San Dimas City Council
May 27, 2025

Ordinance 1326
Municipal Code Text Amendment 23-05 Page 8

4. Action by the director of development services community development is subject to findings provided for in Section 18.162.070 of this chapter.

C. The director of community development, and the planning commission as applicable, may determine that trees on the project site not defined as mature significant trees by Section 18.162.020(A) are desirable to retain. In such case, the provisions of this chapter shall apply.
(Ord. 1165 § 2, 2006)
§ 18.162.060. Conditions imposed.

An approval to remove or relocate mature significant trees by the director of development services community development or the planning commission are subject to conditions of approval as deemed necessary to implement the provisions of this chapter including, but not limited to:

A. Tree relocation and/or two for one replacement with minimum fifteen-gallon box tree(s), or other replacement of equivalent value and size, within the subject property. The two for one replacement ratio may be reduced as determined by the final decision making body, if a minimum of one of the following additional findings are made:

1. The reduced replacement requirement is consistent with the purposes of this chapter.

2. The tree(s) in question are located where the impact of the tree removal on the community is limited (such as trees in a generally flat portion of the rear yard of a single-family house that are deemed to have less public benefit).

3. The property in question has an adequate number of existing trees therefore a reduced replacement ratio is appropriate.

B. When on-site features, project constraints, and/or other considerations exist which prevent reasonable on-site relocation, relocation to an approved off-site location shall be permitted.

C. If said conditions are imposed, the owner will be responsible for all replacement and relocated trees for a minimum period of two years. If during this time the tree(s) is (are) declared unhealthy by a certified arborist as set forth in Section 18.162.090, the diseased trees shall be removed and replaced at the cost of the applicant, as set forth in Section 18.162.100.

D. A maintenance agreement shall be submitted by the applicant and established for each replaced and relocated tree. The maintenance agreement and maintenance responsibility shall be transferred with the sale of the property if title to the property is transferred within the specified maintenance period. (Ord. 1165 § 4, 2006)
§ 18.162.070. Required findings.

Ordinance 1326
Municipal Code Text Amendment 23-05 Page 9
The granting of a permit for the removal or relocation of mature significant trees shall be subject to a minimum of one of the following findings as they pertain to the specific property:

A. The condition of the mature significant tree(s) with respect to disease, danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed structures, and interference with utility services warrant removal of the tree;
B. It is reasonable to remove the tree because of its continued existence at the location prevents the reasonable development of the subject property; C. Removal of the tree will not create a negative impact on the topography of the land, erosion, soil retention, and will not contribute to the diversion or increased flow of surface waters;
D. Based on the number of trees in the neighborhood on surrounding properties or on the site, and the effect of tree removal upon enjoyment of the residents and the general public, and on property values in the area;
E. The tree removal is consistent with good forestry practices, such as the number of healthy trees which a given parcel of land will support. (Ord. 1165 § 5, 2006)
§ 18.162.080. Exceptions.

All trees should be protected, but there are a few cases where this chapter does not apply and they are as follows:

A. Trees located within the boundaries of single-family zoned properties or singlefamily properties designated within a specific plan, with the exception of the following;
a. Trees located within homeowner’s association (1) common areas, (2) open space, (3) scenic easements, (4) slope easements, (5) maintained areas; and
b. Trees located on a single-family lot within (1) open space, (2) scenic easements or (3) slope easements;
A. B. Trees planted, grown, and/or held for sale by licensed nurseries and/or tree farms or the removal or transplanting of such trees pursuant to the operation of licensed nursery and/or tree farm;
B. C. Trees within existing or proposed public right-of-way where their removal or relocation is necessary to obtain adequate line-of-site distances as required by the city engineer;
C. D. Trees which, in the opinion of the city engineer, will cause damage to existing public improvements;
D. E. Trees which require maintenance or removal action for the protection of existing electrical power or communication lines or other property of a public utility;

Ordinance 1326
Municipal Code Text Amendment 23-05 Page 10
E. F. Trees damaged by thunderstorms, windstorms, flood, earthquakes, fire, widespread organic disease or insect infestation, or other natural disasters and determined to be dangerous by a peace officer, fireman, civil defense official or code enforcement officer in their official capacity;
F. G. Minor trimming and/or pruning of trees on developed property within the scope of typical and reasonable tree maintenance;
G. H. Trees declared to be dead, diseased or dying, subject to the requirements of Section 18.162.090;
H. I. Fruit trees, including citrus, plum, nectarine, cherry, apricot, peach, pear, pomegranate, persimmon, loquat, fig, avocado and other species determined similar by the director of development services community development. (Ord. 913 § 1 (Exh. A), 1990; Ord. 1165 § 6, 2006)
§ 18.162.090. Verification of dead, diseased or dying trees.

The health of any mature significant tree declared to be dead, diseased or dying shall, prior to removal, be verified by a written report of a certified arborist, horticulturist or other qualified person.
(Ord. 913 § 1 (Exh. A), 1990)
§ 18.162.100. Tree maintenance.

The careful management of trees has become an ever increasing factor in the health and care of mature significant trees. When mature significant trees are located on designated scenic or open space areas, the owner of the property shall be exempt from this section.

When mature significant trees are located on developed property, whether remaining trees, relocated trees, or new trees planted to replace those removed, the owner of the property shall maintain the trees to preserve and protect their health in accordance with the following measures:

A. The maintenance of trees standing upon private property shall be the responsibility of the owner(s) of those properties.

B. Trees shall be pruned, treated and maintained in such a fashion that the trees will be free of various damage, pests, disease and dead branches. The trees shall be in good biological and aesthetic condition.

C. Where applicable, a bond or cash deposit as determined by the director of development services community development shall be furnished by the developer for the management and protection of each existing, replanted or relocated tree(s).

Said bond or cash deposit shall be refunded upon the successful completion of a tree maintenance program as required by the director of development services community development.

D. Any tree removal and/or replacement permit granted by the director of development services community development pursuant to Section 18.162.040 and the planning commission pursuant to Section 18.162.040 shall include a condition requiring an objectively observable maintenance and care program to be

Ordinance 1326
Municipal Code Text Amendment 23-05 Page 11
initiated to insure the continued health and care of mature significant tree(s) on the property. Such program shall specify length of maintenance program, maintenance plan and method of inspection. Said tree maintenance program and plan is not required of the applicant when trees are to be relocated to an approved off-site location pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 913 § 1 (Exh. A), 1990; Ord. 1165 § 7, 2006)
§ 18.162.110. Protection of existing trees.

Care shall be exercised by all individuals, developers and contractors working near mature significant trees to be preserved so that no damage occurs to the trees. All construction shall preserve and protect the health of trees to remain in place, to be relocated, and new trees planted to replace those removed and any trees adjacent to the subject property in accordance with the following measures:

A. All trees to be saved shall be enclosed by an appropriate construction barrier, such as chain link fence or other means acceptable to the director of development services community development, prior to the issuance of any grading or building or building permit and prior to commencement of work. Fences are to remain in place during all phases of construction and may not be removed without the written consent of the director of development services community development, until construction is complete;
B. Any tree which is adjacent to the subject property and may be potentially impacted by persons or activity on the subject property shall be protected pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.162.110. It shall be the responsibility of the agent of the subject property to obtain the written permission from adjacent property owners prior to action for the protection of trees on adjacent property as required by Section 18.162.110;
C. No substantial disruption or removal of the structural or absorptive roots of any tree shall be performed;
D. No fill material shall be placed within the drip line of any tree; E. No construction, including structures and walls, that disrupts the root system shall be permitted. As a guideline, no cutting of roots should occur within the drip line of the tree as measured at ground level. Actual setbacks may vary to meet the needs of individual tree species as determined by an arborist or landscape architect.

Where some root removal is necessary, the tree crown may require thinning to prevent wind damage;
F. Topping and/or severe pruning of trees that results in significant damage to the tree to the point that reasonable future growth may be limited, as determined by a Certified Arborist, shall constitute a tree removal and is subject to the penalties outlined in Section 18.162.130; and
G. The director of development services community development may impose such additional measures determined necessary to preserve and protect the health of trees to remain on site.

Ordinance 1326
Municipal Code Text Amendment 23-05 Page 12
(Ord. 1165 § 8, 2006)
§ 18.162.120. Appeals.

Appeals shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.212 of this title. (Ord. 913 § 1 (Exh. A), 1990)
§ 18.162.130. Penalties.

Violation of any provision of this chapter, or of any provision of any permit issued pursuant to this chapter shall be a misdemeanor punishable as follows:

A. Fines shall be set forth in accordance with Section 1.12.010 of this code. Each tree removed in violation of this chapter shall constitute a separate offense.

B. As set forth in Section 18.162.010, it is the intent of this chapter to preserve to the greatest extent possible those trees which have contributed to the beauty of the city and the welfare of its residents. It is therefore the expressed intent of the city council that, to the extent legally permissible, upon conviction of any person pursuant to subsection A of this section, in lieu of incarceration, conditions of probation be placed upon such violator requiring the replacement of each tree removed in violation of this chapter with up to four trees of a similar species of not less than a twenty-four inch box size, or other replacement of equivalent value and size, whichever is greater. The number, size and location of the equivalent replacement tree shall be determined by the director of development services community development. For the purpose of this section, a suitable location may include an off-site location.

C. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no development permit of any kind, including but not limited to, any building permit or certificate of occupancy, shall be issued for any lot on which one or more trees have been removed in violation of the provisions of this chapter, or any permit issued pursuant to this chapter, unless and until the owner of such lot has replaced each such tree, to an on-site or offsite location pursuant to the provisions of this section, with up to four trees of a similar species of not less than twenty-four inch box size, or of equivalent value and size, whichever is greater, or provided security satisfactory to the director of development services community development that such trees will be planted at such time as determined by the director.
(Ord. 1165 § 9, 2006)

Agenda Item Staff Report
To: Honorable Chair and Members of Planning Commission
For the Meeting of April 17, 2025
From: Luis Torrico, Director of Community Development
Prepared by: Yasmin Dabbous, Assistant Planner
Subject: Municipal Code Text Amendment 23-05, Consideration and discussion of a Municipal Code Text Amendment to amend Title 18, Chapter 18.162 Tree Preservation to exempt single-family zoned properties and single-family properties within a specific plan from the Ordinance and associated clean-up items.
____________________________________________________________________________

SUMMARY
At the November 12, 2024 City Council study session, Staff was directed to revise the municipal code text amendment to exempt single-family properties from the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance and incorporate associated clean-up items. This Staff Report summarizes the proposed changes to the Ordinance, as requested by City Council.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PC-1696, recommending approval to the City Council of Municipal Code Text Amendment 23-05.

GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
No

FISCAL IMPACT
Application Fee and Administrative Citation revenues will be reduced with the approval of exempting single-family properties from the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance.

BACKGROUND
Trees within the City of San Dimas are regulated under two separate chapters of the San Dimas Municipal Code (SDMC). (1) Chapter 13.36, Community Tree Management, regulates policy and enforcement related to City-owned trees located within any park, City right-of-way, median, ATTACHMENT 2

Municipal Code Text Amendment – Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 2 For the Meeting of April 17, 2025
parkway, planting easement or any other City-owned property, and is administered by the Parks and Recreation Department. (2) Chapter 18.162, the Tree Preservation Ordinance, regulates policy and enforcement related to privately-owned trees, located on privately-owned property, regardless of the established land use, and is administered by the Community Development Department. This Municipal Code Text Amendment (MCTA) solely proposes modifications to Chapter 18.162, which deals with specific provisions, authorities, and enforcement procedures relating to preservation of trees located in private property.

The Tree Preservation Ordinance was originally adopted in 1990 with the intent of preserving and protecting private mature significant trees in the City. The Ordinance does not address any public trees that are found within a separate Ordinance and under the review of the Park and Recreation Department. The Tree Preservation Ordinance defines a mature significant tree as any private tree within the City of an Oak genus which measures eight (8) inches or more in trunk diameter and/or any other species of trees which measure ten (10) inches or more in trunk diameter and/or a multi-trunk tree(s) having a total circumference of thirty-eight (38) inches or more; the multitrunk tree shall include at least one trunk with a diameter of a minimum of four (4) inches. The trunk diameter measurement must be measured at a point thirty-six (36) inches above the ground at the base of the tree. The Ordinance also exempts fruit trees and other similar species from protection; therefore, with the exception these trees, any tree that meets the aforementioned criteria would be protected under the Ordinance.

The Ordinance requires a permit to remove protected trees. Requests to remove up to three (3) trees may be approved by the Director of Community Development, while the removal of four (4) or more trees requires approval by the Development Plan Review Board (DPRB). The application fee for a Tree Removal Permit for up to three (3) trees is $300, and the fee for the review of four (4) or more trees is $500. Approved tree removal applications are subject to a two-for-one replacement ratio with a minimum of fifteen-gallon tree(s), or other replacement of equivalent value and size, within the subject property. A reduced replacement ratio may be approved if the reduced replacement ratio is consistent with the purpose of the Ordinance, removal of the protected tree will have a minimal impact on the community or if the subject site has an adequate number of existing trees.

Per San Dimas Municipal Code (SDMC) Section 18.208, changes to the Code must be initiated by the City Council, Planning Commission or an applicant. The initiation request must first be approved before an application for a Municipal Code Text Amendment (MCTA) can be submitted or processed.

On July 20, 2023, the Planning Commission considered an applicant-initiated request to amend the Tree Preservation Ordinance, Chapter 18.162 of the SDMC to exempt Specific Plan 11 (SP11) from some requirements of the ordinance, and other amendments related to review procedures, and replacement requirements that would only be applicable to SP-11. Specific Plan 11, encompasses the Via Verde Ridge Homeowner’s Association and consists of 262 singlefamily residences within a total of 262-acres of hillside land. The Commission denied the applicant request to exempt SP-11 from the requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance but directed Staff to come back to the Commission with City-wide amendments to the Ordinance as a whole.

On September 21, 2023, the Planning Commission considered a City-initiated request to amend the Tree Preservation Ordinance, Chapter 18.162 of the SDMC to remove the Development Plan Review Board’s review authority, create a protected tree list, reduce the replacement ratio for tree removal violations, remove replacement requirements for removal of trees that pose an immediate danger or removal of trees required by the Fire Department, remove the arborist report submittal

Municipal Code Text Amendment – Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 3 For the Meeting of April 17, 2025
requirement, revise findings, and move the Tree Preservation Ordinance from Title 18 Zoning to Title 13 Civic Facilities to change the implementation responsibilities of the Ordinance from the Community Development Department to the Parks and Recreation Department, and various associated code clean-up items. The Commission voted against moving the Ordinance from Title 18 to Title 13 and for creating a tree exemption list, and voted to initiate a Municipal Code Text Amendment to Chapter 18.162 as follows:
• Remove the Development Plan Review Board’s (DPRB) review authority and allow Staff to review and approve all tree removals, regardless of the number of trees proposed for removal.
• Change replacement requirement to 1:1 if 24-inch box tree(s) is planted or 2:1 if 15-gallon tree(s) is planted.
• Create two levels of protection:
o Oak trees, and any other trees staff proposes, will need to make findings to support removal.
o All other trees with a 10-inch diameter or greater can be removed without any findings as long as they replace them. In this situation, the Director of Community Development can reduce the replacement ratio if there is not enough space to replant trees.
• Do not require replacement trees for removal of trees that pose an immediate danger, and removal of trees required by the Fire Department.
• Explore relaxing the Ordinance for backyard trees.
• Do not require an arborist report for dead, diseased or dying trees, unless applicant disagrees with Director's determination.
• Revise tree removal findings to make them clear and objective. • Change the point at which trunk diameter measurements are taken from 38-inches to 54- inches to be consistent with general arboricultural standards. • Revise the penalty section of the Ordinance.

After receiving direction from the Commission, Staff started the process to amend the Tree Ordinance. This consisted of researching other cities and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) to identify best practices, and consulting with the City’s arborist.

On April 23, 2024, the City Council heard a discussion about fines related to community trees.

The Council also discussed processes, fees and fines related to private trees. After much discussion, the Council directed Staff to schedule a study session to discuss private trees and provided input for discussion. Some of the items that were mentioned during the discussion, included, but were not limited to:
• Explore reducing or removing the Tree Removal Permit Application fee for single-family property applications.
• Reconsider enforcement of Ordinance to include single-family front yards only. • Create an exemption list for private trees (removal without permits/fees):
o Exempt tree species to consider: Eucalyptus, Tree of Heaven, Queen Palm, White Ash, etc.
o If exemption list is created, consider creating a protected list. • In situations where a 4:1 replacement is required, it may not be an appropriate solution, as space and maintenance are a factor.
• The Tree Ordinance should be easy to follow and not burden residents.

Municipal Code Text Amendment – Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 4 For the Meeting of April 17, 2025
• Creation of a tree fund, funded by residents who remove trees but do not have room for required replacement, that would allow other residents to plant trees at no expense to them.

At the November 12, 2024, City Council study session, Staff was directed to revise the Municipal Code Text Amendment to exempt all single-family properties from the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance and incorporate associated clean-up items (see Attachment 2). This Staff Report summarizes the proposed changes to the Ordinance, as specifically requested by City Council.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
Following the City Council study session, staff focused on addressing the City Council’s main objective of exempting single-family residential properties from the Tree Ordinance and incorporating associated clean-up related items such as exempting trees on single family properties but still protecting the following trees:
a. Trees located within homeowner’s association (1) common areas, (2) open space, (3) scenic easements, (4) slope easements, or (5) maintained areas; and b. Trees located on a single-family lot within (1) open space, (2) scenic easements or (3) slope easements;
There are a number of HOA and hillside residential properties that have large lots with sensitive open space or easement areas that are part of the property but are non-developable and intended to be kept as natural areas. These specified areas would remain as protected under the proposed MCTA. In addition, there are certain City properties/communities where a portion of the residents’ lot is landscaped and maintained by the HOA, these areas would also remain as protected areas.

However, any other tree(s) located outside of these listed categories would be allowed to be removed without the submittal of a formal Tree Removal Permit and fee.

Another item the City Council requested Staff to address is if certain tree species had protection granted by other agencies. Staff concluded that there is no outside agency that enforces the protection of endangered or classified tree species (i.e. Oaks). The enforcement responsibility would be up to the individual local jurisdiction. Certain agencies will only protect trees in designated protected areas within their jurisdiction. Staff did not amend the Tree Ordinance to incorporate a protected tree species list at this time, however, if directed, Staff has provided a recommendation in the issues/concerns section of this report.

Associated Code Clean-up Item
The code currently reads “Director of Development Services” which no longer exists so staff corrected the title to read “Director of Community Development”. Note that Staff is currently working on a comprehensive code text amendment update that would address this clean-up throughout the entire code for consistency.

Issues/Concerns
During the research phase of this MCTA, Staff found several inconsistencies in the Tree Ordinance that may cause confusion to residents as well as Staff. At this time, Staff has provided the following recommendations to alleviate the concerns that are not addressed in the MCTA. The

Municipal Code Text Amendment – Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 5 For the Meeting of April 17, 2025
following information outlines these changes. Planning Staff is requesting the Planning Commission to provide additional direction for the Ordinance update. • In the process of researching outside agencies’ direction, Staff found that the Planning Commission could consider incorporating a comprehensive protected tree list that includes native and locally significant tree types. Creating a species list will assist in preserving and conserving other unidentified sensitive areas in the City. This includes the line of Oak trees found along the centerline of the City and called out in the General Plan Land Use Element Exhibit II-4.1 (see Attachment 3). After comprehensive review, Staff would recommend the following tree types:
o Oaks,
o Sycamores,
o Black Walnuts,
o Camphor,
o California Redwood, and
o Pine species (limited).
• Based on general arboricultural standards, the point at which trunk diameter measurements are taken is defined at 54-inches. Staff recommends revising the definition of “Mature Significant Tree” within the Tree Ordinance to accurately reflect arboricultural standards. The code can be amended to change the point at which trunk diameter measurements are taken from 38-inches to 54-inches for consistency. • The current Ordinance does not address trees located in miscellaneous areas found throughout the City. Staff is requesting direction on keeping these areas protected:
o Single-Family Hillside (SF-H): The single-family hillside zone is intended to provide for the development of safe, comfortable residential areas where residents can enjoy views and a natural setting. Development in this zone is meant to blend with the natural setting when viewed from neighboring areas and other parts of the City.

Staff recommends that these areas remain subject to the Tree Ordinance to ensure that the intended topographic character of the zone is maintained and protected.

This zone encompasses a total of 90 properties as depicted in Figures 1 – 3.

Figure 1 – SF-H Properties along Oakengate Drive

Municipal Code Text Amendment – Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 6 For the Meeting of April 17, 2025
Figure 2 – SF-H Properties along S. Walnut Avenue
Figure 3 – SF-H Properties along Terrebonne Avenue

Municipal Code Text Amendment – Tree Preservation Ordinance Page 7 For the Meeting of April 17, 2025

ALTERNATIVES
Planning Commission is able to provide Staff with additional direction or alternatives relevant to the provided report and discussion.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to CEQA guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), CEQA does not apply to this item because there is no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, no additional environmental review is needed at this time.

During the environmental review process of the project, the City hired an outside consultant (PSOMAS) to review the proposed code text amendment and provide additional CEQA services.

According to Section 15061(B)(3), a project may be exempt if the project’s implementation would not result in a significant effect on the environment. The Project consists of text updates to the City’s Municipal Code that would allow owners of single-family properties to remove trees within their property unencumbered by the City’s Tree Removal Ordinance. Therefore, as the Project would result in text amendments to the Municipal Code and would not actually include any tree removal, it can be seen with certainty that there is no potential for a significant effect on the environment, as the Project is programmatic in nature. Furthermore, any subsequent tree removals initiated by private property owners would be done according to the updated requirements, thereby limiting any potential impacts. Lastly, these municipal code text updates would only apply to single-family properties, thereby limiting the number of trees that could be removed in the City. This founded substantial evidence to support a Notice of Exemption for the provided MCTA. Attachment 4 is the completed Notice of Exemption Memorandum as provided by the consultants.

Respectfully submitted,
Yasmin Dabbous
Assistant Planner
Attachments:

1. Resolution PC-1696

2. City Council Study Session Staff Report (Dated November 12, 2024)

3. General Plan Land Use Element Exhibit II-4.1

4. Notice of Exemption Memorandum - PSOMAS

CITY OF SAN DIMAS

PLANNING COMMISSION

MINUTES
Regularly Scheduled Meeting
Thursday, April 17, 2025, at 6:00 p.m.
245 East Bonita Avenue, City Council Chamber

PRESENT
Chairman David Bratt
Vice-Chairman John Davis
Commissioner Margie Green
Commissioner James Shirley
Commissioner Doran Barnes
Planning Manager Marco Espinoza
Assistant Planner Yasmin Dabbous
Senior Management Analyst Kimberly Neustice

CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE
Commissioner Bratt called the regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 6:00 p.m. and Commissioner Green led the flag salute.

CONSENT CALENDAR
CC 1. Approval of Revised February 20, 2025 minutes.

CC 2. Approval of March 20, 2025 minutes.

MOTION: Moved by Commissioner Green, seconded by Vice-Chairman Davis to approve the consent calendar. Motion carried 5-0.

PUBLIC HEARING
PH 1. Municipal Code Text Amendment 25-01, Consideration and discussion of a City-initiated Municipal Code Text Amendment of Title 18-Chapter 18.40 Affordable Housing Overlay Zone, deleting Affordable Housing Overlay Zone No. 2 (AHO-2)
Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission continue the item until the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of May 15, 2025. Staff found that a portion of the overlay zone will need to remain due to the Housing overlay zone for the Grove Station/Village Walk area. It has to do with minimum and maximum density levels and if the overlay zone is removed, this could be seen as down zoning. Staff will revise the report and ordinance and re-notice for the next meeting.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 2
April 17, 2025
RESOLUTION PC-1694

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN

DIMAS, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF MUNICIPAL CODE TEXT AMENDMENT 25-01, WHICH AMENDS TITLE 18 – ZONING, CHAPTER 18.40 AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE, TO REMOVE AFFORDABE HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE 2 FROM THE CHAPTER.

MOTION: Moved by Commissioner Barnes, seconded by Commissioner Shirley to continue the public hearing to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of May 15, 2025.

Motion carries 5-0.

PH 2. Municipal Code Text Amendment 23-05, Consideration and discussion of a Municipal Code Text Amendment to amend Title 18, Chapter 18.162 Tree Preservation to exempt singlefamily zoned properties and single-family properties within a specific plan from the Ordinance and associated clean-up items.

Staff report presented by Assistant Planner Dabbous recommending Planning Commission approve Resolution PC-1696 recommending City Council adopt Municipal Code Text Amendment 23-05. A revised environmental memo from the consultant, Psomas was put on the dais for the Commissioners review.

Vice-Chairman Davis stated that the Commission previously made several suggestions for modifications to the tree ordinance and asked if Staff presented their suggestions to the City Council.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated no, that when the ordinance was presented at the City Council Study Session, the Council only discussed removing the requirements from the single-family areas, but they didn’t discuss any other items at that time.

Vice-Chairman Davis asked if Staff wanted the Commission to give the recommendations again for City Council to consider when this MCTA goes for Council consideration.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated that it was up to the Commission if they wanted to make recommendations to City Council but they were pretty clear that the only recommendation they considered was exempting single-family areas from the ordinance.

Vice-Chairman Davis stated that there were a few recommendations that the Commission felt were important.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated that on page 4 of the Psomas memo it does mention the recommendations made previously by the Planning Commission.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 3
April 17, 2025
Vice-Chairman Davis asked if this new ordinance would trigger an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to remove Homeowner Association (HOA) trees.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated no, an EIR would not be required.

Commissioner Barnes stated that generally this Municipal Code Text Amendment (MCTA) seems fine but he would like to discuss the items being changed. He asked if accessory dwelling units (ADUs) would be considered part of the single-family lot exemption.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated that yes, ADU’s are considered single-family and would be exempt.

Vice-Chairman Davis stated that he would like to discuss if the Commission wants to exempt every tree, or if they would like to have some trees protected from this exemption, and have those protected tree removals considered more closely. He stated that for significant trees, Commission should at least understand why the owner wants to remove the tree and he has a concern about people cutting down major oak trees. He would like to try and encourage the City Council to consider significant trees at least in the front yard, not to be exempt so it can be understood why the owners want these trees removed.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated that Psomas did recommend native trees, predominantly oak trees, not be subject to the exemption. The biologist that prepared the list stated that oak trees are considered rare but not endangered and are protected based more on the location, such as in State Parks. Since San Dimas is a local jurisdiction the City can regulate the types of trees more than State or County areas. The Black Walnut trees can be removed from the list if Commission would like. It might make it easier for the public if the ordinance states that the list of trees are protected no matter the size of the tree.

Commissioner Barnes stated that the proposal’s purpose is to exempt all tree removals on singlefamily lots and it seems to get complicated when calling out protected or significant trees. The easiest thing would be to say it’s your property, you can do what you’d like.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated that City Council’s direction was to exempt all trees but the environmental review by Psomas suggested that trees, at least in conservation areas, should be protected.

Vice-Chairman Davis stated that he is ok with protecting trees in conservation areas. He has a scenic easement on his property and he understands why you would want to protect trees in these areas. He stated he is also ok with the list of protected trees.

Chairman Bratt opened public hearing.

No communications were made.

Chairman Bratt closed public hearing.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 4
April 17, 2025
Planning Manager Espinoza stated that the text for the amendment is on page 45 of the agenda, Item A, under 18.162, and it addresses the environmental concern when it comes to protecting trees in common areas, open space, scenic easements, slopes and maintained areas. All these properties would still be exempt in the developable areas and the protected trees would only apply to the areas just mentioned. There is also an area in the city zoned as Single-Family Hillside that have conservation overlays on them. Those lots would not be part of the recommended single-family exemption but could still apply for a tree removal permit.

Vice-Chairman Davis stated that in his HOA, unless it’s on their actual property, it’s considered common area and asked if these trees in the HOA area would require City approval.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated yes.

Chairman Bratt stated that whatever they do in the back yard is fine with him but to exempt all trees on a single-family property, including the front yard, shouldn’t be done because in his opinion some trees should stay. He disagrees that front yard trees should be part of a blanket exemption. The way he interprets this, the City Council wants to exempt any tree on a single-family lot and he opposes that, and suggests that if it’s in the front yard it should be reviewed. Perhaps there are good reasons to remove the tree but it should be up to Staff to consider it as part of an application.

Vice-Chairman Davis agreed that if the tree type is on the Psomas list and meets the requirements, they should not be exempt and should go through the tree removal application process.

Commissioner Green agreed stating it makes sense to her as well.

Commissioner Shirley asked for confirmation that if one of the trees on Psomas list is in the front yard of a single-family property, would have to go through the tree removal application process.

Vice-Chairman Davis stated that was correct.

Commissioner Barnes stated if his neighbors just decided to chop down five mature trees, that would change the landscape view of the neighborhood. He feels that this should be part of a discussion before just allowing them to remove significant trees, native or not. Any large mature tree being removed should be considered by Staff before just allowing them to remove them under the exemption.

Commissioner Shirley asked if the residents have had a chance to share their thoughts on this matter.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated that today’s public hearing was the opportunity. The agenda was posted on the agenda boards, on the City website and we published a public hearing notice in the newspaper to try to encourage the public to attend.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 5
April 17, 2025
Commissioner Barnes stated he feels we should make it as simple as possible. He wanted to remove a tree a while ago and the process seemed complicated and there was a question if he needed an arborist report. He feels that the process should definitely be streamlined but there should be some kind of input and review for the significant trees. He asked if the MCTA was to go forward and single-family lots are exempt, are they subject to a replacement ratio.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated if the trees were covered under the exemption they could be removed without notifying the City and there is no replacement ratio. Right now, Staff reviews applications and they have to write findings as to why the trees are ok for removal which would no longer be done under the single-family exemption.

Vice-Chairman Davis suggests that there should be a review process for significant trees.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated that the Commission would have to come up with a recommendation as to what determines if it is a significant tree. An eight-inch or ten-inch diameter is rather small to consider a significant tree. Under this code amendment the measurement would now be taken at fifty-four inches from the ground instead of the previous thirty-six inches.

Vice-Chairman Davis stated if someone is going to rip out a significant tree, it really doesn’t do any good to put a box tree in its place because it won’t look the same. He feels that they should get a permit to remove a significant tree in the front yard, but a replacement tree should not be required.

Should a conclusion be made that removing a tree would change the look of the neighborhood, it would be appropriate for Staff to deny a permit.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated that City Council is going to expect explanations for Planning Commission’s recommendations if they decide to require some trees in the single-family area be permitted for removal. The next change on this MCTA is changing the replacement ratio from either one (1) twenty-four-inch box or two (2) fifteen-gallon trees. This would also apply to commercial areas.

Vice-Chairman Davis asked what happens if the site is over saturated with trees.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated the modification states “up to” and can be reduced as needed.

These are part of Planning Commission’s previous comments on the MCTA and staff would like to know if the Commission still wants Staff to bring these items up to the City Council when it moves forward. All of these recommendations from Planning Commission were presented to City Council at the study session but the Council did not discuss the items.

Vice-Chairman Davis stated that he would like to keep this replacement ratio recommendation. He also stated that he wanted to go over Item #1 which deals with who will review tree removal permits.

Less than four tree removals is a Staff level review and four or more is Planning Commission. He states Item #2 can stay.

Commissioner Barnes stated that it’s up to replacement ratio. What’s written now seems very prescriptive and he feels that it should be written differently.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 6
April 17, 2025
Chairman Bratt stated the wording should not say “up to 1”, but should be changed to “at the discretion of staff”.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated Staff will rewrite this portion to say “up to, but at the discretion of Staff”. That way Staff can be flexible if the lot already has several trees and adding another one would over saturate the lot. The concern he has is that City Council is not going to listen to all of these recommendations and that they will go back to only reviewing the single-family areas for exemption of tree permits. If Planning Commission is going to focus on something, maybe focus on the replacement ratio and the significant tree requirements.

Vice-Chairman Davis asked if an arborist report will be required for tree removals that have to go through the permit process.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated that it wouldn’t be required anymore for single-family, however, it could be required for HOA’s and commercial areas. If it’s obvious to Staff that the trees are dead, Staff won’t require a report but if Staff feels it’s still alive, the applicant would be directed to get an arborist report.

Vice-Chairman Davis asked to clarify if City Council is proposing to leave the ordinance the way it is, but to exempt single-family lots from the tree removal ordinance. Planning Commission recommended other changes to the code but it seems like City Council wouldn’t be open to incorporating additional changes at this time.

Planning Manager Espinoza stated that was the indication he received at the City Council Study Session.

Chairman Bratt felt that the Planning Commission should only make recommendations about singlefamily lots back to the City Council. He stated that the two recommendations that the Planning Commission should forward to City Council are the requirement for significant trees and that front yard trees should not be exempt from the ordinance.

Vice-Chairman Davis stated that the Commission can recommend that all trees on single-family lots are exempt except any trees in the front yard above a certain size. What is that size? He feels it should be more than a ten-inch diameter but less than a twenty-four-inch diameter and measured at fifty-four inches from the ground.

Chairman Bratt recommended a fifteen-inch diameter.

Vice-Chairman Davis reiterated that any trees in the back yard can fall under the single-family exemption but any tree in the front yard with a fifteen-inch diameter as measured from fifty-four inches from the ground should be subject to the tree removal permit process and reviewed by Staff since these trees could have a significant impact on the landscape of the neighborhood after removal.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 7
April 17, 2025
Commissioner Barnes stated that if you have a home that has a tree that meet these requirements, you probably bought the home knowing that this tree existed and there are owners that might buy the lot because of these mature trees.

RESOLUTION PC-1696

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN

DIMAS, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF MUNICIPAL CODE TEXT AMENDMENT 23-05, A REQUEST TO AMEND TITLE 18, CHAPTER 18.162 TREE PRESERVATION TO EXEMPT

SINGLE-FAMILY ZONED PROPERTIES AND SINGLE-FAMILY PROPERTIES WITHIN A SPECIFIC PLAN FROM THE ORDINANCE AND ASSOCIATED CLEANUP ITEMS.

MOTION: Moved by Vice-Chairman Davis, seconded by Commissioner Green to approve Resolution PC-1696 recommending City Council adopt MCTA 23-05 with the following modifications:
• All tree removal applications should be reviewed at Staff level. • Exempt tree removals from-single family properties except for mature trees, of any species, in the front yard that are fifteen-inch or more in diameter as measured from fifty-four inches from the ground, which will be subject to the tree removal permit process. • Require that Single-Family Hillside (SF-H) properties remain protected under the Tree Preservation Ordinance and not exempt.

Motion carried 5-0.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
a. Community Development Department
Planning Manager Espinoza gives an update:
• There will be two items for the May Planning Commission meeting. b. Members of the Audience
No communications were made.
c. Planning Commission
Vice-Chairman Davis asked about the Forestry property. Planning Manager Espinoza stated that we have received two different proposals from the owner. The one they would like to build is a one-hundred sixty-one-unit townhome development. The other proposal that they submitted does include two to three story townhomes and some five story apartments in the back. If they

Planning Commission Minutes Page 8
April 17, 2025
under build this site, we would have to update the housing element to relocate the reduced number of homes from this site either to a new site or to an existing identified site.

Commissioner Green asked about movement on the development on Walnut. Planning Manager Espinoza stated that they are moving very slowly but they are still moving forward.

ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Commissioner Green moved, seconded by Commissioner Shirley. Motion carried 5-

0. The meeting adjourned at 7:27 p.m. to the regular Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for Thursday May 15, 2025.
________________________________
David A. Bratt, Chairman
San Dimas Planning Commission
ATTEST:
_______________________
Kimberly Neustice
Senior Management Analyst
Approved: May 15, 2025

5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 300 • Santa Ana, CA 92707 • T: 714.751.7373

MEMORANDUM
April 17, 2025
To: From:

Luis Torrico
Director of Community Development
City of San Dimas
Bryan Hamilton
Jennifer Marks
Psomas
Subject: Substantial Evidence for Notice of Exemption for the Proposed Amendment to the City of San Dimas Chapter 18.162 Tree Ordinance, MCTA 23-05 The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was signed into law in 1970. The California Environmental Quality Act is a statue that requires state and local agencies to identify potential significant effects a “project” may have on the environment and any feasible mitigation that may be implemented to avoid or mitigate those impacts. A “project” is defined in Section 21065, Chapter 2.5, Division 13 of the California Public Resources Code as an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and consists of any of the following: an activity directly undertaken by any public agency; an activity undertaken by a person which is supported, in whole or in part, through contracts, grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of assistance from one or more public agencies; or, an activity that involves the issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies. A “significant effect on the environment” is defined in Section 21068 Chapter 2.5, Division 13 of the California Public Resources Code as a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment. Furthermore, the government agency which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project which may have a significant effect upon the environment is defined as the “lead agency” in Section 21067, Chapter 2.5, Division 13 of the California Public Resources Code.

CEQA applies in situations where a governmental agency can use its judgment in deciding whether and how to carry out or approve a project. A project subject to such judgmental controls is called a “discretionary project.” Where the law requires a governmental agency to act on a project in a set way without allowing the agency to use its own judgment, the project is called “ministerial,” and CEQA does not apply. Once an application for a project is deemed complete, a lead agency must first determine whether an activity is subject to CEQA before conducting an initial study. An activity is not subject to CEQA if: the activity does not involve the exercise of discretionary powers by a public agency; the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment; or the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378.

Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a Notice of Exemption (NOE) may be filed if the City of San Dimas, in its capacity as the Lead Agency, determines that a proposed action or project is exempt from CEQA. According to the CEQA Guidelines, a NOE must contain the following information:
• A description of the proposed action or project;
ATTACHMENT 3

Luis Torrico
April 17, 2025

Psomas
• A finding that the proposed action or project is exempt, including a citation of the State CEQA Guidelines section or statute under which the project is found to be exempt; and, • A brief statement in support of the finding.
• The Lead Agency authorized the preparation of this Notice of Exemption This report was prepared in accordance with Section 21000 (et seq) - Division 13 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15000 (et seq), Article 1, Chapter 3, Division 6, Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. It is important to note that CEQA is not a process that determines whether or not a project should be approved and no recommendations can be made as to whether or not a lead agency should approve or deny a project application.

SECTION 15061 – REVIEW FOR EXEMPTION
Section 15061(b)(3) – Common Sense Exemption
Section 15061(B)(3), the Common Sense Exemption, of the 2025 CEQA Guidelines applies to the proposed revision to the City of San Dimas’ Community Tree Ordinance Project (Project or proposed Project). Section 15061 outlines the process for determining whether or not a project would be exempt from CEQA. This process is detailed in Section 15061(B), provided below:
(b) A project is exempt from CEQA if:
(1) The project is exempt by statute (see, e.g. Article 18, commencing with Section 15260).
(2) The project is exempt pursuant to a categorical exemption (see Article 19, commencing with Section 15300) and the application of that categorical exemption is not barred by one of the exceptions set forth in Section 15300.2. (3) The activity is covered by the commonsense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.
(4) The project will be rejected or disapproved by a public agency. (See Section 15270(b)).
(5) The project is exempt pursuant to the provisions of Article 12.5 of this Chapter.

According to Section 15061(B)(3), a project may be exempt if the project’s implementation would not result in a significant effect on the environment. The Project consists of text updates to the City’s Municipal Code that would allow owners of single-family properties to remove trees within their property unencumbered by the City’s Tree Removal Ordinance, under most conditions, as described below in the Project Description. Therefore, as the Project would result

Luis Torrico
April 17, 2025

Psomas
in text amendments to the Municipal Code and would not actually include any tree removal, it can be seen with certainty that there is no potential for a significant effect on the environment, as the Project is programmatic in nature. These Municipal Code text updates would only apply to single-family properties, thereby limiting the number of trees that could be removed in the City.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Background
Trees within the City of San Dimas are regulated under Chapters 13.36 and 18.162 of the San Dimas Municipal Code (SDMC), respectively. Chapter 13.36 - Community Tree Management, regulates policy and enforcement related to City-owned trees located within any park, City rightof-way, median, parkway, planting easement, or any other City-owned property, and is administered by the Parks and Recreation Department. Meanwhile, Chapter 18.162, the Tree Preservation Ordinance, regulates policy and enforcement related to privately-owned trees located on privately-owned property, regardless of the established land use, and is administered by the Community Development Department.

The City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance was adopted in 1990 with the intent of preserving and protecting private mature significant trees in the City. The Tree Preservation Ordinance defines a mature significant tree as any private tree within the City of an Oak genus which measures eight inches or more in trunk diameter, and/or any other species of trees which measure 10 inches or more in trunk diameter, and/or a multi-trunk tree(s) having a total circumference of 38 inches or more (the multi-trunk tree shall include at least one trunk with a diameter of a minimum of four inches). The Ordinance exempts fruit trees and other similar species from protection; therefore, with the exception of these trees, any tree that meets the aforementioned criteria would be protected under the Ordinance.

The Ordinance requires a permit to remove protected trees. Requests to remove up to three trees may be approved by the Director of Community Development, while the removal of four or more trees requires approval by the Development Plan Review Board (DPRB). The application fee for a Tree Removal Permit for up to three trees is $300, while the fee for the review of four or more trees is $500. Approved tree removal applications are subject to a two-for-one replacement ratio with a minimum of fifteen-gallon box tree(s), or other replacement of equivalent value and size, within the subject property. A reduced replacement ratio may be approved if the reduced replacement ratio is consistent with the purpose of the Ordinance, removal of the protected tree will have a minimal impact on the community or if the subject site has an adequate number of existing trees.

On September 21, 2023, the Planning Commission considered a City-initiated request to amend the Tree Preservation Ordinance to remove the Development Plan Review Board’s review authority, create a protected tree list, reduce the replacement ratio for tree removal violations, remove replacement requirements for removal of trees that pose an immediate danger or removal of trees required by the Fire Department, remove the arborist report submittal requirement, revise findings, move the Tree Preservation Ordinance from Title 18 Zoning to Title 13 Civic Facilities to

Luis Torrico
April 17, 2025

Psomas
change the implementation responsibilities of the Ordinance to the Parks and Recreation Department, and various associated code clean-up items. The Commission voted against moving the Ordinance from Title 18 to Title 13 and for creating a tree exemption list, and voted to initiate a Municipal Code Text Amendment to Chapter 18.162 as follows:
• Remove the Development Plan Review Board’s (DPRB) review authority and allow City Staff to review and approve all tree removals, regardless of the number of trees proposed for removal.
• Change replacement requirement to 1:1 if 24-inch box tree(s) is planted or 2:1 if 15- gallon tree(s) is planted.
• Create two levels of protection:
• Oak tree, and any other tree staff proposes, will need to make findings to remove.
• All other trees with a 10-inch diameter or greater can be removed without any findings as long as they replace them. In this situation, the Director of Community Development can reduce the replacement ratio if there is not enough space to replant trees.
• Do not require replacement trees for removal of trees that pose an immediate danger, and removal of trees required by the Fire Department.
• Explore relaxing the Ordinance for backyard trees.
• Do not require arborist report for dead, diseased or dying tree, unless applicant disagrees with Director's determination.
• Revise tree removal findings to make them clear and objective. • Change the point at which trunk diameter measurements are taken from 38-inches to 54-inches to be consistent with general arboricultural standards. • Revise the penalty section of the Ordinance.

On April 23, 2024, the City Council heard a discussion about fines related to community trees.

The Council also discussed processes, fees and fines related to private trees. After much discussion, the Council directed City staff to schedule a study session to discuss private trees and provided input for discussion. Some of the items that were mentioned during the discussion, included, but were not limited to:
• Explore reducing or removing the Tree Removal Permit Application fee for single-family property applications.
• Reconsider enforcement of Ordinance for single-family front yards only. • Create an exemption list for private trees (can be removed without permits/fees):
• Exempt tree species to consider: Eucalyptus, Tree of Heaven, Queen Palm, White Ash, etc.

Luis Torrico
April 17, 2025

Psomas
• If exemption list is created, consider creating protected list. • In situations where 4:1 replacement is required, it may not be an appropriate solution, as space and maintenance are a factor.
• The Tree Ordinance should be easy to follow and not burden residents. • Creation of a tree fund, funded by residents who remove trees but do not have room for required replacement, that would allow other residents to plant trees at no expense to them.

During the November 12, 2024, City Council study session, City staff was directed to revise the Municipal Code Text Amendment to exempt single-family properties from the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance and incorporate associated clean-up items. The proposed changes to the Ordinance, as specifically requested by City Council, are described in the next section.

Proposed Municipal Code Text Amendment
Following the November 12, 2024, City Council study session, City staff focused on addressing the City Council’s main objective of exempting single-family residential properties from the Tree Preservation Ordinance, while still protecting the following trees:
• Trees located within common areas, open space, scenic easements, slope easements, or areas maintained by a Homeowner’s Association (HOA); and • Trees located on a single-family property within designated open space area, scenic easement, or slope easement.

The City contains numerous hillside residential properties as well as properties governed by a homeowners association (HOA). These properties contain sensitive open space or easement areas that are part of the property in question but are restricted from development in order to be kept as natural open space. These specified areas would remain as protected under the proposed Municipal Code Text Amendment. In addition, there are certain properties/communities within the City where a portion of the owners’ parcel is landscaped and maintained by an HOA, thus viewed as a common area tree. These areas would continue to remain protected areas. Nevertheless, any other tree(s) located outside of the categories mentioned above would be allowed to be removed without the submittal of a formal Tree Removal Permit and associated fee.

REVIEW OF CITY OF SAN DIMAS GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AND GUIDELINES The proposed Project would apply to trees situated within single-family properties. The City published its General Plan in 1991, one year after the passage of the Tree Preservation Ordinance. The City’s Land Use Element contains no specific goals or policies related to trees or tree preservation. In addition, the Conservation Element contains no specific goals or policies related to trees or tree preservation. Nevertheless, the Element does mention the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (City of San Dimas 1991). As such, there would be no conflict with City Land Use policies, nor would there be any conflict with City Conservation Element policies.

Luis Torrico
April 17, 2025

Psomas
REVIEW OF 15300.2–EXCEPTIONS CRITERIA
Location: Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may, in a particularly sensitive environment, be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply to all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.

The Project is not considered under Classes 3, 4, 5, 6 or 11. Therefore, this exception is not applicable to Common Sense Exemptions. Nevertheless, the Project consists of Municipal Code Text Amendments made to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. As the Project is programmatic in nature, the Project would not result in any direct impacts. Subsequent tree removal conducted under the revised Tree Preservation Ordinance would be required to adhere to the requirements outlined in the updated Ordinance, ensuring that none of the trees identified above and in the proposed Text Amendment are removed. As a result, a significant impact would not be created based on the location of future actions under the revised Tree Preservation Ordinance; conversely, impacts would be avoided based on the locations identified as allowable areas for tree removal.

Cumulative Impacts: The Project consists of Municipal Code Text Amendments made to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. As the Project is programmatic in nature and does not propose any development or alteration of existing streetscapes or topography, the Project would not result in any direct impacts.

The City’s consideration of native and sensitive trees, including those within designated conservation areas, would preclude a significant impact related to loss of native and locally important species throughout single-family properties located within the City. In addition, the City has prepared a Community Forest Management Plan dated June 27, 2023 with the intention of protecting existing City trees, implementing public education programs, and expanding the City’s inventory of trees within viable, vacant sites along city streets, at city facilities and in city parks (City of San Dimas 2023). Additionally, because the trees allowed for removal under the revised Tree Preservation Ordinance would primarily consist of individual trees within private property. As a result, cumulative biological impacts are not considered to be significant. Meanwhile, cumulative air quality and greenhouse gas emissions would not be significant either. As stated above, the City’s Community Forest Management Plan calls for the planting of a diverse selection of trees within City owned property. The expansion of the City’s tree inventory would offset the small loss of carbon sequestration resulting from the removal of trees within private, single-family properties.

As a result, no significant cumulative impacts would occur.

Significant Effects (unusual circumstances): The Project would not have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances, as demonstrated by the discussion below.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas: The Project consists of Municipal Code Text Amendments made to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. As the Project is programmatic in nature, dealing with the removal of certain trees located within singlefamily properties, the Project would not induce any development. As a result, no air

Luis Torrico
April 17, 2025

Psomas
quality or greenhouse gas emissions would occur. Nevertheless, depending on the type of equipment used, subsequent tree removal conducted under the revised Tree Preservation Ordinance would result in negligible emissions. It is important to note that these emissions would be too small to quantify and would be well below the regional and local thresholds established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). As stated above, while the ordinance may result in a small loss of carbon sequestration, the City’s Community Forest Management Plan calls for the planting of more trees within City-owned properties. Therefore, no impacts with respect to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions would occur.

Biological Resources: The following analysis focuses on trees that are native to the City of San Dimas: coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), scrub oak (Quercus berberidifolia), canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepis), San Gabriel oak (Quercus durata var. gabrielensis), Nuttall's scrub oak (Quercus dumosa), Engelmann oak (Quercus engelmannii), interior live oak (Quercus wislizeni); western sycamore (Platanus racemosa), southern California black walnut (Juglans californica); knobcone pine (Pinus attenuata), Coulter pine (Pinus coulteri), and Bishop pine (Pinus muricata) 1 . Of these
species, the following species are considered special status: southern California black walnut (California Rare Plant Rank [CRPR] 4.22), San Gabriel oak (CRPR 4.22), Nuttall’s scrub oak (CRPR 1B.13), and Engelmann oak (CRPR 4.22) (CDFW 2025a). Additionally, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) considers the following woodland vegetation types to be sensitive natural communities: western sycamore woodlands (Platanus racemosa alliances), California walnut groves (Juglans californica alliances), and Coulter pine woodland and forests (Pinus coulteri alliances) (CDFW 2025b).

The Significant Ecological Area (SEA) Program was established to help conserve the genetic and physical diversity within Los Angeles County by designating biological resource areas capable of sustaining themselves into the future. SEAs are places where the County deems it important to balance between development and conservation of fragile resources such as streams, woodlands, and Threatened or Endangered species and their habitats. There are two SEAs within the City of San Dimas: the East San Gabriel Valley SEA (i.e., Walnut Creek, Bonelli Regional Park/Puddingstone Reservoir, and various open spaces referred to as the Walnut Islands) and San Dimas Canyon/San Antonio Wash SEA. Both of these SEAs include important oak and walnut woodland habitats. The protection of trees within these open space areas would not be changed by the current proposed municipal code text amendment.

There are a number of HOA-governed and designated hillside residential properties that have large lots with sensitive open space or easement areas that are part of the property but are non-developable and intended to be kept as natural areas. Many of these 1 This list of pine trees includes those that are known to occur along the southern edge of the Angeles National Forest.
2 CRPR 4.2: Species that are considered of limited distribution and are considered fairly threatened in California (20– 80% of occurrences threatened; moderate degree and immediacy of threat). 3 CRPR 1B.1: Species that are considered Rare, Threatened, or Endangered throughout their range and are considered seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened; high degree and immediacy of threat).

Luis Torrico
April 17, 2025

Psomas
conservation overlays include oak and walnut woodlands. The protection of trees within these open space areas would not be changed by the current proposed municipal code text amendment.

The current staff report recommends that single family residences be exempted from applying for a tree permit for the removal of trees on their lot. While single individuals of the protected tree species (as defined by the ordinance) listed above could be present on an individual lot, individuals within developed areas are more likely to have been planted as landscaping during development than to be remnant native individual trees. These individual trees, whether planted or remnant native individuals, are within small fragments of habitat (i.e., single family lots), isolated from larger areas of naturally occurring woodlands and habitat areas, and would not be expected to be naturally reproducing. The change in the municipal code text amendment would not require a tree removal permit for individual trees within single family lots, and could result in the loss of tree individuals, including species on the protected species list. However, since these individual trees are not contributing to sustaining natural woodland areas, the loss of these isolated individual trees would not affect the viability of the larger areas of native woodlands (described above within SEAs and hillside areas/conservation overlays) that provide higher quality woodland habitat. Therefore, the loss of trees resulting from the municipal code text amendment, as currently proposed (applying to only single family lots), would be considered less than significant.

The remaining species recommended as protected trees in the current staff report, camphor and California redwood, are not native to the City of San Dimas. There are also several species of pine trees that have been planted as ornamentals in southern California. These species are not considered special status, as individuals or as woodlands. Therefore, the loss of individuals of these tree species would not be considered a significant impact.

All trees, including native and non-native trees, could provide habitat for nesting birds and raptors; however, compliance with standard protective measures to avoid impacts on nesting birds/raptors would be required.

Geology: The Project would not result in the development of housing or other habitable structures that would expose people to risks associated with seismic shaking, ground failure, landslides, or other geotechnical issues present in Southern California. The Project consists of text amendments made to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance.

Water Quality: The Project consists of Municipal Code Text Amendments made to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. As the Project is programmatic in nature and does not propose any development or alteration of existing streetscapes or topography, the Project would not result in any impacts to water quality, as the Project specifically deals with the removal of certain trees within single-family properties. In addition, the Project’s implementation would not alter drainage patterns within hillside areas, as the removal of trees from these areas would be precluded under the revised Tree Preservation Ordinance.

Luis Torrico
April 17, 2025

Psomas
Noise: The Project consists of Municipal Code Text Amendments made to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. The Project would not induce any development as the Project is programmatic in nature. Nevertheless, depending on the type of equipment used, subsequent tree removal conducted under the revised Tree Preservation Ordinance would result in the generation of temporary noise associated with the use of chainsaws. It is important to note that this noise would be temporary and tree removal would be required to adhere to all applicable City noise regulations.

Utilities and Public Services: The Project consists of Municipal Code Text Amendments and is programmatic in nature. The Project does not propose any development or alteration of existing streetscapes or topography that would result in impacts on any public services or utilities. Nevertheless, green waste generated during the subsequent removal of trees must be removed and properly disposed of pursuant to all applicable local and State requirements.

Scenic Highways: The Project would not result in damage to scenic resources. The Project consists of Municipal Code Text Amendments made to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance.

As the Project is programmatic in nature and does not propose any development or alteration of existing streetscapes or topography, the Project would not result in any impacts on scenic highways or scenic resources, as the Project specifically deals with the removal of certain trees within single-family properties. In addition, according to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), there are no officially designated State scenic highway in the City (Caltrans 2025). As a result, no impacts would occur.

Hazardous Waste Site: The Project consists of Municipal Code Text Amendments made to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. As the Project is programmatic in nature, dealing with the removal of certain trees located within single-family properties (parcels that are typically not associated with hazardous waste sites), the Project would not induce any development, especially development on properties that are included on a list of hazardous materials sites. As a result, no impacts would occur.

Historical Resources: The Project consists of Municipal Code Text Amendments made to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. As the Project is programmatic in nature and does not propose any development or alteration of existing streetscapes or topography, the Project would not result in any impacts to historic resources, including neighborhoods, as the Project specifically deals with the removal of certain trees within single-family properties. As a result, no impacts would occur.

Luis Torrico
April 17, 2025

Psomas

REFERENCES
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) 2025a (January). Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. Sacramento, CA: CDFW, Natural Heritage Division. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109383&inline. ———. 2025b (February 27). California Natural Communities List. Natural Communities List Arranged Alphabetically by Life Form (PDF). Sacramento, CA: CDFW Biogeographic Data Branch. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=153398&inline.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2025 (April 8, last accessed). State Scenic Highway Map. Sacramento, CA: Caltrans.
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8 e8057116f1aacaa.

City of San Dimas. 2023 (June 27, last revised). Community Forest Management Plan. San Dimas, CA: the City.
https://files.sandimasca.gov/Document_Center/Department/Parks%20&%20Recreation/ Community%20Forest%20Management%20Plan%20%20Amended%206.27.2023.pdf ——. 1991 (April 8, last accessed). City of San Dimas General Plan. San Dimas, CA: the City. https://sandimasca.gov/departments/community_development/planning_division/general _plan/general_plan_sections.php.

Revised 2011
Notice of Exemption Appendix E
To: Office of Planning and Research From: City of San Dimas P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 245 E. Bonita Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 San Dimas, CA 91773
County Clerk
County of: Los Angeles
12400 Imperial Hwy
Norwalk, CA 90650
Project Title: Proposed Amendment to the City of San Dimas Chapter 18.162 Tree Ordinance, MCTA 23-05 Project Applicant: City of San Dimas
Project Location – Specific:

The Project would take place on various single-family lots located throughout the City of San Dimas.

Project Location – City: San Dimas Project Location – County: Los Angeles Description of Nature, Purpose and Beneficiaries of Project:

The Project involves revision to the City of San Dimas Community Tree Ordinance, exempting single-family residential properties from the Tree Preservation Ordinance. The City contains numerous hillside residential properties as well as properties governed by a homeowners association (HOA). These properties contain sensitive open space or easement areas that are part of the property in question but are restricted from development in order to be kept as natural open space. These specified areas would remain as protected under the proposed Municipal Code Text Amendment. In addition, there are certain properties/communities within the City where a portion of the owners’ parcel is landscaped and maintained by an HOA, thus viewed as a common area tree. These areas would continue to remain protected areas. Nevertheless, any other tree(s) located outside of the categories mentioned above would be allowed to be removed without the submittal of a formal Tree Removal Permit and associated fee.

Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of San Dimas Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: City of San Dimas Exempt Status: (check one):

Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268);
Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a));
Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c));
Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: Section 15061(B)(3) Common Sense Exemption Statutory Exemptions. State code number:

Reasons why project is exempt:

According to Section 15061(B)(3), a project may be exempt if the project’s implementation would not result in a significant effect on the environment. The Project consists of text updates to the City’s Municipal Code that would allow owners of single-family properties to remove trees within their property unencumbered by the City’s Tree Removal Ordinance, under most conditions. The Project would result in text amendments to the Municipal Code and would not actually include any tree removal, therefore it can be seen with certainty that there is no potential for a significant effect on the environment, as the Project is programmatic in nature. Any subsequent tree removals initiated by private property owners would be done according to the updated requirements described below, thereby limiting any potential impacts.

These Municipal Code text updates would only apply to single-family properties, thereby limiting the number of trees that could be removed in the City.

Lead Agency
Contact Person: Luis Torrico Area Code/Telephone/Extension: 909-394-6208 If filed by applicant:

1. Attach certified document of exemption finding.

2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date: Title:

Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant
Authority cited: Sections 2103 and 21110, Public Resources Code. Date Received for filing at OPR:

Reference: Sections 21108, 21152, and 21152.1, Public Resources Code.

ATTACHMENT 4

ATTACHMENT 5

Agenda Item Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
From: Brad McKinney, City Manager
Prepared by: Stephanie Luu, Human Resources Manager
Subject: Presentation of Compliance with Assembly Bill 2561/Government Code Section 3502.3 - Staff Vacancies and the City’s Recruitment and Retention Efforts to Comply with New Legal Obligations
____________________________________________________________________________

SUMMARY
City staff is requesting a public hearing to comply with Assembly Bill 2561/Government Code Section 3502.3 which requires public agencies to present on staff vacancies and the City’s recruitment and retention efforts to comply with new legal obligations effective January 1, 2025.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:
• Conduct a public hearing and receive and file the staff report to comply with Assembly Bill 2561 and Government Code Section 3502.3 presenting on staff vacancies and the City’s Recruitment and Retention Efforts
GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
No

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact for the recommended action.

BACKGROUND
On September 22, 2024, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 2561 (“AB 2561”) into law to amend the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) to add Government Code Section 3502.3 which establishes a new obligation for public agencies to address the status of their vacancies at a

Compliance Assembly Bill 2561/Government Code Section 3502.3 - Staff Vacancies and the City’s Recruitment and Retention Efforts to Comply with New Legal Obligations Page 2 For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
public hearing, effective January 1, 2025. The California Legislature determined that vacancies are a widespread and significant problem in the public sector affecting agencies and employees.

High job vacancies impact public service workers who are required to absorb heavier workloads, resulting in burnout and increased turnover, which adversely affects service delivery. This legislation ensures that public agencies take accountability and are transparent with their vacancy rates, recruitment efforts, and personnel budgeting.

The legislation requires public agencies report on their vacancy rates, recruitment efforts, and any obstacles in hiring processes that contribute to vacancy rates during a public hearing before the agency’s governing body at least once per fiscal year prior to the City Council’s adoption of the final budget for that year. If the vacancy rate for full-time positions in a bargaining unit exceeds 20%, the agency must provide additional information including: (1) the total number of vacancies; (2) the number of applicants; (3) the average time to fill positions; and (4) opportunities to improve compensation and working conditions for employees in the bargaining unit. The recognized employee organization of the bargaining unit would also be allowed to make a presentation at the hearing concerning recruitment and retention efforts related to vacancies.

Failure to comply with the law may result in an unfair practice charge through the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) who administers and enforces the obligations under the law.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
The City has 77 full-time budgeted positions with 61 of these positions part of the represented bargaining group, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 911. Staff tracked vacancy and recruitment efforts for the City over the period of January 1, 2024, through December 31, 2024, and the City had a vacancy rate of 1.6% for the represented group and 10% for the unrepresented group, as referenced in the table below:
12/31/2024
Total # of Budgeted FTEs 77
Bargaining Unit # of Vacancies # of Budgeted
FTEs % of Vacancies
Teamsters Local 911 1 61 1.6%
Unrepresented Employees 1 10 10.0%
Elected & Appointed Officials 0 5 0.0%
City Manager 0 1 0.0%
To date, the City currently has zero (0) vacancies for their budgeted full-time positions. The City has historically had low turnover and vacancy rates due to the City’s attractive compensation package, inclusive culture, highly sought work environment, and thriving community. The Human Resources (HR) Division makes it a priority to address hiring needs immediately to ensure service level needs are maintained; whether vacancies are planned retirements or unplanned separations.

Once a vacancy is reported, HR personnel will meet with the Hiring Manager to prepare a recruitment plan to fill the vacancy. A recruitment process typically consists of the following:

Compliance Assembly Bill 2561/Government Code Section 3502.3 - Staff Vacancies and the City’s Recruitment and Retention Efforts to Comply with New Legal Obligations Page 3 For the Meeting of May 27, 2025

1. Open recruitment for an average of two (2) weeks in the City’s applicant tracking system, NeoGov;

2. Post job announcements on industry-specific websites, local schools and colleges, as well as emailing opportunities to local agencies.

3. Pre-screen all applications to determine which candidates meet the minimum qualifications of the position.

4. Invite qualified candidates for testing, which may consist of a written exanimation and/or interview.

5. Once testing is complete, candidates are placed on an eligibility list based on pass score of 70% or higher.

6. Hiring Manager has the ability to select from the eligibility list and the selected candidate is given a conditional offer.

7. The condition of the offer is based on the candidate passing a pre-employment process that may consist of a reference check, department of justice criminal background check, department of motor vehicles driving record clearance (only for positions that require driving as an essential function), and/or medical clearance.

The City also encourages and supports succession planning efforts to enhance employee morale and promote career growth and will hire within if there is an opportunity. Of the eight (8) full-time recruitments conducted in 2024, three (3) were filled as an internal promotion, meaning the recruitment was only made available to those who hold a position within the City. This level of commitment highlights the importance of internal succession planning and demonstrates why the City has such a strong workforce with low attrition.

This report ensures the City meets their obligations under AB 2561 to continue enhancements of the City’s recruitment and retention efforts to maintain low vacancy rates and ensure transparent reporting.

ALTERNATIVES
No alternatives are proposed for this agenda item.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to CEQA guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), CEQA does not apply to this item because there is no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, no additional environmental review is needed at this time.

Respectfully submitted,
Stephanie Luu
Human Resources Manager

Agenda Item Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
From: Brad McKinney, City Manager
Prepared by: Scott Wasserman, Director of Parks & Recreation Subject: Adopt a Resolution Setting the City-Wide Landscape Parcel Tax for Fiscal Year 2025-2026
____________________________________________________________________________

SUMMARY
Conduct a public hearing and consider adopting a resolution confirming the voter approved City Wide Landscape Parcel Tax per Ordinance 1086.

RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Conduct a public hearing to implement a Citywide Parcel Tax per parcel in the City of San Dimas for Fiscal Year 2025-2026; and

2. Adopt Resolution 2025-25, Option 1 – With Increase

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIMAS,

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SETTING THE SPECIAL CITY-WIDE PARCEL TAX FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 TO BE

USED FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PURPOSES
GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
No

FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact is dependent on City Council action. Funds collected from the Citywide Parcel Tax are used to offset costs in the City Budget Fund 8 (Landscape Parcel Tax). For Fiscal Year 2025-26, Fund 8 expenditures are estimated at $1,302,860. Approval of the recommended action

Adopt A Resolution Setting the City-Wide Landscape Parcel Tax for Fiscal Year 2025-26 For the Meeting of May 27, 2025 Page 2
would increase the Parcel Tax collected in FY 2025-26 by 3% to approximately $1,071,000 to correspond to the 3% increase in the Consumer Price Index. With the revenue currently generated, Fund 8 is projected to run a deficit of approximately $231,860 in FY 2025-26. If the City Council does not increase the parcel tax, the deficit in the Landscape Parcel Tax Fund would increase to $262,860.

BACKGROUND
In November 1997 the voters of the City of San Dimas by a 71% affirmative vote, approved Ordinance 1086 adopting a special parcel tax to be levied against properties in the city. Per voter approval, the revenues collected are exclusively used to improve and maintain public parks, parkways, medians, and trees. The Citywide Landscape Parcel Tax revenues and expenditures are reflected in Fund 8 of the city budget.

Estimated expenditures in Fund 8 for Fiscal Year 2025-26 are $1,302,860. The expenditures include costs for citywide contract landscape and tree maintenance services, utilities (electric & water), and landscape and irrigation supplies. In addition to revenue generated by the assessment, other revenue in Fund 8 includes reimbursement from the Bonita Unified School District approximately in the amount of $27,000 to cover a portion of the maintenance costs for the San Dimas Sportsplex. Any cost not covered by the Landscape Parcel Tax would need to be subsidized by the General Fund.

The annual increase in expenditures of approximately $100,000 is attributable to:
• 3% CPI for all contract services $38,500
• Tree Replacement $13,000
• Utilities cost increase $23,000
• Irrigation updates $5,500
• Supplies $20,000
Ordinance 1086 requires that commencing with FY 1999–2000; the special tax shall be set annually by the City Council following a public hearing. The rate of the tax as established by Ordinance 1086 can be adjusted annually to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index by an amount equal to the increase in the CPI for the period extending from April 1 of the previous year through March 31 of the current year, which was 3% for April 1, 2024 - March 31, 2025 period.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
Staff requests that the City Council review two options for the City-Wide Landscape Parcel Tax rates for FY 2025–2026.

Option 1 - Adjust the tax by increasing the rate to reflect the change in the Consumer Price Index of 3% for March 2025. The revenue for Option 1 is projected at $1,071,000 reflecting an increase of $31,000. In this scenario, Fund 8 would continue to run a deficit of $231,860.

Option 2 - Maintain the landscape parcel tax at the same rate without adjustment for FY 2025- 2026. The revenue for Option 2 is the same as current fiscal year, projected at $1,040,000. In this scenario, the deficit in Fund 8 would grow to $262,860.

Rates based on property classification are indicated in the following chart:

Adopt A Resolution Setting the City-Wide Landscape Parcel Tax for Fiscal Year 2025-26 For the Meeting of May 27, 2025 Page 3
Option 1 Option 2
Property Classification Tax Amount Tax Amount Increase
Single Family Residential $75.29 $73.10 $2.19/home
Commercial/Industrial, per front foot $ 2.29 $ 2.22 $0.07/foot Non-Profit/Tax Exempt Parcels, per front foot $0.47 $ 0.46 $0.01/foot Multi-Family Residential, per unit $55.14 $53.53 $1.61/unit Mobile home Parks, per front foot $1.76 $ 1.71 $0.05/foot Concluding the Public Hearing, the City Council may adopt a Resolution to assess the landscape parcel tax for FY 2025-2026 with a 3% consumer price index adjustment as indicated in Option 1 or at the same rate as FY 2024–2025, as indicated in Option 2. The Landscape Parcel Tax will operate with a projected deficit of $231,860 in Option 1, and a larger deficit of $262,860 in Option

2. Both options will require a General Fund subsidy to complete scheduled maintenance activities.

ALTERNATIVES
The Council could elect not to adopt Resolution 2025-25, Citywide Parcel Tax and move forward without an approved assessment which would lead to all costs associated with City Budget Fund 8 (Landscape Parcel Tax) being supplemented by the General Fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to CEQA guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), CEQA does not apply to this item because there is no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, no additional environmental review is needed at this time.

Respectfully submitted,
Scott Wasserman
Director of Parks & Recreation
Attachments:

1. Resolution 2025-25, Parcel Tax Citywide Option 1 – With Increase

2. Resolution 2025-26, Parcel Tax Citywide Option 2 – No Increase

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION 2025-25
(Option 1 – with increase)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIMAS, COUNTY OF LOS

ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SETTING THE SPECIAL CITY-WIDE PARCEL TAX FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 TO BE USED FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PURPOSE WHEREAS, at the November 1997 City election, the voters of the City of San Dimas approved Ordinance 1086 adopting a special parcel tax to be levied against the properties in the City, with the revenues to be used to improve and maintain parkway trees, landscaping, public parks and other public areas;
WHEREAS, Ordinance 1086 requires that commencing with fiscal year 1999-2000, the special tax shall be set annually by the San Dimas City Council following a public hearing; and WHEREAS, Ordinance 1086 provides that annually, without further voter approval, the amount of the tax may be adjusted by the City Council to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers for the Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside Area, as published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and WHEREAS, the Consumer Price Index for the period of April 1, 2024 to March 31, 2025 was 3%, and
WHEREAS, the public hearing to set the annual special tax has been properly noticed for the City Council meeting of May 27, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the public hearing was held and testimony received, if any at the May 27, 2025 City Council meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to increase the rate of the special parcel tax at the Consumer Price Index rate of 3% for fiscal year 2025-2026 as authorized by the provisions of Ordinance 1086.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council of the City of San Dimas does hereby resolve that:

For fiscal year 2025-2026 the following special parcel tax shall be levied against property in the City of San Dimas:

PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION AMOUNT OF TAX
Single Family Residential $75.29
Commercial/ Industrial, per front foot $ 2.29
Non-Profit/Tax Exempt Parcels, per front foot $ 0.47
Multi-Family Residential, per unit $55.14
Mobil Home Parks, per front foot $ 1.76

Resolution 2025-25 Page 2
Setting City-Wide Parcel Tax for FY 2025-26 With Increase May 27, 2025
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of May, 2025. ________________________________
Emmett G. Badar, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Debra Black, City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )§

CITY OF SAN DIMAS )
I, DEBRA BLACK, CITY CLERK of the City of San Dimas, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of Resolution 2025-25. It was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the San Dimas City Council on the 27th, day of May, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_______________________________
Debra Black, City Clerk

ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION 2025-26
(Option 2 - no increase)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIMAS, COUNTY OF LOS

ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SETTING THE SPECIAL CITY-WIDE PARCEL TAX FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 TO BE USED FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PURPOSE WHEREAS, at the November 1997 City election, the voters of the City of San Dimas approved Ordinance 1086 adopting a special parcel tax to be levied against the properties in the City, with the revenues to be used to improve and maintain parkway trees, landscaping, public parks and other public areas;
WHEREAS, Ordinance 1086 requires that commencing with fiscal year 1999-2000, the special tax shall be set annually by the San Dimas City Council following a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the public hearing to set the annual special tax has been properly noticed for the City Council meeting of May 27, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the public hearing was held and testimony received, if any at the May 27, 2025 City Council meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to levy the special parcel tax at the same rates for fiscal year 2025-2026.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Dimas does hereby resolve that:

For fiscal year 2025-2026 the following special parcel tax shall be levied against property in the City of San Dimas:

PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION AMOUNT OF TAX
Single Family Residential $73.10
Commercial/ Industrial, per front foot $ 2.22
Non-Profit/Tax Exempt Parcels, per front foot $ 0.46
Multi-Family Residential, per unit $53.53
Mobil Home Parks, per front foot $ 1.71
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of May, 2025 _______________________________
Emmett G. Badar, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Debra Black, City Clerk

Resolution 2025-26 Page 2
Setting City-Wide Parcel Tax for FY 2025-26 With No Increase May 27, 2025

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )§

CITY OF SAN DIMAS )
I,DEBRA BLACK, CITY CLERK of the City of San Dimas, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of Resolution 2025-26. It was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the San Dimas City Council on the 27th, day of May, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_______________________________
Debra Black, City Clerk

Agenda Item Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
From: Brad McKinney, City Manager
Prepared by: Scott Wasserman, Director of Parks & Recreation Subject: Adopt Resolution 2025-27 Confirming the Assessment for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1 (Tract 32818, Boulevard)
____________________________________________________________________________

SUMMARY
Conduct a Public Hearing and consider adopting a resolution confirming the Diagram and Assessment for Fiscal Year 2025-26 for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1 (Tract No. 32818, Boulevard).

RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Conduct a public hearing on the proposed assessment rate for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1 (Tract No. 32818, Boulevard) for Fiscal Year 2025-2026; and

2. Adopt Resolution 2025-27, Option 1 – confirming the diagram and assessment with an increase for fiscal year 2025-2026 for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1 (Tract 32818, Boulevard).

GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
No

FISCAL IMPACT
The funds collected from the assessment are used to offset costs incurred for maintenance of the Boulevard landscape district. The Assessment District was created in 1977 with an allowance for an annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) rate adjustment. At this time, the Boulevard Assessment District has a minimal fund balance of $2,868.71. The Engineer’s Report calls for a CPI increase of 3.3% or $20.57/parcel.

Adopt Resolution Confirming the Assessment for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1 (Tract 32818, Boulevard) Page 2
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025

BACKGROUND
The Boulevard Open Space Maintenance District was formed under the provisions of the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, Division 15, Part 2, of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. The Act further establishes procedures for the annual levy of assessments which includes the approval of an Engineer’s Report and establishing a time and place for a public hearing. The Boulevard Assessment District consists of 19 homes that back up to a tree and ivycovered slope on Paseo Dorado as well as homes that take entry to their properties along Paseo Alondra.

In 2006, the 19 property owners in the Boulevard Open Space Maintenance District approved by ballot measure an annual Consumer Price Index adjustment for future years not to exceed 7% as necessary to cover the costs of maintenance, including increases in the costs of materials, labor, and utilities.

On April 8, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution 2025-18 approving the Engineer’s Report and declaring its intention to levy and collect an assessment for fiscal year 2025-2026 for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1 (Tract No. 32818 - Boulevard) and set a public hearing for May 27, 2025.

Also, April 8, 2025, City Councilmember Nakano asked staff to evaluate the feasibility of installing drought tolerant plants at this location to reduce irrigation costs associated with water use. Staff has determined that the current plant scheme that consists of ground cover (ivy) and trees is the most cost-effective plant material to maintain at this location. Switching to drought tolerant plants would require the removal of the existing ground cover, the installation of a drip irrigation system and additional staff time to maintain the area. Given the number of drought tolerant plants that would be needed to replace the existing ground cover, it is possible that the new plants could require the same amount of water to maintain the Assessment District as the existing landscaping.

Such a dramatic change in the landscaping and any potential increase to the cost of annual maintenance would require substantial community outreach to ascertain the community‘s willingness to proceed with this option.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
The Engineer’s Report was prepared with the scope of work to include quarterly general landscape maintenance, tree trimming, water, and electricity, with an assessment increase of

3.3%, reflective of changes in the Consumer Price Index. The 2024-2025 assessment rate was $623.41 per parcel. The change in the CPI from February 2024 to February 2025 was 3.3%.

Therefore, the recommended authorized assessment rate for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 is increased by 3.3% or $20.57/parcel, which equates to an annual assessment of $643.98 per parcel.

Upon the conclusion of the public hearing, staff requests that the City Council adopt one of the options below for the Open Space maintenance District No. 1 (Tract No. 32818 – Boulevard) for FY 2025–2026.

Option 1 - Adjust the landscape assessment by increasing the rate for FY 2025-2026 to reflect the change in the Consumer Price Index rate of 3.3% (February 2024 – February 2025), as reported in the Engineer’s Report. This option will result in projected Ending Fund Balance of

Adopt Resolution Confirming the Assessment for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1 (Tract 32818, Boulevard) Page 3
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
$1,878.06. Under this scenario, the annual assessment would increase by $20.57 for each household, from $623.41 to $643.98.

Option 2 - Maintain the landscape assessment at the same rate without adjustment for FY 2025- 2026. This option will result in projected Ending Fund Balance of $1,487.23. Under this scenario, the annual assessment would not increase and would remain $623.41 for each household.

ALTERNATIVES
The Council could elect not to adopt Resolution 2025-27, Boulevard Assessment District and move forward without an approved assessment which would lead to all costs associated with Boulevard Assessment District being supplemented by the General Fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to CEQA guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), CEQA does not apply to this item because there is no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, no additional environmental review is needed at this time.

Respectfully submitted,
Scott Wasserman
Director of Parks & Recreation
Attachments:

1. Resolution 2025-27 Boulevard Option 1 – With Increase

2. Resolution 2025-28 Boulevard Option 2 – No Increase

3. Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 for Open Space Maintenance District No.1, Tract 32818, Boulevard

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION 2025-27
(Option 1 – with increase)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIMAS,

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THE DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 FOR OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (BOULEVARD, TRACT NO. 32818) WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of San Dimas, County of Los Angeles, formed Open Space Maintenance District No. 1, pursuant to the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, by adopting Resolution No. 77-57; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution 2025-18, adopted on April 8, 2025, the City Council approved the Engineer’s Report which indicates the amount of the proposed assessments for the fiscal year 2025-2026, the district boundary, the assessment zones, and detailed description of improvements; and
WHEREAS, in said Resolution 2025-18, the City Council did declare its intention to levy and collect an assessment within Open Space District 1, for fiscal year 2025-2026, and fixed the 27th day of May, 2025, at 7:00p.m., as the date and time, and the San Dimas Council Chamber as the place for hearing any objections to the levy of the proposed assessment; and
WHEREAS, notice of said hearing has been posted and published in accordance with law; and
WHEREAS, the said City Council has held said hearing, has afforded all interested persons the opportunity to hear and be heard, and has considered all oral statements and all written protests made or filed by any interested person.

WHEREAS, the said City Council desires to increase the rate of the assessment for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1 (Boulevard, Tract No. 32818) at the Consumer Price Index rate of 3.3% for Fiscal Year 2025-2026
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Dimas, does hereby resolve that:

SECTION 1. The assessments, as shown in the Engineer’s Report, a copy of which is attached hereto, are approved, and the adoption of this resolution constitutes the levy of said assessments for the 2025-2026 fiscal year.

SECTION 2. The City Clerk of the City of San Dimas is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of the diagram and assessments with the County Auditor of the County of Los Angeles no later than the 1st day August, 2025.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby orders the annual maintenance program work as set forth in said resolution of intention to be done.

Resolution 2025-27 Page 2
Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for FY 2025-26 for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1) Boulevard, Tract No. 32818)
May 27, 2025
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of May, 2025. _________________________________
Emmett G. Badar, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Debra Black, City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )§

CITY OF SAN DIMAS )
I, DEBRA BLACK, CITY CLERK of the City of San Dimas, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of Resolution 2025-27. It was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the San Dimas City Council on the 27th, day of May, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_________________________________
Debra Black, City Clerk

ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION 2025-28
(Option 2 - no increase)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIMAS,

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THE DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 FOR OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (BOULEVARD, TRACT NO. 32818) WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of San Dimas, County of Los Angeles, formed Open Space Maintenance District No. 1, pursuant to the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, by adopting Resolution No. 77-57; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution 2025-18, adopted on April 8, 2025, the City Council approved the Engineer’s Report which indicates the amount of the proposed assessments for the fiscal year 2025-2026, the district boundary, the assessment zones, and detailed description of improvements; and
WHEREAS, in said Resolution 2025-18, the City Council did declare its intention to levy and collect an assessment within Open Space District 1, for fiscal year 2025-2026, and fixed the 27th day of May, 2025, at 7:00p.m., as the date and time, and the San Dimas Council Chamber as the place for hearing any objections to the levy of the proposed assessment; and
WHEREAS, notice of said hearing has been posted and published in accordance with law; and
WHEREAS, the said City Council has held said hearing, has afforded all interested persons the opportunity to hear and be heard, and has considered all oral statements and all written protests made or filed by any interested person.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Dimas, does hereby resolve that:

SECTION 1. The assessments, as shown in the Engineer’s Report, a copy of which is attached hereto, are approved, and the adoption of this resolution constitutes the levy of said assessments for the 2025-2026 fiscal year.

SECTION 2. The City Clerk of the City of San Dimas is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of the diagram and assessments with the County Auditor of the County of Los Angeles no later than the 1st day August, 2025.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby orders the annual maintenance program work as set forth in said resolution of intention to be done.

Resolution 2025-28 Page 2
Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for FY 2025-26 for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1) Boulevard, Tract No. 32818)
May 27, 2025
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of May, 2025. _________________________________
Emmett G. Badar, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Debra Black, City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )§

CITY OF SAN DIMAS )
I, DEBRA BLACK, CITY CLERK of the City of San Dimas, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of Resolution 2025-28. It was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the San Dimas City Council on the 27th, day of May, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_________________________________
Debra Black, City Clerk

ATTACHMENT 3

CITY OF SAN DIMAS
OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (TRACT NO. 32818, BOULEVARD DEVELOPMENT)

ENGINEER'S REPORT
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26
SECTION 1 AUTHORITY FOR REPORT
This report is prepared pursuant to the order of the City Council of the City of San Dimas, and in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, and Article XIII D of the California Constitution.

SECTION 2 THE IMPROVEMENTS
The improvements consist of an irrigation system and landscaping within Lot 20 of Tract No. 32818, which was required to be installed by the developer and accepted for maintenance by the City. The plans and specifications for the landscaping are in conformance with the requirements of the conditions of approval of said Tract No. 32818, and City Standards. Reference is hereby made to the said plans and specifications for the exact location and nature of the landscape improvements. Said plans and specifications by reference are hereby made a part of thisreport, and are on file in the office of the City Engineer.

SECTION 3 DIAGRAM FOR THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
A copy of the assessment diagram is on file in the office of the City Engineer.

SECTION 4 ESTIMATE OF COSTS OF THE IMPROVEMENTS
The cost of the initial landscaping of Lot 20 of Tract No. 32818 was borne by the subdivider; therefore, all assessments relate to maintenance only.

Direct Maintenance Costs:

General Maintenance (by Contract)
Utilities - Electrical
Utilities - Water
$4,839.65
$261.41
$8,125.24
Tree Trimming $0.00
Irrigation Repairs or Upgrades $0.00
Total of DirectMaintenance Costs: $13,226.30
CURRENT ASSESSMENT:
2025-2026 ANNUAL ASSESSMENT:
$11,844.79 ($623.41/parcel)
$12,235.62 ($643.98/parcel)
2025-2026 Deficit <$990.65>
Prior Fund Balance
Ending Fund Balance
$2,868.71
$1,878.06
Note: The costs aforementioned are more than the Annual Assessment and there is a minimal deficit for FY 2025-26. The assessment is subject to an annual adjustment tied to the Consumer Price Index-U for the Los Angeles Area as of December of each succeeding year (the "CPI") with a maximum annual adjustment rate not to exceed 7%. Page 328 – 364
The change in the CPI from February 2024 to February 2025 was 3.3%. Therefore, the maximum authorized assessment rate for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 is increased by 3.3% which equates to an annual assessment of $12,235.65 and yields an assessment of $643.98 per parcel. The annual increase per parcel is $20.57.

SECTION 5 ASSESSMENT
The following information regarding assessments to individual lots for the 2025-2026 Fiscal Year is contained herein and is to be levied on July 1, 2025. The net amount estimated to be assessed upon the assessable lands within the district is $12,235.62, which is apportioned to all assessable lots shown on the attached Assessment Roll.

The landscape district was developed for the benefit and enjoyment of all properties included within the assessment district boundaries, and all parcels benefit equally from the improvements.

Respectfully submitted,
Shari Garwick
Director of Public Works
Dave Gilbertson, P.E.

Deputy City Engineer

CITY OF SAN DIMAS ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR
OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1
TRACT NO. 32818 - BOULEVARD DEVELOPMENT
2025-2026 TOTAL
2025-2026

ASSESSMENT
LOT NO. ASSESSOR'S

REFERENCE
2024-2025 ASSESSMENT

ADDRESS ASSESSMENT INCREASE
1204 Via Verde
1228 Via Verde
1236 Via Verde
1244 Via Verde
1252 Via Verde
1260 Via Verde
1306 Via Verde
1318 Via Verde
1322 Via Verde
1330 Via Verde
1338 Via Verde
1346 Via Verde
1354 Via Verde
1362 Via Verde
1219 Paseo Dorado
1203 Paseo Dorado
1220 Via Verde
1211 Paseo Dorado
1212 Via Verde
4 7
8448-021-027
8448-021-032
8448-021-033
8448-021-034
8448-021-035
8448-021-036
8448-021-037
8448-021-038
8448-021-039
8448-021-040
8448-021-041
8448-021-042
8448-021-043
8448-021-044
8448-021-046
8448-021-047
8448-021-048
8448-021-049
8448-021-050
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
623.41
11,844.79

20.57 20.57

20.57 643.98
643.98
8 643.98
9 20.57

20.57 20.57

20.57 20.57

20.57 20.57

20.57 20.57

20.57 20.57

20.57 20.57

20.57 643.98
643.98
643.98
643.98
643.98
643.98
643.98
643.98
643.98
643.98
643.98
643.98
643.98
643.98
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
1 3
6 20.57

20.57 643.98
643.98
2 5
390.83 12,235.62

Agenda Item Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
From: Brad McKinney, City Manager
Prepared by: Scott Wasserman, Director of Parks & Recreation Subject: Adopt Resolution 2025-29 Confirming Assessment for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1, Annexation No. 3 (Tract 32841, Northwoods) ____________________________________________________________________________

SUMMARY
Conduct a Public Hearing and Consider Adopting a Resolution Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for Fiscal Year 2025-26 for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1, Annexation No. 3 (Tract No. 32841, Northwoods).

RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Conduct a public hearing on the proposed assessment rate for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1, Annexation No. 3 (Tract No. 32841, Northwoods) for Fiscal Year 2025-2026; and

2. Adopt Resolution 2025-29 - confirming the diagram and assessment for fiscal year 2025- 2026 for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1, Annexation No. 3 (Tract 32841, Northwoods).

GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
No

FISCAL IMPACT
The funds collected from the assessment are used to offset costs incurred for maintenance of the Northwoods landscape district. The Assessment District was created in 1978 without an allowance for an annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) or other rate adjustment outside of that allowed per Government Code Section 53753, which requires a vote from all properties within the district. At this time, the fund balance for the Northwoods Assessment District is negative with a

Adopt Resolution 2025-29 Confirming the Assessment for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1, Annexation No. 3 (Tract 32841, Northwoods) Page 2
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
shortfall of $20,401.48 since the creation of the Assessment District in 1978. The Engineer’s Report does not call for an increase.

BACKGROUND
The Northwoods Open Space Maintenance District was formed in 1978 under the provisions of the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, Division 15, Part 2, of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. The City collects an annual assessment from 38 private homeowners to provide general maintenance services to the landscape district. The Streets and Highways Code of the State of California further establish procedures for the annual levy of assessments, which includes the approval of an Engineer’s Report that estimates anticipated expenses incurred by the City for maintaining the area in the upcoming fiscal year.

On April 8, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution 2025-19 approving the Engineer’s Report and declaring its intention to levy and collect an assessment for fiscal year 2025-2026 for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1, Annexation No. 3 (Tract No. 32841 - Northwoods) and set a Public Hearing for May 27, 2025.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
The Engineer’s Report was prepared with the scope of work to include general landscape maintenance, tree trimming, water, and electricity on a quarterly basis.

The residents of the assessment district were given the option to vote for an increase in the assessment on May 9, 2023. The vote was opposed by 70% of the ballots submitted. The City Council then directed staff to revise the original Engineer’s Report for reduced maintenance to correspond to the amount that is collected through assessments. The revised report reflects the following reduced Scope of Work: elimination of tree trimming, reduced irrigation and reduced utilities. The quarterly maintenance service will remain. The responsibility of property owners within the district to maintain the landscaping, trees, and irrigation system on their properties in compliance with Municipal Code property maintenance requirements will remain.

At meetings prior to the vote, residents vehemently voiced opposition to any future assessment as well. The Assessment District sunsets on January 1, 2027, at which time the City will no longer have any responsibility for the maintenance of these properties.

No increase is proposed in the assessment rate. The 2024-2025 assessment rate was $898.42 per parcel and the rate proposed for 2025-2026 will remain at $898.42.

ALTERNATIVES
The Council could elect not to adopt Resolution 2025-29, Northwoods Assessment District and move forward without an approved assessment which would lead to all costs associated with Northwoods Assessment District being subsidized by the General Fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to CEQA guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), CEQA does not apply to this item because there is no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, no additional environmental review is needed at this time.

Adopt Resolution 2025-29 Confirming the Assessment for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1, Annexation No. 3 (Tract 32841, Northwoods) Page 3
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
Respectfully submitted,
Scott Wasserman
Director of Parks & Recreation
Attachments:

1. Resolution 2025-29

2. Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1, Annexation No. 3, Tract 32841, Northwoods

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION 2025-29

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIMAS,

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CONFIRMING THE DIAGRAM AND
ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 FOR OPEN SPACE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 3 (TRACT NO. 32841,

NORTHWOODS)
WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of San Dimas, County of Los Angeles, formed Open Space Maintenance District No. 1, Annexation No. 3, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, by adopting Resolution No. 78-38; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution 2025-19, adopted on April 8, 2025, the City Council approved the Engineer’s Report which indicates the amount of the proposed assessments for the fiscal year 2025-2026, the district boundary, the assessment zones, and detailed description of improvements; and
WHEREAS, in said Resolution 2025-19, the City Council did declare its intention to levy and collect assessments within Open Space District 1, Annexation No. 3, for fiscal year 2025-2026, and fixed the 27th day of May, 2025, at 7:00p.m., as the date and time, and the San Dimas Council Chamber as the place for hearing any objections to the levy of the proposed assessment; and
WHEREAS, notice of said hearing has been posted and published in accordance with law; and
WHEREAS, the said City Council has held said hearing, has afforded all interested persons the opportunity to hear and be heard, and has considered all oral statements and all written protests made or filed by any interested person.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Dimas, does hereby resolve that:

SECTION 1. The assessments, as shown in the Engineer’s Report, a copy of which is attached hereto, are approved, and the adoption of this resolution constitutes the levy of said assessments for the 2025-2026 fiscal year.

SECTION 2. The City Clerk of the City of San Dimas is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of the diagram and assessments with the County Auditor of the County of Los Angeles no later than the 1st day August, 2025.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby orders the annual maintenance program work as set forth in said resolution of intention to be done.

Resolution 2025-29 Page 2
Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for FY 2025-26 for Open Space Maintenance District No. 1 Annexation No. 3) Northwoods, Tract No. 32841) May 27, 2025
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of May, 2025. _________________________________
Emmett G. Badar, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Debra Black, City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )§

CITY OF SAN DIMAS )
I, DEBRA BLACK, CITY CLERK of the City of San Dimas, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of Resolution 2025-29. It was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the San Dimas City Council on the 27th, day of May, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_________________________________
Debra Black, City Clerk

CITY OF SAN DIMAS
OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1, ANNEXATION NO. 3 (TRACT NO. 32841, NORTHWOODS DEVELOPMENT)

ENGINEER'S REPORT
FISCAL YEAR 2025- 2026
SECTION 1 AUTHORITY FOR REPORT
This report is prepared pursuant to the order of the City Council of the City of San Dimas, and in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, and Article XIII D of the California Constitution.

SECTION 2 THE IMPROVEMENTS
The improvements consist of an irrigation system and landscaping of easements within Tract No. 32841, which was required to be installed by the developer and accepted for maintenance by the City.

The plans and specifications for the landscaping are in conformance with the requirements of the conditions of approval of said Tract No. 32841, and City Standards. Reference is hereby made to the said plans and specifications for the exact location and nature of the landscape improvements. Said plans and specifications by reference are hereby made a part of this report, and are on file in the office of the City Engineer.

SECTION 3 DIAGRAM FOR THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
A copy of the assessment diagram is on file in the office of the City Engineer.

SECTION 4 ESTIMATE OF COSTS OF THE IMPROVEMENTS
The cost of the initial landscaping of Tract No. 32841 was borne by the subdivider; therefore, all assessments relate to maintenance only.

Direct Maintenance Costs:

General Maintenance (bv Contract) $21,939.89
Utilities - Electrical $201
Utilities - Water $11,999.11
Tree Trimming $0.00
New Planting $0.00
Irrigation Repairs or Upgrades $0.00
Total of Direct Maintenance Costs: $34,140.00
CURRENT ASSESSMENT: $34,140.00 ($898.42/parcel)
2025-2026 ANNUAL ASSESSMENT: $34,140.00 ($898.42/parcel) 2025-2026 Deficit <$0.00>
Prior Fund Balance: <$20,401.48>
Ending Fund Balance: <$20,401.48>
ATTACHMENT 2

Note: The aforementioned costs match the current allowable assessment. The Ending Fund Balance is unchanged and has a shortfall of $20,401.48.

The maximum authorized assessment rate for the 2025-2026 Fiscal Year equates to an annual assessment of $34,140.00 ($898.42/parcel).

SECTION 5 ASSESSMENT
The following information regarding assessments to individual lots for the 2025-2026 Fiscal Year is contained herein and is to be levied on July 1, 202. The net amount estimated to be assessed upon the assessable lands within the district is $34,140.00 ($898.42/parcel), which is apportioned to all assessable lots shown on the attached Assessment Roll. The landscape district was developed for the benefit and enjoyment of all properties included within the assessment district boundaries, and all parcels benefit equally from the improvements.

Respectfully submitted,
Shari Garwick
Director of Public Works

CITY OF SAN DIMAS ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR
OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1, ANNEXATION NO. 3 TRACT 32841 – NORTHWOODS DEVELOPMENT
ADDRESS LOT NO. ASSESSOR'S

REFERENCE
2024-2025

ASSESSMENT
2025-2026

ASSESSMENT

INCREASE
TOTAL 2025-2026

ASSESSMENT
1793 Calle Alto 1 8395-023-002 898.42 0.00 898.42
1789 Calle Alto 2 8395-023-003 898.42 0.00 898.42
1785 Calle Alto 3 8395-023-004 898.42 0.00 898.42
1781Calle Alto 4 8395-023-005 898.42 0.00 898.42
1777 Calle Alto 5 8395-023-006 898.42 0.00 898.42
1773 Calle Alto 6 8395-023-007 898.42 0.00 898.42
1767 Calle Alto 7 8395-023-008 898.42 0.00 898.42
1765 Calle Alto 8 8395-023-009 898.42 0.00 898.42
1761 Calle Alto 9 8395-023-010 898.42 0.00 898.42
1757 Calle Alto 10 8395-023-011 898.42 0.00 898.42
1753 Calle Alto 11 8395-023-012 898.42 0.00 898.42
1749 Calle Alto 12 8395-023-013 898.42 0.00 898.42
1745 Calle Alto 13 8395-023-014 898.42 0.00 898.42
1741Calle Alto 14 8395-023-015 898.42 0.00 898.42
1737 Calle Alto 15 8395-023-016 898.42 0.00 898.42
1733 Calle Alto 16 8395-023-017 898.42 0.00 898.42
1729 Calle Alto 17 8395-023-018 898.42 0.00 898.42
1725 Calle Alto 18 8395-023-019 898.42 0.00 898.42
1721 Calle Alto 19 8395-023-020 898.42 0.00 898.42
1719 Calle Alto 20 8395-023-021 898.42 0.00 898.42
1702 Calle Alto 21 8395-023-022 898.42 0.00 898.42
1706 Calle Alto 22 8395-023-023 898.42 0.00 898.42
1710 Calle Alto 23 8395-023-024 898.42 0.00 898.42
1714 Calle Alto 24 8395-023-025 898.42 0.00 898.42
1718 Calle Alto 25 8395-023-026 898.42 0.00 898.42
1722 Calle Alto 26 8395-023-027 898.42 0.00 898.42
1726 Calle Alto 27 8395-023-028 898.42 0.00 898.42
1730 Calle Alto 28 8395-023-029 898.42 0.00 898.42
1121 Paseo Sandi 29 8395-023-030 898.42 0.00 898.42
1113 Paseo Sandi 30 8395-023-031 898.42 0.00 898.42
1105 Paseo Sandi 31 8395-023-032 898.42 0.00 898.42
1102 Paseo Sandi 32 8395-023-033 898.42 0.00 898.42
1110 Paseo Sandi 33 8395-023-034 898.42 0.00 898.42
1118 Paseo Sandi 34 8395-023-035 898.42 0.00 898.42
1780 Calle Alto 35 8395-023-036 898.42 0.00 898.42
1784 Calle Alto 36 8395-023-037 898.42 0.00 898.42
1788 Calle Alto 37 8395-023-038 898.42 0.00 898.42
1792 Calle Alto 38 8395-023-039 898.42 0.00 898.42
34,139.96 0.00 34,139.96

OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1,
ANNEXATION NO. 3 (TRACT 32841, NORTHWOODS DEVELOPMENT)

:t AVENID6.

ASSZ3.SC 'S -
1 "-

Agenda Item Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
From: Brad McKinney, City Manager
Prepared by: Scott Wasserman, Director of Parks & Recreation Subject: Discussion of the Potential Conversion of Tennis Courts into Pickleball Courts at Lone Hill Park and the San Dimas Sports Plex.
____________________________________________________________________________

SUMMARY
The City Council requested a discussion regarding the potential construction of pickleball courts at Lone Hill Park and the San Dimas Sports Plex.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council receive the report and provide direction as appropriate.

GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
No

FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact is dependent on City Council action. The cost to convert one tennis court into four pickleball courts is between $29,500 - $49,500, depending on the equipment selected. At its meeting of January 28, 2025, the City Council allocated $49,900 to convert one tennis court at Lone Hill Park into four pickleball courts. Truline Construction submitted the lowest responsible bid for $34,087. However, the construction contract has not been executed, pending additional City Council direction.

It is generally more cost effective to convert existing tennis courts into pickleball courts than to construct new courts, due to some of the infrastructure already being in place (i.e. chain link fences, court lighting, concrete pad, windscreens, etc.) Anticipated costs to convert one tennis court into four pickleball courts are summarized as follows:

Discussion of the Potential Conversion of Pickleball Courts at Lone Hill Park and the San Dimas Sports Plex. Page 2
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
Court Re-Surfacing $22,000
Net Posts Purchase and Installation $3,500
Chain link Fencing $4,000
Acoustic Panels $20,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST $49,500

BACKGROUND
The City maintains an inventory of sixteen (16) tennis courts that include two (2) courts at Marchant Park, two (2) courts at Pioneer Park, two (2) courts at Ladera Serra Park, two (2) courts at Lone Hill Park and eight (8) courts at the San Dimas Sports Plex. All tennis courts are lighted and are open until 10:00 p.m., per Section 13.16.190 of the San Dimas Municipal Code.

The tennis courts at the San Dimas Sports Plex are maintained by the City as part of a Joint Use Agreement (JUA) between the City and the Bonita Unified School District (BUSD) that dates back to 1987. Per the terms of the JUA, recreation amenities at the Sports Plex, including the tennis courts, are programmed exclusively by the BUSD between the hours of 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.

Monday - Friday and become available for public use 4:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. during the school week. The tennis courts are also available for public use on weekends between sunrise to 10:00 p.m. However, in practice, the BUSD has been allowing public use of the tennis courts during the day provided that the use does not interfere with the San Dimas High School Tennis Program.

Past City Council action is summarized as follows:

December 10, 2024 - The City Council first considered the construction of pickleball courts in San Dimas at its meeting of December 10, 2024. Staff provided aerial diagrams of each park noting the location of tennis courts that belong to the City and the distance of courts from the nearest homes. Staff recommended converting the inner most tennis court at Lone Hill Park into pickleball courts due its location 123 feet from the nearest home. Among tennis courts in City parks, this particular tennis court is situated the farthest from homes of any other tennis court. However, the City Council expressed interest in potentially converting a tennis court at the San Dimas Sports Plex. Staff advised that the tennis courts at the Sports Plex are the property of the BUSD and that staff would need to consult with the District for permission to convert one of the eight tennis courts on site into pickleball courts. The City Council asked staff to return at a future date to discuss the potential to convert a tennis court at the Sports Plex.

January 28, 2025 - Staff returned to the City Council on January 28, 2025, to report that the BUSD opposed converting one tennis court at the Sports Plex due to the negative impact it would have on the San Dimas High School Tennis Program. The City Council subsequently approved a motion to allocate $49,900 to convert one pickleball court at Lone Hill Park and directed staff not to purchase the acoustic sound panels unless needed, after 12 months of operation. The City Council also directed staff to complete community outreach within a 500-foot radius of the proposed pickleball court and to report back to the City Council if staff received any negative comments. If no negative comments were received, the City Council directed staff to proceed with the conversion of the tennis court.

Discussion of the Potential Conversion of Pickleball Courts at Lone Hill Park and the San Dimas Sports Plex. Page 3
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
Staff subsequently mailed outreach postcards on February 13, 2025, to 47 homes that are within 500 feet of the proposed pickleball court at Lone Hill Park. Staff did not receive any complaints or negative feedback from the households that received the outreach postcard. Staff released the Request for Proposal for the project on March 6, 2025, and received four (4) bids on April 1, 2025.

The low bid for the project was received from Truline Construction in the amount of $34,087. A contract with Truline Construction has not been executed and is pending new direction from the City Council.

April 22, 2025 - At its meeting of April 22, 2025, the City Council asked staff to agendize a future discussion for the City Council to further discuss the potential conversion of tennis courts at the Sports Plex and Lone Hill Park.

Subsequently, the BUSD scheduled a pickleball demonstration at the tennis courts at the Sports Plex on May 12, 2025, to evaluate the noise level of pickleball compared to tennis. The demonstration consisted of approximately 10 students playing pickleball on three of the eight tennis courts, simultaneously. After observing the activity for approximately 20 minutes, BUSD authorities determined that the students playing pickleball did not produce more noise than the same number of students playing tennis. However, the BUSD is concerned about its exposure related to legal action that potentially could be taken against the District as a result of public pushback to the construction of pickleball courts on its property. The BUSD is amenable to moving forward with the construction of pickleball courts at the SPLEX once the City and District have had time to develop an agreement to addresses these concerns. On this basis, the BUSD is receptive to the potential conversion of the easterly-most tennis court into four pickleball courts.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
While the JUA explicitly enumerates limited hours for public use of recreation amenities at the Sports Plex, in practice, the BUSD has been allowing the public use of the tennis courts throughout the day, provided that they are not needed for the high school’s tennis program or for physical education classes. If the City Council wishes to convert one tennis court into four (4) pickleball courts, the BUSD has indicated that it similarly would allow public use of the pickleball court during the school day, without additional restrictions.

The City Council may wish to consider the following issues as it evaluates the best location(s) for pickleball courts:

Noise/Proximity to Homes - As noted in Attachment 1 (Aerial Maps), there are eight (8) tennis courts at the Sports Plex. The westerly-most court is 26 feet from the nearest home. The easterlymost court is 213 feet from the nearest home and directly across the street from the McKinley Children’s Center. While it is generally considered best practice to locate a pickleball court at least 500 feet from homes, the easterly-most tennis court’s distance of 213 feet from the nearest home is the greatest distance from residences of any public tennis court in the City. In comparison, the inner-most tennis court at Lone Hill Park is 184 feet from the nearest residence.

Long-Term Maintenance and Ownership- The City bears 100% of the costs associated with the maintenance of the tennis courts at Lone Hill Park. The tennis courts at the Sports Plex are owned by the BUSD and maintained by the City.

Discussion of the Potential Conversion of Pickleball Courts at Lone Hill Park and the San Dimas Sports Plex. Page 4
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
As previously discussed, the City and BUSD maintain a joint use agreement that dates back to 1987. The purpose of the agreement was to facilitate the cooperative development, use and maintenance of recreation amenities at the Sports Plex for community use. Amenities constructed through this agreement are located on the campus of San Dimas High School and are the property of the BUSD. Recreation amenities include tennis courts, ball fields, dugouts, batting cages and restrooms. The City has continued to maintain these amenities over the past 38 years. The City also maintains appurtenant irrigation systems, electrical lighting systems and pays for the cost of electricity. The BUSD is responsible for paying the cost of water for irrigation.

The City maintains these amenities through contracted services that cost approximately $54,000 and the BUSD reimburses the City for half the cost of the contract ($27,000). The BUSD bears 100% of the cost to maintain the varsity baseball field. The stadium and basketball courts are not covered by the JUA and are used and maintained exclusively by the BUSD.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Proceed with Lone Hill Pickleball Court Only - The City Council could direct staff to proceed with the conversion of one tennis court at Lone Hill Park. As previously discussed, staff completed the outreach on February 13, 2025, for the conversion of one tennis court at this location and did not receive any negative feedback. Staff received a low bid of $34,087 to complete this work and could proceed quickly if directed to do so. The City Council allocated $49,900 to complete this project at its meeting of January 28, 2025. No additional funds would be required for this option.

2. Proceed with Sports Plex Pickleball Court Only – Under this scenario, staff would need time to develop an agreement with the BUSD to address legal concerns raised by the school district. Once this agreement is finalized and approved by the City Council and the Bonita Unified School Board, staff would need to release a new Request for Proposal (RFP) for the conversion of one tennis court at this location. It is anticipated that the cost to convert one tennis court at the Sports Plex would exceed the cost to covert a tennis court at Lone Hill park ($34,087), due to additional fencing required and a larger area to be resurfaced. The City Council also may wish to direct staff to conduct outreach within a 500-foot radius of the proposed pickleball courts.

Under this scenario, the City Manager could exercise his signing authority to approve a construction contract to complete the project at the Sports Plex, provided that the low bid is below the City Manager’s $50,000 signing authority. The City Council could approve a motion to apply the funding of $49,900 that it allocated for the construction of the pickleball courts at Lone Hill Park to the construction of the desired courts at the Sports Plex, which would eliminate the need to return to the City Council to allocate funding at a future date.

Staff anticipates that this funding would be sufficient to complete the project, and no additional funding would be required.

3. Proceed with Pickleball Courts at Lone Hill Park and the Sports Plex- As previously discussed, the conversion of one tennis court at Lone Hill Park can begin immediately.

However, staff would need to develop an agreement with the BUSD to address legal concerns raised by the school district before the conversion of a tennis court could begin at the Sports Plex. The agreement would need to be approved by the City Council and

Discussion of the Potential Conversion of Pickleball Courts at Lone Hill Park and the San Dimas Sports Plex. Page 5
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
Bonita Unified School Board. If the City Council wishes to convert tennis courts at both locations, it would need to allow time for staff to complete the RFP process for the proposed pickleball courts at the Sports Plex. The City Council would need to allocate additional funds for the conversion of a second tennis court at this location.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to CEQA guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), CEQA does not apply to this item because there is no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, no additional environmental review is needed at this time.

Respectfully submitted,
Scott Wasserman
Director of Parks & Recreation
Attachments:

1. Aerial Maps of Lone Hill Park and the San Dimas Sports Plex

Sportsplex Tennis
Courts
889 Cypress St
Closest residence is
26ft away
Use hours: Sunrise -
10:00 PM SPLEX
Tennis
Courts
ATTACHMENT 1 1

2

Use Hours: 8am - 10pm
Actual Court to
be converted is
184 ft away
from residence
Lone Hill Park
500 N Shellman Ave
Closest residence is 123ft away
Use Hours: Sunrise - 10:00 PM
123 Feet
184 Feet
3

Agenda Item Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
From: Brad McKinney, City Manager
Prepared by: Anissa Livas, Sr. Management Analyst
Subject: Introduce Ordinance 1325, Updating the Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) pursuant to Government Code Section 51178 and the California Fire Code ____________________________________________________________________________

SUMMARY
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has completed its latest update to the Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) maps for Local Responsibility Areas (LRAs) across Southern California, including the City of San Dimas. These maps are based on updated scientific data and modeling of fire behavior, topography, vegetation, and climate conditions. Adoption of these maps by ordinance is required by state law and supports local implementation of wildfire mitigation, building code standards, and emergency preparedness.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:
• Introduce Ordinance 1325 and read by title only, with further reading waived.

GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
No

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact for the recommended action.

BACKGROUND
CAL FIRE is mandated under Government Code Section 51178 to identify areas in Local Responsibility Areas (LRAs) that are subject to significant wildfire risk. These areas are classified into three hazard levels: Moderate, High, and Very High. The Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps

Introduce Ordinance 1325, Updating the Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) Page 2 For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
are developed using state-of-the-art fire behavior modeling and take into account factors such as fuels, slope, fire weather, and ember transport.

State law requires local agencies to adopt these maps by ordinance to apply relevant provisions of the California Building Code, Fire Code, and other fire safety regulations.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
CAL FIRE has completed its latest assessment of fire hazards in our jurisdiction and has provided updated LRA maps that reflect current conditions and risk factors. The proposed ordinance formally adopts these updated maps and authorizes use for:
• Determining applicable building standards for new construction • Implementing defensible space requirements
• Disclosure requirements during real estate transactions • Emergency planning and fire prevention efforts
The updated maps are not discretionary and must be adopted as presented by CAL FIRE.

Adoption ensures consistency with state law and supports regional wildfire preparedness efforts.

Per state guidelines, jurisdictions may only propose changes to increase the designated fire hazard severity levels; reductions to mapped zones are not permitted.

Insurance Considerations
It is important to note that the adoption of CAL FIRE's Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps does not directly impact homeowners' insurance rates or availability. According to the California Department of Insurance, insurance companies utilize their own risk models and do not rely on CAL FIRE's maps for underwriting decisions. Therefore, the updated maps are intended to guide local planning and safety measures, not to influence insurance determinations.

ALTERNATIVES
State law mandates the adoption of Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps as determined by CAL FIRE.

The City may not alter or reduce the designated hazard classifications. The only permissible amendments are to add areas that may have been unintentionally excluded. Failure to adopt the maps may result in noncompliance with state fire safety requirements and impact eligibility for certain funding and disaster preparedness programs.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to CEQA guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), CEQA does not apply to this item because there is no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, no additional environmental review is needed at this time.

Respectfully submitted,

Introduce Ordinance 1325, Updating the Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) Page 3 For the Meeting of May 27, 2025
Anissa Livas
Sr. Management Analyst
Attachments:

1. Ordinance 1325 - Adoption of Fire Hazard Severity Zones Exhibit A - Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map

2. Presentation

ATTACHMENT 1
ORDINANCE 1325

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIMAS, COUNTY OF LOS

ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONES WHEREAS, Government Code Section 51175(a) declares that wildfires pose a serious threat to the public peace, health, and safety, with ember cast and wind-driven flames impacting areas far beyond the initial fire front; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 51179(a) requires local agencies to designate, by ordinance, Moderate, High, and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones within 120 days of receiving recommendations from the State Fire Marshal pursuant to Government Code Section 51178; and
WHEREAS, in March 2025, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), under the direction of the State Fire Marshal, released updated Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps for Local Responsibility Areas in Los Angeles County, including the City of San Dimas; and
WHEREAS, these zones were based on current science, topography, vegetation, and climate conditions, and categorize areas of San Dimas as Moderate, High, or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Dimas has reviewed the State Fire Marshal’s recommendation and finds that the map accurately identifies the City’s Fire Hazard Severity Zones as shown in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, public notice of the map’s availability was made and all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this ordinance have been satisfied.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIMAS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. FINDINGS. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the above recitals are true and correct and incorporates them into this ordinance as findings.

SECTION 2. DESIGNATION. The City of San Dimas hereby designates the Moderate, High, and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones as identified in the map, dated March 24, 2025, prepared and recommended by CAL FIRE and the State Fire Marshal pursuant to Government Code section 51178. That map is hereby incorporated by reference and entitled “City of San Dimas – Los Angeles County – Local Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zones”.

SECTION 3. SUPERSEDURE. All prior ordinances or portions thereof that conflict with this designation are hereby repealed or superseded to the extent of such conflict.

SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE AND PUBLICATION. This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after its final passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause the same to be posted at the duly designated posting places within the City and published once within 15 days after passage and adoption as may be required by law in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of San Dimas hereby designated for that purpose; or, in the alternative, the City Clerk may cause to be published a summary of this Ordinance and certified copy of the text

Ordinance 1325 Page 2
Designating Fire Severity Zones
of this Ordinance shall be posted in the Office of the City Clerk five days prior to the date of adoption of this Ordinance; and, within 15 days after adoption, the City Clerk shall cause to be published, the aforementioned summary and shall post a certified copy of this Ordinance, together with the vote for and against the same, in the Office of the City Clerk.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Dimas this 10th day of June 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
________________________________
Emmett G. Badar, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________ ___________________________
Debra Black, City Clerk Jeff Malawy, City Attorney

Ordinance 1325 Page 3
Designating Fire Severity Zones

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )§

CITY OF SAN DIMAS )
I, DEBRA BLACK, CITY CLERK of the City of San Dimas, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of Ordinance 1325. It has been published pursuant to law; was introduced at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 27th day of May 2025, and thereafter passed, approved and adopted at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 10th day of June, 2025. It has been published and posted pursuant to law. ___________________________
Debra Black, City Clerk

City and County boundaries as of 10/22/24 (CA Board of Equalization) CAL FIRE State Responsibility Areas (SRA25_1)
CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZSRA23_3, FHSZLRA_25_1) Data Sources:

Daniel Berlant, State Fire Marshal, CA Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Joe Tyler, Director/Fire Chief, CA Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Wade Crowfoot, Secretary for Natural Resources, CA Natural Resources Agency The State of California and the Department of Forestry and Fire Gavin Newsom, Governor, State of California Protection make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy of data or maps. Neither the State nor the Department shall be liable under any circumstances for any direct, special, incidental, or consequential damages with respect to any claim by any user or third party on account of, or arising from, the use of data or maps. and other relevant factors including areas where winds
have been identified by the Office of the State Fire Marshal as a major cause of wildfire spread.
statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas. Moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones shall be based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, Government Code section 51178 requires the State Fire
Marshal to identify areas in the state as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent Waterbody
Federal Responsibility
Area (FRA)
Unzoned LRA
Incorporated City
Projection: NAD 83 California Teale Albers
Scale: 1:50,000 at 11" x 17"
Km 0 1 2 3 4
Mi 0 1 2
Very High High Moderate
Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) in Local Responsibility Area (LRA), as Identified by the State Fire Marshal
San Dimas
210
10 57
210

UNINCORPORATED
LOS ANGELES CO.

UNINCORPORATED
LOS ANGELES CO.

CLAREMONT
COVINA

GLENDORA

GLENDORA

LA VERNE
POMONA
WALNUT

WEST COVINA
March 24, 2025
As Identified by the
State Fire Marshal
Local Responsibility Area
Fire Hazard Severity Zones
CITY OF SAN DIMAS – LOS ANGELES COUNTY
Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsibility
Area (SRA), Effective April 1, 2024
Very High High Moderate

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF SAN DIMAS
City Council Meeting
May 27, 2025
Fire Hazard Severity Zone Update

CITY OF SAN DIMAS
Why This Matters
• Wildfires pose increasing risk statewide and locally. • State law requires adoption of updated Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) maps.
• Helps ensure public safety, modern building standards, and emergency planning.

CITY OF SAN DIMAS
What are Fire Hazard Severity Zones
• Mandated by Government Code §51178–79
• Zones indicate likelihood of wildfire and potential intensity • Three categories: Moderate, High, Very High

CITY OF SAN DIMAS
How Zones Are Determined
• CAL FIRE used updated scientific modeling:
– Vegetation type and density
– Fire history and burn probability
– Slope, terrain, and local fire weather
– Ember production and transport

CITY OF SAN DIMAS
What’s New in 2025 Maps?
• Updated fire probability (1991–2020 fire data)
• New urban fire environment data
• More precise modeling of wind-driven embers
• Local weather patterns used in zone scoring
• Map prepared by State Fire Marshal

CITY OF SAN DIMAS
Local Adoption
• Only increases to hazard zones are permitted; reductions are not allowed under state guidelines
• Zones apply to:
– Building & development standards
– Defensible space enforcement
– Real estate disclosures
– Emergency preparedness efforts

CITY OF SAN DIMAS

CITY OF SAN DIMAS
Insurance Clarification
• CAL FIRE maps do not determine insurance rates
• Per CA Dept. of Insurance
– Insurance companies use their own models – not the FHSZ map – for underwriting decisions

CITY OF SAN DIMAS
Recommendation
• Introduce Ordinance 1325 to formally adopt the updated FHSZ map.