HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/17/1992Next Resolution No. 92-16
AGENDA
.SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
AUDITORIUM
21865 E. COPLEY DRIVE
DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765
July 27, 1992
CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 pm
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Flamenbaum., Vice
Chairman MacBride, Grothe, Li and Meyer
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 voluntarv) . There is a five minute maximum time limit
when addressing the Planning Commission.
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:
1.- Minutes of July 13, 1992
2. Extension of Time for Conditional Use Permit No. 89-528 -
Resolution of Approval
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS:
3. ZCA No. 92-02 (Hillside Management Ordinance) : Introduction
4. ZCA No. 92-03 (Commercial Manufacturing Zone Amendments):
Introduction
PUBLIC HEARING:
5. Administrative Development Review No. 92-07 (APPEAL)
A request to appeal Administrative Development Review No.
92-7 to permit construciton of a 2,679 square foot -addition
to a single family residence located at 22215 Steeplechase
Lane in The Country.
.Applicant for ADR No. 92-07: Wayne Simonian
22215 Steeplechase Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Applicant for appeal: Kilpyung and Insook Auh
22225 Steeplechase Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
INFORMATION:
No items
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Staff
Planning Commissioners
ADJOURNMENT: August 10, 1992
i
I
PUBLIC HEARING:
5. Administrative Development Review No. 92-07 (APPEAL)
A request to appeal Administrative Development Review No.
92-7 to permit construciton of a 2,679 square foot -addition
to a single family residence located at 22215 Steeplechase
Lane in The Country.
.Applicant for ADR No. 92-07: Wayne Simonian
22215 Steeplechase Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Applicant for appeal: Kilpyung and Insook Auh
22225 Steeplechase Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
INFORMATION:
No items
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Staff
Planning Commissioners
ADJOURNMENT: August 10, 1992
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ?4
4?444�t'
tR JULY 13, 1992
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at
7:05 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management
District Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond
Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE: Chairman Flamenbaum.
ROLL CALL: commissioners: Meyer, Li, Grothe, Vice Chairman
MacBride, and Chairman Flamenbaum.
Also present were Community Development Director
James DeStefano, Associate Planner Robert Searcy,
Planning Technician Ann Lungu, Deputy City Attorney
Bill Curley, and Contract Secretary Liz Myers.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Motion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept the Minutes of
Min. of'June 22
June 22, 1992, as presented.
PUBLIC HEARING:
PT/Lungu presented the staff report regarding the
request, by the applicant Cal Comp Insurance
Variance
Company, for a Variance to approve an illuminated
No. 92-2
wall sign, with a sign face area of 100 square
feet, to be located on the north elevation of the
office building at 21700 E. Copley Drive, in the
Gateway Corporate Center. The design of the
building is such that tenants enter and exit their
suits by common isle ways, within the building,
'
which lead to the main and secondary entrances and.
exits. Individual tenants do not have direct
access from the exterior of the building to their
suites. As a result, per the Sign Ordinance, wall
signs are not permitted. Staff finds, after
analyzing this application, that there are no
special circumstances or exceptional
characteristics applicable to the subject property
'
that would allow the granting of this Variance.
Staff recommended that the Commission deny Variance
No. 92-2 with the Findings of Fact.
Chair/Flamenbaum noted that if the applicant had an
office door that opened to the outside, they would
be entitled to a sign without a variance. If the
Commission denys the variance, the applicant could
lease an area on the first floor, install a door,
and then qualify for the sign.
C/Grothe stated that, to his understanding, the
intent of the Sign Ordinance is to limit these
types of buildings, in general, to one building
identification sign so that there is not a list of
names across the top of that building for every
tenant that gets put in there. The building can
have one conforming sign on it, with the building
owners name or perhaps the major tenant.
July 13, 1992
Page 2
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Ben Reiling, of Zelman Development Company, 166
Hanover, the general partner of Diamond Bar
Business Associates, stated that it was their
understanding that the building was allowed a sign
on the face of the building. The sign meets all of
their rules and CC&Rs, and it was believed, with
the intent of the Sign Ordinance. He pointed out
that, following a strict reading of the Sign
Ordinance, a one story office building could have a
series of signs if it is designed so that each
tenant had a door. There is an inconsistency in
the Sign Ordinance that needs to be clarified in
the near future. It was their intention to have
one sign on the building, and identify it as the
Cal Comp building. In response to C/Meyer, he
stated that they have an elaborate detailed sign
program, that is part of the CC&Rls, for all of the
buildings in the Center.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
PT/Lungu, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum,
explained that, per staff's interpretation of the
sign code, Cal C6mp does not have the proper access
to the outside. However, Cal Comp can have a
business identification sign of 35 square feet, no
higher than 25 feet high off the ground.
CD/DeStefano explained that the former Planning
Commission, and the City Council that adopted the
ordinance, dealt with issues pertaining to limiting
the amount of signage, throughout the community, as
well as the quantity and size of wall signs,
particularly in these multi use centers. If the
tenant occupied the entire building, the sign would
have been approved. The variance can be approved
if the Commission feels that the variance is
warranted and the code is correct in its attempt to
put limitation on signage, or it can be approved
with direction to staff to modify the sign
ordinance because it has been 'improperly
interpreted, or because this Commission feels that
the ordinance itself is incorrect and should be.
amended.
Chair/ Flamenbaum reiterated that the sign at 100
sq. feet would meet the code requirement except for
the fact that the tenant's front door does not open
to the outside wall.
Chair/Grothe, as one of the members of the former
and present Planning Commission, stated that the
July 13, 1992 Page 3
original intent was that a building, with multiple
stories, and with multiple tenants, would get one
identification sign. He noted that, at that time,
he had suggested that the scale size of the sign
should increase as the stories go up.
Ben Reiling pointed out that the issue boils down
to determining where the front door is, the lobby
or at the top of the elevator. To his
interpretation, the front door is where mail is
delivered, which is inside of the lobby.
C/Meyer stated that a variance is not the proper
tool to resolve this problem. His interpretation
of the code is that they do have direct access out
to a public street, which is substantiated by the
Building Department's approval of the building.
The problem would be resolved if the Planning
Department took the same definition used by the
Building Department. Since the sign meets the
other criteria of the sign ordinance, it should be
approved, and staff should come back with some
modification of the sign ordinance that would make
staff more comfortable in their interpretation.
The interpretation of access needs to be expanded.
CD/DeStefano, pointing out that if it is agreed
that the elevator door is the same as the front
door, then a variance for this particular sign may
be needed, or the code changed, if the Commission
is concerned with the total amount of signage on a
building, because, as it is written, it allows for
every tenant to have up to 100 sq. ft. of signage.
Motion was made by Chair/ Flamenbaum and seconded by
C/Li to approve.the variance with the Findings of
Fact, and direct staff to redraft the sign
ordinance.
C/Grothe suggested that, instead of approving a
variance, the Commission could find this building,
and the signs on the building, to be inconformance
with the approved planned sign program, the CC&R Is.
VC/MacBride, noting that this park is the leader of
good taste and aesthetic approach to business in
this community, stated that they should not have to
request a variance on this matter.
The motion and it's second were withdrawn.
Motion was made by Chair/ Flamenbaum, seconded by
C/Meyer and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to find that the
Planning Commission has a contrary interpretation
July 13, 1992
Page 4
than that of staff, in regards to the Sign
Ordinance, and that a variance is not needed in
this particular circumstance, and to direct staff
to return to the Commission, in a timely manner,
with a revised Sign Ordinance.
AP/Searcy presented the staff report regarding two
requests: a one year extension of time for the
existing Conditional Use Permit 89-528 for the
development and expansion of the existing Honda
Dealership, construction of a car wash project, and
a MacDonalds Restaurant; and for an amendment to
the CUP 89-528 to allow a change from the
MacDonalds Restaurant to the Burger King
Restaurant.. AP/Searcy reviewed the components of
the application for Extension of Time, as presented
in the staff report. Staff recommended that the
Commission approve the Extension of Time.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Russell Hand, the owner of Diamond Bar Honda and
Tedrus Properties, reviewed the process for the
approval of the CUP, and the problems involving
L.A. County and the City of Industry regarding the
sewer connection. He explained that MacDonalds
backed out of their lease, but fortunately the
Burger King franchise would like to come in and
take MacDonalds place. He stated that so far he
has put in a box culvert, at a cost of $280,000,
graded. for the plans for the car wash and the
MacDonalds, and put up retaining walls. He would
like to pave, grade, and landscape the one lot that
is vacant, and use it as employee parking for the
time being. In response to C/Li, he stated that he
has paid $140,000 to bring a 161' main across the
road, and he will have to pay an additional $80,000
for three fire hydrants. In response to C/Meyer,
he stated that he did the culvert before the tract
map. The sewer lin connection was for the approval
of the CUP. The tract map has been recorded.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
Motion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Extension of
Time for the existing CUP.
AP/Searcy reviewed the components of the
application for the amendment of the CUP, as
presented in the staff report. Staff has not had a
chance to review the plans for the revised play
ground recreation area because it was submitted
late Friday. Staff has some concerns regarding the
A, 9
%%Z1V
July 13, 1992 Page 5
internal circulation of the project, the parking
area, the location of the trash enclosure on site,
and signage. It is recommended that the Commission
direct the applicant to work with staff in
redesigning the Burker King restaurant to improve
the internal circulation and parking situation, and
to bring the project back to the Commission at the
appropriate time for the CUP and the Development
Review.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
C/Grothe indicated that a simple name change
appears to be a minor modification that doesn't
really need to come before the Commission.
AP/Searcy explained that the City Council was
explicit that any change in that user would have to
require an amendment to the CUP. He further
explained that the site plan and the site
configuration has changed from the approved
location of the MacDonald's restaurant.
In response to VC/MacBride, AP/Searcy confirmed
that the problems with the internal circulation
arises from the change. in the restaurant
orientation. Staff also has concerns regarding the
access for the drive-through, and its proximity to
the exitat' Brea Canyon, and 'concerns with the
width and length of the driveway. However, it is
not felt that these concerns are not
insurmountable.
Russell Hand noted that the Burger King franchisees
and the architect are present to answer any
questions. They have already redesigned the plans,
following staff's suggestions.
Chair/Flamenbaum stated that he would encourage
that the addresses of the carwash and restaurant be
Grand Ave. so that they are easily located.
Charles Cobb, representing Card Investments, 2711
S. Diamond Bar Blvd., stated that they are anxious
to move ahead with the project, and had hoped to
get the CUP approval tonight because most of the
issues seemed to be relatively minor. The building
orientation was changed to conform better with the
type of building because the interior layout, and
the drive-through layout is. different from
MacDonalds restaurant.
CD/DeStefano suggested that the Commission not
approve the CUP without knowing the specific issues
July 13, 1992
Page 6
in the Development Review. A more appropriate
alternative would be•to direct the staff and the
applicant to work closely together to resolve all
of these problems and bring back a complete package
to the Commission.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
dhair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 8:30 p.m.
to allow the Commission time to review the
MacDonalds plans as compared to the presently
proposed plans. The meeting was reconvened at 8:40
p.m.
CD/DeStefano stated that, because of prior
commitments and available manpower, staff will need
30 days to review the proposed changes.
C/Grothe requested staff to bring, to the
Commission's attention, any differences to the
signage.
C/Meyer requested that the following be explored:
the increasing of landscaped areas, by reducing the
amount of asphalt areas, which in turn could also
be used for additional parking; . minimizing
reflectivity; and minimizing runoff.
C/Grothe stated that there should be adequate
pedestrian walkways provided between the
facilities.
Motion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the public
hearing to the August 10, 1992 meeting, with
direction to staff to work with the applicant, and
to include those issues previously indicated by the
Commission.
NEW BUSINESS: PT/Lungu presented the staff report regarding
staff's analysis and interpretation of the County
Analysis of of Los Angeles Planning and Zoning Code, adopted by
distance between the City, and the interpretation of the Uniform
accessory and Building Code pertaining to the distance between
main bldg. accessory and main buildings. The staff report
included information to assist the Commission in
understanding how staff interprets the Planning and
Building Code relative to the separation of a main
structure and an accessory structure (i.e. pools).
Staff interpretation follows the main office
interpretation, which is a 6 foot setback.
.CD/DeStefano stated that staff is looking for a
setback that is safe, and is recommending that
a
U-1100711
July 13, 1992 Page 7
there be at least a 3 feet separation between the
structure and the waterline for safety reasons.
Staff is looking for direction from the Commission.
C/Meyer explained that he had requested this item
to be on the agenda because he does not see where
the public interest is with respect to requiring a
setback of a swimming pool to a structure. The
definition of the Zoning Code needs clarification
because the way it is written requires that all
accessory structures, which- could include such
items as pools, air conditioners, dog houses,
sheds, etc., be 6 feet from the main structure. He
suggested that the code be so interpreted so that
it does not apply to substructures, such as pools,
and that it only applies to permanent structures.
DCA/Curley suggested that the Commission direct
staff to come up with an interpretation, matching
the Commission's intent, using the language as it
exists in the code. It could be brought back so
that the.commission can adopt it as a policy.
The commission concurred to so direct staff.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Meyer commended staff on their job well done on
putting together a Commission package, particularly
with the General Plan still in process.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by VC/MacBride, seconded by
C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the
meeting at 9:05 p.m.
Respectively,
James DeStefano
Secretary
Attest:
Bruce Flamenbaum
Chairman
RESOLUTION NO. 92-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A ONE (1)
YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89-
528, A GRANT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN EXPANSION TO THE
EXISTING DIAMOND BAR HONDA DEALERSHIP, A McDONALDS
RESTAURANT, AUTOMATED CAR WASH, AND FREESTANDING SIGNS
OVER SIX (6) FEET IN HEIGHT ON A 4.8 ACRE SITE LOCATED AT
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF GRAND AVE.AND BREA CANYON ROAD
AND NORTH OF THE STATE ROUTE 60 FREEWAY, DIAMOND BAR,
CALIFORNIA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
(i) Russell Hand of Tedrus Properties 525 S. Grand
Ave., Diamond Bar, California, has heretofore filed a request for
a one (1) year extension of a Conditional Use Permit 89-528 as de-
scribed in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Res-
olution, the subject request for extension of time shall be refer-
red to as "the application".
(ii) On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State
of California. On said date, pursuant to the requirements of the
California Government Code Section 57376, Title 21 and 22, the
City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No.
1, thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances
of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles
County Code contains the Development Code of the County of Los
Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, in-
cluding the subject application, within the City of Diamond Bar.
(iii) On July 13, 1992 the Planning Commission of the
City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the
application and concluded said public hearing on the same date.
(iv) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this
Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Plan-
ning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds
that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
and determines that, based upon the findings set
forth below, no significant adverse environmental
effects will occur.
3. Based on the substantial evidence presented to
this Commission during the above -referenced public
hearing on July 13, 1992 and concluded on the same
date, including written and oral staff reports,
together with public testimony, and in conformance
with the terms and provisions of California Gov-
ernment Code Sections 65360, this Commission here-
by specifically finds as follows:
(a) The application applies to property located
at 525 South Grand Ave., Diamond Bar with a
gross area of 4.8 acres and is zoned C -3 -DP -
BE.
(b) Properties to the north, east and west are
undeveloped and zoned for industrial develop-
ment and to the south the site is bounded by
the SR 57 and SR 60 Interchange.
(c) The applicant's request is for an extension
of time to exercise Conditional Use Permit
89-528.
(d) The subject property is partially developed
with an automobile dealership and is in the
process of being graded.
(e) The site is sufficient in size and can pro-
vide adequate ingress and egress to allow
commercial development.
(f) Granting the extension of time for the condi-
tional use permit with conditions and rest-
rictions hereinafter mentioned is not in
conflict with any components of the General
Plan;
The location of the proposed land use does,
not adversely affect the health, peace, com-
fort or welfare of persons residing or work-
ing in the surrounding area, and will not be
materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment,
or valuation of property of other persons lo-
cated in the vicinity of the site, and will
not jeopardize, endanger, or otherwise con-
stitute a menace to the public health, safety
or general welfare.
5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in
paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission
hereby approves the application subject to the
following:
1. The one (1) year Extension of Time is approved
as requested. All conditions of approval for Con-
ditional Use Permit 89528 are in full force and
effect unless expressly stated herein.
2. The applicant must forthwith transmit a nota-
rized Affidavit of Acceptance to the Community De-
velopment Department prior to this grant becoming
effective.
6. The Planning Commission Secretary shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Reso-
lution, to Russell Hand at the address as set
forth on the application.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JULY, 1992 BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
BY:
Bruce Flamenbaum, Chairman
ATTEST
James DeStefano, Secretary
I, James DeStef ano, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the
City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolu-
tion was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Com-
mission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission opened on the 13th day of July, 1992, and con-
cluded on the same date by the following vote -to -wit:
AYES: [COMMISSIONERS:]
NOES: [COMMISSIONERS:]
ABSTAIN: [COMMISSIONERS:]
RES89528.RES.1992
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR'
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 23, 1992
TO: Chairman and Planning Commissioners
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Direg"
SUBJECT: Agenda Item #3 - Zoning Code Amendment ZCA No. 92 -
(Hillside Management Ordinance)
BACKGROUND: On October 16, 1990, pursuant to the provisions of
Government Code Section 65858, the City Council adopted Ordinance
No. 14 (1990) adopting interim zoning regulations pertaining to
development of hillside areas which exceed a slope of 100. The
purpose of the ordinance was to preserve and protect views to and
from hillside areas, to maintain an environmental equilibrium, to
facilitate hillside preservation through appropriate development
standards and guidelines, to insure that development in hillside
areas was concentrated in those areas with the least environmental
impact and designed to fit the existing landforms, to preserve
significant features of natural topography, to provide a safe means
of ingress and egress within hillside areas, to correlate intensity
of development with the steepness of terrain, to' provide
alternative approaches to conventional flatland development
practices, and to encourage the addition of health and safety
measures within proposed hillside projects.
In September of 1991, the City Council extended the ordinance until
October 16, 1992. The recently adopted General Plan provides a
wealth of environmental and hillside protection goals and
strategies. It is now appropriate for the Planning Commission and
City Council to consider the adoption of a permanent hillside
management ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
review the attached Hillside Management Ordinance and be prepared
to discuss the issues and any possible areas of change deemed
appropriate by the Planning Commission. A public hearing has been
advertised for the Planning Commission meeting of August 10, 1992,
for purposes of adopting the Hillside Management Ordinance.
Attachment: City of Diamond Bar Interim Hillside Management
Ordinance
JDS\mco
ORDINANCE NO."14-B (1990)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR EXTENDING THE TERM OF AN INTERIM ZONING
ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE NO. 14 (1990) PURSUANT TO THE
PROVISIONS OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
65858 AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
(i) On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State
of California and,. on that date, the City Council adopted, by
reference, the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the
City, including Title 22 thereof pertaining to Planning and Zoning
Regulations for the City of Diamond Bar. (Hereinafter said Title
22 shall be referred to as "the Zoning ordinance.") .
(ii) On October 16, 1990, pursuant to the provisions
of California Government Code Section 65858 (a), this City Council
adopted its Ordinance . No. 14 (1990) adopting interim zoning
regulations pertaining to development involving hillside areas
which exceed a slope of ten percent (10%) within the City.
(iii) Pursuant to the provisions - of California
Government Code Section 65858 (d) this
City Council issued. its
written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the
conditions which led to the adoption of Ordinance No. 14 (1990) and
Ordinance No. 14-A (1990) at least ten (10'
days prior to the
expiration of Ordinance No., 14 (1990) and ordinance No. 14-A
(1990).
(iv) A duly noticed public hearing as required by
California Government Code 'Section 65858 (a) was conducted and
concluded prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 14-A (1990) and
this ordinance.
(v) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this
ordinance have occurred.
B. ordinance.
The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does.ordain
as follows:
Section. 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds
that all the facts wet forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this
Ordinance are true and correct.
Section 2. The City Council hereby finds and determines.
that the adoption of this Ordinance is categorically exempt from
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder
pursuant to Section 15305. of Division 6 of Title 14 of the
California Code of Regulations.
Section 3. The City Council finds and determines that
the development of proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance are
continuing; however, such development of amendments to the Zoning
ordinance cannot be completed prior to the expiration of Ordinance
No. 14 (1990) and Ordinance No. 14-A (1990).
Section 4. The City Council hereby specifically finds
that there are presently pending applications for development of
hillside areas which exceed a slope of ten percent (10%) which
would contradict the ultimate goals and objectives of the General
Plan and would not be subject to adequate local review under the
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance unless Ordinance NO. 14 (1990)
is extended and, further, that the approval of any such hillside
developments under the current provisions of the Zoning Ordinance
would result in an immediate threat to the public health, safety or
F
welfare of persons and property within the City of Diamond Bar.
Section 5. Ordinance No. 14 (1990) of the city of Diamond
Bar, as heretofore enacted under the authority of California
Government Code section 65858 (a), hereby is extended and shall be
of no further force and effect as of the 16th day of October, 1992.
Section 6. This Ordinance hereby is declared to be an
urgency measure pursuant to the terms of California Government Code
Sections 65858 (a) and 36937 (b) , and this Ordinance shall take
effect immediately upon adoption.
Section 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption
of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted in three
(3) public places within the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the
provisions- of Resolution No. 89-6.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 17th day of September, 1991.
Mayor
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar,
do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a
regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held
on the 17th day of September, 1991, and was finally passed at a -
regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held
on the 17th day of September, 1991, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Papen, Nardella,
Kim, Forbing
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT:- COUNCIL MEMBERS: Werner
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ATTEST ,7
Burgess, Lyn Burt s,
��City Clerk
of the City of Diamond Bar
' �+.,x - rs. , r. L.L:.`�.LG:.:x...>_.=,_r3,...t � - F� _.....::.:��i. _, s. -i#.. � .._� . _ _.-....y _ ..� ,_. �! �.: ... , ,
• �' ..
� �
EXHIBIT "All
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR INTERIM HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
Section 1. Statement of Purpose.
The purpose of this ordinance is:
A. To preserve and protect the views to and from hillside areas in
order to maintain the identity, image and environmental quality of
the City of Diamond Bar;
B. To maintain an environmental equilibrium consistent with the native
vegetation, animal life, geology, slopes,•and drainage patterns;
C. To facilitate hillside preservation through appropriate development
standards and guidelines of hillside areas. The guidelines are not
intended to be strict standards, but rather to provide direction
and encourage development which is sensitive to the unique
characteristics common to hillside properties, which include, but
are not limited to slopes, land form, vegetation and scenic
quality. Innovation in design is encouraged as long as the end
result is one which respects the hillside and is consistent with
the purposes expressed in this section and in the goals and
objectives of the General Plan;
D. To' ensure' that development in the hillside areas shall. be
concentrated in those areas with the least environmental impact and
shall be designed to fit the existing land form;
E. To preserve significant features of the natural topography,
including swales, canyons, knolls, ridgelines, and rock outcrops.
Development may necessarilyaffect natural features by, for
example, roads crossing ridgelines. Therefore, a major design
criterion shall be the minimization of such impacts;
F. To provide a saf e means of ingress and egress for vehicular and
pedestrian traffic to and within hillside areas, with minimum
disturbance to the natural terrain;.
G. To correlate intensity of development with the steepness of terrain
in order .to minimize grading,. removal of vegetation, land
instability and fire hazards;
H. To provide in hillsides, alternative approaches to conventional
flat land development practices by achieving land use patterns and
.intensities that are consistent with the natural characteristics of
hill areas such as slopes, land .form, vegetation and scenic
quality; and
I To encourage the planning, design and development of home sites
that provide maximum safety with respect to fire* hazards, exposure
to geological and geotechnic hazards, drainage, erosion and
siltation, and materials of construction; provide the best use of
natural terrain; and to prohibit development what will create or
increase fire, flood, slide, or other safety hazards to public
health, welfare, and safety..
Section 2. Hillside Management District.
All property which contains grades in excess. of lo% shall comply with
the following:
A. Definitions: The following definitions shall apply to this Section:
CONTOUR: A line drawn on a plan which connects all points of
equal elevation.
CONTOUR GRADING: A grading technique designed to result in earth
forms which resemble natural terrain characteristics. Horizontal
and vertical curve variations are often used for slope banks.
Contour grading does not necessarily minimize the amount of cut and
fill occurring.
CUT: 'The mechanical removal of earth material.
CUT AND FILL: The excavating of earth material in one place and
depositing of it as fill in an adjacent place.
DRIVEWAY: A means of access over private property to a single
residential unit.
EFFECTIVE BULK: The effective visual bulk of a structure when
seen from a distance of from below.
ELEVATION* Height or distance above sea level.
EROSION: The process by which the soil and rock components of the
earth's crust are worn away and removed from one place to another
by natural forces such as wind and water.
FILL: A deposit of earth material placed by artificial means.
FINISH GRADE: The final elevation of the ground surface after
development, which is in conformity with the approved plan.
GRADING: 'To bring an existing surface to a designed form by
excavating, filling, or smoothing -operations.
HILLSIDE: Refers to a parcel oflandwhich contains grades in
excess of ld%.
NATURAL SLOPE: A slope which is not man-made. A natural slope
may retain natural vegetation during adjacent grading operations or
it may be partially or completely removed and replanted.
PAD: A level area created by grading to accommodate development.
RIDGE: A long, harrow, conspicuous elevation of land.
ROADWAY: A means of access over private property to more than
one residential unit.
SLOPE: An inclined ground surface, the inclination of which is
expressed as a ratio of horizontal distance (run) to vertical
distance (rise), or change in elevation. The percent of any given
slope is determined by dividing the rise by the run, multiplied by
100.
SLOPE, MAN-MADE: A manufactured slope consisting wholly or
partially of either cut or filled material.
SLOPE TRANSITION: The area where a slope bank meets the natural
terrain or a level graded area either vertically or horizontally.
PROMINENT RIDGE: A ridge or hill location which is visible from
a major arterial, secondary, or collector street, which forms part
of the skyline or is seen as a distinct edge against a backdrop of
land at least 300 feet horizontally behind it, or is so designated
by the Plannning Director.,
B. Hillside Designation
The following are standards for hillside slope categories to ensure
that development will complement the character and topography of
n
the land. The standards for one category may be applied to limited
portions of the property in an adjacent category when a project is
developed on property in more than one slope category.
Slope Catego t. Natural Sloe Site Standards
1. 10 to 14.9 Special hillside architectural and
design techniques that minimize
grading are required
in these Slope Categories.
2. 15 to 19.9 Structures shall conform to the
natural.topography and natural grade
by using techniques such as split
level foundations of greater than 18
inches, stem walls, stacking and
clustering. Conventional grading may
be considered by the city for
limited portions of a project when
its plan includes special design
features, extensive open space or
significant use of green belts.
3. 20 to 24.9 Development within this category
shall be restricted to those sites
where it can be shown that safety,
environmental and aesthetic impacts
can be minimized. Use of large lots,
variable setbacks and variable
building structural techniques such
as stepped foundations are 'expected.
Structures shall be designed to
minimize the visual impact of their
bulk and height. The shape,
materials, and colors of structures
shall blend with the natural
environment. The visual and physical
impact of driveways and roadways
shall be minimized by eliminating
sidewalks, and reducing their widths
to the minimum required for
emergency access and following
natural contours, using grade
separations where necessary and
otherwise minimizing grading.
4. 25 and over. This is an excessive slope condition
and development is extremely
limited.
C. Density,
The maximum 'number of residential dwelling units -which may be
permitted to be constructed on a given p'arcel of'land shall be the
calculated development limit less' the number eliminated due to
environmental constraints as determined Pursuant to this ordinance.
Minimum Percent of Site to Remain in Natural.
Average Percent State (No cut or Fill) or Be Developed Solely
Slope of Site For Recreational Purposes
0.0 14.9%
15.0 17.4%
17.5 19.9%
20.0 22.4%
22.5 24.9%
25.0 27.4%
27.5 - 29.9%
30.0 - 32.9%
32.5 - 34.9%
35.0 and above %
32.5 %
40.0%
47.5%
55.0%
62.5%
70.0%
77.5%
85.0%
92.5%
100.0%
RATIO RUN/RISE
PERCENT RISE/RUN
OEGREE ANGLE BETWEEN RUN b RISE
C:
RUN
Figure to Slope ratio percent slope -and degree of slope are shown for
some hillsides of varying steepness
RUT{ (HORIZONtAL)
0
1. Environmental Constraints - The maximum number of residential
dwelling units shall be further reduced by the impact of the
following development constraints, as determined by
environmental assessment, unless such development constraints
can. be'shown to have been eliminated or mitigated to the
satisfaction of the Planning Commission or the City Council on
appeal:
a. Land areas subject to inundation during a loo -year storm.
b. Land areas which ,.have been subject to wild fire.
C. Land areas which are above the hillside view line.
d. Land areas which are. subject to geologic hazard,
landslide and debris over flow.
e. Land areas which lie within'a federally recognized blue
line stream, or which contain significant riparian stream
bed habitats or other. established plant formations which
constitute a significant -natural feature or ecosystem or
which contain rare.or endangered species.
f. Significant vegetation formations and habitat areas.
9- Land areas which are within 100 feet of a significant
ridgeline or hiking trail.
h. Land areas -containing significant archaeologic or
historic sites.
2. Exemption - Other provis*ions of this subsection to the
contrary notwithstanding, lots of record as of the date of
adoption of this ordinance shall be entitled to a minimum of
one dwelling unit.
3. Administration: This ordinance shall be administered in
conjunction with the provisions of Chapter 22.56 of the
Diamond Bar Municipal Code. Where a conflict or inconsistency
exists, the more restrictive regulation shall apply.
D. Uses Permitted.
Subject to conditional use permit, the uses and structures
permitted by the Hillside Management Ordinance shall be those uses
permitted in the underlying base district.
E. Hillside Management Standards and Guidelines.
The following Hillside Management Standards and Guidelines are
intended to ensure the appropriate management of hillside areas.
The Standards are requirements for the use, development, or
alteration of land in Hillside areas. The Guidelines are to be
utilized to provide direction to encourage development which is
sensitive to the unique characteristics common to hillside
properties. The purpose for the Guidelines is to protect existing
hillsides and to encourage innovation, to the extent that is, the
end result, is one which respects the/hillside and is consistent
with the goals and policies of this ordinance. The Guidelines
shall be used by the Planning Commission and the City Council in
evaluating those development proposals for which it is proposed to
go -beyond the minimum standards herein specified.
Exceptions to the standards specified herein may be approved,
pursuant to the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process, when the
approving agency determines that such exceptions are not materially
injurious to the intent of the standards and guidelines set forth
herein. In granting any such exception, the approving agency shall
set forth appropriate findings specifying the facts supporting its
determination.
In granting any such exception, the approving agency shall set
forth appropriate findings setting forth the facts supporting its
determination.
"Where the Planning Commission determines that the literal
enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance for parcels which
may be foo small and of a configuration which would create a
R
hardship, the Commission may vary from the standards contained
herein; provided that a variation from the strict application of
the Code be accompanied by reduction in the maximum permitted
density to the extent deemed necessary to maintain the intent of
the ordinance.
Variations may include modifications of the setback requirements to
achieve clustering of development on the parcel, in order to main-
tain the grading, drainage, siting and. circulation objectives of
the ordinance; except that residential structures shall be sited
and designed 'in a manner which will, in the judgment of the
Planning Director, maintain a vertical and horizontal distance from
other residential structures which will provide a reasonable degree
of privacy, light and air between residential structures."
"Where development is proposed for a parcel which adjoins one or
more vacant, developable parcels, cooperation of the respective
property- owners is encouraged in the planning of the road network,
utilities plan and open space program for the area as a whole. The
City shall consider variations from the strict application of the
provisions of this ordinance as may be needed to achieve
cooperation among all contiguous property owners of vacant,
developable properties, to the extent that such variation may
better achieve the objectives of this Ordinance".
Section 3. Application Filing Requirements.
A. A natural features map, which shall identify all existing slope
banks, ridgelines, canyons, natural drainage courses, federally
recognized blue line' streams, rock outcroppings, and existing
vegetation. Also depicted shall be landslides and other existing.
geologic hazards.
B. A conceptual grading plan, which shall include the following -items
in addition to those required by the Municipal Code or as part of
the Submittal Requirement Checklist:
1. A legend with appropriate symbols which should include, but
not be limited to, the following items: top of wall, top of
curb, high point, low point, elevation of significant trees,
spot elevations, pad and finished floor elevations, and change
in direction of drainage.
2: A separate map with proposed fill areas colored in green and
cut areas colored in red, with areas where cut and fill exceed
depths established in the hillside development guidelines and
standards clearly shown. Additionally, the areas of cut and
fill, calculated as a percentage of the total site area, shall
be included on the plan.
3. Contours shall be shown for existing and natural land
conditions and proposed work. Existing contours shall be
depicted with a dashed line with every fifth contour darker,
and proposed contours shall be depicted as above except with
a solid line. Contours shall be shown according to the
following schedule:
7
Natural Slope
0% to 20%
Above 20%
Maximum Interval Feet
2
5
C. A conceptual drainage and flood control facilities map describing
- _____ planned drainage improvements.
D. A Slope Analysis map for the purpose of determining the amount and
location of land as it exists in its natural state falling into
each slope category as specified below. For the slope map, the
applicant shall use a base topographical map of the subject site,
prepared and signed by a registered civil engineer or licensed land
surveyor, which shall have a scale of not less than 1 inch to 100
feet and a contour interval of not more than 2 feet provided that
the contour interval may be 5 feet when the slope is -more than 20
percent. This base topographical map shall include all adjoining
properties within 150 feet of the site boundaries. Delineate slope
bands in the range of to .10 percent, 10 up to 15 percent, 15 up to
20 percent, 20 up to 25 percent, 25 up to 30 percent, 30% to 35%
and 35 percent or greater. Also included shall be a tabulation of
the land/area in each slope category specified in acres.
E:]
Combining -B. and 'C-
not 2 permitted
is
calculation
20,
30*
Slope •8'
Slope
30,
Slope 'A-
100,
SLOPE FORMULA
'Cro'
Average :S:s slope - slope
5'/100• = .05 5%
- slope
301/20, = 150%
- Slope 'C-
6'130- .:Z = 20%
E:]
N
The exact method for. computing the percent slope and area of each
slope category should be sufficiently described and presented so
that a review can be readily made. Also, a heavy, solid line
indicating the 8 percent grade differential shall be clearly marked
on the plan, and an additional copy of the map shall be submitted
with the slope percentage categories depicted in contrasting
colors.
E. Provide a sufficient number of slope profiles to clearly illustrate
the extent of the proposed grading. A minimum of 3 slope profiles
shall be included with the slope analysis. The slope profiles
shall:
1 Be drawn at the same scale and indexed, or keyed, to the slope
analysis map, grading plan, and project site map.
2. show existing and proposed topography, structures, and
infrastructures. Proposed topography, structures, and
infrastructures shall be drawn with a solid, heavy line.
Existing topography and features shall be drawn with a -thin or
dashed line.
3. The slope pro . file shall extend far enough from the project
site boundary to clearly show impact on adjacent property, at
least 150 feet.
4. The profiles shall be drawn along those locations of the
I project site where:
(a) The greatest alteration of existing topography is
proposed; and,
(b) The most intense or bulky development is proposed; and,
(c) The site is most visible from surrounding land uses; and,
(d) At all site boundaries illustrating maximum and minimum
conditions.
5. At least two of the slope profiles shall be roughly parallel
to each other and roughly perpendicular to existing contour
lines. At least one other slope profile shall be roughly at a
45 degree angle to the other slope profiles and existing
contour lines.
F. Both the slope analysis and sl . ope profiles shall be stamped and
signed by either a registered landscape architect, civil engineer,
or land surveyor indicating the datum, source, and scale of
topographic data used in the slope analysis and slope profiles, and
attesting to the fact that the slope analysis and slope profiles
have been accurately calculated and identified.
9
-prepared. an .:approved soils
G. -A geologic and :'soils *keportt' :
engineering firm and in sufficient detail to substantiate and
support' the design concepts presented in the— application as
submitted. Additional environmental studies and investigations,
such as, but not. limited to, hydrologic, 'seismic,
access/ circulation, and biota research may also be required in
order to help in the determination of the buildable area of a site.
H. A statement of conditions for ultimate ownership and maintenance of
all parts of the development including streets, structures and open
spaces.
I. In the event that no grading is proposed, i.e., custom- lot
subdivision, a statement to that effect shall be filed with a plan
which shows possible future house plotting, lot grading, driveway
design- and septic system location for each parcel proposed, to be
prepared on a topographic map drawn at the same scale as the
conceptual grading plan.
J. When unit development is proposed, illustrative building
elevations, that show all sides of the proposed structure(s) and
which accurately depict the building envelope for each lot, shall
be provided.
K. The following items may be required if determined necessary by the
Planning Director or Planning Commission to aid in the analysis of
the proposed project to illustrate existing or proposed conditions
or both:
1. A topographic model;
2. A line of sight or view analysis;
3. Photographic renderings;
4. Any other illustrative technique determined necessary to aid
in review of a project.
L. Exceptions to the filing requirements shall be determined by the
Planning Director.
Sect -ion 4. Public'SafetV Standards.
A. Fire Protection Standards
1. Residential developments shall be constructed in 'such a manner
so as to reduce the potential for spread of brushfire through
consideration of the following:
a. 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.
10
b. 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.
d. Balconies, patio roofs, eaves and other similar overhangs
shall be of noncombustible construction or shall be
protected by fire-resistant . material pursuant to the
Building Code.
2. Residential developments shall be constructed with adequate
water -supply and pressure . for all proposed development in
accordance 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.
4. Fuel modification areas shall incorporate soil erosion.,and
spdiment control measures to alleviate permanent scarring..'and
accelerated erosion.
5. 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, he may suspend
enforcement thereof and require reasonable alternative
measures designed to advance the purposes of this ordinance.
6. In the event the abatement is not performed as required in
subsection C of this section, the City Council may instruct
the Fire Marshal to give notice to the owner of the'property
upon which said condition exists to correct such prohibited
condition and, if the owner fails to correct such condition,
the City Council may cause the same to be done and make the
expense of such correction a lien on the property upon which
such conditions exist.
7. -Require special construction features in the design of
structures where site investigations confirm potential
geologic hazards.
11
B. Gradinq
The following standards define basic grading techniques which are
consistent with the ordinance and avoid unnecessary cut and fill.
Limitations on project -grading amounts and configurations will be
decided on a case-by-c,ase basis under the conditional use process.
1. Standards.
a. No finished slopes greater than fifty percent (50% or
2:1) may be created except beneath a structure where the
maximum created slope is limited to sixty-seven percent
(670 or Ik:1) or less.
b. Grading shall be phased so that prompt revegetatio ' n or
construction will control erosion. Where possible, only
those areas which will be built on, resurfaced, or land-
scaped shall be disturbed. Top soil shall be stockpiled
during rough grading an used on cut and fill slopes.
Revegetation of cut and fill slopes shall occur within
three (3) months to the satisfaction of the City.
C. Grading operations shall be planned to avoid the rainy
season, October 15 to April 15. Grading permits shall
only be issued when a plan for erosion control and silt
retention has been approved by the City Engineer without
regard to time of year.
d. No excavation or other earth disturbance shall be
permitted on any hillside area prior to the issuance of
a grading permit with the exception of drill holes and
exploratory trenches for the collection of geologic and
soil data. These trenches are to be.properly backfilled
oi
and in addition, erosion treatment provided where slopes
exceed twenty (20) percent.
e. No point on any structure'subject to the provisions of
this Section shall be closer to a prominent ridge than
one hundred (100) feet measured horizontally on a
topographic map or fifty (50) feet measured vertically on
a cross section, whichever is more restrictive. And in no
case, shall - the roof line or any other portion of a
structure extend above the line of sight between a ridge
line and any public right of way, whether said ridgeline
is above or below the right of way.
f. Lot pad grading is limited to the boundaries of the
structure's foundation, vehicle parking space and a yard
area as shown on the approved grading plan.
12
g. Cut slopes for purposes of establishing building pads
shall not exceed twenty (20) 'feet in height and fill
slopes shall not exceed eight (8) feet in depth at any
point on the site.
h. Retaining walls associated with lot pads are limited to:
i. Upslope (from the structure) walls not to exceed
four (4) feet in height. Terraced retaining
structures may be utilized which are separated by a
minimum of three (3) feet and appropriate
landscaping.
ii. Downslope (from the structure) walls not to exceed
three and 1/2 (3 1/2) feet in height. Where an
additional retained portion is necessary due to
unusual or extreme conditions, (such as lot
configuration, steep slope or road design) then the
use of terraced retaining structures - shall be
considered on an individual lot basis. Terraced
walls shall not exceed three (3) feet in height and
shall be separated by a minimum of three (3) feet
and appro-priate landscaping. Terracing shall not
be used as a typical solution within a development.
iii .,Retaining walls which are an integral part of -the
structure shall not exceed eight (8) - feet in
height. Their visual impact shall be mitigated
through contour grading and landscape techniques.
i. Lot lines shall be placed two feet beyond top of major
slope areas within public view corridors to help ensure
their maintenance by the downhill owner.
2. Guidelines.
a. Contour grading techniques should be used to provide a
variety of slope percentage and slope direction in a
three dimensional undulating pattern similar to existing,
adjacent terrain. Hard edges left by cut and fill
operations should be given a rounded appearance that
closely resembles the adjacent natural contours.
b. Where possible, graded areas should be designed with
manufactured slopes located on the uphill side of
structures, thereby, hiding the slope behind the
structure.
13
THIS
Larger manufactured slopes should
be located on the uphill side of the
structure to reduce the a ppe arance
of gradlog from the street
Slopes should be rounded to
provide a more natural appearanco
W/1
Street
—41
NOT THIS
Street
3. Retainincr walls are limited to:
a. One upslope (from the structure) not to exceed 4 feet in
height. Otherwise, terraced retaining structures shall
be utilized which are separated by a minimum of 3 feet
and.appropriate lands'c,aping.
THIS
NOT THIS
3
-7417'1�7
or.
3' min*
r
'14' max
14
b. one downslope . from the structure not to exceed 3 1/2 2 feet
in height. , Where an additional retained portion is
necessary due to unusual or extreme conditions, (such as
lot configuration, steep slope, or road design) then the
use of terraced retaining structures shall be considered
on an individual lot basis. Terraced walls shall. no
exceed 3 feet in height and shall be separated by a
minimum of 3 feet and appropriate landscaping. Terracing
is not to be used as a typical solution within a
development.
C. on lots sloping with the street, and other configurations
not discussed above, one retaining wall, not to exceed 3
1/2 feet in height may be used in a side yard where
necessary (also see roadway).
d. Walls which are an integral part of the structure may
exceed 8 feet in height; however, their visual impact
shall be mitigated through contour grading and landscape
techniques.
4. The following factors shall be taken into consideration in the
design of a project:
a. When space and proper drainage requirements can be met
with approval by the City Engineer, rounding of slope
tops and bottoms shall be accomplished.
b. When slopes cannot be rounded, vegetation shall be used
to alleviate a sharp, angular appearance.
C. A rounded and smooth transition shall be made when the
planes of man-made and natural slopes intersect.
d. When significant - landf orms are "sliced" for construction,
the landf orms shall be rounded as much as possible to
blend into natural grade.
e. Manufactured slope faces shall be varied to avoid
excessive "flat -planed" surfaces.
5. "No manufactured slope shall exceed 30 feet in height between
terraces or benches.
15
t
THISC Retain the integrity
i HIS of the natural slope
f
NOT THIS
Over -emphasized vortical
structures disrupt the natural
silhouette of the hillside.
R
a. Where cut or fill conditions are created, slopes should be
varied rather than left at a constant angle which may be
unstable or create an unnatural, rigid, "engineered"
appearance.
Varying cut or fill slope creates
a more natural appearance
i t
i •
' 1
i Not this 1
1 16
i
b. The'aingle of any graded slope should be gradually adjusted to
the angle of the natural terrain..
Existing development tProposed development
I . " - P :�:Trzct boundary
Variable
Natural grade 'Zz\ I
ztz Proposed slope extension
Existing drainage device I '-'Z' This
Natural grade
Not this
Combine slopes to more closely
Approximate natural gradin
C. Hard edges left by cut and fill operations should be given a
rounded appearance that closely resembles the natural contours
of the land.
THIS, NOT. THIS
Small irregular berm accentuates
the top of the slope
Variety in
30140
slope bank "'J7Landsciving
grading •accentuates Drain2ge
creates a n C contour undulation features
natural appearance I
become
.
more resembling e 1C'COfi very visible
nature . C--., I i I
Engineered slop
banks look I . rc d
Drainage and unnatural
features are
obscured
Use of radii and uneven slopes Use of angles and uniform slopes
d. Manufactured slopes adjacent to roadways -should bemodulated
by sufficient berming, regrading, -and landscaping . to create
visually interesting and pleasing streetscapes.
THIS NOT THIS
Variety in
undulating slope
bank creates
pleasing
road3cap
Section 5. Drainage
4;-- 0
Where a conflict exists bet -11 -ene provisions of this section and
Chapter 70 of the un�L;curift Building Code, the drainage, soils and geology
provisions, -r Chapter 70 shall prevail,' unless in the opinion of the
oli--y hngineer, the provisions of this section meet sound engineering
standards consistent with the standards of Chapter 70..
A. Standards.
1. Debris basins, rip rap, and energy*dissipating devices shall
be provided where necessary to reduce erosion when grading'is
undertaken. Except for necessary flood control facilities
significant natural drainage courses shall be protected from?
grading activity. In instances where crossing is required, a
natural crossing and bank protection shall be preferred over
steel and concrete systems. Where brow ditches are required,
they shall be naturalized with' plant materials and 'native
rocks.
18
2. Building and grading permits shall' not be issued for
construction on any site without an approved location for
disposal of runoff waters, including but not limited to such
facilities as a drainage channel, public street or alley, or
private drainage easement.
3. All cuts shall be drained..
4. The use of cross lot drainage shall be subject to Planning
commission review and may be approved after demonstration that
this method will not adversely affect the proposed lots or
adjacent properties, and that it is absolutely required in
order to minimize the amount of grading which would result
with conventional drainage practices. Where cross lot drainage
is utilized, the following shall apply:
a. Project Interiors - One lot may drain across one other
lot if an easement is provided within either an improved,
open V-swale gutter, which has a naturalized appearance,
or within a closed drainage pipe which shall be a minimum
twelve (12) inches in diameter. In both cases, an
integral wall, shall be constructed. This drainage shall
be conveyed to either a public street or to a drainage
easement. If drainage is conveyed to a private easement,
it shall be maintained by a homeowners association,
otherwise the drainage shall be conveyed to a public
easement. The easement width shall be determined on an
individual basis and shall be dependent on appropriate
hydrologic studies and access requirements.
b. Project Boundaries - Onsite drainage shall be conveyed in
an improved open V-swale, gutter, which has 'a naturalized
appearance, or within an underground pipe in either a
private drainage easement, which is to be maintained by
a homeowner's association, or it shall be conveyed in a
public easement. The easement width shall be determined
on an individual basis -and shall be dependent on
appropriate hydrologic studies and access requirements.
M
u..,...v3,. _....w_..«- .e.,.,. .N �... �T..:�`t .. k.fii ...G,4.�z.i�a, r.: yfi.a..N. f i.. k � ».• 1' 41L, i � � '
:, �+uv.,t,. .....>..,,..... .,i>.. c..,u,Y!�l• ov>n,.: ,..e.....aro�.e:.C...t•:i .
THS
Variable l
e I Use of native rocks to
naturalize man-made
brow ditch
N
NOT THIS
B. Guidelines.
h with
fin -or
1. Where possible, drainage channels should be placed in
inconspicuous locations, and more importantly, they should
receive a naturalizing treatment including native rock,
colored concrete and landscaping, so that the structure
appears as an integral part of the environment.
tA
i. ,♦r ,. :?'_•"'iii'. / /;. •_\i' ` 1 •
� ,•t,r ^_- ••''Rx� '' ."?- • 'o �o.:...,�t;,. atm' t':: •:11 -�.c4 .` 1a•' _ '
20
2. Natural drainage courses should be preserved and enhanced to
the extent possible." Rather than filling them in, drainage
features should be incorporated as an integral part of 'the
project design.
section 6. Access and Parking.
A. Standards.
1. Driveway grades up to a maximum of twenty (20) percent are
permitted, and shall be aligned with the natural contours of
the land. Proper design considerations shall be employed,
including such items as vertical curves and parking landings.
In any case, parking landings shall be utilized on all drives.
over ten (10) percent grade.
2. Driveways shall not .be permitted which exceed twenty (20)
percent slope except that one length, not at the point of
access, of not more than ten (10) feet may have a slope of
twenty-two (22)percent.
3. Grooves for traction shall be incorporated into the construc-
tion of driveways with a slope of twenty (20) percent or
greater, a coarse paving matter into the construction.
`rHJS
r
-----------E
--- `3' max
3' max
iT Of
i'
3 mm Street
7 —�—�
3' mnx
Street
21
4. Where retaining walls are necessary adjacent to roadways or
within street setbacks, they shall be limited to three (3)
f eet in height in order to avoid obstruction of motorists o and
pedestrians I field of view, and to create an aesthetically
pleasing streetscape. No more that three (3), three (3) foot
high terraced or stepped retaining walls shall be utilized
which are separated by a minimum of three (3) feet and
.appropriate landscaping. Slopes not greater than fifty (50)
percent (or 2:1) will be permitted upon review and approval by
the Fire Marshall.
5. Driveways shall enter public/private streets, maintaining
adequate line of sight.
6. Local hillside street standards shall be used to minimize
grading and erosion. potential while providing adequate access
for vehicles, including emergency vehicles. The right-of-way
may be a minimum of 48.5 feet with 40 feet of paved width and
parking on both sides and a sidewalk on I side.
7. Grades of streets in the hillside areas shall be as provided
in this subsection. Hillside collector and arterial streets
shall not exceed 8 percent. Hillside residential local streets
shall not exceed 12 percent.
8. Cul-de-sacs to a maximum of 750 "feet in length may be
permitted with a maximum of 30 dwelling units, and to a
maximum of 1000 -feet in length with a maximum of 20 dwelling
units and shall terminate with a turn around area not less
than 35 feet in radius to curb face.
9. All other street improvement standards shall conform to the
standard plans and specifications for public streets of the
City of Diamond Bar.
10. The Planning Commission may approve modifications to the above
right-of-way design standards provided such modifications are
in substantial conformance with the objectives stated in this
section.
B. Guidelines.
1. Roadways and driveways, where feasible, where feasible, should
conform to the natural landform. They should not greatly alter -
the physical and visual character of a hillside by creating
large notches in ridgelines or by defining wide straight
alignments or by building switch -backs on visually prominent
hillsides, split sections and parking bays should be utilized
in the layout of hillside streets.
22
11
THIS
NOT THIS
Road3 and hillside grading
Reducegrading
educe grading by
align-ngroad'
ligning roads along
natural grades
Avoid running counter
to sleep grades
I To got from A to B, route selection would
be somewhere between perpendicular and
parallel to the contour&
2. Where road construction is perraitted in hillside areas, the
extent of vegetation disturbance and visual disruption should
be minimized by the combined use of retaining structures and
regrading to approximate the natural slope. The following
techniques should be used where feasible:
a. • Utilize landform planting in order to create a natural
appearance and provide a sense of privacy.
23
A
I To got from A to B, route selection would
be somewhere between perpendicular and
parallel to the contour&
2. Where road construction is perraitted in hillside areas, the
extent of vegetation disturbance and visual disruption should
be minimized by the combined use of retaining structures and
regrading to approximate the natural slope. The following
techniques should be used where feasible:
a. • Utilize landform planting in order to create a natural
appearance and provide a sense of privacy.
23
b. Reduce the visual and safety impacts by use of terraced
retaining walls and landscaping.
C. Split roadways increase the amount and appearance of
landscaping And the median can be used to handle
drainage.
No parking
Stabilize and reforest
distributed banks
Se!32f;lte sidewalk
Steep slope
Split section Roadway
Parking ba
Steep slopes
Possible trail Sidewalk
Roadway
Flatter slope
Section 7. Trails
A. Trails are an integral part of . a 'hillside area and provide
recreation areas forequestrian, hiking and biking uses. They can
also function as a means to take up grade or to convey drainage.
In hillside areas, it is not always necessary to provide full
improvements for trails. A more natural exp'e*rience may be
achieved, and the amount of grading required can be reduced, by
providing minimal improvements in appropriate areas, such as
undevelopable, steep slopes.
24
section S. Roadways.
A. Where retaining walls are proven to- be absolutely necessary
adjacent to roadways or within street setbacks, they shall be
limited to 3 feet in height in order to avoid obstruction of
motorist's and pedestrians field of view and to create an
aesthetically pleasing streetsc4pe. Otherwise, terraced or stepped
structures shall be utilized, which are separated by a minimum of
3 feet and appropriate landscaping.
NOT THIS
Knob remaining
from roadway cut
Strom
roadway
Roadway
Too steep for plants
to become established
mass grading to accommodate
one level arterial highway
N,
1-1 __ I . Natural grade
Roadway -,, _1y
THIS
25
Round off cut slope
to conform to the
natural contour of
the hill
Ro2aw-y
Round off - cut 3lopea
Remove small knobs
an roadway cut
'
to0 conform to the
natural grade
\L
Vista
Roadway
Round off
cut slopes Split roadway sections to
accommodate grade -
hangs
Natural grade
.Roadway le
Ro.dwxy.
Section 9.° : Site Dl6sign.
A. standards.
1. The dimensions of a'building parallel to the direction of the
.-__ ._slope.__ shall_ be_ _maximized ._in__order to_- Limit . the ._amount of
cutting and filling and to better fit the house to the naturae,
terrain.
THIS
Terraced decks do not s s
increase building bulk
Effective bulk withV_`?;'
or without decks
i
Building correctly fits
into the ground and�-
minimizes the effect �' L
on the hillside
Use of root decks, low
level decks, and side of t
building decks
i
i
Terracing reduces bulk
Effective bulk
7-
=:ac
Effective bulk
Smaller overhangs for individual floors
or windows help break-up mass and
protect against excessive sunlight
NOT THIS
Overhanging decks
make building
seem more I
massive !,
Effective bulk
High profile building
stands out on the
hillside
Avoid decks hanging
from the downhill side
with long pole supports
Cantilever makes building
appear taller, more
monumental-,
n-
Effective bulk
Excessive roof overhang
results in additional/
visual bulk
i
Effective bulk -5
1
M
B. Guidelines..*
1. Design of building sites should be sensitive to the natural
terrain. Structures should be located in such a way as to
minimize necessary grading and to'preserve natural features
such as prominent knolls or ridgelines.
2. Views of sign . ificant visual features as seen from both within
and outside a hillside development should be preserved. The
following provisions shall be taken into consideration:
a. Dwellings should be oriented to allow view opportunities,
although such views may be limited. Residential privacy
should not be unreasonably sacrificed.
b Any significant public vista or view corridor as seen
from a secondary, collector or major arterial should be
protected.
3.. Projects should incorporate 'variable setbacks, multiple
orientations and other site planning techniquestopreserve
open spaces, protect natural features and offer views to
residents.
THIS NOT THIS
Section 10. Architecture.
A. Standards.
1. The building envelope for all structures shall be as follows:
a. Downhill Lot - A maximum/ height of thirty-five (35) feet
as measured from natural grade at the front setback,
extending towards the rear of the lot. The maximum height
at the side setbacks shall be twenty (20) feet extending
27
♦
Section 10. Architecture.
A. Standards.
1. The building envelope for all structures shall be as follows:
a. Downhill Lot - A maximum/ height of thirty-five (35) feet
as measured from natural grade at the front setback,
extending towards the rear of the lot. The maximum height
at the side setbacks shall be twenty (20) feet extending
27
up to the center of the lot at a'forty-five (45) degree
angle to a maximum height of thirty-five (35) feet as
measured from natural grade.
BUILDING ENVELOPE FOR DOWNHILL LOT
7—M -
Minimum frontsetback
I
Downhill Section
Minimum side setback
Rear .* setback
Street Elevation
b. Uphill Lot - A maximum height of twenty (20) feet at the
front setback extending up and toward the rear of the lot
at a forty-five (45) degree angle to a maximum height of
thirty-five (35) feet as*measured from natural grade. A
maximum height side setbacks shall be twenty (20) feet
extending up to the center of the lot at a forty-five
(45) degree angle to a maximum height of thirty-five
(35) feet as measured from natural grade.
C. Cross Slope Lots - A maximum height of thirty-five (35)
feet, as measured from natural grade, at the front
setback extending toward the rear of the lot. The maximum
height at the side setbacks shall be twenty (20) feet
extending up to the center of the lot at a forty-five
(4 5) degree angle to a height of thirty-five (3 5) feet as
measured from natural grade.
28
THIS
Height limit
I�
Large roof sections to
parallel the average slope ,
Building envelope '.
1 Maximum height limit
Softening of large
vertical surfaces `Y
NOT THIS
lowed
imum height limit
2. The building shall be terraced to follow the slope.
3. Architectural treatment shall be provided to all sides of the
structure visible from adjacent properties, -roadways or public
rights of way.
4. Exterior structural supports and undersides of floors and
decks not enclosed by walls shall be permitted provided fire
safety and aesthetic considerations have been adequately
addressed.
5. Exterior flood lighting for safety shall be located and
shielded so as not to shine on adjacent properties. Decorative
lighting to highlight,a structure is prohibited.
29
THIS
NOT THIS
Large root areas broken up Massive roof area is very visible in
contrast to the natural slope
Use of natural materials and window 1
placement in small increments create
interesting small scale pmtterns
Break up massing of, structural elements Large facade of one material. even
losely approximate the natural
slope if modulated by windows, seems plain
Stone foundations and retaining walla
relate to the ground
B. Guidelines.
.1. The form, mass and. profile of the individual buildings and
architectural features should be designed to blend with the
natural terrain and preserve the character and profile of the
natural slope. Some techniques which may be considered
include:
a. Split**pads, stepped footings and grade separations to
permit structure to step up the natural slope.
b. Detaching parts of a dwelling such as a garage.
C. Avoid the use of gable ends on downhill elevations. The
slope of'the roof should be oriented in the same
direction as the natural slope and should not exceed
natural slope contour by twenty (20) percent.
2. ..Avoid excessive cantilevers on downhill elevations,
3. Excavate underground or utilize below grade rooms to reduce
effective bulk and to provide energy efficient and environ-
mentally desirable spaces. However, the visible area of the
building shall be minimized through a combined use of
regrading and landscaping techniques.
4. Use roofs on lower levels for the deck open space of upper
levels.
5. Building materials and color schemes should blend with the
natural landscape of earth tones and natural chaparral
vegetative growth.
30
N
6. To the . extent possible, the width"of a building measured in
the direction 'of the slope, shall be minimized in order to
limit the amount of cutting and filling and to better "fit"
the house to the natural terrain.
THIS
Building pulls back from
steeper slopes and ravines
on the hillside Minor building
protrusions which
are perpendicular to the
contours are acceptable
but should be stopped or
inset in the hillside
Building is parallel with NOT THIS
tho contours
Building in perpendicular to the contours
Section 11. Fences and Landscapinq.
A. Standards.
0
1. Walls and fencing, not exceeding six (6) feet in height,
visible from roadways or public rights-of-way shall be
visually open and non-opaque.
2. Privacy walls and fences, not exceeding six (6) feet in
height, are permitted adjacent to structures, in order to
provide a private outdoor area. Walls and fences shall be of
materials and colors compatible with the structure's facade.
31
3. Native or naturalized plants or other plant species I that blend
with - the landscape shall be utilized in all areas with
required planting.
.4. Fire retardant- plant materials shall be utilized. Plants
selected as ground cover, shrubs or trees shall be from the
list as approved by the City.
5. A permanent irrigation system, for purposes of establishing
and maintaining required planing, shall be installed on all
slopes. The
e emphasis shall be toward using plant materials
that will eventually need minimal irrigation. Water and
energy conservation techniques shall be utilized including but
not limited too such items as drip irrigation.
THIS
planting pockets an stepped
retaining wall allow screen
planting at several levels
No effective bulk
NOT THIS
No planting possible due
to too of retaining wail
Effective bulk
rr
L.". concrete retaining wall
surfaces can be seen for miles
and take yonri to conceal
with planting and trees
6. Landscaping shall be used to screen views of downslope
building elevations. When the structure height exceeds twenty
(20) feet. from finished grade on a downslope, additional
landscaping is required and a landscaping plan shall be
submitted for review with the submittal package.
32
... ...... .. . .
7. slopes with required planting shall be planted with informal
clusters of trees' and shrubs to soften and vary the slope
plane. Where slopes are 2:1 and five (5) feet or greater in
height, jute netting shall be used to help stabilize' planting
and minimize soil erosion.
8. Native vegetation shall be retained and supplemented within
canyons and along natural drainage courses as allowed by state
and federal resource agencies (State Department of Fish &
Game, U. 5. Fish and Wildlife, U. S. Army Corp. of Engineers).
THIS
NOT THIS
Planting naturally follows
the average slope
Open see-thru fencing that
blends into the natural environme
3-5*rnaximurn retaining wail
Screening req a N.
_Ii7
Trfnsitlon arae
Highly visible solid wall
Over 3.5'(not allowed)
No screening
-Clear cut separation
between natural condition
and developed area --.;i!h no transition
B. Guidelines.
1. Natural landform planting should be used to soften
manufactured slopes, reduce impact of development on steep
slopes or ridgelines, and provide erosion control.
33
wi
2. 'Maintain a.!'vegetative backdrop". by. replanting :With approved
trees*..: The vegetation .-should screen- structures to the extent
possible" at. maturity and preserve, the 'appearance of the
natural hillside
Skyline
Typical building clustering
3. Natural landform planting should be used to soften manufac-
tured slopes, reduce the impact of development on steep slopes
or ridgelines, and provide erosion control.
! THIS
y'lu 4V
Landform planting
Irregular' visual plane
in cross-section 1:�*�'
'Section ev=ca� sCr�a -;,� •
�1
NOT THIS'D
Conventional planting
Unitorm visual piano
in cross-section /,.Af
• � o
/ � 6
i r.r,1
suers«,
34
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 23, 1992
TO: Chairman and Planning Commissioners
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Dir
SUBJECT: Agenda Item #4 - Zoning Code Amendment ZCA No. 92 3
(Land Uses within the CM, Commercial Manufacturing
Zone)
BACKGROUND: In October of 1990, the City Council adopted an
Interim Ordinance No. 15 (1990), amending the list of permitted and
conditionally permitted uses within the CM zone. The.City Council
adopted the Interim Ordinance in order to provide the necessary
study time to review the most advantageous and appropriate land
uses for the CM zone. The Interim Ordinance effectively removed
all non -revenue producing land uses (with the exception of
accessory uses) from the CM zone as a mechanism to grant additional
land use controls for the period preceding the General Plan.
There are presently five generalized areas within the City zoned
CM.
LOCATION
1. Washington St.
2. Lycoming (near Lemon)
3. Gateway Corporate Ctr.
4. Grand/Golden Springs
5. No. Diamond Bar Blvd.
North/Sunset Crossing
PRESENT GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE DESIGNATION
Mobile Home Park RM
Vacant/Industrial I
Office Park OP
Vacant/Church office PD/CO,OP
Mixed Retail/Commercial CO
Uses
The areas located adjacent to or with freeway visible locations
represent the greatest potential for new commercial development
throughout the City. Generally the issues surrounding the Interim
Ordinance have dealt with a desire to significantly limit the
extent of non -revenue producing uses, primarily Quasi Public uses.
In November, 1990, the Council extended the Interim Ordinance to
October, 1991. The Council, as a result of public testimony
presented in November, 1990, directed that staff provide the
Planning commission an opportunity to investigate the
appropriateness of reintroducing church uses into the CM zone at
the specific request of Cavalry Chapel which is located at the
corner of Grand and Golden Springs.
In February, 1991, the Planning Commission concluded its
discussions on the issue and recommended that the City Council
permit churches and other institutional uses within the Commercial
Manufacturing Zone with a Conditional Use Permit procedure and
Development Agreement.
L-:2, i'v
City council reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation in
March, 1991, and concluded that appropriate policy direction had
not yet been determined and chose to reconsider the matter at the
conclusion of the General Plan adoption process.
In October, 1991, the City Council extended the Interim Ordinance
to -October 16, 1992. With adoption of the General Plan it is
appropriate for the Planning Commission to reconsider the issue of
permitting quasi -public uses within the commercial manufacturing
zone.
Additionally, the General Plan now indicates a requirement of a
planned development for those properties specifically located at
Grand and Golden Springs.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
review the attached Interim Ordinance and be prepared to discuss
the issues and any possible areas of'change deemed appropriate by
the Planning Commission. A public hearing has been advertised for
the Planning Commission meeting of August 10, 1992, for purposes of
adopting an Ordinance pertaining to Quasi Public Uses in the CM
zone.
Attachment: Ordinance No.. 15-A(1990)
Permitted uses within the CM Zone
JDS\mco
ORDINANCE NO. 15-B (1990)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR EXTENDING THE TERM OF AN
INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE NO. 15
(1990) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF•
CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858 AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
(i) On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State
of California and, on that date, the City Council adopted, by
reference, the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the
City, including Title 22 thereof pertaining to Planning and Zoning
Regulations for the City of Diamond Bar. (Hereinafte'r said Title 22
shall be referred to as "the Zoning Ordinance.")
(ii) on October 16, 1990, pursuant to the provisions of
California Government Code Section 65858(a), this- City Council
adopted its Ordinance No. 15 (1990) adopting interim zoning
regulations pertaining to land use proposals for non-commercial or
manufacturing uses in the C -M, Commercial Manufacturing Zoning
District within the City.
On November 13, 1990, pursuant to the provisions of
California Government Code Section 65858(a), this City Council
extended the Ordinance to October 16, 1991.
(iv) Pursuant to the provisions of California Government
Code Section 65858(d) this City Council issued its written report
describing the measures taken to alleviate the conditions which led
to the adoption of Ordinance No. 15-A (1990) at least ten (10) days
prior to the expiration of Oi:dinance No. 15-A (1990).
(v) A duly noticed public hearing as required by
California Government Code. Section 65858(a) was conducted and
..concluded prior to the adoption -of this Ordinance.
(vi) All legal prerequisites to the adoption. of this
Ordinance have occurred.
B. Ordinance.
The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does ordain
as follows:,
Section 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds
that all the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this
Ordinance are true and correct.
Section 2. The City Council hereby finds and determines
that the adoption of this Ordinance is categorically exempt from
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated' thereunder
pursuant to Section 15305 of Division 6 of Title 14 of the
California Code of Regulations.
Section 3. The City Council finds and determines that
the development of the General Plan and proposed amendments to the
,Zoning Ordinance are continuing; however, such development of the
General Plan and amendments to the Zoning. Ordinance cannot be
completed prior to the expiration of Ordinance No. 15-A (1990).
Section 4. The City Council hereby specifically finds
that there are land uses permitted within the C -M, Commercial
Manufacturing Zone, the approval of which would contradict the
ultimate goals and objectives of the General Plan and would not be
subject to adequate local review under the provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance unless Ordinance No. 15-A (1990) is extended and,
further, that the approval of any such land uses under the current
provisions of the Zoning ordinance would result in an immediate
threat to the public health, safety or welfare of persons and
property within the City of Diamond Bar.
Section 5. Ordinance No. 15-A (1990) of the City of
Diamond Bar, as heretofore enacted under the authority of
California Government Code section 65858 (a) , hereby is extended and
shall be of no further force and effect as of the 16th day of
October, 1992, unless the City Council has extended said ordinance
in the manner provided in said section 65858 (a).
Section 6. This Ordinance hereby is declared to be an
urgency measure pursuant to the terms of California Government Code
Sections 65858(a) and 36937(b), and -this ordinance shall take
effect immediately upon adoption.
Section 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption
of this ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted in three
(3) public places within the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the
provisions of Resolution No. 89-6.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED This 1st day of October, 1991.
Mayor
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar,
do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced. at a
regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held
on the.1st day of October, and was finally passed at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the
1st day of October, 1991, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
:MW
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ATTEST:
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
of the City of Diamond Bar
C-INI COMINIERCIAL NIA. ;UF-ACTURE c'G ZO'I;E
Sections:
23?8.330
Permitted uses.
22.28.240
accessory uses-
22.28.250
Uses subject to director's review and approval.
7)218.260
Uses subject to permits.
22.28.270
Development standards.
33?8.230
Permitted uses. Premises in Zone C-.IYl may be used for:
A. The
following commercial uses:
7.
Sales.
—
:antique shops.
- - —
appliance stores. household.
—
art'gallerics.
—
art supply stores.
—
:auction hOuscs, excluding animal auctions.
—
:automobile sales. sale of new and used motor vehicles.
—
.-automobile supply- stores. provided all repair activities are con-
ducted within an enclosed buildine.
—
Bakery shops. y
—
Bicycle shops.
—
Boat and other marine sales.
—
Bookstores.
—
Ceramicsrshops.
—
Clothing stores.
Conlectiop�ry or candy stores.
Delicatessens.
Department stores.
Disability rehabilitation and training centers, except that assembly
and manufacturing are permitt
of this section. ed oniv as provided in subsection B
' •
— Dress shops.
— Drugstores.
— Feed and grain sales.
— Florist shops.
— Fruit and vegetable markets.
— Furniture stores.
t T — Furrier shops.
— Gift shops-
1 J
� '`.�...., . __.r c.'_.is �2f>�_ ...JjnT .y teru.k..�,• >... �......._.._ _�.:_r..,...... frlc,. _...1.. r �.;�al. 1 ::..`..i:�. �« .,n,..,_ _ .._..F.7..w � L.1ss3xy..
tip• � •• • •�. � .. .. ..:.._.... ...Y..., �:_-.
Glass.-and mirror sales. including automobile glass installation
only tivhen _conducted within an enclosed building. -
-- Grocery stores.
-- Hardware stores. including the sale of lumber and other building
supplies. but excluding milling or woodworking other than inti-
dental cutting of lumber to size. provided that all sale. display.
storage and incidental cutting is within an enclosed building.
Health food stores."
— Hobby suppivsstores.
— Ice cream shops.
Ice sales. excluding ice plants.
— Jewelry stores.
Lapidary shops.
Leather.goods stores.
— Liquor stores.
— ?Mail order houses.
Meat markets. excluding sl•aughterin2.
Millinery shops.
— Nlobilehome sales.
— Model home display centers and sales oFfices, provided that such
models shall not be used for residential purposes unless a condi-
tional use permit is First obtained pursuant to the provisions of
Part I of Chapter?-2.56.
— 'Motorcycle. motorscooter and trail bike sales.
it-I usic stores.
— Newsstands.
— Lotions or novelty stores.
Nurseries. including the Browing of nursery stock.
Office machines and equipment sales.
— Paint and wallpaper stores.
Pa%,,-nshops.
— Pet stores. within an enclosed building only.
— Pet supply stores.
Photographic equipment and supply stores.
— Radio and television stores.
Recreational vehiirle sales.
Retail stores.
— Sc.�ondhand stores.
— Shoe stores.
— Silver shops.
— Sporting goods stores.
Stamp redemption centers.
-- Stationery stores.
Tobacco shops.
Toy stores.
Trailer sales. box and utility.
— Yarn and Yardage stores.
2. --- Services.
— Banks. savings and loans, credit unions and finance companies.
Laboratories. research and.testing. --..-
22.28.2-40 Accessory uses. Premises in Zone C -M may be used tor:
A. The Colloximz accessory uses. subject to the same limitations and condi-
tions provided in Section 22.28,040 (Zone C -H):
— Accessor,, buildings and structures.
— Building materials. storage of.
B. The Following additional accessory uses. subject to the same limitations
and conditions provided in Section 2121.2 8.19-0 (Zone C-3): .
— Automobile bod%- and, funder repair. painting and upholstering. when
incidental to the sale or new automobiles.
— Boats. minor repair of. ,
— Manufacturing. processing. treating and packaging incidental to and
operated in conjunction with the business conducted on the premises.
except as otherwise provided as a principal use in Section 22.28.230.
C. The following additional accessory uses:
Signs. as provided in Part 10 of Chapter 22.52.
(Ord. 1,19u Ch. 2 Art. 3 § 259.3, 1927.)
22 28.2_50 Uses subject to director's review and appro%-al. If site plans there-
for are first submitted to and approved by the director. premises in Zone C -M maw
be used for:
A. The following uses. subject to the same limitations and conditions
provided in Section 22.28.050 (Zone C -H):
22.28.266. -Uses subject to permits. Premises in Z:DneC'-NI maybe used for:
---A.-:The following uses provided a conditional use permit has first *been
..obtained as provided in Part I of Chapter 22.56, and while such permit is in"full
force and effect in conformity with the conditions of such permit for:
Hotels.
Mo*tels'..
'OtTices.busines)orprofessio*nal."--.'.-..-.-.---
- Restaurants and other eating establishments. including food take-
out.
2.28 .260
— - Temporary uses, as provided in Part 14 of Chapter 22.56.
(Ord. 85-0195 § 8 (part), 1985, Ord. 85-0004 § 43,1936: Ord. 84-0236 § 7.1934: Ord.
84=0161 § 10, 1984: Ord. 83-0007 § 2 (part). 1933: Ord. 82-0024 § 4 part).:193'2. Ord
82-0003 § I I (part). 1982; Ord. 81-0005 § 7, (part). 1981; Ord. 1494 Ch. 2 Art. 3
259.7. 1927.)
22-23.270 Deyelopment standards. Premises in Zone C2VI shall be subject
to the following development standards.
A. That not to exceed 90 percent of the net area be occupied by buildings.
with a minimum of 10 percent of the net area landscaped with a lawn.- shrubberv.
flowers and/or trees. which shall be continuously maintained in -ood condition'.
Incidental walkways. if needed. may be developed in the landscaped area.
B. That there be parking facilities provided as required by Part 11 of
Chapter 22.52.
C. Outside Display. All displziv in Zone C -M shall be located wholly within
an enclosed buildine. except for the following:
— Amusement rides and devices.
— Automobile sales. limited to automobile and trucks under txo tons held
for sale or rental only.
— Automobile service Stations. limited to automobile accessories and
facilities necessary to dispensingm products onl,,
petroleum
— Boat sales. limited to boats held for sale or rental oniv.
— Carnivals. commercial.
— Christmas trees and wreaths, the sale of.
— Crops — Field_ tree. bush, berry and row. including nursci-,. stock.
— Electric distribution Substations.
— Gas metering- and control stations, public utility.
— Mobilchome sales. limited to mobilehomes hold for sale onl\.-.
— Parking lots.
— Recreational vehicle sales, limited to recreational vehicles hold for sale
or rental only.
— Restaurants -and Other eating establishments. 1,n
cludInQ food take-out.
subject to the standards specified by suloslectior, G of Szcliori ???8.070.
— Signs, outdoor �Uvertisina.
T
- Trailer sales. box and UtilILV, limited to trailers held for sale only.
D. Outside Storage. Outside storage - is permitted on the rear of a lot or
parcel ofland in Zone C -NI when such sior aQe is strictly incidental to the permitteduse existing in a building- on the front Portion of the same lot or parcel offland. and
provided no storage is higher than the enclosure surrounding it nor nearer than 50
feet to the front property line. Any outdoor area used forstorage shall be completely
enclosed by a solid masonry wall and solid gate. not less than five fe-t nor more than
six feet in height- except that the director may approve the substitution OL a fence or
decorative wall where. in his opinion'. such wall or fence will adequate!,,- comply
,with the provisions orthis section. All such requests for substitution shall be subj'elll
to the provisions of Part 12 of Chapter ?2.56. on director's review. (Ord. 84-0161 §
11. 1984: Ord. 83-0161 § 13. 1983: Ord. 1494 Ch. 2 Art. 3 § 259.9. 19217.)
22-141
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
REPORT DATE:
MEETING DATE:
CASE/FILE NUMBER:
APPLICATION REQUEST:
PROPERTY LOCATION:
APPLICANT:(for appeal)
PROPERTY OWNER: (applicant
for ADR No.92-7)
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
City of Diamond Bar
PLANNING COMMISSION
. Staff Report
5
July 15, 1992
July•27, 1992
Administrative Development Review
No 92-7 (appeal) -
A request to appeal
Administrative Development Review
No. 92-7 to permit construction
of a 2,679 square foot addition
to a single family residence.
22215 Steeplechase Lane
Kilpyung and Insook Auh
22225 Steeplechase Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Wayne Simonian
22215 Steeplechase Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
The applicant for the Administrative Development Review, Wayne Simonian,
is requesting to construct a 2,679 square foot addition to an existing
two story single family residence of 2,783 square feet and 25.5 feet in
height. The proposed project is located in a gated community called
"The Country" at 22215 Steeplechase Lane. The site is approximately
1.17 gross acres. Due to a large area in the rear portion of the lot
which has building rights restricted, approximately 10,000 square feet
of the site is usable area.
The architectural style of the existing residence is ranch. . The
proposed architectural style is mediterranean which is compatible with
surrounding properties. The exterior of the structure will consist of
Espana Mission Terracota tile for the roof, eggshell color for stucco,
L
and wood trim and brick accent in rose tan. For additional details of
this project see attached staff report dated June 1,5, 1992.
On June 22, 1992, a public hearing for Administrative Development Review
No. 92-7 was conducted and the project was approved by the community
Development Director. In the audience, was the applicant (Mr. Simonian)
and the neighbor located on the west side of the subject site.
ti;•
On June 24, 1992, the City received a letter from the Mr. and Mrs. Auh
stating that they were unable to attending the public hearing . concerning
this project and 'are opposed to the project because the proposed
addition will block their view.
The Auh property is approximately 9 feet higher in elevation and looks
down onto site of the Administrative Development Review (the Simonian
property) . The single family structure on this site is approximately 35
feet from the common property line.
The existing Simonian home is approximately 27 feet from the property
line which is shared by both parcels. With the proposed addition, the
side yard setback will be 15 feet except for an area within the center
of the addition which is a balcony and dining area that will be 10 feet
from the property line. The addition on this side of the Simonian home
will extend the existing house 6 feet further into the rear portion of
the lot.
The main concern of Mr. and Mrs. Auh is that the addition, in their
opinion, will block the view from their living room and dining room. In
visiting the Auh property, the view was observed from outside and inside
their home.
The view observed from the dining room area of the Ahu home, whether
inside or outside, is directly into the rear yard of the Simonian home.
This view includes the rear portion of the single family structure along
with the patio area, lawn area, shrubs, and large trees.
The view observed from the living room area of the Auh home looks
directly into the side portion of the Simonian home where the balcony
and dining area addition will be constructed. This is the portion of
the addition that will be 10 feet from the side property line which is
share by both parcels.
From the rear corner of the Auh home which faces the Simonian property,
the view consists of large, fairly dense trees which belong to the
Simonian property and hills that can be seen through the trees. The
panoramic view from the Auh property is directly from the rear portion
of their home and the rear portion of their lot.
The Director of Community Development and. staff have reviewed this
project and have taken into consideration the objections raised by Mr.
and Mrs. Auh. This project is consistent with the planning and zoning
code, is compatible with the characteristics of the area, complies with
the findings required of the Administrative Development Review
Ordinance, and has the approval from the architectural committee of "The
Country."
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
This item has been advertised in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, and the Highlander on July 15 1992.
Notices were mailed to approximately 36 property owners within a 300
foot radius of the project site on July 10, 1992.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project is
categorically exempt according to guidelines of California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15301 (e) (2) (A&B).
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission affirm the decision of the
Community Development Director and approve Administrative Development
Review No.92-7.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit "All - site plan, elevation, sections, dated June 22, 1992
Resolution of Approval
Staff report date June 15, 1992
Aerial
Photographs
Correspondence date June 23, 1992
ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
RESOLUTION NO. 92 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DENYING THE APPEAL
FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 92-
7 AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, AN APPLICATION
FOR A 2,679 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO A TWO
STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT
22215 STEEPLECHASE LANE - LOT 174, TRACT
30578.
A. _Recitals
1. Kilpyung and Insook Auh has. filed an application
requesting an appeal of Administrative Development
Review No. 92-5 and located at 22215 Steeplechase Lane,
Diamond Bar, California, as described in the title of
this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Development Review application is referred to as
"Application".
2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal organization
of the State of California. On said date, pursuant to
the requirements of the California Government Code
Section 57376, Title 21 and 22, the City Council of the
City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 1, thereby
adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances
of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los
Angeles County Code contains the Development Code of the
County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to
development applications, including the subject
Application, within the City of Diamond.Bar.
3. This Commission hereby finds that the proposed project
described in this Resolution conforms to the General
Plan of the City of Diamond Bar.
4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, on
July 27, 1992 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on
said Application.
5. Ali legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolu-
tion have occurred.
B. Resolution
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1
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.
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that
the project identified above in this Resolution is
categorically exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as
amended and guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant
to Section 15301 (e)(2)(A&B) of Division 6 of 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, there is no evidence before this Commission that
the project as proposed by the Application, and
conditioned for approval herein, will have the potential
of an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the
habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon
substantial evidence presented in the record before the
Commission, the Commission hereby rebuts the presumption
of adverse effect contained in section 753.5 (d) of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
Notwithstanding the provisions of this paragraph, the
Applicant shall pay all fees required for the filing of
a Notice of Determination and any other fees imposed by
the California Department of Fish and Game prior to the
issuance of any building permits.
4. Based upon substantial evidence presented to the
Planning commission during the above public hearing and
oral testimony provide at the hearing, the Commission
hereby specifically finds as follows:
(a) The project relates to a site of approximately
1.17 acres of which approximately 10,000 square
feet is usable area to be developed with an
addition of 2,679 square feet to an existing 2 -
story single family residence of 2,783 square
feet, within the R-1-20 1 000 zone, on 22215
Steeplechase Lane, city of Diamond Bar,
California.
(b) The nature, condition, and size of'the site has
been considered. The site is Adequate in size to
accommodate the use and surrounded by single
family residences.
(c) The Administrative Development Review approval
will not have an adverse impact on adjacent or
adjoining residential uses. It will not be
materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment, or
KI
valuation of property of other persons located in
the vicinity and will not adversely affect the
health or welfare of persons residing in the
surrounding area.
(d) The subject property shall be maintained and
operated in full compliance with the conditions of
this grant and any law, statute, ordinance or
other regulations applicable to any development or
activity of the subject property. Failure of the
permittee to cease any development shall be a
violation of these conditions.
(e) Notification of the public hearing for this
project has been made.
(f) The Administrative Development Review will not
unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment
of the existing neighborhood or future
developments, and will not create traffic or
pedestrian hazards.
(g) The architectural design of the Administrative
Development Review is compatible 'with the
character of the surrounding neighborhoodandwill
maintain the harmonious, orderly and attractive
development contemplated by the Development Review
Ordinance and the General Plan and would provide a
desirable environment for its occupant, visiting
public, and neighbors through good aesthetic use
of materials, texture and color and will retain a
reasonably adequate level of maintenance.
(h) It is hereby declared that and made a condition of
this permit that if any condition hereof is
violated, or if any law,, statue, or ordinance is
violated, the permit shall lapse; provided that
the applicant has been given written notice to
cease such violation and has failed to do so for a
period of thirty (30) days.
Notwithstanding any previous subsection of this
Resolution, if the Department of Fish and Game
require payment of a fee pursuant to section 711.4
of the Fish and Game Code, payment thereof shall
be made by the applicant prior to the issuance of
any building permit or any other entitlement.
3
5. Based upon the substantial evidence and conclusion set
forth herein above, this Commission hereby denies the
application.
The Planning Secretary shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution,
by certified mail, to Kilpyung and Insook Auh at 22225
Steeplechase Lane, Diamond Bar, CA 91765.
DENIED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JULY, 1992,
BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
BY:
Bruce Flamenbaum, Chairman
Attest:
James DeStefano, Secretary
I, James Destefano, Community Development Director of the City of
Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was
duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission held on the 27th day of July, 1992.
AYES: [COMMISSIONERS:]
NOES: [COMMISSIONERS:]
ABSENT: [COMMISSIONERS:]
4
AWN,
MOVITRII MSMPWi�-
6x1,M
01al
�
-P44
PRUIVII
MOVITRII MSMPWi�-
6x1,M
01al
�
-P44
RECEi'41ED CO[1 ,U--JUNIT 1
DEVELOPN!er1JT
I
D`1�L1�hJiG
,2 J n I Lf3, 't 992
I`i'i 1�11T;rl 2`9t� ryry PI'I 4: G.)!^r� fi`''i `-'
?, P I
U ' :
City of Diamond Bar
Public Hearing/ Permit Dept. a-ld Cit' 'M4-n&'�
21660- Copley Dr.
Diamond Bar, CA. 91765
Dear Sir,
I, Resident and property owner of 22225 Steeplechase Lane,
Diamond Bar, Ca., want to file -a Disapproval for the remodeling plan
proposed by th property owner of 22215 Steeplechase Lane, Diamond
Bar, Ca. 91765.
I was not able to attend the Public Hearing concerning this matter
on June 22, 1992, because I was out of town and my wife was
terribly ill with flu.
According to my information, if this plan is completed as is, the
addition will block -the view from my living and dining rooms. 1
believe that I have a right to enjoy my view from my property, and
this is one of the reasons I choose to live in "The Country Estates".
I persist in my right to stop and review this plan.
Thank you very much for your cooperation. I am looking forward to
see your immediate action on this matter.
Sincerely,
Kilpyung Auh
22225 Steeplechase Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
(714) $61-3850
M
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
rgg���
MEETING DATE:
CASE/FILE NUMBER:
APPLICATION REQUEST:
PROPERTY LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
PROPERTY OWNER:
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
1
June 15, 1992
June 22, 1992
Administrative Development Review
No 92-7
A request for construction of a
2,679 square foot addition to. a
single family residence.
22215 Steeplechase Lane
W.D.S. Development Inc.
5206 Benito St., Suite 101
Montclair CA, 91763
Wayne Simonian
22215 Steeple Chase Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
The applicant, W.D.S. Development Inc., is requesting and Administrative
Development Review to construction a 2,679 square foot addition to and
existing single family residence of 2,783 square feet which will be two
stories and 25.5 feet in height. The proposed project is located in a
gated community called "The Country" at 22215 Steeplechase Lane (Lot
174, Tract 30578) , located between S. Razzak'Pircle and Wagon Train Lane.
The project site is zoned R-1-20,000 (Single Family Residential -minimum
lot size 20,000 square feet) and is surrounded by other single family
residences. The site is approximately 1. 17 gross' -acres - approximately
10,000 square feet is usable area. The balance of the site is building
rights restricted area. The site plan for this proposed project shows
that there will not be any structures in the restricted area.
ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW:
The proposed addition is 2,679 square feet, making the single family
structure a total of 5,462 square feet. There is no swimming pool,
tennis court or any retaining walls proposed for this project. The
style of architecture is Mediterranean. The exterior of the structure
will consist of Espana Mission Terracota tile for the roof, eggshell
color for stucco and wood trim and brick accent in rose tan.
The following are required development standards for R-1-20,000 zone and
the proposed project's status concerning these standards:
Development Standards
1. Setbacks - 51&101 side yard
201 front yard
151 rear yard
2. Height - 2 stories, 351
3. Parking - 2 covered spaces
Proposed Project Status
101&10'side yard
211 front yard
1001plus rear yard for the
single family structure
2 stories, and 25.51 high
3 bay garage
Approval from the architectural committee of the homeowners association
of "The Country" has been obtained.
WALNUT/OAK TREES•
There are no oak trees on the site. Since there is a single family
structure on the site, there is existing landscaping. During the
construction process, some of the existing landscaping will be
disturbed. The applicant will relocate as many as possible of the
existing trees which will be disturbed to other areas on the site. The
landscaping which is disturbed will be replaced to blend in with the
existing landscaping.
GRADING•
As per Engineering review of the site plan and proposed project, a
precise grading plan will need to be submitted to the City Engineering
Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. The precise
grading plan will need to be prepared by a registered civil engineer.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
This item has been advertised in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, and the Highlander on June 10, 1992.
Notices were mailed to approximately 36 property owners within a 300
foot radius of the project site on June 11, 1992.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project is
categorically exempt according to guidelines of California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Director of Community Development approve ADR
No. 91-7.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The design and layout of the proposed project is consistent with the
applicable elements of the City's proposed General Plan, design
guidelines of the appropriate district, and any adopted architectural
criteria for specialized area, such as designate historic districts,
theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards, or planned.
developments;
2. The design and -layout of the proposed project will not unreasonably
interfere with the use and enjoyment of existing neighborhood or
future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrian
hazards;
3. The architectural design of the proposed project is compatible with
the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the
harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by the
Development Review ordinance and the proposed General Plan;
4. The design of the proposed project would 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 and will retain a reasonably
adequate level of maintenance;
5. The proposed project will not be
safety or welfare or materially
improvements in the vicinity;
detrimental to the public health,
injurious to the properties or
6. The proposed project will be in compliance with ordinance No.5
(1990), Sections 22.72.050, 22.72.060, and 22.72.070 for
Administrative Development Review.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit "All - site plan, elevation, sections, dated June 22, 1992
Resolution of approval
_.CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190
(714)860-2314 Fax (714)860-3117
PMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
rATSH-0 t N 0Te/4711 O til)
Record Owner(s) Applicant
Name wzq--�
(last nage first) _ _ _
Address -5d-Vb B�(t2� S� 5- U/ LE /0
Ci ty!M oN (C -/=&II
Zip G217le, �
Phone V/Y ) (I2-- z -y--7 .3 ( )
Case#, 7
Recvd"
Fee $ .. �Qs� 7-
Receipt -7 ?� T
By
Applicant's Agent
(Attach separate sheet if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures
of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors of corporations)
CONSEVT: I consent
the submission of the application accompanying this request
r
11 recorded ooners)
Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that
the information �h//errein provided isMcorrect
/ to the best of my knowledge.
Printed Name: WI -f VNE
(Applicant or Agent)
1
S i gned /�-'"� t. Da t e S Z---
(Appli nt or Agent)
Loc a t i on 7 2-215^ -!! C � � "i'VLs C�V�I �% a �(
(Street address or tract and lot nunber)
17�
tv A4owJ
Previous Cases'"'
Present Use of Sitesl/j'\/(�—
Use applied for
7q S
LEGAL DESCRIPTION tall ownership comprising the proposed lots)/parcel(s)
Area devoted to structures Landscaping/Open space
Proposed density
(Units/Acres)
Style of Architecture Jyt D(/ G�1�NE.nrj
Number of Floors Proposed 7ul0 Slope of Roof 2--
yz/3-- co -0 t3
9
ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
RESOLUTION NO. 92-08
A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING
ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 92-7
AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, AN APPLICATION FOR
A 2,679 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO A TWO STORY
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 22215
STEEPLECHASE LANE - LOT 174, TRACT 30578.
A. Recital
1. Wayne Simonian of W.D.S. Development Inc. has filed -an
application for Administrative Development Review No.
92-5 and located at 22215 Steeplechase Lane, Diamond
Bar, California, as described in the title of this
Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Development Review application is referred to as
"Application".
2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal organization
of the State of California. on said date, pursuant to
the requirements of the California Government Code
Section 57376, Title 21 and 22, the City Council of the
City of Diamond Bar adopted its ordinance No. 1, thereby
adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances
of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los
Angeles County Code contains the Development Code of the
County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to
development applications, including the subject
Application, within the City of Diamond Bar.
3. Because of its recent incorporation, the City of Diamond
Bar lacks an operative General Plan. Accordingly, ac-
tion was taken on the subject Application, as to consis-
tency to the General Plan, pursuant to the terms and
provisions of California Government 5 65360.
4. The Community Development Director of the City of
Diamond Bar, on June 22, 1992 conducted a duly noticed
public hearing on said Application.
5. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolu-
tion have occurred.
B. Resolution
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the
Community Development Director of the City of Diamond Bar as
follows:
1. The Community Development Director hereby specifically
finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The Community' Development Director hereby finds and
determines that the project identified above in this
Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as
amended, and guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant
to Section 15061 (b) (3) of Division 6 of Title 14 of
the California Code of Regulations.
4. The Community Development Director hereby specifically
finds and determines that, having considered the record
as a whole, there is no evidence before the Director
that the project as proposed by the Application, and
conditioned for approval herein, will have the potential
of an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the
habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon
substantial evidence presented in the record before the
Director, the Director hereby rebuts the presumption of
adverse effect contained in section 753.5 (d) of Title
14 of the California Code of Regulations.
Notwithstanding the provisions of this paragraph, the
Applicant shall pay all fees required for the filing of
a Notice of Determination and any other fees imposed by
the California Department of Fish and Game prior to the
issuance of any building permits.
5. Based upon substantial evidence presented to the
Community Development Director during the above public
hearing and oral testimony provide at the hearing, the
Director hereby specifically finds as follows:
(a) The project relates to a site of approximately
1.17 acres of which approximately 10,000 square
feet is usable area to be developed with an
addition of 2,679 square feet to * an existing 2 -
story
-story single family residence of 2,783 square
feeti within the R-1-20,000 zone, on 22215
Steeplechase Lane, city of- Diamond Bar,
California.
(b) The nature, condition, and size of the site has
been considered. The site is adequate in size to
accommodate the use and surrounded by single
.family residences.
(c). The Administrative Development Review approval
will not have an adverse impact on adjacent or
adjoining residential uses. It will not be
materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment, or
2
valuation of property of other persons located in
the vicinity and will not adversely affect the
health or welfare of persons residing, in the
surrounding area.
(d) The subject property shall be maintained and
operated in full compliance with the conditions of
this - grant and any ---law;:- statute, -ordinance or
other regulations applicable to any development or
activity of -the subject property. Failure of the
permittee to cease any development - shall be a
violation of these conditions.
(e) Notification of the public hearing for this
project oject has been made.
(f) The Administrative Development Review will not
unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment
of the existing neighborhood or future
developments, and will not 'create traffic or
pedestrian hazards.
(g) The architectural design of the Administrative
Development Review is compatible with the
character of the surrounding neighborhood and will
maintain the harmonious, orderly and attractive.
development contemplated by the Development Review
ordinance and the proposed General Plan and would
provide a desirable environment for its occupant,
visiting public, and neighbors through good
aesthetic use of materials, texture and color and
will retain a reasonably adequate level of
maintenance.
(h) It is hereby declared that and made a condition of
this permit that if any condition hereof is
violated, or if any law, statue, or ordinance is
violated, the permit shall lapse; provided that
the applicant has been given written notice to
cease such violation and has failed to do so for a
period of thirty (30) days.
(i) Notwithstanding any previous subsection of this
Resolution, if the Department of Fish and Game
require payment of a fee pursuant to section 711.4
of the Fish and Game Code, payment thereof shall
be made by the applicant prior to the issuance of
any building permit or any other entitlement.
4. Based upon the substantial evidence and conclusion set
forth herein above, and conditions set forth below in
3
this Resolution, presented to the Community Development
Director on June 22, 1992, public hearing as set forth
above, the Director in conformance with the terms and
provisions of California Government Code S 65360, hereby
finds and concludes as follows:
(a) The granting of this Administrative Development
Review is based on the reasonable probability that
the request considered herein will be consistent
with -the General Plan on the basis of review of
the draft General Plan presently under going
evaluation by "the City. There is little or no
probability of substantial detriment to or
interference with the finally adopted General Plan
if this application is granted and the same is
ultimately inconsistent with the Plan because the
unique physical circumstances applicable to the
subject site, together with the conditions applied
hereto, serve to minimize and deleterious impacts
which could otherwise arise. Further, this
-project's demonstrated compliance with all
applicable requirements of State law and local
ordinance in addition to the referenced conditions
serves. to insure this entitlement is harmonious
with and beneficial to the community.
(b) The project shall substantially conform to all
plans dated June 22, 1992 as submitted to and
approved by the Community Development Director la-
beled Exhibit "All dated June 22, 1992.
(c) Structures shall not to be built within the
building rights restricted area of the subject
site, without the approval of the City Engineer.
(d) I The Applicant shall submit a precise grading plan
prepared by a registered civil engineer to the
Engineering Department as may be required by the
City Engineer.
(e) The Applicant shall relocate on the site, whenever
possible, trees which will be disturbed during the
construction process and replace landscaping which
will be destroyed.
(f) The Applicant shall comply with requirements of
Building and Safety, Planning and Zoning and
Engineering Departments. . .
(g) 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,
4
at
t 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 grant and pay remaining Planning Division
processing fees.
(h) This approval is valid for one year. If an
extension is needed, 'a request;submitted in
writing, to the Community Development Director
shall be required before the expiration date of
this approval.
(i) The community Development Director hereby
specifically finds and determines that, based upon
the findings set forth above, and changes and
alterations which have been incorporated into and
conditioned upon the proposed project, no
significant adverse environmental effects will
occur.
(j) The Community Development Director finds that
facts supporting the above specified findings are
contained in the staff report and exhibits, and
the information provided to this Director of
Community Development during the public hearing
conducted with respect to the project will be made
a condition of approval of said project and are
intended to mitigate and/or avoid environmental
effects identified in this project.
. The Community Development Director shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution,
by certified mail, to Wayne Simonian, at the address as
set forth on the application.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 22nd DAY OF JUNE, 1992,
BY THE COMMUNITY DEVEPOPMENT DIRECTOR OF THE•CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
01M
James
I, James Destefano, Community Development Director of the City of
Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was
duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting
Administrative Development Review held on the 22nd day of June,
1992.
5
r 4 �Pons
du ��ia
—lag Qj. ->�r
t
z �Yi
r
r
�AcmiSaw
o
"T._'T�
Wcqwumvic�
r 4 �Pons
du ��ia
—lag Qj. ->�r
ijPAP&T
NoI
IZ o
Al
to {rkit,
IY+ d 4lµt� K o ri{�{dot q,o N
{
mow'
r
g•
i"%�'kerrl .`r _"^ {1.5
t
w
co
t i a .r S
JKI
SAE
13 M
Jolla '.
' stwl as���7<J�.!s •a � ___taay.><ed�� - � ' S ; � ? p� s � d � ; k � � 5° : : �;. .
an
i;:. a �5�.F cad � H �$� �=a9 ° �3aa-�• 't
t � ��•ga5�a -sE a m Q 3s1
a" $ �'aa^e
� ��^"� �� •�°� ��•aa bra v
law a
a isAdim, `saga•aaa'E�§ �cRa�59aa:
y�;' , '� �1"�.k's "a' i�h't n � r•� a�•x� t S' Hill
2_ g j
8 � �i1 1 # °11 $ 8# #1 PvillM 12 1 1F g# Ft xr
{�`+A"3. r J.: •tm t- a. zi ' �`2..._ .. y . � I r _ �t t{ "' i- t .�y ��':C ,�" i'�ra'a�6►• +d1A�4=�'
t
z �Yi
Y
o
"T._'T�
a.rt u
�
f i• •
tfl�ig'�
O
ijPAP&T
NoI
IZ o
Al
to {rkit,
IY+ d 4lµt� K o ri{�{dot q,o N
{
mow'
r
g•
i"%�'kerrl .`r _"^ {1.5
t
w
co
t i a .r S
JKI
SAE
13 M
Jolla '.
' stwl as���7<J�.!s •a � ___taay.><ed�� - � ' S ; � ? p� s � d � ; k � � 5° : : �;. .
an
i;:. a �5�.F cad � H �$� �=a9 ° �3aa-�• 't
t � ��•ga5�a -sE a m Q 3s1
a" $ �'aa^e
� ��^"� �� •�°� ��•aa bra v
law a
a isAdim, `saga•aaa'E�§ �cRa�59aa:
y�;' , '� �1"�.k's "a' i�h't n � r•� a�•x� t S' Hill
2_ g j
8 � �i1 1 # °11 $ 8# #1 PvillM 12 1 1F g# Ft xr
{�`+A"3. r J.: •tm t- a. zi ' �`2..._ .. y . � I r _ �t t{ "' i- t .�y ��':C ,�" i'�ra'a�6►• +d1A�4=�'
t
z �Yi
Y
o
"T._'T�
ut
nil
Ji
tfl�ig'�
ijPAP&T
NoI
IZ o
Al
to {rkit,
IY+ d 4lµt� K o ri{�{dot q,o N
{
mow'
r
g•
i"%�'kerrl .`r _"^ {1.5
t
w
co
t i a .r S
JKI
SAE
13 M
Jolla '.
' stwl as���7<J�.!s •a � ___taay.><ed�� - � ' S ; � ? p� s � d � ; k � � 5° : : �;. .
an
i;:. a �5�.F cad � H �$� �=a9 ° �3aa-�• 't
t � ��•ga5�a -sE a m Q 3s1
a" $ �'aa^e
� ��^"� �� •�°� ��•aa bra v
law a
a isAdim, `saga•aaa'E�§ �cRa�59aa:
y�;' , '� �1"�.k's "a' i�h't n � r•� a�•x� t S' Hill
2_ g j
8 � �i1 1 # °11 $ 8# #1 PvillM 12 1 1F g# Ft xr
{�`+A"3. r J.: •tm t- a. zi ' �`2..._ .. y . � I r _ �t t{ "' i- t .�y ��':C ,�" i'�ra'a�6►• +d1A�4=�'
w ;
Y
^C`a.
k
�.
.
"�".
y � �t`��'"�•'�i•1:N Il�r�u'itu-�cwt-f i��ai�>wt � f
��t- �- st'hE! ciNf>F11tt, cl�Nn\ „� ,�w��,�•I���.LL�l�+i�'.1517rr7,� + � i � a. �. � � .�' _
� - �7
�.G•-"
+5.�/:iM�K�/Ii�R�' i�nlfl�;
�-
�'.�
x.
k � �. —�LL� 't
� ti
_
FM.�.
rs. .��. s • Yr. .�y- f 'a, - f � 3 .j;' h_ � r" ' ! W x.: x ..qi•'�r A + '
i
P`'ta}j'1 tae 1�'L `4wia i � e
_ C
'� 1 '�,�i 'f,j•' /ice :%'/%�/ � / '!�i"/ ff // // %•/ a �) j
' � � � /// : �,/ i' , • >I'. //�4"v�r` 'P�'if ` � � / }j�`''`� � • t� w /P �' ♦ _��� t 4 : r
' I • � i �y/�1,, � .� . �; /(,i+fi fit', X�., "��. i � � - � ,_.
In
Or
I du
'��' � r' '•S�3 .. �. �(F ,t' - .. , � �` 1<. � � � e ..- �...` � ,S.t s .lA-S " . r t� � . q.,.,,, i�(,r . ,
j
� '{ rhe., J Y rw Y� • rs:f. "..J 'Lr%�' , . a %G a ..�''.,.� ,�.... � Y .� ,,, ''i` �F 1,,,�y,5, �.
{` Y' SL ..F, _£'•, ik'+� }•f`•'S ' S � a •. "' + `` rt..i � "'C.• s ' .'F,�y� > Kp"'R,.'pgr: YgC-.
_At+aK.a�L
__ _ � - _.'.w - ,rz-� ++.'i- ?�`•#.��s_�t �!.�•!�L 'ems• -
a
01
MCIN-M41(n.-IM C11 Sam :uMmo
RIS
')NrE
WKWGRI. -ISIU)H
...-..–.._..,ryy�[y,w,ysf•,,,�r'e>� xi �;. .�+�^r .. .. �. � _. ... Ht., .sus-,�s ,,dri3F'�h
r
'INt i -woun3 k1(1 t(LII-10R INI 5 9 Wrl
( :Md1 LIl11M+dclsl
MUM
!
I
.1
i
(
r �
I 11�t'
---
i
1trf
o --"
rk �
u A
l
t
.Y.y�d�
�-':=,J y :� �A"� ,�.��� r'��1kf�:x...�,k 'Y.....i,�(y J ':n S} ` � F ,� 4 $a'� '}cfi"y.- ,� to �-q S �5.,� 3'.-•'� ra,._• s.4ti
"4It�r. "�,j 1`n°.,•Tt �W`+�{ �y.ti"•'�cf tri s i :- �'"t,+r? �, '"` r .a,�.i, srs,.�I.iYk+W'T.L' y*v"koi T.�n er�ki✓J 1.'�" P �"` f-'
.t.�v–_N-,. �.,. _-_:_.__'±.-z�f ti+ .v._._ —� ...mow_ � ...._"___,_.... ---. - -. _- t .. '� -. -^_- . . - .� _. ^�t'�!r. _^`�.. ._ Y•��.� ,L.n f��;�b'J•;• _,.-•.v ,;
"ONVINamcim" IIA'SO SUAI IIIINMO
MrOKMWORI 3MININ
VCJ tevvqlvsl 91M
lot i bile, —.�no
Doi
File
o and is ready for
-Acilifling
Fil® revis we by
®n—�7f�,;. and is ready gar
desifUciion by City Clark