HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/08/2002PLANNINf
C0A/-tM1SS1( FILE COPY
AGENDA
January S, 2002
7:00 P.M
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Hearing Board Room
21865; East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
Chairman Steve Nelson
Vice Chairman
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Joe Ruzicka
George Kuo
Dan Nolan
Steve Tye
Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Planning
Division of the Dept. of Community & Development Services, located at 21825 E. Copley Drive, and are
available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please call (909) 396-5676
during regular business hours.
In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title 11 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of
Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or
accommodation(s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting must inform the Dept. of Community &
Development Services at (909) 396-5676 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting.
r'iease retrain from smoking, eating or
drinking in the Auditorium The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper
and encourages you to do the same
City of Diamond Bar
Planning Commission
MEETING RULES
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 and Development Services 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 number below.
Every meeting of the Planning Commission is recorded on cassette tapes and duplicate tapes 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) 396-5676 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 PHONE NUMBERS
Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Commission, Cassette Tapes of Meetings (909) 396-5676
Computer Access to Agendas (909) 860 -LINE
General Agendas (909) 396-5676
email: info@ci.diamond-bar.ca.us
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday;, January 8, 2002
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m.
Next Resolution No.2002-01
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Steve Nelson, Vice -Chairman Joe
Ruzicka, George Kuo, Dan Nolan, and Steve Tye.
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 Secreta (Completion of this form is voluntary.)
There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressing the Planning Commission
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chairman.
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: December 11, 2001.
5. OLD BUSINESS: None.
6. NEW BUSINESS: None.
7. PUBLIC HEARING:
7.1. Development Review No. 2001-21. Minor Conditional Use Permit
No. 2001-12 (pursuant to Code Sections 22.48.020, 22.56, and 22.68) is a
request to remodel and add approximately 2,847 square feet to an existing
2,647 square feet single family residence with deck and three car garage.
Project Address: 22205 Steeplechase Lane (Lot 175, Tract 30578)
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
January 8, 2002
Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
Property Owner: John Chang
20430 Yellowbrick Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91789
Applicant: Arthur Tseng
P. O. Box 5245
Hacienda Heights, CA 91745
Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15301(e)(2)(A), the City has
determined that this project is Categorically Exempt.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Development Review No. 2001-21, and Minor Conditional Use Permit
No. 2001-12, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the
draft resolution.
7.2 Development Code Amendment No. 2001-04 to amend Article IV of
Section 22.50.030 of the City's Development Code regarding temporary uses
for outdoor display/sales events.
Project Address: Citywide
Applicant: City of Diamond Bar
21825 E. Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue
this item to January 22, 2002.
8. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS:
9. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects.
10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
CHRISTMAS TREE
RECYCLING PROGRAM
TRAFFIC AND
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION MEETING
December 27 through January 11, 2002
Place tree at curbside on regular trash
pick up day for disposal
Thursday, January 10, 2002 — 7:00 p.m.
AQMD/Govt. Center Hearing Board Room
21865 E. Copley Drive
January 8, 2002
CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW:
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING:
PARKS AND RECREATION
COMMISSION MEETING:
RESCHEDULED REGULAR
CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
11. ADJOURNMENT:
Page 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 15, 2002 — Cancelled
Rescheduled to January 29, 2002
Tuesday, January 22, 2002 — 6:00 p.m.
AQMD/Govt. Center Auditorium
21865 E. Copley Drive
Tuesday, January 22, 2002 — 7:00 p.m.
AQMD/Govt. Center Auditorium
21865 E. Copley Drive
Thursday, January 24, 2002 — 7:00 p.m.
AQMD/Govt. Center Hearing Board Room
21865 E. Copley Drive43
Tuesday, January 29, 2002 — 6:30 p.m.
AQMD/Govt. Center Auditorium
21865 E. Copley Drive
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 11, 2001
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice Chairman Ruzicka called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality
Management: Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Commissioner Nelson led in the pledge of allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Vice Chairman Joe Ruzicka, and Commissioners George Kuo, Steve
Nelson, and Steve Tye.
Also Present: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager, Ann Lungu, Associate Planner,
and Stella :Marquez, Administrative Secretary.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCEIPUBLIC COMMENTS: None offered.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented.
Im
5.
REORGANIZATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION — Selection of Chairman.
Secretary/DCM/DeStefano opened nominations for Chairman.
Commissioner Ruzicka nominated Commissioner Nelson. The nomination was seconded by
Commissioner Tye. There being no further nominations, upon roll call vote and without objection,
Commissioner Nelson was unanimously selected to serve as Chairman of the Planning
Commission.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 27, 2001.
VC/Ruzicka moved, C/Tye seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
November 27, 2001, as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: Kuo, Tye, VC/Ruzicka, C/Nelson
None
None
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
,ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
DECEMBER 11, 2001 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
6.
OLD BUSINESS: None
7. NEW BUSINESS:
7.1 Conditional Use Permit 2001-04, Variance No 2001-07, and Develonment Review
No 2001-12, Code Amendment No 2001-02 and Negative Declaration No. 2001-05 (pursuant
to Code Sections 22.42.130.G.4, 22.58, 22.54 and 22.45) is a request to install a wireless
telecommunications facility that includes a pole with antennas and equipment cabinet. The
Variance relates to the antenna pole that exceeds the maximum allowable 35 -foot height. The
Development Review relates to architectural/design review.
PROJECT ADDRESS
PROPERTY OWNER:
APPLICANT:
St. Denis Roman Catholic Church
2151 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard
Diamond bar, CA 91765
Roman Catholic Abp
3424 Wilshire Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Cingular
2521 Michelle Drive
Tustin, CA 92780
AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Conditional use permit 2001-04, Variance No. 2001-07, Development Review No. 2001-12 and
Negative Declaration No. 2001-05, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within
the resolution.
Chair/Nelson opened the public hearing.
Jereme Brixee, The Consulting Group, addressed concerns of residents in the area of the proposed
project. The project proposes a stealth design to camouflage the view. FCC regulates
environmental concerns and this project operates at about one-tenth of what the FCC regulates as a
healthy exposure. He cited a study conducted by a real estate agency in Marin County wherein they
looked at two separate facilities and determined that there was no effect to property values based
upon the installation of the wireless facility. He offered to submit the study as a condition of
approval.
VC/Ruzicka wants the site camouflaged and felt that not enough effort was made to place the site
within the church's bell tower. He is not convinced that it is technically impossible to relocate the
site within the, parish building. What has Cingular done to mitigate the neighbors concerns about
this site with respect to view? He believes that if the antenna is placed at the end of the parking lot
r)MEW a� as N
DECEMBER 11, 2001 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
next to the steps rather than in the: middle of the parking lot it would be much more camouflaged by
foliage. In addition, he believes the facility could be painted a shade of green to blend into the
background. However, his initial concern is that the antenna should be placed in the church bell
tower or moved to the hillside behind the condominium complex on the opposite side of Diamond
Bar Boulevard.
Mr. Brixee agreed that the steeple is a good location but based upon the signal needed in this
location and the amount of twists in the building the signal would not reach the antenna in any
valuable sense. He explained that placement of the antenna within the bell tower would require
larger electrical cable which is not feasible in the structure. The optimal location and separation
from adjacent residences is the center of the parking lot. Relocation of the antenna to the end of the
parking lot would minimize the distance between the structure and the residences on that side. The
signal will lose all of its strength as it travels down into the valley if it is located on the hillside
behind the condominium complex, which would necessitate an additional site in the same location
in order to pick up the signal. Typically, sites have smaller poles with a 36 inch canister on top.
The proposed design minimizes the canister on top and increases the pole size at the base so that
the antenna is uniform in width from top to bottom. By replacing the light standards at the 32 foot
line, as currently exists, will minimize the impact. Placing the antennas inside the canister further
reduces the visual impact. The pole can be painted a color to blend with the surrounding landscape.
VC/Ruzicka said he would take the consultant at his word regarding the impossibility of stringing
electrical cable in the building. As an alternative, he recommended that the pole be painted an
appropriate color and that a 60 foot high tree be planted close to the pole to minimize the visual
impact of the pole.
Mr. Brixee indicated to C/Tye that the larger cable would be required in the building because the
electrical equipment box would be located a greater distance away from the antenna, which requires
larger cable.
C/Tye thought the cable could be brought up to the bell tower on the outside of the building from
the electrical equipment cabinet located in the courtyard.
Mr. Brixee explained that staff would not allow the equipment cabinet to be visible from the street.
The project architect stated that it would not be feasible to pull the cable up through the building to
the bell tower.
Mr. Bri xee responded to VC/Ruzicka that the equipment cannot be placed on the church roof.
Mr. Brixee indicated to Chair/Nelson that the cable diameter ranges from 24 inches to 36 inches.
Based on the proposed location of the equipment the cable will be 24 inches in diameter. Based
upon the distance of the equipment, the cable from the equipment cabinet to the bell tower would
range from 7/8 inch to 2 inches.
DECEMBER 11, 2001 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
Chair/Nelson requested a copy of the architect's report.
The consultant said he would provide a copy to staff.
AssocP/Lungu responded to Chair/Nelson that she did not speak to an architect about this proposed
project.
Dennis Anderson, 1950 Silver Hawk Drive, thanked the Commission for their questions to the
consultant. He is the first house on the periphery of the property and felt that a 49 foot tower in his
back yard will definitely have an effect on the quality of his life. Further, he believed that this
project would be detrimental to the property values in the immediate area. The City of Diamond
Bar is opposed to locating a tower on Diamond Bar Boulevard due to its visibility and as a single
homeowner, he does not wish to encumber that which the city finds inappropriate. How do you
hide a 40 foot pole in plain site? He has lived in his home for nearly 25 years and his back yard
overlooks St. Denis Church. He asked the Commissioners to consider how they would feel having
a 49 foot pole in their back yard.
Kay Hand, 1936 Silver Hawk Drive, lives directly above Mr. Anderson's home and the church
parking lot. Currently, she enjoys a beautiful view, and a large pole in the middle of the parking lot
would destroy that view and it would be an interruption that she feels would definitely affect the
value of her home and her ability to enjoy her property. She believes there is a better solution to
camouflaging the pole. Perhaps the location of the cross could be reconsidered. All of the residents
directly behind St. Denis Church are in attendance tonight because they are all concerned about the
effect of this project on their lives and property.
In response to C/Tye, Mrs. Hand said she does not believe palm tree or windmill sites are
camouflaged very well. A cross is a natural occurrence in a church parking lot and she likes that
proposal better because it would fit in with the location. The lights that remain on all night in the
parking lot are a disturbance. Therefore, she would not favor a light pole. A better location for the
cross would be favorable and could perhaps be located in the side parking lot.
Fatima Partunavi said she bought her house for its beautiful view and the pole will be in the middle
of that view. She does not want to look at a pole and pleads with the Commission to not approve
the project.
VC/Ruzicka asked Mr. Brixee to expound on his discussions with the parish priests at St. Denis,
his relationship to them and what their demands or requests amount to, and what they will allow
and disallow with respect to this project.
F' em
DECEMBER 11, 2001 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
Mr. Brixee said he has not personally had any interaction with the church. His firm deals with the
parish through a leasing agent. Usually, when his firm finds a candidate that is open to such a
project, their design influence is minimal.
VC/Ruzicka reiterated that Nextel and Cingular have a joint venture on the north end of Diamond
Bar. ,Although the city was told that certain things could not be done to mitigate the effects of the
project on the surrounding neighborhood, in fact, those things were accomplished because the city
pushed to have them done. Even though these circumstances are different, he feels there are things
that can be done to mitigate the impact of this project. He likes the cross design.
VC/Ruzicka moved, C/Tye seconded, to keep the public hearing open and continue the matter to
February 12, 2002, to allow staff the opportunity to work with the applicant to satisfactorily address
the concerns voiced during this evening's session. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Ruzicka, Tye, Kuo, C/Nelson
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
7.2 Development Review No. 2001-20 (pursuant to Code Section 22.48.020.A.) is a request to
construct a two-story single family residence with a basement, two two-cargarages and
patios/balconies for a total of approximately 11,410 square feet. Additionally, the request includes
retaining walls within the rear/side and front yards with a maximum exposed height of six feet.
PROJECT ADDRESS:
PROPERTY OWNER/
APPLICANT:
22883 Canyon View Drive
(Lot 4 of Tract No. 51169)
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Horizon Pacific
2707 Diamond Bar Boulevard #202
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Development Review No. 2001-20, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within
the resolution.
Chair/Nelson opened the public hearing.
Jerry Yeah, Horizon Pacific, said he read staff's report and concurs with the conditions of approval.
C/Tye asked the applicant how this project has been designed to prevent the appearance of a "wall
of houses."
�.s L
DECEMBER 11, 2001 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
DCM/DeStefano said that projects such as the one located at the Grand Avenue Country Estates
entrance would require the review of the Planning Commission. As a result of comments received
by the city about that particular project, staff does everything possible to ensure that no similar
structures are built. The proposed subdivision is unique because of what is currently in vogue in
"The Country Estates." Each lot in this project is unique. Each lot is not rectangular and has some
significant topography. The characteristic of this project will not be the same as in most other areas
of "The Country Estates." As a result of the topography, separations between houses are fairly
substantial.
Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing.
DCM/DeStefano responded to Chair/Nelson that this project has been undergoing mitigation
monitoring review since construction began and has been re -hydro -seeded three times in three or
four years. The project has large slopes, is in a somewhat isolated area and receives a seed mix
from the surrounding area that is unsatisfactory to the city's biologist.
VC/Ruzicka moved, C/Tye seconded, to approve Development Review No. 2001-20, Findings of
Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following
Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMSSIONERS: VC/Ruzicka, Tye, Kuo, C/Nelson
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: CONMSSIONERS: None
8. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: None offered.
9. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects.
10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
DCM/DeStefano stated that presently, the Development Code Amendment is scheduled before the
City Council at its December 17 meeting. Staff requested that this matter be continued to
January 8, 2002, because the sign approval granted by the Commission at its last meeting has been
appealed.
C/Tye asked if the appeal could be held over to the January 29 City Council meeting so that he
could be present.
ra 77
DECEMBER 11, 2001 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
DClvt/DeStefano said that the City Council may choose to appoint a new Planning Commissioner
as soon as December 17. Last week staff received the application to building upon the 80 vacant
acres consisting of about 49 lots adjacent to Mr. Yeh's property. This application will be the last
major subdivision within "The Country Estates" which will be situated between the Horizon
Pacific and JCC Tract 47851.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chairman Nelson adjourned the
meeting at 8:40 p.m. to January 8, 2002.
Attest:
Chairman Steve Nelson
Respectfully Submitted,
James DeStefano
Deputy City Manager
MEMORANDUM T11
�_
nIAMONI) RAR
COMMUNITY & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning Division
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Stella Marquez, Administrative Secretary to
Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner
DATE: January 3, 2002
SUBJECT: Agenda Item No. 7.2
Development Code Amendment 2001-04
Due to new development and time constraints, additional time is needed to provide information
to the Planning Commission. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission
continue this item to January 22, 2002.
City of Diamond Bar
PLANNING COMMISSION
Staff Report
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
REPORT DATE: January 2, 2002
MEETING DATE: January 8, 2002
CASE/FILE NUMBER: Development Review No. 2001-21, Minor Conditional Use
Permit No. 2001-12
APPLICATION REQUEST: A request to remodel and add approximately 2,847 square
feet to an existing 2,647 square feet single family
residence with deck and three car garage
PROPERTY LOCATION: 22205 Steeplechase Lane (Lot 175 of Tract No. 30578)
PROPERTY OWNER:
APPLICANT:
BACKGROUND:
John Chang
20430 Yellowbrick Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91789
,Arthur Tseng
P. O. Box 5245
Hacienda Heights, CA 91745
The property owner, John Chang, and applicant, Arthur Tseng, are requesting approval to
remodel and add approximately 2,847 square feet to an existing 2,647 square feet single family
residence with deck and three -car garage.
The project's address is 22205 Steeplechase Lane (Lot 175 of Tract No. 30578), Diamond Bar,
California, within the gated community identified as "The Country Estates." The parcel is 1.31
gross acres. It is shaped irregularly„ narrower at the front and sloping downward from
Steeplechase (Lane to the rear of the property. There is a Restricted Use Area at the rear of the
property. The proposed development is not within the restricted area.
The project site is zoned R-1-20,000 for single-family residence. Its General Plan Land Use
designation is Rural Residential (RR) '1/du/acre. Generally, the following zones surround the
subject site: to the north is the R-1-40,000 Zone and to the south, east and west is the R-1-20,000
Zone.
REVIEW AUTHORITY/APPLICATIONS
This application requires Development Review by the Planning Commission per the City's
Development Code, Section 22.48.020.A(1), which states that Development Review is required
for projects involving a building permit for reconstruction and additions to structures which are
equal to 50 percent or greater of the floor area of the existing structures on the site. Therefore,
the addition of 2,847 square feet to an existing 2,647 square structure applies to the above
requirement.
The purpose of this review process is to establish consistency with the General Plan through the
promotion of high aesthetic and functional standards to complement and add to the economic,
physical, and social character of the City. The process will also ensure that new development and
intensification of existing development yields a pleasant living, working, or shopping environment
and attracts the interest of residents, workers, shoppers and visitors as the result of consistent
exemplary design.
The existing parcel was approved by Tract Map No. 30578, Lot 175, on April 23, 1969 as 1.31
acres. The existing structure was approved using the Los Angeles County Code in 1977 and met
the required setbacks of that Code prior to the City's incorporation. The current Diamond Bar
Development Code requires minimum lot size as 1 du/acre in Rural Residential Zone (RR). The
front setback for this zone has changed from the Los Angeles County Code of 20 feet to 30 feet.
This application is considered a nonconforming parcel/structure. These are defined as any parcel
or structure that was legally created or constructed prior to the adoption of the current Diamond
Bar Development Code adopted November 3, 1998, and which does not conform to current Code
provisions/standards prescribed for the zoning district in which the use is located.
The addition, enlargement, extension, reconstruction, relocation or structural alteration of a
nonconforming structure may be allowed with Minor Conditional Use Permit approval, in
compliance with Chapter 22.56. The Planning Director or his designee may approve proposed
projects of less than 50% providing that the additions or improvements are less than 50% of the
existing square footage, the site coverage is no more than 40 percent, that the project conforms
to applicable provisions of the Development Code, and the exterior limits of new construction do
not exceed the applicable height limit or encroach further into the setbacks than the comparable
portions of the existing structure where the nonconformity exists. In this case the nonconformity
is in the front.
This proposed project conforms to applicable provisions of the Development Code, the site
coverage is less than 40 percent, and it meets the required height limitations and does not
encroach further into the setbacks than the existing structure in the front. However, the proposed
project is more than 50 percent of the existing square footage. Therefore a public hearing by the
Hearing Officer and approval of a Minor Conditional Use Permit and findings are required.
2
Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.48.030, the highest level of authority shall make
concurrent processing; therefore, the Planning Commission shall hear both applications.
ANALYSIS:
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW/MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
• Development Standards
The followincI is a comparison of the City's development standards and the project's proposed
development standards:
City's Development Standards
Project's Development Standards
1. Setbacks (main structure):
• Front yard -30' from property line
• Side yards -10' & 15' minimum from
property line
1. Setbacks (main structure):
• Front yard- 20 feet from property line*
• Side yards- 10' and 15' from property line
• Rear yard -25' minimum from property
line
• Rear yard -Meets requirement
• Site Coverage -overall maximum 40% I
• Site Coverage -Approximately 9%
2. Building Height:
• Maximum 35'
2. Building Height:
• Maximum 22'
3. Parking:
Minimum two -car garage with each bay
minimum 10"x20'
3. Parking:**
New three -car garage 21.25'x31' and motor
court, meets requirement
. V1 Il IJ IUydl 1101 lc.:urnurmmg and requires a Minor Conditional Use Permit with Findings
of Fact, otherwise the above analysis indicates that the proposed remodel meets Development
Code Standards.
** There are a total of five bedrooms with a three -car garage and driveway; therefore, staff
anticipates adequate parking.
• Architectural Features and Colors
The proposed project's architectural design and palette are compatible with the eclectic
architectural style of other homes within "The Country Estates," and are consistent with the City's
General Plan, Development Code, and Design Guidelines. The proposed project's architectural
style is European design per the Architect. The project's architectural features include the use of
two-story entry; trimmed stucco details, fascia and window treatments; deck with wrought iron; and
layering of materials and finishes via multi-levels of roof lines using Charcoal Grey flat roof tile and
stucco of Eggshell white to add texture and contrast. The applicant has received the approval of
3
"The Country Estates" Homeowners' Association Architectural Committee. A copy of the approved
colors/materials board is attached.
• Floor Plans
The proposed single-family structure consists of two -stories. The first -story includes the two-story
open entry/foyer, living room, dining room, kitchen with nook, family room, and two bedrooms with
sitting room and bath, bonus room from the converted two car garage, and new the three -car
garage. The second story includes the master bedroom with bath and walk in closet, game room,
and bedroom number four with bath and walk-in closet.
SITE WORK
The subject reconstruction/remodel is on the existing pad. No grading or retaining walls are
anticipated. Should it be necessary to work more than 50 cubic yards of earth, the Public Works
Division will require a grading/drainage plan.
LANDSCAPING
The landscape/irrigation plan is included and delineates the type of planting materials, color, size,
quantity and location. The landscaping/irrigation is required to be installed prior to the Planning
Division's final inspection or the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. Additionally, it is noted
for the applicant that any walls, gates, fountains, etc. that may be proposed within the front
setback shall not encroach into the street's dedicated easement; nor, shall any such structure or
dense plant material proposed within the front setback exceed a maximum height of 42 inches.
PRESERVED/PROTECTED TREES
The applicant's signed tree preservation statement indicates that no preserved/protected trees,
oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, or naturalized California Pepper, are on this site. A site visit
confirms there are no preserved trees within the development area and no permit is required for
the proposed construction.
VIEW IMPACT
The terrain in the vicinity of Steeplechase Lane is hilly. The parcels on Steeplechase Lane
generally follow the ridgeline (higher elevations) and slope from the street downward (lower
elevations) at the rear of the lots. Lot 175 has easements and restrictions, however the subject
reconstruction is not within these limits. The neighboring parcels are single-family residences. By
maintaining the height limits of the Development Code, the remodel will not impact neighboring
properties.
4
ADDITIONAL REVIEW
The Public Works Division and the Building and Safety Division reviewed this project. Their
comments are included in both the report and the conditions of approval.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
On December 20, 2001, 210 property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the project site were
notified by mail. On December 28, 2001, notification of the public hearing for this project was
made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers; and a notice
of public hearing on a display board was posted at the site and displayed for at least 10 days
before the public hearing; as well as three other posted within the vicinity of the application.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has
determined that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the guidelines of the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), Section 15301(e)(2)(A).
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. 2001-21,
Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-12, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed
within the attached resolution.
REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FINDINGS:
1. The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan,
development standards of the applicable district, design guidelines, and architectural criteria
for specialized area (e.g., theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards, or
planned developments);
2. The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the use and
enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development, and will not create traffic or
pedestrian hazards;
3. The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with the characteristics
of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain and enhance the harmonious orderly and
attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.48, the General Plan, City Design
Guidelines, or any applicable specific plan;
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, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing;
5. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or
materially injurious (e.g., negative affect on property values or resale(s) of property) to the
properties or improvements in the vicinity; and
6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
REQUIRED NONCONFRQMING STRUCTURES FINDINGS:
The addition, enlargement, extension, reconstruction, relocation or structural alteration of the
nonconforming structure would not result in the structure becoming:
1. Incompatible with other structures in the neighborhood;
2. Inconsistent with the General Plan or any applicable specific plan;
3. A restriction to the eventual/future compliance with the applicable regulations of this
Development Code;
4. Detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of persons residing in the neighborhood;
and
5. Detrimental and/or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood.
REQUIRED MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PEMIT FINDINGS:
1. The proposed use is allowed within the subject zoning district with the approval of a Minor
conditional Use Permit and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Development
Code and the Municipal Code;
2. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan;
3. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible
with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity;
4. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed
including access, provisions of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and the
absence of physical constraints;
5. Granting the Minor Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public interest, health,
safety, convenience or welfare, or materially injurious to persons, property or improvements
in the vicinity and zoning districts in which the property is located, and;
6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Prepared by: z
Li da Kay Smit
Development Services Assistant
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution of Approval;
2. Applications;
3. Oak Tree Statement dated November 5, 2001;
4. Aerial;
5. Exhibit "A" - site plan, floor plan, elevations, landscape plan, and materials/color's board,
dated January 8, 2002.
N.
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO.2002-xx
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
NO. 2001-21, MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-12
AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION 15301(e)(2)(A), A REQUEST
TO REMODEL AND ADD APPROXIMATELY 2,847 SQUARE
FEET TO AN EXISTING 2,647 SQUARE FEET SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE WITH DECK AND THREE CAR GARAGE. THE
PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 22205 STEEPLECHASE LANE
(LOT 175 OF TRACT NO. 30578), DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA.
A. Recitals
1. The property owner, John Chang, and applicant, Arthur Tseng have filed an
application to approve Development Review No. 2001-21, Minor Conditional
Use Permit No. 2001-12, for a property located at 22205 Steeplechase Lane,
Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California and part of the gated
development identified as "The Country Estates," as described in the title of
this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development
Review and Categorical Exemption shall be referred to as the "Application."
2. On December 20, 2001, 210 property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the
project site were notified by mail. On December 28, 2001, notification of the
public hearing for this project was made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune
and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers; and a notice of public hearing
on a display board was posted at the site and displayed for at least 10 days
before the public hearing; as well as three other posted within the vicinity of
the application.
3. On January 8, 2002, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar
conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application.
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.
2. The Planning Commission hereby determines that the project identified
above in this Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) and guidelines
promulgated thereunder. This is pursuant to Section 15301(e)(2)(A) of Article
19 of Chapter 3, Title '14 of the California Code of Regulations.
3. The Planning Commission 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 Planning commission that the project proposed herein
will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the
habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence,
this Planning commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects
contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning
Commission, hereby finds as follows:
(a) The project relates to a parcel at 22205 Steeplechase Lane (Lot 175
of Tract No. 30578), Diamond Bar, CA, within the gated community
identified as "The Country Estates." The project site is approximately
1.31 gross . A Restricted Use Area is at the rear of the property,
however the proposed project is not within this area. The lot is shaped
irregularly, narrower at the front and sloping downward from
Steeplechase Lane to the rear of the property.
(b) The General Plan Land Use designation is Rural Residential (RR), 1
du/acre. The project site is zoned Single -Family Residence, R-1-
20,000.
(c) Generally, the following zones surround the subject site: to the north
is the R-1-40,000 Zone and to south, east and west is the R-1-20,000
Zone.
(d) The application is a request to remodel and add approximately 2,847
square feet to an existing 2,647 square feet single family residence
with deck and three -car garage.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
(e) The design and layout of the proposed development are consistent
with the General Plan, development standards of the applicable
district, design guidelines, and architectural criteria for specialized
area (e.g., theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards,
or planned developments.
The project site, currently developed with a one-story, single-family
residence, was established before the adoption of the City's General
Plan and current Development Code. The adopted General Plan of
July 25, 1995 has a land use designation of Rural Residential (1
du/acre). The current application complies with the City's General
Plan objectives and strategies related to maintaining the integrity of
2
residential neighborhoods and open space, the current Diamond Bar
Development Code, and the City's Design Guidelines. There is no
specific plan.
The existing structure was built using the Development Standards of
the Los Angeles County Code prior to the City's incorporation and is
considered a legal nonconforming structure. Per the current
Development Code, the Planning Director or his designee may
approve proposed projects providing that the additions or
improvements are less than 50% of the existing square footage, the
site coverage is no more than 40 percent, that the project conforms
to applicable provisions of the Development Code, and the exterior
limits of new construction do not exceed the applicable height limit or
encroach further into the setbacks than the comparable portions of
the existing structure where the nonconformity exists. in this case the
nonconformity, is in the front.
The proposed project conforms to applicable provisions of the
Development Code, the site coverage is less than 40 percent and is
comparable with the existing neighborhood, and it meets the required
height limitations and does not encroach further into the setbacks
than the existing structure in the front. Though the proposed project
is more than 50 percent of the existing square footage, a concurrent
application has been made with findings below for the approval of a
Minor Conditional Use Permit.
The terrain in the vicinity of Steeplechase Lane is hilly. The proposed
two-story application is not considered an impact the view corridor of
surrounding properties.
(f) The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere
with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future
development, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards.
Shadow Canyon Drive and Steeplechase Lane adequately serve the
project site. These streets are designed to handle minimum traffic
created by residential development.
The project site is currently developed with a one-story single-family
residence. The proposed reconstruction/remodeling does not change
the existing use of a single-family residence. Although the proposed
addition enlarges the existing residence, and is a two-story structure,
it meets the 35 i`eet height limitation per the Development Code. The
structure is not expected to unreasonably interfere with the use and
enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development with regard
to view or traffic.
3
(g) The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible
with the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood and will
maintain and enhance the harmonious, orderly and attractive
development contemplated by Chapter 22.48, the General Plan, City
Design Guidelines, or any applicable specific plan.
The proposed project's European design is compatible with the
eclectic architectural style of other homes within "The Country
Estates," and is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and
Development Code. The project uses architectural styling with the use
of two-story entry; trimmed stucco details, fascia and window
treatments; deck with wrought iron; and layering of materials and
finishes via multi-levels of roof lines using Charcoal Grey flat roof tile
and stucco of Eggshell white to add texture and contrast.
Additionally, the colors and materials utilized are compatible with the
homes within the surrounding area. The applicant has obtained the
approval of the architectural committee of `The Country Estates."
(h) 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, and color
that will remain aesthetically appealing.
A project colors/materials board is provided as Exhibit 'A." The colors,
materials, and textures proposed are complimentary to the existing
homes within the area while offering variety and low levels of
maintenance.
(i) The proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, or welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative affect on
property values or resale(s) of property) to the properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
City permits, inspections and soils reports are required for
construction and will ensure that the finished project will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially
injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity.
The addition of square footage to the main structure follows the line
of the existing one-story structure in the front and maintains a 35 feet
height, therefore, the proposed application has no negative affect or
impact to the view corridor of surrounding properties.
(j) The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
4
The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project is
categorically exempt pursuant to the guidelines of the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), Sections 1530 1 (e) (2) (A).
NONCOWROMING STRUCTURES
(k) The addition, enlargement, extension, reconstruction, relocation or
structural alteration of the nonconforming structure would not result
in the structure becoming incompatible with other structures in the
neighborhood!.
As stated in Item (g), the proposed project is compatible with other
structures in the vicinity. Many one-story structures in the vicinity have
remodeled adding the second -story and increased square footage.
(I) The addition, enlargement, extension, reconstruction, relocation or
structural alteration of the nonconforming structure would not result
in the structure becoming inconsistent with the General Plan or any
applicable specific plan.
As stated in Items (e) and (g), the proposed project is consistent with
the City's General Plan objectives and strategies, Chapter 22.48 of
the Development Code, and City Design Guidelines.
(m) The addition, enlargement, extension, reconstruction, relocation or
structural alteration of the nonconforming structure would not result
in the structure becoming a restriction to the eventual/future
compliance with the applicable regulations of this Development Code.
The existing parcel was approved by Tract Map No. 30578, Lot 175,
on April 23, 1969 as 1.31 acres. The existing structure was
completed under the Los Angeles County Code in 1977 and met the
required setbacks of that Code prior to the City's incorporation. The
current Diamond Bar Development Code requires minimum lot size as
1 du/acre in Rural Residential Zone (RR). The front setback for this
zone has changed from the Los Angeles County Code of 20 feet to 30
feet. The application is considered a nonconforming parcel and
structure. These are defined as any parcel or structure that was
legally created or constructed prior to the adoption of the current
Diamond Bar Development Code adopted November 3, 1998, and
which does not conform to current Code provisions/standards
prescribed for the zoning district in which the use is located. The
proposed project conforms to the applicable provisions of this
Development Code and the exterior limits of the new construction do
not exceed the applicable height limit or encroach further into the
setbacks than the comparable portions of the existing structure in the
5
front where the nonconformity exists. No further nonconforming
status of this parcel is anticipated.
(n) The addition, enlargement, extension, reconstruction, relocation or
structural alteration of the nonconforming structure would not result
in the structure becoming detrimental to the health, safety, and
general welfare of persons residing in the neighborhood.
City permits, inspections and soils reports are required for construction
and will ensure that the finished project will not be detrimental to the
health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing in the
neighborhood.
(o) The addition, enlargement, extension, reconstruction, relocation or
structural alteration of the nonconforming structure would not result
in the structure becoming detrimental and/or injurious to property and
improvements in the neighborhood.
As stated in Items (e), (t), (g) and (h), the architectural design of the
proposed development is compatible with the characteristics of the
surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the harmonious, orderly
and attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.48, the
General Plan, City Design Guidelines, or any applicable specific plan.
Also, as stated in Item (i), City permits, inspections and soils reports
are required for construction and will ensure that the finished project
will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or
materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth above, the Planning
Commission hereby approves this Application subject to the following
conditions:
(a) The project shall substantially conform to site plan, floor plans,
elevations, and materials/colors board collectively labeled as Exhibit
"A" dated January 8, 2002, as submitted to and approved by the
Planning Commission.
(b) The subject site shall be maintained in a condition that 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 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
0
contractor utilized has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar
to provide such services.
(c) Before construction begins, the applicant shall install temporary
construction fencing pursuant to the Building and Safety Division's
requirements; along the project site's perimeter. This fencing shall
remain until the Building Official approves its removal.
(d) The Applicant shall provide temporary sanitation facilities while under
construction.
(e) The landscaping/irrigation shall be installed prior to the Planning
Division's final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy issuance. Any
walls, gates, fountains, etc. that may be proposed within the front
setback shall not encroach into street's dedicated easement or
exceed a maximum 42 inches in height.
(f) Applicant shall submit an application to the Walnut Valley Water
District as necessary, and submit their approval to the Planning
Division prior to the issuance of building permits.
(g) A permit for demolition shall be obtained from the South Coast Air
Quality Management District.
(h) Drainage pattern shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works
Division; surface water shall drain away from the building at a 2%
minimum slope.
(i) A one-hour wall shall be required between new garage and existing
home.
(j) Site, driveway grade, and house design shall be approved by the Fire
Department. 'The maximum slope is 15% per the Public Works
Division.
(k) The single-family structure shall meet the 1998 California Building
Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and
California Electrical Code requirements.
(1) The minimum design wind pressure shall be 80 miles per hour and
"C" exposure.
(m) The single-family structure requires Fire Department approval and is
located in "Fire Zone 4" and shall meet the following requirements of
that fire zone:
7
(1) All roof covering shall be "Fire Retardant, Class A'; the roofs
shall be fire stopped at the eaves to preclude entry of the
flame or members under the fire;
(2}_ All enclosed under -floor areas shall be constructed as exterior
walls;
(3) All openings into the attic, floor, and/or other enclosed areas
shall be covered with
corrosion -resistant wire mesh not less than '/. inch nor more
than Y2 inch in any dimension except where such openings are
equipped with sash or door;
(4) Chimneys shall have spark arresters of maximum '/2 inch
screen.
(n) This single-family structure shall meet the State Energy
Conservation Standards.
(o) Due to the site's topography, applicant shall comply with special
design requirements as specified in the California Building Code,
Section 18.4.3, building setback, top and toe of slopes.
(p) The single-family residence shall not be utilized in a manner that
creates adverse effects upon the neighborhood and environmental
setting of the residential site to levels of dust, glare/light, noise, odor,
traffic, or other disturbances to the existing residential neighborhood
and shall not result in significantly adverse effects on public services
and resources. The single-family residence shall not be used for
commercial/institutional purposes, or otherwise used as a separate
dwelling. The property shall not be used for regular gatherings which
result in a nuisance or which create traffic and parking problems in the
neighborhood.
(q) The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire
Department and City Planning, Building and Safety, and Public Works
Divisions.
(r) This grant is valid for two (2) years and shall be exercised (i.e.
construction) within that period or this grant shall expire. A one -(1)
year extension may be approved when submitted to the City in writing
at least 60 days prior to the expiration date. The Planning
Commission will consider the extension request at a duly noticed
public hearing in accordance with Chapter 22.72 of the City of
Diamond Bar Development Code.
(s) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee
and owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have
filed, within fifteen (15) days of approval of this grant, at the City of
Diamond Bar Community and Development Services Department,
their affidavit stating that they are aware and agree to accept all the
EM
conditions of this grant. Further, this grant shall not be effective until
the permittee pays remaining City processing fees.
(t) If the Department of Fish and Game determines that Fish and Game
Code Section 711.4 applies to the approval of this project, then the
applicant shall remit to the City, within five days of this grant's
approval, a cashier's check of $25.00 for a documentary handling fee
in connection with Fish and Game Code requirements. Furthermore,
if this project: is not exempt from a filing fee imposed because the
project has more than a deminimis impact on fish and wildlife, the
applicant shall also pay to the Department of Fish and Game any
such fee and any fine which the Department determines to be owed.
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 John Chang, 20430 Yellowbrick Road, Diamond Bar, CA 91789
and Arthur Tseng, P. O. Box 5245, Hacienda Heights, CA 91745.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THI'S 8th DAY OF JANUARY 2002, BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
0
Steve Nelson, Chairman
I, James DeStefano, 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 8th day of January 2002, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
James DeStefano, Secretary
D:WORD-LIND/VPLANCOMM/PROJECTS/DR 01-21 22205 STEEPLECHASE/RESO DR 01-21...
9
C0MMUNrAWDEVFI,0PA1ENT DEPARThiF.NT FPL # 0/
21660 E. Copley Drive Suite I90 De sit $
F (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 �p/ 'J�¢�
R tA'
DEVELOPMENT RE`7EW APPLICATION
By
Date Recd t •� 1
nReecorrd' Owner - Applicant /
Name `11/('y�� s4h `��''M ;4,
(Lut name first) (Last name first)
Address Z -d= Z vs `ems �f PCL(�Q
city %Ct W r-, o -
zip 'J /17 [zJ
Phone JO
Gctrr� oc�3o �ellswbnzr i�o
14 7
Phone(g�) 6�
p
Applicant's Agent
(Last name hast)
Phoi:W.y_ -27 Jr
L4 r ^ r - Va iO
NOTE: It is thea applicant's i && % -
PP responsibility to,�norify the Community Development Director in writing of any change of the
principals involved during the processing of this case.
(Attach a separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors
of corporations.)
Consent. I certify that 1 am the owner of the herein described property and permit the applicant to file this request.
Signed
(All record
e.
Date
Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty ofperjury that the irrlormation herein provided is comet
to the best of my knowledge.
Print Name _ J �' h e 67
(Applicant or Agent)
Signed / 1/ - �r��---- Date
(Applicant Ant)
Location Z �'- ` S �j t� r. e lr el cae /ca Y-e-
(Suurt//address or tract and lot number)
Zoning c o O HNM__L(7 5 7 3 2
Previous Cases
Present Use of Site 1)
Use applied for >�� -%f ��� %'�-r./�,�,-,•�,L�,
5-7
W
3C'
/ / 3 Z
Area devoted to structures s.
Landscaping/Open spam
Project Sirt_? Lot Coverage
Proposed density
Style of Architecture�� (UrLit_c/Acres)
—Z- I --
Number of Floors Proposed 2 Slope of Roof
Grading_ A/O
If yes, Quaatity
out Fill
Import If yea, Quantity
Export If yes. Quantity
�I_Dill. OA
, _y,4
1
Record Owner
CM OFDIAhtONDBAR `a"' -IC,- `' "I '
DEPARTMENT OF FPL a -q -� - —
COMhtUNM h DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Depo=rt S /! 7
Rccnpt
Planning Division By.
2166015. Coplev Drive Suite I go, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Date Recd
(909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 FOR Citi' USE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
Name C � /-NG TO 1i ✓t
(Last name fust)
Address �_� .�(] 4j7%��iG SP
City
vp %6 r
Phone( )
Fa.x ( ) _
Applicant
(Last namc 8nt)
1244 0 Ye&Ot1,-, 4& -,?,c �0) :?�
Cid ` lej Q
Phone(?
Fax
Applicant's Agent
/�
(Litt name first
ten- z�r
honeFPhone-
Fax
ar ( )
NOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the City in writing of any change of the principals involved during the
processing of this case.
(Arta atseepnsr) to sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and siEmatum of members of partnerships,joint ventures, and dircctors of
Consent I certify Mal am/ the miner of the herein described property and permit the applicant to frle thu request
Si®ed , L'
(?►ll record owners) L Date /V,
Certimy knowledge. n; jr, the undersigned
of
best of my hereby certify underpenaby ofPerluO'that the information herein provided is correct to the
Print Name
Signed
Location
—1U(v1 11q
(ftppueant or Agent)
t
(Applicant or
i
(Street address or act and lot number)
Date
Zoning /` � �- [' � �• �'' '
House Numbering Map
Previous Cases
Present Use of Site JS Il_/
Use applied for —�_
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BURDEN OF PROOF
In addition to the information required in the application, the applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the Planning
Commission, the following facts: (answers must be full & complete)
A. That the requested use -it the location proposed will not: '
1. Adversely- affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding
area, or
B.
2.
ki
Be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the
vicinity of the site, or
Jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general Welfare.
That the proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the vards, walls, fences, parking and loading
facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this Title 22, or as is otherwise required in
order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area.
Cly CC T%/-✓�r-.-i' �/�e��e � L!C-C�� y'ils%�
C. Tbat the proposed site is adequately served:
1. By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of
traffic such use would generate, and
2. By other public_ or private service facilities as are required.
Residential: I
Total Units
Bachelor
7�
I Bedroom 2 Bdrm. & larger
Total Pkg. / Cov. Pkg. Uncov. Pkg.
r7
Project Size: �' f Lot Coverage:
Density: Maximum Height: 7 No. of floors: —2i Sq. Footage
Non-residential:
Sq. ft. area No. of Bldgs.
Occupant Load'
CUP Burden of Proof - Page 1
TREE PRESERVATION STATEMENT
[ �111 The subject property contains no oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, or naturalized
California poppet trees.
( ) The sub*
Uect property contains one or more o nu
naturalized California P �' walnut, - � sycamore, willow, or
Pepper trees. The applicant anticipates that no activity
(grading and/or construction) will take place within rive (s) feet of the outer
dripline of any oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, or naturalized California Pepper
tree.
[ ] The subject property contains one or more oak, walnu
naturalized California Pepper trees. The applicant t' sycamore, willow, or
and/or construction) will take place within five that activity (grading
ne
Of any oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, or naturalized California Pepper treof the outer e 1r A
Tree Permit has been or will be applied for prior to any activity taking place on
the property.
�-�� c �«��,
(Applicarrt's Signature;
D: WORD-LQJDA1FoRMSs TREF STATEMENT
(Date)
GF0VIFW R
WINDOWS 95/9B/700O/N I'I
blb
131816
GF0VIFW R
WINDOWS 95/9B/700O/N I'I
Grand Tseng Construction Corporation
PO BOX 5245
Hacienda Heights, CA 91745
J_L Tel: (626)'285-8879 Fax: (626) 369-0855
COLOR BOARD OWNER: JOHN & SOPHIA CHANG
ADDRESS: 22205 STEEPLECHASE TAMV
KEY DATE:
A
DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765
7-04-01
ROOF:
MATERIAL: SLATE
BLn TATWASSOCIATION
MF Diamond Bar, CA 91765
C
X-73 EGGSHELL (BASE 100)
SP 114-1 WHISPER
D
VINYL FRAME WINDOW
The Diamond Bar Country Estates Association Archi-
tectural Committee Vakog no exceptions tai the
covenants, Conditions and, Postrictions unless oth-
erwise stated ia writing nor does the Architectural
Committee take ato; (""'rPn'tion3 to the County of
Ws Aoqnles Building Depad.n,,=, or Building Wde
qr'otbor Goun�y-Ot Slate Roplatory
OrMPpi OVER [3 AMOVED AS NOTED
Q Di APPROVED RIESUBMIT
otj�CKED BY
COLOR: LA HABRA
TEXTURE: YES
MFGR: LA HABRA
X-73
PROD.
PAINT:
COLOR: SP114-1 WHISPER
MFGR: DUNN EDWARDSPAINT
WINDOW FRAM:
COLOR: WHITE
MFGR: SOLAR INDUSTRY
PAINT: ENTRY DOOR
COLOR: NATURAL 209
MFGR: MINWAX
EXHIBIT "A"
DR 2001-21, MCUP 2001-12
22205 STEEPLECHASE LANE
JANUARY 8, 2002
Project Meetings Schedule
January 8, 2002
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
COMMUNITY & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION
Case #
PM
Location
PC CC
PC CC
PROJECTS
1/8/02 1/8/02
CC PC 02 1/29/02 2/5/02 2/12/02 2/19/02
1/22
DEVELOPMENT CODE
DCA 2001-04
AJL
CITYWIDE
PH
AMENDMENT:
(Temporary uses for outdoor display/sales
events)
TSENG, ARTHUR
DR 2001-21
LKS
22205 STEEPLECHASE
PH
(Single Family Residence)
MCUP 2001-12
DEVELOPMENT CODE
DCA 2001-02
AIL
CITYWIDE
AMENDMENT
(COMMERICAL
Cont.
(Signs and Electronic Reader Board
DEVELOPMENT COMPLEXES
PH
within the C-3 Zone)
ADJACENT TO FREEWAY/
WITHIN C-3 ZONE
CINGULAR/THE CONSULTING
CUP 2001-04
AJL
2151 DIAMOND BAR BLVD
GROUP
Cont.
(Cell Site — St Dennis C arch)
+
pH
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS
Case #
PM
Location
DCM
DCM DCM
CLR ENTERPRISES
MCUP 2001-10
LKS
20627 GOLDEN SPRINGS
(Sale of Alcohol)
PH
PENDIN-r' PROJECTS
Case #
PM
Location
AB LES, JAMES
DR 2001-22
LKS
480 WAYSIDE PLACE
PROCESSING
ATLAN STAR/DIAMOND STAR
PLAZA
CSP 2001-01
AJL
20855 GOLDEN SPRINGS
PROCESSING
(Sign)
DEVELOPMENT CODE
DCA 2002-01
AIL
CITYWIDE
AMENDMENT
PROCESSING
(Computer Cafes)
HUANG, SAM & ANNIE
TP 2001-n'A
r uc
' ir- C mnrni r- T -
(Tree Removal)
--
i c�nx� G
PROCESSING
LEGEND
PH = PUBLIC HEARING
X = NON PUBLIC HEARING
Project Meetings Schedule
January 8, 2002
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
COMMUNITY & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
PENDING PROJECTS
Case #
PM
Location
(continued)
JCC — RICHARD GOULD
ADR 2001-15
2800 WATER COURSE
PROCESSING
(Single Family Residence)
JCC — RICHARD GOULD
MCUP 2001-14
LKS
2883 WATER COURSE
PROCESSING
(2 Story Gym with 1st Story Patio &
garage)
JMJR DESIGN
DR 2001-15
AJL
1194 CHISHOLM TRAIL
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
(Sin le Family Residence)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
LITTLE, ROBERT
MCUP 2000-9(l)
LKS
2102 ROCKY VIEW
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
(Second Unit Addition)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
MERICOM
MCUP 2001-11
AJL
21725 GATEWAY
PROCESSING
(Cell Site)
NOVAK & ASSOCIATES
CUP 2000-09
LDM
1155 S. DIAMOND BAR BL.
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
(Co -location Cell Site)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
S & W DEVELOPMENT
DR 2001-18
LDM/
22509 RIDGELINE ROAD
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
(Sin le Family Residence)
LKS
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
S & W DEVELOPMENT
DR 2001-23
LKS
22245 STEEPLECHASE
PROCESSING
(Remodel/Room Addition)
MCUP 2001-13
MV 2001-18
SAN YAO INTERNATIONAL
DR 2002-01
2492 INDIAN CREEK
PROCESSING
(Single Family Residence)
TP 2002-01
WALNUT VALLEY UNIFIED
GPA 2001-01
JDS
DIAMOND CREST LANE
PROCESSING
SCHOOL DISTRICT
DIAMOND BAR BL (Site D)
Land Use Designation Change
Planning Area -4 to Specific Plan
Public Facilities to Specific Plan
WANG, GARY
DR 2001-16
LKS
2760 STEEPLECHASE
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
(Sin le Family Residence)
TP 2001-02
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
WEST COAST ROOMS
MCUP 2001-09
LKS
1805 KIOWA CREST
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
(Room Addition)
MV 2001-14
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Project Meetings Schedule
January 8, 2002
PENDING PROJECTS
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
COMMUNITY & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Case # I PM I Location
WESTWOOD DESIGN DR 2001-19
(1,600 sq. ft. addition0 MV 2001-16
XM SATELLITE RADIO, INC. CUP 2000-10
(Co -location Cell Site — DB High School)
AJL 23646 PROSPECT VALLEY APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
LDM 21400 PATHFINDER APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
� -f0
O S (Q Glti
'ROFESS
= 45846
* Exp.1�3t z-
9
-�OP or
zd-,�
IJ
rJoT� q�rd� IF rldCfl
1>ztts wi LI'WrTo fV-ca1iKic 195'
4vih-' pr.C�.µ�f4G PIP--
r
ipes'
0 , rWE"L-
��,o., rti� � a„�a�� F+r Sfeclra r�-mas.
Glij
;Isry VAC
n 4-va
�KOS�ft �iVzet�S-
i"
+4. L' -1q*
Jc cZa 0 5x 5x1 - m oF- tLl
�41,A 6iP m cg 5o.2r--i-, ce*,91�
44 R6Bi� n-6v� r n 5
C -F C psrlo Sn1oo111 F-14
&aW Joint- "IV M6�'IG bC*p
GcR �Eu�ir�Torl
Ir�,l q��-ftl,�K�e?rmr.�r�Y
GxLFlo�l� Et11dM v�o(�{J
'rcF 1/5.r- e- 66a
90� ceM p�Tro �6-W�
9twt
GidctiTlG��PvA+I.OQ4,�F�20t'�
I�T. c�+Y (114) ott I-63�B
511./.
15. !r4
Id ,x,lq�ti ✓ "���� Fi� rJri4�
l3r�pSn
fre�
lG�rn/rso}
G�rt
xIL�
La
�I)
,}
'B�F=-r:IT�YI.?ta,
T
-
CaH--
I 1 I
_II
r�1 TIz�� �Tnw
p M'44l lrt v51,6+L ��
'jP�Ft.4 flu. /.4 b �c1ric-T1of�
—• W/3o'i 1�}- How..
f,br-Kt�L�+. pRe�Erl-��
I
--- �ssslJ�Jiarl
f'p?^ftTt-
ro SPQ �t�s
"SLE c2, !JrV� p ri�:
3-yi T+1K c�1c.. �, assE
{ GorJ c 6ar1D ,
rvz Go�o2. E r�+l .
G.J ��TS IlP•
r
.iAaiBS �s„t+;rc.� E conr7icji<D
s,0-�rx-ce-m 90 -
PFZWR T" f'oLLR
I 1
- I
I
I �
1
i
I
FX1177AI6
41;cw f}Dp/TlUh`
/fct�E 1S7.FL. Z�B Si,
,2N0. s. l 389 S.F. i
I 6,4KA&E- 4-245.4r.
AF7E5H .ADD/i/UN
fiOUSE , IST FL
2ND. FL, - J 3e'?
TO: it 4419 _. c7
6Al\AGE : 75a f.
s
lOt 6`!TS 77?1)C7 # -3,957dL07 51,6, 56eez S.F. i^1
ZOnUNS = D64 c R f I
�tI
Id
i
y
'I 1 5y Un - III
I
Ni
Y6�R1cpevli✓v�:i
} Ji jd h'EMuyE,p
U
_ 3
O N'
I aovas avita S7fP — ., I
/UO o
DINrN6 /iOUM
LI�/!Nv ROUPI -
z 6,4 GA,, 46,C
ifl rCfrr N
f/UOic'
r'.
uFF/C,
UZ�A
-,W
1-91
27307/170 e7lMd
WO0,v S//NOA
I
I
� I
I
WODz/
it� �w_#>i �a of «- - ---
/oON I NAY 1/Y/ I A/o0�
.`75
_poi-
It
7KV rx a 77HM M.7/✓ —7 =� 771M 915/X_
Q3,{Op fid' �9
,�il
M
n
�
I,
C/
Im
7F/ I
I
7 Huss
-
1-91
27307/170 e7lMd
WO0,v S//NOA
I
I
� I
I
WODz/
it� �w_#>i �a of «- - ---
/oON I NAY 1/Y/ I A/o0�
.`75
_poi-
It
7KV rx a 77HM M.7/✓ —7 =� 771M 915/X_
Q3,{Op fid' �9
,�il
d
2
2
O
2
2
ol
�
2
T
Z
2
2
2
cn
2
2
2 2
0 2
2
2
2 L
2
u
J
SOUTH ELEVATION,/4"= 1'- o"
M
NORTH ELEVATION S. 1/4'_ 1'_ 00
ST:
T,
I.
NO
FASC/A r WN/ T,= -
c
EAST ELEVATION -s: il,'=f-o'
Nil
A