Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
04/25/2017 PC Agenda
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA April 25, 2017 7:00 P.M. City Hall, Windmill Community Room 21810 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Chairperson Vice Chairperson Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Raymond Wolfe Ken Mok Naila Barlas Frank Farago Jennifer "Fred" Mahike Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Planning Division of the Community Development Department, located at 21810 Copley Drive, and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please call (909) 839-7030 during regular business hours. Written materials distributed to the Planning Commission within 72 hours of the Planning Commission meeting are available for public inspection immediately upon distribution in the City Clerk's office at 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California, during normal business hours. In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title 11 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or accommodation(s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting must inform the Community Development Department at (909) 839-7030 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. M Please refrain from smoking, eating or I he City of uiamono bar uses recycleo drinking in the Windmill Community Room paper and encourages you to do the same City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission IhiIAQ111I2CHMII*i PUBLIC INPUT The meetings of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission are open to the public. A member of the public may address the Commission on the subject of one or more agenda items and/or other items of which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission. A request to address the Commission should be submitted in writing at the public hearing, to the Secretary of the Commission. As a general rule, the opportunity for public comments will take place at the discretion of the Chair. However, in order to facilitate the meeting, persons who are interested parties for an item may be requested to give their presentation at the time the item is called on the calendar. The Chair may limit individual public input to five minutes on any item; or the Chair may limit the total amount of time allocated for public testimony based on the number of people requesting to speak and the business of the Commission. Individuals are requested to conduct themselves in a professional and businesslike manner. Comments and questions are welcome so that all points of view are considered prior to the Commission making recommendations to the staff and City Council. In accordance with State Law (Brown Act), all matters to be acted on by the Commission must be posted at least 72 hours prior to the Commission meeting. In case of emergency or when a subject matter arises subsequent to the posting of the agenda, upon making certain findings, the Commission may act on item that is not on the posted agenda. INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COMMISSION Agendas for Diamond Bar Planning Commission meetings are prepared by the Planning Division of the Community Development Department. Agendas are available 72 hours prior to the meeting at City Hall and the public library, and may be accessed by personal computer at the contact information below. Every meeting of the Planning Commission is recorded and duplicate recordings are available for a nominal charge. ADA REQUIREMENTS A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot access the public speaking area. The service of the cordless microphone and sign language interpreter services are available by giving notice at least three business days in advance of the meeting. Please telephone (909) 839-7030 between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday, and 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Friday. HELPFUL CONTACT INFORMATION Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Commission, CDs of Meetings (909) 839-7030 Email: infoadiamondbarca.gov Website: www.diamondbarca.gov CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, April 25, 2017 ED] 1111i7e1 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Next Resolution No. 2017-08 ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Naila Barlas, Frank Farago, Jennifer "Fred" Mahlke, Vice Chairperson Ken Mok, Chairperson Raymond Wolfe 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is the time and place for the general public to address the members of the Planning Commission on any item that is within their jurisdiction, allowing the public an opportunity to speak on non-public hearing and non -agenda items. Please complete a Speaker's Card for the recording Secretary (completion of this form is voluntary). There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressing the Planning Commission. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chairperson 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following items listed on the consent calendar are considered routine and are approved by a single motion. Consent calendar items may be removed from the agenda by request of.the Commission only: 4.1 Minutes of Regular Meeting: March 28, 2017 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7.1 Time Extension — Planning Case No. PL 2016-221 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Sections 21.20.150 and 22.66.050, the applicant is requesting a one-year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 54081, a 16 -lot residential subdivision on 12.9 acres, located at the southern terminus of Crooked Creek Drive, east of the SR -57 Freeway, Brea Canyon Road and Brea Canyon flood control channel and north of the City's southern boundary (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Number 8714-028-003). The City Council initially approved the project on February 20, 2007. The State legislature passed four bills: SB 1185, AB 333 and AB 208, and AB 116, which automatically. extended the duration of the approval period for all tentative maps that were set APRIL 25, 2017 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION to expire. The duration of the combined time extensions granted by all four Senate bills set the expiration date of this tentative map to February 20, 2017. Project Address: Southern terminus of Crooked Creek Drive, east of the SR - 57 Freeway, Brea Canyon Road and Brea Canyon flood control channel and north of the City's southern boundary (APN 8714-028-003) Property Owner/ Cathay View Development, LLC Applicant: 411 E. Huntington Dr. Suite 312, Arcadia Arcadia. CA 91006 Environmental Determination: This project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City Council adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) on February 20, 2007. No further environmental review is required to extend the time limit for the approved project. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Time Extension, PL2016-221 to the City Council. 7.2 Development Review No. PL 2016-211 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48, the applicant, Anil Luthra, is requesting Development Review approval to construct a 1,246 square -foot addition and a 438 square -foot attached balcony and patio area to an existing 2,104 single- family residence on a 0.2 gross acre (9,239 gross square -foot) lot. The subject property is zoned Low Residential (RL) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Low Residential. Project Address: 3543 Hawkwood Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Property Owner/ Anil Luthra Applicant: 3543 Hawkwood Rd. Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Environmental Determination: The project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Article 19 under Section 15301(e) (additions to existing structures) of the CEQA Guidelines. No further environmental review is required. APRIL 25, 2017 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. PL2016-211, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. 7.3 Development Review No. PL 2016-174 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48, the applicant and property owner are requesting Development Review approval to construct a new 12,978 square -foot single- family residence on a 1.39 gross acre (60,548 gross square -foot) lot. The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential. Project Address: 2133 Derringer Lane Diamond Bar. CA 91765 Property Owner: Sumermal Vardhan 2127 Derringer Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Applicant: Pete Volbeda 180 N. Benson Ave. #D Upland, CA 91786 Environmental Determination: The project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Article 19 under Section 15303(a) (construction of a new single-family residence) of the CEQA Guidelines. No further environmental review is required. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. PL2016-174, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS / INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: STAFF COMMENTS / INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING: Tuesday, April 27, 2017, 7:00 pm Diamond Bar City Hall Windmill Community Room 21810 Copley Drive APRIL 25, 2017 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL MEETING: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING: MEMORIAL DAY HOLIDAY: 11. ADJOURNMENT: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 — 6:30 pm South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium 21825 Copley Drive Tuesday, May 9, 2017, 7:00 pm Diamond Bar City Hall Windmill Community Room 21810 Copley Drive Thursday, May 11, 2017, 7:00 pm Diamond Bar City Hall Windmill Community Room 21810 Copley Drive Monday, May 29, 2017 In observance of the holiday, City Offices will be closed. City offices will re -open on Tuesday, May 30, 2017. MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 28, 2017 CALL TO ORDER: l a ,, Chair/Wolfe called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C/Mahlke led the Pledge of Allegiance. Present: Commissioners Naila Barlas, Frank Farago, Jennifer "Fred" Mahlke, Vice Chair Ken Mok, and Chair Raymond Wolfe Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; James Eggart, Assistant City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; May Nakajima, Associate Planner; and Stella Marquez, Administrative Coordinator. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 14, 2017: C/Mahlke moved, VC/Mok seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 14, 2017, as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: Barlas, Farago, Mahlke VC/Mok, None Chair/Wolfe None COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MARCH 28, 2017 PAGE 2 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): M=!"-7 MARCH"- PLANNING COMMISSION 7.1 Development Review No. PL2016-31 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48, the applicant and property owner requested Development Review approval to demolish an existing single family residence and construct a 12,037 square foot single family residence with 2,543 square feet of garage area on a 1.46 gross acre (63,958 gross square foot) lot. The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential. PROJECT ADDRESS: 24042 Falcons View Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Shaolun Ku and Yuling Lin 160 Commerce Way Walnut, CA 91789 APPLICANT: Hunter Wu 556 N. Diamond Bar Blvd, Suite 305 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 AP/Nakajima presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. PL2016-31. Chair/Wolfe opened the public hearing. Hunter Wu, applicant, introduced the owner and landscape architect who were present. Mr. Wu stated that Mr. Ku has a home in The Country Estates and wants a nice home for his family which is the purpose for this application. Chair/Wolfe closed the public hearing. C/Mahlke moved, C/Farago seconded, to approve of Development Review No. PL2016-31. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: MARCH 28, 2017 10. PAGE'3 PLANNING COMMISSION AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Barlas, Farago, Mahlke, VC/Mok Chair/M/olfe None None Chair/Wolfe thanked the applicant and property owner for presenting the Commission with a very nice plan and hoped the owners would spend many years with their family in the City of Diamond Bar and community of The Country Estates. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: None STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 10.1 Public Hearing dates for future proiects. CDD/Gubman updated the Commission on the three -lot Tentative Parcel Map on Timbertop item it recently considered. On March 21, 2017, the City Council approved, by a 5-0 vote, the Tentative Tract Map with an additional condition crafted by the City Attorney. Based on additional research into the City's Subdivision Code, although the City Council agreed with staff that the proposed subdivision met all of the subdivision requirements of the Municipal Code and Subdivision Map Act, the City still had authority to impose conditions of approval. There was language in the Subdivision Ordinance that said among those conditions the City can impose would be those that are deemed necessary by the review authority to achieve compatibility between the proposed subdivision, its immediate surroundings and the community. So, on that basis, the City Attorney drafted a condition (Condition #10) that stated that prior to Final Map approval, the applicant will need to provide evidence that they complied with any CC&Rs applicable to the property or alternatively provide evidence that no such approvals are required. By doing so, they maintained the discretionary authority to impose conditions on a project that they essentially had to approve, but when the Final Map comes before them for approval to record (which is not discretionary), the condition requiring HOA approval will have to be fulfilled. So staff managed to extricate the City from whatever dispute might exist among the applicant and the HOA and they can move forward. The outcome was fairly positive. The legal counsel for the HOA, although he MARCH 28, 2017 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION stated that their first choice would have been for the City Council to deny the subdivision request, if the City Council was inclined to approve it, the HOA was willing to accept that decision with that condition of approval and the applicants also accepted that condition. So this matter was approved and it is now between the applicant and the HOA to resolve their differences which, if they do, great, or if they come up with some compromise, great and if they do not, the City does not have to be concerned because the applicant would not be in compliance with the Conditions of Approval and the Final Map would not go forward. Staff appreciates its great legal counsel for identifying that additional language in the Subdivision Code which led to the resolution of the matter. CDD/Gubman reminded the Commission that the Joint City Council/Planning Commission General Plan Update meeting is scheduled for tomorrow evening in the Windmill Room beginning at 6:30 p.m. On Thursday night, M/Lin will present the State of the City at the Diamond Bar Center. The next scheduled Planning Commission would have been April 11 and because there are no agenda items, the meeting will go dark. The next meeting is scheduled for April 25 with three items currently on the agenda. 1) Staff is completing the FY 2017-18 budget and part of that budget is the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) that requires (state mandate) that the Planning Commission find that the CIP is in conformance with the General Plan and staff will present the Commission with its findings of consistency of the CIP with the General Plan. 2) There is another Development Review application for a new single-family residence in The Country Estates on Derringer Drive. 3) An addition to an existing single- family residence on Hawkwood at the southern end of the City. 11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: Chair/Wolfe reminded everyone that the City's Annual Birthday Party will take place on Saturday, April 8 at Pantera Park beginning at about 11:00 a.m. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair/Mahlke adjourned the regular meeting at 7:16 p.m. MARCH 28, 2017 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 25th day of April, 2017. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman Community Development Director Raymond Wolfe, Chairperson PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR -- 21810 COPLEY DRIVE -DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 -TEL. (909) 839-7030 -FAX (909) 861-3117 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 7.1 MEETING DATE: April 25, 2017 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Time Extension for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 and Related Entitlements — Planning Case No. PL 2016-221 PROJECT LOCATION: Southern terminus of Crooked Creek Drive, east of the SR -57 Freeway, Brea Canyon Road and Brea Canyon flood control channel and north of the City's southern boundary (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Number 8714-028-003) PROPERTY OWNER/ Cathay View Development, LLC APPLICANT: 411 E. Huntington Dr. Suite 312 Arcadia, CA 91006 SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting a one-year time extension to record a 16 -lot residential subdivision located at the southern terminus of Crooked Creek Drive, east of the SR -57 Freeway, Brea Canyon Road and Brea Canyon flood control channel, and north of the City's southern boundary. BACKGROUND: On January 9, 2007, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the following entitlements (collectively, the "Project"): • Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 (16 -lot residential subdivision on 12.9 acres) • Zone Change No. 2006-02 (a zone change from R-1-10,000 to RL/PD) • Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18 (for development in a hillside area and subject to Planned Development Overlay District) • Variance No. 2002-02 (to allow retaining walls that exceed the allowable exposed heights) • Tree Permit No. 2002-13 (to remove and replace oak and walnut trees) The Commission concurrently recommended that the City Council adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND") No. 2006-03 and the associated Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program as the environmental documents for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). On February 20, 2007 to conditions. The Attachments 2 and 3. the City Council adopted the MND and approved the Project, subject City Council Resolutions affirming these actions are included in All Planning Commission and City Council staff reports and minutes are included as Attachments 4 through 8. The Project approval was set to expire on February 20, 2017. However, on January 30, 2017, the applicant requested a one-year time extension in accordance with Section 21.20.150 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code. Subdivision Laws The subdivision of land is regulated pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (Sections 66410 through 66499.58 of the California Government Code) and Diamond Bar's Subdivision Code (Title 21 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code). The subdivision of land generally must follow two steps: tentative map approval, followed by the approval and recordation of a final map. Approval of a tentative map is a discretionary action, which is subject to conditions, and is valid for a limited time period. After tentative map approval, the applicant works toward final map approval by fulfilling all of the conditions of approval prior to the tentative map approval's expiration date. The most significant conditions to be fulfilled usually relate to the public improvements contemplated within the new subdivision. Prior to final map approval, the subdivider must design and agree to construct public improvements, dedicate any land and easements to be used for public purposes, and secure an agreement to make these improvements with a bond or cash deposit. Once all conditions of approval have been fulfilled, the local jurisdiction must then approve the final map as a ministerial action. Extensions of Time The Project's initial expiration date was February 20, 2010 (three years from the approval date). The Great Recession, however, led to the passage of several pieces of State legislation (SB 1185, AB 333, AB 208, and AB 116) which automatically extended all tentative maps that were set to expire on or before January 1, 2014. Collectively, these statutory time extensions automatically extended the Project expiration date to February 20, 2017. In addition to these automatic extensions, the City Council may extend the expiration date for a maximum of three more years. The table on the following page summarizes the associated approval and expiration dates: Page 2 of 6 Expiration Dates Original Approval February 20, 2007 February 20, 2010 SB 1185 Automatic 1 -year extension February 20, 2011 AB 333 Automatic 2 -year extension February 20, 2013 AB 208 Automatic 2 -year extension February 20, 2015 AB 116 Automatic 2 -year extension February 20, 2017 Request for Extension I One Year February 20, 2018 Page 2 of 6 ANALYSIS: Review Authoritv (Diamond Bar Municipal Code Sections 21.20.150 and 22.66.050 Pursuant to Section 21.20.150 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC), an extension of time may be granted up to a maximum of one year when a request for an extension of time, with good cause, is submitted to the Community Development Department. Because the Project was originally approved by the City Council, the City Council is the final review authority for the time extension requests. Proiect Status The subject property was sold to Cathay View Development, LLC on October 24, 2014. As described in the applicant's time extension request letter, the project team has been working diligently on the final map submittals. In order to record the final map, there are technical plans and documents that require review and approval through the Public Works Department. The summary below provides the status on the applicant's progress toward fulfilling the final map requirements: • Street Improvement Plans - Deemed technically approved on May 21, 2009, but mylars were not submitted for formal approval by the City Engineer. The new design team submitted revised plans on December 5, 2016. Plan check comments (redlines) were sent back on December 22, 2016. • Sewer Plans - Deemed technically approved on May 21, 2009, pending L.A. County review and approval. Technical approval has expired since L.A. County approval was not obtained. • Sewer Area Study - Approved on December 22, 2016. • Grading Plans - Plan check comments were sent on May 21, 2009. The new design team submitted revised plans on December 5, 2016. Redlines were sent back on December 22, 2016. • Hydrology Study - Redline comments were sent on May 11, 2008. The new design team submitted a revised study on December 5, 2016. Redlines were sent back on December 22, 2016. L.A. County approval is required. • Storm Drain Plans - Redline comments were sent on May 11, 2008. The new design team submitted revised plans on December 5, 2016. Redlines were sent back on December 22, 2016. L.A. County Flood Control District approval is also required because the storm drain will connect to the County's flood control channel. • Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) — The SUSMP was deemed approved on May 29, 2009, but the approval has expired. • Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) Report - Review of this report was not originally required. However, the latest Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) that was adopted by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board became effective December 28, 2012, which now requires the City to review the SWPPP Reports. This condition must be imposed regardless of when projects received entitlements since it is tied to when grading activities will commence. The SWPPP report has not yet been submitted for review. • Geotechnical Report Review - Under review. Page 3 of 6 • Street Lighting Plans - Deemed technically approved on March 30, 2009, but mylars were not submitted for formal City Engineer approval. New plans must be submitted for review and approval with plan check fees. L.A. County approval shall be required if the lights are to be annexed into the County's Lighting Maintenance District. • Final Map - Redline comments were sent in April 2009. The new design team submitted revised plans on December 5, 2016. Redlines were sent back to the design team on January 9, 2017. • Engineer's Estimates - This is required prior to final map approval. Engineer's cost estimates are required for security/bonding purposes for review and approval. As implied in the above summary, the design team that took over the Project identified a variety of technical deficiencies in the previously -submitted improvement plans. Although they have been working in good faith to revise and resubmit the plans, additional time is needed to resubmit and receive approval of the plans prior to filing the final map. The requested extension of time would allow the design team to continue to work with City staff toward this goal. Next Steps The extension of time request does not change the approved project, and the conditions of approval set forth in City Council Resolution No. 2007-11 and 2007-12 will not change with the approval of the extension of time. In the next few months, City staff will work with the design team on refining the approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map and related entitlements. Should this process warrant changes to the map which would result in the final map not being in substantial conformance with the approved tentative tract map, then the applicant would be required to request Commission and Council approval of an amendment to the tentative tract map before proceeding further. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: On April 14, 2017, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site, and on April 14, 2017, the notice was published in the Inland Valley Daily Tribune and San Gabriel Valley Tribune newspapers. The project site was posted with a notice display board, and a copy of the public notice was posted at the City's three designated community posting sites. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED On April 14, 2017, the City received an email from Jeff Michelsen (Attachment 11). The email includes a statement that the Project "falls far short of meeting legal mandates imposed by CEQA." The email also asserts that the Project is now subject to Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), which requires consultation with local Native American tribes. The discussion in the following section addresses Mr. Michelsen's comments regarding the status of the Project's adopted CEQA determination. Page 4 of 6 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: As noted above, MND No. 2006-03 was adopted for the Project. Pursuant to the CEQA and cases interpreting CEQA, there is a statutory presumption against additional further environmental review for a Project for which a MND has been adopted. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21166, when environmental review has been performed, no subsequent environmental review is required except in three situations. The first is when there are proposed substantial changes to a project that will require major revisions to the previously approved MND. The second is when substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which a project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the MND. The third is when there is new information which was not known and could not have been known at the time the MND was prepared that evidences a project would have significant environmental effects not previously discussed in the MND. If none of these conditions are met, the City is prohibited from requiring further environmental review. As stated by case law, Section 21166 provides a balance against the burdens created by the environmental review process to accord a reasonable measure of certainty for a project proponent. This applies even if the initial review was not accurate in describing the significant effects of the project. None of the conditions requiring additional review are met. The extension request does not propose any changes to the Project. There is no information which would lead to the conclusion that substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken. The City has not been made aware of any new information that was not known and could not have been known at the time the MND was approved that the Project will cause significant effects that were not previously discussed. The City did receive an e-mail from a Scott Harris, who indicated he was an environmental scientist with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife inquiring whether additional environmental review would be required. Specifically, Mr. Harris expressed a concern about ensuring to ensure that wildlife and botanical surveys are conducted to reflect current conditions on the Project site. Initially, the City is unaware of any changed wildlife or botanical conditions on the Project site. However, even if there are changed conditions, the Project conditions require that such surveys be performed prior to any grading. Based on the above, no further environmental review is required for the requested time extension. Assembly Bill 52 — Tribal Consultation On September 25, 2014, Governor Brown signed into law AB 52, which requires notification/request for tribal consultation for projects subject to CEQA. AB 52 specifically states that this requirement only apply to projects for which a notice of preparation of an EIR, Negative Declaration or MND was filed on or after July 1, 2015. Because the Project's MND was adopted in 2007, AB 52 does not apply. Notwithstanding, an assessment of potential impacts to archaeological resources was required and performed when the Project was approved in 2007, and as such, the impacts of the Project would have been considered in the MND. Page 5 of 6 CONCLUSION: Staff finds that the applicant has made a good faith effort to record the final map, and the request for a one-year extension of time is reasonable in light of the applicant's progress to date. If the time extension request is approved, the new expiration date for the Project will be February 20, 2018. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment 1) recommending that the City Council approve a one-year extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 and related entitlements, based on the findings of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 21.20.150, subject to conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. Prepared by: Reviewed by Mayuko Nakajima Greg Gubman, AICP Associate Planner Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Draft Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX 2. City Council Resolution No. 2007-11 3. City Council Resolution No. 2007-12 4. Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes, dated October 10, 2006 5. Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes, dated November 28, 2006 6. Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes, dated December 12, 2006 7. Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes, dated January 9, 2007 8. City Council Staff Report and Minutes, dated February 20, 2007 9. Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, dated July 2006 10. Letter from Applicant, dated January 30, 2017 11. Email from Jeff Michelsen, dated April 14, 2017 Page 6 of 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2017 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 54081 AND RELATED ENTITLEMENTS FOR A 16 -LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED DIRECTLY AT THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF CROOKED CREEK DRIVE, EAST OF THE SR -57 FREEWAY, BREA CANYON ROAD AND BREA CANYON FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL AND NORTH OF THE CITY'S SOUTHERN BOUNDARY, DIAMOND BAR, CA (ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 8714-028-003). A. RECITALS. The applicant and property owner, Cathay View Development, LLC, has filed a request for a one year extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081, a 16 -lot residential subdivision located at the southern terminus of Crooked Creek Drive, east of the SR -57 Freeway, Brea Canyon Road and Brea Canyon flood control channel and north of the City's southern boundary, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map shall be referred to as the "Request." On January 9, 2007, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129), Zone Change No. 2006-02, Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2002-02, and Tree Permit No. 2002-14 for a 16 -lot residential subdivision. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, Conditional Use Permit, Variance, and Tree Permit shall be referred to as the "Project." At that time, the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council approval of the application. 3. On February 20, 2007, the Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129), completed for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081, was adopted by the City Council. 4. On February 20, 2007, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 was approved by the City Council with a three year approval period to file the final map with the Los Angeles County Recorders Office. 5. On February 20, 2007, Zone Change No, 2006-02, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2002-02, and Tree Permit No. 2002-14 were approved by the City Council to allow the development of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081. 6. State Bill 1185 (SB 1185) automatically extended the expiration date on all existing tentative maps for twelve (12) months past their original expiration dates. 7. Assembly Bill 333 (AB 333) automatically extended the expiration date on all existing tentative maps for twenty four (24) months past their original expiration dates. 8. Assembly Bill 208 (AB 208) automatically extended the expiration date on all existing tentative maps for twenty four (24) months past their original expiration dates. 9. Assembly Bill 116 (AB 116) automatically extended the expiration date on all existing tentative maps for twenty four (24) months past their original expiration dates. 10. Section 22.66.050 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) authorizes the approval of a time extension for Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2002-02, and Tree Permit No. 2002-14, 11. Subdivision Map Act Section 66452.6 authorizes local agencies to extend the expiration dates of tentative maps for a period or periods not to exceed ten (10) years from the original date of approval. 12. Section 21.20.150 of the DBMC authorizes the City Council to grant tentative map extensions for a maximum total of three years to the initial time limit granted. 13. On April 14, 2017, notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. On April 14, 2017, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1000 -foot radius of the Project site and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board. 14. On April 25, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date. 4 B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 is the environmental document adopted for the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map and related entitlements. No modifications to the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and related entitlements are proposed which would trigger additional environmental review. No further environmental review is required to extend the tentative map expiration date. 3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: C. FINDINGS OF FACT Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein and as prescribed under Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 21.20.150, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: Tentative Map Extension of Time Findings There have been no changes to the provision of the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, this Title, orthe Development Code applicable to the project since the approval of the Tentative Tract Map; There have been no changes to the provision of the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, or Subdivision Ordinance. The project, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081, a 16 -lot residential subdivision, is consistent with the z oning designation and will not be altered in any way by approving the requested extension of time and all conditions of approval adopted by City Council via Resolution Nos. 2007-11 and 2007-12 will remain in full force and effect. 2. There have been no changes to the character of the site or its surroundings that affect how the policies of the General Plan or other standards of this Title (Subdivision Ordinance) or the Development Code apply to the project; and Since the City Council approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081, there have been no changes to the character of the site or its surroundings that affect how the policies of the General Plan or other standards of this Title or the Development Code apply to the project. 3. There have been no changes to the capacities of community resources, including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment or disposal facilities, roads or schools so that there is no longer sufficient remaining capacity to serve the project. Since the City Council approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 there have been no changes to the capacities of community resources, including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment or disposal facilities, roads or schools so that there is no longer sufficient remaining capacity to serve the project. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above and as prescribed under DBMC Section 21.20.150, this Planning Commission hereby recommends to City Council the approval of the Application subject to the following conditions: 1. All conditions of approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 as approved by City Council Resolution Nos. 2007-11 and 2007-12 shall remain in full force and effect except as amended herein. 2. All conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2002-02, and Tree Permit No. 2002-14 for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 approved by City Council Resolution Nos. 2007-11 and 2007-12 shall remain in full force and effect except as amended herein. 3. This approval shall extend the expiration date of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 to February 20, 2018. The Planning Commission shall: a. Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and b. Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail to Ms. Yanying (Claire) Dong, Cathay View Development, LLC, 411 E. Huntington Drive, Suite 312, Arcadia, CA 91006. C! APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF APRIL 2017, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. Raymond Wolfe, Chairperson I, Greg Gubman, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of April, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Greg Gubman, Secretary 0 C1TY.COUNCIL RESOLUTION j' RESOLUTION N0.2007.- '11.. / A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND . BAR .APPROVING VESTING .TENTATIVE: MAP NO. 54081. AND-,. ADOPTION OF MITIGATED:NEGATIVE DECLARATION N0.2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) AND MITIGATION REPORT AND. MONITORING PROGRAM. AS SET FORTH THEREIN FOR A 16 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, . LOCATED AT THE :SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF 'CROOKED., CREEK DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CAUFO.RNIA. A. RECITALS 1. The property owner/applicant, Daniel Singh; Jewel Ridge, LLC, has,filed-an application for approval of Vesting.Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 and' . adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program, as„described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution,. the:subject Map :Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be referred to, . as the "Application.” 2. On January 30,2007, public hearing.notices were mailed.to approximately..., 209 property owners of record within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site: In accordance with Public Resource Code, Section 21092.5,.on January 30,: 2007, agencies than responded:. to the. project's, Mitigated Negative Declaration were notified in writing of the Februa,ry.20, 2007,'. City Council public hearing. On January 30, 20071 public hearing notices were posted in three public places within :the City of Diamond Bar and the project site was posted with a display board. On February 1, 2007, notification of the public hearing for this, project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and . Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. newspapers. b. 3. On:February '20, 2007,, the., City Council of the .City of Diamond Bar.. conducted a duly noticed public hearing and concluded the public hearing on the Application. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it isfound, determined arld resolved bythe CityCouncil of the City of Diamond Bar as.follows:. 1. This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, 'Part A, of this Resolution are true and:correct. 1 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007•-11 2. The City Council hereby finds that ;the project ;identified above in this Resolution required" a. Mitigated 'Negative.-.:Declaration. (MND). ,'MND No. 2006-03`(SCH #2006071129) has been prepared, according to-the requirements of the California Environmental ,Quality. Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 30.day public review period for the. MND began July: 28,2006; and ended August 28, 2006.Furthermore, the . City. Council has reviewed the MND and related documents in reference to the Application 3. The City Council hereby specifically finds .'andjdetermines that, having considered the record as a whole, including. the findings.setforth below, and , changes and alterations which have been.incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, .there is.no evidence before this City Council that the project proposed herein will have the, -. potential of anadverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends..:Based upon substantial'evidence, this. City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5. (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based •on the findings and conclusions set foith herein, the City Council. hereby finds and determines.that changes .and :alterations have been required in or incorporated into and conditioned upon the project specified in the application, which mitigate or avoid significant adverse environmental. impacts identified in MND No: 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129.) 5. The City Council hereby adopts MND. No. 2006-03'(SCH #2006071129) and.. Mitigation Report and Monitoring:Program attached herein as Exhibit"B" and hereby incorporated by reference'. 6." Based on the findings and,conclusions set forth herein,. this City Council hereby finds as follows:" (a) The project relates to vacant land.located at the southern terminus of " Crooked Creek Drive, east of the SR-57 Freeway, Brea Canyon Road and Brea Canyon flood control channel and-. north of the City's southern boundary.. It 'an' irregular shaped: hillside parcel of approxilmately 12.9 acres; sloping down to the south and west_and sloping up to the east. (b) The project .site has a General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential (RL) Maximum 3.DU/AC::. (c) The project site, is within the .Single Family Residence-Minimum Lot Size 10,000 Square Feet (R-1-10,000) Zone. However, Zone Change No.2006-02 within City Council Ordinance No. XX (2007) approves . the zone change from. R-1-10,000 to Low Density Residential (RL) Planned Development (PD).Overlay for General Plan compliance. - - 2 City Council Resolution No. 2007ki (d) Generally the following zones and. uses.surround the protect site:: to the north and -east is the R-1-6,000.zone'and residences; to the west . is the R-.1-7,50O.zone and residences; flood control: channel and SR -57; and to the south. is the,:A-2-1 zone and vacant land. (e) The Application,.request: inciud.es.the.following: a 16 lot, residential subdivision on 12.9 actes; Mitigated Negative.. Declaration and Mitigation Report and Monitoring. Program; a zone change from R-1- -1-10,.0"00 1 Q,000to. RL/PD;: grading.. and, development in a hillside. area;, retaining walls 'adjacent to the street that exceed the. allowable . ---- exposed -height; and -the rerrroyal and-repiacement-of-oak-and-walnut--- — -- trees. Tentative Map Findings Pursuant to Subdivision. Code Section 21.20. the City Council has made the.following required findings: (f) _ ,The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Low Density Residential/Maximum 3 Du/Ac. (RL):. The General Plan i . describes this designation asa' residential land use category for detached single-family residences with a,niazimum density allowed: for new subdivisions as:three',dwelling unit per acre or less. The proposed mapJs a 16 lot subdivision with a gross density of 0:81 dwelling units per acre; which is consistent with the General Plan. Additionally, the proposed map, as designed, with the incorporation.of, landform grading, the extension.of Crooked Creek Drive (referred to as Street "A" on the. map), revegetation of slopes, and installation of sewers and drainage facilities.is in accordance with the Objectives . and Strategies of the:General Plan, Furthermore, the proposed. land .. use represents an extension of.the.existing development pattern in the project area and the subject property could be characterized as an ".infill" site. As.a result, YTTM 54081is consistent with the .General Plan including its :design and improvements. (g) The project site .is approximately 12.9 gross acres: VTTM 54081 proposes to subdivide 12.9 gross:acres.into 16.residential lots for the developmentof 16 detached single-family residences with two streets and four open space lot for revegetation. As such, the proposed gross ' density'is 0.81 dwelling units per.acre. In accordance to the General Plan, it is possible to subdivide the project site into approximately 30 lots with two streets:. However, a lower density is proposed in order to preserve the open. space identified on the as Lot "C". Additionally, the MND prepared for this project reviewed the suitability of the project site, circulation., grading, . aesthetics, land use, : etc. The MND concluded that the proposed map would not have a significant effect _ on the environment and with the incorporation of mitigation measures. . 3 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX _ .2007-11 . Therefore, the project site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development and. derisity; (h) The MND forthis project analyzed whether or the proposed: map Would 'cause .substantial environmental damage or injure, fish or wildlife or : their habitat. The : MND. concluded that With . the implementation of mitigation measures as prescribed in the Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program summarized, as follows, .it .is anticipated that the proposed map's impacts. would be reduced to a level "less than significant". and the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is not likely to : cause .' substantial environmental damage or injure fish or Wildlife or their habitat. 1. Aesthetics.' According to. the MND; the environmental issue related to `Aesthetics has the potential to be significant unless mitigated to alevel' of less than significant. The proposed series of retaining Wails located along ofnear,rear property lines may partially impede existing views: In orderto mitigate the view of . the retaining .walls, landscaping With irrigation will be used . within the wall cells and planter areas between and in.front of all retaining walls. 2. AirQuality. Environmental issues related to Air Quality affected by dust and particulate matter may be potentially significant during grading and construction, The.appiicant is required to: water. all exposed surfaces three times daily; limit off road trucks to no more than 15 mph; use soil stabilizers; replace ground cover in . disturbed area as .quickly as feasible; and coverall stockpiles. Additionally; all :exterior point for on-site'residential units_ will - conform... to specific specification that. will reduce volatile organic compounds (VOC). 3. Transportation/Traffic. The project entry will be a "traffic roundabout". According to the MND, `roundabouts are a traffic calming device that reduces speed: However due to the intersecting of Streets "A": and t" af` the roundabout, . a conflict point for vehicles; bicycles, or pedestrians may occur. As a result, the final design, ,development plans, and geomefrics of all on-site streets shall be approved bythe City Engineer and complywith the: City's street standards: 4 -XX. City Council Resolution No. 2007 4. Hazards/Hazardous-Materials: project site `is located directly adjacent to a !`Very, High Fire' Hazard Zone'., Asa result, the applicant is required" to, prepare:' and. submit a. fuel modifcatio6 plan to, the':City and Fire .i. DepartmentJor approval. and comply -with" all :fire codes.:' Additionally, the applicant is required to prepare a construction fire prevention"and`control plan outlining all activities that will occur during, construction, access through the•project site. and, fire safety : and suppression . for, approval by. "the.. Fire'. Department and City. 6 Biological Resources. A biological assessment.acknowledges.that walnut and..oak. woodlands and California black.walnut and oak trees exist at the project site. In recognition of a potentially significant impact :. to biological resources;- mitigation measures that, will reduce the impacts to siggificantly less are as.follows' replacement of. oak and walnut trees ata 3:1 ratio on-site and off-site locations and oak and walnut wood land s'with.a five year monitoring plan funded by the. applicant; on-site grading activities must.occur . prior to April.."2007, or a new biological .survey .,must be conducted to reassess the presence or absence of protected biological resources; information regarding biological resource . must be in the covenant, conditions and restrictions (CC&R's);" landscape plans for .all .common . areas shall incorporate replacement ,species, native drought -tolerant; .non-invasive plant species and `weed prevention and" control; and all constructionand rriaterial.staging activities must be confined within the project boundaries.: "The MDN analyzed impacts, related to the design ofatie"subdivision and improvements related to the project.. Mitigation measures related . to air quality, hazards and. hazardous, materials and traffic will be , incorporated into the- proposed map. Mitigation .measures, are ' summarized forthese environmental issues and discussed above. in Item (h). Additionally,.the project will be required to comply with the following: manufactured slopes will be.designed at a slope ratio of no steeper 2:1,Uniform.Building Code compliance will be required; all grading will be performed under `the observation of a" registered geotechnical engineer; comply with aII . Los: Angeles County .Fire Department code will be required; all property owners will be provided with a disclosurestatement identifying the responsibility of maintaining . the. fuel modification zones as. defined .in the .approved Fuel Modification Plan. As a result, the proposed project's_design or type of 5 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007--11 improvements is not likely to cause serious public health.or safety - problems. ti,. ... .. (j) ` The proposed project also, consists of .relocating an existing` recreational trail .:pursuant . to the City's. Trails Master Plana. , Additionally; the Trails MasterPlan identifies a potential "Class A" trail head in proximity to`the pro�ectsite The,proposed onsitatrail head and pedestrian trail easement is identified on.the map.. The applicant will be required to dedicate to the City an: irrevocable.easement of 20. feetforthe pedestrian trail. The easement will be located on the east side of Street "A" and adjacent to the southern boundary of.the.map At the entranceof the tract in'Lot "A'; a'sign/kiosk will be installed " identifying the trail. :Improvements* for the :trail are set forth as.: conditions of the project. Therefore, the design of.the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public'at large•for access through or use.of, property within the ; proposed subdivision. (k) According to the MND prepared for this project, environmental issues.. related to hydrology and water quality are "less than significant" and discharge sewerage..would not result in violation of existing requirements,:prescribed by the 'California Regional Water Quality Control Board. (1) A.geotechnical report was prepared for this project and reviewed by the `City. The, reportt was approved with .conditions . that _ are incorporated into the project design. Additionally, the MND prepared for this project indicates that with the implementation of these . conditions in combination with: applicable Municipal Code and UBC . requirements and appropriate .engineering practices . will ensure impacts related to geology will be 'less than significant". (m) The'proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan land, use designation of Low Density Residential (RL). It will be graded in compliance with the City's . applicable, hillside management and development standards... The physical size and design of the proposed. subdivision will allow for compliance; with the City's Development Code standards for the construction of detached single .family residences. The proposed map is in compliance with the Subdivision Map Act.and is consistent with the City's Subdivision Ordinance -Title 21. .... . 7. Based on the. findings and conclusions set forth above,. the City Council hereby adopts Mitigated Negative'Declaratioh.No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Reportand Monitoring Program (SCH # 2006071129) and approves VTTM : 54081 subject to the following conditions and Standard Conditions.attached and referenced herein: 6 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX a. GENERAL 1: :void. and of no effect unless the This approval shall be null and . Mitigated Negative: Declaration. No. 2006-03 . (S.CH _ #.20060711.29) and MitigationReport and Monitoring Program ; is.,adopted-and VTT.M N6.5-4081, Zone Change No:2006-02, Planned Development Overlay, Conditional .UsePermit No.,2002-13, Variance .No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13. are approved. This approval. is valid for three .. years. Two exterisipns of, time, one year each, may. be . 'approved'in accordance.to Development Code'Section 22.66 b. SITE'DEVELOPMENT 1 A trail is located `within .the project site. Prjor.to final map approval; applicant shall dedicato to the City an irrevocable.. easement of . 0 feet adjacent to the southern boundary of the map and 10.feet on the east side of Street "A" for the pedestrian.trail. Easement shall be identified on the map, 2. Prior tofinal map approval, applieantshall submit a`detail plan indicating a trail width of 10:feet that is ADA accessible with.a three foot wide planter in front of the wall adjacent to the trail:. The detail plan shall also delineate the following: trail surface of decomposed granite; trail head. located at the end of Street "A and adjacent to the' southern boundary of the map, seatinglbench; trash container; shade; and sign/kiosk'at the entrance of the tract within Lot A.. Prior.to final map approval, the. detail plan of the trail shall be reviewed and approved by,. . the Community Development. Director. Improvements to Lot "A" shall be , completed prior to. final inspection and issuance of the. Certificate of Occupancy of the first house. . 3. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall design the 20 foot trail adjacent to the southern boundary of the map for review and approval of: the Community Development Director. To.: insure the development of this section of the trail,.the applicant. shall submit, a I bond or. cash-deposit..to the City for the . estimated development cost of this section of the trail. The bond or cash deposit shall remain with the City until such time as this section of the trail is developed or the,easement is vacated: 4. Because of the trail. head location, Lots 8 and 9 shall be designed with a : common . driveway. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit a detail plan delineating the 7. - City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2001-11 common driveway.to be reviewed and. approved .by the Community Development Director._ '5...i Retaining walls shall not exceed a maximum exposed height of six feet. Retaining walls located on. the east side of Street "A" and adjacenfto the pedestrian trail easement shall not exceed an exposed height 10 feet 6. Walls withanexposed height of 10 feet•shall be constructed" by using a geo-gridlock and load retaining wall system in earth tone color: Irrigation shall be incorporated into the; retaining wall system with pockets in the wall for, plant material: All other retaining -walls shall be constructed. from split face block with caps of the same material.Plant material shall be;the kind that cascades.down the wall. Prior"to.final map,.applicant shall.. provide a retaining wall plan'delineating the Irrigation and species, guantity'and size of all plant material: within the wall system. For the planter areas between and in .front_ of the walls, trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon sizeand planted . eight feet on center. Shrubs shall be a minimum size of five gallons and planted three feet on center:. Appropriate -vines' shall be planted between the'shrubs.to cover the walls. All landscaping :and irrigation plans. shall. be reviewed.:. and approved by the Community Development Director. 7. Priorto final map approval, applicant shall _submit a detail plan . that includes landscapinghrrigation for the circle entry, into. the. project. Prior to final map approval, the detail plan'shail be reviewed" and approved by the Community Development Director. 8.' All,open "space lots/common lots (Lots "A", "B', "C" and "D") shall remain as open.. space/common lots and shall. be identified on the final map as such granting the City the right to prohibit the erection. of structures and including, any construction activities on any said lot... 9. This project shall. comply with the adopted 'Mitigation " Monitoring Program. 10. Uses permitted in the RL zoning district as listed in the , Development. Code shall. be thel only uses allowed in the RL - PD zoning designationfor the"project site. 11. Oak and walnut trees removed shall be replaced at a.3:1. ration. Dead or dying oa,k`and. .walnut trees removed shall be, replaced at a 1:1 ratio 8 City Council Resolution No, M7 -XX 20D7-.11 12. Prior_ to final map,.. the applicantshall provide a revised,.. landscape. plan for the. PlanningDivision review and approval. that shows. trees,:. shrubs, and...vines m the planter.areas between the retaining walls which are adjacent to the property . lines of the homes on Crooked -Creek Drive:and Brea Canyon Flood Control*Channel.shall The landscape plan, shall show . the>following: ornamental evergreen.trees. at 24, 36 and 48' inch box sizes, planted, 12 feet on -center with, 50 percent at24 inch box,' 25 percent at 36 inch box and•.25 percent at 48 inch box; shrubs in 5 and. 10 gallon sizes, planted 3 feet on center With . 75 .percent at 5.gallon size and 25 percent at 10 gallon size;. and vines in 5 gallon size planted 5 feet on center. 13... Prior to issuance of any construction permits or grubbing of the' site,, whichever comes .first, the applicant,,. shall submit. a construction traffic safety mitigation plan that addresses such items as, but not limited to: lane. closures, truck routes- traffic control. measure$ for the.construction area;. street cleaning, ., etc., for the City's review and Iapproval C., PUBLIC WORK/ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ..Priorto final map approval and in conjunction with the grading plan, .applicant shall submit a detailed .plan showing the location;.: planned depth: and design of the recommended `caisson/tiebacks along with structural calculations,supporting their -design. with.geotechnical input.from_the geotechnical.. . consultant. The:submittal, shall be approved -by `the :Public Works%Engineering Department :and Building and, _Safety. Division prior to .final map. . 2: Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit to the Public Works/Engineering .Department the designof:the..geogrid stablized slope.prepared by a qualified licensed engineer using the:parameters provided.. The design shall be prepared by an engineer_ familiar,with geogrid slope, design and shall be reviewed -arid wet stamped by the develop'er's geotechnical . consultant. The Wet, supporting calculations shall be submitted to the Public Works/Engineering Department and Building and Safety Division for:approval prior to final map.,_ d. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION 1: Prior to, final map approval, applicant shall submit to the Building and Safety Division the design of all retaining walls for review and approval concurrently with the grading plan check.. . _ 9 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007•-11 e. LOS ANG ELE&C.OUNTY FIRE PREVENTION 1 : Access shall comply with' Section 902 of,the Fire Code, which requires all weather access. All .weather, access my require paving:.: . 2 .Fre Department acres§ shall be extended to within 150 feet distance of.any exterior portion of all structures.. 3:. Where driveways extend further than 300 feet and .are of single access design, t0marounds suitable for fire protection equipment use shall be provided, and shown on the final map. Turnarounds shall be designed, constructed and maintained to insure their integrity, for, Fire Department use.: Where aopography dictates; turnarounds shall be ,provided. for driveways that extend :over150 feet in length. 4. ;. Private driveways shall be indicated on .the final map as "Private Driveway and Fire Lane" with the widths clearly. depicted and.shall be maintained in accordance with the Fire Code. 5.. .The property is located, within the area described by the Fire Department a "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone". A "Fuel Modification Plan" shall be submitted and approved prior to final map clearance:, (Contact :Fuel Modification Unit, Fire Station #32; 605 N. Angelino Avenue, Azusa., CA 91702-2904, Phone (626-969-5205, for details.) .... . .6... Applicant shall provide Fire Department or City approved street signs and building access numbers priorto occupancy. 7. Applicant shall provide water mains, fire hydrants and fire flows as required by the County of Los Angeles Fire Department, for all land shown on map which shall be recorded. 8. Fire hydrant shall conform to the :following requirements: (a) " Ihstall three public fire hydrants; (b.) Upgrade/verify one existing public fire:. hydrant; (c.) ' Measure 6" x 4" x 2%" brass or bronze, conforming to curtent AWWA standards C503 or approved equal; (d.) : On site hydrants shall be installed a minimum of 25 feet form a structure or protected by two-hour fire wall' . 10 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX. 200711. :' 9. The required fire flow.:for•public fire Hydrants ofthis.-location shall be `1250 gallons per, minute 20 psi for duration.'"of,two hours; over.and.above maximum daily.domestic demand. One: .hydrant flowing: smultaneously,.rriay be used to achieve the Yequired.fire flow. The City Council shall: (a). , Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and. (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge Estates, LLC, 10365 W. Jefferson'Blvd., Culver City, CA 80232 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20TH DAY OF.FEBRUARY 2007, .BY: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE.CITY OF.DIAMOND BAR.. BY: eve Tye, yor. .` I; Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly. introduced. and adopted by the City Council of'the ."City of Diamond Bar, at a regular . meeting held on'the.20th day of February "2007, by the following;vote:_ . AYES: Council Members: Herrera, MPT/Tanaka, M/Tye' NOES:' Council Members: Chang ABSENT: Council Members: wove ABSTAIW . Council Members: None . STA EOF C?d.IFOKNIA .` .. COUNTY OP LCd),r;�G SES CITY OF L%1.N!O'40 B?1Z L TO?•/ Ifs YEA. CF1B^t7JS, CiT'f CLERK OF Y IE CITY OF DIARfJRD E.�LR, C-0'P(EttBEY CuitTIFY'UND$R - " PENC".LTY OF PF,P, Y UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA T&"F. FORGOM TO BEA - mye Cribbins, City Clerk - FULL, TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE. ORIGINAL, AS SAME APPEARS ON FILE IN MY... City Of Diamond Bar' OFFICE . IN 1VIT111ESS ;z IEREON, I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY D AND AFFIa�4'.D'TI- C[TY OF M SHR, THE.S DAY - OF - TD By .. City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX Council Vacancy_.(Bob Zirbes).. 2007-11-11 (b) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City descendents. The City shall'pro.mptly_nottfythe applicant of any claim, action of proceeding, and shall .cooperate fully to the defense thereof: 2. Applicant shall include signed copies of the Planning Commission Resolution of Approval Nos.,2007-01,,2007-02,2007, 03, Standard Conditions, and. all environmental mitigations shall be', included on. the plans (full size) . The sheet(s) .'are ,.'for informationonly; to .all parties.?involved.. in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. 'Revised plans (such as. but not limited tO site plan, elevations, p. landscape/irrigation plan, grading plan, etc.,). incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning. Division review and approval prior to the plan check. 4. Notwithstanding any previous subsection of the resolution, the Department of Fish and Game requires payment of the fee pursuant to Section 71 1.4of that Fish and; Game Code. Said.paymenf shall be made by the appiicant.to.the city within five days of this approval. 5. The project site shall:be maintained and operated in full. compliance with the . conditions of approval and all laws, .or other applicable regulations.' 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development'. Code, all other applicable City Ordinances,. and any applicable. Specific Plan in effect at the.time of building permit issuance. 7. All site, grading, landscape,. irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading;.tree -removal, .encroachment, building, etc.) or'prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or.approved.use has, commenced, whichever comes first. 8. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced . thereon, all conditions of.approval shall be completed. 13 . FEES/DEPOSITS 1; Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to planning, Building and Safety Divisions, Public: Works/Engineering Department and,. Mitigation Monitoring) at the established rates, prior to.finai map approval, issuance of building.or grading permit (whiclievercomes first), as required by . the City. School fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permit. , - 13 . - City Councli Resolution No. 2007-XX'% In addition, the applicant shall pay all remaining prorated City.project.review , and: :processing fees prior to:the' map's recordatio.n'or issuance of building " permit", whichevef come first i. 2. Prior to.final map approval; the'appiicant shall pay a fee to the City in -lieu of dedication for parkland.pursuantto Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 21.32. . 3., Priortoany.publictiearingorfinalmapapprovai,.alldepositaccountsforthe processing.of.this project shali-have no deficits 4.. Notwithstanding any .previous subsection of the resolution; the Department of Fish and. Game required payment of the fee. pursuant to Section 711 A. of that FiWaind Game Code. Said payment,shall be rnede by the,appiicant f6the citywithin five days of this grant's approval. C. TIME.LIMITS . . this shall not "be.effective.for any purpose until the applicant and " owner of the propertyinvolved have filed within, 15 days of approval of,this " map., at�the .City of .Diamond Bar Community Development Department/ Planning Division an"Affidavit of Acceptanc6.stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all the. conditions -of this approval. 2: In .`accordance. with the. Subdivision :Map Act, Section fi646&5, VTTM No. 54081 is valid fo..r three years.'..,An extension of time may be. requested in writing. and shall. only be considered if submitted to the city no less than 60 days priorto the approval's,expiration date. • Final map approval . will not .be.grant ed unless:the. map is,in substantial compliance with VTTM No, 54081 including all conditions and.the:applicanthas entered into a. subdivision improvement agreement to the satisfaction of the City Attorney.. . D. SITE DEVELOPMENT. - 1 . EVELOPMENT1. The project site shall be. developed iri'*substantial' conformance .with. VTTM No. 54081 .except as conditions .herein; .andas conditioned in Conditional.Use'Permit No. 2002-13, Variance NO: 2006-02 and Tree Permit " No. 200213 submitted to. and recommended: approval by the Planning Commission."to the City Council collectively referenced herein as Exhibit "A" the. subdivision. map, `.Exhibit "B'. - :Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 and .Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program dated July 2006; as modified herein. 2.: The Mitigation Monitoring Program outlined in Mitigated Negative Declaration No_ 2006-03 (SCH # 2006071129) and ..approved by the City shall be, implemented.and complied with rigorously: The mitigation monitoring fees shall be deposited with the City 90 days prior to the issuance of a grading 14 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX' 2007 11 permit. All costs related to the ongoing monitoring shall be secured from the applicant and'received by the City prior to the, approval of:the final map 3. Proposed future custom single-family residential unit's shall comply with the City's Development Review process: 4. A Home:Owners Assoclation.(HOA) shall be,formed. The HOA. shall have Conditions and' Restrictions (CC&IR's) and Articles of Incorporation of the. HOA, are subject to' the. approval of Planning Division and .Public WorkslEngineering Department and the City Attorney. The GC&R's shall be recorded concurrently with the final map or prior to the issuance of any"City permits, which ever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the Gity"Engineer. The HOA shall.submit to the Planning Division".a list of the names and addresses of the officers on or before January 1 of each. and every year and whenever said. information changes.'. 5." Prior to the final map recordation or issuance of building permit, whichever come first., the 'application. shall provide the City with a "Buyer's Awareness, Package.." the City's .review and approval. -The "Buyer's ;Awareness' Package" shall include, but, is. not limited to,'information pertaining to geological issues".regarding. the property, wildlife corridors, oak and walnut.: trees, :natural vegetation preservation issues, maintenance. program .for urban pollutant basins, fuel modification, all mitigation measures within the Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program and Exhibit "A" which delineates each lot's building envelope, explanatory information pertaining to restrictions, on.the. use of properties asnecessary, and similar related. matters. The, . applicant shall give each buyer a copy of the "Buyer's Awareness Package and shall document their receipt of the same in the escrow. instructions"of each lot and document their receipt to"the City. . 6. Applicant, through the "Buyers Awareness Program". shall. segregate green waste for reuse as. specified under the "City's Source Reduction Recycling Element; and County Sanitation District's, waste division policies. . 7. All single-family residential,. units shall be required to obtain Development Review approval. Additionally, single-family residential dwelling "units shall use the following development standards: Front yard.setback minimum 20 feet from front property line; b... Side yard setbacks minimum.five and 10 feet from the from the edge of the buildable pador side.pro"perty lines, whichever is applicable; a. .Distance between single-family residential dwelling.units shall be a minimum 15 feet; d. Rear yard setback 20.feet from the edge of the buildable pad or rear property. line, whichever is applicable; and 15 City Council Resolution No. 2007-xX e' Accessory.. structures shall utilize.setback.distancesfrom the edge,of pad or property line, whichever is applicable and be consistenfwith the. RL/PD zoning district at the time of permit issuance. 8 All `ground-mounted utility. appurtenances such. as transformers, , air conditioning condensers; . etc., shall be located out of public view: and adequately screened'lhrough the use of a combination of concrete or masonrywalls; berms; and/odandscaptng'to the satisfaction of the Planning . Division: 9: Prior to final map approval oc.issuance of building permit, whichever come first,. street names shall, be, submitted.for.City.review. and, approval.. Street names shall not duplicate existing streets"within the City of Diamond Bar "s postal service zi.p code, areas.' 10. House numbering pians.shall be submitted to and approved.bythe City prior to issuance of building permits. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified :in .a clear and concise :manner, including proper illumination. House numbering plans, shall: be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. 11: All lighting fiXtures adjacent to interior property lines sfiall be approved bythe Planning Division as to type, orientation and height. 12. A detailed on-sitwlighting plan,. including a, photometric. diagram, shall, be . reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building'permits. Such.plar'shallindicate style, illumination, location, height,: adversely affect ad and method, of shielding so as not to j• acent properties. . E. LANDSCAPE, PRESERVED AND PROTECTED TREES 1. Prior to final.map.approval,. a detailed landscape/irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted to the.Planning Division for review and approval prior to issuance, of building permits and recordation ofthe map; which ever occurs first. 2. Prior to final map.approval, a fuelmodification`plan for land scape/irrigation. prepared by a registered landscape architect shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval. 3. Prior.to the issuance of a grading permit or the initiation of any activity that involves the removal/disturbance of oak and walnut woodland habitat; the applicant shall develop a detail oak and walnut woodland mitigation plan 'in' aeco.rdance with the.Mitigated Negative Declaration's Mitigation Report and Program and submit the plan to the City for review and approval. Mitigation shall include offsite preservation and. or:restoration at no less than 1:1, acreage ratio. The native trees protected under the City's tree preservation 16 . City Council Resolution No. 2007-XX 2007-1'1 and protection standards require a minimum replacement ratio of 3:1. It is . estimated that.a total of 269 trees will be removed. ,However, ;197.are..oak and walnut.trees have deteriorated to the point .of dying or are dead. The remaining 72 trees (43 oak and 29 walnuts) are considered healthy :and will be removed due to the project's'development. Any off, -site mitigation shall be in accordance with : the requirements and approval :of the' California Departmerit of_Fish and Game;. if in -'lieu fees are used fora part of or all mitigation, this mitiigatiori method` shall also be in accordance with the requirements and approval of the California Department of Fish and Game . and.the.City of Diamond Bar.' . 4. Prior to, the issuance of any permits, the applicant.shall submit. revegetation landscape and irrigation plans for slopes within the project site for Planning Division review and ` approval. Said slope shall be landscaped at the _... completion of grading activities. All slope planting, irrigation and.. revegetation areas shallbe continuously maintained`in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit/lot is sold and occupied by the buyer. Priorto releasing occupancyfoethe unit/lot, an inspectionshall be conducted by the Planning Division` to, determine that the. vegetation is in satisfactory. condition. F. SOLID WASTE 1. The site shall be maintained in a condition, which is free of debris both during and after the construction; addition, or implementation :of the entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be done only by, the property owner, applicant. or a duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide. collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste. from. residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste contractor utilized has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services: 2. Mandatory solid waste disposal ser vices shall be provided by the City franchised waste hauler to.all parcels/lots or uses affected by approval of this pec rojt 3. If no centralized trash. receptacles are provided, all trash pick-ups shall be for individual units with all receptacles shielded from public view. 17 'City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007-11 APPLICANT. SHALL CONTACT .THE` PUBLIC. WORKS/ENGINE'ERING DEPARTMENT;: (909)839-7040, _. FOR .GOMPLIANGE .:.WITH `'THE. FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. A. GENERAL.'; 1. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes physical conditions,. fencing,; and weed control; in 'accordance wrth City Master'Traii drawings,: shall.be submitted for, review and approval orio : ;' approvaland_recordation , of the,FinalTract Map and 'prior to approval of street' improvement and grading plans;' Developer shall upgrade and construct -all trails, including fencing and drainage devices in conjunction with;street improvements. 2: Atitle,report/guarantee showing all fee owners; interest holders, and nature of interest shall be submitted for finai`:map plan checlG'An updated title repon/guarantee and subdivision guarantee shall be"submitted.ten (10) business days prior to final map approval.: 3. A permit from.the Los Angeles County P1abllo Works Department shall be . required for work within. -its right-of-way or connection to its facilities. 4. Any existing easement for open space, utilities; riding and hiking trials shall . be reiocafed and/or grading performed; as'necessar to provide, for the . portion. within the project site; practical access for fhe intended use 5:. Prior to final map approval, written certification that all utility services and any, . other service related to .the site shall be available to serveahe proposed project and shall be submitfed to the City: Such letters shall be.issued by the district, utility and cable television company, within nirnety (90) days prior to• final map approval. 6. Prior to.final map approval, applicant shall submit to the City Engineer the detail cost estimates for bonding purposes of all public improvements. . 7. Prior to final mapapproval, if any public or private improvements required as part of this map have not been completed by applicant and accepted bythe City, applicant shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City and shall post the appropriate security. Prior .to -final map approval all site grading; landscaping, irrigation, street, sewer and storm drain improvement plans shall be 'approved by the City . Engineer, surety shall be posted, and ari agreement executed' guaranteeing completion of all public and private improvements. 1$ City council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007--11 . 9. Prior to issuance. of grading permits, surety shall be posted:. and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all. drainage facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels: to. the.satisfaction of the City Engineer.: 10. Any:details,.lor notes which may be inconsistent with. requirement or ordinances, :general'. conditions or approval, or. City ,policies shaV.be specifically approved in 'other conditions or, ordinance. requirements are . modified to those shown .on the:tentative parcel map upon approval by the Advisory agency. 11 All identified'. geologic. hazards within the vesting :tentative tract :map boundaries which cannot be eliminated asapproved..by the City Engineer shall be indicated on the final map as "Restricted Use Area' subject to geologic hazard. The applicant shall dedicate to the City the right toprohibit the erection of buildings or other structures. within such restricted use areas shown on the final map. 12. Easements for disposal of drainage water onto or over adjacent parcels shall be delineated and shown on the final map, as approved by the City Engineer.: 13. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient street; sewer, and drainage.improvements shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to . assure secondaryaccess, proper outfall for sewers and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City.Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the final map.. 14 Prior to any work performed in the street right-of-way, fees shall be paid and, a construction permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Department in addition to an.y.otherpermits.required. 15. Applicant shall label and delineate on the final map any private drives or fire lanes to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. . . 16. Easements, satisfactory to the City Engineer and the utility companies, for public utility and public services purposes shall be offered and shown on the final map.fordedi.cation-to the City. 17. After the final . map records, , applicant shall submit to. the Public Works/Engineering Department, at no cost to the City, a full size reproducible copy of the recorded map., Final approval of the public improvements shall not be given until the. copy of the -recorded map is received. by the Public Works/Engineering Department: 18.: Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall provide.to the City as built mylars, stamped by appropriate individuals certifying the pian for all improvements at no cost to the City. 1:9 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007-31 19. Applicant shall :contribute funds to a separate engineering trust :deposit against which.charges;.can. be made by: the City or its representative's for services rende"red. Charges shall be; on an hourly baslsand shall include any:Cfty administrative costs 20: "Applicant_ shall provide.. igftized information, in a format defined bythe.:City for all related plans; :at no cost to the.City. . 21. ; .-:All activities/improverrientsproposed for thisVTTMNo. 54081 "shall be,wholly; ,. '.. - contained, within boundaries . of the. 'map... Should . any- off-site .the activities/improvements be required, :approval shall be, obtained fromahe . affected property owner and the City as required, by the City. Engineer. B.:. " GRADING' . . 1.: No grading ocany staging or construction shall be perfo,rmed.:prior o final Pap, approval; by the. City.:Council. and.: map ;recordation:: All pertinent . , improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer priorto final map . approval by the City Council., 2. Retaining wall location shall be* shown on the grading plan and submitted.. .' with a soils report to the Public Works/Engineering,Department for review and approval concurrently..with the.grading plan check. 3. Exterior grading and construction activities :and the transportation of equipment, and materials and operation of heavy grading equipment shall be limited to between the Hours of 7:00 a.m. and.5:00 p.m., "Monday through .. Saturday. Dust generated by grading. and construction activities, shall,be... reduced 'by watering the soii prior'to. and :during the activities. and .in -accorda"nce with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 402 and-: Rule 403. Reclaimed water shall be utilized whenever possible. Additionally, all construction equipment shall be.properly. muffled to reduce noise levels.. 4.. All equipment staging areas shall be located. on .the project site. Staging area, including material stockpiJe.and.equipment .storage area, shall be.. enclosed within' a 6 foot -high chain link fence. All access "points in the defense shall be locked wheneverth'e construction site. is not supervised. 5. Precise _grading plans for each lot, shall be submitted to the Community: Development Department/Planning Division for.approyal priorto issuance'of .. building permits.. (This may be on an incremental or composite basis). 6. Grading of theisubject property shall be in. accordance with the California Building Code, City Grading Ordinance; Hillside. Management Ordinance and acceptable grading practices: 20 . City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX .9n r17-11 .' 7. The maximum grade. of driveways serving building pad'areas shall be 15, percent .lh hillside areas driveway grades" exceeding"10 per..cent shall have parking`land ngs with a minimum 16 feetdeep and shall notexceed five percent grade or as.required by the City'Engineer, Driveways with a slope of 15 percentahall incorporate grooves for traction into the construction as required by the City Engineer: 8: At the.#irne of submittal. of the 40 -scale grading plan for plan check, a. detailed soils and geology report shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval.:. Said report shall be prepared.by a qualified engineer.."and/or geologist. licensed by the, Stateof California.** Prior"to .the issuance of a grading permit, the report shall address," but not'be limited to"the following: a. Stability analyses of daylight sfiear keys with a 1:1 projection from daylight to slide plane; a projection plane shall have a safety factorof b: All soils and geotechnical. constraints (i.e., 'landslides, shear key locations, etc.,) shall be delineated in detailwith, respect to proposed building envelopes. Restricted use areas. and structural setbacks. shall be considered and delineated prior to recordation of the final . map. C. Soil remediation measures shall be. designed for .a "Worst case' geologic interpretation .subject to verification in .the field during grading.. d. The extent of any remedial grading;into natural 4.eas.shall be clearly defined. on the grading plans. e. Areas of potential for debris flow shall be defined and proper remedial. . measures implemented as approved by the City Engineer... f. Gross stability of. all fill.`slopes._shall be analyzed as'part of geotechnical report, including remedial. fill that replaces natural slope. g. .Stability of all proposedslopes shall be -confirmed by analysis as approved by the City Engineer: h. All geologic data including landslides and exploratory excavations must be shown on a consolidated geotechnical map using the 40 scale final grading plon"as'a base: L All geotechnical and soils related findings and recommendations shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance.of any grading permits and recordation of the final map:' 9 Priorto, issuance of grading permits, storm drain improvement plans shall be approved byJhe City Engineer and Los_Angeles County Public,Works Department and. surety . shah be posted .and _ an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all drainage. facilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 21 city Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX : zna�=it Ib- Final::. grading : plans..: shall . be. designed in compliance with the . . recommegdations of.the final.detailed soils. and.engiheeringgenlogy-reports.. All remedial earthwork specified in.the final report shall'be incorporated into . the:`grad'ing plans.. Final: grading. plans, shall be signed and stamped by.a .California registered Civil Engineer registered Geotechnical Engineer.and registered Engineering.Geologist.and approved.bythe City En AStandard :Urban `Stbrmwater Management Plan.(SUSMP) conforming to .: City Ordinance, is required to be:incorporated into the.grading plan. and approved bythe Gity Engineer., The applicant shall incorporate Structural or Treatment Control: Best: Management Practices for storm Water runoff into the grading plans for construction and post-construction :activities respectively_ . 12, All slopes shall be seededper. landscape .pl m and/or fuel modification plan With native, grasses'or planted :with ground cover, shrubs,. and trees for, erosion control upon completion of grading or some other alternative method of erosion control shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and a permanent irrigation system shall be installed. 13.:. An erosion control' plan shall be approved by the City Engineer. Erosion control plans shall be .made in accordanceJo .the City's NPDES requirements. 14.,, Submit a•stockpile plan showing the proposed location for stockpile for grading export materials, and the route .of transport, 15. : Prepare a horizontal control plan°and submit concurrently with the grading plan for review and approval. 16.. Priorto the issuance of Building Permits,.a pre-construction.ineeting must be held at the project site with the grading contractor, applicant, and city grading inspector at least 48 hours prior to commencing grading operations. 17. Rough Grade certifications by project soils engineer.shall be submitted prior to issuance of building permits for the foundations of structures. Retaining. wall permit may be issued without a rough grade certificate. 18... ,Final. Grade certifications byproject soils engineer and civil engineers shall be submitted to the Public. Works/Enginee ring.. Department.prior.to the issuance any project final inspections/certificate of occupancy. c.. DRAINAGE:.` 1: All terrace drains and drainage channelsshall be.constructed in muted earth tones so as, not to.,impart adverse visual impacts_ Terrace drains shall follow 22 . .. City Council Resolution No. 2007 XX_ 2007x11 landform ..slope configuration and shall .not be placed in an,exposed positions. All down drains shall be hidden in swales diagonally or ciacviiinear across a slope face: 2. All 'drainage: improvements necessary for dewatering and protecting the subdivided properties shall be installed pr'iorto issuance`of:bullding permits, for construcfion upon any parcel, that may be.subject todra . inage flows entering, leaving, or within a parcel ,relative to which a building permit is requested:` 3.. All identified flood hazard locations within .the tentative map boundaries which cannot el.iminated;as approved by the City Engineer shall be shown on the final map and delineated as "Flood Hazard Area." 4. Storm drainage facilities shall be constructed within the street right-of-way or in easements satisfactory to the City Engineer and the Los Angeles County Flood Control_ Districts: Ali storm drain facilities plans shall be plan checked by the City and County of Los Angeles and all fees required shall be paid by the applicant.: . 5. A final drainage study and final drainage/storm drain plan in a 24" x 36". sheet format shall be submitted.to.and approved by the City Engineer and. Los Angeles Public Works. Department prior to grading permit. All' drainage facilities shall be designed and constructed as required bythe City Engineer and in accordance with County of Los Angeles Standards. :Private (and. future) easements for storm drain purposea shall be offered,and shown on the final map for dedication to the: City. 6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a, complete hydrologyand.hydraulic . study shall .be prepared by a Civil Engineer registered .in the Stateof California to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Los'Angeles Public . Works Department. 7. A comprehensive maintenance plan/program shall be submitted concurrently with -the storm drain plans to the Public Works/Engineering. Department for. review and. approval by the City Engineer: D.. .STREET IMPROVEMENT 1. The applicant shall replace and record any centerline ties and monuments that are removed as part of this construction with. the Los Angeles County: Public Works Survey Division. 2. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall provide written permission to the satisfaction of the City from any property owners which will be affected by offsite grading. 23 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 21.07=ii ' :3: ,:...Street improvement plans in a 24",:x `36" sheet format, . prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, shall:be submitted to.and.approved. by the,Cty Engineer. Streets shag not exceed a maximum slope of 12:perceri . 4: New street,centerline monuments shall be set at the intersections of two or, more streets,i intersections, of two or more.streets;-intersections.of streets":. with tract,boundanes and to.marKthe beginning and, ending of'curyes.orthe ; . points.of :intersegtion;:of tangents .thereof. 'Survey notes;shoWrig the ties between all monuments. set and four (4) durable reference points for each . shall:be submitted.to the City Engineerfor approval. in accordance with City,:_ Standards; prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.: 5. The design and construction of private, street improvements shall. be set to City.and.County standards and.designed to a design speed of 35 mph: 6: Prior to final map recordation, the applicant shall submit plans delineating the, - ... improvement and extension of Crooked Creek Drive forthe:City's review and .approval. The improvement and extension shall occurwithin the project site boundariesof the .proposed: map., The improvement-and extension of Crooked Creek Drive shall 'be completed prior to final inspection of grading activities. . E.. UTILITIES. 1.. Easements; satisfactory to the City Engineer%end the utility companies, for public utility and.public services purposes shall.be offered and shown on the , detailed site plan for.dedication to the City... 2. Prior .to final map.approval, a water system with appurtenant facilities.to : serve all lots/parcels in the land division designed to the Walnut Valley Water : District(WVWD),specifications shall bepmvided and approved bythe.City'::._ Engineer. The system shall include fire hydrants of the type'arid location as . determined by the. Los Angeles County Fire Department. The,water mains shall be sized to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; WVWD and Fire Department. 3.. Prior: to final, map approval,.-the applicant shall construct or enter into an improvement.agreement with the City guaranteeing :construction of the necessary improvements to the existing water system :according to Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD) specifications to accommodate .the total domestic and fire flows as maybe required bythe City Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department. 4. Prior to final map approval or issuance. of building permit whichever comes first, written certification that all utility services and any other service related . to the,site shall be. available to serve the proposed project and: shall be submitted to the City: Such letters shall be issued by the district, utility and 24 . City Council Resolullon No. N07AX 2oa7-i1 . cable:television company, if applicable, within ninety (90.) days prior issuance of grading .permits 5. Prior to recordation:. of final map, applicant shall provide separate., underground. utility services to each .parcel per Section 21.30 of Title 21 of the`Cify Code; including water, gas, electric power -telephone and cable TV, in accordance with the respective utility company. standards. Easements, required by the utility -companies shaft be approved by the City Engineer,. 6. Applicant shall relocate,and underground any existing on-site. utilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the respective utility owner, . 7. Underground utilities shall.not be constructed within the drip line of any mature tree except as approved 'by a registered arborist. F SEWERS . . 1:: Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit a sanitary sewer area study to the City and County Engineer to verify that capacity is available. in: the sewerage system to be. used .as the outfall for the sewers in this land division. If the system is found to be of insufficient capacity, the.problein shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the CountyEngineer.. ..2.. .: Each dwelling unit shall be served by a separate sewer lateral which shall not. cross any other lot lines. The sanitary sewer system serving the.tract shall be connected to the City or District sewer system. Said system shall be of the.size, grade and depth approved:by.the City Engineer, County Sanitation. . District and Los Angeles County Public Works and surety shall be provided. and an'agreement executed prior to approval of the final map. 3. Applicant' shall obtain connection permit(s) from the City and County Sanitation District pdor.to issuance of building permits. The area within.the tentative map. boundaries shall be annexed into the County. Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District and appropriate easements for all sewer main and trunk lines shall be shown on the final map and offered for dedication on the final map... 4. ;: Applicant, at applicant's sole: cost and expense, shall construct.the:sewer.' system in accordance .with the City,' Los Ahgeles_ County Public Works Division:and County Sanitation District Standards prior to occupancy.: G. TRAFFIC MITIGATIONS 1. All traffic' mitigations shall be implemented and constructed, in accordance .. with the traffic report prepared by Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc: dated . ..October2002 and revised September 2003 and conditions of project 25 - City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX .. for the VTTM. No.54081, prior to' issuance of the certificate .of occu.pa icy.. APPLICANT.SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND:SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Plans shall conform to State and Local Building Code (i.e., 2001 California Building Code; California. Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code; and . the.2001 National Electrical Code) requirements and all.other applicable construction codes; ordinances anTregulations in affect at the time of plan check submittal: 2. Submit Public Works/Engineering Department. approved grading plans showing clearly all finish elevations, drainage, and retaining walls1ocations. 3. All retaining-walls. shall be submitted to the Building &Safety and Public. Work Departments for review and approval. 4. Submit grading plans showing clearly all, finish.elevations, drainage,; and retaining' wall.tocations.. No. building permits shall, be issued _ prior to submitting a.pad certification: : APPLICANT SHALL.CONTACT :THE_'.LOS ANGELES, COUNTY. FIRE PREVENTION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Emergency accessshall be..provided, maintaining free and clear, a.minimum 28 foot. at all times during construction in accordance with Fire'Departrrment requirements:. .2.. Prior: to.the.issuance of any building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire Department that temporary water. supply for fire protection is available pending completion.of.the required fire protection. system. 3. Prior:to recordation,.the.final map shall.comply'with all Fire Department requirements. END 26 _ "City Council Resolution No. 2007-XX, 2007-1i -Y COUNCIL. RESOLUTION. NO. 2007- :12, A RESOLUTION .OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF. THE`CI. .01F "DIAMOND BAR;ADOPTING MITIGATED.NEGATIVL,DECLARATION`NO..200603 . (SCH #2006071"129):AND MITIGATION.,REP.ORT AND.'MON.ITORING.. PROGRAM ANDAPPROVING,MLLSIDEMANAGEMENT'ANDPLANNED .. DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO:... 20.02-: 8, VARIANCE NO: 2002-02 AND TREE:PERMIT NO. 2002-18 FOR; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 54,081, A 1610TRESIDO.NTIAL:: SUBDIVISION, -THE CONSTRUCTION OF RETAINING MALLS THAT ,EXCEED THE. ALLOWED EXPOSEDIIEIGHT ADJACENT.TO A:5 ET AND. THE REMOVAL, REPLACEMENT:AND,PRESERVATION 'OF.OAK AND WALNUT TREES: THE PROJEGTSITE IS LOCATED AT SOUTHERN.. 'TERMINUSOF CROOKED CREEK DRIVE; DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA..., (APN NO: 8714-0.28-003) ; A. ` RECITALS 1. The property owner/applicant,.Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge;'LLC, has filed an. application for Conditlon'aiUse.Perm"it No: 2002-18, "Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01;. Variance No. 2002-02- and Tree Permit No. 2002-14 for Vesting Tentatide Tract.Map No. 54081 as'described in the title of this Resolution: Hereinafterin'th'iis Resolution,:th.,e;sgbject Conditional Use Permit, Planned Development Overlay; Variance and.Tree Permit shall.' be referred to as the "Application." " 2. On January 20,2007, public hearing notices werb-mailed to approximately 209 property owners of record within a 1, R 00.0 -foot radius of the project site.. In accordance with Public esource Code;`Section 21092.5; on January 30, 2007, agencies that responded to ane project's .Mitigated'Negative. Declaration were notified in writing of the February 20, 2007, ".City Council.:.: public hearing, On.January 30,2007; public hearing notices were posted: in. three public places within the City of. Diamond'Bar.and the project site was " posted with a display board.On Fefiruary 1, 2007, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Va!16V:Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. 3.' On February 20, .2007, .the. City Council of. the City of Diamond Bar 'conducted'6 duly noticed public hearing and concluded the public hearing on . . the Application. 1 2007--12 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX . B. RESOLUTION. NOW,.THEREF. ORE, it is found, determined.and.resolved bythe GityCouncil offhe Crry of Diamond Bar. as follows: 1: This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are #rue and correct. 2. The City .Councilhereby ..finds.that the project .identified. above in this: Resolution: required a. Mitigated :Negative .Declaration (MND). .MND . . No 2006-03 (SCH- # 2006071129), has been prepared .according to the ' requirements, of the. California Environmental Quality 'Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 30 day public review period for the ..MND began July; 28,12006,: and ended August 28, 2006.,_ Fuithermore,.the M City Councilhas reviewed the ND and. related docume.hts in reference to the Application. 3. . The City Council hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered:the record as a.whole including the .findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned .: upon the proposed. project set forth in the application, there:is no evidence before this: City Councilthat the project proposed- herein, will have the: potential of an adverse effect on wildlife resources drthe habitat upori which' ' the wildlife depends._ Based. upon substantial evidence, this.City Council' ' '.hereby rebuts:the presumption of adverse'effects contained in.Section 753:5: (d) of Title 14 of the California Code.of Regulations., 4. Based on the:findings and conclusions' set forth herein, this City Council hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to vacant land located at the southem. terminus of ' Crooked Creek Drive, east of.the,SR-57 Freeway, Brea Canyon.Road and: Brea Canyon flood .control channel and. north of the City's, southern boundary. 1t is an .irregular shaped .:hillside parcel 'of approximately 12.9:acres, sloping down to the south' and west:and sloping up to the east.:. . (b) The project site has a General Plan land use designation of .Low Density Residential (RL) Maximum'3 DU/AC. (c) The project site; is within the Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot Size. 10,000 Square Feet (RA -1Q,000) Zone.. However, Zone.Change No.2006-02 within Planning Commission Resolution No. '20,06-43 recommends that the City Council approve the'zone change from. R.-1-10,000 to Low Density, Residential -Planned Development .. (RL=PD) for General Plan compliance, 2 City Council Resolbtlon No, 2007 -XX 2007-12 .. (d) Generally the following zones and. uses surround the -project site: to ..the north and east,is the R-1-9,000 zone and residences; to the west is the.R-1-7;500'zone and: residences;.flood control channel and SR -67. -;.:and to the south is; the A-2-1 zoneand vacant land (e) The Application request includes the following: a.16 lot residential subdivision. -on 12.9",.acres" Mitigated Negative .Declaration and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program; a zone change from R-1- 10,000 to RUPD; grading, and development .in a .hillside. area - r., retaining ,walls adjacent to the .stre* that exceed. the 'allowable exposed height; arid the. removal and. replacement of, oak and walnut . _ .. Conditional Use Permit for Hillside "Management In accordance to Municipal Code. Section 22.22.150, pertaining to:reguired findings :for a Gonditiona1.Ose Permit, for hillside development,`the .Ciiy Council.fnds. as follows: (f) ' The proposed map. is a18 lot residential si6bdivision for the eventual development of 1.6 single homes. The, map approval includes grading.; . the project site to, create buildable pads for each lot, .Streets "A".and "B". within the.map's boundaries .of the _project site with Street "A" as an. extension" of "Crooked .Creek, Drive, the revegetation' of Open Space. Lots "A"; 'B", "C" and .."D'. The proposed project willresulf in changes in the existing topography of the. project site. Grading will create. manufactured slopes at.a 2:1. (horizontal .to.; vertical)ratio utilizing a landform -grading -technique.* As a result, manufactured Slopes will have characteristics resembling slopes created: by nature.':' Round -off cut edges will be utilized to conform to the natural grade. Proper transitioning to natural slopes will be achieved through the use of .irregular curvilinear shapes. that will ,blend into the' adjoining topography. Revegetatiori of the manufactured slope will be applied in patterns which. occur in nature. Downslope drainage devices will be, designed to .,follow the: natural lines of the landform graded manufactured slopes, .or tucked away in special swale "and. berm combinations in orderto conceal the drains.ftom view.. Therefore, the proposed project will provide the appearance of naturaftopographic features by means of;landform: grading so as to blend man-made or manufactured slopes into the natural"topography. (g) The proposed project's located' on an "in fill parcel that is surround by .existing detached single-family'.residences.that have a General,.. . Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential (RL) Maximum .. 3 Du/Ac.T.he .zoning designation as prescribed in Zone Change 3 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 93n n7-7 9 No. 2006-02 for this ,project also requires :maximum 3 Du/Ac` The proposed 16 single-family residential.lots-will vary in size from 5,705; to.,10;506"square"feet; with a majority of the lot sizes between 6;229 to 7,325 square feet which,issmaller than the minimum 10,000 square feet 'which is specifiedin this:zoning district.:. With;the"approved` Planned Development :Overlay: District,. -the proposed project is. consistent :with the goals. and policies; of. the G, eneral Plan and ' standards of the Development .Code. The reason ;for using the., ` Planned Development Overlay District is to 'reduce the square footage of each lot, in order to preserve the open space identified as Lot "C As such, the project has been reduced to16 dwelling unit or a density of 0;81 dwelling units per,acre•and will provide'appmximately 8.89. acres, or 69. percent of the project"site:in open space, which is in compliance with the_General,Plan and proposed-Zone"Change for this project... As such, the proposed project will preserve the open space in Lot (h) MND No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Report and' Monitoring program. (SCH #2006071129) has been`prepared-for this project and :has analyzed, visual "impacts, scenic•. -resources; drainage courses, watershed areas, steep slopes and vernal. pools. According to.the MND, the.project site is not considered a scenic vista, view corridor, or watershed area... Additionally, "the project site does not contain vernal pools, major natural topographic feature, drainage courses or steep slopes. However, the one slope area ,is located on open space Lot "C" which is being preserved. (i) According to the MND prepared for the project site, the project site does not contain prominent landrnark fbatures; significant ridgeline, or natural rock outcropping. However, the projectdoes have protected trees and woodlands: According to the project biological assessment prepared for this project"and discussed in the MND; the proposed project will impact 11.5 acres of mixed Coast Live Oak and California walnut woodland with understory dominated by poison oak.,This woodland acreage is identified by the California Department. of Fish and Game as a sensitive".resource and has a minimum replacement ratio .of 1:1. "A survey; indicates that'a total of 468.oak and walnut trees exist on the project: site. A total of 269 of these trees will be removed due to the proposed' grading. However, 197 oak and. walnut trees had deteriorated to the point of dying or dead. The remaining 72 trees (43 oaks and 29 walnuts) are considered healthy.and recommend for replacement at a 3:1 ratio per the City's Tree Permit requirements. Mitigation will include a combination of on-site. and/or .off-site preservation, enhancement and/or restoration. The applicant :will 4 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX " 2ao7--12 . implement the mitigation plan, as,approved bythe Cityand according, to the guidelines'and.performance standards of the;plan.Therefore, the environmental effect will, be, reduced to "Jess than signlflcarif (j) The- proposed .map will cause the eventual development ,of ' 16. detached single-family.homes. The homes wili be required to comply: with developmentstandardssetforth by conditions of approval within tFiis resolution that relate to setbacks, budding height and the location - of accessory structures. Additionally,.future homes will .be required to obtain appro..vaI through the '.City's. Development. Review process: Cblors and material -will Abe. required to -be compatible with ;other: homes in :the surrounding area. >,rurthermore,1he 'City's Design. Guidelines will also apply to.the. development bf future homes.: Foundation design will b:e required to..comply with the.;California Uniform Building Code. , (k). The proposed project will.cgnfine:development to `adjacent to its . western boundaries and Will leave the majority:ofthe eastern portion and' most of the area adjacent to the southern boundary as open space and is referred to.o.n the map. as.Lot " C Therefore,. a portion Of this area will not be graded. at all.. The remaining area.will use landform,grading and Will revegetatethe _grading. area pursuant to the - MND and. Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program. (I) :At;this.time,'the construction of:resident'ial .units is not.part of the application request. The future development will be required to obtain approval through the City's Development Review process and comply with the .City's. Design .Guidelines and comply: with development standards set forth in this resolution. This process analyzes'buiiding designs, locations, and arrangements;,privacy and protection. . (m) Grading will create manufactured slopes ata 2:1(horizontal to Vertical) ratio utilizing a landform grading technique. As a.result, manufactured. slopes will have characteristics resembling slopes created by nature. Round -off cut edges will.be, utilized to conform to the natural grade. Propertransitioning to natural slopes will be achieved'through the use of irregular curvilinear shapes that. will: blend. into. the adjoining topography. Revegetation of the manufactured slopes wilibe:applied. 'in patterns which occur in nature, thereby minimizing the visual effect of grading.The revegetetion will.be accomplished with suitable plant material requiring minimal cultivation and irrigation in order to thrive, thereby fostering slope stability and minimizing the potential _ for erosion. 2007-12.: 5 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX H !, . -Theutilizationof:street designs -and --improvements which serve to minimize grading,alterations and harmonize with the_natural contours and.character of the hillside.. The proposedproject is located directly at the southern terminus of. Crooked Creek. Drive. The project :proposes two private streets, identified as Streets. "A"' and "B" .with Street "X as an extension of., Crooked Creek Drive and the. only access to the. project site. It is required that the extension:align with the existing section of Crooked Creek Drive.;:All improvements to streets:will be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Conditional Use Permitfor Planned Development Overlay District In, accordance to Municipal Code Section 22.22.150, pertaining to required findings for a Conditional Use Permit for Planned Development Overlay District, the. City Council finds as follows:..' (o) Zone Change 2006-02 will change the. existing zoning from R-1- 10;000 to Low Density Residential (RL) Maximum 3 Du/Ac which is.. consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the: project site. However, the Planned Development Overlay is needed to reduce . the square footage of each lot in -order to preserve the open space. identified as Lot."C". As such, the project has been reduced to 16 dwelling unit `on.12.9 gross acres, or a density of 0.81 dwelling units per acre. With the.Planned Development Overlay lots will be reduced in size and will vary from 5,705 to .1.0,506 square feet, with.a majority . of the lot sizes between. 6,229 to 7,325 square feet. With the proposed lot sizes and: Planned Development Overlay, the future detached single-family residences will still be able to comply with.all required Development Code and Municipal Code standards. (p} The General. Plan land use designation of Low Density "Residential" (RL) Maximum 3 Du/Ac. The proposed project is consistentwith the General Plan. It has a proposed gross density of 0:81 dwelling units per acres, which meets the General Plan land use de'signation.forthe project site. Additionally, the project uses landform grading and retains a .natural area .(open space/Lot "C") by clustering the development mainly, in the western- portion of the project site. Furthermore, the proposed project is using a. Planned Development Overlay that is consistent with the goals and policies.of the General Plan. There is no applicable specific plan that applies to the project. (q) As,discussed.in Finding (g),.(j), (1) and (o) above, the design, location; size and.operating characteristics of the" proposed use, are compatible With the existing and future land uses in the the (r) The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed. including access, "provision of utilities Compatibility with adjoining land uses, and the absence of physical constraints as described, in Findings g);Q),.(I) and: (o) above. (s)" The MND and Mitigation .Report and Monitoring Program reviewed.. issues related to. public interest, _ health, .safety,and improvement .` related to":.this `project.. It was found that the. project will not have a significant effect on these issues. 16 'some .instances. mitigation . measures are incorporated:into the project to ensure that the project's effect on these, issues: will be "lessAhan significant".. Therefore, granting,the:Conditiorial;Use Permit. will not be detrimental to the,. public interest; health,: safety, injurious to persons; property, or Improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which tho.pmperty is located: (t} The, proposed project -has. been reviewed `in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); The.: proposed project required a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND).: MND No:.2o06-03..(SCH. #: 2006071.129) has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Env. 'ironmental Quality. Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. Variance"" In accordance to Municipal Code Section 22.54.040', pertaining to required findings for a Variance, the_City Council finds as: follows: {u) . In accordance:wifh Development Code Section 22.524, amapplication fora Variance:may be. filed and considered in order'to increase retaining, walls heights from •the,allowed six feet depending; on topography constraints: `Developiment Code Section 22.22 requires retaining walk not exceed three feet in exposed height adjacent to a street: Additionally, :retaining walls adjacent to the street shall be. no more than three terraced or stepped walls. The applicant proposes retainingwalls adjacentto Streets "A" and "B" at exposed heights of five and six feet; which do'not exceed three terraced walls. These walls are needed to create a. cut into open streets due to the grade differences space Lot "C" for the .new' between the new streets and. Lot "C". 7 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007--12 " The:Citys Trails Master -Plan delineates -a trail that traverses the projectatte. To create a useable pedestriarrtrail with trail :head that connects. to existing or: planned traiis;1 e trail must be relocated:. Retaining Walls are needed to create the walking trail area adjacentto Street "A taking access from .existing:. Crooked ;Creek Drive. Retaining walls will cut into open space Lot ":C" adjacent to Street "A". The proposed, retaining walls will be set back approximately.ten feet .. more.then as shown on the map. Changing the:location of the walls. Will increase. their. exposed height to approximately ten feet. ;As a result, Variance approval.is required forthe increased height of these proposed retaining walls.' A geo-rid: retaining wall. system with cells for . plant material will be used for all retaining walls. (y) Granting the.` Variance is necessary fior the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other property owners. in.fhe.same vicinity and zoning districts and denied to the: property owner for which the Variance is sought.' As referenced .above in Finding (u), granting the Variance. is, necessaryin order to relocate and.create the pedestrian trail pursuant to the Citp's.Trails Master Plan and the topographical constraints of the project site related to the preservation of open space Lot "C (w) Due to the constraints of.the project site related to topography and an increase in wall heights will allow the applicant to :develop the project . site with buildable pads, trail easement and open space. Therefore, granting the. Variance will. be consistent with the General Plan. The project area does not have a specific plan. Before the issuance of any City .permits; the proposed project is required. to, comply with all conditions.within the approved reisolutions.forthis project, landscaping requirements for screening the walls along with geo-grid wall system and the Building and Safety Division, Public Works Department, and. Fire Deparhent requirements. The referenced agencies through the permit and inspection process will ensure that the proposed project and retaining walls are not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or.improvements.in_the vicinity. Tree Permit In' accordance to Municipal Code Section 22.38.110, pertaining to required findings for a Variaiice, the City Council finds as follows: (x) According to the MND and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program prepared for the project site, focused surveys .were prepared for . 8 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007-12 native. frees. and special status piantsbvegetation: The potential . E of;bhvironmenfal. impacts on biologicalresourceslhas. been assessed: According to: the;project biological assessinent,;the proposed project will impact:11.5 acres of mitred Coast Live Oak and California Wainutwoodland with und.erstory, dominated by poison oak. This woodland: acreage is identified by the. California.Departmenf of Fish `and . Game . as a. sensitive . resource ,and has a minimum replacement ratio.of•1:1:. A survey indicates that a total.of 468 aak . and walnut trees exist on the project..site. A total of 269o f.these trees will be removed due to ihe.proposed grading. However,197 oak and walnut trees..had..detehorated to:i4e. point of dying or dead. The remaining 72`trees (43 oaks and 29 walnuts), are considered healthy and recommend for.replacement at 6,31 ratio per the City's Tree Per mit.i•equireme.hts' Mitigation will,irlclude a combination of on-site and/or`offssite;preservatioh, enhancement,. and/or restoration. The applicant will implement the mitigation plan; es approved by the=City and according to the guidelines and performance standards: of the. plan.... . 5 " . Based on the findings and.conciusions set forth above; the City Council hereby approves Conditional Use...Permit No.. 2002-18. for .hillside .' development and Planned Development Overlay, Variance No:2006-02 and . Tree. Permit No 2002=13 :for VTTM No. 54081 subject to the. following,. conditions and Standard Conditions attached. and referenced. herein; a: GENERAL . ;. ; ... :This approval shall be.null and.void and of no effect unless the Mitigated` Negative, Declaration.'. No. 2006-03 (SCH # 2006071129) and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program is. adopted, and VT -TM No. -54081,. Zone Change No. 2006-02,. Planned . Development . Overlay; Conditional Use .Permit No. 2002-13, Variance : No 2006-02. and : Tree. Permit No. 2002-1.3 are approved. This approval is valid fo.r three" years.. Two extensions of time, one .year, each, may be approved pursuant to Development Code Section 22.66. b.. SITE DEVELOPMENT..' A trail is located: within the project site. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall dedicate to the City an irrevocable._ easementof 20 feet adjacent to the southern boundary of. the . map and 10, feet on the east side of Street "A" for the pedestrian trail. Easement shall be identified on the reap. 9 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007--12 Priorto final map approval, :applicant shall submit a detail plan indicating a trail. width; of 10 feet that is ADA.accessibie with a three foot wide planter .iri, front of the wall'adjacentto the.trail. The detail plan shall also delineate the following; trail surface of decomposed granite;.trail head located at the end of..Street ' ,,A,, and adjacent to the southern .boundary of.:the map; seating/bench; trash container, shade; and sign/kiosk at the entrance of the tract within LotA. Prior to final map approval,. the detail plan of the trail shall be reviewed and approved by. the Community Development Direct6c7mprovements to Lot "A". . shall be completed.priorto final inspection and issuance ofthe Certificate of Occupancy of the, first house. 3: Prior to final map .approval,. applicant _shall design the 20 foot trail adjacent to the southern boundary of the map for review and .approval`of the. Community Development Director. To insure the development of this section of the trail, the applicant shall siibmit`a `bond or cash deposit to`the.City for the estimated development cost of this section of the trail.. The bond or cash deposit shall remain with the City until such time as this section of:the trail is developed or.the easement. is. . vacated... 4. Because: ofthe trail head location; Lots 8 and.9 shall be designed. with a common driveway. Prior to final map ' approval, applicant shall submit.a detail. plan delineating the common driveway to be : reviewed: and approved by the Community Development Director. 5. Retaining walls shall not exceed a maximum exposed height of six feet.. Retaining walls locatedonthe east side of Street"A" and adjacenttcthe pedestrian. trail easement shall not exceed an exposed height of 10 feet_. 6. Walls with an exposed height of ten feet shall be constructed by using a goo -grid lock and load retaining wall system in earth tone color. Irrigation. shall .be incorporated into the retaining wall.system with pockets in the wall for plant material. All other retaining walls shall be constructed from split face block with. caps of the same material. Plant material shall be the kind that. cascades down. the. wall. Prior to final. map, _applicant shall provide a .retaining wall. plan delineating the irrigation and species, quantity and size of all plant material within the wall system. For. the planter areas between and in front of the - walls; trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size and planted 10 - : - - City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007-12 eight feet on center: Shrubs shall be a minimum size of five gallons and, planted three #eet :on :center. Appropriate vines. sfiall. be Planted between the shrubs to .cover: the: walls.. All. landscaping and:.irrigation..plans..:shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. 7. Prior to final map approval, applicant shalt submit a detail plan that inclUdes.landscaping/irrigation forthe circle entryinto.the. project. Poor to final map: approval, the detail plan shall be reviewed: and `,approved .by.the.Cominunity-Development.: Director. 8 All open space lots/common lots (Lots "A", B., "C., and D .shall remain .as open space. common. lots ;and shall: be identified on thefinal map as such granting the Cityfhe rightto prohibit the'. erection ;.. of . structures. and including. any, construction activities on ':any said lot:. 9. This `project shall comply ,with the :adopted Mitigation • Monitoring Program:;: - 10. Uses:.permitted. in, the,.RL.zoning district as listed in the Development Codeshall be the only uses allowed in the. RL - PD zoning designation for -the project site... 1 T'. Oak and walnut trees removed, shall be replaced at a 3::1 ration, :Dead or dying oak and walnut trees, removed shall be replaced at a;1:1 ratio :. 12. Prior .to final map, the applicant shall provide: a revised landscape plan for the Planning Division review and approval that shows trees, shrubs and vines in the .planter areas :between the retainingwalls which are adjacent to the. property lines of the homes on:Grooked Creek Drive and Brea Canyon Flood Control Channel shall . The landscape plan shall show the following: ornamental evergreen trees at 24, 36 and 4.8 inch box sizes, planted 12 feet on center with 50 percent at 24 inch box, 25 percent at 36 inch box and 25, percent at 48 inch box; shrubs in 5 and 1.0 gallon sizes, planted 3 feet on.center with.75:percent at 5 gallon size and 25 percent at 10 gallon size;:and.yines in 5 gallon size planted 5 feet on center. 13. Prior to issuance of any permits or. grubbing of the site, . whichever comes first; the applicant shall submit a construction traffic safety mitigation. plan that,addresses such items as, but not limited to:: lane closures,. truck routes, traffic control 11 . City CoUndl Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007-12 measures for the construction area, street cleaning, etc: forthe.., ..::City's review and -approval.' C. 7P ggL IG�1tYGORC�I�ENG$tN ERII O EPAC�rTIUIV 1.. Prior to final map approval and in coniunction with the grading . plan;!.:applicant• shall submit a'detailed plan showing .the location; planned depth and design. of the. recommended :. caisson/tiebacks along with "structural calculations supporting their:design with: geotechnical: input from the geotechnical consultant: The submittal shall be approved by the Public Works/Engineering Department and Building and Safety Division prior to final map: 2. Prior to final map approval. applicant shall submit to the Public Works/Engineering Department the: design of the geogrid- stablized slope prepared by a qualified licensed engineer using. the parameters provided. The design shall be prepared by.an engineer familiar with geogrid slope" design. and shall be , reviewed and wet stamped by the developers geotechnical consultant.. The design and supporting calculations shall be submitted to the Public Works/Engineering Department and Building and Safety Division for approval prior to final map. d. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION -11. Prior,"to final map approval, applicant shall submit to the Building and Safety Division the design of all retaining walls -for review and approval concurrently with the grading plan check. e.. LOS"ANGELES COUNTY FIRE PREVENTION 1. Access shall comply with Section 902 of the Fire"Code, which . requires all weather. access. All weather access my require paving. 2. Fire Department access shall be extended to within 150: feet distance of any exterior portion of all.structures. 3. Where driveways extend further than 300 feet and are of l: single access design, tumarounds suitable for fire protection. equipment use shall be provided and shown.on the final map. Turnarounds shall be designed, constructed and maintained to. insure their integrity for_ Fire Department use. Where. #opography dictates,, turnarounds shall . be provided....for driveways that extend overl50 feet in length. City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 4... Private.:.driveways shal,I be. in .on the :final map. as "Private Driveway and Fire Lane": with the .widths clearly; depicfed and shall be maintained in accordance with the Fire Code. 5. The propt.erty, is located within'the, area. described: by the Fire Department a IV' Hlgh Fire Hazard Severity,Zone A "Fuel Modification. Plan":sha.11 be submitted and approved prior -to .. final map clearance:'. (Contact Fuel ;Modification Unit, Fire. Station #32;605 N..Angelino Avenue, Azusa, CA 91702-2904, . Phone (626-969-5206; for -details.) 6. Applicant shall provide Fire Department or City street signs and building access numbers prior to occupancy. 7. Applicant'shall provide water mains; fire hydrants and fire flows as required, by the County ofios Angeles Fire Department, for all land shown on map which.shalf be recorded. 8. Fire hydrant shall ponform.to the following.re,quirements: . (a.) Install three public. fire hydrants; b (b.) Upgrade/verify one existing public fire hydrant; (a) Measure 6" x .4" x 2'/Z brass.or bronze, conforming to, current AWWA standards C503 br approved equal; (d.) On site hydrants shell.be. installed a minimum.of 25 feet form a structure or protected by.two hour fire wall' 9i. The required fire flow for public fire hydrants:.at this location shall be 1250 gallons per minute at.20 psi forduration of two hours, over and. above maximum dailydomesticdemand. One . hydrant flowing simultaneously;, may be used to achieve the. required fire ow. • .. . The.City Council shall: (a) Certify to the adoption, of this Resolution; and. (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: Daniel.Singh, Jewel Ridge Estates, LLC, .10365 W. Jefferson Blvd., Culver City, CA 90232 13 City Council Resolution. No. 2007 -XX 2007-12 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2007; BY . THE CITY COUNCIL'OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY: Steve,Tye, ayor. I ' l; Tonimye Cribb'ins, City'Clerk, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was " duly introduced, passed;.and adopted by_the City Council, of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular rrieeting of.the:City Council held on the 20th day of February 2007, .: by the following vote: AYES: Council Members: Herrera; MPT/Tanaka, X/Tye NOES: Council Members: alone ABSENT: Council Members: Noone ABSTAIN: Council Members: None T nfm e Cribbins, Cit Clerk .. Y Y �n;^.`i",r ,c.Cw:':�i.,'•��'� =.yYY =L:?IY CF'T_sB? . STfu^r. OVC. L:P-� � . 0E FMGOCn:^, TO WEE. A .FULL, TRUE AND CORRECT 03PY..-OFTHE . ORIGaU.F. AS SANE APPEARS ON FILE R MY . .OFFICE. ... IN WITNESS WrIERBON, I4-IAVE HEV UNTO SET Pi� .. A4Y D AND FiXED�ITi-IC CITY DOF FD 0 BP S l2 DAY ' . .. TO _ A CRIBB7IN$C _. BY 14 City -Council Resolution No, 2007 -XX 2007-12 I y COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. DEPARTMENT' ' M1YAOPoNFF� .. '. I _ .. USE PERMI"fS, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL:. NEW. AND REMODELED. STRUCTURES PROJECT M. . .VTTM No. 54081 MND No. 2006-03 ZC 2006-02 Planned Development Over CUP 2002-18 VAR -2002-02 and TP No.. 2002-13" SUBJECT: Sixteen lot residential subdivision APLICANT:. Daniel Singh Jewel Ridge LLC' LOCATION: Southern Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive " ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO''YOUR PROJECT APP"LICANT.SHALL. CONTACT THE PLANNING, .DIVISION AT',(909) 839-..`.. ' 7030, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1: In accordance with .Government Code Section 66474.9(b) (1), the applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and its officers, agents . arid' employees, from any:claim, action; or proceeding.tp.:attack, set-aside; void or annul, .the approval of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 brought within.the time period provided by Government Code. Section 66499.37. In the event the city and/or its officers, agents and employees are made a paity of any suchactlow. (a) Applicant shall.provide.a defense'to.the City•defendants or at the :City's option reimburse. the: City its costs of defense, including " reasonable attorneys fees, incurred in defense of such claims. 15' City Council Resolution No. 2007-xx 2007--12 ;Applicantshall promptly pay.any final judgment rendered against the . Gity:descendents: The City shall promptly notify the'applicant :of -any claim; action of proceeding, and shall cooperatefully in the`defe.nse thereof. 2. Applicant shall include signed copies of:the PianningCommissio.n Resolution of Appr..oval;Nos. 2007-0.1; 2007-02, 2007-03, Standard Conditions, and all environm.entai"mitigations shall be "included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are. for 'information only to all parties : involved ."in the construction/grading activities and are -not required to be wet sealed/stamped .. by a licensed"Engineer/Architect 3. Revised .plans (such "as but not limited :to . site plan, elevations," . land scapehrogation plan, grading.plan,.etc.,) incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Division "review and approval prior to the, plan check. 4. Notwithstanding any previous: subsection of the resolution,"the Department of Fish and Game requires payment of the, fee pursuant to Section. 711.4 of that* " Fish; and Game Code'..Said .payment shall be made by the applicant to the city within five:days of this approval.. 5. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance with the conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable regulations.• 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and any applicable Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement pians shall be coordinated for: consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.;) or prior to final map approval in.the case of.a custom, lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 8. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced "thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed.' B. FEES/DEPOSITS 1. Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to Planning, Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works/Engineering Department and Mitigation, Monitoring) at the established rates, prior to final map approval, " issuance of building or grading permit (whichever comes. first), as'required by the City. 1School fees shall be paid prior to the. issuance of building permit. In addition, the applicant shall pay all remaining prorated City project review 16 ,City Council Resalurien No. 2007 -XX 2007®32 and processing: fees prior to: -the map's.recordation orissuance of building .permit,Wbichevercome,first .: 2: Prii:606 final niap'approval, the applicant,shall-pay a fee to.the City in -lieu of dedication for -parkland pursuanfto Subdivision Ord. inance,Chapter 21.32:: 3. Prior to any public hearing or final"map approval; -all deposit accounts for the processing of this project shall have.. no;deficits: 4. ' Notwithstanding any previous subsection.ofthe resolution, the -Departmentof .: Fish and Game required payment of the fee pursuantto Section 711:4 of that Fish and,:Game Code* Said payment shall be made by the. applicant to the: city withinfive days of this grant's approval: G.' TIME LIMITS'. 1. This approval shall not be, effective -for any purpose until the.applicant and '-owner of the ,property involved have filed -within 15 days; of approval, of this . . map.,.at-the"C.ity of Diamond Bar Community.Development.Department/ . Planning. Division an Affidavit of Acceptance stating that they are:aware of and agree to accept all the conditions of this approval. 2. In ..accordance with the Subdivision Map Act; . Section 66463.5,:.VTTM. No. 54081 is valid .for three years., An extension of time"m.ay.be requested in writing and shall only be.considered if submitted to the city no less than_60 . days prior to the approval's expiration date.. Final map approval will not be. granted unless the.map is in substantial compliancewith,VTTM.No. 54081 includin. g" all, conditions and the applicant..has entered into a ,subdivision. improvement agreement.to the satisfaction ofthe City Attorney.. D. 'SITE DEVELOPMENT 1. The project. site. shall be developed insubstantial conformancewith.VTTM ; No. 54081 except as -conditions herein, and as conditioned in Conditional Use Permit .No. 2002-13; 'Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree" .Permit . No. 2002-13 submitted to and recommended approval by the Planning Commission to the Cimcity Council. collectively referenced herein -as Exhibit °A"" - the subdivision ap. Exhibit. 'W Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program dated July 2006, as modified herein.. 2. The' Mitigation Monitoring Program outlined in Mitigated Negative Declaration ` No. 2006-03 (SCH`# 2006071129)' and approved by the City shall bu. implemented and complied with"rigorously. The mitigation monitoring fees " shall be deposited with the City 90 days prior. to the issuance of a grading 17 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007--12' permit. All costs related to the ongoing.monitoring shall be secured from the applicant :and received by the:City prior:to-the- approval -ofthe final.map. 3. Proposed future.custorri single-family residential units. shall comply with the. City' s Deve'lopmenf Review process: 4. _ A Home owner's Association (HOA) shall be formed..The HOA shall have Conditions.and Restrictions (CC&R's) and`Articles of.inoor06ration of the HOAare' subject: to. ,the .approval of Planning Division and. Public 1NorkslEngirieering Department and the City.Attorney. The CC&R's shall be recorded concurrently with the final map orprior to.the issuance of any City permits, which 'ever occurs .first. A recorded copy shall be provided. to the City ,Engineer. The HOA shall submit to the Planning Division a list of the n-ames and addresses of the officers on or before January 1 of each and., every year and whenever said information changes. 5. Prior to the final map recordation or issuance of building permit, whichever . come first,'the application shall provide the City: with _a "Buyer's Awareness Package.:" for the':City's.review and approval. The "Buyer's Awareness Package", shall_ include, but is not limited .to, information pertaining to geological issues regarding the property. wildlife corridors;.oak.and walnut tree's, natural .vegetation preservation issues,. maintenance program for urban, pollutant basins, fuel.modification; all mitigation measures within the Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program and. Exhibit"A"which delineates each lot's building envelope; explanatory information pertaining to restrictions . on the .use of properties as necessary, and similar related matters.. The applicant shall give each buyer a'copy of the "Buyers Awareness Package" . and shall document their receipt of the, same in.the escrow instructions of each lot and document their receipt to the.. City. 6. Applicant, through the "Buyer's Awareness Program" shall segregate green waste for reuse as specified under:the City's Source Reduction Recycling Element, and.County Sanitation District's waste.division policies. ' 7. All single-family residential units shall be required to obtain Development Review approval.. Additionally, single-family residential dwelling units shall use the following development standards: a. Front yard setback minimum 20 feet from front property line; b. Side yard setbacks minimum five and 10 feet.from the from the edge of the buildable pad: or side property lines, whichever is applicable; c. Distance. between single-family residential dwelling units shall be a minimum 15 feet; d. Rear yard setback 20 feet from the edge of the.buiidable pad or -rear property .line, whichever is applicable; and 1$ City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007-32 e:_ ::.:: Accessory structures shall'utilize.setback distances from the edge of:. pad orproperty, line whichever is, applicable and be consistent with the ... RL/PD zoning district at.the time of permitissuance. . 8. All `ground -mounted utility appurtenances such as, transformers, . air conditioning condensers; etc.; shall, ,be- located out of public .view, and adequatelyscreened through jhe Use, of a combination' of concrete or:. masonrywalls,berms, and/or landscaping.to the satisfaction of.the Planning Division , 9. Prior.to final "map approval or issuance of building permit, whichever come first, street names shall be submitted for City review and approval. Street names, shall not duplicate existing streets within the City of Diamond. Bar's; postal service zip code areas: 10. :'House numbering plans shall be submitted to and approved bythe City prior to issuance.of building permits: All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a'clear and concise :manner, 'including proper illumination.. , House numbering plans shall be. submitted to and .approved by the. ity Engineer prior to issuance of -building permits, 11. All lighting fixtures adjacent to interior property lines shall be approved bythe Planning Division as to type, orientation and height. 12. A detailed, on-site lighting plan, including a. photometric diagram,. shall be reviewed' and approved by the. Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height,. and'method of shielding.so as not to adversely;affect adjacent properties-... , E. 'LANDSCAPE, PRESERVED AND PROTECTED TREES. . 1: 'P.riorto final map approval, a detailed landscape/irrigation plans shall, be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted to.the Planning Division.for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits and recordation of the map, which ever occurs first.. . .2. Priorto final map approval, a fuel. modification plan for landscape/irrigation prepared by a registered landscape architect shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval. 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit orthe. initiation of any activity that involves the removal/disturbance of oak and walnut woodland habitat; the applicant shall develop a detail oak and walnut woodland mitigation plan.in .' accordance with the Mitigated Negative Declaration's Mitigation Report and Program and submit.the plan to the City for review and approval. Mitigation- shall itigationshall include offsite preservation and or restoration at no less than 1:1' , acreage ratio. The native trees protected under the City's tree preservation 19: City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007-12*: . and protectionstandards require a minimum replacement ratio of 3:1 It: is estimated that aaotal of.269 trees will be, removed. However, .197 are, oak and walnut trees have deteriorated to the point:of"dying or are dead The remaining 72 trees (43 oak and 29 walnuts) are considered healthy and will.. .:be. removed. due to the project's development. Any off-site mitigation shall be in .. accordance with the requirements and :approval ; of the., California Department of .Fish and.Game.. If in -lieu fees are used for apart of or all mitigation, .this mitigation 'method shall also be in accordance with .the requirements and approval of the California Department of Fish and. Game and the City of Diamond. Bar. 4.. Prior to the, issuance of -any permits, the appliG, i shall submit revegetation landscape and irrigation plans for slopes within the project site for Planning . Division. review and approval. Said slope shall be .landscaped at the completion of grading activities. Ail slope planting, irrigation and revegetation areas shall be continuously. maintained in a heatthyand thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit/Jot is sold and occupied bythe buyer. . Prior to releasing occupancy.for the uniVIot; an .inspection, shall be. conducted by the Planning Division to determine that the vegetation is in satisfactory condition. F: SOLID WASTE 1. The site shall be maintained in a condition, which is free of debris both.during ..and after the. construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlement . granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be done only by the property owner, applicant'or by a duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste contractor utilized has obtained .permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. 2. Mandatory solid waste disposal services shall be provided by the City. franchised waste haulerto all parcels/lots or uses affected:by approval of this project: .3. If no centralized trash.receptades are provided, all trash pick-ups shall be for individual units .with all receptacles shielded from. public view. 20 Pity Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX- . 2007-12 APPLICANT "SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC ,:WORKSLENGINEERIIVG DEPARTMENT; {909) 83944.6,. FOR COMPLIANCE "WITH . :THE , , FOC LOWING CONDITIONS:.' A.. -GENERAL':'.....: A detailed pIan :indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, "physical conditions, fencing, and weed control, jn accordance with City .Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for review and approval priorto approval and recordation of the Hnal.Tract Map and prior to approval, of street improyement:and, , grading. plans. .Developer shall upgrade, and construct all trails; including .fencing and drainage' devices, in conjunction with street.improvements-. 2; .. ;A title repgrt/guarantee showing all fee owners, interest holders;, and nature . . of interest".sha.11 be submitted 'for final: map plan check.,An, updated -title report/guarantee and:. subdivision guarantee shall :be submitted ten (10) business days priorto.,final map approval;, 3. . " A ,permit from the Los Angeles County Public Works Department shall be required,forwork:within.its right-of-way or connection.t6 its facilities: Any :existing easement for open space, utilities, riding and.hiking trials shall be. relocated and/or grading:,performed, as, necessary.', to provide, for the portion within the proiectsite, practical access for the intended use. 5. Priorto final map approval,.written certification that all utility services and any other service related to the. site shall be available'to.serve the. proposed. . project and shall be, submitted to the City.. Such letters shall be issued by the district, utility and cable television.company, within ninety (90) days prior to final map approval. " B. Prior tofinal.map approval, applicant .shall submit to the City Engineer the . detail cost estimatesfor bonding purposes of. all public improvements., 7.: Prior to final, map "approval, if any public or private improvements required.as_ part.of this map have not been completed by applicant and accepted by the City, applicant shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City and shall post the appropriate security, 8. Priorto final map approval all site grading;,landscaping, irrigation, street,, sewer and storrri drain improvement plans :shall be approved by the City Engineer;.surety shall be posted, and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all public and private improvements. 21 " . ... City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007--i2 9.: Prior to' issuance. of grading permits., . surety -shall. be posted andan agreement ,executed- guaranteeing completion.. of all drainage.fa.cilities l necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of.the City. Engineer. 10. Any, details or; notes which may be inconsistent with requirement or ordinances,; general conditions or .approval, or, City. `policies -shall be specifically approved in other conditions. or ordinance requirements are modified to those shown on the. tentative. parcel map upon approval by.the Advisory. agency. . 11. All identified .geologic ,hazards within .the vesting ,tentative tract . map boundaries which cannot be eliminated as approved by the CityEngineer shall be indicated on the final map as "Restricted Use Area" subject to geologic hazard.. The applicant shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit the erection of buildings or other structures within such. restricted use, areas shownon'the. finalmap. 12.. Easements for disposal of drainage water onto:or,over adjacent parcels shall be delineated and shown on the final map, as approved by the City Engineer.: 13.. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient street, sewer, and :drainage improvements shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondary access, proper outfall for sewers arid drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. ,Phase boundaries shall correspond to .lot linesshown on the final map: ` .14. Priorto anywork_performed in the street right,. f -way, fees shall be paid and a construction permifshall be obtained from the Public Works Department in addition to any other permits required. 15. Applicant shall label and delineate on the final map any private drives or fire .lanes to the. satisfaction of the City Engineer. 16. Easements, satisfactory to the City Engineer and the utility companies, for public utility and public services purposes shall be offered and shown on the final.. map fordedication to the City 17. After the final map records,.. applicant shall submit .to the Public Works/Engineering Department, at no cost to the City; a full size reproducible copy of the recorded map. Final approval of the public improvements shall not, be given until the copy of the_ .recorded map .is':received by the Public Works/Engineering Department. 18. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall provide to the :City as built myiars,. . stamp ed.by appropriate individuals certifying the plainforimprovements at no cost to the City. 22 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007-12 2007912. Applicant shall contribute. funds;to...a separate engineering trust deposit against which .charges: can be made by the.:City or its'ie4resentatives for . services rendered.'Charges shall be on an.hourly.basis and shall include . any City administrative:costs. . 20.. Applicantshallprovide digitized information in a format defined by the: City . fo.r:all related plans, at no cost to;tii.e City. All acti4ities/improvements.proposed forthis VTTM.No*:5408i shall bewholly' contained within -the,. boundaries of the. map. Should .any off-site activities /improvements be required, .approval shall be obtained: from the. affected-property owner and the City'as required byth.e:City Engineer:. , B. GRADING ., 1. . No grading'or anystaging or construction shall be performed prior.to final map.:approval by. the City Council and map recordation. ' All pertinent improvement plans shall be approved_by the City Engineer prior to final map approval bythe City Council. Retaining wall location shall be shownon the grading plan and submitted with`a soils report to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review. and approval concurrently with the.grading plan check.: . 3. Exterior grading.: a.nd construction activities and the transportation of equipment and materials and operation of heavy grading equipment shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a:m._and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, Dust generated`by grading and. construction. activities shall be reduced.. by .watering the., soil. prior, to and during the .activities and :in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 402 and . Rule 403. water shall be utilized. whenever possible. Additionally, ,Reclaimed all construction equipment shall be properly muffled to7educe noise levels, 4. All equipment staging areas shall be located on the project site. Staging : area, including material stockpile and equipment. storage. area," shall' be enclosed within a•6 foot-high chain. link fence. All access points in the defense shall-be locked whenever the construction site is not supervised.. 5.: Precise grading plans for each. lot shall be submitted to .the Community Development Department/Planning Division for.approval priorto issuance.of building permits. (This may be on an.incremental or composite basis). 6...i Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California Building Code; City Grading Ordinance; Hillside Management Ordinance and acceptable grading practices. 23 City Council Resolution No. 2007-XX 2007912. 7.., The maximum grade of driveways serving. building pad areas shall be 15 percent. In hillside areas driveway grades. -exceeding 10 percent shall have parking landings with. a`minirnum 16 feet'deep and shall not exceed five.(5) percent grade or as required by the City Engineer: Driveways'with a slope of 15, percent shall incorporate grooves for -traction into the construction as - required by the City Engineer. & At the time of submittal of the 40 -scale grading plan for plan check, .a detailed soils and,geology report shall be.submitted to the City Engineer for... . approval. ,Said report shall be prepared by _a qualified .engineer and/or geologist licensed by the State df California. .Prior to the issuance of a: grading permit,'the report shall address, but not be limited to tfie following:. a. Stability analyses of daylight shear keys with a 1:1 projection from daylight to slide plane; a projection plane shall have a safetyfactorof 1.5`. b. All soils and geotechnical constraints (Le.; .landslides, shear key locations, etc:,) shall be delineated in detail with respect to proposed building envelopes. .Restricted use areas and structural setbacks shall.be considered and delineated prior to recordation of the final map. c.. Soil remediation measures shall. be .designed for a "worst case' geologic interpretation subject to .verification in the field during. grading.... d. The extent of any remedial grading into natural areas'shall bei clearly defined on the grading plans. e. Areas of potential for debris flow shall be defined and proper remedial measures implemented as approved by the City Engineer. J. Gross ;stability'd all. fill slopes shall be analyzed as 'part of geotechnical report,'Including remedial fill that replaces natural slope. g. Stability of all proposed. slopes shall be confirmed.by analysis as approved by the City Engineer, ` h. All geologic data including landslides and ,exploratory excavations must be shown on a consolidated geotechnical map using the.40 scale final grading plan as a base: L. All geotechnical and soils related findings and recommendations shall. ` be .reviewed and approved. by the City Engineer..pdor to issuance of any. grading permits and recordation of the final map. 9. Prior to issuance of grading permits, storm drain improvement plans shall be approved by. the City Engineer and Los Angeles County Public Works Department :and. surety shall be posted and an agreement executed. guaranteeing ;completion of all drainage facilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer: .24 City Council Resolution No: 2007 -XX 10: Final. grading:; plans shall be ... designed, in. compliance . with .the recommendations of the final detailed. oils.and engneering,geologyreports. . All.rerriedial earthwork specified inthe fnal,report;shall be incorporated into the.grading plans.:Final:grading plans shall be signed and stamped by. a' califomla'registered Civil Engineer, registered GeotechnicalEngineer and registered Engineering Geologist and approved bythe,City Engineer.. 11.. A Standard. Urban Stormwater..,Management Plan (SUSMP) conforming to city Ordinance is required to. be incorporated into the grading..plan and approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall incorporate Structural or. ' Treatment: Control Best.Management Practices .for storm water runoff into the Ora din plans'..for :constraction:...and :p. construction activities. respectively. 12. ' All slopes shall tie seeded per landscape plan.and/or fuel modification pian . with native, grasses or :planted :with, ground cover; shrubs; and :trees for "erosion control upon completion of grading or some other alternative method . of erosion control shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer: and.a permanent irrigation system shall, be installed; 13: An erosion control plah shall be approved by the City Engineer.: Erosion . control plans shall be made in accordance to the., City's NPDES requirements.,_ 14. Submit a stockpile plan showing the proposed location for stockpile for grading export.materials,l and'the. route: of transport:. 15. Prepare.a horizontal control plan and submit concurrently with the grading plan for review and approval.' 16: Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, apre-construction meeting must be held at the project site with the grading contractor, applicant; and city grading inspector at least 48.hours prior to commencing grading operations. 17. ' Rough Grade.certifications by project soils engineershall be submitted. prior to issuance.of building.permits for the foundations of structures: Retaining wall permit may be issued without a rough grade certificate. 18. Final Grade certifications by project soils engineer and civil engineers shall be submitted to the Public Works/Engineering Deparfinent priorto.the issuance of any.project.firial inspections/certificate.of occupancy. C. DRAINAGE 1. All terrace drains and drainage channels shall be constructed in muted earth tones so as'notto impart adverse visual. impacts.. Terrace drains shall follow 25 . - - City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX . 2007-32 landform slope configuration and shall. not.. be placed in an exposed positions.:All down drains -shall be hidden in swales diagonally or curvilinear' a6ross,a slope face: " 2: All drainage improvements riecessary, for dewatering :and protecting the subdivided properties shall be installed,priorto issuance of building permits, for construction: upon any -parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving; or within a parcel relative to which a building permit is requested, 3. AL1' identified food hazard locations within the tentative map boundaries which cannot be,eliminafed as approved by the City Engineer shall be shown. on the final map and delineated as "Flood Hazard Area:' 4. Storm drainage facilities shall be constructed within�the street right-of-way or in easements satisfactory to the.City Engineer and_the Los Angeles County Flood Control Districts.' All storm drain facilities plans shall be plan checked by the City and County of Los Angeles and all fees required shall be paid by the applicant.. 5. A final drainage study and final drainage/storm drain plan in a 24!'k 36." sheet . format shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer and Los Angeles ,Public Works Department prior to grading permit. All drainage facilities shall be designed and constructed -as required by the City Engineer and in accordance"with County of Los Angeles Standards. Private (and future) easements for storm drain. purposes shall be offered and shown on the final map for dedication to the City. - 6. ` Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a complete hydrology and hydraulic,_ study_ shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer registered in. the State of Californ'ia.to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Los Angeles Public, Works Department. 7. A co.mprehensiive maintenance plan/program shall be submitted concurrently With the -storm drain plans to the Public. Works/Engineering Department for "review and approval by the City Engineer: D. STREET IMPROVEMENT 4. The applicant shall replace and record any centerline ties and monuments that are removed as part of this construction' with the, Los Angeles, County. Public Works'Survey.Division. . 2. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall provide written permission to the satisfaction of the City from any property owners.which will be affected by.offsite grading. 26 City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007-12 3.: Street improvement plans.. in. a 2,r x 36" sheet format,. prepared by a registered. Civil Engineer,. shall be. submitted to:and.approved by,the.City Engineer, .Streets shall not exceed a maximum slope.of:112'percent. 4. New street centerline monuments'shall be at.the intersections of:two or ' more streets,_ intersections of:two. or more:streets, interse' dons._ofstreet.s with tract boundaries and to mark the.beginning and,ending of curves Co -the polnts:.of.intersection of tangents thereof._ Survey notes showing the ties . between all monuments set and four. (4) durable reference points for each, shall be, submitted to.the. City Engineer for,approval,in accordance.with City Standards, pr'ior.to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy., '5. The design and construction of private street improvements shall beset to. City and County standards and designed.tda.design speed of 35 mph. 6. �Priorto final map.recordation, the -applicant shall submit plans delineating.the. improvement and extension of Crooked Creek Driveforthe City's review and approval: The improvement:and extension shall occurwithin the project site, .: . boundaries of the proposed _map. The improvement and., extension of;,. Cmoked.:Creek.Drive shall.bacompleted priortofinal inspecon of grading.' activities..,`.:•, ... . E.. UTILITIES..._. 1: Easements,. satisfactory to the:City Engineer and the utility companies, for public utility and. public services purposes shall.be offered and shown on the. detailed site plan for,dedication to the City..:.- 2.. Prior to final map approval, a water system with appurtenant facilities to ` serve all.lotslparcels in the land division designed to the Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD) specifications shall be provided and approved: by the City Engineer. The system. shall. include fire hydrants'ofthe type and location as determined by the Los Angeles County Fire Department..•The water mains . shall be sized to accommodate'the.total domestic.and fire flows to the . satisfaction. of the CityEngineer, WVWD and Fire Department.. , 3. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall construct or enter into. an improvement agreement with the City. guaranteeing' construction of .the necessary. improvements to the existing water system. according to Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD) specifications to -accommodate thetotal domestic and fire flows as may be.required by the City Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department. 4. Prior to final map approval or issuance of building permit whichever comes first, written certification that all utility services and any other service related 27 . .. City Coumdl Resolution No. 2007 -XX 2007-12. to:the site shall :be available to serve the proposed project and shall be,,. submitted to the City. Such letters shall be issued;by the_district, utility and. cable television company, if applicable, within ninety (90) days prior issuance of grading permits: 5. Prior. to recordation of final map, applicant shall provide separate underground utility services to each, parcel per Section 21.30 of Title 21 of the City Code, 'including.water, gas, electric power. telephone and cable TV, . in accordance with. the respective utility company standards. Easements required by the utility companies shall be approved by the City Engineer.'. . 6. Applicant shall relocate and underground any existing on-site utilities to :the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the respective utility owner. 7. Underground utilities shall not be constructed within the. drip line; of any mature.tree except as appmved.by a registered arborist. L; F SEWERS t Prior to final.map approval, applicant shall submit, a sanitary sewer area study to:the City and County Engineer to 'verify that capacity is available. in the sewerage system to be used as the outfall for the sewers_ in this land division. If the system is found to be of insufficient capacity, the problem. shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the County Engineer. 2. Each dwelling unit shall be served by a separate sewer lateral which shall not cross any other lot lines. The sanitary sewer system serving the tract shall be connected to the City or District sewer system._ Said system shall be of the size, grade,and depth approved by the, City Engineer, County Sanitation District and Los Angeles County Public Works and surety shall be provided and an,agreement executed prior to approval of the final map. 3. Applicant shall obtain connection permit(s) from the City and County Sanitation District prior to issuance of building permits. The area within the tentative map boundaries shall be annexed into the County Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District and appropriate easements for all sewer main and trunk lines shall be shown on the final map and offered for dedication.on the final map.. 4. Applicant, at applicant's sole cost :and expense, shall construct the sewer system in accordance with the City, Los.Angeles County Public Works Division and County Sanitation District Standards prior to occupancy. 28 City Council Resolution No. 2007-)(X- 2007-12 G.`„ TRAFFIC. MITIGATIONS 1; All traffic mitigations shall be implemented and constructed. in accordance with the traffic report prepared by, Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc. dated October 2002. and revised -September 2003 and conditions .of project approval for the VTTM No. 54081; prior to issuance of the certificate of . occupancy. APPLICANT SHALL" CONTACT THE: BUILDIN.G.:AND-SAFETY DIVISION; (909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: " 1. Plans shall'conforrim,to State and Local Building Code,(i.e., 2001 California . ..Building Code; California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and the 2001 :National Electrical.Code) requirements and all other applicable. construction codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of plane check submittal. ..... . 2 Submit Public.:.W6Fks/EngineeringDepartment.. approved grading plans showing clearly all finish.elevations, drainage, and retaining walls locations. 3: - All retaining walls shall be submitted to,the.Building:&.Safety"and, Public' Work Departments.for review and approval. .. 4.. Submit grading plans showing clearly, all finish elevations, drainage, and. retaining wall locations. No building permits shall be issued prior to submitting a pad certification. APPLICANT .SHALL CONTACT. THE LO$ .ANGELES COUNTY FIRE PREVENTION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THEYOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1; Emergency access shall be provided, maintaining free and, clear, a minimum . 28. foot. at all times during construction: in accordance with Fire Department - requirements: `Prior to .the issuance of any building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire Department that temporary water supply for fire protection is available pending completion ofthe required fire protection system. 3. Prior to. recordation, the final map shall comply with all Fire Department requirements: G 1W PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT 21825 COPLEYDRIVE -DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TBL. (909), 839-7030 ''-FAX (909) 861-3117 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 7.4 MEETING DATE: October 10, 2006 CASE/PILE NUMBER: 1. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006.03 2. Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01 3Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 4; Conditional Use Permit No: 2002-18 5. Variance No. 2002-02 6, Tree Permit No. 2002-13 PROJECT LOCATION: Southern Terminus of crooked Creek Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (APN#8714028-003) APPLICATION REQUEST: To adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program; to subdivide a 12.9 acre site into 16 residential lots ranging in size from 5,705 to 10,506 square feet for the eventual development with single-family homes; to change the zoning from R-1-10,000 to RL -PD; to grade and develop In a hillside area; to allow retaining walls with an exposed height of 10 feet that exceed the allowed exposed height adjacent to a street; and to remove, replace and protect oak and walnut trees. PROPERTY OWNER / Mr. Daniel Singh APPLICANT: Jewel Ridge, LLC 10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard Culver City, CA 90232 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission: Open the public hearing; receive comments on the project; close the public hearing and begin deliberations on VTiM No. 53670 and its entitlements; and recommend approval of Zone Change No. 2006-03 and Planned Development Overlay District 2006.01, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2606-03 and Mitigation Monitoring Program, VTTM' No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002.16, Variance No 2002-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-12. BACKGROUND: A. Protect Processing: The proposed project was submitted to the City on November 6, 2002.The staff prepared the first letter to the applicant deeming the application incomplete on November 21, 2002 and a follow—up second letter sent on December 11, 2002. Both letters discussed many Issues and concerns regarding the project's design, retaining heights, environmental Issues, grading, acceptance of the geotechnical report, revegetatlon, etc. In 2003,20 letters were sent overthe year to the applicant reiterating the many Issues and concerns referenced above. The letters also discussed updating the biological assessment and tree survey submitted by the applicant and the need for preparing an air quality assessment and noise analysis. Because the applicant did not respond in a manner that resolved all the Issues and concerns completely, 18 additional letters were sent, to the applicant throughout 2004. Again these letters reiterated some of the same issues and concerns. Also discussed in these letters was a recommendation to hire consulting firms to prepare the air quality assessment and noise analysis and an update of the biological assessment and tree survey. Furthermore, staff had three meetings with the applicant and his team during 2004 to discuss .these Issues. In 2005, the applicant sent a "work In progress" revised map addressing some of the. concerns and Issues discussed in the past. Six letters were sent to the applicant reiterating project concerns and issues not addressed in the revised map. A Tree Permit was issued for.the removal of trees to do borings for further geotechnical analysis. A Stop Work Order was subsequently issued for non-compliance with Tree Permit conditions. Several site visits occurred because of non-compllance with the Tree Permit and Stop Work Order. The geotechnical report was approved subject to conditions in 2006. Also In 2006, the revised map for the project's first public hearing was submitted and the epvironmental document was completed and circulated. In total, staff has sent approximately 45 letters to the applicant between 2002 and 2006. A detailed chronology of these activities is attached to this report. The purpose of the letters was to assist the applicant In preparing and completing adequate plans for the Planning Commission and City Council. B. Site Description: The project site is located at the southern terminus of Crooked Creek Drive, east of the SR -57 Freeway, Brea Canyon Road and Brea Canyon flood control channel and north of the Citys southern boundary. It Is an irregular-shaped hillside parcel, approximately 12.9 acres In size. The property is surrounded by TTM 54081 Pago 2 k I� I single-family homes, on the north, west snc east and undeveloped land to the south outside of the City's boundary. � II In general, theproject site Is slopes down t6 the south and west and slopes up to the east. It is characterized by a moderately steep western facing slope approximately.200 feet high and level canyon on the westerly side adjacent to the flood control channel. Elevations on the project site range from 644 feet above mean sea level in the wester portion adjacent to the flood control channel. to 840 feet at the southeast portion. Vegetation on the site consists of non-native grassland, oak and walnut trees and coast Live oak and walnut woodlands. Additionally, an existing ;recreational trail easement traverses the easter portion of the project site. C. Site and SuMoundinq General Plan and Zoning and Use: A. Aooilcatlona and Review AuthorityMubdlvision Ordinance, Title 21: and Develobment Coda Sections 2214 2258 2Z22.22.64, 22.38 and 2244) The proposed project involves six applications as follows: 1. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program to address impacts that the propose project map have on the environment. 2. Zone Change application to change the project site's zoning RL -PD to coincide with the General Plan's land use designation. 3. Subdivision application for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 to subdivide the project site into 16 residential lots, four open space lots (Lots "A", "B", "C" and "D") and private Streets "A" and "B"; 4. Conditional Use Permit application for development in hillside areas with slopes of 10 percent or greater and to ensure the application of the City's hillside management standards to the project; and for the TTM 54081 Page 3 General Pian Zone Use Project site ffUMaxlmum -31)U/AC R-1-10,000 vacant Norah RL/Maxlmum 3 DUTAC R-1-91000 RwIdentlel South 7 -AG -ISP (Sphere of Influence) _' #2-1 Vacant i East. ,RJMaxlmum 3 DUTAC R-1-9,000 Residential west , RUMmIrnum 3 DU/AC " R-1-7,600 allffood Reecontrol lchannel/ 8R-67 A. Aooilcatlona and Review AuthorityMubdlvision Ordinance, Title 21: and Develobment Coda Sections 2214 2258 2Z22.22.64, 22.38 and 2244) The proposed project involves six applications as follows: 1. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program to address impacts that the propose project map have on the environment. 2. Zone Change application to change the project site's zoning RL -PD to coincide with the General Plan's land use designation. 3. Subdivision application for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 to subdivide the project site into 16 residential lots, four open space lots (Lots "A", "B", "C" and "D") and private Streets "A" and "B"; 4. Conditional Use Permit application for development in hillside areas with slopes of 10 percent or greater and to ensure the application of the City's hillside management standards to the project; and for the TTM 54081 Page 3 establishment of a Planned Development Overlay District to allow flexibility in design, density and intensity. In this case, the PD Overlay District allows the•consideration of residential lots that are less than 10,0001square feet in exchange of more open space; 5. Variance application is for proposed retaining walls with a maximum exposed height* of 10 feet, which exceeds the allowed three feet exposed height adjacent to a street; and 6. Tree Permit application for the preservation, removal and replacement of `oak and walnut trees with ,edlameterdf'eight inches at breast height (DBH); For the Zone Change and Planned Development Overlay and Vesting Tentative Tract Map, the City Council is the review authority with the Planning. Commission giving its recommendation. For the Conditional Use Permit, Variance and Tree Permit applications, the Planning Commission is the review authority. According to the Development Code, when more than one application is involved, all applications shall be processed simultaneously by the highest review authority. In this case, the Planning Commission will review all applications slid provide a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will be the ffnafdecislon'makerfor the project. B. Protect Components The proposed 16 single-family' residential lots will vary in size from 5,705 to 10,506 square feet, with a majority of the lot sizes between 6;229 to 7,325 square feet. Each lot will be graded with a development pad. In addition to the 16 custom residential lots, the project will consist of four letter lots identified as Lots "A", "B", "C" and "D'. These lots will be, common lots maintained by the homeowners' association, which will be formed in the future. Additionally, these lots, especially Lot "C", will be used for on-site mitigation with regards to oak and walnut trees and understory replacement. Streets "A" and "B" are proposed as private streets with sidewalk, curb and gutter on the side of the street developed with homes. Street "A" is a continuation of Crooked Creek Drive and Street "B" Intersects Street "A" at the project entrance. The proposed project also consists of relocating an existing recreational trall pursuant to the City's Trails Master Plan. Additionally, the Trails Master Plan Identifies a potential"'Class A" trail head in proximity to the project site. The proposed on-site trail head and pedestrian trail easement is identified on the map. The applicant will be required to dedicate to the City an irrevocable easement of 20 feet for the pedestrian trail. The easement will be located on the east side of Street "A" and adjacent to the southern boundary of the map. At the entrance of the tract. i0 Lot "A", a sign/kiosk will installed identifying the trail. Improvements for the trail are set forth as conditions of the project. TTM 54081 Page 4 C. General Plan The General Plan land use designation for the project site Is Low Density Residential (RL) Maximum Three Dwelling Units Per Acre (3 DU/AC). The proposed map has a gross density of 0.81 dwelling units per acre. As such, the proposed map 1s In compliance with the City's General Plan with regards to density. D. Zone Change and Planned Development Overlay District The General Plan land use designation for this project is, Low Density Residential (RL)IMaximum Three Dwelling Units Per Acre (3 DUTAC). The current zoning for the project site is R-1=10,000. A zoning change to Low Density Residential (RL) is being processed in.order to bring the zoning In compliance with the General Plan. In addition, a Planned Development Overlay District (PD) Is being proposed to modify the required minimum lot size. Therefore, the zoning nomenclature will be changed to RL -PD. E. Conditional Use Permit for Hillside Development The Clty's hillside management standards apply to a project having a natural slope of 10 percent or greater; The proposed project has natural slopes ranging from less than 10:1(8:4 %) to 4:1(24:8%) with an average natural 'slope if 24.35 percent. As such, a project shall be subject to, the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. To prepare the project site for development, the following grading quantities are estimated: 98,000 cubic yards of out; 86,000 cubic yards of fill; and 5,000 cubic yards of export. The applicant proposes to grade the project site in a manner that provides sixteen residential lots, each with a development pad, four open space lots (Lots "A", "ti" "C" and "D") and two private streets to create a private, non -gated community. Additionally, grading Includes the repair of landslide areas located on the lower portion of the descending natural slope. Access to the project will be at the terminus,of Crooked Creek Drive. Grading will also occur within a portion of Lot "C", cutting into the easterly slope to provide for the streets. Retaining wells will be used to support the graded pads and cut into the easterly slope to for the streets. P. Conditional Use Permit for Planned Develooment Ovedav District The purpose of a Planned Development Overlay is to promote quality design, Innovative site planning, and transfer of development rights and mixed uses consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. The intent of the planned development standards is to preserve a minimum 30 percent of the project's gross acreage as open Space,. incorporate amenities beyond those expected under conventional development standards and to achieve greater flexibility in design. TTM 54091 Page 5 Application for the Planned Development Overlay District requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit to modify development standards (i.e., minimum lot area, setbacks, site coverage, height, landscaping or ofriftg parking) normally required in a specified zone. However, proposed development within a Planned Development Overlay must comply with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code. For this project, the maximum number of dwelling units--per—acre Is three. Therefore, It is possible that about 30 lots plus streets could be established for residential development. However, the Planned Development Overlay is use to reduce the square footage of each lot to order to preserve the'open space Identified as Lot "C". As such, the project has been reduced to 16 dwelling unit or a density of ;0.81 dwelling units per acre and maintains 8.9 acres or 69 percent In open space. G. Varlanc& The purpose of a variance is to allow a deviation from required development standards when special circumstances, applicable to the property (i.e., location, size, shape, surroundings topography, or other conditions) which inhibit the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity under the same zone. The applicant proposes retaining walls throughout the project site due to the topography of the site and grading activities related to cut and 611 that are needed to :prepare the site for 16 lots with buildable pads,'streets and access point. The walls are proposed In a series of two or three at an exposed height of five or six feet each. They are part of each lots development,and cut Into portions of Lot "C' in order to construct the streets. Pursuant to the City's hillside management standards, the maximum allowed exposed height of retaining walls adjacent to a street Is three feet. Additionally, no more than three terraced or stepped walls can be used. The retaining walls adjacent to Streets "A" and "B' are proposed at an exposed heights of five and six feet and do not exceed three terraced walls. Also to create the pedestrian trail adjacent to Street "A" and Lot "C', the proposed retaining walls need to be set back ten feet more then as shown on the map. Changing the location of the walls will increase the exposed height to approximately ten feet, As a result, Variance approval is required for the increased height of these proposed retaining walls. A geo-grid retaining wall system with cells for plant material will be used for the retaining walls adjacent to the street. For all other walls, split face block in earth tone will be required. H. Tree Permit According to the biological assessment, the proposed project will impact 11.5 acres of mixed coast live oak and Calltomia walnut woodland with understory dominated by poison oak. This woodland acreage is identlled by the California TTM 54081 Page 6 Department of Fish and Game as a sensitive resource and has a minimum replacement ratio of 1:1, A survey indicates that a total of 468 oak and walnut trees exist on the project site. A total of 269 of these trees will be removed due to the proposed grading. However, 197 oak and walnut trees are; deteriorated to the point of where they are either dying,or dead. The remaining 72 trees (43 oaks and -29 walnuts) are considered healthy and are recommended for replacement ata 3:1 ratio per the City's Tree Permit requirements. Mitigation will include s;combination of on-site and/or off-site preservation, enhancement and/or ,restoration. The applicant will Implement the mitigation plan, as approved by the City and according to the guidelines and performance standards of the plan. 1. Mitigated Negative Declaration Pdrsuadtto the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has prepared an Initial Study and determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is required for this project. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (BCH #2006071129) was prepared by the City's environmental consultant, Environmental Impact Sciences.' 1. Purpose of a MND: a. A MND is an informational document that evaluates whether or not thereis'substantial evidence that a project will have the potential to significantly effect the environment. it is used to guide and assist the City staff, Planning Commission, city Council, and public In the consideration and evaluation of potential environmental Implications that may result from the proposed project's development.' A MND may be prepared if the Initial Study Identifies a potentially significant effect for which the applicant has made or agrees to make project revisions that clearly mitigate the effects. For a MND; specific mitigation measures are developed and agreed to before project .approval. The mitigation measures are incorporated Into a mitigation reporting and monitoring program which becomes part of the MND. 2, MND Process: a. initial Study An infiial Study Is the first step in determining the appropriate environmental document for a project it is a preliminary analysis to determine whether or not an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a Negative Declaration is need for a project. If the Initial Study concludes that the project will not significantly effect the environment or may have the potential to effect the environment but can be mitigated to a level of less than significant, a Negative Declaration or a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared TTM 54081 Page 7 respectively. Staff and the ClVs' environrnental consultant completedthe Initial Study questionnaire for the proposed project and identified several areas; namely aesthetics, air quality, hazards and hazardous materials; biological` resources and transportation and tra'ff'ic' that have, the potential to effect the environment but will be mitigated to a level of less than significant: r - -b-- - • Ngtice of Availability (NOA-) once the MND is prepared, a NOA is prepared and distributed to agencies that have or may have the responsibility for providing service to the project or may be impacted by the project for review and response. The response period is typically 20 days. However, for this project the response period is 30 days because it'was submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by state agencies. As a result, the NOA for this project was circulated on July 28, 2008 with the review period ending on August 28, 2006. o: Notice of Intent to Adopt A Notice of intent to Adopt and Public Hearing is sent to the County Clark; the public and responsible agencies. The Notice of Intent to Adopt is a minimum 20 day notice. At the public hearing, the Planning Commission shall consider the proposed MND with the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program, and then make a recommendation to the City Council. d. Environmental Factors and Effects Analyzed In the MND The Initial Study process for this project determined that the following environmental issues will have "no Impact' or "less than significant impact and are not addressed In the MND: Agricultural Resources Population/Housing Land Use and Planning Recreation Mineral Resources Cultural Resources Hydrology and Water Quality Noise Public Services Utilities and Service Systems The following environmental Issues. could have a potentially significant effect on the environment unless mitigated to less than significant. But with the incorporation of the project's mitigation program, Impacts associated with the implementation of this project will be reduced to a level "less than significant. Aesthetics Hazards/Hazardous Materials Air Quality Biological Resources Transportat(on/Traffic TTM 54081 Page 8 (1.) Aesthetics. According to the MND, the environmental Issue related to aesthetics has the 'potential to be significant unless mitigated to• a level of,, less than significant,+The proposed series of retaining walls located along or near rear property. line's may, partially impede'existing Views.^'In order to mitigate the view of the retaining wails;landscaping with Irrigation will be used within the wall cells and planter areas between and in front of all retaining walls! (2.) Air Quality. Environmental issues related to Air Quality affected by dust and particulate matter may be potentially significant during grading and construction. The applicant is required to: water all exposed surfaces three times daily; limit off-road trucks to no more than 15 mph; use so]] stabilizers; replace ground cover in disturbed area as quickly as feasible; and cover all stockpiles. Additionally, all exterior points, for on- site residential units will conform to specifications that will reduce volatile organic compounds '(VOCs), (3.) TransportationlTraffio. The project entry will be a 'Yraffio roundabout". Although the streets of the proposed project are private, staff believes this project should not be gated due to the awkwardness 6f the proposed gates location in the traffic roundabout. According to the MND, roundabouts are a traffic calming device that reduces speed. However due to the Intersecting of Streets "A" and "B" at the roundabout, a conflict point for vehicles, bicycles, or pedestrians may occur. As a result, the final design, development plans, and geometrics of all on-site streets shall be approved by the City Engineer and comply with the City's street standards. ' (4.) •Hazards/HazardousMaterials. The project site Is located directly adjacent to a "Very High Fire Hazard Zone". As a result, the applicant is required to prepare and submit a fuel modification plan to the City and Fire Department for approval and comply with all fire codes. Additionally, the applicant is required to prepare construction fire prevention and control plan outlining all activities that will occur during construction, access TrM 54081 Page 9 through the project site and fire safety and suppression for approval by the Fire Department and City. (6.) Biological Rob ources. A biological assessment acknowledges that walnut and oak woodlands and California black walnut and oak trees exist at the project site. In recognition of a potentially -- --signitieant--impaet to,. -biological resources, mitigation measures that will reduce the impacts to significantly less are as follows: + replacement of oak and walnut trees let a ;.,.,g>t ratio on-aite and,bff-site,locetlons and oak and walnut woodland's with a five year, monitoringplan funded by the applicant; on-site grading activities must occur prior to April 2007, or a new biological survey must be conducted to reassess the presence or absence of protected biological resources; Information regarding biological resource must be in the covenant, conditions and restrictions (CC&R's); landscape plans for all common l areas' shall'Incorporate replacement species, native drought -tolerant, non-invasive " plant, species and weed prevention and control; and all construction, and ` material staging activities must be confined within the project boundaries e. Public Review Period/Response to Comments At the conclusion of the public review pedod, comments received are responded to and Included as part of the MND that is reviewed by the decision makers. I. Revision to the Project Design After the close of the MND review period and based on the environmental analysis and comments received, the applicant may need to restudy and redesign the subdivision and its grading concept. g. Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) CEQA requires public agencies to set up a Monitoring Program as part of the MND. The purpose of the MMP Is to insure compliance with the mitigation measures. At the time of the MND's adoption, the MMP is adopted. This projects MMP has been prepared for consideration. moizawPUBISCHEARIhIG Notice for this project was published In the Inland Vallev Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on September 28, 2006. Public hearing notices were mailed to TTM 54081 Page 10 l approximately 219' property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site on September 25, 2006. Furthermore, the project site was posted with a display board and the public notice was posted In three public places by September 27, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commisslon recommend the following to the City Counoilt approval of Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006.01, Mitigated ' Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (BCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program and Vesting Tentative Map No. 64081, Conditional Use Permit No 2002-18 Variance No. 2006-02, Tree Permit No. 2002-13, findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolutions to City Council Prepared byt I I IReviewed by: A n J. L gu, Nancy Fong, AICP, ssociate Planner Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Draff'Resolutlon recommending to City Council approval of Zone Change No. 2002-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01; 2, Draft Resolution recommending to City. Council approval of VTTM No.63430 and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (BCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 3 'Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13 and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (BCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 4. Exhibit."A" Tentative Map No. 64081 dated October 10, 2006; 5. Exhibit "B" Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (BCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program; and . 6. Exhibit "C" Response to Comments; 7: Chronology of VTTM 54081; and 8. Photo simulations of project after development. TTM 54081 Page 11 approximately 219' property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site on September 25, 2006. Furthermore, the project site was posted with a display board and the public notice was posted In three public places by September 27, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commisslon recommend the following to the City Counoilt approval of Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006.01, Mitigated ' Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (BCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program and Vesting Tentative Map No. 64081, Conditional Use Permit No 2002-18 Variance No. 2006-02, Tree Permit No. 2002-13, findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolutions to City Council Prepared byt I I IReviewed by: A n J. L gu, Nancy Fong, AICP, ssociate Planner Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Draff'Resolutlon recommending to City Council approval of Zone Change No. 2002-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01; 2, Draft Resolution recommending to City. Council approval of VTTM No.63430 and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (BCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 3 'Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13 and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (BCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 4. Exhibit."A" Tentative Map No. 64081 dated October 10, 2006; 5. Exhibit "B" Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (BCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program; and . 6. Exhibit "C" Response to Comments; 7: Chronology of VTTM 54081; and 8. Photo simulations of project after development. TTM 54081 Page 11 be conducted on or after 3:00 p.m., and 2) if there is a parking problem the Conditional Use Permit could be subject to review. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan, Lee, Torng, VC/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Wei 7.4 Vestina Tanfnfivn:'r,.M- RX-- .l_ �...... rerm" NO2002-13 - In accordance to the Subdivision Map Act, City's Subdivision Ordinance —Title 21 ! Development Code — Title 22, Sections 22.14, 22.58, 22.22, 22.54 and 22.38, the proposed project is a 22 -lot subdivision on site of approximately 12.9 acres. It would provide for the development of 16 single-family detached homes on individual parcels ranging in size from approximately 5;705:quare feet to 10,506 square feet. The proposed project would include: the construction of private streets, graded pads, manufactured slopes and retaining walls; an easement for a public pedestrian trail in a portion of proposed open space areas; and the removal of a portion of existing vegetation. The current zoning of the project site is R-1-10,000. The Zone Change to RUPlanned Development Overlay provides for compliance with the General Plan land use designation and maximum flexibility in the site planning and design, thereby allowing smaller lots in order to retain more open space within the project boundaries. The Conditional Use Permit relates to grading and development within a hillside area. The Variance relates to retaining walls that are proposed at a height greater than six feet. The Tree Permit relates to the removal, replacement and protection of oak and walnut trees. PROJECT ADDRESS: Southern Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER/ Daniel Singh APPLICANT: Jewel Ridge, LLC 10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard Culver City, CA 90232 OCTOBER 10, 2006 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION AssocPlLungu presented staffs report and, recommended Planning Commission adoption of a resolution recommending City Council approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03, Zone Change No. 2006-02/ Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit No, 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13. C/Torngasked for clarificatiomof the number of units per acre as being three instead of four or five. CDD/Fong responded that the three units per acre requested via the zone change conform' to the City's General Plan designation for low density residential. in addition, the purpose for the Planned Development Overlay is to allow for flexibility in the development standards and density. However, the density will not exceed what the General Pian allows. ` In short, this allows for preserving more than 30 percent of the land area as'Open Space with the transference of density to the more developable portion of the parcel. AssocP/Lungu responded to C/Torng that this project is an entire subdivision and the city would not be, able to change the zoning for a particular lot. ClTorng'asked why there was a discrepancy in the tree replacement number from 98 in the initial study to 73 (Page 9) in the final study. Also, the initial study called for 2:1 replacement ratherthan 3:1 replacement. AssocP/Lungu responded that the applicant suggested a 2:1 replacement; however City code calls for a 3:1 replacement. C/Tomg said the study referred to dead or dying trees and wondered if that was the reason for the 73 instead of 98. based on living trees. AssocP/Lungu said i d she would revireplacement ew the numbehs.number of C/Torng said he was concerned about the variance request for up to a 10 foot retaining wall for hillside development and asked if there was a rule of thumb for approval. CDD/Fong responded that this was a variance and the Planning Commission would have to make findings in order to support the variance. C/Nolan disclosed that she spoke with staff about the proposed project prior to tonight's meeting for purposes of clarification only. There were no other Commissioner disclosures offered. I Ron Brown, RDC, Asset Manager for Jewel Ridge Estates, 159 South Waverly Drive, Alhambra, thanked the Commission for the opportunity to present the 16 -lot residential development, proposed project. Mr. Brown outlined theihistoryofthe proposed project. The subject property consists of approximately 13 -acres and the maximum allowable density is 30 -units. As previously stated, the proposed project is 16 units to be located in the already disturbed area that'is relatively flat: The existing zoning is R-1- 10,000 and the total grading quantities to develop the subject property is 98,000 cubic yards. Approximately two-thirds of the site will remain as undeveloped Open Space. During the past four years of pursuing this project, the City's Planning staff critiqued at least 12 different proposals. The initial project was for 26 units, which was reduced by response to City Planning comments. The preliminary vision for future houses is 2800 square feet and prices ranging from the high $800,000's to the low $900,000. He strongly noted that the zone change request was consistent with the City's General Plan and was not being requested to allow for increased density, rather to allow for a smaller development that preserves more Open Space than would otherwise be, allowed under the existing zoning. In addition,the density was 'less tham the density of the, surrounding development. The applicant and staff helda meeting with the surrounding community to illicit input of the proposed project prior to staff presenting the project to the Planning Commission this evening. Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge, LLC, 10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard, Culver City, CA 90232 presented an overview of the project from its initial submittal to its present iteration and presided over the power point presentation. C/Lee asked if the applicant planned to build more houses in the future or if 16 units would be the maximum. Mr. Singh responded that the application was for 16 units and that was the maximum number projected. C/Lee expressed concern because he did not want the applicant to build more houses. C/Lee asked if staff could lock this project into 16 units only because the pad was designed for future houses. He also asked why the applicant asked for a 10 -foot retaining wall. CDD/Fong explained that this was a Vesting Tentative Tract Map meaning that the proposal for 16 -units was legal and could not be changed to increase the number of lots. Conversely, the applicant could reduce the number of lots but would have to come back to the Planning Commission to seek such a reduction. The Open Space lots will be deed restricted to Open Space. He asked the applicant if he was willing to reduce the height of the retaining wall to six feet and redesign the trail. Mr. Singh said that a redesign to six feet would require two PAGE,12 ' PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 10, 2006 retaining walls instead of one retaining wall. Therefore, it would result in one six-foot retaining wall and one four -foot retaining wall and whatever design was proposed would be plan checked and approved by the City. C/Torng said he felt residents would be concerned about the view impact and asked if the trees would be planted include a condition . Mr. Singh explained that the conditions of app by the City controls the plantings.1herefore, staff would not allow a permit to be issued unless there wasa buffer or screening mirroring that proposed in the renderings. CDD/Fong explained that staff imposed a condition of approval requiring landscaping between the retaining wall .his reqs a uoncepired red tot ual provide and prior to recordation of the Final Map the app licanta detailed landscape plan that staff will verify the compliance with the conditions of approval. Cfforng felt the area presented fire danger and asked the applicant to elaborate on his plan for fire prevention. Mr. Singh explained that currently hillside access'is'constrained and the only access is from the north.` Byopening the development. additional access is provided to areas that were difficult to access prior to the development. Furthermore, the applicant is required to provide a 2oo=foot buffer, fire resistant plantings and so forth as, conditioned. C/Torng asked the applicant to elaborate on the flood zone situation. Mr. Singh responded that the proposed development is in a higher elevation than the existing stream and channel so there is submitted o issue because the water would flow downhill. The app' canthydrology report indicating the water flow that staff reviewed and in addition, there will be an such issues will be'dealtlw with th ogy rert based uon the gh ut the permit processrading plan and VC/Nelson opened the public hearing. Lucy Robinson, 3636 Crooked Creek Drive, said she strongly opposed the proposed project. She lives on the side of Crooked Creek that faces the retaining walls that would be viewed from her n addition, there is a safety egation that they have enjoyed is quickly disappa issue for the children with the removal of the cul-de-sac. Fire is another issue of concern because increased development presents additional fire issues. She said she was also concerned about potential sliding in the area of the development. OCTOBER 10, 2006 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION 'Greg Shockley, 3711 Crooked Creek Drive, (west side of the street opposite the development) asked the Planning Commission to look at the aerial photograph •off of the GIS ontheD.B. website'an'd'ask forfa transparency of the modified graded area. The majority of the existing trees will be gone and adjacent neighbors will be looking atemodified slopes. Additionally, the proposed 10 -foot retaining wall is a'combination of three six-foot retaining walls. The retaining walls will be an excellent surface for bouncing freeway noise into his and his neighbor's front yards.'Freeway noise is so bad in his backyard 'how that itis difficult to carry ona conversation. The subdivision is about 12.9 acres and has the capacity to accommodate 53 lots of 10,000 square feet each., He.sald he would rather have houses randomly interspersed among the 12 acres. The'residentsW,Crooked Creek will receiveabsolutely no benefit from the proposed development. The variances are proof that the applicant could not use the land without heavy modification., He'asked the Commission to take a closer look at this project before making its decision. Jeff Layton, 3703 Crooked Creek Drive; agreed with what Mr. Shockley stated and said that inaddition he was looking at this project as a quality of life, issue for the people who, live on Crooked, Drive. He was concerned about the height of the, retaining wall across from his property and the noise that would be reflected off of the wall. Also, the wall will appear massive from eye level. How long will the new trees last and will they act as a noise buffer? He heard there would not be a gate at the end of Crooked Creek and wondered if it could be instituted following approval? The loss of the natural trees will be a huge negative impact on the area. He also had concerns about fire access and trail access and felt it would not happen if a gate were allowed at the end of the street. He was also concerned about traffic from 19 additional houses that would feed through what used to be a cul-de-sac. Eleanor Reza, 3748 Castle Rock Road, said that as a 19 -year resident she has enjoyed the "country hillside setting" and wildlife in her backyard that directly abuts the channel draining into Brea Canyon and where the development is proposed. Since living in Diamond Bar she has seen quite a bit of housing development and loss of wildlife habitat. Should the proposed housing development occur her new backyard view would be of a six-foot retaining wall. She asked when it might be a good idea to stop approving OCTOBER 10,2006 PAGE 14 PLANNING COMMISSION i housing developments in the City. A recent quote fromthe Diamond Bar City ' i Newsletter' (June 2006) states:"one ofthe best features of D.B. is that it is surrounded by rolling hills and open space. However, that means that the City is in a careful balance with nature, wildlife such as Coyote's, Mountain Lions and Bobcats." She asked if the careful balance with native wildlife meant eliminating their habitat and have there been any wildlife impact surveys done for this project. Steven Greenhut, 3622Crooked'Creek Drive, said' that one of the main reasons he'and his family moved to the cul-de-sac about eight years ago was for the hillsides and although he did not relish the thought of a new development he supported the?prpject because he;did not believe that City officials should stop people from buildingwithin approved zoning and within the General Plan. ! The applicant is seeking variances but is building far fewer houses than allowed under the current zoning. When he moved to the City, Mr. Greenhut did his due diligence and discovered the property was zoned for three houses per acre and he and his wife agreed they could live With such a project. His specific concern was the maintenance of the 10-foot areas behind his side of the street and the beginning of the retaining walls. A homeowner at 3723 Crooked Creek Drive, said she was happy about the area. She paid extra for the last lot and the views. Also, her children play in the cul-de-sac and there is no traffic passing by her house. She was very concerned and fearful about a big change to her house and the additional traffic in the area. People have been driving tractors over her front walk to get the equipment into the lot to grade streets and the winds blow a lot of dust toward her house. Mr. Shockley said he was not opposed to development on the property but felt it would be prudent for the applicant to build in accordance with the property by using step footings, multi-level housing and so forth rather than proposing extensive grading and tree removal. George Wong, 20880 Gold Run Drive, said he was not too concerned about the development but he was concerned about the increased traffic. It appeared to him that the only egress was via Crooked Creek Drive and as such, if he lived on Crooked Creek he would be against the development because there was no other exit. Art Melendez, 3710 Crooked Creek Drive, concurred with previous speakers about the traffic, noise and dust. There are a lot of kids that play out in the street because Itis safe, With trucks and more traffic going through the area it will create a safety hazard and he believed the Citywould have to consider installing speed humps or other traffic calming devices. He said he opposed the project. Joy Tweed, 21155 Running Branch Road, said she agreed with everyone who spoke about problems of ingress and egress for the housing development off of Brea Canyon:She was concerned that any increase in the number of vehicles would' create further problems. She moved to Diamond Bar in 1971 and at that time dhe slogan was "Country Living in Diamond Bar With the arrangements of the high retaining walls she can no longer consider it country living: She believed thatwith'the intelligence of the building staff there Wase strongpossibility that this project could be reviewed to limit the size of the area. 'She said she would like to have the applicant provide a park in the area for the children as atrade-off to the project. James Eng, 20935 Running Branch Road, concurred with most of the speakers about the traffic. During peak afternoon hours it is difficult if not impossible to turn into his neighborhood and 'he believed the City should take a closer look at the traffic pattern in the area, Mr. Singh responded to public speakers. He stated that a noise study was conducted that analyzed the future potential noise generated by the project once the project was completed. The noise report concluded that there would be no significant impact to the community. Regarding the proposal and variances, the initial application did not include a zone change and two of the variances. The requested changes are in fact a trade-off resulting in a smaller development envelope and larger open space. Again, the property has a General Plan designation and by allowing a smaller development a trade off is a large open space that is protected in perpetuity. To the speaker who talked about a transparency, a biological report was completed, a transparency was done and habitats were identified and the impacts as a result of the development were identified with the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Of course there are trees that will be removed but the mitigation calls for replanting those trees at a 3:1 ratio. In addition, the applicant is required to ensure and guarantee the survival of the OCTOBER % 2006 PAGE 16" PLANNING COMMISSION trees for the ensuing five years.A gate'was originally proposed. Pursuant to the community meeting staff is recommending that no gate be installed and the applicant has :agreed ' Currently, 1 there is no trail. However, the ' development will provide for a future trail. Four surveys were completed and the City's consultant verified the accuracy of the surreys. The 10 -foot area behind the wall between the Crooked Creek residents and the project area can be addressed during the process of completing the CC&R's for the homeowners association with language to require' that the homeowner's association he required' to maintain the ' J0 feet. oust control and other mitigation measures are proposed to include watering and no grading should winds exceed a certain velocity: Atraffic report was completed and reviewed by the City's consultant who found that no adverse impacts would result upon completion of the project. A park project has been conditioned for the applicant to -pay a Quimby fee, which will be set aside for future parks contemplated by the City. Additionally, 7o percent of the project will be permanently protected" as Open Space. ' I VC/Nelson closed the pubiic'hearing. C/Lee asked the applicant to comment on rights of view. Mr. Singh stated that staff is very cognizant of views. As such, staff conditiin oned thstaffde project the to provide lower walls and provide screening. cted applicant to flip the houses closer to the existing residences to lessen their visibility and ensure heavy planting between the tiers to mitigate the second wall. C/Lee asked the applicant to comment on the loss of the cul-de-sac playground" and whether the applicant intended to develop a portion of the open space as a small park or play area. Mr. Singh reiterated the City's ordinance that the applicant is required to contribute to Quimby funds and the City decides the appropriate locations for its parks. C/Nolan said she empathized with rsidents about preserving e Crestview and the res dents lose ta of the community. She lives opp group of trees that were called the "dog trees" when the area developed. She visited the site today and could not find the street for the project. She said she would like to visit the site in order to see what the residents will view. She referred to a remark about vegetation walls with cells and vegetation growing off of the cells. She asked where the reference could be found and if it was intended to reduce noise. Mr. Singh explained that the retaining wall was a decorative wall with cells that have vegetation growing i OCTOBER 10; 2006 PAGE 17 PLANNING COMMISSION out of them to camouflage the wails land blend then into the existing environment. The walls are directly opposite the current homeowners. To many of the residents' the area is alreadyvisually blocked because there is currentlya wall behind the property.; The areas that residents view are the upper elevations of the proposed site that will be maintained as open space and generally undisturbed. C/Nolan asked if there is an "owner's right to view? CDD/Fong responded that the City does not have a view protection ordinance. To C/Torng's question about the size of the'houses,,Mc Singh reiterated' that the average house would lconsist of 2800 square feet two-story house with an average of 1500 square foot pad coverage. From the applicant's standpoint'the City was trying to balance the natural area. The original project called for grading 60 to 70 percent of the natural envelope. The City tried to limit the project to the area that was already being disturbed and that is how, the plan evolved and`that is the: reason for thelone change. Conversely, the project now impacts' only percent of the area with 70 percent remaining undisturbed. The current Crooked Creek residences sell for about $500,000- $600,000 and theproposed project incorporates houses selling in the $800,000.$900,000 range. CDD/Fong responded to C/Torng that the applicant is building 16 homes and is required to pay park fees that will be used to improve or expand existing parks. There will be no new park in the area. In order to create parks there must be land available for parks. C/Torng believed that even small traffic impacts should be considered drastic impacts due to the volume of traffic. Otherwise, there would be no mitigation and benefit for the community. He supported the residents concerns about traffic impacts. Peter Lewandowsky, Environmental Impact Services, the City's consultant, stated that all of the comments from the community were specific and germane to the project. Relative to traffic, there are a number of issues. The primary focus .of the traffic analysis looked at internal circulation, ingress/egress, street right-of-way and turnaround, etc, to make sure that those features were sufficient to accommodate the project. The 16 vehicles will generate about 160 trips per day. Relative to the traffic volumes in the area it is a small number in the overall context of traffic and as a result, the traffic analysis did not look beyond the project site. in short, the study did not OCTOBER 10, 2006 pass the threshold standards for traffic analysis for traffic signals and turning movements beyond the'site'. He concurred that it was a significant impact to the residents on Crooked Creek and concurred with the heartfelt comments of residents who feared the project mightchange the character of the street. With respect to safety;'additional traffic along the roadway should prompt residents to consider the safety of the children, an enforcement issue related to the traffic enforcement agency to ensure traffic emermes gency genare y access in ed, The development will result in a secondary point the event that emergency ingress and 'egress is'required for fire reasons. There is no mechanism`relative to the current procedures 'and methodologies with which traffic is assessed to impose significant threshold criteria. C/Torng said the residents of Crooked Creek, Running Branch and Gold Run experience significant traffic issues and wanted staff to think about it. CFfomg saidhe was concerned about the 25 percent grade and wanted to know if the pictures depicted reality. Mr. Singh confirmed d t at the an exact picture was taken using a13D'model of the existing topography replica of the existing conditions: There are steep slopes in the area but those slopes are not being developed. The area being developed is relatively; flat: ' Mr. Singh stated that the applicant would be open to considering ` a° proportionate `share for traffic mitigation. During the community meeting similar issues were raised and M/Herrera said that the City had adopted signalization at one of the intersections and the project would be willing to contribute its fair share. Mr. Singh responded to C/Torng that the project is conditioned to mitigate for noise issues by providing blocks with vegetation to prevent the noise bouncing back and forth. CDD/Fong and Mr. Singh confirmed to C/Tomg that there would be no gate and that there would be a turnaround at the project entrance to mitigate the safety concern. VC/Nelson said he agreed with Mr. Lewandowsky that all concerns were valid. However, from his perspective he identified most closely with Mr. Greenhut's statement that he in no way wanted to restrict or take away the applicant's rights to the fair and reasonable use of the property. However, it was his obligation and duty to do everything possible to make it PAGE 18 PLANNING COMMISSION I I OCTOBER 10, 2006 I PAGE 19 PLANNING COMMISSION I l; asood �a ; 9 project as possible inconsideration of the neighbors' concerns and the concerns of the community at large. To that end, he cannot act on this project until he sees an°actual artist's rendering of the views of the Property, the grading that will take place and what it will do or not do to the hillside from' the SR57: He said he could not agree more with Ms. Tweed that "Country Living" was the theme in the City. He is a realist and knows where the City is heading, NeVertheless; it is a hillside^that has always had special meaning as an entry view into the City. Secondly; he did not believe he could act, on the project until he had artist's renderings of the views from the back yards that would be affected. Further, he is not at all comfortable with the oak tree and walnut tree and woodland' mitigation. As it is currently Presented it appears" to be" deferred mitigation. H& cannot read the documentationtasit currently exists and feel comfortable that potentially significant impacts to oak•trees, and oa'k+woodlands; and walnut trees and walnut woodlands can be mitigated to less+than a significant level in terms of the number of trees proposed to replace current trees' under the ordinance as well as the acreage of the communities those trees provide. As an example, in 1976 he and others prepared the 1976 Significant Ecological Area Study for the, LA County General'Plan'and this hillside was designated as part of the SEA area. In 2000 his firm prepared an update and saw no reason to remove it from that category. elieved that thre was ecological value and he wanted to feel omfortablethat it could be met gated. He wanted to know what if anything could be done for the trees that are claimed to be "dead and dying" because the Department of Fish and Game says that "dead and dying" trees are in fact habitat for a whole suite of Species and he did not want those simply "written off." He also wanted the applicant to find a similar property as a commitment to part of the plan. With respect to the landscape plan he would like to use vegetation that was usual to the area — local or indigenous rather than like a garden - it should look like the surrounding hillside and function as an extension of that. He asked if the vines were intended for the gridlock and Mr. Singh responded affirmatively. VC/Nelson said he was not prepared to advise a good replacement but said that most vine species are highly invasive and he would not want to create a situation that would allow vines to creep into undisturbed woodlands and take over. He recommended that the applicant consult a restoration ecologist who might have an idea about how to replace the vines. OCTOBER 10, 2006 ' "' 1 PAGE 20 "i • ;> PLANNING COMMISSION Mr. Singh pointed out that'mostiof the trees had been removed as a result of the slope's and notofQha development'and did not see la reason for offsite mitigation requirements:= The' cant could a thuld e trees 16 itiig a 1 lnbas . VC/Nelson said that if the app and duplicate the community and replace` the 73 "trees at 3:1 and do something on the"'dead and dying" trees such as a 1:1 replacement it would be acceptable to him. ' CDD/Fong felt that`80 `days might not be sufficient time for the City's consultant to review the plans. in addition she had not verified that the applicant couldprovide the artists rendering in 30 days. C/Torng and C/Lee asked for input with respect to the retaining wall and whether a redesign was appropriate or possible. C/Torng' moved, C/L'ee'seconded to re=open the public''hearing. Without objection, the motion' was so ordered. VC/Nelson 'moved, C/Lee seconded, to, continue the public hearing to November` 28,,2006, with notices of the continue public hearing mailed to residents within 1000 feet of the project.' The purpose of the continued publc to Com'miss oners concernWas to s Mot onacarriednby the following Roll Call vot sufficient time to te: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Nelson, Lee, Nolan, Torng None Wei 8, PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTSIINFORMATIONAL ITEMS: C/Lee welcomed Commissioner Nolan. tC[Torng commended he Jewel Ridge project, t son its suprt and taff welcomed Commissioner staff for bringing forward r Nolan. C/Nolan thanked her colleagues for welcoming her and said she looked forward to working on the Commission. VC/Nelson welcomed C/Nolan and thanked staff for wonderful staff reports. CDD/Fong stated that she hoped, to schedule a workshop for today. However, due to the absence of C/Wei the JCC 'Development workshop was Postponed to October 24 as recommended by the City Attorney. The workshop will commence at 6:00 P.M. prior to the regular Commission meeting. Dinner will be served for the Commissioners between 5:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. with the location tentatively set for Room CC -2. 11. , SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: i As listed in tonighi-s,agenda. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Vice Chairman Nelson adjourned the meeting at 10:23 p.m. Attest: Community +e ment Director (.even, Vice hairman La PLANNING COMMISSION 'A6ENDA REPORT CIN Of DIAMOND BAR -21825 COPLEY DRIVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: MEETING DATE: CASEIFILE NUMBER: PROJECT LOCATION: APPLICATION REQUEST: PROPERTY OWNER APPLICANT: DIAMONDBARiCAB1706'idTEL:(008) 038.7030.-FAX(8o8) 001-3717 7.1� Pubilip heering Continued from October 10, 2008 November 20,2006 1.r Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 2. 2.Zone Change o. 2006.02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01 3 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 4. Conditional use Permit No. 2002-18 5. Variance No. 2002-02 6. Tree Permit No. 2002-13 Seuthem'Termin`sgf Crooked C_ reek Drive i Car CA 91765, Dlamon (APN #8714.026-n1j3J To adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring program;. to subdivide a 12.9 a ra site l,'t 16Iresidaptial lote ranging in size from 5 65 °to'10;50 '8' uare %et for the eventual devial optflent. With single-family homes;, to change the zoning from 12-1-10,00.0 to RL -PD; to grade and develop In a, hillside area; to allow retaining wells with an exposed height of 10 feet that exceed the allowed exposed height adjacent to a street; and to remove, replace and protect oak and walnut trees. Mr, Daniel Singh Jewel Ridge, LLC 10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard Culver City, CA 90232 STAFP RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission: Open the continued public hearing; receive comments on the project; close the public hearing and begin deliberations on VTTM No. 540B1 and its entitlements; and recommend approval of Zone Change No. 2006-03 and Planned Development Overlay District 2006-01, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Monitoring Program, VTTM No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit No, 2002-18, Variance No 2002-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-12, VTfM 54081 , PLANNING COMMISSION 'A6ENDA REPORT CIN Of DIAMOND BAR -21825 COPLEY DRIVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: MEETING DATE: CASEIFILE NUMBER: PROJECT LOCATION: APPLICATION REQUEST: PROPERTY OWNER APPLICANT: DIAMONDBARiCAB1706'idTEL:(008) 038.7030.-FAX(8o8) 001-3717 7.1� Pubilip heering Continued from October 10, 2008 November 20,2006 1.r Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 2. 2.Zone Change o. 2006.02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01 3 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 4. Conditional use Permit No. 2002-18 5. Variance No. 2002-02 6. Tree Permit No. 2002-13 Seuthem'Termin`sgf Crooked C_ reek Drive i Car CA 91765, Dlamon (APN #8714.026-n1j3J To adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring program;. to subdivide a 12.9 a ra site l,'t 16Iresidaptial lote ranging in size from 5 65 °to'10;50 '8' uare %et for the eventual devial optflent. With single-family homes;, to change the zoning from 12-1-10,00.0 to RL -PD; to grade and develop In a, hillside area; to allow retaining wells with an exposed height of 10 feet that exceed the allowed exposed height adjacent to a street; and to remove, replace and protect oak and walnut trees. Mr, Daniel Singh Jewel Ridge, LLC 10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard Culver City, CA 90232 STAFP RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission: Open the continued public hearing; receive comments on the project; close the public hearing and begin deliberations on VTTM No. 540B1 and its entitlements; and recommend approval of Zone Change No. 2006-03 and Planned Development Overlay District 2006-01, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Monitoring Program, VTTM No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit No, 2002-18, Variance No 2002-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-12, VTfM 54081 BACKGROUND: VTTM No. 64081 was presented to the Planning Comrrilkop at a public hearing on October 10, 2006 The Commission continued the public hearing to November 28, 2006 tp.give the appiipahttim`e to address the Commission's ,concern. ANAL' YSIs: At the October. 10, 2008 public hearing for ,this project;, the Planning, Commisslon directed the applicant to address the following concerns. 1, The' height of three 10 foot high retaining walls .adjacent to the proposed pedestrian trail easement located on the east side of Street "Al'. According to the applicant's preliminary landscape plan; the three retaining walls have been reduced in height and are proposed at an,exposed height of five feet each. 2. Provide an artist's renderings before and after the project's construction from the SR 67 freeway.. - Artists renderings were not provided. The applicant provided photographic views ,from 13 locations along4he,SR, 57,freeway; to the project site; The views show that the project site can not be seen from the SR 57 freeway. Staff believes that photographs taken from a dlfferentlane of the freeway, with the development of the alta started andlor completed, the disturbance of the hillside and portions of the homes would be visible, Asa result, staff believes that the CommiSslon's concern regarding the view from the freeway is not adequately addressed. 9. Provide artist's renderings from the backyards of residents affected by the project. Show progression at five and ten year intervals. The applicant provided a photograph of the existing backyard view at ground level from Lot 82 located on .Crooked Creek Drive to the project site. Artist's renderings have also been provided of this view at live and to year intervals and section renderings showing the views from Lots 80 and 82. The renderings Indicate that the view from the backyards of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive will change substantially. However, with the maturity of the plant materials used to buffer the retaining walls, the walls could effectively be screened and the view softened. But, the applicant did not consider the view from the second floor of the existing homes which would certainly be different from the view at ground level. The retaining walls and new home viewed from the second floor would be more obtrusive. Staff believes that the view concern is not adequately addressed. 4. Provide documentation that the.oak and walnut trees, removed by thk project's development will be mitigated to less than significant. 2 VRM 54081 -i➢ ir( The applicant provided 1 s preliminary landscape plan that _shows on -09 mitigation as follows: a. The, removal of 43 oak.traes end their replacement at a 3:1 Mtki fora total of 129 replacement oak trees: b. The removal of 29 walnut trees and (heir replacement at a 3:1 ratio for a total of 87 replacement walnut trees: and c. One hundred and ninety-seven (,197),,dead or drying oak and walnut,trees that wilt be replaced at a 1;1 ratio for a total of 197 replacement trees. The total free replacement is 413 trees. A fuel modification plans was also submitted by the applicant. This plan will be j provided to,the Fire Department ferrevtgw prlorto fine] map ;approval. that US 6 looks hike the surrounding area and functions an as as an extension of the hillside, area, The prellminary landscape plan uses planting patterns that occur ln.nature. Several rOf plant species. era native to southern California. Additionally, proposed vines are located between proposed lots and existing homes,on Crooked Creek next Drive or on lots adjacent to theooline neoand nature! open! space, area. Thesnes 6replao e to the project site's south property need to be deleted frpm the plan and replaced with,a species that is appropriate next to a natural open space arae. The City's environinerctal consultant, En'vironmentaiJmpact sciences who prepared the Mitigated Negative Declaration, has reviewed the, plans and finds that from a CEQA perspectl rd the plans do not Introduce substantially new information that would change. the project. Therefore, the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project Is still an appropriate document for CEQA compliance: Additionally, the plans area full and adequate:solutlon to vegetation related Impacts: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: As directed by the Planning Commission, staff mailed continued public hearing notices to least 10 daystely 219 pr or to the property continued public hearing date of November 28,200 in a i,000 -foot radius of the 6site of ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City I' has prepared an Ihitial.Study and determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) Is required for this project. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) was prepared by the City's environmental consultant, Environmental Impact sciences. The 30 day review period began on.July 26, 2006 and ended on Auust 213, 2006. The addItlonal nt to this report aff does not substantially hangs his project. Tprovided e efore, it is not required that required Declaration be recirculated. 3 VTTM 54091 RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends thatahe Planning, Cor Council: approval Of;Zone;Cbegge,No. �isfYicf No. 2006,01, Mlfigaied'.Negative sslon>recommend the following to the City and Mitigation Monitoring Program and Vesting Tentative Map No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2008.02; Tree Permit No. 2002-13, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolutions to City Council. red b : Reviewed by: nn J. Lungu, Nanay Fong; AI Associate Planner Community Develo rector Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution recommending to City Councll approval of Zone Change No. 20112-02 and Planned Development Overlay District -No. 2006-01; 2, Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of VTTM No.53430 and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 3 Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Pennit No. 2002-13 and addptlon of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated October 10, 2006; 6. Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 10, 2006; 6. 57 Freeway View of VTTM 54081; 7. Artist's Renderings of views from the back yards of Lots 80 and 82 located on Crooked Creek Drive; and 8. Conceptual Landscape Plan and Fuel Modification Plan. V. VTTM 54031 1 RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends thatahe Planning, Cor Council: approval Of;Zone;Cbegge,No. �isfYicf No. 2006,01, Mlfigaied'.Negative sslon>recommend the following to the City and Mitigation Monitoring Program and Vesting Tentative Map No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2008.02; Tree Permit No. 2002-13, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolutions to City Council. red b : Reviewed by: nn J. Lungu, Nanay Fong; AI Associate Planner Community Develo rector Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution recommending to City Councll approval of Zone Change No. 20112-02 and Planned Development Overlay District -No. 2006-01; 2, Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of VTTM No.53430 and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 3 Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Pennit No. 2002-13 and addptlon of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated October 10, 2006; 6. Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 10, 2006; 6. 57 Freeway View of VTTM 54081; 7. Artist's Renderings of views from the back yards of Lots 80 and 82 located on Crooked Creek Drive; and 8. Conceptual Landscape Plan and Fuel Modification Plan. V. VTTM 54031 NOVEMBER 28, 2006 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 6. NEW BUSINESS: None 7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 Vestina Tentative Tract Man No 54081 Zone Change No. 2006-021 Permit No. 2002-13 — In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, City's Subdivision Ordinance — Title 21, Development Code — Title 22, Sections 22.14, 22.58, 2222, 22.54 and 22,38, the proposed project was a 22 lot subdivision on a site of approximately 12.9 acres that would provide for the development of 16 single-family detached homes on individual parcels ranging in size from approximately 5;705 square feet to 10,506 square feet. The proposed project would include the constructions of private streets, graded pads, manufactured slopes and retaining walls; an easement for a public pedestrian trail in a portion of proposed open space areas, and the removal of a portion of existing vegetation. -.,.. The current zoning of the project site is RA-10;000:"The Zone Change to RL/Planned Development Overlay provides for compliance with the General Plan land use designation and maximum flexibility in the site planning and design, thereby allowing smaller lots in order to retain more open space within the project boundaries. The Conditional Use Permit relates to grading and development within a hillside area. The Variance relates to retaining walls that are proposed at a height greater than six feet. The Tree Permit relates to the removal, replacement and protection of oak and walnut trees. (Continued from October 10, 2006) PROJECT ADDRESS: At the southern terminus of Crooked Creek Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER/ Daniel Singh APPLICANT: Jewel Ridge, LLC 10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard Culver City, CA 90232 NOVEMBER 28, 2006 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION i i AssocP/Lungu presented staffs reportand recommended Planning Commission approval of a resolution recommending City Council approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration, No. 2006-03, Zone Change No. 2006-02/ Panned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081,Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13 as amended. Chair/Nelson re -opened the public hearing. Lawrence Berner, 3716 Crooked Creek Drive, a 30 -year resident said he was concerned that construction of the three 16 -foot high brick walls behind the homes would completely ruin the views. Additionally, he was concerned about the mud and water coming down his drainage' ditch. Gregory Shockley, > 3711 Crooked Creek Drive, said he reviewed the documentation and found certain items to be very disappointing and could not understand how the project got tothis point. The geology report indicates the ground is subject to liquefaction in the; event of an earthquake and he believed that with the added weight of deep watering it would lead to problems like those that took'place'in Anaheim Hills, Blue Bird Canyon (Laguna) and two' years' ago' in Diamond Bar. He also wondered why there was no traffic mitigation piaci. Jeff Layton, 3703 Crooked Creek Drive, spoke about the increased noise, loss of country view due to construction of a wall visible from the freeway and possible failure of the retaining wall and threat of personal and property loss as a result. Joyes Tweed, 2115 Running Branch, said she was pleased with the applicant's efforts to meet the requested changes. However, she was not satisfied that only one picture was taken from only one backyard because there are number of residences that will be affected. The project will also affect people who have property on the lower section of Diamond Bar and she was not comfortable about how their backyards would be affected and whether it had been properly explained during this process. She was also concerned about the resident at the very end of the street because it was not apparent whether that resident would be looking into walls across the street as well as next to them. She wanted to see more explanation and view from all locations prior to approval. June Sutherland, ;20850 Gold Run Drive, said she was concerned about drainage from thetop of the hill tothe9owerportion because she felt the drainage channel might Abe rendered inadequate by the project. She believed that the retaining wail would be visible from the freeway and place a negative impact on the surrounding property values. This project does not lend itself to country living, which is the reason people live in Diamond Bar She said she was also concerned about the trees marked as "dead and dying and felt the City should hire an Arborist to meet with a committee of residents that would ultimately be affected by the project. She also believed that the tree replacement ratio was too little because 10 -gallon replacement trees would not replace 100 year-old trees.She stated her belief that heretofore it ihad been difficult to get projects built in the City and giving variances of such drastic bias to the developer was unfair to the long-time residents of Diamond Bar. Daniel Singh, applicant, responded to speakers that he attempted to gain access to backyards of residences that directly face the property and only a few were, willing to give his:, crew access to their backyards to take photographs; He presented additional renderings to the Commission that he said showed in 10 years how difficult it would be to see what had been built. In spite of their being no view ordinance for the City the applicant wants to cooperate and has sought guidance from staff to be as aesthetically pleasing as possible. Mr. Singh said that his biologist was present and would testify that all of the trees would be mitigated on-site and that the habitat area had been mitigated for the oak tree woodland. The City conducted an independent study of the project and asked for some changes that were ultimately included in the Arborists' report. The reason for requesting a zone change is to attempt to preserve as much of the open space as close to the development as possible. The applicant's biologist offered to answer questions. Hunter J. Tannery, 3802 Castle Rock Road, said he does not want any houses built because the animals would disappear and there would be no place for people to hike. Every day he plays with his dog in the backyard and they enjoy the view and do not want the City to tear down the country and make houses. NOVEMBER 28, 2006 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION i Norma Leon Enclade, 3611 Crooked Creek, said she was concerned by how the residents would be impacted by the construction that is occurring at the end of Crooked Creek. It seems the areawilFbe developed and how do the residents ensure the safety' of their children as construction trucks are coming in and out when children are playing in the street. If there were a question of liquefaction what percentage of the existing and thoroughly cemented vegetation' would be left implace to prevent liquefaction that could occur? She believed there were a lot of children that took pleasure in exploring the area and felt it would be lost due to development. At what point does Diamond.Bar cease development in favor of its residents? Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing. C/Wei said that although he was absent from the October 10 public hearing for this project he familiarized himself with the details of the project and read the minutes of the meeting. He asked the developer to respond to the following questions: 1) Is there sufficient drainage to mitigate future mudflow and excess water; 2) will the project infringe on the wildlife habitat and 3) is the treereplacement ratio and size sufficient and would there be sufficient replacement of vegetation to prevent excess mud and water flow; 4) respond to the concerns about the safety of children during construction. C/Lee said that last time he asked if the developer could lower the height of the retaining wall. Also, it appears that the developer did not respond to traffic concerns. CDD/Fong responded that it was the Commission's direction that the applicant was to provide additional information and one of the directions was for the applicant to determine whether he could reduce the height of the retaining wall. AssocP/Lungu explained that staff asked the developer to push the five and six foot retaining walls backto make the trail connection as required by the Trails Master Plan. As a result, the walls might have to be higher than five or six feet each. The developer responded that he could provide the area for the trail and retain the three five-foot high retaining walls. Other walls throughout the project are a series of five or six foot high retaining walls with planter areas between each wall. EC/Lewandowski again explained that with the preparation of the environmental documents for this project a traffic study was prepared that examined the associated,trip generation characteristics. The traffic study calculatedthe number of daily trips as well as; peak houritrips and clearly the project as with any project, would add traffic to the local roadways. However, the added traffic does not manifest in the need for signalization or additional traffic mitigations. C/Lee asked if this was a proper answer to the residents' concerns. CDD/Fong pointed out that this project consists of only 16 houses and although the 16 trips would add some traffic to the general area it would not be enough to warrant signals or stop signs. The City's traffic engineer will be looking at the issue and if the residents have concerns about the general area they are invited to address the Traffic and Transportation Commission and Neighborhood Traffic Management Program'meetings. In general, there may be some mitigation measures that can occur in the area. However, based on expert analysis, this specific• project does not warrant additional mitigation measures. C/Nolan stated 4hat the photos showing the property, from the northbound SR57 are unclear and there is no clear understanding of howthe "gateway to the City of Diamond Bar" would appear if this project were built. It is an important view corridor and she wanted to see, how the views would be impacted by rooftops and retaining walls from all points of entry. CDD/Fong responded that the Commission's direction from last meeting was that the applicant needed to do a photo simulation to show what drivers would see as they traveled the northbound and southbound SR57. The photos did not provide that kind of information to the Commission. C/Nolan said she would like to see a rendition/drawing/graphic design rendition of what would appear in view — the homes, the rooftops, and the retaining walls as to what would be seen in the Diamond Bar gateway. She also wanted to see a rendition of what adjacent residents would see today and 10 years from completion of the project. Gary Dante, Civil Engineer for the project said he took the pictures from the ground and from the freeway. Basically, coming from the freeway there would be no direct view into the site. The closest view would be about a three second view from about a mile away. As one approaches the site there is a barrier of trees that completely block the view of the site. NOVEMBER28, 2006: PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION' Therefore, he does not believe there is a view corridor from the SR57. The view corridor from the houses below shows that with' the separation of the walls and' the planting between the wall's the ;project `is: a considerable distance away from the back yards and those residents would not feel crowded because of this project. In addition, there is a 10 -foot no man's land even before the walls start. The five-foot walls are five feet high so that they step back and each step would have plantings that would render the walls nearly invisible. Mr. Dante responded to C/Nolan that the first retaining wail would be about 15 feet back-from,the rearof the closest resident's rear yards. Additionally, the walls curve at the closest point and the photo was taken from the closest back yard. in some areas the walls are fifty feet from the back yards. He felt the mitigation was good. C/Nolan asked if staff agreed about the view from the SR57. CDD/Fong said that in fairness the applicant should simulate'a photo without the high landscaping at the edge of the freeway in order to provide a true picture of what would be viewed from the SR57. The hills of Diamond Bar are very important to its image. Additionally, the developer could provide another photo that included the freeway landscape. Chair/Nelson asked for clarification of the hydrology drainage changes that would occur as a result of the project and the need to accommodate those changes. EC/Lewandowski responded that the applicant provided hydrology and geotechnical study evaluations, which were reviewed by the City's Engineer and found to be acceptable relative to the City's standards and in conformance with the County's requirements. With the introduction of impervious surfaces and the change in the site topography, clearly the drainage characteristics of the site would be modified. The modifications will necessitate drainage facilities to be incorporated along the roadway with the drainage safely conveyed to the channel. The changes in accordance with County requirements will not result in a substantive change in the quantity or quality of the water that is discharged from the project site. Chair/Nelson asked what safety measures would be implemented to provide for maximum pedestrian safety during construction. Mr. Lewandowski responded that from a traffic engineering perspective there were no additional i,mitigation measures included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. As a matter of policy the City requires a construction plan and stipulatesthat construction shall occur in accordance with the City's requirements an& not adversely impact 16call residents. He believed there Were a number of issues relative'to this paiticular project. This site has a single point of access along a residential street and all construction traffic would therefore have to access the project site via the roadway. Ultimately, if there are safety considerations, and the City is very sensitive to those issues, those are enforcement actions that would have to be monitored by the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department. Mr. Lewandowski confirmed to Chair/Nelson that the site balanced, that there would be no offsite earth movement and all grading'++would be contained within the project site's development envelope, As with all construction activity the site would be fenced and all construction equipment would be staged on the project site. CDD/Fong stated that the Commission could impose a condition that required the;applicantto provide a construction traffic safety mitigation plan. Chair/Nelson felt such a requirement would address the concerns expressed this evening. I Chair/Nelson asked if the trail went through the project and accessed the open 's'pace.`' CDD/Fong' explained that the trail along Crooked Creek would lead to the regional trail at the edge of the City limits and that there would be a trailhead further up on the project site. Chalr/Nelson asked if the grading would be visible fromthe SR57. Mr. Dante responded that the site was very low and that there were two streets between the freeway and the project site with houses on both sides of each street. Those houses would block the view as well, even if the freeway hedges were removed. The grading is not changing much of the site viewscape and the hill blocks part of the site. Chair/Nelson said he had difficulty believing there would be no view of the terraced grading. Mr. Dante said it was downhill from the freeway. Chair/Nelson asked Mr. Dante to take a photograph and simulate the grading and the roofs onto the photograph and if some parts of the graded slope are in fact visible that the applicant show what it would look like now, at a five year and 10 year interval. He believed it would be hidden but he wanted to know what it would look like and that was his request at the last Commission meeting. Mr. Dante said he would do a line of site because the site cannot be seen since it is down at the river level. [1 Chair/Nelson asked what size trees were being used for the terraces behind the homes: Mr Singh responded that they were 10 -gallon on 10 -foot center plantings Chair/Nelson recommended that the applicant consider mixing in larger etrees, to provide better+screeningin a=shorten period of time. CDD/Fong stated that the City's Code requires that all trees must be a minimum 15 -gallon and a certain percentage must be 24" boxed trees. Mr. Singh said that when he'reviewedthe plan1he tree sizes were interspersed'. C/Nolan reiterated her concern about being provided a better rendition of what current residents would view from their back yards. 'Chair/Nelson said he was more comfortable with the project at this point. He thanked the applicant Jor,, making certain' advancements such as an increased ratio of replacement trees and having a qualified restoration 'biologist on board. However, the Commission needs a little more on the visuals. In response to Chair/Nelson CDD/Fong confirmed that staff could review the construction safety plan. 'CDD/Fong explained that the there was no time limitation on this Zone Change. Chair/Nelson moved, C/Wei seconded, to reopen the public hearing and continue the matter to December 12, 2006. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nolan, Wei, Chair/Nelson None VC/Torng No. 2006-01— In accordance with Development Code Sections 22-- .58,22.48 and 22.42 these new applications update and replace the previous Conditional Use Permit No. 1997-02 and Development Review No. 1997-06; change the vendor information; modifies the lease area; adds additional antenna on the existing park light pole behind the existing ones, and modify the equipment area to an enclosed building to match existing park facilities. PLANNING COMMISSION r AGENDA REPORT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR- 21828 COPLEY DRIVE -DIAMOND OAR; CA 91766! -TEC (BOB) 639-7030-FAX(909) 861.3117 , AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 7 j— Pubildhearing continued from, November 28, 2006 MEETING DATE: December 12, 2006 . , , f, CASE/FTLENUMBER: 1: Mitigated g4gative Declaration No. 2006.03 2:' Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned ` Development Overlay District No. 2006-01 3 Vesting Tentative Treat Map No. 64081 ,. 4. Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18. S. Variance No. 2042-02 6. Tree. Permit NO, 2602-13 PROM CT LOCATION: pouthatriTerminus of;Grooked break Dave Dlamon4 B46A 9,,1766 , (APN #67114.028-003) i APPLICATION REQUEST: To adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitlgatton Monitoring Program; to subdivide a 12.9 acre site Into 16 residential lots ranging in size from 5,705 to 10,605 square feet for the eventual development with single-family homes; to change the zoning from R-1- 10,000 to RL -PD; to grade and develop in a hillside area; to allow retaining walls with an exposed height of 10 feet which exceed the allowed exposed height adjacent to a street; and to remove, replace and protect oak and walnut trees. PROPERTY OWNER! Mr. Daniel Singh APPLICANT: Jewel Ridge, LLC 10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard Culver City, CA 90232 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: staff recommends the Planning'Commission: Open the continued public hearing; receive comments on the project; close the public hearing and begin deliberations on VTTM No. 64081 and' its entitlements; and recommend approval of Zane Change No. 2006-03 and Planned Development Overlay District 2006-01, Mitigated Negpjive Declaration No. 2006-03 and Mitigation. Monitoring Program, VTTM No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No 2002- 02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-12. I i VTTM 64061 VTTM No, 64087 was presented to the Planning Commission at a public hearing on October 10, 2006. The Commission continued the public hearing to .November 28, 2008 to give the applicant: time to: address the Commission's, concerns relateo to reteining..._wall...haighta,_,vagatation.'_reptecement'„and,::,xlews,:_ after ,. ths.,.,projegi's development At the, November 28, 2008 meeting, the applicant. provided a revised, preliminary landscape plan •showing,the Three-10 foot high retaining walls reduced to a height of five feet each; the use of vegetation indigenous to the area that functions as an extension of the existing hillside; and replacement walnut and oak trees. The Commission found the revlsed ;preliminary landscape. -plan acceptable. ,The lapiplIcant also, provided photographic ,views from, 13 locations along the SR 57 freeway to the project site and artists renderings of views from the backyards of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive at five and ten year intervals with section 'renderings. The Commission felt that the photographic 'views did not accurateiy`reflect the current view or show the results from grading the project site and constructing homes, Additionally, the renderings did not show the view from the second story of the; homes on Crooked Creek Drive et five and ten year intervals. 'As a result, the Commission .continued the public hearing to December 12, 2200q to allow the applicant' additional time to provide : the photo simulations and rendedngs, ' ANALYSIS: At the November 28, 2006 continued publlc hearing for this project, the Planning Commissiondirected the applicant to re -address the following concerns. Provide photographic simulations of the project site as viewed from the SR 67 freeway. Simulate the grading and roof tops an to the photograph and show the graded slope at the project site. At the November 28, 2006, the applicant presented the Commission with photographic. -views from the SR 57 freeway north bound. The view showed that the project was not visible from the freeway. The applicant has submitted a photographic view and photo simulation from the SR 57 freeway southbound. The photographic view shows the project site as it is today. The photo simulation shows the project site in ten years with a view of the second story and roof top of six homes and open space hillside. It also shows that existing vegetation along with trees planted as part of the proposed project's mitigation will prevent seeing a majority of the proposed homes from the SR 57 freeway south bound. However, the applicant did not provide a photographic view end photo simulation from the SR 57 freeway north bound. 2 MM M81 3. Provide an artist's renderings before and after the projeors construction from the b'ackyard's of the second story, of. existing homes locatedl on, Crooked Creek Ddve.l The renderings after the project's construction should: be at five and ten year Intervals.. The adlst's;renderings submitted by the applicant show the view from the second story basically the same as the' view,from the first story presented to the Commission on November 28, 2008: Due to the elevation difference between the pads of homes on Crooked Creek Drive and a proposed homes, the series of retaining walls are necessary. According to, the applicant's plans, Lot 80 on Crooked: Creek Drive has a'pad elevation of approximately 665. Lot 13 of VTTM 54081 directly behind Lot 80 has a pad elevetfoh of 690. Due to the topography, there It an elevation difference of 25 feet. Therefore, the view of the walls can not be avoided unless Lots 10 through 16 were hot graded. The first wall of the series of three walls will be located approximately 1,2 feet the narrowest point to 30 feet at the widest point from the property line of the homes)on Crooked Creek Drive. The proposed landscaping will assist in'mitigating the view, but the walls wllfatill be seen. 3. Provide a construction safety mitigation pian to address the safety concerns on local res idiinttal streets A condition has been added to the resolutions as follows: Conditional Use Permit,Variance and Tree 'Pernik' `Resolugon page 17, 5., b. -12; and VTTM 54081 and Mitigated' Negative' Declamtlon,Resolutlon, page 9, 7.6.12. The condition states: 'Prior to issuance of any permits or grubbing of the site, whichever comes first, the applicant shall submit a construction traffic safety mitigation plan that addresses such items as, but not limited to; lane closures, truck routes, traffic control measures for the construction area, street cleaning, etc.'for the City's review and approval." 4. On November 28, 2006, public comments expressed concerns related to traffic, retaining walls behind the homes on Crooked Creek Drive and their view, dead and dying trees, safety of children and drainage. A traffic study was prepared for this project and reviewed and accepted by the City. The study examines trips, daily and peak hours, generated by this project The study shows the project would add trips to the local roadways. However, the . added trips did not manifest the need for signaltzation or additional traffic mitigation. As discussed above, retaining walls are needed due to the elevation differences between the ped for existing homes and proposed homes. The view of the wells can be mitigated to some extent with landscaping. The dead and dying trees, to be replaced at a 3:1 and 1:1 ratio respectively, were addressed to the Commissions satisfaction in the revised landscape plans. 3 VTTM 54081 The safety of children Is addressed by,adding a.gond"don to the protect requiring the applicant to provide:a construdign.safetymdigation plan for U79 Citys review abd approveC, The drainage was addressed in a drainage study prepared by the applicant and ravlewed end acgepted by the City. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: As directed by the Planning Commission, staff mailed continued public hearing notices to approximately 219 property owners within,a 1,000 -foot radius of:the;project site at least 10 days prior to the continued public hearing date of November 28; 2006. , ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has prepared an Initial' Study and determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) Is required for this project. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) was prepared by the Ckty's environmental consultant, Environmental Impact Sciences. The 30 day review period began on July 28, 2006 and ended on ,August 28, 2006. The additional Information provided and attachment to this staff report does not substantially change this project. Therefore, it is not required that the Negative Declaration be recirculated. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the following to the City Council: approval of Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 200.8-01, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH 92006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program and Vesting Tentative Map No. 64081, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02, Tree Permit No. 2002-13, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolutions to City Council. Pre ared by. Reviewed by: Ann J. Lungu, Nancy Fong, AICP, Associate Planner Community Development Director n A-KITiLZ51 Attachments; 1. Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Zone Change No. 2002-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01; 2. . Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of VTTM No.53430 and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 3 Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13 and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated November 28, 2006; 5, Planning Commission Staff Reports dated October 10, 2006 and November 26, 2006; 6. SR 57 Freeway Southbound View of VTTM 54081; and 7. Artist's Renderings of views from the back yards at five and 10 yeat intervals. 5 VTTM 54081 DECEMBER 12, 2006PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION i whether the proposed development is consistentwith the Citys General Plan and Development Code. He also advised removal of Condition 5. a. (2) on page 3 of the resolution because it was an illegal condition. C/Nolanmoved, VC/Torng seconded, to approve Development Review No. 2006-22, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution with the deletion of Condition 5 a: (2) of the Resolution. Motion carried by the following, Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan, VClTorng, Lee, Chair/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: ; COMMISSIONERS; Wei ABSENT:' COMMISSIONERS: None RECESS: Chair/Nelson recessed the meeting at 8:15 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Nelson reconvened the meeting at 8:25 p.m. C/Wei returned to the dais. 7. CONTINUED' PUBLIC HEARINGS:' 7.1 Vesting Tentative Tracy '' Map No �540814i Zone Ch Nc Tree Permit No. 2002-13 — In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, City's Subdivision Ordinance — Title 21, Development Code — Title 22, Sections 22.14, 22.58, 22.22, 22.54 and 22.38, the proposed project was a 22 lot subdivision on a site of approximately 12.9 acres thatwouid provide for the development of 16 single-family detached homes on individual parcels ranging in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to 10,506 square feet. The proposed project would include the construction of private streets, graded pads, manufactured slopes and retaining walls; an easement for a public pedestrian trail in a portion of proposed open space areas, and the removal of a portion of existing vegetation. The current zoning of the project site is R-1-10,000. The Zone Change to RL/Planned Development Overlay provides for compliance with the General Plan land use designation and maximum Flexibility in the site planning and design, thereby allowing smaller lots in order to retain more open space DECEMBER 12, 2006 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION within the project boundaries. The Conditional Use Permit relates to grading and development within a hillside area. The Variance relates to retaining walls that are proposed at a height greater than six feet. The Tree Permit relates to the removal, replacement and protection of oak and walnut trees. (Continued from November 28, 2006) PROJECT ADDRESS: At the southern terminus of Crooked Creek Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER/ Daniel Singh APPLICANT: Jewel Ridge, LLC '10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard Culver City, CA 90232 AssocP/Lungu presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of a resolution recommending City Council approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03, Zone Change No. 2006-02/Panned'Devel6pment Overlay' District No: 2006-01, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081, Conditional Use :Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13. AssocP/Lungu referenced a letter staff received today regarding the author's concerns about the project and why he believed it should not be approved. Daniel Singh stated that this was the third Planning Commission hearing on this matter in spite of the fact that staff recommended approval. The Commission was concerned about visual impacts even though the City's attorney has made it clear that the City has no view ordinance. Nevertheless, the applicant has cooperated and provided responses to Commissioner's concerns. During the second hearing the Commission was presented before and after views from three lots that back up to the proposed project, five and 10 -year simulations of what the project appearance would be and a series of photos from the northbound SR57 that confirm the site would not be visible due to the vegetation along the freeway. Also provided at the second hearing was a revised landscape plan that utilized more indigenous vegetation and landscape plan that showed the complete on-site mitigation for oak tree and oak woodland replacement. The mitigation also included dead trees. Present during the November 28 meeting was the biologist that has assisted the applicant throughout the entire process. The applicant also provided a landscape plan that illustrated DECEMBER 12, 2006 PAGE 7 PLANNINGCOMMISSION t, 1 the modified areas. At the last hearing the Commission requested additional visual simulation of the project from the second story as well as a before and after view from the southbound SR57 rand the applicant has complied. The vegetation along the freeway is the same in the depictions of the five, 10 and existing views. He reviewed the proposed project, well under the allowable maximum number of units and.the project now before the Commission is a compromise based on discussions with staff and consultants. The initial project was reduced from 26 houses to 16 houses based on staffs input. The zone change request is consistent with the General Pian and is not being requested rto allow an increase in density; rather, to allow a small development^that preserves more open space than' would not have been made available under the existing zoning. Mr. Singh stated that the applicant has made every effort to cooperate with staff and the Commission and has expended more than $15,000 attempting to respond to the Commissioner's requests.' He hoped the Commission would approve the project at this time. Chair/Nelson re -opened the public hearing. Jeff Layton; 3703 Crooked Creek Drive, stated that at the last meeting he was disappointed about. the applicant's presentation and was disappointed that he was not allowed to speak after the presentations were made because he understood it was to be open hearing. He also felt the engineer was being evasive. The so-called credible biologistwas not knowledgeable about basic requirements and did not make a good presentation. He felt that in general the presentation was far below expectations. He also believed that the photos presented this evening were not indicative of what would occur even within the first five years. Mr. Layton said he was concerned about the steepness of the hillside and what the project would look like from both sides of the street. Gregory Shockley, 3711 Crooked Creek Drive, said he wanted to salvage the firewood from the project. He provided photographs to the Commission that showed a large two -foot base black walnut tagged to be removed as well as other views. Mr. Shockley asked if all trees were supposed to be tagged. Most of the trees in the canopy are not tagged and wondered if they had been counted. The view from across the street shows the 18 -foot retaining wail, the six- foot fence, the tree canopy that would be gone, etc. He said he was not opposed to development of the property and would like to see the applicant do a good job. He felt that a 15 to 18 foot retaining wall was not in the best interest of the residents and Diamond Bar. He referred to his letter addressed to the Commission. DECEMBER, 12, 2006 PAGE 8 PLANNINGCOMMISSION C/Wei recommended that the applicant plant more mature boxed trees than the proposed 15 -gallon at the onset of the project to provide a more mature canopy. CDD/Fong responded to C/Nolan that some of,the oak trees could be relocated under the direction of an Arborist. C/Nolan wanted to know if the Project could consider shelved walls rather than 18 -foot retaining walls. CDD/Fong responded that the applicant' could use a similar type of block with landscaping cells. However, it would, change the design because those types of blocks are placed at an angle and more of the slope would be lost. Mr. Shockley,explained his statements about the failure of the retaining wall as a result of potential earthquakes. Unless th&epicenter of an earthquake Is close :to 1 the area and there is an unreasonably high' water table it is unlikely the walls will fail. However, n6st walls of this`magnitude are on state land or on land that is controlled by a large corporation that can afford to inspect the walls on a regular basis and make appropriate repairs, and are not usually installed in areas where the slope flows down to other properties. If the retaining wall were to fail it would' most likely come down onto Brea Canyon Road: He said he "spoke:with three' engineers and one geotechnician and none said they Would use this'system He may not agree with the civil engineer on all points but in!manyaspects he did a good job. For the most part the palls are on cut and the soil is as good as it is going to get. In his estimation, the primary reason for the retaining wall is to incFease the usable rear yard. The retaining wall could be eliminated and the back yards would be on a slope as they are in "The Country Estates" which, in his opinion, would solve a lot of the problems. He said he did not agree with changing the density. He agreed with the applicant that looking from the elevation of the proposed dwellings residents would not be able to see the freeway. It is possible that the rooftops would be seen from the freeway. However, the block wall will not. He believed there were alternatives to the design plan and was disappointed that Mr. Singh felt compelled to build a retaining wall. If the retaining wall were six-foot high he believed no one would object. CDD/Fong responded to C/Lee that the distance between each of the three six-foot high retaining walls is about five feet in accordance with the Hillside Management Ordinance. AssocP/Lungu explained that the walls would have a much less massive appearance with plantings between each wall. CDD/Fong explained to C/Lee that the applicant presents his design to the DECEMBER 12, 2006 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION i City and the City determines whether the design m'eets'the development standards. ACA/Kovacevich expia'ined that the Commission's job is to apply' the code and lmake its recommendation to the City Council. Peter Lewandowski stated that a Certified Arborist conducted the tree survey in 2004 on behalf of the applicant and the City retained Mitch Beecham, a reputable biologist to review the accuracy of the survey. Based on Mr. Beecham's review there is no evidence to suggest that the tree survey was not conducted in full compliance with City standards.' Mr. Beecham had recommendations that subsequently incorporated. The tree survey was conducted based upon the applicant's original 26 -lot subdivision and the grading plan has since been modified. Therefore, the tree survey should not be necessarily indicative of a precise count but close approximation. Prior to grading, another tree survey will i be conducted to reflect the precise grading plan necessary to accommodate plans that -Council ultimately approves;Tree tagging protocol inciudes tagging: trees that are in compliance with the City's standards of diameter at a specified (breast) height! Thetree survey is an approximation and accurately reflects what was on-site atthe time of1the'survey. The edge of grading has been reduced and the affectedi number of trees is therefore likely less than the number represented in the environmental documentation. C/Lee said he felt that the applicant had not made an effort to design his project in accordance with the wishes and concerns of the residents. Mr. Singh explained that this project had been on the drawing board for four years and that there had been community meetings. C/Lee wanted to know how many meetings the applicant held. Mr. Singh responded. Mr. Singh responded to concerns about the retaining walls that a geotechnical engineer reviewed the plan and provided recommendations that were incorporated into the project. The City's consultant reviewed the soils report on a number of occasions. Both consultants recommended approval based upon the recommended mitigation. With regard to the trees the applicant is replacing trees at a 3:1 ratio and 1:1 ratio for dead trees. He said he would consider larger trees limited to the retaining wall area to help screen the walls. He reminded the Commission that this was not a large development. Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing. C/Nolanfeit'the applicant did not properly respond to'the Commission's request for simulation photos. She asked fot'an answer regarding the retaining walls. CDO/Fong responded that it was the applicant's decision as to what type of wall they would use. There is a condition requiring landscaping and irrigation:`Mr Singh stated that the system is called a "lock and load" system with a fagade that allows for vegetation cells. The reason this type of system is used is to, accommodate the concerns regarding massing and keep the development envelope as, small as possible. VC/Torng commended the builder for his time and effort toward a good project. However, he believed that comments were important for the applicant to consider. He felt that in researching all of the previous material :that the applicant had not properly responded to the request for viewpoint simulations.He asked the applicant to tell the Commission what size trees he intended to install, give ithe i Commission more information about the retaining wall and respond to the request for gateway view simulations. 1 C/Lee agreed with VC/Tomg that the applicant had not fully responded to the Commission's requests for certain' information. He asked'the applicant for his sincere cooperation`based`on the Commission's requests. 'C/Wei echoed 'other Commissionees' comments regarding trees, preservation of oak trees, increase in the size of replacement trees and how to soften the retaining walls with more vegetation. He suggested that the applicant comeback with plans to show the Commission. it seemed to him that the applicant had not complied with the Commission's request to have the pictures from the northbound SR57 without the vegetation at the side of the freeway. Chair/Nelson suggested the applicant speak with restoration ecologist Dr. Quinn at CalPoly to address concerns about what size trees should be installed as replacement of the native trees and replace other trees with larger boxed trees. He wanted a condition added to require that the slopes being graded above residences be planted immediately and that the applicant would use the native planting for erosion control. He believed the project could be made to look like it appears today although it would take a long restoration period. Chair/Nelson said he would like to move the project up the line but he was not convinced the applicant had provided what the Commission asked and he wants the City Council to see it as well. DECEMBER 12, 2006 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION I C/Lee said he was not comfortable with the project and `wanted the applicant' to prove that thea proposed project was the best for the residents. I If C/Nolan wanted to know if C/Lee was asking the applicant to provide a new plan without a retaining`wali. C/Lee sa'rd'he wanted to see different plan options to "'accommodate other opinions put, forth, by'the residents because he believed that,individual views of the', plan were 'completely opposite. C/Nolan said it was notclearto`her what C/Lee was requesting. C/Lee said he wanted a different pianthat included the resident's comments` and concerns. ACA/Kovacevich cautioned the Commission that there might be a fundamental misunderstanding about the process. The idea was not to get to the point of necessarily finding a project that everyone liked but to come to agreement that the project complied with the findings of fact. The applicant has submitted a project that has gone through several iterations and been pared Idown'to'16 homes and; the applicant is seeking an up or down vote on the proposed project. If, C/Lee is uncomfortable with the project and feels he cannot make the findings he could recommend denial: However, it is not proper for: Commission to attempt to redesign the project.•.. , 1 I CIV ei recommended the following: 1) revise the plan, to increase the size of trees and vegetation and a include a plan to transplant or preserve the oak trees, 2)^find away to soften 'the wall and, 3) provide view photos taken from northbound SR57 without the vegetation for photos 2, 3 & 4. Mr. Singh stated that each of the visuals cost the applicant about $1500 each. He wants to cooperate and has presented seven or eight views and asked the Commission to limit their expectations as much as possible. C/Wei believed the vegetation could be added and removed using a computer software program. C/Nolan stated that this request was made at the last meeting and the request was not a new request to the applicant and it would therefore not be unreasonable for the Commission to request compliance. If the applicant had provided one northbound rendering as previously requested this issue might have been resolved this evening. Mr. Singh reiterated that the Commission was requesting views without vegetation (photos 2, 3 & 4) along the northbound SR57 and response to recommendations regarding tree replacement, relocation and vegetation as 0 DECEMBER 12, 2006 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION called out by C/Wei. CDD/Fong said that staff would provide the requests in writing to?Mr. Singh. CDD/Fong reiterated the Commission's requests and included Chair/Nelson's concern about planting trees that were too large. Mr. Singh asked the Commission to reconsider their recommendation regarding replanting dueto the low success ratelof ra very costly effort. He stated that he was willing to comply with all Of the other requests. VC/Torng moved to continue the Public Hearing to January 9, 2007, to allow the applicant time to comply. Chair/Nelson agreed with Mr. Singh about native trees that 15 gallon and 24 box trees would be appropriate and -asked for a friendly amendment to VC/Torng's motion. VC/Torng amended his motion. C/Lee seconded the amended motion. CDD/Fong restated the motion as foll6ws: To continue the item to January, 9', 2007, and to bring back the aforementioned items: 1) revised photos #2, 3 and 4; percentage of tree species for softening the look of the retaining walls minus' relocation of native species. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Torng; Lee, Nolan, Wei, Chair/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: C/Lee cautioned staff to make certain applicants were prepared to respond to Commissioner's request and not waste everyone's time. VC/Torng thanked staff for their responsible efforts. He said it was an honor to work with his colleagues and wished everyone a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Chair/Nelson concurred. 10. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS. 10.1 Public Hearing dates for future oroiects n AGENDA REPORI CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR 'CA 997fi5 TEC. (9d9) 839.7030 - FAX (909) 861.3117' i AGENDA ITEM NUMBER • 7.1 — Public hearing continued from December 12, 2000 . MEETING DATE: Januarys, 2po7 CASE/FILE NUMBER: 1. Mitigated Negative Declaration No., 2006-03 2. Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01 3'"` Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 4. Conditional Use Permit No; 2002-18 5. Var(ahce No?002-02 6. Tree P,ermi No. 2002-13 PROJECT LOCATION: Southern Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (APN #8714-028003) APPLICATION REQUEST: To adopt4 the Mitigated ° Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring'.Program; AID subdivide a 12.9 acre" site into 16 residential lots ranging in size from 5,705 to 10;506 -square feet for the eventual development of single-family homes; to change the zoning, from R-1- 10,'000 to RL�PD; to grade and develop in a hillside area; to allow. retaining Walls with, an exposed height of 10 feet which exceed the allowed' exposed height adjacent to a street; and to remove, replace and protect oak and walnut trees. PROPERTY OWNER / Mr. Daniel Singh APPLICANT: Jewel Ridge, LLC 10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard Culver City, CA 90232 STAFF RECOlVIN�NDATION• Staff recommends the Planning Commission: Open the continued public hearing; 'receive comments on the project; close the public hearing and begin deliberations on VTTM No. 54081 and its entitlements; and recommend approval of - Zone Change No. 2006-03 and Planned Development . Overlay District 2006-01, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Monitoring Program, VTTM No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No 2002- 02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-12. VTTM 54081 BACKGROUND: VTTM No. 54081 was presented to the Planning Commission at a public hearing on October '10, 2006. The Commission continued the public hearing to November 28, 2006 and to De views after the project s developme06, to allow the applicant time address the Commission's concerns..relafed ' to ,retaining wail heights; vegetation replacement and At each continued public hearing 6 a' pplicant -provided views frgm the Sk 57 freeway of the project site before and after construction of the project at five and 10 year intervals. The applicant also provided a preliminarylandscape`plan and photographic simulation views from the backyards of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive at five and ten year intervals with section renderings. The Co'mmistslon felt that the photographic views and simulations did hot accurately reflect the current. view or the results from grading the project site and constructing homes. Therefore, the Commission continued the public hearing to 'January 9, 2p07 to,allow the, applicant additional time to provide the photographic views and accurate simulations. ANALYSIS: At the December 12, 2006 continued public hearing, the; Planning; Commission directed the applicant to re -address the following concerns.; 1. Photogtaphlo simulations from the SIR 57. freeway north bound without the existing -vegetation, located, adjacent to, the freeway., Provide. views from freeway locagons, 2; 3 and -4 as,shown on photographs; presented to the Commission November 28, 2006. Photographic simulations must show the project site Immediately after construction — zero year and five and ten year intervals. Additionally, the photographic simulations must include the slopes above the houses. The applicant has provided additional photographic views and simulation from the north bound SR 57 freeway at locations 2, 3, and 4 to the project site. The current photographic views at zero year and simulations after grading, and at five and ten year intervals show that the views from locations 3 and 4, which are closer to the project site, reveal more of the graded slopes, proposed retaining walls and future homes. Additionally, the photo simulations show that the more mature the vegetation is on the slopes and planter areas adjacent to the retaining walls,, the more effectively the proposed project, is as from the SR 57 freeway. However, the project will still be seen from the freeway. The applicant has also provided photo simulations at the 10 year interval showing the existing vegetation located adjacent to the freeway fight -of -way. This vegetation also assists in screening the proposed project more effectively. 2 VrrM 54081 I BACKGROUND: VTTM No. 54081 was presented to the Planning Commission at a public hearing on October '10, 2006. The Commission continued the public hearing to November 28, 2006 and to De views after the project s developme06, to allow the applicant time address the Commission's concerns..relafed ' to ,retaining wail heights; vegetation replacement and At each continued public hearing 6 a' pplicant -provided views frgm the Sk 57 freeway of the project site before and after construction of the project at five and 10 year intervals. The applicant also provided a preliminarylandscape`plan and photographic simulation views from the backyards of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive at five and ten year intervals with section renderings. The Co'mmistslon felt that the photographic views and simulations did hot accurately reflect the current. view or the results from grading the project site and constructing homes. Therefore, the Commission continued the public hearing to 'January 9, 2p07 to,allow the, applicant additional time to provide the photographic views and accurate simulations. ANALYSIS: At the December 12, 2006 continued public hearing, the; Planning; Commission directed the applicant to re -address the following concerns.; 1. Photogtaphlo simulations from the SIR 57. freeway north bound without the existing -vegetation, located, adjacent to, the freeway., Provide. views from freeway locagons, 2; 3 and -4 as,shown on photographs; presented to the Commission November 28, 2006. Photographic simulations must show the project site Immediately after construction — zero year and five and ten year intervals. Additionally, the photographic simulations must include the slopes above the houses. The applicant has provided additional photographic views and simulation from the north bound SR 57 freeway at locations 2, 3, and 4 to the project site. The current photographic views at zero year and simulations after grading, and at five and ten year intervals show that the views from locations 3 and 4, which are closer to the project site, reveal more of the graded slopes, proposed retaining walls and future homes. Additionally, the photo simulations show that the more mature the vegetation is on the slopes and planter areas adjacent to the retaining walls,, the more effectively the proposed project, is as from the SR 57 freeway. However, the project will still be seen from the freeway. The applicant has also provided photo simulations at the 10 year interval showing the existing vegetation located adjacent to the freeway fight -of -way. This vegetation also assists in screening the proposed project more effectively. 2 VrrM 54081 2. A revised landscape plan showing trees, shrubs and vines in the planter areas between the retaining walls which are adjacent to the properly lines of the homes on Crooked.,Creek ,Drive and Brea Canyon, Flood,; ControlChannel. The. landscape plan must show the following:, ornamental evergreen trees at 24, 36 and 48 inch box sizes, planted 12; feet on center with 50 ;percent at 24 inch box, 25 percent at 36 inch box ;and t25 percent, at, 48; inch box; shrubs in 5 and 10 gallon sizes, planted, 3 feet on center with 75 percent at 5 gallon size and 25 percent at 10 gallon size; and vines in 5 gallon size planted 5 feet on center. The revised landscape plan reflects the above referenced plant sizes and percentages for planter areas between the, retaining walls which are adjacent to the property lines of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive and Brea Canyon Flood Control Channel. Additionally, a condition has been added to the resolution reflecting these, plant sizes, percentages and location. , 3. Provide photographic and informational . material on- the geo-grid , retaining wall system. Explain the ;construction; of the ,wall and how plant materials and irrigation are tintegrated into a :wall. The applicant has provided structural details and information for a geo-grid lock and load retaining wall for another project in the .City of Thousand Oaks, California and a typical section of this type of wall for the City of Diamond Bar. Also provided are photographs of this type of wall with landscape areas between a series of retaining walls, Otoions; 1111= . I ''. The Planning Commission has the following options when considering this project. The options are as follows: 1. Recommend approval to City Council of this project as presented to the Planning Commission; 2. Recommend approval to City Council with additional conditions; 3. Recommend approval to City Council with the elimination of lots; 4. Direct the applicant to redesign the project; or 5. Recommend denial of the project to City Council. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the following to the City Council: approval of Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program and Vesting Tentative Map No. 54081, Conditional 3 VTfM 54081 i< Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No: 2006-02, Tree Permft No., 2002-13, Findings,of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within -the attached resolutions to City Council. Pr pared by. Reviewed by: Ann J. L.ungu, Nancy Fong, AICP, Associate Planner Community'D'evelopment Dii-ettor Attachments: v: 1. Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Zone Change No. 2002-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01; 2. Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of VTTM No.53430 and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 3 Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13 and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated December 12, 2006; 5. Planning Commission Staff Reports dated October 10, 2006 and November 28, 2008 and December 12, 2006; 6. SIR 57 -Freeway northbound view of VTTM 54081 from locations #2, #3 and #4 with present view, view after grading and after construction at 5 and 10 years; 7. Photos of geo-grid walls; 8. Structural details for geo-grid wall; and 9. Preliminary landscape plans with larger size plant materials. 4 VTTM 54081 JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No 54081 Zone Change No. 2006-0 Permit Na. 2002=1:3 In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, City's Subdivision'Ordinanee' = Title 21, Development Code Title 22, Sections 22.14, 22.58,:22.22, 22:54 and 22:38? the proposed project was a 22 lot subdivision on a site of approximately 12.9 acres that would provide for the development of 16 single-family detached homes on individual parcels ranging in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to 10,506 square feet. The proposed project would include the construction of private streets, graded pads, manufactured slopes and retaining walls; an easement for a public pedestrian trail in a portion of proposed open space areas, and the removal' of a portion of existing vegetation; The current zoning of the project site is R-1-10,000. The Zone Change to RL/Planned Development Overlay provides for compliance with the General Plan land ruse designation and maximum flexibility in the site planning and design, thereby allowing smaller lots in order to retain more open space within the project boundaries. The Conditional Use Permit relates to grading and development within a hillside area. The Variance relates to retaining walls that are proposed at a height greater than six feet. The Tree Permit relates to the removal, replacement and protection of oak and walnut trees. (Continued from December 12, 2006) PROJECT ADDRESS: At the southern terminus of Crooked Creek Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER/ Daniel Singh APPLICANT: Jewel Ridge, LLC 10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard Culver City, CA 90232 AssocP/Lungu presented staffs report and provided the Planning Commissioners with photographs and responses to Commissioner's requests and concerns at the December 12, 2006, public hearing. Also in accordance with the Commission's request, the applicant submitted a revised landscape plan that shows a variety of tree and size planted 12 -feet on center. Staff revised the condition to the resolution accordingly. JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION Additionally, in accordance with the Commission's request, the applicant provided -information and structural drawings depicting the type of wall system proposed and included renditions of types of planting materials to be planted in the cells of the wall system. Following the presentation AssocP/Lungu said that the Planning Commission had the following options: 1) approve a resolution recommending City Council approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03, Zone Change No. 2006-02/Panned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18; Variance Na. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13; 2) recommend approval; to the Council with additional conditions; 3) recommend approval to the City Council with elimination of some lots; 4) direct the applicant to redesign the project, or 5) recommend City Council denial of the project. She recited new conditions added to the resolution in accordance with the Commission's recommendations. AssocP/Lungu stated that Planning Commissioners were provided a copy of a letter from Gregory Shockley, 3711 Crooked Creek Drive that discussed his thoughts about the project. Chair/Nelson declared the continued publichearing open and asked for comments: Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge Estates, again explained the project and its history. He said that at each public hearing on this project staff has recommended approval and the applicant has complied with and exceeded every request made by the Commission. He believed it would be somewhat unusual for people driving down the freeway to focus on the development. Steve Miller, Ladera Systems, Costa Mesa, introduced the Planning Commission to the segmental block retaining wall system thatwas proposed for use on the project site and discussed its application using vegetation to landscape its face using a power point presentation. C/Lee asked Mr. Miller if he was a professional engineer and Mr. Miller responded that he was a geologist. C/Lee referred to a resident's comment that this type of wall system tends to be used for commercial projects rather than residential projects. Mr. Miller responded that the resident must not be very familiar with the product because there were many single-family home JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION residential construction projects using this type of system and said found the resident's comment to be. irrelevant. VC/Torng asked about the earthquake load and Mr. Miller said it was very common to apply surcharge during the analysis. His firm follows AASHTO or NCMA design guidelines. In both cases the site static earthquake loading is applied. The geotechnical engineers take site conditions, proximity to most active earthquake faults; the maximumcredible number (size) of an earthquake that would -occur on that particular Ifault and make recommendations for peak route accelerations. Mr. Miller indicated to VC/Torng that the most 'sizeable earthquake would be about 7.0 and dynamic factors .of, safety are commonly 75 percent of static factors. VC/Torng asked Mr Miller if he was pretty sure' it would be safe and Mr. Miller responded that his firm would follow all applicable building codes and generally accepted procedures and design methodologies for design of retaining walls. Gregory Shokley asked what would happen if the wall failed. Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing. There were no disclosures by the Commissioners. Chair/Nelson asked Mr. Miller to respond to Mr. Shokley's question, what would happen to the houses below if the wall failed. Mr. Miller said he was not afraid to say that there are failures in construction. His experience with retaining walls when they fail — especially geo-synthetic retaining walls, with which he has a fair amount of experience, is usually in the facing element. He has never seen a reinforced geo-grid zone fail. Therefore, the area of failure lies within several feet of the retaining wall depending on the height. VC/Torng said the key question was whether there was a safety issue and could there be a large area of damage due to seismic activity. Mr. Miller responded that certainly depending on where a house is located with respect to the retaining wall is apropos. If the retaining wall was 12 feet high and the house was three feet away and there were to be an issue regarding the stability of the wall the panels could fall near the house. Engineers formulate designs for what is understood and what is known and engineers cannot design for what they do not know. A meteor could hit the earth near this project site any time in the future and could impact the performance of the project. What engineers do is design things to standards of practice and they are built and inspected to the standards !of practice and when projects do that there are no problems: Chalr/Nelson askedhow far from the toe of the proposed retaining wall assemblage the nearest residential structure was located. Mr. Singh responded that he believed therw Was a 10 -foot' distance between the existing walls and the proposed walls and that most houses have a 25-40 foot rear yard; therefore the distance from the proposed retaining wall to the actual residence would be from 35 to 60 feet before the first six-foot wall. 'The planting distance between the lowest wall and the next wall up the slope is five feet and there are five feet between each wall thereafter. Each wall is six feet high and the total height is 18 feet. Mr. Miller said: that visually, the worst case -scenario would be'the entire embankment failing — the geo-grid structure as well as the facing elements and traditionally; engineers use a 2:1 rule where the total height would fail at a slope of 2:1. Therefore, the resulting influence of a complete failure would be about 36 feet. C/Nolan asked Mr. Shokley to give the Commission specific failure information. Mr. Shokley responded that he cited three examples In the letter he addressed to the Commission and that there are more. He said he could find a number in the Journal of Civil Engineering. Most failures are failure of soil due to over watering. He cited failures near Cal State LA and Universal City. His concern was whether the 16 homes would have the resources to rebuild and or repair their homes and the homes below them in case of failure or would the City be held responsible. CDD/Fong stated that the City's Engineering staff has placed a condition on this property that the applicant submit very detailed information by engineers and geotechnical engineers to assure that the geological concerns were addressed in the design of the wall. Staff is not saying that this is the only material that can be approved; however, the applicant has proposed the system and material and staff reviews the application to make certain that it meets best practices and standards. City staff must conduct a thorough review of the proposed materials to make sure that they are adequate forthe project and site. CDD/Fong responded to C/Lee that Diamond Bar and southern California is earthquake country and no one could define what would happen if a big earthquake occurred because it would be based on pure speculation. However, engineers and technical staff are experts in this area and apply standards- to .all projects to make certain that the best practices and standards are met based upon what the experts know. ACA/Kovacevich, explained that when the iCommission 'makes its decision this evening that the decision must be supported by "Findings of Fact" and those findings have to besupported by substantial evidence. Substantial findings consist of 1) facts, 2) expert lopinion based on facts; and, 3) reasonable assumptions based or predicated on facts. In the record tonight there is no substantial evidence of any risk of catastrophic failure or any, other matters of concern: On the other hand, there is substantial evidence for success in the form of expert opinion from a geologist based on fact as presented in the public hearing process and related materials. C/Nolan moved, C/Wei seconded, to adopt a resolution recommending City Council approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03, Zone Change No, 2006-02/Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. i54081.'. Conditional Use Permit' No. 2002-:18, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan, Wei, VCfTorng, Chair/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None CDD/Fong explained that this project moves to the City Council for consideration and residents will have an opportunity to offer further testimony in that venue. S. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: CDD/Fong pointed out to VC/Torng that in accordance with the conditions of approval for the project discussed this evening the homeowners' association is responsible for maintenance of the common open space area and the retaining walls. With respect to VC/Torng's comment about the number of times this project has been before the Planning Commission, it is outside of staffs control. Staff attempts to present all pertinent information to the Commission at the initial public hearing and can only prepare the information if the applicant provides the information. Sometimes applicants provide sufficient information to move the projects forward and if the Commission requests additional information it leads to Agenda # 7 - 2 Meeting Date: February 20. 2007 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of fhe, City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Ma a TITLE: ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006-02 A D LANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT NO. 2006-01, VEST[ G TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 54081, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-18; VARIANCE NO. 2002-02 AND TREE PERMIT NO. 2002-13 — A 16 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the,following: • Ordinance No.(2007) approving first reading of Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned OvedayiDistrict No. 2006-01 which allows flexibility in design, density and Intensity; • Resolution No, 2007- approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 and adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; and • Resolution No. 2007- , approving :Hillside Management Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2002-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13. BACKGROUND: The review process for the proposed project began in November 2002. By mid 2006, many of the identified issues and concerns regarding retaining wall heights, environmental issues, grading, air quality assessment, noise analysis, revegetation and adequacy of the geotechnical report were addressed. In September 2006, the applicant submitted revised plans that were deemed complete and adequate and the environmental document was completed and circulated. The project's first Planning Commission public hearing occurred on October 10, 2006. After receiving information from the applicant and public comments, the Commission continued the hearing to November 28, 2006. The continuance allowed the applicant additional time to address the Commission's concems. Because the applicant did not adequately address the Commission's concerns, the public hearing was continued to December 12, 2006 and then to 1 January 9, 2007. On January 9, 2007,, the Commission concluded the public hearing and after their deliberation recommended approval of the project to City Council. ANALYSIS: A. Summary of Proposed Prolect The project site Is located at the terminus,of, Crooked Creek Drive (APN# 8714-028- 003). The applicant, Daniel Singh of Jewel Ridge, LLC, Is requesting approval to subdivide an irregular shaped, hillsideparcel'Iof approximately 12.9 acres into 16 residential lots. In general, the project site slopes down to the south and west and slopes up to the east. it is characterized by: a steep western facing slope approximately 200 feet high and level canyon to the westerly side adjacent to the flood control channel. The lots will range in size, from 5,705 to 10,506 square feet with a majority of the lots between 6,229 to 7,325 square feet. Each lot will be graded with a development pad for future homes. In addition to the 16 residential lots, the project will consist of four letter lots identified as Lots "A", "B", "C" and "D". These lots will be common lots maintained by the homeowners' association which will be formed in the future. Lot "C" will be used for on-site- mitigation for the replacement of oak and walnut trees and understory. Streets "A" and "B" are proposed as private streets with sidewalk, curb and gutter on the side of the street development with homes. Street "A" is a continuation of Crooked Creek Drive and Street "B" intersects Street "A at the project entrance which will not be gated. The request also consists' of relocating an 'existing recreational trail pursuant to the City's Trails Master Plan. The proposed on-site trail head and pedestrian trail easement is Identified on the map. It will be located on the east side of Street "A" and adjacent to the southern boundary of the map. The project site is difficult to develop because of environmental constraints that include steep slopes, elevation differences, and native vegetation such as oak and walnut trees and 'understory. Because of the elevation differences between existing development on Crooked Creek Drive and the undeveloped area adjacent to the project's southern boundary, five, six and ten feet high retaining walls are needed to create the buildable pads, streets and a pedestrian trail. For retaining wails adjacent to the homes on Crooked Creek Drive, plant material will be larger in size and planted closer together to initially create mature landscape screening. Furthermore, retaining walls located adjacent to the streets will be constructed from a geo-grid lock and load system that allows plants and Irrigation to be integrated with the wall. The series of three retaining walls to be located adjacent to the pedestrian trail easement were. proposed to be ten feet high. Due to the Commission's concern about the height, the applicant submitted a revised preliminary landscape plan showing the walls reduced to a height of five feet. The Citys engineering consultant, Hall & Foreman, believes the five foot height of each wall, as located on the plan, is not possible because lowering the height of the walls to five feet would affect the earthwork cut into the slope considerably. As a result, a variance approval Is needed for wall heights of ten feet. 04 LJ C. The main concern discussed and addressed during the public hearing process was the view impact, grading, retaining walls and second story of the future homes will be visible from the north bound SR -57 freeway. However with the maturity of the project's landscaping, the view of the project from the freeway will be minimal. Additionally, existing plant material between the freeway and the project site will add to the screening. Other concerns expressed at the, public hearing related to safety during construction and additional traffic from the project. For safety, the applicant is required to provide a construction traffic safety mitigation plan that addresses lane closures, truck routes, traffic control measures, street cleaning. etc. for the. City's review and approval. A traffic study was prepared for the project and reviewed and accepted by the City. The study 'examined: daily and: peak hour trips and showed that the project will add trips to the local roadways. However, the study stated.that'added trips will not require signalization or additional traffic mitigation. Summary of October 10 2006 Planning Commission Hearing The Planning Commission opened the public hearing and received comments from nine residents of Crooked Creek Drive. Comments from the residents and Commission were generally related to: tree replacement'- ratios of healthy and dead trees; retaining wait heights; preliminary landscape and,fuel modification plans: and views of the project from the SR -57 freeway and from the back yards of the existing homes on Crooked Creek Drive that abut the proposed project. As a result of the Commission's and residents' concerns, the Commission directed the applicant to provide: 1. Fuel modification and preliminary landscape plans that document that the oak and walnut trees removed will be mitigated to a level of less than significant; 2. Lower the height of the threeretaining walls adjacent to the proposed pedestrian trail easement located on the east side of Street °A'; 3. Photographs of the project site from different locations along the SR 57 freeway and photographic simulations from the same locations after grading and at five and ten year intervals; and 4. Photographs of the view from the back yards of existing homes on Crooked Creek Drive and artist's renderings at five and ten year intervals. In order for the applicant to address the above concerns, the Commission continued the public hearing to November 28, 2006. Summary of November 28 2006 Planning Commission Continued Hearing In response to the Planning Commission's direction, the applicant provided the Commission with the following information. 1. Fuel modification and preliminary landscape plans showing healthy oak and walnut trees replaced at a 3:1 ratio and dead oak and walnut trees replaced at a 1:1 ratio for a total replacement of 413 replacement frees. KI i., Commission Comments: The Commission determined that the fuel modification and preliminary landscape plans, with the replacement oak and walnut trees together. With understory and indigenous vegetation to the open space area, would function`as an extension of the existing hillside.' 2. Photographic views and simulations from 13' locations along the SR -57 -freeway, Commission Comments: The Commission believed that the photographic simulations did not provide an accurate picture of the project site at certain Vistas from the north; and south bound SR 57 freeway. The Commission again directed the applicant to•provide photographic; simulation at five and ten year intervals: - 3 A revised preliminary landscape plan that shows the three ten -foot high retaining walls adjacent to the proposed pedestrian trail reduced to five feet each. Commission Comments* The Commission was satisfied with the reduction of the retaining walls' height. However, the fCity's engineering consultant believes the five foot, height of each wall, as located on the plan, is not possible because lowering the height of the walls would .affect the earthwork cut into the slope considerably.; As a result, a variance approval is needed for wall heights of ten feet, 4. Photographic views and artist's renderings of views from the back yards of three homes on Crooked Creek Drive that abut the project site. Commission Comments• The renderings indicated that the retaining walls would be'seen from the homes. The applicant did not provide photographic simulations at five and ten year intervals as directed. The public hearing was continued to December 12, 2006 to allow the applicant additional time to provide the photographic simulations at five and ten year intervals. D. Summary of December 12 2006 Planning Commission Continued Hearin In response to the Planning Commission's direction, the applicant provided the following Information. Artist's renderings showing that the view from the first and second story of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive that abut the project site are the same. The applicant stated that due to the twenty-five foot difference in elevation between the homes on Crooked Creek Drive and pad areas of the proposed project, a series of three retaining walls, each six feet tall, are needed; and landscaping would be used In front of the walls to mitigate the view. 2. Photographic simulations from the north bound SR -57 freeway as requested by the Commission were not provided. 4 The Commission accepted the artist's renderings of the view from the homes on Crooked Creek.Drive. However, the Commission directed the applicant to provide the photographic simulations from three specific locations along the north bound SR 57 freeway. To allow the applicant additional time to provide the photographic simulations, the Commission continued the public hearing to January 9, 2007. E. Summary of January 9 2007 Planning Commission Continued Nearing In response to the Planning Commission's direction, the applicant presented photographic views and simulations from the north bound SR 57 freeway at the three locations specified by the Commission., The photographic simulations showed current views and simulations after, grading anis at five and ten year intervals. Graded slopes and new homes i would ;be seen from the freeway. However, the more mature the vegetation is on the slopes and in punter areas between the walls, the more the project will be screened from the freeway. The Commission was satisfied with the photographic simulations provided by the applicant. After public comments, the public hearing was closed. The Commission deliberated on all the information p esented and recommended approval of the proposed project to the CRY Council. i F. Environmental Review The proposed project 'is subject to CallIfomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and an Initial Study was prepared by the City's environmental consultant, Environmental Impact Sciences. The following is a table displaying the environmental factors with impacts and those without: No Im at Agricultural Resources Potential Si nfflcant Im act Aesthetics Land Use and Planning Air Quality Mineral Resources Transportation/Traffic Hydrology and Water Quality Hazards/Hazardous Materials Public Services Biological Resources Population/Housing Recreation Cultural Resources Noise Utilities and Service Systems According to CEQA, mitigation measures are required for those environmental factors that have potential significant impacts. The mitigation measures when incorporated Into the project will reduce the potential significant impact to less than significant. As a result, the City has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration can be issued for this project. The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was distributed and circulated on July 28, 2008 to all affected agencies for a 30 -day review period ending 5 on August 28, 2006. At the conclusion,of the public review period, comments received were responded to and groluded as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Planning Commission reviewed the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program and determined that it was prepared In compliance with CEQA guidelines. CITY COUNCIL OPTIONS: ` The City Council may: 1. Approve the proposed project as recommended by the Planning Commission; 2. Modify conditions of approval set forth In the resolutions. 3. Continue the proposed project to a date certain; 4. Direct the applicant to redesign the project ,and remand the project to the Planning Commission S. Deny the project. If the Council concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation then adoption of the ordinance and resolutions should be in the following sequence: 1. Approve the first reading of Zone Change, and Planned Overlay District Ordinance No. _ (2007); 2. Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2007—adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH ` #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program and approving Vesting Tentative T16ot Map No. 54081; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. 2007— ,`approving Hillside, Management Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No, 2002-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Notice for this project was published in the Inland'Valiev Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on February 1, 2007. A display board was posted on the project site January 24, 2007. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 209 property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site and the public notice was posted in three public places by January 29, 200. Pursuant to Public Resource Code, Section 21092.5, agencies commenting on the project's Mitigated Negative Declaration were noted in writing of the February 20, 2007 City Council public hearing on January 29, 2007. Furthermore, the Notice of Public Hearing and Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was post with the Los Angeles County Clerk on January 30, 2007. PREPARED BY: REVIEW { BY: Ann J.Lun u, Nancy ng, Al. Associate Planner Community Dev oSqntDJtor David Doyle, Assistant City Manager 6 I I on August 28, 2006. At the conclusion,of the public review period, comments received were responded to and groluded as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Planning Commission reviewed the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program and determined that it was prepared In compliance with CEQA guidelines. CITY COUNCIL OPTIONS: ` The City Council may: 1. Approve the proposed project as recommended by the Planning Commission; 2. Modify conditions of approval set forth In the resolutions. 3. Continue the proposed project to a date certain; 4. Direct the applicant to redesign the project ,and remand the project to the Planning Commission S. Deny the project. If the Council concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation then adoption of the ordinance and resolutions should be in the following sequence: 1. Approve the first reading of Zone Change, and Planned Overlay District Ordinance No. _ (2007); 2. Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2007—adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH ` #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program and approving Vesting Tentative T16ot Map No. 54081; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. 2007— ,`approving Hillside, Management Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No, 2002-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Notice for this project was published in the Inland'Valiev Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on February 1, 2007. A display board was posted on the project site January 24, 2007. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 209 property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site and the public notice was posted in three public places by January 29, 200. Pursuant to Public Resource Code, Section 21092.5, agencies commenting on the project's Mitigated Negative Declaration were noted in writing of the February 20, 2007 City Council public hearing on January 29, 2007. Furthermore, the Notice of Public Hearing and Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was post with the Los Angeles County Clerk on January 30, 2007. PREPARED BY: REVIEW { BY: Ann J.Lun u, Nancy ng, Al. Associate Planner Community Dev oSqntDJtor David Doyle, Assistant City Manager 6 1. Ordinance No. (2007)i approving' Zone Change No. 2006-03 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01; 2. Resolution No. 2007- approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081; and adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 3. (No attachment); 4. Resolution No. 2007- 'approving Hillside Management Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2002-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13; 5. Exhibit "A" — Vesting Tentative Map No. 54081 dated October 10, 2006; 6. Exhibit 'B" — Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 7. Exhibit "C' _ Response to Comments; B. Chronology of VTTM 54081; 9. Planning Commission Minutes dated October 10, November 28, December 12, 2006 and January 9, 2007; 10. Planning Commission Staff Reports dated October 10, November 28, December 12, 2006 and January 9, 2007; 11. Conceptual Landscape Plan and Fuel Modification Plan; and 12. Photographic Simulations and Artists Renderings. FEBRUARY 20, 2007 'PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL 6.6 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2007-10: SUPPORTING INTERSTATE 10/605 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS AND COMPLETIONOF INTERSTATE 10 HOV LANE PROJECT. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2005-01, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006-03, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2005- 01, SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2005-01, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 63623, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005-01, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2005-27 AND TREE PERMIT NO. 2005-06, PURSUANT TO THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, CITY'S SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE (TITLE 21) AND DEVELOPMENT CODE (TITLE 22, SECTIONS 22.22, 22.387, 2248, 2258, 22.60, 22.70 AND 22.62). THE PROPOSED PROJECT CONSISTS OF A 99 -UNIT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, A PUBLIC PARK AND OPEN SPACE AREAS ON APPROXIMATELY 34.52 ACRES, LOCATEDON PROPERTY, SOUTH OF LARKSTONE DRIVE, WEST OF MORNING SUN AVENUE, WEST OF BREA CANYON ROAD, AND NORTHWEST OF PEACEFUL HILLS ROAD. (RELATED FILE: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2005- 01). (CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER 19, 2006, JANUARY 16, 2007 and February 6, 2007.) DCM/DeStefano recommended that the City Council reopen the Public Hearing to receive testimony and continue the matter to March 6, 2007 to allow time, for the applicant to complete traffic studies for the proposed project. M/Tye reopened the Public Hearing With no testimony being offered, M/Tye closed the public hearing. C/Chang moved, C/Herrera seconded to continue the matter to March 6, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Herrera, MPT/Tanaka, M/Tye NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 7.2 ZONE CHANGE NO, 2006-02 AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT NO. 2006-01, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 54081, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2006- 03 (SCH NO. 2006071129) AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-18, VARIANCE NO, 2002-02 AND TREE PERMIT NO, 2002-13, A 16 -LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. (1) APPROVE FOR FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY, WAIVE FULL READING OF ORDINANCE NO. OX(2007); ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006'02, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT NO. 2006-01 AND 02, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT NO. 2006=01 AND MITIGATED'NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2006-03 (SCH#2006071129), MITIGATION REPORT AND MONITORING PROGRAM, 'CHANGE' THE EXISTING ZONING FROM 4-1-10,000 TO LOW DENSITY RESIENTIAL-PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (RL -PD) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF CROOKED CREEK DRIVE, (APN NO. 8714-028-003). C/Chang stated that according to the report it says that the City Engineering Consultant believes that the 5ft height of each wallas located on the plan is not possible because lowering the height of the wall will affect the earth work cut into the slope considerably as a result a variance approval is needed for the wall height of 10 ft. so is this being considered and corrected? ' CDD/Fong responded to C/Chang that during its deliberation the Planning Commission asked the applicant to consider reducing the height of the proposed10-foot retaining walls. The applicant considered the possibility and the City's Engineer reviewed the feasibility of reducing the retaining wall and determined it was not FEBRUARY 20, 2007 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL CDD/Fong presented the staff report. The project consists of approximately 12.9 acres and proposes 16 lots with single-family residences within the gated community. The remaining 8.9 acres are designated Open Space. Access for the project is at the end of Crooked Creek Dr. 'The zone change is a' "housekeeping" item because the site stili has the LA County zoning designation and the City's General Plan designation is low-density residential. This amendment guarantees the zoning change to be consistent with the City's' General Plan and adds a' Planned 'Development Overlay District. The Planned Development Overlay allows the developer to cluster a small development on smaller acreage in order to preserve more open' space' area. She explained the proposed project and indicated that after several meetings and extensive deliberation the Planning Commission recommended City Council approval on a 4-1 vote. CDD/Fong stated staffs recommendation as follows: That the City Council open the public hearing, receive public testimony, close the Public Hearing and take the following actions to approve the project: Approve the Project with conditions'or continue the Project to a date certain; direct the applicant to redesign or address certain issues; remand the Project back to the Planning Commission; or, deny the Project in whole or approve the project in part;' (1) APPROVE FOR FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY, WAIVE FULL READING OF ORDINANCE NO. OX(2007); ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006'02, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT NO. 2006-01 AND 02, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT NO. 2006=01 AND MITIGATED'NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2006-03 (SCH#2006071129), MITIGATION REPORT AND MONITORING PROGRAM, 'CHANGE' THE EXISTING ZONING FROM 4-1-10,000 TO LOW DENSITY RESIENTIAL-PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (RL -PD) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF CROOKED CREEK DRIVE, (APN NO. 8714-028-003). C/Chang stated that according to the report it says that the City Engineering Consultant believes that the 5ft height of each wallas located on the plan is not possible because lowering the height of the wall will affect the earth work cut into the slope considerably as a result a variance approval is needed for the wall height of 10 ft. so is this being considered and corrected? ' CDD/Fong responded to C/Chang that during its deliberation the Planning Commission asked the applicant to consider reducing the height of the proposed10-foot retaining walls. The applicant considered the possibility and the City's Engineer reviewed the feasibility of reducing the retaining wall and determined it was not FEBRUARY 20, 2007 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL feasible. In order to reduce the height of the'retaining wall the applicant would have'had to cut more into the slope and create additional tiers of retainingrwall. :. Ron Brown, RDC; Asset Manager for JewelRidge' Estates, LLC, offered his condolences on the loss of Council Member Zirbes. He presented a history of the proposed project. The subject project is a 13 -acre site land the maximum'allowable density was for30-lots. The proposed project'lis onlyl6�lots, that will be concentrated in the already disturbed area that is relatively flat. The 16 -lot proposal is approximately one-half of the maximum density: The application before the City Council does not require a General Plan Amendment or Conditional Use Permit. The main reason the zone change was applied for was pursuant to direction provided by the City's staff to allow a smaller development that would preserve much more open space by clustering and otherwise would be left under the existing zoning of R-1-10,000. Please note that the proposed density is less than the existing surrounding development. The subject property is a remnant parcel surrounded on three sides by existing development. Aare Energy Group is considering using the fourth side of the property for residential development. The proposed development would be a desirable residential projectand provide much needed new homes for the City of D.B. Daniel Singh, RDC, thanked the Council for the opportunity to bring this project forward. He thanked the Planning Commission and staff for their patience during the past four years to bring the project to this point. The view that the Council saw was not from, the street, it was from the rear'of existing properties. In addition to several public meetings, his firm' conducted' a community outreach prior to the Planning Commission hearing and met with several individuals priorto the Commission hearings. Four hearings were conducted and many community members participated. He reiterated that more than 70% of the project would remain open space. There is a lot of vegetation proposed between the retaining walls and generally onlythe first level wall will be viewable. There were many conditions imposed by the Planning Commission during the process including an increase in the replacement landscape material size to mitigate the viewscape. Additional conditions were imposed for safety matters pursuant to comments received from residents. Mr. Singh reiterated his public outreach efforts to C/Chang. M/Tye opened the Public Hearing. Gregory Shockley, 3711 Crooked Creek, stated that he and his neighbors are not happy with the project. He said they feel like the City is not listening FEBRUARY 20, 2007 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL tothem-and that is the reason there are not more people here tonight. He said his neighbors felt like they were worn down and that the Planning Commission had not represented the community fairly and correctly. He also said he understands the height of retaining walls in D;B. is not supposed to exceed six feet and while this is a multi -tiered system it shouldbe viewed as a complete unit. He said he did not Initially bring up.the matter of the retaining walls because he believed the City would never allow them or he would have spoken up. :M/Tye closedthe Public'Hearing.'' I CDD/Fong responded to Mr. Shockley that there is one variance for the 10- foot wall and the remaining retaining walls are six feet high which is acceptable underthe current code. The three proposed 10 - foot tiered retaining walls meet the minimum standards allowed bythe code. C/Herrera asked if there was an earthquake fault under the property? CDD/Fong responded that the speaker was incorrect. ' Peter Lewandowski, thel City's Environmental Consultant, stated that there are numerous faults in the area, some active and some inactive. Relative to this property, there are no active faults on this particular piece' of property that would create, an adverse' condition or require specific setback provisions. Recent investigations have not disclosed the presence of'any new earthquake faults being discovered in the area.'' The 'science of earthquake technology is constantly evolving and whenever there is an earthquake and a disaster, the geotechnical engineers keep re-examining the standard, and codes keep changing in response thereto. There is no information available to him that would suggest any recent discoveries would have any adverse consequences with respect to this particular piece of property. C/Chang stated he visited the site and studied the information available. He said he had concerns about the project. On the westerly side the nine homes are of no concern. However, on the north side on the hill above existing houses the project requires a drastic cut of the slope to create flat pads for the remaining seven houses. MPT/Tanaka said he had followed this project for quite some time ' along with M/Tye when both sat on the Planning Commission. He commended the applicant and Planning Commission for their diligence with respect to what he felt was a good project. FEBRUARY 20, 2007 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL ClHerrera asked if staff had the applicant'verify`slope stability to see if the slope was stable enough to withstand the sharp cutting. CDD/Fong responded that thin was done as part of the geotechnical study. Boring and soils studies were conducted and staff and the Planning, Commission specifically conditioned the project to require more study prior to submittinghhe final design ofthe retaining walls to predict the soil, load prior to the City issuing a permit for rough grading. Staff will continue to review the projecffor mitigation at the time of plan check. Preliminary studies indicate the hillside is stable enough to withstand cutting. M/Tye thanked Mr. Shockley for coming forward and correcting his neighborsabOuti WhetherAhe Council isolistening:'' M/Tye felt that comments and speculations tend to make it frustrating to render decisions. He heard more from people at church who lived in the area than he heard` in the public' hearing environment. ` Residents need to see projects all the way through and, it is frustrating that only one resident is here tonight to speak when no one else is present to speak to the City Council about their concerns which is where the ultimate decision is madet During the last meeting the City Council discussed the Traffic Management Program and the residents came forward prompting changes. This is the place to express opinions and Council Members are open to receiving all input whether it is in person, via email, regular mail or by some other means other than third party' hearsay.' 'He felt the 'neighbors were also frustrated because there is a difference between undeveloped private property and open space and he believed that Mr. Singh had been working hard to get this project to a level of acceptability. M/Tye trusts staff to make proper decisions and recommendations. If everyone worried about whether there would be an earthquake or natural disaster there would be no building in earthquake areas such as uptown Whittier where it would not have been rebuilt. Earthquakes and natural disasters are risks that go with living in this area. C/Herrera was aware that the plan had been changed and modified over the past couple of years and knew that the applicant had attempted to be very responsive to staff and neighborhood concerns and objections. C/Herrera moved, MPT/Tanaka seconded to approve for First Reading by Title Only, Waive Full Reading of Ordinance No. 01(2007), Adopt Resolutions No. 2007-11 and Resolution 2007-12. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: f� FEBRUARY 20, 2007 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL AYES:, COUNCIL MEMBERS? Herrera, MPT/Tanaka, M).ye NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang` ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 'C/Chang said his reason for the "No" vote was that he would support the nine homes but would not support the seven houses on the hill. Also, the City should take a lesson from the Sunset Crossing Road incident. 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: 8.1 DISCUSSION OF AND PROCEDURE FOR FILLING CITY COUNCIL VACANCY:s 'CM/DeStefanostated that while the City continues to mourn the loss of Council Member Bob Zirbes`it'is'mandated by State Law that within 307days of the vacancy Council must make a decision about appointment of'a new City'Council Member. 'Therefore, the City Council'must make a decision by March 10, 2007 about whether it wishes to fill the vacancy by appointment orwhetherto fill the vacancy by calling for an election that Would be held in November 2007. If the Council chooses an appointment process it has two options: 1) the Council may, by its rules, appoint to November 2007 requiring the appointed Council Memberto run in November 2007 forthe remaining two -years of the seat's term; 2) the Council may appoint for the full un -expired length of time left in the term to the election of November 2009; or, 3) simply call for an election in 2007 to fill the vacancy for two remaining years.' This is the fifth time in the City's history where a vacancywas created on the City Council and overthe years a number of steps and processes have been used to fill the vacancies. CM/DeStefano concluded that a decision must be made by March 10, 2007 or the decision goes to a vote of the people in November 2007. CA/Jenkins confirmed that M/Tye was correct that an individual would have to declare his intent to run for the Council seat in November 2007 were he to be appointed for the balance of this year and there was a call for the special election in November. There was no one present who wished to speak on this matter. ' C/Herrera said she would like to have the Council commit to setting aside several dates in the next few weeks starting with tomorrow. C/Chang asked if C/Herrera was proposing an appointment process. INITIAL STUDY AND DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 54081 DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA Lead Agency: CITY OF DIAMOND BAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178 Z5 cpm m. Applicant: c', JEWEL RIDGF, LLC 10365 West Jefferson Boulevard Culver City, California 90232 July 2006 DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JEWEL RIDGE ESTATESNESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 54081 DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA July 2006 1. NAME, IF ANY, AND A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT. Jewell Ridge Estates. Proposed is a 22 -lot residential subdivision, allowing for the development of 16 single-family detached homes on individual parcels ranging in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to 10,506 square feet. The average lot size for the residential lots will be approximately A892 square feet. The project includes the construction of a 42 -foot wide private street, the retention of a portion of the property as open space, and may include the construction of a "pedestrian trail" allowing public access into a portion of the proposed open space areas. In addition to the approval or conditional approval of the proposed vesting tentative map, other discretionary actions under consideration by the City include, but may not be limited to, the issuance of a conditional use permit, variance, protected tree permit, grading.permit, and such other discretionary permits and approvals as maybe required by the City or by other Responsible Agencies for the construction and habitation of the project site. 2. LOCATION. The approximately 12.9 -acre project site is located adjacent to the southern corporate boundaries of the City of Diamond Bar, within an incorporated area of eastern Los Angeles County. More specifically, the project is located near the southern terminus of Crooked Creek Drive, approximately two blocks east of the Orange (SR -57) Freeway and Brea Canyon Road and east of an existing concrete -lined flood control channel (Brea Canyon Channel), maintained by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Flood Control Division. 3. LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON. Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner, City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21825 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178. 4. ENTITY OR PERSON UNDERTAKING PROJECT. Daniel Singh, Jewell Ridge, LLC, 10365 Jefferson Boulevard, Culver City, California 90232 The Lead Agency, having reviewed the "Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration: Jewel Ridge Estates = Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081" (City of Diamond Bar, May 2006) (Initial Study) and having consideredthe comments received prior to and submitted at the public meetings of the Lead Agency at which time the project was considered, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project, as mitigated to include those measures contained in the Initial Study, will not have a significant effect on the environment. The reasons supporting the Lead Agency s findings are as follows: A. The Lead Agency prepared an Initial Study for the purpose of assessing the potential impacts associated with the construction and habitation of the proposed residential development project. The Initial Study included a detailed analysis of a broad range of environmental issues and incorporated information from a number of technical studies conducted for the purpose of assessing those impacts. B. The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence before the Lead Agency that the proposed project, as modified to incorporate those mitigation measures identified therein, will have a significant effect on the environment. Inclusion of the mitigation measures identified by the Lead Agency will result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of the project's potentially significant environmental effects and will reduce all such impacts to below a level of significance. C. The project proponent has agreed to incorporate those mitigation measures, as identified in the Initial Study, as conditions of project approval. Prior to taking any action on the proposed project, the Lead Agency will adopt a mitigation reporting and monitoring program outlining the manner in which each of those mitigation measures will be implemented. A copy of the Initial Study is on file at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21825 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178 and can be reviewed during the regular business hours of the Lead Agency. This page intentionally left blank. INITIAL STUDY AND DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 54081 DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA Lead Agency: CITY OF DIAMOND BAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISON Attn: Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner 21825 E. Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177 (909) 861-3117 FAX (909)839-7032 Applicant: JEWEL RIDGE, LLC Attn: Daniel Singh 10365 Jefferson Boulevard Culver City, California 90232 (310) 945-3036 FAX (310) 945-3030 July 2006 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Table of Contents List of Sections Section Pape EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES -1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Introduction to the Initial Study 1-1 1.2 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance 1-2 1.3 Initial Study Purpose and Intent 1-2 1.4 Required Contents of an Initial Study 1-3 1.5 Document Format 1-3 1.6 Agencies, Organizations, and Individuals Associated with the Proposed Project 1-4 1.7 Tiering of Environmental Documents 1-7 1.8 Documents Incorporated by Reference 1-7 1.9 Custodian of Documents 1-10 1.10 Independent Judgment 1-10 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2-1 2.1 Project Location 2-1 2.2 Project Description 2-1 Vesting Tentative Tract Map 2-2 2.3 Discretionary Actions 2-4 2.4 Applicant -Nominated Environmental Compliance Activities 2-9 Biological Resources 2-10 Cultural Resources 2-10 Geology and Solis 2-10 Engineering Geology 2-10 Protected Trees 2-10 Traffic and Circulation 2-11 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 3-1 3.1 Introduction to the Environmental Setting 3-1 3.2 Environmental Setting 3-1 3.2.1 Aesthetics 3-1 3.2.2 Agricultural Resources 3-3 3.2.3 Air Quality 3-4 SCAQMD Rules and Regulations 3-5 CEQA Air Quality Handbook 3-7 3.2.4 Biological Resources 3-8 Landscape and Irrigation Plan Requirements 3-9 Tree Preservation and Protection 3-10 Los Angeles County Significant Ecological Areas 3-11 California Natural Diversity Data Base 3-11 Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act 3-13 City of Diamond Bar Initial Study— Table of Contents July 2006 Page i JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page ii Initial Study—Table of Contents List of Sections (Continued) Section Page Biological Resource Assessment 3-14 Proposed Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher 3-15 3.2.5 Cultural Resources 3-16 3.2.6 Geology and Soils 3-17 Seismic Hazards Mapping Act 3-17 Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act 3-19 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation 3-20 3.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 3-27 3.2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality 3-28 Water Quality Control Plan — Los Angeles Region 3-28 Los Angeles County Department of Public Works 3-29 Federal Emergency Management Agency 3-31 Soil -Slip Susceptibility Maps 3-32 Hydrology Study 3-33 3.2.9 Land Use and Planning 3-33 3.2.10 Mineral Resources 3-34 3.2.11 Noise 3-37 3.2.12 Population and Housing 3-38 Regional Housing Needs Assessment 3-39 3.2.13 Public Services 3-40 Walnut Valley Unified School District Fee Justification Study 3-41 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department 3-42 Los Angeles County Fire Department 3-42 3.2.14 Recreation 3-45 3.2.15 Transportation and Traffic 3-46 Traffic Study 3-47 3.2.16 Utilities and Service Systems 3-48 4.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS 4-1 4.1 Introduction to Impact Analysis 4-1 4.2 Threshold of Significance Criteria 4-1 4.3 1995 General Plan Programmatic Mitigation Measures 4-2 4.4 Topic Specific Environmental Evaluation 4-3 4.4.1 Aesthetics 4-3 4.4.2 Agricultural Resources 4-5 4.4.3 Air Quality 4-5 4.4.4 Biological Resources 4-9 4.4.5 Cultural Resources 4-15 4.4.6 Geology and Soils 4-16 4.4.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4-18 4.4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality 4-22 4.4.9 Land Use and Planning 4-25 4.4.10 Mineral Resources 4-26 4.4.11 Noise 4-26 4.4.12 Population and Housing 4-28 4.4.13 Public Services 4-29 July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page ii Initial Study—Table of Contents JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54,081 List of Sections (Continued) Section Page 4.4.14 Recreation 4-32 4.4.15 Transportation and Traffic 4-32 4.4.16 Utilities and Service Systems 4-35 4.4.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance 4-37 5.0 PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION 5-1 5.1 Introduction to Preliminary Determination 5-1 5.2 Preliminary Findings 5-1 6.0 REFERENCES 6-1 List of Appendix Appendix A Environmental Checklist List of Figures Figure Page 2-1 Regional Vicinity Map 2-3 2-2 Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Map 2-4 . 2-3 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 2-5 3-1 Proposed Revisions to the County of Los Angeles Significant Ecological Areas 3-12 3-2 Proposed Critical Habitat Designation for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher 3-16 3-3 Official State Seismic Hazard Zone Map Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle 3-21 3-4. Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 30'x 60' Quadrangle 3-22 3-5 Quaternary Geology of a Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Quadrangle 3-23 3-6 Landslide Inventory within a Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Quadrangle 3-24 3-7 Official Map: Special Studies Zones Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle 3-25 3-8 Project Geology Map 3-26 3-9 Hydrologic Units with Areas and Subareas 3-30 3-10 Portion of FEMA FIRM No. 0650430980B 3-32 3-11 Soil -Slip Susceptibility Map 3-35 3-12 Yorba Linda Quadrangle 50 -Year 24 -Hour Rainfall Distribution Map 3-36 3-13 Natural Hazard Disclosure Map for a Portion of Los Angeles County 3-43 4-1 Vehicle Conflict Points for "T" Intersections with Single -Lane Approaches 4-34 City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study—Table of Contents Page iii List of Tables Table JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 ES -1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures ES -3 ES -2 Draft Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program ES -12 1-1 Agencies, Organizations, and Individuals Associated with the Proposed Project 1-5 3-1 California Natural Diversity Data Base Records Search — Yorba Linda Quadrangle 3-13 3-2 Existing (2 -Day Average) Daily Roadway Values 3-48 373 Intersection Capacity Utilization Summary 3-48 July 20.06 City of Diamond Bar Page iv Initial Study—Table of Contents JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency) has received and deemed complete an application from Jewel Ridge, LLC (Applicant) for the development of an approximately 12.9 acre site located at the existing terminus of Crooked Creek Lane, bordering the southern corporate boundaries of the City. As presently proposed, the Applicant seeks City approval to subdivide the project site to create a 22 -lot residential subdivision, allowing for the development of 16 single-family detached homes. In addition to the approval of a vesting tentative tract map (Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081), the Applicant seeks City approval of a number of additional discretionary actions, including a conditional use permit, variances and/or exceptions. In compliance with Section 15063(a) of the Guideline for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines), following preliminary review, the Lead Agency shall conduct an initial study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment. If the agency determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a significant effect on the environment, the agency is directed to: (1) prepare an environmental impact report (EIR); or (2) use a previously prepared EIR which the agency determines would adequately analyze the project at hand; or (3) determine, pursuant to a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process, which of the project's effects were adequately examined by an earlier EIR or negative declaration. If the agency determined that there is no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspect may cause a significant effect on the environment, the agency is authorized to prepare either a negative declaration or a mitigated negative declaration. A negative declaration constitutes a written statement by the agency briefly describing the reasons that a proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, does not require the preparation of an EIR. A mitigated negative declaration means a negative declaration prepared for a project when the initial study has identified potentially significant effects on the environment but: (1) revisions to the project plans or proposals, made by or agreed to by the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released, would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur; and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the project, as revised, may have a significant environmental effect. Independent of an agency's decision whether to prepare an EIR or process a proposed project through a negative declaration or a mitigated negative declaration, a project's environmental document does not determine whether the agency approves, conditionally approves, or denies a proposed project. The environmental process is both an informational tool designed to provide an environmental basis for an agency's decisions and a means of soliciting public and agency comments concerning the possible environmental implication of an agency's actions. This "Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration: Jewel Ridge Estates - Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (Initial Study) has been prepared in fulfillment of that requirement. Based on the analysis presented in this Initial Study, prior to the consideration of any mitigation measures, the Lead Agency has determined that the proposed project would result in one or more significant or potentially significant environmental effects relative to the following topical issues: (1) aesthetics; (2) air quality; (3) biological resources; (4) hazards and hazardous materials; and (5) transportation and traffic. In response to those potentially significant environmental effects, a number of mitigation measures have been identified by the Lead Agency. In addition, additional mitigation measures have been formulated by the Lead City of. Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study—Executive Summary Page ES -1 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Agency in order to reduce other less -than -significant impacts to the maximum extent feasible. The Applicant has agreed to incorporate each of the mitigation measures recommended herein. The State CEQA Guidelines encourage agencies to utilize "tiering" when a previous CEQA document. As indicated in Section 15152(a) therein: "'Tiering' refers to using the analysis of general matters contained in a broader EIR (such as one prepared for a general plan or policy statement) with later EIRs and negative declarations on narrower projects; incorporating by reference the general discussions from the broader EIR; and concentrating the later EIR or negative declaration solely on the issues specific to the later project." This "second-tier" analysis incorporates information contained the "Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083" (City of Diamond Bar, July 14, 1992), "Master Environmental Assessment - City of Diamond Bar" (City of Diamond Bar, July 14, 1992), "Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083" (City of Diamond Bar, July 25, 1995), and "Implementation/Mitigation Monitoring Program" (City of Diamond Bar, July 25, 1995). Presented in Table ES -1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures) is a summary of the impacts and mitigation measures identified herein, including a listing of the programmatic mitigation measures adopted by the City and contained in the 1995 addendum and mitigation monitoring program. Each of the mitigation measures recommended as conditions of project approval in this Initial Study and an outline of the manner in which each of those measures will be implemented by the Lead Agency is listed in Table ES -2 (Draft Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program). As mitigated, this Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence before the Lead Agency that the proposed project will have a significant effect on the environment. Inclusion of the mitigation measures identified by the Lead Agency will result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of the project's potentially significant effects to a level deemed by the Lead Agency to be below a level of significance. Based on the information contained in this Initial Study, the Lead Agency's preliminary determination is that a mitigated negative declaration is the appropriate manner of CEQA compliance for the proposed project. July 20.06 City of Diamond Bar Page ES -2 Initial Study — Executive Summary U) W Of D Q W Z O Q c� H Z Q N � F ch W Q 2a -02 Il J Q z Z W Z O Z W V.. O Q U) C? N W T 0 J m p l:OI:;O��Tjs « 0 y tp N N J J J Na `FOl N y CO wI j'?•, -- IEwmm ,v_im E.d o.mm`-°v mnvcom '6-0 m E mT J. b «LU«wm«Cod-� ac ma ro aE c.o nt =0 4-f n.A-o oajCm�^R° �cm93._ C. o$3.E m°? -W roy:_Ta0 U tT«ro0�ro C�Cmy NrodL a o1a V CN_N6«. Nro E-O� m0 o a o��rt-too32EcLi«ya`i�$mR�� an,c993nt 'v Joao. moa0 03 t�+a :•'. �cR°=.t4 c�ov�� maxi o EL�0- m ao$m W`aEcn x0`'�,0st om 0 S;Z.S n mtnoxa ro O ro y T N m C 0 oan N d m a m O w T. z Z m n 0 0 0 ro Y 0 Z m«TSa�m N>' -o N�E "oamc�a R'a-o '�nn ccm>,000n- r4 EO mam�m"Gn ro`o mro IIR23«-2 ymL E" y mtS m wy_. am ro 00 Rm' 0 wnZ -.w c ngaovmscJ~moyE o mT N m E m O Eco n mm � �; �OroO -O>0mEEZ't .nN E da�.R3 ro-manym Lm9mmro �ro�«.,=roavN ,Em L t L E a m y o nm -B.m U ji .-" cf v�N M -,Cam cE[2 o NE `m N c v7 ow N 7 c am e Q nox N j a .7;jk'uc mwTnoR N c-m�p o vE ro a E� - 5> n a� 0 0 !n o. Nm 0 0 yc -O 0 E }m} L 0 dR: U J m m C.�' c �aQ J C r co m m 4i 0a` 0 n 0 n 43 m ePz ;i:, m°vLimC a E« ry 0T E=dc� -d CN U�. 0 E `roe-�- oom«moo Ec o m M m C'Em 0 `m@ -0 a a a ro ._ m4R3i E mix m ro E m >o c. E «-o-m`o ro yo E >, E oo aha na mm rorty o yax ,SkOS oNaW N 0 E C 0 mdw w os NaE>E m 0 0 0 >- 0 4j c'Ei, J ro E E N Y.c*OryN 0'S 'O� > N. y mdN N y Od J0, aJ N ft",- a gmm0my «o O•'L w 0 m m- 2Ba`idn o"N> v N- >m 0 N N ro ,5. ... - .... L N m C (J ao� C m C y ny W `I Ol m. j _corn N m cam` E N a n m E _s ftE y0a'€n m U m N o 0.9 n'o M 0 W d E d. N m. O E +a-% C N 6 0 0 m o. N m ami n Eo n 0 w m N O m p. O a E d I..,� . N 0 0 0 m -O L O N Vy/ {a M U d M O >I N O _ N d p 0 o 8 �. u�Er: .: �'c5 0 C �. to J��°> mcO1yro0 �T o..Y O n m O .- mo «0. N w m NJro c >'a "EO0 m v N m ro fA rr; yW a C cm _ m m w- L o C« Nm a 3 $ Ey m N ro £ c 0 N� a C m m 0 m m� a"_ �'� 0 o VI N C -O S U" C 0 E tL° N G _ C W ro C^ _ n ro LL C m m C.2 row.. - W jv C .� 01.0 uy1 m m «'- W NRn0C {{66 cC E `,fib .L.. U] a .0 cR � 0--o--w a c 0 amJ ro ro m c a 0 m T 9 y>>_.m m m-- c 0 ct� «o aw d pSJ`'€,.m....,., a00 12 .2 nom ,@ o c8 'v 22wamo QNCNrn S@ ro �°« Q. v nE-n m m. m m a !a�!!J^ _m y- d y. tmdmta cot w E a_3ooro a`E E c0 =;TcSa ` m 3mTc 000M y N Na E2 m dL t J E €E mi5�aa2 0 v«0 u .� cm m- wM =m ._ 4YMUR'- '. ro 0 m N C 3 O E O- -o B n m L m a Qw0 C E O N C d _ �._- L E O mwoao= w -nm 0 O >� 000 o a E'_mc 0 Em Cd°-cJo Dom La oy Em E E m c- om rn N yo oa r atmNN� m 37E @ «=vat«�K €cm a o >a oo' a-aJ, c 3- n 00N 10 0 n O 0— -W O>� Lmro0 (q U N C Olh noro [A E 6 a 6 n rc T m E[O { 0 C N mEvs« 3 0 mm_a U E ❑ 0 � F� N> m5nm,� C N m 'v m U o N OI fir'• _ d cnPio`o� >0 E m m 0 m `gym mm`6g��T de �`mu E 0�, od «« o�rn �, mmnLc Jbro E rn Jroro o� mN rtoc 0 Si aro { .fidmamd 0.>°.m a E mNJo ,,,rocJ oE3ia vin :a='Rai ro o E as Jm cm m� mW .. of Mm a D of I -m -a E2E. 7.c d' z as W J K� a 3 o 00 m J AS a a C? N W T 0 J m Z �Q y va a C W .JQ N F- �Z W 2 Z O 2 z Z W LL O a C� L M Wv f_ z in W m LU j:j� JI W M c 3:_ LU 1" �jpp � acC r U N C aJi� pC OT P., m U u a C m C m 0 L j N N 16 , _ CC Na Damm m OLmtmJ L.Z` m �.NwL0 mU y..L.m Nd cgntovc`E «`mmEmmPm" �aEo p 000 s $ac � m0C$LNUC .00- 12 � mU0 2 o - OChU::J ja om0` X00ro .m.aYm`oUc� cm -o- �> ta^NOw o 0 03aao 0, o u dm mn n �co aommfa�U3-.N m.,i.33Camvm II1•i84.9>�,'r .s, m=mypnmh>L cli n-• T�am osEOcJ$J9 ErN��$A Om ' Qs_ nmo Z-dZ L- v�uomB U C m�" cvca�o"� E°12— '-.Y,�Ka.EacE°N._i3"' E c°Va« ca°a>'L� 0o' En`� E Ewo ow.ynoo- mEm"$ co- noZmaoUm3$ ma'�0cmN`,°gyn n m m1wam�m jEmmmn� acaor '. �mmm 2 m° apOv =oJ� c�mnim 0 m�Eam cc�mosm rn 0:6 nvv mfu2m 0,9c_ ag�mmo.�mau$ v c�> m om� y�' cO��m=r ovA .. �m., m:m_ a�mJa$aJm ma� > o n mm �� ovm rnEoy moamma vL.3'3 >a mo °w2 `mE m`EN �3 oE��a52 C d N $ U a y m 0 _ 0 o t o m 0° n ma$ 0 m 0E n>y O c�E0 . O 0 0N 0 J 000 � Y¢IO aLoNo° 3� ti OEr—O C0nCR 0;R1a r•'�� .�C.. C mcm mJ .�md�p o0pp U0 vm!E No0 rGm JC --;Ez',". 13 woEn2 >E O 00 `Om m z''`X j:, p�..+ss.—t.'ig.. aa>ms'`d� "r_UO o ma E nEo O Q- c O -c m �O=uii a� cC2 Ym UcEm0or. hWmE bY 'yYg.+<.::w.'_A'tL.`•. � CQs� Nm E .rJC M N Z6 R y N Y CCmr'Nc6 d C Nmm 0a22 n—aw cams t: E-3 om$Nm m ?Nom yaK .?c E` `kE ,rayE7 �+o nom mE Tm Yi =3`m m ° mW 8 m c 0 N r �a oda -c C Mam O ' Piam� avm ver E��am umi°c°+ o>m 0.va� Eom,_ mg0c $a n� m" BEm� m �mm a>i cc KEHE °maw '�axin !'aci mE $m on �Em yaov E.c m E J m �`o>cV E ani m m m m o$5 n o c o N J m � . mE Cr N "oma «yY N 0 m U>.0 aSm_m 0rc jm Oa.0 0 2me N� Em$ cVaL"€ itx C m0 L `CLC N> C O 6 m G n� y y O. N 0,8 O 0 a 0 A j> J 049 9 d T m 0 'D C m? c0 Wm —Wo- w°L . 0Z d0m m0 C UU— 'mo 00 c0K.r0j O '03E.$m 0 nrcm -C..0myc. `t j•rZ.j.=,�mti..m.�eieYu Nmc jmC0 VmOaMEUNN�TN Un..Ja 5Nm m °` ,"-`;.4 To m. •joCm` mma c wmm °cT . E 'mj Elf T6 M EEU aONvcm.°m c 0 nm m`�cJc J mm Omcm m c$�'>o a 0 !;•r "�:s;`�*!:.q-''�` Q_ m r M o moCmy '�E'� 8C_ mE3mE�a`xi omF°o.co : .,•V Ulm— E> - 0, 0 aU 0 mco �d N ch W T 0 rn Z 0 a F C Z :a C � Ia CL W Q N F nZ W n Z z Z W LL 0 Q N u mgsfn pi m`o c m me m ba ° m m ms x>1 o c5 tOL mC O�yyN bQ�N tO�CCa N�C,�LpN > N W N w- m 'O N L_ NtOt NUtiCIOd NrON NU.Z' ZT�CdU m'O - 0Eocco2a`g�nv�f0rndc^�Eom$°1N>10 EatEwtBgm S a1 aE v)oc" wcy10 df �U cQL Cdt�j4---mU6 NLmn t/ hNN?mrnt=roEto�N oNo NUL-cECI'E O>>'ON C oNF �QNa`3 m'S��Oo---+mucor=9 mm.,Nc$o3m10� S'*�c' S'`.,al�y Zc..K E'c mcaaci mEwcmn2wm7a3'- w�$yaEisa-wU.LNmfO mcLC wa'Soom� 0`3 mEa�^o->N �w ma Ey,0 E1°acicF>,a .T"m.o.w xEcc o� 50M .2 -�S Og-00-5 aww.a woymo Ec�oao °1�mo Em-T•msa miU - cdnU'=`ov�0 °��c�o>wcum No gc maw €"Ea m a£ 0C a- a=aE 12 am0 allomN@nE TmC�pm,M cQ o'P9a_9 m Pmmw C9CwUdw 2O9U�1�CNnN'OCN C$U.DRM yCeCE Cw �'. cmt�mo.w 3n nEUmm$5>1L-Q ami as Ea 3m�n`m«�'cQm K s T m < ,r m Tm ` N O 9 O) 0 o wO _ G L dm> N=1 c R 2 _- N C? N W a C 6 m 3 w N C T `� a00do3z aciv c10i 'a- a m E l' w� 49 'NY o o 3mEQomymad >.c c t.,g�maN' c 5 'm E a`� Q w a m w N }g c0.d 1° @ Uw.a�i RISER- wamimo"uo-~o a0� E p� t i d E W n w c 0, Qao 41m'm Nl wmoErn>m E -N- >E c o m m w o , m ;:• O1�rp c E o= o N c o NV R c o la N m 60,E O W w N cE'oc..> o m m A ,. :: 00 'Uoj !adv- c ❑oEn n�c vEr°n'w;@mammo N m� Q A''- wv-�Qcw0 c 0 W- a E LU 202 0-0 a—:r m N N ` d A U C E0 0 o Y4 0010 C m> o o a~ 0 T� Y o m� c d E as C!E 10 d F O m C w t0 U N d 3 W 0Nj1`4V N A >cc4� E wWo=� Em NCpC WpL Wa NN Y� om wwaw>a®E3a2 F10 -w FK j YSi : �n *y N m o: 0, 0 ami ch U � �o Cq — W NF �Ll C LL LL LL C d 7 WLO �-Z W m W F- LU W 3:.F= Wm -7 > 0 N W IL W - V '� O y y m m d N c N m �+•= C C m a x m MIX;{' aQ'�-aot_ma mayNN or �A�Sa�a��j���o a$a10�m.4 `o my ETimcm m„�m,mu—mm �$Ovl �-'m�N?ds O.7m Ut!gC6 N$mm>pNCCOU1Wmm$ mCN¢ON0 rr; Ury��• m OS]`CC N 6C ON lOa m.m..E 0S C dam N—C dC�'O OOm m Nm ACU dE �_yasm 0NdtQ �m Am�m cP E-71, -y�- Nm, 12 Mo C—M a=mLm �Tciac00JdN "amL 016 O amUONmNC Lo p�WVmOc m —0 Emop 0 o f Eaaa_r00 cg o mmoc Z o m s�E w,o88m.a^amwm-m ooc; Z oo0 f N y OCymL N00 O c�Vm msdo-6q N ummm a > mj mmEI ?:oN o>m moa 0 3OaRmIzE o.c—- )oyaD2a0mo NmE �mmmmSrnm�atso8"a Nog g!�Opmmu i - 8d >o.rncrnuw w df c -" i9 o8mo ta�wrn mNom od29!Eaan -EE,m � �• mga--'v` em Co E E , Cr.�. .,�i- � -s.,:. rn x 'a m c W 0 m T .Ri .Rs?( OlJ C w— :s_. LL c c tz: Z .1 - —13 Z CO < C) 00 CL W a) co z W 2 z 0 Z W LL 0 D 0) CO) mEmE0 a�amE --aVd�O PEO M 0 mE>o M,wo ti 2 >7,9 C3 --E m,.9,02--� uo�C-O-C-am > -mt: 0 M o nt OwEm -90�m Em m �arn-,tc 0,a W:3= m -LU -00 maO mw ?9 -.,-Ecu am 05�0 Mm - M W��C;,w OW=U) 0 0 0 a Z 0 -mc.) E= o 0�0 w Q-3 0 0--O, 0 Oa Z -M 'M 0 on 'w'- Z>wwc M-00 c zwj �O mi�maaa OW-gww C"c �j m S'E O320v116 1 0 -M M 0- M42 0 z 60mCm 2! 0 a Mg- "m �. , M 0 m�2 ,m�E, MorJoEm :F 0 000a'- aw�>,!; If= w W= 0 o a E cocDo QW2 W -M 0 'w'- w-nE a 0 :E 0 m-am.5-2 E EZ E '00,E8a 249 u -P �-F, = 0 0 w 0 . V ow E N a �o -M-S 0 w f - LU -S 2 — M� '@';� a L, a w aL)- 0 �m ,a "a 0 0 0 & 0 Ng 2 mS,O 3M 00 -a- izwk �Ocm� O>alE�m>-QC� =W�o Rr a m a am 0409= 0 Tcz' -0 E E - -"c 0 w 0 E z -a 622r(aoo =M e 0 E 08 0 O�E�� 0 P�M� 16 OEUM 0 M 2,5 M,6; Mc -50 E mE ..-Fi 'r. 'M CmmE -EMC200wo cm2n-w.�, a >2 2 2m<z a < M (D. - Wnfo (9(92nNa MAWR MIX 0- -.01 .2 E m 101.1. M N mONwamCL I E 0 0 sm aw 'o 3§� w 0 o WE u 2 Z 0 � E a 0 - a 0 w > 0 �A 000 - -1 --E 0 m 2) E mu) a _d 12 L.QC!F E Z 0, E4 LOA. 0 -0 3M: "t'k. IM" �w 0 0 E E -Fu 0 WEI �o j'_ S. 0 m mm w - E 0N E Z mW 000 WI.M; w oz 0 w w omw Fn 0 0 m (if tau ri. f!, 4 LL 2 c a H vc Z �a C 00 Ca a W Q � F ca Z W 2 Z O z Z W LL O a U) O a0 N W iDu• Nm.�j_ j N J fq J f7 12C Al C a 2 V -o C O W w-] ! mN tw m m Cal Wow >ugof>nm mo=Hj .�'"vSnm 62m m ae.mm>oN nm`Na cWcm mvmi mO_my aW°a o mc dmoNan�rummQaro,�.a� Q mNwoocw E agVmm 'dHJc dozs m m 1 '• + z-xndR� C !/1 r y a �L.. W w 2� -° y O p N Q m ro'O m N °NN E L °' 6 Ca E v W 'a-�5 m« m'- c T o m S W. O m o C 2 OZ o a m m c� Z A> U U K <W.Ea1 Z ro w CE mum. $ W W C o N~ .s ar ppro 12 w!/J C C 9 C y m J Oro O J O m w°« C L N C E E N m ? 8 a E m ^r N t= 0 N w L° n m� Q= v M� 'L € Z v M 'rami_ �m�� °-E oom oo cam m� Ha«o QED n wrote �J c acv L ..3�._ �N= m ro�Qola m NoDO CmU 0, Cc �LmO>.~OnCE m0 ` .w.. hOmUU me8m� o m.l, Ju T o0 aE roE Emaa La 3m_ aJ'C �'r".il,_:'•. aE��U m>,�v��c�m=oEg auU mo y.cm 8 8m 2 am M-g,M W cU omni �`o ,. ro ngna n w w av W o$ —Uommw mWL«ro mro«❑ cm m L H v m c 1J m o' o `m m a m _� 69m0 m2 ;£,m MA vim ' ° � a ,.C'O.. W mid 9 cma�3 5m «>•UO WL MN t« aN m Q m m C oTm JO o€ °w E.«m 0tM3 c -oE m si 10 aEi -°t=ma' 3 T mW acini E03 ���0p 0 3W O'�`�'' m E mow t C? c nom` a r m y 3C'�j'O O nmvm- «mEnm Qm m27 -O N — .m m la E m- E m °m >2m$ppN n EddO3r mopcN mN yam} Sgyo dUErom amm mH E 02 nm m m= o a o T Wb CL ON yd tV aE WCT aN �Wr 0 %s.S"t'2a Z 3a S.E 2n 2nc 0 �-•. >,. m tiff a Joni a T C = v C - mSS4& 9'O L w m� N M � L O a0 N W Z Q 1- a 0 z �a C cn UQ Ch 1 W Q N F ca z W z O z z W U. O a 7 E E E J U) N `Rw Rl aw E m a v O � o U- Ol�i,YR Rm R mm mm . aofn�s W �� fa f�. o• m- o , .� w ji'FC(, C C C m E3� " z z z Z Q ins 7Y� y m `^O m c m c m o 12w2EZ! no idmCi'aNCmN 120 na' N12C a�wvm ,C R, Oc O O 0 ECm mnmRmm 0 J m OZ cL21CNm W, Jmnm E a m > mLo Twi-O . " O Cm 0m 20 ER mmE O¢ mmQ0 m W R c� m° �$cEa >- oxss N m wvoav •-?R41.F . 6Rn I v J; L O -O $ m n m L O o m y1 HDo ^ m m m "' m J C C L �L m U 0 EmmE3m �m-wmNm - O 0 chi U' ccu o m d Ei'c mm E= R '.3 V Q, U m c .J 01 Jna oSo 0) nc m e c nm m R -C E0c m n> E oam om m $m U C K 9 .o c..: o` NS�cas E2m $o.am 3omE no -o t >-w mv2 Jcu �'0 3�H�`�3 aE o 4 2a�Mo m n o g mmo.': c� c 1� m m m6&E a> m m aci` o'm_ yc L '.3r mmmE c m > ¢c 0 mN - N mNCN E 36m o m> UU Ea•- R moW J 9 mw cmR d mn J '.0 a -o9 -Ti Ps.000-0C•-a m .� E m m ma ow p$= W 3 n9 O C j m m m R m m a f/1 w 9 _ I�1 O d J" - � `.' O ¢ m m C m U m m 'm'a 02> c9 m-oR.i9 m='m -0 mtnm a E c= m Cos3 c a ma ma nQ c m moaa>i�m >m� `m,CSU am¢m o 0N$ Ucoi` p0 CmWV U'UC �R- -, ¢Jp Qa N> aPE 0nO]$ E�-'`ma OI mUN WN@ NO T. U�$00 a��.'m- yYE-L-° P C u mm U Eo E C_ mon<6 i Vim= m V ocv C Q.m C 7E Noa.comm co 0-L R „�C.C -0- Lm �g C E 3 V N -0 N U $mm.,- c T E J- J N oL° W V co c W 0: m^0' fla N 60 y + Jn ry `.. mNmm3C mmo co-- Yl @ a m c Oa zm"z.-c 0....00yE C i mdpT' mmi'S k° Li'm Rn> w mcw,, e-cJm .L-�mm 3«�'- E � a, () V om E od ¢mmmom mm WLR>E a O'mOWO ROd. U0$ m812 L`mco E R mn� �9� m 9�ry a LU ¢9R~0NtW m> w C �a a E.9 cn(q � N Qj NmN CCwO W m R m L m O _ m> f0 m �J (D m >. m ,�(] C m N m m U u�aE m� mca¢ C m 2- LM E -US$ mo¢m ¢ am WOO 9L.� mmo V Ew m W-Cmm .2 m -ow R m> 0 m w 0 E N 0,088 m n Cm m m -. own C> d sc s fn a �% > >. m m m C m mr.ZE0{.=mmo dwEmmw E.Nc m9L Za= aO$, mem `mm o ¢oam �SNyg-Em c3o =0 ct umiF mac mEocm @ mLwn J om a vc aaa cwm o_m c¢_t LEL omn o E mm uoi'moom$ >mmami�5m mmm cava oma $ncJi �mm oy mMCc rna na�W G$c ocom° -' f 0¢aw W m3o o z U:'a:4 �i n.� 3`mS fc5E`m>E= 7r a c � R w m m m coo 0 �E fi! fav g2 z E E E J U) N `Rw Rl aw E m a v O � o U- c c c O- $ �c�pp bh�pp$ 2a cy r O O d N 0 $ E r $ N c y C N G J VJ J f0 J fA a m o c m N m E 2 E c ami aci E E L i0 N u m v o ym ymc vm miN 9n E dy acro ay 2 EW cci2m a rn oZ ya d _®dN C- N p d m W ❑ E n r a m E T c o w N> 0 a $y 5$N Nltl IL aOcVmHnavqmXE L�.Tm_Lmm' W smm`U�d2C'O U) aaNcmim CE `�SaCN—mcm —YamEvaia � E 0 Em2aE m d E po,E mJ E nU mo 1� o— aoow vc a m W aa mm$ oa ma `0E c oww—9mo tm= C mU O N m Wocoe$CE d PomE y W.. $7 a W d WC m of _odE m a m— dcda a B o= cm dW WmW, mgm ods �c nv $E'n5 0= mE mE c� 20 L°a Win` PFJ N? mm 3oE c .`oo ca c DEME Pow mmv �°O aZ` `�mm Z0 8 12 8 ��m >E.N acix ma ��om �dc 3v EE aLL mem._ aai 9a�ac 2cm y-5 0>' 9 q y - E M m m O O O O'Lum mm�' 'yocm mad$ 00oEy EaE 2 —y.cm, W dmtc M, fn M" mm EL a: E— -mSE mn= O m m >, NOm Ec ❑cEm mWv$o.mc o72 mmEa1 a oo>amE maN1 mao >n a� m c�$m as 2c _e as m— E�a�m o.d mc cmdmoo .n' acaHweEo6m cc0, cvamas WW mm2o c' m8v m$a EmWaN LU c m c �y> �t K o a W dw oo� 2$a=>v2 rd �a.do m0a$"h E .-co�nN wd0y yE mOconaEy° a.( mn. W U NW 0- 0 0 mn O- $ �c�pp bh�pp$ 2a cy r O O d N 0 N c m -o E 6 t 30. da U'O� dW —mN �O ao a -C2 o$/ `a€- 0 Ew 0 o-22 dc$. V$ Z`>>- C� m d Ww a 2m=6O€ E2$Ud�mmammm'W LE°nc�dV�ao$a w mW.5 -Um U` -aocyE0.d$ac d U z—Z aa Uct z z 2! 12 N_ca To �m Em yo .�y OOd€d6�Ec— $� ON dN,a0 E N �> coo 1N m = ¢�maLoaUcn-mw0 o90-�mE waay0❑Ea3nomdmd0 rn 2m"20 0 �W-6-2 w2 dL° -0ommoUmr220 cca� a m o c m N m E 2 E c ami aci E E L i0 N u m v o ym ymc vm miN 9n E dy acro ay 2 EW cci2m a rn oZ ya d _®dN C- N p d m W ❑ E n r a m E T c o w N> 0 a $y 5$N Nltl IL aOcVmHnavqmXE L�.Tm_Lmm' W smm`U�d2C'O U) aaNcmim CE `�SaCN—mcm —YamEvaia � E 0 Em2aE m d E po,E mJ E nU mo 1� o— aoow vc a m W aa mm$ oa ma `0E c oww—9mo tm= C mU O N m Wocoe$CE d PomE y W.. $7 a W d WC m of _odE m a m— dcda a B o= cm dW WmW, mgm ods �c nv $E'n5 0= mE mE c� 20 L°a Win` PFJ N? mm 3oE c .`oo ca c DEME Pow mmv �°O aZ` `�mm Z0 8 12 8 ��m >E.N acix ma ��om �dc 3v EE aLL mem._ aai 9a�ac 2cm y-5 0>' 9 q y - E M m m O O O O'Lum mm�' 'yocm mad$ 00oEy EaE 2 —y.cm, W dmtc M, fn M" mm EL a: E— -mSE mn= O m m >, NOm Ec ❑cEm mWv$o.mc o72 mmEa1 a oo>amE maN1 mao >n a� m c�$m as 2c _e as m— E�a�m o.d mc cmdmoo .n' acaHweEo6m cc0, cvamas WW mm2o c' m8v m$a EmWaN LU c m c �y> �t K o a W dw oo� 2$a=>v2 rd �a.do m0a$"h E .-co�nN wd0y yE mOconaEy° a.( mn. W U NW 0- 0 0 mn 0 a� v a Z Q a f- O Z Z C Q y UQ a 12 Ch W Qa fl Z -W H2 Z O Z W LL O w Q N LU "t W FQ Z W o Wm C9 > � c J F- W W E Wm n> 3 �p I � sm, m�•. V Frn}F L � m c c m e c � m L c m`m Ym _t. Yea Yeo �d -'`vi m m Sti Cq m — C `tj m C Uo.a m'�o-c E Em EcES Q a...ma EtmEc m EE�o>EOcmc K 'ziEv, c O N m> c m O d m ZcmOmO=O E O m�mmaNyo0 pR.. c0 m m O c m N a c m a O m m 72 o>— w .00 , yWanEOy '. RK t m ma Eo ; m E 10 m m E c .� o m m @ S� .L° $ Ja a c= E m aE N .T. X ¢ m $ t C U a —'G m a Ya > N Ei m m =a m =m my m mm P ma m m = m° CO'5 as `� m ¢ vm E IS LO m EE �..OUa cmnm aa « g Am03mm''Lp¢p0o d C m m m P m m—ZUE NO 2 Z" UUO OC aNm -Om > N m ma= m m LCm aC> = a 0.2 .o V LW £ m 0 a O m C 9dS 8 16'a c 0 a m m N aE @m om'5o o 04 E Om c mo w Moa=PC¢ OU w"N2 E aw E E d 9"O3N auLL—.mmm j° 8 LA4 Fm ca E: m O EEa m.OC0am- m me,- o°:j LmE E E ¢m a O c QU m3 >r ca«_c a E o f o� ow oa .. 0-c0 mm E Om m` dO a m L UmE '-gen_(n 6Jn od m� y oom 0 a- jcY�3o❑ �clu commmo 0"m mU mm - c mW ct m m vou0 m mom>�ae m c°> tm m o av1 mE _c Eoa m ¢mEmox co aum �cmo mm� ow a c�mmcaU £o o E m m -c L Y`omme =d=fffD t �`a`m3vacmti( mLUI bC6 m d mE ¢E mc m o¢m-am' LL-I amaoBao m Mm -2 M C4 am aaUO $aEacm ow a C� Omc M (0y CSCV yct 0 a 0 0y c O meLm E :.. w n= cimo�W mn oo;ry a>>� L°m" �d mm om om c� ou=in o -`o Ti Koi o -y2 ��Ln a =o+arn x4 : a.a o� as a� o a os 35 U� ¢8 ama' �? icon O r C m u N m 0 P 0'r �74 m p FAMe Y ~KIA n C%jC N2 w . Cr c OL LL c Ian cF LL U) LLI "r W M LLI o La Mu rn ul 0 W o 12 M 'j, 2 0 .1 0 0 (L a D ,JLm IVU IL (L 0 a. 0 - 0 0 (L .2:- CD E Is Cl E E.2 c E a E E o EOM -6 E02 E o 2 E o 2 -0 EOT E ir 0>5 E 0 > i5 E j5 0 E 0 > 5 E 0 0>0 0 Q 0 E 0 2 ClJ > > I > 0 E t TM ZZ, M 0 mmn ca WIG m 0) j; sg 0 a. 0 Cl) 0 E w w a o 0-� 0 0 �* "in E �a-z 0_:.'.2va �Z E 4 o 0 OS -0c 0 0 W�- 0 co '�;,a E m 0 >o E� — - � M 0 2 15 C-4 0 -0 0 E E i- 0 18 0J Z' �: E.s A4, W ?r. 0- a _0 E z. M M CC.) 0 T co- mVm E E LO M Naw o 2 �o P, 0 0 '0 Z c 0 0 0 EnZ -am -PR a - M � 0 EL a u- E c 3: IA0 0 8 0 C14 't M _ CD 0.5 0 t: = 0 I dl M � M ON 1- 0 -9 cco mm Ma 0 o �s a. I - C3:-,-_O(Da 'j5 M -Z 0 E LU 0 M > C) E 12 a w 72 c� o 0 T €-E M A= W -<O. — M -42 E w m �z 0 LL Z 0 > - 0 o S' co (D M ow 0:5 �: -6 , 2 2I a8 Mir, 0 0 C C" a �Mal ccamOC-5 W-6 cow m W Nim E Co ?r w 0 23 0 0 c = 0 -a 5 10 o 0 0 0 u'a =CD b 4), 0 — X 0 �Owitou5�iEo w -a M-0.5 0 M 0 �'6 , M 0- Mc 'V i C c a '- 1- w 0 -16 0 E Mn � 2 0 0 -6 :5 w - � - � - 0 1 0 Co -6 - a 0 0 12 0 m_ M ca e 0) cu 0 � 0 0— 0 (D E �m� > 0 00=- �=-- M 0 'w' 0 .1 3:0= E� C= C() wo c 11 WLO Xv 0 M -6 W CD Ojc� M 0 M m M E � ' M w 3: E MUV' . , M Q,no m= 0 > 0 C � > a TO 0 0 0 = -_ .2 c 0 wo 3: 13 T CCU 9.s 2 = w m 0 Q >'a(D 2 t, o > w w � � - ��W=500W_ 0=2 o ca >�e If%. 0 0 a.M M 8 --ru 2 0 0 0, -�C-6 OMC() 0 q Jim .i>-.= , ca I co -0 All F_ �� T �q w 0 M �m v 0 0 0'§ 0 �:v_ �o. EZ� 0� 0, 'i, -0 uv w a OEmw-wo E 0 a Lm E , 0 0 a w 0 w M 0 � '00.2? E w MIV16 I E Co 0 ow 'c 0 M M CL S W OE — 0 0 '�M a E a'F� j, 0 0.,t: �cr' (D 0 O:am 0 o c 0 0 0 715 co i-, m 0 coF-= O� E c c - V �m— w - c n -R I;s 2icmm?.owE W� cu 75 W 0 0:5 0 �3 0 .=M 0 2 M> 0 w z g_ � Z,.G o W 0 2 2 Z 1 0 �.?t o 3:- V3 0 Om (D_M M�R 5 �'�R 0 (2 ID a) a 0 0 1� 2 a - z 0150 um �M E 00 ow ow 0 kz H CY 05 20 o 2 E 2 2 0 mV arEm -6 M� 0 0 0 J'Z' , LO C C 0 (.5 Cl) WF �T c M CULL LL c L 2 A kl,..m 4 �CD E m E 0 M 0 0 =0 0c 0 va CL IL 16 (L (L Q M 0 EL Ou 0 A 0 - 14 Mg t rr E E om E Eom E E.9 Sof 4'00 E > S E 0 E 0 cd� 0 0 m 0 M > 0 0 0 0 -ow'- 0 rnc a, 0 0 > 0-0 cm.c M-. m r.- MD;6.0 a 0 n O'C m C 6 0 0 0 0 16 W m O's- a) a) M am s -6 0 U.La E Z� � --cZ� ca C, M� m'j5 a 0 .2 W - E -6 00 E 0 am 0 MC) w 0 0 N> 2 .2 I 0 0 0 E 0 0 O� � 0 MWw,.WEI.`=-cw woo �?Tf-wm� C6 M2 -2 -a -�a 0 M m 0 0 0 o- M c6 0 Z 0 M= a 'M 0 , 5 � -a- )OOo 0 E� m M:F -6 am aa � L 0 aa 0 mC m 0, o- 49 16 P m ao W M W aO - E' - 0 3: 0 0 - o 2 55 wta-c< 0�'c 0 0 m m 0 W wmr 0 0, MO E 0 aMLD 0 0 0 a 0', 5 0 0 0 0 a.- M.- > 2 wo Z 0 0 A $`-000 0D 0.2 tr c.' W C _m I)f a- 0 a > _Cm E b o o 0 n [2:S -m, 0-@ - 00 0 1 E 0 Mm =m -W —W �w a --a am am 0- —M M�o E =0 E a 0 W'�j > 0 � W 0 W. - 0 - a � > po 0 0 w 0 E --E a, 0 E`@�� na I 7E MZO w a 0 dc 2 W m> " M c a 0 0 0 - § m W-6 - -��o , 2.c-0 0 0 a 0 0 wo OIE �.�? t6 � 'a , a 3: 3 M L 0 , W �aO ua W , W �j 0 -W 00 O.S 2 a C� am�-5 0 a m 0 2 > m � 0 E M 0 a w 0 a= (a , � a W -73 MX W 0 0 W� 0 W, MA > 4i cu,& -d p 0 JAZn Et3 0:5 , T - ¢ a - o- a aoR� am 0 . w 0 0 00 0 Co M 0 12:2, 'a Mm W WMT�-:� 0 0 ,jg t, E a E 0 a� :S 0 0 — 0 0 a — :e m E m 0 02 m 0 016 0 C -E a E 0 0 p 0 W -2: a 0 C M W a M C -=M M 0 0 M M 00-- -0 0 a - m a)'E E - 0 2 0 m 00 'a a= 0 c 0:56'60m -E, a E w: E m 0 .0 0 7� -00 N 0 0 w x -E 0L 25 0 0 �,, 002,50mWO' 0 m Z -6 w �c=-a ME? 0 0 a) M 0 0 w 0-2 m �6 0 12 C 0 m Z- a a C-'� 0 ID 0 1 - 0 W.c- W— m , 0 mm0=M=mc � M- , ;S c:E c m 2 m 0 w a a hi > 0 M�Ctuw 0 = t: , a 0-� , ;o.c -, 0 .,a- ON K. 0 W- w 0 as 0> an W a- a a a m 0 0 0 W WIE.0 2 0() 'C -6 S9 a 0 0 a >0 C 0 0 0 0 -Ea;s -.LD C� w M > M ca IL 0 -C wo , m M 0 a E- 0 0 �2 = 0 0 0 w 0 Ey 6.22 mlw-F o 0 0 �0op1 0 Em 0 E� a 2 E -Eb w m &nw 2 w =m'w- -c cz m� 0 -� m Cr 0 0 21 -6- co 0 0 0 -6- a 0 ou 0 -6 � Cly 0>2a>FW� , E `0 "a 0) 0:5 0 a 0 iii a 0 m t E -M M 0 0 M m a E E W 0 E A o W A i.� O a O Z O F O Z OZ 0 0 N Z W It - Ix TO F W Z O Q O C� G QLL Q No W� J. -z Wm W �- LU W a 3r..N Lu > &A k 0' w == ra+. C� c C mO a C�m � C m> Z>C _ Co C yO LttQ On J (9a Lr uDy CnN aQOcaaoF aUa LL 46U a.p o F o 'E E "cE Ed Eq Eo � Q. E0(D Ed— Edm W Ed= Em` U Um❑ Um❑ Um� y C C m $ O a T O O N C C �N C .Z` y W .D M >E. t0 L iA O L ❑ y +m' C N J y N > W c 2E �0'� DoL ooc E` oco a=t•Q�$ c o w=MtO Ot ?wac ymL.coi mmm$mamtJ1 cNcoamom�u� aNa a o o a ma.a m coc ot.c.Onym i mooa V- OmmiE mdaE3- .0Qc Ua :000❑ aE°mnm3 mVn4"M cyCcd m tO O 'm 5.c J L EC o:E:;ri OL maw mU m cc am m OaJ-m .OcJOi n� m C =. E 0 ®D w•CU m s:, yN3>, L o. E-cM"--MV Nz E a,-. a) MTWnTE, d-WOn omcaM,> #,i-s O COdw O m.O m O- 0._ 6 oOO mpL NO ON y�Li c oura -Nr�y t v O fcoi =m JOCo - O OD�C'lyo m•cQ0oO poOEy cac, Em3 Lint om'�ca a- J°f`'C:,m CyC= aJOU `g C ym0 G�mUq:0 r> m J. m O'E>y$ c7 w•nCoEcc E manm� y/1, Ma ma u3 ¢Qc:2c g`oZ 5tCoF, mmrn comm ":,. NryNTmnmm a Em Omn Con$O N E,ONJCm ECOOma CD NO� IL - om waco apcmi WoE mn wC�a EmYva m mma�nm m v$y pc 0o>ov G -Mrnm$a a 4w2-- mmam >0 ES (D otc n!':'.'"�..:`'.''. �mOmy mmyCDa)y 'Oy&L�ad+rUZ yOW mm-_7: ;5'-J. X y`m y OCQ C E o C@c C w 'Vi dm OoLO aw Q. O w Qm❑� W aaJcmCmNmmmyN 0E � otowID 3m a 0��- .�Oom mmcl Nm�cLCD 'ci$ a,V, '€+•.°s.}��Y oN0EE Q LcmJxi UJNJNsKmCVLL$ .�rc-i a mmam -W. •.ca _a«.0mrya--ani m$cmo ac :UT�OmE>cmeaz am �c$saCw>�3OdCoam0 m'a�.aa3m(-0ii 'y_s- LUo o$ ❑❑ro c omcopa_m aaE,o vc FaO- m Qpa y m�W� $mUC �CV ~mUNOOmaOV mmLamm mNVCO oyi$�a12 G ®� A. Nn -C MN NONp ��Emm'y m N>Mc Qm.O-,'> '2 o.W (mN�wVC C y ya Ny cU m 6 N O" O Cm `�D mW NC'i m am . =NOmM O -2N N L =Cya N 0 NrC+C W C ONG w mUO m�.❑- > D C N oc OUm m mOQCaNOLym�lim m. OT00aO V._WU c c w—�Tmo0o my C.may o- 2ooUd aoa 2 �15:_ U;oE 2U m O UoNJ n O OO6 g � O O m m J N mEa,OEE OU cQOm00m mm O.—C9(76.-�$ ODQmEO 2pmUmam WORM aa ao2OmM bra M WS Fz 6 U) 16 W 12 LLI C3 (D -1- Wm 1 F- W m Z�.S; LLI z > 0 N m p aLL 0 (D (L 0 0 (D E ma, EHa E 5 LLI Ed- E -W> 2 0 v. 0 0, v C EO�2 E 0 0 c N.cwU0_.Gw a_ maminm 0 >- E If E- E ao ow� W.- c w w C:9 , M ow,-�> -- 0 a 0 C�Omc > , E'- alm 2 w M8 2E� 0 w C 0,00 < f (D wammo 0, -, E E w 1 0 c5s E a EUwo E > 0 .;3'. mm 1-.- oo E w > ID 0 (D=— 22 a - 0 (,D (D 0 c Ert w (D > rn mrn 0 > 0 2 E c -E 0 Ejog Ow W= OE c z cw� cu , cu 0 2 C.2n m mm -SE � z wcmmM, > m=ew�E W,o- C--- 0 LU�>0 75 � '0� � ,Zo 019 a 0 , am c a m 6 0 CUEE, Wo-- 0 —0 4) a Z;, 0 2 46 M CO -, .-- w O= — M � z 0 mcm0 0 2 a— () , E e 9 c (D 5 0 MM m O 80 -8 0 0 c E a 0 000--0 E:6 f 'Cu E W m E "I >'- 0 , , w Ila 0c c a=12 - 0ti2 :)v-, a, 0 [2 >0 -ja E 0-4.6 omi:l 9 f2 (D 0 0 0 0 (D Co E U) W- 5 0) U) 00 0 > 0 2 a E E mvd a: w w w a- -.s -a Q -a(.) M020 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 This page intentionally left blank. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page ES -16 Initial Study— Executive Summary JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE INITIAL STUDY The City of Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency') has received and subsequently deemed complete an application from Jewel Ridge, LLC (Applicant2) for the development of an approximately 12.9 acres site located at the existing terminus of Crooked Creek Lane, bordering the southern corporate boundaries of the City. As presently proposed, the Applicant seeks City approval to subdivide the project site for the purpose of constructing up to 16 single-family detached dwelling units on the resulting residential parcels. The current development application has been under review by the Community Development Department, Planning Division (Department) since 2003. During that time period, the project has undergone a number of design changes, including a reduction in the number of dwelling units, elimination of proposed private access gates, and changes in proposed lot sizes and configuration. Although no formal architectural plans havebeen submitted for the current development application, conceptual plans were submitted to the City by the Applicant as part of an earlier (under review by the City during 2003-2004) development concept and demonstrating that all residential lots could be suitably developed for the proposed use. Similarly, as part of the Applicant's original 2003-2004 submission, a number of technical studies were requested from the Applicant by the City. The information presented in those studies reflected the conditions that then existed on the project site and examined the potential impacts associated with a more intensive residential development project. Because those studies assumed both a greater number of dwelling units and greater level of disturbance of the project site, the information presented therein can be assumed to reflect a worst-case scenario from an environmental perspective. Except as noted, the Department has not required the Applicant to submit revised and updated technical studies examining a lesser level of development. This environmental analysis, conducted in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as codified in Section 21000 et seq. of the Public Resources Code (PRC), and the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines), as codified in Section 15000 et seq. in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), is intended to provide the environmental basis for any and all discretionary actions that may be required from the City and from other governmental entities for the development of the project site for the contemplated land use. r/ As defined in Section 15367 In Tifie 14 of the California Code of Regulations, a 'lead agency" is defined as the public agency that has the principal. responsibility for carrying out or approving a project. The lead agency will decide whether an environmental impact report or negative declaration will be required for the project and will cause the document to be prepared. The term "Lead Agency," as used herein, refers to the City of Diamond Bar. 2/ Reference to the "ApplicanC herein is assumed to be inclusive of the contractors and subcontractors required for the construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed project and is inclusive of any subsequent holder(s) of real property interests in the subject property, other than the owners of the single-family homes that will be constructed within the tract map area site, the City of Diamond Barg and any other public agencies that may become holders of any real property interests within the tract map boundaries. 3/ All acreage figures, square footages, and other dimensional and volumetric references cited herein are provided for descriptive purposes only and represent approximations and/or rounded numbers and should, therefore, not be construed as exact. As the project moves forward through the permitting process, minor variations to these numbers can and should reasonably be expected, such that -there inclusion herein is not intended to unreasonably restrict the ability of the City or the Applicant from modifying the proposed project. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study- Introduction Page 1-1 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract N6.54081 1.2 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT COMPLIANCE As defined in Section 21065 of CEQA, a "project" is defined as any of the following: (a) an activity directly undertaken by any public agency; (b) 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; and/or (c) an activity involving the issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies. The State CEQA Guidelines further defines a "project" as comprising "the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in a physical change in the environment, directly or ultimately," including "[a]n activity involving the issuance to a person of a lease,. permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies "4 Since the proposed project will require one or more discretionary actions from the City, those activities that are the subject of this environmental review constitute a "project" subject.to the provisions of CEQA and its implementing guidelines. Upon receipt of an application for a proposed activity, CEQA provides a three-step structure to guide public agencies in their environmental compliance efforts. Under the first step, if a proposed project is determined to be statutorily or categorically exempt from CEQA, no further agency evaluation is required. None of the statutory or categorical exemptions outlined in the State CEQA Guidelines appear applicable to the proposed project. If there is a possibility that the project may have a significant environmental effect, under the second step, the agency must prepare an "initial study" as a means of assessing the nature and significance of those impacts. The precise nature of the third step is dependent upon the findings of the initial study. If the initial study reveals no substantial evidence that the proposed project will not have a significant environmental effect, the agency may complete either a "negative declaration" (ND) or a "mitigated negative declaration"5 (MND) briefly describing the reasons supporting that determination. If, however, the initial study concludes that the proposed project will or may have a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency is required to commence preparation of an "environmental impact report" (EIR) in order to more thoroughly evaluate the precise nature of those impacts and to explore alternatives to the proposed action that could reduce or eliminate those significant or potentially significant environmental effects. 1.3 INITIAL STUDY PURPOSE AND INTENT In accordance with Section 15003(g) of the State CEQA Guidelines, "the purpose of CEQA is not to generate paper, but to compel government at all levels to make decisions with environmental consequences in mind" The CEQA process is part of a comprehensive planning program undertaken by those public agencies responsible for approving, conditionally approving, or denying a proposed project and documents the efforts of those agencies to evaluate the potential environmental costs associated with a proposed development application. °/ Section 15378[a][31, State CEQA Guidelines_ 5/ As defined in Section 21064 of CEQA, a"'negative declaration' means a written statement briefly describing the reasons that a proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and does not require the preparation of an environmental impact report" As further defined in Section 21064.5 of CEQA, a "'mitigated negative declaration' means a negative declaration prepared for a project when the initial study has identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the public agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment" July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 1-2 Initial Study - Introduction JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 This "Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration: Jewel Ridge Estates - Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (Initial Study) was prepared for the purpose of: (1) identifying the project's potential environmental impacts; (2) providing the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an EIR, a ND, or a MND; (3) enabling the Applicant to modify the proposed project in order to mitigate any adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared; (4) facilitating environmental assessment early in a project's design and development process; (5) providing factual documentation for the findings in a ND or MND, if supported by the information and analysis presented in the Initial Study, that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment; (6) eliminating the preparation of an unnecessary EIR if, based upon a reasonably diligent review, no significant environmental impacts are associated with a proposed project or remain following the application of feasible mitigation measures; (7) determining whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the proposed project; and (8) assisting in the preparation of an EIR, if one is required, by focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant, identifying the effects determined hot to be significant, and explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not, in fact, be significant. This Initial Study provides the City, other governmental agencies, and the general public with detailed information Concerning the proposed project and its potential environmental effects. This analysis has been undertaken by the City to: (1) determine the magnitude of those effects; (2) identify feasible mitigation measures and other actions that are or may be available to the City and/or to the Applicant to reduce or avoid any significant effects associated with the proposed project; and (3) determine the post -mitigated level of significance of the resulting impacts. Information contained in this Initial Study will serve as the factual basis to support the City's election to prepare a ND or MND or to narrow the scope of the requisite EIR, should the Lead Agency subsequently determine that an EIR is required for the proposed action. It is not the function of this Initial Study to evaluate alternatives to the proposed project or to determine whether the proposed land use could be better accommodated at another location. The Lead Agency must respond to the application now before the City and approve, conditionally approve, or deny the Applicants' request for those discretionary actions that may be necessary to allow for the project's effectuation. Should this Initial Study determine or should the Lead Agency subsequently elect to commence the preparation of an EIR for the proposed project, that document would include an analysis of a reasonable range of alternatives for the project site. CEQA does not obligate an agency to conduct that same level of analysis when a project, either as proposed or as subsequently modified, qualifies for a ND or a MND. 1.4 REQUIRED CONTENTS OF AN INITIAL STUDY Section 15063(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that an initial study shall contain: (1) a description of the project, including the location of the project; (2) an identification of the environmental setting; (3) an identification of environmental effects by use of a checklist, matrix, or other method provided that entries are briefly explained to show the evidence to support the entries; (4) a discussion of ways to mitigate any significant effects identified; (5) an examination of whether the project is compatible with existing zoning and local land use plans; and (6) the name of the person or persons who prepared or participated in the document's preparation. 1.5 DOCUMENT FORMAT This Initial Study is divided into a number of sections corresponding, either directly or indirectly, with the analytical requirements for an adequate CEQA record. Those sections include: City of. Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study- Introduction Page 1-3 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Section .1.0 (Introduction) provides a general introduction to the proposed project and to the CEQA process, introduces those agencies, organizations, and individuals associated with the project, and identifies those documents incorporated herein by reference. Section 2.0 (Project Description) provides a more thorough description of the project site and a more detailed description of both the proposed project and the proposed actions now under consideration by the City and by other responsible agencies. e Section 3.0 (Environmental Setting) presents a general overview of the physical setting in which the proposed action would occur or the regulatory setting. germane to each of the topical issues addressed herein. This description serves to provide important baseline data against which the project's potential environmental impacts can be predicted, focusing on the physical change to the existing environment predicated by the project and tempered by the regulatory environment in which the project will operate. Section 4.0 (Impact Analysis) presents the City's evaluation of the project's potential. environmental consequences and includes or references the supportive information used to derive the Lead Agency's preliminary conclusions concerning the potential magnitude of those environmental effects and the potential need for mitigation or other actions to reduce the significant impacts of the proposed project. Section 5.0 (Preliminary Determination) presents the Lead Agency's preliminary determination whether the proposed project, as proposed or as subsequently modified, will generate significant environmental effects. _ Section 6.0 (References) identifies the technical and related documents cited herein, excluding those prepared by or for the Applicant, and the City's independent evaluation of those studies considered by the Lead Agency in the analysis of project -related impact. Certain information relevant or potentially relevant to the City's deliberations concerning the proposed project and its potential environmental effects, including the "Environmental Checklist Form," has been included in the accompanying technical appendix- 1.6 ppendix 1.6 AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT Presented in Table 1-1 (Agencies, Organizations, and Individuals Associated with the Proposed Project) is a preliminary listing of those agencies, organizations, and individuals associated with the proposed project, including: (1) responsible agencies that may be required to take one or more discretionary actions concerning the proposed project and who may be required to utilize the City's CEQA documentation as the environmental basis for their own independent deliberations; and (2) trustee agencies' having jurisdiction by law over the natural resources affected by the proposed project. 6/ As defined in Section 15381 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the term "responsible agency' means "a public agency which proposes to carry out or approve a project, for which lead agency is preparing or has prepared an EIR or negative declaration. For the purpose of CEQA, the term 'responsible agency includes all public agencies other than the lead agency which have discretionary approval power over the project:' 7/ A "trustee agency" means "a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project which are held in trust for the people of the State of California" (Section 15386, State CEQA Guidelines). July 2096 City of Diamond Bar Page Ill Initial Study - Introduction JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Table 1-1 AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT ss dia ian Goa ae City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department, Planning Division Lead Agency Attn: Nancy Fong, Director 21825 E. Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177 (909)839-7030 Environmental Impact Sciences Citys Consulting Attn: Peter Lewandowski, AICP CEQA Consultant 26051 Via Concha Mission Viejo, California 92691-5614 (949) 837-1195 Leighton and Associates, Inc. City's Consulting Attn: David C. Smith, RCE 46222 Geotechnical 10532 Acacia Street Suite B-6 Engineer Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 (909)484-2205 Transportation and Traffic Engineering City's Consulting Attn: Warren C. Siecke, PE Traffic Engineer 20142 Canyon Drive Yorba Linda, California 92886-6058 (714)970-6247 Charles Abbott Associates, Inc. Attn: Don Winslow, PE 20955 Pathfinder Road, Suite 230 Diamond Bar, California 91765 City's Consulting (909) 598-1782 Civil Engineers DGA Consultants, Inc. Attn: James Eldridge 2130 E. 41h Street, Suite 100 Santa Ana, California 92705 (714) 568-0200 Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc. City's Consulting Attn R. Mitchel Beauchamp, President Biological Consultant P.O. Box 985 National City, California 91951-0985 (619)477-5333 Jewel Ridge, LLC Attn: Daniel Singh Applicant 10365 Jefferson Boulevard Culver City, California 90232 (310) 9453030 Applicant's Philip Gustafson, RCE 13875 Project Engineer 1843 Business Center Drive Duarte California 91010 E -Design International Applicant's Attn: Shekar Gant! Project Designer 5209 Augustine Drive Culver City, California 90230 (310)397-4264 City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study- Introduction Page 1-5 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Table 1-1 AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT aource: tnvironmentai Impact baences July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 1-6 Initial Study- Introduction - Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc. Applicant's Attn: Jerry T. Overland, TE 1579 Traffic Engineer 25876 The Old Road, Suite 307 Santa Clarita, California 91381 (661) 799-8423 GeoSoils Consultants, Inc. Attn: Rudy F. Ruberti, CEG 6634 Valjean Avenue Van Nuys, California 91406 Applicant's (818) 785-2158 Geotechnical Engineers GEO Environ Attn:Jabed Masud, Project Engineer 3914 E. Miraloma Avenue, Suite I Anaheim, California 92806 (714)632-3190 Gary M. Gantney, PE Applicanfs 5042 N. Langham Avenue Civil Engineer Covina, California 91724 (626) 915-0883 Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc. Attn: Ken Halama 223 62n1 Street Newport Beach, California 92663 Applicant's (949) 646-8958 Biological Consultant Bonterra Consulting Attn: Marc Blain 320 N. Halstead Street, Suite 130 Pasadena, California 91107 (626)351-2000 Don Case, Arborist Applicant's 3117 San Juan Drive Arborist Fullerton, California 92635 (714)879-0798 Applicant's Archaeological Consultant Cultural Resource Attn: Louis James Tartaglia, Ph.D. Consultant 3154 Rikkard Drive Thousand Oaks, California 91362 Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Waterworks/Sewer Maintenanoe/Flood Management(Solid Waste Divisions Potential Attn: Donald L. Wolfe, Director Responsible Agencies 900 South Fremont Avenue Alhambra, California 91803 626)458-5100 California Department of Fish and Game, South Coast Region 5 Potential Attn Chuck Raysbrook, Regional Manager Trustee Agency 4949 Viewridge Avenue San Diego, California 92123 (619)467-4200 aource: tnvironmentai Impact baences July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 1-6 Initial Study- Introduction JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Although the list seeks to be inclusive of all agencies now known to the City from whom discretionary permits or approval may be required, should the City ultimately approve or conditionally approve the proposed project, other governmental agencies may be identified as the project moves forward through the permit process. The City's failure to list any local, State, or federal agency as a potential responsible agency herein does not preclude that agency from utilizing the City's CEQA documentation as the environmental basis for any later discretionary action(s) that may be required for the project's construction and habitation. 1.7 TIERING OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS As indicated in Section 15152 of the State CEQA Guidelines: "'Tiering' refers to using the analysis of general matters contained in a broad EIR (such as one prepared for a general plan or policy statement) with later EIRs and negative declarations on narrower projects; incorporating by reference the general discussions from the broader EIR; and concentrating the later EIR or negative declaration solely on the issues specific to the later project" As further indicated in Section 15152(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines: "Where an EIR has been prepared and certified for a program, plan, policy, or ordinance consistent with the requirements of this section, any lead agency for a later project pursuant to or consistent with the program, plan, policy, or ordinance should limit the EIR or negative declaration on the later project to effects which: (a) Were not examined as significant effects on the environment in the prior EIR; or (2) Are susceptible to substantial reduction or avoidance by the choice of specific revisions to the project, by .the imposition of conditions, or other means." Pursuant to Section 15152(e) of the -State CEQA Guidelines: "Tiering under this section shall be limited to situations where the project is consistent with the general plan and zoning of the city or county in which the project is located, except that a project requiring a rezone to achieve or maintain consistency with a general pian may be subject to tiering." Two "program -level" or'Tirst-tier" environmental analyses have been conducted that include the project site and assume the subsequent development of that, property in accordance with the adopted I policies of the City. Those earlier environmental studies were prepared by the Lead Agency for the 1992 "City of Diamond Bar General Plan" (City of Diamond Bar, July 14, 1992) (1992 General Plan) and the 1995 "City of Diamond Bar General Plan" (City of Diamond Bar, July 25, 1995) (1995 General Plan). Those first-tier CEQA documents serve as valuable tools in understanding both the existing environmental setting and the anticipated long-term environmental impacts associated with development activities undertaken within the City and conducted in accordance with the City's land use and related policies. As indicated in Section 1_8 (Documents Incorporated by Reference), this project -level assessment has been tiered from CEQA documentation prepared by the City for the 1992 General Plan and 1995 General Plan. 1.8 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE Section 15150(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines authorizes NDs, MND, and EIRs to "incorporate by reference all or portions of another document which is a matter of public record or is generally available to the public" and relates, either directly or indirectly, to the proposed project or provides additional information concerning the project's environmental setting and/or the impacts that may result therefrom. Through incorporation, the Lead Agency is able to enter technical information into this CEQA document without having to physically incorporate the body of that information as part of the text subsequently circulated for public review and comment. City of.Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Introduction Page 1-7 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Those documents that are potentially relevant to the discussion of the existing environmental setting and/or potentially relevant to the assessment of the project's potential environmental impacts include, but may not be limited to: Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083 (City of Diamond Bar, July 14, 1992), Master Environmental Assessment - City of Diamond Bar (City of Diamond Bar, July 14, 1992), Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083 (City of Diamond Bar, July 25, 1995), and Implementation/Mitigation Monitoring Program (City of Diamond Bar, July 25, 1995). The "Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083" (1992 General Plan FEIR) constituted a program -level assessment of the potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the plans and policies outlined in the 1992 General Plan. The 1992 General Plan FEIR provided substantial and useful background information concerning the environmental setting within the City as well as a program -level assessment of the potential impacts that could occur as a result of the 1992 General Plan's implementation. The "Master Environmental Assessment — City of Diamond Bar" (1992 General Plan MEA) provided a comprehensive database encompassing the existing (1992) physical, social, environmental, and economic conditions influencing future planning decisions in the City. The document presented a generalized description of the community, described those existing conditions affecting the City, and. identified issues and opportunities associated with a number of technical areas relevant to this environmental analysis. The "Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083" (1995 Addendum), prepared in response to a petition to repeal the City's approval of the 1992 General Plan and the City's subsequent preparation of a revised City-wide planning document, examined the potential environmental impacts associated with the approval and effectuation of the 1995 General Plan. As indicated in the 1995 Addendum, "the Final EIR identified six unavoidable adverse environmental impacts [biological resources, transportation/ circulation, air quality, acoustic environment, land use, public services and facilities] associated with General Plan. implementation. Mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR will substantially mitigate these significant environmental effects n8 As indicated in Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), adopted by the City Council on May 9, 1995, although the mitigation measures contained in the General Plan FEIR which were prepared in connection with the 1992 General Plan "remain current and valid," a new mitigation monitoring program, identified as the 1995 General Plan's "Implementation/Mitigation Monitoring Program" (1995 General Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program), was adopted by the City. Programmatic mitigation measures presented in the 1995 Addendum and subsequently adopted by the City have been considered in the derivation of the mitigation measures recommended herein. 8/ City of Diamond Bar, Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, July 25, 1995, p. 4. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 1-8 Initial Study- Introduction JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Copies of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, 1992 General Plan MEA, 1995 Addendum, 1995 General Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program, and 1995 General Plan are all available for review at the Department (21825 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar) during the regular business hours of the City. In addition to the above referenced programmatic documents, a number of technical reports addressing various aspects of the proposed project have been prepared by or for the Lead Agency or have been submitted by or on behalf of the Applicant and have been reviewed by the City. Information contained in those technical reports, as well as the findings of the City's independent review of those reports, have been considered and, where applicable, incorporated into this project -level CEQA analysis. Those reports, which are incorporated herein by reference and which by this reference made part hereof, include: (1) "Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California" (Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., December 11, 2003); (2) "Biological Assessment — Jewel Ridge Estates Project, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc., November 2002); (3) "Cultural Resource Survey Report — Parcel 4 of Parcel Map No. 7409, Diamond Bar,. California" (Louis James Tartaglia, Ph.D., October 30, 2002); (4) "Interim Engineering Geologic Review, Proposed Residential Tract, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Calif., Project No. 3375" (Ray A. Eastman, February 5, 2003); (5) "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004); (6) "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation — Proposed Residential. Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, California, APN #8714028003" (GeoEnviron Engineering Consultants, Inc., February 15, 2003); (7) "Preliminary Report, Order No. 11045031-X49" (Chicago Title Company, February 7, 2001); (8) "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated January 10, 2006 by Leighton and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoils Consultants, Inc., February 3, 2006); (9) "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated September 17, 2004 by Leighton and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoils Consultants, Inc., September 26, 2005); (10) "Third Party Tree Inventory Review of the Jewel Ridge Estates Property, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County" (Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc., November 3, 2003); (11) "Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision Located at the Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive (Approximately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of Diamond Bar)" (Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc., October 2002, Revised September 2003); and (12) W.T.T. 54081 Existing and Proposed Hydrology" (Gary M. Gantney, November 4, 2002). Each of the above referenced reports was independently reviewed by the City and, in many cases, revised studies or other supplemental information provided in response to that review. Because of the size of those documents and/or the exhibits contained therein. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Introduction Page 1-9 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 In addition, the Applicant has provided the City with a number of letters from the Applicant's technical consultants, addressing specific aspects of the proposed project and/or responding to specific informational requests, and from individual service purveyors. Those letters include, but may not be limited to: (1) "Results of Spring Habitat Assessment Survey on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site (Tentative Tract 54081), in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (Marc Blain, April 13, 2004); (2) "Results of California Gnatcatcher Habitat Assessment on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site (Tentative Tract 54081), In the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (Marc Blain, April 15, 2004); (3) "Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 (Entry/E)it Design Review)" (Jerry T. Overland, Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc., April 14, 2004); (4) "Response to the Protected Tree Inventory Review by Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc." (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004); and (5) "Review of Biological Resources on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site in the City of Diamond Bar, California" (Bonterra Consulting, April 21, 2006). Various service providers have provided the City with "will serve" letters, demonstrating the ability of those providers to fully and effectively service the needs of the proposed development. Those letters include, but may not be limited to: (1) "Will Serve Letter for Jewel Ridge Estates, TTM 54801" (Ed Davis, Technical Services, North Region, The Gas Company, October 29, 2002); (2) "Will Serve Letter for the Tentative Tract Map No. 54081" (Mel Whiteaker, Associate Planner, Technical Services, North Region, Southern California Gas Company, October 27, 2003); and (3)."Proposed Tract 54081 at Crooked Creek Dr." (Stephen J. Kerman, Customer Service Planner, Southern California Edison, October 17, 2003). The above referenced reports, letters, and correspondences are available for review at the Department during the regular business hours of the City. 1.9 CUSTODIAN OF DOCUMENTS As required under Section 15074(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines, "[wjhen adopting a negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration, the lead agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based." Without predetermining the actions of the decision-making body, the Lead Agency has designated Nancy Fong, Director, Community Development Department, as the "custodian" of documents upon which that decision or those decisions will be made. Copies of all documents comprising the project's environmental review record can be reviewed at the office of the Lead Agency (City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21825 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177) during the regular business hours of the City. 1.10 INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT The information presented in this Initial Study reflects the independent judgment of the City relative to the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the proposed project and presents the Lead Agency's preliminary findings based on a detailed analysis of the project's potential environmental impacts. The Lead Agency has neither made a predetermination concerning the manner of CEQA documentation nor the outcome of the environmental review and decision-making processes. No reference is inferred or implied herein regarding any final action or predetermination by the City's advisory or decision-making bodies or the advisory or decision-making bodies of any other public agency with jurisdiction over the project or the resources contained thereupon concerning the proposed project or the adequacy of the project's environmental documentation. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 1-10 Initial Study- Introduction JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION The project site is located in the City of Diamond Bar, an incorporated community situated along the western edge of Los Angeles County (County). As illustrated in Figure 2-1 (Regional Vicinity Map), the City is bordered on the south by unincorporated County lands, identified by the County as the "South Diamond Bar Land Use Policy Area," and by the Firestone Boy Scout Reservation, which was purchased by the City of Industry in 2003. The western approximately two-thirds of the Firestone Boy Scout Reservation lies within County designated Significant Ecological Area No. 15 (SEA -15). West of the City is both another County unincorporated area, located within the "Rowland Heights Community Planning Area" and the City of Industry. To the north, the Cities of Walnut and Pomona abut the City s jurisdiction but do not border the project site. To the east of the City's corporate boundaries is the City of Chino Hill, located in San Bernardino County. The currently vacant property, identified as Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel No. 8714- 028-003,1 714028-003,' is illustrated in Figure 2-2 (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Map). As indicated therein, the approximately 12.9 acre site is located in the southwestern corner of the City, east of the Orange (SR -57) Freeway. The site's southern boundary is also the southern border of the City. Directly adjacent to the project's southern boundary is a narrow strip of land owned by the Shell Oil Company, beyond which lies an 80 -foot wide Southern California Edison (SCE) easement containing an overhead high-voltage electrical transmission line. As its nearest location, the, SCE easement is approximately 75 feet from the project's southern boundary. Vehicular access to the property is provided from Crooked Creek Drive. Crooked Creek Drive is located approximately two blocks east of Brea Canyon Road. The Orange Freeway parallels Brea Canyon. Road in the general area of the project site. The project site is bordered on the west by concrete -lined flood control channel (i.e., Brea Canyon Channel), maintained by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Flood Control Division. That flood control facility is not part of the project site and no encroachment thereupon is planned or proposed. 2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed is a 22 -lot residential subdivision (Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081), allowing for the. development of 16 single-family detached homes (Lots "1-16") on individual parcels ranging in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to 10,506 square feet. The average lot size for the residential lots will be approximately 6,892 square feet. The project is proposed as a private, ungated residential enclave, accessible by means of an internal roadway system comprised of two new 42 -foot wide private streets (Streets "A -B"). In addition to their fee simple ownership interests in the land beneath their homes and the improvements thereupon, each homeowner will own an undivided interest in the streets, sidewalks, and other common open space areas. All future home sites will be located on the west or down-slope side of the proposed internal roadways. The tentative tract map identifies four common "open space" lots (Lots "A -D"). One of those parcels (Lot "A") abuts an existing residences located at the current terminus of Crooked Creek Drive. Although its use is not specified other than "open space," the parcel would likely serve as '/ Parcel No. 4, Parcel Map No. 7409, as recorded.in Book 74, Pages 3 and 4 in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Los Angeles. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Project Description Page 2-1 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 a landscaped entry and could serve a limited passive recreational function. Two of the "open space" lots (Lots "B" and "D") encompass the terraced retaining walls, inclusive of the intervening landscaped areas adjoining and between the walls (excluding the private areas of abutting properties) which frame the western, southern, and northern edges of the property. The remaining "open space" lot (Lot "C") comprises the majority of the site and includes those areas located to the east of the internal streets (Streets "A" and "B"). Those portions of Lot "C" not impacted by grading operations will be retained as natural open space. No public dedication or conveyance of any of the four "open space" lots is currently proposed. A "trail head" and "pedestrian trail" is, however, depicted in the tentative tract map within Lot "C." Similarly, a 20 -foot wide "public access easement" is depicted at the end of Street "A," abutting the adjoining property to the south, in order to provide for emergency access. A homeowners' association (HOA) will be created and will manage all common areas retained by homeowners. The HOA will impose assessments on individual property owners to fund the maintenance of those common areas. Prior to recordation of the final subdivision map, a project -specific set of covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) will be formulated and will provide for the establishment of the HOA. The City may require that the CC&Rs be approved by the City Attorney and/or by the City Council prior to the recordation of the final subdivision map. As such, the City has the authority to .modify the Applicant -proposed CC&Rs to ensure their compliance with public policy (e.g., elimination of any discriminatory provisions). Membership in and support of an HOA, which will control and manage the maintenance of all common areas and facilities, shall be mandatory for all property owners. The HOA will be formed to manage the maintenance of private streets, street lights, storm drain systems, and designated non-public open space areas within the project boundaries. The HOA will be responsible for maintaining landscaped and improved areas not the separate responsibility of individual property owners. Maintenance responsibilities will further include street sweeping, repair, and replacement. HOA fees will be established and collected in accordance with applicable California Department of Real Estate (DRE) guidelines. Vesting Tentative Tract Map As illustrated in Figure 2-3 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081), proposed is the subdivision of the project site for the purpose of creating 16 single-family residential parcels (Parcels 1-16). In addition, four "open space" lots (Lots A -D) will be created and two private street parcel (Streets "A" and "B") created. The private on-site street system will be comprised of a minimum 42 -foot wide right-of-way2 and will extend from the existing terminus of Crooked Creek Drive to access the individual residential parcels. Since housing is proposed only on one side of the street, a sidewalk would be constructed only along that side of the street containing residential dwellings. z/ As indicated in the Circulation Element of the 1995 General Plan, roadway classification right-of-way Width classifications have been established. As indicated therein, the right-of-way for a "local residential street," defined as a street designed to serve adjacent residential land uses only, is defined as 44-60 feet (see Circulation Element, Table V-1). July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 2-2 Initial Study - Project Description JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 The Applicant has identified the project as a "vesting tentative maps3 which, if approved, will confer upon the Applicant or a subsequent holder of real property interests a vesting right to proceed with the development in substantial compliance with the ordinances, policies, and standards described in Section 66474.2 of the California Government Code." 3/ As defined in Section 66424.5 in Chapter 1 (General Provisions and Definitions) in Division 2 (Subdivisions) of the California Government Code: "(a) Tentative map' refers to a map made for the purpose of showing the design and improvement of a proposed subdivision and the existing conditions in and around it and need not be based upon an accurate or detailed final survey of the property. (b) 'Vesting tentative map' refers to a map which meets the requirements of subdivision (a) and Section 66452." As further indicated in Section 66452.6(g) therein: "The rights conferred by a vesting tentative map as provided by Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 66498.1) shall last for an initial time period, as provided by ordinance, but shall not be. less than one year or more than two ears beyond the recording of the final map." / Referencing Section 66474.2(a) of the California Government Code: "Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (b) or (c), in determining whether to approve or disapprove an application for a tentative map, the local City of. Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Project Description Page 2-3 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Y� J �Figure 2-2 ' • LOS ANGELES 4 •ASSESSOR'S PARCEL • " ' � ' .s Angeles As indicated in Section 21.20.130(5)(c) of the "City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code' (Municipal Code), with regard to vesting tentative map approvals, "[sjubsequent land use permits, building permits, extensions of time or other entitlements filed on parcels created by the subdivision may be conditioned or denied only if the review authority determines that: (1) A failure to do so would place the residents of the subdivision or the immediate community, or both, in a condition dangerous to their health or safety, or both; or (2) The condition or denial is required, in order to comply with state or federal law." 2.3 Discretionary Actions Approval or conditional approval of the proposed project will require a number of discretionary actions by the City and other responsible agencies including, but not necessarily limited to: Vesting Tentative Tract Map.5 As proposed, the Applicant seeks City approval of a 22 - lot (16 dwelling units) vesting tentative tract map. agency shall apply only those ordinances, policies, and standards in effect at the date the local agency has determined that the application is complete pursuant to Section 65943 of the Government Code." 5/ As indicated in Section 21.20.130 (Vesting Tentative Maps) of the Municipal Code: "The approval of a vesting tentative map shall not be granted unless the review authority first determines that the intended development of the subdivision is consistent with the zoning regulations applicable to the property at the time of filing, in addition to all other findings required for tentative map approval by section 21.20.080 (Tentative map approval or disapproval)." July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 24 Initial Study - Project Description Zwm� > Q o W z 2400 N S W Z C W,5 zz � 5 rn �; 0 o� N N N c 0 a ET n w < C O �d 13 �3 oa Co O N i 'O 0 f A L a 40 � r � Z bA � u � � S O � Z O Y a A I^ f `J } O � A y r f O A 3� � Z N`p y aS � A m f } O � A ^o rA r 0 nA0 O 2�2 4 a ga �a m �a d �1 O f O A � Z i � ^ O A aS � A f } O � A ^o rA r 0 m d �1 Lr o I o Z� I 4� Y If I 1 i �o 11 maw ymo 2nd ab \ �A+,no vA p"I �r �Co m 2<l cj O �o Y � Z TT aS 7—H, f ^o rA 0 aS f I j m d �1 Lr o I o Z� 4� Y If \ �Co JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 • Conditional Use Permit a The following conditional use permits (CUPS) will or may be required for the proposed residential development: (1) Planned Development'; and (2) Hillside Development Standards.8 Variances.9 The following variances will or may be required for the proposed residential development: (1) minimum lot size standards1o; and (2) street standards." Exceptions. Although the Applicant has not submitted a written request for an exception(s) to any of the provisions of Title 21 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code, Section 21.03.050 (Exceptions to Subdivision Standards) provides the City with an alternatives means to modify subdivision standards on a project -by -project basis. Reference to these code provisions herein is intended to ensure full disclosure and provide both the City. and the Applicant with an alternative procedural option should site- specific and project -specific conditions so warrant. 6/ As defined in Section 22.80.020 (Definitions of Specialized Terms and Phrases) of the Municipal Code, a "conditional use" is defined as a "use of land identified by article II (Zoning Districts and Allowable Land Uses) as being allowed in a particular zoning district subject to conditional use permit approval in compliance with chapter 22.58 (Conditional Use Permits)." 7/ As indicated in Section 22.14.030 (Planned Development [PD] Overlay District) in Chapter 22.32 (Planned Development Standards) of the Municipal Code, a CUP is required for all development proposed on a site subject to the "Planned Development (PD) Overlay DIstdcL" 6/ As indicated in Section 22.22.020 (Applicability) in Chapter 22.22 (Hillside Management) of the Municipal Code, hillside developments shall be subject to the approval of a CUP in compliance with Chapter 22.58. As defined therein, the standards contained in that chapter apply to all uses and structures within areas having a slope of ten percent or.greater. The average slope of the project site has been calculated to be 24.35 percent. Referencing Section 22.22.050 (Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines) of the Municipal Code, exceptions to the City's hillside development standards "may be approved through the conditional use permit process, when the commission determines that the exceptions would not materially affect the intent of the standards and guidelines. 9/ As indicated in Section 22.54.010 (Purpose) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code: an adjustment "may only be granted when, because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other conditions, the strict application of this development code denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners In the vicinity and .under identical zoning districts or creates an unnecessary, and non -self-created, hardship or unreasonable regulation which makes it obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards." 19/ Pursuant to Section 22.08.040 (Residential Zoning District General Development Standards) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code: "Subdivisions, new land uses and structures, and alterations to existing land uses and structures, shall be designed, constructed, and/or established in compliance with the requirements in Table 2-4, in addition to the applicable development standards in article III (Site Planning and General Development Standards)" In accordance with Table 2-4 (Residential District General Development Standards), the minimum lot size for residential parcels located with the "RL" district shall be 10,000 square feet. As further indicated therein: "Condominium, townhome, or planned development projects may be subdivided with smaller parcel sizes for ownership.purposes, with the minimum lot area requirement determined through the subdivision review process, provided that the overall development site complies. with the lot area requirements of this chapter." As such, a variance for lot sizes less than 10,000 square feet may not be required but is included herein to ensure full disclosure of the full range of discretionary actions that may be taken by the Lead Agency with regards to the proposed project. "/ As required under Section 21.30.030(4) in Title 21 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code: "New streets proposed or required within a new subdivision or adjacent to a new subdivision shall be located and designed as follows, and in compliance with the Diamond Bar Development Improvement Standards, Requirements and Guidelines." With regards to right-of-way and surfaced width, the width of the right-of-way and improved surface of streets shown on a tentative map shall be as provided by the Diamond Bar Development Improvement Standards, Requirements and Guidelines (Section 21.30.030[4][b] of the Municipal Code). Private streets shall be designed to the same standard as public streets (Section 21.30.030[5] of the Municipal Code). Proposed subdivisions shall be designed to provide rights-of-way for pedestrian paths, bikeways, and multiple -use trails, consistent with the Circulation Element of the 1995 General Plan and/or the Citywide Comprehensive Parks Master Plan, as applicable (Section 21.30.030[6] of the Municipal Code). City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Project Description Page 277 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Tree Preservation and Protection. 12 Based on the findings of a protected tree survey, prior to the Applicant's initiation of recent geotechnical investigations which resulted in the authorized removal of a number of protected trees, a total of approximately 202 trees13 were identified within either the previously proposed grading limits or had the potential to be severely impacted by proposed grading operations. . In addition, approximately 27 additional trees, located within the 50 -foot buffer zone and in close proximity to the previously identified grading limits, could be affected. In accordance with Section 22.38.130 (Tree Replacement/Relocation Standards), residential parcels greater than 20,000 square feet shall be planted at a minimum 3:1 replacement ratio.l The Community and Development Services Director (Director) or the Planning Commission may grant exceptions to these requirements or may require additional replacement trees based on specified considerations. The Applicant is currently proposing replacement "on a 2:1 basis "1s Grading Permit.76 As indicated in Section 15.00.310 (California Building Code - Adopted), the California Building Code, 2001 Edition (Part 2, Title 24, California Code of Regulations) and the appendices thereto, which incorporate and amend the "Uniform Building Code" (1997 Edition), as published by the International Conference of Building 12/ Pursuant to Section 22.38.050 (Tree Removal Permit or Tree Pruning Permit Required) in Chapter 22.38 (Tree Preservation and Protection) of the Municipal Code: "No person shall remove or relocate a protected tree or develop within the protection zone of a protected tree without first obtaining a tree removal permit from -the director. No person shall prune a protected tree without first obtaining a tree pruning permit from the director if branches are to be pruned that are over four inches in diameter at the point of the cut. The maximum amount allowed for the pruning of a protected tree shall be 20 percent, except for oak trees which shall be ten percent" As defined in Section 22.38.030 (Protected Trees) therein, "protected trees" include: (1) native oak, walnut, sycamore and willow trees with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of eight inches or greater; pepper trees with a DBH of eight inches or greater where appropriate; (2) trees of significant historical or value as designated by the City Council (Council); (3) trees of significant historical or value as designated by the Council; (4) any tree required to be planted as a condition of approval for a discretionary permit; and (5) a stand of trees, the nature of which makes each tree dependent upon the others for survival. As further indicated in Section 22.38.070 (Tree Removal in Conjunction with a Discretionary Permit) of the Municipal Code, when the removal or relocation of a protected tree is proposed in connection with an application for another discretionary permit, the director may waive the requirement of a separate tree removal permit and require necessary information to be submitted as part of the discretionary permit application. All of the standards of this chapter, including. Section 22.38.130 (Tree ReplacemenURelocation Standards) and Section 22.38.140 (Tree Protection Standards) shall apply to the approval of a discretionary permit. 13 As indicated in the Applicant's "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004): "There are a total of 202 trees to be removed comprised of 195 trees within the grading limit and 7 severely impacted trees within the buffer zone. However, of the 202 trees, there are 104 trees that have deteriorated to the point that they have been evaluated as dying or dead, therefore, only 98 trees should be considered to be removed since they have the minimum health standards for preservation. The 98 trees consist of 36 Oaks and 62 Walnuts" (p. 1). 141 As indicated in the Applicanfs "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004): "only 98 trees would require replacement since the remaining trees identified for removal are so deteriorated that they are dying or almost dead. ..Trees removed; as a result of project implementation shall be replaced on a 2:1 basis" (p. 5). 15/ Op. Cit., Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081, p. 5. 15/ Pursuant to Section 22.22.080 (Grading) in Chapter 22.22 (Hillside Management) of the Municipal Code: "Limitations on project grading amounts and configurations will be decided on a case-by-case basis under the conditional use permit process." As further indicated in Section 22.22.150 (Evaluation of Conditional Use Permit Application) therein, the City is required to evaluate a CUP application for hillside development based on a number of specified objectives, including a determination whether the project promotes the preservation of natural topographic. features and appearances by means of landform grading so as to blend man-made or manufactured slopes into the natural topography." As further indicated in Section 22.02.050 (Additional Permits and Approvals may be Required) of the Municipal Code: "An allowed land use that has been granted a land use permit, or is exempt from a land use approval, may still be required to obtain city permits or approvals before the use is constructed, or otherwise established and put into operation." July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 2-8 Initial Study - Project Description JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Officials, constitute the City's building code. Procedures for the review and processing of grading permits are enumerated, in part, in Appendix Chapter 33 (Excavation and Grading) of the 1997 "Uniform Building Code" (UBC)." As indicated in Section 15.00.320 (Same - Amendments) of the Municipal Code, amending Section 3309.1 of the UBC: "Except as exempted in section 3306 of this chapter 33 (Appendix), no person shall do any grading without first obtaining a grading permit from the city engineer." The distinction between discretionary and ministerial actions can often be unclear. In order to ensure full public disclosure, other discretionary and/or ministerial actions associated with the proposed project include, but may not be limited to, issuance of building and related permits, plot plan review (Chapter 22.47, Municipal Code), and development plan review (Chapter 22.48, Municipal Code). Each of those actions has been considered herein and is explicitly made a part of this environmental review. 2.4 Applicant -Nominated Environmental Compliance Activities18 A number of technical studies have been prepared by or for the Applicant and submitted for the City's review and consideration. A number of those studies include recommended actions, conditions, and/or mitigation measures designed to address specific impacts associated with the proposed project. Since those reports were prepared by or for the Applicant and subsequently submitted to the City as part of the Applicant's development application, the City has assumed that each of the recommended actions, conditions, and/or measures presented herein constitute self-imposed environmental compliance activities that the Applicant has voluntarily elected to incorporate into the design, development, and operation of the proposed project. In incorporating these Applicant -nominated actions, conditions, and/or measures herein ;"the Lead Agency is not commenting on the precise nature of the language presented (other than as noted) and neither endorsing nor accepting each such action, condition, and/or measure in the form and format now presented. There inclusion herein is intended to: (1) provide further definition of the current development application and proposed project now under consideration by the City; and (2) facilitate discussion and consideration of these actions, conditions, and/or measures as part of the Lead Agency's subsequent deliberations with regards to the proposed project and its potential environmental effects. Each of the Applicant -nominated actions, conditions, and/or measures have been included as part of the project description. Terms such as "should" or "may" have, however,_ been modified from their original form by the City in order to reflect a more definitive commitment on the part of the Applicant. Additionally, all references to the "contractor" have been replaced with reference to the "Applicant" since the project proponent is applying for the specified discretionary actions and not the Applicant's construction contractor and since the term "Applicant" is intended to be inclusive of all contractors working under the direction of the Applicant or the Applicant's agents. The City -initiated changes to the precise language of each Applicant -nominated action, condition, and/or measure is noted through the use of underlining. '7/ The UBC is published by the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBG), now the International Code Council (ICC), one of three mode code groups in the country, and is used by most agencies in southern California as the basis for their building codes. 78/ Mitigation measures contained in the project's "Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California" (Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., December 11, 2003) have not been included herein since that study was conducted by the City and not submitted by the Applicant. As such, those recommended measures do not constitute "Applicant -nominated" actions but constitute mitigation under CEQA. City of.Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Project Description Page 2-9 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Biological Resources Any potential impacts to breeding birds shall be avoided by grading outside of the breeding season or by avoiding active nests until the breeding cycle is completed.19 The nest locations shall be flagged and a 100 -foot buffer places around the nest until breeding is complete.20 Cultural Resources All surface and subsurface modifications (i.e., grading activities) shall be confined to only those areas of absolute necessity to reduce any form of impact on unrecorded (buried) cultural resources that may exist within the confines of the project area.27 Geology and Soils Note. Although too numerous to itemize herein, specific design and development recommendations are presented in the following studies. (1) Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation — Proposed Residential Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, California, APN #871402800"3 (GeoEnviron Engineering Consultants Inc., February 15, 2003); and (2) "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated September 17, 2004 by Leighton and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, 'Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoi/s Consultants, Inc., September 26, 2005). Engineering Geology Site inspections shall be made by the project geologist during grading and construction in order to verify the geologic conditions encountered and, of course, additional recommendations may be required if conditions other than anticipated are found 22 Protected Trees All on-site and off-site open space areas shall be buffered in a manner that discourages encroachment by the new human inhabitants. Deed restrictions regulating the operation of motorized off-road vehicles and limiting trail access shall be developed with the intent of protecting the open space areas from these potentially adverse influences. Since construction is planned in the vicinity of native trees, efforts shall be exercised, to the extent possible, to avoid their damage or removal. Approximately ninety-eight trees, including approximately 36 oaks and 62 walnut trees, removed as a result of project implementation shall be replaced on a 2:1 basis. Each replacement tree shall be a minimum box size of 24 inches for six or fewer replacement trees. For greater than six replacement trees, the sizes shall be determined by the Director. 191 Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc., Biological Assessment—Jewel Ridge Estates Project, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, November 2002, p. 13. 20/ Ibid., p. 12: 21/ Louis James Tartaglia, Ph.D., Cultural Resource Survey Report — Parcel 4 of Parcel Map No. 7409, Diamond Bar, California, October 30, 2002, p. 22. 221 Ray A. Eastman, Interim Engineering Geologic Review, Proposed Residential Tract, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Calif., Project No. 3375, February 5, 2003, p. 4. July 2006 City,of Diamond Bar Page 2-10 Initial Study - Project Description JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Replacement trees shall be properly cared for and maintained for 2 years and replaced by the Applicant or permittee if mortality occurs within that period. Where feasible, replacement trees shall consist exclusively of indigenous oak trees and shall be certified as being grown forma seed source collected in Los Angeles or Ventura Counties. Replacement trees shall be planted and maintained on the subject property and, if feasible, in the same general area from which the trees were removed. The replacement process of trees shall be supervised in the field by the arborist. Common avenues of damage to preserved and newly planted trees that must be avoided include: (1) overwatering, (2) underwatering, (3) soil compaction above the root zone, (4) drainage alteration, and (5) poisoning by weed inhibitors used in conjunction with paving activities. No cutting, grading, filling, trenching or other restructuring of the soil shall take place within the drip -line of a preserved tree. Should a trench, retaining wall, or other construction requiring any of these procedures is necessary, a qualified expert shall be present during construction. Landscaping requiring irrigation shall not be planted within the drip -line of trees due to the susceptibility of the trees to root rot, caused by excessive unseasonable irrigation. The design and installation of landscape irrigation systems outside the drip -line of the oaks shall be such that the area within the drip -line is not wetted during operation of the system. In addition, surface runoff from impermeable surfaces shall be directed away from the trees; where the natural topography has been altered, provisions shall be made for drainage away from the tree trucks so that water will not pond or collect within the drip -line of any tree. A temporary chain-link fence not less than 4 feet in height shall be installed around the encroachment zone of trees within the 50 -foot zone adjacent to development grading. Fencing shall be in place prior to commencement of any activity on the subject property. This fencing shall remain in place throughout the entire period of development and shall not be removed without written authorization of the Director. To ensure compliance with the above mitigation measures, a resource management plan and mitigation -monitoring program shall be designed for the on-site walnut and oak trees established as a condition of project approval 23 Traffic and Circulation New homeowners shall be informed that they are joining an existing neighborhood and they need to respect the area's existing environment. The posting of speed limit signs for traffic leaving the new subdivision at the existing terminus of Crooked Creek Drive is reauired.24 23/ Don Case Arborist, Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081, February 5, 2004, pp. 5-6. 24/ Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc., Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision Located at the Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive (Approximately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of Diamond Bar, October 2002, Revised September 2003, p. 28. City of. Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study- Project Description Page 2-'t1 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 This page intentionally left blank. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 2-12 Initial Study- Project Description JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 3.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING As required under Section 15063(d)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the initial study shall include "an identification of the environmental setting." This description of the existing environmental setting presents a general overview of the local. regulatory setting and the physical environmental setting in which the proposed action would occur and serves to present applicable or potentially applicable background information that may be relevant to the assessment of the project's potential environmental impacts. It is, however, neither the intent of this section to be inclusive of all information and regulations germane to a specific topical issue nor to present the same level of detail that might be otherwise included in a project -level EIR. In order to facilitate cross-referencing with the Lead Agency's analysis of potential environmental effects, as presented in Section 4.0 (Environmental Evaluation), the following discussion of the project's existing environmental setting addresses, in the sequence presented therein, each of the topical issues contained in the City's "Environmental Checklist Form" (Checklist), included in Appendix A (Environmental Checklist), as extracted from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. The order in which these topics are addressed is not intended to indicate either the real or perceived magnitude or severity of the potential impacts that are likely or that could occur with respect to those issues or to suggest any prioritization with regards to the real or perceived local or regional importance of each environmental issue under consideration. The Checklist constitutes a standardized form that is used both by the Lead Agency and by the preponderance of other governmental entities in California to examine the environmental consequences of projects subject to the provisions of the CEQA. Based on the project -specific characteristics of the proposed project and the site-specific characteristics of the project site, certain topical issues presented in the Checklist are clearly not applicable to the environmental analysis of the proposed project. Where, in the judgment of the Lead Agency, a specific topical issue is deemed not to be applicable to the proposed project, the rationale for the termination of further analysis of that issue is presented herein. 3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 3.2.1 Aesthetics In accordance with Section 21000(b) of CEQA, "[i]t is necessary to provide a high-quality environment that at all times is healthful and pleasing to the senses and intellect of man." Pursuant to Section 21001(b) of CEQA, it is the policy of the State to "[t]ake all actions necessary to provide the people of this State with clean air and water, enjoyment of aesthetics, natural, scenic, and historic environmental qualities, and freedom from excessive noise." As indicated in the 1992 General Plan FEIR, 1992 General Plan MEA, and 1995 Addendum, the discussion and analysis of "aesthetics" focused on landforms and topography. Reference to "landforms" and "topography," as described herein, relates to the visual quality impacts associated with the physical change to a site produced by a project's proposed grading operations. Related geological, hydrologic, and biological issues associated with those grading operations are separately addressed under their corresponding sections of this Initial Study. City of. Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-1 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on "landform and topography" could be effectively mitigated to below a level of significance. In addition, based, in part, on the findings of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum concluded that program -level impacts on "landform and topography" were "determined to be mitigable to less -than -significant levels."' The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that relate, either directly or indirectly, to the preservation and enhancement of the community's visual quality. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Maintain residential areas which protect natural resources, hillsides, and scenic areas. (a) Development in hillside areas should be designed to be compatible with surrounding natural areas, compatible to the extent practical with surrounding development, aesthetically pleasing, and provide views from development, but not at the expense of Views of the development. (b) Earthwork in hillside areas should utilize contour or landform grading. (c) Minimize grading to retain natural vegetation and topography (Strategy 1.2.3, Land Use Element); • Require that new developments be designed so as to respect the views of existing development; provide view corridors which are oriented toward existing or proposed community amenities, such as park, open space, or natural features (Strategy 2.2.4, Land Use Element); • Promote incorporation of hillside features into project designs (Strategy 3.3.2, Land Use Element); • Limit grading to the minimum necessary (Strategy 3.3.4, Land Use Element); • Require contour or landform grading, clustering of development, or other means to minimize visual and environmental impacts to ridgelines or prominent slopes (Strategy 1.1..1, Resource Management Element); • To the greatest extent possible, require that dwelling units, structures and landscaping be sited in a manner which protects views from existing development, retains opportunities for views from dwellings, preserves or enhances vistas, particularly those seen from public places, preserves mature trees, natural hydrology, native plant materials, and areas of visual interest, permit removal of vegetation as part of a City or Fire District approved fuel modification program (Strategy 1.1.7, Resource Management Element); and • Utilize grading permit procedures to ensure that site designs for development proposals for hillside areas conform to the natural terrain, and consider the visual aspects (Strategy 1.1.8, Resource Management Element). As indicated in Section 22.16.130 (View Protection) in Chapter 22.16 (General Property Development and Use Standards) of the Municipal Code: (1) the development of new projects shall respect the views of existing residential uses; new structures shall be located in a manner that preserves views by creating view corridors; (2) new developments that are within the viewshed of existing residential uses shall be kept as low as possible to reduce or eliminate the possibility of blocking views; and (3) in reviewing projects with potential view blockage impacts, the council, commission, or director shall refer to the view protection guidelines in the City's "Citywide design guidelines" manual. 1/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p. 4_ July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-2 Initial Study- Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 The State Scenic Highway System includes a list of highways that are either eligible for designation as scenic highways or have been so designated. These highways are identified in Section 263 of the California Streets and Highways Code (S&HC). The status of a State Scenic Highway changes from "eligible" to officially "designated" when the local jurisdiction adopts a scenic corridor protection program, applies to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for scenic highway approval, and receives notification from Caltrans that the highway has been designated as a scenic highway. When a city or county nominates an eligible scenic highway for official designation, it must identify and define the highway's scenic corridor and adopt ordinances to preserve the scenic quality of the corridor or document such regulations that already exist (scenic corridor protection program). Official scenic highway status places no restrictions for making improvements on scenic highways; however, Caltrans works with local agencies to coordinate transportation proposals and maintenance activities and to ensure the protection of scenic corridors to the maximum extent feasible. As indicated in Section 263.4 of S&HC, the State Scenic Highway system shall include "Route 57 from Route 90 to Route 60 near Industry." That segment of the SR -57 Freeway between the SR-57/SR-60 Freeway interchange southward to the southern boundary of the County of Los Angeles, however, remains an "eligible" State Scenic Highway (Not Officially Designated) pending the adoption of a City or County scenic corridor protection program. No such program has yet to be adopted by either the City or by the County. As part of the County's current comprehensive update to the "County of Los Angeles General Plan" (County General Plan), however, a "draft scenic highways" plan (undated) has been formulated and identifies that portion of the SR -57 Freeway between the SR -60 Freeway and the southern County border as a "proposed scenic highway.' 3.2.2 Agricultural Resources Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the accompanying resolution, the 1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following "land use" impact could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "Potential alteration of open space and agricultural lands within the City."Z Although "agricultural resources" were not explicitly addressed in the 1995 Addendum, the accompanying resolution concluded that all previously identified significant environmental impacts, except for "air quality," would be reduced to a less -than -significant level .3 As indicated in the Resource Management Element of the 1995 General Plan, although the City began as an agricultural community, it has evolved into a residential suburban community. As indicated therein, at the time of its adoption, cattle grazing was the only agricultural activity that remained as a reminder of the City s heritage." Cattle grazing activities have been recently observed south of the project site, on abutting lands located in unincorporated Los.Angeles County. Since the project site is fenced and since the lower and more accessible portions of the project site were, when observed, covered with 2/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of Overridinsq Considerations), p. 5. 1 City of Diamond Bar, Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), adopted by the City Council on May 9, 1995, Exhibit A, p. 4. °/ City of Diamond Bar, City of Diamond Bar General Plan, Resource Management Element, adopted July 25, 1995, p. III -9. City of. Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-3 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 invasive grasses, there exists no evidence that cattle grazing activities now occur on the subject property. Since the project site does not current support any agricultural use and since the site's topography and vegetative cover suggests that no commercial agricultural or other farm - related use has recently occurred on the project site, the City has determined that this topical issue is not germane to an assessment'of the proposed project and has discontinued further discussion or analysis of potential project -related impacts on local or regional agricultural resources. 3.2.3 Air Quality Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. Those measures related primarily to energy conservation, use of alternative transportation, and implementation of transportation demand management (TDM) programs. As indicated in the implementing resolution, the 1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following "air quality" impacts could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "(a) Short-term air quality impacts associated with the construction phases of development (e.g., construction equipment, emissions, etc.). (b) Long-term stationary and mobile source air emission increases. -5 As indicated in the 1995 Addendum, "strategies identified in the Final EIR intended to reduce air emissions are also included in the 1995 General Plan ...but not below the significant level"6 Notwithstanding those actions identified in the 1995 Addendum and 1995 General Plan, the City concluded that the following air quality impacts would remain significant: "(a) Short-term air quality impacts associated with the construction phases of development such as from fugitive dust and construction equipment. (b) Long-term stationary and mobile source air emission increases."' The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that relate, either directly or indirectly, to air quality and the reduction of air emissions. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Promote the provision of non-polluting transportation alternatives such as a Citywide system of bikeways and pedestrian sidewalks (Strategy 1.9.1, Public Health and Safety Element); Ensure that site designs facilitate rather than discourage pedestrian movement between nearby uses (Strategy 1.9.5, Public Health and Safety Element); and Require grading plans to include appropriate and feasible measures to minimize fugitive dust (Strategy 1.9.6, Public Health and Safety Element). . Section 22.16.030 (Air Emissions) in Chapter 22.16 (General Property Development and Use Standards) of the Municipal Code, however, includes specific standards regarding air emissions. As required therein, those land use activities that have the potential to create 5/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations), adopted by the City Council on July 14,1992, p. 5. / Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p. 9. '/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), adopted by the City Council on May 9, 1995, Exhibit A, p. 4. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-4 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 fugitive dust emissions shall be conducted in a manner so as to create as little dust or dirt emission beyond the boundary line of the parcel as possible. Standards applicable to those projects include, but not limited to, the following: (1) Scheduling - Grading activities shall be scheduled to ensure that repeated grading will not be required; and that implementation of the proposed land use will occur as soon as possible after grading; (2) Operations .during high winds - Clearing, earth -moving, excavation operations, or grading activities shall cease in high wind conditions when dust blows and control methods are no longer effective; (3) Area of disturbance - The area disturbed by clearing, demolition, earth -moving, excavation operations, or grading shall be the minimum required to implement the allowed use; (4) Dust control - During clearing, demolition, earth -moving, excavation operations, or grading, dust emissions shall be controlled by regular watering, paving of construction roads or other dust -preventive measures (e.g., hydroseeding), subject to the approval of the building official and city engineer; (5) On-site roads - On-site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible, watered periodically with reclaimed water, whenever possible, or stabilized in an environmentally safe manner; (6) Revegetation - Graded areas shall be revegetated as soon as possible in compliance with the approved landscape plan and any conditions of approval; and (7) Fencing - Appropriate fences or other means may be required by the director to contain dust and dirt within the parcel. The Municipal Code further acknowledges that the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has established daily and quarterly significance thresholds for construction exhaust emissions, as identified in the.SCAQMD's "CEQA Air Quality Handbook" (South Coast Air Quality Management District, April 1993). All land use activities shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Air Quality Management Plan. _Exhaust emissions shall be calculated for each stage of grading and .construction proposed. If exhaust emissions from construction activities (including fugitive dust) exceed daily or quarterly significance thresholds, the project proponent shall coordinate with the SCAQMD to determine the appropriate mitigation measures to minimize exhaust emissions, including prohibiting truck idling in excess of two minutes, and shall be subject to compliance with the SCAQMD rules and regulations pertaining to construction emissions (Section 22.16.030[c], Municipal Code). SCAQMD Rules and Regulations The SCAQMD has jurisdiction over an area of 10,473 square miles (referred to hereafter as the District), consisting of the four -county South Coast Air Basin (i.e., Orange County and the non - desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bemardino Counties) and the Riverside County portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin and the Mojave Desert Air Basin. The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) exceeds State and federal air quality standards for PM10 and is classified as a "serious non -attainment area." In December 1996, the SCAQMD adopted the 1997 "Air Quality Management Plan" (1997 AQMP), which included the 1997 PM10 State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the SCAB. The 1997 AQMP included a request for extension of the federal PM10 attainment deadline from 2001 to 2006. Under the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), the request had to be accompanied by a commitment to adopt and implement Best Available Control Measures (BACM). The SCAQMD is responsible for reducing emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect sources. In furtherance of that objective, the SCAQMD has promulgated a series of rules and regulations governing specific activities performed within the SCAB, binding on all parties conducting those activities. Two of those rules addressing fugitive dust (PM10) are briefly described below. These rules contain nuisance provisions giving SCAQMD inspectors broad City of.Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-5 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 latitude to enforce dust abatement, particularly in the event of a nuisance complaint. Compliance with these rules is mandatory for all large-scale construction projects. Rule 402. Rule 402 (Nuisance) is a nuisance provision that states that a person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material that may: (1) cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public; (2) endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public; and/or (3) cause or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. Rule 403. Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) sets requirements for control and monitoring to any activity or man-made condition capable of generating fugitive dust. Basically, the rule requires that all parties shall: (1) not cause or allow the emissions of fugitive dust from any active operation, open storage pile, or disturbed surface area so that the presence of such dust remains visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line; (2) utilize one or more reasonably available control measures to minimize fugitive dust emissions from each fugitive dust source type which is, part of any active operation; (3) not cause or allow PM1e levels to exceed 50 micrograms per cubic meter in the air when determined by simultaneous upwind and downwind sampling (sampling may be exempted when fugitive dust control measures are implemented); and/or (4) prevent visible particulate matter from being deposited upon paved roads as a direct result of their operations. Special conditions are required when wind gusts exceed 25 miles per hour (mph). These additional measures include a cessation of all active operations or further enhancement of watering (i.e., every hour) and/or use of chemical stabilizers.8 In accordance with SCAQMD Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings), which is "applicable to any person who supplies, sells, offers for sale, or manufacturers any architectural coating for in the District that is intended to be field applied to stationary structures or their appurtenances, and to mobile homes, pavements or curbs; as well as any person who applies or solicits the application of any architectural coating within the District" (Rule 1113[a]), except as otherwise provided, "no person shall supply, sell, offer for sale, manufacture, blend, or repackage any architectural coating for use in the District which, at the time of sale or manufacture, contains more than 250 grams of VOC per liter of coating (2.08 pounds per gallon), less water, less exempt compounds, and less any colorant added to tint bases, and no person shall apply or solicit the application of any architectural coating within the District that exceeds 250 grams of VOC per liter of coating" (Rule 1113[c][1]). SCAQMD Rule 1186 (PM10 Emissions from Paved and Unpaved Roads, and Livestock Operations) impose specific obligations on the owners or operators of paved or unpaved public roads. Those requirements include, but are not limited to: (1) any owner of operator of a paved public road on which there is visible roadway accumulations (defined to mean the deposit of particulate matter onto paved roads as a result of wind or water erosion, haul vehicle spillage, or any other event excluding vehicular track -out (defined as any bulk material that adheres to and agglomerates on the exterior surface of motor vehicles, haul trucks, and equipment, including tires, that have been released onto a paved road and can be removed by a vacuum sweeper or broom sweeper under normal operating conditions) which results in the accumulation of visible roadway dust covering a contiguous area in excess of 200 square feet) shall begin removal of e/ On April 2, 2004, the SCAQMD's Board of Directors certified "Final Environmental Assessment for Proposed Amended Rules 403 -Fugitive Dust, 403.1 -Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control Requirements for Coachella Valley Sources and 1186-PM10 Emission Reductions from Paved and Unpaved Roads, and Livestock Operations, SCAQMD No. 012804KC9" (SCAQMD, April 2, 2004) revising, in part, Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust). July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-6 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 such material through street cleaning within 72 hours of any notification of the accumulation and shall completely remove such material as soon as feasible); (2) beginning on January 1, 2006, any owner or operator of a public or private paved road shall construct, or require to be constructed, all new or widened paved roads in accordance with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines or the applicable equivalent locally adopted guidelines for curbing, width of shoulder, and medians as specified in the rule;. and (3) any owner or operator of an unpaved public road in the SCAB shall annually treat unpaved roads that have greater than the average daily trips (ADT) or all unpaved roads in its jurisdiction (as determined by the owner/operator) beginning January 1, 1998 and each of eight calendar years thereafter by either (a) paving at least 1 mile of such roads using typical roadway materials, (b) applying chemical stabilization to 2 miles of such roads in sufficient quantities to maintain a stabilized surface, or (c) taking one or more of the following actions on 3 miles of such roads (i) installing signage at '% intervals that prohibits vehicular speeds in excess of 15 mph, as authorized by California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 22365, (ii) installing speed control devices (e.g., speed bumps) every 500 feet,, and/or (iii) maintaining the roadway in such a manner that inhibits vehicular speeds in excess of 15 mph. CEQA Air Quality Handbook The SCAQMD's "CEQA Air Quality Handbook" (Handbook) was prepared to serve as guidance to assist local governmental entities in developing environmental documents pursuant to CEQA. As indicated. therein, "[p]lanners and project proponents may determine if a project is likely to be significant by screening the project using Table 6-2" and "Table 6-3 provides a screening table for determining when a. project's construction emissions could exceed the threshold of significance."g In accordance therewith, a project can be presumed not to generate a significant construction and/or operational air quality impact if the project does not exceed the thresholds identified in Table 6-2 (Screening Table for Operation — Daily Thresholds of Potential Significance for Air Quality) and Table 6-3 (Screening Table for Construction — Quarterly Thresholds of Potential Significance for Air Quality). As indicated in Table 6-2 (Screening Table for Operation — Daily Thresholds of Potential Significance for Air Quality) in the Handbook, a residential project can be presumed not to produce a significant operational impact if the project is a single-family development consisting of 166 or fewer dwelling units. Since the proposed project is comprised of only 20 units, or about 12 percent of the SCAQMD's screening table threshold, it can be presumed that the project's operational emissions would be at a less -than -significant level. As further indicated in Table 6-3 (Screening Table for Construction — Quarterly Thresholds of Potential Significance for Air Quality) in the Handbook, from a construction perspective, a single-family residential development project would be presumed to produce a less -than - significant impact if the project included less than 1,309,000 square foot gross floor area (GFA) and where to involve the grading of less than 177 acres. Although no architectural plans have been submitted by the Applicant, assuming that each dwelling unit were to contain a GFA of 3,500 square feet, the resulting square footage (56,000 square feet) would remain substantially below the SCAQMD's screening table threshold. Since the project site contains only approximately 12.9 acres, the screening table's grading threshold would not be exceeded. As such, it can be presumed that the project's construction -term emissions would be at a less -than -significant level. 9/ South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993, pp. 6-2 and 6-4. City of. Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-7 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 3.2.4 Biological Resources Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the implementing resolution, the 1992 General' Plan FEIR concluded that the following programmatic impacts on "biological resources" could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "(a) Loss of vegetation and wildlife displaced from potential development areas. (b) Potential removal of woodlands and riparian brush."'o As indicated in the 1995 Addendum: `in addition to the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR, some new strategies addressing preservation of biological resources have been included in the 1995 General Plan" and "[tjhese additional strategies are expected to further lessen impacts on biological resources as identified in the Final EIR."11 The City's implementing resolution concluded that, based on the additional analysis presented in the 1995 Addendum, the previously identified significant impacts on "biological resources" would, in fact, be less than significant.t2 The 1995 General Plan includes a number of policies that address, either directly or indirectly, biological resources that may be applicable at the project level. Relevant policies include, but may not be limited to, the following: To preserve significant environmental resources within proposed developments, allow clustering or transferring of all or part of the development potential of the entire site to a portion of the site, thus preserving the resources as open space, and mandating the dedication of those resources to the City or a conservancy (Strategy 1.5.6, Land Use Element); Encourage clustering within the most developable portions of project sites to preserve open space and/or other natural resources. Such development should be located to coordinate with long-term plans for active parks, passive (open space) parks, and preserve natural open space areas (Strategy 1.6.4, Land Use Element); To the greatest extent possible, require that dwelling units, structures and landscaping be sited in a manner which: _ protects views for existing development, retains opportunities for views from dwellings, preserves or enhances vistas, particularly those seen from public places, preserves mature trees, natural hydrology, native plant materials, and areas of visual interest, permit removal of vegetation as part of a City or Fire District approved fuel modification plan (Strategy 1.1.7, Resource Management Element); New development should include the preservation of significant trees of cultural or historic value (Strategy 1.1.12, Resource Management Element); Maintain, protect, and preserve biologically significant areas, including SEA 15, riparian areas, oak and walnut woodlands, and other areas of natural significance, providing only such recreational and cultural opportunities as can be developed in a manner sensitive to the environment (Objective 1.2, Resource Management Element); 10/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations), p. 5. '/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p. 6. 721 Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), Exhibit A, pp. 34. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-8 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Recognizing the significance of SEA 15 ecological resources, support further definition of the extent and intensity, of such resources to provide needed additional information for the purpose and intent of preservation of this area (Strategy 1.2.1, Resource Management Element); • Ensure that all development, including roads, proposed adjacent to riparian and other biologically sensitive habitats avoid significant impacts to such areas. Require that new development proposed in such locations be designed to minimize or eliminate impacts on environmentally sensitive areas, protect the visual seclusion of forage areas from road intrusion by providing vegetative buffering, provide wildlife movement linkages to water, food, shelter and nesting, provide vegetation that can be used by wildlife for cover along roadsides, avoid intrusion of night lighting into identified areas through properly designed lighting systems, allow wildlife and migration access by use of tunnels or other practical means, replace fresh drinking water for wildlife when natural water areas are removed or blocked, to the greatest extent possible, prevent street water runoff from flowing into natural or blueline streams (Strategy 1.2.2, Resource Management Element); Take an active role in pursuing the preservation of environmentally sensitive canyon areas in their natural state (Strategy 1.2.4, Resource Management Element); and To the greatest extent possible, provide for preservation of flora and fauna (Strategy 1.2.5, Resource Management Element). As required under Section 22.16.040 (Environmental Resource Protection) in Chapter 22.16 (General Property Development and Use Standards) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code: "Development proposals shall be evaluated in compliance with the California Environmental- Quality Act (Public Resources Code § 21.000 et seq.), city and general plan environmental policies including, but not limited to, open space habitat, sensitive biological and botanical resources; rare, threatened and/or endangered species; air quality; mineral resources; archaeological resources; and geologic hazards." Landscape and Irrigation Plan Requirements As required under Section 22.24.030 (Landscape Plan Requirements) in Chapter 22.24 (Landscape Standards) of the Municipal Code: "A preliminary landscape plan shall be submitted as part of an application for a land use entitlement, for new development, and the significant expansion or redevelopment_ of an existing use as determined by the director." As further required in Section 22.24.040 (Landscape Area Requirements), landscaping shall be provided as follows: (1) all setback and open space areas required under the development code shall be landscaped, except where a required setback is occupied by a sidewalk or driveway or where a required setback is screened from public view and it is determined by the director that landscaping is not necessary to fulfill the purposes of this chapter, (2) all areas of a project site not intended for a specific use shall be landscaped unless it is determined by the director that landscaping is not necessary to fulfill the purposes of this chapter, and (3) new single-family developments shall provide landscaping with an automatic irrigation system for the area of the site between the street curb and the front of the structure from side property lines. As further required under Section 3316.4(b) (Planting and Irrigation Plans and Specifications) in Title 15 (Building and Construction Safety) of the Municipal Code: "For grading which includes cut slopes more than five feet in height; or fill slopes supporting structures or more than three feet in height; or natural slopes disturbed more than ten feet in surficial extent by the grading operations planting and irrigation plans and specifications shall be submitted for approval of the City of Diamond Bar July 2006 initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-9 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 city engineer. For all manufactured slopes more than 20 feet in height or natural slopes disturbed more than 20 feet in surficial extent by grading operations plans shall be prepared and signed by a civil engineer or landscape architect." Tree Preservation and Protection As further indicated in Section 22.38.010 (Purpose) in Chapter 22.38 (Tree Preservation and Protection) of the Municipal Code, the "general, plan, as the overall policy document for the city, requires the preservation and maintenance of native trees including oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, significant trees of cultural or historical value and pepper trees where appropriate. The purpose of this chapter is to protect and preserve these trees and when removal is allowed as a result of new development to require their replacement" The provisions of the City's tree preservation and protection ordinance are applicable in all zoning districts to the removal, relocation or pruning of "protected trees; as provided in Section 22.38.030 (Protected Trees). As indicated in Section 22.38.040 (Damaging Protected Trees Prohibited), except as provided in Section 22.38.060 (Exemptions), no person shall cut, prune, remove, relocate, or otherwise destroy a "protected tree." In addition, the topping of "protected trees" is prohibited. As defined in Section 22.38.030 (Protected Trees), a "protected tree" is any of the following: (1) native oak, walnut, sycamore and willow trees with a DBH of eight inches or greater; pepper trees with a DBH of eight inches or greater where appropriate; (2) trees of significant historical or value as designated by the City Council; (3) trees required to be preserved or relocated as a condition of approval for a discretionary permit; (4) any tree required to be planted as a condition of approval for a discretionary permit; .and (5) stand of trees, the nature of which makes each tree dependent upon the others for survival. As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004 submittal, the Applicant submitted and the City reviewed a protected tree report. That and a subsequent report, entitled "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, October 29, 2002) and "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004), encompassed both the area located within the proposed grading limits and expending 200 -feet beyond those limits. Each tree was assigned an identification number and a corresponding tag was affixed to each tree. These tag numbers are utilized in the protected tree report for the purpose of identification and description. All trees 25 inches or more in circumference (8 -inch diameter) and multiple trunk trees with a combined circumference of at least 38 inches (12 -inch diameter), as measured 4.5 feet above mean natural grade, were tagged. The physical structure of each tree was evaluated. Measurements of the diameter of the tree's canopy, plus five feet, were taken in order to establish the protected zone. An assessment of the aesthetics of the trees was conducted, considering such factors as symmetry, broken branches, unbalanced crown, excessive horizontal branching. An aesthetic rating was then assigned. 13 In addition, the health of each tree was evaluated and rated .14 13/ The following description of the aesthetic rating system is provided: (1) A—Tree crown is typical of these species and has a good branching structure; (2) B — Tree has uneven characteristic of crown; branch or trunk structure that is considered minor; (3) C, D, and E — Trees indicate progressively more secure crown branch or truck distortion such that the trees would not make acceptable landscape specimens. t4/ The following description of the health rating system is provided: (1) A — Tree is healthy and vigorous and is reasonably free from signs of disease; (2) B — Tree with reduced vigor, insect problems, minor amount of dieback, and/or moderate amount of leaf edge browning; (3) C — Tree with high amount of leaf, twig, and small branch dieback, thinning of the crown, and/or wounds that are slow to recover; (4) D — Tree with major dieback of the July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-10 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 A total of 463 trees were surveyed. The type, location, and health of those trees is presented in "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004). Of these, four trees were twice listed due to the closeness of their trunks. An additional six trees, such as toyon, were not counted since they do not constitute protected trees under the City's ordinance. Eleven trees were assigned the same number as the adjacent tree, with the letter "A" or 'B" assigned. These revisions resulted in a net number of 464 surveyed trees. Following the preparation of that tree survey, the Applicant obtained City authorization to conduct a detailed geotechnical investigation which included subsurface boring. In order to obtain equipment access, one or more protected trees were removal and/or selectively pruned. Similarly, since the preparation of the 2004 survey, trees have continued to mature. As a result, one or more trees not previously meeting the Municipal Code's size requirements may now meet those standards. Although representing a reasonable app�oxlmation of the number of ordinance -size protected trees that exist on. the site, the number specified may not precisely reflect the number of protected trees that now exist within the tract map boundaries. Los Angeles County Significant Ecological Areas As part of the ongoing County General Plan update, numerous revisions to the County's existing significant ecological areas (SFA) are under consideration. As illustrated in Figure 3-1 (Proposed Revisions to the County of Los Angeles Significant Ecological Areas), the County is considering the expansion of a number of existing SEAs and the creation of a new 13,421 -acre Puente Hills SEA. The project site is not, however, located within either an existing or proposed City or County designated SEA. Other than the presence of City protected trees and with the possible exception of the Cooper's hawk (Accipier cooperii) and the northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax), site-specific biological resource surveys have not identified the presence of sensitive biological resources within the subject property. California Natural Diversity Data Base The California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) is a valuable repository of rare plant and animal information maintained by the Habitat Conservation Division of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). The primary function of the CNDDB is to gather and disseminate data on the status and locations of rare and endangered plants, animals, and vegetation types. The California Native .Plant Society (CNPS) is a substantial contributor to the database. The CNDDB only records actual sightings of rare species and natural communities.15 In order to identify the range of sensitive species and plant communities that may exist on the project site, a CNDDB records search of the 7.5 -Minute United States Geological Survey (USGS) Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle was conducted in 2004. The findings of the CNDDB search are presented in Table 3-1 (California Natural Diversity Data Base 2004 Records Search — Yorba Linda Quadrangle). It is noted that the area comprising the USGS 7.5 - minute quadrangle is approximately 64 square miles and, therefore, encompasses a geographic area substantially larger than the project site. As such, the information contained in the CNDDB is not necessarily indicative of those resources found on the project site. main branches, large cuts and/or wounds, extensive trunk rot and/or decay and very sparse leaf growth, exemplifying a tree in a dying state; and (5) E —Tree is dead. 5/ Bittman, Roxanne, The California Natural Diversity Database: A Natural Heritage Program for Rare Species and Vegetation, Fremontia, Volume 29:34, California Department of Fish and Game, July/October 2001, pp. 57-62. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-11 NOTE: This map is a component of the Los Angeles County General Plan Update Program. It Is a working draft, which will be refined after the public review period. Information within chles is for reference only. Significant Ecological Area boundaries that overlap Into city boundaries are shown for biotic continuity only. Significant Ecological Area policy and regulations are not applicable within city boundaries. All suggestions for modifications to the maps contents received prior to June 1, 2004 will be considered by County staff when revising the map In preparation for public hearings by the Regional Planning Commission. Written comments and supporting documentation should be submitted to the Department of Regional Planning General Plan Development Section (address: 320 W. Temple Street. Los Angeles, CA 90012; fax: 213-62&0434; or e-mail: generalplan@planning.m.la.m.us). LEGEND: — Freeway .. ___ National Forest Boundary Proposed SFA [� County Boundary 0 Unincorporated Area JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Figure 3-1 PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREAS Source: County of Los Angeles The Applicant's biological assessment acknowledges that "habitat on the project site does have potential to support a variety of unlisted sensitive species such as the northern red=diamond rattlesnake (Crotalis Tuber Tuber), Cooper's hawk (Accipier cooperif), and the northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax).n18 Cooper's hawk is a California Species of Special Concern(no federal status). As indicated by the CDFG, habitat destruction, mainly in lowland riparian areas, is probably the main threat to this species, although direct or indirect human disturbance at nest sites can be equally detrimental. Illegal take of nestings is also a potential threat, especially in populated areas. 17 The northwestern San Diego pocket mouse is a California Species and Special Concern (no federal status) and, as indicated in a November 15, 1994 Federal Register notice, is being reviewed by the USFWS for possible addition to the list of endangered and threatened wildlife under the FESA. 16/ Marc Blain, Results of Spring Habitat Assessment Survey on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site (Tentative Tract 54081), in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, April 13, 2004, p. 1. 17/ Remsen, J.V., Jr., Bird Species of Special Concern in California, Cooper's Hawk, California Department of Fish and Game, 1978. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-12 Initial Study- Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Table 3-1 CALIFORNIA NATURAL DIVERSITY DATA BASE 2004 RECORDS SEARCH YORBA LINDA QUADRANGLE I Ile, 011 111 ore b E cre "fc Fe ' a Cifovrta` Animals Long-eared owl Asio otus None None° Coastal California gnatcatcher Polioptdla calffomica califomica Threatened' None" Least Bell's vireo Woo bellii pusillus EndangereI Endangered Southwestern pond turtle Emys (=Clemmys) marmorata pallida Species of Concem" None° Coast (San Diego) horned lizard Phrynosoma coronatum (blainvillei) None None' Coast patch -nosed snake Salvadora hexalepis vlrgultea None None" Northern red -diamond rattlesnake Crotalus rubermber None None" Plants Southam tarplant Centromadia parryi ssp. australis None None" Man) -stemmed dudleya Dudleya muiticaulls None None° Chaparral sand -verbena Abronfa villosa var. aurda None None Santa Ana River woolly -star FWasbum densifollum ssp. sanctorum Endangered Endangered Intermediate mariposa lily Calochortus weedd var. intermedius None None5 Plant Communities Southern coast live oak Southern coast live oak riparian forest riparian forest None None Southern willow scrub . Southern willow scrub None None California walnut woodland California walnut woodland None None Notes: 1. Animal species listed as "threatened" do not automatically have protection under the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (FESA). The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), however, has applied most of the same protection provided for "endangered" species to "threatened" species. This is authorized through Section 4(d) of the FESA. 2. Listing as "endangered" gives species protection under Section 9 of the FESA, which prohibits the take of a federally -listed endangered species. 3. "Species of Concern" is an informal term used by the USFWS to refer to those species that the USFWS believes might be declining or be in need of concentrated conservation actions to prevent their decline. These species receive no legal protection and the tens does not mean that they will eventually be proposed for listing. 4. Identified as a California "Species of Special Concern," defined as species whose declining population levels, -limited ranges, and/or continuing threats have made them vulnerable to extinction. 5. California Native Plant Society (CNPS) List 1 B (Rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere). Source: California Natural Diversity Data Base, April 2004 Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act There exist a wide range of federal and State statutes and regulations promulgated to protect and preserve biological resources including, but not limited to, the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544), the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), the California Endangered Species Act (Section 2050-2116, California Fish and Game Code), and the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (16 U.S.C. 703-712) (MBIA). City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-13 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 The MBTA establishes a federal prohibition, unless permitted by regulations, to "pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture or kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, cause to be shipped, deliver for transportation, transport, cause .to be transported, carry, or cause to be carried by any means whatever, receive for shipment, transportation or carriage, or export, at any time, or in any manner, any migratory bird, included in the terms of this Convention ... for the protection of migratory birds ... or any part, nest, or egg of any such bird" (16 U.S.C. 703). The MBTA decreed that all migratory birds and their parts (including eggs, nests, and feathers) are fully protected. Under this action, the federal government is provided with the authority to establish threshold regulations that govern the hunting and management of listed species. The list of migratory birds protected under the MBTA appears in Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Parts 10.13 and 17.11. Biological Resource Assessment As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004 submission, the Applicant submitted and the City reviewed a site-specific biological assessment (i.e., "Biological Assessment — Jewel Ridge Estates Project, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc., November 2002).• That nearly 4 -year old assessment was based on a single day field study conducted during a non -optimal time period (October 7, 2002) when certain sensitive plant species might not otherwise be evident .on the project site and included no detailed analysis of either the potential presence of the coastal California gnatcatcher of other sensitive species, as identified in the CNDDB. As a result, the City requested that the Applicant prepare and present a supplemental biological assessment. As indicated in the original report, approximately 1.408 acres on the project site where categorized as "Non -Native Annual Grasslands" and approximately 11.475 acres where categorized as "Mixed Coast Live Oak/California Walnut Woodlands."8 As further indicated therein: `The California Department of Fish and Game considers California walnut woodlands a Top Priority Rare Natural Community with a sensitivity ranking of S2.1. This ranking indicates that the habitat is threatened and that it occurs in only 6 to 20 locations and/or that there are between 2,000 and 10,000 acres remaining in California.i19 State rank (S -rank) contains a threat designation, such that "S2.1" refers to a species or vegetative community with between 1,000-3,000 individuals or 2,000-10,000 acres with is "very threatened. "20 The southern California black walnut (Juglandaceae Juglans var. califomica) is almost entirely restricted to this region. The current distribution of this species is highly fragmented and reduced compared with its original distribution. It is almost entirely (89.3 percent) on private land, with remnant populations in the Santa Clara River drainage, Simi .Hills, Santa Susana Mountains, Santa Monica Mountains, San Jose Hills, Puente Hills, and Chino Hills.21 As requested by the City, a subsequent site visit was conducted by a qualified biologist on April 3, 2006 and the adequacy of the November 2002 report critically examined. As indicated by the Applicant's consulting biologist, "the descriptions of the biotic resources in the report remain accurate to date. The biotic conditions are unchanged at the level of detail which they are 78/ Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc., Biological Assessment—Jewel Ridge Estates Project, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, November 2002, Figure 3 (Vegetation Communities Map). "/ Ibid., p. 9. 201 California Department of Fish and Game, Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List, Natural Diversity Database, April 2004, p. iv. 21/ Davis, F.W., of a/., The California Gap Analysis Project - Final Report, University of California, Santa Barbara, 1998, Appendix SW (The Southwestern California Region). July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-14 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 described. Any potential differences in the conditions present at the time of the original survey work and the present are considered inconsequential. As a result, the conclusions regarding the potential or lack of potential for each special status species remains accurate ."22 Proposed Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher "Critical habitat" is a term used in the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544) (FESA) that refers to specific geographic areas that are essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require special management considerations.23 Areas not occupied by the species may be designated if these areas are essential to the conservation of the species. As specifically defined in Section 5(A) -(B) of the FESA: "(A) The term "critical habitat" for a threatened or endangered species means (j) the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the provisions of section 4 of this Act, on which are found those physical or biological features (1) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require special management considerations or protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed in accordance with the provisions of section 4 of this Act, upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species. (B) Critical habitat may be established for those species now listed as threatened or endangered species for which no criticalhabitat has heretofore been established as set forth in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph." Section 7 of the FESA (16 U.S.C. 1536) requires that federal agencies refrain from contributing to the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. This requirement is in addition to the prohibition against jeopardizing the continued existence of a listed species and is the only mandatory legal consequence of a critical habitat designation. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) recently proposed the establishment of a critical habitat designation for the coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptilla californicus). The coastal California gnatcatcher was listed as threatened on March 30, 1993 (58 FR 16742). On October 24, 2000, the USFWS published a final determination of critical habitat (65 FR 63680). Several lawsuits were subsequently filed challenging various aspects of the designation, including the adequacy of the economic analysis. The USFWS subsequently requested permission to prepare a new economic analysis. On June 11, 2002, the court granted the USFWS' request for a remand of the critical habitat designation to allow the USFWS to reconsider the economic impact associated with designating any particular area as critical habitat. The court ordered the USFWS to complete a new proposed rule by April 11, 2003. Areas designated as critical habitat in the USFWS' 2000 final rule retain their designation until a new, revised final critical habitat designation becomes effective. A new proposed rule for the designation of critical habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher was published in the Federal Register on April 24, 2003 (68 FR 20228). As depicted in Fi ure 33-22 (Proposed Critical Habitat Designation for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher) and as described in the Federal Register notice, the following proposed critical habitat unit is located in 22/ Bonterra Consulting, Review of Biological Resources on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site in the City of Diamond Bar, California, April 21, 2006, 23/ Critical habitat affects federal agencies by requiring them to evaluate the effects that any activities they fund, authorize, or carry out may have on listed species. Agencies are required to ensure that such activities are not likely to jeopardize the survival of a listed species or adversely modify its critical habitat. Designation of critical does not constitute a land management plan nor does it signal any intent of the government to acquire or control the land. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-15 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 proximity to the project site: "Unit 9: East Los Angeles County. Unit 9 encompasses approximately 9,410 hectare (22,595 acres) within the Montebello Hills, Puente -Chino -Hills, and East and West Coyote Hills areas. Core populations are known from the Montebello Hills, south slopes of the Puente -Chino Hills from Whittier east to Yorba Linda, and the East and West Coyote Hills. The Brea Canyon Landfill is not proposed as critical habitat, but it represents a significant potential restoration area to support these remaining populations. The unit also provides the primary connectivity between core gnatcatcher populations and sage scrub habitat within the Central -Coastal Subregions of the Orange County NCCP (Unit 7), the Western Riverside County MSHCP (Unit 10), and the Bonelli Regional Park core population within the East Los Angeles (Unit 12)." LOS ANGELES COUNTY SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY Figure 3-2 PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER Source: United States Fish and Wildlife Service The project site is located about 0.9 miles north of the proposed critical habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher. That there exists no substantial urban development between the proposed critical habitat area and the project site that would prevent or otherwise impede dispersal and foraging opportunities extending northward toward the subject property. There is, however, no evidence that any such dispersal or foraging does occur. 3.2.5 Cultural Resources Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FOR focused on a specific policy in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on "cultural resources" could be mitigated to below a level of significance. Based, in part, on the findings of July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-16 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum concluded that program -level impacts on "cultural resources" were "determined to be mitigable to less -than -significant levels."24 As indicated in "Cultural Resource Survey Report" (Louis James Tartaglia, Ph.D., October 30, 2002), which examined the potential for the presence of cultural resources on the project site, "[n]o known buried cultural resources have been documented for the project property. Therefore, clearance for cultural resources for the entire project area is hereby given ."25 A copy of that report is on file with the City's Community and Development Services Department. Based on the absence of cultural resources, the City has concluded that this environmental issue is not germane to an assessment of the proposed project and has discontinued further discussion or analysis of potential project -related impacts on historic or prehistoric resources. 3.2.6 Geology and Soils Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General .Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on "earth resources and seismicity" could be effectively mitigated to below a level of significance. In addition, based, in part, on the findings of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the. 1995 Addendum concluded that program -level impacts on "earth resources and seismicity" were "determined to be mitigable to less -than -significant levels."26 The 1995 General Plan includes a number of policies that address, either directly or indirectly, geology and soils that may be applicable at the project level. Relevant policies include, but may not be limited to, the following: Minimize the potential for loss of life, physical injury, and property damage from seismic groundshaking and other geologic hazards (Objective 1.1, Public Health and Safety Element); and As required by the Uniform Building Code, require site-specific geotechnical investigation be performed to determine appropriate design parameters for construction of public and private facilities in order to minimize the effects of any geologic and seismic hazard on such development (Strategy 1.1.2, Public Health and Safety Element). Seismic Hazards Mapping Act Prompted by damaging earthquakes in 1990, the State Legislature passed the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (SHMA), codified in Division 2, Chapter 7.8 of the PRC, which became operative on April 1, 1991. The SHMA was adopted for the purpose of protecting the public from the effects of strong ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides or other ground failure, and other hazards caused by earthquakes. As required therein, the California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (DMG)27 was directed to delineate the various "seismic hazard zones" located throughout the State. Under the SHMA, the State Mining and 24/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p. 4. 25/ Tartaglia, Louis James Ph.D., Cultural Resource Survey Report, October 30, 2002, p. 22. 26/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p. 4. 27/ Now renamed the Califomia Geological Survey (CGS). City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study- Environmental Setting Page 3-17 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Geology Board (SMGB) was further charged with the mandate to prepare additional regulations, policies, and criteria, to guide cities and counties in their implementation of the law. The SMGB's "Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication No. 117"28 provides guidelines for evaluating and mitigating seismic hazards, other than surface fault rupture, and for recommending mitigation measures as required under Section 2695(a) of the PRC. As defined in Section 2693(c) of the PRC, "mitigation" means those measures that are consistent with established practice and that will reduce seismic risk to acceptable levels." As further defined in Section 3721(a) therein, "acceptable level" means that level that provides reasonable protection of the public safety, though it does not necessarily ensure continued structural integrity and functionality of the project." The project site is located in the southern portion of Section 29, Township 2 South, Range 9 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, as shown on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle. The USGS 7.5 -minute maps are generally at a scale of 1:24,000 -scale quadrangle series. The area portrayed on each sheet ranges from 64 square miles at Latitude 30" North to 49 square miles at Latitude 49" North. The applicable section of the State map, as prepared by the California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, is presented in Figure 3-3 (Official State Seismic Hazard Zone Map - Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle). As illustrated therein, portions of the project site contain the following "zones of required investigation": (1) Liquefaction — Areas where historical occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological, geotechnical and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation, as defined in Section 2693(c) of the PRC, would be required; and (2) Earthquake -Induced Landslides — Areas where previous occurrence of landslide movement or local topographic, geological, geotechnical and subsurface water conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacement such that mitigation, as defined in Section 2693(c) of the PRC, would be required. As defined in Section 2693(c) of the PRC: "'Mitigation' means those measures that are consistent with established practice and that will reduce seismic risk to acceptable levels As stipulated in Section 3724 (Specific Criteria for Project Approval) of the PRC: "(a) A project shall be approved only when the nature and severity of the seismic hazards at the site have been evaluated in a geotechnical report and appropriate mitigation measures have been proposed. (b) The geotechnical report shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer or certified engineering geologist, having competence in the field of seismic hazard evaluation and mitigation. The geotechnical report shall contain site-specific evaluations of the seismic hazard affecting the project, and shall identify portions of the project site containing seismic hazards. The report shall also identify any known off-site seismic hazards that could adversely affect the site in the event of an earthquake." As authorized in Section 3725 (Waivers of Geotechnical Report Requirements), under certain conditions, the lead agency may determine that the geological and geotechnical conditions at the site are such that public safety is adequately protected and no mitigation is required. In addition to the required mapping, DMG has prepared a seismic hazard zone report for the Yorba Linda quadrangles. That report summarizes the methods and sources used to prepare the corresponding seismic hazard zone map. As indicated in the "Seismic Hazard Zone Report 281 State Mining and Geology Board, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication No. 117, March 13, 1997. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-18 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 010: Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Yorba Linda 7.5 -Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles and Orange Counties, California" (California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1997 [Revised 2001]): 'The northern two-thirds of the quadrangle is made up of the Puente and Chino Hills, which are crossed by Brea, Tonner, Carbon and Telegraph canyons. Within Los Angeles County, most of Diamond Bar and a small part of the City of Industry occur in the northern corner of the quadrangle ... In the Yorba Linda Quadrangle the liquefaction zone is restricted to the bottoms of canyons and the alleviated lowlands in the northwestern comer. The occurrence of landslide -prone rocks, manifested by widespread and abundant landslides in the hilly areas, especially in the Chino Hills, contributes to an earthquake -induced landslide zone that covers about 34 percent (14,700) acres [sic] of the quadrangle "29 The generalized geology of that portion of the Yorba Linda quadrangle that includes the project site is presented in Figure 3-4 (Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 30' x 60' Quadrangle) and Figure 3-5 (Quaternary Geology of a Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Quadrangle). As illustrated, the lower portions of the project site are comprised of younger Quaternary alluvium (Map Symbol Qya) while the remainder of the site is comprised of Tertiary sedimentary rock (Map Symbol Ts). The DMG report notes: "Boreholes drilled in the Diamond Bar area penetrate alluvium deposited on floor of Brea Canyon. These near -surface sediments are described as being composed mainly of clayey silt, silty fine-grained sand, fine- to medium - grained sand, and gravely sand, generally loose to moderately dense."30 DMG geologists compiled the existing landslides in the Yorba Linda quadrangle from published regional landslide maps, field observations, analysis of aerial photographs, and interpretation of landforms on current and older topographic maps. That portion of the landslide inventory map that encompasses the project site is presented in Figure 3-6 (Landslide Inventory within a Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Quadrangle)_ Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act The Alquist-Pdolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (APEFZA), formally called the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act, codified in Section 2621 et seq. in Chapter 7.5 of Division 2 of the PRC, was adopted to "provide policies and criteria to assist cities, counties, and State agencies in the exercise of their responsibilities to prohibit the location of developments and structures for human occupancy across the trace of active faults."31 An "active fault" is defined as one along which surface displacement has occurred within Holocene time (during the past 11.,000 years). The purpose of the APEFZA is to regulate land development near active faults in an effort to mitigate the hazard of surface fault rupture. The law requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones, known as "earthquake fault zones "32 around the surface traces of active faults and to issue appropriate maps. 'The maps are then distributed to all affected cities, counties, and State agencies for use in planning and controlling development activities. Under the 29/ California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 010: Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Yorba Linda 7.5 -Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles and Orange Counties, Califomia, 1997 (Revised 2001), p. vii. 30/ Ibid., pp. 7-8. 31/ Section 2621.5(a), Chapter 7.5, Division 2, PRC. 32/ "Earthquake fault zones" are regulatory zones that encompass surface traces of active faults that have a potential for future surface rupture. Areas that are so designated contain active faults that may pose a risk of surface rupture to ebsting or future structures. If a property is undeveloped, a fault study may be required before the parcel can be subdivided or before most structures can be permitted. If a property is developed, the APEFZA requires that all real estate transactions within the "earthquake fault zone" must contain a disclosure of those potential hazards by the seller to prospective buyers. City of. Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-19 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 APEFZA, local agencies must regulate activities within those zones, as defined by an appropriate setback from the fault trace. Pursuant to Section 2623 of the PRC, "cities and counties shall require, prior to the approval of a project, a geologic report defining and delineating any hazard of surface fault rupture. If the city or county finds that no undue hazard of that kind exists, the geologic report on the hazard may be waived, with the approval of the State Geologist" The geologic report required under the APEFZA must meet the criteria and policies established by the SMGB, as codified in Sections 3600-3603, Article 3, Title 14, CCR. The applicable APEFZA map is presented in Figure 3-7 (Official Map: Special Studies Zones — Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle). As illustrated therein, the nearest earthquake fault zone is located south of the project site and is associated with the Whittier fault zone, located about 1.25 miles south of the project site. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004 submission, the Applicant submitted and the City reviewed a number of geotechnical reports, include: (1) "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation — Proposed Residential Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, California, APN #8714028003" (Geo Environ Engineering Consultants, Inc., February 15, 2003); (2) "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated September 17, 2004 by Leighton and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoils Consultants, Inc., September 26, 2005); and (3) "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated January 10, 2006 by Leighton and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoils Consultants, Inc., February 3, 2006). Copies of those reports are on file with the Department. A copy of the project geologic map is presented in Figure 3-8 (Project Geologic Map). The following information is extracted, in part, from those site-specific analyses. Geologic Conditions. The project site is located in the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province which extends southeasterly from the San Gabriel Mountains into Baja California, Mexico. The major geologic formations in the region include alluvium at the valley floors and sedimentary bedrock in the mountain terrain. Major earthquake faults include, but are not limited to, the .nearby Whittier, Sierra Madre, and Cucamonga systems. Geology of the site consists of four basic units: sedimentary bedrock, landslide debris, colluvium, and fill. The bedrock is assigned to the La Vida member of the Puente Formation and consists mainly of firm, gray and brown, shale with siltstone, and fine to medium grained sandstone beds. The associated strata are highly folded/faulted and have dips of 5-45 degrees towards a variety of directions. Geology on the project site consists of four basic units: sedimentary rock, landslide debris, colluvium, and fill. Landslide masses involve three areas of about 1 to 2 acres each that are located in the northeasterly, southwesterly and southeasterly sides of the site. The related debris is present as major wedges of about 10 to 40 feet in depth and same consists mainly of medium firm, gray and brown, clayey fine to medium grained (f- m) sand and f -m sandy silt with abundant rock fragments -boulders and caliche 33 33t Op. Cit., Interim Engineering Geologic Review, Proposed Residential Tract, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Calif., Project No. 3375, p. 2. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-20 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-21 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 EXPLANATION Qya= Younger Quaternary alluvium Qyf: Younger Quaternary alluvial fan Qof: Older Quaternary alluvial fan Qvo: Very old Quaternary sediments Ts: Tertiary sedimentary rocks Figure 3-5 QUATERNARY GEOLOGY OF A PORTION OF THE 7.5 -MINUTE YORBA LINDA QUADRANGLE Source: California Department of Conservation City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-23 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 FAsting Landslides Sheartestompie lootion July 2006 Page 3-24 Figure 3-6 LANDSLIDE INVENTORY WITHIN A PORTION OF THE 7.5 -MINUTE YORBA LINDA QUADRANGLE Source: California Department of Conservation City of Diamond Bar Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Figure 3-7 OFFICIAL MAP: SPECIAL STUDIES ZONES - PORTION OF THE 7.5 -MINUTE YORBA LINDA TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE _ Source: California Department of Conservation City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-25 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Bedrock conditions favorable to gross stability occupy about 40 percent of the site whereas areas of gross instability with respect to massive grading as related to the presence of landslide masses and adversely folded bedrock strata occupy the other about 60 percent 34 Groundwater. Groundwater seepage was encountered at depths of 20-30 at the test boring in the alluvium section of the project site' 3.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on speck policies presented in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on "hazardous materials" could be effectively mitigated to below a level of significance. In addition, based, in part, on the findings of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum concluded that program -level impacts on "hazardous materials" were "determined to be mitigable to less - than -significant levels."3" Although the 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that relate, either directly or indirectly, to "hazards and' hazardous materials," none of those policies appear applicable at the project -specific level. In recognition of the potential hazards to underground pipelines associated with grading and associated earthmoving activities, the State has imposed certain requirements regarding excavation activities in proximity to underground infrastructure .37 As required under Section 4216.2(a) of the CGC: "Except in an emergency, every person planning to conduct any excavation shall contact the appropriate regional notification center, at least two working days, but not more than 14 calendar days, prior to commencing that excavation, if the excavation will be conducted in an area which is known, or reasonably should be known, to contain subsurface installations other than the underground facilities owned or operated by the excavator and, if practical, the excavator shall delineate with white paint or other suitable markings the area to be excavated." As further indicated in _Section 4216.9(a) of the CGC: "No permit to excavate issued by any local agency, as defined in Section 4216, or any state agency, shall be valid unless the applicant has been provided an initial inquiry identification number by a regional notification center pursuant to Section 4216.2.i3B As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004 submission, the Applicant submitted and the City reviewed a Phase I environmental site assessment (ESA). The ESA was conducted to determine "the potential for the presence of petroleum products (e.g., oils) and/or hazardous materials on the site or that have migrated on site from adjacent properties. The investigation included a site inspection, adjacent property exterior inspection, interviews with City of Los Angeles Building Department and Los Angeles County Health Department, Califomia State officials, and a review of appropriate Federal, State, County, and City historical and environmental records."39 The Phase I ESA concluded that no above ground storage tanks containing either petroleum 34/ Ibid., p. 3. 35/ Ibid., P. 2. 36/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p.4. 37/ Chapter 3.1 (Protection of Underground Infrastructure), Article 3, Sections 4215-4216.9, CGC. 39/ As defined in Section 4216(h) of the CGC, a "regional notification center" is defined to mean "a nonprofit association or other organization of operators of subsurface installations which provides advance warning of excavations or other work close to existing subsurface installations, for the purpose of protecting those installations from damage, removal, relocation, or repair." 39/ Geo Environ, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Property at Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, May 10, 2004, p. 3. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study- Environmental Setting Page 3-27 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 products or liquid hazardous chemical and no underground storage tanks containing petroleum products and liquid hazardous chemical existed on the project site. The study found three sites listed by the Leaking Underground Storage. Tanks Information System (LUST) and three underground storage tanks (USTs) were identified within ''Y2 mile of the subject property.40 3.2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on "drainage and flood control" could be effectively mitigated to below a level of significance. In addition, based, in part, on the findings of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum concluded that program -level impacts on "drainage and flood control" were "determined to be mitigable to less -than -significant levels."41 The. 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that address, either directly or indirectly, hydrology and water quality and that may be applicable to the proposed project. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Minimize the potential for loss of life, physical injury, property damage, public health hazards, and nuisances from the effects of a 100 -year storm and associated flooding (Objective 1.2, Public Health and Safety Element); Where applicable, as a prerequisite to new development or the intensification of existing development, ensure that a drainage study has been completed by a qualified engineer, certifying that the proposed development will be adequately protected, and that implementation of the development proposal will not create new downstream flood hazards (Strategy 1.2.1, Public Health and Safety Element); and Require development to meet the requirements of the County's urban stormwater discharge permit (Strategy 1.8.3, Public Health and Safety Element). As indicated in the MEA, the stream located directly west of the project site is identified as "Brea Canyon Creek. 42 As further indicated therein: "The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works indicates no major maintenance problems for this channel other than periodic cleaning and desilting in the unincorporated portions south of the City." Directly south of the subject property, through the Tonner Canyon area, the MEA identifies the need for "[i]mprovements to Brea Canyon Channel, connecting Public Drain 493 and 418 upstream with private facilities downstream"4a Water Quality Control Plan — Los Angeles Region Responsibility for protecting the State's water quality rests with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and its nine regional water quality control boards (RWQCBs). The SWRCB was established by the 1967 California Legislature to administer the State's water quality and water rights functions. In addition to administering water rights programs, the SWRCB, together with the RWQCBs, enforce pollution control standards to protect the State's rivers, lakes, groundwater basins, and shoreline. The SWRCB addresses water rights issues, 40/ Ibid., pp. 3-4. 41/ Op. CH., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p. 4. 42/ City of Diamond Bar, 1992 Master Environmental Assessment - City of Diamond Bar, July 14, 1992, Figure II -C-1 (Drainage Basins). 43/ Ibid., p. II -C-9. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-28 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 sets Statewide policies, and develops regulations for the implementation of those water quality control programs mandated by federal and State statutes and regulations. Individual regional boards develop and implement water quality control plans that consider beneficial uses, water quality characteristics, and water quality problems. The project site is located within the jurisdiction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (LARWQCB). The LARWQCB's 1994 "Water Quality Control Plan — Los Angeles Region" (Basin Plan)" is designed to preserve and enhance water quality and protect the beneficial uses of the regional waters. The Basin Plan: (1) designates beneficial uses for surface and groundwaters; (2) sets narrative and numerical water quality objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and conform to the State's anti -degradation policy; and (3) describes implementation programs to protect all waters in the region. For planning purposes, as illustrated in Figure 3-9 (Hydrologic Units with Areas and Subareas), the LARWQCB further divides the region's surface waters into hydrologic units, hydrologic areas (HA), and hydrologic subareas (HSA). The project site is located within the Los Angeles — San Gabriel Hydrologic Unit, the Anaheim Hydrologic Area (405.60), and the La Habra Hydrologic Subarea (4D5.62), all part of the San Gabriel River watershed. As described in the Basin Plan: "The San Gabriel River watershed, totaling more than 136,000 acres, has extensive areas of undisturbed riparian and woodland habitats."45 As indicated in the Basin Plan, generalized surface water problems evident throughout the region include: (1) poor mineral quality in some areas; (2) bio -accumulation of toxic compounds in fish and other aquatic life; (3) impacts from increased development and recreational uses; (4) in -stream toxicity from point and non -point sources; (5) diversion of flows necessary for the propagation of fish and wildlife populations; (6) channelization, dredging, and other losses of habitat; (7) impacts from transient camps located along creeks and lagoons; (8) illegal dumping; (9) introduction of non-native plants of little value to the biota and clog streams; (10) impacts from sand and gravel mining operations; (11) natural oil seeps; and (12) eutrophication and the accumulation of toxic pollutants in surface waters.48 Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires the State to identify surface waters that do not meet applicable water quality standards with certain technology-based controls. The list of waters identified under Section 303(d) must include a description of the pollutants causing impairment and a priority ranking for purposes of development of total maximum daily loads (TMDLs). Section 303(d) listed waters represent those waters for which effluent limitations are not sufficient to meet water quality standards. TMDL is a number that represents the assimilative capacity of water for a particular pollutant or the amount of a particular pollutant that water can receive without impact to its beneficial uses. Various reaches of the San Gabriel River are on the Section 303(d) list due to nitrogen and its effects, trash, PCBs and pesticides, metals, and coliform. Los Angeles County Department of Public Works The Los Angeles basin is periodically subject to devastating floods resulting in substantial property damage. Such damage is intensified by debris flows .resulting from the destruction of 44/ California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, Water Quality Control Plan — Los Angeles Region, adopted June 13,1994. 4s/ Op. Cit., Los Angeles Region, Water Quality Control Plan — Los Angeles Region, p. 1-16. 481 /bid., P. 1-19. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-29 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 the watershed by major brush fires. In recognition of and in response to those conditions, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) manages and maintains County flood control facilities within the major rivers and channels throughout the County. The LACDPW's Flood Control Division is responsible for operating and maintaining major flood control facilities located throughout the County for which the County has accepted responsibility. The Flood Control Division only maintains those flood control facilities that are part of the County -maintained flood control system and provides no review, management, or on-going maintenance of private facilities. The LACDPW's "Hydrology Manual" establishes the County's hydrologic design procedures and policies on levels of flood protection. On January 31, 2005, the County adopted the LACDPW's "Interim Peak Flow Standard,"47 applicable to "discretionary priority projects" (e.g., housing developments of 20 or more units) located in areas tributary to the San Gabriel River and certain other areas. Under those standards, the County stipulates that all post -development runoff from a 2 -year, 24-hour storm and 50 -year capital storm shall not exceed the pre -development peak -flow rate. These interim standards are intended to protect against increased streambed erosion resulting from post -development increases in peak flows and flow durations and changes in the riparian habitat resulting from increases in the low flows and flow durations from development. 47/ County of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Interim Peak Flow Runoff Criteria for New Development, January 31, 2005, as contained in correspondence from Donald L. Wolfe, Acting Direct of Public Works to Jonathon Bishop, Executive Officer, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-30 Initial Study- Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Under the provisions of the County's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (NPDES No. CAS004001), as issued by the LARWQCB on December 13, 2001, the Flood Control Division is designated as the Principal Permittee and the cities within the County are designated as Co -Permittees. The Principal Permittee coordinates and facilitates activities necessary to comply with permit requirements but is not responsible for ensuring compliance by any of the Co -Permittees. Under the provisions of the County's NPDES Permit, the following specific requirements have been established for single-family hillside homes designed to reduce the impact of development on natural areas: (1) conserve natural areas; (2) protect slopes and channels; (3) provide storm drain system stenciling and signage; (4) divert roof runoff to vegetated areas before discharging unless the diversion would result in slope instability; and (5) direct surface flow to vegetated areas before discharge unless the diversion would result in slope instability." Those categories of projects identified in the NPDES Permit as requiring Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMPs) (e.g., 10+ home subdivisions) are required to submit, for County review, a drainage concept and stormwater quality plan. Details of facilities and measures identified by the project proponent to mitigate impacts on water quality are to be shown on improvement plans and reviewed as part of those plans.49 Two of the most important requirements of the SUSMP are the specific treatment and design sizing criteria for Best Management Practices (BMPs). These criteria require that developments shall contain BMPs to infiltrate or treat the storm water runoff (volume or flow rate) generated from 0.75 inches of rainfall over 24 hours (determined to represent the 850i percentile of storm in Los Angeles County). The SUSMP also includes the following eight general requirements: (1) maintain pre -development -peak storm water runoff discharge flows where increases in flows or rates will result in increased potential for downstream erosion; (2) conserve natural areas; (3) minimize storm water pollutants of concern; (4) protect slopes and channels; (5) provide storm drain system stenciling and signage; (6) properly design outdoor material storage areas; (7) properly design trash storage areas; and (8) provide proof of ongoing BMP maintenance. Federal Emergency Management Agency The Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA)50 flood insurance rate maps (FIRM) identify those areas located within the 100 -year flood boundary, which are termed "Special Flood Hazard Areas" (SFHAs).51 A 100 -year flood does not refer to a flood that occurs once every 100 years but refers to a flood level with a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year.52 The SFHAs are subdivided into insurance risk rate zones. Areas between the 100 and 500 -year flood boundaries are termed "moderate flood hazard areas." Areas located outside the 500 -year flood boundary, are termed "minimal flood hazard areas." 46/ Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Development Planning for Storm Water Management: A Manual for the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan, September 2002, pp. 1-4, 2-2, and 3-11. 48/ Ibid., p. 2-1. 50/ On March 1, 2003, FEMA became part of the United States Department of Homeland Security. 51/ As defined in the Standard Flood Insurance Policy, "flood" is defined as "[a] general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from overflow of inland or tidal waters or from the unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source." 52/ Floods are described in terns of probability, as expressed in percentage rather than in terns of return period (recurrence interval). Return period (the N -year flood) and probability (p) are reciprocals, that is, p = 1/N. A flood having a 50 -year return frequency (%a) is commonly expressed as a flood with the probability of recurrence of 0.02 (2 percent chance of beingexceeded) in any given year. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-31 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 As illustrated in Figure 3-10 (Portion of FEMA FIRM No. 06504309808), the project site is located in "Zone C" (No Shading). The subject property is not located within an area subject to either 100 -year or 500 -year flood inundation. Areas designated as "Zone C" (minimal flooding) do not have known flood hazards. a �' nlvKa.lYtiSN. --------1MUF4'. prKm on" mk� MW PROJECT SITE FIR[ nUf61mk6i[ilfi Wp' An HUM. I MINIMA �� IL�111�[4lAR'FA@Edl olft*04# 014 ,fy�r J E7LiiNr:.tfLN DE LA BRA LAND GIANT REM MR 5 Oman ANGELES iw0 � . � a" T 2 s Figure 3-10 PORTION OF FEMA FIRM NO. 06504309808 Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency Soil -Slip Susceptibility Maps As indicated by the USGS, debris flows (commonly referred to as mudslides or mudflow) are a common and widespread phenomenon during periods of intense winter rainfall in southern California. These debris flows originate as small, shallow landslides, commonly referred to as soil slips. Unlike "bedrock" or "deep-seated" landslides that are generally recognizable for long periods of time, soil slip -debris flow scars quickly "absorb" into the ambient physiography leaving little, if any, record of their prior existence. 53 Soil slips pose relatively little hazard at the site of the initial failure but the debris flow can be a serious hazard to people and structures in its path. Slope has long been recognized as a critical factor in generating soil slip 54 The USGS, working in cooperation with the California Geological Survey, has prepared soil -slip susceptibility maps encompassing the Santa Ana 30' x 60' Quadrangle, representing a 53/ Morton, D.M., Alvarez, R.M., and Campbell, R.H., Preliminary Soil -Slip Susceptibility Maps, Southwestern California Open -File Report 03-17, United States Geological Survey, 2003, pp. 34. ! Ibid., p.7. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-32 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 preliminary regional assessment of the relative susceptibility for initiating soil slip -debris flows during periods of intense winter rains. The maps depict only the points of origin of soil slips and do not address the subsequent coarse of a debris flow or the distance a debris flow would travel. As intended by the USGS, "the map may help identify locations where the relative potential for hazard is greater.i55 As illustrated in Figure 3-11 (Soil -Slip Susceptibility Map), a portion of the project site is identified as contained a "moderate susceptibility" soil -slip potential. Hydrology Study As illustrated in Figure 3-12 (Yorba Linda Quadrangle 50 -Year 24 -Hour Rainfall Distribution Map), as extracted from the County Sedimentation Manual, the project site is depicted as being located generally within the vicinity of a maximum 8.0 -inch 50 -year, 24-hour isohyetal Iine.56 As further depicted therein, the site's debris production area (DPA) is classified as "NA" and the site's soil classification is described as "Altamont Clay Loam" (002). The Applicant submitted and the City reviewed a site-specific hydrology study, entitled W.T.T. 54081 Existing and Proposed Hydrology" (Gary M. Gantney, November 4, 2002). Additional information concerning the project setting is presented therein. 3.2.9 Land Use and Planning Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the implementing resolution, the 1992 General Plan FOR concluded that the following significant land use impact could not be mitigated: "Potential alternation of open space and agricultural lands within the City."57 The 1995 Addendum further indicated:. "in addition to the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR, some new strategies relevant to land use have been included in the 1995 General Plan."58 The implementing resolution stated that "jajithough the City Council found in Resolution 9243 that the impacts from implementation of the 1992 General Plan on biological resources, circulation/transportation, air quality, acoustical environment, land use, and public services and facilities may be unavoidable adverse impacts, the City Council now finds, based on the Final Environmental Impact Report and the Addendum," air quality impacts would remain significant59 The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that address, either directly or indirectly, land use. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Maintain the integrity of residential neighborhoods by discouraging through traffic and preventing the creation of new major roadway connections through existing residential neighborhoods (Strategy 1.2.2, Land Use Element); "/ /bid., p. 11. 56/ Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Sedimentation Manual, Hydraulic/ Water Conservation Division, June 1993, Appendix A. 57/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of Overridin,%Considerations), p. 5. / Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p. 12. 59/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), Exhibit A, pp. 34. City of.Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-33 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Maintain residential areas which protect natural resources, hillsides, and scenic areas. (a) Development in hillside areas should be designed to be compatible with surrounding natural areas, compatible to the extent practical with surrounding development, aesthetically pleasing, and provide views from development, but not at the expense of views of the development. (b) Earthwork in hillside areas should utilize contour or landform grading. (c) Minimize grading to retain natural vegetation and topography (Strategy 1.2.3, Land Use Element); Maintain residential areas which provide for ownership of single family housing and require that new development be compatible with the prevailing character of the surrounding neighborhood (Strategy 1.2.4, Land Use Element); To preserve significant environmental resources within proposed developments, allow clustering or transferring of all or part of the development potential of the entire site to a portion of the site, thus preserving the resources as open space, and mandating the dedication of those resources to the City or a conservancy (Strategy 1.5.6, Land Use Element); and Encourage clustering within the most developable portions of project sites to preserve open space and/or other natural resources. Such development should be located to coordinate with long-term plans for active parks, passive (open space) parks, and preserve natural open space areas (Strategy 1.6.4, Land Use Element). As indicated on the City s "Land Use Map,' the project site is designated 'RL Low Density Residential (Max. 3 DU/Acre)." As further indicated in the City's Zoning Map, the approximately 12.9 -acre project site is zoned "R-1 20,000." As indicated in Note 1 in Table 2-4 (Residential District General Development Standards) in Section 22.08:040 (Residential Zoning District General Development Standards) in Chapter 22.08 (Residential Zoning Districts) of the Municipal Code, "projects may be subdivided with smaller parcel sizes for ownership purposes, with the minimum lot area requirement determined through the subdivision review process, provided that the overall development site complies with the lot area requirements of this chapter." As described in Section 22.08.020 (Purposes of Residential Zoning Districts) in the Municipal Code: 'The maximum allowed density for new residential subdivisions within this zoning district will be three dwellings per gross acre. The RL zoning district is consistent with the low density residential land use category of the general plan." 3.2.10 Mineral Resources As indicated in the MEA, all lands within the City are categorized as MRZ-1 (Areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence) and MRZ-3 (These areas incorporate land containing mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data), as defined by the California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology. As further indicated therein: "The only areas that could contain significant aggregate resources (MRZ-3) would be within the Soquel member of the Puente Formation" and "siltstones of the Puente Formation are generally unsuitable for use as aggregate 60 The site's bedrock is assigned to the La Vida member of the Puente Formation, .consisting mainly of firm, gray and brown, shale with siltstone and fine -medium sandstone beds 61 As such, no significant mineral deposits exist on the project site. fi0/ Op. Cit., Master Environmental Assessment - City of Diamond Bar, p. II -B-17. fig/ Geo Environ Engineering Consultants, Inc., Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation — Proposed Residential Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, California, APN #8714028003, p. 8. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-34 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Figure 3-11 Low Suseepfibinty, Moderate Susceptibility MHigh Sueceptibiliry SOIL-SLIPSUSCEPTIBILITY MAP Uncolored arca. have zero wl-sGpsusceptibility valuer Source: United States Geological Survey City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-35 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 '017 ON Ir -� 1c-��) °°?- J _ 4N f� / f ;0/j/017 ll {� DPA -7 `\) {C\I l%j / / \ 002 n 017ON •i��916 0021 ✓J J ^ t ��///� 09D 016 Pro602 �I% Cl� / �Z.. i o99 I .�\ 04, _ 1. _AAQe(IS CNAI _ .. 0 ys o1z um �.,- 1 � o'er ��I._y' i / -> / J_ _ 012% r 7( w3 J/W2 / 013 ( 0°z jar/ - P02 017 f i 1J c o1fl ;o1s _ `�� L ,//J/ (9p ots1 1 / " 413 9J7 i;x 2 -' t= j kj /ii7 016E / C i� roki nu (1 1 : {/ w3-��( wz 1\ \ 4 002 ooy� 'i l /( ✓ / Wz \A .Figure 3-12 YORBA LINDA QUADRANGLE 50 -YEAR 24-HOUR RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION MAP Source: Los Angeles County Department of Public Works July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-36 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Since the project site does not contain commercial -grade soils materials, the City has determined that this topical issue is not germane to the proposed project and has discontinued further analysis of potential project -related impacts on local or regional mineral resources. 3.2.11 Noise Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the implementing resolution, the 1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following programmatic impacts on the "acoustical environment" could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "(a) Short-term acoustical impacts during grading, infrastructure installation and building construction. (b) Long-term acoustical impacts occurring from increased traffic and urban activities."62 As indicated in the 1995 Addendum: "In addition to the mitigation measures identified in the Final E.IR, some new strategies relevant to the acoustical environment have been included in the 1995 General Plan" and "will further reduce impacts on the acoustic environment as identified in the General Plan Final EIR."63 As indicated in the implementing resolution, "[a]lthough the City Council found in Resolution 9243 that the impacts from implementation of the 1992 General Plan on biological resources, circulation/transportation, air quality, acoustical environment, land use, and public services and facilities may be unavoidable adverse impacts, the City Council now finds, based on the Final Environmental Impact Report and the Addendum" that only air quality impacts would remain significant 84 The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that address, either directly or indirectly, noise and that may be applicable to the proposed project. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: • Consider noise issues .in land use planning and development permit processing to require that noise generated by one use or facility does not adversely affect adjacent uses or facilities (Objective 1. 10, Public Health and Safety Element); Within identified 65 dB CNEL noise contours, require that site-specific noise studies be prepared to verify site-specific noise conditions and to ensure that noise considerations are included in project review (Strategy 1.10.1, Public Health and Safety Element); • Within identified 65 dB CNEL noise corridors, ensure that necessary reduction measures are applied to meet adopted interior and exterior noise standards (Strategy 1.10.2, Public Health and Safety Element); Through the CEQA process, analyze new projects which might have a significant impact on noise sensitive land uses (projects are defined as actions having the potential to . unreasonably. increase projected CNEL noise levels). Require demonstrated empirical mitigation measures to ensure that adopted noise standards within sensitive land use areas are not exceeded as the result of the proposed project. Mitigation measures shall be verified by field measurements after construction. Prior to occupancy, if the required 62/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations), p. 5. / Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, pp. 10-11. 64/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating Resolution No_ 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), Exhibit A, pp. 3-4. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-37 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 level of mitigation is not achieved, further corrective action will be required (Strategy 1.10.5, Public Health and Safety Element); and • Apply mitigation measures as needed to noise generators and receptors to ensure that adopted noise standards are met and to protect land uses from excessive noise impacts (Strategy 1.10.9, Public Health and Safety Element). As indicated in Section 22.28.070 (Noise Zones Designated) in Chapter 22.28 (Noise Control) of the Municipal Code, all residential properties within the City are designated to be within "Noise Zone Il.n In accordance with the provisions of Section 22.28.080 (Exterior Noise Standards) therein, the exterior noise level standard within this zone is 45 decibels (dB) between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM and 50 dB between the hours of 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM. As illustrated in the 1995 General Plan (Figure IV -4: Projected Future Noise Contours), the western portion of the project site is located within the 65 dB CNEL contour. As further indicated therein (Table IV -1: Noise Standards), single-family residential projects located within areas subject to noise levels within the 60-65 dB CNEL range are considered to be "conditionally acceptable" (i.e., New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements ismade and needed noise insulation features included in the design). Single-family residential projects located within area subject to noise levels within the 65-75 dB CNEL range are considered "normally unacceptable" (i.e., New construction or development should generally be discourages; if new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design .65 As indicated in Strategy 1.10.1, as found in the Public Health and Safety Element of the 1995 General Plan, a site-specific noise study should be prepared for the proposed project. The current noise environment within the general project area is dominated by traffic -generated noise along the SR -57 Freeway. In order to characterize on-site noise levels, field measurements were taken at three locations (i.e., northernmost portion of the site near the terminus of Crooked Creek Drive; approximately 100 feet to the south, southernmost portion of the site where the proposed cul-de-sac will be located) on an unspecified weekday date for unspecified durations. Occasionally, measurements peaked above the 61 dBA sound level. No readings above 65 dBA were recorded during the field measurements 66 3.2.12 Population and Housing Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on "socioeconomics (housing)" could be effectively mitigated to below a level of significance. In addition, based, in part, on the findings of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum concluded that program -level impacts on "socioeconomics (housing)" were "determined to be mitigable to less -than -significant levels .,,117 Unlike other elements of the 1995 General Plan, the City's Housing Element must be updated every five years. The 2000 Housing Element contains numerous policies that relate, either ss/ City of Diamond Bar, 1995 General Plan City of Diamond Bar General Plan, July 25,1995, Public Health and Safety Element, p. IV -15. / Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, Califomia�/ December 11, 2003. Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p. 4. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-38 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 directly or indirectly, to the provision of housing within the City. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: • Maintain residential areas which provide for ownership of single family housing and require that new development be compatible with the prevailing character of the surrounding development (Strategy 1.24, Land Use Element); • [P]rovide opportunities for development of suitable housing to meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents (Goal 2, Housing Element); • Promote the expeditious processing and approval of residential projects that meet General Plan policies and City regulatory requirements (Policy 4.2, Housing Element); • Require that dwelling units and structures within hillside areas be sited in such a manner as to utilize ridgelines and landscape plant materials as a backdrop for the structures and the structures themselves to provide maximum concealment of cut slopes (Strategy 1.1.2, Resource Management Element). As indicated in the 2000 Housing Element, the project site is identified as a "housing opportunity area," defined as one of a number of vacant sites located within the City that may be available for housing development. Regional Housing Needs Assessment As indicated in the Southern California Association of Government's (SCAG) "Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guiden6B (RCPG), substantial population growth is forecast within the SCAG region. The regional housing needs assessment69 (RHNA) is a key tool for SCAG and its member governments to plan for that growth by focusing on existing and future housing needs, including new construction. The current RHNA serves to quantify the need for housing within each jurisdiction between 1998 and 2005. The existing need assessment examines key variables from the most recent United States Census to measure ways in which the housing market is not meeting the needs of current residents. The future need for housing is determined primarily by the forecasted growth in households in a community. The City's adopted RHNA new construction need is identified as 144 dwelling units, including housing needs for the following income categories: (1) Very Low Income — 23 units; (2) Low Income —17 units; (3) Moderate Income — 27 units; and (4) Above Moderate Income — 76 units. It is assumed that the project seeks to response to a portion of the "above moderate income" housing need identified in the RHNA. 3.2.13 Public Services The 1992 General Plan FEIR, 1995 Addendum, and 1995 General Plan do not make a clear distinction between public services and utilities and service systems, as those terms are utilized in the Checklist. The 1995 General Plan combines solid waste, wastewater, flood control facilities, parks, law enforcement, libraries, schools, postal services, emergency services, disaster preparedness, and gas and electrical services all as part of the City's Public Services and Facilities Element. 681 Southern California Association of Governments, Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide, March 1996. 69/ SCAG is mandated by Section 65584 et seq. of the CGC to determine the existing and projected housing needs for its region, as well as the share of this need to be allocated to individual cities and counties in the SCAG region. This determination is called the Regional Housing Needs Assessment. The process for establishing a regional housing needs allocation plan is set forth in Section 65584 of the CGC. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 339 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 For the purpose of this environmental review, public services are assumed to include police and fire protection, schools, and libraries. Potable water, wastewater, and solid waste are addressed in Section 3.2.16 (Utilities and Service Systems). Storm water conveyance is separately addressed under Section 3.2.8 (Hydrology and Water Quality) and parks are separately addressed under Section 3.2.14 (Recreation) herein. Southern California Edison (SCE) is regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and is required to provide electrical service to proposed projects within its jurisdiction in accordance with the rules and regulations on file with the CPUC. Coordination for that service typically occurs between SCE and the project proponent during the preliminary design phase. Coordination ensures that the nature, design, and timing of electrical service improvements are adequate to serve the project and occur in compliance with the State's energy conservation requirements (Titles 24 and 25, CCR). As such, no further discussion of electrical service is provided herein. Similarly, the Southern California Gas Company is the supplier of natural gas in the project area. The Southern California Gas Company is regulated by the CPUC and is required to provide service to all new customers in accordance with the rules and regulations on file with the CPUC. The gas company continues to develop additional energy supplies while seeking efficiencies relative to existing consumption. Existing distribution facilities in the general project area appear adequate to serve anticipated project demands. As such, no further discussion of natural gas service is provided herein. Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the accompanying resolution, the 1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following programmatic impacts on "public services and facilities" could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "[a] Increased demand on fire,.police protection, schools, libraries, health services, solid waste disposal and telephone services; [b] increased consumption of water and energy supplies; and [c] increased waste- water generation/treatment demand.i70 As indicated in the 1995 Addendum: "1995 General Plan strategies are more comprehensive."71 As further indicated in the accompanying resolution, "[a]lthough the City Council found in Resolution 9243 that the impacts from implementation of the 1992 General Plan on biological resources, circulation/transportation, air quality, acoustical environment, land use, and public services and facilities may be unavoidable adverse impacts, the City Council now finds, based on the Final Environmental Impact Report and the Addendum" that only air quality impacts would remain significant .72 The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that relate, directly or indirectly, to public services and facilities. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Protect existing residents and businesses from the cost of financing infrastructure aimed at supporting new development or the intensification of development (Strategy 1.1.2, Public Services and Facilities Element); 70/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations), pp. 5-6. 1/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p. 15. 72/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), Exhibit A, pp. 3-4. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 340 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Require the construction of water, sewer, drainage and other necessary public facilities prior to or concurrent with each new development (Strategy 1.1.3, Public Services and Facilities Element); • Require the project sponsor to provide all necessary infrastructure improvements (including the pro rata share of system -wide improvements) (Strategy 1.1.4, Public Services and Facilities Element); Require all new, housing subdivisions be connected to a public sewerage system (Strategy 1.1.6, Public Services and Facilities Element); and • Within new residential developments, encourage organizations of individual neighborhoods and discourage through traffic on local streets while maintaining pedestrian and bicycle continuity and encourage neighborhood parks, improvement programs and social events (Strategy 1.5.3, Public Services and Facilities Element). As authorized under Section 17620(a) of the California Education Code (CEC) and Section 65995(b) of the California Government Code (CGC), local school districts are authorized.to impose and collect school impact fees for all residential and non-residential development activities that occur within their jurisdiction to off -set the costs associated with the new students that result directly from the construction of new homes and indirectly from the creation of new employment opportunities. When noticed of a school facility exaction, a city or county may not issue a building permit to an affected development project until the school district has certified that the project has either complied with the school board's resolution or is not subject to the exaction (Section 53080, CGC): Referencing Section 65995(h) of the CGC, "[t]he payment or satisfaction of a fee, charge, or other requirement levied or imposed pursuant to Section 17620 of the Education Code in the amount specified in Section 65995 and, if applicable, any amounts specified in Section 65995.5 or 65995.7 are hereby deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization as defined in Section 56021 or 56073, on the provision of adequate school facilities." Walnut Valley Unified School District Fee Justification Study The project site is located within the boundaries of the Walnut Valley .Unified School District (WVUSD). On May 5, 2004, the WVUSD's Board of Directors adopted the finding presented in the updated "Justification .Report for the Walnut Valley Unified School District — This Study Established the Justification for the Imposition of Developer Fees Pursuant to Applicable Law as of March 2004" (Calwell Flores Winters, Inc., adopted May 5, 2004). As indicated therein, the WVUSD found justification in imposing a fee of $6.40/square foot for residential development.73 That fee, however, exceeds the fee limitation established by the State Allocation Board (SAB). On January 25, 2006, the SAB increased the amount of the statutory maximum Level 174 school fees which may be levied by a school district on new development. As authorized by the SAB, 731 Calwell Flores Winters, Inc., Justification Report for the Walnut Valley Unified School District — This Study Established the Justification for the Imposition of Developer Fees Pursuant to Applicable Law as of March 2004, undated, p. 2. 74! Level I fees are the current statutory fees allowed under Section 17620 of the CEC. This code section provides the basic authority for school districts to levy fees against residential and commercial construction for the purpose of funding school construction and reconstruction. Level II fees are outlined in Section 65995.5 of the CGC and allow a district to impose a higher fee on residential construction if certain conditions are met. Level III fees are outlined in Section 65995.7 of the CGC. If State funding becomes unavailable, this section authorizes a district that approved the collection of Level II fees to collect a higher fee on residential construction. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-41 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 the maximum Level 1 fees were increased to $2.63 per assessable square foot of residential construction and $0.42 per square foot of enclosed and covered space for commercial and industrial development. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department The City contracts with the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department (LACSD) for law enforcement services. The project site is located within the patrol area of Walnut/Diamond Bar Sheriffs Station (21695 East Valley Boulevard, Walnut) and the Diamond Bar Sheriff Service Center (23449 Golden Springs Drive, Diamond Bar). Los Angeles County Fire Department Fire protection and paramedic services are provided to the general project area under contract to the County of Los Angeles Fire Department (LACFD). The nearest (first response) LACFD facility to the project site is Fire Station 120 (Battalion Headquarters/Engine Company), located at 1051 South Grand Avenue, Diamond Bar. Sections 51175-51188 to the CGC requires the California Department ofForestryand Fire Protection (CDF), acting in cooperation with local fire authorities, to identify Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) within designated State Responsibility Areas (SRAs). Those VHFHSZs located in the general project area, as determined by the CDF, are illustrated in Figure 3-13 (Natural Hazard Disclosure Map for a Portion of Los Angeles County). As illustrated therein, the project site is identified as being located within a "wildland areas that may contain substantial forest fire risks and hazards" and directly adjacent to "very high fire hazard severity zone." As defined in Section 223-V of Title 32 of the County Code, the "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone" is defined to mean those "areas that are highly vulnerable to wildfire. The designation of such zones shall be made by the Board of Supervisors and shall be based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather and other relevant factors in accordance with Chapter 6.8 of Title 5 of the California Government Code commencing with Section 51175." The following standards have been established by the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) for single-family dwellings located in a VHFHSZ (Fire Zone 4): (1) the water system is capable of delivering 1,250 gallons per minute (gpm) at 20 pounds per square inch_ (psi) for two hours; (2) the distance from the structure to the fire hydrant does not exceed 450 feet via vehicular access; and (3) the proposed construction must be within 150 feet of a vehicular access roadway that is a minimum of 20 feet wide, paved with concrete or asphalt and does not exceed 15 percent grade.75 More specifically, the LACFD's "Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire Zone 4 or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zonesi78 provide a set of procedures and standards designed to implement the requirements of the "Los Angeles County Fire Code" (Fire Code), codified in Title 32 of the County Code. 75/ Los Angeles County Fire Department, Prevention Bureau, Information on Fire Flow Availability for Building Permit, Form 195, January 2002. 76/ County of Los Angeles Fire Department, Prevention Bureau, Forestry Division, Brush Clearance Section, Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire Zone 4 or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, January 1998. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 342 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 LEGEND �AmvnmSa FSSI.m�11�NAP S�MN95T.1MI/.L 4 Figure 3-13 NATURAL HAZARD DISCLOSURE MAP FOR A PORTION OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY Source: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-43 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 This page intentionally left blank. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-44 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 As specified in the LACFD's "Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire Zone 4 or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones," fuel modification plans are required for all tentative map approval or building permits on or after January 7, 1996. A "fuel modification plan" identifies specific zones within a property that are subject to fuel modification. A "fuel modification zone" is a strip of land where combustible native or ornamental vegetation has been modified and/or partially or totally replaced with drought tolerant, fire resistant plants. 77 Current code requirements for subdivisions, including access, fire flow, fire sprinklers, water storage, and fire resistive construction techniques, are considered and credited, where appropriate, by the LACFD in establishing the final fuel modification requirements. The size and type of the fuel modification zone(s) will be determined by the LACFD upon review of preliminary development plans.78 3.2.14 Recreation Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FOR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on "recreation and open space" could be effectively mitigated to below a level of significance. In addition, based, in part, on the findings of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum concluded that program -level. impacts on "recreation and open space" were "determined to be mifigable to less -than -significant levels.i79 The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that relate, either directly or indirectly, to recreation. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Pursue the development of a system of greenbelts within the community (Strategy 1.3.6, Resource Management Element); and Develop recreational facilities emphasizing active and passive recreational areas (Strategy 1.3.7, Resource Management Element). As authorized under Section 66477 of the CGC (Quimby Act), cities and counties have the authority to pass ordinances requiring that developers set aside land, donate conservation easements, or pay fees for park improvements. The goal of the Quimby Act is to require developers to help mitigate the impacts of new development on existing park resources. As specified in Section 66477(b) therein, "the dedication of land, or the payment of fees, or both, shall not exceed the proportionate amount necessary to provide three acres of park area per 1,000 persons residing within a subdivision subject to this section, unless the amount of existing neighborhood and community park area, as calculated pursuant to this subdivision, exceeds that limit, in which case the legislative body may adopt the calculated amount as a higher standard not to exceed five acres per 1,000 persons residing within a subdivision subject to this section." Section 66477(c) of the CGC further stipulates that "[t]he land, fees, or combination thereof are to be used only for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing neighborhood or community park or recreational facilities to serve the subdivision." As authorized under Section 21.32.040 (Park Land Dedications and Fees) in Chapter 21.32 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code: "As a condition of tentative map approval, the subdivider 77/ Ibid., p. 1 "I Ibid., pp. 2-3. 791 Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p. 4. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-45 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 shall dedicate land. and/or pay a fee in compliance with this section for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing park or recreation facilities to serve the subdivision." The amount of acreage required to be dedicated by a residential subdivider for park and recreational purposes is based on the number and type of dwelling units and is computed using the following formula: X = 0.005(UP) where "X is the amount of parkland required in acres, "U" is the total number of approved dwelling units, and 'P" is 3.4 for single-family dwellings. In subdivisions of over 50 lots, the city may require the subdivider to dedicate both land and pay a fee. Only the payment of fees shall be required in subdivisions of 50 parcels or less. If the subdivider provides park and recreational improvements on dedicated land, the value of the improvements together with any installed equipment shall be a credit against the required fees or land. Each park site proposed for dedication in compliance with this section shall be physically suited for the intended use. In May 2001, the City adopted a "City of Diamond Bar Recreational Trails and Bicycle Route Master Plan" (Trails Master Plan). As indicated therein, the plan identifies "five trails completely within the City of Diamond Bar; one trail partially within the City — Skyline (Schabarum) Trail; and one trail head which provides access to a trail outside the City limits (Tonner Canyon).i8' As depicted in the Trail Master Plan, the Tonner Canyon Trail parallels the southem boundary of the City and includes a proposed trailhead in the vicinity of the project site. The project site is specifically identified and illustrated in the Trails Master Plan. The plan states: 'Three properties exist at the City's southerly limits, the use of which could be beneficial in the development of a trail head and access to the County's Skyline (Schabarum) Trail Extension and to the Tonner Canyon Trail. These properties are located at the southerly City limits in the vicinity of Crooked Creek Drive and Running Branch Road. One is located within the City limits and two are located in unincorporated County territory."81 Designated trail heads are categorized based on the types of facilities proposed in the Trails Master Plan. With regards to Tonner Canyon Trail, the plan depicts a "Class A trail head in the vicinity of the terminus of Crooked Creek Drive or Running Branch Road. The development of this trail head improvement should be linked to improved maintenance of the Skyline Trail Extension (Schabarum Trail) by the County of Los Angeles."82 "Class A" trailheads are intended to include or may include the following facilities: parking, information kiosk, bike rack, drinking fountain, picnic table, shade trees or structure, trash container. 33 3.2.15 Transportation and Traffic Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the accompanying resolution, the 1992 General Plan FOR concluded that the following programmatic impact on "transportation/circulation" could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "Contribution to the local and area -wide need for expanded transportation systems.n84 80/ City of Diamond Bar, City of Diamond Bar Recreational Trails and Bicycle Route Master Plan, May 15, 2001, p. 13. 87/ Ibid.. p. 75. e2/ Ibid., p. 16. 83/ Ibid., Table 2, p. 17. 84/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations), p. 5. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-46 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 As indicated in the 1995 Addendum: "In addition to the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR, some new strategies related to circulation have been included in the 1995 General Plan" and "[t]hese additional measures will further lessen circulation impacts as identified in the Final EIR."B5 As further indicated in the accompanying resolution, "[a]lthough the City Council found in Resolution 9243 that the impacts from implementation of the 1992 General Plan on biological resources, circulation/transportation, air quality, acoustical environmerit, land use, and public services and facilities may be unavoidable adverse impacts, the City Council now finds, based on the Final Environmental Impact Report and the Addendum" that only air quality impacts would.remain significant es The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that address, either directly or indirectly, transportation and traffic and that may be applicable to the proposed project. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Preclude the connection of roadways from adjacent jurisdictions into the City unless demonstrable benefits to Diamond Bar residents and businesses are indicated (Strategy 1.1.1, Circulation Element); • Pursue other traffic measures to enhance circulation and transient traffic movement (Strategy 1.2.3, Circulation Element); • Prevent the creation of new roadway connections which adversely impact existing neighborhoods (Strategy 1.3.1, Circulation Element); • Design new developments and their access points in such a way that the capacity of local streets is not exceeded (Strategy 1.3.3, Circulation Element); • Work to ensure that any new development is provided with adequate access from within the City of Diamond Bar (Strategy 2.2.1, Circulation Element); • Consider all opportunities to expand and maintain pedestrian access routes throughout the City (Strategy 3.1.6, Circulation Element); and • All new development shall be required to provide mitigation measures. Such measures could include improvements or traffic impact fees (Strategy 3.2.1, Circulation Element). Traffic Study The Applicant submitted and the City reviewed a.traffic study conducted to assess the potential traffic -related impacts attributable to the site's development. That study, entitled "Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision Located at the Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive (Approximately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of Diamond Bar)" (Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc., October 2002, Revised September 2003),87 presented a detailed evaluation of existing and future traffic conditions at the following nine study area intersections and residential street segments: (1) Diamond Bar Boulevard/Brea Canyon Road; (2) Diamond Bar Boulevard/SR-57 Freeway Northbound (NB) Ramps; (3) Brea Canyon Cutoff/SR-57 Freeway Southbound (SB) Ramps; (4) Crooked Creek Drive south of Gold Run Drive; (5) Gold Run Drive east of Castle Rock Road; (6) Castle Rock Road south of Gold Run 85/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p. 8. m/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), Exhibit A, pp. 3-4. 8 / Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc., Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision Located at the Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive (Approximately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of Diamond Bar), October 2002, Revised September 2003. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 3-47 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Drive; (7) Castle Rock Road north of Gold Run Drive; (8) Silver Bullet Drive east of Brea Canyon Road; and (9) Copper Canyon Drive east of Brea Canyon Road. Daily traffic counts were conducted for two days on the local streets serving the project site. The results of the two-day average daily traffic counts are shown in Table 3-2 (Existing [2 -Day Average] Daily Roadway Values). As indicated, daily volumes are the highest on Copper Canyon Road. Silver Bullet Drive also provides a connection to Brea Canyon Road but has significantly less traffic volumes, notwithstanding the presence of a traffic signal. Table 3-2 EXISTING (2 -DAY AVERAGE) DAILY ROADWAY VALUES si fn a �St ee ist` n Dar y^ rattrc eel ofge ice Copper Canyon Drive (East of Brea Canyon Road) 3,019 D Silver Bullet Drive (East of Brea Canyon Road) 943 A Castle Rock Road (North of Gold Run Drive) 2,222 B Castle Rock Road (South of Gold Run Drive) 868 A Gold Run Drive (East of Castle Rock Drive) 2,545 C Crooked Creek Drive (South of Gold Run Drive) 396 A Source: Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc. An analysis of morning (AM) and evening (PM) peak -hour traffic conditions was conducted at the following three intersections: (1) Diamond Bar Boulevard/Brea Canyon Road (traffic signal); (2) Diamond Bar Boulevard/SR-57 Freeway NB Ramps (traffic signal); (3) Brea Canyon Cutoff(SR-57 Freeway SB Ramps (stop sign controlled off ramp). As shown in Table 3-3 (Intersection Capacity Utilization Summary), the intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard/Brea Canyon Road is currently operating at Level of Service (LOS) "E" during the AM peak hour. The existing- LOS is primarily due to the heavy westbound left -turn volume from Diamond Bar Boulevard to southbound Brea Canyon Road. Table 3-3 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION SUMMARY Source_ Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc. 3.2.16 Utilities and Service Systems Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the accompanying resolution, the 1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following programmatic impact on "public services and facilities" could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "[1] Increased demands on fire, police protection, schools, libraries, health services, solid waste disposal and telephone July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 348 Initial Study - Environmental Setting �t 'r._q°Ai1�Peak ersec ro*010 ou RMRgau Diamond Bar Boulevard/Brea Canyon Road 0.932 E 0.862 D Diamond Bar Boulevard/SR-57 Freeway NB Ramps 0.587 A 0.705 C Source_ Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc. 3.2.16 Utilities and Service Systems Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the accompanying resolution, the 1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following programmatic impact on "public services and facilities" could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "[1] Increased demands on fire, police protection, schools, libraries, health services, solid waste disposal and telephone July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 348 Initial Study - Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES vesting Tentative Tract No- 54081 services; [2] Increased consumption of water and energy supplies; and [3] Increased waste- water generation/treatment demands." As indicated in the 1995 Addendum: "The Public Services and Facilities Element contained in the 1995 General Plan is more comprehensive than the 1992 Element" and "[t]he strategies added to the 1995 General Plan are intended to further reduce impacts .,,89 The City's implementing resolution concluded that, based on the additional analysis presented in the 1995 Addendum, the previously identified significant impacts on "public services and facilities" would, in fact, be less than significant 90 The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that relate, either directly or indirectly, to utilities and service systems. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: • Protect existing residents and businesses from the cost of financing infrastructure aimed at supporting new development or the intensification of development (Strategy 1.1.2, Public Services and Facilities Element); • Require the construction of water, sewer, drainage and other necessary public facilities prior to or concurrent with each new development (Strategy 1.1.3, Public Services and Facilities Element); • Require the project sponsor to provide all necessary infrastructure improvements (including the pro rata share of system -wide improvements) (Strategy 1.1.4, Public Services and Facilities Element); • Require all new housing subdivisions be connected to a public sewerage system (Strategy 1.1.6, Public Services and Facilities Element); and • Within new residential developments, encourage organizations of individual neighborhoods and discourage through traffic on local streets while maintaining pedestrian and bicycle continuity and encourage neighborhood parks, improvement programs and social events (Strategy 1.5.3, Public Services and Facilities Element). Water service to the project site is provided by the Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD). In Fiscal Year 2002-2003, the WVWD provided 24,339 acre feet of water to its residential and business consumers. The WVWD is dependent upon an imported potable water supply obtained almost entirely from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), the sole importer of water to this area, through a wholesale member agency, Three Valleys Municipal Water District (TVMWD). The water is treated at MWD's F.E. Weymouth Filtration Plant, located in the City of La Verne, prior to being conveyed to the WVWD's terminal storage reservoir for distribution within the district's water supply system. Potable ground water is not available within the district's boundaries owing to the characteristics of the local groundwater basin, which is a narrow, shallow, dense aquifer high in total dissolved solids and nitrate concentrations. 88/ Op. Cif., Resolution 9243 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations), pp. 5-6. / Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, p. 15. 90/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar incorporating Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), Exhibit A, pp. 3-4. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Environmental Setting Page 349 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract N6.54081 The County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (CSDLAC) are a confederation of special districts serving the County's wastewater and solid waste management needs. The CSDLAC's service area covers about 800 square miles, encompassing 78 cities and unincorporated County areas, and includes the City. The CSDLAC are comprised of 25 separate (23 active) sanitation districts working cooperatively under a Joint.Administration Agreement (JAA). Each district has a separate board of directors consisting of the presiding officer of the governing bodies of the local jurisdictions situated within that district. The CSDLAC owns, operates, and maintains over 1,300 miles of main truck sewers and 11 wastewater treatment plants with a total permitted capacity of 627.8 million gallons per day (mgd). The CSDLAC's sewerage system currently conveys and treats approximately 510 mgd of wastewater.91 The project site is located within County Sanitation District No. 21. County Sanitation District No. 21, in combination with 16 other districts, are signatories to a Joint Outfall Agreement which provides for a regional, interconnected system of facilities known as the Joint Outfall System. The CSDLAC constructs, operates, and maintains trunk sewers and wastewater treatment and disposal facilities serving residential, industrial, institutional, and commercial users throughout a major portion of the County. Local wastewater collection systems (lateral sewers) are constructed, operated, and maintained by other public agencies, including the County and various cities. Such systems are typically tributary to and discharge into the CSDLAC's sewerage systems. Operation and maintenance of local sewers and laterals and the collection and the transport of solid wastes to CSDLAC facilities are the responsibilities of local jurisdictions. Sewer facilities within the City are regulated under the provisions of Chapter 13.00 (Sewers and Sewage Disposal) in Title 13 (Utilities) of the Municipal Code. Municipal sewer flows generated within the City are treated at the CSDLAC's Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (24501 South Figueroa Street, Carson). The facility provides both primary and secondary treatment for approximately 320 million gallons of wastewater per day. In addition, the CSDLAC operate a comprehensive solid waste management system serving the needs of a large portion of the County. This system presently includes three active sanitary landfills (Calabasas, Puente Hills, Scholl Canyon), two transfer and material recovery facilities (iSouth Gate, Downey), five refuse -to -energy facilities (i.e., Calabasas, Commerce, Puente Hills, Southeast Resource Recovery Facility [SERRF], Palos Verdes, Spadra), two full-service recycle centers (Palos Verdes, Puente Hills). In addition to those solid waste facilities operated by the CSDLAC, there are numerous privately owned and operated solid waste facilities (e.g., landfills, transfer stations) located throughout the region that could be potential recipients of municipal solid waste (MSW) generated from the project or from the general project area. The California Integrated Solid Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), codified in Division 30, Section 40000 et seq. of the PRC, requires every city and county in the State to reduce or recycle 25 percent of the solid wastes disposed in landfills by the year 1995 and 50 percent by the year 2000. For those jurisdictions unable to meet AB 939 diversion objectives and established deadlines, monetary penalties can be imposed against those agencies. Refuse and recycling service is provided to City residents by Waste Management Inc. In 2002, fifty-three percent of the waste collected in the City was recycled 92 91/ County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, Draft Palmdale Water Reclamation Plant Disinfection Facilities Plan, January 2004, p. 1-1. w/ City of Diamond Bar, General Plan Annual Report - Period Beginning January 1, 2002 and Ending December 31, 2002. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 3-50 Initial Study- Environmental Setting JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 4,0 IMPACT ANALYSIS 4.1 INTRODUCTION TO IMPACT ANALYSIS As required under Section 15063(d)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, an initial study shall contain "an identification of the environmental effects [of the proposed project by use of a checklist, matrix, or other method, provided that entries on a checklist or other form are briefly explained to indicate that there is some evidence to support the entries. The brief explanation may be either through a narrative or a reference to another information source such as an attached map, photographs, or an earlier EIR or negative declaration." A "sample format"' for that checklist is. included in the State CEQA Guidelines and has been used by the City herein as a means of identifying and evaluating the project's potentially significant environmental impacts. The following analysis, in combination with the information presented in Section 2.0 (Project Description) and Section 3.0 (Environmental Setting) and the program -level assessments contained in the 1992 General Plan FEIR and 1995 Addendum, contains the supportive information utilized by the Lead Agency in the derivation of those preliminary conclusions presented in the accompanying "Environmental Checklist Form" (Checklist), included in Appendix A (Environmental Checklist), and the preliminary findings of the Lead Agency relative to the continuing presence or absence of unmitigable significant environmental effects, as presented in Section 5.0 (Preliminary Determination). Under CEQA, impacts can be both beneficial and adverse. A.determination whether an effect is adverse or beneficial may be based, in part, on the judgment and perspective of the individual reviewer. As indicated in Section 15064(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines: "In determining whether an effect will be adverse or beneficial, the lead agency shall consider the views held by members of the public in all areas affected as expressed in the whole record before the lead agency." In completing the Checklist, the City has not sought to determine whether a particular effect is either adverse or beneficial, rather the Lead Agency has sought only to indicate whether the resulting physical change to the existing environmental setting is significant from an environmental perspective. 4.2 THRESHOLD OF SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA As indicated under Section 15064(a) of the. State CEQA Guidelines, "determining whether a project may have a significant effect plays a critical role in the CEQA process." This determination influences an agency's determination concerning whether or not to commence the preparation of a negative declaration or an EIR and determines whether mitigation measures will be required once a negative declaration or EIR is commenced.' Section 15064 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides the basic guidance to lead agencies in determining the significance of a project's effects. Referencing Section 15064(b) therein: "the determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for '/ Section 15063(f), State CEQA Guidelines. Z/ CEQA specifies that judgments of "significance" are made at three different points in the environmental review process: (1) in determining whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment and thus requires the preparation of an EIR (Section 210822[a], CEQA); (2) if an EIR is prepared, in the EIR's discussions of which environmental impacts are, in fact, significant and thus warrants mitigation (Section 15126.4[a][4], State CEQA Guidelines); and (3) if an EIR is prepared, in making findings following the document's completion whether a project's significant environmental effects have been avoided or substantially reduced (Section 21081 [a], CEQA). City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-1 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 careful judgment on the part of the public agency involved, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data. An iron clad definition of significant effect is not always possible because the significance of an activity may vary with the setting." Section 15065 of the State CEQA Guidelines identified the conditions where lead agencies are mandated to determine significance and either commence the preparation of an EIR or impose mitigation (through use of a MND in lieu of an EIR) to reduce the identified effect to a less -than -significant level. No thresholds of significance where identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR or in the 1995 Addendum. in the absence of contrary evidence, the City has, therefore, elected to utilize the standards of significance contained in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines as the basis for determining whether the project's potential impacts would be deemed significant. To the extent that other public agencies have formulated, recommended, or adopted threshold of significance criteria for use by local agencies in their CEQA process, the Lead Agency has considered those standards known to the City in its independent assessment of the project's potential impacts and; when deemed applicable and absent any fair argument to the contrary, has, as noted, applied those standards to the determination of potential significance. 4.3 1995 GENERAL PLAN PROGRAMMATIC MITIGATION MEASURES As more thoroughly described in Section 1.0 (Introduction) herein, this "second-tier" analysis serves to build upon the environmental record established by the Lead Agency and contained in the 1992 General Plan FEIR and 1995 Addendum. Referencing Resolution No. 92-43: "This City Council finds that although the Final EIR identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the proposed General Plan is adopted, all significant effects can feasibly be mitigated or avoided [sic] have been reduced to the extent feasible by the imposition of mitigation measures contained within the Final EIR and Mitigation Monitoring Plan.n3 As further indicated in Resolution No. 95-20, "the mitigation measures contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report which was prepared in connection with the 1992 General Plan remain current and valid and a revised Mitigation Monitoring Program is hereby made a part of the Final Environmental Impact Report for the 1995 General Plan to ensure implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report. ,4 As indicated in the 1995 General Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program, "the goals, objectives, policies, and specific actions, are the proposed mitigation measures of the updated General Plan. i5 As further indicated therein, the 1995 Addendum will "be consulted to determine whether a specific project is consistent with the General Plan." 3 As indicated in Section 3.0 (Environmental Setting), for most of the topical issues addressed in the Checklist, programmatic mitigation measures (presented in the form of policy statements in the 1995 General Plan) were previously adopted by the City. Each of those programmatic measures is presented in Table ES -1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures) under the corresponding topical heading most germane to each such measure. 3/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of Overridintq Considerations), pp. 4-5. / Op. Cif., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating Resolution No. 9243 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), adopted by the City Council on May 9, 1995, p. 3. 5/ City of Diamond Bar, Implementation/Mitigation Monitoring Program, July 25,1995, p. MMP -5. 6/ Ibid., p. MMP -4. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-2 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 The inclusion of program -level mitigation measures therein is intended for informational purposes only and is designed to facilitate the formulation of project -level mitigation measures when the resulting analysis concludes that project -related impacts would manifest at a significant or potentially significant level. By their inclusion, it is not the intent of the Lead Agency to impose those program -level mitigation measures as project -level conditions. Following the release of this Initial Study and upon receipt of any subsequent comments that may be received by the City in response thereto, the Lead Agency could elect to determine that any or all of those program -level mitigation measures identified therein or contained elsewhere in the 1995 General Plan, the 1995 Addendum, or the 1995 General Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program are applicable to the proposed action and appropriately constitute project -level mitigation measures and/or conditions of project approval. 4.4 TOPIC -SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Presented below is the City s preliminary response to each of the items raised in the Checklist. The information presented herein may be subsequently revised based on comments received by the Lead Agency from other responsible or trustee agencies and from the general public following the dissemination of any environmental notices resulting from the City's independent environmental review of the proposed project. In assessing each topical issue, it is assumed that the proposed project will be constructed, operated, and maintained in strict compliance with all applicable federal, State, and local laws, rules, regulations, standards, and associated requirements applicable to the precise nature of the proposed use. Since statutory and/or regulatory provisions applicable to those operations and activities constitute pre-existing obligations, compliance with those pre-existing provisions is not identified either as recommended mitigation measures or conditions of approval herein. 4.4.1 Aesthetics (a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Significant unless Mitigation Incorporated. In proximity to the project site, the SR -57 Freeway is "eligible" for State Scenic Highway designation and, although not formally adopted by the County, is presently identified as a "proposed scenic highway" in the on- going County General Plan update which is presently underway. Pending a formal designation of that roadway as a State Scenic Highway, no view preservation or scenic corridor protection policies or regulations now govern development activities located within that roadway's existing viewshed. Additionally, the 1995 General Plan does not define the existence of any scenic vistas within the City and neither the 1992 General Plan FEIR nor the 1995 Addendum identifies any scenic vistas within or adjacent to the City or contain any program -level view preservation measures. A limited number of adjoining and proximal properties presently possess a view of all or portions of the project site. Following the site's development, those existing views will be modified from that of an open space setting to an altered setting possessing both urban and open space visual elements. Those views likely to be most impacted are from those abutting properties located on Crooked Creek Drive. Southeasterly oriented, fore- ground views from Lots 76-84 of Tract Map No. 25989, located along the southeasterly side of Crooked Creek Drive and located at a lower elevation that the adjoining portion of City of. Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-3 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 the project site, will change from those of an undeveloped hillside area to a series of 6 - foot tall, stair -stepping retained walls, above which will be constructed rear -yard fences for single-family homes. Each of those property owners currently have some type of wall (e.g., masonry, wood, chain link) located along or near their rear property lines. Wall height is generally assumed to be about five feet above finish grade. As such, existing views of the project site are partially impeded by the presence of those existing perimeter walls. Because of the elevational differences, east -facing views from those residences are dominated by the slope area that abuts those properties. As such, the perceived visual character of a limited number of private views will change substantially. As proposed and as illustrated on the Applicant's landscape plan, a planting strip will be retained at the base of the retaining walls and in the 5 -foot wide terraced area separating the individual walls. As the Applicant's proposed slope and wall landscaping matures and the proposed walls become less dominant visual elements as a result of that landscaping, the resulting change may diminish over time. Additionally, southwesterly oriented, middle -ground views from Lots 79-85 of Tract 29053, located on the westerly side of Running Branch Road and at a higher elevation than the adjoining portion of the project site, will be altered as the existing view by residents changes from an undeveloped property to one containing both urban and open space elements. Since these views are generally across the project site to more distant areas located to the west of the SR -57 Freeway, the resulting visual impacts will be less perceptible than those from Crooked Creek Drive. In recognition of the presence of potentially significant aesthetic impacts, the following mitigation measure is recommended: Mitigation Measure No. 1. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the Community Development Director and City Engineer shall approve detailed retaining wall, landscape, and irrigation plans identifying how those three elements will be fully integrated into the wall design. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be signed by a landscape architect and shall specify and quantify the plant palette, characteristics of the plants selected, watering requirements including frequency, and specify how water will be dispersed. Landscape plans shall also include performance standards relative to amount of surface coverage and plant survivability. Specified landscape performance standards shall be binding on the homeowners' association. As mitigated, the potentially significant aesthetic impacts associated with the proposed project can be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No: 4.4.1(a) above. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-4 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 (c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Significant unless Mitigation Incorporated, See Response No. 4.4.1(a) above. (d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less than Significant Impact. Presently no artificial light sources exist on the project site. Project implementation will, therefore, result in the introduction of new sources of light, such as new street lighting, interior and exterior structural lighting, decorative landscape lighting, security lighting, and automobile headlights. Those new light sources, in combination with site grading, infrastructure improvements, and new residential dwellings, will change the existing visual character of the property_ The property is, however, designated for an urban use and abuts existing residential areas along three of .its four sides. As such, new introduced lighting will neither change the overall visual character of the general area nor substantially contribute to the existing sky -glow effect associated with areawide night lighting. 4.4.2 Agricultural Resources In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by. the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmlands. (a) Would the project convert prime farmland," unique farmland, or farmland of Statewide importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? No Impact. The project site does not contain any State or locally designated "Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance." (b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The project site is not currently subject to a Williamson Act contract. (c) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. See Response No. 4.4.2(a). 4.4.3 Air Quality Where available, the signfcance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determination. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 . Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-5 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 (a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant Impact. As indicated in City -initiated "Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California" (Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., December 11, 2003), as initiated by the City as part of.the Applicant's 2003-2004 submittal, a project's consistency with the existing "Air Quality Management Plan" (AQMP)8 is determined through an assessment of the following inquiries: (1) Will the proposed project result in an increase in the frequency or severity of an existing air quality violation or contribute to the continuation of an existing air quality violation? (2) Will the proposed project exceed the assumptions included in the AQMP or other regional growth projections relevant to the AQMP's implementation? The first question is addressed in Response No. 4.4.3(b). The second question is addressed herein. Applicable air quality plans are based on current land use policies. A residential project relates to the AQMP through the land use and growth assumptions used to forecast air emissions. The AQMP is based on the designated land use within the regional air basin, as contained in local general plans. To the extent that the proposed development is consistent with the land use policies of the 1995 General Plan, it is, by inference, also consistent with the AQMP. Such consistency implies that the project will not create any unanticipated regional air quality impacts because such impacts have already been incorporated within the framework of the regional air quality planning process. If, however, approval of the proposed project allows for a greater intensity of development than currently anticipated under local land use plans, such growth inducement may create a regional air quality planning inconsistency. That inconsistency, if substantial, could potentially create a significant air quality impact even though the incremental impact from the project might be de minimus on a regional scale. As indicated in the "Land Use Map" (adopted July 25, 1995), the approximately 12.9 acre project site is designated "RL Low Density Residential (Max. 3 DU/Acre)." Based on that designation, assuming that the entire site was to be developed for residential use, a total of 38.7 dwelling units could be constructed on the subject property. As a result, the maximum allowable development authorized under the 1995 General Plan would be 38 dwelling units. The corresponding zoning for the project site is "R-1 20,000." Under existing zoning, a total of 28 dwelling units could be developed on the project site. Since only 16 dwelling units are now proposed, the project meets the second criteria for consistency with the AQMP. (b) Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute• substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 7/ As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004, a number of studies were conducted both by the Lead Agency and by the Applicant for a more intensive residential use of the project site. Although the current development application contains a lesser number of residential units, the Lead Agency has not. performed a detailed revised air quality analysis since the previous study allows for a worst-case assessment of the project's potential air quality impacts. 8/ The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are the agencies responsible for preparing the AQMP for the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). Since 1979, a number of AQMPs have been prepared. The most recent comprehensive plan currently now fully approved by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is the 1997 "Air Quality Management Plan," which includes a variety of strategies and control measures. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-6 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Significant unless Mitigation Incorporated. As indicated in "Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California" (Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., December 11, 2003), prior to consideration of any possible mitigation, operational emissions attributable to a higher intensity residential development was found to not exceed the threshold standards recommended by the SCAQMD. Air emissions attributable to construction activities were, however, projected to result in the generation of short-term air emissions for reactive organic gases (ROG) that were above the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria. All other criteria emissions were projected to occur at levels below the SCAQMD's standards. As indicated in the independent air quality analysis conducted for the City: 'The construction activities may generate up to 82 pounds per day of ROG while the daily threshold limit is 55 pounds per day. ROG are precursors to ozone formation. This is important in that the SCAB is currently non -attainment for ozone."9 The following potential mitigation measures were identified in that air quality assessment: (1) to mitigate dust and particulate matter generated during, construction and site preparation activities, SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, which requires regular watering of exposed soils during earth moving operations; (2) during grading and construction phases,.Crooked Creek Drive must be swept on a daily basis to reduce fugitive dust emissions; (3) all trucks hauling debris removed during clearance and grading operations must be covered; (4) the applicant will be required to pay for the drapery cleaning services for those residences located immediately adjacent to the project site at the conclusion of the grading and brush clearing activities; (5) the applicant will be required to pay for the pool cleaning services of those residences located immediately adjacent to the project site at the conclusion of the grading and brush clearance activities; (6) the applicant will be required to maintain construction equipment in tune to reduce heavy equipment emissions; and (7) the applicant will be required to use low emission architectural coatings approved by the SCAQMD.1e None of those potential measures, however, serve to mitigate or reduce ROG emissions. As such, the identified actions do not effectively address the project's significant air quality impact and have not been expressly brought forward as mitigation measures herein. Compliance with applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations will serve to reduce many construction -term criteria emissions. The City can, however, impose more stringent standards in order to further reduce short-term impacts. Those additional requirements are identified as a recommended mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure No. 2) herein. ROG emissions" are, in large part, associated with the application of paints and architectural coatings. The projected 81.63 pounds per day of ROG, as indicated in the referenced air quality analysis, is based on coatings having a VOC content of 250 grams per liter. The computer modeling used to derive the estimate of ROG emissions assumed compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). As required therein, the SCAQMD prohibits the sale, manufacturer, or application of any architectural s/ BlodgettBaylosis Associates, Inc., Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California, December 11, 2003, pp. 5-6. io/ Ibid., pp. 6-7. - "/ In SCAQMD documents, the inclusive term "reactive organic compounds" generally describes and is gradually replacing the separate terms "reactive organic gases" (ROG), "volatile organic compounds" (VOC), and "hydrocarbons" (HC), except in cases where such separation provides additional clarification and definition. For purposes of this analysis, these terms are used synonymously herein. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study- Impact Analysis Page 47 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 coating containing more than 250 grams of volatile organic compounds (VOC) per liter of coating (2.08 pounds per gallon), less water, less exempt compounds. There are, however, a variety of coatings that are low in VOCs. Several of the primers have VOC contents of less than 0.85 pound per gallon (100 grams/liter) (e.g., DuluP, professional exterior primer 100 percent acrylic), while topcoats can be less than 0.07 pound per gallon (8 grams/liter) (e.g., Lifemaster 2000-SeriesTm). Assuming two coats of primer and one topcoat, a specification that all primers shall contain less than 0.85 pound per gallon (102 gramsfliter) of VOC and that all topcoats shall contain less than 0.07 pound per gallon (8 grams/liter) of VOC would result in an average VOC content of no more than 71 grams per liter. ROG emissions from paints and coatings would, therefore, be reduced from an estimated 81.83 to 23.24 pounds/day. When ROG emissions from grading activities are added (i.e., 6.65 pounds/day), total construction -term ROG emissions would be projected to be below the SCAQMD threshold criteria of 55 pounds/day. The use of these low-VOC coatings .would, therefore, substantially reduce VOC emissions associated with the application of paints and coatings and "the ROG emissions may be reduced to levels that are less than significant by using these low emission architectural coatings.02 In order to reduce ROG emission, a mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure No. 3) has been recommended specifying the use of low-VOC coatings. In recognition of the presence of a potentially significant construction -term air quality impact, the following mitigation measures are recommended: Mitigation Measure No. 2. During project grading and construction, the following additional actions will be implementedby the Applicant: (1) three times daily watering of all exposed surfaces; (2) three times daily watering of unpaved roads; (3) limit off-road trucks to no more than 15 mph; (4) application of soil stabilizers to inactive areas; (5) replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as feasible; and (6) cover (apply stabilizer) to all stockpiles. Mitigation Measure No. 3. All exterior paints utilized in the initial construction of on-site dwelling units shall conform to the following specifications: (1) all primers shall contain less than 0.85 pound per gallon (102 grams/liter) of volatile organic compounds (VOC); and (2) all top coats shall contain less than 0.07 pound per gallon (8 grams/liter) of VOC. The Applicant shall comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations regarding particulate emissions. As mitigated, the significant air quality impact associated with the proposed project can be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (c) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standards (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less than Significant Impact. The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is classified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) as an extreme non -attainment 12/ Op. Cit., Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California, p. 6. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-8 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 area for ozone (1 -hour) and a non -attainment area for ozone (8 -hour), a serious non - attainment area for carbon monoxide (CO), and a non -attainment area for oxides of nitrogen (NOx), particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM,o), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM25). The SCAB is classified by the State as non -attainment for ozone (1 -hour), PM25, and non -attainment -transitional for PM1o. Based on the analysis presented in the project's air quality assessment, none of these pollutants are projected to occur at levels above the recommended SCAQMD threshold standards. In accordance with SCAQMD methodology, any project that results in criteria air emissions that are below or that can be mitigated to a level below the daily threshold of significance criteria is not considered to be significant on a cumulative basis. (d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial air pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant Impact. .An impact is potentially significant if emission levels exceed the State or federal ambient air quality standards and expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Because carbon monoxide (CO) is produced in greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the atmosphere, adherence to ambient air quality standards is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO "hot spot" concentrations. As indicated in "Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California" (BlodgettiBaylosis Associates, Inc., December 11, 2003), "a number of sensitive receptors. are located near the project site. These receptors will not be exposed to significant carbon monoxide (CO) emissions generated from the future development. No -carbon monoxide (CO) hot -spot will be generated by future project traffic."13 (e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less than Significant Impact. Odors are one of the most obvious forms of air pollution to the general public. Odors can present significant problems for both the source and the surrounding community. Although offensive odors seldom cause physical harm, they can cause agitation, anger, and concern to the general public. The only potential odors associated with the project are from the application of asphalt .and paint during the construction period and from diesel emission generated by construction vehicles and equipment. Those odors, if perceptible beyond the project boundaries, are common in the environment, would be of limited duration, and would not be projected to persist beyond the construction period. Any odor impacts would, therefore, not be considered significant. 4.4.4 Biological Resources (a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)? 73/ Op. Cit., Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California, p. 6. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-9 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004 submission, the Applicant submitted and the City reviewed two previous biological studies for the proposed project. As indicated in "Biological Assessment — Jewel Ridge Estates Project, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc., November 2002), the project site "does not contain the habitat characteristic of the five sensitive plant species" and the site "contains no habitat that would support any species listed as either threatened or endangered by the State and Federal resource agencies .04 The 2002 report does, however, acknowledge that the site "contains habitat that may support the list of Species of Special Concern" and "11.5 acres of mixed community of California walnut woodland and coast live oak woodland" and "[a]ny impacts to these resources must be considered significant: r16 As indicated in Table 3-1 (California Natural Diversity Data Base Records Search — Yorba Linda Quadrangle), three sensitive plant communities have been identified within the area comprising the USGS 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle (i.e., southern coast live oak riparian forest, southern willow scrub, and California walnut woodland). As further indicated in the 2004 biological report, "[t]]wo sensitive species were. observed on the property during the spring survey: the walnutloak woodland (a CDFG highest priority community) and California black walnut trees (Juglans californica var. califomica) (California Native Plant Society List 4)"'s Based on the declaration of the Applicant's biologist (i.e., "Any impacts to these resources must be considered significant"), in addition to compliance with the City's protected tree ordinance, additional mitigation is, therefore, required in response to the project -related impacts on "California walnut woodland and coast live oak woodlands." Although tree replacement requirements under the protected tree ordinance will serve to compensate for the lost of individual protected trees, the planting of replacement trees will not sufficiently compensate for the impacts on these plant communities and the habitats those communities support. In addition, since the biological assessment did not specifically addressed fuel modification requirements beyond the limits of proposed grading, as may be imposed by the LACFD in accordance with the VHFHSZ (Fire Zone 4) requirements, actual project -related impacts on biological resources could potentially exceed those identified by the project's biologist and arborist. In contrast, although the protected tree survey did consider potential impacts beyond the proposed grading limits (e.g., "A total of 59 trees within the 50 foot buffer zone are in close proximity to the grading and will be affected""), the precise nature of any fuel modification requirements have not yet been established by the LACFD and could potentially exceed the spatial limits of that survey (i.e., extend beyond the 50 -foot buffer). In contrast, based on the Applicant's own declarations, as contained in the "Oak Tree Permit Application," dated November 6, 2002, in response to the inquiry: "How many oak trees will be cut, removed, relocated or damaged," the Applicant declares "269 of which only 72 are considered healthy enough for preservation." 74/ Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc., Biological Assessment — Jewel Ridge Estates Project, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, November 2002, p. 11. 15/ Ibid.. 16/ Marc Blain, Results of Spring Habitat Assessment Survey on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site (Tentative Tract 54081), in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, April 13, 2004, p. 2. '7/ Don Case Arborist, Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081, February 5, 2004, p. 1. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-10 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Since the protected tree survey did not consider the currently proposed grading plan, the information contained in that survey is not necessarily indicative of the potential impacts associated with the current project. In assessing the 2003-2004 development application, based on a City -sponsored assessment of the Applicant's protected tree survey, the City's independent consultant concluded: (1) the trees located in the south- central portion of the site need to be remapped; (Z) areas of the map where tagged tree numbers appear twice should be investigated (this will allow for the correct mapping location of the respective tree, or determine if the same tag was used twice); (3) an additional site visit should be conducted to determine the actual number of California black walnut trees; and (4) health ratings of the trees should be changed from those mentioned in the Applicant's protected tree report to those recorded by the City s consultant.18 As specified in Section 22.38.130 (Tree Replacement/Relocation Standards) in the Municipal Code: "Residential parcels greater than 20,000 square feet and commercial and industrial properties shall be planted at a minimum of 3:1 ratio." In contrast, the Applicant is currently proposing replacement "on a 2:1 basis n19 As specified in Section 22.38.130(b) of the Municipal Code, the Director and/or the Planning Commission is authorized to grant an "exception" (or require additional replacement trees) to the City's 3:1 replacement standard. In recognition of the presence of a potentially significant direct biological resource impact, the following mitigation measures are recommended: Mitigation Measure No. 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a revised protected tree survey based on the approved site plan, the revised grading plan prepared in response to that site plan and following review by the City Engineer, and incorporating each of the City's comments formulated in response to the "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar - Protected' Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004). The revised protected tree survey shall include an exhibit depicting the on-site and off-site location of all protected trees on the project site (whether located in the City or within adjacent County areas) located within the limits of proposed grading, within the limits of the fuel modification zone as outlined in the Applicant's "fuel modification plan," and any additional area(s) beyond those limits identified by the arborist, the City Engineer, and the Los Angeles County Fire Department as comprising an area within which direct or indirect impacts to protected trees could reasonably be anticipated. Mitigation Measure No.S. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a "California walnut woodland and coast live oak woodlands" mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City of Diamond Bar designed to mitigate not only the loss of individual protected trees but also the loss or diminishment of the existing southern coast live oak and California walnut woodland habitat located on and adjacent to the project site. In addition to satisfying the minimum replacement ratio set forth in Section 22.38.130 (Tree Replacement/ Relocation Standards) of 1e/ Pack Southwest Biological Consultants, Third Party Tree Inventory Review of the Jewel Ridge Estates Property, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, November 3, 2003, p. 5. 79/ Op. Cit., Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081, p. 5. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-11 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 the Municipal Code, the mitigation plan shall require and specify the selective on- site or off-site planting of replacement trees and typically associated vegetation in a characteristic woodland assemblage. The mitigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect possessing recent experience in the design and implementation of habitat mitigation plans in County areas. The resulting aggregation of trees and associated vegetation shall seek to establish a.natural, viable plant community in the area of that replacement, as opposed to the indiscriminant distribution of replacement trees at various locations throughout the project area. The mitigation plan shall further specify the Applicant's proposed schedule for the effectuation of that plan, describe the performance expectations for plant survival, present an outline for a minimum five-year monitoring plan that will be initiated and funded by the Applicant, and describe the manner in which those monitoring activities will be funded and performance will be verified. The City shall independently review the proposed mitigation plan and shall identify those changes, if any, that are required to that plan based on the findings of that independent review. The Applicant shall reimburse the City for any costs incurred in conducting that review and shall amend the plan based on the City's directives. Mitigation Measure No. 6. If on-site grading activities have not commenced prior to April 3, 2007 (the date of the most recent biological field survey), in accordance with the provisions of an approved grading plan, the Applicant shall withhold commencement of any and all grading operations, excluding emergency activities, pending the submission and acceptance by the City of a new biological survey conducted to reassess the presence or absence of protected biological resources on and adjacent to the site. As indicated in the 2004 biological resource assessment: "The habitat on the project site does have potential to support a variety of unlisted sensitive species such as the northern red -diamond rattlesnake (Crotalls Tuber Tuber), Cooper's hawk (Accipier cooperit), and. the northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax).i20 Although not located on the project site, a number of the species listed in Table 3-1 (California Natural Diversity Data Base Record Search — Yorba Linda Quadrangle) could exist in the general project area (e.g., Tonner Canyon). As indicated by the CDFG, with regards to the coastal horned lizard, the negative effects of human disturbance are not limited to the immediate vicinity of land disturbance or human habitation, sometimes effects are manifest at considerable distances (e.g., domestic cats have been observed to eliminate horned lizards within a several square kilometer area from a cat's home base).21 Although biological surveys have not been conducted by the Applicant beyond the boundaries of the project site and no such surveys have. been submitted for the City s consideration, indirect impacts on biological resources can be anticipated beyond the project boundaries. Based, in part, on the County's proposed expansion of an existing SEA (SEA 15: Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills) and the establishment of a new SEA south of but not inclusive of the project site (Puente Hills SEA), as now included in the on-going 20/ Marc Blain, Results of Spring Habitat Assessment Survey on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site (Tentative Tract 54081), in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, April 13, 2004, p.1. 21/ California Department of Fish and Game, Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California, California Homed Lizard, 1994. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-12 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 planning activities comprising the County General Plan update, it is evident that a rich biological diversity exists in nearby County unincorporated areas. Causal factors generated by human activities may be collectively termed "harassment" Harassment is defined as those activities of man and his associated domestic animals that increase the physiological costs of survival or decrease the probability of successful reproduction in wildlife populations. The most common forms of harassment that accompany development include increased human presence, construction and background noise, light intrusion, the introduction of non-native species (e.g., pets and ornamental plants), and the introduction of environmental contaminants. The effects of harassment manifest primarily on wildlife and predominately occur through habitat degradation. Although the impacts of harassment are not as complete as total habitat removal, they can nonetheless be significant. In recognition of presence of a potentially significant indirect biological resource impact, the following mitigation measures are recommended: Mitigation Measure No. 7. All initial purchasers of real property within the tract map boundaries shall be notified, in writing through their respective residential purchase contract, that access to designated open space areas is prohibited except along approved and designated trails and via designated access points. Pedestrians and bicycles shall be permitted only on approved and designated trails. Mitigation Measure No. 8. Conditions, covenants, and restriction (CC&R) shall specify that the following activities and uses shall be expressly prohibited within designated open space areas: unauthorized entry; use of motorized vehicles; possession of firearms including air or gas propelled weapons, slings and sling- shots; collection or possession of native plants or wildlife, collecting wood, or engaging in activity to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, poison, capture or collect wildlife; smoking or the use of fire; unauthorized trail construction; and removal, defacement or damage to natural features. CC&Rs shall be enforceable and contain provisions sufficient to deter violations. Mitigation Measure No. 9. Landscape plans for all landscaped common, open space, and fuel modification zone areas shall incorporate native, drought - tolerant, non-invasive plant species. Exotic plant species listed by the California Exotic Plant Pest Council as noxious weeds shall be prohibited for use as landscaping material. Landscape plans shall include weed prevention and control measures including, but not limited to: (1) use of only certified weed -free hay, straw, and other organic mulches to control erosion; and (2) use only certified weed -free seed for the reclamation of disturbed areas. Based on the findings of a April 4, 2004 field survey, the Applicant's biologists (California Gnatcatcher 10[a] Permit No. TE001075-0) concluded that the "Jewel Ridge Estates project site has no potential to support the California gnatcatcher.x72 Additional correspondence, dated April 21, 2006, was submitted to the City by the same biologist, as countersigned by another qualified biologist, operating under contract to the '/ Marc Blain, Results of California Gnatcatcher Habitat Assessment on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site (Tentative Tract 54081), In the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, April 15, 2004. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study- Impact Analysis Page 4-13 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Applicant. Based on a subsequent site reconnaissance survey conducted on April 3, 2006, with regards to the 2002 biological assessment, the biologist noted that "the descriptions of the biotic resources in the [2002] report remain accurate to date. The biotic conditions are unchanged at the level of detail which they are described. Any potential differences in the conditions present at the time of the original survey work and the present are considered inconsequential. As a result, the conclusions regarding the potential or lack of potential for each special status species remain accurate.i23 Project -related and cumulative biological impacts could exceed those levels addressed herein if grading or construction staging activities were to extend beyond the confines of the assumed limits of grading. In order to reduce those potential impacts, the following Mitigation measure is recommended: Mitigation Measure No. 10. All construction and material staging activities and all equipment marshalling activities that need to occur in close proximity to the project site shall be confined to the property limits and shall not -include any on- site or off-site areas extending beyond the City authorized limits of project — specific grading. To the maximum extent feasible, all such activities shall occur at the greatest possible separation distance from any near -site sensitive receptors. As mitigated, the potentially significant direct and indirect biological resource impacts associated with the proposed project can be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any. riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS? Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. See Response No. 4.4.4(a) above. (c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? No Impact. No wetlands, marshes, vernal pools, or coastal areas exist on the project site. .In the absence of those on-site resources, no direct or indirect project -related impacts are anticipated on any waters of the United States. (d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less than Significant Impact. Since the project site is surrounded on three sides by existing residential development, although undeveloped areas located to the south of the project site likely serve a significant wildlife movement function, the project site does not itself play any substantial role in facilitating wildlife movement between existing open 23/ Correspondence from Ann M. Johnson, Principal, Biological Services and Marc Blain, Biological Resources Manager to Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge Estates LLC (Subject Review of Biological Resources on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site in the City of Diamond Bar, California), April 21, 2006. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-14 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 space areas. As such, the site's development would not substantially impede wildlife movement or adversely affect any migratory wildlife. (e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Less than Significant Impact. The project appears to generally comply with all applicable local policies and ordinances formulated to protect biological resources. (fl Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Less than Significant Impact. Neither the project site nor directly adjacent areas are located in or under consideration for inclusion into any.planned, proposed, or adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other local, regional of State habitat conservation planning area. South of the project site, on non-contiguous property, is an existing SEA (SEA 15: Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills). As part of the current planning activities now comprising the on-going comprehensive County General Plan update, that existing SEA may be expanded (Puente Hills SEA) to encompass a substantially larger area, extending northward and abutting the project site. No current or proposed City or County plans, however, contemplate the preservation of the project site or the inclusion of the subject property into the existing or proposed SEA boundaries. 4.4.5 Cultural Resources (a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines? No Impact. No significant historic, prehistoric, or paleontological resources and no evidence of human remains have been identified on or near the project site. (b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines? No impact. See Response No. 4.4.5(a) above. (c). Would the project, directly or indirectly, destroy a unique paleontological resource, site, or unique geologic feature? No Impact. See Response No. 4.4.5(a) above. (d) Would the project disturb human remains including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? No Impact. See also Response No. 4.4.5(a) above. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-15 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 4.4.6 Geology and Soils (a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: (i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (n) Strong seismic ground shaking? (iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (iv) Landslides? Less than Significant. As illustrated in Figure 3-6 (Official Map: Special Studies Zones — Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle), the project site is not located within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (APEFZA) special study area. However, as. indicated in Figure 3-3 (Official State Seismic Hazard Zone Map — Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle), portions of the project site contain the following "zones of required investigation": (1) liquefaction (i.e., areas where historical occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological, geotechnical .and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation, as defined in Section 2693[c] of the PRC, would be required); and (2) earthquake -induced landslides (i.e., areas where previous occurrence of landslide movement or local topographic, geological, geotechnical and subsurface water conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacement such that mitigation, as defined in Section 2693[c] of the PRC, would be required). In recognition of those potential hazards and pursuant to City requirements, a site- specific geotechnical investigation was conducted by the Applicant and independently reviewed by the City. That geotechnical investigation includes the following studies: (1) "Interim Engineering Geologic Review, Proposed Residential Tract, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Calif., Project No. 3375" (Ray A. Eastman, February 5, 2003); (2) "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation — Proposed Residential Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, California, APN #8714028003" (GeoEnviron Engineering Consultants, Inc., February 15, 2.003); (3) "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated September 17, 2004 by Leighton and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoils Consultants, Inc., September 26, 2005); and (4) "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated January 10, 2006 by Leighton and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoils Consultants, Inc., February 3, 2006). With regards to the project's potential geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils impacts, a number of recommended actions are presented in the above referenced studies and constitute Applicant -nominated environmental compliance activities that, as a result of their inclusion in Applicant -submitted studies, are included as part of the project description. Because of the inclusion of those actions therein, each of those Applicant - nominated actions do not constitute mitigation measures under CEQA. Although the identified impact does not elevate to a level of significance, in order to ensure the inclusion of the recommendations presented in the project's geotechnical investigation(s)i the Lead Agency has formulated a mitigation measure requiring that all July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 416 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 the recommendations presented by the project's engineering geologist and geotechnical engineer be incorporated into the project's subsequent design and development. Mitigation Measure No. 11. The project design and development shall incorporate and the Applicant shall include, conduct, perform, and undertake all design and development recommendations contained in the project's geotechnical investigation(s), including, but not necessarily limited to, those contained in GeoEnviron Engineering Consultants Inc.'s "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation — Proposed Residential Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive; Diamond Bar, California, APN #8714028003" (February 15, 2003), GeoSoils Consultants, Inc.'s "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated September 17, 2004 by Leighton and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (September 26, 2005), and in any subsequent design -level investigation(s) that may be conducted for the proposed project, except where otherwise expressly authorized by the City Engineer. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measure, in combination with the applicable Municipal Code and UBC requirements and appropriate engineering practices will ensure that this impact remains at a less -than -significant level. (b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact. The County and municipalities within the County implement a municipal storm water program to reduce storm water and urban runoff pollutant under the requirements of RWQCB Order No. 01-182 (NPDES No. CAS004001). In compliance with the permit, the City, as a Co -Permittee, has implemented a storm water quality management program (SQMP) that requires that a "Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan" (SUSMP) be prepared that includes appropriate BMPs and guidelines to reduce pollutants in storm water to the maximum extent practicable (MEP). As specified under that permit, the project's SUSMP shall contain a list of minimum required BMPs. In addition, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant must obtain a general construction activity storm water permit that shall include a separate "Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan" (SWPPP) with details of BMPs. The project's compliance with applicable permit requirements will ensure that storm water discharge, including potential water -borne soil erosion, will not adversely impact receiving water quality. (c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on-site or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.6(a) above. (d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risk to life or property? City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-17 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Less than Significant Impact. Expansive soils are characterized by their ability to undergo significant volume change (shrink or swell) due to variations in moisture content. Changes in soil moisture content can result from rainfall, landscape irrigation, utility leakage, roof drainage, perched groundwater, drought, or other factors and may cause unacceptable settlement or heave of structures, concrete slabs supported -on - grade, or pavements supported over these materials. Expansive soils possess a shrink -swell characteristic. Shrink -swell is the cyclic change in volume (expansion and contraction) that occurs in fine-grained clay sediments from the process of wetting and drying. Structural damage may occur over a long period of time, usually the result of inadequate soil and foundation engineering or the placement of structures directly on expansive soils. Expansive soils may, among other things, cause foundations and flatwork to heave and become damaged. As indicated in the Applicant's engineering geology report: "Major portions of the geologic units are anticipated to be expansive and precautions are required relative thereto."24 Potential expansive soil impacts can be effectively mitigated through compliance with Municipal Code and UBC requirements, appropriate engineering practices, and implementation of specified design and development recommendations. With regards to the project's potential geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils impacts, a number of recommended actions are presented in Section 2.4 (Applicant -Nominated Environmental Compliance Activities) and constitute Applicant -nominated environmental compliance activities that are included as part of the project description. In addition, a mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure No. 11) has been formulated requiring.that all the recommendations presented in the project's geotechnical investigation be incorporated into the project's design and development. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measure,. in combination with the applicable Municipal Code and UBC requirements and appropriate engineering practices will reduce this potential impact to a less -than -significant level. (e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. No aspect of the project would involve the use of septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems. 4.4.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials (a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less than Significant Impact. Nearly.all land materials and generate some quantity of proposed project, those materials and tho uses consume some quantity of hazardous hazardous wastes. With regards to the ;e wastes will likely be limited to paints, cleaners, solvents, and pesticides, as typically associated with residential uses. 24t Op. Cit., Interim Engineering Geologic Review, Proposed Residential Tract, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Calif., Project No. 3375, p. 4. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-18 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Additionally, limited quantities of pathogens may be present in those municipal solid wastes (MSW) generated by the project, in the form of disposable diapers, sanitary napkins, pet feces, and other similar wastes. The quantities of any such materials, either located or consumed on the project site, would be comparable to other similarly sized residential uses located throughout the community. As such, no inordinate hazards would be associated with the implementation and operation of the proposed project. (b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less than Significant Impact. No aspect of the proposed project has the potential to result in the accidental release of substantial quantities of hazardous materials. Based on the information contained in a preliminary title report, as submitted by the Applicant,' no evidence of underground pipelines, traversing the project site, has been identified. Notwithstanding the information contained therein, the Applicant is still required to comply with Sections 4216.2(a) and 4216.9(a) the CGC. Compliance with those requirements, which is mandatory for all contractors, will ensure that any grading activities as may be required for the project's development, operation, and on-going maintenance fully considers and avoids potential impacts upon any "subsurface installation" (i.e., any underground pipeline, conduit, duct, wire, or other structure, except non -pressurized sewer lines, non -pressurized storm drains, or other non -pressurized drain lines) that may exist within the area of proposed ground disturbance. (c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. The project site is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school and no hazardous emissions are associated with the proposed project. (d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code and create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment? Less than Significant Impact. Groundcover (in the form of non-native grasses) covered most of the site, thus obscuring visibility. In response, the City requested and the Applicant submit a Phase I environmental site assessment conducted for the purpose of assessing the presence or absence of the range of contaminants within the scope of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLA), petroleum products, and other environmental hazards on the project site at levels that may require further investigation and/or remediation (e.g. actionable levels). As indicated in "Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Property at Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (Geo Environ, May 25/ Chicago Title Company, Preliminary Report, Order No. 11045031-X49, February 7, 2001. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 initial Study - impact Analysis Page 4-19 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 10, 2004), "only a low potential is considered to exist for the soil and/or groundwater of the subject property to have been impacted with hazardous substances as a result of past or current subject property usage" and "no further assessment of the subject property is considered necessary at this time." No mitigation measures or other recommended actions were identified therein and no mitigation measures are recommended or required by the Lead Agency. (e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The project site is neither located within an airport land use planning area nor within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. (f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the area? No Impact. The project site is not located in close proximity to any private airstrip. (g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. The project site has neither been included in an emergency response plan nor designated a part of any emergency response planning area. As such, project implementation will not physically interfere with any emergency evacuation plan. (h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. As illustrated in Figure 3-11 (Natural Hazard Disclosure Map for a Portion of Los Angeles County), the project site is identified as being located within a "wildland area that may contain substantial forest fire risks and hazards" and directly adjacent to "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone." One of the key provisions of the "Los Angeles County Fire Code" (Fire Code)?' codified in Title 32 of the County Code, relative to Fire Zone 4 standards, is contained in Section 1117.2.1 therein. In accordance therewith, a "fuel modification plan" is required for development activities proposed within a VHFHSZ. As more thoroughly described therein: "A fuel modification plan, a landscape plan and an irrigation plan approved by a registered landscape architect shall be submitted with any subdivision of land or prior to any new construction, remodeling, modification or reconstruction of a structure where such remodeling, modification or .reconstruction increases the square footage of the existing structure by 50% or more within any 12 month period and where the structure or 26/ Op. Cit., Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, Property at Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, pp. 3 and 4. 27/ As indicated in Section 16.00.010 (Adopted) in Title 16 (Fire Safety) of the Municipal Code: "Except as hereinafter provided in this title, Title 32, Fire Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on July 1, 1999, which constitutes an amended version of the California Fire Code, 1998 Edition (Part 9 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), including Appendix I -C and excluding all other appendices, is hereby adopted by reference and shall constitute and may be cited as the fire code of the City of Diamond Bar." July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-20 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54061 subdivision is located within areas designated as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone or Fire Zone 4 in the County Building Code. Every fuel modification plan, landscape plan and irrigation plan shall also be reviewed and approved by the forestry division of the fire department for reasonable fire safety (Ord. 95-0063 § 70 (part), 1995)." Since the Fire Code specifies the Applicant's obligation to prepare and submit a "fuel modification plan, a landscape plan and an irrigation plan approved by a registered landscape architect," those requirements are not again repeated as mitigation measures herein. The precise nature of those fuel modification, landscape, and irrigation plans, however, could result in additional impacts to on-site and near -site biological resources, including protected trees. In recognition of those requirements, the City has formulated a recommended mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure No. 2) designed to ensure consistency between the project's biological resource compliance requirements and the public safety considerations imposed by the LACFD. The LACFD has submitted correspondence to the City in response to the LACFD's review of the proposed tentative tract map. The following "conditions of approval for subdivision" were identified therein: (1) access shall comply with Section 902 of the Fire Code, which requires all weather access; all weather access may require paving; (2) fire department access shall be extended to within 150 feet distance of any exterior portion of all structures; (3) where driveways extend further than 300 feet and are of single access design, turnarounds suitable for fire protection equipment use shall be provided and shown on the final map; turnarounds shall be designed, constructed, and maintained to insure there integrity for fire department use; where topography dictates, turnarounds shall be provided for driveways that extend over 150" feet in length; (4) private driveways shall be indicated on the final map as "private driveway and firelane" with the widths clearly depicted and shall be maintained in accordance with the Fire Code; all required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested, and accepted prior to construction; (5) vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction to all required fire hydrants; all required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested, and accepted prior to construction; (6) this property is located within the area described by the LACFD as "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone" (formally Fire Zone 4); a "fuel modification plan" shall be submitted and approved prior to final map clearance; and (7) provide the LACFD or the City approved street signs and building access numbers prior to occupancy.' In addition; the LACFD has identified the following "water system requirements" for the proposed project: (1) provide water mains, fire hydrants, and fire flows as required by the LACFD for all land shown on map which shall be recorded; (2) the required fire flow for public fire hydrants at this location is 1,250 gallons per minute (gpm) at 20 pounds per square inch (psi) for two hours, over and above maximum daily domestic demand; one hydrant may be used to achieve the required fire flow; (3) fire hydrant requirements are as follows (a) install 3 public fire hydrants and (b) upgrade/verify 1 existing public fire hydrant; (4) all hydrants shall measure 6"x4"x2%2" brass or bronze, conforming to current AWWA standard C.503 or approved equal; all on-site fire hydrants shall be installed a minimum 25 feet from a structure or protected by a 2 -hour rated firewall; (5) all required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested, and accepted or bonded for prior to final map approval; vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout 28/ Correspondence (Conditions of Approval for Subdivision — Incorporated) from Claudia Soiza, Land Development Unit, Fin; Prevention Division, Los Angeles County Fire Department, dated December 9, 2003. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-21 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 construction; and (6) upgrade not necessary, if existing hydrant(s) meet(s) fire flow requirements. 29 In recognition of the site's designation, as established by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and notwithstanding the Applicant's obligations under the provisions of the Fire Code, the following mitigation measures are recommended in response to the project's potentially significant impacts: Mitigation Measure No. 12. Prior to the commencement of any on-site grading, grubbing, and construction activities, the Applicant will prepare and jointly submit to the City and to the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) a construction fire prevention and control plan outlining -those activities to be undertaken by the Applicant and/or others during the construction period to ensure the provision of adequate continuing access to and through the project site and outlining plans for fire safety and suppression. The construction fire prevention and control plan shall address all phases of project construction. The plan shall not be deemed adequate and no on-site grading, grubbing, and construction activities can commence until the plan is jointly accepted by the LACFD and by the City. Mitigation Measure No. 13. Approval of the final tract map shall only occur after approval by the LACFD and following the Applicant' demonstrated compliance with all applicable conditions of approval for subdivision, water system requirements, and such other conditions and recommendations that may be identified by the LACFD for the proposed project. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, in combination with the applicable Municipal Code and UBC requirements and appropriate engineering practices, will reduce this potential impact to a less -than -significant level. 4.4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality (a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the jurisdiction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (LARWQCB) and is subject to the water quality standards contained in the "Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Region" (LARWQCB, June 13, 1994) (Basin Plan). In addition, the project, as a "non - point" discharge source, is subject to compliance with the provisions and standards for municipal storm water and urban runoff discharges specified in the Permittee's NPDES permit (NPDES No. CAS004001). Since the project involves more than ten dwelling units, the Applicant is required to prepare a SUSMP and identify applicable BMPs to control storm water pollution from sediments, erosion, and construction materials leaving the construction site. Compliance with those requirements and standards will ensure that the project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. 29/ Correspondence (Water System Requirements — Incorporated) from Claudia Soiza, Land Development Unit, Fire Prevention Division, Los Angeles County Fire Department, dated December 9, 2003. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-22 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 (b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that then: would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting wells would drop to a level which would not support existing or planned land uses for which permits have been granted)? Less than Significant Impact. Grading activities are not projected to occur at depths likely to encounter subsurface groundwater. As such, groundwater will not be impacted by direct interference. To the extend that regionwide groundwater resources are utilized to provide potable water for human consumption, the introduction of new housing units will serve to incrementally increase existing regional demands for those resources. Based on the project size and the number of individuals now residing within the regional, the project's impacts on those resources would be de minimus. (c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site. or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on the site or off the site? Less than Significant Impact. As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004 submittal, the Applicant submitted and the City reviewed a hydrology study for the project site. As indicated in W.T.T. 54081 Existing and Proposed Hydrology" (Gary M. Gantney, November 4, 2002), total storm water drainage discharged from the project site will increase from 41.2 cubic feet per second (cfs) under pre -project conditions to 46.8 ds following project implementation. Storm waters discharged from the project will be conveyed, via on-site storm water conduits, to the abutting Brea Canyon Channel. Based on the information presented in the project's hydrologic study, the City Engineer conditionally concluded that "post development hydrology is adequately stated."30 Although the identified impact does not elevate to a level of significance, in order to ensure the inclusion of the City's recommendations, the Lead Agency has formulated a mitigation measure requiring the City's and/or the County's approval of all project -related drainage improvements. Mitigation Measure No. 14. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the City Engineer shalt approve a revised project -specific hydrologic study consistent with the approved tentative map. All drainage structures and associated facilities and improvements shall be subject to final design and engineering review and approval by the City Engineer and, if subject to County jurisdiction, by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measure, in combination with applicable City and County requirements and appropriate engineering practices, will ensure that this impact remains at a less -than -significant level. 30/ Memorandum (Subject Tentative Tract Map 54081 — Tentative Map Hydrology — Second Review— P.O. 13026 from Don Winslow to John Ilasin, November 3, 2003. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-23 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 (d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on the site or off the site? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.8(c) above. (e) Would the project create or contribute to runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.8(c) above. (0 Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.6(a) above. (g) Would the project place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard. delineation map? No Impact.. As illustrated in Figure 3-9 (Portion of FEMA FIRM No. 06504309806), the project site is included in FEMA's FIRM No. 06504300980B. As depicted therein, the project site is located in "Zone U and is not located within an area subject to either 100 - year or 500 -year flood inundation. (h) Would the project place within a 100 year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flow? No Impact. See Response No. 4.4.6(8) above. (i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding including flooding as a result of failure of a levee or dam? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.6(8) above. Q) Would the project be subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Less than Significant Impact. A seiche is the sloshing of a closed body of water (e.g., reservoir, swimming pool) from earthquake shaking. The project site is neither located adjacent to an existing waterbody nor includes the development of a substantial water element that would have the potential to spill a substantial quantity of water during an earthquake event. Since the project site is not located in a coastal setting, the potential hazards associated with a seismic sea wave (tsunami) are considered to be minimal. The Applicant's geotechnical report concludes that the "proposed development will be safe from landslides, settlement and slippage when grading has been completed in accordance with the recommendations of this report. "31 Those recommended actions 31l Op. Cit., Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation — Proposed Residential Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, California, APN #8714028003, p. 11. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-24 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 are presented in Section 2.4 (Applicant -Nominated Environmental Compliance Activities) and constitute Applicant -nominated environmental compliance activities that are included as part of the project description. As such, those recommended actions are not repeated as mitigation measures herein. Hillside areas not.routinely susceptible to mudflow hazards, however, may be subject to debris flows following a wildfire event and winter rains. Compliance with Fire Code requirements, in combination with those mitigation measures identified herein, will reduce potential fire risks to a less -than -significant level. In the event of a wildland fire, the HOA, the LACFD, the City, and other emergency planning agencies would assess debris flow risks and take appropriate actions to protect lives and property. 4.4.9 Land Use and Planning (a) Would the project physically divide an established community? Less than Significant Impact. Since the project site is designated for residential use in the 1995 General Plan ("RL Low Density Residential [Max. 3 DU/Acre]") and City Zoning Map ('R-1 10,000") and because the project site is surrounded on three sites by existing single-family residential uses, the subject property could be appropriately categorized as an "infill" site. Additionally, no authorized public use of the property is now provided. The site's development will not, therefore, foreclose an authorized public use. The project design. includes a "public access easement," inclusive of a "20' wide easement for possible future fire," extending southward from the proposed southern cul- de-sac to the adjoining property to the south. That retained easement will allow for emergency access and could facilitate emergency response activities benefiting both the proposed project and other abutting properties. The proposed land uses represents an extension of development patterns already present in the general project area. As such, the construction of new market -rate housing will likely serve to complement and enhance the character of the existing neighborhood. (b) Would the project conflict with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less than Significant Impact. As indicated in the 1992 General Plan FOR and 1995 Addendum; general plan policies constitute program-levelmitigation measures that, at the City's discretion, could be either applied at the project level or modified to become project conditions. The 1995 General Plan and the Municipal Code contain a broad diversity of plans, policies, and regulations governing development activities within the community. Not all plans, policies, and regulations are applicable to all projects and, based on the diversity of those policies, there likely exist certain statements that could be construed as either favoring or opposing any development activity within the City. Presented in Table 4-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures) are those 1995 General Plan policies that appear most applicable to the proposed project. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-25 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 As part of the City's deliberations regarding the proposed project, the Planning Commission and City Council must determine whether the proposed project complies with the policies presented in the 1995 General Plan and make appropriate findings. If the project's decisionmakers independently determine that the proposed project does not conform to those policies, the City could not then approve the project as submitted. If the project were not to be approved, then no physical changes would occur to the project site and no land use impacts would manifest therefrom. (c) Would the project conflict with an applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.4(f). 4.4.10 Mineral Resources (a) Would the project result in loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. The site does not contain known mineral resources that would be of substantial value to the locale, to the region., or to the residents of the State. (b) Would the project result in foss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. See Response No. 4.4.10(a). 4.4.11 Noise (a) Would the project result in expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less than Significant Impact. The following information is extracted from the "Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California" (Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., December 11, 2003),32 conducted for the purpose of assessing project - related impacts on the existing noise environment. With regards to construction -term impacts, the acoustical analysis concluded: "Adherence to City Code requirements will ensure that any potential noise levels are less than significant.'aa The following potential construction -related mitigation measures were identified in the above referenced acoustical analysis: (1) the grading and building contractor must adhere to the requirements of the City of Diamond Bar Noise Control Ordinance; (2) construction staging areas must be located away from the existing residences located to the north along Crooked Creek Drive; and (3) the residential units must employ double - paned windows, insulation, and other construction techniques to ensure that interibr 321 As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004, a number of studies were conducted both by the Lead Agency and by the Applicant for a more intensive residential use of the project site. Although the current development application contains a lesser number of residential units, the Lead Agency has not elected to perform a revised acoustical analysis since the previous study allows for a worst-case assessment of the project's potential noise -related impacts. 33/ Op. Cit., Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California, p. 11. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-26 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 noise levels are reduced to 40 dBA (CNEL) 34. Since some of those measures merely cite preexisting obligations and in the absence of any significant construction -related acoustical impact, those actions have not been expressly brought forward as mitigation measures herein. Relative to operational impacts, field measures identified a maximum on-site ambient noise level of 62.5 dBA. Based on the site's proximity to the SR -57 Freeway, that noise is likely attributable to traffic traveling along that roadway. Since the 1995 General Plan (Noise Element) stipulates that the exterior noise level at residential locations should not exceed 65 CNEL, the ambient noise environment is potentially conducive to a residential land use. The 1995 General Plan further stipulates that interior noise levels at residential locations should not exceed 45 CNEL. Since typical construction practices will result in a 20- decible35 to 27-decible36 reduction in interior noise levels, as compared to the exterior noise environment with the windows closed, no additional architectural features are required to allow for the attainment of that standard. Use of double -pane windows and insulation are already preexisting obligations under the provisions of California's energy (Title 24) standards. (b) Would the project result in expose persons to or generate excessive ground -borne vibration or ground -borne noise levels? Less than Significant Impact. Vibratory compactors or rollers, pile drivers, and use of explosives have the potential to generate perceptible ground vibration. It is noted that the use of either explosives or pile drivers is not planned, required, nor anticipated during project construction. As indicated in the Applicant's engineering geology report, "the footing excavations and detailed work areas may require heavy ripping and jackhammer work due to zones of hard rock and boulders."37 As a result, during construction, some use of equipment capable of generated ground -borne vibration is anticipated. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) notes: "With the exception of a few instances involving pavement breaking, pile driving, all Caltrans construction vibration measurements have been below the 5 mm/s (0.2 in/sec) architectural damage risk level for continuous vibration. ..Other construction activities and equipment, such as D-8 and D-9 Caterpillars, earthmovers and haul trucks have never exceeded 2.5 mm/s (0.10 in/sec) or one half of the architectural damage risk level, at 3 m (10 ft.) ... (Tjhe probability of exceeding architectural damage risk levels for continuous vibration from construction and trains is very low and from freeway traffic .practically non-existent. However, if vibration concerns involve pavement breaking, extensive pile driving, or 34/ Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California, December 11, 2003, p. 12. 35/ United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Noise Guidebook, March 1985. m/ United States Environmental Protection Agency, Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety (Technical Report 550/9-74-004), 1974. 37/ Op. Cit., Interim Engineering Geologic Review, Proposed Residential Tract, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Calif., Project No. 3375, p. 4. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact. Analysis Page 4-27 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 trains, 7.5 m (25 ft) or less from normal residences, buildings, or unreinforced structures, damage is a real possibility." 3B Caltrans further indicates that annoyance "is highly subjective, and does not take into consideration elderly, retired, ill, and other individuals that may stay home more often than the 'average' person. Nor does it account for people involved in vibration sensitive hobbies or activities, and people that like to relax in quiet surroundings without noticing vibrations. The threshold of perception, or roughly 0.25 mm/s (0.01 in/sec) may be considered annoying by those people. Low level vibrations may also cause secondary vibrations and audible effects such as a slight rattling of doors, windows and dishes, resulting in additional annoyance. Annoying low frequency airborne noise can sometimes accompany earth-bome vibrations.i39 Jackhammering would have substantially less potential to contribute to ground -borne vibrations than pavement breaking or pile driving. Although potentially annoying, Vibratory impacts associated with the use of jackhammers is, therefore, assumed to be less than significant and not mitigation is required or recommended. (c) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.11(a) above. (d) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.11(a) above. (e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The project is located in excess of two miles from any public airport or public use airport. (t) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The project is not located within close proximity of a private airstrip. 4.4.12 Population and Housing (a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 38/ California Department of Transportation, Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations, Technical Advisory,,Vibration (TAVO-2-01-R9601), February 20, 2002, pp. 15 and 18. l Ibid., p. 18. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-28 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Less than Significant Impact. Proposed is a 16 -unit residential subdivision. As indicated in the 1992 General Plan MEA, the average household size in the City is 3.49 individuals. Based on that per household rate, an additional 56 individuals would occupy the project site. In 2000, the United States Census reported a City population of 56,287 individuals. The project's contribution to the City s population is, therefore, de minimus. (b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact No existing housing units will be displaced as a result of the proposed project. (c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. See Response 4.4.12(b) above. 4.4.13 Public Services Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services. (a) Fire protection? Less than Significant Impact. As indicated in Response No. 4.5.7(h) herein, the LACFD has reviewed the previous, higher density development application and submitted comments to the City. Those comments include a specific set of LACFD-recommended conditions. In addition, the City has formulated a recommended mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure No. 13) that would require both evidence of compliance with those conditions and additional project review by the LACFD. The project is also subject to the provisions of the Fire Code (e.g., fuel modification zone). As such, impacts on the LACFD, its resources, and its facilities would be less than significant. (b) Police protection? Less than Significant Impact. During construction, a minor demand for additional police services may occur during the project's construction phase. Such services include, but may not be limited to, consultation during plan check, routine surveillance of the construction site by regular patrol units, potential investigations of theft of or vandalism to construction equipment and materials, and enforcement of local speed limits near the construction site. In addition, if construction activities result in the discharge of dirt or other debris along local roadways, haul drivers can be cited under the provisions of the California Vehicle Code. Provision of those police services would neither require construction of any new police department facilities nor necessitate the physical alteration of any existing Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department (LACFD) facilities. No substantial adverse short-term City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-29 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 impacts to police protection services or facilities would occur during project's construction. Once operational, the proposed project will result in an incremental increase in the City's population. New residential projects incrementally contribute to existing demands on LACSD resources. However, there presently exists no direct mechanism to equate crime propensity to local land use decisions. The LACSD has not established. a functional mechanism for the County to collect LACSD impact fees for the impacts generated by new residential development. Funding for LACSD personnel, equipment, and facilities is typically derived through ad valorum taxation and based on yearly allocations by the County Board of Supervisor that occur through the County's annual budget process. Increased property valuation provides a mechanism whereby the County, at its discretion, has the ability to augment existing LACSD resources to accommodate reasonably anticipated project -related County and local demands. Although the project's traffic study acknowledge that the "additional single family homes added to Crooked Creek Drive probably will result in more occurrences of speeding ,,41 routine law enforcement activities can serve as a deterrent to speeding. As such, since the project does not create an unsafe travel environment, the resulting impacts would not be deemed significant. (c) Schools? Less than Significant Impact. As indicated in the WVUSD's "Justification Report for the Walnut Valley Unified School District" the WVUSD has determined that, on average, each new single-family dwelling unit constructed within the district's boundaries will generate 0.720 new students, including 0.253 grade kindergarten (K) through 6 students, 0.192 grade 7-9 students, and 0.275 grade 9-12 students. Based on those student generation rates, the proposed 16 -unit single-family housing project will likely add around 11.5 new students to WVUSD schools, including about 4.1 grade K-6 students, about 3.1 grade 7-9 students, and about 4.4 grade 9-12 students. Based on projected areawide growth, the fee justification study concludes: "It is projected that for residential development, the District will need $15,022,927 in 2004 dollars to finance projected future needs for K-12 school facilities. These cost projections are based on the current residential construction schedule, current pupil per dwelling unit yield ratios and SFP [School Facilities Program] facilities construction standards. Residential developer fee revenues are projected to be $5,208,000 for the District, leaving a shortfall.of $9,814,927 for financing future needs for the District."41 Although Applicant contributions will not fully offset the project's potential impacts on local school facilities, the payment of school impact fees constitutes full mitigation for the impacts of residential development on affected school districts (Section 65995[h], CGC). Since the payment of those fees constitutes a pre-existing obligation, no additional mitigation measures have been identified herein. 401 Op. Cit., Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision Located at the Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive (Appro)imately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of Diamond Bar), October 2002, Revised September 2003, p. 28. 41/ Calwell Flores Winters, Inc., Justification Report for the Walnut Valley Unified School District — This Study Established the Justification for the Imposition of Developer Fees Pursuant to Applicable Law as of March 2004, adopted May 5, 2004, p. 14. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-30 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 (d) Parks? Less than Significant Impact. Project -specific park demands can be calculated in accordance with the formula provided in Section 21.32.040 (Park Land Dedications and Fees) in Chapter 21.32 (Subdivisions) in the Municipal Code (X = 0.005(UP) where "X' is the amount of parkland required in acres, "U" is the total number of approved dwelling units, and 'P" is 3.4 for single-family dwellings). In accordance therewith, the proposed 16 -unit subdivision would generate a need for 0.27 acres (approximately 11,850 square feet) of additional parkland within the City. Because the on-site open space areas do not constitute "useable" areas available for recreational use, those on-site areas do not serve as real property offsets. Payment of applicable Quimby Act fees constitutes full mitigation for project -related park requirements. The project site is specifically identified as a possible location for a "recreational trail" in the City's Trails MasterPlan. As defined therein, recreational trails "are rustic in nature, typically not paved, and are found in the City's parks and open space areas and along government or utility -owned easements. Recreational trails are suitable for the use of hikers, casual walkers, and, in some instances, mountain bicyclists and equestrians.n42 No specific cost estimates are provided for trail segments but identified cost items include land acquisition, plan preparation, grading, and the installation of guard rails. In addition, the Trails Master Plan identifies a potential "Class A" trail head in proximity to the project site. The estimated cost to construct a "Class A" trail head is $70,000 to $85,000, with the majority of that cost ($61,450 to $66,300) being associated with the provision of parking 43 A proposed on-site "trail head" and "pedestrian trail" is identified on the tentative tract map. The "pedestrian trail" provides non -motorized access to the major retained open space area (Lot C). Although the inclusion of an on-site trail appears consistent with the Trails Master Plan, no design or development details concerning that trail segment have been included with the development application. Similarly, since the proposed on-site street improvements are identified as a private street, there may exist access restrictions and in -tract parking limitations affecting the proposed trail segment. Additionally, responsibilities for trail segment maintenance (e.g., homeowners' association) are not presently addressed in the development application. . Although the identified impact does not elevate to a level of significance, in order to facilitate the implementation of the proposed "pedestrian trail," the Lead Agency has formulated mitigation measures requiring both the conveyance of an easement for trail and related purposes and requiring further design -level detail of the proposed improvements. Mitigation Measure No. 15. Concurrent with the recordation of the final tract map, the Applicant shall dedicate to the City an irrevocable easement or similar instrument and post a cash bond or other similar instrument, acceptable to the City Attorney, allowing for the construction, operation, and maintenance of a trail head, recreational trail, and such other related uses and facilities as may be identified by the Community Development Director. 10. 42/ Op. Cit., City of Diamond Bar, City of Diamond Bar Recreational Trails and Bicycle Route Master Plan, p. 43/ (bid., Table 5, p. 40. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-31 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Mitigation Measure No. 16. Unless otherwise determined by the Community Development Director, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the Community Development Director shall approve detailed improvement plans for the on-site trail head and recreational trail, including all related uses and facilities identified by the Community Development Director. Trail improvement plans and specifications, if required, shall be included in the project's landscape plans and in such other plans as may be determined by the Community Development Director. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures will ensure that public service impacts remain at a less -than -significant level. (e) Other public facilities? Less than Significant Impact. The following two additional "public facilities" are addressed herein: library services and private street maintenance. Each new residential unit constructed within the City will impose an incremental demand on County library services. Although not applicable to projects located within the incorporated boundaries of the City, the County has established a library mitigation fee program. Since the City has not adopted either the County's or another library fee program, no library fees will be assessed against the proposed project. 4.4.14 Recreation (a) Would. the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.13(d) above. (b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.13(d) above. 4.4.15 Transportation and Traffic (a) Would the project cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume -to -capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Less than Significant impact. As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004, the Applicant submitted and the City reviewed a project -specific traffic study for a higher intensity residential use of the project site. As indicated in "Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision Located at the Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive (Approximately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of Diamond Bar)" (Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc., October 2002, Revised September 2003), "[t]he capacity analysis conducted for the proposed 20 single family home subdivision July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-32 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 estimated to add approximately 192 daily vehicular trips with 15 morning peak hour trips and 20 trips during the afternoon peak hour to the existing street network will not significantly impact any of the study intersections or roadways analyzed in the traffic impact report."44 With regards to the project's potential traffic impacts (as associated with a 20 -unit residential development), a number of recommended actions are presented in Section 2=4 (Applicant -Nominated Environmental Compliance Activities) and constitute Applicant -nominated environmental compliance activities that are included as part of the project description. As such, those actions are not repeated as mitigation measures herein. (b) Would the project exceed, individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the County congestion management agency for designed roads or highways? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.15(a). above. (c) Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact. No aspect of the project will alter existing air traffic patterns. (d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp . curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Significant unless Mitigation Incorporated. Proposed at the project entryway is a "traffic roundabout." While roundabouts and other traffic calming designs can be effective in reducing vehicle speed, those elements may introduce additional safety considerations that might not otherwise exist if a typical street link were to be provided. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), however, notes: "Roundabouts may improve the safety of intersections by eliminating or altering conflict types, by reducing speed differentials at intersections, and by forcing drivers to decrease speeds as they proceed into and through the intersection.i45 As further indicated therein: "The frequency of crashes at an intersection is related to the number of conflict points at an intersection, as well as the magnitude of conflicting flows at each conflict point. A conflict point is a location where the paths of two motor vehicles, or a vehicle and a bicycle or pedestrian queue, diverge, merge, or cross each other. ,46 As illustrated in Figure 4-1 (Vehicle Conflict Points for "T" Intersections with Single -Lane Approaches), when comparing a "T" intersection and a single -lane roundabout, the number of vehicle -vehicle conflict points for roundabouts decreases from nine to six for three -leg intersections. However, the FHWA states that, besides conflicts with other road users, "the center island of a roundabout presents a particular hazard that may result in over -representation of single -vehicle crashes that tend to occur during periods 44/ Op. Cit., Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision Located at the Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive (Appro)dmately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of Diamond Bar), October 2002, Revised September 2003, p. 28. p. 103. 45/ Federal Highway Administration, Roundabouts: An Informational Guide, FHWA-RD-00-067, June 2000, 46/ Ibid., p. 104. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-33 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 of low traffic volume. At cross intersections, many such violations may go unrecorded unless a collision with another vehicle occurs." 41 nll 1 I t� • Diverging O Merging O Crossing Figure 4-1 VEHICLE CONFLICT POINTS FOR "T" INTERSECTIONS WITH SINGLE -LANE APPROACHES Source: Federal Highway Administration Although not provided in direct response to the current tract map configuration, the City's consulting traffic engineer had, based on a review of the Applicant's 2003-2004 development application, concluded: `There do not appear to be any significant deficiencies in the proposed street design. There is no indicationthe project would increase hazards due to a design feature provided the proposed roundabout is designed per acceptable guidelines ... Three of the predominate types of collisions are: (1) failures to yield at entry to circulating vehicles, (2) single vehicle run-off the circulatory roadway, and (3) single vehicle run -into the central island.. To reduce the severity of single vehicle crashes, special attention should be accorded to improving visibility and avoiding or removing any hard obstacles on the central island.i48 Since the creation of a potentially hazardous design element would constitute a significant impact, in order to ensure that safety issues are fully considered in roadway design, the following mitigation measure has been recommended: Mitigation Measure No. 16. Prior to the recordation of the final map, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the City Engineer shall approve final design and development plans and geometrics for all proposed on- site street improvements and, unless otherwise authorized, conform to the Diamond Bar Development Improvement Standards, Requirements and Guidelines. If, during construction, equipment or material staging activities were to occur along those local streets located in proximity to the project site, the presence of that equipment and those materials could interfere with the use of those streets by residences and by other; 47/ Ibid., pp. 105 and 116. 48/ Memorandum (Subject VTTM 54081) from Fred Alamolhoda to Warren Siecke, Warren C. Siecke Transportation and Traffic Engineering, May 17, 2004, p. 2. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-34 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 could reduce available on -street parking, and could impede access by emergency equipment and personnel. In order to ensure that construction activities do not produce off-site impacts, a mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure No. 10) has been formulated requiring that all construction and material staging activities and all equipment marshalling activities be confined to the property limits and not include any on-site or off- site areas. Although this measure would not preclude construction workers from parking along Crooked Creek Drive, it would prohibit the parking, storage, and maintenance of construction vehicles and equipment along that roadway. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures will reduce potential transportation and traffic impacts to a less -than -significant level. (e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.15(d) above. (t) Would the project result in inadequate parking capacity? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed 42 -foot wide private street right-of-way is sufficient to accommodate off-site parking on both sides of the street without impeding through traffic or emergency access. It is, however, noted that, with regards to public streets, the Circulation Element of the General Plan specified "roadway classification right-of-way width" for "residential" (local) streets is 44-60 feet 49 North of the project site, Crooked Creek Drive is an improved 60 -foot right-of-way. The transition between the two rights-of-way would occur at the proposed roundabout. (g) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. No changes or other modifications are proposed to any existing alternative transportation facilities operated by or operating within the City. 4.4.16 Utilities and Service Systems. (a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the R WQCB? Less than Significant Impact._ The design capacities of the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (CSDLAC) wastewater treatment plants are based on population forecasts contained in Southern California Association of Govemment's (SCAG) "Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide" (RCPG). The RCPG is part of the "Air Quality Management Plan" (AQMP). The AQMP and RCPG are jointly prepared by the SCAQMD and SCAG as.a requirement of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA). In order to conform to the AQMP, all expansions of CSDLAC facilities must be sized and service phased in a manner that ensures consistency with the Growth Management Element (GME) of the RCPG. The GME contains a regional forecast for the Counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial, as prepared by SCAG. Specific policies in the RCPG that deal with the management of growth are incorporated into the AQMP's strategies to improve air quality in the SCAB. The available 49/ Op. Cit., City of Diamond Bar General Plan, Circulation Element, p. V-6. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-35 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 capacity of the CSDLAC's treatment facilities is assumed to be limited to those levels associated with approved growth identified in the RCPG. Projects that are consistency with local general plans are, therefore, adequately accommodated by CSDLAC wastewater treatment facilities. Conversely, projects that are not consistent with existing general plan and which would generate wastewater quantities in excess of those levels that could otherwise be generated based on allowable land uses may not be adequately accommodated by CSDLAC facilities. Since the 1995 General Plan designates the project site for residential use and since the density standards presented therein would authorize a greater number of dwelling units than now proposed, the project is presumed to be adequately serviced by CSDLAC facilities. As a result, impacts upon those facilities would be less than significant. (b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less than Significant Impact. Based on water supplies that are currently available, the MWD has in place the existing capacity to: (1) meet 100 percent of its member agencies' projected supplemental demands over the next twenty years in average and wet years; (2) meet 100 percent of its member agencies' projected supplemental demand over the next 15 years in multiple dry years; and (3) meet 100 percent of its member agencies' projected supplemental demand over the next ten years in single dry years 50 As a result, it can be assumed that sufficient water resources are available to meet the local demand imposed those current and planned development activities authorized under existing general and regional plans. To the extent that the proposed project is determined by the City Council to be in compliance with those plans, sufficient water and wastewater facilities would be available to accommodate project -specific demands. See also Response No. 4.4.16(a) above. (c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less than Significant Impact. New on-site storm water facilities will be constructed to safely convey storm waters from the project site into existing County.storm drain facilities (Brea Canyon Channel). Sufficient capacity remains in the facility to accommodate project -generated flows. See also Response No. 4.4.8(c) above. (d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.16(b) above. sol Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Report on Metropolitan's Water Supplies, February 11,2002. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-36 Initial Study - Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 (e) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that has inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.16(a) above. (t) Would the project be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Less than Significant Impact. Waste haulers operating within the City determine the solid waste management facility -where wastes are disposed. As such, they have the ability to transport municipal solid wastes (MSW) to facilities with sufficient remaining capacity. The nearest County operated landfill to the project site is the Puente Hills Landfill (2800 South Workman Mills Road, Whittier). As indicated by the Couriv, sufficient capacity at that facility exists to accommodate waste demands through 2013. (g) Would the project comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact. The project will fully comply with all applicable federal, State, and local statutes and regulations relating to solid waste. 4.4.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance (a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fishAvildlife species, cause a f1sh/wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a planvanimal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare%ndangered plant/animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history/prehistory? Less than Significant Impact. As mitigated, the proposed project will not result in the degradation of the existing environment, result in any substantial reduction in the habitat of any fish or wildlife species, cause any existing fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, eliminate or reduce the range of any protected plant or animal species, or eliminate important examples of major periods in the State's history or prehistory. (b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? Less than Significant Impact. The project will not generate impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. (c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly orindirectly? Less than Significant Impact. As mitigated, the proposed project does not have the potential to cause substantial adverse impacts on human beings, either directly or indirectly. 51/ County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, Continued Operation of the Puente Hills Landfill, Executive Summary of the Draft Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 2000041066, June 2001, P. 1.0-10. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-37 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 This page intentionally left blank. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 4-38 Initial Study- Impact Analysis JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 5.0 PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION 5.1 INTRODUCTION TO PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION The Lead Agency shall prepare a proposed mitigated negative declaration (MND) when the Initial Study identifies potentially significant effects but "revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed mitigated negafive declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur" (Section 15070[b][1], State CEQA Guidelines). If the Initial Study identify and the Lead Agency subsequently adopt mitigation measures "for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of approval in order to mifigate or avoid significant effects on the environment" (Section 21081.6, CEQA), the Lead Agency is required to prepare a "mitigation reporting and monitoring program" (MRMP) outlining the agency's proposed method of compliance with those measures. A determination that a proposed action meets the standards for a MND can only be made if "there is no substantial evidence in light. of the whole record" that the project, as proposed or as subsequently modified, would result in the generation of a significant environmental impact (Section 21080[c], CEQA). 5.2 PRELIMINARY FINDINGS Based on the analysis presented herein, prior to the consideration of any project -level mitigation measures, the Lead Agency has determined that the proposed project has the potential to result in one or more potentially significant. environmental effects. Based on that determination, the Lead Agency has identified a number of recommended project -level mitigation measures that, if implemented, would reduce those impacts to below a level of significance. Pursuant to CEQA requirements, the Lead Agency has prepared and is circulating, with this Initial Study, a draft mitigation reporting and monitoring program (MRMP) demonstrating the manner in which each of those recommended mitigation measures would be implemented. The Lead Agency's draft MRMP is included in Table ES -1 (Draft Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program) herein. This Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence before the Lead Agency that the proposed project, as modified to incorporate those mitigation measures identified therein, will have a significant effect on the environment. The imposition of the mitigation measures recommended by the Lead Agency as conditions of project approval will result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of the project's potentially significant effects and would serve to reduce those effects to a level, deemed by the Lead Agency, to be below a level of significance. As a result, pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the project, as subsequently modified to include each of the recommended mitigation measures, is eligible for processing under a MND since no significant environmental effects will likely result from the construction and subsequent habitation of the proposed project. A draft MND has been prepared by the City and is being circulated with this Initial Study. The Lead Agency encourages the public and other governmental agencies to submit written comments on this Initial Study and draft MND. The Lead Agency will consider those comments and the issues raised herein prior to taking any formal action on the proposed project. City of, Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study — Preliminary Determination Page 5-1 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 This page intentionally left blank. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 5-2 Initial Study- Preliminary Determination JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 6.0 REFERENCES • Bittman, Roxanne, The California Natural Diversity. Database: A Natural Heritage Program for Rare Species and Vegetation, Fremontia, Volume 29:3-4, California Department of Fish and Game, July/October 2001. • Blakeley, Edward J. and Mary Gail Snyder, Mary Gail, Fortress America: Gated Communities in the United States, 1997. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 010: Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Yorba Linda 7.5 -Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles and Orange Counties, California, 1997 (Revised 2001). • California Department of Fish and Game, Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List, Natural Diversity Database, April 2004. • California Department of Transportation, Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations, Technical Advisory, Vibration (TAVO-2-01-R9601), February 20, 2002. • California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, Water Quality Control Plan — Los Angeles Region, adopted June 13, 1994. California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, Watershed Management Initiative Chapter, December 2001. • Calwell Flores Winters, Inc., Justification Report for the Walnut Valley Unified School District — This Study Established the Justification for the Imposition of Developer Fees Pursuant to Applicable Law as of March 2004. City of Diamond Bar, City of Diamond Bar General Plan, July 25, 1995. City of Diamond Bar, General Plan Annual Report - Period beginning January 1, 2002 and ending December 31, 2002. • City of Diamond Bar, City of Diamond Bar Recreational Trails and Bicycle Route Master Plan, May 15, 2001. County of Los Angeles Fire Department, Prevention Bureau, Forestry Division, Brush Clearance Section, Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire Zone 4 or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, January 1998. County of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles General Plan, adopted November 25, 1980. County of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County Code. County of Los Angeles, Significant Ecological Area Technical Advisory Committee (SEATAC), SEATAC Report and Comments, September 9, 2002. County of Los Angeles Fire Department, 2001 Statistical Summary, 2002. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study— References Page 6-1 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 • County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, Continued Operation of the Puente Hills Landfill, Executive Summary of the Draft Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 2000041066, June 2001. • County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, Draft Palmdale Water Reclamation Plant Disinfection Facilities Plan, January 2004. • Davis, F.W., of al., The California Gap Analysis Project - Final Report, University of California, Santa Barbara, 1998. • Federal Highway Administration, Roundabouts: An Informational Guide, FHWA-RD-00- 067, June 2000. • Helsley, Robert W. and William C. Strange, Gated Communities and the Economic Geography of Crime, Journal of Urban Economics, 46(1), 1999. • International Conference of Building Officials, Uniform Building Code, 1997. • Los Angeles County Fire Department, Prevention Bureau, Information on Fire Flow Availability for Building Permit, Form 195, January 2002. • Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Development Planning for Storm Water Management: A Manual for the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan, September 2002. • Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning (PCR Services Corporation, Frank Hovore & Associates, FORMA Systems), Biological Resource Assessment of the Proposed Puente Hills Significant Ecological Area, November 2000. • Los Angeles County (PCR Services Corporation, Frank Hovore & Associates, FORMA Systems), Los Angeles County Significant Ecological Area Update Study 2000 — Background Report, November 2000. • Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Report on Metropolitan's Water Supplies, February 11, 2002. • Morton, D.M., Alvarez, R.M., and Campbell, R.H., Preliminary Soil -Slip Susceptibility Maps, Southwestern California, Open -File Report 03-17, United States Geological Survey, 2003. • Remsen, J.V., Jr., Bird Species of Special Concern in California, Cooper's Hawk, California Department of Fish and Game, 1978. • South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Environmental Assessment for Proposed Amended Rules 403 -Fugitive Dust, 403.1 -Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control Requirements for Coachella Valley Sources and 1186-PM10 Emission Reductions from Paved and Unpaved Roads, and Livestock Operations, SCAQMD No. 012804KCS, April 2, 2004. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 6-2 Initial Study— References JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Southern California Association of Governments, Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide, March 1996. • State Mining and Geology Board, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication No. 117, March 13, 1997. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect. Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety (Technical Report 550/9-74-004),1974. • United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Noise Guidebook, March 1985. • United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Frequently Asked Questions about the New Proposed Designation of Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher, February 4, 2000. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study— References Page 6-3 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 This page intentionally left blank. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page 6-4 Initial Study — References JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 Appendix A Environmental Checklist City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Initial Study — Technical Appendix This page intentionally left blank. JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 1. Project Title: Jewel Ridge Estates (Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081) 2. Lead Agency Name/Address: City of Diamond Bar ❑ Community Development Department — Planning Division ❑ 21825 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177 3. Contact Person/Telephone No.: Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner (909) 839-7032 4. Project Location: Situs Pending (City of Diamond Bar) Southern Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive Los Angeles County Assessor Parcel No. 8714-028-003 Thomas Bros. Map Book Reference: Page 709 (G-1) 5. Project Sponsor Name/Address: Jewel Ridge, LLC 10365 Jefferson Boulevard, Culver City, CA 90232 Attn: Daniel Singh (626x305-8454 6. General Plan Designation: RL Low -Density Residential (Max. 3.0 DU/Acre) 7. Zoning Designation: RL -10,000 (Low Density Residential -10,000 sq. ft. min.) 8. Description of Project: Proposed is a 22 -Jot residential subdivision, allowing for the .development of 16 single-family detached homes on individual parcels ranging in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to 10,506 square feet. The average lot size for the residential parcels will be approximately 6,892 square feet. In addition to the approval or conditional approval of a vesting tentative map, other discretionary actions under consideration by the City include, but may not be limited to, the issuance of a conditional use permit(s), variance(s), protected tree permit(s), and grading permit(s), and such other discretionary permits and approvals as may be required by the City or other responsible agencies for the construction and habitation of the project site. 9. Surrounding Land Uses North: Single-family Residential (City of Diamond Bar) and Setting: South: Vacant (Los Angeles County - Unincorporated) East: Single-family Residential (City of Diamond Bar) West: Single-family Residential and Los Angeles County flood control facility (City of Diamond Bar) 10. Other agencies whose approval (1) Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region is or may be required: (2) Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Environmental. Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ■ Aesthetics ■ Hazards/Hazardous Materials ❑ Agricultural Resources ❑ Hydrology/WaterQuality ■ Air Quality ■ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils City of. Diamond Bar Environmental Checklist ❑ Land Use ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance July 2006 Page A-1 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54061 Determination: On the basis of this initial evaluation I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a El DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made or ■ agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an El IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant ❑ unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated:' An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all ❑ potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Date Ann Lungu, Associate Planner . City of Diamond Bar Printed Name Lead Agency Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: (1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on the project -specific screening analysis). (2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. (3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. (4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact" The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page A-2 Environmental Checklist JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses" may be cross-referenced). (5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: (a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. (b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. (c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. (6) Lead Agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where applicable, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. (7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. (8) The is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. (9) The explanation of each issue should identify: (a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and (b.) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact too less than significance. City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Environmental Checklist Page A-3 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page A-4 Environmental Checklist KCIN �'111610a _ I. Aesthetics. Would the project: (a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑ (b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State ❑ ❑ N ❑ scenic hi hwa . (c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the El and its surroundings? El El (d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would 11❑ adverse affect da or nighttime views in the area? ■ ❑ II. Agricultural Resources. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmlands. Would the project: (a) Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or Farmland -of Statewide importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring ❑ ❑ ❑ Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? (b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson ❑ ❑ Act contract? ❑ a (c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 non-agricultural use? tit. Air Quality. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determination. Would the project: (a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ (b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an or roected air qualityviolation? ElEl El (c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standards ❑ ❑ E ❑ (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial air pollutant concentrations? El El ❑ (e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? El ❑ ■ ❑ IV. Biological Resources. Would the project (a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, El El E]policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or United States Fish and Wildlife Service USFWS ? (b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, ❑ ❑ ❑ policies, regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS? July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page A-4 Environmental Checklist JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Environmental Checklist Page A-5 Y .. issuea:anrtsSaup orcin Soares � Pi Iy � i ai gni ca ' n ass h d S hi ica` g v� {c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident ❑ migratory Wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife El■ E-1or nursery sites? (e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree reservation olio or ordinance? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ (1) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or ❑ ElEl other approved local regional, or State habitat conservation Ian? V. Cultural Resources. Would the project (a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA ❑ p ❑ ■ Guidelines? (b) Cause a substantial adverse change In the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the State ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ CEQA Guidelines? (c) Directly or indirectly, destroy a unique paleontological resource, site, or unique geologic feature? ❑ El El (d) Disturb human remains including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ VI. Geology and Soils. Would the project (a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: (J) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (ii) Seismic - related ground failure including liquefaction? iv Landslides? (b) Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ (c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result on-site or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, El El■ El liquefaction, or collapse? (d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risk to life or ❑ p ■ ❑ ro e (e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ are not available for the disposal of wastewater? VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the project (a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? El El ❑ (b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the El El ❑ environment? City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Environmental Checklist Page A-5 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page A-6 Environmental Checklist ,.. _ z rSr Issues an S ,�pgrtut S2 rce _ -,,, < r ni s S A acanY•. Muni 2 rrtpae ` a -t (c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter ❑ ❑ ❑ mile of an existing or proposed school? (d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the ❑ El El ■ California Government Code and create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment? (e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or El El ❑ public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in ❑ ❑ ❑ E the area? (g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted El 11❑ . emergency response plan or emergency evacuation Ian? (h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are ❑ ❑ El to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the project: (a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge El El ❑ requirements? (b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting El ❑ ■ ❑ wells would drop to a level which would not support existing or planned land uses for which permits have been granted)? (c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, El 11Elin a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on the site or off the site? (d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, ❑. El❑ or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on the site or off the site? (e) Create or contribute to runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or ❑ ❑ N ❑ provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ E ❑ (g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or ❑ ❑ ❑ N other flood hazard delineation map? (h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures that would 0 11 El—impede or redirect flood flow? (i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding including flooding as a result of failure of a ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ levee or dam? Q) Be subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page A-6 Environmental Checklist JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 - - o eAn I ur Sign zit"o McJ'nn u in ;act IX. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: (a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ X ❑ (b) Conflict with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the ❑. ❑ 0 ❑ purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (c) Conflict with an applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ X. Mineral Resources. Would the project: (a) Loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of - ❑ El value to the region and the residents of the state? ■ (b) Loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land ❑ ❑ ❑ use Ian? XI. Noise. Would the project result in: (a) Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ applicable standards of other agencies? (b) Expose persons to or generate excessive ground-bome vibration ❑ or round -borne noise levels? ❑ 0 ❑ (c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the El E]■ project vicinityabove levels existingwithout the project.? ❑ (d) A substantial temporary. or periodic increase in ambient noise levels El E] theproject vicinityabove levels existingwithout the project? ■ E]in (e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public El ❑ El airport or public use airport, would the project expose people ■ residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to ❑ ❑ ❑ excessive noise levels? Al. Population and Housing. Would the project (a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housingelsewhere? ❑ El El ■ (c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housingelsewhere? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ XIII. Public Services. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: (a) Fire protection? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ (b) Police protection? ❑ ❑ ` ❑ (c) Schools? ❑ ❑ E ❑ (d) Parks? ❑ ❑ N ❑ (e) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ N ❑ City of Diamond Bar July 2006 Environmental Checklist Page A-7 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 � � � � � ,3a � ' 55 es, MIN ortm Dune IVX. Recreation. (a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial ❑ ❑ M ❑ physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might ❑ ❑ M ❑ have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. Transportation and Traffic. Would the project: (a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the —JN existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the ❑ ElEl volume -to -capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (b) Exceed, individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the County congestion management agency for ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ designed roads or highways? (c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 safety risks? (d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ equipment)? (e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ (f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ (g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting ❑ El ❑ alternative transportation e.. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. Utilities and Service Systems. Would the project: (a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB? ❑ ❑ ❑ (b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of exisfing facilities, the El ❑ ❑ construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which ❑ ❑ ❑ could cause significant environmental effects? (d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded ❑ ❑ N ❑ entitlements needed? (e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that has Inadequate capacity to ❑ ElE]serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? (f) Be served.by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to El El11accommodate the ro ect's solid waste disposal needs? (g) Comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations El E] El ■ related to solid waste? July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page A-8 Environmental Checklist JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 �__ yr 3Pae tialy °i � �- Y`: ' o antra Ye Sig r r . ass a''8 ssues -n ,up o; g;SouEc@ . Sin ca n Slgq[ can I Fact XVII.Mandatory Findings of Significance (a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fishhvildl'rfe species, cause a fishtwildiife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant/animal community, ❑ ❑ M ❑ reduce the number or restrict the range of a raretendangered planttanimal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California histo / rehisto (b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but considerable? ❑ El ■ E]cumulative) (c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or ❑ ❑ ❑ indirectl. City of Diamond Bar July2006 Environmental Checklist Page A-9 JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 This page intentionally left blank. July 2006 City of Diamond Bar Page A-10 Environmental Checklist Environmental Impact Sciences 26051 Via Concha Mission Viejo, California 92691-5614 (949) 837-3935 FAX (949) 837-1195 6VCathay View Development January 30, 2017 Mrs. Grace S. Lee Senior Planner City of Diamond Bar Planning Department 21810 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Attention: Ms. Mayuko "May" Nakajima Associate Planner RE Tract No. 54081 City of Diamond Bar - Crooked Creek Development Request for Tentative Map Time Extension Dear Mrs. Lee As you know pursuant to the City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code, Section 22.66.050(b) (2)(c)(2) and section 66452.6(e) of the California Government Code (Subdivision Map Act) Cathay View Development, LLC., has filed with the City of Diamond Bar a request for Tentative Map Time Extension. This time extension being requested for the conditionally approved Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 (project). This project was conditionally approved by the City Council, City of Diamond Bar on February 20, 2007, said conditionally approved Tentative Map is due to expire February 20, 2017. Cathay View Development, LLC was not the original applicant for the project, and in fact when we purchased the project on October 24, 2014, it was with the representation by the previous owner (applicant), giving us the understanding that the improvement plans Tel: (626) 538-4668 Address: 441 E. Huntington Dr. #312 Arcadia, CA 91006 Cathay View Development LLC and final map for this project, were essentially completed and previously reviewed and approved by the City of Diamond Bar and or there representatives. With this understanding we moved forward with the project under contract with West Coast Technical Consults, Inc. (Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors) and Geosoils Consultants Inc. (Geotechnical Consultants) to resume the entitlement process that had previously began and initiated by the Civil Engineer and Geotechnical Engineer of record for the development. Unfortunately the project team (consultants) were not very responsive initially. Getting them to pull out the project from the archives and start moving forward with the project seemed to take a substantial amount of effort, time and cost. During this initial period we were told by Geosoils (Geotechnical Consultant) that additional technical evaluation and field testing needed to be performed to update the soils report and amended to address the new seismic code and previous unanswered questions as generated from the City's Geotechnical Consultant. We authorized this work and start moving forward, accordingly on or about April 25, 2016 the improvement plans for the development and revised geotechnical report were submitted to the City of Diamond Bar. It was our understanding, as we were lead to believe by the original developer (applicant) and consulting team at the time that this submittal would by the final submittal and review of the engineering documents for final project approval. On or about May 16, 2016 we received comments back from the City of Diamond Bar relative to the aforementioned submittal, to our dismay we learned that the level of completeness of the project drawings and technical reports as well as other items that needed to be addressed for final map recordation. We were surprised and shocked that were far from the necessary level of completeness of the project documents for City approval and eventual final map recordation. This fact made us reconsider our project approach. In a good faith effort and in an attempt to continuing moving forward with the project we reevaluated the project team. This reevaluation lead us to the decision to change the project consulting team as well as to hire an outside project manager to provide project oversite. We contracted with the RamCam group as the project/construction manager, TTG Engineers as the Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors of record, along with Sitescape for Landscape Architectural Services and Carlson Strategic Land Solutions for environmental consultation and process. This individual and firms, all having performed consulting services successfully on prior projects in the City of Diamond Bar. Geosoils remained as the geotechnical engineer of record. The new project team was first task with reviewing the current documentation on the project and to determine its level of accuracy. This was done to insure that and above all Cathay View Development's will complete a development that we are all proud of and that is consistent with the requirements and desires of the City of Diamond Bar. This effort lead us to the determination that the prior documents (improvement plans) were not to the standard of the industry. To correct this situation we interred into a contracts Tel: (626) 538-4668 Address: 441 E. Huntington Dr. #312 Arcadia, CA 91006 00 A Cathay View Development LLC to perform all new design services which included but was not limited to performing a new boundary survey, perform new aerial topographic mapping of the development, and additional geotechnical soil testing and evaluation of the site. All at a substantial cost. The major issues that were uncovered as a result of this effort can be grouped into four (4) main categories; Aerial Topography - The new aerial topography for the site was significantly different then that as originally used for the Tentative Map preparation and the subsequent first submittal of the improvement plans. Examination between the new and old topography for the site revealed a significant difference in elevation, in some areas up to 20 feet along with a general different configuration of the land element. Being that the new topography was controlled utilizing state of the art technology and was field verified we have every reason to believe the new aerial topography for the site is correct. This difference had substantial impact to the entire project, mainly though constituting the requirement for substantial higher retaining walls and more walls then indicated on the Tentative Tract Map Crooked Creek Street Design — The intended design of Crooked Creek or extension there of as indicated on the approved Tentative Tract Map did not provide a scenario where the Sanitary sewer service could be provided to all of the proposed lots in a manner that is consistent with the requirements of the City of Diamond Bar nor the County of Los Angeles without providing for a lift or Pump Station. Such a facility is not desirable by either the City of Diamond Bar, or the County of Los Angeles. Not to mention the financial hardship that would be placed on the project as a result thereof and continued maintenance. To eliminate this, the Crooked Creek Street improvement had to be raised so that it would provide positive gravity flow for the proposed sewer to existing facilities to the north of the project. This being required to provide adequate cover over the proposed sewer. This also resulted in the raising of the proposed pads at the end of Crooked Creek to facilitate this design. Geotechnical Evaluation — The additional Geotechnical Evaluation of the site among other items revealed that removal of the existing non -competent site soil along the Brea Canyon Channel and along the back of the homes that front onto existing Crooked Creek is not practical. So in order to allow for the development of the project as shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map a pile wall system will need to be constructed along the project boundary. This was not originally anticipated thus having substantial cost impacts to the project but more importantly took additional time to develop the parameters of which this wall will need to be designed to. The site is also burdened by an historic landslide. To Tel: (626) 538-4668 Address: 441 E. Huntington Dr. #312 Arcadia, CA 91006 Cathay View Development LLC develop the project as indicated on said tentative tract map additional testing, evaluation and remedial development had (have) to be developed. This effort has taken significant effort and time to determine a reasonable solution, not to mention cost. Retaining Wall/Slope Grading — Based upon the aforementioned topographic impacts, the change in pad elevation, historic land slide remediation and reconfiguration of the street patterns to the betterment of the project, additional design effort had to be expended relative to the grading design and design of retaining walls necessary to minimize disturbance on the site or maintain the disturbance in substantial conformance with the Tentative Tract Map as approved by the City. This effort resulted in the requirement of retaining wall heights greater than that indicated on the Tentative Tract Map as well as the requirement of retain walls in areas not previously indicated. However once making it through all of the technical design issue, improvement plans were redrafted i.e. prepared from scratch discarding the previous efforts. On or about December 5, 2016 the revised improvement plans were submitted to the City for review and the plan checking purposes. Comments associated there with were received back from the City of Diamond Bar on December 22, 2016. Efforts immediately expended to review and respond to the comments received. During this effort and in developing a design that addressed the City's comments and concerns, the design team became concerned that the required proposed improvements were no longer in substantial conformance with the Tentative Tract Map as approved. A meeting was held with City staff on January 19, 2017 to discuss the revised plans that were developed to respond to the City comments. As a result there of the consulting team was informed as was I on Tuesday January 24 that the proposed improvements would not in fact be considered as in substantial conformance with the approved tentative tract map. Furthermore based upon the physical condition of the site as shown on the correct topography of the site that the site cannot be developed as indicated on the approved Tentative Tract Map while maintaining wall heights consistent therewith, grading disturbance consistent therewith as well as to address the technical short falls in the approved map. Therefore in order for the development to continue moving forward, and for us to realize and make use of the cost incurred on the project to date plus the cost of purchase of the property a Time Extension is being requested. This request is being filed so that we can reevaluate the project and together with an application for Tentative Map Amendment develop, work with the City of Diamond Bar City Staff on developing an amended Tel: (626) 538-4668 Address: 441 B. Huntington Dr. #312 Arcadia, CA 91006 A/ Cathay View Development Tentative Map and associated actual improvement plan that would allow for the development of the project that both we Cathay View Development and the City of Diamond Bar can be proud of and that can be an asset to the community. We realize that this will result in a reduction of density for the project (loss of lots), however we feel that this is the appropriate action for the project given the uniqueness of the site and associated constraints. Thank you for considering this request. We are confident in working with the City of Diamond Bar we can keep this project moving forward and create a development that is reflective of the City's commitment to excellence. Very Truly Yours �1 Yanying (Claire) Dong Manager Cathay View Development, LLC Tei: (626) 538-4668 Address: 441 E. Huntington Dr. #312 Arcadia, CA 91006 Greg Gubman From: jeff michelsen <jeffmichelsen@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 12:06 PM To: Greg Gubman; Marsha Roa; James DeStefano; Tommye Cribbins; Tommye Cribbins; Stella Marquez, Stella Marquez Cc: Amy Minteer; biogeol23@gmail.com; Medak, Christine; Gerald L. Croissant; dregarystickel@att.net; Cynthia Robin Smith; lee@leepaulsonphotography.com; firstdistrict@bos.lacounty.gov; Garrison Ty; Kelly.Schmoker@wildlife.ca.gov; mnb@cbcearthlaw.com; nikkihexum@me.com; Paolo.Perrone@tpI.org; Mark Smith; Erica Landmann; enrique.robles@mail.house.gov, scott.p.harris@wildlife.ca.gov; Steve.Scauzillo@sgvn.com; zakbushey@yahoo.com Subject: Fw: April 25 Hearing South Diamond Bar for Emerald Ridge Residential Development Attachments: PublicNoticeGoldRun.jpg Dear City of Diamond Bar, Regarding the attached document Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21092.2, we hereby request notice of any future proceedings regarding this matter, including, but not limited to, notices of preparation, notices of availability, notices of hearing, and notices of determination. For the recorded No time extensions should be allowed for this proposed project. Please include on your notification list all email contacts included in this email. Can you please send us a clear copy of attached document and post the attached documents and any further documents on your webpage to keep the public and all involved agencies informed? Unfortunately, the proposed Project now under review falls far short of meeting the legal mandates imposed by CEQA. The Project will have significant impacts on biological resources, traffic, air quality, water supply, and quality of life. By Law your city is required to include a Cultural Resources. In 2014, the California Legislature approved Assembly Bill 52. AB 52 creates a new category of environmental resources that must be considered under the California Environmental Quality Act: "tribal cultural resources." The legislation imposes new requirements for consultation regarding projects that may affect a tribal cultural resource, includes a broad definition of what may be considered to be a tribal cultural resource, and includes a list of recommended mitigation measures. AB 52 requires lead agencies to consider the effects of projects on tribal cultural resources and to conduct consultation with federally and non -federally recognized Native American tribe(s) early in the environmental planning process. If your project has filed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) or a notice of Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) on or after July 1, 2015, and the tribe has submitted a request for consultation, your project is subject to AB 52. CEQA defines tribal cultural resources as "sites, features, places cultural landscapes, sacred places and objects with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe" that have been determined to be significant. (Public Resources Code §21074.) It is important to note that tribal cultural resources are not limited to archeological artifacts, but also include landscapes and places of importance to tribes. The DSEIR needs to examine/review the Project site for possible impacts on such resources. It is well documented that the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians/ Kizh Nation has resided in the San Gabriel Valley. Dr. Gary Stickel, Ph.D., Tribal Archaeologist should be consulted for relevant input, studies, and maps. Any additional information on this proposed project please post on your webpage. Your time and help is greatly appreciated. Thank you, Jeff Michelsen Sierra Club Member From: Harris, Scott P.@Wildlife<Scott.P.Harris@wiIdIife.ca.gov> Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2017 12:11 PM To: GGubman@Diamond BarCA.Gov Cc: Medak, Christine; dregarystickel@att.net; jeff michelsen; Wilson, Erinn@Wildlife; Schmoker, Kelly@Wildlife Subject: RE: April 25 Hearing South Diamond Bar for Emerald Ridge Residential Development Mr. Gubman, The Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) received the below information and above public notice regarding concern about an older residential development project (Jewel Ridge) approved by the City of Diamond Bar in 2007 but has yet to be developed. Will the City of Diamond Bar be noticing the discretionary action to extend the City's Project approval under CEQA for further general public review and if so, what level of CEQA review is anticipated? The Department would appreciate any subsequent CEQA documentation associated with the City's proposed action, for review and comment during the public comment period. Topics of specific concern include assuring that wildlife and botanical surveys are conducted to reflect current conditions on the Project site to inform avoidance and mitigation efforts and that further consultation with the Department is undertaken for any impacts to species listed under the California Endangered Species Act and jurisdictional waters of the state regulated by the Department that may require Department permits prior to Project related vegetation and ground disturbances. Please contact me if you wish to discuss further. Thank you. Scott P. Harris Environmental Scientist California Department of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Planning 308 S. Dunning St. Ventura, CA 93003 Scott.p.harris@wildlife.ca.gov (805)644-6305 CDFW is California's Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources, and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State. CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. i SaveCurWater.com • Drought.CA.go From: jell michelsen [mailto:jeffmichelsen@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2017 11:55 AM 3 To: Schmoker, Kelly@Wildlife Ce: Medak, Christine; Harris, Scott P.@Wildlife; dregarystickel(a)att.net Subject: Fw: April 25 Hearing South Diamond Bar Dear Kelly and Christine, It was recently brought to my attention that the city of diamond bar a developer is proposing a 16 home subdivision within the foothills. Do you have any documents regarding this proposed project if so please forward them too me. Are you aware of any endangered species that might reside within this proposed development? Myself and others are going to send letters to the city of diamond bar requesting a new updated EIR be conducted since they're working off an old EIR report. Since the EIR report was last done possibly endangered species have been included that we're not surveyed. We are also requesting that AB -52 be included For cultural resource studies a new law that was recently passed in 2014 for Native American culture resource studies. This site has been documented to have many Native American artifacts. I hope your department can also encourage the city to move forward with a new updated EIR to ensure the public and decision -makers are fully informed with as much information as possible to ensure that CEQA guidelines are followed. Thank you in advance for your time and help. Sincerely, Jeff Michelson Sierra Club Member PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21810 COPLEY DRIVE -DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 -TEL. (909) 839-7030 -FAX (909) 861-3117 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: PROJECT LOCATION: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING DISTRICT: PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT: SUMMARY: 7.2 April 25, 2017 Development Review No. PL2016-211 3543 Hawkwood Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (APN 8714-022-019) Low Density Residential (RL) Low Density Residential (RL) Anil Luthra 3543 Hawkwood Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 The property owner/applicant is requesting approval of a Development Review (DR) application to construct a 1,246 square -foot two-story addition and a 438 square -foot attached balcony and patio areas to an existing 2,104 square -foot, two-story residence with a 600 square -foot garage on a 0.2 acre (9,239 square -foot) lot. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment 1) approving Development Review No. PL2016-211, based on the findings of Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.48, subject to conditions. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the north side of Hawkwood Road, south of Chirping Sparrow Road. The property was developed in 1984 under Los Angeles County standards with a 2,104 square -foot single family residence and 600 square -foot attached garage. There are no protected trees on site. The property is legally described as Lot 82 of Tract No. 34161, and the Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) is 8714-022-019. Project Description The proposed addition is located at the front and rear of the existing residence and consists of the following components: PROJECT SUMMARY (square footage) Living Area Existing 2,104 New 1,246 Total Living Area 3,350 Attached Garage Existing 600 Total Garage Area 600 TOTAL FLOOR AREA 3,950 Patio/Balcony Areas Existing Patio (to be demolished) 380 New Patio/Balcony 438 Total Patio/Balcony Area 438 Total Patio/Balcony Area 438 The existing two-story home consists of common areas (living room, family room, laundry room, and kitchen), four bedrooms, three bathrooms, and a three -car garage. The applicant is proposing to enlarge the existing kitchen with a nook, add one bedroom and a bathroom to the first floor and enlarge the existing bedrooms and bathrooms on the second floor. A new balcony, and patio areas are also proposed. The height of the existing house is 22'. With the addition, the height will remain the same as measured from the finished grade to the highest point of the roofline. Site and Grading Configuration: The subject property is rectangular -shaped lot. The existing house is situated on a leveled pad. A portion of the rear of the lot contains a descending slope. The second -story addition is proposed above the existing residence. There will be no grading and no site improvements proposed on the property. Architectural Features, Colors, and Materials: The architecture of the existing residence is 1980s tract design with stucco walls and concrete tiles on a gabled roof. The original wood siding was removed from the front elevation in 2013. The proposed addition is designed to blend into the existing house by using the building materials and exterior colors of the existing house. The proposed roof will be integrated into the existing roof by using the same roof pitch and materials as the existing structure. In addition, the applicant proposes to add stone veneer along the lower portion of the front elevation to enhance the architecture. Development Review No. PL 2016-211 Page 2 of 7 A General Plan Designation Zoning District Land Use i d. - �r 7p i ANALYSIS Review Authority The proposed project requires a land use approval through the Development Review process. The analysis that follows provides the basis for staff's recommendation to approve the Development Review application. Development Review (DBMC Section 22.48) Additions which are equal to or greater than 50 percent of the existing habitable floor area of all existing structures on site, or substantially change the appearance of an existing residence require Planning Commission approval of'a DR application. Development Review approval is required to ensure compliance with the City's General Plan policies and design guidelines, and to minimize adverse effects of the proposed project upon the surrounding properties and the City in general. As stated in Section 22.48.010 of the Development Code, the Development Review process was established to ensure that new development and additions to existing development are consistent with the General Plan "through the promotion of high functional and aesthetic standards to complement and add to the economic, physical, and social character" of Diamond Bar. Development Standards: The following table compares the proposed project with the City's development standards for residential development in the RL zone: * The rear setback is measured from the edge of the buildable pad on a descending slope. Development Review No. PL 2016-211 Page 5 of 7 20 feet 20 feet Yes • • • 20 feet 5 feet on one side and 7'— east side 7'— east side • • • • 10 feet on the other side 10'-3" feet— west side 10'-3"— west side Yes • 15 feet 20'-7"— east side 20'-7"— east side Yes 17'-3" feet— west side 17'-3" feet— west side • - 20 feet 35' 28'-6" Yes • Maximum of 40% 17.9% 30% Yes ' 35 feet 22' 22' Yes • 2 -car garage 3 -car garage 3 -car garage Yes * The rear setback is measured from the edge of the buildable pad on a descending slope. Development Review No. PL 2016-211 Page 5 of 7 Landscaping: Landscape plans are not required because the site is already developed, and because the project is exempt from the City's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. The ordinance would only apply if new or rehabilitated landscaping of 2,500 square feet or more was being installed or altered. However, landscaping that is damaged during construction will need to be restored upon project completion. This requirement is included as a condition of approval. Compatibility with Neighborhood The proposed project complies with the goals and objectives as set forth in the adopted General Plan in terms of land use and density. The project is located between two-story homes on each side, and is designed to be compatible with the character of the existing homes in the neighborhood. Although a portion of the addition is proposed at the front of the existing residence (on the second story, above the garage), the front setback will remain the same and the addition is designed to create articulation with varying wall planes. The proposed addition continues the same building setback line of the house and is visually integrated with the existing house. The proposed roof style, pitch and materials will match the existing house. Furthermore, the addition will match the existing home in color and building materials and will incorporate similar architectural features. In light of these observations, staff finds that the addition will be visually integrated into the existing home and not negatively impact the look and character of the neighborhood. The project incorporates the principles of the City's Residential Design Guidelines as follows: The addition will conform to all development standards, including building height and setbacks; • A gradual transition between the addition and existing residence is achieved through appropriate setbacks, building height and window and door placement; Placement and relationship of windows, doors, and other window openings are carefully integrated with the building's overall design; The addition is visually integrated with the primary structure, by utilizing similar colors and materials throughout the proposed addition; and The proposed roof type, pitch and materials of the addition match the primary structure. Privacy and Sensitivity to Adjacent Neighbors: A majority of the second story addition with new windows is located on the west side of the house. The proposed second story addition and balcony will create views toward the west. To ensure that the proposed addition would not raise privacy concerns, the applicant sought and obtained a consent letter from the property owners at 3551 Hawkwood Drive (adjacent neighbor to the west). The letter states that the owners do not object to the proposed addition. The new balcony will also create views toward the east property. However, the fencing along the east property line is open wrought iron, which already enables adjacent neighbors to view each other's rear yards. No new windows are proposed on the second floor along Development Review No. PL 2016-211 Page 6 of 7 the east side of the home. As such, the project does not appear to create any added privacy concerns. Deed Restriction: If the proposed project is approved, the residence will have a total of five bedrooms, one study room and four bathrooms. Staff is including a condition of approval requiring a deed restriction to be recorded with the County of Los Angeles which restricts the rental of rooms of other portions of the property under two or more separate agreements and prohibits the use of the property as a boarding or rooming house. Additional Review The Public Works Department and Building and Safety Division reviewed this project, and their comments are included in the attached resolution as conditions of approval. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: On April 14, 2017, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1000 -foot radius of the project site. On April 14, 2017, the notice was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. A notice display board was posted at the site, and a copy of the notice was posted at the City's three designated community posting sites. Public Comments Received No comments have been received as of the publication date of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: This project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to the provisions of Article 19 Section 15301(e) (additions to existing structures) of the CEQA Guidelines. No further environmental review is required. Prepared by: , Mayuko Nakajima Associate Planner Attachments: Reviewed by: U Greg Gubman, CP Community Development Director 1. Draft Resolution No. 2017 -XX and Standard Conditions of Approval 2. Site Plan, Floor Plans, and Elevations Development Review No. PL 2016-211 Page 7 of 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2017 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. PL2016-211 TO CONSTRUCT A 1,246 SQUARE -FOOT TWO-STORY ADDITION WITH AN ATTACHED 438 SQUARE -FOOT BALCONY AND PATIO AREAS TO AN EXISTING 2,104 SQUARE -FOOT, TWO-STORY SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH AN ATTACHED 600 SQUARE -FOOT GARAGE ON A 0.2 GROSS ACRE (9,239 GROSS SQUARE -FOOT) LOT, LOCATED AT 3543 HAWKWOOD ROAD, DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 (APN 8714-022-019). A. RECITALS 1. The property owner and applicant, Anil Luthra, has filed an application for Development Review No. PL2016-211 to construct' a two-story addition consisting of 1,246 square feet of floor area with an attached 438 square -foot patio and balcony areas to an existing 2,104 square -foot, two-story, single- family residence with an attached 600 square -foot, three -car garage located at 3543 Hawkwood Road, Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review shall be referred to as the "Proposed Project." 2. The subject property is comprised of one parcel totaling 9,239 gross square feet (0.2 gross acres). It is located in the Low Density Residential (RL) zone with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential. 3. The legal description of the subject property is Lot 82 of Tract No. 34161. The Assessor's Parcel Number is 8714-022-019. 4. On April 14, 2017, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1000 -foot radius of the Project site. On April 14, 2017, notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers; and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board. 5. On April 25, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; and 2. The Planning Commission hereby determines the Project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the provisions of Article 19, Section 15301 (e) (additions to existing structures) of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, no further environmental review is required. C. FINDINGS OF FACT Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein and as prescribed under Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.48, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: Development Review Findings (DBMC Section 22.48.040) The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the. applicable elements of the City's General Plan, City Design Guidelines, and development standards of the applicable district, design guidelines, and architectural criteria for special areas ,(e.g., theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards or planned developments). The design and layout of the proposed two-story addition consisting of 1, 246 square feet of floor area with an attached 438 square -foot balcony and patio areas to an existing single-family residence is consistent with the City's General Plan, City Design Guidelines and development standards. The addition is located at the front and rear of the existing house. The project site is not part of any theme area, specific plan, community plan, boulevard orplanned development. 2. The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. The proposed addition will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments because the use of the project site is designed for a single-family home and the surrounding uses are also single-family homes. Although a portion of the addition is proposed at the front of the house, it maintains the same building front and side setback lines as the existing house. 2 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX The proposed addition will not interfere with vehicular or pedestrian movements, such as access or other functional requirements of a single- family home because it complies with the requirements for driveway widths and is a continuation of an existing use. 3. The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain and enhance the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.48: Development Review Standards, the City's Design Guidelines, the City's General Plan, or any applicable specific plan. The existing architecture is a 1980s tract design with stucco and concrete tiles on a gabled roof. The applicant is proposing to retain the existing building form and will match the existing roof style, pitch and materials. Furthermore, the project is located between two-story homes on each side. As such, the addition will be visually integrated, into the existing home and not negatively impact the look and character of the neighborhood. Although the addition may create views towards the west property, the applicant has obtained a letter from the property owners at 3551 Hawkwood Drive (adjacent neighbor to the west).. The letter states that the owners do not object to the proposed addition. The new balcony will also create views towards the east property. However, the fencing material on both sides of adjacent properties is open wrought iron, which already enables adjacent neighbors to view upon each other's rear yards. There is only a small portion of the existing bedroom that is being extended and no new windows are proposed on the second floor towards the east side of the home. As such, the project should not create any privacy concerns. 4. The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, color, and will remain aesthetically appealing. Although a portion of the proposed addition is at the front of the existing house, the front setback will remain the same. The addition is designed to create articulation with varying wall planes, use of materials and a balcony. The proposed addition will use the same stucco material to match the existing house. The proposed roof will match the existing roof style, 5:12 pitch, and materials. Therefore, the proposed addition will preserve the architectural integrity of the existing construction by matching exterior colors and building materials. 5. The proposed development will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare or -materially injurious (e.g., negative effect on property values or resale(s) of property) to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX Before the issuance of any City permits, the proposed project is required to comply with all conditions within the approved resolution, and the Building and Safety Division and Public Works Departments requirements. Through the permit and inspection process, the referenced agencies will ensure that the proposed project is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. 6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as set forth under Article 19 Section 15301(e) (additions to existing structures) of the CEQA guidelines. 7. Detrimental and/or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood. The addition to the existing single-family dwelling unit will be constructed in a manner similar with existing dwelling units located in the surrounding community and will not be detrimental and/or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby approves this Application, subject to the following conditions: 1. Development shall substantially comply with the plans and documents presented to the Planning Commission at the public hearing. 2. Standard Conditions. The applicant shall comply with the standard development conditions attached hereto. 3. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall record, and provide the City with a conformed recorded copy of, a Covenant and Agreement or similar document in a form approved by the City Attorney, which restricts the rental of rooms or other portions of the property under two or more separate agreements and prohibits use of the property as a boarding or rooming house, except to the extent otherwise permitted by the Diamond Bar Municipal Code or applicable state or federal law. 4. The hours during which construction activities causing the operation of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, or demolition work are limited to Monday through Saturday, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. 4 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX The Planning Commission shall: a. Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and b. Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail to the property owner, Anil Luthra, 3543 Hawkwood Road, Diamond Bar. CA 91765. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF APRIL 2017, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. M Raymond Wolfe, Chairperson I, Greg Gubman, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of April, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Greg Gubman, Secretary 5 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS USE PERMITS, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL NEW AND REMODELED STRUCTURES PROJECT #: Development Review No. PL 2016-211 SUBJECT: To construct a 1,246 square -foot two-story addition with an attached 438 square -foot balcony and patio areas to an existing 2,104 square -foot two-story single-family residence with an attached three -car garage. PROPERTY Anil Luthra OWNER/ 3543 Hawkwood Road APPLICANT: Diamond Bar, CA 91765 LOCATION: 3543 Hawkwood Road, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. I. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION AT (909) 839-7030, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and its officers, agents and employees, from any claim, action, or proceeding to attack, set-aside, void or annul, the approval of Development Review No. PL2016-211 brought within the time period provided by Government Code Section 66499.37. In the event the city and/or its officers, agents and employees are made a party of any such action: (a) Applicant shall provide a defense to the City defendants or at the City's option reimburse the City its costs of defense, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred in defense of such claims. 6 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX (b) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City defendants. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action of proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense thereof. 2. This approval shall not be effective for any purpose until the applicant and owner of the property involved have filed, within twenty-one (21) days of approval of this Development Review No. PL2016-211, at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department, their affidavit stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all the conditions of this approval. Further, this approval shall not be effective until the applicants pay remaining City processing fees, school fees and fees for the review of submitted reports. 3. All designers, architects, engineers, and contractors associated with this project shall obtain a Diamond Bar Business License; and a zoning approval for those businesses located in Diamond Bar. 4. Signed copies of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 5. Prior to the plan check, revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval. 6. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed. 7. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance with the conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable regulations. 8. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and any applicable Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 9. All site, grading, landscape/irrigation, and roof plans, and elevation plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of City permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 7 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX 10. The property owner/applicant shall remove the public hearing notice board within three days of this project's approval. 11. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of City Planning, Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works Department, and the Fire Department. B. FEES/DEPOSITS 1. Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to Planning, Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works Department and Mitigation Monitoring) at the established rates, prior to issuance of building or grading permit (whichever comes first), as required by the City. School fees as required shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permit. In addition, the applicant shall pay all remaining prorated City project review and processing fees prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever comes first. 2. Prior to any plan check, all deposit accounts for the processing of this project shall have no deficits. C. TIME LIMITS 1. The approval of Development Review No. PL2016-211 expires within two years from the date of approval if the use has not been exercised as defined pursuant to Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.66.050(b)(1). In accordance with DBMC Section 22.60.050(c), the applicant may request, in writing, a one-year time extension for Planning Commission consideration. Such a request must be submitted to the Planning Division prior to the expiration date and be accompanied by the review fee in accordance with the Fee Schedule in effect at the time of submittal. D. SITE DEVELOPMENT 1. This approval is to construct a two-story addition consisting of 1,246 square feet of floor area with an attached 438 square -foot balcony and patio areas to an existing single-family residence located at 3543 Hawkwood Road, as described in the staff report and depicted on the approved plans on file with the Planning Division, subject to the conditions listed herein. 2. The construction documents submitted for plan check shall be in substantial compliance with the architectural plans approved by the Planning Commission, as modified pursuant to the conditions below. If the plan check submittal is not in substantial compliance with the 8 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX ,. approved Development Review submittal, the plans may require further staff review and re -notification of the surrounding property owners, which may delay the project and entail additional fees. 3. To ensure compliance with the provisions of the Planning Commission approval, a final inspection is required from the Planning Division when work for any phase of the project has been completed. The applicant shall inform the Planning Division and schedule an appointment for such an inspection. 4. The above conditions shall run with the land and shall be binding upon all future owners, operators, or successors thereto of the property. Non-compliance with any condition of approval or mitigation measure imposed as a condition of the approval shall constitute a violation of the City's Development Code. Violations may be enforced in accordance with the provisions of the Development Code. 5. Failure to comply with any of the conditions set forth above or as subsequently amended in writing by the City, may result in failure to obtain a building final and/or a certificate of occupancy until full compliance is reached. The City's requirement for full compliance may require minor corrections and/or complete demolition of a non- compliant improvement, regardless of costs incurred where the project does not comply with design requirements and approvals that the applicant agreed to when permits were pulled to construct the project. 6. The project site shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the approved plans submitted to, approved, and amended herein by the Planning Commission, collectively attached referenced as site plans, floor plans, architectural elevations, and landscape plans on file with the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 7. All ground -mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, air conditioning condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berms, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. 8. All roof -mounted equipment shall be screened from public view. 9. All structures, including walls, trash enclosures, canopies, etc., shall be maintained in a structurally sound, safe manner with a clean, orderly appearance. All graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours by the property owners/occupant. 9 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX 10. All landscaping, structures, architectural features and public improvements damaged during construction shall be repaired or replaced upon project completion. E. SOLID WASTE 1. The site shall be maintained in a condition, which is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the, entitlement approved herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste contractor used has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. 2. Mandatory solid waste disposal services shall be provided by the City franchised waste hauler to all parcels/lots or uses affected by approval of this project. II. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, (909) 839-7040, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL 1. An Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted concurrently with the grading plan clearly detailing erosion control measures. These measures shall be implemented during construction. The erosion control plan shall conform to national Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards and incorporate the appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's) as specified in the Storm Water BMP Certification. B. DRAINAGE 1. Detailed drainage system information of the lot with careful attention to any flood hazard area shall be submitted. All drainage/runoff from the development shall be conveyed from the site to the natural drainage course. No on-site drainage shall be conveyed to adjacent parcels, unless that is the natural drainage course. 10 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX III. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: General Conditions: 1. At the time of plan check submittal, plans and construction shall conform to current State and Local Building Code (i.e., 2013 California Building Code series will apply until December 31, 2016, otherwise the 2016 CBC series applies) requirements and all other applicable construction codes, ordinances and regulations in effect. 2. Provisions for CAL Green shall be implemented onto plans and certification shall be provided by a third party as required by the Building and Safety Division. Specific water, waste, low VOC, and related conservation measures shall be shown on plans. Construction shall conform to the current CAL Green Code. Plan Check — Items to be addressed prior to plan approval: 3. The minimum design load for wind in this area is 110 M.P.H. exposures "C" and the site is within seismic zone D or E. The applicant shall submit drawings and calculations prepared by a California State licensed Architect/Engineer with wet stamp and signature. 4. This project shall comply with the energy conservation requirements of the State of California Energy Commission. All lighting shall be high efficacy or equivalent per the current California Energy Code 119 and 150(k). 5. Indoor air quality shall be provided consistent with ASHRAE 62.2 as required per California Energy Code 150(0). 6. Public Works/Engineering Department is required to review and approve grading plans that clearly show all finish elevations, drainage, and retaining wall(s) locations. These plans shall be consistent with the site plan submitted to the Building and Safety Division. 7. "Separate permits are required for retaining walls" and shall be noted on plans. 8. All balconies shall be designed for 601b/ft live load. 9. All easements shall be shown on the site plan. 11 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX 10. Fire Department approval shall be required. Contact the Fire Department to check the fire zone for the location of your property. If this project is located in High Hazard Fire Zone, it shall meet requirements of the fire zone per CBC Chapter 7A. a. All unenclosed under -floor areas shall be constructed as exterior wall. b. All openings into the attic, floor and/or other enclosed areas shall be covered with corrosion -resistant wire mesh not less than 1/4 inch or more than 1/2 inch in any dimension except where such openings are equipped with sash or door. c. Eaves shall be protected. d. Exterior construction shall be one-hour or non-combustible. e. Fuel modification plans shall be approved through to County Fire Fuel Modification Unit. f. LA County Fire shall approve plans for fire flow availability due to home being over 3600 sf as required per CFC Appendix B105.1. 11. All retaining walls shall be separately submitted to the Building and Safety and Public Works/Engineering Departments for review and approval if applicable. 12. A soils report is required per CBC 1803 and all recommendations of the soils report shall be adhered to. 13. Slope setbacks shall be consistent with California Building Code Figure 1805.3.1 and California Residential Code R403.1.7. Foundations shall provide a minimum distance to daylight. 14. Light and ventilation shall comply with CBC 1203 and 1205. The existing living room shall be justified with consideration that the covered patio is only open on one side. 15. The occupancy group shall be listed as R-3 rather than R-1. 16. Roof crickets shall be identified on plans for proper roof drainage. Permit — Items required prior to building permit issuance: 17. Solid waste management of construction material shall incorporate recycling material collection per Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 8.16 of Title 8. The contractor shall complete all required forms and pay applicable deposits prior to permit. 12 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX 18. Prior to building permit issuance, all school district fees shall be paid. Please obtain a form from the Building and Safety Division to take directly to the school district. 19. AQMD notification is required at least 10 days prior to any demolition. Proof of notification is required at permit issuance. 20. All workers on the job shall be covered by workman's compensation insurance under a licensed general contractor. Any changes to the contractor shall be updated on the building permit. Construction — Conditions required during construction: 21. Every permit issued by the building official under the provisions of this Code shall expire and become null and void unless the work authorized by such permit is commenced within one -hundred -eighty (180) days after permit issuance, and if a successful inspection has not been obtained from the building official within one -hundred -eighty (180) days from the date of permit issuance or the last successful inspection. A successful inspection shall mean a documented passed inspection by the city building inspector as outlined in Section 110.6. 22. All structures and property shall be maintained in a safe and clean manner during construction. The property shall be free of debris, trash, and weeds. 23. All equipment staging areas shall be maintained in an orderly manner and screened behind a minimum 6' high fence. 24. A height and setback survey may be required at completion of framing and foundations construction phases, respectively. 25. The project shall be protected by a construction fence to the satisfaction of the Building Official, and shall comply with the NPDES & BMP requirements (sand bags, etc.). All fencing shall be view obstructing with opaque surfaces. 26. The location of property lines and building pad may require a survey to be determined by the building inspection during foundation and/or frame inspection. 27. The applicant shall contact Dig Alert and have underground utility locations marked by the utility companies prior to any excavation. Contact Dig Alert by dialing 811 or their website at www. dig alert.opg. 28. The applicant shall first request and secure approval from the City for any changes or deviations from approved plans prior to proceeding with any work in accordance with such changes or deviations. 13 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX 29. All glazing in hazardous locations shall be labeled as safety glass. The labeling shall be visible for inspection. 30. Pursuant to California Residential Code (CRC) Section R315, carbon monoxide detectors are required in halls leading to sleeping rooms. 31. Drainage patterns shall match the approved grading/drainage plan from the Public Works/Engineering Department. Surface water shall drain away from the building at a 2% minimum slope. The final as -built conditions shall match the grading/drainage plan or otherwise approved as -built grading/drainage pian. 32. Decks, roofs, and other flat surfaces shall slope at least 1/4'Yft with approved and listed water proofing material. Guardrails shall be provided for these surfaces at least 42" minimum in height, 4" maximum spacing between rails, and capable of resisting at least 20 pounds per lineal foot of lateral load. 33. Special inspections and structural observation will be required in conformance with CBC 1704 to 1709. 34. All plumbing fixtures, including those in existing areas, shall be low -flow models consistent with California Civil Code Section 1101.1 to 1101.8. 35. The existing fireplace supply air shall be vented directly to the outside. END 14 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX 6 DESIGN & CONSULTANT BASILAMMARI 202 AMBLING DRIVE BREA, CA 92821 TEL -(714)422-7792 RESTRICTIVENCIPCE cgxo 1 EG NSINTOGUARETHELx C.. FNOl wGAGAANG`S`SR`EG.. NRARCEADAammsmu�Gr MGNO iT MOM,1£YWRNWfWRIREV WXEBI! REVISIONS NO I L. I REV R., PROJECT OWNER TEL: (909) 861-1750 PROJECTAODRESS Lo UU H U Z wQ Q O � Z /(� W 0 Q �+ O W a z= co It LLL M DATE: 01-032017 SHEET DESCRIPTION TITLE SHEET SHEET T-1 ABBREVIATIONS / DEFINITIONS: PROPERTY INFORMATION VICINITY MAP SHEET- INDEX ANILE E Ei,. L S OWNER NAME: ANIL LUTHRA RESIDENCE Z. o AT I LE LAM: u¢ LA...AT' LAVAroaY C:C, BIG, B.C. CGRE SEAT COYER DRAIDSER DESCRIPTION SHEET PE EJ ExFA1.SCNNMMr LRE, LG LR SCHEO, SCOHHODUL a N "GNNEA '°D"°� EL ODCAT Lr. DIIS PROPERTY LOCATION_ 3543 HAWKWOOD ROAD i I R LE F E M C F° Ca :R E, DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 .T ' TITLE SHEET T-1 E.ECEMERGENCY M, L, Mc01CME CABINET SIT SHELF SHELF � [� A.B. AxcxnR Bar E.L. EMERGENCY N., NADINE BOLT I., sxouER TEL: (909) 802 - 8895 SITE PLAN SP -1 PBV, A A80`re EP EUPT ELECTRICAL PgNELB0AR0 EOUW PNAR , MECHG. MECHANICAL Mr. ^ SHT sari SNEEui CrcYUGNT NTE°� ABI ADJUsiA9LF E wG ^ ELEc c w ,ER cWLEre ME. G MAx AGnRNG EL SUPE LOT SIZE: 9,239 SO. FT. PARCEL # 8714022019 • • EXISTING IST & 2ND FLOOR PLAN A-1 AFE ABOVE PRE FI ExSi Ex STING MFR. MANUFACNNIG SNO. SANITARY NATION DISGP`RSEC /// Aoc . AccREarE W ANUM ExP 10, ExPAxsaN Exl..G x. MAxxnLE AAM sx.R. w CIAGNY BUILDING FOOT PRINT= (NEW) LOT COVERAGE ° y PROPOSED IST&2ND FLOOR PLAN A-2 GG xux xc ExrRw+ ROD LL saEnFCAnarvs FLOOR PLAN L APPROXNA,E A FBI AURA cEITANEOUs A AGGI GPENING ° ssK, ARE GES., SINK raL PROPOSED ELEVATIONS ---- A-3 APROx, RCH. ARCHITECT F F:B: Fur BAR' .G. Mm nmuxiE. ssr. siuNLEss siEr_L EXISTING isI FLOOR AREA 1050 SQ. FT. ARD s'x. ARCHIIECNRAL AMALT FO FLOOR GRAIN IAVL MUWON SLA. siARW EXISTING 2nd FLOOR AREA 1054 SQ. FT. '., Fox. f. FWNDABON f E lINOTT5TT R - N N. NORni ,G sroR, CrAN°ARG EXISTING GARAGE AREA �� 600 SD. FT. EXISTING ELEVATIONS -------A-3.1 nN yExFnrvculsxeR CABINET c NO. aq NOMr N cOxTRAm BER S,oancE �� A-4 TOTAL EXISTING AREA 2,704 SD. FT. Bc. p N BB. aong0 OGS swL smunuxAL BIG., BLIUMNWS F:I 9x91 crenOE NOM NGMINAL S,ROQ'I ST. INCL - /j - -' .,....�" %'•• SECTIONS Nmc. BLD. Bunmxc 1211 Fx.c F . TIRE lbsE cnGWE, XTS. Nor TO SCALE SIRMCI DOE,. S1RUC,URE susPENOEo EXISTING ROOF & PROPOSED ROOF LAYOUT A-5 NEW 1st FLOOR AREA 899 SQ. FT. AINUH SIRc. ea cKlxc R, LIR 0/ OrLR sW I. WOOD Ru. GM. , BEAM FLASH. FLUOR. AUOREDSTI °P' WS °aGscncaL sYM. svmMEmICAL NEW 2nd FLOOR AREA 347 SQ. FT. PROPOSED IST& 2ND FLOOR UTILITY PLAN A-6 COt TEAM F.O.C. FG.F pCERESCENOu F 0 CONCRETE FACE FTNISN ETE GO o o. °N CEN R GusnE DIAMETER (GIM) }B, TOWEL BAR NEW 2nd FLOOR DECK AREA 176 SQ. FT. CABINET EOM. GF FACE GF MuwU OFF. GFncE rc TW of cuae rEMpPxaxE GENERAL NOTES GN -i CCAB, CB, CATCH BACON Fos. FACE OF STUDS O.NG. oLELIEAD CARGEr Tna.P EqW NEW lst FLOOR COVERED PATIO AREA 262 SQ. FT. T FPNI TGAIMMA.F OPENING TERRAz20 NEW TOTAL ADDITION (WITHOUT DECK) 1,246 SQ. FT. - FFAM'c TRAM ma. GP ebTe 1. G. I.A. AND cRWYE cip cosiGrc SCOPE OF WORK FOUNDATION PLAN— S-1 Fs. sc Tuu rzf POK ,urc. wl - cG. c °' CORNER GUARD inuuxG Fr F'I, FGD, Ore Ei DENTING °£ Csi P P� BCCnsr PLA roc :oP o ,O cope ,W O PUTE ROOF &FLOOR FRAMING PLAN— S-2 --,-- ----------- -.-.—.--- EKG. 1. A.ING mfr WRR. FDRHING UN. PUS, PLASTIGLnxNn,E PusTER {P:B. OF" BUILDING CODE ' 2nd FLOOR ADDTION, EXTERIOR OF BEDROOMS AND BATHROOMS, Fvr FI., PLYw000 TRO. INTLET 11. DISPENSER TREAD TOTAL NEW =347SQ. FT. DETAILS SD -0 TO OAK.E. IN, C.O. CASE° OPFJRNG Ca CAJCE PNM PANEL T.V, 1UP PION COL COLVMN ,°_ G GwA. Gr Dv,�xaEG Tw iW aF wALL Pw aiuv'e kG 'NEW 2nd FLOOR DECK=176 Sq. FT. WRC, concge iE ce. cren�enre rvm. PLYvm.O m. TYPICAL DETAILS---------SD-2 .NN. .DID ONSECCTUR CNER s GCGDLR GL ANO. R Gu GROUND GRA« Pre PROPERTYRLIKE U N ¢». uNHrvrsxsG CODE , 2016 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE 2016 CECT CMC, CPC AND 2016 CALI. • NEW 1st FLOOR ADDITION EXTERIOR OF KITCHEN AND NEW G RE Core . ..ISO SIPP: crosuu PT. PREFAB PONT PREFABRICATED UR. UNLESS GTHERYNSE NOTED URINAL ENERGY CODE AND CITY ORADINANCE BEDROOM & BATHROOM TOTAL NEW =899 SQ. FT, TITLE 24 ------- T-24 CORK 'ATNOSSI.R G.B. BOARD GmSVM BOP N. i.O PAPERAGOD DISPERSER BASE TRIT CWk1ERSVxtt T.D� COMBIN `n CX PAPE0. TOWEL V V,B, NABOB NABOB BARRIER CTR, CENTPR B HOSE BIBB k RECEPTACLE VEsi VERTHAL II ND HONGKO CORE P1N. PASPTBSER �S TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION V -B D GUAR NEPA NOMe, NAR°WOW G LRECEP,ACE VTT, D, "I OF, X N DETAIL G FOUNTAIN WE. H PGRD.M H LLOW METAL 1_I Oi. WARRY ALE ... q VNT'R£ THRu ROPE ffff Lot Coverage Calculation DIAMETER HR: HR. HORaDNTAL xouR `G �] TIl IM OCCUPACYGROUP D R-3 ' C:ADETAIL Diu wvfxslnx HF,cPT R R, FISER KHAT EXISTING BUILDING FOOTPRINT WITH GARAGE =1050+600=1650 SQ. FT. MI OOt`M Nm. ¢ac "Ale PC'. HuvmcnxG RAD, re a LUS R" vm' woAa'EC C105tT ' EXISTING LOT COVERAGE RATIO =1650 / 9239 =17.9 % GUL e ODOR OPENING .Daft xwz xGNIZOoNTAl- NEP. COIN,GRAIN v YAjO .,IN HEATER WITERP • NEW BUILDING FOOT PRINT WITH GARAGE =1050+600+899+262=2811 SQ, FT, DS. OmmSPOm TD IREG, gA.ETFG BEER, WpIASCAT OF D.S P. Dw DRY S,PNBPIPE INSVL ixsvLAnon qfv FIALGERAiOfl REr.RSE RU mcr.^Iv„Tor FIRE SPRINKLER NONE 'NEW LOT COVERAGE RATIO=2811/9239=30.0% owes GRAKINsxLR Ogavnrvcs wT, DTERI°R DINFUNCE, REINFORCED - Gll, BRAVER REO. DEWWEL j an, IANNGR 'LINT RESM R, REsOFNr ROC THIS PROJECT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER K NO OT Nro RAN REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES ADOPTED BY „No«OUT EATER LE WAR LEADER K/S KNEE STAGE THE LOCAL GOVERNING AGENCIES. DESIGN & CONSULTANT BASILAMMARI 202 AMBLING DRIVE BREA, CA 92821 TEL -(714)422-7792 RESTRICTIVENCIPCE cgxo 1 EG NSINTOGUARETHELx C.. FNOl wGAGAANG`S`SR`EG.. NRARCEADAammsmu�Gr MGNO iT MOM,1£YWRNWfWRIREV WXEBI! REVISIONS NO I L. I REV R., PROJECT OWNER TEL: (909) 861-1750 PROJECTAODRESS Lo UU H U Z wQ Q O � Z /(� W 0 Q �+ O W a z= co It LLL M DATE: 01-032017 SHEET DESCRIPTION TITLE SHEET SHEET T-1 -PL: -62.55' PROPERTY LINE I I I I I SITE PIAN LEGEND — Xwx - ® —1— HAWMYOOD ROAD SITE PLAN 0 SCALE :118" =1'-D" DESIGN &CONSULTANT BASILAMMARI 202 AMBLING DRIVE BREA, CA 92821 TEL. (714) 422-7792 RESTRICTIVENO➢CE mE..Esrcxs,oXAwwce eRo ssFaFrwirossmEmEacLosrvE mssEwuwwcsr�x wucm �' nuxsEE�mEo,w xafl C.W PXYOmE115IXIICNF45XE IRIi FflOMMENVryfHOVf Wfl1�lEXfFlX591I REVISIONS xa 1- wiE mvlsmrvs PROJECT OWNER _ ANIL LUTHRA TEL: (909) 86Y175O Wco ¢ �W HIGH RLMM&L � Z z W 2 Qa m 0 Q �o t<'_Y' Q c I I (S) LNGSCAPS AREA � Q a 10 a W O 0 o ¢ w oo `9LOCK WALL a ¢ I � z= M ItM STAMP 3 wl z W ►a�_ w ,C 1 7._D.. LJ HAWMYOOD ROAD SITE PLAN 0 SCALE :118" =1'-D" DESIGN &CONSULTANT BASILAMMARI 202 AMBLING DRIVE BREA, CA 92821 TEL. (714) 422-7792 RESTRICTIVENO➢CE mE..Esrcxs,oXAwwce eRo ssFaFrwirossmEmEacLosrvE mssEwuwwcsr�x wucm �' nuxsEE�mEo,w xafl C.W PXYOmE115IXIICNF45XE IRIi FflOMMENVryfHOVf Wfl1�lEXfFlX591I REVISIONS xa 1- wiE mvlsmrvs PROJECT OWNER _ ANIL LUTHRA TEL: (909) 86Y175O Wco � U Z z W 2 Qa m 0 Q �o ¢ p Q c C Q a 10 a W O 0 o � w oo a � z= M ItM STAMP wl W I A �IIOCN WALL Yev�_ _ 1 4 G 18'XIGX (E) CONCRETE DRIVEWAY AF ELaxwul. I $E (e) wnnscAPe AREA PROPERTY LINE �- HAWMYOOD ROAD SITE PLAN 0 SCALE :118" =1'-D" DESIGN &CONSULTANT BASILAMMARI 202 AMBLING DRIVE BREA, CA 92821 TEL. (714) 422-7792 RESTRICTIVENO➢CE mE..Esrcxs,oXAwwce eRo ssFaFrwirossmEmEacLosrvE mssEwuwwcsr�x wucm �' nuxsEE�mEo,w xafl C.W PXYOmE115IXIICNF45XE IRIi FflOMMENVryfHOVf Wfl1�lEXfFlX591I REVISIONS xa 1- wiE mvlsmrvs PROJECT OWNER _ ANIL LUTHRA TEL: (909) 86Y175O DATE: 01-n2017 SHEET DESCRIPTION SITE PLAN SHEET SP -1 Wco � U Z z W 2 Qa m 0 Q �o Q C Q W O 0 H oo a � z= M ItM STAMP DATE: 01-n2017 SHEET DESCRIPTION SITE PLAN SHEET SP -1 EXISTING 1st FLOOR PLAN _ SCALE :1/4'= V-0" WALLLEGEND � EXISTINGWALLTOREMAIN ® EXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVED NEW WALL (2x STUDS AT 16' O.C.) WINDOW & DOOR SCHEDULE 5'-0'x37.6' VINYL SLIDING WINDOW(EXISTING) O 2'-6'x6'-8' WOOD DOOR (EXISTING) 5'-0'x5'-0' VINYL SLIDING WINDOW (EXISTING) B'-D'x6'-8' VINYL SLIDING DOOR (EXISTING) 2'-8'x8'-8' WOOD DOOR (EXISTING) 8'-0'x5'-O'(XOX)SLIDING VINYL WINDOW (Ems LNG) 6'-07x5'-0' SLIDING VINYL WINDOW (EXISTING) 3'-0'x67-8' WOOD DOOR (EXISTING) O 2'-9'x5'-0' SINGLE HUNG VINYL WINDOW (EXISTING) 10 2'-8'x6'-8' WOOD DOOR (EXISTING) 11 5'-07x3'-9'VINYL SLIDING WINDOW (EXISTING) 13 2'-07x1'-3' VINYL SLIDING WINDOW (EXISTING) 19 l'-9' x 2'-10' SINGLE HUNG VINYL WINDOW (EXISTING) EXISTING 2nd FLOOR PLAN SCALE :114" = T-0" DESIGN &CONSULTANT BASILAMMARI 202 AMBLING DRIVE BREA, CA 92821 TEL -(714)422-7792 RESTRICTIVENOTICE Txss osslrals,auwEwv,uro LPELIfILAl10N5 A4E TIE PC W SNE maysiEn� mxsva Toone®xo�s' FusuivomExsmucrvxsseesuar IwumEu wmarwwrrexwxswr REVISIONS xo o<rE nensoxs PROJECTOWNER ANIL UUTHRA TEL: (909) 861-1750 1 canirrT ennaFcc I STAMP DATE: 01-03-2017 1 1 cuccT ncerelenrw I EXISTING 1st & 2nd FLOOR PLAN SHEET A-1 WALL LEGEND NEW WINDOW & DOOR SCHEDULE DESIGN& CONSULTANT O 5'-0"x5".0" FIXED VINYL WINDOW BASIL AMMARI o EXISTING WALL TO REMAINO 202 AMBLING DRIVE 3'-0"z5"-0"SINGLE HUNG VINYL WINDOW ® EXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVED BREA, CA 92821 NEW WALL (2x STUDS AT 16' OZ,) © 12•'6'x6"-0" WOOD POCKET DOOR TEL -(/14)422-7192 2'-B"x6'-8^WOOD DOOR 14'e' 1a' -z' OT NEW 120 x5'-0^ VINYL POCKET GLASS DOOR O x WOOD DOOR ,HERSTRI TIVE OT E 0 x 6'-8' 5'-0"x5"-0" SLIDING VINYL WINDOW l � (1 (Nlvawaw 1 sxcrcx%Er vcwtA - _ O NEW 2'-" FIXED GLASS WINDOW ,xeseoRxmxsscwxors6covm PAIR OF 2'-0°x6'$'FRENCH DOORS TM"'+sm6Rfo caxaxawssoxox NjWINDOW NWI DOW (NIWINOOW (N)WI' GW xlWinbow O cNi AVroWERSIPucrvF6sx6xYA.r HmeNxmxWr,uwilEYfgXS°rrt -- -- - -- - � B'-0"xfi"-0"SLIDING VINYL DOOR B A B T'o B A B- - o 4 Iz O I Iz V a of § 0 T -0"x Y -W SLIDING VINYL WINDOW REVISIONS ^ h e li EI ^ x 4'-0"x4"-0" SLIDING VINYL WINDOW xa WiE R6mswxs 31 6 q FS (N) Nook _1...._. G� gl Ic"amge'a' V 5'-0"x6';3" SLIDING VINYL DOOR Qj -IS-417 PIANcxscx n I O 2'$"x6'-0"WOOD DOOR sLHAtf ARCH — - j 1a3rc _ NWDOW _ ..;( I____-___(nlwlrvoow j S'-0"x3'-0"SLIDING VINYL WINDOW (FLORSTEO GLASS) B I I v -_ -- 1- ---_ �- I (N)Bedmoml IS 0 3'-0"x4'-0" VINYL SLIDING WINDOW CMirg I ©5-0"x4'-0"SLIDING VINYL WINDOW - I '� a !� 4 m ® 3'-0"xi'-0"SLIDING VINYL WINDOW (STAINED GLASS) e --LClE OF FLOORABOVE---_m �z `ri f ///' r - Q 3'-0"z3'-0"SLIDING VINYL WINDOW PROJECT OWNER S ANIL LUTHRA rY j ARCH IN) Kitchen ry 2'9' S-0' 2'9' P'-0" 13'-3^ cNvngsv ____--.____._;___________ I h TEL (909) 861-1750 9 r NEW METAL GUARD IL4R'HIGH PROJECT ADDRESS I» L--------- --� (N) COVERED PATIO ', of I I I I I at l `a e e Ln al I 4 O W.I.C. x - __ ___ _-L .I. _� _ ,•.]^ aw' m I m c l c"uu:q oDW I (N)IDECK P �/ NPOCHEi GLASS G0oft ^ r^ 3 2 B 2"S' \ (N) a GOW 1• •• 2'-0' L O(N)WINDOW ... (I NNGOW ^ < I PATID DR. 2•J!• 3'] 2' / � r H I/1 wing I� O -. 3m .......Farm wau (EcLpemm m tors' zs r -s (Ec Bedmoml (E)9�d0 " by V1 O D y / //'-•�� W 4. m g om2 Q N wrzn FtoasTED 13 Canlnq e'-0• ar mcn �_-___— - m c°YE YE 6, l �E1 Be-- 3 Q F��/ Q GLASS 4_ __ ___________________ 0 (NJ Marler bath 2 _- § ® FEiEs°Yis Ervaos"URE \\ CIoSBI W.LC. �l 0 n w Li0Q0 sa a6 tai -1 - .O Closer Y _ A ANDA SEAT 0 WRHSTAINED GLASS r �' n • Q a z O o - -- q Closet r - (E) HaNWay 1-q a , Q �, r, 1z sEAT Laundry UP m WIT-STAwaD I \ - -- I 1 c m Q �r C _ a2k40'SHOWERWmH WF _ FRANI A ANDA -, ELES . CLOSURE 10 'q 1 (IS -hii IN) Bath Ranf ODI-... 6-11' 2- o0' 2'-0' 10'.9' R \\ - —_ �( Q zss (E) Formal Living But m O l 1ti O Open to bel / ow d E 4 P'x4B'SnOWERWIIH \ o fRVAE LESS ENCLOSURE \\ 4 M spa_ _ av q N AGDASEAT \ (OAU (E) Walk In Closet m l STAMP r (E) En (N) Master Bath F WITH Daalnfl a'o' (E) 3 -Car Garage 4 Os cuss I \ ^_:.--------------- ----� -- — l ,3•E• ---- - O ' ae q (Elsuawwwoow I (N)Stady flm / `q e,041 o 1E) Master Bedroom 4 I3 . DATE: 01-03-2017 v i I SHEET DESCRIPTION (F1G4a4GE DDDR �� ' i I r -' - / CIOSBI o (EJGARAGE ODOR no m---- PROPOSED 1st & 2nd -- (xlwmoow / l FLOOR PLAN N ------- ---- — — ©l -s 29'-2' PROPOSED 1st FLOOR PLAN - -------- sD'u' -- --1-- - -� SHEET Y_-2' S'L' Y-1• 6•4• 2•L• 5•_1• 2•L• 6•E• —_ /� -- — SCALE: 1/4"=V-oA_� " PROPOSED 2nd FLOOR PLAN _ SCALE :114" =1'-0" PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION �^ SCALE: 1/4"=1-0" 'L( &(PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE :114" =1-0" ELEVATION NOTES: O EXISTING ROOFING, CONCRETE TILE O EXISTING STUCCO O NEW ROOFING, CONCRETE TILE TO MATCH EXISTING IN COLOR AND STYLE NEW 3 -COAT STUCCO TO MATCH EXISTING IN COLOR & SME EXISTING CHEMNEY © 3112" WIDE STUCCO FOAM TRIM AROUND ALL DOORS AND WINDOWS EXISTING AND NEW O EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE (TYPICAL) NEW STONE VENEER WITH 3" FOAM TRIM ON TOP (BEIGE COLOR) • ALL NEW AND EXISTING ROOF OVERHANGS SHALL MATCH AND OVERHANGS SHALL BE 18- n COLORTABLE 0 I] ALL NEW STUCCO COLOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING STUCCO COLOR (BEIGE COLOR) E2 ALL NEW AND EXISTING WINDOW FRAME COLORS SHALL MATCH (WHITE COLOR) (a] ALL NEW ROOFING TO MATCH EXISTING ROOFING, CONCRETE TILE ROOFING (REDISH BROWN COLOR) ® EXISTING 3- STUCCO FOAM AROUND WINDOWS DESIGN & CONSULTANT BASILAMMARI 202 AMBLING DRIVE BREA, CA 92821 TEL -(714)422-7792 RESTRICTIVENOTICE 1ME8EBELCXS.Ol4WWG8.µP IftWSffAgE0. g2PFPPOWCF➢NON CµµY OMEA 31g11CI11PE88EBIIM1i ' REVISIONS 019391171PIAN�&ie. PRII.IFfT IIWAIFR ANIL LU I NKR TEL: (909)861-1750 PROJECT ADDRESS m DATE: 01-03-2017 °op SHEET DESCRIPTION 4 i ELEVATIONS SHEET A-3 COLOR TABLE A ALL NEW STUCCO COLOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING STUCCO COLOR (BEIGE COLOR) ALL NEW AND EXISTING WINDOW FRAME COLORS SHALL MATCH (WHITE COLOR) F9 ALL NEW ROOFING TO MATCH EXISTING ROOFING, CONCRETE TILE ROOFING (REDISH BROWN COLOR) ® EXISTING 3" STUCCO FOAM AROUND WINDOWS ELEVATION NOTES EXISTING ROOFING, CONCRETE TILE O EXISTING STUCCO NEW ROOFING, CONCRETE TILE TO MATCH EXISTING IN COLOR AND STYLE 0° NEW 3 -COAT STUCCO TO MATCH EXISTING IN COLOR&STYLE EXISTINGCHEMNEY 0 31(2- WIDE STUCCO FOAM TRIM AROUND ALL DOORS AND WINDOWS EXISTING AND NEW O EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTUF zEXISTING NORTH ELEVATION SCALE :1/4" =1'-0" oiXISTING WEST SIDE ELEVATION____ SCALE: 1/4" =1'-0" A,EXISTING EAST SIDE ELEVATION ____ SCALE: 1l4"=1'-0" DESIGN & CONSULTANT BASILAMMARI 202 AMBLING DRIVE BREA. CA 02821 TEL -(714)422-7792 RESTRICTWENOTICE rras,mwwaccuo EPEGFlGTPYSA4ElXEIXCYASNE REVISIONS A DI -0}201] PMNECK-1 PROJECTOWNER ANIL LUTHRA TEL: (909) 861-1750 PROIECTADORESS DATE: 01-03-2017 1 SHEET DESCRIPTION I ELEVATIONS SHEET A-3.1 SECTION NOTES: Q EXISTING STUCCO FINISH Q NEW 3 -COAT STUCCO FINISH TO MATCH EXISTING STYLEAND COLOR NEW ROOFING, CONCRETETILE TO MATCH EXISTING IN STYLE AND COLOR 0 NEW FRAMING MEMBERS PER STRUCTURAL PLANS PROVIDE 1XG T & G EXPOSED ROOF SHEATHING OVER DECK AREA. ROOF& FLOOR WALL INSTILLATION PER TITLE -24 PLANS O 5/8° DRYWALL AT ALL WALLS & CEILINGS. O POST AT DECK PER STRUCTURAL PLAN BEAM PER STRUCTURAL PLANS 10 GUARD RAIL MIN. 42"HIGH 1f CRICKET BUILT-UP ROOF FOR DRAINAGE SECTION A -A -------- SCALE -1/4'= l-" SECTION B -B SCALE: 114" =1'-0" DESIGN& CONSULTANT BASILAMMARI 202 AMBLING DRIVE BREA, CA 92821 TEL. (714) 422-7792 RESETCTIVENOTICE ,HESE oEscxs, oaAwwcs, m¢ivennaxsexEmEExciusns=. mws�rtE�a, w a�aw'ucvn° uoa' iNi ANY OMEfl SIINCNXESBEBYLLi qW TIEMWRXWIWHTEHCOXEEX! REVISIONS /XOR MlE aMAPY3 A'\ 01-03A1) %ANCNFCK PROJECT OWNER ANIL LUTHRA TEL: (909) 861-1750 Lo W U � U W� m F�1 � Z (S� O Q 0 x O O �Q M co co DATE: Oi-03-2017 SHEETOESCRIPTION SECTIONS SHEET ml _ ROOF PLAN NOTES INDICATES R- DIRECTION U.N.O. ROOF MATERIAL: CONCRETE EXISTING TILE ROOFING 18' (INCHES) TYPICAL ROOF OVERHANG AT PNCE, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE 18' (INCHES) TYPICAL ROOF OVERHANG AT RAVE, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE EXISTING ROOF LINE r_______________.., I i I I I I I I I I I I /EXISTING ROOF LINE I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SERIDGE ______ F----------- .... N RIDGE -() _____--------___-_.._.__. I `� I N► 5:12 512 I � � I i 1 �yQY I � I � J RESTRICTIVENOTICE I �1 IF1 L� I I J I I I I I I I � I I I EXISTING ROOF LAYOUT PLAN SCALE : 1/4" =1'-0" I I I I I I I I I —EXISTING BUILDING LINE 'tjr - - �I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I 1 QI �1 I I KI I I ^I I I I I I I ) I I I � rJ I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I � �1 I I I I I I I /EXISTING ROOF LINE I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IL _ I I N RIDGE -() _____--------___-_.._.__. I 5:12 I I � �1 I DESIGN &CONSULTANT I ` I I ` e I LID I IL _ I I N RIDGE -() _____--------___-_.._.__. I 5:12 I I � � I i I �yQY W� I I � �1 512 (N) RIDGE 5:12 Fl ___�___I_. ► I I I I I I I r J I PROPOSED ROOF LAYOUT PLAN SCALE :1/4" =1'-0" BUILDING LINE PROJECTOWNER ANIL DESIGN &CONSULTANT TEL: (909)861-1750 PROJECTADORES$ BASILAMMARI LID 202 AMBLING DRIVE r U� BREA, CA 92821 z0 TEL -(714)422-7792 W� RESTRICTIVENOTICE IG46.BN1WWG4 M'0 _ za 10' Q iNEk��G3 W6JGi BEfAPlEO tlYPFAiW11LFDN6i o Q ____ -T fAINATiEMWfIFIWf WB NB�Wti a W I O I � REVISIONS I I I I '% oniE Neasia�s I I I I Q 010 p= PUW HECK I I wl '� I rrl n1 I w I � I I I 512 (N) RIDGE 5:12 Fl ___�___I_. ► I I I I I I I r J I PROPOSED ROOF LAYOUT PLAN SCALE :1/4" =1'-0" BUILDING LINE PROJECTOWNER ANIL LUTHRA TEL: (909)861-1750 PROJECTADORES$ LID W1.0 r U� z0 W� m _ za Q o Q a W Fri �1 O � O 0 z= LYJ STAMP _- DATE: 01-032017 SHEET DESCRIPTION ROOF LAYOUT & PROPOSED ROOF LAYOUT A-5 L91 zv $ (N) No DO, 41 t1 \ I\ I �I (C0 Bedroom 1 ______________ __4— ) I / I � ___--- \ \ / ________LWEOFiL00J%ABOVE __.___________ Tfd 3d IN) Ifthon Aye (N)COVERED PATIO v� —" z.a.. mra - - G: Linen.... `B i Wm Island B''0'\ I 1 F I A- IF Pro LLIV CE I°NAF o i i i! i HEF. (N)MastLinen MON \ er Balh _p_. Gore em� .�' .�. WH Laundry x (E) 3 Car Garage C (E) Formal Living Rm DESIGN & CONSULTANT BASEAMMARI 202 AMBLING DRIVE BREA• CA 92821 TEL -(714)422-7792 RESTRICTIVENOTICE SI1R9EDE%1. AVETREACCHAVE THEBE�TANDDOS ORAOTBECAHED gEVEPROWCEDNOR SENWNIMEBBEBONT FROMMW WRHWIWHRIENCON. REVISIONS AID I EOH n OIL2I-%NCHEC K PROJECT OWNER ANIL LUTHRA TEL: (909) 861-1750 PROJECTADDRESS tf) U� z� W� 00 O � z (� O a `aq � a O A O � � a � z= T LO CYE) STAMP DATE: 0"3-2017 SHEET DESCRIPTION PROPOSED 1ST & 2ND FLOOR UTILITY PLAN SHEE PROPOSED 1st FLOOR UTILITY PLAN PROPOSED 2nd FLOOR UTILITY PLAN _ I �_� SCALE :1W—==1'-0" SCALE :114"=1-0" UTILITY SYMBOLS UTILITY NOTES t DUPLEX OUTLET PER 201] C.E.L. ART 210-52(A) -- FLUORESCENT UNDER CABINET EIGHT 1, ONE 0EEDT13S ALLLOF TM000. A C6ACM3 093LL IN 1' MINGS1F OUTLETS R CT AN PRC -FAULT I/2 HOT OUTLET PER 2013 C.E.C. ART. 210-52(A) SINTER SLEEPING AREAS ALLA9 INTMERVPIER(S). (CED 210-12(b)) RECEPTACLE W ai LO AGON5 SHALL COMPLY WEN 12MY FIXED APPLIANCE SUCH AS DISPOSAL DISHIYASHER ��u' 220 WR£i HER 201] CEC. ART. 310-53(A) 'n5 3-VIAY SWICII c R -52 a). CLOTHES WASHER. DRYER BUILT-IN HEATERS, OR ANY IT FRED APPLIANCE ARM 1%A H.P. MOTOR OR LARGER SHALL A. OUTLET PER R01] EEC. ARi 310-53(A) m - Y BRIGHT INTO DIMMER 3. INSTALL NON -REMOVABLE BACK FLOC PRE\TNTION DEVICES BE AN A SEPARATE Ail AWG 6NE BRANCH CIRGAn.. EACH 'p" CIMM ER SVF TCN ON ALL EXTERIOR HOS- BIBS PER C C - 'P" GVELLI'0 UNIT SHALL HAVE INSTALLED MARTIN AN GFl Wlt£i-CEAniEAPROOF PER 2013 DEC, SMOKE DETECTOR i0 FUNNY ALARM CLAD N ATTC PER CDC 319 PROVIDE LIGHT, N VT SUPPLIED VAIN MINIMUM Al2 PG \GREE AMR A 15 AMP CREDIT SW12H. (CEC 210-23 & 22B) (j CRbYv� JUNCTON 80% AUDIBLE IN ALL SLEEPING PREPS i0 BE HARDVAREO NTH BATTERY BACKUP ROOTER• CAS ACCESS AND ]O' NIDE AERN SPACE. HEVICECONDENSATE DRAIN LINE TO 220 DISCONNECT - NAn1ERPROOF PER 2013 HD THERMOSTATVN TEA TIME AND COMBUSTION PER 13.BAMOM ROOR SERVICE ROOM MINIMUM ...IT AREAS LETTING MOIMIED LIGNi E'/0' PUSH-BUTTON ACMC CHANT 2 S. DAMAGE RECEPTACLE OUTLETS SHALL BE SUPPLIED BY A SHALL BE 1-1/2 BOVARE FEET OPERABLE9OR PROVIDE PROVIDINGI FIV AIR CHANGES PER HOIIRA(GBCb1203.3) p¢' y- PENDANT *PS PHOTO SENSORS OTHERR OUT OUTLETS HOORMSER TEND OREGON RS UPER1MIITTED M ARE RESUMED IN CORRIDORS S'p'RIONO SUPPLY THE REQUIRED RECEPTACRIMORE MAN ONE DETECTORS C ACCESS TO EACH SLEEPING AREA. 14ttS. MORD' SENSOfl IYALL MOUNTED LICHi �a I CHIMES OATHER.M. 'CT N. '..'NOUN, W/ HATE, SENSOR WALL MWRICK TOM H TELEPHONE OUTLET B AS A MINIMUM, MEETING THE REOVIREMENTS OF UL 181, HER, I5. CARBON MOSTATS X[,RB SHALL eE NIERCONNECTED DECEASED CAN 0 IBIS, SHALL BE USED OR AOOIBONAL MCI ATTACHMENT HARD-AIRRE\NHIBTTERY BACKUP, OUTSIDE OF EACH LIGHT EXHAUST FAN "® N OVtt£i ENCES GLEN AS TON APS OR BASIN MLL BE REQUIRED FOR INSTALLING MECHANICAL BOLTING, SLEEPING AREA IN IHS IMMEOATE MANNY OFTHEBEDROOMS. •�IiE FUEL GAS J. THE RETURN AIR PLENUM SERVING THE MECHANICAL EXHAUST FAN WITH APPROVED E DAMPER •-$ FIRFPIAIII KEY (LOOSE) IPMENT BUSH BE FULLY BUGLED MGM THE CGUIPMENT EWGL TO THE CONOHIONED SPACE. DROP CEILINGSALL CAVITIES AND SCHIAV NE PLATFORMS MAY N07 BE USED AS PLENUMS. ® COMBINATION OF EXHAUST FAN RnNT oo MOUNTED p NOSE BIB WITH TON -REMOVABLE BACK .11 PREVENTED BENCE 8, CABLE TV ANO TELEPHONE SIDES VAT. BE �} FLUORESCENT GLA MOUNTED LIGHT �v RECESSED SNB -WT FOR ICE -MAKER ALL EREOAMICPL, . FWORESCENi CAN LIGHT R- REQUIREDFOR MOTION SENSOR FLUORESCENT CAN LIGHT CM CARBON MEND%TOE ALARM pRgINAGE PIPING SERI G FlXiIlRESSLOL�iEO THE ELEVATOR OF ME NEXT UPSTREAM SEVERE FlXNRES ABOVE ® I SUCH ELEVATION SHALL NOT DISCHARGE THROUGH ME TACHOMETER VALVE. RE RUNEATUO CELLIINGSMWNIEO B WODIC INTERRUPTER '5 BPROVEINGARAGEOTWE. IT 21ML BE DESIGN & CONSULTANT BASEAMMARI 202 AMBLING DRIVE BREA• CA 92821 TEL -(714)422-7792 RESTRICTIVENOTICE SI1R9EDE%1. AVETREACCHAVE THEBE�TANDDOS ORAOTBECAHED gEVEPROWCEDNOR SENWNIMEBBEBONT FROMMW WRHWIWHRIENCON. REVISIONS AID I EOH n OIL2I-%NCHEC K PROJECT OWNER ANIL LUTHRA TEL: (909) 861-1750 PROJECTADDRESS tf) U� z� W� 00 O � z (� O a `aq � a O A O � � a � z= T LO CYE) STAMP DATE: 0"3-2017 SHEET DESCRIPTION PROPOSED 1ST & 2ND FLOOR UTILITY PLAN SHEE PROPOSED 1st FLOOR UTILITY PLAN PROPOSED 2nd FLOOR UTILITY PLAN _ I �_� SCALE :1W—==1'-0" SCALE :114"=1-0" PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21810 COPLEY DRIVE -DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765- TEL. (909) 839-7030 -FAX (909) 861-3117 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: PROJECT LOCATION: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION ZONING DISTRICT: PROPERTY OWNER: 7.3 April 25, 2017 Development Review No. PL2016-174 2133 Derringer Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (APN 8713-034-035) Rural Residential (RR) Rural Residential (RR) Sumermal Vardhan 2127 Derringer Lane Diamond Bar. CA 91765 APPLICANT: Pete Volbeda 180 N. Benson Ave., Suite D Upland, CA 91786 SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting approval of a Development Review (DR) application to construct a 12,978 square -foot single-family residence with 1,148 square feet of garage area, and 1,701 square feet of patio/balcony area. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment 1) approving Development Review No. PL2016-174, based on the findings of Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.48, subject to conditions. BACKGROUND: The project site is located in the Diamond Bar Country Estates (The Country), on the west side of Derringer Lane, south of Lodge Pole Road and north of Indian Creek Road. The property is a hillside property and is located on a descending slope that starts from the private street easement through the rear property line. There is minimal vegetation with no protected trees on-site. This property was originally part of a larger parcel. On June 21, 2011, the City Council approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 71362 (Planning Case No. PL 2010-438) to subdivide a vacant 133,729 square -foot (3.07 acres) gross lot into two separate lots for the development of a single-family residence on each lot. Parcel 1 is 73,181 square feet (1.68 acres) and Parcel 2 is 60,548 square feet (1.39 acres). The subject property is Parcel 2. The project has been submitted to the Diamond Bar Country Estates Architectural Committee for review, but the applicant has not yet obtained formal approval. The property is legally described as Lot 2 of Parcel Map No. 373-91-93, and the Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) is 8713-034-035. Site and Surrounding General Plan. Zoning and Land Uses The image below highlights the subject property: Site (Plan View) Aerial Development Review No. PL 2016-174 Page 2 of 9 Project Site Adjacent Property to South Development Review No. PL 2016-174 Adjacent Property to North Page 3 of 9 The following table describes the surrounding land uses located adjacent to the subject property: Site General Plan Designation Rural Residential Zoning District RR Land Use Single -Family Residential North Rural Residential RR Single -Family Residential South Rural Residential RR Single -Family Residential East Rural Residential RR Single -Family Residential West Rural Residential RR Single -Family Residential Project Description Site Plan The property's gross lot area is 60,548 square feet (1.39 acres), which includes a 3,485 square - foot, 32 -foot wide private street easement for Derringer Lane along its frontage. The property's net buildable area (i.e., minus the private street easement) is 57,064 square feet (1.31 acres). The proposed house is situated toward the front of the lot, approximately 30 feet from the edge of the private street easement line. The property was rough graded and compacted when the residence to the north was constructed in 2015. The applicant is also proposing balconies and a covered patio. An infinity swimming pool with spa are proposed in the rear yard. Grading Plan The project site is located on an irregular shaped lot with an average descending slope of 18.9% to the rear of the parcel. The applicant is proposing to cut 1,200 cubic yards of soil and fill 12,000 cubic yards of soil to expand the buildable pad behind the home. Therefore, 10,800 cubic yards would have to be imported to the site. Standard dump truck capacities range from 10 to 15 cubic yards, so the proposed amount of import would require 720 to 1,080 total truck trips. The applicant is proposing a maximum four -foot high tiered retaining walls at the rear of the property to create a minimum 25 -foot rear level pad to comply with the City's development standards for the rear setback. All exposed portions of retaining walls will be finished with a stucco texture to match the proposed exterior wall finish of the house. Architecture The architectural style is a Mediterranean style and will include elements such as 3:12 low- pitched hipped roof forms with clay barrel tile roofing, arched windows and entrance, balusters, columns and earth -toned stucco. Additionally, the architect is proposing a covered patio at the basement and balconies throughout the first and second levels of the house. Development Review No. PL 2016-174 Page 4 of 9 Proposed Front Elevation The proposed three-level house's floor plan is comprised of the following components: • Basement. Two bedrooms each with its own bathroom, game room, laundry room, exercise room with sauna and bathroom, powder room, theater, and a five -car garage; • Ground floor. Common areas (entry area with a double staircase, family room, living room, kitchen with a pantry, wok kitchen, wine cellar, and dining room), library, prayer room, laundry room, one bedroom, two powder rooms and one bathroom; • Second floor. Vista room, one master suite with own bathroom, two bedrooms, each with a bathroom and closet and laundry room; and • An elevator providing access to all levels. The floor area distribution is summarized below: PROJECT SUMMARY (square footage) Total Basement Level Living Area 3,446 Garage Area 1,148 Rear Covered Patio Area 840 Total Basement Level Area 5,434 SF First Level Living Area 5,540 Front Porch Area 118 Rear Balcony 500 Total First Level Area 6,158 SF Second Level Living Area 3,992 Front Balconies 88 Rear Balconies 155 Total Second Level Area 4,235 SF TOTAL LIVING AREA 12,978 SF Total Garage Area 1,148 SF Total Porch/Patio Area 1,701 SF TOTAL FLOOR AREA 15,827 SF Development Review No. PL 2016-174 Page 5 of 9 The applicant is proposing 1,701 square feet of patio and balcony areas throughout the three levels of the residence. Additionally, an infinity swimming pool and spa is proposed in the rear yard. The height of the building is 35 feet, measured from the finished grade to the highest point of the roofline. Landscape Plan The applicant is proposing a variety of trees to be planted throughout the property, including: 36 -inch box crape myrtles and London plane trees, 24 -inch box pittosporum and, 24 -inch box coast live oaks. Additionally, various 5 -gallon shrubs, such as lily of the nil , wild lilac, gardenias and bermuda groundcover are proposed throughout the front and rear yards. Overall, all landscaping will be drought tolerant and non-invasive species to minimize irrigation and reduce the area of turf and sod ground cover planting. The project is required to comply with the City's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance, and compliance will be verified during building plan check and final inspections. The subject property is located within the Los Angeles County Fire Department "High Fire Hazard Severity Zone." Therefore, the proposed landscaping must comply with the Fire Department's Fuel Modification Plan requirements. The landscape plans will be submitted for review and approval by the Fire Department during building plan check. ANALYSIS: Review Authority (Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Chapter 22.48) New construction of a single-family home requires Planning Commission approval of a Development Review (DR) application. DR approval is required to ensure compliance with the City's General Plan policies, development standards, and design guidelines, and to minimize adverse effects of the proposed project upon the surrounding properties and the City in general. As stated in Section 22.48.010 of the Development Code, the DR process was established to ensure that new development and additions to existing development are consistent with the General Plan "through the promotion of high functional and aesthetic standards to complement and add to the economic, physical, and social character" of Diamond Bar. The analysis that follows provides the basis for staff's recommendation to approve the DR application. Development Review No. PL 2016-174 - Page 6 of 9 Development Standards: The following table compares the proposed project with the City's development standards for residential development in the RR zone: Compliance with Hillside Management Ordinance (DBMC Section 22.22) The proposed project was reviewed for compliance with the City's Hillside Management Design Guidelines and regulations. The project complies with all of the regulations and guidelines to ensure that development will complement the character and topography of hillside areas set forth in the Development Code, and incorporates the following features: All proposed retaining walls associated with the building pad are ata maximum exposed height of four feet; • Retaining wall heights will be visually mitigated with proposed landscaping; Terraced retaining walls are used to step down the natural slope; • Earth tone building materials and color schemes are used that blend in with the natural landscape; and The building maintains a maximum building height of 35', where 35' is allowed. The project complies with all of the regulations and guidelines to ensure that development will complement the character and topography of hillside areas set forth in the Development Code. Compatibility with Neighborhood The proposed project complies with the goals and objectives as set forth in the adopted General Plan in terms of land use and density. The project is designed to be compatible with and enhance the character of the existing homes in the neighborhood. The new house will not be intrusive to neighboring homes and will not block existing views from adjacent properties since the home will be situated towards the front of the property, in-line with the adjacent homes. Development Review No. PL 2016-174 Page 7 of 9 The proposed house is comparable in mass and scale to existing homes on similar lots in The Country. While the architecture in The Country is eclectic, and includes a variety of architectural designs, the proposed design reinforces the Mediterranean theme of its neighbors to the north and south. The scale and proportions of the proposed home are well balanced and appropriate for the site. In sum, the proposed project fits the character of the neighborhood on which it is proposed. The project incorporates the principles of the City's Residential Design Guidelines as follows: • The new single-family residence will conform to all development standards, including building height and setbacks, which is consistent with other homes in The Country; • A gradual transition between the project and adjacent uses is achieved through appropriate setbacks, building height, landscaping, and window and door placement; • The proposed new single-family residence is appropriate in mass and scale to the site; Elevations are treated with detailed architectural elements; • Large wall expanses without windows or doors are avoided; The exterior finish materials and colors blend with the natural environment; and • Effective landscape design should serve the dual purpose of intrinsically' enhancing a project setting, as well as integrating the landscaping into the overall architectural design. Staff finds the proposed plant palette to be diverse, and the plant selections are compatible with Southern California native landscapes. Additional Review The Public Works Department and Building and Safety Division reviewed this project, and their comments are included in the attached resolution as conditions of approval. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: On April 14, 2017, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site. On April 14, 2017, the notice was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. A notice display board was posted at the site, and a copy of the notice was posted at the City's three designated community posting sites. Public Comments Received No comments have been received as of the publication date of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: This project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be Categorically Development Review No. PL 2016-174 Page 8 of 9 Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to the provisions of Article 19 Section 15303(a) (construction of a new single-family residence) of the CEQA Guidelines. No further environmental review is required. Prepared by: Reviewed by: 6r-\� aF�' - Mayuko Nakajima Greg Gubman, AICP Associate Planner Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution No. 2017 -XX and Standard Conditions of Approval 2. Color and Material Board 3. Site Plan, Floor Plans, Elevations, Landscape Plans, and Conceptual Grading Plans Development Review No. PL 2016-174 Page 9 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2017 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. PL2016-174 TO CONSTRUCT A NEW 12,978 SQUARE -FOOT, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH AN ATTACHED 1,148 SQUARE -FOOT FIVE -CAR GARAGE, 1,701 SQUARE FEET OF PATIO/BALCONY AREA ON A 1.39 GROSS ACRE LOT LOCATED AT 2133 DERRINGER LANE, DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 (APN 8713- 034-035). A. RECITALS 1. The property owner, Sumermal Vardhan, and applicant, Pete Volbeda, have filed an application for Development Review No. PL2016-174 to construct a new 12,978 square -foot single-family residence with 1,148 square feet of garage area, and 1,701 square feet of patio/balcony area located at 2133 Derringer Lane, Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California.; 2. The subject property is made up of one parcel totaling 60,548 square -feet (1.39 acres). It is located in the Rural Residential (RR) zone with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential. 3. The legal description of the subject property is Lot 2 of Parcel Map No. 373- 91-93, and the Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) is 8713-034-035. 4. On April 14, 2017, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the Project site and were posted at the Project site and the City's three designated community posting sites. On April 14, 2017, notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. 5. On April 25, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; and 2. The Planning Commission hereby determines the Project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the provisions of Article 19, Section 15303 (a) (new construction of a single-family residence) of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, no further environmental review is required. C. FINDINGS OF FACT Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein and as prescribed under Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.48, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: Development Review Findings (DBMC Section 22.48.040) The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the applicable elements of the City's General Plan, City Design Guidelines, and development standards of the applicable district; design guidelines, and architectural criteria for special areas (e.g., theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards or planned developments): The design and layout of the proposed single-family residence consisting of 12,978 square feet offloorarea; 1, 148 square -foot garage area; 1,701 square feet of patio/balcony areas is consistent with the City's General Plan, City Design Guidelines and development standards by complying with all required setbacks and building height. A gradual transition between the project and adjacent uses is achieved through appropriate setbacks, building height, landscaping, and window and door placement. The proposed new single-family residence incorporates various details and architectural elements such as clay barrel tile roofing, stucco walls; arched windows and entrance; columns and balusters, and appropriate massing and proportion to meet the intent of the City's Design Guidelines. In addition, appropriate screening and integration of the home to the natural environment is accomplished by providing a variety of groundcover, shrubs, and trees throughout the site. The project site is not part of any theme area, specific plan, community plan, boulevard orplanned development. The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards; The proposed single-family house will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments because the use of the project site is designed for a single-family home and the surrounding uses are also single-family homes. In addition, no protected trees exist on site. There will be various landscaping along the perimeter of the property to reduce visibility to/from the adjacent neighboring properties. 2 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX The proposed single-family house will not interfere with vehicular orpedestrian movements, such as access or otherfunctional requirements of single-family home because it complies with the requirements for driveway widths and exceeds the minimum number of required off-street parking spaces. 3. The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain and enhance the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.48: Development Review Standards, the City's Design Guidelines, the City's General Plan, or any applicable specific plan; The new single-family home is designed to be compatible with the character of the eclectic neighborhoods in The Country Estates. It is designed in a Mediterranean style with earth -tone shades for the exterior finish to soften the building's visual impact and assist in preserving the hillside's aesthetic value. As mentioned, there will be various landscaping along the perimeter of the property to reduce visibility to/from the adjacent neighboring properties. The new home will be visually integrated into the existing streetscape and not negatively impact the look and character of the neighborhood. 4. The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, color, and will remain aesthetically appealing; The design of the new single-family home is Mediterranean. Consistent building elements have been achieved through the utilization of similar architectural features and building materials. The new home will not be intrusive to neighboring homes and will be aesthetically appealing by integrating a variety of materials, such as claybarrel the roofing, stucco exterior walls, and arched windows and entrance. Earth -tone shades for the exterior finish are used to soften the building's visual impact and assist in preserving the hillside's aesthetic value. Also, landscaping is integrated into the site to complement the massing of the house and blend in with neighboring homes and the natural environment of the site in order to maintain a desirable environment. 5. The proposed development will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative effect on property values or resale(s) of property) to the properties or improvements in the vicinity; and Before the issuance of any City permits, the proposed project is required to comply with all conditions within the approved resolution, and the Building and Safety Division and Public Works Departments requirements. 3 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX Through the permit and inspection process, the referenced agencies will ensure that the proposed project is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. 6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as set forth under Article 19 Section 15303(a) (new construction of a single-family residence) of the CEQA Guidelines. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby approves this Application, subject to the following conditions: 1. Development shall substantially comply with the plans and documents presented to the Planning Commission at the public hearing. 2. If, during plan check of the landscape construction documents, the City determines that any trees or other plant materials could compromise the structural or slope integrity on the subject property or the adjacent properties, the City reserves the authority to require substitute plant material selections to be specified on the plans prior to permit issuance. 3. Prior to building permit issuance, the required landscape plan shall be designed to meet the requirements of the Los Angeles County Fire Department's Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines in terms of plant selection, placement and maintenance. The final landscape and fuel modification plans shall be submitted to the Los Angeles Fire Department for review and approval. 4. Prior to building permit issuance, landscape and irrigation plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City's Consulting Landscape Architect and shall comply with the updated Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall record, and provide the City with a conformed recorded copy of, a Covenant and Agreement or similar document in a form approved by the City Attorney,'which restricts the rental of rooms or other portions of the property under two or more separate agreements and prohibits use of the property as a boarding or rooming house, except to the extent otherwise permitted by the Diamond Bar Municipal Code or applicable state or federal law. 6. Standard Conditions. The applicant shall comply with the standard development conditions attached hereto. 4 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX The Planning Commission shall: a. Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and b. Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail to the property owner, Sumermal Vardhan, 2127 Derringer Lane, Diamond Bar, CA 91765, and applicant, Pete Volbeda, 180 N. Benson Ave., Suite D, Upland, CA 91786. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25th DAY OF APRIL 2017, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. Raymond Wolfe, Chairperson I, Greg Gubman, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of April, 2017, by the following voter AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Greg Gubman, Secretary 5 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT F STANDARD CONDITIONS USE PERMITS, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL NEW AND REMODELED STRUCTURES PROJECT #: Development Review No. PL2016-174 SUBJECT: To construct a new 12,978 square -foot single-family residence with an attached 1,148 square -foot 5 -car garage and 1,701 square feet of patio/balcony area. PROPERTY Sumermal Varhan OWNER: 2127 Derringer Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 APPLICANT: Pete Volbeda 180 N. Benson Ave., Suite D Upland, CA 91786 LOCATION: 2133 Derringer Lane, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION AT (909) 839-7030, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and its officers, agents and employees, from any claim, action, or proceeding to attack, set-aside, void or annul, the approval of Development Review No. PL2016-174 brought within the time period provided by Government Code Section 66499.37. In the event the city and/or its officers, agents and employees are made a party of any such action: (a) Applicant shall provide a defense to the City defendants or at the City's option reimburse the City its costs of defense, including reasonable attorneys fees, incurred in defense of such claims. 6 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX (b) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City defendants. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action of proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense thereof. This approval shall not be effective for any purpose until the applicant and owner of the property involved have filed, within twenty-one, (21) days of approval of this Development Review No. PL2016-174, at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department, their affidavit stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all the conditions of this approval. Further, this approval shall not be effective until the applicants pay remaining City processing fees, school fees and fees for the review of submitted reports. 3. All designers, architects, engineers, and contractors associated with this project shall obtain a Diamond Bar Business License; and a zoning approval for those businesses located in Diamond Bar. 4. Signed copies of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2017 -XX, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 5. Prior to the plan check, revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance with the conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable regulations. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and any applicable Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 9. All site, grading, landscape/irrigation, and roof plans, and elevation plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of City permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.,) or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 10. The property owner/applicant shall remove the public hearing notice board within three days of this project's approval. 11. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of City Planning, Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works Department, and the Fire Department. 7 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX B. FEES/DEPOSITS 1. Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to Planning, Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works Department and Mitigation Monitoring) at the established rates, prior to issuance of building or grading permit (whichever comes first), as required by the City. School fees as required shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permit. In addition, the applicant shall pay all remaining prorated City project review and processing fees prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever comes first. 2. Prior to any plan check, all deposit accounts for the processing of this project shall have no deficits. C. TIME LIMITS 1. The approval.of Development Review No. PL2016-174 expires within two years from the date of approval if the use has not been exercised as defined per Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.66.050 (b)(1). In accordance with DBMC Section 22.60.050(c), the applicant may request, in writing, a one- year time extension for Planning Commission consideration. Such a request must be submitted to the Planning Division prior to the expiration date and be accompanied by the review fee in accordance with the fee schedule in effect at the time of submittal. D. SITE DEVELOPMENT 1. This approval is to construct a new 12,978 square -foot single-family residence with 1,148 square feet of garage area, and 1,701 square feet of patio/balcony area at 2133 Derringer Lane, as described in the staff report and depicted on the approved plans on file with the Planning Division, subject to the conditions listed below. 2. The construction documents submitted for plan check shall be in substantial compliance with the architectural plans approved by the Planning Commission, as modified pursuant to the conditions below. If the plan check submittal is not in substantial compliance with the approved Development Review submittal, the plans may require further staff review and re -notification of the surrounding property owners, which may delay the project and entail additional fees. 3. To ensure compliance with the provisions of the Planning Commission approval, a final inspection is required from the Planning Division when work for any phase of the project has been completed. The applicant shall inform the Planning Division and schedule an appointment for such an inspection. 4. The above conditions shall run with the land and shall be binding upon all future owners, operators, or successors thereto of the property. Non-compliance with 8 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX any condition of approval or mitigation measure imposed as a condition of the approval shall constitute a violation of the City's Development Code. Violations may be enforced in accordance with the provisions of the Development Code. 5. Failure to comply with any of the conditions set forth above or as subsequently amended in writing by the City, may result in failure to obtain a building final and/or a certificate of occupancy until full compliance is reached. The City's requirement for full compliance may require minor corrections and/or complete demolition of a non-compliant improvement, regardless of costs incurred where the project does not comply with design requirements and approvals that the applicant agreed to when permits were pulled to construct the project. 6. The project site shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the approved plans submitted to, approved, and amended herein by the Planning Commission, on file with the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. All ground -mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, air conditioning condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berms, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. All roof -mounted equipment shall be screened from public view. 9. All structures, including walls, trash enclosures, canopies, etc., shall be maintained in a structurally sound, safe manner with a clean, orderly appearance. All graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours by the property owners/occupant. 10. All landscaping, structures, architectural features and public improvements damaged during construction shall be repaired or replaced upon project completion. E. SOLID WASTE The site shall be maintained in a condition, which is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlement approved herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste contractor used has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. 2. Mandatory solid waste disposal services shall be provided by the City franchised waste hauler to all parcels/lots or uses affected by approval of this project. 9 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX F. FIRE PROTECTION STANDARDS Development shall be constructed to reduce the potential for spread of brushfire. In the case of a conflict, where more restrictive provisions are contained in the Uniform Building Code or in the fire code, the more restrictive provisions shall prevail. Roofs shall be covered with noncombustible materials as defined in the building code. Open eave ends shall be stopped in order to prevent bird nests or other combustible material lodging within the roof and to preclude entry of flames. C. Exterior walls shall be surfaced with noncombustible or fire-resistant materials. Balconies, patio roofs, eaves and other similar overhangs shall be of noncombustible construction or shall be protected by fire-resistant material in compliance with the building code. 2. All development shall be constructed with adequate water supply and pressure for all proposed development in compliance with standards established by the fire marshal. 3. A permanent fuel modification area shall be required around development projects or portions thereof that are adjacent or exposed to hazardous fire areas for the purpose of fire protection. The required width of the fuel modification area shall be based on applicable building and fire codes and a fire hazard analysis study developed by the fire marshal. In the event abatement is not performed, the council may instruct the fire marshal to give notice to the owner of the property upon which the condition exists to correct the prohibited condition. If the owner fails to correct the condition, the council may cause the abatement to be performed and make the expense of the correction a lien on the property upon which the conditions exist. Fuel modification areas shall incorporate soil erosion and sediment control measures to alleviate permanent scarring and accelerated erosion. If the fire marshal determines in any specific case that difficult terrain, danger of erosion, or other unusual circumstances make strict compliance. with the clearance of vegetation undesirable or impractical, the fire marshal may suspend enforcement and require reasonable alternative measures designed to advance the purposes of this chapter. 6. Special construction features may be required in the design of structures where site investigations confirm potential geologic hazards. 10 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, (909) 839-7040, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL 1. An Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted concurrently with the grading plan clearly detailing erosion control measures. These measures shall be implemented during construction. The erosion control plan shall conform to national Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards and incorporate the appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's) as specified in the Storm Water BMP Certification. For construction activity which disturbs one acre or greater soil a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be needed. 2. Grading and construction activities and the transportation of equipment and materials and operation of heavy grading equipment shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m: and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Dust generated by grading and construction activities shall be reduced by watering the soil prior to and during the activities and in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 402 and Rule 403. Reclaimed water shall be used whenever possible. Additionally, all construction equipment shall be properly muffled to reduce noise levels. B. SOILS REPORT/GRADING/RETAINING WALLS 1. Prior to grading plan submittal, a geotechnical report prepared by a Geotechnical Engineer, licensed by the State of California, shall be submitted by the applicant for approval by the City. 2. Upon approval of the geotechnical report, the applicant shall submit drainage and grading plans prepared by a Civil Engineer, licensed by the State of California, prepared in accordance with the City's requirements for the City's review and approval. A list of requirements for grading plan check is available from the Public Works Department. All grading (cut and fill) calculations shall be submitted to the City concurrently with the grading plan. 3. Finished slopes shall conform to City Code Section 22.22.080 -Grading. 4. All easements and shall be clearly identified on the grading plan. 5. The grading plan shall show the location of any retaining walls and the elevations of the top of wall/footing/retaining and the finished grade on both sides of the retaining wall. Construction details for retaining walls shall be shown on the grading plan. Calculations and details of retaining walls shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for review and approval. 6. All equipment staging areas shall be located on the project site. Staging area, including material stockpile and equipment storage area, shall be enclosed within 11 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX a six foot -high chain link fence. All access points in the defense shall be locked whenever the construction site is not supervised. 7. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California Building Code, City Grading Ordinance, Hillside Management Ordinance and acceptable grading practices. 8. The maximum grade of driveways serving building pad areas shall be 15 percent. In hillside areas driveway grades exceeding 15 percent shall have parking landings with a minimum 16 feet deep and shall not exceed five (5) percent grade or as required by the City Engineer. Driveways with a slope of 15 percent shall incorporate grooves for traction into the construction as required by the City Engineer. 9. All slopes shall be seeded per landscape plan and/or fuel modification plan with native grasses or planted with ground cover, shrubs, and trees for erosion control upon completion of grading or some other alternative method of erosion control shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 10. Submit a stockpile plan showing the proposed location for stockpile for grading export materials, and the route of transport. 11. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a pre -construction meeting shall be held at the project site with the grading contractor, applicant, and city grading inspector at least 48 hours prior to commencing grading operations. 12. Rough grade certifications by project soils and civil engineers shall be submitted prior to issuance of building permits for the foundation of the residential structure. Retaining wall permits may be issued without a rough grade certificate. 13. Final grade certifications by project civil engineers shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of any project final inspections/certificate of occupancy respectively. C. DRAINAGE Detailed drainage system information of the lot shall be submitted. All drainage/runoff from the development shall be conveyed from the site to the natural drainage course. No on-site drainage shall be conveyed to adjacent parcels, unless that is the natural drainage course. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a complete hydrology and hydraulic study shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer registered in the State of California to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Los Angeles Public Works Department. 12 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX D. UTILITIES Underground utilities shall not be constructed within the drip line of any mature tree except as approved by a registered arborist. E. SEWERS/SEPTIC TANK Applicant shall obtain connection permit(s) from the City and County Sanitation District prior to issuance of building permits. Applicant, at applicant's sole cost and expense, shall construct the sewer system in accordance with the City, Los Angeles County Public Works Division. Sewer plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the City. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL CONDITIONS At the time of plan check submittal, plans and construction shall conform to current State and Local Building Code (i.e., 2013 California Building Code series will apply) requirements and all other applicable construction codes, ordinances and regulations in effect. 2. Provisions for CAL Green shall be implemented onto plans and certification shall be provided by a third party as required by the Building Division. Specific water,. waste, low VOC, and related conservation measures shall be shown on plans. Construction shall conform to the current CAL Green Code. B. PLAN CHECK — ITEMS TO BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO PLAN APPROVAL: 3. The minimum design load for wind in this area is 110 M.P.H. exposures "C" and the site is within seismic zone D or E. The applicant shall submit drawings and calculations prepared by a California State licensed Architect/Engineer with wet stamp and signature. 4. This project shall comply with the energy conservation requirements of the State of California Energy Commission. All lighting shall be high efficacy or equivalent per the current California Energy Code 119 and 150(k). Indoor air quality shall be provided consistent with ASHRAE 62.2 as required per California Energy Code 150(0). Public Works/Engineering Department is required to review and approve grading plans that clearly show all finish elevations, drainage, and retaining wall(s) locations. These plans shall be consistent with the site plan submitted to the Building and Safety Division. 13 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX 7. "Separate permits are required for pool, spa, retaining walls, and fences over 6' in height" and shall be noted on plans. 8. All balconies shall be designed for 60lb/ft live load. 9. All easements shall be shown on the site plan. 10. Fire Department approval shall be required. Contact the Fire Department to check the fire zone for the location of your property. If this project is located in High Hazard Fire Zone, it shall meet requirements of the fire zone per CBC Chapter 7A. a. All unenclosed under -floor areas shall be constructed as exterior wall. b. All openings into the attic, floor and/or other enclosed areas shall be covered with corrosion -resistant wire mesh not less than 1/4 inch or more than 1/2 inch in any dimension except where such openings are equipped with sash or door. c. Eaves shall be protected. d. Exterior construction shall be one-hour or non-combustible. e. Fuel modification plans shall be approved through LA County Fire Fuel Modification Unit. f. LA County Fire shall approve plans for fire flow availability due to home being over 3600 sf as required per CFC Appendix B105.1. 11. All retaining walls shall be separately submitted to the Building and Safety and Public Works/Engineering Departments for review and approval. 12. A soils report is required per CBC 1803 and all recommendations of the soils report shall be adhered to. 13. Slope setbacks shall be consistent with California Building Code Figure 1805.3.1 and California Residential Code R403.1.7. Foundations shall provide a minimum distance to daylight. 14. Light and ventilation shall comply with CBC 1203 and 1205. Justification shall be provided for the theater room. C. PERMIT — ITEMS REQUIRED PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE: 15. Solid waste management of construction material shall incorporate recycling material collection per Diamond Bar Municipal Code 8.16 of Title 8. The contractor shall complete all required forms and pay applicable deposits prior to permit. 14 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX 16. Prior to building permit issuance, all school district fees shall be paid. Please obtain a form from the Building and Safety Division to take directly to the school district. 17. Submit grading plans clearly showing all finish elevations, drainage, and retaining wall locations. No building permits shall be issued prior to submitting a pad certification. 18. AQMD notification is required at least 10 days prior to any demolition. Proof of notification is required at permit issuance. 19. All workers on the job shall be covered by workman's compensation insurance under a licensed general contractor. Any changes to the contractor shall be updated on the building permit. D. CONSTRUCTION — CONDITIONS REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION: 20. Fire sprinklers are required for new single family dwellings (CRC R313.2). Sprinklers shall be approved by LA County Fire Department prior to installation and shall be inspected at framing stage and finalization of construction. 21. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until all California Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been met. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 22. Every permit issued by the building official under the provisions of this Code shall expire and become null and void unless the work authorized by such permit is commenced within one -hundred -eighty (180) days after permit issuance, and if a successful inspection has not been obtained from the building official within one - hundred -eighty (180) days from the date of permit issuance or the last successful inspection. A successful inspection shall mean a documented passed inspection by the city building inspector as outlined in Section 110.6. 23. All structures and property shall be maintained in a safe and clean manner during construction. The property shall be free of debris, trash, and weeds. 24. All equipment staging areas shall be maintained in an orderly manner and screened behind a minimum 6' high fence. 25. A height and setback survey may be required at completion of framing and foundations construction phases respectively. 26. The project shall be protected by a construction fence to the satisfaction of the Building Official, and shall comply with the NPDES & BMP requirements (sand bags, etc.). All fencing shall be view obstructing with opaque surfaces. 27. The location of property lines and building pad may require a survey to be determined by the building inspection during foundation and/or frame inspection. 15 PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX 28. The applicant shall contact Dig Alert and have underground utility locations marked by the utility companies prior to any excavation. Contact Dig Alert by dialing 811 or their website at www.digalert.org. 29. The applicant shall first request and secure approval from the City for any changes or deviations from approved plans prior to proceeding with any work in accordance with such changes or deviations. 30. All glazing in hazardous locations shall be labeled as safety glass. The labeling shall be visible for inspection. 31. Pursuant to California Residential Code (CRC) Section R315, carbon monoxide detectors are required in halls leading to sleeping rooms. 32. Drainage patterns shall match the approved grading/drainage plan from the Public Works/Engineering Department. Surface water shall drain away from the building at a 2% minimum slope. The final as -built conditions shall match the grading/drainage plan or otherwise approved as -built grading/drainage plan. 33. Decks, roofs, and other flat surfaces shall slope at least 1/4"/ft with approved and listed water proofing material. Guardrails shall be provided for these surfaces at least 42" minimum in height, 4" maximum spacing between rails, and capable of resisting at least 20 pounds per lineal foot of lateral load. 34. Bodies of water that are greater than 18" in depth shall have the required barriers to prevent unintentional access per CBC 3904.4. 35. Special inspections and structural observation will be required in conformance with CBC 1704 to 1709. 36. All plumbing fixtures, including those in existing areas, shall be low -flow models consistent with California Civil Code Section 1101.1 to 1101.8. County of Los Angeles Fire Department (909) 620-2402: 1. Submit 2 sets of Architectural Drawings when ready for plan check. 2. Provide a minimum unobstructed width of 20 feet, exclusive of shoulders, except for approved security gates in accordance with Section 503.6, and an unobstructed vertical clearance "clear to sky" Fire Department vehicular access to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. 3. The applicant is required to have the attached Information of Fire Flow Availability for Building Permit (Form 195) completed by the Water Purveyor. 16 - PC Resolution No. 2017 -XX 4. Show all existing public and private on-site fire hydrants on the site plan. Include the location of all public fire hydrants within 600 feet of the lot frontage on both sides of the street. Specify size of fire hydrant(s) and dimension(s) to property lines. Additional fire hydrant requirements may be necessary after this information is provided. 5. Indicate locations of smoke/carbon monoxide detectors on floor plan. 6. Additional requirements will be required pending information provided. . END 17 - PC Resolution No. 2077 -XX. PETE VOLBEDA ARCPIITECT 180 N Benson, Suite D, Upland, Ca 91786 ph 909 373 1150 Color Board Owner: Vardhan Sumerhal Residence PARCEL 2 Derringer, Diamond Bar Clay roof tile BORAL NEWPORT BLEND Window frames Dunn Edwards DE6134 Shortbread Garage Door & French & exterior Dunn Edwards Wrought Iron, Doors, Railings DE6075 Woodlake Exterior Wall Stucco SAN SIMEON 34 La Habra Exterior Stucco Accent, Foam eave, exterior trim, window sills etc Cortez x 501 La Habra Copper ( Gutter and downspout) Precast color ( Balusters& Columns, Surrounds) Fiberglass reinforced gypsum plaster Eldorado: Ivory color RECEIVED OCT 0 4 2016 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR R ER 1 I,4L INDEX COVER I SITE PLAN 20 SCALE P A R C E I- 2 P M 3. SITE PLAN SCALE 3 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN 10 SCALE 3.1 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN 20 SCALE 4 BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN P KA _71a62 5 IST FLOOR PLAN 6 2ND FLOOR PLAN 1 ROOF PLAN 8 FRONT AND REAR ELEVATIONS THE A 1 SOUTH ELEVATION 10 NORTH ELEVATION 11 SECTION A A 12 SECTION B B C C 13 SCHEDULE SHEET 2133 DERRINGER DI DETAILS LANDSCAPE PLANS D AMOND O OWNER: RECEIVE VARDHAN,SUMERMAL PH 951 316 1840 APR 0 4 201% PARCEL 2 PM 11362 SOIL ENGINEER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT CIVIL ENGINEER SOIL ENGINEER: GLOBAL TOM SEGURA GOLDEN LAND ENGINEERING CO MOHAN 1 CORPORATE WAY. IRVINE CA PO BOX 944 2912 RIO LENPA OR REPORT NO 5384-4 CLAREMONT CA 91150 HACIENDA HTS. CA 91145 PH 949 2210900 PH 909 424 2100 TEL 624 311 4506 ZONE R-1 40,000 APN 8113 034 035 iffif IS ii ii ii ii ii ii 11 ii 1 OCCUPANCY R R/UI TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION VN Average slope Is 18.9 % BSMNT 3446 SF FRONT YARD LANDSCAPING IST 5540 SF COVERAGE CALCULATION 2ND FUR 3992 SP AREA 3500 50 FT PAVING AREA 1510 SF TOTAL LIVING 12,918 SF LANDSCAPE AREA 1990 SF GARAGE AREA 1148 SF LANDSCAPING AREA PER 51% FRONT ENTRY PORCH 118 SF - ` COVERED PATIO BASEMENT 452 SF IST FLOOR DECK 194 SF TOTAL FOOTPRINT 6515 SF - -- - -- - --- - GROSS LOT AREA 60,548 SF PRIVATE STREET EASEMENT 3485 SF ---0.019 AC PARCEL I NET LOT AREA 51,064 SF NET COVERAGE GROSS COV. LOT COVERAGE BLDG 11.4 % 10.1% LANDSCAPE AREAS 59,191 SF 69.5 % 69.5 It PAVING. 1300 SF 18.6% 18.6% 2/21/2017 212112017 ADJ. BLDG on o ----— l-sF ._ ?P4 c \ 0-12 FF—F— yi mm 6 J 31 Q �3 r _ ' r ..It"i' - 3 S- a•: .'i : •',N U1,QRI?FEl41jGY ..: 5 FT HEIGHT lUi POOL 0 �o BARRIER FENCE (DIRT) -'" _ \ z PAINT BLACK"(`{n rd tt < .: LLLJ SEE DETAIL 6 SHT DI BASEMENT GAR. FF AA ;�I�a!`'. / YC4 `fit,REV DATE 1 A 71 POOL n all a vm %pR line IST l IST FF 994 INFINITY EDGE DEC -po IR COL 9�exmETAINING WALLS 0t. —� :AI-,,-A.0AC T i \ � ro me BW 9B5 -�"- BLOCK �'F?VrEF2T (A BLOCK DGpi -- o - HATCH BLDG COLOR TYP ol P� ❑ PCC y1 32r ADJ. WY 37 ADJ. DWY TRASH ;; 0 L P _– :: : ;; GAP"" J O L ENC C � mw SH ul EXPDSEG BLOCK AND BUILDING WALLS I_ v I C T I N G OE ��� �, I ^ E om SHALL SN OQ SL Rt MATCH BNILL¶N' /� J ISA V ADJ TENNIS z Ail RMNING Wv SHALL BE SCREENED NIDI r -D a QO LANDSCAPING SBS LANDSCAPE PLANS FOUNTAIN rco SEE LS PANS rc q :. o�q pN SITE PLAID SCALE 1 INCH = 10 FT (cn_ \ \ \DiSSA FOR =-\ \ ti• �, _ ------- �j \_ +______ —___ _ ` c C \ IL �. \ t• \' r . '. �.3 12 l- 1 \ / { E 6099 \ SE / p 6.0 1 1 MI fn $ (DIRT) y3- �•-� \ z o• I $ASE ANT FF .4 �'sx 2>i9�1 .. / 63 m m, v5 U>. ci am rn: \ _ ';1', �� SLC � REV DATEOF CL 1 , 00 2:1 LOPE oea U YC HM \ / \ E fi.. I �� Aice �sv OLE _, --- 9$2...-.__ OPEWA 4S,- \ I t i ra 14X80 985 ' �b o' 32' PCC m �1ADJ. W 32' a \. ADJ. DWY ��1' c^ —... 9936-- �ry ADJ POOL ENOL P ___ 01 EXISTING =�o ADJ TENNIS 'li 1t - o 0 TAIN a POUN ANS SEE LSP �o i �.z UP iow ONO W~M CONCEPTUAL GRAD ING PLAN SCALE IINCH =,OFT g / AVERAGE SLOPE OF LOT 18.9% y QUANTITIES OF EARTH MOVEMENT CUT 1200 CU IDS r6oe••• \. e•••e r FILL 12,000 CU YD g� • •e • � �e•L•q i0i LEGEND - act _ - _ 1 EXIST CONTOUR Sl ,mr v 32 NEW CONTOUR / ;�meq}} I' M re•e Je°eSb •e 0arre• ♦e ` r o ea•so� I- area �e ea •edros 4' oOi•o C r �•i"� ee •t>e•se i ' , �°oe°e!eov..•o Geos olr�. otiP ♦•s • 0 4! • e• •eo lr t �♦ `crrT,,�pp�.R,–fnf®lmeq�i��w�r��r-�u� �itF�L I1� / - -`-- SCALE t INCH = 20 FT VICINITY MAP CONCEPTUAL- GRADING PIAN FOR 21-3-3 DERRINGER w+� o°i • e okill AVERAGE SLOPE OF LOT 18.9% y QUANTITIES OF EARTH MOVEMENT CUT 1200 CU IDS r6oe••• \. e•••e r FILL 12,000 CU YD g� • •e • � �e•L•q i0i LEGEND - act _ - _ 1 EXIST CONTOUR � v 32 NEW CONTOUR �b.�..�a7Y�➢,SI ;�meq}} I' M re•e Je°eSb •e 0arre• ♦e ` r o ea•so� I- area �e ea •edros 4' oOi•o C r �•i"� ee •t>e•se i ' , �°oe°e!eov..•o Geos olr�. otiP ♦•s • 0 4! • e• •eo lr t �♦ `crrT,,�pp�.R,–fnf®lmeq�i��w�r��r-�u� �itF�L COLORED CONCRET OR PAVING, SALT I SEE COLOR BOARD ®COLORED PAVING, 24"OC OIAG MAX SEE SEE COLOR BOARD rv+4 11 k - _.1 # NO EXISTING TREES ON s 00 C, � Q U Z o� J j N W 0 Q Z M F�0 ON M l� m O Z 0) O J I iml AVERAGE SLOPE OF LOT 18.9% y QUANTITIES OF EARTH MOVEMENT CUT 1200 CU IDS FILL 12,000 CU YD (WORT IM W YDS OFRSIE/W W YDS HIM LOT 56 ' LEGEND - act _ - _ 1 EXIST CONTOUR v 32 NEW CONTOUR rv+4 11 k - _.1 # NO EXISTING TREES ON s 00 C, � Q U Z o� J j N W 0 Q Z M F�0 ON M l� m O Z 0) O J I iml TILE ROOF �— STUCCO OVER FASCIA STUCCO LA HABRA PRECAST SURROUND _-.. PRECAST WINDOW �--- SILLS AND TRIM TILE ROOF STUCCO O STUCCO LA HABRA WOOD FRF WINDOWS ALUM CLA PRECAST SURROUND PRECAST SILLS AND TYPICAL TWR Y 0 I ro � c o � _. FF 999 WEST ELEVA SCALE 3/16" = I F -0 IN. E,4ST ELEV�4710N FL z Q Q C/) ry Q H III U z w 0 v) w or -------- SCALE 3/16" = I FT -0 IN. NORTH ELEVATION STUCCO OVER FASCIA WOOD FRAMED WINDOWS ALUM CLAD FF --1006 -FF-9�94---- mim z Q z 0 ry Q cfD O W W U z W cn W rV ------- --�� HOILHT NV OPe _ — —— — —\ 1020 _ r 1015 - 1_010 ' FF 1008 1005q - 1000 I I. _.._ o 1000 995 - 990 TMwre -- _ _ _-- -- 6A'5M --___ ------ -_-_ i F 984 - 95 - IST FLOOR I' FF 994 EXISTING _990_- _____ .._. SEWER �/_980 975 cemncK PxoPr®puae 975 s PL NE WLINE EXITING GRADSE 970 s 970 IT Hr exVELOFE PROPOSED GRADE 965 1020 HFJGXr exVELOPe /% / 111 1020 _— . -- _ 965 SCALE 1015 960 -------------------------------------------------------- 1015 955 •'•\ j 955 - 950 - - C- C --__ •: 950 945 SECTION 945 LL 1010. -.I�.I 1010 1005 � `2ND FLOOR . p -- 1000 I' -' LQ I U Ci -_. _1000 I• IPL__ --_- 69 995 - 1ST f LOOR 995FE984 --.�_ 995 990 P 990 990 _ - ----ENT 985 M BASE F-984 FF-984- 5985 980 EXISTING 980 SEWER 975975 970� . 970 970 965 9 6 EXISTING GRADE 965 960 960 _ _. PROPOSED GRADE 960 955 955 955 - 950 950 950 945 945 945 SECTION B B SCALE 1 INCH = 10 FT ------- --�� HOILHT NV OPe _ — —— — —\ 1020 _ r 1015 - 1_010 ' FF 1008 1005q - 1000 I I. _.._ o 1000 995 BElB.1CK -- smo wr4e °°B 915 - 990 TMwre -- _ _ _-- -- 6A'5M --___ ------ -_-_ i F 984 - 95 - IST FLOOR I' FF 994 BElB.1CK -- smo wr4e °°B 915 - 990 TMwre -- _ _ _-- -- 6A'5M --___ ------ -_-_ i F 984 - 95 - EXISTING _990_- _____ .._. SEWER �/_980 975 cemncK PxoPr®puae 975 PL NE WLINE EXITING GRADSE 970 970 PROPOSED GRADE 965 965 960 SCALE 1 INCH = 10 FT 960 955 955 - 950 C- C _ 950 945 SECTION 945 ROOM FINISH SCHEDULE WINDOW SCHEDULE DOOR SCHEDULE s IBASE IWALL I LING nu24 S I ZE ENRGYFLOOR S I ZE ENERGYREMIRMN1 S m RECIARMNTIm p Jo m m btt Q J ¢F = J T 'O g W 6 6 ¢ Do w m m m 0 W W _ -1 i- 6 N ZW 1 F Q W Z (� P m 9c i9 i'J 1-�' i9 �� S x m Y- UVALUE z ZN x x Y~ W 6 J- VAUJE M Q _ J m 7, J g9 yp O a a V F OJ°O o¢ Q (D U o¢ o¢ a m 1-O,JBO ojJ U }ppx{ ROOM ti i5 # 1= = ui N i ui ui t w ¢ J x w BHOC . 3 3 x 3 u_ (9 f- a 0.37 8 w = 8 8¢ a a w SNGO p 3 i 1- C] D u. x J a OST z 01 4'-0' 15-0' I H MIDG I I I I 1 8'-0 20'-0'2 H WI IWI I H B 2'-0' 8'-0' F 2 B'-0 B'-0' )'" F A J 9'-0" F a 8 -018'-0" F A w = `y 5'-0' 7'-0' F 4 3'-0 8'-0' C A '_' 6'-0' G 5 '-0 8'-0" NDC 20 5'-0' W -O' G B I I'- '8 -0' G LLI 3'-0' 7'-0' G T f- 8'-0' 10'-0' I G rrr1-r-r lt1 ' �- PROJECT INFORMATION 1-6' 6-0 D ° 2'-0" 5-0 8 0 aaQ ��-- 6'-0' 9'-O' G IU6'-0' Y-0' 5-0 G 1 OWNER'S NAME: ADDRESS: Q 4'-0' W-0' G I8 PHONE: I Z 2'-0'4'-0'4 ® 6'-0' 4'-0' IB O 2'-0S'-0eO 4'-0' 5'-0' 8T 0, 8-0 5-0 G ° ILJJJ Z2'-0' J 6'-0' ° 8-0 6-0 G ��1 �, ��11 B-0 8-0 G 0^OD H ONE PANE OF WINDOWS SHALL BE TEMPERED 3 WINDOWS BASE BID: SIERRA PACIFIC DUAL GLAZED LOW E (ONE PANE TEMPERED PER FIRE ZONE) WINDOW TYPES; NOTE ALL WDO'8 WI 40' OF LOOKING DEVICE OOR Ox ROUSRumNOLIVE wTOUGR EOM DESIGN LOADS ROOF DEA 19 POP ROOF DEAD 18 PST SHALL BE TEMPERED, PL PLATE TP L GLASS 088 SINGLE WD WOOD W DUAL GLASS 9G 91 NGLE GLA89 V VINYL GL AL AV VINYL FLOOR SIVE 18 PST $MANE ORAD 102P17 P5F15 MIN PER CODE) O BASE SHEAR 0.166W SOIL BEARING 1500 PSP Ly Q Q 8 OA FLUSH BO ENTRY OC PANEL (gA'APOflOBE EO LOUVER z TP❑ AO SLIDER BO 8H OC 8GO &I%ED EO ARCl2F ARCH W/ WDO QO IA. CUD. PPATI _ Q ' A PATIOd O� OILITEj, ,,GRESS As Nr set e� ow A8 LL 4 IN CABINS CA8ING IHO%wI A8 eMOWNI BOTHEPANES Z HARDWARE A EXTERIOR LOCKBET W W YL/ 4' F ' BABE 5 FRONT DOOR LOCKSET I 4 IN APRON AND STOOL t4�01,N C PASSAGE 0 BATHROOM —J zuj W Q COOK H O E EDROOKSLIDING PRIVACY F CLOSET Q Q WINDOW G SLIDING DOORS Lij (J),./� P H DOUBLE ACTING. FLOOR HINGE ACTING. 1 �`NJ u CA91NG DETAIL TYPICAL WINDOW TYPICAL INTERIOR DOOR ALL EVFEOCR OPE S SHALL C011FORN TO CITY (D GL DOOR AND TRANSOM REWRn8E5 CASING DETAILS B+�rr 13 WJ FENCE SEE DEI PLASTER OVER WALT TO MATCH RESIDEN( FLOAT TEXTURE TO MATCH RESIDENC DE WOODLAKE COL( FOR WROUGHT IRON r_J 1 J POOL FENCE AND WALL DE WOOOLAKE COLOR TYPICAL FOR WROUGHT IRON �7 1 INCH TUBES 3/4" TUBE 1/2" TUBES io a VERIFY ALL POOL FENCING SIDS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTIONj IAx C'4:2POOL AND WROUGHT IRON FENCE DETa o A❑ VE9OR EQU VERIFY WITH WTH OWNERWNER WINDOW SILL DETAIL FBI FLOOR DETAIL 0 Z 9TANOING 9EAM 5 STUCCO OVER ]X a W N K .;t a PLASTER OVER 2X FRAMING o Wiz JJNQRIN PLASTER OVER RADIUS ooia 00-0n aa�¢ Y ¢ � ~ FRASTE OVER WZ! zmra 'QSpp UhUY 2 2 ZE 61 7 10 SNA FACIRC NU.1 CLAD WINDOWS, OXOR YARN DE 6134 SHORTBREAD (WOOD .FRAMED VANOOWS W. �C(�EL1�;11�IS�1"LiI�L•1(� PLASTER OVER WALL TO MATCH RESIDENCE FLOAT TEXTURE TO MATCH RESIDENCE, PRECAST CONC CAP "CONCRETE" COLOR NZ $4 -24 -OC -�4 IN Ba CURB :N1 TOP 4 BOTTOM ALTERNATE IN FOOTWD ALUM CLADDING) 2X6 EXTERIOR PLASTER STUCCO 2X FRAMING 4X HEADER PLASTER ACCENT COLOR NOTE ALL WNDOWS RECESSED 2 IN �-PRECAST, MATCH WDO I SURROUND COLOR DETAIL SIMILAR AT JAMB SEE EXT ELEV BLOCK WALL 0 TRASH AND POOL EQUIP ENCLOSURE. 0 ENTRY VER FOAM © MAIN HOUSE CORNICE DET GUTTER AND DOWNSPOUT PLASTER OVER FOAM Li 12 mn LIZr- ic co 0, � Cl- Q U ®D 9 J o (Co Z. am ax Hw- a LL lu j 0 ll..i m Q ® 0 m O Z P H MR./MRS. VARDHAN RESIDENCE NEW DEVELOPMENT-LOT 57 DERRINGER IN 'THE COUNTRY 2133 DERRINGER LANE, DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS SITE PLAN VICINITY MAP GENERAL NOTES l CMIIPNfN961161dlwYtgY✓A'dbY atl69RdWNadw C TMIMdtW GvuYYbbLlm�Wl6.adYxW.n.ewy bud"tl.xyadddM "rgM��wvb. M Im'Y1N Y bgxype bqn. ymwb PGMO.VA 1101' a ww mrMw..arwe..y..a�...e.wwyxw.xY^�z "w. vt hru.dwvsarynjxws �>y.rhduYanwRdatSY. Mwbg4wk4lm MlywssY.pWEf� MUOebM bbbxpnLL"agws}vls4b46Y4 bwnY lM.bMWa ' x umw NxekdmbpYbWyALdi4Vad,u.r,b.Mq.r.e®w. PIAMONPB a onwAYa MMbmdw.eymwwmr.l.alnm:mmyYd w AwM Mq. x.�a.. � •� W tly m w+� •w.yuu. w w oxr. a Iw�ovw�ENaxrNrsuwnr,M..�..F..e.bn,.ybyw dw r I ¢ rW m�WNFmYWlpgrbblayatlmw Yy dF"Mrya..atd I //�� 41.Fv.gYw Ybbbf M=gwb�'phexWSmvirldugd� _ . ua �.T.d.wd,.ynye.ba..,dmmaaaw.w � ' � =wAgwb�wp,Aw.n x..gxi...Y r.. I A 4161WCItQItARrt MJwT w'IW atl.w9'q�w'Jblmad.Txer' S w.gwp.eTypbx,Y wbb,.�.wydwc a,.+b.wem G i I �LWE ubw.,ywbmy.wuw.wmbb MUMMY,.yvYwlsw � I F smgq+gaw..a medu.wwaewb w.i.vybvlgbpwx w+q.ewgw.w.am44Fq� m..xw w.bwwywbry. AdM3.br..msdmxw ws.s.Y*dwm.. w.. 't Y ' f. A'MrblDM41YJAlYAGM a..woNMa.Ypwvydw PIB�JE0T8 � ......... pq.q .xwadmdmnadpywmp.ww..pyNnmw.+ �}+y F nmm' mN.wg.e4.mdgdwwk. M.fq.Ma Aw ION .. vm.... mewww4w.mbwupwW�+yw^�.+ � nw�adxy.waywp.Ngb �.p.wnw..rm //�\ _ _ /vl I� V NOT TO SCALE s. nmlrmw+mdgriATmruorerasM..samdmm�.r9rw.+w wrtmputpgsgmfwpwatldm4..ptnFbwagmxgawb NaY NOT TO ECALE 4 OVf1sp MIGKiM.sgwA�tM�nwwk Mm6aYYnblg myWAvndg} u.muw..dbywnq.dwywnb.b.M.bo ...ebwbbinmallgw.+AwA.e b. IlgWil[RGV1415 4wpkdngWMI4mYYtlaaxvvl..e SHEET INDEX •Ywex.uy.rwwe.O.Nq.bb4YFw.w'wwbAm:. w.p1 w xmF�.x.bmyw.....wgbMpF.dwb. e,.Woy.+. - L0.0T TIRE SHEET .nkp�bm•{Ad awwi.po.WldMxArotadu�gbpN w y w v. 0. 9.61IMLl6NMwYwAb}v1MivLwmbGaa6.4MwwtM wy..w.ma.d.awb....N.:�'Nx..wJywb.wy.ww.e L101 IRRIGA71ON PLAN a en�nexarxxc MrYAxwwob,..wbry,..Fwersm.xn,.bw ,'abw.F>""'wada L202 IRRIGATION DETAILS, WATER CALCULATIONS mrybwdwddal wxyY4gdaMmyeoyrpavtw. M AND IRRIGATION SCHEDULES P.�.p,wrmwx.Fgw..s.m..w..7q..gwmA.�. a um-wewmx+rzunAnnMwy..aam.m.wn<"we 13.0'1 PUNTING PIAN ,p. .ea�.gwe..n ygb.awpnpdee�,w x.wbwym �d �MNv,wbngFadbvw.v mxy. FbYkMwwgebu 1 dweaxvY6awbavl u)Lgwekl ' ��dbY �w� N (WIY.,MMILINWitlSfQEMYb.W nxNYgwbYg Ym♦Jyt w.mY.4Yrq.If(ybda/fMw1xJ[qv MclWlvwYrinp.pNM. oy 4'.wwg3eh5A .yefgw MMfdv.htlY4gvYWs gygww.bau...ww ewuewm,ve.eAbwbaey. Amt.1.A..Y m.•da�+w..Fu�wi.da�sla m: r�.qw ' vg4wYpady.x.bdb CONSULTANTS: MWELO COMPLIANCE 0 s�waMlwraw.m.a.n.wngemweia.gO.=mwgrw w].wwaam.Nwabnrmyr.�n.,m.wwxd gw4mpAabx ngeNdm4o.'b.�w M.ddfsY0.mYbYM.W,g}vNJYYMb pmwywr.A.b. I Have cum=LIED WITH t� cwlERla oF,uE c+rT cf= olxlam eAR � ��� seawFa..x.bd4�.xnJ�aw4m.Y. Mtln.f.YolT4tbMb3lnxJ�eY wryp..dw.mbwv Yminw^Y ARCFitiECP. WATER CGN6EMMG LANOBGAPE ORDRWiCE (Pd1G Bls) AND F£F.IED 11gTl FOR THE EFFICIEM UBe6 WATERMiHE LAVDBCAPc DESIGN PLNt gfaxwrev4.gb.gdqwrF4wMMpnabx Mg vYbeb� adpu}A.bA vlwfa,. EDEVD AROIDECDIEE PLWNOiC n. winn[x MIW.b Mnmexms.gw,edat4wM 'ISO N 6D15ONAVF SU(fE D w UPLAEm,U9D06 UdIR.A, �Mndbs 7=d W xnm wYaJ �4fl�t4wwY,.kn g.Yma. aavb+ewr.I..w.eay4.nW.aywrnav�mme.bmw 4.py.yYmbindbPwfbwpv. MIaW[4Y Avl.1W AAbnM CONTACR TELE VO1EmA THO 0J Ld 1410 Ytivybaoipex �w..wen...ewp.pyMyw.x.dm�yww TD:909 LO TW1 N AWM FWMYy.Mgvm'rpvwYlbxw,gawwlgdw p'hdbry w aW W Nd ¢arils x xOy m ad WbY b b M M1wMrlMarywgm.yvxm w6'.dwgiwdwwRyW axr OWNER/CLIENT: APPROVALS MR. SUMER VARDHAN DIG ALERT ZM DL NDER LAN¢ DIAMOND EAR, CA suss DIx rai Ncz YFen-Fv-w CONTACT SUMER VARDHAN AilEA4i Nq DAB G8O!£ TOJ OI6 umeaww am+.e ua+a emnwl cuxmaaA n CGRWL fiW LL Yl nE rflY'. IXHp P LAW(CAPE IRw44nGN MN ,Mlm ATn APPROXatAre LOCAtILN MRTHE "LEliffipER9 PL AV O. cCNTFACfGR ELLLLIWTALL R101K'PEDIILEp PPEO°.IRR BAGIILCW PTRIMREI(ly'PLOL 044gRIK'MABtER VALVETI£ CWRuT EMQ9 r1E tEWIK•PYC AOMAMMLME A6 AVlmap. l/AAMT]E mm mcgL.wrRraamee®]ilY SDBuau wnwrlc PTJMMMA ND BDADiD sr BR4uB.AB dPPlVfED Br TIE w]RR'6 FEPrESEYrdnvl NN TlR cnr M3PEGTRi FDERroTNe GML OKNEER6 FL418 FOR TlE WAftRtlElfll LOCAnpi M fLr4RdLT01lMNLL MVrnw AVALaCLE F1lMIMRN2 c! T!}CIe AID rlla@4661N Im Pl6'RrOCrA)YBYyY. WIK MORIRIGCtp[ 611ALL ffi]� IeAPaelan MrtAvr 4Nvae eRLDasde rexs FNuae ronx.TR,E 1]Eea MsrRD]Nxx ArND mTro rHc cuBSR MAxnn p4+Na 300I¢1'I nuDxar easuwp� ITAK. @fiWPE 6D P61 6TATIG gVEBBII£ 65PoIPtiR YW.ryIf YALLlY YI41ER pI61RICi '.01-6%-tl68 IRRIGATION LEGEND 9YMEOL tFG MWEL o T N P VALVE KEY VALYS ILIR9{ AePFO%. ePRa YALVETRANONRdC �— vuve ala ♦ 8 RdPbIRD IMG-BN'I-pq).5p. t,H •P pOP-'X'TLTG OPRgT S' O.p.Ob, 030 90 N NNIry.'#p 14.60 BI@488 OAil VdLVE-BISE PER PLAY 9 0 RAN41Rp 'Nro.BAM-PRb.Dgµ1P PLP -W &4tlO BP1MY tl' 065, L90, 360 30 b RdMBl10 IMG-06^I-FR3-4JN PLP.W MIpp OPRAY b' Offi. b8 Q Wln?R NCV GEGC YXYfi B RAWIAD IMd.84`I.1°W8.®VAV POP.YP ENRD MLAY IB` 0.9 9�0 ® i£HCO e]B. Td Wa'IffdLTEp PIRBRIAE BACYFLOY AEV@IIkR m ® ® 11WLER I-iO-¢0-80.30 BX2b MTOR RI RICER 30' LIGgT 59 � HNfER PL.p60 &1AW R.BTA}ILTi WLLL.MxT d11pP:RCWIRJ-LI.ER ANTER RELLB-W R^q TqdY4TEIMC18Y8i. A. 05D 30 0 NNhR YLM-SYNC EVAPOIRAVWIPATIR{RRES, AVD RAM 6@I8'R ' (rvp FER REE] ® HWTER RCWCLM IK'ROL EENEcftwi • RAMHIR] IB09.sAM.FRA-101-P<-M wBCR ifd0 g154LER 3 0M 30 ® RAMBI.® R1g23 I° LdJpOCdPE YW1ER FEIER. FOR IRRWdTMi QLLT OO IWiER PLD.AVR Al. RELIM VALVE f NNRR P .v •l• pL69TICRYbI BKL VKVE ndW.IL£ IN•MD LEBO ECN.10 P2.3•ML L4YdER NATER WV.15W-f8 Ih'PLASTICIM01ER v4K- NRd'IALLT GiEi WA 06, MsiALL MM b' DEPM B INIIER ICY PidO}IC RS'RJIE CCN IRCLVK4E-81II 1RRPLAV ��= XNRR 066A•1•tl`OG ECO MT -REFER fO OHPEi U01 FOp pE}pJL RN2R PCZ -ml 14'PLABnc DRIP zpnE vdL`.E --- Eco-ndr 114ap LALEWAL L. 4360 Prt 9/a°AND LdW'lR CL 34 �� FLD-W-18-N0-hBER TO &REi UO{D!}dIL °1 d.EEYRL B�GI aO PC (U DIPo0.ptaI tN'LODEp PIP£ -MM N'DEEP 36 WWtB,MW 1a' pEIP IRRI6AT70N NOTES 1-robru3. Au 1RRIBATIgi ccNRaENrs AGCCRDIND ro LOLPL covEs a exolR+e4®. }-N.L IRwsAncN sxNL � I14TA11® Br A ucea®LLxmderoe ir¢acuRirt �rorz�slwio�BrnA�ttLc�wamµilail A�uo rdr�%,�Au. PEPMIlS uN ALL IxsPecnore AE Reamm. o-TNe cpxmAcroRsNAu.ce ResvawMr ANpuAELEFORAxr E.VLWONAaBir INro waAcwr PRaP4Lx. RDxs, a+EB�ans EeT4ACNs oR AYr o�raa LYAL FRarBeLrr._.TRIa1aB EI1tE3t nARRep oR u].A.Fm. HT91V1L B! 111E RESPQ61BILnY LI TE LONiWLTLR M FMIILIARI}E NIn3HP W}N H1 LtLEp6FL1RD MLInB. LGi1R/LniR SYWL REPURmEn�Ge Ar. ND Ammpxu cpar ro TrE ow�Axr pexc a ro 9-n£ LGMMciOR &Wt 8E PIOPUBIpL A•b LIAW! PORdNY MO All NveE DLE rD uadnd4 aR ICIPOT ro Pawc w Dm4e Deanw'erors, E%ISTRD Aw 1tn PLN+r iMTBiIKS ex AN(onec Rtt51LP1 ElEMEMBEITBt H.AV'®taNMMKEp, nl WFIIRaOTGR sxAl]. eE }EBPIXAIBLE POR copwlNAnpN of wrmnEswTx Au o11ae 6-nE nameAeroa axAu vewPr Au caromab Nm dPENMoxs ak%M qI PL/JI6 AT nE 811l PRILR TO CQR ENCRBT1f OF AVr YV'RK N1 dBLREPAYLI� tlWl!! RQd(r® T011Y OY0B1 F]9 ANY PFO LAWiLµE /FG11%TFORdRFLTld1114®IA%Y. VJN}IWAWAnGN OFWRK IB AT ME LdIIRALTJR5 w6KAq ENp'cIHE. T-. L(MRFLTGR 91MIJ. VtlLP" nE STATW FFEY.URE. FEfBt SIZE, SIZE w seence TO ne n�TER. ANr pEYIArlds rvaN pErnul dOrERIA JWlEE dV.tl1 ronE ATINmGN OP li@ PP" NTT N,,, A0.111rfLT. LLNiIWAnLN W WJ10. Y011lUf itlIIPIGATIRI TO TB COMWGTINS d£K� S1WL B! M 111E W1rRAGTOR9 R4yC AND EWB6E 9-0wVBAT10H RAk3 A9 WAIW 9W.y. Y GgGIGlRC7 pIAHRNMATW ALL PIPE YkYEO. ITL. &1GyN WnIM PAVm MEAS A@ PLR Dtl1aN CIARIFILATILN OKY ANp 9W11 !! M5TA4ID M RJNfRG AFCA Y163LT'ER P(P.3101E. PQELLMROLLO[ TJ w+W. AIN IF'PM\ABY ilE dE0lP8REYNTAT NI FLR PXNLdifROLLBL r1C C14Ri GW.L IEA 9JLI[ll!@ PRIM. A•b A pIFPPRBd LOVJIL 9NALL BE U9Fp TO AYbin£ NRA OPf EMGCX NATld4 MGVRi BNW. IG 10VRlIDN1Y 9GLm YiIQN Nb PIELIO W PWn4 il! LN.VtT BIV1L 0! YGUNED tbRb.VflcPo eR MPRWPn dA41 M! eP TA^! INONE <ONIPOI.LBt LABREi. ril0! CIV.RiO M%T !! cGMPLIRo,Vb M PVG! rR10R t0 PIN4. ALL�IAN'R (N WMK BY M OK30. II-bJbT AIL IEAO• FGR Ib OVLR SfR4Y cX NLN-PLulilp AWA4 N9 roR corWerl covlRACE TNIS BIw.Ix0.lms SB.EcnNB rle Effii oE4R�oP AacroFIr TIE EwsTM9 cdmma4. AD.usr PLR nwxr ISEdmVcrat 9NPlL GKRpINAre LGVAnox AVD P08R IMroK PCR wrulnne IRwswnDN epinr*alae A. omBes PErRe srAnve. Isne cdlRAcroR sxu. PROVIDE AIN FEBr w ro DAre A cpnmlTe AB awLr BEr ax APDAanICIBLE NYLAe AU WLRK9 &V3L!l IRAT NN LPbIB{E CdnFA'TLR BW.L C@tfIPr RR1tRW'ICIP Asro KCLRKY AMf LdTiE1QCY5. LLHiPKTCR dl/J1 ce RE0Po191gE POR MDAnikSR6FfNIKI&.E A9 PpiARED. MMLO KATER OALOULATIONS I HAYS COMPLIED WTH THE CRITERIA CP THE CALIFOR]IA MODEL WATER EWICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDMMtCCE AM APPLIED il£M FOR THE EWIGIENT ISE OF WATER IN TFE LANDBCAPE DESIGN PLAN. PVC LATERAL LINE SIZING OHART PIPE GALLQIB PR'E BIS ItRMINRE BIID 64tLd10 PSRM142 VALVE KEY VALYS ILIR9{ AePFO%. ePRa YALVETRANONRdC �— vuve ala PRESSURE LOSS CALCULATIONS mpEm. m.h:wmePwm,n2un[nfnMca=,tl 6'MAfyg qE® PRESSURE LOSS CALCULATIONS E pwu=v.lw eo. 0emna ❑j conaw ped niEalnErere xaw s� M1O tw „M mWn Y 1 pu grow nticPaEsswE awns U l^.uc caw[ £'� WMM Wne: M1Xv ® .e roUG O e M,la NMACFPEasIN19Mx 1. feMOlYplcel O �� Z II�WeI�N.I�w IpNE NJtASEx 9U)MSttd µire Vela mx 9rzvmis - 160 NJ 3 ________ wlelo.vw.Im C. y µ vnv1E a seE ,e I © xi-VPxa' wl q I I, a.� .ey 3�0 Z �YIxttla. ea I I 5 +a..uees ❑(Ia mY liFa' W�npE,Ea P91 zI•Mva_.ZZO+pOm Alrtdl.4INl0 d II 5 I r.NwJ) ©rP beeknm m asra IAisiFa+wvvEan ''s< 3 elan PM. dleMa. nrn:me... pews. 13 p+'(aav � iasExLE o q A� ®1 �em.[gmemwneoi.eaen:emrtu:n:a,E a. a ntuu iI ©W dea mldvn ��a it 9 Q9 rlw+al.a to edem I Q�=.d•ym net. F�vuvwEs I]N G4 stWAl �z 6 �Uv�xrufwull .pmlrluuw ®� s Ilro mleed.g� ElEvnmxauaxaE o ® aP..n al.Gms IP II ii an. neaou loUtsrmAlOsses: PaE6awE roaPExeiExPao. � Mn pq. Gumut• y 8 ��+ I x Au pw�� � I��i 12 1.Idds�ips.�pry Ilr..(Vaebl- iryYfc6i Sini111PtE65NEnVPLet5s1 � � �[gya �El4, �Y� �pM 9 agry4ue tx te6lauwn]Envl�sslxa: ossa 1 PLOW SENSOR eKKOW M-&NTOR W rpqu�I.rwm ENCLObI/RE :fS33rL�SJPPLSiC-P.F''3CI_.�_ti 6E ula.5.nms �kerce Rao. M,nFpe�nlmMZP[rY®0 Mseaga Mel NbIGi Squalrva[apnrtslMmreRNI rc wlr(pww[Iwagerepa) PMImdNelmKKerye mageM&aes lrcaautl Wtleu6z Marypwekex @SeKfival EFnquueeN Fmlab SpsW IaM[wpnmalio.¢["o=06g R PnPoo lreelm[e Ew<n[.ssm+m.wm+wcewn<rcnv rer[+a [dW n' '✓YSPs N Mfa1R F¢.kNl e[e NeakniSM v`x UWvek[[I 1aL bn M4n6 EIo nS a 055 a .SRW. a 063= ,9S[B IRRIGATION SCHEDULE FOR ESTABLISHED LANDSCAPE ScMdulcfo, £slabi RN Llmdseapu cawme seeeem e[ pent i�mu a<Imm amy w mwlm or,u, waM� �" _ ars Eio Weanm!(i m[o. lwroumenG Camoh.RMiW 61P�B>R lo^a[mei array Jem,tl6ar+lyl' m.h:wmePwm,n2un[nfnMca=,tl w mn M1O tw „M U a�56� 1. dm rgl�nRaan, Iw 160 esm arra .z, mmn .i, nouns*, ' I A� ®1 �em.[gmemwneoi.eaen:emrtu:n:a,E a. WATER CALCULATIONS -'VM' sEclav az.cmea]€o]aru \vniireusE ¢Twi Ernu yElmlOarylPP'lurel• sul .[. v. vm,tgAmup,Ymp Em re�m.neewn�tevaaal�nwaaa eamwo<e5'..1 P 1 IFe[b® NVCIX61 R6nYu,s1 x� mmmaa.w,x[ tl nNl 6U P 4ndIrcWWNeyeereepbvbtlutle epxu lnm,.e[e.lrei pwue bll IES MQi4m E&krcy ynVNnun Ofl bNl IRRIGATION SCHEDULE POR &—MONTH ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD 4rvrn nm esw,l'skrcm ee,«,a Camoh.RMiW 61P�B>R lo^a[mei array Jem,tl6ar+lyl' lw,W i„rt(OOJ,s' EIeW reeUW mk.emPona.>U wuW W Isa,:n[mn M1O tw „M U a�56� 1. to mn e�We zs Is .Im , 160 esm ionll. p . t� W° ,u,,BBa.mml6 W# Y k G Ee B ] a B W V� ZUJ� L—U � 8 Q a �6 Z m=� ° RZ C S z m vire F� f•' E OC J_ W b Q 0 3v z0 Q0 s VV 041rICA6H sr. TJg �• 08 T1 16 Q AS BNdW 5 a 8 elesie 3 PLANTING NOTES I-CCNrR6ETOR lBr@MH101ElE EOR Md(ND WMBFIEEA•BWM YIfIH.tt B✓ff•ZRp11D NN �GOei WO�Dd£TO OY•165E 6661�O LNM1A'CE PCLF 1. pO µF WLIA6LT pp^LE6D Wr11 CR1BipIEIIW i6 pmYt.¢D W.Fn IL K D6f @ F%IBT1W}NAYNOf1+AVEBEENDb1ANWRM6 pE6Yil BYN C[WITI}IQ0 &ULL BE tt@p4rELY BRWNr i0 T! Ai101r1a CF T16 WNFR nff WEE IO NLI�MGyF qY.N µ'JiF ILIR fgidLL !£CEIedRY pEN0KN3 J -LLL PLA'RN6 BWtLL BE BN)ER Tp DHBCi1W 6A LICENYO Ea1R/LTCR teJTz Q eamaLL, ae wxL ce ua ae Eoe wolx PLurt eeLFalw um MBiLLL4ila 1GCI W 0@B. GMpICKR dLYI. EE r6NpYIBt@ FGAAM cxwBurvH WTi euxwmucTGm M EEaWax ro Acromuau FLsvrna oPEPAriglB. 4-eEE D6TAue AVD aPFCFrarlaeFGOmMNS NEIIKD.Msnr FD DneMeKim arra vaarlu REaxIaeENee. 0 -Ga 6NRETKNG MD1ALLArIP(AMNRN6 BPERMq f}H]9rY (ibl DAT9M1@Olb@p FA1CR TOFM4. AfG@PrMGGTE W.(A'BT i1E OYER M4MIFR0..K'E BN4.L OYNb6 NLiP1YV LLEEDNi IFRIGGTMM P 1 WBPtl TIWE ROT BHLe uNla e6Tne B@Lcwoxao@. EFmluuc svp aQLTw esu eEwre ML ATE xFCFinaeY rcR M�Ruwa Ho uFK@eP. I•uuwrelAwe use NE:IID1m ALFEPrVPO. rEFLYEIi-11[CL8A4MJ AVp dPAlerI1G 1ECE60dRT r0 NEEP iK IMRWAMN 6Y61BI N NJ.'9 WCRUNS RZfER WIN PRQ'Elt CbrEWtlAE. Wi1f�1EiIE OINBR'B A:PFCrUt M>MRN4Y.£PtWOD &1.LLL IE TO 1£PFT MNrta6FtLC1ERIenG MO mTABLBMEnr. 6 - qLL pLpVr M61EP14 eW.1. DH AMNrEp EORONLIR BT n1E 011ER I LNOBCgPE AIB:xnEcr Fu«aro BBrLLLAnaa rIELLOYLIERBIa B�Blfdt , L�WdiIM e{WLL 4'fN.ETC AP AL IY AVATMI 8.4L W NV.B LCGAIED Lm011LL46• FpQ14VY Y4LL6, HAPoYJJfi CR PLNWi .L BE r41@p WTI RqT B0.pAEm F REIR BTMDA® p@T41L AIIDR M BL!}Flll.[G IIIE(d)RM RYa. CGMP4CEGR BNaI.t Wx PYSRB EtteENf4rhE 4PRTE TIF R"Of BLRR90. MBTPLLA}kM 9 - L4NG9CME CCfIR4Cr R TO (EC@If£ BTE 0.4AD® WTIM IMG AiW! W PNI&¢D EPME LCNIPOGRR BIILLL YLYPr GRADF gllIXtN CgT@ET1e 'KiY. eTAR}M5 W-JM1B4V LGCEPIAVCEG 6WS8. FN402bE00NALL BE dDJIerFO ld DIRA. -'IED 5Y BT PMER ALL GLDNi euLL L Cp•Fl E}E ppORTO CC11'D3A'@LVr G RAttOYa G£WATfMe. XL fILYID> M %.MIr MEAL ENµ1 ik)r E%RID 11 Yq£. bG-CaIPN:TCR @YKL HTIET PoNFR @6V Ey ryl OPTS RNCR TO taPBKEl1@M YLACTO CQTIDIN4R HtlJFLT INBP2Crlgi @CIEDLLE6 AB ROI4Q'D DT lFfif.61ELTICW. -4L ArE.b for R.8V1ED W 1VIS. fiW'Ub CT£R CR NrGWBEED. WINTIAM BYW.E TONO]IIER'8 RLFGB@IrATYB Pq[q^RbIK PyPo�I tta AFPLICST4M R a-LLSBD CMr(py KILL /Ay .T(Au TNN w50e FR'A1 ene M86 GR P6F•hMIRI C4 Y@ED rj f£p' INGTGIf W IH NYCPC9@@D GRIN Qir) GflMr FmIrE PLAxrnG A0.Fd EOL wTl A PR:-erP.Raonxelmcice M RFeaeEnDEo arvD APRIeD DT M H.iIVxO FeercWDPrx AGV10D.@ aND LPPucATOR MMEBM Gem DAre � xiDRxEEneE LVD eerclE IaDrED 6Rua eD+Bu wx G@!FVNIEO. rIE ilRDlf-Ice NWLL ee AF%.IFD TO DRY eOILTby W r A q!e NPKfFARLIGTKM IIYCIS�'W1Ep MIO TC eDIL DIAY134TNM HM MNiM'I W 6 MWlim. LWID Y4TER RN Ri G2MLL Ei'MIOX MERTE FIG-6MEBEIR NETEICJDE NAe DE91 APRED.00.�IAWAR IE®ICID@ MFl.IGTa NTON.YmDBG c({RdilpW, IS - WL, TET IFiER dLL BOIL NA4 TO T@ Nn? BUT BMCL@ BBIL T#Fdpdnq{ T@ fgnRaGfpp EXpLL CBidIN A MLL rEBT EGR RLWCLLTFaL artMluR avp EERnurc rlsrw DBr aca.iEowun afiaxunaa K 01nWLL LA@OR4ro.¢IE6 BBmw.RKNIBxIcoPrG rear l6WlE TO TIE uR uID LAW BOAFF ARDIIn:G. w -MIL PPEFARATCTL WE MLW1Nb MLL A`p1p 6eWJAce KR aD ARIT2EB QiLT.PM4L BC.'L MRAypIf Ri£0 ASL OIAVTIrIPO NWJ. CE p44® p1 M0.r@BTpECLi?OmAi1g3. MrOTLLL Tl XALgIBLJ MD yEHlB 6•IMO LNE bLL AT pgTEO NDIUIFD Pc41p4S MII rE rE0 r 401. Ypa NlTw26ll BTmIU= BuwuBT um LBA pTFel1 m LBB cIro P.Dw31 MlE MML.0 MATER CALCULATIONS I HAVE COMPLIED WTN THE CRITERIA CF THE CALFORNIA MODEL WATER EFFIGENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCCE AND APPLIED THEM FM THE EFFICIENT U M WATER IN THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN PLAN, PLANTING LE68ND 9YM. BOTANICAL NAME C CN NAME ZOOS SIZE U44 PP. OTY CONI•RNTD !,YM. BOTANICAL NAME CO910N NMIE ZONE SIZE M. PP.. QTY COMHENiS �\ TIME, EHRIIBB, ( •—PITT08PORIP•I R OIFOLIWI OIEENI LAND PITTOSPO A 24° BOX M O5 6—AGPANTNP)8 sP LILY 0f THE NILE B 5 GAL M 05 B4 LAGER TOREMIA INDICA CRAPE MYRRE A 36° BOX M 05 II NATCHEZ' 0 CEANTHOS WILD LILAC S-30 5 GAL L 03 34 'CONCHA' PLATAMIS ACERIFOLIA LONDON PLANE TREE 8 36• BOX M 05 4—DIETEB BICq-OR FORTNIGHT LILY A I GAL M 05 10 v- GARDENIA JASMINOIDE6 G ENIA A 5 GAL M 05 16 =12R Y IPOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 15-30 24" BOX M 02 9-HEMEROCALLIS SPP DAYLILY A 1 GAL M 0b 10 YELLOW B RED LIRCPE M AM LILY NN4 A 6 GAL M 05 42 - N� � ❑ MAHONIA NEvNII NEvIN MAHONIA 5-30 6 GAL L 02 43 o NAIDNA DOMEBTICA HEAVENLY BAMBOO A 5 GAL M 05 29 'GULF STFEAI' BER'MDA T W BANDERA BER•WDA SOD M Ob 606 ep- LLESTCOAST IW'S O—-PNORMWM TEOWC DwA FLAX A 5 GAL M 05 50 'CREAM DELIGHT' (@69) 893-9813 101 PHORMIUM TENAX OWARP FLAX A 5 GAL M 0b 26 TM THLPIB' ®VERBENA LILACINA LILAC VERBENA A FLATS m L 03 4315 SF. Ie•OC I•i7r-PITTOSPO TOBIRA VARIEGATED PITTOSPORRT A-5 SGAL M 0b 52 'YARIEGATA' ®DYMCNDIA MAf A!RETAE DYMONOIA A &ATS L 02 390 SP 'SILVER CARPET' ROSA SPP. TRAILIOKs ROSE A 5 GAL M 05 20 'CARPET SSE' 2' OL. d�--SALVIA CLEVELANDU SAGE B-50 5 GAL L 02 93 ROSMARIOWS CFFICINALIB ROSEMARY 13-90 FLATS®L 02 103310F. 4" T$ SANTOLINA CHAMAECYPARRISBJS LAVAL®RRC CI4 A 5GAL L 02 46 -11- 3°LAYEft'COVER MJLCH' BYEAmeNTs'No SOIL - 29 206F. V V By EA ENTB,MC - A ��-�� E PLL TREES, 5HWR3 AND GFIOUND fAVER.S SPECIES, MJ ITIE5 AND TNEIR PWCE r AND LOCATION ARE FIX THE !WME14 AND AEpROVAL p THE LA.G.PD. BCH.@. M' .I' -B• u• 4 W 4B• z Z W Q Lli �a m z 02 QO W Ow I- } U F z D O U z W Ow (Dx(nw zWLf) C� Z Q Z 2E > < LL, gO�Z S J Lij W Z� O Uo]z ZZU ma�z> �z.:5E a.OQa. QU o z u a it n S 11 a.0 KU aXQd QU 0 z w C7 LU J r U� U(0 C C C O O O r c E `o U a N o `o c E c N - oO _ N E Cp C O O w w U m c o a a m U 0 0 C O) O) C Un S 3 3 a 3 rn IL v 3 r c0 N N m w � N N U1 U N C m N In N N N N d m m 3 -0o U x a E E E N a a o 0 0 0 Q c 0 U c s c m E m 0 E c CL c t Qo @ Q c w 0> L>, w L U N J O C) u Q a> a U L CL J z z z z a CL FLU z z z zJ J Q U Q Q.. z z U' (D a N r N � N �G N � (O � � � •i\- � ON �p�JJ (O � o J N ON N N W O a a N LL a a a a a m a. a. a to a- N N m o (If0 a a 0 0 0 CL v� am a o a cD m G O Z ma U c m E E c ao_ m0 Z of c a — a w o' — — ;p a > y H o a `m y 'E in j J .E .Ea m m e CO N N a c w Q N O m Y w �� m m -C o m E- U f/7 N (D O U p N -_ JE r O K W C N fL N N - C m N m J Uo oc m > 0 m - m0 0 - �� �E ❑ >Y O 3 w O 'N OJ'^O" X Z6 F o a U� C O O Z 0 W C p w Y O C N 0> O O E 2' w O J H 0 U.� N 0 3... N 0 U E C N ELL w m- W Z E E W m c0 0 c m h c9 c c N m e 5.2 a 'p IL Z 0O Ste, Q Z N.. Z QO m0 mN m >O > �N Q O. O' 4.. L E' V' 'a0 N (p 0 O Z r 'a0 N 'a0 h N W N y N N a J (OU 0 y N Q z N N ❑ Q CL w d (p Q OQ N (OZ N (n (O O 2 N -w N a M� z W Ow (Dx(nw zWLf) C� Z Q Z 2E > < LL, gO�Z S J Lij W Z� O Uo]z ZZU ma�z> �z.:5E a.OQa. QU o z u a it n S 11 a.0 KU aXQd QU 0 z w C7 LU J N G o c C p 0 O '� 0 O '@ O 0 '� O '@ c O c O O 0 E `o E `0 E E E E c 0 0 0 `0 c o 0 (0 O C c c c N (6 N G O O O O c c c 0 O - - O O O N w N (0 N l0 N N N p m w �o 10 o � O O O = m .c-. m m m CJ O) Ol m 3 m m m m 'm 'm 3 3 3 3 n I I I I O W N M M N N m M V � N C C G C C C C C C C C C N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Ul N N f� N O N N N N u N 0 N N N 0 0 0 N 0 0 N 0 0 E EE E E E E E E E E E o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c0i 0 a T m 3 c c � m UC9 N Q. = ~ c N > _ _ L O c J c o X > a U N O Q. C lL T Y C Y N L X N CO -i c U CO K i (n T 7 S U) Q a LL Q z z 2 :Ez z z Z z z z z N O O ON O a O N a J N a NO J a a � d J d J CL a J d J a a a a a a o U � o o D o o o o D o U O 2 D 0 U U U U U O F- c N c N C N C N c N C N c N N N U! 01 (0 CL c d @ c N - N w m w a E cc o aED T �' m 0 w m y -p OI N 0 '_' L N D Op M 0 C __ . N 0 0 0 N= c6 - = N t (6 O a �` C7 U �_ J E - O J J E U E G E U C N N U O c E ,C `n t0 _C 3 C N c_ E N @ C O .- N c y G N N O p .' mp c c '00 n 0o m 0 m— Y o 'mo mo N rn_ O C7 a M U uj N Ll O p N N J p N O O O .0 N (/J 0 N (n y O OJ a N N (O a N a M a t0 N n N O N N a N N U MQ U MQ M� OQ MZ W Q OQ MQ MZ nZ N N� N CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ) I, Stella Marquez, declare as follows: On April 25, 2017, the Diamond Bar Planning Commission will hold a Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, Windmill Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. I am employed by the City of Diamond Bar. On April 21, 2017, a copy of the Planning Commission Agenda was posted at the following locations: South Coast Quality Management District Auditorium 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar Library 21800 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Heritage Park 2900 Brea Canyon Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on April 21, 2017, at Diamond Bar, California. Stella Marquez Community De CD:\zstel l a\af'id iv i tposti ng. doc VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION CL i- t _ AGENDA ITEM: CL SUBJECT: G VAA TO: Planning Commission DATE:�(/zC/Q SPEAKER D j `\ % l/ G j NAME: /, cy J'(� 1r I -s (Please print clearly) n nno�ec. �7 /0 )r' iai oo IR� (Please print clearly) I would like to address the Planning Commission on the above stated item. Please have the Commission Minutes reflect my name and address as printed above P P �!v Signature Note: This form is intended to assist the Chairman in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Commission will have the opportunity to do so, and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. After completion, please submit your form to the Planning Commission Secretary. Thank you. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM: 7, j SUBJECT:(_. --- TO: Planning Commission DATE: 4 — SPEAKER print print clearly) l would like to address the Planning Commission on the above stated item. Please have the Commission Minutes reflect my name and address as printed above Signature Note: This form is intended to assist the Chairman in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Commission will have the opportunity to do so, and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. After completion, please submit your form to the Planning Commission Secretary. Thank you. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION j SUBJECT: __6L � 24?I —� `— AGENDA ITEM: TO: Planning Commission DATE: SPEAKER ninnnvavA � clearly) ADDRESS: (Please print clearly) 1 would like to address the Planning Commission on the above stated item. Please have the Commission Minutes reflect my name and address as printed abo>� � n I I gnature Note: This form is intended to assist the Chairman in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Commission will have the opportunity to do so, and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. After completion, please submit your form to the Planning Commission Secretary. Thank you. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM: TO: Planning Commission SPEAKER C NAME: ADDRESS:(/tel 7 �lG (Please print clearly) SUBJECT: C t/Y1Dl<C�ct �t�!< o je DATE: - P\ - 2 ATE: P\2 prr-Sz,>-�r«f 1 would like to address the Planning Commission on the above stated item. Please have the Commission Minutes reflect my name and address as printed above S nature Note: This form is intended to assist the Chairman in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Commission will have the opportunity to do so, and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. After completion, please submit your form to the Planning Commission Secretary. Thank you. x VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: TO: Planning Commission DATE: q /-V92— SPEAKER NAME: (ft (Please print clearly) ADDRESS: a - (Please print clearly) I would like to address the Planning Commission on the above stated item. Please have the Commission Minutes reflect my name and address as printed above Signature Note: This form is intended to assist the Chairman in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Commission will have the opportunity to do so, and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. After completion, please submit your form to the Planning Commission Secretary. Thank you. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM: ' SUBJECT: 4 `! TO: Planning Commission DATE: SPEAKER NAME: U (Please Print clearly) ADDRESS: ���1 CrUa� CY e��� r taaM�tr Fac r C , �ilii'`> (Please print clearly) I would like to address the Planning Commission on the above stated item. Please have the Commission Minutes reflect my name and address as printed above 1 1 rlM� Signatu Note: This form is intended to assist the Chairman in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Commission will have the opportunity to do so, and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. After completion, please submit your form to the Planning Commission Secretary. Thank you. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION/ rJ A pa payjx,G�lM°4 6 n l f G AGENDA ITEM: ? SUBJECT: e_� CG S ((y// ' V OF TO: Planning Commission DATE:.—`%�i�` (7Ti�7 SPEAKER NAM -Dn CAR (Please print clearly) so WiNat9m i31U> No (Please print 1 would like to address the Planning Commission on the above stated item. Please have the Commission Minutes reflect my name and address as printed above Sign V r Note: This form is intended to assist the Chairmanin ensurin hat all persons wishing to address the Commission will have the opportunity to do so, and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. After completion, please submit your form to the Planning Commission Secretary. Thank you. April 25, 2017 Greg Gubman, Community Development Director City of Diamond Bar 21810 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 - Transmitted via e-mail, ggubman@diamondbarca.gov RE: Crooked Creek Project, Agenda Item 7. 1, Planning Commission Hearing April 25, 201.7 Dear Director Gubman: California Oaks, a program of California Wildlife Foundation, works to conserve oak ecosystems because of their.critical,role in Sequestering .carbon, maintaining healthy watersheds, and providing sustainable wildlife habitat. We are writing, regarding agenda item 7. 1, in which the Planning Commission will consider a Time Extension -Planning Case No. PL 2016-221, Crooked Creek project. We understand that Cathay View LLC requests a one-year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 54081, residential subdivision on 12.9 acres on Crooked Creek. We concur with the conclusions transmitted in letter submitted by Sierra Club Angeles Chapter on April 24, 2017 that the proposal is for a new project and therefore the extension must be, denied. A new project application should be issued with updated California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) evaluations made and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared because: 1. The expiration date has passed for the initial approval and allotted extension periods. The City Council initially approved the project on February 20, 2007. The duration of the combined time extensions granted by state legislation set the expiration date of this tentative map to February 20, 2017. 2. The project is not the same as that initially approved for the reasons articulated in the aforementioned Sierra Club letter. 3. There is new" irnforinatiimit, nnotkn'W" at the time sof the preparation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (,MND), which indicates that the project would have significant environmental impacts. The MND does not include considerations of the climate impacts associated with the oak woodland acreage that would be impacted. Senate Bill (SB) 1334, passed in 2004, brought the conversion of oak woodlands, with a few exceptions, under the purview CEQA. CEQA requires the analysis and mitigation of greenhouse gas 428 13n, Street, Suite LO A, paklmtdCA 94612, 510.763'.028:2, email.: oakstat2Ceal.duNilngaks.uig, www.calirbouwaks.org emissions associated with a:proposed oak woodland conversion: The MND fails to comprehensively analyze or feasibly mitigate anthropogenic and biogenic direct/indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions pursuant to CEQA requirements. Specifically, the failure to fully account for the foreseeable carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CHa), nitrous oxide (N20)s, black carbon, and hydrofluorocarbon, emission effects due to, biomass disposal decomposition, combustion and transportation, and the soil CO2 emissions associated with ground disturbing activities. These omissions represent a failure to proceed in the manner prescribed by CEQA. Anew project;applicationshould 'be.smtbmitte- andtheproposedlimneextensionofthe initial approval be denied. Sincerely, Janet Cobb Executive Officer California Oaks City 6.f Diarn64d Bar, Plahn'ing Department Re:' Item.7'.1 Apr. 25, 2017 Honorable Planning Commissioners, The time extension for Crooked Creek PI -2016-221, should be denied for the following reasons: Cathay View LLC, Crooked Creek.develop-merit is a NEW {project -and should be registered a new application, with the benefit of updated CEQA requirements and ground-truthed environmental surveys. The tract map expired Feb. 20, 2017. Cathay View's January 30, 2017 letter to the City, clearly portrays that the project has been and is being, totally redesigned to remedy the failure and inconsistency of the [S/MND and vested Tentative Tract Map 2007, Crooked Creek's improvement plans were redrafted from scratch in December 2016. DB Planning informed Cathay the required proposed improvements were no longer in, substantial conformance with the Tentative Tract Map as approved. Cathay further states in their letter: they were led to "determine that prior documents (improuement.plans) were.aot to the st4adard.of the industry." Packet page 307 Confusion? Agenda Packet Page 14: DB Agenda report,claims the time extension does not "change the approved project and the conditions of approval set forth in City Council Resolution #2007-11 and 2007-12 and will not change with the extension of time." This statement makes nosense. How it is true in light of the on-going, total redesign of the project, as specified in Cathay View's January 30, 2017 letter? _More Confusion? Which General Plan. Es. WhichT July 2006 IS/MND data frequently refers to the Diamond Bar 1992 General Plan with "addendum of the 1995 General Plan." In fact, the 1992 draft plan was contentiously appealed, defending Tonner Canyon from proposed transit roads and high-density housing. Which is why the July 1995 (present) General Plan was adopted. (1983 Diamond Bar Community Plan, posted at dA ,Regional Planning was in force at the time until the new incorporated city adopted its own charter.) Why may the IS/MND refer to and gain support from (2) general plans? Shouldn't the IS/MND have relied solely on the ONLY city charter in force, during 2006 - the 1995 approved General Plan? Please explain. All plai?x"Jag pi ojects ale to be "consistent" with, the General Plan, and the General Plan must be internally consistent with itself. It appears ails aspects of the Crooked" Creek Project are.bei ng redesigned; much to the applicant's "surprise and shock" (Cathay Letter pg. 307). To uphold communit-y.heAth, safety and aesthetic charactarof.aurcit-y, and i,n helping the applicant apply best practices and achieve cost effective success in a splendid project worth of our City, I propose the extension be denied, to create a new application. Respectfully, C. Robin Smith. ' Bellows Court, Diamond Bar 909-86106760 Sources Cited: Cathay View LLC, Letter January 30, 2017 Crooked Creek IS/MND 2006 ,Los Angeles Times/Sara Gabriel VaUey &gest June 14, 1992 "D"aarnond Bar: (Draft General Plan Protested" 10 tI WltIA -D" i M -i YIy \vl 1t iii f is W� Z 15 `V� trot 5& p. -, c ov\. 5LJ Job 0\,,v -t t(xe&A 'er (20V 1:�- be, Wt )�il V1fr1V1 CC lb1v%&ya600 �, kv- CfiA ak- CFJQ �W� Creel* . Kra � L. ZOV 7 vemi v ZUNJJ lu-V7 6Cee�- .Dr. P 0117& �IC7�1 15 'Xb9c-7 Mayuko Nakajima Kizh Nation From: Stella Marquez Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 8:12 AM To: Mayuko Nakajima Cc: Grace Lee Subject: FW: Diamond BarApril25,2017 Diamond Bar Planning Commission Attachments: KizhAB52DrStickelLetter.pdf; TribalConcernsSiteDEIRResponse.pdf; KizhNationChairmanAndrewSalas.pdf; DiamondBarApril25,2017.pdf Stella Marquez I Administrative Coordinator City of Diamond Bar I Community Development Department 21810 Copley Drive I Diamond Bar, CA 91765 909.839.7030 1 909.861.3117 (fax) smarquez(&diamondbarca.goy I www.DiamondBuCa.Gov From: Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians [mailto:gabrielerioindians@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 11:30 PM To: Stella Marquez <SMarquez@DiamondBarCA.Gov>; Jimmy Lin <JLin@DiamondBarCA.Gov>; Ruth Low <RLow@DiamondBarCA.Gov>; Carol Herrera <CHerrera@DiamondBarCA.Gov>; Steve Tye <STye@DiamondBarCA.Gov>; nylons@diamondbarca.gov; Greg Gubmah <GGubman@DiamondBarCA.Gov> Cc: Gary Stickel <dregarystickei@att.net>; Henrypedregon <henrypedregon@aol.com>; Christina Swindall <christinaswindall@yahoo.com>; Matt.Teutimez.Kizh Gabrieleno <matt.teutimez@gmail.com>; Richard Gradias <rgradias@yahoo.com>; Martha Gonzalez. Kizh Gabrieleno <marthagonzalez777@yahoo.com>; Nadine Salas <nadinesalasl@gmaiLcom>; Andy Salas <andysalas07@yahoo.com> Subject: DiamondBarApril25,2017 Diamond Bar Planning Commission Dear Planning Commission, Please see attachments Sincerely, Andrew Salas, Chairman Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation PO Box 393 Covina, CA 91723 cell: (626)926-4131 email: gab rielenoindiansCcDVahoo.com website: www.plabrielenoindians.org Y>aKl of 3 q i. GABRIELENO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS — KIZH NATION .i Historically known as The San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians v recognized by the State of California as the aboriginal tribe of the Los Angeles basin . k'ii; Nayoe` , 4/25/2017 Delivered Electronically B via Personal Messenger To: The City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission, Mr. Raymond Wolfe, Chair, Mr. Ken Mok, Vice Chair, Ms. Nails Barlas, Mr. Frank Farago, Ms. Jen "Fred" Mahike Be apprised, the Honorable Mayor Jimmy Lin, City of Diamond Bar and Community Development Director, Greg Gubman, were electronically notified by our archaeologist, Dr. Gary Stickel on April 15, 2017, regarding AB 52 compliance for at least (2) active city development projects: 2006 Crooked CreeWJewel Estates and 2017 Existing Conditions, Diamond Bar General Plan update data, as being inaccurate. Additionally, Dr. Stickel expressed concern about the ciVs consultant Mr. Peter Lewandowski's (Environmental Impact Services) erroneous evaluations and advice to Director Gubman to ignore my 2010letterregaiding Site D/Special Plan (located near the Crooked Creek development.) (See letters attached.) Dr. Stickel has called upon the City to update its cultural resources policy/procedures for AB 52 compliance as well as requesting a status response from the Mayor. Dr. Stickel has not received any response from the City of Diamond Bar to date. Meanwhile, on April 25, 2017, 7 p.m. the Diamond Bar Planning Commission Hearing will consider the time extension of tentative tract map PL 2016-221 for the Crooked Creek development. The Planning Commission Agenda was published Friday, April 21st. While the Agenda does include a general explanation about AB 52, it dismisses applicability of this particular project, since the Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration was filed in 2007. _ Furthermore, Dr. Stickels' letter is not referenced nor included in April 2e Public Comments of the Planning Commission Agenda packet, omitting his findings from the Planning Commission's consideration. Therefore, 1 submit this testimony for consideration on, April 25, 2017 Planning Commission hearing in the matter of item 7.1 Applicant., Cathay View Development, Tract #54081, Crooked Creek Development. I also respectfully request the City of Diamond Bar to acknowledge this matter publicly, issue a response to the Kizh Nation and Dr. Stickel, and to please explain their course of action in engaging cultural resources due diligence and best practice. Andrew Sales, Chairman cell (616)926-4131 Cc: Honorable Mayor, Jimmy Lin, Mayor Pro -Tem, Ruth Low, Councilmember Herrera, Councilmember, Tye, Councilmember Lyons Community Development Director, Greg Gubman Auachments: 4115117 Letter from Dr. Stickel to the Honorable Mayor Jimmy Lin 619110 Letter from Mr, Peter Lewandowski to Mr. Greg Gubman 5123110 Letter from Mr. Andrew Salas to Mr. Greg Gubman Andrew Solas, Chairman Albert Perez, treasurer I Elders Nadine Was, V'me-Chairman Martha Gonzalez tames, treasurer II Christina Swindail Martinez, secretary Richard Gradias, Chairman ofthe council of PO Box 30 Covina, CA 91723 1 www gabrielenoindians(cpyahoo com gabrielenoindians@yahoo.com GAMELFNO )SAND OF M155ION INDIAN$ - KIZH NATION Historicallg known as The San Gabriel band of.Wssiou Indians rrcognizccl by t,6c 5tato of &I forr m as tiro aboriginal tribe of the Los Angelce basin Mayor Jimmy Lin City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive City of Diamond Bar, CA91765-9178 April lS, 20'7 Re: your city's proper interaction with its original Native American tribe regarding cultural resources and new developments. Dear Mayor Lin, I am writing to you in my capacity as the Tribal Archaeologist of the original Native American tribe of your City's area. They were and are now "lied the "Kizh" (more commonly known as the "Gabrielenos" after San Gabriel Mission). I received my Ph.D. From UCLA in 1974 where I also fuugbt about southern California archaeology and of the local Indian Tribes of the area. In 2010 the current Kizh Tribal Chairman, Mr, Andrew Salas, wrote a letter to your Community Development Director Mr. Greg Gubman regarding a development project for "Site D's Specific Project EIR." He informed Mr. Gubman that the EIR was in error, that proper Native American coordination had not taken place since the Kizh (Cabrielenos) had not been property contacted as required. Please note that Chairman Salas was not contacted back by Mr. Gubman as he should have. I have found out that Mr. Gubman was informed by Mr. Peter Lewandowski, Principal of Environmental Impact Services (EIS), which hid prepared the Site D's Edit in which cultural resources were discussed, that no response to Mr, Sales's request was needed since EIS had solicited other "Native tribal groups" whose contact information was provided by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). 1 have carefully reviewed Mr. Lewandowski's letter and I wish to inform you that his information is erroneous since the "groupt'he mentioned are not the legitimate tribe ofyour city's area. Icor example, a Ms. Cindi Alvitre was contacted however she has been proven by a State of California certified genaeologist as not Native American and certainly not of the local Gabrieleno (Kizh) Indian ancestry (cf, that information posted an the Tribe's website: gabriclenoindians.org). Consequently she is no longer on the NAIIC referral list. Furthermore, the archaoological consulting process, as described in the Site D's documents, do not exhibit accurate information or due diligence. To accurately state this situation for you, the people claiming to be "tongva" are not legitimate and "tongva" is an illegitimate term (please see my scholarly 50 page article on why the tribe Is correctly called "Kizh not tongva" t posted on the Tribe's website). The Gabrieleno "Band of Mission Indians/ Malt Nation" Is the only tribe recognized by the State of California. (in 1994) for your city's area, Also the Federal government's recently established San Gabriel Mountatlus National Monument exclusively recognizes and involves the Kizh in an advisory capacity. .Additionally, it has come to our attention that there are two new proposed development projects in your city. One involves a parcel of land (PL 2016-221) with the applicant Cathay View Development and the Diamond Bar General Plan update (existing conditions Vol. 3, Cultural and historic Resources 2.4). Both projects involve many natural oaldwalnut woodland habitats along with reports of ancient Mzh artifacts and possible sacred sites. I have also reviewed the PL 2016-221's ISIAIND documents. Again the statements in the docu meats of both projects appear to be inaccurate and inadequate in addressing the due diligence legally required regarding cultural resources involving Native American sites and artifacts. Andrew Salas, Chairman Nadine $aim, vtce-Chalrmao Chdstina SNIlndail Natttnez, Secretary Afhert Perez, tMalUnir l Murtha Gonzatez Lamm. 71emurer It atchmd Grdtas, Chatraum of the council of Elders Crunch of Elders Council of Elders F05.x�,95 C�h,a,CA917z3 MDyGabrieEeno9ndi ns.erg gabrietencaindianseivahoo.conn My letter is intended to respectfully apprise you that the laws pertaining to Native A merican sites and artifacts has been strengthened by the State of California law AB -52 in 2014 which also includes protection for sacred places of the Kizb Tribe. I am concerned with the quality of the research I have seen your city employ (as presented in the above cited examples) and I hereby request the practices by remedied with file due diligence involving the best practices as laid out by the Kizh Tribal Council. I recommend that you speak with Mr. Gubman and have him contact the Tribal Chairman Andrew Sulas (ph. 626 926-4131) as soon as possible in order to provide for your city's compliance with the current State's mandate contained in AB -52. Will you also please contact me so I can provide specific details and instructions that would aid in savingsites and artifacts that could be otherwise illegally destroyed by the current proposed development projects in your city. Sincerel , yours, r Dr at ickel Triba]'Ay haeotogist Gablieeieno Band of Mission Indians/ 14izh Nation cc; Mr. Andrew Solas, Tribal Chairman and the Tribal Council California Stnte Attorney General Ancirew5alas Chairn'an Nadine Salas vice -(:6 man Felicia 5i,cerman-Garcia Trr 6w er Christina Sv indall-MaHnez 5edatarl) Attachment 14 Martha Genmlez-temps GA5pjELENO r)AND Or M1551ON INDIANS Council Memher Historically known as Tice 5an Gabriel Lund of Mission Indians ecognized 6g the State of California as the a6orioinal tribe of the Los Angeles basin May 23, 2010 Mr. Greg Gubman, Community Development Director City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Ph: 909-839-7000 Reference: Site "D" Specific Plan Project/EIR Dear Mr. Gubman; Please be advised that we have reviewed the EIR for the above referenced project and we are quite confused on how the "Tribal Consultation" was handled altogether. We find it alarming that in the reportits states the following: "On February 1, 20031 the Department submitted to the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) a `local government tribal consultation list request," requesting a list of California Native American tribes with whom the City needed to provide notice. Although the NAHC did not formally provide the City with a written contact list of those tribes groups with traditional lands or cultural placesv within or potentially within the city's jurisdiction, a number of tribal organizations, including the Gabrieleno/Tongva Tribal Council, the Gabriellno/Tongva Council, Gabrielino Tongva Nation, and the Gabrieiino Band of Mission Indians of California, were provided copies of the NOP and Initial Study and notice of the pre -circulation scoping meeting. No response to those notices was received by the City from the NAHC or by any of those tribal groups." Normal procedure has always been when the NAHC Is contacted by an agency performing an EIR they immediately provide a list of tribes for the City to contact. In addition, the report mentions that "a number of tribal organizations including... were provided copies of the NOP.." This is the City's omission that they contacted tribal organizations but NOT from the NAHC contact list which gives our tribe two causes for alarm 1) how would the City know that they contacted all the tribal organizations if they didn't use a proper contact list? And 2) they did not follow the proper protocol nor give the proper notification to all tribal organizations. This project is within a culturally sensitive area and we as a tribe find it imperative to have a NA monitor on site during all excavation/ground disturbances. -No exceptions as accepted. Due to the fact, that the EIR was handled erroneously by not giving sufficient notification to all the local Native American tribes provided by the NAHC. P.O. Sox 393 - Covina, California,91723 - 626.926.-i'131 ^ www.ga6rielenoindians.org Should you have any.questions or comments, l'can be reached at 626-926-4131 or please contact Felicia Sheerman our NA monitor coordinator.: �i cerely,' Andy Salas Chairman vv Cc: Dave Singleton, NAMC Linda Strong, Sierra Club Margo Eiser, Sierra Club Environmental Impact 5c e-nce_e r=yam 26051 Via Concha ' Mieelon Viejo, California 92691.5614 ✓ 949.837.1195 949.837.3935 Fax June 9, 2010 Greg Gubman, Director City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178 Subject: "Site D" Specific Plan—Tribal Consultation Dear Greg: During the Planning Commission's recent deliberations concerning the proposed "Site D' Specific Plan" (SDSP) and its accompanying "Draft Environmental Impact Report for the'Site D' Specific Plan" (DEIR), the City of Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency) received correspondence, dated May 23, 2010, from Andy Salas, Chairman of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians (Tribe). The Tribe alleged the project's environmental impact report (EIR) "was handled erroneously by not giving sufficient notification to all the local Native American tribes." This letter is submitted in response to the Tribe's letter. Background Senate Bill (SB) 18 (Chapter 905, Statutes of 2004), signed into law by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in September 2004, requires cities and counties to notify and consult with California Native American Tribes about proposed local land -use planning decisions for the purpose of protecting Traditional Tribal Cultural Places. Starting on March 1, 2005, cities and counties must send their general plan proposals to those California Native American Tribes that are on the Native American Heritage Commission's (NAHC) contact list and have traditional lands located within the city or county's jurisdiction. After March 1, 2005, if requested, cities and counties must also conduct consultations with those tribes prior to adopting or amending their general plans. To help local officials meet these obligations, SB 18 required the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to amend its "General Plan Guidelines" to include advice to local governments on how to consult with California Native American Tribes. On March 1, 2005, OPR issued interim guidelines and on April 15, 2005 issued "Tribal Consultation Guidelines." On November 14, 2005, OPR issued "Tribal Consultation Guidelines Supplement to General Plan Guidelines" (2005 Supplement). In accordance with the statutory requirements of SB 18, the 2005 Supplement (also known as Tribal Consultation Guidelines) provides advisory guidance to cities and counties on the process for consulting with Native American Indian tribes during the adoption or amendment of local general plans or specific plans. /V `\ Environmental Consultants environ mentCsOooxxat Greg Gubman, Community Development Director "Site D" Specific Plan —Tribal Consultation June 9, 2010 Page 2 For purposes of consultation with tribes, as required by Sections 65352.3 and 65562.5 of the California Government Code (CGC), the NAHC maintains a list of California Native American Tribes with whom local governments must consult. The "California Tribal Consultation List" is developed and maintained by the NAHC under authority granted under Sections 65092, 65352, and 65352.3 of the CGC. Section 65352.3 requires local governments to consult with tribes prior to the adoption or amendment of a general plan or specific plan proposed on or after March 1, 2005. As specified therein, only if a tribe is identified by the NAHC and that tribe requests consultation after being contacted by a local government must a local government consult with the tribe on the plan proposal. Notification and Outreach Efforts In accordance with the "Tribal Consultation Guidelines," the City has fully complied with all applicable noticing requirements with regards to tribal outreach efforts, including: (1) on February 1, 2008, sending a "Local Government Tribal Consultation List Request" to the NAHC; (2) on February 1, 2008, sending copies of the "Notice of Preparation" (NOP) to the NAHC and to the following tribal organizations: (a) the Gabieleno/Tongva Tribal Council, (b) the Gabriele6o Tongva Nation, and (c) the Gabrieli6o Band of Mission Indians; and (3) on June 19, 2009, sending copies of the "Notice of Completion" (NOC) to the NAHC and to the following tribal organizations: (a) the Gabieleno/Tongva Tribal Council, (b) the Gabriele6o Tongva Nation, and (c) the Gabrieli6o Band of Mission Indians. It is noted that the NAHC never responded to the City's initial outreach efforts. In the absence of a response from the NAHC to the City's "Local Government Tribal Consultation List Request," the tribal contact information and mailing list was obtained from the NAHC website: No responses to any of the above referenced notices were received.from the NAHC and/or from any tribal organization. Copies of the Lead Agency's "Local Government Tribal Consultation List Request" and NOP are included in the DEIR. A copy of the NOC is included in the "Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the'Site D' Specific Plan" (RTC). In addition, as indicated in the DEIR, PCR Services Corporation (PCR) separately undertook consultation with the NAHC and with "Native American groups and individuals identified by the NAHC" (Appendix K, p. 15). In the preparation of this letter, EIS asked PCR to provide clarification of its actions. PCR provided the following response: As part of our cultural resources assessment of the Site D project, PCR commissioned a Sacred Lands File (SLF) records search of the study area through the California Native American Heritage Commission(NAHC) on October 8, 2007. The NAHC SLF records search results did not indicate any known Native American cultural resources within the study area or surrounding vicinity (see attached letter from NAHC). As per NAHC suggested procedure, follow-up letters were sent via certified mail on November 21, 2007 to the eight individuals and organizations identified by the NAHC as being affiliated with the vicinity of the study area to request any additional information or concerns they may have about Native American cultural resources that may be affected by the proposed Site D development (see attached list and letters). Each Native American group and/or individual listed was sent a project notification letter and map and was asked to convey any Native American issues or concerns with the proposed project. The letter included information such as study area location and a brief description of the proposed development. As of today (in our report it Greg Gubman, Community Development Director "Site D" Specific Plan — Tribal Consultation June 9, 2010 Page 3 states `as of February 22, 2008'), PCR has not received a response from any of the Native American individuals or organizations. A copy of the NAHC's response letter to PCR's SLF records search, dated October 10, 2007, is included in Exhibit 1 (Native American Heritage Commission Letter [October 10, 2007]) and copies of correspondence from PCR, dated November 21, 2007, to each of the tribal organizations identified by the NAHC are included in Exhibit 2 (Solicitations for Tribal Participation [November 21, 2007]) herein. As evidenced by the extent of Lead Agency efforts, the City fully complied with all outreach and consultation obligations concerning the NAHC and California Native American Tribes. Any allegations to the contrary are, therefore, unfounded. Request for a Native American Monitor In correspondence dated May 23, 2010, the Tribe stated that "we as a tribe find it imperative to have a NA [Native American] monitor on the site during all excavation/ground disturbances. No exceptions as [sic] accepted." EIS believes that no basis exists to support that request. Based on the findings of a records search and field reconnaissance survey, the DEIR concluded: "No prehistoric archaeological resources have been previously recorded within one mile of the project site and no prehistoric resources were identified on the subject property during the pedestrian survey. Prehistoric sites identified in the general project vicinity consist of relatively small collections of surface artifacts. The distribution of subsurface prehistoric deposits in the vicinity is unknown. Given the lack of prehistoric materials identified on the surface of the project site and surrounding radius, in light of multiple previous surrounding studies, the potential for subsurface prehistoric deposits in the study area appears to be low" (p. 4.11-15). Although the potential for prehistoric deposits was deemed to be low, based on the site's associations with Frederick E., Lewis (owner and operator the Diamond Bar Ranch from 1918 until 1946) and the early ranching history of southern California, the potential exists for unearthing historic artifacts during initial site grading and grubbing operations. The DEIR included a mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure 11-1) requiring that a "qualified archaeologist" be present to monitor initial vegetation removal activities. The on-site presence of a qualified archaeologist will ensure that, should any prehistoric and/or historic features be identified, appropriate actions are taken to protect those features in accordance with applicable statutory and regulatory obligations. EIS believes that no further actions are necessary with regards to the Tribe's letter. Sincerely, €€ Peter Lewandowski, Principal Exhibits: (1) Native American Heritage Commission Letter (October 10, 2007) (2 Solicitations for Tribal Participation (November 21, 2007) Exhibit 1 Native American Heritage Commission Letter (October 10, 2007) 10.,11%2007 06:38 FAX 910 657 5.390 NAHC Cfi 001%.,10'2 NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION 915 CARTCL MAU- noeia M SACRAMENTO, CA 95n14 {916} 659 -Writ F- (zNS) 6557-ra96 Web Site SYYtYLIIry^e c_+nav sinal.,: ds_rrshcr6pac�eicneX October 10, 2007 Mr, Kyle Garcia, Associate Archaeologist PCR SERVICES CORPORATION One Venture, Suite 150 - Irvine, CA &'2618 Sent by FAX to: 949-753-7002 Number of pages: 2 Re: Culurat Resource lderhfificailon Siudy/S creel 1 ands FR1e Search for Sita D Protea fi f itt of Diamox] Bar. Los S tiles County, California Dear Mr. Garcia: The Native American Heritage Commission was able to perform a record search of its Sacred Lands File (SLF) for the affecird project area. The SLF failed to indicate the presence of Native American cultural resourcas in the immediate project area. The absence of specific site information in the Sacred Lands File does not guarantee the absence of cultural resources in any `area of potential effect (AAE.).' Early consultation with Native American tribes in your area is the best way to avoid unanticipated discoveries once a project is underway. Enclosed are the nearest tribes that may have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. A List of Native American contacts are attached to assist you. The Common makes no recommendation of a single individual or group ever another. It is advisable to contact the person listed; if they cannot supply you with spedfic information about the impact on cultural resources, they may be able to refer you to another tribe or person knowledgeable of the cultural resources in or nearthe affected project area (APE). Lack of surface evidence of archeological resources does not preclude The existence of archeolcgical resources. Lead agencies should consider avoidance, as defined in Section 15370 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) when significant cultural resources could be affected by a project. Also, Punic Resources Code Section 5097.95 and Health & Safety Code Section 7050.5 provide for provisions foraccidentally discovered archeological resources during construction and mandate the processes to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remahm in a project location other than a `dedicated cemetery. Disartssiorr of these should be included in your environmental documents, as appropriate. tfyou have any questions about this response to your request, please do not hesitate to contact me at (916) 653-6251. 47 � ave Sing Program Analyst Attachment Native Arnarican Confect Ust io,,il,2007 06t 38 FAX 916 657 5390 KOC Native Arnerican Contacts Los Angeles County October 10, 2007 LA City/County Native American Indian Comm Ron Andrade, Director 3175 West 66th Street, Rm. 403 Los Angeles , CA 90020 (213) 351-5324 (213) 386.3995 FAX Ti'At Society Cindi Alvitre 6602 Zelzan Avenue Gabriefino Reseda , CA 91335 calviE e@yahoo.com (714) 504-2468 Cell Tongva Ancestral Territorial Tribal {Nation john Tommy Rosas, Tribal Adminstrator 4712 Admiralty Way, suite 172 Gabrielino Tongva Marina Del Rey , CA 90292, 310-574-6567 Gabtietenotrongva Tribal Council Anthony Morales, Chairperson PO Box 693 Gabrielino Tongva San Gabriel CA 91778 ChiefRBwife@aof.com (626) 286-1632 (626) 286-1755 - Home (626) 286-1262 Fax This Stst in 8urreut only as at the data of this doaunwM. Q0oz-one Gabrielfnofrongva Council i Gabrielino Tongva Nation Sam Dunlap, Tribal Secretary 761 Terminal street; Bldg 1, 21-0 floor Gabrielino Tongva Los Angeles , CA 90021 office @tongvatribe.net (213)489- 5001 - Officer (909) 2829351 - cell (213) 489-5002 Fax Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians of CA Ms. Susan Frank PO Sox 3421 Gabrielino Beaumont CA 92223 (951) 897-2.536 Phone/Fax Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council Robert Dorame, Tribal Chair/Cultural Resources 5450 Sfauson, Ave, Suite 157 PMB Gabrielino Tongva Culver City , CA 90230 gtongvaG verizon.net 562761-6417 - voice Gabrieilno Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council Mercedes Dorame, Tribal Administrator Po sox $90809 Gabrieilno Tongva San Francisco , CA 94159 Pluto45@hotma9f.com Distribution pt this list does not relieve fifty person of Wabitory rssMnsib3iity as depIntti in Section 71)50_5 at the Health and Wety Coos, SOS Uon 509754 of the public Resources Code and Section 54airM of the public Rc ureas code. This ttst is army appilicsbte for mrdacting local Native Anmrican vdM reGerd to cultural tasoureas for the proposed Diamond Sar She D Project; tocatad in ss' utheadern Los Angete5 Cotmty, California, for Which a Saored Laude File ssarch and bladva Armed= contact lis£ Wee regtfeanYr. Exhibit 2 Solicitations for Tribal Participation (November 21, 2007) November 21, 2007 Ron Andrade, Director LA CITY/COUNTY NATIVE AMERICAN INDIAN COMM. 3175 West 6`h Street, Rut. 403 Los Angeles, CA 90020 Re: PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Andrade: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION r arlanan, Ph.D. Acting Director/Principal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 INTERNET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 O Rh IM- R2 i Ny t .'uGy November 21, 2007 Cindi Alvitre TI'AT SOCIETY 6602 Zekzah Avenue Reseda, CA 91335 Re: PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. Alvitre: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information youarewilling to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rocicinan@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION rarc,' ckman, Ph.D. Acta` g Director/Principal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 INTERNET www.pernet.COM TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 November 21, 2007 John Tommy Rosas, Tribal Adminstrator TONGVA ANCESTRAL TERRITORIAL TRIBAL NATION . 4712 Admiralty Way, Suite 172 Marina del Ray, CA 90292 Re: PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Rosas: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rookrnan@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION aroyR ckman, Ph.D. Acti, g Director/Principal Archaeologist One venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 INTERNET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 November 21, 2007 Anthony Morales, Chairperson GABRIELENO/TONGVA TRIBAL COUNCIL P.O. Box 693 San Gabriel, CA 91778 Re: PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Morales: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION aro kman, Ph.D. Acti g Director/Principal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 INTERNET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 rax 949.753.7002 November 21, 2007 Sam Dunlap, Tribal Secretary GABRIELINO/TONGVA COUNCIL/ GABRIELINO TONGVA NATION 761 Terminal Street, Building 1, 2d Floor Los Angeles, CA 90021 ' Re: . PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Dunlap: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.corn. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION arc,) Ac»' ktnan, Ph.D. Actrfg Director/Principal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 INTERNET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 November 21, 2007 Ms. Susan Frank GABRIELINO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS OF CA P.O. Box 3021 Beaumont, CA 92223 Re: PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. Frank: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South; Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION ar fy �kman, Ph.D. Aot g Director/Principal Archaeologist One venture, suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 INTERNET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 ti k "'pS i� pi November 21, 2007 Robert Dorame, Tribal Chair/Cultural Resources GABRIELINO TONGVA INDIANS OF CALIFORNIA TRIBAL COUNCIL 5450 Slauson Ave., Suite 151 PMB Culver City, CA 90230 Re: PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Dorame: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half.Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION ar�Cy Manan, Ph.D. Asti g Director/Principal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 INTERNET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 .:.. u.s IRy November 21, 2007 Mercedes Dorame, Tribal Administrator GABRIELINO TONGVA INDIANS OF CALIFORNIA TRIBAL COUNCIL P.O. Box 590809 San Francisco, CA 94159 Re: PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. Dorame: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 19 81) 7.5' US GS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION are Eckman, Ph.D. Ac I g Director/Principal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 INTERNET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Mayuko Nakajima From: Medak, Christine <christine_medak@fws.gov> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 7:37 AM To: Greg Gubman Subject: Re: April 25 Hearing South Diamond Bar for Emerald Ridge Residential Development Thank -you for your response. Given that the least Bell's vireo was also observed as recently as 2015, we consider the habitat to be currently occupied and recommend that the City work with the applicant to proactively develop measures to avoid direct and indirect impacts to vireo occupied habitat. Christine L. Medak Fish and Wildlife Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2177 Salk Avenue, Suite 250 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Phone: (760) 431-9440 ext. 298 Fax: (760) 431-9624 bitp://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/ Follow us on Facebook at htty://facebook.com/USFWSPacificSouthwest Follow us on Twitter at http://twitter.com/TJSFWSPacSWest "I'd like to offer a plug for actually having the natural processes instead of having to simulate them." —NadavNur, PRBO Conservation Science On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Greg Gubman <GGubmanng,diamondbarca.gov> wrote: Hi Christine, The MND is online via the link below. Click "Attachment 9" under Public Hearing Item 1 to access the IS/MND http://diamondbarca.igm2.com/Citizens/Detail Meeting. aspx?ID=1357 I also attached the Response to Comments (RTC) to the Draft MND. The final adopted MND and MRMP incorporated the revised/added mitigation measures as set forth in the RTC document. We will note in the project file that CDFW and USFWS have requested a review of the updated biological surveys, and will forward to them accordingly. Least Bell's vireo is included in Table 3-1 of the MND. Should the least Bell's vireo and/or other special status species be encountered during the required subsequent surveys required under the MRMP, the project would be subject to reopened CEQA review, which may lead to an amended MND or EIR. Best regards, Greg Gubman, AICP I Community Development Director City of Diamond Bar I Community Development Department 21810 Copley Drive I Diamond Bar, CA 91765 909.839.7031 1 909.861.3117 (f) www. DiamondBarCa. Gov From: Medak, Christine [mailto:christine medak@fws.aov] Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 11:29 AM To: Greg Gubman <GGubman@DiamondBarCA.Gov> Cc: Schmoker, Kelly@Wildlife<Kelly.Schmoker@wildlife.ca.aov> Subject: Re: April 25 Hearing South Diamond Bar for Emerald Ridge Residential Development Mr Gubman, We did not receive this notification directly. Is there a copy of the MND online that we can review? Our primary concerns are the potential for impacts to federally listed species, including the least Bell's vireo, as a result of construction and/or operation of the project. The least Bell's vireo has been know to occupy Brea Creek, adjacent to the project site, since at least 2010, based on surveys conducted for the Southern California Edison Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project. Potential impacts to least Bell's vireo include direct removal of occupied habitat, or degradation of habitat due to changes in water quality or hydrology, additional night lighting, increases in disturbance from human presence, or increases in non-native plant species within occupied habitat. This may constitute new information that requires additional consideration under CEQA. In 2 addition, we are concerned that impacts to native habitats are adequately mitigated due to our knowledge of the rapid decline of native wildlife species and associated habitats in Los Angeles County. We would appreciate an opportunity to review updated biological surveys that will be completed prior to initiation of impacts, as required in the Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program. Christine L. Medak - Fish and Wildlife Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2177 Salk Avenue, Suite 250 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Phone: (760) 431-9440 ext. 298 Fax: (760) 431-9624 htto://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/ Follow us on Facebook at httn•//f"acebook.com/USFWSPacifieSouthwest Follow us on Twitter at http://twitter.comfUSFWSPacSWest "I'd like to offer a plug for actually having the natural processes instead of having to simulate them." —NadavNur, PRBO Conservation Science On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Greg Gubman <GGubmanng,diamondbarca.gov> wrote: Dear Mr. Michelsen, Thank you for writing in regards to the extension of time request for Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 ("TTM 54081 "). Your comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission as part of the staff report being prepared for this matter. The staff report C will be included in April 25, 2017 Planning Commission meeting agenda packet, and will be published on the City website this coming Friday. Per your request, a copy of the Planning Commission public hearing notice for the above -referenced matter is attached. The posting of hearing notices online is a feature planned for the next City of Diamond Bar website upgrade. However, anyone wishing to receive future hearing notices for proposed development projects may do so by subscribing via the following link: http://www. cityofdiamondbar. com/index. aspx?page=403&subscriberguid=Oa0fe954- 36ee-4f8b-b129-1 ab035aO7f86&confirm=1. By subscribing, you will also receive notice of the forthcoming City Council hearing for TTM 54081. E -subscribers receive such notices approximately ten days prior to the associated hearing dates. Sincerely, Greg Gubman, AICP 1 Community Development Director City of Diamond Bar 1 Community Development Department 21810 Copley Drive I Diamond Bar, CA 91765 909.839.7031 1 909.861.3117 (f www. Diamond BarCa. Gov From: jeff michelsen[mailto:ieffmichelsen@hotmail.comj Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 12:06 PM To: Greg Gubman <GGubman@DiamondBarCA.Gov>; Marsha Roa <MRoa@Diamond BarCA.Gov>; James DeStefano <JDeStefano@DiamondBarCA.Gov>; Tommye Cribbins <TCribbins@DiamondBarCA.Gov>; Tommye Cribbins <TCribbins@DiamondBarCA.Gov>; Stella Marquez <SMarguez@DiamondBarCA.Gov>; Stella Marquez <SMarg uez@ Dia mondBarCA.Gov> Cc: Amy Minteer <acm cbcearthlaw.com>; biogeo123@gmail.com: Medak, Christine <christme medak@fws.gov>; Gerald L. Croissant <glcroissant@cpp.edu>; dregarvstickel@att.net; Cynthia Robin Smith <diamondbarbeautifui@gmail.com>; lee @leepaulsonphotographv.com; firstdistrict@bos.lacounty.gov; Garrison Ty <Ivtg@aol.com>; Kelly.Schmoker@wildlife.ca.gov_; mnb cbcearthlaw.com: nikkihexum@me.com; Paolo.Perrone@tpl.org; Mark Smith <mark alien smith@hotmail.com>; Erica Landmann <efalcon64@aol.com>; enriaue.robles@mail.house.gov; scott:p.harris@wildlife.ca.gov: Steve.Scauzillo@sgvn.com; zakbushev@vahoo.com Subject: Fw: April 25 Hearing South Diamond Bar for Emerald Ridge Residential Development Dear City of Diamond Bar, Regarding the attached document Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21092.2, we hereby request notice of any future proceedings regarding this matter, including, but not limited to, notices of preparation, notices of availability, notices of hearing, and notices of determination. For the recorded No time extensions should be allowed for this proposed project. Please include on your notification list all email contacts included in this email. Can you please send us a clear copy of attached document and post the attached documents and any further documents on your webpage to keep the public and all involved agencies informed? Unfortunately, the proposed Project now under review falls far short of meeting the legal mandates imposed by CEQA. The Project will have significant impacts on biological resources, traffic, air quality, water supply, and quality of life. By Law your city is required to include a Cultural Resources. In 2014, the California Legislature approved Assembly Bill 52. AB 52 creates a new category of environmental resources that must be considered under the California Environmental Quality Act: "tribal cultural resources." The legislation imposes new requirements for consultation regarding projects that may affect a tribal cultural resource, includes a broad definition of what may be considered to be a tribal cultural resource, and includes a list of recommended mitigation measures. AB 52 requires lead agencies to consider the effects of projects on tribal cultural resources and to conduct consultation with federally and non -federally recognized Native American tribe(s) early in the environmental planning process. If your project has filed a Notice of i Preparation (NOP) or a notice of Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) on or after July 1, 2015, and the tribe has submitted a request for consultation, your project is subject to AB 52. CEQA defines tribal cultural resources as "sites, features, places cultural landscapes, sacred places and objects with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe" that have been determined to be significant. (Public Resources Code §21074.) It is important to note that tribal cultural resources are not limited to archeological artifacts, but also include landscapes and places of importance to tribes. The DSEIR needs to examine/review the Project site for possible impacts on such resources. It is well documented that the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians/ Kizh Nation has resided in the San Gabriel Valley. Dr. Gary Stickel, Ph.D., Tribal Archaeologist should be consulted for relevant input, studies, and maps. Any additional information on this proposed project please post on your webpage. Your time and help is greatly appreciated. Thank you, Jeff Michelsen Sierra Club Member From: Harris, Scott P.@Wildlife<Scott.P.Harris@wildlife.ca.eov> Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2017 12:11 PM To: GGubman@DiamondBarCA.Gov Cc: Medak, Christine; dreaarVstickel@att.net: Jeff michelsen; Wilson, Erinn@Wildlife; Schmoker, Kelly@Wildlife Subject: RE: April 25 Hearing South Diamond Bar for Emerald Ridge Residential Development Mr. Gubman, The Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) received the below information and above public notice regarding concern about an older residential development project (jewel Ridge) approved by the City of Diamond Bar in 2007 but has yet to be developed.. L Will the City of Diamond Bar be noticing the discretionary action to extend the City's Project approval under CEQA for further general public review and if so, what level of CEQA review is anticipated? The Department would appreciate any subsequent CEQA documentation associated with the City's proposed action, for review and comment during the public comment period. Topics of specific concern include assuring that wildlife and botanical surveys are conducted to reflect current conditions on the Project site to inform avoidance and mitigation efforts and that further consultation with the Department is undertaken for any impacts to species listed under the California Endangered Species Act and jurisdictional waters of the state regulated by the Department that may require Department permits prior to Project related vegetation and ground disturbances. Please contact me if you wish to discuss further. Thank you. Scott P. Harris Environmental Scientist California Department of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Planning 308 S. Dunning St. Ventura, CA 93003 Scott.P.harris@wildlife.ca.gov (805) 644-6305 CDFW is California's Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources, and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State. CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. SaveOurWater.com • Drouaht.CA.aov From: jeff michelsen[mailto:jeffmichelsen@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2017 11:55 AM To: Schmoker, Kelly@Wildlife Cc: Medak, Christine; Harris, Scott P.CaWildlife; dregarystickel(cbatt.net Subject: Fw: April 25 Hearing South Diamond Bar Dear Kelly and Christine, It was recently brought to my attention that the city of diamond bar a developer is proposing a 16 home subdivision within the foothills. Do you have any documents regarding this proposed project if so please forward them too me. Are you aware of any endangered species that might reside within this proposed development? Myself and others are going to send letters to the city. of diamond bar requesting a new updated EIR be conducted since they're working off an old EIR report. Since the EIR report was last done possibly endangered species have been included that we're not surveyed. We are also requesting that AB -52 be included For cultural resource studies a new law that was recently passed in 2014 for Native American culture resource studies. This site has been documented to have many Native American artifacts. I hope your department can also encourage thecity to move forward with a new updated EIR to, ensure the public and decision -makers are fully informed with as much information as possible to ensure that CEQA guidelines are followed. Thank you in advance for your time and help. Sincerely, Jeff Michelsen Sierra Club Member Mayuko Nakajima Sierra Club From: Greg Gubman Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 11:41 AM To: David A. DeBerry, Grace Lee, lames H. Eggart; Mayuko Nakajima Cc: James DeStefano Subject: FW: Crooked Creek Project, Agenda Item 7.1, Planning Commission Hearing April 25, 2017 Attachments:. Comments on extension of 2007 project approval -3 (1).pdf Greg Gubman, AICP I Community Development Director City of Diamond Bar I Community Development Department 21810 Copley Drive I Diamond Bar, CA 91765 909.839.7031 1 909.861.3117 (f) www. DiamondBarCa.Gov From: Joan Licari [mailto:jlicari20l3@gmaii.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 11:27 AM To: Greg Gubman <GGubman@DiamondBarCA.Gov>; Stella Marquez <SMarque2@DiamondBarCA.Gov> Subject: RE: Crooked Creek Project, Agenda Item 7.1, Planning Commission Hearing April 25, 2017 To whom it may concern; Please find attached comments from the San Gabriel Valley Task Force of Angeles Chapter of Sierra Club relating to the Crooked Creek item on the Diamond Bar. Planning Commission agenda this evening. Joan Licari, D.Env. Chair, San Gabriel Valley Task Force Angeles Chapter of Sierra Club r SIEI�1t/i CLUB coon ocu iesa Sierra Club, Angeles Chapter 3250 Wilshire Blvd. #1106 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Telephone: 213-387-4287 fax: 213-387-5383 e-mail: info@angeles.sierraclub.org April 24, 2017 To: City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Director, Greg Gubman City of Diamond Bar Planning Commissioners RE: Crooked Creek Project, Agenda Item 7.1, Planning Commission Hearing April 25, 2017 This letter is respectfully submitted by the San Gabriel Valley Task Force of the Angeles Chapter of Sierra Club relative to agenda item 7.1, Apr. 25, 2017 in which the Planning Commission will consider a Time Extension -Planning Case No. PL 2016-221, Crooked Creek project. The San Gabriel Valley Task Force was organized by the Angeles Chapter of the Sierra Club in 1999 to work with San Gabriel Valley cities and political leaders to seek ways to create a more livable environment for valley residents while preserving or improving natural resources including water resources and water quality, recreational opportunities and wildlife habitat. Cathay View LLC requests a one-year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 54081, residential subdivision on 12.9 acres, located at the southern terminus of Crooked Creek. It is our belief that the proposed project is, in fact, a new project and therefore the extension must be denied. A new project application should be issued with updated CEQA evaluations made and an EIR prepared. our concern is based on the following observations. 1. The expiration date has since passed for the initial approval and allotted exterision periods. The city Council initially approved the project on February 20, 2007. The State legislature passed four bills: 581185, AB33 and A13208, and AB 116, which automatically extended the duration of the approval period for all tentative maps that were set to expire. The duration of the combined time extensions granted by all four Senate bills set the expiration date of this tentative map to February 20, 2017. The project is not the same as that initially approved. In the January 30, 2017 letter to the Planning Commission, Cathay View LLC admits to the fact that this is a new project saying "improvement plans were redrafted (i.e. prepared from scratch, discarding the previous efforts" (Packet Page 309). Cathay View LLC at time of purchase of the project in 2014 was informed that the "improvement plans and final map for this project, were essentially complete and previously reviewed and approved by the City of Diamond Bar and/or their representatives." However, consultants for Cathay View have since discovered errors in the studies performed prior to approval in 2007 which require major changes in the project. a. On Packet page 309, Cathay reports that they determined that "topography for the site was significantly different than that as originally used for the Tentative Tract preparation ..... This difference has had significant impact to the entire project'. The impact has a need for higher and more substantial retaining walls than in the original plan. b. The sewer system needs to be redesigned. As a result, the Crooked Creek Street itself and the associated pads will need to be raised to develop positive gravity flow. c. The Geotechnical Evaluation revealed that grading in the initial plan was not practical and a new pile wall will be needed along the project boundary. In addition a historic landslide complicates the development. 3. City staff has already informed Cathay View LLC on January 24, 2017, that "the proposed improvements would not in fact be considered as in substantial conformance with the approved tentative tract map" and that the site could not "be developed as indicated on the approved Tentative Tract Map...". (Packet Page 309) In addition to the above we have grave concerns about changes in the area since the initial approval in 2007. Scientific information about biological resources in the Puente -Chino Hills has increased, understanding of the local geology/hydrology has expanded and there has been population growth that has affected traffic, air quality, etc. 1. Biological resources may have changed. A new biological study must be performed. Grading will be changed as indicated by the developer. The area under consideration was reported to originally have 468 oak and California Walnut trees on site. We have experienced a major period of drought. How has the habitat and concurrently the biota of this area changed? New species may have received protection. New biological information may have been found about adjacent areas that would potentially be important on the project site. Is any portion of this site included in the Puente Hills Significant Ecological Area (SEA 15) or would this project affect that SEA? 2. Seismic research in Southern California and the specific area has been extended and seismic evaluations have changed. This area is located within proximity to the Whittier -Elsinore fault zone. A new seismic evaluation must be performed. 3. How will the new grading and pad design impact Coyote Creek/Brea Creek, a blue - line stream and its riparian environment? How will the hydrology be affected by these changes? 4. In 2014, the California legislature approved Assembly Bill 52, AB 52 creates a new category of environmental resources that must be considered under the California Environmental Quality Act: "tribal cultural resources." The legislation imposes new requirements for consultation methods regarding projects that may affect a tribal cultural resource, with a broad definition of what may be considered a tribal, cultural resource, and includes a list of recommended mitigation measures. These requirements were not in effect earlier and thus have not been addressed. The extensive changes require a new evaluation of this entire project. Brea Creek habitat is a recognized area utilized by indigenous people. How will grading and excavation activities be conducted to accommodate probable findings? 5. The population patterns, traffic patterns, air quality considerations have changed in the period since 2007. All these must be addressed in a new EIR. In public comments received, a letter from Jeff Michelson (Packet Page 312), suggested that provision of an extension by the City would violate the mandates of CEQA. The City has responded (Packet Page 15) that since a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was adopted for the project, there is a statutory presumption against additional further environmental review for this project. The City indicates (Packet Page 15) that there is an exception, however, and a new environmental review is required in three situations: 1. When there are substantial changes to a project that would require major revisions to an approved MND. 2. When substantial changes to the circumstances under which a project will be undertaken. 3. When there is new information, which was not known at the time of the MND that would have significant environmental effects. There have been substantial changes to this proposed project and there is new information available on biological and geological concerns as well as change in knowledge of the site itself. Thus we believe a new project application should be submitted and the proposed time extension of the initial approval be denied. Respectfully submitted, Joan Licari, D.Env. Chair, San Gabriel Valley Task Force Angeles Chapter of Sierra Club Jlicari20l3(@gmail.com 626-330-4229 Mavuko Nakaiima California Oaks From: Oak Staff <oakstaff@californiaoaks.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 4:49 PM To: Greg Gubman Cc: Janet Cobb Subject: Crooked Creek Project, Agenda Item 7.1, Planning Commission Nearing April 25, 2017 Attachments: California0aksCrookedCreek4_25_17Planning.pdf Dear Director Gubman, Please find attached a letter, which I am submitting for Janet Cobb, regarding Crooked Creek Project, Agenda item 7.1 for this evening's hearing. All the best, Angela Moskow Angela Moskow California Oaks Information Network Manager. California Wildlife Foundation/California Oaks 42813th Street, Suite 10A Oakland, CA 94612 www.californiaoaks.org Office: (510) 763-0282 Mobile: (510) 610-4685 April 25, 2017 Greg Gubman, Community Development Director City of Diamond Bar 21810 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Transmitted via e-mail, ggubman@diamondbarca.gov RE: Crooked Creek Project, Agenda Item 7. 1, Planning Commission Hearing April 25, 2017 Dear Director Gubman: California Oaks, a program of California Wildlife Foundation, works to conserve oak ecosystems because of their critical role in sequestering carbon, maintaining healthy watersheds, and providing sustainable wildlife habitat. We are writing, regarding agenda item 7. 1, in which the Planning Commission will consider a Time Extension -Planning Case No. PL 2016=221, Crooked Creek project. We understand that Cathay View LLC requests a one-year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 54081, residential subdivision on 12.9 acres on Crooked Creek. We concur with the conclusions transmitted in letter submitted by Sierra Club Angeles Chapter on April 24, 2017 that the proposal is for a new project and therefore the extension must be denied. A new project application should be issued with updated California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) evaluations made and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared because: 1. The expiration date has passed for the initial approval and allotted extension periods. The City Council initially approved the project on February 20, 2007. The duration of the combined time extensions granted by state legislation set the expiration date of this tentative map to February 20, 2017. 2. The project is not the same as that initially approved for the reasons articulated in the aforementioned Sierra Club letter. 3. There is new information, not known at the time of the preparation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), which indicates that the project would have significant environmental impacts. The MND does not include considerations of the climate impacts associated with the oak woodland acreage that would be impacted. Senate Bill (SB) 1334, passed in 2004, brought the conversion of oak woodlands, with a few exceptions, under the purview CEQA. CEQA requires the analysis and mitigation of greenhouse gas 428 13thStreet, Suite 10 A, Oakland CA 94612, 510-763-0282, email: eakstaff@califGmiaoaks.org,www.califbmiaoaks.org emissions associated with a proposed oak woodland conversion. The MND fails to comprehensively analyze or feasibly mitigate anthropogenic and biogenic direct/indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions pursuant to CEQA requirements. Specifically, the, failure to fully account for the foreseeable carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N20), black carbon and hydrofluorocarbon emission effects due to biomass disposal decomposition, combustion and transportation, and the soil CO2 emissions associated with ground disturbing activities. These omissions represent a failure to proceed in the manner prescribed by CEQA. A new project application should be submitted and the proposed time extension of the initial approval be denied. Sincerely, 7anef Cobb Executive Officer California Oaks S Mavuko Nakaiima ave Our Community From: James Flournoy <saveourcommunitysgv@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 2:35 PM To: Greg Gubman; Stella Marquez Subject: comments on CEQA Neg Dec Extension- Crooked Development Attachments: Newhall Ranch ARB Mitigation.doc To whom it may concern; Please find attached comments from Save Our Community San Gabriel Valley relating to the Crooked Creek item on the Diamond Bar Planning Commission agenda this evening. In addition to CEQA issues raised by others we would like to point out that under the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act a Geotechnical Report must be prepared and then INDEPENDENTLY reviewed and approved by a specialist in geotechnical reviews and copies of both sent to the California Geological Survey. The SHMA states "PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF A PROJECT THE LEAD AGENCY SHALL..." Without this report and approved review all approvals can be voided. It appears that there are several Geotechnical issues which have come to light (and which a SHMA report may have uncovered much earlier). New findings are one of the reasons that a Negative Declaration can be voided and an Environmental Impact Report required. So two good reasons not to approve'any extensions and to start over with a clean sheet on this project. We also note that the greatest seismic hazard to Diamond Bar is the Southern San Andreas (as shown in the 2005-6 Terrashake findings and SHAKEOUT. Any ground motion and Liquefaction/ landslide studies must include the Southern San Andreas snf,udy use dynamic methodologies not the simple ones. We call your attention not only to CGS Special Publication 117 (for 2007) and now SP 117A 2008 and the superseding Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Guidelines for the Preparation of Geotechnical Reports (GMED MANUAL 2013. (GMED MANUAL must have updates made by the City to match the latest Building Code) The Los Angeles County Building Code has been revised 3 times "since 2007 and the last two updates have made major changes in the Seismic/ Ground Motion Area. The American Society of Civil Engineers ASCE-7 was revised in 2010 and recently with a 2016 edition. ASCE-7 is referenced in the Building Code so is regulatory. There are recent opportunities in Stormwater, Sewer, Solar,Greywater and Recycling which must be included. We are attaching some recent mitigations proposed by the ARB and accepted by a recent development for your consideration. Does this project have a consultation with USF&W and CDFW? Sincerely Yours, James Flournoy; Secretary c/o 8655 Landis View Lane Rosemead, CA 91770 Newhall RanchARB/CDFW additionalmitigation measures COPP would like to see these proposed for all projects Smaller projects when taken together could result in significant reductions in Air Pollution Not covered in the following (one measure per page) are the Earth -mover particulates and other ARB areas of responsibility which could be locally enforced by AQMM 1.4.1 Global Climate Change/Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact 2-1: Project -Generated GHG Emissions The project is estimated to generate annualized construction emissions of 6,437 MT CO2e amortized over 30 years (193,119 MT CO2e total), net annualized vegetation change emissions of 1,335 MT CO2e amortized over 30 years (40,059 MT CO2e total based on net change in carbon sequestration/land use changes), and 518,330 MT CO2e operations -related emissions at project buildout in 2030. Before consideration of mitigation measures proposed by the project applicant, total project emissions would be 526,103 MT CO2e/year in 2030. This level of GHG emissions has the potential to result in a considerable contribution to cumulative emissions related to global climate change, and would be potentially significant without the implementation of further mitigation. Mitigation Measure 2-1: Residential Zero Net Energy Prior to the issuance of residential building permits, the project applicant or its designee shall submit a Zero Net Energy Confirmation Report (ZNE Report) prepared by a qualified building energy efficiency and design consultant to Los Angeles County for review and approval. The ZNE Report shall demonstrate that the residential development within the RMDP/SCP project site subject to application of Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations has been designed and shall be constructed to achieve ZNE, as defined by CEC in its 2015 Integrated Energy Policy Report, or otherwise achieve an equivalent level of energy efficiency, renewable energy generation, or greenhouse gas emissions savings. A ZNE Report may, but is not required to: A Evaluate multiple buildings and/or land use types. For example, a ZNE Report may coverall of the residential and commercial buildings within a neighborhood/community, or a subset thereof. A Rely upon aggregated or community-based strategies to support its determination that the subject buildings are designed to achieve ZNE. For example, shortfalls in renewable energy generation for one or more buildings may be offset with excess renewable generation from one or more other buildings, or off-site renewable energy generation. As such, a ZNE Report could determine a building is designed to achieve ZNE based on aggregated or community-based strategies even if the building on its own may not be designed to achieve ZNE. A Make reasonable assumptions about the estimated electricity and natural gas loads and energy efficiencies of the subject buildings. Project -related emissions of GHGs from the residential energy sector (i.e., electricity and natural gas) would be substantially reduced through implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-1. Through the incorporation of zero -energy technology into new residential development, as prescribed by a qualified energy efficiency and design consultant, fossil fuel -related sources of GHGs associated with energy use would not occur from project -related activities. Mitigation Measure 2-1 is considered feasible and enforceable mitigation because the project applicant or its designee shall be required to comply with the standards and components of the measure before construction begins. Los Angeles County shall hold the project applicant or its designee accountable for meetingthe criteria of Mitigation Measure 2-1 prior to approving or issuing residential building permits. Issuance of residential buildings permits shall be contingent upon the project applicant or its designee providing adequate evidence as to implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-1 as specified. Mitigation Measure 2-3: Swimming Pool Heating Prior to the issuance of private recreation center building permits, the project applicant or its designee shall submit swimming pool heating design plans to Los Angeles County for review and approval. The design plans shall demonstrate that all swimming pools located at private recreation centers on the RMDP/SCP project site have been designed and shall be constructed to use solar water heating or other technology with an equivalent level of energy efficiency. Project -related emissions of GHGs from the energy sector (specifically natural gas) associated with heating swimming pools would be eliminated through incorporation of low -emission heating design for pools constructed as a result of project implementation. Swimming pools shall be designed and constructed to use solar water heating or other technology with an equivalent level of energy efficiency; therefore, no combustion of natural gas would occur during heating and operation of the swimming pools. Mitigation Measure 2-3 is considered feasible and enforceable mitigation because the project applicant or its designee shall be required to comply with the standards and components of the measure before construction begins. Los Angeles County shall hold the project applicant or its designee accountable for meeting the criteria of Mitigation Measure 2-3 prior to approving or issuing private recreation center building hermits. Issuance of private recreation center building permits will contingent upon the project applicant or its designee providing adequate evidence that Mitigation Measure 2-3 has been implemented as specified Mitigation Measure 2-4: Residential Electric Vehicle Chargers and Vehicle Subsidy Prior to the issuance of residential building permits, the project applicant or its designee shall submit building design plans, to Los Angeles County for review and approval, which demonstrate that each residence within the RMDP/SCP project site subject to application of Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations shall be equipped with a minimum of one single -port EV charging station. Each charging station shall achieve a similar or'better functionality as a Level 2 charging station. Additionally, prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the RMDP/SCP project site, the project applicant or its designee shall establish and fund a dedicated account for the provision of subsidies for the purchase of ZEVs, as defined by ARB. The project applicant or its designee shall provide proof of the account's establishment and funding to Los Angeles County. The dedicated account shall be incrementally funded, for each village -level project, in an amount that equals the provision of a $1,000 subsidy per residence - on a first-come, first-served basis - for 50 percent of the village's total residences subject to application of Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations. Project -related emissions of GHGs from the transportation sector would be substantially reduced through incorporation of EV charging stations. Use of ZEVs results in a reduction of GHG emissions from fossil fuel - combusting engines. Further, the electricity supplied to EV charging stations may originate from renewable resources provided by public utilities, as specified through RPS, or on-site sources of renewable energy. As discussed in Chapter 2, Global Climate Change/Greenhouse Gases, deployment of Senate Bill 350 would require public utilities to achieve a 50 percent renewable portfolio by 2030, the year of project buildout. Mitigation Measure 2-4 is considered feasible and enforceable. mitigation because the project applicant or its designee shall be required to comply with the standards and components of the measure before construction begins. Los Angeles County shall hold the project applicant or its designee accountable for meetingthe criteria of Mitigation Measure 2-4 prior to approving or issuing residential building permits. Issuance of residential buildings permits shall be contingent upon the project applicant or its designee providing adequate evidence as to implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-4 as specified. Mitigation Measure 2-6: Transportation Demand Management Plan The project applicant -submitted Newhall Ranch Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM Plan), located in Technical Report Appendix E contained in AEA Appendix 1, shall be implemented to reduce VMT resulting from project build out with oversight from Los Angeles County. The TDM Plan is designed to influence the transportation choices of residents, students, employees, and visitors, and serves to enhance the use of alternative transportation modes both on and off the project site through the provision of incentives and subsidies, expanded transit opportunities, bikeshare and carshare programs, technology- based programs, and other innovative means. Implementation of relevant elements of the TDM Plan will be included as a condition of approval by Los Angeles County when approving tentative subdivision maps for land developments that are part of the project. Accordingly, the TDM Plan identifies key implementation actions that are critical to the effectiveness of the VMT-reducing strategies, as well as timeline and phasing requirements, monitoring standards, and performance metrics and targets tailored to each of the strategies. In accordance with the TDM Plan, a non-profit Transportation Management Organization (TMO) or equivalent management entity shall be established to provide the services required, as applicable. Implementation of the TDM plan would reduce project -related emissions of GHGs from the transportation sector through incorporation of measures and strategies designed to influence behavior and increase the efficiency of transportation modes. Implementation of the TDM strategy will result in increased rates of alternative modes of transportation, such as walking, bicycling, and public transit use, with a subsequent decrease in single -occupancy vehicle dependency through vanpooling, car -sharing, and ride -matching programs, which will reduce transportation -related GHG emissions on a community -wide scale. Incorporation of measures to improve the efficiency of transportation systems will lower rates of emissions associated with idling and braking. Pursuant to SB 375, TDM strategies have been developed by Metropolitan Transportation Organizations MPOs and incorporated into Regional Transportation Plans (RTP/SCSs). These plans are reviewed by ARB, which has concluded that TDM produces a notable reduction in GHG emissions from automobiles. Mitigation Measure 2-7: Traffic Signal Synchronization Prior to the issuance of traffic signal permits; the project applicant or its designee shall work with Los Angeles County and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), as applicable, to facilitate traffic signal coordination along: A State Route 126 from the Los Angeles County line to the Interstate 5 north -bound ramps; i Chiquito Canyon Road, Long Canyon Road, and Valencia Boulevard within the RMDP/SCP project site; A Magic Mountain Parkway from Long Canyon Road to the Interstate 5 north -bound ramps; and i Commerce Center Drive from Franklin Parkway to Magic Mountain Parkway. To effectuate the signal synchronization and specifically the operational and timing adjustments needed at affected traffic signals, the project applicant or its designee shall submit traffic signal plans for review and approval, and/or pay needed fees as determined by Los Angeles County or Caltrans, as applicable. A majority of the signals that will be synchronized will be new signals constructed/installed by the project. Thus, for these signals, the project will provide the necessary equipment at the signal controller cabinet, as well as within the new roadways themselves, to enable and facilitate synchronization. The project is responsible for paying 100 percent of the applicable fee amount for the signal synchronization work, with assurance that the necessary funding will be available to fully implement this measure. The improved synchronization of the aforementioned intersections will improve vehicle efficiency, thus decreasing transportation -related emissions of GHGs associated with project implementation. Emissions from inefficient travel (e.g., idling) shall be mitigated through signal synchronization and improved vehicle movement. Mitigation Measure 2-7 is considered feasible and enforceable mitigation because the project applicant or its designee shall be required to comply with the standards and components of the measure prior to issuance of traffic signal permits. Los Angeles County and Caltrans shall hold the project applicant or its designee accountable for meeting the criteria of Mitigation Measure 2-7 prior to issuing traffic signal permits. Issuance of traffic signal permits shall be contingent upon the project applicant or its designee providing adequate evidence as to implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-7 as specified. Mitigation Measure 2-8: Electric School'Bus Program Consistent with the parameters of the Newhall Ranch TDM Plan, the project applicant or its designee shall provide Los Angeles County with proof that funding has been provided for the purchase, operation, and maintenance of electric school busesin furtherance of the school bus program identified in the project's TDM Plan. The proof of funding shall be demonstrated incrementally as the school bus program is, paced to village -level occupancy and student enrollment levels. Use of electric school buses would mitigate transportation -related emissions of GHGs by reducing the use of GHG-emitting fossil fuels during operation of school buses. Proof of funding shall be demonstrated incrementally as the school bus program is paced to village -level occupancy and student enrollment levels. Mitigation Measure 2-9: Electric Transit Bus Program Prior to the issuance of the first 2,000th residential building permit within the RMDP/SCP project site and every 2,000th residential building permit thereafter, the project applicant or its designee shall provide Los Angeles County with proof that it has provided a subsidy of $100,000 per bus for the replacement of up to 10 diesel or compressed natural gas transit buses with electric buses to the identified transit provider(s). Use of electric transit buses would mitigate transportation-relafed emissions of GHGs by reducing the use of GHG-emitting fossil fuels (i.e., diesel fuel and natural gas) during operation of transit buses. Mitigation Measure 2-9 is considered feasible and enforceable mitigation because the project applicant or its designee shall be required to comply with the standards and components of the measure before an incremental number of residential building permits are issued. Los Angeles County shall hold the project applicant or its designee accountable for meeting the criteria of Mitigation Measure 2-9 prior to issuing building permits. Issuance of buildings permits shall be contingent upon the project applicant or its designee providing adequate evidence as to implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-9 as specified. Mitigation Measure 2-10: Offsetting Construction and Vegetation Change Emissions Prior to issuing grading permits for village -level development within the RMDP/SCP project site, Los Angeles County shall confirm that the project applicant or its designee shall fully mitigate the related construction and vegetation change GHG emissions (the "Incremental Construction GHG Emissions") by relying upon one of the following compliance options, or a combination thereof, in accordance with the project applicant - submitted Newhall Ranch GHG Reduction Plan (GHG Reduction Plan; see Technical Report Appendix F contained in AEA Appendix 1): A Directly undertake or fund activities that reduce or sequester GHG emissions and retire the associated GHG reduction credits in a quantity equal to the Incremental Construction GHG Emissions; or A Obtain and retire carbon credits that have been issued by a recognized and reputable carbon registry, as described in the GHG Reduction Plan, in a quantity equal to the Incremental Construction GHG Emissions. Involvement in at least one of the actions listed above would be sufficient to offset the GHG emissions associated with construction- and vegetation change -related to project implementation. The sum of purchased GHG reduction credits and/or carbon credits shall equal the total emissions generated during construction activities and vegetation removal as amortized over the life of the project (i.e., 30 years). Carbon credits shall be of sufficient criteria to meet the standards of an adequate carbon credit through a reputable carbon registry. Carbon credits purchased to offset construction and vegetation emissions shall be real, additional, quantifiable, enforceable, validated, and permanent. The year of full buildout (2030), the project applicant shall engage in a one-time purchase of carbon offsets that can demonstrate GHG reductions shall continue over the life of the project on a yearly basis. Mitigation Measure 2-10 is considered feasible and enforceable mitigation because the project applicant or its designee shall be required to comply with the standards and components of the measure prior to issuance of grading permits. Los Angeles County shall hold the project applicant or its designee accountable for meeting the criteria of Mitigation Measure 2-10 prior to issuing grading permits. Issuance of grading permits shall be contingent upon the project applicant or its designee providing adequate evidence as to implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-10 as specified. Mitigation Measure 2-11: Building Retrofit Program Prior to the issuance of building permits for every 100 residential units or 100,000 square feet of commercial development for each village -level project, the project applicant or its designee shall provide proof of funding of the proportional percentage of the Building Retrofit Program (Retrofit Program), as included in Technical Report Appendix G contained in AEA Appendix 1, to Los Angeles County. ("Commercial development" includes retail, light industrial, office, hotel and mixed-use buildings.) Building retrofits covered by the Retrofit Program can include, but are not limited to: cool roofs, solar panels, solar water heaters, smart meters, energy efficient lighting (including, but not limited to, light bulb replacement), energy efficient appliances, energy efficient windows, insulation, and water conservation measures. The Retrofit Program shall be implemented within the geographic area defined to include Los Angeles County and primarily within disadvantaged communities, as defined by the Retrofit Program, or in other areas accepted by the Los Angeles County Planning Director. Funding shall be applied to implement retrofits strategies identified in the Retrofit Program or other comparable strategies accepted by the Los Angeles County Planning Director. The Retrofit Program would reduce emissions through the replacement of existing and less -efficient technologies anti addition of low -emission infrastructure. Cool roofs and improved insulation keep the internal temperatures of buildings low, thus reducing dependency on heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems, and the indirect GHG emissions produced from their energy use. Solar panels and solar water heaters employ the sun's energy to heat and power buildings to meet energy demands while reducing GHG emissions from electricity and natural gas. Use of energy efficient lighting, meters, appliances, and windows lower the overall energy.demand of a building or structure requiring less energy, therefore, lowering the rate of energy-related fossil fuel combustion. Implementation of water conservation strategies further reduce GHG emissions associated with water and wastewater treatment and conveyance. Mitigation Measure 2-11 is considered feasible and enforceable mitigation because the project applicant or its designee shall be required to comply with the standards and components of the measure prior to issuance of building permits for a proportional number of residential units or square feet of commercial space. Los Angeles County shall hold the project applicant or its designee accountable for meeting the criteria of Mitigation Measure 2-11 prior to issuing building permits. Issuance of buildings permits shall be contingent upon the project applicant or its designee providing adequate evidence as to implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-11 as specified. Mitigation Measure 2-13: Implement a GHG Reduction Plan In addition to Mitigation Measures 2-1 through 2-12, the project applicant shall offset GHG emissions to zero by funding activities that directly reduce or sequester GHG emissions or, if necessary, obtaining carbon credits through the Newhall Ranch GHG Reduction Plan. The project applicant -submitted Newhall Ranch GHG Reduction Plan focuses on achieving GHG reductions or sequestration through the direct investment in specific programs or projects in coordination with an accredited carbon registry, such as the Climate Action Reserve. If these direct investment efforts do not achieve an adequate amount of GHG reductions, the project applicant can obtain carbon credits from accredited carbon registries. The South Coast Air Quality Management District recommends that mitigation be considered in the following prioritized manner: (1) project design feature/on-site reduction measures; (2) off-site within neighborhood; (3) off-site within district; (4) off-site within state; and (5) off-site out of state. Prior to issuing building permits for development within the project site, Los Angeles County shall confirm that the project applicant or its designee shall fully offset the project's remaining (i.e., post implementation of Mitigation Measures 2-1 through 2-12) operational GHG emissions over the 30 -year project life associated with such building permits (`Incremental Operational GHG Emissions") by relying upon one of the following compliance options, or a combination thereof, in accordance with the Newhall Ranch GHG Reduction Plan: A Demonstrate that the project applicant has directly undertaken or funded activities that reduce or sequester GHG emissions ("Direct Reduction Activities") that are estimated to result in GHG reduction credits, as described in the GHG Reduction Plan, and retire such GHG reduction credits in a quantity equal to the Incremental Operational GHG emissions; A Provide a guarantee that it shall retire carbon credits issued in connection with Direct Reduction Activities in a quantity equal to the Incremental Operational GHG emissions; A Undertake or fund Direct Reduction ActiVities and retire the associated carbon credits in a quantity equal to the Incremental Operational GHG Emissions; or i if it is impracticable to fully offset Incremental Operational Emissions through the Direct Reduction Activities, the project applicant or its designee may purchase and retire carbon credits that have been issued by a recognized and reputable, accredited carbon registry in a quantity equal to the Incremental Operational GHG Emissions. Compliance with MM 2-13�shall be demonstrated incrementally prior to obtaining building permits, and shall follow the preferred geographic hierarchy recommended by SCAQMD, discussed above. Incremental Operational GHG emissions shall be equal to the sum of the number of proposed residential units covered by the applicable building permit multiplied by 108.89 MT CO2e and every thousand square feet of proposed commercial development covered by the applicable building permit multiplied by 506.86 MT CO2e. See Technical Report Appendix K, contained in AEA Appendix 1 for detailed derivation of these estimates for the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-13 shall be adequate to fully mitigate the Incremental Operational GHG Emissions through direct investment in GHG reduction activities and/or the efficacy of carbon credits and the reductions they produce. The parameters of the compliance options provided above ensure that the carbon offsets purchased by the project applicant meet the criteria of a successful and effective offset. To be accredited by a recognized carbon registry, carbon offsets must demonstrate that they are real, additional, quantifiable, enforceable, validated, and permanent. Carbon offsets purchased following project implementation shall meet these standards, and shall produce levels of carbon offsetting on a yearly basis to mitigate the Incremental Operation GHG Emissions during project implementation. The carbon offsets associated with the aforementioned compliance responses are considered appropriate and applicable mitigation for the Incremental Operational GHG Emissions produced by the project following deployment of Mitigation Measures 2-1 through 2-12. Accredited projects and programs participating in local, regional, and global carbon markets shall be subject to the standards enforced by carbon registries. If it is found that a project or program loses its ability to meet the criteria of being real, additional, quantifiable, enforceable, validated, and permanent, it loses its accreditation as an active carbon reducing or sequestrating action. The carbon credits purchased as a result of Mitigation Measure 2-13 shall be subject to the same standards. in the event that a project or program providing offsets to the project applicant loses its accreditation, the project applicant shall comply with the rules and procedures of retiring . offsets specific to the registry involved and will undertake additional direct investments or purchase an Re: Time extension for Planning Case No. PL 216-221 I disapprove of the Time Extension of Case No. PL 2016-221 f"Project") Circumstances have changed since the Project was originally approved. We have a draught situation that will not go away soon. The snow is melting too fast to be usable as a water resource. Construction of the 16 Unit lots will use lots of water, so will the tenants. You are hurting the environment by taking away Nature and displacing the wildlife. The traffic has become incrementally worse since that project was originally approved. It will only worsen with additional drivers going in and out of this tract. During traffic hours from 1:30 pm to 7:00 pm it takes a long time till I can pull out of my Tract to get to the Freeway. The mornings, getting from Diamond Blvd. to the Freeway are worse. And traffic on Brea Canyon is extreme in the morning and in the afternoon. It is not ethical to allow an entity to get rich at the detriment of many. The property can be donated to the Park System and get a tax deduction. It would be best to leave the property as it is. No 16 Units. We are so congested... You know all the negative aspects relating to this Project. But you don't seem to give it any weight. It is more unpleasant to live in Diamond Bar year after year. From: Hertha Nissel 3429 Crooked Creek Drive Diamond Bar CA 91765 11Q4 -s"- LIU, c