The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1/23/1995QA 7:00 P.M. South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California D, Wd Meyer c- Ramenbaum Don /Scbad FrankUn n •i Huff Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Community Development Office, located at 21660 F— Copley Drive, Suite 190, and are availablefor public inspection. If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please call (909) 396-5676 during regular business hours. In an. effort to comply with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or .accomodation(s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting must inform the Community Development Department at (909) M-5676 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking Tfe City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper in the Auditorium and encourages you to do the sane. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Monday, January 23, 1995 Next Resolution No. 95-3 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman David Meyer, Vice Chairman Bruce Flameribaum, Don Schad, Franklin Fong, and Bob Huff 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC ' COMMENTS: This is the time and place for the general public to address the members of the Planning Commission on any item that is within their jurisdiction, allowing the public an opportunity to speak on non-public hearing and non -agenda items. Please complete a Speaker's Card for the recording; SecretaU (Completion of this form is voluntary). There is a five minute maximum time limit when addressing; the Planning Commission. 3. 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: 3.1 Minutes of January 9, 1995 4. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 41 Development Review No. 94-2 A request to construct. an 18,110 square foot, two-story office/professional building. The 40,496 square foot project site is undeveloped and is located at the southeast comer of Brea Canyon Road and Lycoming Street in Zone C -1 -BE. The project additionally proposes a freestanding 6 ft. high monument sign on .the Brea Canyon Road frontage. Continued from December 12, 1994. 01 Applicant/Property Owner: G. Miller Development, 721 Brea Canyon Road #7, Diamond Bar, CA 91789 Environmental Determination: pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that this'prqject requires a Negative Declaration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing, receive testimony, and Approve Development -Review,No., 94-2 with Findings of Fact and conditions as listed. 6. OLD BUSINESS: None 7. NEW BUSINESS: None S. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 8.1 Transmittal of Precise Alignment Study for Citrus Valley Health Partners Diamond Bat Medical Plaza. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS 10.1 League of California Cities - PLANNERS INSTITUTE Wednesday - Friday, March 22 - 24, 1995 10.2 Planning Commission Reorganization - March 13, 1995 I 11, ADJOURNMENT-: February 13, 1995 2 9 MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 9, 1995 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Meyer called the meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. at the South Coast Air'Quality Management District Board Room, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Vice Chairman Flamenbaum. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners: Chairman Meyer, Vice Chairman Flamenbaum, Schad, Fong, Huff Also Present: Associate Planner. Robert 'Searcy; Assistant Planner Ann Lungu; Interim City Attorney Michael Montgomery, Consultant Engineer Michael Myers; Recording Secretary Carol Dennis MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS - None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of November 14, 1994 and December 12, 1994. The following corrections/amendmentswere offered: 1. C/Huffj November 14 minutes, Page 7, New Business, Item I., change "indicative". to "indigenous,". 2. Chair/Meyer, November 14 and December 12 minutes should reflect that C/Huff abstained from the minutes approval process. 3. C/Fong, November 14, Page 5, middle of third paragraph, correct 11topal" to 11topo". 4. Chair/Meyer, December 12, Page 4, motion by C/Huff regarding Variance 94-2, spell out the conditions. Copy from the Resolution into the minutes. January 91 1995 Page 2 Planning Commission 5. Chair/Meyer asked that the minutes be more active by abbreviating the staff report And adding more comments. 6. VC/Flamenbaum, November 14, Items 1 and 2, outline of proposed Development Ordinance, should include the request for staff to present the outline at the January, 1995 meeting. AP/Searcy stated his notes reflected "expeditiously" and that no date had been stated in the request during the November 14 meeting. A motion was made C/ Schad to accept the carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: by VC/Flamenbaum and seconded by minutes as amended. The motion was 1. VARIANCE No. 94-3. A request to install a total of six monument signs: Three monument signs - a maximum height of 10 feet with a maximum sign face area of 36.75 square feet utilized for tenant identification; and three monument signs - a maximum height of six feet with a maximum sign face area of 11.38 square feet utilized for center identification. Property Location: Diamond Bar Village Shopping and Professional Center, 325-379 South Diamond Bar Boulevard and 23341-23499 East Golden springs Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. Property Owner/Applicant: Steve Poretta, Poretta Family Trust, 601 South Glenoaks #301, Burbank, CA 91502. AstP/Lungu presented the staff report and indicated that staff feels the proposed project is an opportunity to correct the sign deficiencies, reduce the sign pollution on the site, and improve sign visibility for tenants.- If the Planning commission approves the proposed project, installation for all monument signs is, proposed to occur within four months of the approval. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Negative Declaration No. 92-7 and Variance 94-3, Findings of Fact, and conditions as listed within the resolution. VC/Flamenbaum asked if staff would approve the center identification signs to which Ast/P Lungu replied, "yes". . January 9, 1995 Page 3 Planning commission In response to C/Huf, f , AstP/Lunqu responded the existing signs are approximately 18 feet high, several feet in excess of the proposed .10 foot high signs. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing open. Constance Nicholson, owner BCN Lighting & Signs, 2887 Buckhaven Road, Chino Hills stated her company has worked closely with staff and is available for questions from the Planning commission. In response to Chair/Meyer, AstP/Lungu stated it is a requirement of the Sign Code that all free-standing monument signs have addresses. In addition, DKS has proposed a minimum setback of 15 feet from the edge of the travelled way and this will not create a site distance problem for entering vehicles. Chair/Meyer stated he believed the stipulated setback measurement should be from property line, not from curbface. Responding to Chair/Meyer, Mrs. Nicholson stated she does not know where the property lines are at the corner of Golden Springs Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard. Chair/Meyer stated usually, the 15 foot triangle is measured from property line rather than curbside. CE/Meyers referred Chair/Meyer to Condition (g) on Page 5 which -allows for review and approval of the location. Chair/Meyer stated he would like the parameters spelled out in the resolution. In response to Chair/Meyer, AstP/Lungu indicated the applicant stated he would have the project completed within four months, even though he is allowed one year. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing closed. Chair/Meyer suggested the following wording be added to Condition (g): "All freestanding monument signs shall maintain a minimum 15 feet setback from the travelled roadway edge, provided that such signs shall not project over the public right-of-way, nor shall they impair vehicular site distances, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." A motion was made by C/Schad and seconded by C/Fong to adopt the resolution as amended. The motion was carried unanimously. January 9, 1995 Page 4 Planning Commission 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No. 94-6. A request to modify and continue operation of an unmanned public utility substation for a -cellular communication facility. The modification will incorporate digital in addition to the existing analog facilities which are now in place. The existing facility is located at Diamond Bar High School. The equipment is located on the roof and also in an enclosed interior unit. currently, the visible equipment consists of roof mounted whip antennae and a microwave antenna with the majority of the equipment obscured behind the school's mascot banner. The proposed project will add additional whip antennae and microwave antennae. Applicant: AirTouch Cellular, 3 Park Plaza, Irvine, CA 92714. Property Owner: Walnut Valley Unified School District, 880 S. Lemon -Avenue, Diamond Bar. AP/Searcy reported the project is a request by the applicant to continue operation and expand the available technology at the site. The site has been in operation at this location for seven years and located on the roof of the gymnasium and within an adjacent equipment room. The current equipment features an array of antennae placed at various locations on the roof of the gymnasium. The proposed project would place additional equipment on existing structures and add new antennae in perimeter locations around the roof. The staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing and receive testimony and approve the Negative Declaration and the draft PC Resolution 95 -XX with the Findings of Fact and conditions listed. In response to VC/Flamenbaum, AP/Searcy indicated he had spoken with both AirTouch and L.A. Cellular about combining efforts and erecting a monopole. He further indicated that because they are two separate companies providing the same service, combining, the service may create conflict and cross- talk within the two systems. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing open. Dennis Lowry, Site Development Consultant, Air Touch Cellular, stated that this project will be a digital upgrade to provide better service to the community surrounding the site and involves minor hardware changes. January 9, 1995 Page 5 Planning Commission VC/Flamenbaum stated his concerns that Diamond Bar is starting to look like an "antenna farm" and asked the applicant if there 'is a way to combine the applicant and competitor systems in a single monopole. Mr. Lowry .responded that in some cases it is possible. However, in general, there needs to be some distance between systems.. C/Schad stated he concurs with VC/Flamenbaum. Craig Clute, 21217 Fountain Springs Road, objects to the lack of information contained in the flyer distributed to the residents: He is very concerned that Diamond Bar is becoming an "antenna farm" and feels the Planning Commission.needs to place a limit on the number of antennae allowed. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing closed. VC/Flamenbaum announced he will be recusing himself from the next agenda item since he has a leasehold interest in the affected land, and proposed the Planning Commission table this agenda item until the next agenda item* is heard. He suggested the Commission arrive at a solution by which the two parties can combine their efforts. Chair/Meyer asked if this would preclude VC./Flamenbaum from entering into the debate on this application. VC/Flamenbaum responded his concern is that somehow the Antennae should be combined. Chair/Meyer asked if the question of proliferation of the antennae should be a part of the Development Code. VC/Flamenbaum responded that it clearly should be. C/Schad asked if it is possible for the cellular companies to combine several systems.on one antenna. Responding to Chair/Meyer, AP/Searcy stated there will be one whip antenna approximately 22 feet high. The remainder will be, hidden by the parapet and by the enclosure and the aesthetic impact will be approximately the same as currently exists. A motion was made by C/Schad and seconded by VC/Flamenbaum to approve Conditional Use Permit No. .94-6. The motion was carried unanimously. January 9, 1995 Page 6 Planning commission In response to Chait/Meyer, AP/Searcy stated he would have used a categorical exemption had he been able to determine that a Negative Declaration had been prepared on *the previous Conditional Use Permit. In the absence of that, and Los Angeles County's inability to provide staff with the information, the Negative Declaration was utilized to cover all bases. 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No. 94-7. A request to operate an unmanned public utility substation for cellular telecommunication facility with a 90 footmonopole with antennae and microwave dish. The radio equipment will be housed within an enclosed modular unit. Property Location: 3333 S. Brea Canyon Road Applicant: L.A.-Cellular, Box 6028, Cerritos, CA 90702 Property Owner: Metro Diamond Bar Properties, Inc., 2030 Main #1020, Irvine, CA 92714 VC/Flamenbaum reminded the Planning Commission that he had recused himself from deliberation of this project and asked the record to -reflect that he neither favors or opposes the project. AP/Searcy reported the applicant requests approval to locate a cell site, including a 90 foot monopole and radio equipment enclosure, in the parking area of an existing two. story office building. The steel monopole is proposed with three antennae arrays with four antennae each and a future 4 foot microwave dish. The proposed 90 foot height is approximately 25 to 30 feet over the height of any other approved monopole within the City. Because one of the primary service recipients is mobile cellular users, the monopole must reach this service area. Because of the grade differential between the freeway and the area adjacent to the freeway and the area available for the project to be developed, this height is desired by the applicant to deliver the required level of service. The staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing, receive testimony, and continue the project for additional information. Responding to C/Schad, AP/Searcy stated the parking requirement for the office building is 127 spaces. With the removal of four spaces for this project, there will be 134 January 9, 1995 Page 7 Planning Commission spaces remaining. In addition, there will be a backup generator at the site. Since the enclosure is soundproof, it is not expected to generate additional noise. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing open. Dr. Gerald Bushberg, L..A. Cellular representative, stated there are facilities which have multiple cellular telephone companies', equipment on a single pole. He further stated this is technically impossible since the systems were developed independently and because they are subscription based at this location. Dan Hare, AirTouch Cellular, 3 Park Plaza, Irvine, stated the temporary site has always been a marginal location and, in order to service the area, there are three sites proposed. At this time, only six antennae will be installed. C/Fong requested the applicant consider another location. Mr. Hare responded several alternative sites had been -considered. C . /Fong reiterated he is . . not convinced this is the optimum location for the antenna. He has a problem with the proposed facility location because of the visual impact. C/Huff asked why L.A. Cellular has three sites as opposed to AirTouch's one site. Mr., Hare responded he does not know. C/Huff stated he agrees with C/Fong that an alternative site should be considered. Craig Clute, Diamond Bar resident, - reiterated the Planning Commission needs to set limitations immediately. Chair/Meyer declaredthepublic hearing closed. Chdir/Meyer stated the service station, which is a major sales tax contributor to the City, cannot have a sign exceeding six feet. In addition, Diamond Bar does not permit freeway signs. During the General Plan hearings the Planning Commission received testimony and recommendations that the City provide certain advertising upon entering the City. In his opinion, the various providers, in addition to combining on a pole., might do so on a pole which would have benefit to the business aspects of the community. He further stated that a two foot wide landscape planter is not adequate. Additionally, off- street parking for the business may become an issue. A motion was made by C/Huff and seconded by C/Schad to January 91 1995 Page 8 Planning Commission postpone the item to February 13, 1995 and have the _applicant consider alternative sites, particularly to the south of the current site. The motion was carried 4-1 with the following roll pall: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Huff, Schad, Fong, Chair/Meyer NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Flamenbaum, ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None RECESS: Chair/Meyer recessed the meeting at 9:10 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Meyer reconvened the meeting at 9:20 p.m. 4. CONDITIONAL USE.PERMIT No. 94-4. The City is requesting to develop a 23.8 acre site located east of Pantera Drive and south of Bowcreek Drive. The master plan for the park includes development of two ball fields, multi -use hard courts, tennis courts-, picnic areas, a tot lot, and a multipurpose community center approximately 7,500,square feet in size. Property Location: 700-800 Pantera Drive Applicant: City of Diamond Bar, 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite #100, Diamond Bar AP/Searcy commented that the role of the PlanningDepartment, is to present the City's technical review of the project. He stated that the project has undergone, numerous scoping sessions with the public. The master plan project as it is presented has been approved as a "consensus" project by the Parks and Recreation Department and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review. CSD/Rose will serve as proponent for the Parks and Recreation Department's "consensus" project. AP/Searcy reported that the 23 acre park site was reviewed as a part of the EIR and established as part of the subdivision of Tract No. 31479 approved circa 1978. The 23 acre park site was designated a!3 an element of the residential development that entailed the area north of Grand Avenue, east of Golden Springs Drive and.Diamond Bar Boulevard, and south of the SR 60 Freeway. . In 1988 the County Parks and .Recreation Department initiated a project with similar elements to the present project and received approval in 1989 but the project was never constructed. The City Community services Department then set out to create a new master plan for the Pantera Park January 91 1995 Page 9 Planning Commission site and using staff, a professional consultant, and community input from residents in the immediate vicinity of the park site. The General Plan has identified the inadequacy of park facilities within the City. "By any measure, the City is inadequately served by active and passive facilities." (Resource Management Element Page 111-2). The primary active recreational facilities are located at Diamond Bar High School and the County Golf Course. As the City continues to grow in population, the 'disparity in the available active recreational facilities will increase. currently, there is a total of 23 acres of developed park land to serve Diamond Bar north of Grand Avenue. There are no lighted baseball fields and no lighted basketball or tennis courts- to serve north Diamond Bar. The General Plan directs the City to provide adequate active and passive recreation facilities. The present project has the opportunity to satisfy this directive. The incorporation of an extensive passive area for picnics, open play and future interpretive area (hiking trail) and the provision of the hard court area and ball fields go a long way. However, staff feels that the current plan does fall short in maximizing the park's features. In particular, the omission of lights on the ball fields reduces the opportunity for the utilization of the facility to its highest and best use. The potential negative impacts of ball field lighting can be mitigated as previously. stated and should strongly be considered for this site. The staff has reviewed the needs of the general community as it relates the provision of recreation activities and found that the City lacks adequate facilities. The development of this park represents the opportunity for the greatest amount of active park space in the City. This project has undergone the scrutiny of the neighborhood in the immediate vicinity of this project and yielded the basis for a truly beneficial facility. The primary issues related to the master plan are traffic and circulation, light spillage, and intensity of use. The master plan and environmental mitigations have been incorporated to maximize the use and minimize the impacts. The project design, limits on hours of operation, ation., deliveries; and lighting is def ined in a manner that reduces impact to the existing residential development. January 91 1995 Page 1 10 Planning commission The purpose of this public hearing is to review the Negative Declaration and Mitigation monitoring Program as this initiates the public review period. AP/Searcy stated the proponent for the project is Bob Rose, Director of Community'Services for the City of Diamond Bar. i Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing, receive testimony and consider the Negative Declaration and direct staff as appropriate. Responding to VC/Flamenbaum, AP/Searcy stated the City is bound by the Conditional Use Permit requirements. Responding to VC/Flamenbaum, DCS/Rose indicated there is security lighting around the building at Summit Ridge. Responding to C/Schad, AP/Searcy reiterated that 15.5 acres would be active and the remaining 7.5 acres would be natural or passive. C/Schad voiced his concern that there would be loss of the facility for night games without night lighting. AP/Searcy responded that the master plan excludes the use of ball field lighting. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission strongly consider including lighting to maximize usage of the park. C/Schad commented that he wishes review of the botanical features of the park for preservation during the development process and expansion for certain areas be addressed. Responding to C/Schad, AP/Searcy stated that Pomona School District has no definitive plans or schedule for building the school. Responding to C/Huff, AP/Searcy - stated the park was conceptualized as a part of the original approval of the tract map about 1978 and lighting was included in the original plan. Again responding to C/Huff, �AP/Searcy indicated Planning staff was not present at the community workshops. C/Huff asked AP/Searcy to address the liability factor of the water element and the costs involved. AP/Searcy stated he did not have that information available. January 91 1995 Page 11 Planning commission Responding to C/Huff, AP/Searcy indicated the mitigation measures for the lighting system would limit the height of the standards on which the lights are placed and incorporate light shields, directing and focusing the light in certain areas. The Negative Declaration refers to incorporating very -tall trees along the parameter of the site for diffusion. Pat Mann, Cotton\Beland\Associates, Inc. stated the Negative Declaration was prepared under his direction.' The lighting was removed from the park plan and the firm does not have information on the type of lighting and intensity which might be used. He further stated that closing the park at 10:00 p.m. and turning off all lights would be the most effective measure in limiting the lighting impact. In response to C/Huff, DCS/Rose indicated the percentage of increase of use of the park on a year-round basis as a result of incorporating lighting for the ball field would be 46%. Inclusion of youth programs use during the winter months would increase the use percentage by about 102%. C/Fong asked how deep the water will be in the pond. AP/Searcy responded there is no specific design for the water element at this time. DCS/Rose introduced members of the project I team. Joe Ruzicka,'Vice Chairman, Parks and Recreation Commission, stated Pantera Park represents a great opportunity for the City of 'Diamond Bar. According to state and national recreation standards, Diamond Bar should have a minimum of IiO acres of developed active park land. Diamond Bar currently has about 50 acres and the development of Pantera Park would bring the total to approximately 65 acres which is still below the standard. The design provides facilities for many of the park uses which have been demanded by the community. These include active ball fields, tennis, basketball and roller blade/hockey courts, formal picnic structures, and a jogging path around the park. Of the 55,000 residents of Diamond Bar, a full 30% .or 16,000 are children. This park will allow us to further serve the -children's needs with wholesome activities. The. process for design incorporated the need to balance the desires of the local neighborhood with the needs of the entire community. In order to achieve this goal, the Parks and Recreation commission conducted an extensive, series of'public workshops to reach consensus on the elements to be January 91 1995 Page 12 Planning Commission incorporated into the park's design. - Bob Mueting, Landscape Architect, referred the Planning Commission to the artist's conceptual drawing of the proposed site project master plan and pointed out the location of each of the components. Responding to C/Huff, Mr. Mueting 'stated the development is notyet phased. It is an overall master plan which needs to be approved before moving on to the subsequent design development with the staff. Responding to VC/Flamenbaum, Mr. Mueting stated that it would be his intent to make the retention basin attractive, whether or not it contained water. In addition, the bench drains would be designed to conform to the General Plan. Mr. Mueting indicated that whether or not the community center gets built in the future will not significantly impact the project. The plan before the Planning Commission represents a consensus of the community participation, not specifically documented by needs for each one of the elements. VC/Flamenbaum stated he feels there are too many elements for this size park and is concerned that the parking may not be adequate. Responding to VC/Flamenbaum, DCS/Rose statedthe response from Pomona Unified School District is that the school site is available for overflow parking from the park, should it become necessary. When the school is built a joint use agreement would be acceptable. VC/Flamenbaum suggested that if the school comes with ball fields, would it not be expedient to enter into a reciprocal agreement to use some of its facilities and minimize the elements of Pantera Park. He feels the City is trying to solve all of its park problems with one facility, thereby burdening the neighborhood. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing open. Donovan Martinez, 635 Pantera Drive, stated that he was one of the residents in attendance at all of the Pantera Park community planning meetings. In the beginning there was complete division. One group was in favor of an active park and the other group was in favor of a passive park. By the end of the deliberation there was consensus for what is before January 9, 1995 Page 13 Planning commission the Planning Commission. There was never consensus to include lighting for the park and it was never part of the presentation. The only lighting considered was low lighting for the tennis courts. The majority of the residents were against field lighting. He asked that the Planning Commission respect the time and energy of the citizens to arrive at the current concept. Ardeshir Malganji, 765 Bowcreek, requested the Planning Commission reconsider the walkway to Bowcreek since it will create major parking problems. Dan Buffington, 2 605 Indian Creek Road, stated although he was not -a part of the meeting process, he strongly urges the use of lights in the park for the sake of the youth of Diamond. Bar. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing closed. Chair/Meyer stated that since this is a neighborhood park and the residents actively participated in the concept. He would urge cooperation, as part of this master plan, with the Pomona Unified School District and to address whether there is duplication of facilities. In addition, off-site signing needs to be provided for the park. He further stated that he is concerned with the feasibility of the water element. Chair/Meyer further stated he has two major concerns regarding the project. one is the timing of the Conditional Use Permit and the ability to exercise the permit in ' the one year time period. Secondly, regarding the environmental report concerning traffic. He adamantly disagrees with the report and believes that a park of this magnitude will generate significantly more traffic and wants it adequately addressed in the environmental review. In addition, thd report should include the cumulative effect of the school traffic. C/Fong suggested lighting only one of the fields and also consider lighting ball fields in other parks in the City. Chair/Meyer reminded staff that the issue of parking I on Bowcreek needs to be addressed. C/Huf f asked for feedback on the proposed lighting and the impact on the neighborhood. He is concerned that other sites were not planned with lights as part of the project. Pantera. Park was from the beginning and as distressing as it may be to January 91 1995 Page 14 Planning Commission the residents, when they moved into the area, it was part of the plan. ,Respopding to Chair/Meyer, AP/Searcy asked for clarification of the traffic study concerns. Chair/Meyer indicated that he would vote "no" when the environmental study comes before the Commission. He feels the traffic study is inadequately addressed. A motion was made by C/Schad and seconded by C/Huff to continue the public hearing to February 27, 1995. The motion was carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS - None PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS C/Schad stated he would like to begin working on a Tree ordinance. Chair/Meyer referred to a letter from the Mayor of Chino Hills indicating he found it extremely disappointing that the Traffic Element of the Draft General Plan did not assume Diamond Bar's responsibility of solving the traffic problem created by the City of Chino Hills by placing a four lane road through the environmentally sens#ive Tonner Canyon. Chair/Meyer indicated he Would, with the blessing of the Commission, work with staff to draft -a letter to the mayor indicating why it was not in the Draft General Plan prepared by the Planning Commission. Chair/Meyer stated the Planning Commission would like to take a pro -active stance on the Development Code. He asked staff to place the item on the February 13, 1995 agenda., VC/Flamenbaum requested the Traffic Development Study for Calvary Chapel and Inter -Community Hospital also be placed on the February 13, 1995 agenda. AP/Searcy responded he was contacted Friday, January 6, 1995 by the traffic engineer advising staff there are three identified alternative locations and a cost evaluation associated with each alternative site. Tentatively, meetings will be held the week of January 9, 1995 with the two adjacent property owners to discuss what they wish to do and what future plans Calvary January 9, 1995 Page 15 Planning Commission Chapel may have for their site. Staff hopes to bring this information to the Planning Commission within the next 60 days.. Chair/Meyer asked staff to include the updates in the February meeting agenda. ANNOUNCEMENTS - None Chair/Meyer declared the meeting adjourned at 10:52 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, James DeStefano Secretary Attest: David Meyer Chairman City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 4.1 REPORT DATE: January 19, 1995 MEETING DATE: January 23, 1995 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Development Review No. 94-2 APPLICATION REQUEST: A request to construct an 18,110 square foot, two-story office/professional building. The 40,496' Square foot project site is - undeveloped and is located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Lycoming Street in Zone C.- 1 -BE. The project additionally proposes a freestanding 6 ft. high monument sign. PROPERTY LOCATION: 21008 Lycoming St. APPLICANT.: ___G.__ Miller -Development- 721 Brea Canyon Road #7 Diamond Bar, CA. 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: BACKGROUND: Same The Planning Commission conducted public hearing on the project December 12, 1994. At the conclusion of the public testimony, the Planning commission directed staff to work with the applicant to provide additional information concerning an update to the traffic report, resolution to the parking provisions on and off-site, and future access between the adjacent commercial properties.. In the interim, the applicant has provided staff with an addendum to the traffic impact analysis that addresses the submitted project with updated projections based on current conditions. The addendum also addresses inter -parcel circulation to the extent possible at the present time. The applicant has also re -designed the office building on the southern elevation, reducing the gross square footage and reoriented the parking stalls in the immediate area of the building. Q1L=RS1RRF0)ZTSWR94-2A.R" ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted modifications to the previous design that respond to circulation and parking issues. The modifications include a redesign of the building and floor plan, relocation of parking spaces on the south elevation, replacement of the entry walls with a landscape berm and a proposed modification to the lot line along the eastern and a portion of the southern boundary. The building modification provides a better visual complement for northbound Brea Canyon Road travelers. The site will now provide landscaping and the architecture of the building as the first visual elements of the site as opposed to block walls and automobiles. Parking/Circulation The building modifications have reduced the gross square footage by slightly less than 300 square feet. The modification proposes to relocate the colonnade to the west. This modification has provided the opportunity to relocate the four parking spaces north of the Brea Canyon Road entrance toward the interior of the site and away from the perimeter of the site. The relocation of the parking serves to reduce the potential impacts related to the potential traffic hazards of cars backing into the driveway approach and drive aisle from both sides. Moving the spaces further into the interior ofthe site allows for better circulation. The number of parking stalls for the project have been increased to 51 overall. Forty-six (46) of the stalls are provided on the subject site, in conformance with the minimum requirement (for general retail/commercial). Staff recommends that a condition which restricts the project from medical uses be placed on the project to maintain the project's integrity.. Five (5) additional stalls are provided as a result of an informal agreement between the adjacent property owners. The five off-site spaces are located at the extreme eastern portion of the project at the point where the L.A.C.F.C.D. easement intersects the abutting properties. The applicants request that no easements or other encumbrances be placed on this portion of the project because of the potential negative financial impacts at the time of any sales transactions may transpire. The parking area has undergone an additional revision. The trash enclosure has been moved forward to the north and reduced in size in response to the proposed lot line adjustment. The 61 tall concrete block enclosure will allow pedestrian access from the east and will feature a 51611 wide planter on the west facing elevation. The gates for the enclosure swing open toward the parking area but within the confines of the curb. Staff recommends that a decorative iron face be incorporated into its design. C. 1UTMRS1REPORTSWR94-U.Rff 2 The applicant prepared an addendum to the traffic report. The City has reviewed the addendum report and found it adequately addresses the traffic impact projections associated with the development of this site. -The report found that the project will have a negligible -effect on off-site circulation. The analysis of the addendum generated conditions related to the City's requirement to ensure the traffic report format conform to the County's Congestion Management Plan (CMP). The internal and future inter -parcel circulation have been reviewed from the aspect of safety and efficiency. No concerns were generated subsequent to the reconfiguration of the parking stalls at the Brea Canyon Road entrance (as stated above). Access and inter -parcel circulation was the remaining issue addressed. Analysis of the plan indicates that the project provides a 20 ft. wide access at the point of the proposed future shared access. This may create problems' for circulation related to truck traffic. Staff has developed two scenarios to address this potential situation. In one alternative, the access could be increased to a minimum of 24 ft. with the loss of one parking space as the planter is modified to meet this modification upon development of the shared access. The other alternative, raised during the public hearing, calls for direct access from the north/south drive aisle into the adjacent site. Creation of this access would cost the subject site four parking spaces as access is gained to the abutting site. With improvements for vehicular and pedestrian access, guarantees for --in=kind-...-.rep-l-a-cement-.--on.--.-the - .abutting - parc_e_l____wo_uld.__._need. to___b_e__._ included within the covenants created for the reciprocal access agreement. Lot Line Adjustment The applicant is proposing a lot line adjustment to adjust the irregular property lines that currently exist on-site. The lot line adjustment involves approximately 1,500 sq. ft. with the office building site gaining the majority of the square footage. The adjustment includes the -eastern boundary in addition to the south property line. The southerly adjustment will transfer the existing well site to the southerly property owner thereby aligning the property with straight boundary. The eastern adjustment will also transform the irregularly shaped boundary into a straight north/south boundary ensuring the, office site the 46 required parking spaces. Development Standards Proposed Project Status 1. Setbacks - Of side yard 101 20' front yard 20' Of rear yard 551 2. Height - 13 times buildable area 2 stories, 351 C. 1L9nWRSMEP0RTSWR94-2A.RYT 3 3. Parking 1 space per 400 sq. ft. 45 spaces (minimum) NOTICE -OF PUBLIC -HEARING: This item has been advertised in San Gabriel Valley Daily Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on November 21, 1994. Public notices were mailed to 167 property owners in a 500 ft. radius of theproject21 days prior to the public hearing. Staff has reviewed environmental information submitted as a part of this project and has prepared a Negative Declaration. RECOMMENDATIONS: The staff recommends that the Planning Commission re -open the public hearing and receive testimony and adopt the Resolution of Approval with the attached conditions. 1. The design and layout of the proposed development will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of the neighboring existing and future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrians hazards; _.2. The archi-t.e.-c.-t:ural--.-dek-gign. of.- --the is compatible with the character -of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the harmonious, orderly, and attractive de- velopment contemplated by this Chapter and the contemplated General Plan of the City; 3. The design of the proposed development 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; 4. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. Attachments: Development Plans Staff Report Dated December 12, 1994 Traffic Report Addendum Resolution With Findings of Fact Lot Line Adjustment Exhibit 4 E RECEIVED 91/19 10:39 1995 AT 909-061-3117 PAGE 2 (PRINTED PAGE 2) 3 Qwl) 7142406592 P. 02 �Kv-j�s_ Gkoup -W dr vr 'Wi • OaN I M M - � l✓fAxiMtiM C�Ut�afly�st Nt!IG4Nf � �tO��v/�� HIl�fH :";dN �t� H101H r f-ev 1- - -.- 0- v AFAA afltrx' U-0,-nAAOVF, AKOA 4w. rf PINdWt#Hv;poo 4-21+e OR- f �, f. 4 1,.^ I A ft "eo Pm a- ri f. 0,01witio ^fppw; eff-l"P I'vf I*WeM : 01777 VAR. f. eprl~ -%o5o *a; Tef,AV 1.7} ft -7 'Pa. f`� Op Ftrr��a fl,gY,07 to. -�l Pf. Or -.0 -7, rAlp-KIHrot PAYe7Uf H~14/^r &F^,0,p0 leoll:p, W10VI 14~k 0P/N~ movi pop J. (4?ri rrvmffy) INa .... r^r-je4 F WIN 10 City, of Diamond Ba PLANNING. COMMISSION Staff Report AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 5.1 REPORT DATE: December 5, 1994 MEETING DATE: December 12, 1994 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Development Review No. 94-2 APPLICATION REQUEST: A request to construct an. 18,110 square foot, two-story office/professional building. The 40,496 square foot project site is undeveloped and is located at the southeast corner of Brea_ Canyon Road and Lycoming Street in Zone C- 1 -BE. The project additionally proposes a freestanding 6 ft. high monument sign at on the Brea Canyon Road frontage. PROPERTY LOCATION: 21008 Lycoming St.- APPLICANT: t. APPLICANT: G. Miller Development 721 Brea Canyon Road #7 Diamond Bar, CA. 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Same BACKGROUND: In 1990 the subject site was rezoned from R-1 (Single Family Residence Zone) to C-1 (Restricted Business Zone). The property is currently vacant. Formerly, the property had been developed with a single family residence. Abutting the site from the east to north lies a Los Angeles County Flood Control Channel, to the south a recreation vehicle storage site which is located adjacent to the SR 60 Freeway, to the north a convenience store and a condominium project, and to the west single family residential development, a day care center, and a variety of miscellaneous industrial/manufacturing type uses. The proposed project is a request for a 18,110 sq. ft. two story office/professional building on an irregularly- shaped site. A portion of the project, approximately 4,700 sq. ft., is -covered by an Los Angeles County Flood Control Easement and lies outside the,. C.1rXrrRRS1REP0RTSIDR944.RPT 1 property boundary. The use is allowed within the zone subject to approval of the Development Review. -The considerations for 'approval of the project, focus - on compatibility of the project to the surrounding environment, conformity of the project to the draft General Plan and development standards, and quality of design and materials. ANALYSIS: The project is designed with an orientation toward the interior of the site rather than to Brea Canyon Road. The advantage of this design allows for a substantial swath of landscaping along the Brea Canyon Road frontage thereby reducing the perception of the mass of the building. The structure will be located at distances ranging from 10 ft. to 20 ft. behind the sidewalk. An extensive mixture of plants including shrubs and trees are proposed long this rear elevation. The applicant is providing approximately 25 percent landscaping throughout the site. The project proposes a lot coverage ratio of 69 percent and a FAR of .56. There is an entry statement provided at the entries to the project in the form of 42 in. high stucco walls that screen the parking area from the street with assistance of landscaping. A six foot high block wall is proposed along the extreme southeast property line as an extension of the existing wall. All lighting will be designed so as'to provide a minimum of one candlefoot over the site while minimizing light spillage off- site. Landscaping for the project is quite extensive and is intended to give the project the appearance of instant maturity. For example, the landscaping along Brea Canyon Road features four 36 in. box Queen Palms and three 25 ft. tall Mexican Fan Palms in addition to extensive shrubbery and ground cover. The parking area will be encased by Yew Pines and Dwarf Salmon along the southerly perimeter and Mexican Fan Palms, Loquats and various shrubs at the easterly boundary along the flood channel'. The interior area of the site will be planted with a variety of trees and shrubs in sizes and quantities sufficient to detract from the visibility of the hardscape. The site provides for two points of ingress and egress, one on Brea Canyon Road, a four lane major arterial, and the other on Lycoming Street, a secondary road. All drive aisles conform to the L.A. County standard of 26 feet. The project is designed with a shared access easement to afford future inter -parcel circulation for any future development. The subject project is designed with parking spaces within this easement. The easement enters the site from the south and follows the flood channel to the Lycoming Street access. Staff recommends that the easement be recorded with the County Recorder upon approval of the City once the instrument is crafted. C. V_EnWRSUWPO1?TSU)R.04-2.M7 2 The parking standard stipulates a parking ratio of one space per 400 sq. ft. of retail/commercial office space. Additionally, the code requires one space per 250 sq. ft. of prof essional/medical office space. -The minimum--requirement--for this project is 45 spaces if no professional /medical uses are located within the structure. Fifty parking spaces have been proposed on site and there is no on -street parking on Brea Canyon Road or Lycoming Street. Landscaping has been distributed in islands to break up the harshness of the hardscape. Thirty one spaces are standard size (18.5 ft. X 8 ft.), 16 are compact stalls (8 ft. X 8 ft.) and three handicapped spaces are proposed and one of these spaces must accommodate van accessibility requirements. The site is currently vacant and the construction of the project will* generate traffic volumes in excess of the previous land use (a single family residence). The increase will not'however have a significant adverse impact. The traffic report prepared for more intensive but similar project identifies a projection of approximately 1,500 trips per day. For this project the trip generation will be less. The report identified mitigation measures which will Assist in reducing the impacts associated with the project. Included as mitigation measures are restriping Lycoming at the approaches to Brea Canyon Road to provide a dual left turn lane into the project and at the intersection and to prohibit parking on Lycoming Street (currently in effect). .The building orientation is toward the interior of the site but the appearance the structure from all sides displays consistency of theme and style. The design of the two - f loor office building features a French architectural style and a height of 3.5 feet. The applicant has proposed the primary exterior finish as Bisque stucco complemented by a darker Balsa accent. Additional channel accents are incorporated over areas of the first floor in the 'central .portion of the building and the corners. The project offers second floor access to the outside via balconies from all elevations and is encased by the precast concrete balustrades. Cloud White trim is proposed for the fascia, trim, qudins and second floor precast concrete balustrades. The material proposed for the 12:12 roof is a typical flat concrete tile of dark adobe, adobe, avante light grey and sand topped with a painted sheet metal roof cap. Perched atop the 'protruding roof elements, the project proposes ornamentations. The windows of the project will display painted sheet metal caps above and typical stucco finish on the remaining perimeter. The applicant has chosen to place the air conditioning and heating equipment on the roof in a well area that, in addition to the parapet, conceals the equipment from view. Signage for the project is proposed for the corner of the site closest to the intersection of Brea Canyon Road and Lycoming Street. The freestanding. sign is designed with a maximum height of 6 ft. The sign will display the "BREA CANYON PLAZA" center identification in 12 in. high illuminated reverse pan channel letters. The stucco monument structure will have a 10 ft. long Q1U=PS1PXP0RTSW"4-2.R" 3 split face in order to maximize exposure to commuters in all directions. The sign features architectural treatments which include a central 6 ft. capped stucco pilaster as well as a 42 in. pilaster with -channels-,* -on the perimeter of each- side. - No other signage is requested as'a part of this application. Development Standards Proposed Project Status 1. Setbacks - Of side yard 10, .20f front yard 20" 01 rear yard 551 2. Height 13 times buildable area 2 stories, 351 3. Parking - 1 space per 400 sq. ft. 45 spaces 4. Basement/Cellar N/A. N/A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: This item has been advertised in San Gabriel Valley Daily Tri ' bune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on November 21, 1994. Public notices were mailed to 167 property owners in a 500 ft. radius of the project 21 days prior to the publi.c.hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Staf f . has . reviewed --environmental information -submitted-as- a- part of - this project and has prepared a Negative Declaration. RECOMMENDATIONS: The staff recommends that the Planning commission open the public hearing and receive testimony and approve the Resolution of Approval with the attached conditions. MANDATORY FINDINGS: 1. The design and layout of the proposed development will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of the neighboring existing and future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrians hazards; 2. The architectural design of the proposed residence is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the harmonious, orderly, and attractive de- velopment contemplated by this Chapter and the contemplated General Plan of the City; 3. The design of the proposed development would , provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good aesthetic use of Q=rMRSUWP0JZTSW"4_1RM 4 materials, texture and color that will remain aesthetically appealing and will retain a reasonably adequate level of maintenance; 4. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the ,public health, safety or *welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. 0 C.IL=RSUMPORTSIDR94-2.Rn PC RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 94-2 AN APPLICATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN 17,867 SQ. FT. TWO STORY PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING ON A VACANT SITE LOCATED AT 21008 LYCOMING STREET, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. (i) Terry Adkinson, acting as the agent for G. Miller Development, 721 Brea Canyon Road, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 has heretofore filed an application as described above in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the project located at 21008 Lycoming Street, Diamond Bar, California, shall be referred 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. 14, 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. (iii) The City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan. Action was taken on this application, as to consistency to the proposed General Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of an Office of Planning and Research Extension of Time granted pursuant to California Government Code Section 65360 and 65361(a). (iv) On December 12, 1994 the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said public hearing on January 23, 1995. (v) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. C) B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found ', determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. C.ILEnWJZSIREPORTSIDR.%-2A.RIIF 1 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the initial study review prepared by the City of Diamond Bar and Negative Declaration No. 94-6 has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act 6f 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, and, further said negative declaration reflects the independent judgement of the City of Diamond Bar; 3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence before the Planning Commission that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, the Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based on the substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the above -referenced public hearing on December 12, 1994 and concluded on January 23, 1995, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, and in conformance with OPR Extension of Time, the Planning Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: 1. The subject property_ is. located at. 21008..Lycoming Street. on. the.. southeast corner of the intersection of Brea Canyon Road and Lycoming Street, an area with a mixed concentration of commercial development bordered by multi -family and single family development; 2. The property is located in Zone C -1 -BE and allows this use as a right of zone. The project site is approximately 40,496 sq. ft. in size and is currently vacant. 3. The applicant's request is for the construction of a two story office building approximately 17,867 sq. ft. in size. 4. The surrounding properties are developed with commercial and light industrial manufacturing use to the north and northwest, a day care center and single family residences to the west, single family and multi -family development to the east and northeast and a recreational vehicle storage to the south of the project site. 5. Notification of the public hearing for this project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily GILT MRSIRRPORTSIDR94-1A RPT 2 Bulletin on November 21, 1994. There are 167 property owners within 500 feet of the project site who were notified by mail. 6. The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the applicable elements of the City's contemplated General Plan, , and design guidelines and architectural criteria of the appropriate district; 7, The design and layout of the proposed development will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of the neighboring existing and future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrians hazards; 8. The architectural design of the proposed residence is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the harmonious, orderly, and attractive development contemplated by this Chapter and the contemplated General Plan of the City; 9. The design of the proposed development 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; 10. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or im- provements in the vicinity. 5. Based on the fmdings ,and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, the Planning Commission hereby approves the application subject to the following restrictions as to use: 1. This permit shall not be effective for any purpose until a duly authorized representative of the owner of the property involved has filed, at the office of Diamond Bar Community Development Department, an affidavit stating that the applicant is aware of, and accepts all the conditions of this permit. 2. That three copies of the revised plot plan and marked Exhibit "A" and conforming to such of the following conditions as can shown on a plan, shall be submitted for approval of the Community Development Director. The. property shall thereafter be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the approved plans. C.IUMxsu?EroxTsinn94-2A.RFr . 3 I This grant is valid for two years and must be exercised (i.e. construction started) within that period or this grant will expire. A one'year extension may be requested in writing and submitted to the City 30 days prior to the expiration date. 4. All construction materials must comply with materials board approved by the Planning Commission and marked as Exhibit "A- 1" and dated January 23, 1995. 5. Notwithstanding any previous Subsection of this Resolution, if the Department of Fish and Game requires 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. 6. The property shall be maintained in a condition which is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlements granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction, shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's _--obligation -to insure. that the waste contractor utilized has obtained - permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. 7. The applicant must comply with all federal, state, Zone C -1 -BE, Engineering Department, and Building and Safety Department requirements unless otherwise amended as a part of this grant. 8. The applicant must submit a revised landscape plan for approval of the Community Development Director prior to issuance of building permits. 9. All drive aisles shall be marked as Fire Lanes and all compact parking stalls shall be marked as "Compact". 10. As proposed project is within Zone AO as designated on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, the applicant shall assure that all earthwork and construction complies with Ordinance No. 30 (1989) . of the City adopting Flood Damage Prevention Regulations. Priorto the issuance of any grading or building permits the applicant shall obtain from the City a Development Permit as required by said ordinance. C. IUTMRSUWPOR TS IDR94-2A. RPT 4 1.1. Applicant shall obtain permission from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts to directly connect building sewers to Sanitation District No. 21 trunk sewer. If permission to connect is not obtained, applicant shall prepare plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and construct public sanitary sewer to extend existing public sanitary sewer to serve the project prior to occupancy of building. 12. Applicant shall obtain permission from the Los Angeles County Flood Control District for access, driveways, parking and other improvements as proposed over District easement. 13. Applicant shall install street lights on Marbelite poles along the frontages of the project to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 14. Applicant shall install street trees along the frontages of the project to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 15. Applicant shall submit to the City for processing, a lot line adjustment application prior to issuance of building permits. The applicant shall record the approved lot line adjustment with the County of Los Angeles and provide to the City verification thereof, prior to issuance of a Cetificate of Occupancy. - .16. - The—project .--shall. -be-- designed . with . - commercial driveway approaches with a minimum 30 ft. width in order to accommodate proposed traffic flow. 17. Applicant shall comply with the recommended mitigation measures identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum dated January, 1995, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 18. The applicant shall work cooperatively with the adjacent property owner in order to obtain, as feasible, appropriate agreements related to reciprocal vehicular access and parking in conjuntion with future development of the southerly adjacent parcel. 19. That all grading, drainage plans and wall plans shall conform to all City standards or as amended by this action. 20. The office building is restricted to non-professional and non- medical uses in order for the project to conform to the parking standards. 21. The applicant shall construct landscaped berms on the perimeter C:1UnWRSIRHP0RTS1DR94-24.RPT 5 of the parking areas it abuts the public streets. 22. The project shall be conditioned to include a Trip Reduction/Travel Demand Management Plan (TR/TDM) program sufficient to comply with the CMP program. 23. The project shall provide traffic mitigation consistent with the CMP sufficient to account for a minimum of 293 development points as determined by the L.A. County CMP program guidelines. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, to Terry Adkinson and G. Miller Development at the addresses as set forth on the applica- tion. 19W."11,21 No •10 11010 LOW96)• a 01F.10 [ David Meyer, Chairman I, James DeStefano, Secretary of the Planning Commission 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 23rd day of January, 1995, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: [COMIV.IISSIONERS:] NOES: [COMMISSIONERS:] ABSTAIN: [COMMISSIONERS:] ABSENT: [COMMISSIONERS:] Attest: James DeStefano, Secretary C.1UTTERSMEPORTSIDR94-2A.Rn 6 PC RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 94-2 AN APPLICATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN 17,867 SQ. FT. TWO STORY PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING ON A VACANT SITE LOCATED AT 21008 LYCOMING STREET, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. . (i) Terry Adkinson, acting as the agent for G. Miller Development, 721 Brea Canyon Road, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 has heretofore filed an application as described above in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the project located at 21008 Lyco'ming Street, Diamond Bar, California, shall be referred 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. 14, 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. (iii) The City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan. Action was taken on this application, as to consistency to the proposed General Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of an Office of Planning and Research Extension of Time granted pursuant to California Government Code Section 65360 and 65361(a). (iv) On December 12, 1994 the Planning Commission of the City_ of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said public hearing on January 23, 1995. C� (v) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution 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. 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. C.- ILE TTERS LREPOR TS IDR94-2A. Kff 1 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the initial study review prepared by the City of Diamond Bar and Negative Declaration No. 94-6 has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental -Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, and, further said negative declaration reflects the independent judgement of the City of Diamond Bar; 3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered ,the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence before the Planning Commission that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, the Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based on the substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the above -referenced public hearing on December 12, 1994 and concluded on January 23, 1995, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, and in conformance with OPR Extension of Time, the Planning Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: _l._ The subject_property.islocated.at_21008 Lycoming._Street.on the southeast corner of the intersection of Brea Canyon Road and Lycoming Street, an area with a mixed concentration of commercial development bordered by multi -family and single family development; 2. The property is located in Zone C -1 -BE and allows this use as a right of zone. The project site is approximately 40,496 sq. ft. in size and is currently vacant. 3. The applicant's request is for the construction of a two story office building approximately 17,867 sq. ft. in size. 4. The surrounding properties are developed with commercial and light industrial manufacturing use to the north and northwest, a day care center and single family residences to the west, single family and multi -family development to the east and northeast and a recreational vehicle storage to the south of the project site. 5. Notification of the public hearing for this project has been made in the San Gabriel` Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily r UXTMxsinaroxzswxsa-za.xrr 2 Bulletin on November 21, 1994. There are 167 property owners within 500 feet of the project site who were notified by mail. 6. The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the applicable elements of the City's contemplated General Plan, and design guidelines and architectural criteria of the appropriate district; 7, The design and layout of the proposed development will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of the neighboring existing and future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrians hazards; 8. The architectural design of the proposed residence is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the harmonious, orderly, and attractive development contemplated by this Chapter and the contemplated General Plan of the City; 9. The design of the proposed development 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; 10. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or im- provements in the vicinity. 5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, the Planning Commission hereby approves the application subject to the following restrictions as to use: 1. This permit shall not be effective for any purpose until a duly authorized representative of the owner of the property involved has filed, at the office of Diamond Bar Community Development Department, an affidavit stating that the applicant is aware of, and accepts all the conditions of this permit. 2. That three copies of the revised plot plan and marked Exhibit "A" and conforming to such of the following conditions as can shown on a plan, shall be submitted for approval of the Community Development Director. The. property shall thereafter be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the approved plans. C:IUnWRSIRRPORTSlDR94-2A.RPT 3 3. This grant is valid for two years and must be exercised (i.e. construction started) within that period or this grant will expire. A one year extension may be requested in writing and submitted to the City 30 days prior to the expiration date. 4. All construction materials must comply with materials board approved by the Planning Commission and marked as Exhibit "A- 1" and dated January 23, 1995. 5. Notwithstanding any previous Subsection of this Resolution, if the Department of Fish and Game requires 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. 6. The property shall be maintained in a condition which is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlements granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction, shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's _..obligation.to- insure that_the-waste. contractor- utilized has_obtained_._..___.--- permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. 7. The applicant must comply with all federal, state, Zone C -1 -BE, Engineering Department, and Building and Safety Department requirements unless otherwise amended as a part of this grant. 8. The applicant must submit a revised landscape plan for approval of the Community Development Director prior to issuance of building permits. 9. All drive aisles shall be marked as Fire Lanes and all compact parking stalls shall be marked as "Compact 10. As proposed project is within Zone AO as designated on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, the applicant shall assure that all earthwork and construction complies with Ordinance No. 30 (1989) of the City adopting Flood Damage Prevention Regulations. Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits the applicant shall obtain from the City a Development Permit as required by said ordinance. C:IIBTTERSiRRPORTSIDR94-1A.RPT 4 11. Applicant shall obtain permission from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts to directly connect building sewers to Sanitation District No. 21 trunk sewer. If permission to connect is not obtained, applicant shall prepare plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and construct public sanitary sewer to extend existing public sanitary sewer to serve the project prior to occupancy of building. 12. Applicant shall obtain permission from the Los Angeles County Flood Control District for access, driveways, parking and other improvements as proposed over District easement. 13. Applicant shall install street lights on Marbelite poles along the frontages of the project to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 14. Applicant shall install street trees along the frontages of the project to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 15. Applicant shall submit to the City for processing, a lot line adjustment application prior to issuance of building permits. The applicant shall record the approved lot line adjustment with the County of Los Angeles and provide to the City verification thereof, prior to issuance of a Cetifica.te of Occupancy. _.The_ _project .shall be designed with --commercial __driveway-- - - approaches with a minimum 30 ft. width in order to accommodate proposed traffic flow. 17. Applicant shall comply with the recommended mitigation measures identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis. Addendum dated January, 1995, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 18. The applicant shall work cooperatively with the adjacent property owner in order to obtain, as feasible, appropriate agreements related to reciprocal vehicular access and parking in conjuntion with future development of the southerly adjacent parcel. 19. That all grading, drainage plans and wall plans shall conform to all City standards or as amended by this action. 20. The office building is restricted to non-professional and non- medical uses in order for the project to conform to the parking standards. 21. The applicant shall construct landscaped berms on the perimeter C: LU=RSLUPORTSIDRSW-2A.RPT 5 of the parking areas it abuts the public streets. 22. The project shall be conditioned to include a Trip Reduction/Travel Demand Management Plan (TR/TDM) program sufficient to comply with the CMP program. 23. The project shall provide traffic mitigation consistent with the CMP sufficient to account for a minimum of 293 development points as determined by the L.A. County CMP program guidelines. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, to Terry Ad%inson and G. Miller Development at the addresses as set forth on the applica- tion. ••••• r • r •r•• r •r -1 - • -• •• • �� • • • : • r MIN r :• • David Meyer, Chairman I, James DeStefano, Secretary of the Planning Commission 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 23rd day of January, 1995, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: - [COMMISSIONERS:] NOES: [COMNIISSIONERS:] ABSTAIN: [COMIVIISSIONERS:] ABSENT: [COMMISSIONERS:] Attest: James DeStefano, Secretary C.1UTTERSMEP0RTSIDR94-Z4.RPT 6 IT "All LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT L_YCOM 1 NG S TREE T SCALE V - 100' SEE DETAIL BELOW \ AREA OF ADJUSTMENT \s 2, 037.47 S. F. s, TO LOT 7 LOT 7 S75.50. E y ZOS _ _ _ TRACT 216 6 N75. 2 �2-M - ` F� OOD N pC l COUNTY NB2•.W 05' E 211.98 1�, 02' AREA OF ADJUSTMENT ` 92.�N0T33'55'N15.00' 796.23 S.F. 97 AREA OF ADJUSTMENT TO LOT 79 �I 225.00 S. f. TO LOT 79 \ N82' 26' 05' E 15.001 LOT 7 9 S07'33'55'E 15.00' O TRACT 33069 O .y0 . R-267.50' `- L-80.18' !o'29AREA OF ADJUSTMENT -- r \ 2, 037.47 S. F: TO LOT 7 267.50' L- 22.98' `507-315 519E s'\ 76,50,05,E F \ S82'26� 00 \`N7�'42 0 4441 4' N75' t`2.M N B7 88' 63.00'_ .n 582' 26' 05' N 582! 26-05 N \ `-AREA OF ADJUSTMENT 11 r' T A 1 1 796.23 S. F. TRAFFIC BIPACT ANALYSIS ADDENDUM THE BREA CANYON PLAZA Prepared for: G. MILLER DEVELOPMENT CO. Prepared by: and Assocites, Inc. c January 1995 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ADDENDUM FOR THE BREA CANYON PLAZA Prepared for: G. Miller Development Co. 721 South -Brea Canyon Rd., Suite 7 Walnut, California 91789 Prepared by: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2100 W Orangewood Ave., Suite 140 Orange, California 92668 0 January 1995 SUMMARY Kimley-Horn and Associates has been retained to conduct professional transportation engineering services for the purpose of updating the August 30, 1989 Traffic Impact Study performed by ASL Consulting Engineers. The previous study was done for a proposed site plan that included an office/retail complex with 21,000 square feet of total space. The current site plan calls for approximately 18,100 square feet of office use. City staff has indicated that an addendum to the 1989 report would be an acceptable format for this updated study. This study includes a comparison of. "existing" 1988 and "future" 1995 traffic conditions; estimated project trip generation and distribution, based on the "old" and "new" land uses; and project -related impacts in the context of build -out conditions for both the "old" and "new" land uses. In addition, this study assesses potential traffic flow at shared access points on the project site as well as on-site circulation issues. EXISTING CONDITIONS To analyze the potential traffic 'impacts of the proposed new office building, it was necessary to reassemble existing condition traffic data. Updated traffic volumes were collected on December 15, 1994 and are shown on Figure 1. Figure 2-1 from the previous study by ASL illustrates the "existing" 1988 traffic volumes used for that analysis. As the figures indicate, the study area -intersections on Brea Canyon Road show fewer trips, primarily in the northbound direction, in 1994 than in 1988. This decrease in trips can be attributed to the opening of the Grand Avenue roadway link connecting Valley Boulevard to SR -60. The opening of this link diverts a number of trips from Brea Canyon Road onto Grand Avenue. PROJECT TRAFFIC Trip Generation Trip generation and peak hour trip ends were determined to establish the magnitude of any potential traffic impacts of the newly proposed office building on the existing street system. The trip generation of the new land use was determined using the trip generation rates and equations from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Report (Fifth Edition, 1991) for General Office gM Category 710). Table 1 shows the estimated daily and peak hour trips generated by the proposed project. The table also illustrates the daily and peak hour trips previously estimated for the 1989 ASL report. TABLE -1 SUINSIARY OF PROJECT TRIP GENERATION AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT ADT IN' OUT IN OUT New (1995) 386 45 6 9 44 Old (1989)* 1507 50 19 70 103 099020.000reaCyn.Rpt -1- January 11, 1995 The new office only project will generate 1121 fewer daily trips than the previously studied office/retail project. There will be 5 fewer inbound trips and 13 fewer outbound trips in the morning peak hour, and 61 fewer inbound and 59 fewer outbound trips in the evening peak hour for the new project versus the old project. Trin Distribution The original trip distribution characteristics used in the 1989 ASL study were found to remain reasonable carried over for this study. The, directional distribution characteristics were used to assign the new project traffic to the study area intersections previously determined. Figure 2 shows the project traffic volumes for the new project. Figure 3-3 from the previous study shows the project traffic volumes for the old project. BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC The new office development is anticipated to take two years to complete; therefore 1997 has been used as the build -out year for this study. The 6.1 percent two year growth rate used in the original study was used again in this update and applied to the existing 1994 traffic volumes to project the anticipated traffic for 1997. Figure 3 illustrates the background traffic volumes at project build -out. Estimated project traffic volumes were added to the background traffic volumes to help determine the impact that the proposed project would have on the build -out traffic conditions. The background plus project traffic volumes are shown on Figure 4. IMPACT ANALYSIS The previous study, performed prior to the adoption of Congestion Management Program standards, used TRACS computer modeling software to evaluate intersection level of service. The level of service (LOS) analysis for the new project was conducted using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method as specified by the 1993 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County. Each study area intersection was reanalyzed for the new project based on existing, 1997 background, and 1997 background plus project traffic conditions. Table 2 summarizes the "existing" level of service found at each intersection and compares it to the "existing" LOS found in the original study. Between 1988 and 1994, the LOS at three of the study area intersections decreased slightly, while the LOS at one intersection actually improved. The LOS differences between both studies can be attributed to: the change in traffic volumes between 1988 and 1994, consistent with the overall growth in the area; the opening of the Grand Avenue extension; and the inherent difference between the methods used to evaluate the LOS. If the 1988 "existing" conditions were reevaluated using current CMP analysis methodology the LOS results would be approximately .10 higher than the 1989 ASL study results indicate. This difference in LOS can be attributed to a lost time factor of .10 that is currently required under the CMP standards. Table 3 illustrates the future background LOS results for both studies. The table shows that the 1997 LOS is somewhat higher at some of the intersections than the 1991 LOS. This increase in LOS can again be attributed to the change in "existing" traffic conditions. Table 4 shows the expected LOS for background plus project traffic conditions for both the 1989 study and this 1995 update. The old report indicates a LOS ranging from "A" (Brea Canyon/Lycoming, Brea Canyon/Golden Springs, and SR -60 EB/Golden Springs) in the morning peak hour to "E" (Brea 099020.001BreaCyn.Rpt -2- January 11, 1995 Canyon/SR-60 WB) in the rang evening peak hour. The updated study shows a e of LOS from "B" (Brea t> Canyon/Golden Springs and SR -60 EB/Golden Springs) in the morning peak hour to "E" (Brea Springs t) 0 Canyon/Lycoming, Brea Canyon/SR-60 WB and Brea Canyon/Golden Springs) in the evening peak hour. The results of the impact analysis indicate that all of the study area intersections will continue to operate at an acceptable level of service under the new 1997 future background plus project conditions. TABLE SUMMARY OF EXISTING TRAFFIC LOS INTERSECTION NEW PROJECT (199) OLD PROJECT (19$9)* AAIPEAK PM PEAK AM PEAK PM PEAK ICU T -LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS Brea Canyon/Lycoming .67 B .86 D .38 A .61 A Brea Canyon/SR-60 WB .76 C .86 D .63 A .89 D Brea Canyon/Golden Springs .58 A M2 E .51 A .76 C -60 EB/Golden Springs 50 A 63 B .41 A .52 F A TABLE SUASIARY OF BACKGROUND TRAFFIC LOS INTERSECTION NEW PROJECT. UM OLD PROJECT (1991)* - AAI PEAK PINI PEAK AM PEAK PM PEAK ICU -1 LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS Brea Canyon/Lycoming .71 C .90 E .39 A .64 B Brea Canyon/SR-60 WB .74 C .90 E .67 B .95 E Brea Canyon/Golden Springs .61 B .97 E .56 A -F .81 D SR 60 EB/Golden Springs 64 B 66 B J .42 A 7.5= fA TABLE SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT LOS INTERSECTION' NEW PROJECT (1997) OLD PROJECT (1991)* AM PEAK PM PEAK AM PEAK A K PAI PEAK ICL ICU 7 -LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS Brea Canyon/Lycoming .72 C .91 E .39 A .69 B Brea Canyon/SR-60 WB .74 C .91 E .68 a .97 E Brea Canyon/Golden Springs .61 B .98 E .57 A .82 D SR -60 EB/Golden Springs .67 .42 A 56 fA ryfflr. I-Rct Analvsis mn rt nroduced by ASL ConsuldnEr Eneinctn. 099020.00WreaCyn.Rpt -3- January' 11, 1995 TRAFFIC FLOW AND CIRCULATION Internal Site Circulation Access to Brea Canyon Plaza and circulation within it were also considered as part of this updated study. The parking supply *meets and exceeds City code per the architects site plan data. Circulation within the site is adequate and will allow vehicles to comfortably enter, park and exit with little or no problem. The layout of parking and the relationship to the driveway activities is of common design and should serve the site adequately. Furthermore, an analysis of SU -30 truck turning movements indicates that garbage trucks should be able to access the site without any obstructions. Shared Access The City has expressed concern about future access to the parcel of land south of Brea. Canyon Plaza and any potential limitations at the south site access locations. The south site currently has only direct access to Brea Canyon Road. The geometry of Brea Canyon Road and the spacing of intersections (Lycoming and WB SR -60 ramps) may indicate that an additional access point could be needed if the south site is redeveloped. Residential tracts along Lycoming preclude access to the south site; thus, a shared access arrangement with Brea Canyon Plaza is the only viable mean to provide an additional access point for the south site. A site plan for a 1989 proposed development on the south site was obtained and used for this study. Since the 1989 traffic study was unable to be located in the City files, it was necessary to recreate an estimate of trip generation, trip distribution and trip assigiunent using the same assumptions and principles assumed for the north site. The results of the trip generation estimates indicate that there would be 3,075 average daily trips produced by the south site. Of the daily trips, 357 would occur in the morning peak hour and 323 trips would occur in the evening peak hour. Trip distribution estimates show 25% of the daily traffic from the south site would utilize a shared access driveway through the north site. This results in a potential access demand from the south site across the north site of 52 inbound and 37 outbound trips in the morning peak hour, and 42 inbound and 39 outbound trips in the evening peak hour. The current design of the Brea Canyon Plaza driveway on Lycoming could handle the additional traffic created by the south site if a shared access arrangement is needed. Three or four parking spaces would most likely need to be eliminated on the Brea Canyon Plaza site to provide access to the south site. The elimination of these spaces could cause Brea Canyon Plaza to fall short of the parking spaces required by City code. If the shared access is to be implemented, a shared parking arrangement should be made with the developer of the south site to provide parking on that site to replace all of the parking spaces that would be eliminated, from the Brea Canyon Plaza site, to construct the shared access driveway. 099020.000reaC�n.Rpt -4- January 11, 1995 N O Z Oz Ld it m Co Co 0) Co 17/33 (a U') 1814/99 116/191 f LYCOMING 64/134 P 46/111 �o 9 —)1 155/lk7g�/ > U)tV <Z7-> F=t PROJECT SITE NOT TO SCALE 'p 991 /831 0 r 0 276/535 00 0 U0 NOT TO SCALE FIGURE I EXISTING 1994 TRAFFIC VOLUMES LEGEND XX/YY = AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMES @) = STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS mmp� mrl LJ= Kimley—Horn and Associates, Inc. N W m m F. 0 0 276/535 00 622/540 19/23 19 /� .287 /270 J SPRINGS RD. 174/225 r 260/889 2 146 Ou 128/1 GOLDEN GOLD 330/897— po tn tn to to to " I'll, " 13/25 to c) Ca It ro FIGURE I EXISTING 1994 TRAFFIC VOLUMES LEGEND XX/YY = AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMES @) = STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS mmp� mrl LJ= Kimley—Horn and Associates, Inc. N W m m F. Gf. 44 LYCOMING G. POMONA FR`q-(. d � a= P _ Gf. 44 LYCOMING G. POMONA FR`q-(. � 4 COLIMA RD- �sr 851--�' tk8` tl G7 LEGEND 10,700- EXISTING DAILY VOLUMES (2 -WAY) i— 1,496- P.M. PEAK VOLUME Gf GATEWAY. ' NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES 1 Q /NTER,9EGT/DN /HUMBER N.T s. ,ASS. Consulting Engineers FIGURE 2- Arcadia' • Santa Ana : Palm Springs E X IST I N G CONDITIONS Rancho Cucamonga Camarillo (AL1GUrS'T 988) i d � a= z c� �. ?o Z a w Q U Q _i � � 4 COLIMA RD- �sr 851--�' tk8` tl G7 LEGEND 10,700- EXISTING DAILY VOLUMES (2 -WAY) i— 1,496- P.M. PEAK VOLUME Gf GATEWAY. ' NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES 1 Q /NTER,9EGT/DN /HUMBER N.T s. ,ASS. Consulting Engineers FIGURE 2- Arcadia' • Santa Ana : Palm Springs E X IST I N G CONDITIONS Rancho Cucamonga Camarillo (AL1GUrS'T 988) i Q M z 0 z w 10 Lip. F LYCOMING ... ..... .................. Y. 4c�s IT E pOtAot4A. IFIR\v. 7 J COLIMA RD' LEGEND *— JU EXITING TRAFFIC 4•- 00 'ENTERING TRAFFIC N.T.S. ASL Consulting Engineers FIGURE 3-3 Arcadia • Santa Am • Palm Sprhigs PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES Rancho Cucamonga. • Camarillo P. M. PEAK HOUR LYCOMING pOMONA FR`NY- GOLDEN SPRINGS d Cr Z 0 Z a a w m 0 t0 00 \� %�-20/48 0) 01 ? ---90/109 1 r 127/229 68/142 54/119 -*- `s "c� s� 164/190 -} �.Q S � I L iV c4 RTH INOT TO SCALE PROJECT SITE „ ' t LYCOMING pOMONA FR`NY- GOLDEN SPRINGS d Cr Z 0 Z a a w m 0 t0 00 \� %�-20/48 0) 01 ? ---90/109 1 r 127/229 68/142 54/119 -*- `s "c� s� 164/190 -} �.Q S � I L iV c4 RTH INOT TO SCALE PROJECT SITE Co N to 295/579 toa M n 660/573 ,J j �.. (' 20/24 185/239-, 350/952 14/27 a, "� ""' A,:\.-� 261 /21, i�ta p� ao,� �� 189 173 276/g13`' �— ,36/155 a LEGEND a XX/YY = AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMES 3 Q = STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS a w m FIGURE 3 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. „ �bi R. Co N to 295/579 toa M n 660/573 ,J j �.. (' 20/24 185/239-, 350/952 14/27 a, "� ""' A,:\.-� 261 /21, i�ta p� ao,� �� 189 173 276/g13`' �— ,36/155 a LEGEND a XX/YY = AM/PM TRAFFIC VOLUMES 3 Q = STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS a w m FIGURE 3 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. cr- Ir Z a O Li- z Ld Q V _J Q N w a m N m 37 (4) < N v (ZZ) i t► a'!59 (97) LYCOMING :57( ......... .. S ITE J 4 O • iso Ulo) r� - � �' COLIMA ga2C9o2)—► rs�Cr�) 'fit w�, o,r3 J LEGEND 181 (176) TOTAL BACKGROUND TRAFFIC TRAFFIC NTS. ASL. Consulting Engineers FIGURE 4.-1 Arcadia • . Santa Ma Palm Springs BACKGROUND PLUS RanchoCucarrowga • Canwino PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES P. MI.' PEAK HOUR .Offiloin INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION: Brea Canyon Road/Lycoming DATE: 12/20194 TIME: AM PEAK HOUR ------------- BRAELYC.wki r n ' INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION: Brea Canyon Road/Lycoming DATE: 12/20194 TIME: AM PEAK HOUR ------------- BRAELYC.wki INTERSECTION: Brea Canyon Road/Lycoming DATE: 12/20/94 TIME: PM PEAK HOUR ------BREALYC.wkf EXISTING CONDITIONS 1997 BACKGROUND 1997 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT ---------------------- No. --------------- AM Peak CriL -------------------- 1997 AM Peak Crit PROJ. PROJ. PM Peak Crit Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C • Mvmt Gwth Vol. ---- --- V/C ---- Mvmt ----- VOL ---- Vol. --- V/C ---- Mvmt ----- --------- NL 1 --- --- ---- 1600 259 0.16 ----- 0 0.061 275 0.17 0 0 275 0.17 0 NR 1 1600 60 0.04 0 0.061 64 0.04 0 27 91 0.06 0 NT 2 3200 1242 0.39 1 0.061 1318 0.41 1 0 1318 0.41 1 SL 1 1600 14 0.01 1 0.061 15 0.01 1 14 29 0.02 1 SR 1 1600 65 0.04 0 0.061 69 0.04 0 0 69 0.04 0 ST 2 3200 561 0.18 0 0.061 595 0.19 0 0 595 0.19 0 EL 1 800 64 0.08 0 0.061 68 0.08 0 0 68 0.08 0 ER 1 1600 155 0.10 0 0.061 164 0.10 0 0 164 0.10 • 0 ET 1 1600 46 0.03 1 0.061 49 0.03 1 5 54 0.03 1 WL 1 800 116 0.15 1 0.061 123 0.15 1 4 127 0.16 1 WR 1 1600 17 0.01 0 0.061 18 0.01 0 2 20 0.01 0 WT 1 1600 84 0.05 0 0.061 89 0.06 0 1 90 0.06 0 0.33 N/S component 0.40 N/S component 0.42 N/S component RtTn. comp. 0.43 0.00 E/W component 0.17 E/W component 0.18 E!W component Lost Time 0.19 0.10 RtTm comp. 0.00 RtTn. comp. 0.00 RtTn. comp. ICU 0.00 0.90 Lost Time 0.10 Lost Time Critical movement identified by a 1. 0.10 Lost Time 0.10 ICU 0.67 ICU 0.71 ICU 0.72 Critical movement identified by a 1. Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION: Brea Canyon Road/Lycoming DATE: 12/20/94 TIME: PM PEAK HOUR ------BREALYC.wkf EXISTING CONDITIONS 1997 BACKGROUND 1997 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT ---------------------- No. --------------- PM Peak Crit -------------------- 1997 PM Peak Crit PROJ. PM Peak Crit Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt Gwth Vol. --- V/C ---- MvmL ----- VOL Vol.V/C ---- --- ---- Mvmt ----- --------- NL 1 ---- --- ---- ----- 1600 187 0.12 0 ---- 0.051 1198 0.12 0 0 198 0.12 0 NR 1 160084 0.05 0 0.061 89 0.06 0 5 94 0.06 0 NT 2, 3200 1363 0.43 1 0.061 '1446 0.45 1 0 1446 0.45 1 SL 1 1600 38 0.02 1 0.061 40 0.03 1 3 43 0.03 1 SR 1 1500 39 0.02 0 0.061 41 0.03 0 0 41 0.03 0 ST 2 3200 984 0.31 0 0.061 1044 0.33 0 0 1044 0.33 0 EL 1 800 134 0.17 0 0.061 142 0.18 0 26 168 0.21 0 ER 1 1600 179 0.11 0 0.061 190 0.12 0 13 203 0.13 0 ET 1 1600 111 0.07 1 0.061 118 0.07 1 4 122 0.08 1 WL 1 800 191 0.24 1 0.061 203 0.25 1 0 203 0.25 1 WR 1 1600 33 0.02 0 0.061 35 0.02 0 0 35 0.02 0 WT 1 1600 99 0.06 0 0.061 105 0.07 0 1 106 0.07 0 N/S component 0.45 N/S component 0.48 N/S component 0.48 E/W component 0.31 E/W component 0.33 E/W component 0.33 RLTn. comp. 0.00 RtTn. comp. 0.00 RtTn. comp. 0.00 Lost Time 0.10 Lost Time 0.10 Lost Time 0.10 ICU 0.86 ICU 0.90 ICU 0.91 Critical movement identified by a 1. Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement NA - Not Applicable •- MovementNotAllowed Critical movement identified by a 1. Ten lanes for a right tum Indicates free movement NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION: Brea Canyon Road/SR-60 WB Ramp Q INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET HOUR FOR ON-OFF RAMP INTERSECTION BREA60WB.wk1 INTERSECTION: Brea Canyon Road/SR-60 WB Ramp EXISTING CONDITIONS 1997 BACKGROUND 1997 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT ---------------------- No• DATE: 12/20/94 ------------------ 1997 PM Peak Crit PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Direction Movemnt Lanes TIME: AM PEAK HOUR Mvmt. Gwth Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C MvmL ARTERIAL: --------------------------- BREA60WB.wkl -2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 1997 BACKGROUND 1 1997 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT ---------------------- 0.07 --------------- No. AM Peak - -Crit. ------------------ 1997 ----- AM Peak Crit.------PROJ. - AM Peak Crit. Direction Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C ---- ---- ----- Mvmt. ---- Gwth Vol. V/C ---- --- ----- NA Mvmt. ---- VOL. Vol. V/C ---- --- '----- Mvmt. ---- 0 ------------- ---- ARTERIAL Brea Canyon Road 3200 830 0.26 0 0.061 681 0.28 0 3 804 -------Left 2 2400 193 NA 0 0.081 205 0.09 0 0 205 0.09 0 NORTH Right •` NA NA 0 NA 0 0.061 0 NA 0 0 0 NA 0 Through 2 3200 595 0.25 1 0.061 631 0.20 1 18 647 0.20 1 Left •• NA NA 0 NA 0 0.051 0 NA 0 0 0 NA 0 SOUTH Right 1 1600 199 0.12 1 0.061 211 0.13 1 1 212. 0.13 1 Through 2 3200 320 0.10 0 0.061 340 0.11 0 2 342 0.11 0 RAMP: SR -60 WS 0 O.C61 882 0.37 0 2 884 0.37 0 ----- Thrgh •• NA NA 0 NA 0 0.061 0 NA 0 0 0 NA, 0 WEST flight 2 2400 991 0.41 1 0.061 1051 0.44 1 11 1062 0.44 1 Left 1 800 211 0.26 0 0.061 224 0.28 0 0 224 0.28 0 EAST Left •' NA 0 0 NA 0 0.061 0 NA 0 0 0 NA 0 Right •• NA 0 0 NA 0 0.061 0 - NA 0, 0 0 NA 0 Thrgh •' NA 0 0 NA 0 0.061 0 NA 0 0 0 NA 0 Ramp Component Arterial Component 0.25 Arterial Component 0.20 Arterial Component Right -turn Component 0.20 0.00 Ramp Component 0.41 Ramp Component 0.44 Ramp Component Lost Time 0.44 0.10 Right -tum Component 0.00 Right -tum Component 0.00 flight -tum Component 0.10 0.00 ICU Lost Time 0.10 Lost Time .0.90 0.10 Lost Time 0.10 ` - Movement Not Allowed ICU 0.76 ICU 0.74 ICU 0.74 •- MovementNotAllowed Critical movement identified by a 1. Ten lanes for a right tum Indicates free movement NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION: Brea Canyon Road/SR-60 WB Ramp DATE: 12/20/94 TIME: PM PEAK HOUR BREA60WB.wk1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 1997 BACKGROUND 1997 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT ---------------------- No• --------------- PM Peak Crit. ------------------ 1997 PM Peak Crit PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Direction Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Gwth Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C MvmL ARTERIAL: -2 2400 160 0.07 1 0.061 170 0.07 1 0 170 0.07 1 NORTH flight" NA NA 0 NA 0 0.061 0 NA 0 0 0 NA 0 Through 2 3200 830 0.26 0 0.061 681 0.28 0 3 804 0.28 0 Left" NA NA 0 NA 0 0.061 0 NA 0 0 0 NA 0 SOUTH Right 1 1ciao 320 0.20 0 0.061 340 0.21 0 9 349 0.22 0 Through 2 3200 1037 0.32 1 0.061 1100 0.34 1 18 1118 0.35 1 RAMP: SR -60 WB --------Thrgh `• NA NA 0 0.00 0 0.061 0 NA 0 0 0 NA 0 WEST Right 2 2400 831 .0.35 0 O.C61 882 0.37 0 2 884 0.37 0 Left 1 800 293 0.37 1 0.061 311 0.39 1 0 311 0.39 1 Left •• NA NA 0 NA 0 0.061 0 NA 0 0 0 NA 0 Right ^ NA NA 0 NA 0 0.061 0 NA 0 0 - 0 NA 0 Thrgh " NA NA 0 NA 0 0.061 0 NA 0 0 0 NA 0 Arterial Component 0.39 Arterial Component 0.41 Arterial Component 0.42 Ramp Component 0.37 Ramp Component 0.39 Ramp Component 0.39 Right -turn Component 0.00 Right -tum Component 0.00 Right -tum Component 0.00 Lost Time 0.10 Lost Time 0.10 Lost Time 0.10 ICU 0.85 ICU .0.90 ICU 0.91 ` - Movement Not Allowed Critical movement identified by a 1. Ten lanes for a right tum indicates free movement INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION: Brea Canyon Road/Gilden Springs Road DATE: 12/20/94 TIME: AM PEAK HOUR M� BRAEGLD.wkt EXISTING CONDITIONS 1997 BACKGROUND 1997 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT ---------------------- --------------- No. AM Peak Crit -------------------- 1997 AM Peak Crit PROD. . PM Peak Crit. Movemnt lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt Gwth Vol. V/C ---- --- ---- Mvmt ----- VOL Vol. ---- --- V/C MvmL ---- ----- --------- --- --- ---- ----- NL 1 1600 171 0.11 1 0.061 181 0.11 1 0 181 0.11 1 NR 1 1600 136 0.09 0 0.061 144 0.09 0 0 144 0.09 0 NT 2 3200 201 0.06 0 0.061 213 0.07 0 5 218 0.07 0 SL 1 1600 102 0.06 0 0.061 108 0.07 0 0 108 0.07 0 SR 1 1600 386 0.24 1 0.061 410 0.26 1 2 412 0.26 1 ST 2 3200 332 0.10 1 0.061 352 0.11 1 1 .353 0.11 1 EL 2 2400 287 0.12 1 0.061 305 0.13 1 9 314 0.13 1 ER. 1 1600 128 0.08 0 0.061 136 0.08 0 0 136 0.08 0 ET 2 3200 260 0.08 0 0.061 276 0.09 0 0 276 0.09 0 W1. 1 1600 179 0.11 0 0.061 190 0.12 0 0 190 0.12 0 WR 1 1600 244 0.15 0 0.061 259 0.16 0 2 261 0.16 0 WT 2 3200 435 0.14 1 0.061 462 0.14 1 0 462 0.14 1 N/S component 0.21 N/S component 0.22 N/S component 0.22 E/W component 0.26 E/W component 0.27 E/W component 0.27 RtTn. comp. 0.02 RLTn. comp. 0.02 RtTn. comp. 0.02 Lost Time 0.10 Lost Time 0.10 LostT•une 0.10 ICU 0.58 ICU 0.61 ICU 0.61 Critical movement identified by a 1. Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION: Brea Canyon Road/Golden Springs Road DATE: 12/20/94 TIME- PM PEAK HOUR BREAGLD.wkt EXISTING CONDITIONS 1997 BACKGROUND - 1997 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT --- No. PM Peak Crit 1997 1997 --_---PM Peak Crit PROJ. PM Peak Crit Movemnt Lanes Gap. Vol. V/C MvmL Gwth Vol. --- V/C - Mvmt VOL Vol. V/C MvmL --------- ---- --- ---- ----- NL 1 1600 177 0.11 0 ---- 0.061 188 0.12 0 0 188 0.12 0 NR 1 1600 503 0.31 1 0.061 534 0.33 1 0 534 0.33 1 NT 2 3200 430 0.13 1 0.061 456 0.14 1 1 457 0.14 1 SL 1 1600 285 0.18 1 0.061 302 0.19 1 2 304 0.19 1 SR 1 1600 590 ' 0.37 1 0.061 626 0.39 1 11 637 0.40 1 ST 2 3200 468 0.15 0 0.061 497 0.16 0 4 501 0.16 0 EL 2 1600 270 0.17 0 0.061 285 0.18 0 2 288 0.18 0 ' ER 1 1600 146 0.09 0 0.061 155 0.10 0 0 155 0.10 0 ET 2 3200 889 0.28 1 0.061 943 0.29 1 0 943 0.29. 1 WL 1 1600 163 0.10 1 0.061 173 0.11 1 0 173 0.11 1 WR 1 1600 199 0.12 0 0.061 '211 0.13 0 0 211 0.13 0 WT 2 3200 413 0.13 0 0.061 438 0.14 0 0 438 0.14 0 N/S component 0.31 N/S component 0.33 ITS component 0.33 E/W component 0.38 E/W component 0.40 E/W component 0.40 RLTn. comp. 0.13 RLTn. comp. 0.14 RLTn. comp. 0.14 Lost Time 0.10 Lost Time 0.10 Lost Time 0.10 ICU 0.92 ICU 0.97 ICU 0.98 Critical movement identified by a 1. Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement NA- Not Applicable • - Movement Not Allowed Critical movement identified by a 1. Ten lanes for a right tum indicates free movement NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION: INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION DATE: WORKSHEET FOR ON-OFF RAMP INTERSECTION TIME: PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION: Golden Springs Road/SR-60 EB Ramp --------------------------- BREA60EB.wk1 DATE: 12/20/94 TIME: AM PEAK HOUR 1997 BACKGROUND 1997 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT ---------------------- No. --------------------------- BREA60ES.wk1 Crit. ------------------ 1997 PM Peak Crit. PROD. PM Peak Crit. Direction Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C ---- ----- EXISTING CONDITIONS 1997 BACKGROUND Gwth Vol. V/C 1997 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT ---------------------- VOL. Vol. WC --------------- No. AM Peak_ Crit. ------------------ 1997 AM Peak Crit. PROJ. AM Peak Crit. Direction Movemnt _. Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt._ ---- ----- ---- Gwth Vol. V/C ---- --- ----- M4mt ---- ' VOL Vol VIC ---- --- ----- Mvint. ---- ------------- ---- ---- ARTERIAL: Golden Springs Road 1 1600 225 0.14 1 0.061 239 0.15 -------Left 1 1600 174 NA 1 0.061 185 0.12 1 0 185 0.12 1 EAST Right 1 1600 13 0.01 1 0.061 14 0.01 1 0 14 0.01 1 Through 2 3200 330 0.16 0 0.061 350 0.11 0 0 350 0.11 0 Left 1 1600 19 0.01 0 0.061 20 0.01 0 0 20 0.01 0 WEST Right 1 1600 276 0.17 0 0.061 293 0.18 0 2 295 0.18 0 Through 2 2400 622 0.26 1 0.061 660 0.27 1 0 660 0.27 1 RAMP: SR -60 ES 540 0.23 1 0.061 573 0.24 1 0 573 0.24 ------ Thrgh 0 160 3 NA 0 0.061 3 0.02 0 0 3 0.02 0 SOUTH Right 0 640 43 0.07 0 0.061 46 0.07 0 0 46 0.07 0 Left 2 2400 344 0.14 1 0.061 365 OAS 1 9 374 0.16 1 NORTH Left NA 0 45 NA 0 0.061 48 NA 0 0 48 NA 0 Right NA o S NA 0 0.061 5 NA 0 0 5 NA 0 Thrgh 1 1600 39 NA 0 0.061 41 NA 0 0 41 NA 0 0 Arterial Component 0.26 Arterial Component 0 49 0.39 Arterial Component Right 0.39 NA Ramp Component 0.14 Ramp Component 0.051 37 OAS Ramp Component 0 37 0.16 0 Right -turn Component 0.00 Right=tum Component 0.00 Right -tum Component 0 . 0.00 0.02 LostT'ime 0.10 Lost Time 0 0.10 Lostriime Arterial Component 0.10 0.37 ICU 0.50 ICU Arterial Component '0.64 ICU 0.65 • - Movement Not Allowed Critical movement identified by a 1. Ten lanes for a right tum indicates free movement NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION: Golden Springs Road/SR-60 EB Ramp DATE: 12/20/94 TIME: PM PEAK HOUR --------------------------- BREA60EB.wk1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 1997 BACKGROUND 1997 BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT ---------------------- No. --------------- PM Peak Crit. ------------------ 1997 PM Peak Crit. PROD. PM Peak Crit. Direction Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C ---- ----- Mvmt. ----- Gwth Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. WC Mvmt. ----------------- ---- ARTERIAL: Golden Springs Road -------Lett 1 1600 225 0.14 1 0.061 239 0.15 1 0 239 0.15 1 EAST Right 1 1600 25 0.02 0 0.061 27 0.02 1 0 27 0.02 1 Through 2 3200 897 0.28 0 0.061 952 0.30 0 0 952 0.30 0 Left 1 1600 23 0.01 0 0.061 24 0.02 0 0 24 0.02 0 WEST Right 1 1600 320 0.20 0 0.061 340 0.21 0 11 351 0.22 0 Through 2 2400 540 0.23 1 0.061 573 0.24 1 0 573 0.24 1 RAMP: SR -60 EB -------Thrgh 0 160 9 0.00 0 0.061 10 0.06 0 0 10 0.06 0 SOUTH Right 0 640 31 0.05 0 0.061 . 33 0.05 0 0 33 0.05 0 Left 2 2400 400 0.17 1 0.061 424 0.18 1 2 426 0.18 1 NORTH Left NA NA 45 NA 0 0.061 49 NA 0 0 49 NA 0 Right NA NA 35 NA 0 0.051 37 NA 0 0 37 NA 0 Thrgh 1 1600 35 NA 0 0.061 37 0.02 0 0 37 0.02 0 Arterial Component 0.37 Arterial Component 0.39 Arterial Component 0.39 'Ramp Component 0.17 Ramp Component 0.18 Ramp Component 0.18 Right -tum Component 0.00 flight -tum Component 0.00 Right -tum Component 0.00 Lost Time 0.10 Lost Time 0.10 Lost Time 0.10 • ICU 0.63 ICU 0.66 ICU 0.67 - Movement Not Allowed Critical movement identified by a 1. Ten lanes for a right tum indicates free movement a � r I' � _ \� i _ �*_ AM Peak Hr Begins at 730 AM PEAK VOLUMES = 46 39 ADDITIONS:SIGNALIZED 8 '344 3 45 174 330 13 19 622 276 1919 SOUTHLAND CAR COUNTERS VEHICLE AND MANUAL COUNTS r -S STREET: I- ' 60 EB -RAMPS/ DATE: 12/15/94 CITY: DIAMOND BAR DWY -W STREET: GOLDEN SPRINGS DAY: THURSDAY PROJECTV 0187001A NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR 'EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 2 1 1 2 1 6:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM 7:00 AM 6 0 2 70 0 7 44 102 5 7 154 68 465 15 AM 2 5 1 75 1 6 35 47 6 2 147 70 397 30 AM 6 3 4 88 1 2 49 56 2 5 144 73 433 45 AM 18 18 2 102 2 17 39 105 4 9 -193 71 580 8:00 AM 15 16 0 65 0 10 44 107 5 2 152 69 485 15 AM 7 2 2 89 0 16 42 62 2 3 133 63 421 .30 AM 4 3 2 68 3 13 27 86 3 4 143 67 423 45 AM 4 5• 1 64 1 10 33 72 1 3 134 61 .389 9:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM 10:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES = 62 52 14 621 8 81 313 637 28 35 1200 542 3593 AM Peak Hr Begins at 730 AM PEAK VOLUMES = 46 39 ADDITIONS:SIGNALIZED 8 '344 3 45 174 330 13 19 622 276 1919 N -S STREET: I-60 EB -RAMPS/ DATE: 12/15/94 CITY: DIAMOND BAR DWY E -W STREET: GOLDEN SPRINGS DAY: THURSDAY PROJECT# -0187001P _ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 2 1 1 2 1 2:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM 3:00 PM 15 PM - 30 PM .45 PM 4:00 PM 10 4 14 114 2 12 56 208 8 6 127 74 635 15 PM 16 5 5 101 0 6 50 208 6 2 120 113 632 30 PM 14 7 4 111 0 9 43 203 7 2 123 97 620. 45 PM 15 10 6 104 0 12 51 231 7 5. 181 118 740 5:00 PM 16 8. 15 72 1 3 60 208 7 6 112 127 635' 15 PM 18 5 7 136 6 12 54 219 7 5 123 131 723 30.PM 19 .12 7 108 2 4 60 239 4 7 124 159 745 45 PM 14 7 7 87 2 6 50 211 6 4 117 131 642 6:00 PM 15. PM 30 PM 45 PM TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES — 122 58 65 833 13 64 424 1727 52 .37-1027 950 .5372 PM Peak Hr Begins at 445 PM PEAK VOLUMES = 68 35 35 420 9 31 225 897 25 23 540 535 2843 ADDITIONS:SIGNALIZED 4-S STREET: SOUTHLAND CAR COUNTERS VEHICLE AND MANUAL COUNTS BREA CYN. RD DATE: 12/15/94 F 0 Fliy.,ry on ykll ::& -�-W STREET:- GOLDEN SPRINGS DAY: THURSDAY PROJECT# 0187002A ----------- SOUTHBOUND 'EASTBOUND 'WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2 .0 1 '2 1 2 2 1 1 .2 1 6:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AIS 7:00 AM 30 43 26 16 66 75 49 51 34 - 59 96 70 615 15 AM 41 39 23 12 80 91 63 47 30 44 106 46 622 30 AM 27 47 33 18 106 106 69 47 22 69 101 65 710 45 AM 73 49 58 33 77 104 99 77 29 31 120 73 823 8:00 AM 39 53 24 26 66 80 47 84 43 28 101 55 646 15 AM 32 52 21 25 83 96 72 52 34 51 113 51 682 30 AM 37 42 20 21 55 78 70 69 25 23 81 48 569 45 AM 31 36 24 22 65 66 64 58 21 25 79 50 541 9:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM 10:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES = 310 361 229. 173 598 696 533 485 238 330 797 458 5208. AM Peak Hr Begins at 730 AM PEAK VOLUMES = 171 201 136 102 332 386 287 260 128 179 435 244 28'.61 ADDITIONS:SIGNALIZED r r ' SOUTHLAND CAR COUNTERS VEHICLE AND MANUAL COUNTS N -S STREET: BREA CYN. RD DATE: 12/15/94 CITY: DIAMOND BAR E -W STREET: GOLDEN SPRINGS DAY: THURSDAY PROJECT` 0187002P ------------------------ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 .2:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM 3:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM 4:00 PM 49 89 89 74 77 66 74 184 35 21 83 37 878 15 PM 47 69 116 75 66 123 72 189 44 27 90 36 954 30 PM 46 99 124 73 92 121 88 210 21. 19 72 43 1008 45 PM 29 121 153 66 93 148 79 198 33 36 108 29 1093 5:00 PM 46 107 '126 62 150 120 60 210 36 45 88 51 1101 15 PM 61 95 103 59 .111 153 76 225 36 37 93 41 1090 30 PM 41 107 121 98 114 169, 55 256 41 45 124 78 1249 45 PM 43 93 107 76 101 133 50 225 32 36 119 53. 1068 6:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM TOTAL NL -NT� NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES = 362 780 939 583 804 1033 554 1697 278 266 777 368 8441 PM Peak Hr Begins at 445 PM PEAK VOLUMES = 177 430 503 285 468 590 270 889 146 163 413 199 ADDITIONS:SIGNALIZED 4533 SOUTHLAND CAR COUNTERS VEHICLE AND MANUAL COUNTS d -S STREET: BREA CYN. RD DATE: 12/15/94 CITY: DIAMOND BAR -W STREET: I-60 WB RAMPS DAY: THURSDAY PROJECT# 0187003A NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 2 2 0 0.5 1.5 6:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM 7:00 AM 32 99 159 29 37 161 517 15 AM 34 117 134 44 48 168 545 30 AM 39 147 183 53 58 262 742 45 AM 44 173 166 58 54 247 742 8:00 AM 51 148 154 46 43 254 696 15 AM 59' 127 129 42 56 228 641 30 AM 41 118 113 38 41 164 515 45 AM 25 126 114 33 43 150. 491 9:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM 10:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM TOTAL NL� NT NR �SL� ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES = 325 1055 0 0 1152 343 0 0 0 380 0 1634 4889 AM Peak Hr Begins at 730 AM PEAK VOLUMES = 193 595 0 0 632 199 0 0 0 211 0 991 2821 ADDITIONS:SIGNALIZED C SOUTHLAND CAR COUNTERS VEHICLE AND MANUAL COUNTS N -S STREET: BREA CYN. RD DATE: 12/15/94 CITY: DIAMOND BAR E -W STREET: I-60 WB RAMPS DAY: THURSDAY PROJECT# 0187003P ---------- ------------ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 2 2 0 0.5 1.5 2:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM 3:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM 4:00 PM 33 .127 171 71 62 186 650 15 PM 36 131 182 84 73 184 690 30 PM 41 136 214 90 79 183 743 45 PM 37 169 234 91 77 208 816 5:00 PM 44 247 289 72 78 215 945 15 PM 41 203 .266 83 66 222 881 30 PM 38 211 248 74 72 186 829 45 PM 33 197 219 64 70 178 761 6:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES = 303 1421 0 0 1823 629 0 0 0 577 0 1562 6315 PM Peak Hr Begins at 445 PM PEAK VOLUMES = 160 830 0 0 1037 320 0 0 0 293 0 831 3471 ADDITIONS:SIGNALIZED SOUTHLAND CAR COUNTERS VEHICLE AND MANUAL COUN'T'S f -S STREET: BREA CYN. RD DATE: 12/15/94 CITY: DIAMOND BAR .-W STREET: LYCOMING ST DAY: THURSDAY PROJECT# 0187004A NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL *NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 6:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM 7:00 AM 40 214 8 3 124 11 12 9 29 32 19 4 505 15 AM 42 .238 9 4 119 13 15 12 27 33 25 3- 540 30 AM 58 321 12 6 164 18 17 7 40 32 17 5 697 45 AM 76 325 17 3 157 19 13 11 41 27 21 4 714- 8:00 AM 68 312 17 3 129 12 18 15 46 25 24 5 674 15 AM 57 284 14 2 111 16 16 13 28 32 22 3 598 30 AM 34 226 13 5 107 11 12 9 26 29 23 4 499' 45 AM 28 234 9 4' 103 13 9 10 22 24 17 6 479 9:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM 10:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM TOTAL NL— NT -NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES = 403 2154 99 30 1014 113 112 86 259 234 168 34 4706 AM Peak Hr Begins at 730 AM PEAK 'VOLUMES = 259 1242 60 14 561 65 64 46 155 116 84 17 2683 ADDITION5:SIGNALIZED N -S STREET: SOUTHLAND CAR COUNTERS VEHICLE AND MANUAL COUNTS LYCOMING ST DATE: 12/15/94 DAY: THURSDAY CITY: DIAMOND BAR PROJECT# 0187004P NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND PEAK VOLUMES = 187 1363 - 84 38 984 39 134. 111 179 191 99 33 3442 ADDITIONS:SIGNALIZED NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM 3:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM 4:00 PM 45 243 13 12 184 6 29 21 30 33 22 5 643 15 PM 42 261 :12 13 197 7 28 23 32 32 24 6 677 30 PM 38 271 14 9 211 8 32 24 38 39 19 8 711 45 PM 47 279 19 7 231 11 34 33 49 44 28 13 795 5:00 PM 59 376 31 8 273 13 29 31 52 58 23 4 957 15 PM 42 368 16 11 .251 7 37 28 43 48 27 9 887 30 PM 39 340 18 12 229 8 34 19 35 41 21 7 803 45 PM 34 321 17 7 207 5 28 24 27 42 19 3 734 6:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES = 346 2459 140 79-1783 65 251 203 306 337 183 55 .6207 PM Peak Hr Begins at 445 PM PEAK VOLUMES = 187 1363 - 84 38 984 39 134. 111 179 191 99 33 3442 ADDITIONS:SIGNALIZED 6m. es 4 EXHIBIT .11 All LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LYCOMING STAEET LOT 7� • N2S' '4 �1. \ y TRACT 2 � 66 44 .16 26' 05• E 211- COO) 11.N82•�, 9zgj � �N07'33'55'X 15.00' AREA OF ADJUSTMENT 7 s 225.00 S. F. TO LOT 79 \ N82.26' 05' E 15.00' S07' 33'55'E 15.00' y® SCALE V - 100' EE DETAIL BELOW AREA OF ADJUSTMENT 2, 037.47 S. F. TO LOT 7 S76'50,00• _ LOS ECES FLOOD=TRO( EOUNTY \--AREA OF ADJUSTMENT ~` 796.23 S. F. TO LOT 79 ' • TRACT1•• N, N � R•267.50' '� \ AREA OF ADJUSTMENT 2,037.47 S. F. TO LOT 7 0.267.50' L-22.98' ._SD7'3155'E 5�6-x'55'18' S82' 2%05'0- .0 o ' \- N25'�2' `�` 44. .. N75. rn �, 610(),- 2. 26' 05' X w 582' 26' .._ AREA OF ADJUSTMENT D E T A I L TO LOT . 79F. Agenda Item 4.1 — DR No. 94.2 Plans found in project file. Z,i iJmj a File revi by • and Is ready. onFile revi wed by and is ready for - destruction by city clerk