HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/22/1995►11 .
MAY 229 1995
7:00 P.M.
South Coast. Air Quality Management. District
Auditorium
21 865 East Copley Drive
Diamond Ear, California
Chairman
Trice Chairman
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Bob
David Meyer
Don Schad
Franklin Fong
Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Community
Development Office, located at 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190, and are available for public inspection If you have
quedstions 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 accomodations(s) in
order to communicate at a City public meeting must inform the Community Development Department at (909) 396-5676
a minimum of 72 hours prior to he scheduled meetng.
"'�•2 The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper
in the Auditorium ��R�a*ri� and encourages you to do the same
Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Monday, May 22, 1995
Next Resolution No. 95-7
11 CALL TO ORDER: - 7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Bruce Flamenbaum, Vice
Chairman Bob Huff, David Meyer, Don Schad, and Franklin Fong
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�Secret (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 May 8, 1995
3.2 RESOLUTION NO. 95-06: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 95-1, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO.
95-1, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 95-1 WHICH IS A REQUEST
TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY SANCTUARY STRUCTURE WITH A
CELLAR AND INSTALL TWO TEMPORARY MODULAR CLASSROOM
UMTS AND REPEALING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1634(1) FOR
A CHURCH FACILITY LOCATED AT 3255 SOUTH DIAMOND BAR
BOULEVARD (TRACT 33417, LOT 19).
4. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
4.1 Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 (pursuant to Code Section 21.24) is a request to
subdivide a 2.55 gross acre parcel into four residential lots ranging from .55
acres to .90 acres. The tentative parcel map also includes the following:
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1 (pursuant to Code Section 22.56.215 and the
Hillside Management Ordinance No. 7 (1992)) which is required to protect
ii
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
resources within a significant ecological area and for hillside management in
areas where grades are in excess of ten percent; and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2
(pursuant to Code Section 22.56, Part 16) which is required to preserve and
protect an existing oak tree. Continued from May 8, 1995.
Applicant: Hunsaker and Associate Inc., 10179 Hunnekens Street, San
Diego, CA 92121
Property Owner: Warren Dolezal, 4251 South Higuera, Street, , San Luis
Obispo, CA 93401
Property Address: 3,000 block (North side) of Steeplechase Lane between
Hawkwood Road and Wagon Train Lane, Diamond Bar,
CA 91765
Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that this project
requires a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2, Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382,
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-2, Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2, Findings of Fact
and conditions as listed within the attached Resolution.
NEW BUSINESS: None
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
ANNOUNCEMENTS
ADJOURNMENT: June 12, 1995
I
I
MINUTES OF -THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 8, 1995
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Flamenbaum calledthe meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. at the
South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley
Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in -the. Pledge of Allegiance by Chairman
Flamenbaum.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners: Chairman Flamenbaum, Vice
-Chairiman Huff, Meyer, Schad, Fong.
Also Present: Community Development Director James
DeStefano; Associate Planner Robert Searcy;
Assistant Planner Ann Lungu; Assistant City
Attorney Michael Estrada; Consultant Engineer
Mike Myers; Special Counsel Robert Owen; and
Recording Secretary Carol Dennis.
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Lydia Plunk, Diamond Bar resident, respectfully requested that
the commission give due consideration to go beyond the
legalities and consider the appearance of having the highest
ethical standards in discussions and decisions. When a public
official serves
s on the.board of an organization which stands
to benefit in value, in her opinion, the commissioner should
step down as a member of the Planning commission an. d address
the item as a private citizen.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes of April 24, 1995.
VC/Huff indicated the minutes should reflect the opening
and ' continuing of the public hearing for New Business
Stem Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382.
May 8, 1995 Page 2 Planning commission
A motion was made by VC/Huff and seconded by C/Schad to
approve the minutes as amended. The motion was approved
4-1 with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Huff, Schad, Fong,
Meyer
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Flamenbaum
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
OLD BUSINESS:
1. Vesting Tentative Tract 'Map No. 47850 and Master Environmental
Impact Report No. 91-2. Consideration of Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 47850 and Master Environmental Impact Report No.
91-2 for review and comment pursuant to Government Code
Section 65857. At the joint session on April 6, 1995,
consideration of the project was continued before the Planning
Commission for their review and comments.
Applicant/Owner: Diamond Bar Associates, Inc., 3480
Torrance Boulevard #301, Torrance, CA
90503
CDD/DeStefano stated that, during this meeting, the Planning
Commission will be discussing Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
47850. In addition to staff, Tom Smith and Steve Nelson,
Environmental Consultants from Michael Brandman and Associates
and the developers team are present. Also present is Robert
Owen, Special Legal Counsel, Rutan & Tucker, who was, retained
to provide the City with specific legal advice regarding this
project. He further stated that'since this is not a public
hearing item, the Commission has the discretion to entertain
public comments. Staff recommends that the Commission provide
comments regarding the project which will be forwarded to the
City council for the May 16, 1995 public hearing.
AP/Searcy stated that this project has been referred back to
the Planning Commission at the direction of the City Council
pursuant to the action taken at the conclusion of the Joint
Session held on April 6, 1995. The Planning Commission
expressed the desire for further information to provide
clarification on issues and perceived inconsistencies related
to development of the project. The Planning Commission cited
a lack of familiarity with the project, as there are no
current members from the 1992 Commission that approved the
project. The commission forwarded an itemized list of
May 81 1995 Page 3 . Planning Commission
questions via public testimony to staff for responses. Staff
has compiled answers to the expressed issues as attachments to
this overview.
The project was reviewed by the ' Planning Commission in a
series of public hearings beginning in September of 1991. At
the October 28, 1991 Planning Commission hearing, the
Commission directed staff to prepare Resolutions of Approval
and to amend the draft conditions of approval to most notably
preserve an additional seven ( 7 ) oak trees in the western most
canyon. The project was returned to the Commissi6ri on
November 25, 1991. The commission took action to certify the
Master Environmental Impact Report for the purpose of
approving the hillside development/SEA Conditional Use Permits
and Oak 'Tree Permits and to recommend approval of the VTM
47850, 47851, and 48487 in addition to the Certification of
the Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR).
The City Council began deliberation on the project in January,
1992 following a* series of public hearings over several
months. In June of 1992, the Council certified the MEIR and
approved VTM 47851 and VTM 48487 as recommended by the
Planning commission. several issues arose out.of the public
hearing that focused on the geotechnical information on VTM
47850. The Council required the applicant to provide
extensive information in order to respond to the questions.
In November of 1992, the Council set a public hearing to
deliberate on the project. The applicant had not provided the
required information to respond to the plan check review
questions in time for the public hearing and requested an
extension of time to respond to the issues. The Council took
action to deny * the requested extension of time and
additionally took action to deny the application without
prejudice. In so doing, the Council found that they could not
approve the project without definitive information on the
geotechnical issues and allowed the applicant to submit a new
application for the project once the information had been
gathered.
Subsequently, the applicant filed a lawsuit to appeal the
decision. The lawsuit was resolved when the City and the
developer entered into an out of court settlement agreement.
The settlement agreement required the City -to re-initiate
processing of the project commencing with a Joint Session to
be conducted with the Planning commission. AP/Searcy further
stated that the City Attorney's recommendation for following
May 80 1995 Page 4 Planning commission
the settlement agreement is included in the Planning
Commission packets. As a result of the April 6, 1995 joint
session, the public hearing for this project has been set by
the City Council for May 16, 1995. The Planning Commission's
comments from tonight's meeting will be forwarded to the City
Council for the public hearing session.
AP/Searcy continued that this project is a 73 acre site
located in Northern Tonner Canyon. The 57 lot subdivision is
proposed for a site which currently developed with extensive
oak and walnut woodland. This project contains the-kost
valuable biota of the three tracts proposed for development.
VTM 47850 contains significant walnut woodlands that cover
approximately 34 acres contain almost 700 trees.
Approximately 110 oak trees are primarily found within two
stands comprising 2.5 acres. The trees located in the
southwest portion of the tract have been identified to be
protected and contain some of the oldest and healthiest trees
on-site.
Sixteen oak trees have been marked for removal as a part of
this project. These oak trees will be replaced at a 4:1 ratio
as will all walnut trees removed as part of the project. The
replacement trees have been grown from seeds collected on-site
in order to ensure the continuation of the genetics of native
plant community. The landscape plan for the project has been
crafted to reproduce an environment that is compatible with
remaining vegetation and natural habitat to be complementary
with residential development and the mitigation measures
recommended by the SEATAC.
The project was submitted and deemed complete in 1989 and is
vested in the standards in effect at that time. The
Government Code (section 65360) allows actions to be taken in
the absence of a General Plan with approvals of the projects
requiring the City to make findings of consistency with the
future adopted General Plan.
The map as proposed is consistent
istent with the zoning
classifications which traverse the site. Approximately 50
percent (35 acres) of the site.is within the R-1-8,000 zone
classification with the remainder of the project to be
developed within the R-1-20,000 zone. The project proposes
development of the site with a total of 57 units, although the
total number units under the zoning entitlement for the R-1-
8,000 acreage (net acres) would be approximately 142 units.
May 8, inw�_ Page 5 Planning Commission
o=
The applicant designed the project to conform to the 1 unit
per acre density -(RR/Rural Residential) classification
proposed in the draft General Plan and the Community General
Plan previously approved by the County of Los Angeles. If the
most restrictive application of density (I unit per acre) were
to be applied to the project, the project would be entitled to
72 units. The proposed density of the 57 unit project is .73
units per acre.
The concept of clustered development has been utiliz&d to
maximize open space opportunities within hillside. projects
throughout the City. The subject project does not cluster
development in the sense that all of the proposed lots meet or
exceed the minimum lot sizes required by the zone. The
applicant has provided additional open space by simply
reducing the density. The project as a whole conforms to the
land use designation RR as proposed within the Draft General
Plan.
The geotechnical issues primarily revolve around soil
stability and the calculations which were used to design the
project. The design parameters of this project meet or exceed
state of the art factors of safety which are traditionally set
at 1.5. The site'is designed to meet all design standards.
The design was reviewed and approved by the City. The site
extensively implements conservative measures to account for
worst case scenarios. For example, the site is designed as if
materials such as bentonite are found on-site, although none
has been identified. All shear strength calculations were
a
performed using lesser shear strength values associated with
this material. Additionally, the project will be overgraded
with a lo foot blanket fill.' The standard overfill depth is
typically three (3) feet.
The . environmental issues raised at the Joint Session reflect
that staff needed to highlight the environmental documents
that include technical appendices which supplement the
presentation with the revised EIR.
The primary issues staff identified as being raised are
centrally related to the animals found or thought to be found
on-site. All of the animals found on-site cannot be observed
in the surveys that can be conducted on-site in a couple of
visits. Therefore, staff compiled lists of animals expected
to be on-site or traverse the site based on historical
surveys. The site may be used by certain animals at certain
May 8, 1995 Page 6 Planning commission
times but because of the development surrounding the site on
three sides, the value of the site as a primary corridor is
.negligible. The site does, however, provide limited habitat
for certain, animals that will be reduced as a part of the
development of the site but the proximity of Tonner Canyon
provides a viable area for relocation.
CDD/DeStefano reiterated that the City's staff and
consultants, as well as the developer's consultants are
present to assist the Planning Commission in its deliberation.
The project has been returned to the City as a result: of a
settlement agreement. This matter was the focus of a Joint
Session held by the City Council and the Planning commission
on April 6, 1995. The project was also the subject of a
community -wide study session held March 11, 1995 to outline
the project and related issues. The project is before the
Planning Commission tonight as a result of City Council's
direction 'requesting Planning Commission comments.
Responding to C/Meyer and public comment by Lydia Plunk,
CA/Owen stated that he agreed with the conclusion of the legal
opinion from ICA/Montgomery that C/Schad may participate in
any deliberations regarding this project.
In response to VC/Huff, C/Schad asked that ICA/Montgomery's
memo be entered into the record. It reads as follows:
"The mayor has asked if Commissioner Schad is
disqualified from voting on a zoning application, if the
developer may decide to donate to the Tonner Canyon
Wilderness Conservancy as part of its mitigation of the
environmental impact.
Based upon the documents that I have been provided with,
the Tonner Canyon Wilderness Conservancy was incorporated
effective April 30, 1992, by Commissioner Schad as sole
incorporator as a tax exempt, charitable corporation,
pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c) (3).
Paragraph V(A) , of the articles of incorporation recites:
"The property of this corporation is irrevocably
dedicated to charitable. purposes and no part of a
net income or assets of the corporation shall every
inure to the benefit of any director, trustee,
member, or officer of this corporation, or to any
private personand upon dissolution, the assets
May at 1995 Page 7 Planning . Commission
shall be distributed to a governmental or non-
profit charitable entity (Subdivision B).11
The State of California issued a tax exemption to the
Conservancy on October 20, 1992. The United States
government issued its tax exemption on July 19., 1993.
Commissioner Schad stated for the record at a public Planning
commission meeting on June 13, 1994, that he does not, has
never, and will not in the future, take any personal
remuneration of any nature from the Conservancy..
Based upon the foregoing, the Fair Political Practices
commission, on June 15, 1994, issues a telephonic opinion,
that commissioner Schad has no present financial or
incompatibility conflict of interest, with respect to the
Tonner .- Canyon Wilderness Conservancy, and pending
applications, wherein the applicant retains the final decision
as to which environmental preservation entity will receive the.
mitigation payments-"
C/Schad stated that he has never made a penny from this
Conservancy. His goals, gains and enjoyment have been
achieved by working with the children and assisting them in
understanding and enjoying nature. He further stated he has
run this -Conservancy out of his own pocket and it has never
made a cent.
VC/Huff requested C/Schad to respond to whether the conditions
in effect at the time are still in effect including the fact
that there are no bylaws, directors or employees of the
Conservancy. C/Schad responded -that these facts or currently
in.,effect.
Responding' to C/Meyer, AP/Searcy stated the recommendations
from the staff are now before the Planning commission for
comment and recommendation to the City Council.
Mr. . Owen, responding to C/Meyer, stated that, at this meeting,
the Planning commission cannot make a formal recommendation to
approve or deny the project. This can only be done at a
public hearing under the City's local subdivision ordinances
and tonight's -meeting is not a public hearing.
C/Meyer recommended that the City Council be encouraged to
determine whether it wants land or money as meeting the. Quimby
Act.
May 8, 1995
Page 8 Planning Commission
In response to C/Meyer, CDD/DeStef ano stated that the question
of project reduction in relation to the amount of grading
required had been addressed in the EIR. In addition, the
project is consistent with the density provisions of the Draft
General Plan being reviewed by the City Council on May 1'6,
1995.
AP/Searcy stated, in response to C/Meyer that the common lot
is the lift station to be given to the Homeowners Association
for maintenance.
C/Meyer asked if the street easements proposed for the project
would affect the density projections, to which AP/Searcy
responded that the project would still be in conformity with
the proposed General Plan even if the easements for the
streets are subtracted from the equation.
In response to C/Meyer, AP/Searcy stated that the project must
conform to the minimum 10,0010 square foot building pad size.
Regarding annexation to "The Country Estates", AP/Searcy
stated that a provision of approval states that the developer
must actively seek annexation. CDD/DeStefano stated that
based upon the approval of the companion tract, it is the
City's expressed desire that this property become a part of
"The Country Estates" Homeowners Association. However, the
City Council did not specifically mandate annexation. The
Council said that there shall be an application for annexation
and a good faith effort toward annexation. The Council also
indicated that the annexation fees should not exceed those
fees which were paid by the developers of Tract No. 47722.
Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, CA/Owen stated that the City
Council can make reasonable conditions on its approval.
Often,. with respect to subdivision maps, there is a
requirement that a homeowners association be formed.
Regarding this map, the matter is under consideration for the
project to join an existing homeowners association. The City
does not have the power to force the existing association to
accept new development. However, as a condition of approval,
the City Council can require that the developers of this
project make their best efforts to annex to the existing
homeowners association.
CDD/DeStefano, in response to C/Meyer, stated that the "Buyer
A wareness Package" was established approximately four years
ago by the City of Diamond Bar for all new subdivision tracts.
May 8, 1995 -Page 9 Planning commission
The idea of the package is to provide an additional means of
information to the potential buyer of any given lot within the
tract of homes. For example, this project is adjacent to a
significant ecological area that has sensitive species of
flora and fauna, predatory animals and a number of different
items unique to the subdivision immediately adjacent to this
project. The "Buyer Awareness Package" for this project would
indicate the type of fencing material that would permit these
types of animals to traverse the site. In addition, the
package would indicate the buyer needs to be aware that there
are animals present that may "eat your cat".-Theref6re,'-'food
should not be left outside. Additionally, the buyer would
also be advised that careful consideration should be given
toward the use of pesticides and other chemicals which might
be hazardous to the immediate environment. He further stated
that the package goes beyond that required by the Department
of Real Estate and is prepared by the developer and designed
to be specific to the tract. The City must sign off on the
package and there must be evidence that every buyer and
potential buyer has received the package.
Again responding to C/Meyer, CDD/DeStefano stated the
application was submitted as a Vdsting Tentative Tract Map in
1989. The City did not have a Hillside Management Ordinance
until October, 1990.- This developer chose to adopt some of
the standards of the Hillside Management Ordinance and
incorporate them in their product even though they were not
required to do so.
C/Fong suggested that a reduction in density should result in
a reduction of the amount of grading required.
C/Fong stated his concerns regarding shear strength value and
requested further explanation of staff's comments that lower
shear strencrths.were used in adjacent tracts.
C/Fong recommended that the developer and consultant should
state in writing their understanding of Smectite and Bentonite
and clarification of the actual element contained in the
project site.
C/Fong stated that the project should implement the spirit of
the Hillside Management Ordinance.
VC/Huff recommended that the sentence referring to fences on
Page 2, Paragraph 2 under Wildlife Habitat of the Buyers
Awareness Package" be changed to read: "No fences or other
May'S, 1995 Page 10 Planning commission
barriers can be constructed within these areas except for
fences approved by the City of Diamond Bar."
Chair/ Flamenbaum requested clarification of the response to
his question regarding planting of trees on the hillside. He
stated the response indicated that the EIR does not state that
trees shall not be planted on the hillsides. He read from the
EIR as follows: "In general, the planting of trees on'slopes
is not recommended, since the individual root systems,
although very deep, are limited in extent and the process
s of
normal growth may loosen the soil and create channels for'the
ingress of water into the soils". _
Chair/Flamenbaum again requested to know what happens attthe
end of.the five year monitoring program for tree growth.
Responding to questions from the Commission, CE/Myers stated
that the issue of reduction in density/grading is addressed in
his memo to CDD/DeStefano dated April 20, 1995. He further
stated that since there has been no five to fifteen lot
proposal submitted to the City, he is not in a position to
state conclusively, that a smaller project would involve less
grading disturbance.
With regard to the shear strength, CE/Myers stated that it is
his understanding regarding the lower parameters used in
analyzing the reports on the adjacent tract, that there is no
more information contained in the reports other than that
those parameters were assumed. This project incorporates a
body of work and tests which recommend higher parameters than
are being used -in the analysis. The applicant was pressed to
stand by his earlier conservative assumptions in reviewing
this project.
CE/Myers asked for further clarification of C/Fong's concern
for -clarification of the definition of Smectite and Bentonite.
In staff's opinion, the relevant information is being utilized
in the geotechnical analysis and the definition of the
material is academic.
CE/Myers stated that the vesting status of this project map
gives the city limited ability to require compliance with the
Hillside Ordinance. Staff feels that the applicant has
attempted to comply with the Hillside Management Ordinance at
the perimeter of the project.
Chair/ Flamenbaum declared the meeting open to public comments.
May 81 1995
Page 11 Planning commission
Lydia Plunk stated that in her opinion, when dealing with a
sensitive area the idea of donating property to a Conservancy
is good. She requested that the commission recommend to the
Council that the criteria would assure that any property set
aside would be used for the purposes stated in perpetuity and
in good repair.
Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public comment portion of the
meeting closed.
RECESS: Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the -meeting at 8:17 p.m.---,
RECONVENE: Chair/Flamenbaum reconvened the meeting at 8:27 p.m.
Kurt Nelson, Diamond Bar Associates, stated that as a result
of conversations with CDD/DeStef ano and the City Council, the
"Buyer Awareness Package" originally prepared for Tract No.
47851 -has been revised and upgraded for Tract No. 47850. He
further stated that if the oak tree plantings have survived
for five years, they would have reached their full - native
state, thereby allowing them to survive on their own from that
point. The homeowners association that is -being established
will be charged with further custody beyond the five year
program.
Regarding annexa * tion, Mr. Nelson stated that, as a result of
recent discussions with the board of directors of "The Country
Estates", an agreement is forthcoming. Diamond Bar Associates
paid "The Country Estates" in excess of $300,000 in the mid
1980s in settlement of a legal action concerning the back
country tracts which included Tract No. 47850. In addition to
the jump sum payment, the lots must pay $3000 for, access
rights as they are built out. There is an optional payment of
$4,500 per lot that the owner must pay if they wish to avail
themselves of "The Country Estates" recreational facilities.
Mr. Nelson stated the. applicant has offered to make the $4,500
mandatory for uniformity of annexation. In lieu of the
$4,500, the applicant has offered to meet with the board of
directors of "The Country Estates" to determine what figure
would be agreeable.
Mr. Nelson further stated that as a result of project
alternative studies conducted in 1987, the EIR states that a
15 lot subdivision would not significantly lessen the remedial
grading. Given the studies and the fact that the 57 lots were
50 percent of the allowable number of lots under the
May 8, 1995 Page 12 Planning Commission
ordinances in effect at the time'the map-vested,,no--further
consideration was given to a 15 lot subdivision.
Mr. Nelson indicated
Management ordinance,
Horst Shore in 1990.
Planning commission is
by the engineering
accommodate a large
Ordinance.
that, An the spirit of the Hillside
the tract is completely redesigned by
The project alternative before the
the result of a radical tract redesign
firm of Hunnsaker & Associates to
portion of the Hillside Management
Responding to VC/Huff, Tom Smith, Michael Brandman Associates,
stated .that the replacement 'ratio for oak trees is 4:1 and for
walnut trees is 2:1. The intent of the monitoring program is
that at the end of the monitoring period there will be as many
living trees as there are planted. Mr. Smith agreed that the
wording could be clarified to indicate this outcome.
Mr. Smith stated, in response to VC/Huff, that a condition of
approval is that a specific mitigation plan is to be developed
to determine where the buffer areas are in relation to other
requirements such as, fuel modification,
and
, biological
restoration and habitat. There are a number of areas that are
overlain by a number of different requirments. VC/Huff
requested that the language be revised to limit the non-native
plants to the pad.
Referring to Page 28 of the Mitigation Monitoring Program,
VC/Huff read that "all trash and manmade materials shall be
removed from natural open space areas on a regular basis" and
he asked to know who would remove the trash. Mr. Nelson
responded that the homeowners association would have the
authority to respond to such conditions.
C/Schad commended the applicant for attempting to develop a
project that is aesthetically balanced with the existing
environment by gathering seeds for approximately 5,000 plants
from the project site, and having nurseries develop plants
that are indicative to the area.
Again responding to C/Fong's concern regarding the reduction
of the number of units for the project, CDD/DeStefano stated
that the City Council retains full discretion with respect to
approval or denial of this project and if the Council feels
that it is appropriate to reduce the number of dwelling units,
it has the authority to impose such conditions. C/Fong
recommended that the number of building lots be reduced to 34
May 8, 1995 Page 13 Planning commissio.n
thereby, in his opinion, significantly reducing the amount of
necessary remedial grading; that these lots be removed from
the westerly and southerly portions of the property where the
most complicated geotechnical problems exist; development
should be confined to the easterly portion of the site in
those areas most generally covered by lots 1 through 12, 27
through 36 and 45 to 57 where the geotechnical conditions are
most favorable..
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by Chair/Flamenbaum
to recommend that the city Council approve the project subject
to 'the 33 conditions from the Community Development
Department, the 52 conditions recommended by the City's
Engineering Department, the five (5) conditions recommended by
CE/Myers in a memorandum dated March and addressed to the
Community Development Director, the recommendations contained
in Resolution No. 91-23, consideration of the Quimby Act, as
well as other recommendations stated by the Planning
commissioners at this meeting. - .
GENERAL COMMENTS:
VC/Huff stated that, in his opinion, if a developer came
before the Planning commission today with this project he
would be shown the door.. The rights were granted to this
Y
project some time ago. et, it has been returned to the
Planning Commission for recommendations. He further stated
that he has difficulty recommending this project because he
does not* like the standards under which project approval might
be granted. The residents have been clearly stating they want
more open space and less housing. In spite of the fact that
development does not stop, it should be shaped to the needs of
the city. He indicated he would like to see the project go
back to the developer. The fact that the developer does not
want to do a project of 34 units does not mean he cannot do it
and still make a profit. He stated he believes there will be
significant impact to the project site.
In response to VC/Huff, C/Meyer commented that the commission
is dealing with standards that were set in 1988 and 1989. The.
applicant applied for the map and had it veszted in 1989. The
proposed density was over double of I that now proposed. The
project is consistent with the three draft general plans that
the commission has looked at.
Special Counsel Robert Owen reminded the commission they are
free to make any recommendations they desire to the Council,
but the commission is not free to take a formal vote of
approval or denial of the subdivision map, as is normally done
for every subdivision map in the City, because it is not a
noticed public hearing.
May 8, 1995 Page 14 Planning Commission
C/Fong recommended that the shear keys be eliminated on -- lots
3, 4 and 5 to save the oak grove.
C/Schad called for the question.
C/Fong recommended that the Hillside Management Ordinance be
implemented for this project.
C/Fong recommended that the lots be staggered and that spaces
be left between the lots.
Chair/ Flamenbaum restated the motion. The Planning Commission
recommends that the City Council approve all the conditions as
presented by staff and transmit all comments and
recommendations stated at this meeting tonight. I
The motion was approved 5-0.
RECESS: Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 9:17 p.m.
RECONVENE: Chair/Flamenbaum reconvened the meeting at 9-:27 p.m.
CDD/DeStefano introduced the new Assistant City Attorney, Mike
Estrada, with the law firm of Richards,, Watson & Gershon.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1 and Development Review No. 95-
1. A request to amend Conditional Use Permit No. 1634(1) in
order to approve construction of a two story sanctuary
structure with a cellar and two temporary modular units; and
to ensure compliance with applicable design standards.
Property Location: 3255 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar
Property Owner/Applicant: Evangelical Free Church of Diamond
Bar, 3255 S. Diamond Bar.Boulevard, Diamond Bar
VC/Huff announced that he would be recusing himself from this
agenda item and left the dais.
Ann Lungu stated the applicant is requesting approval to
construct a two story sanctuary structure with a cellar and
install two temporary modular classroom units. The modular
units will be removed when the Certificate of occupancy is
issued for the two story sanctuary structure. . The applicant's
request also includes lifting the time constraints and
deleting irrelevant conditions of approval in the original
Conditional Use Permit.
The project site is a 2.37 acre triangular shaped lot. The
project site is zoned R-1-7,500 and has a draft General Plan
May 81 1995 Page 15 Planning commission
designation of Commercial (C). Since this facility is located
in a residential area, a Conditional Use Permit is required to
insure that the development of this church is well integrated
with the existing development in the area within the
residential zone.
The reason for the applicant's current request is twofold.
First, the applicant desires to lift the time constraints of
the original. Conditional Use Permit. Since the Council's
approval for the extension of time, Phase II was completed.
Consequently, it is reasonable to suggest that substantial
construction and completion of the project has occurred. once
substantial construction occurs within a grant's specified
time limit, a grant is in full force and effect.
Additionally, land use entitlements, which meet this
requirement remain with the land. Therefore, the commission,
could nullify the time constraint. The applicant wants the
nullification in order to accumulate enough money to construct
a debt free sanctuary structure. The applicant hopes to begin
Phase III's construction at the end of 1997 or the beginning
of 1998.
Since the applicant is applying for revisions to the original
Conditional Use Permit grant by the county, staff feels it, is
appropriate to delete conditions of approval which are no
longer relevant. These conditions restrict the construction
of a tower and/or spire and limits evening activities to twice
a week. The applicant is not applying for a tower or spire,.
so that condition is no longer applicable. In the evenings,
the Church provides community services by allowing Cub Scouts
and Alcoholics ' Anonymous meetings, as well as church
activities. Therefore, it is not in the community's best
interest to eliminate these services.
In December 1994 the city Council approved on -street parking
along southbound Diamond Bar Boulevard from 100 feet south of
the curb return at Crooked Creek Drive to the northerly
driveway of the project site. The permitted time for parking
along Diamond Bar Boulevard is Sunday from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00
p.m. However, the on -street parking is only permitted until
installation begins for double left turn/intersection
modification on southbound Diamond Bar Boulevard at Brea
Canyon Road.
Presently, the project site maintains 41 on-site parking
spaces, two of which are handicapped spaces. The code allows
a ratio of one parking space for every five occupants based on
4-_mkl area of the Church. The largest assembly
the larges as -s I
area of the sanctuary structure will have an occupancy.of 390
persons. Therefore, based on code, 78 parking spaces are
required, two of which are required to be handicapped spaces.
May 8, 1995 Page 16 Planning Commission
AstP/Lungu pointed out the current,plan which allows for 76
on-site parking spaces. Compact parking spaces could be added
to allow for the additional two on-site parking spaces needed
to meet the code. The Fire Department is reviewing the
proposed plans and their -comments will be a requirement for
this project..
The parking lot construction causes the removal of three
Aleppo Pine trees and one Canary Island Pine tree. The
applicant is proposing to replace three of the four trees
within the parking lot area.
Proposed grading quantities for the sanctuary excavation for
the cellar includes 2,960 cubic yards of soil. 172 cpbic
yards of the excavated soil will be deposited in the western
portion of the parking lot. Exported soil quantities will be
2,788 cubic yards. Due to the expected excavation, the
applicant is required to make an application for a grading
permit and submit a grading plan prepared by a Civil Engineer
for review and approval by the City Engineer.
An application for Development Review is required for this
project because it is an institutional type use and the
applicant is adding more than 10'000 square feet to the
existing structure.
The proposed project's development standards comply with the
City's development standards. The architectural style of the
proposed sanctuary structure will match the existing
structures on-site. The colors and material utilized will
match the existing structures which have red tile roofs and
off-white colored stucco. As such, the proposed sanctuary
structure will be compatible with existing oh -site structures
andotherstructures in the area.
The applicant is also requesting to install two -24 feet by 60
feet temporary modular classroom units to be utilized until
construction of the sanctuary is completed. Before the
issuance of the sanctuary's Certificate of occupancy, the
temporary classroom units will be removed. In addition, the
area will need to be paved to accommodate the temporary
modular classroom units.
Pursuant to the Development Review Ordinance, an application
approved or conditionally approved automatically expires if
not exercised. within one year. However, the Planning
Commission, subject to appeal to the City Council, may extend
any such approval for two successive periods not to exceed six
months each.
May 8, 1995 Page 17 Planning commission
Since construction of the proposed sanctuary depends on the
Church's financial' status,. staff recommends that the
commission consider granting a two year Development Review
approval. If construction does not begin within this two year
period and the design of the sanctuary structure is not
altered substantially, .staff recommends that the commission
require the applicant apply for an Administrative Development
Review application to ensure compliance with current design
standards and the commission's approval.
The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project
will not have a significant effect on the environment and a
Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the
guidelines of the California Envirormintal Quality Act (CEQA)
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approval
Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1, Development Review No. 95-1,
and Negative Declaration No. 95-1, Findings of Fact, and
conditions as listed within the resolution.
Responding to Chair/ Flamenbaum, AstP/Lungu stated that if the
applicant does not exercise the CUP within two years the
project will be referred back for Administrative Review.
Staff is recommending that the time constraints be lifted.
The applicant has made a substantial completion of the project
and only one phase is left to be completed. The reason staff
recommended Administrative Development Review is to assure
that the applicant has complied with the conditions.
Chair/Flamenbaum indicated that the lifting of time
constraints appears to be granting the applicant special
privileges that have not been granted to any other applicant
in the past. AstP/Lunqu respondedthatstaff feels that the
applicant has substantially complied with the CUP. This
agenda item is an amendment to the original CUP approval.
In response to, Chair/ Flamenbaum, AstP/Lungu indicated the
proposed 78 on-site parking spaces complies with the code for
a ratio of 1 parking space for every 5 occupants. The
sanctuary accommodates 390 occupants. Chair/Flamenbaum
questioned whether the 78 spaces would be adequate. In
addition, he indicated that the City has shied away from
adding compact parking spaces. AstP/Lungu stated the
applicant may be able to increase the parking area to
accommodate the two additional required spaces to comply with
the Code without adding compact parking spaces,.
CE/Myers responding to Chair/ Flamenbaum stated he'did not feel
it was necessary to conduct a I traffic study for this
Conditional Use Permit.
May 8, 1995 Page 18 Planning commission
AstP/Lungu responding to ChairyFlamenbaum stated she believes
that -the Church has had conversations regarding parking with
the owner of the adjacent 'commercial property located across
the flood channel. At this time, she indicated she is not
aware.of any agreement for parking.
C/Schad commented that he believes in extending the time for
the applicant since they have made a good. faith attempt to
comply with the Conditional use Permit. He suggested the mesa
area could be "stepped" for future parking. He indicated that
some of the 'older pines along the storm drain may represent a m
hazard and may need to be removed.. He cited the historical
value of the property in the knoll area and suggested that the
applicant should consult with the City's historical group to
see if there is anything on the property that should be
preserved prior to further construction. He stated that the
trash on the northwest corner of the property adjacent to the
residences should be removed without cost to the Church.
C/Schad suggested a northerly left turn lane from the Church
property.
Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing open and
requested that those in opposition to the project approach the
podium.
Larry Fry, 3155 Cherrydale Drive, stated he has been a
resident of Diamond Bar for 21 years and has lived on
Cherrydale Drive for 11 years. He indicated he does not
oppose the Church. However, he does have a concern about the
knoll area and the.trees which are situated on the site of the
original Diamond Bar Ranch ranch house. If the trees are
taken out, they cannot be replaced in kind. In addition, red
tailed hawks live in the trees. He suggested the area that is
proposed to be used for office space by the Church could be
converted to classrooms and sublease office space in another
location.
Responding to C/Meyer, Mr. Fry stated he has no problem with
removing the night meeting restriction. He indicated he has
no problem with the bell tower as long as it is not used in
the night hours. He further stated that he has no problem
with the sanctuary. His only concern is the knoll area.
Ronald Jung, 3163 Cherrydale Drive, stated he has been a
resident of the area since 1981. He indicated that when he
bought his property in Diamond Bar he was told by the
developer that the area was protected and the trees would
remain along with the country.feel. He further stated he is
not opposed to building of the sanctuary but he is totally
against any building on the knoll area.
May 8, 1995
In response nse
the
bell tower.
Page 19
Planning
commission
to C/Reyer'
restrictionon the gt. Stated he
Q.
"Ing meetings Opposed to
Nora Jean
a problem &Tung, 3163 Cherrydale Drive, and On the
t* ]n With meet' el
0 the spires. lngs five stated
wildlife She fort h - nights a week and She
er
n stated she i c have
building on live Would
n the knoll she is opposed
the knolo s Oncerned with -the
ChristineFri
I area. and
she is opposed to an
surprised -PrY, - 33. y
that th 55 Cherrydale Dr -
e staff _,
environmental impact Drive,
With -eport doe stated that she
-building Wildlife She indicated
Is
In ndicated not include 'a� n -
the k she 4s' negative
Problem In that in
knoll area and i Very concerned
with a S With evening church She further s Oppose to a,
Urther stated s d an
re/tower for the sanctuary, meetings he has , no
See' and she has
project no one else who wished
no Problem
Ject , chair/plamenba., bed to speak -
Mark invited the proponents Opposition
Hopper, P. roponents t to the
3255 S. Dia stor, E.
orig. Mond Ba angel' 0 speak.
S. r Boulevard1cal Free church of
Site or referred the Com,.Dic-mond
Conditional Use Plan f the project the knoll Permit which r a Iss. Bar,
In 1990 t area- The ori included 'on to the
g1nal building two-story
the bui he Church received a dopted Under the
requested has fivewas building. In
COMPleted in
$100,000
at this not been compi Year extension and 1983.
'000 building time. He ' eted, an extensio. Since
esti building cost to - funds have Indicated that n Is.being
Insufficient be - been raise, aPProxim,
stressed funds In excess of $1 and tely
I d that the to complete construct'.000 0 With the
knoll Church has Jon. 1 00, there are
He asked that this a desire tor H
ed that th s should Pa aper
read as follow e addendum be reflected to developsthe grassy
Church S: if to the st in the staff,s
facilities In the ev aff report be ch r
shall P Ies into ent that fut ePort.
He stat rotect and preserve
knoll is Ile expansionanogfed to
ed that erve needed,
from t. the buildingand/or relocat• the the
two for Ol e and re ant
height 0 to one story which the kn .1
f a res. , re lace
willing Idence. would has been reduce,
and Vis.tO help He further be =
Jbilit, grade down er stated th-Pproximately the
addition whether for the knoll to e Church
the k 0 building - . reduce Would be
knoll
area anfd the trees or for the nuisance
trees would n are located on the Parking, t be dist the Perimeter of
that would be disturbed . disturbed, The two
C/Pong suggested Would be repla, or three
structure could that the pro I ed by the Church.
Preserve, be redesigned
Posed knoll
residents the terrain Jgned to I . area cj
_n and aesthet �be built Into _assroom
the hill to
Ic Value for the
adjacent
May 8, 1995 Page 20 Planning commission
Ron Clark, 20940 Ambusher Street, requested that the Planning
Commission favorably consider the recommendation by staff.
Pamela Watkins, resident of Pomona and Church attendee, cited
numerous Church sponsored programs which impact the facility.
She 'stated the Church is currently renting space at a facility
on the opposite side of Brea Canyon Road to accommodate the,
overflow.
Al Smith, Church Elder, emphasized the importance of providing
facilities for the youth of Diamond Bar.
Michael Beard, Associate Pastor, Evangelical Free Church of
Diamond Bar, stated there are no written agreements for
parking at neighboring locations. I
Mr. Fung entered photographs of the project site into the
record.
Jim Thayer, Architect for the Church, indicated the majority
of trees at the site would be preserved. He stated the 5 to
1 ratio for parking appears to be inadequate and the ratio is
closer to 3 1/2 to 1.
Larry Fry stated that, in his opinion, the restriction
originally imposed by the County should remain on the project
and that the Commission should consider restricting further
building in consideration of the areas adjacent to the project
site.
Responding to Mr. Fry, Pastor•Hopper stated that the Church
has needs and that.they are attempting to move forward in a
responsible manner, with due consideration to the neighbors.
Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed.
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by Chair/Flamenbaum
to direct staff to prepare a *Resolution of Approval for
Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1 and Development Review No. 95-
1 which prohibits development on the grassy knoll, removes the
time constraints of the original Conditional use Permit,
removes the spire constraint, and removes the restrictions on
evening meetings.
The motion was approved 4-1 with the following roll call:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
Meyer, Chair/Flamenbaun,
Fong, Schad
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
ABSTAIN:.
COMMISSIONERS:
VC/Huff
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
May 81 1995 Page 21 Planning Commission
VC/Huff returned to the dais.
RECESS: Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 11:05 p.m.
RECONVENE: C.hair/Flamenbaum reconvened the meeting at 11:10 p.m..
2. Tentative Parcel.Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-
1, and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2. A request to subdivide one
parcel into four residential lots.
Property Location: 3000 Block (north side) of Steeplechase
Lane, Diamond Bar
Property . owner: Dolezal Family Limited Partnership, 4251
S. Higuera Street, San Luis Obispo., CA 93401
Applicant: Warren Dolezal, 4251 S. Higuera Street,
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Applicant's Agent: Hunsaker and Associates, 10179 Huennekens
Street, San Diego, CA 92121
CDD/DeStefano stated that staff has provided the Planning
Commission with an extensive package on this item including a
lengthy staff report, environmental documentation, mitigation
monitoring program as part of the negative declaration, maps,
etc. This is an application for a four lot subdivision behind
the gates of "The Country Estates" located on a 2.55 acre site
directly across the street from the JCC project discussed
earlier this evening. The four proposed lots range in size
from about 24,000 gross square feet to a little more than
39,000 gross square feet. The pad sizes range from about
5,600 square feet to about 6,500 square feet. The zoning for
the property is R-1-8,000. Therefore, the proposal is
consistent with the zoning. The project is consistent with
the draft General Plan which permits up to threedwelling
units per acre.
The project requires a Conditional Use Permit because it is
within a Hillside Management area and technically within a
significant ecological area. An Oak Tree Permit is required
because there is one existing oak tree on site which is set
aside and designated for preservation. The property has
smaller pads than some of the adjacent properties, the purpose
of which is to serve as starter pads for future development
for homes ranging in size from 4,000 to 8,000 square feet and
to attempt to comply with the Hillside Management ordinance
guidelines. The units would be consistent with that which has
been and is being developed in "The Country Estates". The
property is technically incorporated within the Significant
May 8, 1995 Page 22 Planning commission
Ecological Area (SEA) No. 15. However, there is only one oak
tree in the area. The property has been disked over the last
20 years. It is essentially,a remanent piece from the Las
Brisas condominium project which was built several years ago.
The old SEA boundary generally ran along the ridgeline. This
property, according to the graphic that.was provided to the
City upon incorporation, indicates the property is included
within the SEA. The City hired a biologist and environmental
consultant to look at the property and, through this process,
confirmed staff's suspicion that the property should no longer
be considered a part of the SEA as it has none of, the
qualities for which the SEA was originally created.
Approximately 185 property owners surrounding the site have
been notified through the public hearing notification process.
Staff requests that the Planning Commission recommend approval
and forward the application to the City Council for approval
of Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit No.
92-1, Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2, and the Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 95-2.
Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, CDD/DeStefano stated "The
Country Estates" has no interest in a third gate (Hawkwood
Road and Steeplechase Lane) . Hawkwood Road homeowners are not
interested in the additional traffic that a third gate at that
location might create. The third -gate does provide an
appropriate location for an "emergency only" access point.
Responding to C/Schad, CE/Myers indicated that there is
existing sewer at the Las Brisas Condominium for connection to
these four parcels. Therefore, no pumping station is needed.
In response to VC/Huff, CE/Myers stated *he does not note any
significant drainage swales or down drains proposed for this
project.
CDD/DeStefano responded to VC/Huff that the condition for
annexation is consistent with that imposed upon recent
developments in "The Country Estates" i.e., that essentially
a good faith effort must be demonstrated toward annexation
into "The Country Estates" and that the fees should not exceed
those which Tract 47722 paid.
Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing open.
Lex Williman, Planning Director for Hunnsaker & Associates,
10179 Huennekens Street, San Diego, CA 92121, stated he is
representing the applicant for this project. It is the intent
of the project to annex to "The Country Estates" homeowners
association. The intent of the project is to take driveway
access from Steeplechase Lane and offer the ability within a
May 81 1995 Page 23 Planning commission
2 1 0 foot maximum step to drop the house down the hill in order
to minimize grading and disturbance of the area.
Mr. Williman indicated the applicant does not have any problem
with the conditions except with one issue which is
specifically related to the Hawkwood Road/ Steeplechase Lane
interface. Hawkwood Road currently deadends'. In addition,
there is an emergency access from the Las Brisas Condominium
complex which connects into Hawkwood Road and onto
Steeplechase Lane. The applicant proposes, as an alternative
to the cul-de-sac turn around, a gate with fence in a motif
and material that mimics the entrance to "The Country Estates"
.which would be used for emergency access only. A small turn-
around would be retained. He requ.ested that the wording
regarding the cul-de-sac be eliminated and attach their
rendering as the basis for fulfilling that condition.
C/Meyer requested the applicant provide hillside development
standards that would put a building envelope on the four
proposed lots. He stated he is opposed to the development as
it is proposed.
Chair[Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed.
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by VC/Huff to
continue the hearing for Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 to May
22, 1995. The motion was approved unanimously.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - None
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS - None
ANNOUNCEMENTS - None
ADJOURNMENT:
Chair/ Flamenbaum declared the meeting adjourned at 11.40 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
James DeStefano
Community Development Director
Attest:
Bruce Flamenbau-m
Chairman
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Chairman and Planning commissioners
FROM: Ann J. Lunqu, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Resolution of Approval for conditional Use Permit
No. 95-1 and Development Review No. 95-1
DATE: May 18, 1995
The Planning commission, at the May 8, 1995 meeting, directed
staff to prepare the Resolution of Approval and appropriate
exhibit for the above mentioned project. Attached is the draft
Resolution of Approval and Exhibit "A", for your review and
approval.
Attachments:
1. . Draft resolution
2. Exhibit "All
PLANNING COMMISSION lot%
RESOLUTION NO. .95-06
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 95-1, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO.
95-1, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 95-1 WHICH
IS A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY
SANCTUARY STRUCTURE WITH A CELLAR AND INSTALL
TWO TEMPORARY MODULAR CLASSROOM UNITS AND
REPEALING CONDITIONAL
L USE PERMIT NO. 1634(1)
FOR A CHURCH FACILITY LOCATED AT 3255 SOUTH
DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD (TRACT 33417, LOT 19).
A. Recital
1. The property owner/ applicant, Evangelical Free Church of
Diamond Bar filed the "Applications" for Conditional Use
Permit No. 95-1 and Development Review No. 95-1 for a
request to construct a two story sanctuary structure
with a cellar and repeal Conditional Use Permit No. 1634
(1). The project site is located at 3255 South Diamond
Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, Califor-
nia, as described in the title of this Resolution. H-
ereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional
Use Permit and Development Review applications are re-
ferred to as the "Application".
2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal organization
of the State of California. on that 'date, pursuant to.,
the requirements of the California Government Code
Section 57376 the City Council of the City of Diamond
Bar adopted its ordinance.No. 1, thereby adopting the
Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of
.Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County
Code contains the Development Code of the County of Los
Angeles now currently applicable to development
applications, including the subject Application, within
the City of,Diamond Bar.
3. The City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan.
Accordingly, action was taken on the subject
application, as to consistency with the Draft General
Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the office
A,
of Planning and Research extension granted pursu 0
California Government Code Section 65361.
4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, on
May 8, 1995 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on
the Application. The public hearing for this project
was closed on May 8, 1995.
5. Notification of the public hearing for this Application
was made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on April 14,
1995. Sixty property owners, within a 500 foot radius
of the project site were notified by mail on April 11,
1995.
5. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolu-
tion have occurred.
B. Resolution
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. The Planning Commission hereby specific : ally finds that
all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of
this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that
having considered the record as a wholel there is.no
evidence before this Planning Commission that the
project as proposed by the Application, and conditioned
for approval herein, will not have the potential of an
adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon
which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial
evidence presented in the record before this Planning
Commission, the Commission hereby rebuts the presumption
of adverse effects contained in section 753.5, (d) of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
3. The Planning Commission hereby finds that an Initial
Study and Negative Declaration (No. 95-1) have been
prepared by the City of Diamond Bar in compliance with
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, and guidelines
promulgated thereunder. Further, said Negative
Declaration reflects the independent judgement of the
City of Diamond Bar.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth
herein, this Planning Commission, hereby finds as
follows:
2
(a) The project relates to a 2.37 acre tris V r
shaped lot located at 3255 South Diamond
Boulevard.
(b) The project site is developed with the following:
a 4,524 square foot one story structure utilized
as a sanctuary; a 3,200 square foot two story
structure utilized as classrooms; a playground
area; and a parking area with 41 on-site parking
stalls.
(c) The project site is located within the single
Family Residential -minimum Lot Size 7,500 Square
Feet (R-1-7,500) Zone. It has a draft General
Plan land use designation of General Commercial
(C).
(d) Generally, the following zones surround the
project site: to the north,and east is the Single
Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 7,500 Square
Feet (R-1-7,500) Zone; to the west are the
Restricted Business (C-1) and Commercial Planned
Development (CPD) Zones; and to the south is the
Single Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 10,000
Square Fee (R-1-10,000) Zone.
e) The nature, condition and size of the site has
been considered. The site is adequate in size to
accommodate the proposed project.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(f) The proposed project will not be in substantial
conflict with the draft General Plan, local
ordinances, and State requirements.
(g) The proposed project will not adversely affect the
health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons
residing or working in the surrounding area.
(h) The proposed. project will not be materially
detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of
property of other persons located in the vicinity
of the site.
(i) The proposed project will not jeopardize, endanger
or otherwise constitute a menace to public health,
safety or general welfare.
(j) The project site is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and
loading facilities, landscaping and other
3
development features prescribed within *p, y
ordinances, or as otherwise required in orde'
integrate the use with uses in the surround
area.
(k) The project site is adequately served by highways
or streets of sufficient width and improved as
e I
necs I sary I to carry the kind and, quantity of
traffic such use would generate..
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
(1) The design and.layout of the proposed project is
consistent with the applicable elements of the
city"s draft. General Plan,design guidelines ' of
the appropriate district, and any adopted
architectural criteria for specialized area, such
as designated historic districts, theme areas,
specific plans, community plans, boulevards, or
planned development.
(m) The design and layout of the proposed oposed project will
not unreasonably interfere with the use and
enjoyment. of neighboring existing or future
developments, and will not create traffic or
pedestrian hazards.
(n) The 'architectural design of the proposed project
is compatible with the character of the
surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the
harmonious, orderly and attractive development
contemplated by the Development Review ordinance
and the draft General Plan.
(o) The design of the proposed project would provide a
desirable environment for its occupants and
visiting public, as well as it neighbors through
good aesthetic use of materials, ' texture and color
that will remain aesthetically appealing and will
retain a reasonably adequate level of maintenance.
(p) The proposed project will not be detrimental to
the public health, safety, or welfare, or
materially injurious to the properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth above,
the Planning Commission hereby approves this Application
subject to the following conditions: ,
(a) Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1 and Development
Review No. 95-1 shall be developed in substantial
4
conformance to plans dated May 8,nA,
995,
collectively labeled Exhibit "All as submittTdeq
approved by the 'Planning Commission.
substantial modifications shall be reviewed rrp
approved by the Planning Commission.
(b) The site shall be maintained in a condition which
is free of debris * both during and after the
construction, addition, or implementation of the
entitlement granted herein. The removal of all
trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or
subsequent to construction shall be done only by
the property owner, applicant or by a duly
permitted waste contractor, who has been
authorized by the City to provide collection,
transportation, and disposal of solid waste from
residential, commercial, construction, and
industrial areas within the City. It shall be the
applicant's obligation to -insure that the waste
contractor utilized has obtained permits from the
City of Diamond Bar to provide such services.
(c) A minimum of 78 on-site parking stalls shall be
provided and maintained.- A minimum of 20 percent
.of the 78 parking stalls may be compact. A
minimum of three handicapped parking stalls shall
be provided that.. comply with the American
Disabilities Act's (A.D.A.) requirements.
Standard parking stalls shall have * ve a minimum width
of eight (8) feet and a minimum length of 18 feet.
Compact parking stalls shall have a minimum width
of seven (7) feet six (6) inches and a minimum
length of 15 feet. Two-way drive aisles shall
have a minimum width of 26 feet. Within 120 days
of this grant's approval, a site plan, with the
previously mentioned revision, shall be submitted
to the City for review and approval.
(d) Future parking lot lighting shall be installed and
shielded in a manner that does not create glare or
direct illumination upon neighboring properties.
Plans for this improvement shall be submitted for
review and approval by the City.
(e) Within 120 days of this grant's approval, revised
plans shall be submitted indicating the required
trash and recycling bin enclosure, for review and
approval by the City.
(f) The two temporary modular classroom units shall be
removed when the Certificate of occupancy is
issued for the two story sanctuary structure.
5
(g) The existing one story structure curren-klAY19
A
utilized for a sanctuary and business of fi c1
shall cease functioning as a sanctuary upon they
issuance of a Certificate of occupancy for the two
story sanctuary structure.
(h) Approval of this grant supersedes and repeals
Conditional Use Permit No. 1634(1).
The applicant shall comply with all Planning -
Division, Building and Safety Division,
Engineering Department, and Los Angeles County
Fire Department requirements.
(j) The approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1
and Development Review No. 95-1 shall not be
effective for any purpose until the permittee and
owner of the property involved (if other than the
permittee) have filed within fifteen (15) days of
approval of this map, at the City of Diamond Bar's
Community Development Department, their Affidavit,
of Acceptance stating that they are aware of and
agree to accept all the conditions of this
project. Further, this approval shall not be
effective until the permittee pays remaining
Planning Division processing fees.
(k) 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 therefore
.shall be made by the Applicant prior to the
issuance of any building permit or any other
entitlement.,
(1) The subject property shall be maintained and
operated in full compliance with the conditions of
this grant and any law, statute, ordinance or
other regulations applicable to any development or
activity of the subject properties.
The Planning commission Secretary shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution,
by certified mail to: Evangelical Free Church of Diamond
Bar, 3255 S. Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, CA, 91765;
R
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MAY,
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
11
Bruce Flamenbaum, Chairman
19951
I, James DeStef ano, 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 22nd day of May,
1995, by the following vote:
AYES: , Flamenbaum, Fong, Meyer, Schad
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Huff
ATTEST:
James DeStefano, Secretary
fl
0
1 111�� I� i ��1L'J3 LIIIJIIt' Q — r ....i .�r. cn.,., „1;,11•
ja8 puouaai7
�=MY d jo yojny�
> til
.
DDCDDDDD>J S, i: J I Ji'C a aa�� �aoi�a�upn3 R E I K Y I
4
10 tq' Q, MI to: NI c01 QI ,nl OI
n
i". m
A— - —
vavw7�
� � m
c k J
{
12
r o
1 •
cols S
_`7 --------- ----�``
t 1
0-1
,o gib% f k �'a, �`• a,
� � rrm-rtrt � tm - trt�rrrn-rrm `�'
14m ®s
--------------------------
F M � •M/
r`
a a
uo
' U
'i `' '' �' '' •' '' 'I `I '�
11111111 i i
1111111111
DDDDDDDDDD
"y ef•: � +.i �: -:.: :�i:.'i' M1
p
�2Ii1s��zlfi�H1' ®
S �'� �11i�
`...:'.:'�'..w
��=:�.�.�
=
� 'r �,li ll�r 11 r�(rll'. � x, � .�
as uowp
8
x yoanyo eelA la�lia6ugn3 5 f k
Jim
Lo! MI
t0l NI
tAI CIN ,. C'I col
i
4
7
c
0
uj
"I. -
U)
z
U .
c
0
P �uoO
`0
YinY
LU
Q
cq
K
N
U5
C o
®_
y�y
LU
LU
p
sg®
0
z
"I(D
tot
Q'
MI
Jim
NI
toi
cQi
Qi
tql
0'
W)l
wx rc .+w un -5 of •c: �arTT�' C'^t�f� ti�� ��1 S 7%.I � b
1111'0 l l 1 l �—€ lr
s111'i111111 �u11.L�31.It1�2IV �:;� Mpg puown14
& DDDDDDDDDD 5 r w Iii if MEN,, � yo�ny0 0013 Inolta6uan3
O tqi FYI MI Lot NI in; col f?I toi 01_
i
I
i
I
tA' Vt MI u'
NI tn' coy VI ml
V
N
1
Y
OI
��nsaaiitro��qtl 9t 21 ri 19 Fill R J,
99LI6 VJ'lo8 Puowgp ...WZt6 V0108 Puaugq 1
IOly toO'O'd `P49 Jog PU++olt]'S SSLC ( .i •o :'• ,
- Jog
puowgQ;o yoJnyo aaJA •un3 ,
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Chairman and Planning Commissioners
FROM: Ann J. Lung
u, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Building Envelope Hillside Development Standards
for Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382
DATE: May 16,1995
Pursuant to a Planning Commissioner's direction, the applicant has
submitted proposed envelope development standards for Tentative
Parcel Map No. 23382 (TPM 23382) labeled Exhibit "B". This
exhibit graphically indicates the building envelope for all future
residential structures as follows: downhill lots will have a
maximum height of 35 feet measured from the natural or finished
grade at the front yard setback; the maximum structural height at
the side setback will be 25 feet extending up to the center of the
lot at a 45 degree angle, to a maximum height of 35 feet measured
from the natural of approved finish grade.
The applicant's submittal also indicates the following: adjacent
front yard setbacks shall vary no less than five (5) feet,
beginning with a minimum setback of 20 feet from the front
property line; no adjacent lots shall utilize the same front yard
setback; minimum required rear yard setbacks are 15 feet from the
buildable pad's edge; and minimum side yard setbacks shall be 10
and 15 feet from the buildable pad's edge.
With the applicant's submittal, compliance with the City's
Hillside Management Ordinance and Development Review Ordinance and
conditions of approval, perimeters for the building envelope are
established.
Please bring the following documents to the May 22, 1995 Planning
Commission meeting which were attached to the May 8, 1995 packet:
Exhibit "A" - ' Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382; Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 95-2; Mitigation monitoring Program; April 3, 1995
SEATAC minutes; memorandum for Mike Myers dated May 3, 1995;
geotechnical reports dated April 1995 and February 1992 from Earth
Systems; geotechnical comments date April 26, 1995 and February
15, 1994 from Kleinfelder.
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolutions standards for
2. Applicant's hillside development envelope
Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 labeled Exhibit "B"
3. Staff report dated April 6, 1995
PA
- _ RECEIVED COMMUNITY -
.
= PROPOSEDµ DEVELOfIIfENT STAN ARDS
_
- FOR PARCEL MAP 2332 Pm
t
1. The butiding envelope for all atructures,shatl be as follows: -
-
a. Downhill Lot - A maximumtheight of thirty-five (35) feet as
measured from natural or a finished grade at the front setback,
extending towards the rear of the lot. The maximum -height at the
side setbacks shall be twenty-five (25) feet extending up to the
center of the lot at a forty-five (45) degree angle to a maximum
height of thirty-five (35) feet as measured from natural grade or
approved finish grade.
4 35'
b. Adjacent front yard setbacks shall vary no less than five (5) feet,
beginning with a minimum setback of 20 feet from the front
property line and no adjacent lots shall utilize the same -front yard
setback. Minimum required rear yard setbacks are 15 feet from the
buildable pad's edge. Minimum side yard setbacks shall be 10 and
15 feet from the buildable pad's -edge.
LW; kd( MWMrd`k;111OVA IIA00 Jt
wo11M1 Ell 2106 EXHIBIT.
km
DRAFT
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO* 95 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT AND SIGNIFICANT
ECOLOGICAL AREA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
92-11 OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 95-2, AND MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 95-2 FOR TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP NO. 23382 WHICH IS A REQUEST TO
DIVIDE ONE PARCEL INTO FOUR RESIDENTIAL LOTS
LOCATED AT THE EXTREME NORTHWESTERN EDGE OF
TONNER CANYON/CHINO HILLS SIGNIFICANT
ECOLOGICAL AREA (SEA) NO. 15, AT 3000 BLOCK
(NORTH SIDE) OF STEEPLECHASE LANE. .
Recitals
1. The property owner/applicant, Warren Dolezal of Dolezal
Family Limited Partnership has filed the "Application"
for Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 for a request to
divide on parcel into four residential lots located at
the extreme northwestern edge of Tonner Canyon/Chino
Hill Significant Ecological Area No. 15. The project
site is located at 3,000 block (north side) of
Steeplechase Lane, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County,
California, as described in the title of this Resolu-
tion. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the• subject
Tentative Parcel Map application is referred to as the
"Application".
2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal organization
of the State of California. on that date, pursuant to
the requirements of the California Government code
Section 57376, the City Council of the City of Diamond
Bar adopted its ordinance No. 1, thereby adopting the
Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of
Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County
Code contains the Development Code of the County of Los
Angeles now currently applicable to development
applications, including the subject Application, within
the City of Diamond Bar.
3. The City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan.
Accordingly, action was taken on the subject
application, as to consistency to the Draft General
1
E1.2
Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the office
of Planning and Research -extension granted pursuant to
California Government Code Section 65361.
4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, on
April 24, 1995 conducted a duly noticed public hearing
on the Application. At that time, the public hearing
was - -continued to May -.8j -1995. On May 8, 19 9 5, the
public hearing was continued to May 22, 1995.
5. All legal prerequisites.to the adoption of this Resolu-
tion have occurred.
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.
2. The Planning Commission hereby findsanddetermines that
having considered the record as a whole, there is no
evidence before this Planning Commission that the
project as proposed by the Application, and conditioned
for approval herein, will have the potential of an
adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon
which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial
evidence presented in the record before this Planning
commission, the Commission hereby rebuts the presumption
of adverse effects contained in Section 753,.5 (d) of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
3. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the initial
study review and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2
has been prepared by the City of Diamond Bar in
compliance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended,
and guidelines promulgated thereunder. Further, said
Mitigate Negative Declaration reflects the independent
judgement of the City of Diamond Bar.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth
herein, this Planning Commission, hereby finds as
follows:
(a) The project request relates to a vacant parcel of
2.55 gross acres located at the extreme
northwestern edge of SEA No. 15,at the,3000 block
(north side) of Steeplechase Lane at the terminus
K
of Hawkwood Road and adjacent to a gated community
identified as "The Country Estates". -
(b) The project site is located within the Single
Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square
Feet (R-1-8,000) Zone. It has a draft General
Plan land use designation of Low Density
Residential -Maximum 3 Dwelling Units Per Acre (RL -
3 Du/Acre).
(c) Generally, the following zones surround the
project site: to the north are the Single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 Square Feet
(R-1-20,000) and Commercial -Recreational (C-R)
Zones; to the west .is the single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 9,000 Square Feet (R-
1-9,000) Zone; to the east is the R-1-20,000 Zone;
and to the south is the R-3-8,000 Zone.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(d) The proposed project will not be in substantial
conflict with the draft General Plan, local
ordinances, and State requirements.
(e) The proposed project will not adversely affect the
health, peace, comfort or welfare ' of persons
residing or working in the surrounding.area.
(f) The proposed project will not be materially
detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of
property of other persons located in the vicinity
of the site.
(g) The proposed project will not jeopardize, endanger
or otherwise constitute a menace to public health,
safety or general welfare.
(h) The project site is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and
loading facilities, landscaping and other
development features prescribed within City
ordinances, or as otherwise required in order to
integrate the use with uses in the surrounding
area.
(i) The project site is adequately served by highways
or streets of sufficient width and improved as
necessary to carry. the kind and quantity of
traffic such use would generate.
3
SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA (SEA)
(j) The proposed project is designed ' to be highly
compatible with the biotic resources present,
including the setting aside of appropriate and
sufficient undisturbed areas.
(k) The proposed project is designed so that wildlife
movement corridors (migratory paths) are left in
an undisturbed and natural state.
(1) The proposed project retains sufficient natural
vegetative cover and/open spaces to buffer
critical resource areas from the requested -
project.
(m) Where necessary, fences or walls are provided to
buffer important habitat areas from development.
(n) The proposed project is designed to maintain water
bodies, watercourses, and their tributaries in a
natural state.
(o) The roads and utilities serving the proposed
project are located and designed so as not to
conflict with critical resources, habitat areas or
migratory paths.
HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT AREA
(p) The proposed project is located and designed so as
to protect the safety of current and future
community residents, and will not create
significant threats to life and/or property due to
the presence of geologic, seismic, slope
instability, fire, flood, mud flow, or erosion
hazard.
(q) The proposed project is' compatible with the
natural, biotic, cultural, scenic, and open space
resources of the area.
(r) The proposedprojectis conveniently served by (or
provides) neighborhood shopping and commercial
facilities, can be provided with essential public
services without imposing undue costs.on the total
community, and is .consistent with the objectives
and policies of the Draft General Plan.
(s) The proposed project demonstrates creative and
imaginative design, resulting in a visual quality
4
that will complement community character and
benefit current and future community residents.;
OAK TREE PERMIT
(t) The proposed project will be accomplished without
endangering the health of the remaining oak tree.
5. Based upon the findings and.conclusions set forth above,
the Planning Commission hereby approves this Application
subject to the following conditions:
A. PLANNING DIVISION
(1) 'Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 shall be developed
in substantial conformance to plans dated May 8,
1995, labeled Exhibit "All and Exhibit "B" as
submitted and approved by the Planning Commission.
(2) The approval of the Hillside Management Ordinance
and Significant 'Ecological Area Conditional Use
Permit No. 92-1, Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2, and
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2 is granted
subject to the approval of Tentative Parcel Map
No. 23382.
(3) The approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382
shall not be effective for any purpose until the
permittee
ittee and owner of the property involved (if
other than the permittee) have filed within
f ifteen (15) days of approval of this map, at the
City of Diamond Bar's Community Development
Department, their Affidavit of Acceptance stating
that they are aware of and agree to accept all the
conditions of this map. Further, this approval
shallnot be effective until the permittee pays
remaining Planning Division processing fees.
. (4) In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9
(b) (1), the applicant shall defend, indemnify,
and hold any claim, action, or proceeding against
the City or its agents, officers, or employees to
attack, set aside, void or annul, and approval of
the Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 which action is
brought within the time period provided for
Government Code Section 66499.37.
(5) The site shall be maintained in a condition which
is free of debris both during and after the
construction, addition, or implementation of the
5
uRA
entitlement granted herein. The removal of all
trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or
subsequent to construction shall be done only by
the property owner, applicant or by a duly
permitted waste contractor, who has been
authorized by the City to provide collection,
transportation, and disposal of solid waste from
residential, commercial, construction, and
industrial areas within the City. It shall be the
applicant's obligation to insure that the waste
contractor utilized has obtained permits from the
City of Diamond Bar to provide such services.
(6) All requirements of the Zoning ordinance and of
the underlying zoning of the subject property
shall be complied with, unless otherwise set forth
in the permit or shownonthe approve plans.
(7) The applicant shall satisfy the City's park
obligation by contributing an in -lieu fee to the
City prior to recordation of the final map per
Code Section 2124.340.
(8) The applicant shall pay development fees
(including, but not limited to, Planning and
Building and Safety Divisions and school fees) at
the established rates, prior to issuance of
building or grading permits, as required by the
Community Development and Public Works Directors.
(9) The owner shall make a bona fide application to
"The Country Estates" Association to annex this
subdivision to that association. The owner shall
be required to annex 'if all fees assessed by "The
Country Estates" Association do not exceed the
fees assessed per lot for annexation to "The
Country Estates" Association for Tract No. 47722.
(10) Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&Rls)
and Articles of Incorporation of a homeowner's
association, are required and shall be provided to
the Community Development Director and the City
Attorney for review and approval prior to the
recordation of the final map. A homeowners'
association shall be created and responsibilities
there of shall be delineated within the CC&Rfs or
the homeowners' association shall be incorporated
into "The Country Estates". The CC&Rls and
Articles of Incorporation shall be ' recorded
concurrently with the final map or prior to the
issuance of any City permits, whichever occurs
N.
[I o *.
Jk- A" , A
first. A recorded copy shall be provide to the
City Engineer. ,
(11) The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation
Monitoring Program for Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 95-2.
(12) The Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) fees shall
be deposited with the City prior to issuance of a
grading permit. Additionally, all costs related
to the ongoing monitoring shall be secured from
the subdivider and received by the City prior to
the final map approval.
(14) The parcel map shall be designed so as to
substantially comply with the CC&RIS implemented
by the adjacent development heretofore know as
."The Country Estates". The CC&RIs shall
incorporate at a minimum, provisions which. would
establish a maintenance program for urban
pollutant basins and all mitigation measures
within the Mitigation Monitoring Program. The
CC&RIs shall, to the fullest extent possible, be
consistent with "The Country Estates"' CC&RIs-
(15) A clause shall be incorporated into the CC&RIs
which requires dispute involving 'interpretation or
application of* the agreement (between private
parties), to be referred to a neutral third party
mediation service (name of service may be included
prior to any party initiating litigation in a
court of competent jurisdiction. The cost of such
mediation shall be borne equally by the parties.
(16) Grading and/or construction activities shall be
restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday. All equipment utilized for
grading and/or construction shall be properly
muffled to reduce noise levels. Transportation of
equipment and materials and the operation of heavy
grading shall be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. All equipment staging areas shall be located
on the subject property. Dust generated by
grading and construction activities shall be
reduced by watering the soil prior to and during
the activities. Reclaimed water shall be used
whenever possible.
(17) Construction equipment and/or related construction
traffic shall not be permitted to enter the
project site from Hawkwood Road.
0
(18) Parcel Map No. 23382 shall maintain a minimum 20
foot wide (open clear to the sky) paved access
road along and within that public utility and
public services easement on the westerly portion
of Lot I and between the cul-de-sac of Hawkwood
Road and the knuckle of Steeplechase Lane, to the
satisfaction of the Los Angeles County Fire
Department and the City Engineer. The access
shall be indicated on the map as a "Fire Lane".
Vehicular or pedestrian gates obstructing the
access shall be of an approved width and shall be
provided only with locking devices and/or override
mechanisms which has been approved by the Fire
Chief. -
(19) The applicant shall prepare and submit to the
Community Development Director for approval prior
to the sale of the first lot of the subdivision, a
"Buyers' Awareness Package" which shall include,
but, not limit ' ed to, information pertaining to
geologic issues regarding the * property, wildlife
corridors, oak and walnut tree preservation
issues, the existence and constraints pertaining
to SEA No. 15 and Tonner Canyon, explanatory
information pertaining to restrictions on use of
properties as necessary and similar related
matter. The applicant shall institute a program
to include delivery of a copy of the "Buyers'
Awareness Package" to each prospective purchaser
and shall keep on file in the applicant's office a
receipt signed by each such prospective- purchaser
indicating that the prospective purchaser has
received and read the information in the package.
The applicant shall incorporated within the CC&RIs
a reference to the availability of said package
and the fact that.a copy thereof is on file in the
City of Diamond Bar's City Clerk's office.
(20) The project applicant, through, the "Buyer
Awareness Program", shall encourage the
segregation of green wastes for reuse as specified
under the. City's Source Reduction Recycling
Element and County Sanitation District's waste
diversion policies.
(21) All down drains and drainage channels shall be
constructed in muted earth tones so as not to
impart adverse visual impacts.
(22) Slopes in excess of five feet in vertical height
shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion
control. Slope landscaping and irrigation shall
N.
IM
D"'ReAFv
be continuously maintained in a healthy and
thriving condition by the developer until each
individual lot or unit is sold and occupied by the
buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for the
units, an inspection shall be conducted by the
Planning Division to determine compliance with
this condition.
(23) Variable slope ratios of 2:1 to 4:1 shall be
utilized within the indicated grading areas of
each lot to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
(24) Adjacent front yard setbacks shall vary no less
than five (5) feet, beginning with a minimum
setback of 20 feet from the front property line
and no adjacent lots shall utilize the same front
yard setback. 'Minimum required rear yard setbacks
are 15 feet from the buildable pad's edge.
Minimum side yard setbacks shall be 10 and 15 feet
,from the buildable pad's edge.
(25) All proposed single family residential structures
are required to comply with the City's Development
Review ordinance.
(26) Notwithstanding any previous subsection o ' f 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 therefore
shall be made by the Applicant prior to the
issuance of any building permit. or any other
entitlement.
(27) The subject property shall -be maintained and
operated in full compliance with the conditions of
this, grant and any law, statute, ordinance or
other regulations applicable to any development or
activity of the subject properties.
(28) This grant is valid for two (2) years and must be
exercised (i.e. construction) within that period
or this grant will expire. A one (1) year
extension may be requested in writing, submitted
to the City, 30 days prior. to this grant's
expiration date.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
General
(1) Prior to approval and recordation of the parcel
. map, written certification shall be submitted to
0
W17 -i
the City from the Walnut Valley Water District
(WVWD) that adequate water supply and facilities;
from Los Angeles County Sanitation District
(LACSD) that adequate sewage conveyance and
treatment capacity; and from ' each public utility
and cable television purveyor that adequate
supplies and facilities; are or will be available
to serve. the proposed project. Such letters must
have been issued by the districts, utility
companies and cable television company within
ninety (90) days prior to parcel map approval.
(2) A title report/guarantee and subdivision guarantee
showing all fee owners and, interest holders, and
nature of interest shall be submitted when a
parcel map is submitted for map check. The
account with the title company shall remain open
until the parcel map is filed with the County
Recorder.. An updated title report/ guarantee and
subdivision guarantee shall be submitted ten (10)
working days prior to parcel map approval.
(3) All easements existing prior to parcel map
approval shall be identified and shown on parcel
map. If an easement is blanket or indeterminate
in nature, a statement to that effect shall be
shown on the parcel map in lieu of showing its
location.
(4) Based on a field survey boundary monuments shall
be set in accordance with the State Subdivision
Map Act and local subdivision ordinance and shall
be subject to approval by the City Engineer.
(5) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all required public improvements. if
any required public improvements have not been
completed by Applicant/ Subdivider and accepted by
the City prior to the approval of the parcel map,
Applicant/Subdivider shall enter into , a
subdivision agreement with the City and shall post
the appropriate security, guaranteeing completion
of the improvements, prior to parcel map approval.
(6) Plans for all site grading, landscaping,
irrigation, street, sewer, water and storm drain
improvements shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
HN
(7) House numbering plans shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
building permits.
(8) The detail drawings and construction notes shown
on the submitted tentative map are conceptual only
and the approval of this tentative map shall not
constitute approval of said notes.
Grading
(9) The final subdivision grading plans (111, = 40" or
larger scale, 2411 x 3611 sheet format) shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer
prior to issuance of any building or grading
permits and prior to parcel map approval.
(10) The Applicant/Subdivider, at the Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall perform
all -grading in accordance with plans approved by
the City Engineer. For grading not performed
prior to Parcel Map approval an agreement shall be
executed and security shall be posted,
guaranteeing completion of the. improvements prior
to Parcel Map approval.
(11) Applicant/Subdivider shall submit, to the City
Engineer the detail grading and drainage
construction cost estimate for bonding purposes of
all grading, prior to approval of the parcel map.
(12) Precise final grading plans for each parcel shall
be submitted to the City Engineer for approval
prior to issuance of building or grading permits.
(This may be on an incremental or composite
basis.)
(13) Grading of the subject property shall be in
accordance with the current Uniform Building Code
and City's Hillside Management Ordinance, and
acceptable grading practices. The final
subdivision and precise final grading plans shall
be in substantial conformance with the grading
shown as a material part of the approved Tentative
Map. No driveway serving building area(s) shall
exceed 15% grade.
(14) All landslide debris shall be completely removed
prior to fill placement or other approved remedial
measures implemented as required by the final
11
geotechnical report and approved by the City
.Engineer.
(15) At the time of submittal of the final subdivision
grading plan for plan check, a detailed soils and
geology report shall be submitted in compliance
with City guidelines to the City Engineer for
approval. -The report shall be prepared bya
qualified registered geotechnical engineer and
engineering geologist licensed by the State of
California. All geotechnical and soils related
findings and recommendations shall be'review*ed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
any grading permits and recordation of the parcel
map. The report shall address, but not be limited
to, -the following:
(a) Soil remediation measures shall be designed
for a "worst case" geologic interpretation
subject to verification in the field during
grading.
(b) The extent of any remedial grading into
natural areas shall be clearly defined on the
grading plans.
(c) Areas of potential for debris, flow shall be
defined and proper remedial measures
implemented as approved by the City Engineer.
(d) Gross stability of all fill slopes shall be.
analyzed as part of the geotechnical report,
including remedial fill that replaces natural
slope.
(e) Stability of all proposed slopes shall be
confirmed by analysis as approved by the City
Engineer.
(f) All geologic data including landslides and
exploratory excavations shall be shown on a
consolidated geotechnical map using the final
subdivision grading plan as a base.
(16) Final subdivision grading plans shall be designed
in compliance with the recommendations of the
final detailed soils and engineering geology
reports. All remedial earthworm specified in the
final report shall be incorporated into the plans.
(17) Grading plans shall be signed and stamped by a
California registered Civil Engineer, registered
Geotechnical Engineer and registered Geologist.
(18) All identified geologic hazards within the
Tentative Subdivision boundaries which cannot be
eliminated as approved by the City Engineer shall
IM
MOM -
he indicated on the parcel map as "Restricted Use
Area" subject to geologic hazard. The subdivider
shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit
the erection of buildings or other structures
within such restricted use areas shown on the
parcel map. -
Drainage
(19) A drainage study and drainage improvement plans
(2411 x 3611 sheet format) prepared by a California
registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to
and approved by the City Engineer prior to parcel
map approval. All drainage facilities shall be
designed and constructed as required by the City
Engineer and in accordance with County of Los
Angeles standards.
(20) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all drainage improvements in accordan6e
with plans approved by the City Engineer. For
drainage improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion
ion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all drainage improvements
prior to parcel map approval.
(22) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all facilities necessary for dewatering
all p . arcels to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. For dewatering facilities not
constructed prior to parcel map approval an
agreement shall be executed and security shall be
posted, guaranteeing completion of the
improvements, prior to parcel map approval.
Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for bonding
purposes for all dewatering improvements prior to
parcel map approval.
(23) Easements for disposal of drainage water onto or
over adjacent parcels shall be delineated and
shown on the parcel map as approved by the City
Engineer.
(24) All drainage improvements necessary for dewatering
and protecting the subdivided properties shall be
13
installed prior I to -issuance, of building permits
for construction upon any parcel that may be
subject to drain ' age flows enter, leaving, or
within that parcel for which a building permit is
requested.
(25) An erosion control plan shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
grading permits.
(26) An offer of easements for drainage and drainage
improvements, as required by the City Engineer,
shall be made on the parcel map prior to parcel
map .approval.
Streets
(27) Street improvement plans (2411 x 3611 sheet format)
prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer
shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
(28) The Applicant/Subdivider., at
Applicant/ Subdivider Is sole cost and. expense,
shall construct all street improvements in
accordance .-with plans approved by the City
Engineer. For street improvements not constructed
prior to parcel map approval an agreement shall be
executed and security shall be posted,
guaranteeing completion of the improvements, prior
to 'parcel map approval. . Applicant/Subdivider
shall submit to the City Engineer the detail cost
estimate for bonding purposes for all street
improvements prior to approval of the parcel map.
(29) New street centerline monuments shall beset at
the intersections of streets, intersection of
streets with the westerly boundary of Parcel 1 and
the easterly boundary of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map
1528, and to mark the beginning and ending of
curves or the points of intersection of tangents
thereof. Survey notes showing the ties between
all monuments set and four (4) durable reference
points for each shall be submitted to the City
Engineer for approval in accordance
cordance with City
Standards, prior to issuance of Certificate of
Occupancy.
(30) Prior to any work being performed in public right-
of-way, fees shall be paid. and a construction
permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's
14
Office for work in the City of Diamond Bar in
addition to any other permits required.
(31) No. street shall exceed a maximum slope of 120
unless approved by the City Engineer.
(32) Base and pavement on all streets shall be
constructed in accordance with a soils report and
pavement thickness calculations shall be prepared
by a qualified and registered engineer and shall
be approved by the City Engineer or as otherwise
directed by the City Engineer.
(33) The street light at end of Hawkwood cul-de-sac
shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
(34) All utility lines shall be placed underground in
and adjoining the proposed tentative subdivision
map.
(35) Curbs and gutters for cul-de-sac at end of
Hawkwood shall be constructed to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
Sewer and Water
(36) Prior to parcel map approval the subdivider shall
submit an area study to the City Engineer and Los
Angeles County Department of Public Works to
determine whether capacity is available in the
sewerage system to be used as the outlet for the
sewers in this land division. If the system is
found to be of insufficient capacity, the problem
shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Los Angeles County Department of
Public Works.
(37) Each dwelling unit shall be served by a separate
sewer lateral which shall not cross any other lot
lines. The sanitary sewer, system serving the
subdivision shall be connected to the city sewer
system.
(38) sewer system improvement plans (2411 x 3611 sheet
format, 2 pages per sheet) prepared by ' a
California registered Civil Engineer shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer,
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, and
Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts prior to
parcel map approval.
15
(39) The Applicant/$ubdividet, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all sewer system improvements. For
sewer system improvements
rovements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted guaranteeing
completion of the,improvements prior to parcel map
approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit to
the City Engineer the detail 'Cost, estimate for
bonding purposes for all sewer system improvements
prior to approval of the parcel map.
(40) The Applicant/ Subdivider shall obtain connection
permit(s) from the City, Los Angeles County Public
Works Department and County, Sanitation District
prior to issuance of building permits. The
subdivision area within the tentative map
boundaries shall be annexed into the County
Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District and Los
Angeles County Sanitation District'No. 21.
(41) An offer' of- easements for sewer system
improvements, as required by the City Engineer,
shall be made on the parcel map prior to parcel
map approval.
(42) Domestic water system improvement plans, designed
with appurtenant facilities to serve all parcels
in the land division and designed to Walnut Valley
Water District (WVWD) specifications, shall be
provided and approved by the City Engineer and
WVWD. The system shall include fire hydrants of
the type and location as determined by the Los
Angeles County Fire Department. The main lines
shall be sized to accommodate the total domestic
and fire flows to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department.
(43) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all domestic water system improvements.
For water system improvements not constructed
,prior to parcel map approval an agreement shall be
executed and security shall be posted,
guaranteeing completion of the improvements, prior
to parcel map approval. Applicaht/Subdivider
shall submit to the City Engineer the detail cost
estimate for bonding purposes for all domestic
water system improvements prior to approval of the
parcel map.
132
(44) Separate
e underground utility services shall be
provide to each parcel, including water, gas,
electric power, telephone and cable TV service, in
accordance with the respective. utility company
standards. Easements that may be required by the
utility companies shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to granting.
(45) An offer of easements for public utility and
public services purposes, as required by the City
Engineer, shall be made on the parcel map prior to
parcel map approval.
(46) Applicant/Subdivider shall relocate and
underground any existing on-site utilities as
necessary and to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and the respective utility owner.
(47) Reclaimed water system improvement plans,'designed
with appurtenant facilities capable of delivering
reclaimed water to all portions of the subdivision
and serving each parcel in the subdivision and
designed to Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD)
specifications, shall be provided and approved by
the City Engineer and WVWD.
(48) Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/ Subdivider Is
sole cost and expense, shall construct reclaimed
water system improvements, including main and
service lines capable of delivering reclaimed
water to all portions of- the subdivision.
Applicant/Subdivider shall .,submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for bonding
purposes for all reclaimed water system
improvements prior to approval of the parcel map.
(49) As reclaimed water supply is not currently
available, Subdivider shall enter into agreement
.to design and construct system, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Walnut
Valley Water District. The system shall be
designed to permit "switch over" of non-domestic
services on each lot at such time a reclaimed
water supply is available to the subdivision.
Irrevocable security 'shall be posted to guarantee
the performance of this agreement.
(50) The Applicant/Subdivider shall install portions of
the reclaimed water system (main and irrigation
service lines) capable of delivering reclaimed
water to those designated areas, if any, of the
subdivision for which the homeowners association
17
is responsible URAF)
Ma for irr•
andPresent This Inst igation and/
c°nnectio allation shall landscape
shall include n to
the domes Provide
to the future reclap ed isions for domestic
water f m
water. a switcsyste
system. h -over
The 'Planning Commission Secret
(a) Certify to the adoption
shall:
(b) Fort dopt1on °f this Resolution.
b
-Forthwith transmit
y certified , and
Limite mail a certified
d Part to: Warre copy of this
Obispo 340 ship, 4251 S D°lezal of Dole solution,
, CA 9
1; Higuera Street al Family
THE PLANNI1,�PCOMROVED AND ADOPTED San Luis
MISSION OF THIS THE 22ND
BY: THE CITY OF DIAMONpBARF MAY,
1995, BY
Bruce Flamenba
�' chairman
I• James DeSte
City Of fano. Secretary Resol Diamond Bar do Y of the Plan
n. was duly hereb
meeting of the y introduced Y certify i th t mission the
1995 Planni Passed the of
by the following Vote: Commiss' and ado a re going
ion held adopted, at
AYES: n the 22nd day of Ma
May,
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
James DeStefano, Secretary
18
kl%
PLANNING COMMISSION 4PP
RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23382 AND
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 95-2 FOR A
REQUEST TO DIVIDE ONE PARCEL INTO FOUR
RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED AT THE EXTREME
NORTHWESTERN EDGE OF TONNER CANYON/CHINO
HILLS SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA (SEA) NO.
15, AT 3000 BLOCK .,(NORTH SIDE) OF
STEEPLECHASE LANE.
A. Recitals
1. The property owner/applicant, Warren Dolezal of Dolezal
Family Limited Partnership has filed the "Application"
for Tentative Parcel ..Map No. 23382 for a request *to
divide on parcel in ' to four residential lots located at
the extreme northwestern edge of Tonner Canyon/Chino
Hill Significant Ecological Area No.. 15. The project
site is located at 3,000 block (north side) of
Steeplechase Lane, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County,
California, as described in the title of this Resolu-
tion. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Tentative Parcel Map application is referred to as the
"Application".
2. On April '18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal organization
of the State of California. On that date, pursuant to
the requirements of the California Government Code
Section 57376, the city Council of the City of Diamond
Bar adopted its ordinance ' No. 1, thereby adopting the
Los 'Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of
Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County
Code contains the Development Code of the county of Los
Angeles now currently applicable to development
applications, including the subject Application, within
the city of Diamond Bar.
3. The city of Diamond Bar lacks an operative. General Plan.
Accordingly, action was taken on the subject
application, as to consistency to the Draft General
Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Office
of Planning and Research extension granted pursuant to
California Government Code Section 65361.
11
IM
4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, on
April 24, 1995 conducted a duly noticed public hearing
on the Application. At that time, the public hearing
was continued to May 8, 1995. On May 8, 1995, the
public hearing was continued to May 22, 1995.
5. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolu-
tion have occurred.
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.
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that
having considered the record as a whole, there is no
evidence before this Planning Commission that the
project as proposed by the Application, and conditioned
for approval herein, will have the potential of an
adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon
which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial
evidence presented in the record before this Planning
Commission, the Commission hereby rebuts the presumption
of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
3. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the initial
study review and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2
has been prepared by the City of Diamond Bar in
compliance with the requirements 'of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended,
and guidelines promulgated thereunder. Further, the
Mitigate Negative Declaration reflects the independent
judgement of the City of Diamond Bar.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth
herein this. Planning Commission, hereby finds as
follows..
(a) The project request relates to a vacant parcel of
2.55 gross acres located at the extreme
northwestern edge of SEA No. 15 at the 3000 block
(north side) of Steeplechase Lane at the terminus
of Hawkwood Road and adjacent to a gated community
identified as "The Country Estates".
(b) The project site is located within the Single
Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square
Feet (R-1-8,000) Zone. It has a draft General
Plan land use designation of Low Density
K
mil
Residential -maximum 3 Dwelling Units Per Acre (RL -
3 Du/Acre).
(c) Generally, the following zones surround the
project site: to the north are the Single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 Square Feet
(R-1-20,000) and Commercial -Recreational (C-R)
Zones; to the west is the Single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 9,000 Square Feet (R-
1-9,000) Zone; to the east is the R-1-20,000 Zone;
and to the south is the R-3-8,000 Zone.
(d) The proposed parcel map is consistent with the
City's draft General Plan and zoning standards.
(e) The design and improvements of the proposed
subdivision complies with the City's draft General
Plan, local ordinances, and State requirements.
(f) The project site is physically suitable for this
. type of subdivision.
(g) The design of the proposed subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially
and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat.
(h) The design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements is not likely to cause serious public
health problems.
The design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements will not conflictwith easements,
acquired by the public at large, for access
through or use of, property within the proposed
subdivision.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth above,
the Planning Commission hereby approves this Application
subject to the following conditions:
A. PLANNING DIVISION
(1) Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 shall be developed
in substantial conformance to plans dated May 8,
1995, labeled Exhibit "All and Exhibit "B" as
submitted and approved by the Planning,Commission.
(2) The approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 is
granted subject to the approval of the.Hillside
Management and significant Ecological, Area
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1, Oak Tree Permit
No. 95-2, and Mitigated Negative Declaration No.
95-2.
(3) The approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382
shall not be effective for any purpose until the
permittee and owner of the property involved (if
other than the permittee) have filed. within
fifteen (15) days of approval of this map, at the
City of Diamond . Bar's Community Development
Department, their Affidavit of Acceptance stating
-that they -are aware of.and agree -to. -accept all the
conditions. of this map. Further, t ' his approval
shall not be effective until the permittee pays
remaining Planning Division processing fees.
(4) In accordance with Gover . nment Code Section 66474.9
(b) (1), the applicant shall defend, indemnify,
and hold harmless from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City or its agents,
officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void
or annul, approval of the Tentative Parcel Map No.
23382, which action is brought within the time
period provided for Government Code Section
66499.37.
(5) The site shall be maintained in a condition which
is free of debris both during and after the
construction, addition, or implementation of the
entitlement granted herein. The removal of all
trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or
subsequent to construction shall be done only by
the property owner, applicant or by a duly
permitted waste contractor, . who has been
authorized by the City to provide collection,
transportation, and disposal of solid waste from
residential, commercial, construction, and
industrial areas within the City. It shall be the
applicant's obligation to insure that the waste
contractor utilized
zed has obtained permits, from the
City of Diamond Bar to provide such services.
. (6) All requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and of
the underlying zoning of the subject property
shall be complied with, unless otherwise set forth
in the permit or shown on the approved plans.
(7) The applicant shall satisfy 'the City's park
obligation by contributing an in -lieu fee to the
City prior to recordation of the final map per
Code Section 2124.340.
(8) The applicant shall pay development fees
(including, but not limited to, Planning and
Building and Safety Divisions and school fees) at
.the established rates, prior to issuance of
building or grading permits, as required by the
Community Development and Public Works Directors.
N
(9) The owner shall make a bona fide application to
"The Country Estates" Association to annex this
subdivision to that association. The owner shall
be required to annex. if all fees, assessed by "The
Country Estates" Association do not exceed the
fees assessed per lot for annexation to "The
Country Estates" Association for Tract No. 47722.
(10) Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&Rls)
and Articles of Incorporation of a homeowner's
association are required and shall be provided to
the Community Development Director and the city
Attorney for review and. approval prior to the
recordation of the final map.* A homeowners'
association shall be created and responsibilities
there of shall be delineated within the CC&Rls or
the homeowners, association shall be incorporated
into "The Country Estates". The CC&Rfs and
Articles of Incorporation shall, be recorded
concurrently with the final map or prior to the
issuance of any City permits, whichever occurs
first. A recorded copy shall be provide to the
City Engineer.
(11) The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation
Monitoring Program for Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 95-2.
(12) The Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) fees shall
be deposited with the City prior to issuance of a
grading permit. All costs related to the ongoing
monitoring shall be secured from the subdivider
and received by the City prior to the final map
approval.
(13) The parcel map shall be designed so as to
substantially comply with the CC&Rls implemented
by the adjacent development known as "The Country.
Estates". The CC&Rls shall incorporate at a
minimum, provisions which would establish a
maintenance program for urban pollutant basins and
all mitigation* measures within the Mitigation
Monitoring Program. The CC&Rls shall, to the
fullest extent possible, be consistent with "The
Country Estates"' CC&Rls..
(14) A clause shall be incorporated into the CC&Rls
which requires disputes involving interpretation
or application of the CC&Rls (between -private
parties), to be referred to a neutral third party
mediation service (name of service may be
included) prior to any party initiating litigation
in a court of competent jurisdiction. The cost of
such mediation shall be borne equally by the
parties.
5
(15) Grading and/or construction activities shall be
restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday.. All equipment utilized for
grading and/or construction shall be properly
muffled to reduce noise levels. Transportation of
equipment and materials 'and the operation of heavy
grading shall be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m.. - All * equipment -staging areas shall be located
on the subject property. Dust generated by
grading and construction activities shall be
reduced by watering the soil prior to and during
the activities. Reclaimed water shall be used
whenever possible.'
(16) Construction equipment and/or related construction
traffic shall not be permitted to enter the
project site from Hawkwood Road.
(17) Parcel Map No. 23382 shall maintain a minimum 20
foot wide (open clear to the sky) paved access
road along and within that public utility and
public services easement on the westerly portion
of Lot 1 and between the cul 'de -sac of Hawkwood
Road and the knuckle of Steeplechase Lane, to the
satisfaction of the Los Angeles County 'Fire
Department and the City Engineer. The access
shall be indicated on the map as a "Fire Lane".
Vehicular or pedestrian gates obstructing the
access shall be of an approved width and shall be
provided only with locking devices and/or override
mechanisms which has been approved by the Fire
Chief.
(18) The applicant shall prepare and submit to the
Community Development Director for Approval prior
to the sale of the first lot of the subdivision, a
"Buyers' Awareness Package" which shall include,
but, not limited to, information pertaining to
geologic issues regarding the property, wildlife
corridors, oak and walnut - tree preservation
issues, the existence and constraints pertaining
to SEA No. 15 and Tonner Canyon, explanatory
information pertaining to restrictions on use of
properties as necessary and similar related
matter. The applicant shall institute a program
to include delivery of a- copy of the " "Buyers"
Awareness Package" to each prospective purchaser
and shall keep on file in the applicant's office a
receipt signed by each such prospective purchaser
indicating that the prospective purchaser has
received and read the information in the package.
The applicant shall incorporated within the CC&RIs
a reference to the availability of the package and
the fact that a copy thereof is on file in the
City of Diamond Bar's City Clerk's office.
M
W
iji
(19) The project applicant, through the "Buyer
Awareness Program", shall encourage the
segregation of green wastes for reuse as specified.
under the City's Source Reduction Recycling
Element and County Sanitation District's waste
diversion policies.
(20) All down drains and drainage! channels shall be
constructed in muted earth tones so as not to
impart adverse visual impacts.
(21) Slopes in excess of five feet in vertical height
.shall be 1 ' andscaped and irrigated for erosion
control. Slope landscaping an ' d irrigation shall
be continuously maintained in ' a healthy and
thriving condition by the developer until each
individual lot or unit is sold and occupied by the
buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for the
units, an inspection shall be conducted by the
Planning Division to determine compliance with
.this condition.
(22) Variable. slope. ratios of 2:1 to 1 4:1 shall be
utilized within the ' indicated grading areas of
each lot to the satisfaction the City Engineer..
(23) 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 therefore
shall be made by the Applicant prior to the
issuance of any building permit or any other
entitlement.
(24) The subject property shall be maintained and
operated in full compliance with the conditions of
.this grant and any law, statute, ordinance or
other regulations applicable to any development or
activity of the subject properties.
(25)
This grant is valid for two (2)
exercised (i.e.
or this grant
extension may b
to the City,
expiration date.
construction)
shall expire.
! requested in
30 days prior
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
General
years and must be
within that period
A one (1) year
writing, submitted
to this grant's
(1) Prior to approval and recordation of the parcel
map, written certification shall be submitted to
the City from the Walnut Valley Water District
(WVWD) that adequate water supply and facilities;
7
from Los Angeles County Sanitation District
(LACSD) that adequate sewage conveyance and
treatment. capacity; and from each public utility
and - cable television purveyor' that adequate
supplies and facilities; are or will be available
to serve the proposed project. Such letters must
have been issued by the districts, utility
and cable television company within
ninety (90) days prior to parcel map approval.
(2) A title report/guarantee and subdivision guarantee
showing all fee owners and, interest holders, and
nature of interest shall be submitted when a
parcel map is submitted for. map check. The
account with the title company shall remain open
until the parcel map is filed with the County
Recorder. An updated title report/ guarantee and
subdivision guarantee shall be submitted ten (10)
working days prior to parcel map approval.
(3) All easements existing prior to parcel map
approval shall be identified and shown on parcel
map. If an easement is blanket or indeterminate
in nature, a statement to that effect shall be
shown on the parcel map in lieu of showing its
location. .
(4) Based on a field survey boundary monuments shall
be set in accordance with the State Subdivision
Map Act and local subdivision ordinance and shall
be subject to approval by the City Engineer.
(5) The Applicant/Subdivider., at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole. cost and expense, shall
construct all required public improvements. if
any required public improvements have not been
completed by Applicant/ Subdivider and accepted by
the City prior to the approval of the parcel map,
Applicant/Subdivider shall enter into a
subdivision agreement with the City and shall post
the appropriate security, guaranteeing completion
of the improvements, prior to parcel map approval.
(6) Plans for all site grading, landscaping,
irrigation, street, sewer, water and storm drain
improvements shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
(7) House numbering plans shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
building permits.
(8) The detail drawings and construction notes shown
on the submitted tentative map are conceptual only
N1
and the approval of this tentative map shall not
constitute approval of said notes.
Grading
(9) The final subdivision grading plans (111 = 4011 or
larger scale, 2411 x 3611 sheet format) shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer
prior to issuance of any building or grading
permits and prior to parcel map approval.
(10) The Applicant/Subdivider, at the Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost. and expense, shall perform
all grading in accordance with plans approved by
the City Engineer. For grading not performed
.prior to Parcel Map approval an agreement shall be
executed and security shall be posted,
guaranteeing completion of the improvements prior
to Parcel Map approval.
(11) Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the city
Engineer the detail grading and drainage
construction cost estimate for bonding purposes of
all grading, prior to approval of the parcel map.
(12) Precise final grading plans for each parcel shall
be submitted to the City Engineer for approval
prior to issuance of building or grading permits.
(This may be on an incremental or composite
basis.)
(13) Grading of the subject property shall be in
accordance with the current Uniform Building Code
and City's Hillside Management ordinance, and
acceptable grading practices. The final
.subdivision and precise final grading plans shall
be in substantial conformance with the grading
shown as a material part of the approved Tentative
Map. No driveway serving building area(s) shall
exceed 15% grade.
(14) All landslide debris shall be completely removed
.prior to fill placement or other approved remedial
measures implemented as required by the final
geotechnical report and approved by the City
Engineer.
(15) At the time of submittal of the final subdivision
grading plan for plan check, a detailed soils and
geology report shall be submitted in compliance
with City guidelines to the City Engineer for
approval. The report shall be prepared by a
qualified registered geotechnical engineer and
engineering geologist licensed by the State of
A
DRAFT
California. All geotechnical and soils related
findings and recommendations shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer.prior to issuance of
any grading permits and recordation of the parcel
map. The report shall address, but not be limited
to, the following:
(a) - -Soil remediation measures shall be designed
for a "worst case" geologic interpretation
subject to verification in the field during
grading.
(b) The extent of any remedial grading into
natural areas shall be clearly defined on the
grading plans.
(c) Areas of potential for debris flow shall be
defined and proper remedial measures
implemented as approved by the City Engineer.
(d) Gross stability of all fill slopes shall be
analyzed as part of the geotechnical report,
including remedial fill that replaces natural
slope.
(e) Stability of all proposed slopes shall be
confirmed by analysis as approved by the City
Engineer.
(f) All geologic data including landslides and
exploratory excavations shall be shown on a
consolidated geotechnical map using the final
subdivision grading plan as a base.
(16) Final subdivision grading plans shall be designed
in compliance with the recommendations of the
final detailed soils and engineering geology
reports. A . 11 remedial earthworm.specified in the
final report shall be incorporated into the plans.
(17) Grading plans shall be signed and stamped by a
California registered Civil Engineer, registered
Geotechnical Engineer and registered Geologist.
(18) All identified geologic hazards within the
Tentative Subdivision boundaries which cannot be
eliminated as approved bytheCity Engineer shall
be indicated on the parcel map as "Restricted Use
Area" subject to geologic hazard. The subdivider
shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit
the erection -of buildings or other structures
within such restricted use areas shown on the
parcel map.
Drainacre
(19) A drainage study and drainage improvement plans
(2411 x .3611 sheet format) prepared by a California
registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to
and approved by the City Engineer prior to parcel
M
map approval. All drainage facilities shall be
designed and constructed as required by the City
Engineer and in accordance with County of Los
Angeles standards.
(20) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all drainage improvements in accordance
with -plans approved by the City Engineer. For
drainage improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all drainage improvements
prior to parcel map approval.
(21) The Applicant/Subdivider, - at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all facilities necessary for dewatering
all parcels to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. For dewatering facilities not
constructed prior to parcel map approval an
agreement shall be executed and security shall be
posted, guaranteeing completion of the
improvements, prior to parcel map approval.
Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for bonding
purposes for all dewatering improvements prior to
parcel map approval.
(22)- Easements for disposal of drainage water onto or
over adjacent parcels shall be delineated and
shown on the parcel map as approved by the City
Engineer.
(23) All drainage improvements necessary for dewatering
and protecting the subdivided properties shall be
installed prior to issuance of building permits
for construction upon any parcel that may be
subject to drainage flows enter, leaving, or
within that parcel for which a building permit is
requested.
.(24) An erosion control plan shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
grading permits.
(25) An offer of easements for drainage and drainage
improvements, as required by the City Engineer,
shall be made on the parcel map prior to parcel
map approval.
Streets
is
(26) Street improvement plans (2411 x 3611 sheet format)
prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer
shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
(27) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all street. -improvements in accordance
with plans approved by the City Engineer. For
street improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all street improvements prior
to approval of the parcel map.
(28) New street centerline monuments shall be set at
the intersections of streets, intersection of
streets with the westerly 'bound ary of Parcel I and
the easterly boundary of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map
1528, and to mark• the beginning and ending of
curves or the points of intersection of tangents
thereof. Survey notes showing the ties between
all monuments set and four (4) durable reference
points for each shall be submitted to the City
Engineer for approval in accordance with City
Standards, prior to issuance of Certificate of
Occupancy.
(29) Prior to any work being performed in public right-
of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction
permit shall be*obtained from the City Engineer's
Office for work in the City of Diamond Bar in
addition to any other permits required.
(30) No street shall exceed .a maximum slope of 12%
unless approved by the City Engineer.
(31) Base and pavement on all streets shall be
'constructed in accordance with a soils report and
pavement thickness calculations shall be prepared
by a qualified and registered engineer and shall
be approved by the City Engineer or as otherwise
directed by the City Engineer.
(32) The street light at end of Hawkwood cul-de-sac
shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
(33) All utility lines shall be placed underground in
and adjoining the proposed tentative subdivision
map.
12
(34) Curbs and gutters for cul-de-sac at end of
Hawkwood shall be constructed to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
Sewer and Water
(35) Prior to parcel map approval the subdivider shall
submit an area study to the City Engineer and Los
Angeles County Department of Public Works to
.determine whether capacity is available in the
sewerage system to be used as the outlet for the
sewers in this land division. If the system is
found to be of insufficient capacity, the problem
shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Los Angeles County Department of
Public Works.
(36) Each dwelling unit shall be served by a separate
sewer lateral which shall not cross any other lot
lines. The sanitary sewer system serving the
subdivision shall be connected to the City sewer
system.
(37) sewer system improvement plans (2411 x 3611 sheet
format, 2 pages per sheet) 'prepared by a
California registered Civil Engineer shall be
submitted to and approved by ,the City Engineer,
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, and
Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts prior to
parcel map approval.
(38) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdividerfs sole cost and expense, shall
construct all sewer system improvements. For
sewer system improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map 'approval an agreement shall be executed
and security .1 shall be, posted guaranteeing
completion of the improvements prior to parcel map
approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit to
the City Engineer the' detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all sewer system improvements
prior to approval of the parcel map.
(39) The Applicant/ Subdivider shall obtain connection
permit(s) from the City*, Los Angeles County Public
Works Department and County Sanitation District
prior to issuance of building permits. The
subdivision area within the tentative map
boundaries shall be annexed' into the County
Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District and Los
Angeles County Sanitation District No. 21.
(40) An offer of easements for sewer system
improvements, as required by the City Engineer,
13
shall be made on the parcel map prior to parcel
map approval.
(41) Domestic water system improvement plans, designed
with appurtenant facilities to serve all parcels
in the land division and designed to Walnut Valley
Water District (WVWD) specifications, shall be
provided and -approved-.by- the City Engineer and
WVWD. The system shall include fire hydrants of
the type and location as determined by the Los
Angeles County Fire Department. The main lines
shall be sized to accommodate the total domestic
and fire flows to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department.
(42) Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/Subdividerfs
sole cost and expense, shall construct all
domestic water system improvements. For water
system improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all domestic water system
improvements prior to approval of the parcel map.
(43) Separate underground utility services shall be
provide to each parcel, including* water, gas,
electric power, telephone and cable TV service, in
accordance with the respective utility company
standards. Easements that may be required by the
utility companies shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to granting.
(44) An offer of easements for public utility and
public services purposes, as required by the City
Engineer, shall be made on the parcel map prior to
parcel map approval.
(45) Applicant/Subdivider shall relocate and
underground any existing on-site utilities as
necessary and to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and the respective utility owner.
(46) Reclaimed water system improvement plans, designed
with appurtenant facilities capable of delivering
reclaimed water to all portions of the subdivision
and serving each parcel in the subdivision and
designed to Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD)
specifications, shall be provided and approved by
the City Engineer and WVWD.
(47) Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/Subdivider's
sole cost and expense, shall construct reclaimed
14
a
rNP. AFT
water system improvements, including
ncluding main and
service lines capable of delivering reclaimed
water to all portions - of the subdivision.
Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for .bonding
purposes for all reclaimed water system
improvements prior to approval of the parcel map.
(48) As- reclaimed water supply is not currently
available, Subdivider shall enter into agreement
to design and construct system, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Walnut
Valley Water District. . The system shall be
designed to permit "switch over" of non-domestic
services on each lot at such time a reclaimed
water supply is available to the subdivision.
Irrevocable security shall be posted to guarantee
the performance of this agreement.
(49) The Applicant/Subdivider shall install portions of
the reclaimed water system (main and irrigation
service lines) capable of delivering reclaimed
water to those designated areas, if any, of the
subdivision for which the homeowners association
is responsible for irrigation and/or landscape
maintenance. This installation shall provide for
a present connection to the domestic water system
and shall include provisions for the switch -over
to the future reclaimed water system.
The Planning Commission Secretary shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution,
by certified mail to: Warren Dolezal of Dolezal Family
Limited Partnership, 4251 S. Higuera Street, San Luis
Obispo, CA 93401; o .
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MAY, 1995, BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
�w
Bruce Flamenbaum, Chairman
15
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 22nd day of May,
1995, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
James DeStefano, Secretary
M
BACKGROUND:
The property owner and applicant, Warren Dolezal is requesting
approval (pursuant to Code Section 21.24) to subdivide one parcel
0
into four residential lots located at 3000 block (north side) of
Steeplechase Lane, at the terminus of Hawkwood Road and adjacent to
11
City of Diamond Bar
PLANNING COYMSSION
Staff Report
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
6.1
REPORT DATE:
April 6, 1995
MEETING DATE:
May 8, 1995
CASE/F ILE NUMBER:
Tentative Parcel Map No
23382, Conditional Use
'Permit No. 92-1, and Oak
Tree Permit No. 95-2
APPLICATION REQUEST:
To subdivide one parcel
into four residential
lots.
PROPERTY LOCATION:
3000 Block (north side)
of Steeplechase Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER:
Dolezal Family Limited
Partnership
4251 S. Higuera Street'
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
APPLICANT:
Warren Dolezal
4251 S. Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401.
. APPLICANT'S AGENT:
Hunsaker and Associates
10179 Huennekens Street
San Diego, CA 92121
BACKGROUND:
The property owner and applicant, Warren Dolezal is requesting
approval (pursuant to Code Section 21.24) to subdivide one parcel
0
into four residential lots located at 3000 block (north side) of
Steeplechase Lane, at the terminus of Hawkwood Road and adjacent to
11
"The Country Estates". The request also includes the following:
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1 which is required (pursuant to Code
Section 22.66.215 and Hillsid6 Management Ordinance No. 7 (1992))
e I
to protect resources contained within a Significant Ecological Area
(SEA) and for hillside management where grades are in excess of ten
percent; and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2 which is required (pursuant
to Code Section 22.56, Part 16) to protect and preserve an existing
oak tree.
The public hearing for the
April 24, 1995 Planning
Commission, with the
recommendation, continued
Prolect overview:
proposed project was scheduled for the
Commission meeting. The Planning
applicant's request and staff's
the public hearing to May 8, 1995.
The tentative parcel map site has 2.55 gross acres which will be
divided into four residential lots as follows:
LOT NUMBER
GROSS ACRES/
SQUARE FOOTAGE
NET ACRES/
SQUARE FOOTAGE
PAD ACRES/
SQUARE FOOTAGE
1
.90/39,204
.62/27,001
.14/6,098
2
.55/23,958
.55/23,958
.13/5,663
3
.55/23,958
.55/23,958
.15/6,534
4
.55/23,958
.55/23,958
.14/6,098
TOTAL
2.55/111,078
2.27/98,875
.56/24,393
The draft General Plan land use designation for this project is Low
Density Residential -Maximum 3 Dwelling units Per Acre (RL -3
du/acre). The proposed land use designation for this project is
one (1) unit for every .64 acres. As such, the proposed parcel map
is consistent with the draft General Plants land use designation.
The project site is within the Single Family Residential -Minimum
Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet (R-1-8,000) Zone. The proposed parcel
Map will create lots that are a minimum 23,958 square feet which is
consistent with the site's current zoning Generally, the
following zones surround the subject site: to the north is the
Single Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 Square Feet (R-1-
20,000) and Commercial -Recreation (C-R) Zones; to the east is the
R-1-20,000 Zone; to the south is the R-3-8,000 Zone; and to the
west is the Single Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 9,000 Square
Feet (R-1-9,000) Zone.
other tract maps under consideration by the City Council, recently
2
approved in the area, or under construction have various size lots
beginning at .44 acres (19,000 square feet) . Therefore, the
proposed parcel map is compatible with tract maps under
consideration by.the City Council, recently approved in the area,
or under development when considering lot acreage.
The project site is irregular shape. On-site elevations range from
approximately 1077 at the southern property line to 1022 along the
northern property line. The site slopes downward to the north with
an average slope of 21.6 percent.
The project site has several man-made improvements. A six foot
high perimeter chain link fencing has been erected on the north,
east, and west to restrict access. A 40 foot wide general utility
and access easement is Within Lot 1, adjacent to the western
property line. A 'twenty foot wide paved portion of this easement
is utilized by the Los Angeles County Fire Department for emergency
access to the Las Brisas condominium project which is. located along
the site's western boundary. A concrete 'IV" ditch to control
surface runoff has been constructed on top of a manufactured slope
(shear key) paralleling the northern property line. Additionally,
the slope easement to Los Angeles County located on Lot 3 may be
vacated by the recording of the proposed parcel map.
ANALYSIS:
The Conditional Use Permit process is utilized for projects
designated as a Significant Ecological Area (SEA). This process
insures, to the extent possible, that development maintains and
where possible enhances the remaining biotic resources of the SEA
and the natural topography, resources, and amenities of the
hillside management area, while allowing limited controlled
development.
Pursuant to the City's Hillside Management ordinance (HMO),
projects that contain slopes in excess of 10 percent also require
the utilization of the Conditional Use Permit process. The
Hillside Management Ordinance's purpose is to encourage development
which is sensitive to the unique characteristics common to hillside
properties such as -the terrain's steepness, protection of views,
knolls, canyons, and ridgelines, and to provide alternative
approaches to conventional flat land. development practices. Since,
the proposed parcel map is in an SEA and with grades in excess of
10 percent, a Conditional Use Permit is required.
Additionally, an Oak Tree Permit is required for this project due
to one oak tree located on Lot 3, adjacent to the eastern property
line and within the front portion of the lot. The purpose of this
permit process is to recognize oak trees as significant historical,
aesthetic, and valuable ecological resource and to create favorable
conditions for the preservation and propagation of this unique,
3
threatened plant heritage. This oak tree will be preserved and
protected, pursuant to the City's Oak Tree Permit process. This
process include ' s the installation of chain link fencing five feet
outside the tree's dripline or 15 feet from its trunk, which ever
is greater. It also includes the removal of concrete pipes stacked
against the oak tree's trunk and accumulated soil and the hand
aeration of soil within the dripline rectifying soil compaction.
Grading and Pad Development:
Approximately, 75 percent of the project site has been previously
graded., Prior grading activities include remedial grading to
correct an 'unstable slope condition over the western/central
portion of the site and to construct a shear key along the northern
property line for the Las Brisas Condominium project, grading for
Steeplechase Lane along the site's southern boundary, and
construction of an emergency access road along the western
boundary. The subdivision, as proposed, requires approximately
2,300 cubic yards each for cut and fill.
While final precise grading for individual lots is acceptable,
remedial grading does not respect property lines. Therefore, it is
important and required that remedial and mass grading, for all
lots, be performed at the same time. However, precise grading, for
individual lots, may be executed separately.
A significant portion of the site is an ancient landslide. A
buttress fill was constructed at the northerly property line with
the development of Tract No. 36382 (subdivision adjacent northerly -
Las Brisas Condominiums) to protect that development to the north
and not necessarily to prepare this project site for development.
A preliminary geotechnical report for the proposed project has been
review by Klienfelder (City's consultant). The applicant has
addressed the concerns stated by Klienfelder. Attached is a
correspondence dated April 26, 1995 from Klienfelder stating that
the responses, supporting calculations, and . ref erence material
satisfactorily address their comments.
"Starter" pads are indicated on the tentative parcel map ranging
from 5,-663 square feet to 6.,534 square feet. In the future, the
applicant desires to construct custom homes ranging from 4,600 to
8,000 square feet. When determining future development standards
for the proposed lots, the Hillside Management ordinance's
guidelines, which address retaining the integrity of each site's
natural topography, minimal grading, utilization of terraces and
multiple orientations, reduction of bulk, and avoidance of
excessive cantilevers on downhill elevations, are required to be
incorporated into this project. Additionally,.the objectives and
strategies of the 'City's draft General Plan require consideration.
These objectives and strategies dictate that development maintain
a feeling of open space, minimize grading, encourage superior land
use, ensure new development yields a pleasant living environment,
4
compatibility with surrounding development, and building setbacks
along roadways be varied to avoid a monotonous street scene and
relate to scale of structure. To meet the guidelines of the
Hillside Management ordinance and the objectives and strategies of
the draft General Plan, structures for each residential lot.should
be designed to retain the integrity of each site's natural
topography; grading should be minimal with variable slope ratio
from 2:1 to 4:1 within the proposed graded area; terracing and low
levels deck should be utilized; excessive cantilevers on downhill
elevations should be avoided; structure bulk should be reduced;
architectural treatment should be used on all sides of the
residential structure; building materials and color schemes should
blend in with the natural landscape of earth tones; and view
opportunities and multiply orientations should be considered along
p
with residential privacy. Additionally, adjacent front yard
setbacks should vary no less than five feet, beginning with a
-minimum setback of 20 feet from the -front property line and no
adjacent lots can utilize the same front yard setback; minimum
required rear yard setbacks are 15 feet from the buildable pad's
edge; and minimum side yard setbacks should be 10 and 15 feet from
the buildable pad's edge. Keeping the above mentioned guidelines
in mind when developing the project site, and the fact that each
proposed residential structure is required to comply with the
City's Development Review Ordinance, the envisioned product will be
compatible with the existing development in the area.
Annexation to "The Country Estates'".
The proposed project is located adjacent to a private, gated
community identified as "The country Estates". The project's
applicant proposes annexation to "The Country Estates". A
condition of approval for this project is that an application for
annexation shall occur and Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions
(CC&RI s) comply with and be consistent with the CC&Rf s implemented
by "The Country Estates".
Road Improvements and --- Access
The tentative parcel map, as proposed, requires the extension of
Steeplechase Lane and Hawkwood Drive. The alignment shown requires.
construction of the street and public utilities off-site, on
property outside the ownership of the applicant. Easements must be
obtained by the applicant from the adjacent property owner. The
tentative parcel map must be revised to match street alignments
shown on Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 (VTTM 47850). VTTM
47850 is conditioned to construct street improvements - knuckle at
Steeplechase Lane and the cul-de-sac of Hawkwood Road, pursuant to
City standards. For those portions of the private street
improvements within the parcel map's boundaries, the applicant is
required to dedicate right-of-way for public . use. For public
street improvements, the applicant is required to grant access
easements for private and public purposes and for street drainage.
9
Access to the project site will only be provided through "The
Country Estates".
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project will
not have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated
Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant*to the guidelines
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Mitigated Negative Declaration/ Mitigation Monitoring.Program:
The City hired David Tanner and Associates to prepare the Mitigated
Negative Declaration for this project. This Mitigated Negative
Declaration was revised by City staff.
The proposed project will not have a significant effect on the
environment because mitigation measures are incorporated into this
project. These mitigation measures will reduce any significant
effects on the environment to a level of less significant so as not
to have any potentially significant effect on the environment.
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a
Mitigation Monitoring Program was - prepared by City staff. The
Mitigation Monitoring Program is a schedule utilized to supervise
the project's mitigation measures. Its purpose is to ensure that
mitigation measures are satisfied.
The incorporated mitigation includes appropriate measures to
prevent soil erosion by wind or water. These measures, pursuant to
the Hillside Management ordinance and the Uniform Building Code,
require planting materials (native, naturalized, or other) which
blend with the area and are fire retardant. These planting
materials are required to have a support irrigation system which
utilizes water and energy conservation techniques. other
mitigation measures include hours of construction, compliance with
the City's Noise ordinance and SCAQMD Rule 403, National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permits,.and protection of
existing oak tree.
Significant Ecological Area (SEA):
Tonner Canyon is established as Significant Ecological Area (SEA)
No. 15 by Los Angeles County in 1976 to preserve one of three hilly
areas in eastern Los Angeles County that still supports a
relatively undisturbed stand of the southern oak woodland/ chaparral
coastal sage scrub/riparian woodland complex that was 'once common
in this part of the country. Based on a study by England and
Nelson Environmental Consultants, prepared for Los Angeles County's
Regional Planning Department, an area is designated "ecologically
significant" when it contains undisturbed biotic communities and
possesses resources that are uncommon, rare,. unique, or absolutely
critical. to the maintenance of wildlife. Based on this study, the
SEA within Los Angeles County contains eight classifications, each
with its own criteria (for classifications-' explanations see page
4 of -Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2).
The Tentative Parcel Map No.22382 is located at the extreme
northwepterri edge of the Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills Significant
Ecological Area No. 15. and within Class 7. This SEA
classification contains undisturbed stands of southern oak
woodland, chaparral, coastal sage scrub, riparian woodland complex,
California Walnut, and intermittent stream in the canyon bottom.
However, this project site is denude of any of the above mentioned
vegetation due to annual surface scraping/disking by the Los
Angeles County Fire Department conducted over many years, except
for Lot 3. Lot 3 contains the one oak tree previously mentioned.
According to the applicant, the project site (a remnant lot from
the Las Brisas Condominium project was used as a storage area when
Las Brisas Condominium project was built. As such, the project
site does not meet the prerequisites or criteria for being in an
SEA. Further more, boundaries chosen for' SEAS 'are based on
ridgeline, toe of slop, interpretation of aerial photographs, and
cultural features such as freeways, dams and development.
Steeplechase Lane (abutting the project site) is a- ridgeline.
Based on this natural delineation and the fact that the site is
regularly disturbed and denude of vegetation, the project site
should not be designated as an SEA as it no longer meets any of the
SEA criteria.
The city has a Significant Ecological Area Technical Advisory
Committee (SEATAC) which, pursuant to the City's Code, reviews and
comments and provides recommendations on projects within the SEA.
SEATAC met on April 3, 1995 to discuss the proposed parcel map.
SEATAC finds that the proposed parcel map, with mitigation
measures incorporated into the project as listed within the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, will not have a significant effect
on * SEA No. 15 and no additional changes or recommendations are
necessary.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin
and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on March 31, 1995. Public
hearing notices were Mailed to approximately 185 -property owners
within a 500 foot radius of the project site on March 28, 1995.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Planning commission recommend approval to
City Council for Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use
K
Permit No. 92-1 and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2, Findings of Fact, and
conditions as listed within the attached resolution.
I I
Prepared by:
ann J.
n ssistant Planner
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolutions of Approval
2. Exhibit "A" Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 dated May 8,
1995
3. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2
4. Mitigation Monitoring Program
5. Minutes of the April 3, 1995 SEATAC Meeting
6. Application
7. Correspondence dated April 17, 1995 from SEATAC member Dr.
David Berry
8. Correspondence date stamped April 18, 1995 from SEATAC member
Chuck Hewitt
9. Correspondence dated February 13, 1995 from Walnut Valley
Water District
10. Correspondence dated January 18, 1995 from the Los Angeles
County Fire Department
11. Corresspondence date April 26', 1995 from Kleinfelder
12. Memorandum from Mike Myers dated May 3, 1995
E Z
e�
O
n
pz
a �
S
,
+
N
�
V
m
S EL
4 e
NM.
F
_yE
C')
»
=
M
=�
NLu
co
6
C
=II'
cc
Z
�€ :;a"��
a =�
�
Aga
�
f'�'�:::>
� •'��f'{uj
iw�•"..'�.GwpO
J �i
n� .y
W yy,,�5„
'- � � 'i ` �
is
� 3 � S S Q
�
!
�� I}
�
Wzu
zl
D
U
cc
'+t *
',w
<
a
a 0?
SS, 4N
`
GY
g14R:tl
elo
•
lJ�
Pd
W
E Z
e�
O
n
pz
a �
S
,
� o
�
V
m
S EL
4 e
r
F
A
File revi w by for
Fit
d is te'
destructiOn Y Ci Cl
Agenda Item 4.1 — TPM 23382
Plans found in project file.
File rev' we by _� ,�
on an and is ready for.
destruction by City Clerk