An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decisionmaking and public participation." Chapter 6 of the Final EIR describes the process by which the City determined the range of alternatives to be evaluated. In addition to the "no project" alternative (Alternative 1), as mandated under Section 15126(e) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the following development -oriented alternatives were also examined therein: • Multiple Infill Sites. Multiple infill sites in developed areas would have the potential to reduce impacts such as aesthetics and biological resources since they are located in an area that has previously been developed. This alternative was suggested by interested parties during the scoping process. This alternative is considered environmentally "superior" to the Project, even though the Project would not result in any significant impacts. This alternative is evaluated as Alternative 2. ® Tres Hermanos-South. This site is part of the Tres Hermanos property, which is also owned by the Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency, and is located approximately 1 mile south of the Project Study Area. While preliminary analysis indicated that this alternative could require more extensive infrastructure work because it is not contiguous to existing development, an alternative location was suggested by interested parties during the scoping process. This alternative is evaluated as Alternative 3. 8 EIR PL2013-227 1.7 Project Applicant The City is serving in the dual role of both "Applicant" and CEQA "Lead Agency." This dual role is typical of most public projects and is authorized under CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and established agency practices. Based on the legal and ethical standards to which governmental agencies are held, no inherent conflict is established when a public agency serves in that dual role. The State CEQA Guidelines defines "Applicant" to mean "a person who proposes to carry out a project which needs a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use or financial assistance from one or more public agencies when that person applies for the governmental approval or assistance" (14 CCR 15350). The term "Applicant," as used herein and throughout the project's environmental review record, is intended to apply to not only the City, as the Lead Agency and the proponent of the Project, but also to that (those) subsequent holder(s) of real property interests that will serve as the developer(s) and/or master builder(s) for those uses authorized therein and who may seek discretionary actions from the Lead Agency and from other responsible agencies for those development activities, infrastructure improvements, and other actions and programs that may be authorized under the provisions of the Project, if so adopted. 2.0 INTRODUCTION TO FINDINGS 2.1 Applicable Provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines Section 21001(d) of the State Public Resources Code (California Environmental Quality Act, or "CEQA") codifies the important Statewide policy of "ensur[ing] that the long-term protection of the environment... shall be the guiding criterion in public decisions." In Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1988), the court noted that "[t]he foremost principle under CEQA is that the Legislature intended the act 'to be interpreted in such manner as to afford the fullest possible protection to the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory language."' CEQA contains a "substantive mandate" requiring public agencies to refrain from approving projects with significant environmental effects if "there are feasible alternatives or mitigation measures" that can substantially lessen or avoid those effects" (Mountain Lion Foundation v. Fish and Game Commission [1997]). The State CEQA Guidelines define the term "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors" (14 CCR 15364). As noted in Table 2.5-1 of the Final EIR, all potential impacts are found to be less than significant, or would be reduced below the level of significance with the identified mitigation measures as described in §21081(a)(1) of the CEQA. 2.2 Findings of Fact Section 21081 of the State Public Resources Code ("CEQA") provides, in part, that "no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out" unless, among other things, the agency makes one or more of three findings with respect to each significant effect. This document presents the findings of fact and substantial evidence that must be made by the City Council, acting in its capacity as the Lead Agency's decision- making body, prior to determining whether to certify the Final EIR and approve orconditionally approve the Project. The possible findings specified in Section 21081(a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA) and Section 15091(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, which shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record, include: 9 EIR PL2013-227 (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines); and/or (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the findings. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency (Section 21081(a)(2) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(2), State CEQA Guidelines); and/or (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR (Section 21081(a)(3) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(3), State CEQA Guidelines). With respect to those significant effects that are subject to finding (1), the City shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the Project or made a condition of Project approval to avoid or lessen significant environmental effects. With respect to those significant effects that are subject to finding (2), the findings shall not be made if the City has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. With respect to those significant effects that are subject to finding (3), the findings shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and alternatives. In accordance with Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council makes the herein referenced findings for each significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR. Those impacts are categorized under the corresponding topical headings presented in the Final EIR. Reference to numbers assigned to standard conditions, performance standards, and mitigation measures in these findings are as presented therein and may differ from those numbers or notations subsequently assigned by the Lead Agency should the City's decision-making body elect to approve or conditionally approve the Project, or some variation thereof. 2.3 Custodian and Location of Records The following information is provided in compliance with Section 21081.6(a)(2) of CEQA and Section 15091(e) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The documents, studies, reports, correspondence, and other material comprising the administrative record for the project are located at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department (21810 Copley Drive, Second Floor, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178) and are, upon appointment, available for review during the regular business hours of the Department. The Director of the Community Development Department (Director) is the custodian of record for the project. 3.0 GENERAL FINDINGS In addition to the specific findings identified herein, the Council hereby finds that: (1) The Council finds and certifies that the FEIR constitutes a complete, accurate, adequate, and good -faith effort at full disclosure under CEQA. (2) The Council finds and certifies that the FEIR and all environmental notices associated therewith have been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and local guidelines and procedures, (3) The Council has independently reviewed and analyzed the FEIR and the FEIR reflects the independent judgment of the Lead Agency's decision-making body; 10 EIR PL2013-227 (4) The Council has neither made any decisions nor taken any actions that would constitute an irretrievable commitment of resources toward the project prior to the certification of the FEIR, nor has the Council previously committed to a definite course of action with respect thereto or with regard to the use and utilization of the project site; (5) Under CEQA, the City is the appropriate "lead agency" for the project and, during these proceedings, no other agency has asserted or contested the City's "lead agency" status; (6) In compliance with Section 21092.5(a) of CEQA, at least 10 days prior to the certification of the FEIR, the City provided its written proposed responses to those public agencies that submitted comments to the Lead Agency on the DEIR; (7) The potential environmental impacts of the project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of certification of the FEIR; (8) Each of the issues to be resolved, as identified in the FEIR and/or subsequently raised in comments received by the City during the deliberations of its advisory and decision-making bodies', have been resolved to the satisfaction of the City Council; (9) The Council reviewed the comments received on the FEIR, including, but not limited to, those comments received following the dissemination of the DEIR, and the City's responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses presented add "significant new information," as defined under Section 15088.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines, to the DEIR; (10) The City's analysis of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions complies with the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, inclusive of those changes thereto resulting from the approval of SB 97, as approved by the Governor on August 24, 2007 and which became effective on March 18, 2010, (11) Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the FEIR are and have been available for review during the regular business hours of the City at the office of the Department from the custodian of records; and (12) Having received, reviewed, and considered all information and documents in the record, the Council has or will impose conditions, standards, and mitigation measures and has or will take other reasonable actions to reduce the environmental effects of the project to the maximum extend feasible and makes the findings stated herein. 5.0 FINDINGS REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION PROJECT THAT CAN FEASIBLY BE REDUCED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE With regards to the Project, the City Council has determined that existing statutes, regulations, uniform codes, project design features, in combination with those conditions, standards, and mitigation measures included in the Final EIR and adopted or likely to be adopted by the Council, will result in a substantial reduction of the following environmental effects and that each of the following environmental effects will either occur at or can be effectively reduced to a level that is less than significant. 5.1 Air Qualify and Greenhouse Gases 5.1 A Environmental Effect- Construction Impacts on Air Quality Emissions. The emissions of criteria pollutants (mainly fugitive dust and NOx) from the Project during construction are considered a potential significant impact that can be mitigated through feasible control measures. Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). 11 EIR PL2013-227 Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Air Quality impacts are addressed in Section 5.3 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: AQ -1 Prior to approval of a development on the project site the applicant shall develop and submit to the City and the AQMD a Comprehensive Construction Dust Control Program. The Program components shall include but not be necessarily limited to the following: • Scheduling — Minimize repeated disturbance of any area and reduce the time period between disturbance and subsequent construction or stabilize any already disturbed areas; • High Winds — Cease disturbance operations if dust control is not effective, • Disturbance Area — Keep disturbance operations if dust control is not effective; • Dust Control — Utilize dust suppression techniques, including: • Water exposed surfaces as needed to avoid visible dust leaving the construction site (typically 3 times/day); • Cover all stockpiles with tarps at the end of each day or as needed; • Provide water spray during loading and unloading of earthen materials; • Minimize in -out traffic from construction zone; • Require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard and cover all trucks hauling dirt or sand; and • Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is carried out from the construction site. • On -Site Road — Pave as soon as possible and restrict travel speed to 15 mph prior to paving; • Revegetation — Revegetate graded areas as soon as possible; and • Fencing — Install perimeter fencing with wind screens. AQ -2 The applicant of any development at the Project site shall develop and use reasonably available control measures for diesel exhaust emissions. Combustion emissions control that shall be applied during construction includes, but is not limited to the following: • Utilize well -tuned off-road construction equipment, • Establish a preference for contractors using Tier 3 or better heavy construction equipment; and • Enforce 5 -minute idling limits for both on -road trucks and off-road construction equipment. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.2 Environmental Effect Operational Impacts on Air Quality Emissions. The Project's ROG, NOX, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2,5 emissions during its operation are considered potentially significant impacts that can be mitigated through feasible control measures. 12 EIR Pr2013-227 Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Findinq: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Air Quality impacts are addressed in Section 5.3 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: AQ -3 For any permanent fireplaces or stoves shown in any building plans for development on the site, only gaseous -fueled devices as specified by the SCAQMD Rule 445 shall be approved. (c) Since, upon application of this mitigation measure, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.3 Environmental Effect: Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Pollutants — On -Site. Site A is over 1,000 feet from State Route 60 at its closest point, and this distance is sufficient so that diesel exhaust from the highway traffic can disperse and does not represent a significant impact. Because of the proximity of Site B to SR -60 and the associated truck traffic and diesel exhaust on this highway, the potential exposure of future residents within Site B to the adverse effects of diesel exhaust is considered a potential significant impact, which can be sufficiently reduced through mitigation measures. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Air Quality impacts are addressed in Section 5.3 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: AQ -4 Prior to final approval of any development within Parcel B, the applicant shall accomplish one of the following: A. Demonstrate on a site plan for the development that the nearest proposed residential location within Parcel B would be greater than 500 feet from the nearest point on State Route 60. B. In the event that development is proposed within 500 feet of State Route 60, prepare a health risk assessment in accordance with SCAQMD and CARB guidelines to evaluate in detail the effect of exposing residents to diesel exhaust associated with traffic on State Route 60. If indicated by the results of the health risk assessment, 13 EIR PL2013-227 provide additional measures to reduce exposure, such as through the use of residential air filtration systems with a "Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value' of 12 or higher, and demonstrate through the health risk assessment that the measures will reduce potential exposures below the level of significance, defined as follows. Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk >_ 10 in 1 million; Cancer Burden >0.5 excess cancer case (in areas >_1 in 1 million); and Chronic and Acute Hazard Index ? 1.0 (project increment). (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2 Biological Resources 5.2.1 Environmental Effect: Substantial Adverse Effect on an Endangered or Threatened Species. Construction of the Project could result in impacts to special status plant species and the loss of habitat for special status wildlife species observed or expected to occur in the Project area. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding:, (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Biological Resources are addressed in Section 5.4 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (c) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Bio -1 Special Status Species — Protocol surveys shall be conducted for the above - noted species within suitable habitat areas on Site A or Site B to determine presence/absence of special status species prior to approval of project design by the City. Subsequent surveys may also be required if development is not initiated within one year after the last surveys. If the surveys determine occupancy by any of the above -noted species, the applicant shall be required to consult with the resource agencies to obtain permit(s) under Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act and/or a Section 2081 concurrence from CDFW under the Endangered Species Act. The consultation process shall include preparation of a mitigation plan to avoid, relocate, or minimize impacts. Resource agency approvals for the project shall be provided to the City prior to the issuance of any grading permit(s). The project applicant shall implement the terms and conditions of the resource agency permits and associated mitigation plan, as defined therein in. Bio -2 Bird Nesting — a. If development within Site A or Site B commences within the bird breeding season, defined as February 15 to September 1, a preconstruction bird nesting 14 EIR PL2013-227 survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within seven days prior to the onset of construction activities. The limits of Project disturbance shall be surveyed for the presence of any active nests (common or special status). If no active nests are found, no further mitigation would be required. Results of the surveys shall be provided to the City and the resource agencies (if required). b. If nesting activity is present, construction shall not commence within the vicinity of the nest site until nesting activity has ended. Nests found during survey efforts shall be mapped on construction plans. To protect any nest site, the following construction restrictions will be required: 1) clearing limits shall be established a minimum of 300 feet in any direction from any occupied nest, and 2) access and surveying shall be restricted within 200 feet of any occupied nest. Any encroachment into the buffer areas shall only be allowed if it is determined by the biological monitor that the proposed activity shall not disturb the nest occupants. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 52.2 Environmental Effect Substantial Adverse Effect on Riparian Habitat or Other Sensitive CDFW or the USFWS. The Project area includes several CDFW-designated special status plant communities, namely coastal sage scrub (CSS), southern coast live oak woodland, and southern willow scrub. These habitats can support a variety of special status plant and wildlife species and are considered "rare and worthy of consideration." Development of Site A could result in the loss of up to 6.5 acres of native CSS, an additional 2.5 acres of landscaped CSS, and 0.9 acre of southern coast live oak. Development of Site B could result in the loss of up to 0.9 acre of native CSS, an additional 2.7 acres of landscaped CSS, 0.5 acre of southern coast live oak, and 1.6 acres of southern riparian scrub. Impacts on these resources can be reduced to less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures. Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Biological Resources are addressed in Section 5.4 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Bio -3 Coastal Sage Scrub — If development encroaches within or adjacent to established coastal sage scrub habitat areas within Site A or Site B, the project applicant shall develop a coastal sage scrub mitigation plan. Mitigation shall include on-site preservation, enhancement, and/or restoration at a 2:1 ratio to offset temporal loss of existing habitat and ensure no net long-term loss of habitat values as a result of the project implementation. The coastal sage scrub mitigation plan shall be approved by the City prior to the issuance of any grading permit. 15 EIR PL2013-227 The project applicant shall implement the approved mitigation plan in accordance with the plan's guidelines and performance standards. The mitigation plan shall be prepared in accordance with resource agency guidelines (included in Appendix B)and include the following information: responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to implement and supervise the plan, site plan, site preparation, planting and maintenance procedures, schedule, and perpetuity preservation (e.g., conservation easement or deed. restriction). Bio -4 Coastal Sage Scrub — Prior to commencement of any grading activities in areas within or adjacent to established coastal sage scrub habitat areas, construction limits shall be marked on grading plans by the construction supervisor and a qualified biological monitor. The biological monitor shall verify earth -moving equipment does not enter open space areas throughout construction phases. Bio -5 Oak Woodland — If the development encroaches within or adjacent to the established oak woodland present within Site A or Site B, the project applicant shall develop an oak woodland mitigation plan prepared by a licensed arborist with specific knowledge regarding oak tree preservation, relocation, and establishment. Mitigation shall include on-site preservation and/or relocation to the extent feasible, and a mitigation replacement ratio of no less than 3:1 for each tree removed, as required under the City's Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance. The mitigation plan shall be prepared in accordance with resource agency guidelines and include the following information: responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to implement and supervise the plan, site plan, site preparation, planting and maintenance procedures, schedule, and perpetuity preservation (i.e., conservation easement or deed restriction). The oak woodland mitigation plan shall be approved by the City prior to the issuance of any grading permit. The project applicant shall implement the mitigation plan as approved by the City and resource agencies in accordance with the plan's guidelines and performance standards. Bio -6 Oak Woodland — Prior to grading, construction limits shall be marked on grading plans by the construction supervisor and the licensed arborist and specify the installation of physical barriers, such as chain link fencing, to prevent encroachment beyond the construction limits. The biological monitor shall verify earth -moving equipment does not enter the oak woodland preservation area throughout construction phases. Bio -7 Riparian Vegetation — Mitigation for project impacts to riparian vegetation located within Site A or Site B shall consist of: 1) avoidance or minimization of impacts to the extent feasible, 2) compensation in the form of on-site expansion of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and the State of California and associated riparian habitat at a minimum or 2:1 ratio within the project's dedicated open space areas, and 3) on-site relocation of existing mature and healthy oak trees and/or replacement at a minimum 3:1 ratio. Any compensation through restoration should be on-site, if possible, and in kind. The mitigation plan shall be prepared in accordance with the City's Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance and resource agency guidelines (included in Appendix B) and include the following information: responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to implement and supervise the plan, site plan, site preparation, planting and maintenance procedures, schedule, and 16 EIR PL2013-227 perpetuity preservation (i.e., conservation easement or deed restriction). Upon concept approval by the City, the final plan will be developed with, and submitted to, the resource agencies as part of the regulatory permit process. Bio -8 Riparian Vegetation — Additional project -specific requirements may be determined by the resource agencies, namely the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Section 404), the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Section 401), the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Section 1600), and possibly the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Section 7). Resource agency approvals for the project shall be provided to the City prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The project applicant shall implement the terms and conditions of the resource agency permits and associated mitigation plan, as defined therein. Bio -9 Riparian Vegetation — Prior to grading near preserved waters and/or riparian habitat, construction limits shall be marked by the construction supervisor and the qualified biological monitor, and memorialized on the grading plan. The construction supervisor shall ensure the installation of physical barriers, such as chain link fencing, to prevent encroachment beyond the construction limits. The biological monitor shall verify earth -moving equipment does not enter waters and/or riparian preservation areas throughout the construction phase. Bio -10 Invasive Exotic Species - Landscape plans shall be submitted to the City for review and approval by a qualified biologist to ensure that species proposed do not include those known to colonize in adjacent open space areas (e.g., invasive, exotic plants). Landscaping bordering the open space areas shall incorporate species native to the project region (e.g., coast live oak, toyon, lemonade berry, sugar bush) to the extent practicable and shall be consistent with guidelines of the Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County. Bio -11 Human Activity - To limit the amount of human disturbance on open space areas on and adjacent to the project area,. signage and lighting plans shall be submitted to the City. Prior to obtaining occupancy permits, signs shall be installed to discourage human encroachment into the open space and habitat mitigation areas. Project street lighting in areas adjacent to open space or habitat areas shall be hooded and directed away from the open space areas to reduce light spillover. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.3 Environmental Effect: Substantial Adverse Effect on Federally Protected Wetlands as Defined By Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Waters of the United States (WoUS) and the state of California are present with the study area. Impacts to these resources would be substantially reduced through mitigation measures. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). 17 EIR PL2013-227 Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Biological Resources are addressed in Section 5.4 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: [See Mitigation Measures Bio -5 through Bio -11]. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.4 Environmental Effect: Conflict with any Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources. A total of 3.5 acres of southern coast live oak woodland is present within the 78 - acre project area. Development of Site A could potentially impact up to 0.9 acre of this woodland, while development of Site B could impact up to 0.5 acre. The City of Diamond Bar tree ordinance protects native trees greater than eight inches diameter breast height (dbh), including oak, walnut, sycamore, and willow trees, and requires compensatory mitigation for their loss. Applicable City requirements include a minimum 3:1 replacement ratio with a minimum box size of 24 inches. Mitigation Measures Bio -5 through Bio -11 also specifically address potential impacts to native trees. In addition to required compliance with City regulations, these measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Biological Resources are addressed in Section 5.4 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: [See Mitigation Measures Bio -5 through Bio -11]. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.5 Environmental Effect: Cumulative Impacts. Potential cumulative impacts to sensitive and/or special status species and waters of the United States and state, including associated riparian vegetation, that could result from project implementation would be offset by the expansion of like habitat within the project's dedicated open space areas as required by project -specific mitigation measures. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the 18 EIR PL2013-227 significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Biological Resources are addressed in Section 5.4 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: [See Mitigation Measures Bio -5 through Bio -11]. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.3 Cultural Resources 5.3.1 Environmental Effect Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of an Archaeological Resource. There is a possibility of cultural resources being located within Site A or Site B. Mitigation measures would assure that no significant adverse impacts to archaeological resources would occur. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations_ have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to cultural Resources are addressed in Section 5.5 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR whichwill be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: CR -1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits for any development on Site A or B, the project proponent shall prepare and submit to the City for review and approval a Cultural Resources Assessment (Phase I Assessment) that covers the entirety of the project site. The Cultural Resources Assessment shall be prepared by personnel determined to be qualified by the City. In the event no potential cultural resources are identified within areas planned for development, no further studies are required. If the site-specific Cultural Resources Assessment identifies potential cultural resources within the area(s) planned for development, Mitigation Measure CR -2 shall apply. CR -2 In areas planned for development in which potential cultural resources have been identified, the project proponent shall submit to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits a Phase II (e.g., test -level) Cultural Resources Report. The Phase II survey shall include, but shall not be limited to, the definition of site boundaries, information and analysis on the structure, content, nature, depth of subsurface cultural deposits and features, and site integrity. This information shall be used to address the National 19 EIR PL2013-227 Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historic Resources eligibility requirements for the resource in question, and make recommendations as to the suitability of the resource for listing in either Register. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent shall provide evidence acceptable to the City that the measures required to mitigate impacts to any identified cultural resource have been fully satisfied. In the event any identified cultural resource is determined be eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register, Mitigation Measure CR -3 shall apply. CR -3 If any cultural resource located within an area planned for development is identified as being potentially eligible for listing in either the National Register or the California Register, and project designs cannot be altered to avoid disturbing the resource, a Phase III Cultural Resources Assessment shall be prepared. The survey shall be submitted to the City, the appropriate Native American Tribe (if applicable), and the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) for review and approval. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent shall provide evidence acceptable to the City that the measures required by the city, the state, and/or other authority to mitigate impacts to a National Register or California Register eligible resource have been fully satisfied. CR -4 Prior to the issuance of grading permits for development on any site, the project proponent shall submit evidence to the City that a qualified archaeologist (as. determined by the City) has been retained to monitor ground -disturbing activities. The project proponent shall submit to the City for review and approval a monitoring plan that, at a minimum, establishes the amount, location, and duration of monitoring activities; identifies the authority granted to monitors to halt or redirect grading operations; and identifies the process to be followed in the event a potential cultural resource is detected during grading operations. As determined necessary by the City, the monitoring personnel may include participant-observer(s) from any Native American entity who has responded to consultation request for the project. Prior to commencement of ground - disturbing activities, the project proponent shall further submit evidence to the City that the construction contractor has been provided information regarding the purpose, need, and authority of the on-site monitors, as well as the practices required to safeguard previously identified or potential cultural resources. CR -5 Notwithstanding the results of any cultural resource assessment, in the event potential cultural or archaeological resources are uncovered or discovered during construction activities within any area planned for development on Site A or B, no further excavation or disturbance of the area where the resources were found shall occur until a qualified archaeologist evaluates the find. If the find is determined to be a potentially significant archaeological or paleontological resource, the project applicant shall, consult with the City to determine the appropriate actions as required by Public Resources Code §21083.2(b), (c) and (d). As appropriate, further assessment via the requirements detailed in Mitigation Measures CR -1 through CR -7 shall be required. Prior to the continuation of ground -disturbing activities in the vicinity of the find, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that appropriate measures have been taken to fully satisfy applicable cultural resource protection requirements established by the City, State, and/or other applicable regulatory authority. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no 20 EIR PL201 a-227 additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.3.2 Environmental Effect Destroy a Significant Paleontological Resource Site or Unique Geologic Feature. There is a possibility of paleontological resources being located within Site A or Site B. Mitigation measures would assure that no adverse impacts to paleontological resources would occur. Neither Site A nor Site B contains any unique geologic features. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Findinq: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Cultural Resources are addressed in Section 5.5 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: CR -6 Prior to the issuance of grading permits for development on either Site A or Site B, a paleontological resource literature search and field survey shall be conducted by a qualified paleontological investigator. If the survey determines that this area has no potential for paleontological resources, no further studies or mitigation are necessary. If the survey determines that the area has the potential for paleontological resources to be present, then compliance with Mitigation Measure CR -7 shall be required. CR -7 Prior to the issuance of any grading permits for development on either Site A or Site B, the project proponent shall submit to the City for review and approval a plan or program developed to mitigate impacts in the event paleontological resources are identified within the area of planned disturbance. This plan/program shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures: ® A qualified paleontological monitor shall be on site during grading and excavation operations of areas determined to be of high paleontological sensitivity. The paleontological monitor shall be empowered to halt or divert equipment temporarily in the event suspected paleontological resources are encountered. The qualified monitor shall be equipped to salvage paleontological specimens as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays. ® The paleontological monitor shall be equipped to collect and remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of small fossil mammals. To avoid significant construction delays, these sediments shall be removed from the area of active grading or off-site for further investigation. All recovered paleontological specimens, including small vertebrates contained in sediment samples, shall be prepared to a point of identification. All recovered paleontological specimens shall be identified and curated at an established museum repository with retrievable storage. 21 EIR PL2013-227 • A report that documents the findings of the program shall be prepared. The report shall provide an itemized inventory of the recovered specimens. Submission of the final report and inventory shall be made to the City and shall represent completion of the Program to Mitigate Impacts to Paleontological Resources. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.3.3 Environmental Effect Disturb any Human Remains. There is a possibility that human remains could be located within Site A or B. Mitigation measures would assure that no significant adverse impacts to buried human remains would occur. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Cultural Resources are addressed in Section 5.5 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: CR -8 In the event human remains are discovered during excavation, grading or construction activities within Site A or Site B, compliance with state law (Health and Safety Code §7050.5) would be required. These requirements are imposed on any construction activity in which human remains are detected, and include the following provisions: • There shall be no further excavation or disturbance ofthe site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the Los Angeles County Coroner is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required; and, If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. • The NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendant from the deceased Native American. • The most likely descendant may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code §5097.98, or where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further and future subsurface disturbance pursuant to Public Resources Code §5097.98(e). 22 ER PL2013-227 I . The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendant. 2. The most likely descendant is identified by the NAHC, but fails to make a recommendation within 48 hours of being granted access to the site; or 3. The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended oT required. 5.4 Geology, Soils and Mineral Resources 5.4.1 Environmental Effect Consistency with Applicable Plans and Regulations. Grading and development of the project could potentially create unstable geological conditions. Compliance with City standards and mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts below the level of significance. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA;' Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Geology, Soils and Mineral Resources are addressed in Section 5.6 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Geo -1 Grading Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Grading Plan to the City for review and approval. The Grading Plan and specifications shall be prepared and signed by a licensed civil engineer. The Grading Plan shall show in sufficient clarity the nature and extent of the provisions of the applicable codes and all relevant laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. At a minimum, the Grading Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. Specifically, the Grading Plan shall reflect a preference for landform grading techniques (e.g., contour grading) rather than mass grading and extensive cut slopes. Also, the Grading Plan should reflect a preference to balance grading on-site (to the extent feasible or practical, as determined by the City) for grading associated with the development area, access roads, internal driveways, and off-site improvements. Grading plans shall meet California Building Code Appendix J as adopted in City Municipal Code Section 15.00.310 and amended by Section 15.00.320. Geo -2 Construction Management Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Construction Management Plan to the City for review and approval. The Construction Management Plan shall contain sufficient clarity and detail to ensure that soil erosion, fugitive dust, and 23 EIR PI_2013-227 siltation will be managed in accordance with the provisions of the applicable codes and all relevant laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. At a minimum, the Construction Management Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. Geo -3 Hillside Management Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Hillside Management Plan to the City for review and approval. The Hillside Management Plan shall demonstrate compliance with all hillside development standards regulated by the City's Municipal Code (including Title 22 - Development Code, Article III - Site Planning and General Development Standards, Chapter 22.22 - Hillside Management). The Hillside Management Plan shall be consistent with the recommendations of the approved Geotechnical Report and the approved Grading Plan. At a minimum, the Hillside Management Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. Geo -4 Drainage and Urban Runoff Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Drainage and Urban Runoff Plan to the City for review and approval. The Drainage and Urban Runoff Plan shall demonstrate that all site runoff is managed in accordance with the provisions of the applicable codes and all relevant laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. At a minimum, the Drainage and Urban Runoff Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. Geo -5 Design and construction of the project shall conform to the California Building Code seismic standards as approved by the City Building and Safety Division as adopted in the City's Municipal Code Section 15.00.310. Geo -6 Location of any earthquake faults shall be identified and risks assessed by the geotechnical engineer. Geo -7 All grading and earthwork shall be performed in accordance with the Grading Ordinances of the City and the applicable recommendations of the approved Geotechnical Report. Geo -8 All earthwork and construction shall be completed in accordance with mitigation as defined in Public Resources Code §2693(c) to ensure that issues of potential liquefaction are addressed. Geo -9 To address potential soil settlement, minimize potential soil movement, and avoid potential damage to structures, all new building construction shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations of the approved Geotechnical Report and Grading Plan. Geo -10 To minimize soil erosion, all construction activity shall be conducted in accordance with the approved Construction Management Plan. Geo -11 A qualified geotechnical engineer shall be present during all site clearing and grading operations to test and observe earthwork construction, as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction and stability of the material. The geotechnical engineer shall reject any material that does not meet compaction and stability requirements per the recommendations and requirements of the approved Geotechnical Report and Grading Plan. Geo -12 All excavations shall comply with the current OSHA requirements. All cuts greater than 3 feet in depth should be sloped or shored. Temporary excavations should be sloped at 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter, up to a 24 EIR PL2013-227 maximum depth of 10 feet. Heavy construction equipment, building materials, excavated soil, and vehicular traffic should not be allowed within 5 feet of the top (edge) of the excavation. Where sloped excavations are not feasible due to site constraints, excavations shall require shoring. The design of the temporary shoring shall take into account lateral pressures exerted by the adjacent soil, and, where anticipated, surcharge loads due to adjacent buildings and any construction equipment or traffic expected to operate alongside the excavation - Geo -1 3 xcavation. Geo-13 Retaining walls shall be constructed according recommendations of the approved Geotechnical Report, with other applicable design standards established by Official. to the structural and in accordance the City Building (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.4.2 Environmental Effect Risk of Life and Property Due to Seismic -Induced Hazards. Ground shaking during earthquakes could expose structures or people to damage or injury. Compliance with Municipal Code requirements and mitigation measures would substantially reduce this impact. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Geology, Soils and Mineral Resources are addressed in Section 5.6 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Geo -14 Emergency and Secondary Access Plan - Prior to approval of the Final Plan, the Applicant shall submit an Emergency and Secondary Access Plan (or equivalent Internal Circulation Plan) to the City of Diamond Bar, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and the Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County for review and approval of the primary and secondary emergency accesses. Primary and secondary emergency access shall connect to off-site streets to allow residents of the Project adequate escape routes in case of a geologic event, soil failure or other major emergency. At a minimum, the Emergency and Secondary Access Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this FIR. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 25 EIR PL2013-227 5.4.3 Environmental Effect Risk of Life and Property Due to Non -seismic Soil and Slope Hazards. Unstable soil conditions could expose structures or people to damage or injury. Compliance with Municipal Code requirements and mitigation measures would substantially reduce this impact. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Geology, Soils and Mineral Resources are addressed in Section 5.6 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Geo -15 Positive drainage shall be established away from any project structure and shall be maintained throughout the life of the structure. Ponding of water shall not be allowed adjacent to any structure. Over -irrigation within landscaped areas adjacent to any structure shall be avoided. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5.5.1 Environmental Effect Consistency with Applicable Plans and Regulations. Implementation of the Project would introduce structures and people to an area that is currently unoccupied and undeveloped. Future development would be required to demonstrate compliance with adopted plans, policies, and regulations, including the City's Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan, which would reduce impacts below the level of significance. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Hazards and Hazardous Materials are addressed in Section 5.7 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Haz-1 Landscape Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Landscape Plan to the City for review and approval. The Landscape Plan and specifications shall be prepared and signed by a licensed landscape architect. The Landscape Plan shall show in sufficient clarity the nature and 26 EIR PL2Dt3-227 extent of the provisions of the applicable codes and all relevant laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations, including the provisions of City Municipal Code Section 22.24.050 (landscape standards) and Section 22.22.140 (fire protection in hillside area). At a minimum, the Landscape Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. Specifically, the Landscape Plan shall reflect provisions for a fire safety buffer zone and provisions for the long-term maintenance of required landscape at the Project Site. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.2 Environmental Effect: Generate Transport or Exposure to Hazardous Substances. The Phase I report prepared for the project site found no evidence of previous hazardous conditions. Mitigation Measures would ensure and reinforce compliance with standard requirements related to the use and handling of hazard substances during construction. Findings: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Hazards and Hazardous Materials are addressed in Section 5.7 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Haz-2 Construction Management Plan — Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Construction Management Plan to the City for review and approval. The Construction Management Plan shall contain sufficient clarity and detail to ensure that the transport, storage, and use of hazardous substances, including fuels, used during the construction phase will be managed in accordance with the provisions of the applicable codes and all relevant laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. At a minimum, the Construction Management Plan shall meet the performance standards identified in this EIR. Haz-3 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan — Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and in compliance with Los Angeles County and Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements, the Applicant shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City for review. The applicant will be required to submit the SWPPP to the state Water Quality Resources Control Board for review and approval. A copy of the state permit shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. The SWPPP shall contain sufficient clarity and detail to ensure that the transport, storage, and use of hazardous substances, including fuels, used during the construction phase will be managed in accordance with the provisions of the applicable codes and all relevant laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. The SWPPP shall contain a contingency program for the containment and management of accidental spills 27 EIR PL2013-227 of any hazardous substance. At a minimum, the SWPPP shall meet the performance standards identified in this EIR. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.3 Environmental Effect: Risk Due to Natural Hazards. The project is not located in an area identified by CAL FIRE as being a high fire hazard zone. Municipal Code requirements and mitigation measures would reduce the risk of wildland fire below the level of significance. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Hazards and Hazardous Materials are addressed in Section 5.7 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Haz4 Construction Fire Protection Plan — Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan to the City and Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County for review and approval. The Construction Fire Protection Plan (which can be a component of the Construction Management Plan) shall show in sufficient clarity and detail provisions for the safe clearance of surrounding brush and storage/removal of combustible materials. The Plan shall also identify temporary emergency access routes and notification procedures in the event of a fire emergency. The Construction Fire Protection Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.6 Hydrology and Water Quality 5.6.1 Environmental Effect: Alteration of Drainage Patterns Erosion Siltation Local Flooding and Surface Water Quality. The project's effects related to drainage, erosion, sedimentation, and surface water quality are considered a potential significant impact that can be mitigated through the combination of proper planning and design, construction practices, site planning and landscaping, and drainage controls. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). 28 EIR PL2013-227 Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Hydrology and Water Quality are addressed in Section 5.8 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Hyd-1 NPDES Construction General Permit - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide evidence of coverage under SWRCB Order No. 2009- 0009-DWQ, the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, or the most current version of that applicable permit. All applicable components from the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan prepared for the permit shall be incorporated into the grading plans. All Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be incorporated into the grading plans and construction activities, and all equipment or improvements related to BMPs shall be installed and maintained in accordance with any relevant manufacturer specifications and good engineering practices. A copy of the SWPPP will be required to be kept on the Project site during construction at an easily accessible location so that it can be made available at the time of an on-site inspection or upon request by a City inspector or other legal authority. The applicant will be required to implement such BMPs from commencement of construction activity until final stabilization of the project site is complete. Hyd-2 Storm Water Mitigation Plan - Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the project, the applicant shall submit to the City for review and approval a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). The SUSMP shall conform to the requirements of the City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 8.12.1695, and requirements of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7 Noise 5.7.1 Environmental Effect Construction Noise Impacts. Construction activities are expected to meet the applicable criteria from the City's Municipal Code at the nearby residences to the southwest of Site B and at the nearest occupied rooms at the high school (daytime short-term construction noise levels no more than 75 dB(A) on normal work days). However, because the nearest high school rooms are in temporary buildings that are likely to have less noise insulation there could be some disruption of classroom activities from construction noise. This is considered a potential significant impact that can be mitigated with routine construction noise controls and proper scheduling. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding 29 EIR PL2013-227 (a) Project -related and cumulative Noise impacts are addressed in Section 5.10 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: N-1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the project, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the City a Construction Noise Mitigation Plan in order to demonstrate compliance with the numerical criteria in Section 22.28.120 of the Municipal Code relating to allowable construction noise. The plan shall address noise levels during construction to the portable classrooms on the campus of Diamond Ranch High School, as well as noise levels at nearby residential areas, and identify measures to minimize those noise levels. The Construction Noise Mitigation Plan shall include the following construction practices to minimize construction noise levels: All mobile equipment shall have properly operating and maintained mufflers; Stockpiles of construction material or waste shall be located as far as possible from existing residences and the Diamond Ranch High School property, Mobile source equipment during the noisiest grading activities operating within 300 feet of the school shall either occur during school based holidays or after students at Diamond Ranch High School are our for the day; and ® Stationary equipment such as generators or dewatering pumps continually operating within 500 feet of any single-family residential home or within 250 feet of any portable classroom on the Diamond Ranch High School campus shall be equipped with a temporary noise barrier as close as possible to the noise source that can reduce noise levels by 10.0 dB(A). (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7.2 Environmental Effect On-site Operational Noise Impacts. Site A is impacted by traffic noise from Chino Hills Parkway and Site B is impacted by traffic noise from the SR -60 freeway. Mitigation would reduce these impacts below the level of significance. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Noise impacts are addressed in Section 5.10 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: 30 FIR PL2013-227 N-2 This measure applies only to Site A. Prior to approval of a tentative subdivision map or Development Review for Site A, the applicant shall do one of the following: • Submit a development site plan that shows all areas within Site A intended for residential uses are located at a distance equal to or greater than 150 feet from the centerline of Chino Hills Parkway, OR • If development of residential uses is proposed within 150 feet of Chino Hills Parkway, prepare and submit a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements, as specified in Section 22.28.090 of the Municipal Code, in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. The analysis shall include updated estimates of outdoor noise levels, and shall identify measures to reduce outdoor living area noise levels to 65 dB(A) CNEL and demonstrate that indoor living areas will have noise levels no greater than 40 dB(A) CNEL in accordance with California Building Code 1207. Measures to achieve these standards may include, but are not limited to: • Construct a noise wall or berm to shield ground floor living areas from noise; (not effective for upper stories), • Situate balconies or patios on the side of the building away from Chino Hills Parkway such that they are noise protected by the building itself, or, ® Equip patios or balconies having a line of sight to Chino Hills Parkway with a plexiglass or transparent enclosure or similar noise barrier. N-3 This measure applies only to Site B. Prior to approval of a tentative subdivision map or Development Review for Site B, the applicant shall do one of the following: ® Submit a development site plan demonstrating that all areas within Site B intended for residential uses are located at a distance equal to or greater than 1,000 feet from the centerline of SR -60, OR • If development of residential uses Is proposed within 1,000 feet of SR - 60, prepare a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements, as specified in Section 22.28.090 of the Municipal Code, in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. The analysis shall include updated estimates of outdoor noise levels, and shall identify measures to reduce outdoor living area noise levels to 65 dB(A) CNEL and demonstrate that indoor living areas will have noise levels no greater than 40 dB(A) CNEL in accordance with California Building Code 1207. Measures to achieve these standards may include, but are not limited to: • Construct a noise wall or berm to shield ground floor living areas from noise; (not effective for upper stories), • Situate balconies or patios on the side of the building away from SR -60 such that they are noise protected by the building itself; or, ® Equip patios or balconies having a line of sight to SR -60 with a plexiglass or transparent enclosure or similar noise barrier. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no 31 EIR PL2013-227 additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.8 Public Services and Utilities 5.8.1 Environmental Effect: Increased Demand for Fire Protection Services. Development of 490 additional housing units would create additional demand for fire protection services, which can be mitigated to acceptable levels with the measures identified. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Public Services and Utilities are addressed in Section 5.12 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Pub -1 Construction Fire Protection Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan to the City and Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County for review and approval. The Construction Fire Protection Plan (which can be a component of the Construction Management Plan) shall show in sufficient clarity provisions for the safe clearance of surrounding brush and storage/removal of combustible materials. The Plan shall also identify temporary emergency access routes and notification procedures in the event of a fire emergency. The general contractor shall be responsible for carrying out provision of the Construction Fire Protection Plan and communicating it to all subcontractors. The Construction Fire Protection Plan should include, but not be limited to, the following: Procedures for reporting emergencies to the Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County, ® Procedures for emergency notification, evacuation, and/or relocation of all persons in the building under construction on the Project site; Procedures for hot work operations, management of hazardous materials and removal of combustible debris and maintenance of emergency access roads; Floor plans identifying the locations of exits, exit stairs, exit routes and portable fire extinguishers; ® The name and contact phone number of the person(s) responsible for compliance with the Construction Fire Protection Plan; Demonstrate that all construction sites shall be accessible by fire department apparatus by means of roadways having an all-weather driving surface of not less than 20 feet of unobstructed width and engineered to support the live load of fire apparatus. Demonstrate that construction vehicles will be parked a minimum of 20 feet from new buildings under construction; 32 EIR PL2013-227 ® Demonstrate that adequate hydrants or interim fire flow water supply is installed prior to combustible construction materials accumulating on site; a Demonstrate that where automatic fire sprinkler systems are required to be installed in new buildings, the system would be placed in service as soon possible. ® Provisions for portable fire extinguishers as directed by the LACFPD. The general contractor shall ensure that an adequate number of individuals are trained in the proper use of portable fire extinguishers. ® Prohibition of smoking anywhere inside or on the roof of new buildings under construction. ® Provisions to ensure that all tanks and containers are marked with the name of the product and "FLAMMABLE -KEEP FIRE AND FLAME AWAY." ® Demonstrate that wood, cardboard, packing material, form lumber, and similar combustible debris would not be accumulated within buildings. ® Demonstrate that hot work (i.e., including any work involving operations capable of initiating fires or explosions, such as cutting, welding, brazing, soldering, grinding, thermal spraying, thawing pipe, torch applied roofing, or any other similar activity) and use of equipment would be in accordance with pre -site inspection, fire watch, and post - inspection procedures to be defined in the plan. Pub -2 Operational Fire Management Plan - Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit an Operational Fire Management Plan to the City and Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County for review and approval. The Operational Fire Management Plan shall show in sufficient clarity provisions for the long-term management and maintenance of the project, including provisions for safe clearance of surrounding brush and storage/removal of combustible materials. The Plan shall also identify permanent emergency access routes and notification procedures in the event of a fire emergency. The Operational Fire Management Plan shall meet the minimum performance standards identified in this EIR. The Operational Fire Management Plan should include, but not be limited to, the following information and measures to reduce safety risks and frequency of calls to the LACFPD for fire protection and emergency medical service: ® Provisions for implementation, maintenance and inspection of all required fire sprinkler systems. ® Provisions for adequate primary and secondary access to the Project, including security measures, maintenance, and emergency evacuation planning along such routes. ® Identification of emergency exits within the building, stairwells, locations of fire extinguishers and fire alarms, and provisions for period safety inspections and maintenance of such facilities. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.8.2 Environmental Effect: Increased Demand for Police Protection Services. Development of 490 additional housing units would create additional demand for police protection services, which can be mitigated to acceptable levels with the measures identified. 33 EIR PL2013-227 Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative impacts to Public Services and Utilities are addressed in Section 5.12 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: Pub -3 CPTED — Construction Phase — Prior to initiation of construction activities, the Applicant or Construction Contractor shall provide a CPTED Plan (addressing construction strategies) to the City of Diamond Bar and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. The CPTED Construction Strategies shall outline crime prevention techniques to be implemented throughout the duration of construction activity at the Project Site(s). Such CPTED Construction Strategies shall include but are not limited to: 1) provisions for construction area fencing; 2) provisions to secure, disable or lock up construction equipment stored at the Project Site(s); and 3) provisions for a security firm to patrol on-site or security monitoring providing surveillance during non -construction hours to deter criminal activity at the Project Site(s). Pub -4 CPTED — Project Design and Occupancy — Prior to approval of the Final Plan, the Applicant shall submit a CPTED Strategy Guide that identifies key techniques for residential uses which deter criminal activity that have been incorporated (or will be incorporated) into the Project design and/or future maintenance. The CPTED Strategy Guide shall identify along with each proposed strategy measure the associated program for implementation. For example, the CPTED Strategy Guide should identify which measures would be incorporated into the Landscape Plan that would ensure that the landscape design provides adequate defensible space surrounding buildings. Or the CPTED Strategy Guide would identify which measures would be managed by the property management upon building occupancy (i.e., maintenance of surveillance equipment and coordination of on-site patrols). The CPTED Strategy Guide should incorporate techniques similar or equivalent to, but not limited to, those identified by through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development guidelines for single-family homes and neighborhood development. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9 Traffic and Circulation 5.9.1 Environmental Effect Conflicts with Applicable Circulation SVstem Plans and Requlations. The project would generate an estimated 3,259 vehicular trips per day, including 250 trips during the AM peak hour and 304 trips during the PM peak hour. 34 EIR PL2013-227 Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Traffic and Circulation impacts are addressed in Section 5.14 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: T-1 The applicant of future development on the Project site shall pay a fair -share of the improvement costs at the intersection of Phillips Ranch Road at Village Loop Road. The improvements at this intersection shall include the re -striping of eastbound shared through/right turn lane as an exclusive right -turn lane. Improvements will also include the modification of the existing signal to allow for an eastbound right -turn overlapping phase. The improvement cost at this intersection is estimated at $8,000 (2012 dollars). The Project fair -share percentage (based on greatest peak hour impact) at this impacted intersection for the Year 2034 Cumulative plus Project traffic conditions totals 14.09%. The applicant of future development on the Project site shall therefore pay a fair share of $1,127.20 (2012 dollars) based on the fair share 14.09% contribution. The applicant of future development on the Project site shall pay said fair share of $1,127.20 (2012 dollars) prior to issuance of any building permit on the Project site. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.2 Environmental Effect: Site Access. The Project would require access from Chino Hills Parkway. This intersection is currently projected to operate at an acceptable level of service with an unsignalized intersection. However, future conditions could warrant installation of a traffic signal based on conditions at the time of development. Adequate line of sight is required to ensure safe operation of this intersection. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Traffic and Circulation impacts are addressed in Section 5.14 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: T-2 Prior to approval and recordation of a final subdivision map or approval of street improvement plans, a traffic signal warrant analysis shall be prepared by the Project Applicant in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. If a 35 EIR PL2013-227 signal is determined to be warranted, the Project applicant shall design and install a signalized intersection prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the development. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.3 Environmental Effect Project Entry Line of Sight Analysis. The sight distance evaluation prepared for the Project entrance was based on the criteria and procedures set forth by Caltrans in the State's Highway Design Manual for "Private Road Intersections." The sight distance evaluation concluded that sight distances would adequate at the Project entrance, provided that landscaping and/or hardscape to the north and south of the Project driveway, and within the median on Chino Hills Parkway, are designed such that a driver's clear line of sight is not obstructed and does not threaten vehicular or pedestrian safety. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Traffic and Circulation impacts are addressed in Section 5.14 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: T-3 Prior to approval and recordation of any final subdivision map or approval of street improvement plans, a note shall be placed on the map identifying sight distance standards in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the proposed development, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City Engineer that the design and installation of the project entry meets all applicable sight distance safety requirements. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.4 Environmental Effect Emergency Site Access. In order to ensure public safety in the event of an emergency or natural disaster, it is desirable to have a secondary access route for developments. Diamond Ranch High School is immediately adjacent to both Site A and Site B, and a secondary access could potentially be provided to serve both the high school and the Project site. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA, Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding 36 (a) Project -related and cumulative Traffic and Circulation impacts are addressed in Section 5.14 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: T-4 Prior to approval and recordation of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant of future development on the Project site shall develop and submit a Secondary Site Access Plan to the City. This plan shall outline and describe an area that shall be utilized in developing a secondary ingress/egress point onto the Project site. If feasible, the emergency access shall be coordinated with Pomona Unified School District and the Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency so as to also provide emergency access to Diamond Ranch High School. The secondary access point shall be gated and only be used in emergency situations where residents of the Project site need to quickly and safely evacuate. The Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department shall be provided "emergency access keys" for access to the Project site from said secondary access point in the event of an emergency. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.5 Environmental Effect Hazardous Design Features. The project is required to comply with design standards to ensure public safety. Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Traffic and Circulation impacts, are addressed in Section 5.14 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final FIR which will be incorporated into the Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: T-5 Prior to the approval of any subdivision map, grading permit or engineering/encroachment permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a site plan demonstrating compliance with all applicable engineering and safety standards for streets, pedestrian walkways and bicycle lanes in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.6 Environmental Effect Temporary Construction Impacts. During construction, temporary traffic impacts could occur. 37 EIR PL2013-227 Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1), namely: "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA; Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative Traffic and Circulation impacts are addressed in Section 5.14 in the Final EIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Following are the Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR which will be incorporated into the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project, to reduce this impact to a level below significance: T-6 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant of future development on the Project site shall submit to the City Engineer a Construction Worker Parking and Equipment Staging Plan that shall minimize the disturbance to the surrounding residential neighborhoods and schools to the greatest extent feasible. Unless otherwise authorized, contractors and other construction personnel performing development activities in proximity to the Project site shall be prohibited from parking and/or operating construction equipment, trailers, dumpsters, or other material within a public right-of-way or other public property. T-7 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant of future development on the Project site shall submit to the City Engineer a Construction Traffic Mitigation Plan. The plan shall identify the following: • The travel and haul routes to be used by construction vehicles; • The points of ingress and egress for all construction vehicles; • If applicable, temporary street or lane closures, temporary striping, and temporary signage; • Location of materials storage and construction equipment staging areas; • Maintenance plans to remove spilled debris from roadway surfaces; and • The hours during which construction equipment may be used and brought on/off the Project site. The applicant of future development on the Project site shall keep all of the haul routes clean and free of debris including, but not limited to, dirt and gravel from construction operations. The applicant shall clean adjacent streets and roadways, per the City, of any material that may have been spilled, blown, or tracked onto adjacent streets. Hauling or construction transportation of heavy material shall only be allowed between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, unless authorized differently by the City. No hauling or transport shall be allowed during nighttime hours, weekends, or state/federal holidays. T-8 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant of future development on the Project site shall develop and submit to the City a Traffic Control Plan. This plan shall be consistent with the Southern California Chapter of the American Public Works Association's "Work Area Traffic Control Handbook," the California Department of Transportation's "Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones", or any alternative reference 38 EIR PL2013-227 accepted by the City. The plan shall describe the applicant's plans to efficiently and safely maintain vehicular and non -vehicular access and movement along local roadways throughout the construction period. The plan shall delineate detour routes, the hours, duration and frequency of such restrictions, and the emergency access and safety measures that will be implemented during closures or restrictions of roadways and lanes. (c) Since, upon application of these mitigation measures, none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional conditions, standards, and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 6.0 FINDINGS REGARDING THE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION PROJECT THAT CANNOT FEASIBLY BE REDUCED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED With regards to the Project, the City Council has determined that existing statutes, regulations, uniform codes, project design features, conditions, standards, and mitigation measures included in the FEIR will result in a substantial reduction of all of those environmental effects identified in the FEIR to a level that is less than significant. 7.0 FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that Environmental Impact Reports "...shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives". The selection of alternatives and their discussion must "foster informed decision-making and public participation" (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(a). Emphasis added). A fundamental consideration in the selection of alternatives for the Project is the requirement of state housing law that the City rezone property to accommodate development at least 490 new housing units at a density of at least 30 units/acre. Because of this legal requirement, no alternative uses of the site (such as lower -density residential or commercial development) were considered since they would not meet this fundamental purpose of the project. As presented in Section 5 above, all potentially significant effects of the Project have been adequately mitigated to a level below significant. In other words, "changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the Final EIR" (Section 21081(a)(1) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA); Section 15091(a)(1), State CEQA Guidelines). 7.1 Alternative 1 (No Project) Alternative 1 (No Project) Description: Under Alternative 1, future use of the site would continue to be regulated by the existing General Plan land use and zoning regulations. According to General Plan Land Use Element Figure 1-2, the Project site is designated "PA- 1/SP" (Planning Area 1, Specific Plan Overlay). Strategy 1.6.1 of the Land Use Element (p. I- 16) states that: "A master plan shall be developed for each area of the City designated as a Planning Area (PA). The location of each Planning Area is shown on Figure 1-2. Descriptions of each area and the contemplated land use designations are defined as follows: 39 EIR PL2013-227 a) Planning Area 1 PA -1 is located within the incorporated City south of the Pomona Freeway west of Chino Hills Parkway. This 720± acre vacant area is part of the larger Tres Hermanos Ranch property spanning Grand Avenue, including property within the City of Chino Hills. PA -1 incorporates the Agriculture (AG) land use designation permitting single family residential at a maximum density of 1.0 dwelling unit per 5 gross acres. Facilities appropriate for this site should be designed based upon a. vision for the future and not merely extend the patterns of the past. Such facilities may include educational institutions, reservoir for practical and aesthetics purposes, commercial developments which are. not typical of those found in the area and a variety of residential, churches, institutional and other uses which are complimentary to the overall objective of having a master planned area. Development within the Tres Hermanos area should be designed so as to be a part of the Diamond Bar community as well as compatible with adjacent lands." For purposes of this alternative, a 30 -acre (gross) portion of the Project site would be developed with single-family homes at a density of one unit per five gross acres, and a total of six single-family homes. Finding: For most issues that are related to the disturbance of undeveloped land (e.g., Aesthetics, Biological Resources) this alternative is superior to the Project. However, for Land Use and Planning this alternative is inferior because it would not maintain consistency with regional plans and the City's Housing Element. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City's analysis of Project Alternative 1 is presented in Section 6.3.1 in the Final EIR; this analysis is incorporated by reference herein and summarized below. (b) AESTHETICS: Under this alternative, less grading, landform alteration and disturbance of natural vegetation would be required in order to accommodate six single-family homes as compared to the Project. Therefore, visual impacts resulting from development would be reduced. However, the analysis of the Project concluded that aesthetics impacts would be less than significant, and therefore the No Project alternative would not eliminate or reduce significant impacts of the Project. (c) AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: The only agricultural activity on the site is livestock grazing. Under this alternative, it is assumed that the same amount of land (30 acres) would be removed from grazing activity as for the Project. No forestry resources would be impacted by either this alternative or the Project. Therefore, impacts would be similar for this alternative and the Project, and no significant impacts would be eliminated or reduced. (d) AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Air pollutant emissions are caused during construction and ongoing operations associated with transportation and other types of energy use by new development. Development under this alternative would be expected to generate a reduced quantity of air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions during construction and operation as compared to the Project because less grading would be required and fewer vehicle trips would be generated. No significant impacts associated with air emissions were identified for the Project, and therefore this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts related to this topic. 40 EIR PL2013-227 (e) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Sensitive biological resources are present on the Project site. Under this alternative, it is assumed that a similar amount of land would be disturbed to create roadway access and residential lots for six homes as compared to the Project, since owners of the five -acre parcels would be permitted to replace natural vegetation with ornamental landscaping, hardscape, etc. As a result, potential impacts would be similar or potentially greater than for the Project, which could include common areas that encompass sensitive vegetation and remain undisturbed. However, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce the impacts of the Project below the level of significance; therefore, no significant impacts would be eliminated or reduced under this alternative. (f) CULTURAL RESOURCES: Sensitive archaeological or paleontological resources could exist on the Project site. Under this alternative, it is assumed that a reduced amount of land would be disturbed to create roadway access and building pads for six homes as compared to the Project, and as a result, the potential to disturb cultural resources would likely be less. However, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce the impacts of the Project below the level of significance; therefore, no significant impacts would be eliminated or reduced under this alternative. (g) GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Under this alternative, grading to create roadway access and building pads would be reduced in comparison to the Project, and fewer people and structures would be exposed to hazards such as earthquakes and landslides. However, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce the impacts of the Project below the level of significance; therefore, no significant impacts would be eliminated or reduced under this alternative. (h) HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Under the No Project Alternative, the construction period would likely be shorter and fewer people would be exposed to potential risks from hazardous materials used in construction. Also, fewer people would be exposed to wildland fires that could occur on-site after occupancy. However, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce the impacts of the Project below the level of significance; therefore, no significant impacts would be eliminated or reduced under this alternative. (i) HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Under the No Project Alternative, the future development "footprint" from grading to create roadway access and building pads on the Project site would be reduced. As a result, required drainage improvements would . also be reduced as compared to the Project. During the public scoping process, comments were submitted regarding existing drainage problems in the residential neighborhood located on Scenic Ridge Drive northeast of the Project site, and concerns were expressed regarding the potential for the Project to exacerbate the existing problems. Mitigation measures have been identified to address potential impacts related to drainage from the Project, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, while the No Project alternative would be expected to require less extensive drainage improvements compared to the Project, it would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts. (j) LAND USE AND PLANNING: The General Plan Land Use Element and zoning regulations would not be amended under this alternative. Consequently, the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan would be internally inconsistent, which would be a violation of state law. In addition, the City's General Plan would be inconsistent with regional plans. These land use conflicts would represent a significant adverse impact. In addition, this alternative would not meet the basic project objective of accommodating the City's fair share of regional housing needs. 41 EIR PL2013-227 (k) NOISE: Noise impacts are generated during construction and from traffic during long- term operation. This alternative would be expected to result in reduced noise impacts as compared to the Project due to a shorter construction period and substantially less traffic added to the road network. However, with the identified mitigation measures, impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with respect to noise. (1) POPULATION AND HOUSING: This alternative would result in a reduced inducement to population growth compared to the Project since it would allow only six additional homes. However, the impacts of the Project would be less than significant in this regard; therefore, this alternative would not reduce or eliminate any significant impacts. Because the Project site is vacant, neither the No Project alternative nor the Project would result in displacement of people or homes. Therefore, this alternative would be identical to the Project with respect to this potential impact. (m) PUBLIC SERVICES: Under the No Project Alternative, development of six homes would be allowed on the site. Therefore, risks due to police protection, fire or paramedic services would be reduced compared to the Project. However, with the identified mitigation measures, impacts of the Project would be less than significant, therefore, this alternative would not reduce or eliminate any significant impacts. (n) RECREATION: Under the No Project Alternative, demand for parks and recreation would be reduced compared to the Project. However, with the identified mitigation measures, impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this alternative would not reduce or eliminate any significant impacts. (o) TRANSPORATION/TRAFFIC: Under the No Project Alternative, traffic generation would be substantially reduced compared to the Project. However, with the identified mitigation measures, impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this alternative would not reduce or eliminate any significant impacts. Since this alternative would not provide an opportunity to provide shared emergency access for Diamond Ranch High School, it is considered inferior to the Project in this regard. (p) UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Under the No Project Alternative, demand for utilities and public services would be reduced compared to the Project. However, with the identified mitigation measures, impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this alternative would not reduce or eliminate any significant impacts. 7.2 Alternative Locations for the Project With regard to alternative locations for a project, CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(f)(2) provides that 'The key question and first step in analysis is whether any of the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project in another location. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR." (Emphasis added). The environmental analysis presented in Chapter 5 of the Final EIR concludes that all of the potential impacts of the Project would either be less than significant, or would be reduced below the level of significance by mitigation measures identified in the analysis of each topic. Therefore, according to CEQA, no analysis of alternative site locations is required (§15126.6(f) (2)). However, comments were received during the public scoping process requesting that the City consider other locations for the Project. In order to address those public comments and concerns, two alternative locations for the Project have been evaluated and are discussed in Section 6.3 of the Final EIR. These alternative locations include multiple infill sites in a developed light industrial portion of the City, and another location within the Tres Hermanos property approximately one mile south of the Project site. 42 EIR PL2013-227 7.3 Alternative 2 (Infill Sites) Alternative 2 (Infill Sites) Description: Under this alternative, General Plan and zoning amendments for separate infill sites listed in Table 6.3-1 below and shown in Exhibit 6-1 would be adopted to allow development of 490 housing units. These sites are located in the northwestern portion of the city, north of the SR -60 freeway, and most are currently developed with light industrial buildings. Finding: For most issues that are related to disturbance of undeveloped land (e.g., Aesthetics, Biological Resources) this alternative is superior to the Project because the sites have previously been disturbed by development. However, for other impacts such as Recreation and Utilities/Service Systems the impacts of this alternative would be similar to the Project since both alternatives would generate a similar demand for public services and facilities. This alternative would be inferior to the Project with respect to Land Use and Planning because it would not maintain consistency with the Housing Element. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City's analysis of Project Alternative 1 is presented in Section 6.3.2 in the Final EIR; this analysis is incorporated by reference herein and summarized below. (b) AESTHETICS: All the parcels included in this alternative are presently developed, and are surrounded by a fully urbanized area. Some parcels are located adjacent to residential areas while others are adjacent to similar industrial and/or commercial development. There are no natural resources remaining or significant aesthetics views that could be adversely affected by redevelopment of any of the sites for high-density residential use. No designated historic structures exist within the area. Increased lighting could occur with redevelopment; however, exterior lighting already exists on the buildings on these sites, and the City Municipal Code contains provisions to minimize potential impacts of increased lighting on any adjacent sensitive uses. While this alternative would avoid the conversion of vacant land to urban uses, the impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts with regard to aesthetics. (c) AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: No agriculture or forestry resources would be affected under this alternative, and therefore, impacts would be less than for the Project. However, no significant impacts to agriculture and forestry resources were identified for the Project; therefore, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts related to this topic. (d) AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Air pollutant emissions are caused during construction and ongoing operations associated with transportation and other types of energy use by new development. While development under this alternative would be expected to generate a similar quantity of air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions during construction and operation as the Project, existing uses on these sites already generate air pollutants, therefore, the net change in emissions would be less than for the Project. However, no significant impacts associated with air emissions were identified for the Project; therefore, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts related to this topic. (e) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: All parcels included in this Alternative are currently developed, and are surrounded by urban uses. There are no natural resources remaining on these sites. Subsequent redevelopment of these sites for high-density residential use would have reduced potential to cause biological impacts. 43 EIR PL2013-227 While the Project could potentially impact biological resources, the identified mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, while this alternative would be superior to the Project with respect to biological resources, it would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts in this regard. (f) CULTURAL RESOURCES: All the parcels included in this Alternative are presently developed, and are surrounded by urbanized area. Consequently, any archaeological resources that may have existed would likely have been eliminated during construction of the existing uses. Sub -surface paleontological resources could potentially exist,in this area; therefore, redevelopment of these sites could impact cultural resources. With the identified mitigation measures, the Project would not result in significant impacts to cultural resources; therefore, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts in this regard. (g) GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Under the Infill Sites Alternative, future development would occur within a previously developed area. Because this alternative is located on land that is relatively flat, previously urbanized and accessible by an existing roadway network, potential impacts related to geology and soils would be reduced in comparison to those anticipated with the Project. Because the Infill Sites are not located in a hillside area, there would be no need for a Hillside Management Plan and hillside, slope stability and landslide concerns would not be anticipated. Mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce potential impacts of the Project with regard to geology and soils to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, while this alternative would be expected to result in reduced potential geological impacts as compared to the Project site, it would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts. (h) HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: While this alternative would be expected to result in reduced potential risk for some natural/manmade hazards (such as wildfires or landslides), the potential risk for other hazards (such as exposure to hazardous substances) would be increased as compared to the Project. With the identified mitigation measures, potential impacts of the Project would be less than significant; therefore, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts. (i) HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Under the Infill Sites Alternative, future development would occur within a previously developed area in the northwest area of the City. Because this alternative is located in a developed area, existing drainage facilities would be expected to serve the new residential development, and therefore required drainage improvements would be reduced as compared to the Project site. During the public scoping process, comments were submitted regarding existing drainage problems in the residential neighborhood located on Scenic Ridge Drive northeast of the Project site. Mitigation measures have been identified to address potential impacts related to drainage from the Project, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, while this alternative would be expected to require less extensive drainage improvements compared to the Project, it would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts. (j) LAND USE AND PLANNING: CEQA defines land use and planning impacts as the physical division of an established community, conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the General Plan, Specific Plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect; and/or conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. 44 EIR PL2D13-227 All of the parcels included in this alternative have been previously developed, and are surrounded by urbanized area. The General Plan Land Use Element designates all of these parcels for Light Industrial use, with the exception of a small parcel located adjacent to the SR -60 Freeway at Brea Canyon Road which is designated for Professional Office (OP) use. Surrounding adjacent areas are developed with residential uses varying from 5 to 20 dwelling units per acre. With regard to physical division of an established community, no significant impacts were identified for the Project and this alternative would similarly have no significant impacts. Neither this alternative nor the Project would result in significant conflicts with land use plans or policies, and neither area is within an area covered by a habitat conservation plan. Therefore, impacts for this alternative would be similar to the Project. (k) NOISE: Noise impacts are generated during construction and during long-term operation. Selection of this alternative site would be expected to result in similar noise impacts as compared to the Project because a similar amount of construction would occur and a similar volume of traffic would be generated. However, some of the sites are immediately adjacent to the SR -60 freeway, and would be exposed to a higher level of traffic noise compared to the Project site. With the identified mitigation measures, the impacts of the Project would be less than significant, and this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with respect to noise. (1) POPULATION AND HOUSING: Potential impacts with regard to population and housing include inducement of population growth or displacement of people or homes. This alternative would result in a similar inducement to population growth as the Project since both would allow up to 490 additional homes. Neither this alternative nor the Project would result in displacement of people or homes, and therefore impacts would be similar. (m) PUBLIC SERVICES: As with the Project, it is anticipated that any new development of the Infill Sites would be required to comply with existing regulations to ensure adequate emergency access, construction in compliance with fire safety and building codes, provisions for adequate fire flow and hydrant access. With the identified mitigation measures, the impacts of the Project would be less than significant, and this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with respect to fire and police protection. (n) RECREATION: All residential development must provide for dedication of parkland or pay in -lieu fees in accordance with Section 21.32 of the City's Subdivision Code. No significant impacts to recreation were identified in association with the Project, and anticipated impacts related to this alternative would be similar to the Project. (o) TRANSPORATION/TRAFFIC: The Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the Project identified one intersection (Phillips Ranch Road at Village Loop Road) where potentially significant impacts would require mitigation to conform to adopted level of service standards. Due to the greater distance between the Infill Sites Alternative and that affected intersection, it is less likely that this impact would occur; however, impacts could occur at other intersections closer to the Infill Sites. The amount of vehicular traffic generated would be the same for this alternative as compared to the Project since the same number of new housing units would be anticipated. However, since new housing at the Infill Sites would replace existing industrial uses, the net increase in traffic would likely be less than the Project, since it is a vacant site. However, since mitigation measures have been identified that would 45 EIR PL2013-227 reduce impacts of the Project to a less than significant level, the Infill Sites Alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts. (p) UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: The Project and the Infill Sites Alternative would generate similar demand for public services and utilities since both would result in development of 490 additional residential units. Since the Infill Sites are currently served by utilities, it is expected that infrastructure improvements would be less than for the Project site; however, upgrading of water or wastewater lines could be necessary to serve high-density residential development. No significant impacts have been identified for the Project and therefore this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts in regard to utilities and service systems. 7.4 Alternative 3 (Tres Hermanos - South) Alternative 3 (Tres Hermanos - South) Description: This alternative site is located west of Chino Hills Parkway near the intersection of Chino Avenue, approximately one mile south of the Project site. The site is part of the Tres Hermanos property owned by the Successor Agency to the Industry Urban Development Agency. Similar to the Project Site, the Tres Hermanos South Site is characterized as gently rolling terrain with distinct hills and valleys. However, this location includes a portion of the ranch that is within a broad valley with less topographical relief as compared to the Project Site. During the scoping process, public comments were received requesting that alternate locations be considered for the Project. Along with the Infill Sites Alternative, this alternative responds to those public comments and addresses CEQA requirements to consider alternatives that might achieve most of the project objectives while reducing or eliminating significant environmental impacts. This site is more than 30 acres in size and could accommodate the project objective of 490 residential units. Finding: For most issues, Alternative 3 (Tres Hermanos-South) would have similar impacts to the Project. However, as with the other alternatives, it would not maintain consistency with the Housing Element and therefore would not meet a basic project objective. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The Lead Agency's analysis of Project Alternative 1 is presented in Section 6.3.3 in the Final EIR; this analysis is incorporated by reference herein and summarized below. (b) AESTHETICS: this site has rolling topography and sparse natural vegetation along Chino Hills Parkway in areas visible to immediately surrounding undeveloped areas. The site is not immediately adjacent to development but may be visible in the distance from surrounding areas. In that respect, view impacts would be considered similar to the Project site. No significant aesthetics impacts were identified relative to the Project, and therefore this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with regard to aesthetics. (c) AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: This alternative would have similar impacts to grazing land as the Project. However, no significant impacts to agriculture and forestry resources were identified for the Project, and therefore this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts related to this topic. (d) AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Air pollutant emissions are caused during construction and ongoing operations associated with transportation and other types of energy use by new development. Development under this alternative would be expected to generate a similar quantity of air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions during construction and operation as the Project. No significant impacts 46 EIR PL2013-227 associated with air emissions were identified for the Project, and therefore this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts related to this topic. (e) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: No field surveys have been conducted on this alternative site; however, site photographs and aerial photos suggest that sensitive biological resources may exist on-site, similar in character to the Project area. This alternative site is also in closer proximity to a designated Sensitive Ecological Area (SEA) located in the Tonner Canyon area approximately two miles south of the project area. The proximity to this area could increase the potential for indirect impacts to the sensitive biological resources within the SEA due to the increased proximity of human activity and the associated potential for intrusion. No significant impacts to biological resources that could not be mitigated to a less than significant level were found in relation to development at the Project site. This alternative would be considered similar to the Project in terms of impacts related to biological resources. (f) CULTURAL RESOURCES: This alternative site is underlain by the same soil types as the project area. The potential for discovery of both archaeological and paleontological resources exists within the area. No significant impacts to cultural resources that could not be reduced to a less than significant level were found in relation to development on the Project site, and the same level of impact would be expected for this alternative. This alternative would be considered similar to the Project in terms of impacts to cultural resources. (g) GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Compared to the Project site, the Tres Hermanos South Site Alternative would result in slightly greater impacts than the Project because the underlying risks are greater due to the alternate site's location within a drainage area underlain -with alluvial fill. However, as with the Project, it is anticipated that with appropriate engineering measures and best management practices, as defined and recommended by qualified geotechnical engineers, impacts related to geology and soils could be reduced to less than significant levels. (h) HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Potential hazards related to the presence or use of hazardous materials on-site would be similar for this alternative as for the Project Site. Both sites have been used as grazing land and have not been previously developed. No significant hazards due to aircraft would occur at either site, and emergency access issues would be similar for the sites. Wildland fire hazards would also be similar for these sites since they are in the same general area and are both adjacent to undeveloped land. For these reasons, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant adverse impacts. (i) HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Impacts to hydrology and water quality associated with development of the Tres Hermanos-South alternative site would be similar to the Project site in that a substantial amount of grading and installation of drainage infrastructure would be required as part of the development. Mitigation measures have been identified to address potential impacts related to drainage from the Project, and impacts would be less than significant. This alternative would not eliminate or reduce significant impacts on hydrology because existing City Code requirements and identified mitigation measures applicable to the Project would reduce potential impacts below the level of significance. (j) LAND USE AND PLANNING: The alternative site is undeveloped and utilized for grazing similar to the Project site. The site is designated in the General Plan for Agricultural uses, as is the Project site. Development on this site would not physically divide an established community or conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural 47 EIR PL2013-227 community conservation plan. This alternative would require General Plan and zoning amendments similar to the Project, and would maintain consistency between the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan, as well as consistency with state law and regional plans. No significant land use and planning impacts were identified with the Project, and none would be anticipated with this alternative. This alternative would be considered similar to the Project in terms of impacts related to land use and planning. (k) NOISE: Noise impacts are generated during construction and during long-term operation. While this site is similarly situated along Chino Hills Parkway, it is not adjacent to the SR -60 freeway and therefore selection of this alternative site would be expected to result in marginally lower noise impacts as compared to portions of the Project site. With the identified mitigation measures, the impacts of the Project would be less than significant, and this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with respect to noise. (I) POPULATION AND HOUSING: Potential impacts with regard to population and housing include inducement of population growth or displacement of people or homes. This alternative would result in a similar inducement to population growth as the Project since both would allow up to 490 additional homes. Neither this alternative nor the Project would result in displacement of people or homes. Therefore, this alternative would be similar to the Project with respect to population and housing impacts. (m) PUBLIC SERVICES: Fire Protection — With the Tres Hermanos South Alternative, future development would occur within an undeveloped area approximately one mile south of the Project site. Similar to the Project site, this alternative would result in the potential for increased fire service calls to an area that currently experiences negligible activity. This impact would be similar to the Project. Both sites have a similar exposure to wildland fire hazards. Mitigation measures identified in the Public Services chapter would reduce impacts of the Project to a level that is less than significant, and this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with regard to fire protection. Police Services — Similar to the Project site, this alternative would result in the potential for increased police service calls to an area that currently experiences negligible activity. This impact would be similar to the Project, and identified mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level that is less than significant. This alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts with regard to police services. (n) RECREATION: All new residential development must provide parkland or pay in -lieu fees in accordance with Section 21.32 of the City's Subdivision Code. This requirement would apply to this alternative site as well as the Project site. No significant impacts to recreation were identified in association with the Project, and none would be anticipated related to this alternative. This alternative would be considered similar to the Project in terms of impacts related to recreation, and no significant impacts would be eliminated or reduced. (o) TRANSPORATION/TRAFFIC: The Traffic Impact Analysis for the Project identified one intersection (Phillips Ranch Road at Village Loop Road) where potentially significant impacts would require mitigation to conform to adopted level of service standards. A mitigation measure is identified that would reduce that impact below the level of significance. Since this alternate site is located near the Project site, would also take access from Chino Hills Parkway, and would generate the same traffic volume, traffic impacts would be expected to be similar to the Project. Since mitigation measures have been included to reduce impacts of the Project to a less than significant level, this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts. 48 EIR PL2013-227 (p) UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: The Project and the Tres Hermanos-South Alternative would generate similar demand for utilities since both would result in development of 490 additional residential units. No significant impacts have been identified for the Project and therefore this alternative would not eliminate or reduce any significant impacts in regard to utilities and service systems. 7.5 Summary and Comparison of Alternatives The comparison, presented in detail in Section 6.4 of the Final EIR, indicates that Alternative 1 (No Project) would result in impacts that are both superior and inferior to the Project. For most issues that are related to the disturbance of undeveloped land (e.g., Aesthetics, Biological Resources) this alternative is superior to the Project. However, for Land Use and Planning this alternative is inferior because it would not maintain consistency with regional plans and the City's Housing Element. It would also not meet the basic Project objective of maintaining consistency with the Housing Element. However, it is considered the environmentally superior alternative. For most environmental impact categories, Alternative 2 (Infill Sites) would result in impacts that are either superior or similar to the Project. For most issues that are related to disturbance of undeveloped land (e.g., Aesthetics, Biological Resources) this alternative is superior to the Project because the sites have previously been disturbed by development. However, for other impacts such as Recreation and Utilities/Service Systems the impacts of this alternative would be similar to the Project since both alternatives would generate a similar demand for public services and facilities. This alternative would be inferior to the Project with respect to Land Use and Planning because it would not maintain consistency with the Housing Element. For this reason, it would not meet a basic Project objective. This alternative is considered the environmentally superior alternative other than the No Project alternative. For most issues, Alternative 3 (Tres Hermanos-South) would have similar impacts to the Project. However, as with the other alternatives, it would not maintain consistency with the Housing Element and therefore would not meet a basic project objective. 49 EIR PL2013-227 i7 G O A E w c 0 U o c @ C U N 'Oi_ O E ` C R OU d O o C C O T"C � C � O O l7 - m L 4 @ U U .0 .0 w N E :° _- U _ G'� n Q d Q a O m> m 0 o O 0 a m «- m m o m n a aEi ii G o d 0@ C E O =O ' O y N C O .J R N @ "O LL N a _0" D✓ O y o c m O m o ` o O L- aJ U U -P C d 2 R N O d R d N D U N E R N E O v C] m •� p m N N L 'O O_ N a O d d E O- O - E 0 N Y l U UO N .-5 N O N c0 l>6 0) N O U" O a+ N O �..' N O O @ O E S] -60 U m a T T C O U O O @@ N O V U R y "O D` �O C N N R L ..�J U N n N R C E _ R E m O E CG LL U O w o U W U W o m S 0 a m O N S] y N Q a r 0 t E. 'w. C O U c m m Q a c C s � � E: N aR o o R R N d d'6 R d7 U HE O O .E E o `o C m o o E C O w _y fC d C E o C G C O (D a `o o� F- < Q m O D L_ R fn a E N 3 �O D O__E T aJ U Q R L T ON O m 0 io E m o Z o¢ m a m co N �zi ami o .:F m_Z .nwE_ Al e o v m a_ m cNocoE o�°'3' N—Doo aUi R m m a E d E a a a m E R�Nd@mwmm L N n `m N N m : R�:. o 00 @> O C N N N O N N n N R O N C (n —` 'U N N J L N O R O E •� m E C .. o 6 o R NO y = m L y O N O C L y 0CT ca N v o O N 3 E !n 'O @ O a N d R c [p a N R E m "' :E N N N R w N D C T a Q E L @ E C .� V L.. N C u U R U_ N N > ..o O N _ Q O C) E N O U L 11 "O UJ d R G U m N E U C p U> h C C O N N C C N - E O O E O O a' E m v E Q1 aoi � U O D m O c c @ o C O a ¢ ¢E a d x as o. a• 3 `o c.co �. mo o_ O c o c a 3 ri m o 0 o m C. m @@E@ m L ..J o Z U o p .3 0 ..- - E 3 E aci m o"o o t L m m 2i - mL Z7; CpUN�@N0 �p]C"�d OCp mN���� �LO _E m oa .y m E@ a m t m 'n m @ L E U c a m 2c o :7 C�- L O@ •- QN O" N T S -O C n - O � T N N@ N¢ L � O� T- N -.>-.`oe .vm @woco mm �_o g>fl (mp NOoD amT-a w _cc o.c. y m o E@@ o@ d d T N O O> Na. _ m,5 @ a E -o '3 '� @-,-RR a m "o o omE �-@' hm��'p ��w -�¢cv 2mm mm �auomco pc�mo -F o l g O N N_ E W p (O O (O N d O C} j N@ N U •- N i N @ T p_ L N O '.C-_.12 N L_ _U E2 -`N7 U E a- v a> 3 v d fn cd � c? N O_ m O m m �EpOCmmmJ o m U U _T E G C m m p p E C a C U m - U ` O O -2 C 0 0 � E U O _.0 U O �_ U Q O p ¢ E ¢ S Q Ell E T N C .—C� _m m�� �� -3 d D_ 9C O OJ �-' O d (n R N I- m@ N N p m g@ Oo �L _v w O E U s N N m vii `o aZi d p da-= (J c75N N@ d ¢. L E¢ 753.�o�cw aai 'may m mE� po?�� p E- L_ o_oa.3 mos `m aoim`o@oJ..- m.`. dp c oo n+ E o Lv@i m o"� o- E o@ a `o N a> a d. y H c m t0 m. @ w m @ .J E m a O @ d m O N a N Q@ c 'S 1] = C G I d O O E Q L O G 06 N Z> OJ _O ._ a Q@ .p @ O a N _O v O p o w o v E nT v -@o ... c m a 5 co c 2 E Taj 1 y r m m d o'E E m a@ m a -a NL°'no m m c a�a�ic win w m"G 'N w w "° mem T@LN o c= m p c o `o rn G -L-- E .- c 0 2 @ 'o :` E, o o a of i .@ n _E ~ c N m p d w m~ E o L m m a m o a c mE D_ Y@ R L @ w w Y 0 @ d w w O m w 3 m d 4- H o, o a m o.L o_.S m m m I r 0 0 m 0 m m A U C C CP O (6 O C y O Q @ C O> .O '6 O 9 (5 @` O@ m d CP y y y O [O ca O 7U @ co U co U C5 D 0 O m m m U U o p o p C C R 1p U d'Cd C d d d ¢ Q E Q E m .D wo 5 y o d (>O (66 0 Q C T- � @ Q a y _m a U N m -`-' a m m m �ZL `m-`mto@moo o -o a £ t' c nTcny TL@a o-L°E�m °' @o�oE 2@ E E o� -a- 3 o o mo E¢ m o m Nc 3 > @poLoRNc@mF'C3cuojpmn `� nLJo o bo� � E. g�_�NcOpE.~Jmo`aEam@o v ma3m@nomo`aO-avma d -" ma0��LmOa°o�fJma-O omEmTN°@c.nJo"m'oNyaT� �.>xEyo.EntO.>op]EE U.c=omLy-'yCaoo>oV U @@o@`m`nOUdOOooco E>,mE =@oCJmoN=3cNOma�mc ti 75 = aJc�CoUm@acim y �omEm=Qry=QJ_�OOaKCpOmrnmcm.' dmomt'cd@�C'°wcOa`Em _ - X -.> - _ ET y Eo p -Eym[-o0Lpc�O-@m ' � aifmmLw-V�daO��mmi . - Lo NO m � ty[iT m 02-1 f0 l ' J a U mw YUo ¢ y ¢ O v o > '>EzE cOd�omm mi m- ° a•.m@f . N cy� m In A I C d m D7 U N O R m O) zTO N U U U D o O o m m C Z7 m m m C R1 C V tO U U — Q Q Q Q ¢ m m o U ie _C5 E ad, N a �c�3 �crms o - :E m 9 ooI�. o Uca .�— E `o_ c `o m O m o E t o m m o c -9 o � 2 L E NDC 7 M7 C N C p� d U � 3: O. N N O m m 6N-6— E c a� o N .`° � vi E m O_ o m c ,I a i E o `� a v E R -00 D o W m K co o-E 'mm o ��mam2mcoN a omo6R2� LN E o m '" m L d ,> 3 15 o `'15 �o=Lmovnmm=��m.c v� avm o'o'o .�. o=o-a�m�oo� C w() N N U O h O h> Q. ld QJ C LC O "O v O L O_ r/! >• 0 N p d O G N d :C C d O 0 0 N N m O O OU V C N N OJ d m N ro N N? Q 6 O_ m N L J > N 6 0 O N �N � .� N m m � U � U I U O N C m R d @ C m a O m m V U_ O O D7 O) C C � O m m � c @ @ V U Q Q n m o `o o f m o H L or a'o E 4 c 4 __ o v> n-ov m c o o'g @ E o °� a -io v °•' n tE o m a`3 m o 9 d o -o m �. -o ai > m p EIV T � c E O N L Vl _C � d o>m -- m Ea o m c L o sc o m E a>i U c m E O m m ._ m C 'n m o> tLn m C �SCCmQo m'�To =2N _"-Eoo o,ELmm m=off v> m Y o- o m EE cos mco`o =mm�tm mnmmm�mo t-'� m c@ia 0aco n°m� ^ m_> m Nm _o mo yo -00 2 o m o m>o oo oE o f 5 h a E m o o -d -,u Ea Nin L L o ao 0 m E `o @ o'�6 OU O 0 m t .0 m tO Q m Q 1- c m `6 ayi 'o 'm cna m L m m n om w o L 2 m o m oo- 2 Q cp � o r � c m o a¢ E 2 >o co en R � K U U m 'E � U y C Q R C 3 � N N m O R � 2 O R R U U E= O o w 6J C C a — m m c m m v U Q D_ D_ Q Q Ll R t O R O E c a N N U J E 3 0� E O _E E E E O C N C L C p J O Qom] U N w6 O =@ C@ C (? D7 O d C Q R 3= R ~C L E .�_� CD � R..� E > a W R g� = @ m — �m -� .� H @ o� N voi Q� _�c E E Q E O m R rn m o 3 L o m •. Z @ > to Q L 'o m p @ aJ Q p � E c m m m o• _= — c y � m R C L Q E E u> Jo E2 °' ._ R o `J o a� E 3� o— 3 U `v d -S2 c c 3.T � o `m vaoi—UL r a v .o c c •- @ m �' m o �t�.� ?aoJ v'�Em5.a o a. >cw+ NUtmm _ R mm m m m �'o��o¢'_ mQoE�a��mam 4 @ owv°��'��� UmLRU oommm�Q"a E=' T E Eo-E d`NT._VE g mCD I m h U U U U U U U 0 0 m m m m m Q Q Q � m o m � V m J - L E m h o mc° m ca m� O 3 U ti m a ma"o f ao o J.m� 15 U-om s m m t m N m -c m E o m E m c E a o 0,2 m_ @c m`o �2i o o - v_ O m m � E� �'ot m m .n >. o. m� N�� m.od o U m o> E vi m y ppr-aaoct ca>=a�pmN�m mEm- 'c@�aE C� �UN�p'o a C N f0 @ !O U 0 L N '=n m a `off W L O N@ �2i- m min aha td v mt �n o of 3� @ - A .J m� F- m aci � aci m 3 m w °� is w @ '> m m g E o m m E E E v -• a>> _� o@@- 65 c ._ o o= m CoO I D_ @ o QO Q @_ :E Cto]@ Ga OU @ J m N N q O O O O O aoi m @ U' C9 C7 U' I E m m R m E lA p N 0) O) m ^O R O@ C O p c4 6> p t6 a - O 0 O@- O@ N= (Q - Q m w m m m m 0 u .J m .0 IJU U EF UUU O d d O C E_ O O O O O O Ol m D1 0) D) OJ T a Q) Ql m m m m m m U U m m C C C C Tf C C C C a a a a a a a a ¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q ¢ N C E 19 C N Q E C N (7 d� c = O O'= D m"o o. ^. D-� E R LL J t vRi. R O N m w a„__ y@ @ R m v`o m y�Elmm�3o dLw @ p. LaL 3 R N R R (p N V V 'O w N o>@,m N oma 3o ama m-4 t m`m m m o v ¢V '` o m 0 �. o ao w0 "Gy o' @ m X O N D_ >• 6) F- R o `m E n. `o 0 m 2- .n aci -- m c E E c Q o R _ to_ a� o. w m m w m '� R , G @ o o E m w `° c E 0 >. E `° EEi o cEv p d ry o ¢ ff m NL' a o m m y �°' o E api O ul E Di m6i E> m 3 E api m U m E 'n o c@ a m R Q 2` m e o N�UO mo Qt�-�L@Now m LNO��NO SCO FN�Q EU R O pVjO�EO E m R @ 0 0m E R _@ R R R U N c L m 2 N tLn N C N R W R V H t O O Ol 2'C N@ N N Q '.7 y O R V^ U E 3 5 h O-2,- U E N L O d N O R D7 X N O 0 U N J 0 V t @ d T GE W v R .- N 0 R m m coi m m _� m m m m o >. ¢ 0 L m d .o c v d Q E c mac' c o m .a m '- , E @_ m om? ra ti U R O 6 "6 N >O m d N y N U O E y V R R .-62, (O NO OXo URR 0 O C OU 00,0N@ CUCc 'OOo =m JmN aY p@ OJ Uc LNO ydO mO o@VO 6-0U scO m N O] R L .o -3 2 O``Q .R o x o w `-O V O E L °� '��- Q) r C N y C a E v d o ami m o w m a @ m m H o m o co co o m d m `oa m co 'o m o rs s m m m >> 'E o m c R W 2 m@ J m J 0 0 0 0 g U (9 C9 C7 c9 C9 x E O- m p O N O 0 O -0 @ d O -0 O O _ m m U U E N p E O O O p) T d7 m C C @ � U U m U - 4 Q d _ m C' i V JmE O C T N d O NO O @ m m m co d m U m m - E to r"n .J m R m a> o o c a m O Q � 07 N OU d @ O N= E O .- m ' d Nd mL - N N N > d- O •- - _U U N G Q y @g""hNa�m'c EE-oodTo OE Ud__oa�� �h O c.N�a >. iv Om mCL oa@m m"'N..-mNNm� 'No O O" .a tO E B F o N d N C N N w o m E S m m g m m m. _. . . m 5 0o m m o -o�E o m v ooE E L t m L F " 3 E E o c g m m c o o 3 v `9 E p E o `o A Q@ -_ C_ w (O N C fO d V V 16 @ O@ J`- -- tQ L E N N N `. m V. c E m j 3 o _. Q o N -oo c a� Q o f >. O m E -� c 1 m Q a o E LL m a>i m E N m m m d c E w o @ a' E m E g n -o O-` d .� @ 0 0 U b N O O N O N E 0 (n Q p m N N N '. C �- E E N m N J N @ = S I Z d @ C C V V) C m ' m o: o m U N O C 07 Q) = W m U C C U U oa a ¢ ¢ ._ Cd R o `o t a =o o m o@ d o y y `o, m l.f �. E .6 0oc" co �. ti U U m o a@i H oc "m o f 3 N N 'C d E r_ N L a O'E d. U @ N p" > I -_U O OJ U N E •- o m p g m m v 2 L o: c m o 12-a Y J'= W @ N p 12 _= T R) J mL- @- ov3�co��a_'im ��m�o»mo cO"Uc E:E`o_ 3yaci o'o nm' a'Rc=L pm RdG6�'� pN2EONN 21 SNL r0 d =p t6 R N= C -O t0 - O S O O Q _U 2= X.• n m._ 3 m R y 'Q t S m S m R O a� d�' O. �• V Cn � Sa � aJ y O O' O aJ Y n O N N "O O O C N U N h o 75-2 R C Q mt `O a n? E p L ,, 0 a R R A@ O U O O'O 6 L@ a) @ N@ N O R? a m °D U and E¢ -o R off pin n a@ ym U �U 2 ad N a.� a N 0 T S Z m z c%> cw O o `o o 0 o N o E > c m o N d O) mo m O >o m _ a E L On N N m m E '> _> _ a o o 3 B o3 c m N 0 0-2N d > R o m z c%> cw c 21- `o 0 o N E > c C N d O) O p � W m z c%> U � c0 p � Q) In C h O � D7 O t9 d O _ O- m U � O D) a C ZS C � O m U c m U Q a a N O al E E= 0 I_ p o N O O U d. O p _ T d om U 'o @ `oa - E � m d. o v o co c � " .Z � � w •- v � , . >, t a`� a> 3 s d:�E 3 N �_ -5 F o Q o E w o R c d L 17LLL a` E ? @� N R m E m W 6-6 p E N N R W O O S] LL LL O @ -O O c O C @ 0 E Q N N O "OC_ O R E 1 O@ ` OJ U� Q N j C C N Ol _. w@ @ 0 0 0@ LL C t0 O L N R O] (J LL O p2 'r R N N U R E p O O) C C OU 0 C @ N N g 2 c9 U C Gl Ll !V OJ R N (p d 2 Q O E-6 y>-. _O (O OJ R 3 (gyp 7moo LLa'vS@odo EIc- ERR `LLyooa m T675 oo2 E Uo3bUmoE � NmoC oH OR o 'd E 3E E R > U4mmo2E OJ O OL E E pUO O a ui r R E v m y O @ 0-5 O @ O @ - d O d O - O T N G 50 E U E Q m T E O O C =p C E > N N U U O 0 m C C [Q U U_ _ Q a d Q a O O V T 102 C N m E mm�mmE`o OU 0 d O-«� O y d E R Q U C 'O N C N N R p E E E w o �� o oi.o � m o m m o m - `L" o w o- m tO o U m m •-'i� o 0 v E a R _ O C L 8 3 3 3 @�o c R m aS y E a T oo n o m R o E o t o m a -- E a w `G F- O. E K U c_ $ oi� U •� a o 0 N W-2-5` O V E (CO U T T E C d U E _O Q o_ U ry R O d� ~ > y p C ~ � N '; >' p E E E c o- . 'u. m E o m a -co m E ai y E U W B a o -. '•- o -y ���mcaBRo ate°? QomaR oc oao ER mmmtoB R U'mhoo�m Y o o -o y 0 a 0 y c p.n ... w om a o o m e o f co o f .m o? m .� a� m w 0 "1- in 0 0 3 �- m A o~ `-' '0 0 0 6-2 1i m =o E � E �= u � � - L 3 o m a o a`� g E U m o v- O 2 m 30 " t � `m n t o y t m m E io A N m t- C C m tb a [� `m E N Tv 2 O o ..T '= ami y a� w O E t- O O- O U p N �j O O E 6 N % O L L O C E vl O_ O..R` E N R E � a` tL E� m O Q a N O O _ - � LL ui r o a > m c Q m m > E H > E m > E oa a c m a o n. o a ti C [6 CC U m m m U C E_ O G C p n p) OJ O] _T _T U p p UJ [O U U C U C U C V C U C p cu 6 R O r- � N N~ d N O T L R R R m +L- U� pyo 0R l _ ° n -SON (n o m 0 o c E o m 75 o. W m g .y a a N o .o o 0 a c m m rn E n a R C O@ O N Oi3O .N V �'. O@ R U 2:`— OJ C N T R N R N E V C c m Q 0 E -o m o �`6'i>omE R aai�c=Q o 0 0 oE o n�o-N of N n.o N 16R 0 m@ o ��w T mem a RRRd�nRLO@OTOOJN L N,C~Lir�U E E R N C�O]p_L1R,ry P p O IW- o m E; 'm .� a c rn E m o E 2-6 2 cow 0 16 Fw- va Q d wt�' m o-E� 0sv oa V 3 '@o` RmH .E t m o 'w a t c N N OJ O L t N U~ OJ 0 S] 3 OEll C L T6 2Q -ELO aJ@ L _ 2-2 D) tO E lO R R R Rcm@> O oc= C7 o aon6a 'mm�>NEO -92 R6 onami E m E G o E mE a w¢."U p. 0 ` mmm oQ 2LE � OLomd C- F- U N 0 d E o 0 C O Ol EL mr) N O � ED Ce N o L � � W �� 0 O o N 0 � � U C C O 'y d7 O a Q ti I E `o Q m d m E m E m c=i o m .`o m U N T N C C C w C w E E ai �aUi w T T _a, - ' -'U CD U � c U Q ¢ p. Q U Q Q Q N O O U C U E m n O o m m d a E m c S -E2 v c L O T O U N N m o 3�� U m y p° c�a � 3 m w `m o m m `o a m L• m p m _� p .` y - w o E r E.E. a.a m m magi c m a 010 om E m oc aNi c m 9 .X N o T N fp O N N m N t6 fn OJ p_ N U .Y c5 fO C N � y � r C- O _ w N D m C D OV L N p N CO m N C N N N p U N .� _ 3 p b d � N O N .� OI .` d � � .L] N t➢ .� .f m m t .o U _ y0 O S m N p -ca O D U- (6LNDCND ETLN OD�O 'p�-V OE"- jOF-m CEO=2 a o p_ F- O00 O��i4m O��C�C�y�OOt`pH 0 ElD 00 O F-��J�HO � r ti I )� o FO \\\\\22 \\\\\\ \\�\\\\\�\\0-6 02 Attachment 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2013-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT, AND ZONE CHANGE FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION PROJECT (PLANNING CASE NO. PL2013-227) ON PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF CHINO HILLS PARKWAY, SOUTH OF DIAMOND RANCH HIGH SCHOOL, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (EASTERLY PORTION OF ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 8701-022-273). A. RECITALS 1. State housing element law requires each city to make available adequate sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate its fair share of regional housing needs as established in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment; and 2. On April 19, 2011, the Diamond Bar City Council adopted the 2008-2014 Housing Element update, which includes a program to establish a new land use district allowing High Density Residential development at 30 dwelling units per acre and redesignate sufficient sites to accommodate at least 466 lower-income residential units for the 2008-2014 planning period; and 3. The 2014-2021 Regional Housing Needs Assessment identifies the City's share of regional housing need for lower-income households as 490 units for the planning period; and 4. The following approvals are recommended to the City Council in order to provide adequate sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate the City's fair share of regional housing need (hereafter, collectively, the "Approvals"): (a) General Plan Amendment to establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) land use designation and to make corresponding text amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element, as shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and change the land use designation on the Land Use Map for the property identified as "Site A" in Exhibit B, attached hereto, from Agricultural 948305.1 (b) (AG) to Planning Area 5/High Density Residential -30 (PA-5/RH-30); and (c) Development Code Amendment to establish a new High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) zoning designation and development regulations as shown in Exhibit C, attached hereto; and (d) Zone Change to change the zoning designation for the property identified as "Site A" in Exhibit D, attached hereto, from Agricultural (AG) to High Density Residential -30 Dwelling Units per Acre (RH-30), and establish a maximum of 490 housing units for this site. 5. In accordance to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15168 et seq., an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the Approvals, which found that the Approvals would not have a significant effect on the environment. Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the EIR was being reviewed concurrently by the Planning Commission along with the General Plan Amendment, Development Code Amendment, and Zone Change; and 6. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15090 through 15093, a resolution recommending City Council certification of the EIR and adoption of a mitigation reporting and monitoring program for the project was reviewed by the Planning Commission concurrently with this resolution; and 7. Notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on August -2-,-2013. -Publichearing-notices were mailed -to propertyowners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the parcel on which the zone change is proposed, as well as all speakers who have previously attended the scoping meeting or submitted comments in writing, and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board in two locations (Chino Hills Parkway and Rockbury/Deep Springs Drive) and the notice was posted at three other locations within the project vicinity; and 8. On August 13, 2013, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date; and 9. The Planning Commission has determined that the proposed General Plan Amendment, Development Code Amendment and Zone Change represent a consistent, logical, appropriate and rational land use 2 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 designation and implementing tool that furthers the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan; and 10. The documents and materials constituting the administrative record of the proceedings upon which the City's decision is based are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission as follows: 1. That all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends City Council approval of General Plan Amendment, Development Code Amendment, and Zone Change for the Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project (Planning Case No. PL2013-227) based on the following findings, as required by. Section 22.70.050 of the Municipal Code and in conformance with California Government Code Section 65358: Finding: The Approvals are internally consistent with the General Plan and other adopted goals and policies of the City. Facts in Support of Finding: a. The Approvals will establish a new High Density Residential -30 -- (RH=30) designation in the General Plan --Land- -Use_Element_and Development Code to allow owner- and renter -occupied multi- family residential development at a density of up to 30 units per acre, as required by Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B); will amend the Land Use Map (Figure 1-2 of the Land Use Element) to redesignate the property identified as "Site A" in Exhibit B; attached hereto, from Agricultural (AG) to Planning Area 5/High Density Residential -30 (PA-5/RH-30); and will amend the Zoning Map to redesignate the property identified as "Site A" in Exhibit C, attached hereto, from Agricultural (AG) to High Density Residential -30 (RH-30) to accommodate the housing needs of lower-income households commensurate with the Regional Housing Needs Assessment for the City. b. For the reasons set forth below, the Approvals are consistent with the following goals and policies of the 2008-2014 Housing Element: 3 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 GOAL 2 Provide opportunities for development of suitable housing to meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents. The RH-30 designation will facilitate a greater diversity of housing at higher densities than allowed under current land use regulations, which limit density to 20 units/acre. GOAL 3 Provide adequate sites through appropriate land use and zoning designations to accommodate future housing growth. The Approvals will accommodate future housing growth for all economic segments of the community, including lower-income households. Policy 3.1 Maintain an inventory of potential sites available for future housing development. The Approvals will expand the City's inventory of potential housing development sites. Policy 3.3 Integrate multi -family residential uses within the Tres Hermanos Specific Plan. The Approvals will allow multi -family residential uses within a portion of the Tres Hermanos area, and would not constrain the future adoption of a specific plan for the entire Tres Hermanos area. GOAL 4 Mitigate potential governmental constraints which may hinder or discourage housing development in the City. The RH-30 designation will serve to mitigate governmental constraints by allowing higher density development than is currently permitted in the City. Policy 4.1 Continue to provide regulatory incentives and concessions to facilitate affordable housing development in the City. The increased density permitted under the RH-30 designation will serve as an incentive to affordable housing development by reducing the per-unit land cost. Policy 4.2 Promote the expeditious processing and approval of residential projects that meet General Plan policies and City regulatory requirements. 4 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 The RH-30 zoning regulations allow non -discretionary permit processing, pursuant to Program 9 of the Housing Element. GOAL 5 Consistent with the Vision Statement, encourage equal and fair housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community. The RH-30 designation will facilitate the production of lower-cost housing, which furthers equal housing opportunities for all economic segments and persons with special needs. C. For the reasons set forth below, the Approvals are consistent with Goal 1 and related strategies of the Land Use Element: Goal 1 Consistent with the Vision Statement, maintain a mix of land uses which enhance the quality of life for City residents, providing a balance of development and preservation of significant open space areas to assure both economic viability and retention of distinctive natural features of the community. The approvals would expand the mix of land uses in the City to include higher -density residential product types and would also preserve a significant portion of the site for open space as required by the Hillside Management Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 22.22). Strategy 1.2.3 Maintain residential areas which protect natural resources, hillsides, and scenic areas. (a) Development in hillside areas should be designed to be compatible with surrounding natural areas, compatible to the extent practical with surrounding development, aesthetically pleasing, and provide views from development, but not at the expense of views of the development. (b) Earthwork in hillside areas should utilize contour or landform grading. (c) Minimize grading to retain natural vegetation and topography. All development within the RH-30 area will be required to be consistent with this strategy through required compliance with the Hillside Management Ordinance. Strategy 1.2.6 Broaden the range of, and encourage innovation in, housing types. Require developments within all Residential areas to provide amenities such as common usable, active open space and recreational areas, when possible. 5 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 The RH-30 designation will facilitate greater innovation in housing types by allowing higher density than currently permitted. New developments will be required to provide amenities such as open space and recreational areas in conformance with the RH-30 zoning regulations. Strategy 1.2.7 Where consistent with the other provisions of the City's, encourage the provision of low and moderate cost housing. The RH-30 land use designation will encourage the provision of low- and moderate cost housing by reducing the land cost per unit compared to lower density development. Strategy 1.5.6 Preserve significant environmental resources within proposed developments, allow clustering or transferring of all or part of the development potential of the entire site to a portion of the site, thus preserving the resources as open space, and mandating the dedication of those resources to the City or a conservancy. The RH-30 land use designation will allow development clustering in order to preserve sensitive resources and open space. Strategy 1. 6.4 Encourage clustering within the most - developable portions of project sites to preserve open space and/or other natural resources. Such development should be located to coordinate with long-term plans for active parks, passive (open space) parks, and preserve natural open space areas. Site A comprises approximately 30 gross acres, of which a net development area of approximately 16.33 acres is required to accommodate 490 units at a density of 30 units/acre. The gross site area allows for clustering development to preserve the most valuable natural resources and open space on the site. Strategy 2.2.1 Require that new development be compatible with surrounding land uses. The RH-30 zoning regulations require design review to ensure that future development is compatible with surrounding uses. Strategy 2.2.2 Prohibit the development of adjacent land uses with significantly different intensities or that have operational characteristics which could create nuisances along a common boundary, unless an effective buffer can be created. 6 GPA and ZG PL2013-227 Site A is not immediately adjacent to any residential use. Diamond Ranch High School is adjacent to the north of the site, and can be buffered by the difference in elevation. as well as placement of development on the site. Strategy 3.2.1 Within the urban residential portions of the City, require the incorporation of open space and recreational areas into the design of new projects. Within topographically rugged and rural areas, emphasize the preservation of natural landforms and vegetation. Required compliance with the RH-30 zoning regulations and the Hillside Management Ordinance will ensure that open space and recreational areas will be incorporated into the design of any new development on Site A. Strategy 3.2. 10 New development shall comply with the City's Hillside Management Ordinance. Any residential development within the RH-30 area will be required to comply with the Hillside Management Ordinance, Strategy 3.3.1 Balance the retention of the natural environment with its conversion to urban form. Site A comprises approximately 30 gross acres, of which a net development area of approximately 16.33 acres is required to accommodate 490 units at a density of 30 units/acre. The gross site area allows for clustering development to preserve the most valuable natural areas on the site. Strategy 3.3.2 Promote the incorporation of hillside features into project design. Required compliance with the Hillside Management Ordinance will ensure that hillside features are incorporated into future project design on Site A. d. For the reasons set forth below, this amendment is consistent with Strategy 1.1.3 of the Resource Management Element: Strategy 1.1.3 Require that dwelling units and structures within hillside areas be sited in such a manner as to utilize ridgelines and landscape plant materials as a backdrop for the structures and the structures themselves to provide maximum concealment of cut slopes. 7 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 Required compliance with the Hillside Management Ordinance will ensure that any new development within Site A will be sited in conformance with this strategy. e. For the reasons set forth below, the Approvals are consistent with the Circulation Element: Goal 2 Provide a balanced transportation system for the safe and efficient movement of people, goods, and services.through the City. Future development within Site A will be required to provide an internal circulation network that includes streets and also accommodates alternative modes of transportation. This site is also adjacent to transit routes along Chino Hills Parkway. Goal Maintain an adequate level of service on area roadways. The EIR prepared for the project included an analysis of project area roadways and levels of service. With the identified mitigation measures, no significant impacts to roadway level of service would occur. f. For the reasons set forth below, the Approvals are consistent with the Public Services and Facilities Element: Goal Provide adequate infrastructure facilities and public services to support development and planned growth. Public services and utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, and other utilities are available to serve future development of Site A. 3. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council authorize the Community Development Director to make such other clerical revisions to the General Plan and Development Code text and statistical tables as may be necessary to maintain consistency with the intent of the Approvals. 4. The Planning Commission further recommends that the Community Development Department, as part of the 5th Cycle (2014-2021) Housing Update, evaluate sites other than Site A, including "Tres Hermanos South" (as described in the aforementioned EIR under Section 6/Alternatives Analysis as Alternative 3) and the Kmart property, to accommodate the City's fair share of the region's lower-income housing need. 8 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 The Planning Commission Secretary shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution to the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13" DAY OF AUGUST, 2013, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. By: S eve Nelson, Chairm n I, Greg Gubman, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of August, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: Farago, Lin, Shah, VC/Torng, Chair/Nelson NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: None ABSTAIN: Commissioners: None ATTEST: Greg Gubman, Secretary ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Land Use Element Text Revisions Exhibit B: Amended Land Use Element Map Exhibit C: Development Code Text Revisions Exhibit D: Amended Zoning Map 0 GPA and ZC FL2012-=7 Exhibit A Land Use Element Text Revisions Section E., Strategy 1.1.1 is amended to add a new paragraph (g) as follows: "(g) Designate properties for high-density multi -family use as High Density Residential 30 (RH 30) allowing a maximum net densitV of 30 units/acre and a minimum net density of 20 units/acre to accommodate the City's share of the regional affordable housing need as required bV the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) Net density is the number of portions of the project site which: lie within the setbacks of state or federally designated jurisdictional wetlands contain plant communities which should be avoided based on the findings of professional biological surveys; are located within pre-existing public streets utility easement, and drainage channels or basins. Section E., Strategy 1.6.1 is amended to add a new paragraph (e) as follows: (e) Planning Area 5 PA -5 is entirely surrounded by PA -1 adjacent to Diamond Ranch High School PA -5 incorporates a 30 -acre (gross) area designated RH-30 to accommodate a maximum of 490 high-density multi -family housing units consistent with the Regional Housing Needs Assessment and the Housing Element. The first paragraph of Section F.2 is amended as follows: "The Element uses certain terminology to describe the land use designations. The term "density" refers to residential uses and to the population and development capacity of residential land. Density is described in terms of dwelling units per gross acre of land (du/ac) unless stated otherwise. For example, 100 dwelling units occupying 20rg oss acres of land is 5.0 du/ac." 10 GPA and ZG PL2D13-227 Exhibit A (continued) Table 1-3, General Plan Land Use (By Category) is amended as follows: Table I-3 General Plan Land Use By Cateeorv) GPA and ZG PL2013-227 Permitted Density! Gross Acres Gross Acres Total Gross Land Use Designations Intensity In the City In Sphere Acres Residential Designations RR Rural Residential (I ac/du) 1,392 1,392 RL Low Density Residential (up to 3 du/ac) 3,089 3,089 RLM Low -Medium Residential (up to 5 du/ac) 838 838 RM Medium Density Residential (up to 12 du/ac) 275 275 RMH Medium High Residential (up to 16 du/ac) 197 197 RH High Density Residential (up to 20 du/ac) 66 66 RH-30 High Density Residential (30 (up to 30 du/net ac) 30 30 units/net acre) Subtotal 5,887 5,887 Non -Residential Designations C General Commercial (25 — 1 FAR) 172 172 CO Commercial / Office (.25 — 1 FAR) 63 63 OP Professional Office (.25 — 1 FAR) 178 178 I Light Industrial (.25 — 1 FAR) 93 93 Subtotal 506 506 Mixed Use Designations PA Planning Areas (see text) PA_1 690 690 pA_Z 401 401 PA_3 55 55 PA -4 82 82 PA_5 30 30 Subtotal 1,258 1,258 Fffiloe,Desig.,ficral') PF Public Facilities 27 27 W Water 19 2 21 F Fire 1 1 S School 345 345 PK Park - 158 158 GC Golf Course 178 178 OS Open Space 642 642 PR Private Recreation 15 15 AG Agriculture 1 du / 5 ac 0 3,589 3,589 Fwy / Major Roads 684 684 Total 1 9,690 3,591 13,281 GPA and ZG PL2013-227 Exhibit A (continued) Table 1-3, General Plan Land Use (By Category) is amended as follows: Table I-4 Potential Residential and Commercial Growth M (2) The Planning Network, 1990 (3) City of Diamond Bar 2008-2014 Housimp Element (Table B-1) Adopted April 19 2011 Residential Densities include Vacant sites and Projects currently approved/not built (4) Residential Densities on Vacant Land are assumed at 100% of the maximum permitted density. Includes projects currently under construction (7/94) 151 Based on average development intensities consistent with current development patterns on vacant land. Includes projects currently under construction (7/94) 161 2007 Dent of Finance Population based on 3.313 persons per household at a 1.71% vacancy rate. (7) Population based on 3.19 persons per household at a 4.5% vacancy rate. 12 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 Existing Potential Expected Population at General Plan Land Use Unt. itsJSq. F Additional Total Units/Sq. Ft. Development Buildout Residential City 18,276 DUShI 1284 DU (3) 19.560 6464 92rt� Sphere 0 718 DUS 718 2,200 5,865,000 Sq. Ft.(" 1,550,000 Sq.Ftl51 7,415,000 Commercial/ Industrial M (2) The Planning Network, 1990 (3) City of Diamond Bar 2008-2014 Housimp Element (Table B-1) Adopted April 19 2011 Residential Densities include Vacant sites and Projects currently approved/not built (4) Residential Densities on Vacant Land are assumed at 100% of the maximum permitted density. Includes projects currently under construction (7/94) 151 Based on average development intensities consistent with current development patterns on vacant land. Includes projects currently under construction (7/94) 161 2007 Dent of Finance Population based on 3.313 persons per household at a 1.71% vacancy rate. (7) Population based on 3.19 persons per household at a 4.5% vacancy rate. 12 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 City of Diamond Bar Exhibit B Land Use, Map 13 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 P�p.�d t�„a €tom V�P 13 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 Exhibit C Development Code Text Revisions Sec. 22.06.020, Table 2-1 is amended as follows: General vian Lana use Zoning Map Symbol Zoning District Name Category Implemented by Zoning District IT RH-30 Sec. 22.08.020. - Purposes of residential zoning districts, is amended to add as follows: "The purposes of the individual residential zoning districts and the manner in which they are applied are as follows. (7) RH 30 (high density residential -30 dwelling units per acre) district The RH-30 zoning district is intended for high-density condominium and apartment developments. The maximum allowed density for new residential projects within this zoning district will be 30 dwellings per net acre and the minimum density will be 20 dwelling units per net acre The RH 30 zoning district is consistent with the High Density -30 residential land use category of the General Plan When the RH-30 designation is applied to property pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(h), subsequent review of any complete development application submitted in the same Housing Element planning period shall comply with the requirements of Government Code Sec 65583.2(1). Sec, 22.08.030, Table 2-3, is amended to add the RH-30 land use district, with the same permit requirements as applicable in the RH district. Sec. 22.08.040, Table 2-4, is amended to add the RH-30 land use district, as follows: Development Feature RH 30 Minimum lot area 5 acres Residential density Maximum 30 dwellings per net site acre Minimum: 20 dwellings per net site acre Setbacks required (same as RH) Lot Coverage 60% Height limit 35 ft. Hillside development (Same as RH) Landscaping (Same as RH) Parking (Same as RH) 14 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 Exhibit C (continued) Sec. 22.48.020. —Applicability, is amended as follows: (a) Development review. An application for development review is required for commercial, industrial, and institutional development, and residential projects that propose one or more single-family dwelling units (detached or attached) or multiple - family dwelling units and that involve the issuance of a building permit for construction or reconstruction of a structure(s) meeting the following criteria: Sec. 22.22.020. —Applicability, is amended to add as follows: C. Conditional use permits. Hillside vcv ciop mc,msorrcm-oeawrccrz^v-crtc-appf6kal-Qfi3 conditional use permit in GempliaRse with ^1-^n+^ ' r '2 58. Development Review. Hillside developments shall be subject to Development Review in compliance with chapter 22.48, except that residential developments in the RH-30 district shall be subject to non -discretionary development review if required pursuance to Section 22.08.020(7). Sec. 22.22.050. — Hillside development standards and guidelines, is amended as follows: (b) Exceptions. Exceptions to the standards in this chapter may be approved through the GeRditiGnal use development review process, when the commission determines that the exceptions would not materially affect the intent of the standards and guidelines. In approving a conditional use m' development review, the commission shall make appropriate findings supporting the determination in compliance with the chapter 22.58 (ConditionalUse Permits) 22.48 (Development Review). Sec. 22.22.070, Table 3-5 Slope Categories is amended as follows: Slope Category Natural:rSlo aPercenta e : Site Standards' 4. 50% and over This is an excessive slope condition and it is anticipated that residential subdivisions will not be developed in these areas. If residential development is pursued in these areas, lot sizes may be considerably larger than the minimum allowed by the underlying zoning district in order to comply with the standards and guidelines of this Chapter. Actual lot size shall be determined through the Development Review nrncess. 15 GPA and ZG PL2013-227 Exhibit C (continued) Sec. 22.22.080. — Grading, is amended as follows (a) Landform grading techniques. The following standards define basic grading techniques that are consistent with the intent of this chapter and avoid unnecessary cut and fill. (Figures 3-10 and 3-14). Limitations on project grading amounts and configurations will be decided on a case-by-case basis under the PonditiARAI uc; permit development review process. Sec. 22.22.150. — Evaluation of op use ,P development review application, is amended as follows: The commission shall evaluate a cenditieRal usepermit development review application for hillside development based on the following objectives and the required findings in compliance with chapter 22- 22.48 (Development Review). 16 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 Exhibit D L3'35+.++aary R. W19h 04a-,s6Y� zotir F+.�L'-y'a'�,G kKPsywa:+;'.=[r: ReWen1i5F1.�7ns :a -e. •�.. nf4•iNLK<y1W9U�c'Y'u ': i'i3A:iYvi FiC12^.L`�SU.�--tl�i yy 1i' uas'.m]nEj La^.atcu ('`=..�J21AM'url.-2cCry'�iz'Svs?b! Ua,'=v�..tr.'Czmmvai nM1K4: 1:1Mtm. Y.l�.s a'�^" t:axfwl f...cGnT.cr3i C/It a s.'RVN FLa�1X L[Y.%.Yifsly ', �'. GP. u^pttM: P3Y iJA!"-4l Fffl "�V. ^�+s4aSG4CM:g4"s'+p4 +U -P.A3: Y.efri�A s] bu x'zcven... w�,weavyx3s,:_x-x< Zoning Map DUH BA i B 1 GPA and ZC PL2013-227 ATTACHMENT Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designation Project EIR Copies of the Final Environmental Impact Report: Volume 1 and Technical Appendices: Volume 2, dated May 2013, are available for public inspection and review at the City Clerk's Office in City Hall and the Diamond Bar Branch of the Los Angeles County Public Library. These documents were also posted on the City's website at http://diamondbarca.gov/index.aspx?paqe=772. Attachment 9 August 9, 2013 City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department/Planning Division 21810 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Attention: Planning Commissioners Ms. Grace S. Lee, Senior Planner Subject: Selection of Housing Site A for High Density Residential Rezoning 2008-1014 Housing Element Implementation for Proposed Affordable Housing (Planning Case No. PL 2013-227) Dear Commissioners and Ms. Lee In response to the August 2, 2013 Notice of Public Hearing to be held on August 13, 2013, at which time the Planning Commission will determine whether to select Housing Site A or Housing Site B in the above named matter, the undersigned Diamond Bar homeowners, living in the immediate vicinity of this proposed housing development, hereby request that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council to select Housing Site A. Housing Site A will result in the least amount of environmental impacts, with the lowest construction impacts on nearby homes, and with the least amount of new road development. Site B would not be a prudent alternative for a number of reasons, including the considerable additional road grading that would be required, and also because of adverse impacts to two stream courses and associated riparian habitats. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments pertaining to this matter Sincerely, Diamond Bar Homeowners Name Address Date z August 9, 2013 City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department/Planning Division 21810 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Attention: Planning Commissioners Ms. Grace S. Lee, Senior Planner Subject: Selection of Housing Site A for High Density Residential Rezoning (Planning Case No. PL 2013-227) Dear Commissioners and Ms. Lee: In response to the August 2, 2013 Notice of Public Hearing to be held on August 13, 2013, at which time the Planning Commission will determine whether to select Housing Site A or Housing Site B in the above named matter, the undersigned Diamond Bar homeowners, living in the immediate vicinity of this proposed housing development, hereby request that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council to select Housing Site A. Housing Site A will result in the least amount of environmental impacts, with the lowest construction impacts on nearby homes, and with the least amount of new road development. Site B would not be a prudent alternative for a number of reasons, including the considerable additional road grading that would be required, and also because of adverse impacts to two stream courses and associated riparian habitats. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments pertaining to this matter. Sincerely, Diamond Bar Homeowners Name Address 442�ZC2 �ri�i/f ��� % 7"l Date A1- I'll/ SU It; PL, I Vzll� f-ls 3 OF August 9, 2013 City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department/Planning Division 21810 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Attention: Planning Commissioners Ms. Grace S. Lee, Senior Planner Subject: Selection of Housing Site A for High Density Residential Rezoning 2008-1014 Housing Element Implementation for Proposed Affordable Housing (Planning Case No. PL 2013-227) Dear Commissioners and Ms. Lee: In response to the August 2, 2013 Notice of Public Hearing to be held on August 13, 2013, at which time the Planning Commission will determine whether to select Housing Site A or Housing Site B in the above named matter, the undersigned Diamond Bar homeowners, living in the immediate vicinity of this proposed housing development, hereby request that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council to select Housing Site A. Housing Site A will result in the least amount of environmental impacts, with the lowest construction impacts on nearby homes, and with the least amount of new road development. Site B would not be a prudent alternative for a number of reasons, including the considerable additional road grading that would be required, and also because of adverse impacts to two stream courses and associated riparian habitats. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments pertaining to this matter. Sincerely, Diamond Bar Homeowners Name Address L Wk*)A) L- qq 2- L O Q J V 'n In ot. -Io kannes' SanioS6 `fY7a� -J).psr�iinas I�riV a:1i'rjAn ,,1 & CR�iI fib r' f+� -rjjY.Q (@e-- )44It ICY. iioc,",,-,,A 6v('A 111K) °P-(iso►A Lai,, '-J2-44y Dy- - NAkneili -Al tl 5 . D � r�/� l Diamond Bar City Council Hearing Proposed Affordable Housing Land Use & Rezoning Project 9/3/13 ® 2008-2014 Housing Element Update to Diamond Bar General Plan City of Diamond Bar (DB) "Affordable Housing Land Use and Zoning Designatior Project" (Project) 490 -unit multi -family, high density, low-income (affordable) housing development ® California Department of Housing and Community Development (CDHCD) My name is Brian McGurty. I have been a DB homeowner at 24419 Top Ct. immediately adjacent to the west side of the proposed development site for over 26 years. Today, I represent myself along with nearly 200 homeowners who live within 1,500 ft of the west side of the proposed project, for which we have filed two petitions with over two hundred signatures objecting to the project and requesting that the project be located on Site A. My comments are in two parts: First, I will give you 4 reasons why Site A is a far better choice for the proposed project than Site B. Second, I will give you 3 reasons why neither Site A nor Site B seem to make much sense. Part 1: Site A should be selected instead of Site B Site A is by far the better choice for the proposed development project because it would be much less costly to develop than Site B, and it would have fewer adverse environmental impacts than Site B. In particular... Site A is located immediately adjacent to Chino Hills Parkway. In contrast, Site B is nearly 1 mile to the west of Chino Hills Parkway, and therefore it would cost much more to develop Site B and there would be land disturbance over longer distances to provide access to Site B, which therefore would require more grading, more road asphalt, and much longer conveyance facilities for water, power, sewer lines, and other municipal services. 2. Since major portions of Site A would have to be graded and developed in order to provide access and municipal services to Site B, then instead of impacts occurring on just one site or the other, selection of Site B would in fact require the development of both sites! Page II Access from the west to Site B is not feasible for reasons identified in the DB General Plan and in the 1993 EIR for Diamond Ranch High School: -- In the Circulation Element of the DB General Plan there is a strategy statement to "minimize impacts of roadways serving the Diamond Ranch high school site on surrounding residential neighborhoods', streets which by the way that have children playing in them. -- In the 1993 EIR, it is stated that "the limited width and circuitous design of these streets [to the west of Site B] indicate that they were intended to handle local traffic only and would easily be overloaded if an east -west connector road were established", and further that "the higher volume of traffic" would be a "neighborhood intrusion' that would reduce the "quality of life" for those homeowners, that "the local residents would experience higher levels of traffic and noise", and further that unavoidable overload parking "within the existing neighborhood would bring additional noise, litter and occasional vandalism". Moreover in this regard the EIR also states: "The additional drop-off activity in this area [if access to the west was developed] is likely to seriously affect Deepsprings/Rockbury residents. There is no sufficient space to provide the likely demand for drop-off activity in this area. Residents would be impacted by the congestion and noise, and would likely have difficulty exiting their driveways during the morning and evening peak hours." 3. Site A could be developed adjacent to Chino Hills Parkway with no loss of riparian habitat or oak woodland. In contrast, at Site B there is a permanent spring and a be lost, which DB codes are supposed to protect, and which are inhabited by species of amphibians and birds that do not otherwise occur in surrounding areas. In fact, the location of Diamond Ranch High School as you see it today was located precisely where it is to avoid impact to this riparian habitat on the west side of the school property. I know this because I participated in the environmental analysis for the high school before it was built. Various measures within DB's General Plan call for protection of natural vegetation, especially mature oak trees and riparian habitats. 4. Development of Site A would cause no view obstructions because there are no associated hillside or hilltop homes affected at that location. In contrast, Rockbury Dr., which DB codes are supposed to prevent, especially if the structures are to be built to a height of 45 ft (i.e., 4 stories) as contemplated in the EIR. The DB General Plan strategy objectives for land use and resource management state that new developments are to be designed to respect the views of pre-existing developments, and further that new dwelling units are to be sited in a manner that protect the views of existing developments. In addition, in DB's Housing Element Goals and Policies one of the goals is to "conserve the existing housing stock and maintain property values and residents' quality of life." Although the EIR plays down visual impacts for both sites, there can be no doubt whatsoever that a 4 -story condominium or apartment structure on Site B would at least partially block the current irreplaceable views of many homes that were sold with additional lot premium payments of 12-15% on top of their tract sales prices. Page l2 In conclusion, we Diamond Bar homeowners support the recommendations of both City Staff and the City Planning Commissioners to select Site A. Part 2: Neither Site A nor Site B seem to make sense Now, I would like to suggest for Council consideration that neither Site A nor Site B appear to be appropriate for the proposed development project, for the following reasons... 1. The location of either site appears to be out of step with both the DB General Plan and CDHCD rules and guidelines for such projects, because either site would be isolated from basic services within DB's city limits, and therefore neither site could be integrated into the DB community, as seemingly required. DB General Plan strategy objectives for land use state that development within the Tres Hermanos property should be designed so as to be a part of the Diamond Bar community and compatible with adjacent lands. DB General Plan strategy objectives for traffic circulation state that all new developments must be provided with adequate access to City infrastructure. Instead, either site would result in the vital community services being necessarily provided by adjacent portions of the City of Pomona, because there are no economic segments of DB directly available or accessible to either site. Consequently, selection of either site would appear to be inconsistent with statutory and Department codes, standards, and guidelines which require that affordable housing projects are to be integrated with available community services in order to provide viable living conditions, in particular for the type of low-income homeowners that are the objective of the proposed housing development, including for example bus line and other public transit routes and facilities, hard surface pedestrian walkways and bicycle laneways, and nearby access to supermarkets, primary and secondary schools, child care, banks, medical and health care facilities, retail and drug stores, laundromats, restaurants, places of worship, etc., all of which are several miles removed if they are to be provided by DB. General Plan strategy objectives for traffic circulation state that all new developments >t be provided with adequate access to City infrastructure. California housing law states : the following considerations must be taken into consideration: "the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community", and "an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites", including the needs for the "elderly" and "persons with disabilities". Moreover, access to services is even more critical to people who live in affordable housing because they own fewer cars and travel less. In fact, in California's six largest metropolitan areas, it has been documented in transportation surveys that three-fourths of the low-income households own no vehicles or only one car, and thereby will make 40 percent fewer auto trips per household than current DB residents. Page 13 2. According to the California Government Code Section 65583 et al., when local governments (such as DB in this case) inventory land for potential residential development (such as the affordable housing project that is currently under consideration), they are supposed to consider and incorporate public facilities and services available to such sites. As such, the Code lists the following order of priority for determining 'land suitable for residential development': 1st: "vacant residentially zoned sites"; 2"d: "vacant non -residentially zoned sites that allow residential development'; 3`d: "underutilized residentially zoned sites capable of being developed at a higher density or with greater intensity"; and Last: "non -residentially zoned sites that can be redeveloped for, and/or rezoned for, residential use". However, selection of either site would be turning this order of priority upside down on its head by selecting the last, worst-case option (rezoning vacant land) without first exhausting the other options. 3. Because both Sites A and B and the immediate surroundings are currently zoned for agriculture, then development of either of these sites would appear to breach the spirit and intent of Government Code Sec. 65589.5, in which it is stated: "(c) The Legislature also recognizes that premature and unnecessary development of agricultural lands for urban uses continues to have adverse effects on the availability of those lands for food and fiber production and on the economy of the state. Furthermore, it is the policy of the state that development should be guided away from prime agricultural lands; therefore, in implementing this section, local jurisdictions should encourage, to the maximum extent practicable, in filling existing urban areas." Also, in this Government Code section it is stated that one of several exceptions to a housing development requirement is when... "(4) The development project or emergency shelter is proposed on land zoned for agriculture or resource preservation that is surrounded on at least two sides by land being used for agricultural or resource preservation purposes, or which does not have adequate water or wastewater facilities to serve the project." In conclusion, DB has an opportunity to optimize the affordable housing State mandate by creating a cost-efficient community asset, whereby the footprint of the project creates a minimal disruption, and the project is better integrated into the DB community than either of the two proposed sites, in particular in a different location where infrastructure and services are already in place but are currently being underutilized, or otherwise in a new master -planned location further south on the Tres Hermanos property. Page 14 CD CO L Q Co N C6 •V � C O E U a)_ a) CU U) AM u i 4 �-j AlU U) Jc N N• U O 'O L Q O Q U N 0 4-0 'o L M U) N U O Cl U u LO a� O a, N 4-a O a) U ((T3,' L O 40— U) c) C: =3 O U -0 O 0) ® M �� _-0 .. W avi >j "" 0 0 (3) o o �� .® L C U (6 U O 0 -0 c U Q U T- N O ry a) L U O a) E m F. a) o 0-0 U o E L- O � �L U) a) U a) L O M ry 0 L (� O O 'O N N CL O mo (a (6� -,� O.� 'c cE U Ca O o U �Ea) cn CT U .� N (a N L Q C a) 'Fn E O .0 E T m .cn O ■ 0 0 -6--1 N U yi+ }, N O � � N cr cnU N � _N E W E O) O C U U ' cn Co =3 C: O I U 0 A cn N wo A E 'X 0 Cc: o _0 •cn I ' cn N 4— � N s.. O O Q � � •to _ o •- a� .> O C:N •L �� '�� > O N E U O O >, N N N ® 4-0_ C: •�•� N .� N � N .Ocu N mN N cn p co N Q� co > tl� U)O O O N .U? (6 p .� N Co�- > N O cn N L Oi- Q •— a >% cn U U E = w 0) O U) L L 0 N O M to O mE O ♦0 cn E 3 � O i �rn U-0 o o �_ � � c v o O o� ® L V (1) Q. 4-0 Cl) N 07 ca N.C: oo N U.� O C: 4-1 CIO.O N O E c .� 1 Ncn W r �� s O O O N �l E U U .0 � E O u) E cu N —C: 2 U co � `}_ v ow 06E a) 0O ccn _ c C a0- O � 70 N C: 4-1 O �� N O O U)U U N j 'a N C: p � O Co�, co cnO a) cum C: U � '� 0, ® O O U N C. C: Cl) U U V p > N O 4- 4= ca 4-_1 N ® N 0U N -CUN �. C: oO N c > C� Z a. w U. � y - O 0 N O E �' •O c (n (� O a) ° •� ° Q C: U i -0 L - 'C: O, C N � ° p cn c N C: C) OU N + Q O 4-0O cn O N a) N70 7 N U) N L � O �+ c •� E o . 0 -P -j U c E � �`' C= O aD ® C: N > N N �. E O E I--- ® O ♦., Q � >% CLN O N O O O � C: N •F i N N N U U. c� U O E 4-0 C: N O O O Q °6 �.0 Q. O ca CD N CU M C: .� cm O Q 06 +� M °6 E c/) Q iC:M N O 4-- cu m U .U) a. L. U 0. O M C/) O O j >% O N O OL. U. w cr ry 4-0 C _ O Q E c L. p C:0 L ._ C:O >, _0 Co >, > c s.. -0 N O cm U) 06 co E O 0 >, O U .0 Q O p — O N O C: cn O N 0 0 0 0 E U .� N U U cn N N > O C: C: c . r --a N E Q _O N > � cn N Q Q -U N �CL Q O c m D -� U) W L U ,2 (D U o Cn U)CD Jc: W O -0 C: +-+ L O m j U c . r 1 C/) U c6 00 ti 0 ^U) W L O M 0 1 4 J co 4-a a) co co N O mo a) W cu L Q W ■ O z V O c O Ll 0 U) 0 C: E L on i 4-0ate--+ cu 7 c Q1 � O > o co O—a) V O N O Q i C Q > �+� -�=V N Cn co N �= 0�= i � E a — C:= . ® co LL p O Q O •� cn O X- � L N 0) Co Q. O Q. O (D(a -0 -0 Lli •E 0 .1a mo O '� N U M70 0 c oV E•aCO � Co � � C: C: Z: 2 a)O N >> O C U Q •� a� '� E Q 0 0 N U) � W co lil = - +r � O Co � m U N O to (I)m Co U E O 0- < Q .E I O4.0 cn ='= C: N .C: cn � O � �E_ .>, ja a (6 .0 O .E U) U N Co >O -U) C Co -O � Q � C N E N W .U) 0 2 O N 00 O O N ■ 0 N 0 0 N .co U CL ■ 0 m u ■ co V- C) N co N N cn 0 co O N d7 Q a) 0 W 6 C: U. 0 a) E E 0 0 cncn C N ry ■ M V - CD N M N O Q cm .L coU Q U 0 ^i W U W C O U E N (� Q cn Q Q.i. .® :3 0 O C2 Q N = N .® c O U > IL .� oO 4 U) U � U U 4-0 4-0 4-1 = U °, � O Q +_• -0 cn U cn U t � U ZT 4—, C: O O N E 0—cu = 4.4 O c N N O U > co N !n - W � `'— cCico o 06o 0 L-_ -0 E Fn cn cu OO (0 O QO L C O U Q 0 L- ®� (n •L LL N ZaCL co L -i co 4- c (D Q V U) O J }' 2� N ♦) (/) 2� O_ ca E ® -� >,— CU E C- N -0 C: mc6 U u 0 a H n U) O > c N M d- +-+ Q C6 co Q cu .. 0c O N 0 4-1 E Ocn U O O O Co U U O a) L U U V ♦ G C O O O_ U U I— 4-0 75 c6 U m L Co rr^^ VJ L L O c.N ^>, 5 (^3), s Q ^, W OU) E LL U L O L C � '0 70 L U +-+ C C (� E U E� w o c ry iL U) s m C: Q co Q O E U Co N � O Q N y= L C O U C: L o 4-1 0 Q U O r- N d � TO co c E IL 4- U U) L � `� U co 0) o 4-0 O U N U) > N N O -� r _ E O Co Ucn N � (U .0 -0 N N E 6) 0 m E N -� U L co U O 40-- �p (� L- c- -o -0O .N C ca W O Nco Np o t �.,_,L _O N E O 0 U O OV C: L CT C }, v N N tCi .cm W, LJ O CU Fl W C/) C/) N co cu U) E p 0- E O — U c >, c >, > = co Co m 0 Q •� L 0 •L O L � I- Q o- U to > n • 1 rid U) U) cn 4-0 N E E O U co 0. cn U N r ■ O .a) O CDL N 06 U N cu cn WA 0 N 0. N N O O A u ■ 2 N .C: N E m co cnN 4- _>4 E �X O 0 ■ M a) E cm C: C: O •- C: •> O O � (a E •C M'0 -� ia) c U O U O � U U ry a W .E a) 4-0 : U .cn i Q E N O C:O 1 N E N E � X .L _ cn> .0 U C:4-0 N Q a) �.C: Q OU Q cn 5 N c O O Co O( � c/) , cn a) U W U O U - • 0 •- a) Co �. Ca UJ N a) to L Co Co Co coLL _ -0 4-j C/)O -t-j > ■ ■ ■ ,> n M a) E cm C: C: O •- C: •> O O � (a E •C M'0 -� ia) c U O U O � U U ry a W .E 2M 22 ■ L O Q N C) (n +_ E o L L W O co Q L _O co C 4-aC (6 E VJ coO O U cn 1 ate-+ m Q O to N U '� JCZ- .,_, L co CU Q. NN U) J C� LLCl) co 22 ■ nj ro O U) U) WNW O (6 U a) U An U a) .o a) E E O U a) N cn 4-a a) E a) E co 0) .C: O N c6 c co a) U) m Q a) U) co Jc a) 0 a) E E O U a) M -1-a C: O4-1 Q1 2 cn w N p 'N N O CUi 4.50 N -0 ?> E4-0 o (� t6 E cu >cu E CUN N cn cn N i = O � OC c -0 - O O C C:'— cn Zj O .� O Q C: CU =3 E •� O N N N co i Q L i co N 4— 3:U O O to cn a)CL � � C 0w U= IL v U U) L O _0 O C: U) cm E O O C C:'§ _ :3 N O •� ;~ � CM . 4_• N — �- V -0 L 4-0 4- L > CD 0 LO U vi m N-0 0 a 0 0 a) o L U _co •`� o N O = O 4-0 O N E:� N to O — 0 .0) C:Co o CO O X O N N cr co Z w E 0 co U 5 `�- n A, . U) O U (u .C: N CU 4- 0 N 0 U -6--1 a) E _a) W cm O 2 X— N O N co N L 4 N N E U 0) O N N co r -N 4— O N D U CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 8 , 1 Meeting Date: September 3, 2013 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: James DeStefano, City Man TITLE: ORDINANCE NO 03(A) 2013. ANRDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IDENTIFYING THE LOCATION OF REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING ORDINANCE NO 03(2013) RECOMMENDATION: Adopt for Second Reading by Title Only, Waive Full Reading. FISCAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: On August 20, 2013 staff advised that due to the continued unavailability of the SCAQMD Auditorium, City Council meetings would need to be continued in the Windmill Room, on the First Floor of Diamond Bar City Hall through November 5, 2013. Following discussion, the City Council approved for First Reading by Title Only, Waiving Full Reading of Ordinance No. 03(A) 2013. The attached Ordinance, if adopted by Council, will provide public notice of the relocation of City Council meetings on an interim basis. Upon the conclusion of the November 5, 2013 City Council meeting the Ordinance will automatically terminate and the publicly noticed time and place of the regular meetings of the Diamond Bar City Council, beginning November 19, 2013, will revert back to the SCAQMD Auditorium as specified in Section 2.08.10 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code. Prepared by- Tommy6 by- TommyCribbins, City Clerk 951777.1 ORDINANCE NO. 03(A) (2013) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IDENTIFYING THE LOCATION OF REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING ORDINANCE NO 03(2013) The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does ordain as follow Section 1. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 4A(1989) regularly scheduled meetings of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar are held at 21865 Copley Drive. Section 2. Due to unforeseen circumstances, the Diamond Bar City Council Meetings scheduled for July 2, 2013, July 16, 2013, August 6, 2013, August 20, 2013, September 3, 2013 and September 17, 2013 are unable to be held at the location set by said Ordinance. Section 3. On June 3, 2013 the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 03(2013) relocating its City Council meetings for July 2, 2013, July 16, 2013, August 6, 2013, August 20, 2013, September 3, 2013 and September 17, 2013 at Diamond Bar City Hall, located at 21810 Copley Drive. Section 4. City Staff has been notified that the City Council meetings scheduled for October 1, 2013, October 16, 2013 and November 5, 2013 will be unable to be held in the SCAQMD Auditorium and therefore, will need to continue to be held in the Windmill Community Room, located at City Hall, 21810 Copley Drive. Section 4. At the conclusion of the City Council meeting of November 5, 2013, said location of the City Council meetings will revert back to the location where said meetings were previously held. Section 5. Therefore, the Diamond Bar City Council will amend Ordinance No. 03(2013) adding the dates of October 1, 2013, October16, 2013 and November 5, 2013 to the dates that City Council meetings with be held in the Windmill Community Room. Section 6. The Mayor shall sign this ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be posted within fifteen (15) days after its passage in at least (3) public locations in the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to Resolution No. 89-6(A). Jack Tanaka, Mayor I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 20th day of August, 2013 and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 3rd day of September 2013, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tommye A. Cribbins, City Clerk IIT VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK��% % FROM: etlu f�P 'LCL//C9 / DATE: r� ADDRESS: �J�3 116 {,c�a&5 PHONE: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA#/SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda/subject itleig. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature This document is a public record subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act. .T VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA#/SUBJECT: C1lV\C L ft DATE: L �J 5�� j -t PHONE: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda/subject item. Please have the Council inutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature This document is a public record subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act. car c \ yap VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK Q 2 FROM: T lAl—� Its 7 ��o DATE: ADDRESS: ;LA 01 n IiY Diauncn✓� 1�� r PHONE:?(- ORGANIZATION: Mnm v Sad AGENDA#/SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda/subject item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. v Signa e his document is a public record subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act. r ,ya9 VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA#/SUBJECT: DATE: ! 3 ll3 Q,, PHONE: C�o�� 8�� �-22`4 I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda/subject item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. C Signature --' This document is a public record subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act Cl T „Jgo VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: CITY CLERK rl io +b 5 Z�'�' DATE: 3 c� (S PHONE: 1.��• QTS ORGANIZATION: AGENDA#/SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda/subject item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature This document is a public record subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA#/SUBJECT: S DATE: 46�/IG PHONE: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda/subject item. Moo have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. This document is a public record subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act. TO FROM: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL CITY CLERK Stiv[A- Rd,CR,R-bLL DATE: ADDRESS: (eSb P-� p) P�oPHONE: q �� 2eezG ORGANIZATION: AGENDA#/SUBJECT: 1'�2e ?oni mta�1 �ikr� l� (avyc est I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda/subject item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Jg 4,,at&ure This document is a public record subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act. ,Tr lgg VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK 2 FROM: �c ( Y -(`4 4q DATE: J, 3 ADDRESS: �� PHONE: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA#/SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda/subject item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature This document is a public record subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK t_ FROM:?IphVl��Lr�n�g� DATE: ADDRESS: G 0 �Vlg404tq,, NV -e- PHONE: ��°l� �'i3' ��1FOR ORGANIZATION: AGENDA#/SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda/subject item le se have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. re This document is a public record subject to disclosure under thi,Public Records Act T San VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA#/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK DATE:'�3 ICSfoe�3�cx�i �fi PHONE: 1Y3_TII (� I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda/subject item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. �l Signature Tk;- i� 6 ...hlir rc,M cnhiart fn riicrincnra i incur tha Pi ihlir Rarnrrls Art