HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/8/1995AMY 89 1995-
7:00 P.M.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Auditorium
21865 :East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar; California
i - ,Il-•• �/
rb Huff
,E)aWd Meyer
►ri Schad
,r; r Fong
di items are on Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating
rive, suite to age d are available fottlpublice in h nspecri n,
Development Office, located at 21660 E Copley
If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please call (909) 396-5676 daring regular business hour.
In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title 11 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 the
City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or.
accomodation(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 the scheduled meetin&
P(easa®in ff tom $=king, eating or drinking
in the Auditorium
The city of Diamond Bar uses rtcyded paper
and encourages you to do the same.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Monday, May 8, 1995 Next Resolution No. 95-6
CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
1, ROLL CALL: CMMan B b Huff, , David Meyer, Don Schad, and
Vice
ChaFranklin Fong
2, MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS:
This is the time and place for the general public to :tddress 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 .recordi19S Com letion of this form is volun There is a five minute
maximum time limit when addressin the Plannin 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 April 24, 1995
4. OLD BUSINESS:
4.1 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. Continued from April 24, 1995.
Applicant/Owner: Diamond Bar Associates, Inc. 3480 Torrance Blvd.
#301, Torrance, CA 90503
Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that this project
requires an Environmental Impact Report.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
review the project and provide comments for City Council consideration.
i
I
5. NEW BUSINESS: None
6. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING.-
6.1
HEARING:
6.1 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
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.
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 open
the public hearing, receive testimony and approve 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.
7. PUBLIC HEARING:
7.1 Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1 (pursuant to Code Section 22.20.100 and 22.56,
Part 1) is a request to amend Conditional Use Permit No. 1634(1) in order to
approve the construction of a two story structure with a cellar utilized for a
sanctuary, classrooms, storage area, and kitchen. Additionally, the request
includes two temporary modular units utilized for classrooms until the proposed
two story structure is complete. Development Review No. 95-1 (pursuant to
Code Section 22.72.020) is required to ensure that the proposed project complies
with all applicable local design guidelines, standards, and ordinances. The
project site is developed with an existing church facility.
16 MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 6
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 24, 1995
CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chairman Huff called the meeting to order at 7:08 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 Vice Chairman
Huff.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners: Vice Chairman Huff, Meyer,
Schad.
Commissioner. Fong arrived at 7:13 p.m.
Also Present: Assistant Planner Ann Lungu; Associate Planner
Robert Searcy; Consultant Attorney Robert
Owen; Consultant Engineer Mike Meyer; and
Recording Secretary Carol Dennis.
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS:
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes of April 10, 1995.
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by C/Schad to
approve the minutes as submitted. The motion was
approved 3'-0 with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer, Schad, VC/Huff
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: C/Flamenbaum, Fong
NEW BUSINESS - None
PUBLIC HEARING:.
1. Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit
No. 92-1 and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2. TPM 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
April 24, 1995 Page 2 Planning Commission
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 resources contained in 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.
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: 3000 block (North side) of
Steeplechase Lane between Hawkwood Road and Wagon Train
Lane, Diamond Bar
AstP/Lunge reported that the applicant wishes to continue
this item to a later date.
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by C/Schad to
continue the item. The motion was approved 3-0 with the
following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer, Schad, VC/Huff
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Flamenbaum, Fong
OLD BUSINESS:
1. Certification of Master Environmental Impact Report No.
91-2 and approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
47850, located easterly of Steeplechase Lane and South of
Windmill Drive adjacent to the private gated community
known as "The Country Estates". 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 Blvd'. #301, Torrance, CA 90503
April 24, 1995 Page 3 Planning Commission
AP/Searcy stated that the Applicant/Owner had requested
continuance of this item. He suggested that the
Commission request that a representative of the applicant
state the reason for their request.
Dan Buffington, Diamond Bar Associates, Inc., stated that
the applicant wished to continue the item until certain
legal matters had been cleared up. He indicated the
attorney for the applicant feels there are discrepancies
in the interpretation of the settlement agreement between
he and Mr. Owen and they are attempting to work out these
difference. Mr. Buffington further stated that until
the matters are worked out, the applicant seeks a
continuance.
In response to C/Meyer, AP/Searcy stated that the
appropriate action would be to table the item until the
attorneys have settled their differences. At that time,
the item will be re-agendized.
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by C/Schad to
table the item.
Responding to VC/Huff, AP/Searcy stated the item was
scheduled to go back to the City Council on Tuesday, May
16. Since the item has been continued to the May 16
meeting, regardless of the action taken by the Planning
Commission, the City Council will open the public hearing
at that meeting. At their discretion, they could act on
the matter or table the item to a later date.
The motion was approved 3-1 with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer, Schad, Fong
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Huff
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Flamenbaum
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - None
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
C/Schad stated he would like to have the Commission get under
way on the Development Code so that a Tree Ordinance can be
established.
April 24, 1995 Page 4 Planning Commission
ANNOUNCEMENTS- None
ADJOURNMENT:
VC/Huff declared the meeting adjourned at 7:17 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Rob Searcy
Associate Planner
Attest:
Robert Huff
Vice Chairman
AGENDA ITEM No. 4.1
DATE: May 4, 1995
TO: Chairman and Planning Commissioners
FROM: Robert Searcy, Associate Planner
RE: Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850
The Planning Commission tabled this item at the April 24, 1995 meeting at the applicant's
request. The applicant requested the Commission action in order to resolve legal issues.
Those issues have been resolved and therefore this project is agendized for the Commission
review on May 8, 1995.
Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement and the direction of the City Council, the Commission
is charged with the review of the project. The review is primarily focused on the
geotechnical issues that arose prior to the denial of the project in 1992. At the Joint Session,
the Commission raised additional areas of concern and requested staff to provide the relevant
information. The City Council then continued the public hearing on the project to May 16,
1995.
Attached is the staff report and reference materials distributed for the April 24, 1995
meeting.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the project and provide comments
for City Council consideration.
C:\LETTER\REPORTS\VTM47850.1vEM
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
REPORT DATE:
MEETING DATE:
CASEIME NUMBER:
APPLICATION REQUEST:
City of Diamond Bar
PLANNING COMMISSION
Staff Report
7.1
April 19, 1995
April 24, 1995
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850
The project is a request for approval of a Vesting
Tentative Tract Map and related approvals including a
Hillside Management Conditional. USePerniit and Oak
Tree Permit for development of 57 lots for custom
home development within the area adjacent to "The'
Country".
PROPERTY LOCATION: The project is located in northern Tonner Canyon,.
south of Steeplechase Drive and south of Windmill
Drive.
APPLICANT: Diamond Bar Associates
3480 Torrance Blvd., Ste. 300
Torrance, CA.
PROPERTY OWNER:
SAME
BACKGROUND:
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 questions via public testimony to
staff for responses. Staff has compiled answers to the expressed issues as attachments to this
overview.
1
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, testimony was taken
from the public, staff and the applicant. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Commission directed
staff to prepare Resolutions of Approval and to amend the draft conditions of approval to most notably
preserve an additional 7 oak trees in the western most canyon. The project was returned to the
Commission on the 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 of 1992 concluding after a series of
public hearing 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 doing so, the Council found that they could not approve the project without definitive
information on the geotechnical issues but 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. In anticipation of the renewed processing, a revised
environmental document was prepared. The revised document updated information related to air
quality and biological_ resources, as regulations and standards have changed, and to the geotechnical
information related to the 24 outstanding issues that served as the foundation for denial of the project.
The revised draft MEIR was then circulated to responding agencies and for public review in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
At the conclusion of the Joint Session the City Council remanded the project back to the Planning
Commission for review. Attached is the opinion of the City Attorney representative as to the scope of
review available to the Commission as a part of this review as provided in the Settlement Agreement.
In short, the Settle Agreement provided for the Commission's review of "... any other new matters or
alternatives which the Joint Session deems appropriate" and did not preclude the Commission or
Council's review in conformance with local ordinances or state statue.
APPLICATION ANALYSIS:
Project Description
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 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 most 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.
General Plan/Vesting
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 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.
The applicant designed the project to conform to the 1 unit per acre density WRural 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, 1 unit per acre, were to
be applied to the project, the project would be entitled to 72 units. The proposed density is .73 units
per acre.
The concept of clustered development has been utilized 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.
3
Issues
Staff has responded to the questions related to geotechnical and environmental issues and has provided
responses which are intended to resolve perceived inconsistencies. Staff and City's professional
consultants have provided an itemization of responses that were generated by the comments made at
the Joint Session.
The geotechnical issues primarily revolve around soil stability and the calculations which were used to
design the project. The design parameters and factor of safety for the site were calculated by using
state of the art industry standards. The site has been designed to meet all design standards and the
design has been reviewed and approved by. the City. The site has extensively implemented
conservative measures to account for worst case scenarios. For example, the site was designed as if
materials such bentonite were found on-site. All sheer strength calculations were performed using
lesser sheer strength values associated with this material. Additionally, the project will be overgraded
with a 10 ft. blanket fill. The standard overfill depth is typically 3 ft.
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 within
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 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.
RECO1VIl41ENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the project as submitted and direct staff as
appropriate.
PREPARED BY:
Robert Searcy, Associate Planner
ATTACFD&MS:
Memorandum from City Engineer, Dated April 20, 1995
Leighton and Associates, Geotechnical Response to Citizen Comments, Dated April 19, 1995
Michael Brandman Associates, Response to City Council and Planning Commission Response to
Comments, Dated April 20, 1995
Draft Conditions of Approval
Memo from Robert Owen, Rutan & Tucker dated April 18, 1995
C:\LETTERS\REPORTS\VTM47850.STY
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
DATE: April 20, 1995
TO: Jim DeStefano, Community Development Director
FROM: Mike Myers VIA: George Wentz, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850;
Response to Public, City Council and Planning Commission
Questions from the Joint Meeting of April 6, 1995
The following questions were noted from the Joint Meeting of the City
Council and Planning Commission held on April 6, 1995. In addition to the
responses to these questions herein, the City's Geotechnical Consultant
(Leighton and Associates) has prepared a written response to written
questions submitted at that meeting by Mr. Wilbur Smith. Their response,
dated April 29, 1995, is transmitted herewith.
Question: Can the proposed fill in westerly canyon be eliminated if some lots are
eliminated? And, more generally, can the extent of the area disturbed
by grading be reduced by reducing the number of lots?
Answer: Intuitively this is a very reasonable expectation. Certainly the earthwork
necessary to create the landform for access and the building pads is
reduced very directly with the size and extent of the project. However,
the magnitude and necessary extent of remedial earthwork can only be
determined by detailed analysis of a specific proposed project. No
project other than that now proposed has been submitted for review.
While it is reasonable to assume that a significantly reduced project
would likely require less remedial earthwork and impact a smaller area it
does not necessarily follow that a project half the size of that proposed
would impact half the area; it may impact somewhat more than this.
And there may be a project that could be designed in such a way to
impact less.
Question: Can the proposed canyon fill in westerly canyon be eliminated if that
proposed adjacent shear key (parallel easterly on the westerly facing
slope of this canyon) is constructed deeper?
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 April 20, 1995
Memorandum, Response to Questions Page 2
Answer: It may be possible to eliminate the presently proposed canyon fill by
constructing a deeper and larger shear key along the slope. However, it — -
is probable that the shear key "front -cut" would extend significantly
further downslope toward the canyon into areas which are now shown
to be undisturbed. Also, as the site presently balances and the amount
of material in the proposed canyon fill may not be able to be
accommodated elsewhere onsite, a significant earthwork imbalance
might be created.
Question: Has the Developer published any safety factors for individual lots or are
safety factors cited for entire project?
Answer: A safety factor (SF) is applicable in the analysis of an entire slope and is
not lot dependent. To the extent that a single lot is supported by that
slope the SF is applicable to that lot.
Question: How can burrowing animals be kept away from the site which is
immediately adjacent to the SEA?
Answer: Burrowing animals are a concern where water is directed into the
burrows which can then cause a detrimental effect on the surficial
stability of slope faces. Animal burrows are not likely to be a conduit for
water to depths that would cause a detrimental effect on the gross
stability of the slopes. The manufactured slopes are immediately above
the undisturbed natural slopes around the perimeter of the project and
the natural slopes are all within an area to be dedicated to the HOA for
slope maintenance purposes. Burrowing animal abatement programs
are well understood and can be readily implemented by the homeowner.
Such services are also available commercially. The control of burrowing
animals will be required of the homeowner by the C,C & R's for this
project.
Question: How will a 10 feet "blanket" fill assure that water will not infiltrate from
the surface into any of the lower natural joints and fissures.
Answer: This is discussed in the City's Geotechnical Consultant's (Leighton and
Associates) Response to Citizen (Wilbur Smith) Comments dated April
19, 1995, Response Item C.
Question: if proposed structure setbacks are varied, does this affect the
geotechnical stability of the site?
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 April 20, 1995
Memorandum, Response to Questions Page 3
Answer: The geotechnical stability of this site is not affected by the location of
residential or accessory structures or the setback of these structures
from property lines. However, in addition to the structure set back
requirements in the planning and zoning codes, the setback of structures
and foundations to/from slopes (both top and bottom) is regulated by
the Uniform Building Code (UBC).
Question: Are "blue -line streams" affected by this project?
Answer: Yes. Two intermittent "blueline" streams are within the project area (see
EIR page 3.2-3). Only the westerly canyon (intermittent "blueline"
stream) is affected by grading and the construction of drainage
improvements.
Question: Did the project Geotechnical Report analyze and make recommendations
regarding post -construction fill settlement?
Answer: No. On Tract 47851 (grading recently completed) the City Staff in
analyzing the final geotechnical report required Subdivider's Geotechnical
Engineer to monitor a deep (approximately 110') fill similar, but deeper,
than that proposed for this subdivision. The City has not yet given final
grading approval for those lots supported by that fill and will not until a
longer period (perhaps an additional 3 months) of settlement monitoring
is completed. The fill on this project (approximately 80') and any
requirement for settlement monitoring will be handled in the same way.
Question: Can the conditions of tentative map approval require an "as -graded"
plan and report and include a requirement that elevations of "bottom
excavations" be shown?
Answer: Yes. Conditions may be included to require this, however, the City's
standard General Grading Notes require a final report and as -graded
geotechnical map prior to approval of final grading, therefore Staff did
not recommend a condition of tentative map approval.
Question: As different geotechnical conditions may be encountered during grading,
can the conditions of tentative map approval require detailed
geotechnical mapping be performed during grading operations and
require that any different conditions discovered be re -analyzed?
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 April 26, 1995
Memorandum, Response to Questions Page 4
Answer: Yes. Conditions may be included to require this, however the grading
operation is subject to continuous supervision by the Subdivider's
professional -geotechnical consultants. The City's inspection will require
that regular reports (daily, weekly and monthly) be filed by the
Subdivider's geotechnical consultants. Given the requirements for a final
report and as -graded geotechnical map (as noted above) Staff did not
recommend a condition of tentative map approval.
Question: Did Subdivider's geotechnical consultant analyze the safety factor of
"back cuts"?
Answer: Yes. Minimum factors of safety were in excess of 1.25 for these
temporary slopes. This exceeds industry standards for these slope
conditions that only exist for short periods of time during the
construction process.
Question: Can slope downdrains can be buried?
Answer: Yes. However, buried pipes and associated inlets are more susceptible
to clogging and therefore are a greater potential for creating conditions
which could cause water to flaw over the face of slopes. It is preferred,
from maintenance standpoint, -to have such drains on the surface, readily
visible and easily accessible for cleaning.
Question:' How were the values for cohesion (C = 150) and friction angle (o = 15°)
established?
Answer: This is discussed in the City's Geotechnical Consultant's (Leighton and
Associates) Response to Citizen (Wilbur Smith) Comments dated April
19, 1995, Response Comment Item F.
Question: What were the values for cohesion (C) and friction angle (e) that were
used in the adjacent development (Tracts No. 29053 and 32974,
adjacent westerly)?
Answer: C = 200 and e = 10°. This is discussed in the City's Geotechnical
Consultant's (Leighton and Associates) Response to Citizen (Wilbur
Smith) Comments dated April 19, 1995, Response Comment Item H.
Question: Explain apparent contradiction in the project Geotechnical Report
regarding report of no groundwater when Lawmaster Boring (DH -A-1)
made in November, 1988 encountered seepage.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 Apri120, 1995
Memorandum, Response to Questions Page 5
Answer: This is discussed in the City's Geotechnical Consultant's (Leighton and
Associates) Response to Citizen (Wilbur Smith) Comments dated April
19, 1995, Response Item I.
Question: Can the conditions of tentative map approval require rubberized asphalt
paving?
Answer: Yes. Conditions may be included to require this. Should the Council
desire that rubberized asphalt concrete pavement be required in the
construction of street improvements it is recommended that the Planning
Commission recommended Conditions, Engineering (Road) No. 29 be
modified by adding the words "rubberized asphalt concrete" before the
word "pavement".
- Question: What are the impacts of this project on the Shebarum Trail?
Answer: Grading of the project will erase portions of the present trail and on the
lower portions of Lots 18, 19 and 20 make the present trail impassible.
In the final mapping for Tract 47851 portions of the present actual trail
were found to be outside of the present easement dedicated to the
County of Los Angeles. The present easement was abandoned with the
recording of the final map and concurrently an alignment was dedicated
to the City that matched the physical alignment of the existing and in
some areas realigned/regraded trail. Continuity of the trail through the
project was maintained and a passable trail within the easement was
established. These same issues are expected in the final mapping of this
project and will be handled in the same way.
Question: What provisions have been made for the grading shown offsite westerly?
Answer: Grading easements have been obtained from all affected properties and
recorded by the subdivider. Additionally Staff has recommended that a
specific condition regarding this issue be added to those conditions of
tentative map approval previously recommended by the Planning
Commission.
Question: Can the design of drainage swaies incorporate rocks?
Answer: Yes. However, this will adversly affect the hydraulic capacity of any
design. Also, this will create a greater potential for trapping debris and
increasing the effort in maintaining these necessary drainage facilities.
Geotechnical and Wironmental Engineering Consultants
April 19, 1995
To: City of Diamond Bar
21660 F—,Lst Copley Drive, Suite 190
Diamond Bar, California 91765
Attention: Mr. George Wentz
Geotechnical Response to Citizen Comments Regarding (Revision No. 2) Tract 47850,
City of Diamond Bar, California
Subject:
Project No. 291016460
L4 In response to your request, we have reviewed the letter dated March 14, 1995 (Revision No. 2), by
Mr. Wilber Smith which includes comments regarding the geotechnical issues within Tract 47950.
Our responses are lettered sequentially, corresponding to Mr. Smith's comments A through F. Mr.
Smith's letter is attached.
A. ibis comment should be directed to the City Attorney.
B. The geotechnical reports associated with the development of Tract 47850 have been reviewed by
E -n g the review process, comments were prepared by Leighton and
Leighton and Associates. Durin
Associates regarding various aspects of the geotechnical report. The review comments were
subsequently responded to by the developer's geotechnical consultants, Harrington Geotechnical
Engineering, Inc. Through an iterative process involving our review of the responses to our
comments, preparation of additional review comments and subsequent responses to those
comments by Harrington, all geotechnical issues were resolved. On August 23, 1994, Leighton
approved Tract 47850 from a geotechnical standpoint (Leighton., 1994e).
It is our opinion that the geotechnical issues . associated with the development of Tract 47850 have
been adequately addresse&
C. The assumption that there will be no static ground water table or phreatic surface which would
would create pore pressures
within the subject slopes is. a valid assumption. Shear keys,
incorporating heel and back cut drains, will be constructed around the perimeter of the site which
will effectively prevent the buildup of water. In addition, it is standard practice to overexcayate
the lots located above slope stability shear keys or buttresses and replace the overexcavated
L material with compacted fill. The standard practice is to overexcavate the lots 3 feet. This
reduces the potential for surface water seeping directly into adverse bedding planes and/or
adverseI joints. Within Tract 47950, the lots above the shear keys will be overexcavated a
minimum of 10 feet below finish grade; in excess of the standard practice. It is, however, possible
that the materials onsite will undergo fluctuations in moisture content- Strength parameters
developed for the, earth materials onsite, including the smectite layer, are based on saturated
conditions. Thus, itis our opinion that the analyses performed to evaluate the stability of the site
are appropriate.
659 BREA CANYON ROAD, SUITE 4, WALNUT, CALIFORNIA U.S.A. 91789 (909) 869,6382 - (800) 777-2286
FAX (909) 869-6387
2910164-60
Douglas E. Moran, Inc. performed laboratory testing of a representative sample of the smectite
obtained during Harrington's field investigation. They were provided with the sample and
performed the test. Moran makes the following statements: "In using such parameters to
represent the strength of the material tested, it is appropriate to recognize that shear strength
is effectively reduced by pore water pressure which tends to neutralize confining pressure on
which a significant portion of shear strength depends. This effect needs, to be" considered in an
analysis of stability in which such parameters are used to represent material strength". Since
Moran has never been to the site or reviewed the geologic and geotechnical data associated with
the development, their comments must be viewed as general in nature. In fact, pore water was
considered by Harrington. It was determined that pore water pressures would not be a factor.
Furthermore, the shear strength parameters used by Harrington (150 psf cohesion and 15 degrees
friction angle) in the analysis of slopes onsite are significantly less than those recommended by
Moran.
D. In order to mitigate the potential effect of downhill bedrock creep on the development, a series
of daylight shear keys will be constructed around the perimeter of the development. In effect,
the creep effected material will be removed in the vicinity of the shear keys and replaced with
compacted fill. To reduce the potential for water accumulating in the shear keys, drains have
been incorporated in the design. Also, all lots will be capped with compacted fill to reduce the
potential for surface water infiltration. In our opinion, these measures are state -of -the -practice
and adequately address the drainage issues associated with stabilization of the slopes onsite.
E. The City of Diamond Bar and the County of Los Angeles require a minimum static factor of
safety of 1.50 when analyzing the stability of permanent manufactured and natural slopes. This
is also an industry standard. Tract 47850 has been designed such that all slopes meet the
minimum required stability standards. Slope stability analyses are performed on cross-sections in
areas where worst-case conditions exist. The results of the analyses are not lot dependent, but
reflect the minimum factor of safety for the slope analyzed.
F. As with most hillside developments, the most significant geotechnical issues with respect to the
development of Tract 45850, are those associated with slope stability. The smectite layers onsite
were considered by Harrington as the material which controlled the site stability. Harrington
conducted numerous laboratory tests to determine the strength of this material, both in house and
by others. Based on the results of their testing program, they established strength parameters for.
3 the smectite material However, based on our review of the geologic units onsite and on our
experience, we questioned (by review comment) whether other, weaker materials could be present
onsite. After several discussions, Harrington agreed to reduce the strength parameters to those
which they had originally assumed based on the assumption that the controlling material onsite
was a weaker clay material
4 -2-
:E� Yf ry
y
2910164-60
c
Slope stability analyswere performed for the site utilizing the weaker strength parameters
es
Based on the analyses, shear keys were designed to stabilize the parameter slopes. The
construction of drains within the shear keys and capping of lots with compacted frill are measures
r taken to reduce the potential for water buildup within the shear keys, as discussed in our
response to Comment D.
Rr
}_u Burrowing animals can have a detrimental effect on the surficial stability of slope faces.
Burrowing animals tend to loosen the upper soil on the face of slopes which can result in soil
r slump type failures during periods of heavy rains. It is very unlikely that animal burrows located
on the building pad, within the fill cap, will have any effect on the gross stability of the slopes
onsite. The future homeowners, or the homeowner's association, should develop a slope
maintenance program, one aspect of which should be the control of burrowing animals.
G. See our response to Comment B, above.
H. Considerable laboratory testing was performed by Harrington and others onsite to determine the
shear strength of the earth materials onsite, including the smectite material The final shear
strength parameters utilized in slope stability analyses in Tract 47850 are significantly lower than
the laboratory test results indicate. Lower strength parameters were used by S. B. Medall &
Associates, Inc. during their geotechnical review of Tracts 29053 and 32974 (Mendall, 1976).
However, there are no reports by Medall on file with the City of Diamond Bar which support the
t_ use of the lower parameters with laboratory testing. In their October 4, 1976 report, Medall
states, "The parameters c and � that appear in the above equation define the strength of the
material that is present along the bedding plane under consideration. Since it is not possible to
determine with certainty the values of these parameters for each and every bedding plane along
<= which sliding might tend to occur, it is common practice to assume the worst, that the lowest
values obtained are characteristic of each and every bedding plane. This assumption is generally
conservative". Thus, it appears that the strength parameters used by Mendall were conservative
' assumptions.
L Seepage was encountered in the Lawmaster Boring DH -A-1, drilled November 21, 1988 (Plate
C-45, Brandeman, 1995). The seepage, encountered at depth of 71 feet, was described as
emanating from slightly open joints. This was a minor perched water condition. No static ground
water was encountered. Seepage was also encountered in Test Pits S-3, TPA -1 and TPA -2
(Plates C-11, C-47 and C48, Brandeman,1995). These latter three test pits were excavated in
the bottom of, or adjacent to, active stream channels. We would anticipate water in these
locations. This has no significance with respect to potential pore water pressure buildup and the
stability of the slopes onsite. Thus, we do not see any contradiction to Harrington's conclusion
�i that pore water pressure need not be included in the stability analysis of the slopes onsite.
-3- p_
LEIGHTONANDASSOCIATES, INC
2910164-60 -
J. The burden placed upon the homeowners, or a homeownees association within Tract 47850 is
no greater than those put upon any other homeowners or homeowner's associations within a
hillside residential development. It is common practice for the geotechnical consultant to
recommend preventative measures to control burrowing animals, maintenance of proper drainage
devices and landscaping, and prevention of excessive watering to reduce the potential for surficial
slope instability and erosion.
K The shear strength parameters used by Harrington, consisting of a cohesion of 150 psf and a
friction angle of 15 degrees, are more conservative than zero cohesion and 22 degrees as
recommended by Moran as a lower bound.
I. Harrington's conclusion that long-term creep may continue below the shear keys refers to the.
natural slopes downslope of the shear keys. Shear keys have been designed and recommendations
provided by Harrington to mitigate the affects of long-term creep on the development. Creep
affected materials are being removed and replaced with compacted fill along the daylight cut and
on the buildina Dads. Severe seasonal moisture changes which can contribute to long-term creep
in expansive soils can be controlled by proper landscaping, irrigation, and slope maintenance
within the development.
M. No response from the geotechnical consultants required.
Ifyou have any questions, please call us at your convenience.
pPi C. Respectfully submitted,
C.
ay
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Na 46222
Exp. W31198
crm David C. Smith, RCE 46222
OF Manager of Operations
DCS/rsh
Attachment: Appendix A - References
Appendix B - Letter dated March 14, 1995
Distribution: (2) Addressee
-4-
APPENDIX A
References
Harrington Geotechnical Engineering, Inc., 1992, Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation an
Grading Plan Review, Vesting Tentative Tract 47850, Diamond Bar, California, Project No.
91-01-0109B, dated September 3, 1992
, 1993, Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation and Geotechnical Report Review
Response, Vesting Tentative Tract 47850, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 91-
01-0109B, dated April 28, 1993.
1994a, Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet for Vesting Tentative Tract 47850,
Diamond Bar, California, dated May 17, 1994.
1994b, Material Shearing Strength, Vesting Tentative Tract 47850, Diamond Bar,
California, dated June 14, 1994.
,1994c, Revised Slope Stability Analyses for Vesting Tentative Tract 47850, Diamond Bar,
California, Project No. 91-01-0109B, dated July 6, 1994.
ER
, 19944, Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet for Vesting Tentative Tract 47850,
R Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 91-01-0109B, dated August 1, 1994.
r
1994e, Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet for Vesting Tentative Tract 47850,
Diamond Bar, California, dated August 16, 1994.
Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1992, Geotechnical Review Sheet, Vesting Tentative Tract 47850,
Report dated September 3, 1992, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 2910164-19, dated
October 29,1992.
�£ 1994a, Geotechnical Review Sheet, Tract 47850, Report dated April 28, 1993,
;t Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 2910164-60, dated April 29, 1994.
�. 1994b, Geotechnical Review Sheet, Tract 47850, Report dated June 14,
1994, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 2910164-60, dated June 15, 1994.
1994c, Geotechnical Review Sheet, Tract 47850, Reports dated September 3, 1992 and
r=a Revised October 16, 1992, April 28, 1993, and July 6, 1994, Diamond Bar, California,
F, Project No. 2910164-60, dated July 21, 1994.
19944 Geotechnical Review Sheet, Tract 47850, Report dated August 1,
y 1994, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 2910164 60, dated August 12, 1994.
'. 1994e, Geotechnical Review Sheet, Tract 47850, Report dated August
23, 1994, Project No. 2910164 60, dated August 23, 1994.
A-1
t
i
jAPPENDIX A
References (Cont'd.)
F , 1994f, Geotechnical Response to Citizen Comments Regarding Tract 47850, City of
Diamond Bar, California, dated March 23, 1995.
f
Michael Brandeman Associates, 1995, Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report, Vesting Tentative
Map 47850, (State Clearinghouse No. 90010861), Volume IL dated January 1995.
S.E. Medall & Associates, Inc., 1976, Soil Engineering and Geologic Review of Tentative Tract 29053
and Tract 32974, Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California for Weatherfield Homes,
dated October 4, 1976.
g , 1978a, Supplemental Subsurface Exploration, Tracts 29053, 34160 and 34161, Diamond
Bar, County of Los Angeles, California for County of Los Angeles, W.O. 605D, dated
March 7, 1978.
S
1978b, Addendum Report for Tracts 29053, 34160 and 34161, County of Los Angeles,
California for Weatherfield Homes, W.O. 605D, dated May 5, 1978.
1979, Rough Grade Report; Lots 48-100, Tract 34160, Diamond Bar, County of Los
Angeles, California, W.O. 605D, dated February 1, 1979.
i
z
's
A-2
Wilbur G. Smith
21630 Fairwind Lane
Diamond Bar Ca. 91765
909-861-0742
March 14,1995
To: City of Diamond Bar
21660 East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar Ca. 91765
Attn: Mayor P.Papen,City council Members,J.DeStefano
Subject I : Vesting Tentative Track Map 47650 - Revision ro.2
(ten new references,5ix additions to ATTACHMENT B,
identification of additional conflicting statements)
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Information (Attachment A) suppilied by the Cities
Community Development and Engineering Departments has been
reviewed for the purposes of providing citizen comment at
Public Bearings to be held on the Crystal Ridge Development
(VTTM 47850) and its Draft Environmental Inpact Report (Ref.5).
Attachment B presents my.citizen comments on the subject that I
will present at these hearings and requests for actions to be taken
by the city Council before voting on approval of the VTTM 47850.
Please include this letter with attachments A and B in the
final documentation of the Public Bearings.
Thank You
Wilbur G. Smith
City of Diamond Bar, 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (909) 396-5676
•0: property Owners within a 500 foot radius of subject site
ROM: City of Diamond Bar '
at the City Council and Planning Commission will conduct a joint public
SOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to State Law, th
tearing on the following item to determine whether or not the subject request shall be approved under the provisions of State Law
and the City of Diamond Bar:
DATE AND TIME OF HEARING: Thursday, April 6, 1995 6:30 P.M.
PLACE OF BEARING: South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium
21865 E. Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
S.U=CT: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAI' NO. 47850 and ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 92-1.
REQUEST: The applicant proposes a residential development on an approximately 73 a..—e site in the City of Diamond Bar. The
proposed project, if approved, would allow for the development of 57 custom lot single-family residences. Lot sizes are proposed
L o vary from 0.44 to 5.47 acres with an average lot size of 1.05 gross acres. Pad sizes wtH range from 9,391 square feet to 21,391
square feet.
Overall project density is 0.78'units per gross acre. The project site will have two access points from Steeplechase Lane and will
include an internal loop roadway system with four onsite cul-de-sacs. Approximately 47 acres willbe graded for -the lots with 16 acres
`graded for a fuel modification zone.
VTDi 47850 was a component of a three tract development considered by the City in 1992. In May 1992 the City approved Vesting
;Tentative Tract Man Nos. 47851 and 48487. In November 1992 the City denied the third map (VTM 47850) which is now being
reconsidered by the City and has been the subject of additional environmental documentation, Pursuant to the terms of the California
Environmental Quality Act,.the City has determined that. this project requires an Environmental Impact Report (FIR). An FIR was
,prepared for this project in 1991 (SCSI No. 90010861) and has been revised to reflect the current project and conditions. The Revised
ELR has been prepared to assess the individual and collective environmental impacts associated with the development of VTM 47850
and to establish mitigation measures for those impacts. A noticed Public Workshop designed to reintroduce the project and provide
a forum for public input regarding the proposal and the Revised ETR was held Saturday, March 11, 1995. The April 6, 1995 scheduled
public hearing on the proposed development provides an additional opportunity to comment upon the project
APPLICANTIOVYNER: Diamond Bar Associates, Inc. 3480 Torrance Blvd. '301, Torrance, CA 90503
PROPERTY ADDRESS: The project is located within'The Country Estates' near the intersection of Steeplechase Lane and
Wagon Train Lane.
Published in:
San Gabriel Valley Tribune: March 24, 1995
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin: March 24, 1995
If you are unable to attend the public hearing, but wish to send written comments, please write to the City of Diamond Bar
Cc=muniry Development Department at headdress eiveu below. To preview case mat--;ais or for further information on this subject
piece contact the Community Development Department at (909) 396-5676.
jJo>�e� /his is your %as 74' Chaore /� ���aSE' Pi-ofec
(See reverse for Site Map)
,U you challenge this application and project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else
I raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Community Development
9L
ATTACHMENT A
REFERENCES
r
t
a
1)
Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation and Geotechnical
Report Review Response for Subject Project, Dated April 28,
1994 by Harrington Geotechnical Engineering,Inc.
`i
2)
Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation and Grading Plan
2R
Review, Dated October 16,1992 by Harrington Engineering Inc.
3)
Geotechnical Review Sheet for VTTM 47850, Dated October 29,
--
1992 by Leighton & Associates Inc.
4)
Compilation of Geotechnical Report Review Sheets and Responses
for Vesting Tentative Track 47850 dated August 29,1994 by
Harrington Geotechnical Engineering Inc.
5)
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report for Vesting
Tentative Map 47850 Vol 1 and 2 dated January 1995 by
Michael Brandman Associates.
;may
6)
Case No. 71 16 84 filed in SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE
of CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE; DATE 21 JUNE 1993.
7)
Letter from DOUGLAS E.MORAN,INC to Harrington Geotechnical
Engineering: Subject :Results of Shear Tests Performed
Tentative Tract No.47850 ,dated April 14,1993.
8)
Leighton and Associates letter to City of Diamond Bar:
Subject: Tract Map No. 47851 dated August 2,1994.
9)
Harrington Geotechnical Engineering,inc Report N0.91-01-0109A
(Tract 47851)
10)
Harrington Geotechnical Engineering,Inc. letter to B.Mazur
of D.B.A. dated July 6,1994.
11)
Harrington Geotechnical Engineering,Inc letter to B.Mazur
of D.B.A.. dated May 17,1994.
Addendum Report for Tracts 29053,34160,34161 for Weatherfield
Homes by S.E.Mendall and Associates,Inc. dated May 5,1978
Supplemental Subsurface Exploration Tracts 29053,34160 and 34161
for Weatherfield Homes by. S.E.Mendall and Associates,Inc. dated
March,7,1978
Soils Engineering and Geologic Review of Tentative Tract 29053
and Tract 32974 for Weatherfield Homes by S.E.Mendall and
Associates,Inc. dated Oct.4,1976
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT between DIAMOND BAR CITY and D.B.A
No.16396-00002,F:\Doc\166\94030005.A10,aated 03-24-94
ATTACHMENT B
COMMENTS and ACTIONS REQUESTED OF THE CITY COUNCIL
BEFORE APPROVAL OF TRACK 47850
A) Direct the city attorney to give a legal opinion on the
liability (degree and time periods) of D.B.A., City of
Diamond Bar, J.C.C, and Leighton Associates for losses
incurred by homeowners due to geologic hazards or errors in
�f geotechnical calculations or assumptions.
Gn B) Reference 3 contains 24 specific questions that Leighton and
Associates asked regarding Track 47850. These questions were
elements in the law suite(Ref 6) filled by D.B.A against the city.
D.B.A. responded to these questions in Reference 1. The city
should now direct Leighton to make a definitive statement on
each of the responses as to its adequacy and Leightons acceptance
`* of the response. This request is consistent with the settlement
agreement between The City OF DIAMOND BAR and D.B.A. (Ref. 15,
section 2 Reconsideration of VTM 47845,page 3)which suspended the
r$ law suite.
C) Stability analysis calculations are not adequate because they
` assume no groundwater and/or pore water pressure (Ref. 1 page 11).
This assumption is not valid because it is physically possible for
water to reach the smectite layer. To support this,Section 4.4
(Analysis of the Smectite Layer),page 1.0, states "other factors
such as different topography and/or ground water buildup must
also 'have existed at the time of failure and contributed to the
slides". A clear contradiction exists here. Page 11 states no water,
whereas page 10 indicates the existence of ground water buildup
in the past. Therefore the Council should require that all
stability analysis and Factor of Safety calculations are made
with assumptions of finite amounts of groundwater and/or pore
water pressure -Supporting this opinion is the statement in Ref.7
(page 3)"in using such parameters (cohesion and angle) to represent
the strength of the material tested it is appropriate to recognize
that shear strength is effectively reduced by pore water pressure
which tends to neutralize confining pressure on which a significant
portion of shear strength depends.This effect needs to be considered
in an analysis of stability in which such parameters are used to
represent material strength."
D) Another deficiency in the reports is that Reference 2 (page 10)
identifies a condition of bedrock creep (to depth of 100 ft.)
caused by 1) cyclic changes in moisture content and density
due to seasonal wetting and drying, 2) water in tension/shrinkage
cracks, ...., 4) deep-seated, very, thin bentonite (smectite) bed.
Eowever,Ref.2 page 11 states " ground water was not encountered
in any of the excavations made at the site and is not expected
to be a matter of future concern to the project under normal
conditions ...... .It is not reasonable to assume that because
water was not encountered in these excavations that in will not
i
occur at some future time, especially since there is evidence
(land slides) that water was there in the past. Also the
NO GROUNDWATER statement is qualified by NORMAL CONDITIONS.
the fortunes and lives of so many people certainly should
a
k�• consider abnormal conditions such as adverse weather.
;y (50-100 year rainy seasons),uncertainties in geologic
parameters, human deficiences in workmanship etc.,etc.
The city council should require D.B.A. to conduct an error .
�analysis of the Factor of Safety and other stability analysis
computations using reasonable uncertainties in all system
°a parameters (presence/amount of water,efficiency of blacket fills,
V` geologic parameters. etc.,etc.)
E) The COUNTY BUILDING CODE requires slope Factors of Safety
greater than 1.5. The references presented Factors of Safety
values of 1.5051, 1.5039,'1.5011, 1.5133, 1.5218,1.5602 ,1.6492.
s 'These values indicate that the tract design is very marginal
from the COUNTY Factor of Safety prespective.
Small errors in the computational process,the data used or
assumptions made could cause many of these values to be less
than the requirement which means the project would not be safe
by County standards. The City Council should require D.S.A.
to conduct an error analysis of the Factor of Safety
computational process . Also the Council should require D.B.A to
publish the Factor of Safety for each lot.
} F) The most significant aspect of Track 47850 is the presence
of a smectite layer which lies from 30 to 100 ft. below the
r surface.If water reaches this layer earth movement(landslides).could
occur. Existing landslides are evidence o= this The developers
approach to preventing this is to place 10 or 3 ft. earth blankets
on each lot to prevent the infiltration of surface water down to the
"Most
smectite laye_. Ref.9(page 26) states t of the instability
of existing slopes (landslides and downslope creep) are believed'
$ to be attributed, at least in part, to the infltration of surface
water into the underlying bedrock. In order to minimize water
h
' infiltration we have recommended that all lots,pads and graded
slopes be covered with at least ten feet of compacted fill."
E Unforunately the developer presents no analysis of the
effectiveness of this measure. Be strongly recommends that the
homeowner eradicate burrowing animals (Ref.5 Vol II page E-5)
3
or resort to impractical measures of filling the burrows with
)
t concrete (Ref.5 Vol II page E-6) because the burrows;
in conjunction with the many faults, cracks, fractures
e -
and joints identified in Ref.5 (VOL II, plates C-1 thru C-58)
provide easy passage for water to the smectite layer.
5
d The City Council should require D.B.A. to find pest control.
professionals who will state the degree to which burrowing
animals can be controlled in areas that are adjecent to much
larger wilderness areas (3500 acres of Tonner Canyon) where no
attempt at control is made. Also D.B.A. should be required
to access the effectiveness of the blanket fills in conjunctionwith
the many open cracks, fractures, joints and faults below the fills'
as a means of preventing water reaching the smectite layer.
G) Before approval of VTTM 97850 require Leighton and Associates to
write a letter stating approval of the geotechnical conditions as
was done for VTTM 97851 (Ref.8).
H) The low Factor of Safety values of 1.5051,1.5039,1.5011,1.5133
values (see Ref .10) were based upon cohesion values and angles ,of
150 and 15 degrees respectively. Reference 12 states "...smectite
�.
these tracts .... layers of relatively weak material with
,. significantly lower shear strenths are known to exist within other
areas of the Puente Formation ... to date none have been identified
within the limits of this project or the adjecent adjecent tracts to
the east ....". However, the soils reports (References 12,13,14)
on the adjacent Weatherfield Homes Tracts to the southwest of
KN
47850 used cohesion values and angles of 200 and 10 degrees
respectively and identified the presence of bentonite.
The use of these values for Tract 47850 could reduce
the Factors of Safety to something considerable less than the
County required values of 1.5. Please ask D.B.A. to calculate
Factors of Safety using these values and Leighton to review the
Lzil
zJ results.
I) Ref.l page 11 states "...the potential for groundwater buildup
CIA
and/or pore water pressure buildup within confined smectite silt
t strata that could affect the stability of the site is extremely
remote. As a result, the inclusion of groundwater and/or pore water
4.7
r inclusion in the stability
buildup was not considered appropriate fo
analysis performed as part of this investigation. This conclusion is
based in part on the following:
c: * Groundwater was not incountered in any of the exploratory
borings drilled on the site
These statements are contradicted by plates C -11,C -45,C-47 and C-48
in Ref .5 VOL II which shows water and/or seepage.Also Ref .7(page 3)
clearly states that pore water pressure should be considered (see
statement C in this Attachment). Consideration of VTTM 47850 should
not be continued until these contradictions are resolved.
J) A heavy burden is placed upon the homeowner to prevent potential
s by the need to
geotechnical/earth movement problem
1) eradicate burrowing animals
2) have proper drainage of water from the lot
3) having and maintaining landscapeing
4) prevent excessive watering
5) proper design and maintainence (no leaks or cracks)
of pools or spas.
The potential homeowner should be advized that failures in the above
areas could result in serious earth movement problems because they
are mechanisms whereby water can reach the smectite layers;
R) Concerning shear strenth parameters, Ref.7 (page 3) states " Values
on the order of 22 degrees and zero cohesion could be used as a
conservative lower bound." Please ask Harrington to calculate
Factors of Safety using these recommended values and Leighton to
evaluate the results.
L) The Conclusions. and Recommendations section Ref.2( page 17)
states " Long-term creep which might continue below the shear key
should be effectively mitigated up-slope because: 1) Surface
water infiltration into any tension/. shrinkage cracks which now
exist will be essentially eliminated, 2) volume changes in the
expansive materials resulting from seasonal moisture changes
will be essentially eliminated,....". This is a THRUST ME
STATEMENT because the document presents no evidence that either
surface water infiltration or volume changes will be eliminated.
The reality is that these can never be eliminated because they
are controlled by the following characteristics of Nature
laws of gravity
b) Seasonal moisture changes are a result of weather.
The only way to isolate expansive materials from the
weather is to place it in a closed system such as
a refrigerator,heater,thermos,etc.,etc.
c) The tension/ shrinkage cracks, which are the means whereby
water reaches the shear planes and causes the creep are
continually being formed by the seasonal temperature
changes resulting from weather.
It is totally impossible to isloate this entire developement from
the effects of nature or the weather.
M) Reference 15 states "The Joint Session (City Council plus
Planning Commission) may also consider VTM 47850 in light of
the proposed General Plan". The General Plan requires a minimun
of one (1) acre per dewelling unit . However VTM 47850 has lots
as small as 0.43 acres. How will this difference be resolved ?
April 20, 1995
MEMORANDUM
E�tileo�atrvrtitC.ouPu.tsrr. PL•1��tNG Rssot:xcLN:we>!Lnr
TO: James De Stefano, City of Diamond Bar
FROM: Tom Smith and Steve Nelson, Michael Brandman A=ciat i �
SUBXCT: Responses to Comments on Revised Draft ETR for VTI 47850 by Planning
Commission and City Council at Meeting of April 6, 1995
Michael Brandman Associates has prepared responses to the comments on the Revised Draft ETR
(non -geotechnical comments) provided by members of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission and
City Council at the April 6 meeting. The Responses are organized to refer to the commentor's
question, the page number of the April 6 meeting minutes whoa the question occurs, followed by
our response. Steve Nelson and I Rill attend the April 24 Planning Commission, and City Council
meeting in May to provide additional explanations as requested.
Planning Commission Comments
ChairlFlamenbaum (page 13):
1 ghat assurances does the City have that the natural flora and fauna will not be impacted
by future residents?
There are no absolute assurances that the City has in this regard. This situation exists throughout
the City in existing developed areas. The CC&Rs for VTM 47850 could be revised to add a
statement concerning this issue; the Homeowner's Association for the dmlopment could then handle
any violations by residents.
2. Will there be a mitigation monitoring program and if sri, who w411 maintain and pay for the
program?
Yes, there is a mitigation monitoring program for VY -Ni 47850 as required by CEQA. A copy of the
Program vias provided to the Planning Commission and City Council in the materials for the April
6 meeting. The applicant is responsible for paying for the implementation and monitoring of the
program.
17310 Rett IIiI! :�7:.:` i .;U. I 'i!tc; (:'11ifi;r2 "•l:j I .? :7 .'r.' { 14.3)U . j5
I„'sr: IA'LEI
ti ,!)uiC1) . SaCRAM121-)
i RECEIVED 09/20 12:32 1995 AT 613117 PAGE s trHininu rnbn
APR -20-1995 12:1? P•0
3- . Does the new Draft EIR consider the impact of the taro adjacent projects?
Yes, the impact of the two adjacent projects (VTM 48487 and VTM 47851) was considered in both
the revised Draft EIR as well as the original EIR. In the current revised Draft EIR, the graded
condition of VTM 47851 was considered as an impact to the natural environment; VTM 48487,
although not graded presently, was assumed to be developed in the next 3-5 years, and its resulting
impact on the natural environment, as described in the earlier certified EIR, was considered. From
a cumulative impact standpoint with respect to the natural environment, the prior approvals of the
adjacent projects committed this area to urban uses.
4, Subsequent to the initial EM, the Jerry Yeh project was approved. What is the impact
upon this tract as a result of that project approval?
Because the Jerry Yeh development (VTM 51169) is north of, and not contiguous to, this
development, there is no impact on this tract from that project approval
5. Regarding Volume I of the revised Draft EIR, page 7, Section 4.2.3, Mitigation Measures
for Air Quality, are these the same mitigation measures that were used for the other
recently completed projects and what were the results?
Generally, the mitigation measures listed in this section are from the same source as air quality
mitigations in other recent projects: the 1993 Air Quality Handbook, approved by the SCAQMD.
Each project was evaluated using the procedures specified in this handbook; the mitigation measures
listed in the revised Draft EIR are specified in the SCAQivfD Handbook. The EIRs for previous
projects have included simlar mitigation measures, but not necessarily identical to those for this
project, since each project is unique.
6. Throughout the EIR there is no mention of cougars or bobcats; why did the video include
a shot of a sleepy cougar?
As is standard practice, the EIR text summarizes the findings contained in the Technical Biological
Report provided in Appendix A of the document. Potential use of the site by mountain lions is
discussed on Page A-22 of the technical report under the heading 'V ildlife Movement Corridors'.
As indicated in Table 2, Faunal Compendium of the technical report, mountains lions are expected
to be on the site sporadically, but was not observed during the field surveys.
Similarly, discussions on bobcats can be found in the technical report. Specrflcally, bobcats are
mentioned on Pages A-6, A-22 and in the Faunal Compendium. Bobcats, while not observed, are
expected to use the site in low numbers.
7. Are all of the animals pictured in the video at the site?
All of the animals pictured in the video were either observed or are expected to use the site with
varying degrees of regularity.
j—dba 7-' us
8. The EM makes mention of numerous animals, but it also avoids a number of animals.
The EIR text represents an expanded summary of the technical report. By referring to the Faunal
Compendium of the technical report, the reader will see that numerous animals were observed or'are
expected onsite.
C air/Flamcnbaum (page 14):
9. Is this area a part of a wildlife corridor? The EIR states that this is a secondary corridor,
but it does not talk about the project's impact to the secondary corridor.
To clarify, the site may be, at best, part of a secondary corridor to and from the Tonner Canyon
valley floor (see page 417 of the EIR and page A-22 of the technical report). However, it is more
likely not to play a marked role in regional wildlife movement The impact of the project on regional
wildlife movement is discussed on Page 420 of the EIR, and Pages A-27, 28 of the technical report.
Implementation of the project is not,expected to substantially prevent or inhibit wildlife movement
in the Tonner Canyon area.
10. Inasmuch as the other tract maps aro not considered in the EIR, what Is the impact of the
other improvements upon this site?
The other tract maps are considered in the revised Draft EIR for VTM 47850 in Section 5,
Cumulative Impacts. In that section,.the cumulative impacts of the proposed project, when
considered in conjunction with 19 other recently approved or completed projects throughout the City,
were considered for the three key environmental issues evaluated in this EER Geology, Air Quality,
and Biological Resources.
11. If the setbacks for lots are varied or not varied, does it have any significant impact in the
EIR with regard to aesthetics and geology?
Varying of the setbacks on lots (or not varying them) will have no impact on the geology of the site
or the impact and mitigation discussion in the ETR. The building pads are designed to accommodate
building placement anywhere on the pad. From an aesthetic perspective, varying lot setbacks in a
development can add visual interest when compared to repetition of identical setbacks. However,
the differences are not significant on a development of this size and in this location that is visible to
very few residents of the Qty.
12 The EER discusses mammals - raccoons and bobcats are not mentioned.
Page 4-15, and allof Table 411 of the EIR summarizes the observed or expected occurrence of
'Sp6dal Status Species on the Project Site". Raccoons and bobcats have no special status as defined
in the biological assessment On page 4-6 of the technical report provided in Appendix A, raccoon
and bobcat are indicated as being expected onsite, although not observed. Bobcat is again mentioned
on page A-22 of the technical report. The Faunal Compendium in the technical report indicates that
raccoons are expected to be fairly common onsite and bobcat are expected in low numbers. To the
boss or the author's knowledge, the Elft text and technical report do not indicate that these species
are not expected
j—dbarr2_ttA
RECEIVED 09/20 1Z:33 159!, Al b1z" r -
AM -20-1995 12:"19 P.05 -
13. The EIR refers to no impact to the mule deer, however, it refers to a loss of a bedding
Because mule deer are not afforded any special status, impacts to this species are addressed under
the headings "Direct Impacts to Wildlife" and "Impacts on Wildlife Movement" in the FJR In both
cases, the analysis found that these impacts were less than significant. Due -to the large open spaces
and available habitats within Tonuer Canyon and further to the east and south of the site, the loss
of the site as a bedding area was not found to be significant for wide ranging, highly mobile mule deer
populations in the arm
14. • where is the project site in relation to the boundaries of SEA #15? An overlay of the
SEA ##15 on the project site is needca.
Such an overlay exhibit was displayed and discussed at the March 11 public meeting, and was available
at the April 6 meeting. The exhibit wlI be discussed at the April 24 meeting of the Planning .
Commission. The technical report does discuss the project's potential impacts to SEA #15 on page
A-23. These include the potential for a decline in habitat value and the potential for genetic isolation
of plant and wildlife populations caused by habitat fragmentation. In response to potential impacts
on the resources within SEA a15, virtually all of the 31 mitigation measures outlined on pages 4.20
through 4-27 of the EIR address impacts to these resources. Based on the comprehensive coverage
of these measures, it is concluded that the proposed project will not result in any significant adverse
impacts to biological resources.
14. What happens at the end of the 5 -year monitoring period for tree growth?
The 5 -year monitoring period is a requirement used by the California Department and Fish and
Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in their mitigation programs. After 5 years, and with
tree growth meeting the performance standards specified in the mitigation monitoring program, it is
assumed that the trees will continue to prosper as they would in natural settings. At the conclusion
of the 5 year period, the trees are the responsibility of the Homeo'Amer's Association, as is all other
common areas in the development The City has no responsibility for their continuing maintenance.
16. What is the impact upon those trees and other native species caused by the runoff from the
residents' lawns and washing of cars?
There should be no impact on trees or other native species from car washing or lawn irrigation runoff
from residents. Pads are graded to drain toward the streets of the development. Any runoff from
lots will be conveyed to the storm system and to the water quality ponds designed to catch the first.
Bush runoff from the development.
17, Are there any blue line streams in the area?
As noted in the original EIR ccrtsed for VTM 47851 and VTM 4$"-.37 and applicable to the current
revised Draft EAR for VTM 47850, there is one blueline stream that traverses the western edge of
VTM 47850. Appropriate permits will be obtained by the applicant from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and the Department of Fish and Game for impacts to this drainage, as noted in the revised
draft EIR (pages 1-3 and 1-4).
Fit'K—CO-177 1G• 17
18 On page A22 the EIR says that no wildlife movement was studied and in another section
it states that there is a wildlife corridor. These statements are in conflict If a study is not
conducted, how can the report determine there is no wildlife corridor?
Page A-22 of the EIR states, in relevant part: "Wildlife movement through Tanner Canyon has not
bern studied in detail, to the best of MBA's knowledge. however, a review of aerial photographs
and topographic maps indicates that Tonner Canyon is likely a primary corridor. The project site has
limited importance for wildlife movement because the onsite drainages originate on the site near
existing development and, therefore, only provide a connection with open space to the south in
Tonner Canyon ......Identification of wildlife corridors or bedding areas was determined by the
observation of wildlife and scat, tracks, and other signs of wildlife activity. On the project site, it
appears that mule deer use the site as a bedding area rather than a movement corridor_ However,
due to the development of the ridgeline, the site docs not serve as a corridor by which wildlife move
from one habitat area to another.'
As noted above, the site was evaluated with respect to its potential as a wildlife movement corridor
and determined to not be one. It does appear that Tonner Canyon is a wildlife movement corridor,
although this has not been studied as part of the revised Draft EIR analysis.
19. On page A-25, the HER states that the Catalina Mariposa Lily may be present. Is it or isn't
it present?
This page of the ETR notes that focused studies were not conducted for specific sensitive plant
species. To do so would have added considerable expense to the effort that was not warranted, in
the opinion of the MBAbiologists. Instead, a habitat analysis was used to predict the potential for
the occurrence of sensitive species. WhM the Mariposa Lily was predicted to be potentigUy present
onsite due to the presence of supportive habitat and site conditions, the EIR concluded that any
impacts to the Mariposa Lily, if it were present, would not be considered significant because "the
proposed project will not remove a significant amount of habitat for these species" (page A-25).
Chair(Flamenbaum, page 15:
20. Although the ETR indicates no trees shall be planted on the hillsides, the map shows that
trees will be planted on the hillsides. What about slope maintenance areas, and are the
hillsides being planted or are they not being planted?
As a point of clarification, the EIR does not state that trees shall not be planted on the hillsides.
�htitigation measure 1 (Walnut Woodlands) and measure 6 (Oak Woodlands) require the preparation
of revegetation programs that will specify where the replacement trees will be located, and the
specific requirements to ensure their long term survival. It is anticipated that some tree replacement
will occur in slope maintenance areas, as long as appropriate wrocxiland habitat is assured. The
mitigation measures are intended to provide for replacement of habitat, not just trees.
jss:dSarr7t.tes
RECEIVED Aq/20 12:39 1995 AT 613117 PAGE 7 (PRINTED PAGE 7) 1
APR -20-1995 12.20
P.0?
F
City Council +Comments
Mayor Papers (page 19):
1. When does the developer's 5 -year tree maintenance program begin?
Fiveyesr maintenancelmonitoring programs begin upon completion of the installation of all trees and
other elements of the mitigation monitoring program for biological resources impacted by site
development.
Z One of the alternatives in the FIR is that appro)dmately 15 homes would be bunt on the
northeast corner. Concern was expressed that an alternative in the ETR states that 15
homes will be built on the northeast section, however, if the soil cannot withstand this
construction, is the alternative valid?
This alternative was originally descn'bed in the Final FIR certified for VIM 48951 and VIM 48487
and repeated in the revised draft EIR. The analysis of this alternative in the current ETR states
(page 6-7) that although there would only be 15 residences built onsite, the same impacts to
geological factors would occur as with the proposed project, because "the onsite soil and geologic
instabi lities on the entire site would need to be remediated". Although this alternative is therefore
valid since geological stability of the lots would be achieved, the a anomic feasibility of such an
alternative may be questionable.
ias:deArr2r-W 6
City of Diamond Bar
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
and Chairman and Planning Commissioners
VIA: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development it
SUBJECT: DRAFT PROJECT CONDITIONS for
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 47850
DATE: April 4, 1995
On Thursday, April 6, 1995, the City Council will conduct a Joint Meeting with the Planning
Commission and begin its reconsideration of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850.
Attached please find draft project conditions as prepared by the staff. In addition for your use
and information we have provided a copy of the Planning Commission Resolution No. 91-23
recommending approval of the project.
JDS\mco
attachments
Illl2�l'Ta.l'�?
I ON If li: i
VTM 47850
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
April, 1995
A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:
This approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 shall not be effective
for any purpose until a duly authorizer) representative of the applicant has filed
with the Community Development Department an Affidavit of Acceptance,
thereby accepting all the conditions. of this approval which Affidavit shall be
filed within 15 days of the date of approval.
2. In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9(b)(1) and (2) and (e).
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its agents,
officers,. and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City
or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, an
approval of the City, which action is brought within the time period provided
for in Government Code Section 66499.37.
Any condition imposed pursuant to this subdivision shall include the
requirement that the City promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action,
or proceeding and that the City cooperate fully in the defense. If the Cityfails
to promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action, or proceeding, or if the
City fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not thereafter
be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City.
3. The property shall be maintained in a condition which is free of debris both
during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the
entitlements granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse,
whether during or subsequent to construction, shall be done only by the
property owner, applicant or by a refuse hauler who has obtained a permit for
such refuse hauling from the City of Diamond Bar. It shall be the applicant's
obligation to insure that the waste hauler utilized is one which has obtained
permits from the City of Diamond Bar.
B. PLANNING REQUIRE YEENTS:
1. That three (3) copies of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 presented
at the public hearing and marked Exhibit "A" and conforming to such of the
following conditions as can shown on a plan, shall be submitted to the
c:u=RS1VM47 w.cox
Community Development Director. Thereafter, the 57 lot residential
subdivision with one (1) common lot shall be developed and maintained in
accordance with the approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map.
2. The approval of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 is granted subject
to the approval and certification of Master Environmental Impact Report No.
91-2.
3. That all requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and of the underlying zoning of
the subject property must be complied with, unless otherwise set forth in the
permit or shown on the approved plan.
4. The applicant shall satisfy the Park Obligation by contributing land acreage or
the in -lieu fee to the City prior to recordation of the final map per code section
21.24.340.
Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) and Articles of
Incorporation of Homeowner's Association are required and shall be provided
to the Community Development Director and the City attorney for review and
approval prior to recordation of the final map. A Homeowners Association
(HOA) shall be created and responsibilities thereof shall be delineated within
said the CC&R's. The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation shall be
recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building
permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the
City Engineer.
6. The project shall be designed so as to substantially comply with the CC&R's
implemented by the adjacent development heretofore known as "The Country".
The CC&R's should incorporate at a minimum, provisions which would
establish a maintenance program for urban pollutant basins, and all mitigation
measures within the Mitigation Monitoring Program, such that wildlife
movement corridors are left in an undisturbed and natural state. The CC&R's
will, to the fullest extent possible, be consistent with the CC&R's of "The
Country".
7. A clause shall be incorporated into the CC&R's which requires disputes
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 partyinitiating litigation in a court of
competent jurisdiction. The cost of such mediation shall be borne equally by
the parties.
i:espansibihties thefeef shall be delineated h� said GG& k-' ,
8. 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
C:ILEITERSIY7M47 3U.CON
1nK •11..1. a .� "l i
"Buyers Awareness Package" which shall include, but not be 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 matters. The applicant shall institute a program to include
delivery of a copy of sdd the "Buyers Awareness Package" to each
prospective purchaser and shall keep on file in the office of the applicant a
receipt signed by each such prospective purchaser indicating that the
prospective purchaser has received and read the information contained within
the "Buyers Awareness Package ". The applicant shall incorporate within the
CC&R's a reference to the availability of the "Buyers Awareness Package"
and the fact that a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk of the
City of Diamond Bar.
The applicant shall obtain approval by County Sanitation on the location of the
structures affecting County Sanitation easements and submit written evidence
to the City prior to issuance of a grading permit.
10. The Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) outlined within Master
Environmental Impact Report (MSIR) No. 91-2 shall be submitted to and
approved by the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of the
grading permit. Should a conflict exist between the Conditions of Approval,
the MMP as outlined in the MEIR- No. 91-2, and the SEATAC Final Report
dated April 8, 1991, said the conflict will be presented to the Community:
Development Director for resolution.
11. Prior to approval of the final landscape plan the applicant shall demonstrate
that the landscaping palette for the project emphasizes the use of drought .
tolerant, native plant species with low water requirements adapted to the inland
Southern California climate. In order to limit the potential threat of wildland
fires, low -fuel volume plants shall be incorporated into the revegetative plan.
The final landscape plan shall substantially comply with the recommendations
of the Final SEATAC Report, MEIR No. 91-2, and the preliminary landscape
plan submitted and approved by the Planning Commission and marked Exhibit
"A-1" and shall be submitted to the Community Development Director prior to
issuance of any building permits. Indicate fence details, tree staking, soil
preparation, planting details, an automatic irrigation system and the
incorporation of xerotropic landscaping wherever feasible.
12. All irrigation equipment, slope planting and revegetated areas shall be
continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer
or HOA until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to
releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the
Planning Division to determine that the plantng is in satisfactory condition.
C:iLE P.51VT.Nf785O. CON
13. Exterior grading and construction activities (framing and roofing, etc.) shall be
restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday, except that
interior building construction activities shall not be. limited. All construction
equipment shall be properly muffled to reduce noise levels.
14. Transportation of_equipment and materials and operation of heavy grading
equipment shall also be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. All
equipment staging areas shall be located on the subject property. Dust
generated by construction activities shall be reduced by watering the soil prior
to and during grading activities. Use of reclaimed water shall be used
whenever possible.
15. Dust control mitigation measures shall comply with MEIR No. 91-2 and shall
be included and enforced under the Mitigation Monitoring Program approved
by the Community. Development Director. Measures may include but not be
limited to reducing dust by watering the soil prior to and during grading
activities. Use of reclaimed water shall be used whenever possible.
16. The use authorized by this approval shall be commenced or construction
necessary and incidental thereto shall be started on or before the time limit
specified herein and thereafter diligently advanced on or before two (2) years
after the expiration of the appeal period. A one year extension may be
requested and granted.
17. The applicant shall pay development fees (including, but not limited to,
Planning, Building 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.
18. Comply with all conditions of approval listed by the Engineering Dept. as
exhibited on Exhibit "B-2."
19. Prior to any occupancy permit being granted, these conditions and all
improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director and City Engineer.
20. The applicant shall contribute a,pro rata share for the study of Tonner Canyon
and SEA No. 15.
21. All residences will be required to receive approval via the Development
Review process by the Planning Commission or Community Development
Director prior to issuance of building permits.
22. The owner shall make a bona fide application to Diamond Bar Country Estates
Association to annex this subdivision to that Association. The owner shall be
required to annex if all fees assessed by the Diamond Bar Country Estates
C: V. ETT E RS I V W 47850. CON
Association do not exceed the fees assessed per lot for annexation to the
Diamond Bar Country Estates Association for Tract No. 47722.
23. All down drains and drainage channels shall be constructed in muted earth
tones so as not to impart adverse visual impacts. Terrace drains shall follow
land form slope configurations and shall not be placed in exposed positions.
All down drains shall be hidden in swales diagonally or curvilinear across a
slope face.
24. The applicant shall participate in an oak and walnut tree replacement program
substantially conforming to the ratios and locations exhibited in MEIR No. 91-
2 prior to issuance of occupancy permits.
25. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a
construction barrier in accordance with the Los Angeles County code and so
noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in
place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed
landscape plans.
26. Prior to recordation or issuance of any permits, the applicant shall pay all
environmental and development fees at the established rates as required. All
Mitigation Monitoring Program fees to defray the cost of implementation and
monitoring by City staff and consultants retained by the City, are to be
deposited with the City prior to the issuance of building or grading permits and
all costs related to the ongoing monitoring shall be secured by the City prior to
Final Map approval.
27. The final map shall clearly delineate and dedicate to the City the right to
prohibit the construction of buildings (or other structures) within those areas to
be designated on the map as building restriction areas.
28. The location of the fences demarcating the construction rights prohibited area
shall be clearly delineated on the final map.
29. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans
shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and
drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries
shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map.
30. The use authorized by this approval shall be commenced or construction
necessary and incidental thereto shall be stared on or before two (2) years
after the expiration of the appeal period. A one (1) year extension may be
requested and granted.
31. Lot Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 15, 16, 17, 18, 34, 35, 36, 46, 47, 48 and 49 shall
provide a minimum lot/street frontage of 60 feet at the property line, as
C.V E=RS1V7M478SO.CON
defined in Title 22 of the City's Subdivision Code. All other lots shall have a
minimum lot/street frontage of 125 feet.
32. All lots shall be constructed with a minimum pad size of 10,000 square feet.
33. In compliance with Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code, a
qualified biologist shall determine the presence of any raptor nests prior to or
concurrent with grading activities, the project applicant(s) shall contact the
California Department of Fish and Game, shall obtain and comply with all
appropriate procedures relative to grading operations in proximity to those
nests, and shall provide verification of same to the City.
34.
site.
C.ILEnERsJV M47M.CON
6
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
DATE: March 28, 1995 (Revised April 3, 1995)
TO: Jim Destefano, Community Development Director
FROM: Mike Myer Gorge Wentz, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850;
Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions as
Recommended By Planning Commission
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 has been recommended for
approval by the Planning Commission with conditions in accordance
with its Resolution 91-23 approved November 25, 1991. The City
Engineer suggests modification of those conditions as follows.
Deletions are shown with "strikeout" and additions in italics.
SUBDIVISION
1. All easements existing prior to final map approval must be
identified. If an easement is blanket or indeterminate in
nature, a statement to that effect must be shown on the final
map in lieu of showing its location.
2. Subdivider shall submit aA title report/guarantee and a
subdivision guarantee showing all fee owners and interest
holders must be submitted when a final map is submitted for
planmap check. This account with the title company must
remain open until the final map is filed with the County
Recorder.. An updated title report/ guarantee and subdivision:
guarantee must.be submitted ten (10) working days prior to
final map approval.
3. The d_.c'__p^r subdivider shall submit to the City Engineer
the total detail cost estimate of all off-site improvements,
prior to approval of the final map.
4. The subdivider must submit recorded documents indicating that
t4eythe project will have proper/adequate right -of -entry to
the subject site via QTR the private streets within "The
Country".
5. The tract shall be annexed to the Lighting and Landscape
Maintenance Assessment District 387 aid the—City Wide -
6. Street centerline monuments shall be set to mark the
intersections of streets, intersections of streets with the
Vesting Tentative Tract Map N0.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95)
Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 2
tract boundary and to mark either the beginning and end of
curves or the points of intersection of tangents thereof, or
other intermediate points to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. New centerline monument ties -set --as -part-of--this -----
subdivision must be approved by the City Engineer, in
accordance with City Standards, and centerline monument tie
notes shall be submitted to the City engineer prior to
issuance of building permits.'
7. Where subdivision boundary monuments are not found at the
time of making the survey for the final map, nNew boundary
monuments must be set in accordance with the Subdivision Map
Act, State law, the City Subdi vision' Code and City Standards
and are subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to
approval of building permits.
8. if any required public improvements have not been completed
by-- the e= and accepted by the City prior to the
approval of the final map, thee� subdivider shall
enter into an agreement with the City to complete
the improvements and shall post the appropriate security.
9. All site grading, landscaping, irrigation, street
revec en s, sewer, water and storm drain improvement plans
shall be coordinated for consistency and approved by the City
Engineer prior to final map approval.
10. A–dei-;;iled en. -site lighting. Plan shallhe Pd Pd
appreved by the City prior- te the issuanco-e e4fg building
mien, height, aid methed ^f shielding, sa as net—t-e
affeGt ad,...en't pEeperte;^
11. Street names shall be submitted for City review and approval
prior to approval of the final map. These names must not be
duplicated existing street names within the City of Diamond
Bar's postal service zip codes.
12. House numbering clearance ;-s requ4zEed by the City Engineer,
is required prior to appreva1 efthe
nal –mag issuance of
building permits.
13. The detail drawings and construction notes shown on the
submitted plans are conceptual only and the approval of this
map does not constitute approval of these notes and details.
GRADING GEOLOGY & -SOILS
14. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with
the Uniform Building Code, City Grading ordinance :',`?^�--�aon)
No. 7 (1992), Hillside Management Ordinance or as amended and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map NO -47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95)
Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 3
acceptable grading practices. The final grading plan shall
be in substantial conformance with the app,-eved grading plan
shown as a material part of the tentative map as approved.
The maximum grade of driveways serving building pad areas
shall be 15$.
15. rr-G44Bert shall be—prepared by 4 qaalified
engineer
16.
At the time of submittal of the 40 -scale
grading plan for plan check, a detailed soils and geology
report shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval.
Said report shall be prepared -by a qualified engineer and/or
geologist licensed by the State of California. The report
shall address, but not be limited to, the following:
(a) Stability analyses of daylight shear keys with a 1:1
projection from daylight to slide plane; projection plane
shall have a minimum safety factor of 1.5.
(b) All soils and geotechnical constraints (i.e., landslides,
shear key locations, etc.) shall be delineated in detail with
respect to proposed building -envelopes. Restricted use areas
and.structural setbacks shall be considered and delineated
prior to recordation of the final map.
(c) Soil remediation measures shall be designed for a "worst
case" geologic interpretation subject to verification in the
field during grading.
(d) The extent of any remedial grading into natural areas shall
be clearly defined on the grading plans.
(e) Areas of potential for debris. -flow shall be defined and
proper. remedial measures implemented as approved by the City
Engineer.
(f) Gross stability of all fill slopes shall be analyzed as part.
of geotechnical report, including remedial fill that replaces
natural slope.
(g) Stability of all proposed slopes shall be confirmed by
analysis as approved by the City Engineer.
(h) All geologic data including landslides and exploratory
excavations must be shown on a consolidated geotechnical map
using the 40 -scale final grading plan as a base.
17. Grading plan (24"x36") must be designed in compliance with
recommendations of the soils and engineering geology reports.
All remedial earthwork specified in the final report shall be
incorporated into the plans.
18. Grading plan must be signed and stamped by a California
registered Civil Engineer, Soils Engineer and registered
Geologist.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map N0.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95)
Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 4
19. All identified flood and geologic hazards- areas associated
with this proposed development must which cannot be
eliminated aid—rest--isted—use ^a by to the
satisfaction of the.City Engineer must be indicated on the
final map as "Restricted Use Area". The subdivider shall
dedicate to the City the right to. prohibit the erection of
buildings or other structures within the restricted use areas
on the final map.
20. As a custom-lot subdivision, the following requirements shall
be met:
a) Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed
guaranteeing completion of all grading and on-site drainage
facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels to the
satisfaction of the "^b11^ TG,-Ir. „e^ +me^' City Engineer
prior to final map approval and prior to the issuance of
grading permits.
b) Appropriate easements for safe disposal of drainage
weir flows that are conducted onto or over adjacent parcels,
are to be delineated and shown on the final map to
the *satisfaction of the City'-s Wer-ks Department,
Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits.
c) On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering
and protecting the subdivided properties from drainage flows,
are to be installed prior to issuance of building permits for
construction upon any parcel that may be subject to drainage
flows entering, leaving, or occuring within a parcel ,
4a for which a building permit is requested.
d) All slope banks in excess of five (5) feet in vertical
height shall be seeded with native grasses or planted with
ground cover for erosion control upon completion of grading
or snmeother- an alternative method of erosion control shall
be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In
addition, a permanent irrigation system shall be provided.
21. Completion and stabilization of all man-made slopes, removal
of all landslide materials and reconstruction of slopes must
comply with the T A.-geles rl,,,, ty City Building Code, all
other provisions of this .tentative map approval and
Ordinances including those requirements for erosion
protection and landscaping.
22. The geotechnical consultant of record, Harrington
Geotechnical Engineering, Inc., must provide written
confirmation of their acceptance of the geotechnical data and
information provided previously by other consultants for the
vesting tentative tracts- which has been utilized or relied
upon in preparation of their geotechnical reports. further
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95)
Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 5
23. The following geotechnical issues must be addressed and
approved by the City, prior to approval of the grading plan:
a) Areas of potential for debris flow need to be defined
and proper remedial measures recommended.
b) Gres----AbilitY Of a 150 fees ugh fill alege4:R Traz
epe
C) Stability of all proposed slopes must be confirmed by
analysis. Unstable slopes shall be redesigned or stabilized
utilizing slope reinforcement.
d) _ All landslides must be shown on a consolidated
geotechnical map. Specific remedial measures shall be
implemented pursuant to requirements ofLes ,!. g4,,es Geunty
City Code and Ordinances.
e) Stability of back cuts (i.e. excavation of natural
slopes) must be analyzed. _
ROAD
24. Street improvement plans (24"x36"), prepared by a registered
Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the
City Engineer prior to final map approval. Security shall be
posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer and City Attorney guaranteeing completion of
the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final
map approval.
25. Cul-de-sacs, in accordance with all applicable City
Standards, must be constructed at the terminus ends of
Hauikwood Road (public) and Steeplechase Lane (private).
.26. Install street name signs at all intersections within the
Tract.
27. 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 in addition to any
other permits required.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95)
Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 6
28. Street improvement plans for all private streets shall be
designed with a maximum siepe grade of 12%, shall be previded-
fer3e;.74ew and appEevai by the City E g; ^^^r. •Prior to any
work being performed on the pate streets, fees shall be
paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the City
Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required.
29.. Construct base and pavement on all streets and access roads
to pump station, and the emergency access road to southerly'.
property line in accordance with the City approved soils
report and City Standards. Vehicular access must be provided
to all "Urban Pollutant Basins" with a minimum width of 151,
with 12' of pavement and with a maximum s!spe grade no
greater than 20%.
30. Prior to approval of the final map, the developer shall
contribute $8,550.00 towards the construction of sidewalk
along the east side of Diamond Bar Boulevard across from the
Country Hills Shopping Center.
DRAINAGE
32. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by
the City Engineer prior to final map approval. All drainage
facilities shall be installed designed and constructed as
required by the City Engineer and in accordance with the
County of Los Angeles Standards. Private (and future)
easements for storm drain purposes shall be offered and shown.
on the final map for dedication to the City. The private
storm drain facilities shall be maintained by the homeowners
association,and this shall be assured through the CC&R's.
33. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of
any storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature
tree trunk.
34. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient
improvement plans shall be completed beyond the phase
boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries
shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative
map.
35. Prior to placement of any dredged or fill material.into any
U.S.G.S. blue line stream bed, a 404 permit shall be obtained
from the Army Corps of Engineers mus a apprev uG
antion �� subject to the provisions of nation wide permit for
discharges of dredged or 'Lill materials into water ways of
the United States. Not withstanding a permit to place any
fill in the U.S.G.S. blue line stream bed a written
permission from affected property owners must be obtained
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95)
Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 7
prior to approval of the final map and issuance of a grading
permit. An agreement with the California Department of Fish
and Game shall be obtained and submitted to the City Engineer
prior to approval of the final map and issuance of.a grading
permit.
SEWER
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 tract shall be connected to
city sewer system. Said system shall be of the size, grade
and depth approved by the City Engineer, County Sanitation
District and Los Angeles County Public Works Department,
prior to approval of the final map.
37. The subdivider must obtain a sewer connection permit from the
City and County Sanitation District. The subdivision must be
annexed into the County Consolidated Sewer Maintenance,
District and appropriate easements for all sewer main lines
and pump station must be provided and accepted by the Seng
c T p n bl i r. WArks n ..+,. nt City, Pry= to with.
approval of the final map.
38. Prior to approval of the final map, the subdivider must
conduct an engineering analysis to determine the capacity of
sewer lines from the site to the County Sanitation District
trunk line. If the system is found to be of insufficient
capacity the problem must be resolved to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer.
39. Subdivider, at his sole cost and expense, must construct the
sewer, system including the pump station in accordance with
the City, Los Angeles County Public Work Department and
County Sanitation District Standards.
TRAFFIC
40.
6bal l be pest -ed a zr.en t
41. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the
City Engineer for approval in conformance with adopted
policy.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95)
Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 8
42. Tom—subdivider shall—pEeFa£e +r=��; +r , signing n
of-oR.1 mvaf 94G Maniaal-p ie£ to of f -i -n- ,
map.
43. Pavement striping, marking and street name signing shall be
installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
44. A separate right tore lane shall betr „a _n4 ate
sem,--y�rstalled is the no-�thbeund dr
i£eetienatm
ipteEseezion of Diamend $a£ -d—Shadow Gany r
D=ry
45. A seF a£ate right t4£n lane shall be striped and apprzepE:�ate
signs instialled- in the
46. An additional left -turn lane shall be striped and appropriate
signs installed in the southbound direction at the
intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road.
47. A stop sign shall be installed at the intersection of Wagon
Train Lane and Steeplechase Lane. The stop sign shall be
installed on Wagon Train along with fifty feet- of double
yellow striping, Type D pavement markers, stop legend and
limit line.
48. Stop signs shall be installed at the intersection of
Steeplechase Lane and street "A", subject.to the approval by
the City.Engineer.
49. Developer shall contribute $28,500.00 towards the
installation of a traffic signal at intersection of Diamond
Bar Boulevard and Shadow Canyon Drive prior to approval of
the final map.
UTILITIES
50. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including
water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all
underground) in accordance with the respective utility
companies standards. Easements shall be provided as
required. All utilities shall be placed underground.
51. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of
existing utilities as necessary and placing them underground.
Facilities within that easement owned by General Telephone
Company shall be relocated as necessary to allow telephone
company to relinquish its easement. Subdivider shall, at
it's own expense, cause General Telephone Company to
relinquish this easement.
vesting Tentative Tract Map NO.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev -4/3/95)
Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 9
52. Prior to recordation of the final map, a written
certification shall be submitted to the City from Walnut
Valley Water District, GTE, SCE, SCG and Jones Intercable
stating that adequate facilities are or will be, prior to
issuance of building permits, available to serve the proposed
project ani De—r;ahmtced tot.he City and they have no
objection to recording of the map. Such letter must be
issued by the utility companyies at least -94 30 days prior to
final map approval.
Xby
RESOLUTION NO. 91-23
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
CERTIFICATION OF MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 91-2
AND AppROVAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 47850, FOR A 57
LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN NORTHERN TONNER CANYON, WITHIN
SEA NO. 15, SOUTHERLY AND EASTERLY OF STEEPLECHASE LANE
AND WAGON TRAIN LANE, IN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
(i) Diamond Bar Associates, Inc., 3480 Torrance Blvd.,
Torrance, California, have heretofore filed an application for
certification of a Master Environmental Impact Report and approval
of a Vesting Tentative Tract Map, as described in the title of
this Resolution. Hereinafter -in this Resolution' referred to as
"the application".
(ii) On April 181 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State
of California. On said date, -pursuant to the requirements of the
California Government Code Section 57376, Title 21 and 22, the
City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No.
1, thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances
of the City of Diamond Bar.. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles
County Code contains the Development Code of the County of Los
Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, in-
cluding the .subject application, within the City of Diamond Bar.
Because of its recent incorporation, the City of
Diamond Bar' lacks an operative General Plan. Accordingly, action
was taken on the subject application, as to consistency to the
proposed General Plan, pursuant to the terms and 'provisions of
California Government Code Section 65360.
(iv) On September 23, 1991, the Planning Commission of
the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on
the application and concluded said public hearing on November 25,'
1991.
(v) . All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this
Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution. .
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Plan-
ning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
This Planning commission hereby specifically finds
that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The City Planning Commission hereby finds that the
project has been required to prepare an
Environmental Impact Report in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as
amended, and the Guidelines . promulgated ,
thereunder, and further, this,Planning Commission
has reviewed and considered the information in
reference to the application.
3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds
and determines that, based upon the findings set
forth below, and changes and alterations which
have been incorporated into and conditioned upon
the proposed project set forth in the application,
no significant adverse environmental effects will
occur.
4. Based on the substantial evidence presented to
this Commission during the above -referenced public
hearing on September 23, 1991, and concluded on
November 25, 1991, including written and oral
staff reports, together with public testimony, and
in conformance with the terms and provisions of
California Government Code Sections 65360, this
Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The project is located within SEA NO. 15 to
the southeast of Steeplechase Lane and Wagon Train ;7
Lane adjacent to the eastern boundary of the
private gated community known as "The Country".
b. The use is compatible with adjacent uses and
is in compliance with the zoning standards, the
Community General Plan, and the mitigation
measures cited in the SEATAC Final Report and MEIR
91-2.
c. The surrounding land uses to the north and
west are single family and multi -family
.residential and to the south and east the land is
primarily vacant and natural.
d. Granting the vesting tentative maps with
conditions and restrictions hereinafter mentioned
will not be in substantial conflict with any com-
ponents of the proposed General Plan;
The proposed site has adequate traffic access and
said site is adequately served by other public or
private service facilities which it requires, and;.
The location of the proposed laendeuse o est not
adversely affect the health, pa ,
welfare of persons residing or working in the sur-
rounding area, and will not be materially detri-
mental to the use, enjoyment, or valuation of pro-
perty of other persons located in the vicinity of
the site, and will not jeopardize, endanger, or
otherwise constitute a menace to the public
health, safety or general welfare.
e. The City of Diamond Bar is presently reviewing
.its draft General Plan and the final General Plan
is to be adopted within the statutory time period
as extended. It is reasonably probable that the
project and land uses proposed by the Applicant
will be consistent with the final General Plan on
the basis of comparison of the same with the draft
General Plan and the comments generated in respect
to the same. Given the development abutting and
adjacent to the subject site, and the conditions
and design standards applied to this project
proposals, there is little or no' probability of
substantial detriment to or interference with the
finally adopted General Plan if the project is
ultimately inconsistent with the General Plan.
The project, as conditioned, is in compliance with
all applicable laws, regulations, policies and
standards.
f. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that
the City Council review and certify that
Ov Environmental Impact Report No. EIR 91-2 has been
completed in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and
the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, and,
further, that the Planning Commission has reviewed
and considered the information contained in said
Environmental.Impact Report No. E.I.R. 91-2.
5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in
paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission
hereby recommends' that the City Council approve
the application subject to the restrictions and
conditions listed on the attached Exhibits "B-1,
B-2, and B-3" as to use.
6. The Planning Commission Secretary shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Transmit this recommendation to the City Clerk for
submittal to the City Council.
(c) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Reso-
lution, to Diamond Bar Associates at the address
as set forth on the application.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THI TH 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1991
BY THE PLANNING COMMIS ION O T CI OF -AMOND BAR.
BY:
.flack Grothe, C airman
ATTEST r
Jda{es DeStefanb, Secretary
I, James Destefano, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the
City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolu-
tion was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Com-
mission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting• of the
Planning Commission held on the 25th day. of November, 1991, by the
following vote -to -wit:
AYES: (COMMISSIONERS:) GROTHE, HARMONY, MACBRIDE, SCHEY
NOES: (COMMISSIONERS:)
ABSTAIN: (COMMISSIONERS:)
ABSENT: (COMMISSIONERS:) LIN
EXHIBIT B -1A. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 47850.
1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with
the approved Vesting Tract Map and plans reviewed by the
Planning Commission and City Council as revised by these
conditions of approval.
2. The approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 is granted
subject to the approval of Hillside Management and Significant
Ecological Area Conditional Use Permit/Oak Tree Permit No. 89-
582.
3. The approvals incorporate all mitigation measures and conditions
listed within the SEATAC Final Report Dated April 8, 1991 and
Master Environmental Impact Report No. 91-2.
4. A mitigation monitoring program outlined within MEIR 91-2 shall
be prepared by the developer and submitted to the City for
review and approval 30 days prior to the issuance of a grading
permit.
5. Should a conflict exist between the conditions or mitigation
measures outlined within the Master Environmental Impact Report,
SEATAC Report on Project Conditions, said conflict will be
presented to, the Director of Community Development for
resolution.
6. The preparation of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions
(CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of Homeowners' Association
are required and are subject to the approval of the Planning and
Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney.. They shall be
recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the
issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A
recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer.
7. The project shall be designed so as to substantially comply with
the CC&Rs implemented by the adjacent development heretofore
known as "The Country". The CC&Rs should incorporate, at a
minimum, provisions which would establish a maintenance program
for the urban pollutant basins, and all mitigation measures
within the SEATAC report, such that wildlife movement corridors
are left in an undisturbed and natural state.
sha14 he per.-itted en let ✓ r
mT'-QCrT.--TTO- 1].
9. Exterior construction activities (grading, framing, etc.) shall
be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday,
except that interior building construction activities shall not
') be limited. All construction equipment shall be properly
muffled to reduce noise levels.
Transportation of equipment and materials and operation of heavy
grading equipment shall also be limited to the hours of 7:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m. All equipment staging areas shall be sited on
the subject property. Dust generated by. construction activities
shall be reduced by watering the `soil prior to and during
grading activities. Use of reclaimed water shall be used
whenever possible.
10. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope
planting and model home landscaping shall be prepared by. a
licensed landscape architect and submitted for City review and
approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior to
final map approval. Fence details, tree staking, soil
preparation, planting details and the automatic irrigation
systems and the incorporation of xenotropic landscaping shall be
incorporated wherever feasible.
11. All down drains and drainage channels shall' be constructed in
muted earth tones so as to not impart adverse visual impacts.
12. All oak trees and walnut trees shall be replaced at the ratios
and locations exhibited in EIR 91-2.
13. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be
protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Los
Angeles County Code, and so noted on the grading plans. The
location of those trees to be preserved in plata and new
locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed
landscape plans.
14. ..Emergency secondary access from Tract 47850 shall be provided in
accordance with -Fire Protection District Standards and
requirement of the City Engineer.
15. Prior to issuance of any permits the applicant shall pay all
environmental and development fees at the established rates.
16. The applicants for tracts 47850, 47851, and 48487 shall;
contribute $20,000 as their pro rata share for the Ecological
Concept Study for Tonner Canyon and SEA No. 15.
17. The applicant shall pay development fees (including, but not
limited to, Planning, Building, Park, and school fees) at the
established rates prior to issuance of .Building Permits, as
required by the Community Development Director.
18. Street addresses shall be provided by the City Engineer after
tract map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits.
19. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to
issuance of building permits.
20. The.final map shall clearly delineate and dedicate to the City
the right to prohibit the construction of buildings (or other
structures) within those areas to be designated on the map as
building restriction areas.
21. The location of the fences and retaining walls demarcating the
construction rights prohibited area shall be clearly delineated
on the final map and the locations line clearly shown on the
final map.
22. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient
improvement plans shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries
to assure secondary. access and drainage protection to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall
correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map.
3:J
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
I N T E R 0 F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
r -
DATE: March 27, 1992
TO: Department of Community Development, Planning
FROM: Department of Public Works, Engineering f'
SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.47850 DATE SEPTEMBER 19, 1991
Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 has been recommended for approval by
the office of the City Engineer subject to the following
conditions:
SUBDIVISION
1. All easements existing prior to final map approval must be
identified. If an easement is blanket or indeterminate in
nature, a statement to that effect must be shown on the final
map in lieu of its location.
2. A title report/guarantee showing all fee owners and interest
holders must be submitted when a final map is submitted for
plan check. This account must remain open until the final map
is filed with the county Recorder. An updated title
report/guarantee must be submitted ten (10) working days prior
to final map approval.
3. The developer shall submit toe City all off -.site neer the improvements,
cost
estimate for bonding purposes
prior to approval of the final map.
4. The subdivider must submit documents indicating that they will
have proper/adequate right -of -entry to the subject site from
the Country.
5. The tract shall be annexed to the Landscape Assessment
District 38; and the City-wide lighting district.
6. New centerline ties set as part of this subdivision must be
approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with City
Standards.
7. New boundary monuments must be set in accordance with the City
Standards and subject to approval by the City Engineer.
S. if any required public improvements have not been completed by
the developer and accepted by the City prior to the approval
of the final map, the developer shall enter into a subdivision
agreement with the city and shall post the appropriate
security.
9. All site grading, landscaping, irrigation, street improve-
ments, sewer and storm drain improvement plans shall be
coordinated for consistency prior to final map approval.
10. Street names shall be submitted for.city review and approval
prior to approval of the final map. These names must not be
duplicated within the City of Diamond Bar's postal service zip
codes.
11. House numbering clearance is required by the City Engineer,
prior to issuance of building permits.
12. The detail drawings and construction notes shown on the
submitted plans are conceptual only and the approval of .this
map does not constitute -approval of these notes.
GRADING GEOLOGY & SOILS
13. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with
the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Ordinance A14-(1990)
or as amended and acceptable grading practices. The final
grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the
approved grading plan.
14. In preparation to construct the fill slope at section SG -SG',
the stability of the slope on the bentonite shear plane shall
be accomplished by removing the.landslide debris.
15. Creep -prone materials shall be stabilized by the construction
of shear keys. Minimum 10 ft. thick blanket fills are
required to eliminate cracks extending to the finished pad
surfaces. The shear keys shall be extended -through the land-
slide behind lots 42 and 43.
16. Grading plan (241lx3611) must be designed in compliance with
recommendations of the final detailed soils and engineering
geology reports.
17. Grading plan must be signed and stamped by a registered Soils
Engineer and registered Geologist.
18. All geologic hazards associated with the proposed development
must be eliminated and restricted use areas as approved by the
City Engineer must be indicated on the final map. The
subdivider shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit
the erection of buildings or other structures within the
restricted use areas.
19. All landslide debris shall be completely removed prior to fill
placement.
20. From the preliminary data and analyses presented to date, the
proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical point of
view. At the time of application for. a 40 -scale grading plan
check, a detailed soils and geology eport shall be submitted
to the city Engineer for approval and said r=fort shall be
prepared by a qualified engineer and/or geologist licensed by
the State of California. The report shall contain, but not be
limited to the following:
a) The locations and orientations (including the depth and
extent) of the bentonite bed shall be delineated on a 40-
scale map and stability analyses shall be provided for
further evaluation.
b) Stability analysis of the daylight shear keys.
For daylight shear keys, a 1:1 projection from daylight
to slide plane -shall be used in design and the projection
plane shall have a minimum factor of safety of 1:1.
c) All soils and geotechnical constraints (i.e., landslides,
shear key location, etc.) shall be delineated in detail
with respect to proposed building envelopes. Restricted
use areas and structural setbacks shall be considered and
delineated prior to recordation of the final map.
21. As a custom -lot subdivision, the following requirements shall
be met:
a) Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed
guaranteeing completion of all. on-site drainage
facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels to the
satisfaction of the Public Works Department prior to
final map approval and prior to the issuance of grading
Permits.
b) Appropriate easements for safe disposal of drainage water
that are conducted onto or over adjacent parcels, are to
be delineated and recorded to the satisfaction of the
City's Public Works Department, prior to issuance of
grading permits.
C) On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering
and protecting the subdivided properties, are to be
installed prior to issuance of building permits for
construction upon any parcel that may be subject to
drainage flows entering,. leaving, or within a parcel
relative to which a building permit is requested.
d) All slope banks in excess of five (5) feet in vertical
height shall be seeded with native grasses or planted
with ground cover, shrubs, and trees for erosion control
upon completion of grading or some other alternative
method of erosion control shall be completed to the
satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
In addition, a
permanent irrigation
system shall be
provided.x
y
22. completion and stabilization of all man-made slopes, removal
of all landslide materials and reconstruction of slopes must
comply -with -the Los Angeles County Building .Code and
ordinances including those requirements for erosion protection
and landscaping.
23. The geotechnical consultant of record, Harrington Geotechnical
Engineering, Inc., must provide written confirmation of their
acceptance of the geotechnical data and information provided
previously by other consultants for the tracts. A further
statement is required accepting data and information in
Lockwood -Singh report dated November 3, 1989 for Tract 47851
and Lawmaster reports dated July 13, 1987, May 25, and October
12, 1989 as being valid -and applicable to the current 100 -
scale tract maps dated September 19, 1991.
-24. The following geotechnical issues must be addressed and .
approved by the City, prior to approval of the grading plan:
a) Areas of potential for debris flow need to be defined and
proper remedial measures recommended.
b) Gross -stability of a 150 foot high fill slope in Tract
47851 needs to be analyzed as part of geotechnical
report.
c) Stability of all proposed slopes must be confirmed by
analysis. Unstable slopes shall be redesigned or
stabilized utilizing slope reinforcement.
d) All landslides must be shown on a consolidated
geotechnical map. Specific remedial measures shall be
implemented pursuant to requirements: of Los Angeles
County Code and Ordinances.
e) Stability of back cuts (i.e. excavation of natural
. slopes) must be analyzed.
ROAD
25. Street improvement plans (241lx36"), prepared by a registered
Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney
,guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street
improvements, prior to final map approval.
26. Cul-de-sacs, in accordance with all applicable City Standards
and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer must be
constructed at the terminus ends of Hawkwood Road (public) and
Steeplechase Lane (private).
3' 27. Install street name signs at all intersections within the
Tract.
28. 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 in addition to any other permits
required.
29. Street improvement plans for all private streets with maximum
slope of 12%, shall be provided for review and approval by the
City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the
private streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits
shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition
to any other permits required..
30. Construct base and pavement on all streets and access roads to
pump station, 'and the emergency access road to southerly
property line in -accordance with the City approved soils
report and city Standards. Vehicular access must be provided
to all "Urban Pollutant Basins"with a minimum width of 15',
with 12' of pavement and with a maximum slope no greater than
20%.
31. Prior to approval of the final map, the developer shall
contribute $8,550.00 towards the construction of sidewalk
along the eastside of Diamond Bar Boulevard across from the
Country Hills Shopping Center.
r.naTMaGR _..
32. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by
the City Engineer prior to final map approval. All drainage
facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer
and in accordance with the County of Los Angeles Standards.
33. Trees'are 1 prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of
any storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature
tree trunk.
34. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient
improvement plans shall be completed beyond the phase
boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries
shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative
map.
35. Prior to placement of any dredged or fill material into any
U.S.G.S. blue line stream bed, the Army Corps of Engineers
must review and approve such action subject to the provisions.
of nation wide permit for discharges of dredged. or fill
materials into water ways of the United States. Not-
withstanding a permit to place any fill in the U.S.G.S. blue
line stream bed a written offsite permission to grade from s.„T
affected property owners must be obtained prior to approval of
the final map.
SEWER
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 tract shall be connected to city sewer
system. Said system shall be of the size, grade and depth
approved by the City Engineer, County Sanitation District and
Los Angeles County Public Works Department, prior to approval
of the final map.
37. The subdivider must obtain connection permit from the City and
County Sanitation District. The subdivision must be annexed
into the County Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District and
appropriate' easements for all sewer main lines and pump
station must be provided and accepted by the County of Los
Angeles Public Works Department, prior to approval of the
final map.
38. Prior to approval of the final map, the subdivider must
conduct an engineering analysis to determine the capacity of
sewer lines from the site to the County Sanitation District ?.
trunk, line. "r
39. Subdivider, at his sole cost and expense, must construct the
sewer system including the pump station in accordance with the
City, Los Angeles County Public Work Department and County
Sanitation District Standards.
TRAFFIC
40. Traffic improvement plans prepared by a registered Traffic
Engineer and signed by a registered Civil Engineer shall be
submitted to and approved by .the City Engineer. Security
shall be posted and agreement executed to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing
completion of these improvements prior to final map approval
.unless otherwise stated herewith.
41. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the
City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy.
42. The subdivider shall prepare traffic control signing and
striping plans in accordance with requirements of the state of
California Traffic Manual prior to approval of final map.
43. Pavement striping, marking and street name signing shall be `
installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
44. A separate right -turn lane shall be striped and appropriate
A, signs installed in the northbound direction at the
intersection of Diamond Bar -Boulevard and Shadow Canyon Drive.
45. A separate right -turn lane shall. be striped and appropriate
signs installed in the southbound directionat the
intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Pathfinder Road.
46. An additional left -turn lane shall be striped and appropriate
signs. installed in the southbound direction at the
intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road.
47. .A stop sign shall be installed at the intersection of Wagon
Train Lane and Steeplechase Lane. The.stop sign shall be
installed on Wagon Train along with fifty feet of double
yellow striping, Type D pavement markers, stop legend and
limit line.
48. Stop signs shall be installed at the intersection of
Steeplechase Lane and street "A", subject to the approval by
the City Engineer.
49. Developer shall contribute $28,500.00 towards the installation
of a traffic -signal at intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard
and Shadow Canyon Drive prior to approval of the final map.
V11Lt11i+
50. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including
water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all
underground) in accordance ,with the respective utility
companies standards. Easements shall be provided as required.
51. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of
existing utilities as necessary.
52. Prior to recordation of the final map, a written certification
from Walnut Valley Water District, GTE, SCE, SCG and Jones.
Intercable stating that adequate facilities are or will be
available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to
the City. Such letter must be issued by the utility company
at least 90 days prior to final map approval.
MEMORANDUM
City of Diamond Bar
DATE: March 29, 1995
TO: Jim DeStefano, Community Development Director
FROM: Mike Myers Via: George Wentz, City Engineer
SUBJECT: vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850;
Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions as
Recommended By Planning Commission and Other
Considerations
Attached is memo of March 28, 1995 regarding recommended revisions
to the Engineering Conditions as those conditions were approved by
the Planning Commission at its November 25, 1991 meeting for the
subject vesting tentative map. Following is discussion of other.
issues related to Council approval of the vesting tentative map
including suggested language for additional conditions.
It is understood that all streets within the development are
intended to be private streets with the lots extending to the
centerline of.the streets. However, neither the tentative map nor
the Planning Commission's recommended Conditions of Approval
address this matter. it is recommended that the Council's
approval of this map expressly include approval of private streets
for this subdivision (except as shown on the tentative map as a
public street dedication at the westerly terminus of
Steeplechase).
It is understood that street lights are not to be constructed
within this subdivision.. While ,21.32.140 of the Subdivision
Code requires street lights, 921.32.150 provides that they may be
waived if the Advisory Agency finds that they are not in keeping
with the neighborhood pattern. The Planning Commission's
resolution recommending approval does not address this matter. It.
is recommended that the Council's approval of this map expressly
include a finding of "not in keeping and waive the
requirement for street lights for this subdivision.
Grading is shown offsite (westerly) and is critical to the
development of the subdivision as shown on the tentative map. It
is understood that the subdivider has obtained easements to grade
from the affected owners. These easements should be provided for
Staff's review prior to Council approval of this subdivision.
Numerous easements of record are shown and referenced on the
tentative map. Many of these easements would appear to
Revisions to Planning Commission conditions March 29, 1995
Other Considerations Re: VTTM No. 47850 Paae 2
significantly affect the realization of clear buildable
residential pad areas as shown. With respect to easements shown
which were offered to the public (LA County), the City has the
authority under §66499.20 1/2 of the Subdivision Map Act to vacate
such. These are generally those indicated on the tentative map as
A, B and V. The notice of the public hearing for this map before
the Council should clearly identify, as necessary to satisfy
requirements for public notice and hearing on the matter, the
Council's intention to vacate these easements and offers of
easements.
Private easements, however, cannot be addressed in this manner.
Unless these easements, many of which are for access and utility
purposes along the same lines as the public easements and offers,
are cleared from the property, they may subsequently affect the
subdivided property owner's ability to utilize his lot. Recommend
the following Condition be considered:
On all lots where the effect of existing easements may
reduce the usable building pad area to less than that
shown on the tentative map, such easements shall be
relocated or otherwise removed from the required
building pad area to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director and City Engineer prior to approval
of the final map.
It is suggested that Lot A (lift. station site) be conveyed in fee
to the Homeowners Association. The City Engineer will require
that an easement be dedicated over the necessary portion of this
lot for sewer lines and a lift station purposes (also water
lines). It is further suggested that the right to prohibit
buildings and other structures on Lot A be dedicated to the City.
Recommend the following Condition be considered:
Lot A shall be conveyed to the Homeowners Association
and the owner shall dedicate to the City the right to
prohibit the erection of buildings and other structures
thereon.
It is recommended that the "Remainder Parcel" shown on the
tentative map not be approved as such. This parcel does not have
.suitable access from existing or proposed streets._ Recommend the
following Condition be considered:
On the final map Lot 13, Lot 15 and/or Lot 16, as shown
on tentative map, shall be modified to include the
entirety of the "Remainder Parcel".
It was noted in the public comments received in recirculating the
Draft EIR that some were concerned about possible construction
Revisions to 'Planning Commission Conditions March 29, 1995
other Considerations Re: VTTM No. 47850 Page 3
traffic entering the project area via Hawkwood. This access via
public streets is possible to the westerly project boundary. If
the City Council desires to limit these short term impacts on the
existing public streets leading to the project, recommend the
following addition to Condition 7 (Planning Commission Resolution
Exhibit B -1A) be considered.
No construction equipment nor related construction
traffic shall be permitted to enter the.site from
Hawkwood Drive.
In considering recent tentative maps, the City Council has
concerned itself with the matter of reclaimed water service to the
subdivision. If the Council remains concerned about this matter,
recommend the following Condition be considered:
As reclaimed water supply is not currently available,
Subdivider shall agree to design and .construct, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Walnut Valley
Water District, main and service lines capable of
delivering reclaimed water to all portions of the
subdivision and the system shall be designed to permit
"switch over" of nondomestic services on each lot at
such time a reclaimed water supply is available to the
subdivision. Security shall be posted to guarantee the
performance of this agreement. Subdivider shall
install, prior to approval of final grading, a portion
of the system consisting of main and service lines
capable of delivering reclaimed water to those portions
of the subdivision for which the homeowners association
is responsible for irrigation and/or landscape
maintenance. This portion installed shall provide for
switchover from domestic service to reclaimed service at
such time as it is available.
MEMORANDUM
City of Diamond Bar
DATE: March 31, 1995
TO: Jim DeStefano, Community Development Director
FROM: Mike Myers Via: George Wentz, City Engineer
SUBJECT:Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850;
Additional Recommended Condition
In addition to those issues and additional conditions contained in
my memo of March 29, 1995, consider the following.
Regarding cgrading offsite westerly:
The March 29 memo (page 1, 4th paragraph) discussed the necessity
for Staff to review those "easements to grade" that the subdivider
had previously obtained for that grading work proposed offsite
westerly. The subdivider has submitted copies of those recorded
documents granting permission for J.C.C.-Diamond Bar to grade as
obtained from the owners of those affected properties, except for
permission from the.owner of Lot 1 of Tract No. 33602. These
documents suffice as necessary to permit the grading offsite.
However, applicant must provide similar document relating to Lot 1
of Tract No. 33602.
An additional issue has been raised regarding the future repair
and maintenance of the storm drain pipes and inlets which are also
an integral part of the necessary grading in this area and which
are outside the boundaries of the subdivision.- These letters of
permission "for the purposes of grading" (which reasonably also
includes the construction of drain pipes and inlets) may be
consider as granting of a "temporary" right and therefor terminate
when the work is completed. Consideration must be made for the
ongoing, long term maintenance that is necessary to keep these
pipes and inlets functioning properly. The HOA will be
responsible to provide for the maintenance of storm drains
throughout the subdivision and the requirement to maintain these
facilities outside the limits of the subdivision can be included
within this responsibility. However, there are no present
provisions to assure that the HOA will have or can obtain the
necessary access to these pipes and inlets to perform this
maintenance and repair.
It is recommended that the following condition be included:
Prior to approval of the grading plan and final map,
Subdivider shall submit permission to grade from all affected
property owners outside the boundaries of the subdivision and
shall submit documents granting necessary easements for
maintenance and repair of inlets and storm drains to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
1-U -1-01410)& VAI�1011101
TO: Diamond Bar Planning Commission
FROM:. Robert Owen, Rutan & Tucker
DATE: April 18, 1995
RE: Scope of Planning Commission's Review of VTM 47850
This memorandum is in response to a request for an opinion on
the permissible scope of the Planning Commission's review of VTM
4785.0. We conclude that the Planning Commission may review and
discuss any aspect of VTM 47850 and that it is not limited in the
recommendations it transmits back to the Council. This conclusion
is based upon the facts and law as stated below.
As the Commission is aware,' VTM 47850 was previously
recommended for approval by the Planning Commission in November of
1991 as a 5,7 -lot subdivision. It was ultimately disapproved by the
City Council in November of 1992 due to geotechnical concerns.
After litigation, the City and Diamond Bar Associates entered into
a settlement agreement whereby DBA agreed to drop the lawsuit in
exchange for City reconsideration of VTM 47850. As part of this
process, on April 6, 1995, the City Council and Planning Commission
conducted a Joint Session to review the tentative map application.
At the conclusion of this Joint Session, the Council directed that
the matter be referred back to the Planning Commission for review.
The permissible scope of the Planning Commission's review of
VTM 47850 is governed by three sources:. the Government Code, local
ordinance, and the settlement agreement between the City and DBA.
The following is an analysis of any possible restrictions these
sources may impose on the Commission's actions.
Government Code § 66415, which is contained in the Subdivision
Map Act, defines "advisory agency" as "an official body charged
with the duty of making investigations and reports on the design
and improvement of proposed divisions of real property, the
imposing of requirements or conditions thereon, or having the
authority by local ordinance to approve, conditionally approve, or
disapprove maps." If a city has an established advisory agency,
then a vesting tentative map application must first be filed with
that agency prior to consideration by the legislative body. (Gov't
Code § 66452.)
Whether an advisory agency has the power to approve tentative
maps, as opposed to merely advising the legislative body, depends
upon local ordinance. Pursuant to City Ordinance No. 25 B, the
Diamond Bar Planning Commission serves as the "advisory agency" to
the City Council, with only advisory powers concerning subdivision
F52\2901015413-0001\2142834. e04118/95
maps. Pursuant to § 66415, the Commission is therefore empowered
to "make investigations and reports on the design and improvement
of proposed divisions of real property."
Nothing in §66415 limits the scope of this review. Further,
there is nothing in state or local law to prevent the City Council
from referring VTM 47850 to its advisory agency for review,
comment, and recommendation concerning any relevant subject matter,
including alternative proposals. However, the VTM 47850 process is
also governed by the settlement agreement between the City and DBA,
which must be examined for any potential constraints beyond those
provided by general law.
The operative provisions of the settlement agreement
pertaining to future consideration of VTM 47850 are contained in
paragraph 2, a copy of which is attached. In our opinion, nothing
in paragraph 2 prevents the Planning Commission from considering
any issue relating to VTM 47850. A proponent of limited Planning
Commission review would likely point to the second sentence of
paragraph 2, which. provides that "the City Council will be
reconsidering the same application for VTM 47850 as was before the
Council in November of 1992." Having been heavily involved in the
settlement agreement negotiations, we can confidently state that
DBA's purpose in including this provision was not to limit any
review ,that the Planning Commission might undertake, but to
preserve the argument that the ordinances and policies -existing in
1989, when the application was originally submitted, would be
effective during future City consideration of VTM 47850.
Specific provisions of paragraph 2 indicate an intent that the
City may consider matters and alternatives other than those which
are contained in the specific application submitted by DBA.
Paragraph 2 indicates that the Joint Session, of which the Planning
Commission is a part, "may also consider VTM 47850 in light of
. any other new matters or alternatives which the Joint Session
deems appropriate." It further provides that -the Council "shall
exercise that degree of discretion permitted the Council by state
statutes and local ordinances pertaining to approval of a
subdivision tract map." As noted above, nothing in state or local
law prohibits the City Council from referring a subdivision
proposal to the Planning Commission for review and comment on any
relevant issue.
To summarize, we believe that nothing in the Government Code,
local law, or the settlement agreement prohibits the Planning
Commission from considering any subject relevant to VTM 47850. We
will be happy to further discuss the matter if the Commission so
desires.
FS212901015413.000112142834. a04118195 —2—
I . Settlement. This Agreement shall be effective
only upon completion of all of the following: (1) execution and
delivery of this Agreement by all parties hereto; (2) completion
by the City of all of the actions described in Paragraph 2
herein, infra; and (3) execution and delivery by DBA of a
dismissal of certain aspects the Action as described in Paragraph
3 herein, infra.
It is the intention of the parties that this Agreement
shall have no effect in any way whatsoever on the right of DBA to
continue to prosecute the Appeal. The Appeal will survive the
execution of this Agreement. Although this.Agreement provides
certain releases to the Council, those releases.in no way
diminish the potential liability of Miller and Papen arising out
of the Appeal or any of DBA's claims against Miller and Papen
which are at issue in the Appeal, including without limitation,
the Sixth and Seventh causes of action of the Second Amended
Complaint.
2. Reconsideration of VTM 47850. The Council shall,
at its next regular meeting, adopt a motion, or resolution, to
reconsider its previous action in denying VTM 47850. In adopting
such motion or resolution, the City Council will be reconsidering
the same application for VTM 47850 as was before the Council in
November of 1992. At some reasonable period of time thereafter,
the Council and the City Planning Commission ("Commission") shall
conduct a Joint Session to consider VTM 47850. The Joint Session
shall review DBA's compliance with the 24 points raised in the
October 29, 1992 memorandum and geotechnical review sheet
prepared by Leighton & Associates, Inc. relating to VTM 47850.
The Joint Session may also consider VTM 47850 in light of the
proposed General Plan currently being considered by the City and
any other new matters or alternatives which the Joint Session
deems appropriate. At least thirty (30) days prior to the Joint
Session, DBA shall make its professional -technical consultants
available to meet with, provide information to and/or answer
questions of members of the Commission regarding VTM 47850.
*After conducting the Joint Session or any continuance of the
Joint Session meeting, VTM 47850 shall be referred to the City
Council to take action on the reconsideration. Upon such
reconsideration, the Council shall exercise that degree of
discretion permitted the Council by state statutes and local
ordinances pertaining to approval of a subdivision tract map.
Further, the Council shall consider approval of VTM 47850 under
the recently obtained extension
'of.the deadline for adopting a
General Plan issued by the Governor's Office of Planning and
Research.
Provided, however, that if the Council denies VTM 47850
on the basis that VTM 47850 is not consistent with the City's
proposed General Plan or on any other related ground, then DBA
shall have the right to challenge such decision and/or finding on
03-24-94 16396-00002
F:\Doc\166\94030005.A10
all available grounds, specifically including, without
limitation, the ground that no such finding of consistency is
required for VTM 47850.
S. Partial Dismissal of Action. Provided that this
Agreement is executed by the parties as required herein, and
further provided that all related documents have been executed,
and that the Council at its next regular meeting adopts a motion
or resolution to reconsider its previous action in denying VTM
47850:
(a) Counsel for DBA shall execute and promptly
deliver to counsel of record for the City, a request for
dismissal with prejudice of the Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth
causes of action stated the Second Amended Complaint and shall.
take whatever further action is necessary to dismiss those causes
of action with prejudice; and
(b) Counsel for DBA shall execute and promptly
deliver to counsel of record for the City, a request for
dismissal without prejudice of DBA's Petition for Peremptory Writ
of Mandate (C.C.P. §1094.5), as set forth in DBA's First cause of
action in the Second Amended Complaint, and shall take whatever
further action is necessary to dismiss the Petition without
prejudice.
Provided, however, that nothing herein, including
without limitation, the dismissal of the Petition without
prejudice or the dismissal of any causes of action of the Second
Amended Complaint with prejudice, shall in any way be deemed a
..waiver or otherwise limit any of DBA's rights to challenge any
subsequent action of the Council or the Commission on VTM 47850
on any and all available grounds, including, without limitation,
the ground that the Council need not •find that VTM 47850 is
consistent with the City's proposed General Plan.
Provided further, however, that nothing herein,
including, without limitation, the dismissal of the Petition
without prejudice or the dismissal of any causes of action of the
Second Amended Complaint with prejudice, shall in any way be
deemed a waiver or otherwise limit any of DBA's rights to seek
damages from the City and/or Council based upon any subsequent
action of the Council or the Commission on VTM 47850.
4. Releases.
a. Release of DBA by City. Upon the Council's
action to adopt a motion or resolution to reconsider its previous
action in denying VTM 47850, or within a reasonable period of
time thereafter, the City and Council, for themselves, and for
their successors and assigns, agree to hereby forever release,
absolve, acquit and discharge DBA and all of its present and
03-24-94 16396-00002
F:\000\166\94030005.A10
BACKGROUND:
The property owner and applicant, Warren Dolezal is requesting
approval (pursuant to Code Section 21.24) to subdivide one parcel
into four residential lots located at 3000 block (north side) of
Steeplechase Lane, at the terminus of Hawkwood Road and adjacent to
1
�Ciityg7o�f'�Dyiamond Bar
Y Tilil.�INYl G �.lJ1vi1 USSI®N
Staff Report
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
6.1
REPORT DATE:
April 6, 1995
MEETING DATE:
May 8, 1995
CASE/FILE 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
into four residential lots located at 3000 block (north side) of
Steeplechase Lane, at the terminus of Hawkwood Road and adjacent to
1
"The Country Estates". The request also includes the 'following:
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1 which is required (pursuant to Code
Section 22.56.215 and Hillside Management Ordinance No. 7 (1992))
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 proposed project was scheduled for the
April 24, 1995 Planning Commission meeting. The Planning
Commission, with the applicant's request and staff's
recommendation, continued the public hearing to May 8, 1995.,
Project Overview:
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
1 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 Plan's 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
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 "V" 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,
threatened plant heritage. This oak tree will be preserved and
protected, pursuant to the City's Oak Tree Permit process. This
process includes the installation of chain link fencing five feet
outside the tree's dripline or 15 feet from its trunk, whichever
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 reference 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 4,000 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,
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
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 CountryEstates":
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&R's) comply with and be consistent with the CC&R'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.
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
northwestern 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
Permit No. 92-1 and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2, Findings of Fact, and
conditions as listed within the attached resolution.
Prepared by:
nn An u, Pssistant 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
8
m
91,
IRE
HI
i
d d
m
91,
PLANNING COMMISSION
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 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
Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Office
of Planning and Research extension granted pursuant to
California Government Code Section 65361.
1
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.
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 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
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.
(i) The design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements will not conflict with easements,
acquired by the public at large, for access
through or use of, property with in 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 "A" 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
(3)
AC*444tt'r
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, this approval
shall not 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 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 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.
(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&R's)
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&R's or
the homeowners' association shall be incorporated
into "The Country Estates". The CC&R's 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 ofa
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&R's implemented
by the adjacent development known as "The Country
Estates". The CC&R's 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&R's shall, to the
fullest extent possible, be consistent with "The
Country Estates!" CC&R's.
(14) A clause shall be incorporated into the CC&R's
which requires disputes involving interpretation
or application of the CC&R's (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.
(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&R's
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.
(19) The project applicant, through the "Buye3?-
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 landscaped and irrigated for erosion
control. Slope landscaping and 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 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.
B. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
General
(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;
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 wi
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
and the approval of this tentative map shall not
constitute approval of said notes.
Grading
(9) The final subdivision grading plans (1" = 40' or
larger scale, 24" x 36" sheet format) shall be
8
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/
Subdividerfs 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
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:
4%
(a) Soil remediation measures shall be designe
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
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.
Drainage
(19) A drainage study and drainage improvement plans
(24" x.36" 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
10
AP
construct all drainage improvements in accorda
with plans approved by the City Engineer. Fo
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
(26) Street improvement plans (24" x 36" sheet format)
prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer
shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
11
(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 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 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.
(34) Curbs and gutters for cul-de-sac at end of
Hawkwood shall be constructed to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
12
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 (24" x 36" 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/
subdivider's 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 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,
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
13
in the land division and designed to Walnut Va
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/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. 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, Iin
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
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
14
purposes for all reclaimed water S!ystml
improvements prior to approval of the parcel map. CC��
(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;
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF MAY, 1995, BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
BY:
Bruce Flamenbaum, Chairman
I, James DeStefano, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the
City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing
15
Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regulate
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 8th day of May,
1995, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
James DeStefano, Secretary
16
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX
i
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.
92-1, OAR 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.
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 into four residential lots located at
the extreme northwestern edge of Tanner 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 Off iceP
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 8, 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:
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, 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
of Hawkwood Road and adjacent to a gated commune
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.
SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA (SEA)
(j) The proposed project is designed to be highly
compatible with the biotic resourcespresent,
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 proposed project is 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
AA
that will complement community character' --.--and
benefit current and future community residents:y`�'
OAR 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 "A" 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 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, this approval
shall not 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
entitlement granted herein. The removal of
trash, debris, and refuse, whether during o
subsequent to construction shall be done only b�'
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 shown on the 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&R's)
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&R's or
the homeowners' association shall be incorporated
into "The Country Estates". The CC&R's 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 theme
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&R's implemented
by the adjacent development heretofore know as
"The Country Estates". The CC&R's 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&R's shall, to the fullest extent possible, be
consistent with "The Country Estates"' CC&R's.
(15) A clause shall be incorporated into the CC&R's
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.
(18) Parcel Map No. 23382 shall maintain a minimum`�20e
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.
(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 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&R's
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 fivefeet in vertical height
shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion
control. Slope landscaping and irrigation shall
be continuously maintained in a healthy and,)
thriving condition by the developer until eachc='a
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 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.
(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.
B. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
General
(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;
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
A
to serve the proposed project. Such lettersu"t
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/
Subdividerts 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
and the approval of this tentative map shall not
constitute approval of said notes.
10
Grading
141
(9) The final subdivision grading plans (1" = 40'or
larger scale, 2411 x 36" 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
California. All geotechnical and soils related
11
G
findings and recommendations shall be reviewedand�
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
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..
Drainage
(19) A drainage study and drainage improvement plans
(24" x 36" sheet format) prepared by a California
12
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 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.
(22) 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.
(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
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.
(25) An erosion control plan shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
grading permits.
13
A
(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 (24" x 36" 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 be set 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 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
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 12%
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
14
�`
be approved by the City Engineer or as otherwi
directed by the City Engineer. y
(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 (24" x 36" 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.
(39) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
subdivider's 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 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
15
s.
bonding purposes for all sewer system improvements
prior to approval of the parcel map.
a
(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. 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.
(44) 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.
(45) An offer of easements for public utility and
public services purposes, as required by the City
16
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's
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 Appiicant/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.
17
The Planning Commission Secretary shall: ;rw
to
(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;
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF MAY, 1995, BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
BY:
Bruce Flamenbaum, Chairman
I, James DeStefano, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the
City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 8th day of May,
1995, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
James DeStefano, Secretary
18
Location: 3255 S. Diamond Bar Blvd.
AppHcant/Property Owner: Evangelical Free Church of Diamond Bar, 3255 S.
Diamond Bar Blvd., 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 Negative Declaration.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open
the public hearing, receive testimony and approve Negative Declaration No.
95-1, Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1,. Development Review No. 95-1, Findings
of Fact and conditions as listed within the attached Resolution.
9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS
11. ADJOURNMENT: May 22, 1995
z
Dolezal Family Limited Partnership Project
Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit 92-1, and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2
City of Diamond Bar
PROJECT DESCRIPTION - INITIAL STUDY
Introduction
This Initial Environmental Study has been prepared in accordance with Section 15063 of the
Guidelines for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The initial
study provides the factual and analytical basis for a Negative Declaration or to focus an EIR on
the significant effects of a project. This initial study addresses the potential impacts associated
with the Parcel Map, Conditional Use Permit, and Oak Tree Permit applications and ultimately,
development of the property.
Project Description
The Dolezal Family Limited Partnership filed an application with the City of Diamond Bar
requesting approval of Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit 92-1, and Oak Tree Permit
No. 95-2. The Parcel Map proposes to divide a 2.55 gross acre parcel into four residential lots.
The Conditional Use Permit is required by the City of Diamond Bar Hillside Management
Ordinance for grades in excess of 10% and for lots which are in or partly in an area designated
as a significant ecological area. The project applicant proposes a private development containing
four custom homes. Homes would range in size from approximately 4,000 to 8,000 square feet
and would be marketed to upper income families. Access to the site will be provided through the
"The Country Estates" development. "The Country Estates" development is a private community
having restricted access. The project site is proposed to be annexed to "The Country Estates"
Homeowners Association. A secondary emergency access route will be provided through a gated
connection between Steeplechase Lane and Hawkwood Road (Baldwin, Tract 32974). Street
lighting is not proposed. Parcel Map No. 23382 has been provided for review in Figure 1.
Location and Access
Location: T2S R9W '/a OF NW '/a SEC. 28
(YORBA LINDA 7.5' QUADRANGLE, SBBM)
APN: 8713-017-08
Access: Regional access to the project vicinity is provided by the 57 Freeway. Arterial access
to the project vicinity from the 57 Freeway is provided by Diamond Bar Blvd. Local access to
the project site from Diamond Bar Boulevard is obtained from Shadow Canyon Drive, south to
Steeplechase Lane, then southwest to its terminus at the southeastern boundary of the project. A
Location map is provided on Figure 2 for review.
prepared: April 1993
revised: March 1995
Lu
cc
Figure
2
Not to Scale
David J. Tanner
Location Map I & Associates, Inc.
3 • Tentative Parcel Map 23382
Diamond Bar General Plan
The contemplated Diamond Bar General Plan Land Use Element designates the project site as
Low Density Residential (RL) maximum 3 du/ac.
Site Zoning -
The project site is zoned R-1 (8,000). R-1 (8,000) zoning permits development of single family
residential dwellings with a minimum lot site of 8,000 square feet.
Significant Ecological Area
The project site is located at the extreme northwestern edge of the Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills.
Significant Ecological Area (SEA) No. 15, pursuant to the Los Angeles County Significant
Ecological Area Study completed in 1976. This study was prepared for Los Angeles County
Department of Regional Planning by England and Nelson Environmental Consultants. According
to this study, in order for an area to be designated "ecologically significant", it must contain
undisturbed biotic communities and possess 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 classification, each with
its own criteria. These classifications and their criteria are as follows:
Classification
Criteria
Class 1
Habitat of rare, endangered, and threatened plant and animal species;
Class 2
Biotic communities, vegetative associations, and habitat of plant and
animal species that are either one of a kind, or are restricted in distibution
on a regional basis;
Class 3
Biotic communities, vegetative associations, and habitat of plant and
animal species that are either, one of a kind, or are restricted in distiution
in L. A. County;
Class 4
Habitat that at some point in the species' life cycle or group of species,
serves as a concentrated breeding, feeding, resting, or migrating grounds
and is limited in availability;
Class 5
Biotic resources that are of scientific interest because they are either an
extreme in physical/geographical limitations, or they represent an unsual
variation in a population or community;
Class 6
Areas important as game species habitat or as fisheries;
Class 7
Areas that would provide for the preservation of relatively undisturbed
examples of the natural biotic communities. in L. A. County;
Class 8
Certain area that are worthy of inclusion, but do not fit any of the above
criteria.
The project site (located within Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills SEA No. 15) is in Class 7. This
particular SEA Class contains undisturbed stands of southern oak woodland, chaparral, coastal
sage scrub, riparian woodland complex, California Walnut, and intermitent stream in the canyon
bottom. However, the project site contains only one oak tree and is denude of any vegetation due
to annual surface scraping/disking by the Los Angeles County Fire Department conducted over
many year. As such, the project site does not meet the prerequisites or citeria for being in an
SEA. Additionally, boundaries chosen for SEAS are based on ridgelines, toe of slope,
interpretation of aerial photographics, and cultural features such as freeways, dams, and
development. Steeplechase Lane (abutting the project site) is a ridgeline and could be a natural
delineatation for the SEA. The project site falls north of this ridgeline. Based on this natural
delineation and the fact that the site is reqularly disturbed and denude of vegetatation, it may be
reasonable to suggest that the project site should not be designated as an SEA as it no longer
meets any of the SEA criteria.
Site Description
Landform: The project site is irregular in shape, encompassing 2.55 gross acres. Elevations on-
site range from 1077± at the southern property line to 1022± along the northern property line.
The site slopes downward to the north averaging 15-20%. Approximately 75% of the site has
been previously graded. Prior grading activities included: remedial grading to correct an unstable
slope condition over the western/central portion of the site, grading for Steeplechase Lane along
the southern boundary of the site, construction of an emergency access road along the western site
boundary and remedial grading to construct a shear key along the northern property line for the
Las Brisas Condominium project. Site Photos have been included in Figures 3 & 4 for review.
Existing Land Use: The project site is privately owned vacant land. The entire project site is
disked regularly by the County for fire prevention purposes. The project applicant is not utilizing
the property in anticipation of development.
Man-made Improvements: Six foot perimeter chain-link fencing has been erected on the north,
east and west to restrict access. A 40 foot general utility and access easement containing a 20
foot paved emergency access drive for the Las Brisas Condominium project is located along the
western site boundary. A concrete W" ditch to control surface runoff has been constructed atop
a manufactured slope (shear key) paralleling the northern property line. The entire site has been
previously disturbed by grading and or disking. Numerous pieces of 12 inch ACP water pipe left
over from the construction of Steeplechase Lane are present on the property, along with isolated
areas of domestic litter.
The project site lies adjacent to Steeplechase Lane, an unpaved private dirt road connecting
Hawkwood Road (Baldwin, Tract 32974) on the west to Wagon Train Lane (serving PM -1528 to
the south) and "The Country Estates development (Tract 30289) on the east. Steeplechase Lane
has a 60 foot right-of-way. Once improved, Steeplechase Lane will have two 14 foot travel lanes.
An underground water main and fire hydrant have been constructed within the right-of-way of
Steeplechase Lane adjacent.
View. from 57 Freeway looking south. Project site is located just below ridgeline
and above the Las Brisas Condominium project in center of photo.
Telephoto view from the 57 Freeway looking south.
Site Photos
Photo Taken: March 1993
6
Figure
3
David J. Tanner
& Associates, Inc.
Tentative Parcel Map 23382
View from the high point on the site looking north. Las Brisas Condominium
project in foreground, 57 Freeway in background.
Figure
4
View from the high point on the site looking northeast. Las Brisas Condominium
project in foreground. The Country development to far right.
Site Photos
-7
Photo Taken: March 1993
David J. Tanner
& Associates, Inc.
Tentative Parcel Map 23382
View looking east along the site's northern boundary. Photo taken from north-
western corner of site.
Figure
5
View looking south along eastern site boundary. Photo taken from northeastern corner
of site. Steeplechase Lane (a private dirt road) shown along left side of photo.
Site Photos
Photo Taken: March 1993
David J. Tanner
& Associates, Inc.
Tentative Parcel Map 23382
Public Utilities and Services
Fire S=ression: The City of Diamond Bar contracts with the County of Los Angeles Fire
Department for fire protection services. Station 119, located at 20480 East Pathfinder
Avenue, Walnut, CA. 91789 is the closest station. Station 119 will provide primary fire
suppression and emergency paramedic response to the project site. Estimated response
times range from 3-5 minutes.
Law Enforcement: The City of Diamond Bar contracts with the County of Los Angeles
Sheriffs Department for law enforcement services. The nearest Sheriffs substation is
located in Walnut.
Telephone: The project site lies within the service area of the General Telephone Company
of California.
Electricity: The project site lies within the service area of the Southern California Edison
Company.
Natural Gas: The project site lies within the service area of the Southern California Gas
Company
Water: The project site is within the service area of the Walnut Valley Water District. An
existing 12 inches ACP line has been installed beneath Steeplechase Lane adjacent to the
site. The District has indicated that they can provide water to the project._
Sewer: The City of Diamond Bar contracts with the County of Los Angeles Sanitation
Department for sewage treatment. The District has indicated that they can provide sewer
service to the project site.
Schools: The project site lies with in the boundary of the Walnut Valley Unified School
District. Students generated from the project would most likely attend Castle Rock
Elementary, South Pointe Middle School and Diamond Bar High School. The District is
experiencing overcrowding and has enacted a school impact fee mitigation program in
accordance with Senate Bill 201. With the payment of impact fees, the District will be
able to provide adequate school service to facilitate the project needs.
Libr : The City of Diamond Bar contracts with the County of Los Angeles for library
services.
Solid Waste Disposal: The City of Diamond Bar contracts with the County of Los Angeles
Sanitation District for solid waste disposal. Solid waste from the City of Diamond Bar is
deposited in the Spadra Landfill. The City contracts with a private hauler for solid waste
disposal in this area.
Surrounding Land Uses
The project site is located in an area which has experienced significant growth over the past
decade. The project site is surrounded by existing and or planned residential developments.
family residential custom and tract developments lie adjacent to the project site on the east
Single P
g Y
10
("The Country Estate" development, Tract 30289) and west (Baldwin, Tract 32974). Multi -family
housing lies adjacent to the project site on the north (The Las Brisas Condominium project, PM
15434). Single family residential land uses have been approved or are proposed on the south
(Parcel Map 1528 & proposed Vesting Tentative Tract 47850) but not constructed. The California
Division of Forestry utilizes a portion of Parcel Map 1528 located south of the project site as a
temporary emergency helicopter landing pad.
The boundary of the Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills Significant Ecological Area (SEA) No. 15 is
believed to lie immediately east of the project site. SEA 15 encompasses approximately 3,600±
gross acres. In total, the County of Los Angeles has established 52 SEA's to maintain the
integrity of the County's varied ecological resources. SEA 15 was originally established by the
County to protect relatively undisturbed stands of Southern Oak Woodland, Chaparral, Coastal
Sage Scrub and Riparian Woodland complex.
Existing Environmental Setting
Drainage: Surface runoff sheet flows to the north where it is intercepted by a concrete lined "V"
ditch paralleling the northern property line. From this point runoff flows easterly into the Las
Brisas Condominium project where it is channeled into an underground storm drain system.
Flora and Fauna: Two biological site investigations have been conducted on the project site. The
first was conducted under contract with the project applicant in August of 1992 '. The second
survey was conducted under contract with the City of Diamond Bar in March 1993 2. The purpose
of the second survey was to have an independent evaluation of the applicant provided
biological survey.
Both biological site surveys concluded that the site has been severely disturbed by past
surface scraping/disldng. The project site is disked regularly by the County for fire
prevention purposes. Pre -disturbance vegetation, based on extant remnants, consisted of
coastal sage shrub and California Walnut Woodland, a designated special interest
Comm The site is bordered on all sides by development, further fragmenting the
remnants of the walnut woodland. The wildlife potential on-site has been effectively
removed due to past disturbance. Implementation of the project will eliminate
approximately 0.5 acre of remnant walnut woodland.
Biological Site Assessment, Parcel Map 23382
O'Farrell Biological Consultants, August 4, 1992
z Biological Site Assessment, Parcel Map 23382
Biological Assessment Services, March 10, 1993
11
Because of the existing disturbed site and lack of wildlife developed habitat and the
adjacent development surrounding the site, the impact to sensitive wildlife is deemed non-
significant. Past disturbance on-site has removed most components of the walnut
woodland. There is no longer a viable plant association. The remnants of this community
on-site comprise isolated individual plants with no interactive understory.
CulturalResources: A preliminary archaeological assessment of the project site was
conducted in February 1993 3. Evaluation of the project site consisted of: 1) background
research to determine if the property had been previously surveyed and if cultural resources
had been recorded within a one -mile radius of the project site: and 2) an intensive
pedestrian survey of the project site.
The records survey indicated that no -cultural resources have been identified on-site or
within a one -mile radius of the project site. The pedestrian survey did not find any
evidence of cultural resources on-site. The archaeologist concluded that development of
the project site poses no threat to known cultural resources.
Visual Resources: The project site is situated on the northern flank, near the top of a
prominent ridgeline. This ridgeline trends in an east -west direction. Nearly all of the
northern flank has been developed for residential land uses. - Diamond Bar Boulevard has
been constructed along the base of this slope.. Farther north, lies the 57 Freeway. The
majority of the project site is visible from the 57 Freeway (from 1/2 mile north of the
Diamond Bar Boulevard interchange to the Pathfinder Avenue interchange in both
directions). In general, views of the site increase as the distance from the site increases.
This results because the Las Brisas Condominium project and its landscaping substantially
block views from the lower elevations closest to the bottom of the slope. Only limited
vistas'of the site can be obtained from Diamond Bar Boulevard.
3 Archaeological Assessment, Parcel Map 23382, Diamond Bar, CA, Scientific Resource
Surveys, February 22, 1993
12
1. Background
1. Name of Applicant: Warren Dolezal
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent:
Dolezal Family Limited Partnership -
4251 South Higuera Street San Louis Obispo CA 93401 Phone: (805) 544-3990
3. Name, Address and Phone Number of Project Contact:
Hunsaker And Associates San Diego Inc --
10179 Hunnekens Street San Diego CA 92121 _-
Phone: (69) 558-4500 --
Contact Person: Mr Lex Williman
4. Date of Environmental Information Submittal: Februaa 17 1992
5. Date of Environmental Checklist Submittal: April 5 1993
6. Lead Agency (Agency Required Checklist): City of Diamond Bar
7. Name of Proposal if applicable (Tract No. if Subdivision): Tentative Parcel Map
23382 Conditional Use Permit 92-1 and Oak Tree Permit NO. 95-2.
8. Related Applications (under the authority of this environmental determination):
Site Development Permit(s) Grading Plan(s) & Building Permit(s)
Yes No
Variance: — x
Conditional Use Permit: x
Zone Change: _ x
General Plan Amendment: _ x
Oak Tree Permit x —
Tract Map x x
(Attach Completed Environmental Information Form)
13
II. Environmental Impacts:
(Explanations and additional information to supplement all "yes" and "possibly"
answers are required to be submitted on attached sheets)
YES
NO POSSIBLY
1. Earth.
Will the proposal result in:
a.
Unstable earth conditions or changes in
geologic substructures?
b.
Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
C.
Change in topography or ground surface relief
features?
d.
The destruction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical feature?
e.
Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or off the site?
f.
Changes in deposition, erosion of stream
banks or land adjacent to standing water,
changes in siltation, deposition or other
processes which may modify the channel of
constant or intermittently flowing water as
well as the areas surrounding permanent or
intermittent standing water?
g.
Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
2. Air.
Will the proposal result in:
a.
Substantial air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality?
b.
The creation of objectionable odors?
C.
Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
temperature, or any changes in climate,
either locally or regionally?
3. Water.
Will the proposal result in:
a.
Changes in currents or the course or
direction of water movements?
14
YES
NO POSSIBLY
b.
Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface
run-off?
C.
Alterations of the course or flow of flood
waters?
d.
Changes in the amount of surface water in
any body of water?
e.
Discharge into surface waters, or in any
alteration of surface water quality including
but not limited to dissolved oxygen and
turbidity?
f.
Alteration of the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters?
g.
Change in the quantity of ground waters,
either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception of an
aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h.
Substantial reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public water
supplies?
i.
Exposure of. people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding?
4. Plant
Life. Will the proposal result in:
a.
Change in the diversity of species, or number
of any species of plants (including trees,
shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
b.
Reduction in the numbers of any unique rare
of endangered species of plants?
C.
Reduction in the size of sensitive habitat
areas or plant communities which are
recognized as sensitive?
d.
Introduction of new species of plants into
an area, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species?
e.
Reduction in acreage of any agricultural
crop?
15
YES NO POSSIBLY
Ak
b. Probable interference with an emergency
response plan or an emergency evacuation
plan?
11. Population. Will the proposal:
a. Alter the location, distribution, density,
or growth rate of the human population of
an area?
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect:
a. Existing housing, or create a demand for
additional housing?
14. Public Services. Will the proposal:
a. Have an effect upon, or result in the need
for new or altered governmental services in
any of the following areas:
1. Fire Protection?
2. Police Protection?
3. Schools?
17
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal
result
in:
a.
Generation of Substantial additional
vehicular movement?
b.
Effects on existing parking facilities or
demand for new parking?
C.
Substantial inpact on existing transportation
systems?
d.
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people and goods.
e.
Alterations to waterborne, rail or air
traffic?
f.
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
14. Public Services. Will the proposal:
a. Have an effect upon, or result in the need
for new or altered governmental services in
any of the following areas:
1. Fire Protection?
2. Police Protection?
3. Schools?
17
YES NO POSSIBLY
4. Parks or other recreational facilities?
5. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
6. Other governmental services?
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing
energy sources or require the development
of new sources of energy?
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in:
a. A need for new systems, or Substantial
alterations to public utilities?
18
17.
Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)?
b. Exposure of people to potential health
hazards?
18.
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in:
a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view
open to the public, or will the proposal
result in the creation of an aesthetically
offensive site open to the public view?
19.
Recreation. Will the proposal result in:
a. An impact upon the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities?
20.
Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. The alteration of or the destruction of a
prehistoric or historic archaeological site?
18
YES NO POSSIBLY
b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building, structure
or object?
ANA
C. A physical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values?
d. Restrictions on existing religious or sacred
uses within the potential impact area.
19
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance?
a. Does the proposed project have the potential
_
to degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
orwildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate or
significantly reduce a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b. Does the proposed project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage
of long-term,,environmental goals?
C. Does the proposed project pose impacts which
are individually limited but cumulatively
considerable?
d. Does the project pose environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
19
III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION:
(Attach Narrative)
IV. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a
significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described on the attached sheet
have been incorporated into the proposed project.
A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant
effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
Date: Signature:
Title: CoN aN
For the City of Diamond Bar, California
20
Dolezal Family Limited Partnership Project
Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit 92-1, and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2
City of Diamond Bar
IhIYI �
EXPLANATION OF "YES", "NO" AND "MAYBE" ANSWERS
Initial Stuff - Findings of Fact
1. Earth: (a -g)
Potential Impact: The proposed project will result in grading over the majority of the site to
create residential building pads and yard areas. Approximately 2,300 cubic yards of earth
redistribution is anticipated. Grading of the 2.55± acre site will alter the existing contour of the
land. Grading will have the potential to result in short term soil erosion, and may induce
accelerated sedimentation/siltation of downstream flood control facilities. Grading will also result
in disruption, displacement and compaction of these erodible soils. Site development will subject
future residents to earthquake hazardous typically experienced throughout Southern California.
Discussion: Approximately 75 %" of the site has been previously graded. Prior grading activities
included; remedial grading to correct an unstable slope condition over the western/central portion
of the site, grading for Steeplechase Lane along the southern boundary of the site, construction
of an emergency access road along the western site boundary and remedial grading to construct
a shear key along the northern property line for the Las Brisas Condominium project. The site
is disked regularly by the County for fire prevention purposes. The impact to the natural
landform from site grading is considered insignificant.
Erosion and sedimentation can be readily controlled by various management practices and
techniques through an erosion control plan. An erosion control plan and National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit are required prior to site grading. These
programs incorporate the following erosion control measures to insure that the potential for
increased erosion and sedimentation during grading are maintained at a level of insignificance.
Erosion Control Measures
Erosion control measures will be implemented during all phases of construction to revent
the loss of on-site soils as required by the City of Diamond Bar.
All appropriate cleared areas will be re -planted immediately after grading to prevent the
erosion of soils by wind or water. These plantings may be permanent or temporary in
nature.
All cleared areas will be regularly watered to prevent erosion by wind or water.
Watering will be increased on excessively hot or windy days; grading activities will
cease when wind speeds exceed 15 mph and during Santa Ana conditions and during
Stage I smog episodes.
21
During the rainy season, erosion control dikes and sandbags shall be placed at
appropriate intervals in roadway cuts.
Install construction equipment wheel washes at the entrance/exits of the construction
sites.
Public roadways providing access to the construction sites shall be cleared of soil
on a regular basis.
The project site is located in a region known for its seismic activity. While no known
active faults occur on the property, the site could be impacted by earthquakes generated
from the Whittier, Chino and San Anderas fault zones. Seismic activity on these faults has
the potential to generate strong ground shaking. Because of the proximity of the site to
these active earthquake faults and the intensity of ground shaking anticipated during a
major event, project development will expose people and property to geologic hazards;
damage to residential structures may be experienced in a major earthquake..
However, buildings designed to the standards of the Uniform Building Code will reduce
this exposure to an acceptable level of risk and the effect is therefore considered
insignificant.
Finding: Site development may have a significant impact on the environment. However,
existing regulations mitigate potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
2. Air: (a -c)
Potential Impact: The proposed project will generate both short and long-term; primary
and secondary air emissions. Short-term pollutants will be generated locally by
construction equipment emissions and by dust from grading activities. Long-term
pollutants will be generated locally from the use of natural gas for cooking and space
heating and through use of the automobile by future residents. Long-term pollutants will
be generated off --site at electrical generation facilities.
Discussion: The project is not anticipated to result in the creation of objectionable odors,
or in alteration of air movements, moisture, temperature, or climate.
The project. site lies within the South Coast Air Basin. The South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) regulates airborne emissions within the basin. The
SCAQMD has released "Guidelines For Implementing the 1989 Air Quality Management
Plan (AQMP). The proposed project will contribute incremental quantities of air pollutants
locally, at levels well below the threshold criteria suggested by the SCAQMD for
determining significance.
The project developer(s) is required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 to protect against
windblown soil erosion during grading. Emissions from construction equipment are also
regulated by the AQMP. The Uniform Building Code, Title 22 requires utilization of
22
energy efficient appliances and building practices. Combined, these measures minimizing
the potential for significant impacts to air resources.
Finding: Site development may have a significant impact on the envirorunent. However,
existing regulations mitigate potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
3. Water: (a -i)
Potential Impact: Site development will increase the amount of impervious surfaces on-site
and result in an incremental increase in off-site runoff. Landscape irrigation will
incrementally increase the amount of water absorbed into the soil. Site grading has the
potential to increase erosion on-site and increase off-site siltation of down stream storm
drain facilities.
Discussion: Site development will not result in the need for new or upgraded off-site
drainage facilities. The incremental. increase in off-site runoff and on-site absorption
anticipated from site development is considered insignificant.
Erosion and sedimentation can be readily controlled by various management practices and
techniques through an erosion control plan and NPDES permit. The grading permit and
NPDES process is designed insure that potential erosion and siltation effects to water
resources are maintained at a level of insignificance.
Finding: Site development may have a significant impact on the environment. However,
existing regulations mitigate potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
4. Plant Life: (a -d)
Potential Impact: Site development will result in removal of all on-site vegetation with the
exception of one oak tree within lot #3. Site grading and development in close proximity
to this oak tree could destroy it. New urban landscapes will be planted by the individual
home owners following development.
Discussion: The project site has been severely disturbed by past grading, surface scraping
and disldng. The project site is disked regularly by the County for fire prevention
purposes. The site is bordered on all sides by existing and or planned development.
The project site is located at the extreme northwestern edge of the Tonner.Canyon/Chino
Hills Significant Ecological Area (SEA) No. 15.
The City has identified oak trees as a valuable resource. Oak woodlands have been rapidly
decreasing in size throughout Southern California as a result of wide -spread urban
development.. The City has adopted an Oak Tree Permit process to protect these oak
resources. While the proposed project does not propose to remove the singular oak tree
on-site. The following measures shall be considered during the site plan review stage to
minimize accidental damage to the oak tree.
23
a. Prior Construction Damage: The large concentration of concrete pipes
stacked against the trunk and accumulated soil shall be removed. The area
within the dripline should be hand aerated to rectify soil compaction which
has occurred.
Protection/Preservation Measures: 'Pursuant to the City's Oak Tree Permit
process, chain link fencing, with a minimum height of four (4) feet, shall be
installed five (5) feet outside the tree's dripline or 15 feet from its trunk,
shich ever is greater.
c. Maintenance Guidelines: In addition, improper care and maintenance by the
homeowner can result in damage and or death to the oak tree. The site
developer and future homeowner shall be provided a copy of the Oak Tree
Management Guidelines contained in the Biota report review attached hereto.
Finding: Because of the small scale of the project, its disturbed nature and location
adjacent to urban developments, site development is not anticipated to result in a significant
impact to plant life.
5. Animal Life: (a -d)
Potential Impact: Site development will result in the displacement of all wildlife onsite.
Site development may result in the introduction of domestic cats and dogs onto the site and
the SEA. Upon completion of landscaping, wildlife compatible with urban areas is
anticipated to utilize the project site for nesting and foraging.
Discussion: The wildlife potential on-site has been effectively removed due to past
disturbance. Because of the existing lack of wildlife developed habitat and the adjacent
development surrounding the site, the impact to sensitive wildlife is deemed non-
significant.
The project site is located at the extreme northwestern edge of the Tonner Canyon/Chino
Hills Significant Ecological Area (SEA) No. 15.
The potential impact to the SEA from site development is not considered significant.
However, the following measure is recommended to help maintain the biologic integrity
of the Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills SEA.
a. During the site plan review stage, consideration shall be given to minimize
excessive amounts of light and glare directed toward the SEA (southeast).
Consideration may include architectural design, lighting location, type of
lighting, use of shields and landscaping.
Finding: Because of the small scale of the project, its disturbed nature and location
adjacent to urban developments, site development is not anticipated to result in a significant
impact to animal life.
24
6. Noise: (a -b)
Potential Impact: Site development will result in the generation of both short and long-
ed locally
ction
term noise. Short-term . Theu use
of the automobile byise will be tfuture residents will resthe ult in an
of each residential unit. The use of
-term noise levels within the community.
incremental increase in long
Discussion: Ambient noise levels within the project site are considered low. Existing
ambient noise is generated by low density residential land uses. Approval of the project
is not anticipated to subject people to noise levels in excess of state or local standards for
interior and/or exterior residential uses.
The project developer(s) is required to comply with existing regulations that govern
construction noise, minimizing potential impacts to nearby noise receptors.
have a significant impact on the environment. However,
Finding: Site development may
existing regulations mitigate potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
7. Light and Glare:
Potential Impact: Site development may result in the generation of long-term light and
glare.
Discussion: Ambient levels of light and glare on the project site are considered low.
dential land
Existing ambient light and gest aswells th
glare sgenerated
57 Freeway ito the north.edium S to ty devel development
uses to the north east and w
will add incremental quantities of light and glare to the project vicinity. No street lighting
is proposed.
is not considered
The potential impact to the SEA from project-relatedis recommended to h �p maintain the biologic "
significant. However, the following measure
integrity of the Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills SEA.
a. During the site plan review stage, consideration shall be given to minimize
excessive amounts of light and , glare directed toward the SEA of (south).
Consideration may include architectural design, lighting location, typelighting,
use of shields and landscaping.
Finding: Because of the small scale of the project, site development is not anticipated to
result in a significant generation of light and glare.
8. Land Use:
will permit development of four
Potential Impact: Approval of the proposed project
custom homes on the project site.
I. 25
I
Discussion: The proposed project is consistent with the City's contemplated General Plan
and Zoning Ordinance. The project site is surrounded by existing residential and or
planned residential land uses.
Finding: For the reasons discussed above, site development is not anticipated to result in
a significant impact to land use.
9. Natural Resources:
Potential Impact: Site development will consume both renewable and non-renewable
natural resources over the life of the project. Non-renewable natural resources include the
use of fossil fuels (for the generation of electricity and fuel for automobiles) and natural
gas (for space heating). Renewable lumber products will be used as a construction
material.
Discussion: Site development is. not anticipated to use abnormally large quantities of
natural resources. The project developers) and future homeowners are. required to comply
with. existing regulations to reduce the generation of solid wastes to off-site landfills
(AB939) and are encouraged to recycle which further minimize the consumption of natural
resources.
Finding: For the reasons discussed above, site development is not anticipated to result in
a significant impact to natural resources.
10. Risk of Upset: (a -b)
Potential Impact: Site development may involve the temporary storage of fuels and oils
used by grading equipment. While the risk of spillage and or leakage of small quantities
of diesel fuel or engine oil is considered remote, this potential exists at any construction
site.
Discussion: The project will not involve the risk of explosion or the release of hazardous
substances. The project will not interfere with emergency response plans or emergency
evacuation plans.
The project developers is required to comply with existing regulations to protect against
the risk of spillage and or leakage of toxic materials including diesel fuel and engine oil.
In addition. the project developers is required to mitigate off-site waterborne construction
pollutants through the existing NPDES permit process. Combined, these measures
minimizing potential the risk of upset from site development.
Finding: Because of the projects small scale and existing regulations in effect, the
proposed project is not anticipated to result in a significant risk of upset.
M,
11. Population:
Potential Impact: Site development will result in a population increase of approximately
14 residents.
Discussion: The proposed project is consistent with the City's contemplated General Plan
and Zoning Ordinance. The project site is surrounded by existing residential and or
planned residential land uses. Site development is consistent with growth projections for
the project site.
Finding: For the reasons discussed above, site development is not anticipated to result in
a significant impact to population. ,
12. Housing:
Potential Impact: Site development will increase the City's housing stock by four single
family detached homes.
Discussion: The proposed project is consistent with the City's contemplated General Plan
and Zoning Ordinance. The project site is surrounded by existing residential and or
planned residential land uses. Site development is consistent with growth projections for
the project site.
Finding: For the reasons discussed above, site development is not anticipated to result in
a significant impact to housing.
13. Transportation/Circulation: (a -f)
Potential Impact: Site development will generate approximately 48 average daily trips to
the local circulation system. Access to the site will be provided by Steeplechase Lane, a
private street having restricted access.
Discussion: Because of the small scale of the proposed project, the site development will
have minimal impact on existing traffic levels or circulation patterns. The project will not
result in alterations to waterbome, rail or air traffic.
Finding: For the reasons discussed above, site development is not anticipated to result in
a significant impact to Transportation/Circulation.
14. Public Services: (a, 1-6)
Potential Impact: Project development will incrementally increase the demand, for public
services; e.g.; law enforcement, fire protection, school and park facilities.
Discussion: The project will contribute development fees as required by the City for law
enforcement, fire protection and public park facilities. These funds will ensure that
27
sufficient services and facilities are provided to accommodate the demand generated by this
development.
The project site lies with in the boundary of the Walnut Valley Unified School District.
The District is experiencing overcrowding and has enacted a school impact fee mitigation
program in accordance with Senate Bill 201. With the payment of impact fees, the District
will provide adequate school services to facilitate the project's needs. .
Finding: Existing regulations mitigate potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
15. Energy: (a -b)
Potential Impact: Site development will consume both renewable and non-renewable
energy resources. Non-renewable energy resources include fossil fuels (generation of
electricity and fuel for automobiles) and natural gas (space heating and cooldng).
Discussion: Site development is not anticipated to result in the use of substantial amounts
of fuel, or a substantial increase in demand for energy or the development of new sources
of energy. The project developers) and future homeowners are required to comply with
existing regulations to reduce the use of non-renewable energy resources. These
regulations include; compliance with energy efficient.design standards, use of emergency
efficient household. appliances and recycling programs (AB939). Renewable solar energy
will be used for passive space heating and cooling of residential dwellings and swimming
pools.
Finding: Insignificant effect.
16. Utilities:
Potential Impact: Project development will incrementally increase the demand for public
utilities; e.g., water and sewer service, electricity and natural gas.
Discussion: Utilities are available adjacent to the project site and will be extended from
Steeplechase Lane onto the project site. The project will pay connection fees as required
by the City.
Finding: Insignificant effect.
17. Human Health: (a -b)
Potential Impact: The proposed project is not anticipated to result in the creation of any
health hazards or the exposure of people to potential health hazards. Existing regulations
are in-place which regulate construction materials used in residential construction.
Finding: Insignificant effect.
29
18. Aesthetics:
Potential Impact Approval of the proposed project will permit site development of four
custom homes near the top of a ridge within the viewshed of the 57 Freeway and
residential/commercial areas north of Diamond Bar Boulevard. Site development will
require recontouring of the land to create residential building pads and yards.
Approximately 2,300 cubic yards of earth redistribution is anticipated.
Discussion: The natural appearance of the project site has been disturbed by past grading
activities and contains litter from the construction of a water main along Steeplechase Lane.
The project site is disked regularly by the County for fire prevention purposes.
The site contains one large oak tree which is proposed to be incorporated in the design of
the project.
The project site is located in an area which has experienced rapid urban development. The
entire site is surrounded by existing and or planned residential land uses. The project site
is situated on the northern flank, near the top of a prominent ridgeline. Nearly all of the
northern flank has been developed for residential land uses.
The majority of the project site is visible from the 57 Freeway (from the Diamond Bar
Boulevard interchange to the Pathfinder Avenue interchange in both directions). In
general, views of the site increase as the distance from the site increases. This results
because the Las Brisas Condominium project and its landscaping substantially block views
from the lower elevations closest to the bottom of the slope. Only limited vistas of the site
can be obtained from Diamond Bar Boulevard. Upon site development, the upper portions
of the four homes will be visible from the north. Site development will be seen from
adjacent areas with the Baldwin development to the west, the Country development to the
east and Las Brisas Condominium project to the north.
Residential land use on this site is consistent with the City's contemplated General Plan.
The design of the proposed parcel map is consistent the City's zoning ordinance. This type
of development will be similar in character to adjacent development on the east ("The -
Country Estates") and west (Baldwin Tract) and at a lower density than adjacent
development on the north (Las Brisas Condominiums). The proposed project will be
similar in character to planned residential development on the south (Parcel Map 1528).
The project developer(s) is required to comply with the City's Hillside Management
Ordinance which is designed to "preserve and protect the views to and from hillside areas
in order to maintain the identity, image and environmental quality of the City of Diamond
Bar". Each homesite will be required to undergo individual site plan review for
conformance with the Development Review Ordinance. Combined, these measures insure
that the potential adverse aesthetic impacts from site development is maintained at a level
less than significant.
Finding: Under these conditions, project development is not considered to be of aesthetic
p:
significance.
19. Recreation:
Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project will incrementally increase the
demand on the City's existing recreational facilities.
Discussion: In accordance with State regulations, the City requires the payment of in -lieu
park improvement fees for developments of this size. The City utilizes this fee to acquire
and/or improve new park and recreation facilities.
Finding: Insignificant effect.
20. Cultural Resources: (a -d)
Potential Impact: Approximately 2,300 cubic yards of earth redistribution will be required
to construct residential building pads.
Discussion: A records search and site investigation for cultural resources was preformed
in February 1993. The records survey indicated that no cultural resources have been
identified on-site or within a one -mile radius of the project site. The pedestrian survey did
not find any evidence of cultural resources on-site. The archaeologist concluded that
development of the project site poses no threat to known cultural resources.
Finding: Insignificant effect.
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance:
a. Discussion: The project site has been previously disturbed by grading activities.
The site is disked on a regular basis by the County for fire prevention purposes.
The site is fenced on the north, east and west. No rare or endangered species
have been observed on or are anticipated to utilize the project in it's current
state. No cultural resources have been reported within a one mile radius of the
project site and none were observed during a site investigation.
Finding: The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife species to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate or
significantly reduce a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California history or prehistory.
b. Discussion: The proposed project implements the long-term goals of the City's
contemplated General Plan for development of this site and completes the
improvement of Steeplechase Lane.
30
Finding: The project will not have the potential to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals.
C. Discussion: Site development will continue the planned implementation of the City's
contemplated General Plan for this area. Increased urbanization adjacent and within
significant ecological areas will increase pressure on those species sensitive to urban
encroachment. Continued urban development within Diamond Bar will increase
long-term service demands on public service and utility companies. Continued
urban development will increase the number of automobiles utilizing local roadway
and may necessitate the need for new and/or improved roadways. Long range
infrastructure planning is based on the level of development anticipated by buildout
of the contemplated General Plan. The proposed project and others approved in the
project vicinity are consistent with the contemplated General Plan.
Finding: The cumulative impact of the proposed project combined with other
planned developments in the project vicinity is not considered significant.
d. Discussion: The project does not involve the use of hazardous materials, pose the
risk of explosion nor is it located in close proximity to such uses.
Finding: The approval of the proposed Parcel Map, Conditional Use Permit, Oak
Tree Permit, and ultimate construction of four custom homes is not anticipated to .
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
DETERNIINATION:
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described
herein have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
WILL BE PREPARED.
31
O F„
rT
rn
� p
� N
x H rr
p.o dM
b
y.Q
Ozb
a.
El
y'< � a
a
�,
p�'
z
HBO
�.
R
\p
`�
C7
�Oti
-
_ J w CD
tilt �'
W n
O
W b -:
tp OAHd
N
ty
hCD
0 0y�•
vi
0
�
0
vxi
00c•
y
0
bi vii
N
(gyp
p _ rP,
m m
80
�g m
bro
"'• Cr' ny
ro
R' n'
ro
.•� F. pNN
a ro
n
°
V~pi
�
m
m
�• Cq
F9
m m
�
- n m
� C1
ci
to
p
�•
G"
F
p
5'
F°
iS
p.
Vl
w p p.qQ
0
R tG
FC
p R
p
Et
a
co
°15'9
C b
ro
anF
°C
n
o
mN
a.
.
°
�
dQ
N
00
R•
E
�C
00
n
G
p n
O
cm
yngv�
DO
m
°
G
`o
o;
DQ
00
OQ
,e
ro
0 0y�•
vi
0
�
0
vxi
00c•
y
0
bi vii
N
(gyp
p _ rP,
d
p
d
'C1
P
d
m
�
d d
m
•
IL
IL
n
V~pi
�
p
�•
G"
p.
F
p
p
a
n
°
N
r O 7ii*
pO�°. m p 11�10C n� �° � o �•
OR m m y p 4:1� m �.
a a
cru E �o 00 �B
p pC 6' rn p�
p m P. p Oryp "*y'C'��"' O� O R'C� m'°M-'P�O p C'•.m,�
UQ
`Ccr
CD
o
D o^
CD
m °
,Q a. Q• ro < G G1.
asUQ
CD ^�• `"}' ,C- <
O
C CO, 0
P N
0 p m• C M M
M �D
DQ
tF
G m O oro 0
Fn
(C
O
M
0 0
r N•
N m O
?� � 'o
NR. „5�3 '•O .O "i7 b• 0 b y p
2X5 5
m
y m It
m m
R. a
I. INFORMATION SUMMARY
REPORT DATE: 4 August 1992
PROJECT LOCATION: T2S R9W SW 1/4 of NW 1/4 Sec. 28
(Yorba.Linda 7.5' Quadrangle, SBBM)
REFERENCE NUMBERS: PARCEL MAP 23382
OWNER/APPLICANT: The Dolezal Family Limited Partnership
4251 South Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Michael J. O'Farrell
O'Farrell Biological Consulting
2912 N. Jones Boulevard
Las Vegas, NV 89108
REPORT SUMMARY: A biological survey was conducted on 16 and 17
July 1992. The project site has been severely disturbed by past
surface scraping/disking. Pre-disKurbance vegetation, based un
extant remnants, consisted of coastal sage scrub and. California
walnut woodland, a designated special. interest community. The site
is bordered on all sides by development, further fragmenting the
remnants of the walnut woodland. The wildlife potential onsite has
_ been effectively removed due to past disturbance. Implementation
of the project will eliminate ca.. 0.5 acre of walnut woodland.
Mitigation to protect the walnut woodland may include:
o Replacing trees directly impacted by development.
o Use of Condition, Covenants and Restrictions to reduce
domestic animal impacts and limit liumali impacts to natural
communities off site.
II. PROJECT ANU PROPER'T'Y DESCRIPTION
The ca. 2.6 -acre project site is located east of Diamond Bal -
Boulevard, directly east of the Brea Canyon interchange with
Highway 57, in extreme eastern Los Angeles County (Figure 1). The
property is bordered on the west, north, and east by existing
housing. The rough dirt alignment of the Steeplechase Lace
alignment forms the southern border. A cleared pad site is
immediately adjacent to the south of the road alignment. The
southern portion of the site including the road alignment occurs
on a ridgeline, with the majority of the property consisting of
relatively steep slope facing to the north.
The property has been heavily disturbed in the past. A 20 -ft wide
paved road occurs along the interior western border. Steeplechase
Lane alignment has been rough graded, as well as one of tl;e
connecting road alignments to the south. The remaining body of the
property has been cleared of surface vegetation by scraping and/or
disking. Some debris, such as pipes, has been stockpiled off the
road alignment.
III. METHODOLOGY
Preparation of the present biological survey included the followi-ig
tasks: 1) identification of habitats contained in the project
area; 2) assessment of potential occurrence of species or natural
communities of special interest; 3) surveys for speciesani'.
communities of special interest potentially occurring within the
Project area; and, 4) development of recommendations for
mitigation.
Tn order to identify all sensitive biological resources potential
for the: project site vicinity, the regulatory agencies were
contacted. A Natural 'Diversity Data Base Report for special
interest species and natural communities for the Yorba Linda.
quadrangle was obtained from the Resources Agency, California
Department of Fish and Game. Species and communities inventoried
in the CNDDB are ranked by the state according to their Population
distributions and stabilities. The rankings prioritize the order
in which information on each species is gathered. The state has
five rankings S1 through S5, each of which is subdivided into three
additional categories called a threat number (i.e., 52.1). The
agency also gives a global ranking which is a reflection of the
overall condition of.a species or community throughout its global
range.
Sensitive biological resources were discussed with John Hanlon at
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office, Carlsbad. Plant
resources were discussed with A. Sanders, Curator, University of
California, Riverside Herbarium and T. Keeler -Wolf, biologist,
Natural Heritage Division of California Department of Fish and
2
Name, S•+i:ra+pent0.
site was examined for wildlife resources
Tile project on ib :Ju'+y
1992. The entire
Pell )c to site s e
allow acompletea
ea ltinat ion 1 t t.t,c:
r>bserver (M.lO'
Farr
Special emphasis was placed on identifying the piesc:n+:L:
or potentia) for use of sensitive species. A checklist of wildlite
during the site examination (see AtlaCh"It,llt
ubsGrved was generated
B).
The site was visited on 17 r�dY tn92 to surveyn forspecial
s++tt iutere5t
uccuriing on the prop Y a
,,l
project
site was +traversed on foot considered
bylone observeroccur.
(RachellMandai�+l
1� A
to provide a complete assessment of botanical t'inguileS
checklist of plant species observed was generated during the yurv�y
(sGe Attachment M.
the wildlife survey consisted of parr.ly
Weather conditions during
cloudy skies, wind ranging from 1-3 mph, and temperature �s il`11
Weather during the botanical visit was sunny,
tcn+{+araturc near 95"F•
I V . RESULTS
vegetation on the project site consists of highly acres; thedremainderrof tl+l`'
sage scrub comprising approximately
:;ita contains California walnut WO plant obs rived onsitt"L++arm
lows Holland 1986)
presented in Attachment A. V4getatation distribution is sl
designation fol+uwn i++
Figure 2.
Coastal sage scrub is a community 'domina•ted by e ferui�
sagebrush(Artemisia californica), black sage (Salvia mellifr+),
cond
and White sage (Salvia apianl}�n.
i a�nuhei���C1•bedlustarlds°(Braslsi-A
shrubs reach approximately and thistles are common in Lbu
wild oats (Avena fatua),
disturbed area. black walnut
woonated On5ite by
California walnut a). Thisand lspeoels .is an evergreen resell. I()-
California
californi_ca)• coverage is described as open• ll1e
25 m i n he iglu . Cano1 Y
canyons. Tile open tree canopy allows development:
California walnut woodland is less well-developed onsite than t+
the surrounding
the
all understory of non-native grassland. i'he walnut
inter9rades with Coast live oak woodland ins effectively
canyons.
The level of general surfacepotential. disturbance
tile eClack lof r vial)It
most of the wildlife
habitat, few species were observed (see Attachment B)•
SF:NSITIVL' 6IOLOGICAL RESOURCES
A number of sensitive species are known to occur in the genertl
area of the project site (see Attachment C), The majority of Lhc.;e
species have been determined to be sensitive due to the rapid and
irrevocable loss of habi-tat.-- A speci-alinterest community is a
distinct association of plants and/or animal species whose lone
term viability may be in jeopardy. the Stdte of California
protects rare and threatened natural communities. The only uatural
community of special interest identified to occur on or near Ute
site is California walnut woodland. The City of Diamond Bat 11,1s
designated this woodland as sensitive habitat.
California walnut woodland has a global listing of G2 and a state
ranking of 52.1. The state threat number one defines this woodlaLld
as very threatened. The dominant tree in this community is black
walnut. Other trees such as coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) atv
commonly found. The community under story consists of species
asL5ociated with Riversidean or coastal sage scrub such as black
e,age, white sage, and California sagebrush.
Fast disturbance onsite has removed most components of the walnut
woodland. There is no longer a viable plant association. The
remnants of this community onsite comprise isolated-indivirlual
1.dauLs with no interactive uuderstory.
The project site has been heavily disturbed in the least and i:,
C0111pletely surrounded by Housing or clearing for Lului,
development. Except for peripheral elements, shrubs and underSLory
around cover have been eliminated. The lack of developed habitat
eliminates the potential for resident occupation of sensitive
species requiring -such conditions (all slaecies listed in Attachment:
C except for the southwestern pond turtle)., No aquatic habitat was
present on or adjacent to the site which could support pond
turtles. The lack of a viable food base on the site diminishes the
cluality for raptor foraging potential.
VI. IMPACTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The project site is designated for the development of 4 residential
lots. Construction will eliminate the remaining vegetation oustt.e,
excQpt for a',single oak tree located in the southeastern carrier of
Lot 3. This will necessitate the removal of approximately 0.5 acre
Of California walnut woodland.
Because of the existing lack of developed wildlife habitat and the
adjacent development surrounding the site, the impact to sensitive
wildlife is deemed non-significant.
California walnut woodland is listed as endangered and as such,
warrants protection. It is estimated that less than 10,000 arre�
of this community exists worldwide. If the, woodland was protected
onsite, a remnant of a rare native woodland would remain. 14inor
wildlife values and aesthetic values would be maintained. The
impacts of the proposed development on the walnut woodland
community can be successfully managed.
To minimize the impacts of the development on the native vegetation
on the parcel the foliow'ing is recommended:
o Protection of the California walnut woodland and coast live
oak trees by adherence to strict guidelines set by the
Homeowner Association (HOA). .
o Eliminating impacts of pets through HOA By-laws or Conditions,
Covenants and Restrictions (CCR) by:
- Confining dogs to the fenced yard area,
- Requiring leashes when pets are outside the yard area;
- Forbidding free roaming dogs; and,
Keeping equines limited to established equestrian trails,
o Limiting impacts of human occupation with CCRs and HOA BY -laws
by:
Restricting the' Use of all terrain or off-road vehicles
within the development; and,
Develop landscaping standards utilizing drought tolerant
native species.
The recommended mitigation measures will provide extended benefit
to off site,'undisturbed habitats.
VI.I. -REFERENCES
American Ornithologist's Union (A.O.U.). 1983. Check -list of
North American birds. 6th edition. Allen Press Inc.,
Lawrence, Kansas. 877 pp.
California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). 1991. Special
animals. California Dept. of Fish and Game, Natural Diversity
Data Base. 21 pp.
Holland, R.F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial
natural communities of California. State of California, the
Resources Agency. 155 pp.
Jennings, M. R. 1983. An annotated check list of the amphibians
and reptiles of California. California Fish and Game, 69:151-
171.
5
ATTACHMENT A
CHECKLIST OF PLANTS OBSERVED ON PARCEL MAP 23383
17 JULY 1992
..FAM.IL_YLSPECIES- --
COMMON NAME
Asteraceae
Artemisia californica
California Sagebrush
Centaurea calcitrapa
Star Thistle
Cynara scolymus
Wild Artichoke
Haplopappu_s junceus
Haplopappus
Taraxacum calfornicum
California Dandelion
Brassicaceae
Brassica campestris
Field Mustard
Brassica geniculata
Perennial Mustard
Caprifoliaceae
Sambucus mexicana
Elderberry
Fabaceae
Lotus heermannii
Lotus
Fagaceae
Quercus agrifolia
Coast Live Oak
quercus wislizenii
Interior Live Oak
Lamiaceae
Marrubi_um vulga_r_e_
Horehound
Salvia api_ana
White Sage
Salvia mellifera
Black Sage
Poaceae
Avena fatua.
Wild Oat
Rosaceae
Heteromeles arbutifolia
Toyon
Nomenclature follows Munz
(1974).
ATTACHMENT 8
CHECKLIST OF WILDLIFE SPECIES
OBSERVED ON PARCEL MAP 23382
E
FAMILY/SPECIES
COMMON NAME
Cathartidae
Turkey Vulture
Cathartes aura
Corvi,dae
Aphelocoma coerulescens
Scrub Jay
Paridae
Plain Titmouse
Parus inornatus
Troglodytidae
Bewick's Wren
Thryomanes_bewickii
Mimidae
Mimus pplyglottos
Northern Mockingbird
Emberizidae
Pipilo crissalis
California Towhee
Fringillidae
House Finch
Carpodacus mexicanus
Leporidae
Sylvilagus audubonii
Desert Cottontail
Sciuridae
Spermophilus beecheyi .
California.,Ground Squirrel
Geomyid-3e
Bona's Pocket Gopher
Thomcmys bottae
Nomenclature follows Jennings
(1983), American Ornithologists'
Union (1983), and Jones et al..(1992).
I
ATTACHMENT C
CHECKLIST OF SENSITIVE SPECIES POTENTIAL OR EXPECTED TO OCCUR
FAMILY/SPECIES _.____ _
COMMON NAME
Emydidae
Clemmys marmorata pallida
..Iguanidae
Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillii
Teiidae
Cnemidophorus hyperythrus
Cnemidophorus tigris_multiscutatus
Troglodytidae
Campylorhynchus b_runneicapillus
sandiegoense
Musr.icapidae
Polioptila californica
Leporidae
Lepus californicus bennettii
Heteromyidae
Chaetodipus fallax fallax
Muridae
Neotoma lepida intermedia
Mustelidae
Taxidea taxus
Southwestern Pond Turtle A,++
San Diego Horned LizardAAl++
Orange -throated Whiptail*A ++
Coastal Western Whiptail++
Coastal Cactus WtenAA.++
California GnatcatcherAA,++
San Diego Black -tailed Jackrabbit+{
Northwestern San Diego Pocket Mouse++
San Diego Desert Woodrat++
American Badger"
+ Federally -listed Endangered
A
State -listed Threatened
A A
Species of Special Concern (CNDDB 1991)
++ Federal or Cate
9 Y 2 Candidate (USFWS 1991)
Nomenclature follows Jones et al. (1992) and USFWS (1991)
YT
iL
U.S.G.S. 7.5' Topographic Map Nt Los Angeles Co., CA
Yorba Linda Quadrangle Figure i
Jones, J.K., Jr., R.S. Hoffmann; D.W. Rice, C. Jones, K.J. Baker,
ecklist
and
north ofmMexico? 199e?visocca . Papers oMus. ,th Amep Te asTechm
Univ., 146:1-23.
1974, p flora of southern California. Univ.
Munz, PA
California Press, Berkeley. lU8 P1�•
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1991. Animal candidate
review for listing as endangered or threatened species. Fed.
Reg., 56(225):58804-58836.
VIII. CERTIFICATION
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished
atiOn
above and in the attached exhibits present thea`datthad ith O1 facts,
required for this biological evaluation,
statements, and information presented are true and correc� to /t
l>e5t of my knowledge and "belief. r
TE: 4 August 1992 SIGNED:
DA. ( ;
6
REVIEW O BIOTA REPORT
ON TENTATIVE PARCEL MAF' 23382
BY OTARREL., Al )GUST 44 1992
Prepared for:
'nie City of Diamond liar
and
David I Tanner and Associates, Inc.
REVIEW or BIOTA REPORT
ON TENTATIVE-" PARCEL MAP 23382
BY O'VARREL, AUGUST 4, 1902
Prepared for:
The city of Diamond Bur
and
David J. Tanner and Associates, Inc.
223 62nd Street,
Nc,.vport Beach, CA 92663
(714) 646-8956
Prepared By:
Biological Assessment Services
3293 perlita Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90039
(213) 662-9344
March 1993
The following information is provided as an independent review of, and N intended to
supnlcmctlt, tho biota report of 8/4/92 on Tentative Parcel Map (111M) 23382 by QTarrcl
1liologiuilC`.onsultfng. The site was surveyed on February 25, 1993 by Biological Asscstmient
Services. The weal her was cool and clear with scattered cumulus clouds. The entire site was
surveyed on foot, flora and fauna observod were recitrded in -the field.
in general the dcscription of the.site conditions contained in the August A, 1992 report by
O'Furrcl are, true and correct. There are six areas that I would like to comment on, (1)
additional species were observed nn -site, (2) coastal sage scrub was oot discussed as a
sensitive community, (3) the oak tree impact (present and potential), (4) the; list of sensitive
species known to occur in the vicinity is incomplete, (5) there is no discussion of the
adjacent To tner Canyon SFA, and (6) the mitigation section is inadequate. Each of these
items will be discussed in further detail in the following paragraphs.
(1) The plant species list includes 16 common plant species two of which (Centaurc:a
calci.tralm and Haplopappus Juncxrus) arc not found north of San Diego County according to
Munz (1974). Munz is the citation referred to in the report. During a brief site visit
(February 25, 1993) 17 additional plant species (listed below) were identified on-site.
The following additional plant species were identified on '1PM 23382 during our
investigation:
Malosma laurina
laurel sumac
Barchrvis .salicifolia
mulefat
Baceluurs pilukrris
coyote brush
Centaurea melitendy
tocalote
Haplopap,us vertetus
coastal goldenbush
i1eluutthus animus
common sunflower
Meterothcca grandiflora
telegraph weed
Silyburn madanurn
milk thistle
Srephurwowria virgata
twiggy wreathplant
Helianthemunt scoparium
common rock -rose
* Macro sp.
acacia
L'rodlurn cicutarium
red -stemmed filarce
Jugdans callfornira
California black walnut
Yhoradendron tomentosum
big -leaved mistletoe
Datura innoxia
western jimsonweed
llynius condensatus
giantwild ryc
Vulpiu ttwgalura
foxtail fescue
* indicates a nonnative species.
IU1,UG1C t. ASS �:.'. M -NT SERVMMS Siota Report Revicw, Tptvt 3382 PaFr 1
The report listed the fuuna observed on the site ut the time of the survey and docs not
mention those species likely to utilizerthc site. '°`'Ate and mule detho Dori f5 the short site
Cios tught very likely to um
the site at least on o=sion are the f ray fox, coy ,
visit the following additional species were observed on-site:
Helix ppmatirr
Rumina ciccullatra.
Callipchla californium«
Crt117w euma
Sgt-nrnis niXrirans
Sriurus grixcus
garden snail
predatory snail
California quail
Anna's hummingbird
black phoebe
western gray squirrel
The sighting of the gruy �quirrcl is important bccauac it indicates that the ouk and walnut
trees found on the site and in surrounding naturalareas are fung Y the as uraeastern habitat
for
for the species. The western gray squirrel is rapidly supplanted pphintin
fox
squirrel in suburban southern caiifornia. The fox squirrel will utilize many nonnative plant
species for food and shelter, whereas the gray squirrel is reliant on native oak-,, walnuts, and
conifers.
(2) 'Though element-, of the coastal sage scrub community were found on-site, the only
developed coastal sage scrub association was located off-site along the Steeplevbase lane
alignment. The previous report indicated the presence of a remnant coastal sage scrub
habitat on-site, There probably was coastal sage scrub on the site at one time that has been
subsequently eliminated. l.iowever, the regional loss Of. coastal sage scrub should he
discussed because coastal sago scrub has become the focus an intense controversy as one of
the most imperiled habitats in California.
Southern or Uicgan coastal sage scrub occurs in comparatively dry, hot, and exposed areas,
frequently on south- or southwest -facing slopes from Orange County south into northern
Baja California. The vegetation consists generally of scmiwoody subshrubs, 1 to 4 feet high,
for which the principal adaptation is the exploitation of moisture in the thin upper soil
during the cool winter season. Most coastal sage species are active during the winter
ittonths, initiating new growth shortly after the onset of fall rains. About two-thirds of the
crub are drought -deciduous, losing their leaves in
plant. species round in the coastal sage ss that are adapted to :trld environments. Southern
the summer, the remainder are evergreen
coastal.sage scrub (called Diegan coastal Sage Scrub by Holland) occurs "Typically on low
moisture-availabilitygitcs: steep, xeric slopes or clay -rich soils that are slow to release stored
water:' (Holland 1.986). Coastal sage scrub often occurs in areas of thin soil cover over
bedrock. Because of the frequent occurrence of the habitat in loss than ideal situations, the
vegetative cover is frequently more open than in adjacent communities. The more sage scrubo
P open
nature of coastal e permit,, the occurrence of a greater herbaceous courpai3cnt of
forts, grasses, and succulents than is usually associated with dense stands of mature
BIC _C7 , A. S NT L-1 1C
iota sport cv�cw, -- -'} a4'u.
chaparral. Representative coastal sage scrub species include California sagebrush (Artemisia
califomica), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), black sage (Salvia mellifera),
and other species such as white sage (Salvia apiana), California bush sunflower (Encelia
califomica), sticky monkey -flower (Mimulus longiflorus), coastal goldenbush (Haplopappus
venetus), and deerweed (Lotus scoparius). Several species are characteristic of southern
coastal sage scrub and are found only in the coastal sage scrub found south of Santa
Barbara. Among these species are Spanish bayonet (Yucca whipplei), lemonadeberry (Rhus
integrifolia), laurel sumac (Malosma laurina), and white sage (Bakker 1971).
According to the Natural Communities Conservation Plan/Coastal SageScrub Scientific
Review Panel, appointed by the California Secretary of Resources, approximately 100 species
of plants and animals considered rare, Sensitive, Threatened, or Endangered by Federal and
State resource agencies, are associated with coastal sage scrub (NCCPAP 1992). The
primary threat to most of these species is loss of habitat. Various sources estimate that 70
to 90 percent of the historic distribution of the habitat in southern California has been
eliminated by agricultural and urban development. In his review of the status of the
California Gnatcatcher, Atwood quotes leading plant ecologists ev the status of coastal sage
scrub (Atwood 1990):
Klopatek et. al. (1979) concluded that "coastal sagebrush" present in 1967 showed a
37% decrease relative to its "potential" area. Hanes (1976) stated that "the Coastal
Sage Scrub community is the most endangered vegetative type in Southern California
due to the pressures of urbanization, flood control projects and rock quarries."
Kirkpatrick and Hutchenson (1977) described coastal sage scrub as "one of the least
known and fastest disappearing types of vegetation in California." and Axlerod
(1978) observed that the community is "rapidly disappearing under spreading
urbanization." Mooney (1977) noted that coastal sage scrub 'often occupies choice
development sites and is being destroyed over large areas of the state.,, Westman
(1981) calculated that coastal sage scrub in California had been "reduced to estma
Of its former extent" Because this calculations presumably included the 0-15 n
[coastal sage scrub] association that occurs in the comparativelyundeveloped portion
of coastal California north of Ventura County, this relative degree of coastal sage
scrub loss in southern California may be even higher. Westman (1987) believed
coastal sage scrub to be "one of the most endangered habitat types in the nation," and
O'Leary (1990) concluded that "the present decade likely represents an 'eleventh -
hour' period" for the "imperiled" plant community.
The widely recognized decline of southern coastal sage scrub, coupled with the decline of
many animal species dependent on the habitat, has led to the presence of southern coastal
sage scrub on a site becoming a serious constraint to development. This, in turn, has led to
the development of the Natural Community Conseivation Planning/Coastal Sage Scrub
program (NCCP) of the California Resources Agency, undertaken pursuant to legislation
recently enacted in California. The purpose of the NCCP is to develop a plan or procedure
that would allow the systematic evaluation of the remaining coastal sage scrub in the state
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT SERVICES Biota Report Review, TT 23382 page 3
and direct the dcvclopment of a plan for the preservation of the habitat. Generally the plan
is to preserve enough of the habitat in designated preservation area,,; to preserve all of its
component species as well. If it can be demonstrated that the habitat and component
lhcir preservation in designated areas, than the
species arc no lonbcr threatened due to
remaining habitaL would tjut be protcctcd. The NCCP is in the early stages of dcvclopmcnt
and the result~ of the blast arc out yet. evident. This lack of evidence regarding the success
of the NC:CP leads to the conclusion that southern coastal sage scrub is still an irnperiled
habitat.
(3) The City has identified native oak and walnut trees as a valuable resource.
Recognizing the decline of this resource the City has adopted an oak 'free Ordinance to
protect tilt city's trees. While there is no proposed impact to thc- oak tree on-site, there is
a large pile of concrete pipes stacked against its trunk. The pipes and accumulated sail
should be removed immediately. The area within the dripline of the tree should be hand
aerated to rectify the soil compaction that has already taken place. Following Lltc
rectification of the existing conditions the tree should be protected during construction by
the placement of it fcrtcc around the tree five feet outside the dripline of the tree.
Should the tree he killed during construction or allowed to die in the future, the parties
causing the death of the tree (by direct or indirect action) will be subject to the conditions
of the City's Oak Tree Ordinance.
Tltc future homeowner must also be responsible for maintenance of the tree, To insure this
maintenance it is rccommendod that the area within the dripline of the tree be protected
with a decd restriction. The following general guidelines for treatment of oaks in a
development area should he included in the deed restriction.
OAIG �'RFr MANAGEMENT
An important aspect of oak tree preservation relates to the management of the preserved
trees during construction and after the development is in place. Oak trees are sensitive to
changes in their environment and improper irrigation, soil cc»upaetion and/or disturbances
to the roots can result in the decline in health and eventual loss of the tree. Deed
restrictions limiting the uses of the areas within the dripline of the preserved trees should
be required on all lots containing said trees in order to inure.the continued health of the
trees. The following guidelines have been used to successfully maintain preserved trees
during and after project implementation.
lrrie' tom► icon - Established oaks are adapted to xeric (dry) conditions and do not need summer
water at all. However, turf areas associated with landscaping do need frequent irrigation.
drip line of existing trees will promote the growth
Lxcessive dry season irrigation within the
BI l,OG1C AS SSM ER rota Report evjcw, TP _82 l age. 4
of Oak Root Fungus Annillcaia mellea. Tho fungus occurs nuturally, and grows more rapidly
under wct conditions such as during winter months. Normally tho whscquent dry Beason
.keeps the fungus in chock. Moisture around the base of the tree in the warm Hummer
Beason not only a.liows the fungus to survive but the combination of warmth and moisture
uctually fusters fungus growth:—Prolonged fungus attack promotes oak tree decline and
eventual death. Therefore, Lurf areas and associated irrigation systems should be planned
Lo not encroach within the drip line of an existing oak tree. Ideally oak leaf litter Should be
allowed to uccumulatu iii the arca directly under a preserved tree, if this is not aesthetically
feasible, redwood or fir bark should he placed around the tree extending out to the drip line.
In either case, a header board should be used to separate these areas from turf areas.
Commotion -Avoid soil compaction within five feet of the dripline of the tree. Storage of
Itcavy equipment or materials shall not occur within 5 feet of the dripline of the tree.
Dr
ainaie Natural drainage courses and natural grades around existing oak trees should not
be allured. Because the alteration has already taken place; the natural grade should be
restored around the tree. Surface runoff from adjacent areas shall he directed away from
preservation areas and shall not increase runoff to these areas.. Water shall not he allowed
to pond or collect within the drip line of any oak tree.
Pruning - The tree shall not be pruned, except as necessary for health and safety.
Weed Control - Use of soil sterilizers shall he prohibited within and around the tree's
dripline, as sterilizers may leach into the root system and kill the tree. Use of pre -emergent
wood killers shall be prohibited within 50 foot of the oak tree.
(4) The sensitive species list presented in the report represents only those species reported
in .the NDDR. A more complete list, including those spccies known to occur in the arced
based on recent LIRs cc) nplcted in the region, is found below. It should he noted that none
of the sensitive species known to occur in the region is thought likely to occur on-site given
the present condition of the site. However, all the raptor species listed have been observed
soaring in the vicinity. Tllc two sensitive habitat types listed that occur on-site are. discussed
above.
R OGIC 1.SSNI-EN ' S Rv C'ES Biota Report cvrew, 'l'YM ' 3.18'2 P KKI 5
U
aH
�z
cn
cn �j
wa>
U�
Q
a0
O�
Q
>Q
cn
z
W
vA
U_
uv.I U U UUUt?U U UUU U U U
Ga V) � cn a. vi v� cn En vi v) cn cn
U U! u UUUGc U U.wu.uU : U U I W U
If'.
N N NcV N N N N N a
UC. UU UUUUU , : : 4. i U U t G.L�.000 1 UW UU
e
c
U � O
u
U Q.
a �
m y y
s aCL
ir U e Zj o-0
•� C � 'CS � xy .� p 4 `�' v y O � � u �
It
U r u
u C '5
i
0"°0 Q U U 0. .? h 'Es v v A o
y c ^^ b r 1 o•�W� W o ^y
CL 04 y w. a� y C c e u U
c.14�yU u Y o
o �x c c `° c �bU� �UC7 c ts= 0 0
0 0.
A
� c c c'v �cca � � m G o � � c •ca � y ^oa ea v CQ cCa cJa
mo 0088 o8�c�sAz3�-m369uu>. �a
8z
O
C�
7S
.4
Eg
.cc' � c 4
� �
z l
15
cc
0 r, A cc
4
7E
dq
Er
E
> LLI
P-5 7a p 3 -2
Ln .0
LLI
C
C
.0
CA
ciE
-n
L c3
CL
94 u r—n (n
O: z
cm
C W L m s
(5) The Tunner Canyon/Cltiuo Hills Significant Ecological Aroa (SEA) is located to the
immediate southeast i>f the project site, and a short distance to the south (the cleared
plateau immediately south of the site was deleted from the Sl?A in 1979 because the land
had been elcarod, J,sce attached map]). Airy devclopmcnl that borders fug SEA is hound to
have sums effect ori the SFA. Bccausc these natural areas have alroudy been determined
to be significant, any nagative Impact to the area is also significant. Bccauso there is very
little habitat WILIC piuscnt cin the site the loss of natural open space will not significantly
at'1'eet the SEA. The most likely impacts w the SFA will be secondary, such as invasion of
the iL'A by pcuplc:, pets. and nonnative plants used in landscaping. '1'hc mitigation measures
discussed below will insure that these impacts are reduced to a less than significant love].
(6) 1'110 mitibation section of the previous report includes several measures that are to
be developed by the h6mcawners association. There will probably be no homeowners
association for this project. In addition to the measures included in the reference report,
and the above oak protection guidelines, the following mitigation measures should be
included a, conditions of project approval.
1. The regional impact the coastal sage scrub and walnut woodland communities, and
the potential invasion of the SFA by nonnative plant species, shall be mitigated by
native plant restoration. Revcgetation using only native coastal sage scrub species
shall be accomplished can all graded and cut -and -fill areas where 9tractures or
improvements are not constructed. At least 75% of the species used shall he native
species presently found on the project site. Private lot landscaping within 100 feet
ur a structure is exempt from this requirement. Non-native species used in.
landscaping should of non-invasive varieties.
Rccause the resources present in the SRA would be severely damaged by the off-road
use of motor vehicles, any hiking and riding trails entering the SEA from the project
site shall have specified access points and shall be wristructed to eliminate the entry
of off-road vehicles into the SEA. if the project site is nut: gated at Hawkwood, then
all off-site open space areas shall he buffered in a manner to discourage illegal or
unauthorized entry, this could be accomplished by fence or wall construction.
2. The potentially adverse effects of night lighting on surrounding open space areas shall
be mitigated by the following measures: (1) street lighting only at intersections; (2)
low -intensity street lamps; (3) low elevation lighting poles; and (A) by internal
silvering of the globe or external opaque reflectors directing the light away from open
space areas. The degree to which these measures are utilized ,shall be dependant
upon the distance of the light source from the urban edge. Use otf private sources
of illumination around homes shall he restricted to eliminate the use of arc fighting
adjacent to open space areas.
3. All development of the site is subject to the City's Hillside Management Ordinance,
which will require individual site plan review. These mitigations should he taken into
account during the review of individual site plans
13l i. c,IC,AI- AS >r iNT VI(
Blots Report cview, ' ti YQ9L K
Conclusion
As stated previously, the general descriptions and conclusions stated in the OT arrel report
are correct. implementation of the Mitigation measures described there smd in this rohort
would render the impacts of the proposed project to biotic resources leas Chun significant.
RF OGI :AL ASSNS 4 'NT SERVIMS Biolu Report eview, TPM ' . , Pe7g 9
ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE
DOLEZAL FAMILY PROJECT,
PARCEL MAP 23382, CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
DAVID J. TANNER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
223 62nd Street
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Prepared By:
WAYNE H. BONNER
Senior Archaeologist
SCIENTIFIC RESOURCE SURVEYS, INC.
P.O. BOX 4377
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92605
February 22, 1993
ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE DOLEZAL FAMILY PROJECT,
PARCEL MAP 23382, CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
This
letter report presents the results of
a cultural resources
assessment performed on
the 2.27 acre Dolezal Family parcel,
Tentative Parcel Map No.
23382, located within
the City of Diamond
Bar,
Los Angeles County,
California (Figures 1
and 2). The survey
was
carried out at the request David J. Tanner
and Associates, Inc.
The
tract is scheduled for
development into four
residential lots.
Evaluation of the said property consisted of 1) background research
to determine if the property had been previously surveyed and' if
cultural resources had been recorded within a one -mile radius of the
said parcel; 2) an intensive pedestrian survey of the said Dolezal
Family parcel.
FINDINGS
Reviewing a records search conducted at the UCLA ' Archaeological
Information Center for a recently completed survey (Boxt 1992)
located approximately one mile north-east of the subject parcel
indicated that no historic or prehistoric sites had been recorded on
the Dolezal Parcel. Five previous surveys have been executed within
a one -mile radius of the subject property (see Bibliography). None of
these efforts located any cultural resources.
A pedestrian survey of the Dolezal property was conducted on
February 22, 1993. No cultural resources' were identified on the
subject property. Ground visibility was poor (less than 10 percent)
due to vegetation cover. In addition to introduced grasses, a number
of. scrub oak were observed, particularly on the upper (southern)
portion of the parcel. A paved access road exists on the extreme
western boundary of the property. There also is a possibility that
underground water lines have been installed in the upper (southern)
portion of the parcel along the projected route of Steeplechase Lane.
Although ground visibility was poor cultural resources are not
expected to be found on slopes of the nature of this parcel (in excess
of 20 degrees), but are more likely to occur on flatter topography
near water sources.
Based on the evidence provided by the previous records search and
the field survey the said property receives- a low archaeological
sensitivity rating.
RECOI INIENDATIONS
The negative results of the records review and pedestrian survey
support the recommendation that no further archaeological testing is
required. Development of the Dolezal Family property poses no
threat to known cultural resources.
There is a remote possibility that buried cultural resources may
occur on the property. Should any cultural resources be exposed
during grading, construction will cease in the immediate area of the
finds and a qualified archaeologist be contacted to assess the
remains.
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the 'statements furnished above and in the
attached exhibits present the data and information required for this
archaeological assessment, and that the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to , the best of my
knowledge and belief.
DATE: SIGNED:
Wayne H. Bonner
Senior Archaeologist
SRS, Inc,
BIBLIOGRAPHY
UCLA
FILE #
-373 Quenette, Terry
1975 AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF LOT 188 TRACT 30578 REGARDING
TENTATIVE TRACT 34491 DIAMOND BAR, LOS
ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
Report on file, UCLA ARCH, INFO. CENTER
Particulars: SURVEY
QUADS: Yorba Linda
ACRES: 8
SITES: NONE
FIRM: CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, FULLERTON
AGENCY: Webbc.o Development
PAGES: 20
-655 Caalry, Theo:k,re
1979 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES SURVEY CONDUCTED FOR A 280 ACRE TRACT
IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, L. A. COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Report OD file, UCLA ARCH. INFO. CENTER
Particulars: PARTIAL SURVEY
%'UADS: Yorba Linea
ACRES: 2r�a
SITES: NONE
FIRM: ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CXRp.
AGENCY: Michael Ahlering & Assoc.
PAGES: a
-�0
1
r Jan Horn, David
M.
1981 C'ILTi1R;AL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT THE LOWER TONNER CANYON FL,C)JECT
Report. oil file, UCLA ARCH, INFO. CENTER
Particulars: SURVEY
QUADS: Yorba Linda
AC ES: 666
SITES: isolated artifact.
FIRM: AA
r".GENCY: Ultrasysten , Inc,
PAGES: 27
2Ci3 7 D ' a.ltroy, Terence N.
1976 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
Report on file, UCLA ARCH.
Particulars: SURVEY
QUADS: YORBA LINDA
ACRES, 30
SITES: NONE
FIRM: C.A.
REPORT DIAMOND BAR MOUNTAIN VILLAGE
INFO. CENTER
AGENCY: ERVIN ENGINEERING
PAGES: 25
Boxt, Mathew A.
1992 AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 51169, PARCEL 14 OF
PARCEL MAP NO. 1528, IN THE CITY OF POMONA,
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA.
Report on file, UCLA ARCH. INFO. CENTER
Particulars: SURVEY
QUADS: YORBA LINDA
ACRES: 20
SITES: NONE
AGENCY: UNION WIDE, INC.
PAGES: 12 '
Pe
..
tY iii
�il
II$a
I
3bkEE
a�5�
' gill
3
T°
c a
(P�
P
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE
SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
APRIL 3, 1995
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 10:00 a.m. in the City of
Diamond Bar Conference Room, 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100,
Diamond Bar, California.
ROLL CALL OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Present: Chairman Chuck Hewitt and Vice Chairman Dr.
David Berry
Also Present: Associate Planner Rob Searcy and Assistant
Planner Ann Lungu
PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
DISCUSSION
1. Discussion and Review of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 95-2 for Tentative Parcel Map 23382.
Property Owners: Mr. & Mrs. Warren Dolezal
Applicant: Lex Williman, Hunsaker & Associates
Ann Lungu, Project Manager and Assistant Planner for
the City of Diamond Bar, stated that the project site
is one parcel of 2.55 acres proposed to be developed
into four residential lots ranging in size from .55
gross acres to .90 gross acres. This project requires
a Conditional Use Permit 92-1 pursuant to the Hillside
Management Ordinance for grades in excess of 10% and
for lots which are in or partly in an Significant
Ecological Area (SEA) designation. This project also
requires an Oak Tree Permit 95-2 to preserve and
protect one Oak tree which is on Lot #3.
The project is located adjacent to a gated community
identified as "The Country Estates". It is at the 3000
block (north side) of Steeplechase Lane abutting
Hawkwood Road. The project is proposing annex into
"The Country Estates". The zoning is R-1 8000 with the
Draft'General Plan Land Use Designation RL 3DU/Acre Low
Density Residential with a maximum of three dwelling
units per acre. The project is located at the extreme
northwesterly edge of Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills SEA No.
15. To be designated as an SEA the site must contain
undisturbed biotic communities and possess resources
April 3, 1995 Page 2 SETAC
that are uncommon, rare and unique that are absolutely
critical to maintain wildlife. The project contains
only one oak.tree and is denuded of any vegetation due
to the annual surface scraping and disking by the`fire
department which has been conducted over a period of
many years. As such, the project does not meet the
criteria for being in an SEA. Because this project is
in an SEA, it requires review by this body.
Responding to VC/Berry, Mr. Williman stated that as
part of the Las Brisas development, a shear key had
been put in to mitigate the adverse conditions in the
area. He further stated that there was mitigation as a
result of the Las Brisas condominium project. The site
is currently surrounded on three sides by existing
development. The proposed grading is minimal and the
road is half graded and if the adjoining Tract 47850
develops first, they will complete the grading of the
road.
Mr. Dolezal stated that the project site was used for a
storage site and as part of the grading plan, 40,000
cubic yards of dirt was to have been added to the area.
With all of the shear keys in the Las Brisas
development which is just below the hill from the
proposed project, there was not sufficient dirt to
accomplish this. He indicated they felt they did not
need to import a lot of dirt. There was a 40 foot wide
road graded in on the far lower side as an access
easement for the fire department. An interconnection
was installed along Steeplechase Lane for the Walnut
Water District loop system between Diamond Bar and the
adjacent tract. Las Brisas tapped into that water
system for their development. Ultimately, other
utilities were added through that system. There was an
attempt to preserve the vegetation. However, this
installation resulted in 20,000 to 30,000 cubic yards
of dirt and debris which was cleaned up from the area.
Responding to Chairman Hewitt, Mr. Williman stated that
the only grading necessary is for the pads.
In response to VC/Berry, Mr. Dolezal stated the
architect indicated the natural contour of the land
will be utilized for a split level home rather than
April 3, 1995 Page 3 SETAC
grading a flat pad.
Mr. Williman pointed out the one oak tree that will
remain in place. He indicated that biologically, over
time, the site has been extensively disturbed.
Recently, Steve Nelson re-evaluated the site for
species and nothing new to the area was found.
Responding to VC/Berry Mr. Williman stated there is no.
additional grading needed for the project.
There is, however, a hydrology issue. From the ridge
one side flows.toward Tonner Canyon, which is the
sensitive area, and one side flows in the opposite
direction toward Diamond Bar Boulevard and into the
existing Las Brisas development. The flows from the
project will not be impacting any sensitive areas to
the south.
Mr. Dolezal assured Chairman Hewitt that the Valley Oak
are not an issue for this project site. In addition,
the Walnut trees on site are inactive and, in fact,
were buried until he uncovered them and with pruning,
they would disappear. He further stated that each new
home will be required to submit a landscaping plan
compatible to the area for approval. The annex to "The
Country Estates" will be a part of the ongoing process.
Chairman Hewitt stated that he did not visit the site
and indicated he would reserve his comments until he
made the visit. He is concerned that the Walnut trees
not be placed off-site which would increase the number
of black walnuts in the SEA. He would rather have the
conservancy determine the off-site location.
Responding to Chairman Hewitt, Mr. Williman stated the
conservancy exists as a viable entity. However, they
do not hold any land. The City is looking at parks and
other projects and there will be some mitigation
involved, so there are a number of options. Chairman
Hewitt recommended that a small contribution could be
made to replace the trees to satisfy the conservancy.
Chairman Hewitt indicated that the final report would
be available no later than April 17, 1995.
April 3, 1995 Page 4 SETAC
ANNOUNCEMENTS - None
ADJOURNMENT:
With no further business to conduct, Chairman Hewitt
adjourned the meeting at 10:35 a.m.
Respectfully,
Ann Lungu
Secretary
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR I • j
OF PLANNING I p
DaA�
V1
21660 E. Copley Drive Suie 190
Fax (71 )860-7
7
(714)860-3195
SUBDIVISION APPLICATICIN
TRACT #23382,
Record Owner(s)
licant
Famil
Name IIOL£ZAL y LIMITED W---
litsl)PARTNERSHIP
' —
General Partner
(last Date
Address 4251 S. HIGUERA ST.
City SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zip 93401
Phone( 8095-44-19 -0
t` Peceipt ��8`}
Applicant's Agent
HUNSAKER AND ASSOC.
10179 HUENNEKENS STREET
SAN DIEGO, CA
92121
(619 998-1-900
oft
memberspofapar nerte tshipse joint venturesif ncessaTY, n, ndadirectorseofecorporationstjres
CONSENT: I consent to the submission of the application accompanying this
request
Date
Signe i
(All recorded atoers)
CERTIFICATION: I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that
the information herein provided is correct to the best of my .
Printed Name HUNSAKER AND ASSOCIATES
pplicaot or lleol)
Da t e /' 27 92
Signed
(l pplicaot or lteoll
Location 3000 BLOCK (NORTH SIDE) OF STEEPLECHASE LANE
(Street address or batt aad lot "'bu)
BENT TWIG LANE and WAGON TRAIN I -ANE
between (Slreel) (Street)
099-H-337
Zonin
R-1-8000 / p L 5 Du /;-C HWg t i
Previous Cases NONE
Present Use of Site _____— VACANT
Use applied for RESIDENTIAL
Domestic Water Source EXIST. 12" ACP IN Company/District WALNUT VALLEY WATER DIST.
STEEPLECHASE
Method of Sewage Di spas aIPUBLIC. SEWER Sanitation District CO. OF LOS ANGELES
Grading of Lots by Applicant? YES XX NO Amount 2300 CY
(Show necessary grading design on site plan or tent. map)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (All ownership comprising the proposed lots/project) If
petitioning for zone change, attach legal description of exterior boundaries of
area subject to the change.)
PARCEL'3 OF PARCEL MAP 7409, PER BOOK 74 PAGES 3 AND 4 OF PARCEL MAPS
Project Site: 2.55 AC. Tent ativePr-AaRpFl .ber 23382
Gross Arca
Lots: Existing 1
Area devoted to : Structures N/A
Residential project N/A.
Grosr Ares
Proposed Density 1.56/AC
uoitsllcre
Number and typesof Units 4 CUSTOM LOTS
Residential Parking:Type Required
N/A .
Total
Proposed 4
Open Space N
_ and
Ao. at (loots
Provided
_,,TRACT # 23382
3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE—BURDEN OF PROOF
In addition to the information required in the application, the
applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the Zoning
Board and/or Commission, the following facts:
A. That the requested use at the location proposed will not:
1. Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or
welfare of persons residing or working in the
surrounding area, or
2. Be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or
valuation of property of other persons located in
the vicinity of the site, or
3. Jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a
menace to the public health, safety or general
welfare.
THERE WIU BE MINIMAL GRADING AND NO UNIT CONSTRUCTION IS
ppnpoSED WITH THE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP. THE PROPOSED CUSTOM
HOMES WILL NQT ENDANGER OR CONSTITUTE A MENACE TO PUBLIC
HEALTH, SAFgTy OR GENERAL WELFARE.
B. That the proposed site is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading
facilities, landscaping and other development features
prescribed in this Title 22, or as"is otherwise required
in order to integrate said use with the uses in the
surrounding area.
N/A — NO UNIT CONSTRUCTION IS PROPOSED WITH THIS PERMIT..HOWEVER,
THE 4 LOTS PROPOSED RANGE IN SIZE FROM .55 ACRE TO .90 ACRE
AND WOULD BE ADEQUATE IN SIZE AND SHAPE TO ACCOMMODATE ANY
_FUTURE WALLS YARDS, FENCES,PARRING AND LANDSCAPE FEATURES
PRESCRIBED IN TITLE 22.
C. That the proposed site is adequately served:
1. By highways or streets of sufficient width and
improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity
of traffic such use would generate, and
2. By other public or private service facilities as are
required.
THE PROPOSED LOTS ARE SERVED BY STEEPLECHASE LANE !A PRIVATE STREET)
AND WILL HAVE PUBLIC SEWER.AND WATER SERVICE AVAILABLE TO
THEM VIA STEEPLECHASE LANE.
TRACT # 23382 Staff Use
Project No.
------------------
------------------
------------------
------------------
INITIAL STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE
A. GENERAL INMRIAATION
Project Applicant (Omer): Project Representative:
Dolezal Family Limited Partnership HUNSARER AND ASSOCIATES
WARREN DOLEZAL,General Partner
NAME NAME
4251 S. HIGUERA STREET 10179 HUENNEKENS STREET
ADDRESS ADDRESS
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 SAN DIEGO.,.CA 92121
(805) 544-3990 (619) 558-4500
P
PHONE #PHONE #
1. Action requested and project description: SUBDIVIDE 1 PARCEL INTO 4
CUSTOM LOTS
2. Street location of project: NORTH SIDE STEEPLECHASE LANE BETWEEN BENT
TWIG LANE AND WAGON TRAIN LANE
3a. Present use of site: VANCANT LOT
3b. Previous use of site or structures: VACANT LOT
4. -Please list all previous cases
(if any) related to this project: NONE
5. Other related permit/approvals required.
Specify type and granting agency. NONE
6. Are you planning future phases of this project? Y (N )
If .yes, explain:
EXISTING PROPOSED
7. Project Area: NONE N/A
Covered by structures, paving:
Landscaping: .aTiIRAT.
N/A
Open space: VACANT LOT N/A
Total Area:
8. Number of floors: N/A
9. Present zoning:
R-1-8000
/10. Water and sewer service:
Domestic Public
Water Sewers
u
Does service exist at site? i Y ) N (Y)
If yes, do purveyors have
capacity to meet demand of
proiect and all other approved Y) N ( Y) N
projects?
If domestic water or public sewers are not available, how will these services
beprovided?
Residential Projects:
11. Number and type of units:
4/CUSTOM HOME
12. Schools:
What school district(s) serves the property? wATNuTyAliFv
Are existing school facilities adequate to meet project needs?
(TES) NO
if not, what provisions will be made for additional
classrooms?
Non -Residential projects:
13. Distance to nearest residential use or sensitive use (school, hospital,
etc.) 'N/A
14. Number and floor area of buildings:
15. Number of employees and shifts:
16. Maximum employees per shifts
17. Operating hours:
18. Identify any: End products
Waste products
Means of disposal
/19. Do project operations use, store or produce hazardous substances such as
oil, pesticides, chemicals, paints, or radioactive materials?
YES ( NO)
If yes, explain
20. Do your operations require any pressurized tanks?
YES (130)
If yes, explain
21. Identify any flammable, reactive or explosive materials to be located on—
site. N/A
22. Will delivery or shipment trucks travel through residential areas to reach
the nearest highway?
YES (NO)
If yes, explain
J
/ B. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
1. Environmental Setting --Project Site
a. Existing use/structures VACANT LOT
b. Topography/slopes AVERAGE 15-20% SLOPE
*c. Vegetation DISTURBED GRASS LAND. SITE HAS BEEN DISTURBED BY PREVIOUS
GRADING AND SURROUNDING CONSTRUCTION. SOME WALNUTS AND ONE OAK EXIST
ON SITE.
*d. Animals THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH DISTURBED GRASS LAND - NONE OBSERVED.
*e. Watercourses
f. Cultural/historical resources NONE KNOWN - SITE PREVIOUSLY DISTURBED
BY SURROUNDING GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION
g. Other EXISTING PAVED EMERGENCY ACCESS TRAVERSES THE WEST OF THE
PROPERTY.
2. Environmental Setting -- Surrounding Area
a. Existing uses structures (types, densities): NORTH - CONDOMINIUMS
SOUTH -VACANT EAST -CUSTOM HOMES WEST -TRACT HOMES
b. Topography/slopes NORTH -GRADED SOUTH 15-40% EAST -GRADED WEST -GRADED
*c. Vegetation SOUTH -NATIVE BRUSH AND SCATTERED WALNUT.TREES.
*d. Animals SOUTH -BLACK SHOULDERED KITE, SHARP SHINNED HAWK, SAN DIEGO
COAST HORNED LIZARD, ORANGE THROATED WHIPTAIL, COOPER'S HAWK, WILLOW
FLYCATCHER
G�ACAATLiT5. BLWA�CNKN TAILED GNATCATCHER, GOLDEN EAGLE, LONG EARED OWL,
DIEGO *e. Watercoi t SOUTH -INTERMITTENT BLUELINE STREAMS WITHOUT TRIBUTARIES
FLOWING INTO TONNER CANYON.
f. Osltural/historical resources NONE KNOWN
g. Other
* Answers are not required if the area does not contain natural,
undeveloped land.
3. Are there any major trees on the site, including oak trees?
( YES, ) NO
If yes, type and number: (1) ONE OAK TREE,SCATERED WALNUT TREES.
d. Will any natural watercourses, surface flow patterns, etc., be changed
through project development?:
YES (M)
If yes, explain:
5. Grading:
Will the project require grading? (YES) N0
If yes, how many cubic yards? 2300 GY
Will it be balanced on site? (YES) NO
If not balanced, where will dirt be obtained or deposited?
6. Are there any identifiable landslides or other major geologic hazards on
the property (including uncompacted fill)?
YES (NO )
If yes, explain:
7. Is the property located within a high
fire hazard area (hillsides with
moderately dense vegetation)?
(YES ) NO
4 MILES
Distance to nearest fire station:
B. Noise:
NO1fE
Existing noise sources at site:
Noise to be generated by project:
NONE
Fumes:
N0\E
Odors generated by project:
Could toxic fumes be generated?
\0
10. What energy -conserving designs or material will be used?
HOUSES WILL BE SUBJECT `LQ TTTT F 24 IF T ow 'now gTjnyF.R RFAT1¢ FT(
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in
the attached exhibits present the data and information required
for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that.
the facts, statements, and information presented are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
i- 27-.92
Date Signature
For: CHUCK CATER - HUNSAKER AND ASSOCIATES
--
• Environm, .al Information Form for Reside Lal Projects
(To be completed by applicant)
rv-
General
Information:
Date Filed: 1/28/95
Pertinent Permits/Applications:
Project Information:
1. Name, Address and .Phone Number of Project Sponsor:
Dolezal Family 1imitEd Partnership -
4251. Sallih v
_ San Luis Obispo G4 93451 :Warren n�1a1
2. Name, Address and Phone Number: of Key Contact Person(s):
(619) 558-4500 :Lex Williman
3. Project Address:
None currentl exists. The roiect is located within the 3000 -Block (Ha-, h
side of Steeplechase Lane.
4. Project Assessor's Block and Parcel Number(s): 8713-017-08
5. - Other Identification (other r j prded/map location i— ormation):
Parcel 3 of Psi 7409 T29 R9W 6 of NW 144 sec. 28 (Yorba Linda Ouadransle)
6-A. Does the project require any of the following acticns by the City:
YES NO
Variance: x
Conditional Use Permit: x
Zone change: X
General Plan Amendment: x
,10. Project Detail
Attach a separate page of descriptive data for each housing type included in this
project:
N/A a. Number of Housing Units by type.
N/A b- Floor Area by type (minimum, maximum, and average square footage).
N/A c- Number of floors (stories) for each type.
N/A d- Housing market targeted (demographic profile).
N/A e.Estimated market sales price or estimated market rents.
see belowf. Describe all amenities proposed (for example, landscaping,
recreation equipment, common use facilities, trials, etc.).
.55ac g- Minimum lot size. (Net lot area, not 'including Right -of -Way).
.90ac h Maximum lot size. (Net lot area, not including Right -of -Way).
.60ac i. Average lot size. (Net lot area, not including Right -of -Way).
none j- Number of lots which do not meet City Standards.
11. Describe public or private utility easements, utility lines, structures
or other facilities which exist on the surface or below .the surface of the
project site.
12. Associated Projects: (Projects or potential projects which are directly
related to this project, ie: potential developments which require completion of
this project): N/A
13. Describe any anticipated Phasing for this project:
Frame] {Yumber of Units & Time
N/A
. 14: Attach one copy of each of the following:
a. Preliminary Soils Report
b. Preliminary Geologic Investigation.
C. Drainage Study.
d. Topographic Map highlighting any existing slopes of 25% or more.
e. Tract Map, Parcel Map, or Plot Plan clearly showing each area of cut
and each area of fill: all residential unit pads (if known), and
any areas with slopes 25% or more.
f. Photographs showing the site from different (ie: north, south, est,
west) vantage points and photographs showing vistas (ie: north,
south, east, west) from the site.
10. f. Each lot will be alcustom lot and therefore no amenities are proposed.
A site plan review will be required when an owner decides to build.
r�D_I_scuss
Ye the following 1t rs appllcaDle zo Lun tlluLJu _ Y. mea' or S'. ciSec�ar
below all items which apply to this project: attach additional sheets
necessary)
5. Grading: N/A: There is no Grading proposed as a part of this Parcel Map.
maximum depth of excavation: 10' -Maximum depth of fill: 20'
Quantity of soil moved: 230_ 0 cubic yards.
will there be an on site balance of cut and fill?: =YES
16. Viewshed: Describe any change in the appearance of the site resulting from
the project as proposed. The project will allow the development of 4 custom homes
near the top of a ridge w/in a vlewshed of the 57 freeway and residential/commercial
nnrth of Dfamond Bar Blvd. the ral^appearance of the pr_oje�=uct___e hasbeen
to
undergo site plan review for conrormauce w-
17. Describe how the proposed project will fit into its surroundings (ie: will
the proposed project blend into and existing neighborhood? How will it relate
to the size, scale, style, and character of the existing surrounding
development?) Residential land use on this site is consistent w/the City's General
Plan. The desi n of the ro osed Parcel Ma is consistent w/the City's zoning
ordinance. The ro osed custom lot development walldbwestmandratnaclowertdensiter to the
t_ _ !rti o Cn,mtal 3
is. Describe any alteration of the existing drainage patterns, or
llothntf al for
changes in surface or ground water quality or quantity. ('e
any permanent or intermittent surface/ subsurface water change as a result of this
project? How?: will there be any injection wells, septic systems, or other
facilities which may affect surface or�subsurface �wate crualitnr );nape Dattern
19. Describe any long-term noise and/or vibration. which may occur as a result
truction will this project directly or indirectly
of this project: (after cons
cause the generation of noise and or vibration greater than any that exists now?)
Lon¢ -term noise and/or vibration should not occuraaaarresu1t-P! the re�Dronosed.
or
scribe
the lottenuumber of each structure sed o. rilleclland (ie: identify
None, proposed built of filled land).
The site will have minimal
_Dads. All 'L lots X111 h- �--
ho r f
21' Do any significant trees exist 'on the, project site nowt
effect this project will have on them. (ie: Oak and Walnut trees are considered
significant. Describe whether the Proposed Describe the
of any of these trees), p p Project will disturb or cause removal
YPc_ 1 —1- «___ I .
22• Is the project site located in a national, state
ional or
designated area of historical,
environmental or other �s significance. ance. locally
t
If
describe. (ie: is the site an area designated as a hillside management area
significant ecological area, significant mineral resource area, etc.)
Re site is located within a hillcidP maraoome _
Environmental setting:
23• Describe the environmental setting (synopsis) of the project site. This
narrative shall include a description of the soil stability, slopes, drainage,
scenic quality, plants, and animals which may exist on the site; now, and any
existing structures and the existing land use of the project site.
Approximately 75' of the site iac 7___
Will remain. Remnants of WalnutcWoodlandtalso On oak tree exists plate ecand
individual plants with no interactive understor QTS and comprise isolated
site has been effectively removed due to disturbance'.
wildlife potential on
past disturbance.
abil
4 ue���� slop -es, 'drainage scenic quality,
,.,dude andanimalswhich may exist tIndicate the type of land use (residential,
ycommercial, etc.), intensity of land use (single-family, multi -family, density,
commercial, professional, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-
�T.,.. back, etc.) in the adjacent surrounding area. !.
The surroundin ro erties include both sin 1e family and multi family residential,
as we as vacant an o.t a ort is t e' as risas con ominium project.
:'I ,,,,: trart developments lie to the east t e untry -
-
those round on site an in t e onner Canyon area.
certification:
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits
present the data and information required for initial environmental evaluation
of the proposed project. All info mationcisto thsend best
of my knowledge, belief
and ability to determine factual, , ,SOC/
Date: 1/28/95 signature: �1
For Marybeth Murray,,Hunsaker & Associates
Completion of this form is required to begin review of a project. Information
assist te City in
within this form and the quireclattaihedmmateriay be ls W-1 1 whether ah Mi igated
determining whether a Negate
Negative Declaration may be granted, or whether Environmental Impact Report shall
be required.
CITY OF DIAMOND T R
1DEPARTMENT OF PLaNNiNG
21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190
(714)396-5676 Fax (71MEbffiD CG1n 1UHITY
OAK TREE PERMIT APPLTCA'Tx0)Q`,iE--1T
Record it5w,er(s) AM 9 oApplicant
Cased
Filed
Fee $� 00 DEposrr 1 f� C121
Receipt
Applicant's Agent
Name Dolezal Family Trust same
(Last name first) x'-nsaker & Assoc., Sari Diego, Inc.
Address 4251 South Higuera.St.. 10179 Huennekens"5t:, " WO
WiLlu
City San Luis Obispo CA San Diego CA
Zip 93451 92121
Phone(909)860-2489 (. )
OWNER'S AUTHORIZATION
(619).558-4500
I ceWfv that I am the owner of the herein described property and permit the aDplicant to file
this request.
Signed
it recorded owners)
Cerci cation: 1, the undersigned hereby certify under penalty of Deriury that the inforrnatkon
herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge
Printed Name Marybeth Murray
(Applicant or Agent)
Signed Date .1/26/95
(Applicant orAgent)
Location (i.e.. address or general description of location) and legal description
of property in question: (use additional sheets as necessary)
Parcel 3 of plan 7409 as per map filed in Book 74, pages 3 and 4 of Parcel maps,
in the office of the County Recorder, County of Los Angeles, State or California
How many oak trees will be cut, removed, relocated or damaged? 0
How many oak trees will remain 1
Will trees to be removed be replaced?N/A If yes, indicate the
proposed size, type, location (indicated on site plan) and schedule for planting.
Are trees to be relocated? No
and his qualifications for doing this.
\/A
If yes, identify who will move them
BURDEN OF PROOF
Submit additional sheets describing bow the following findings will be satisfied.
A. That the proposed construction or proposed use will be accomplished without
endangering the health of the remaining trees subject to this Par 16, if any, on the
subject property, and
I
B. That the removal or relocation of the oak tree(s) proposed will not result in soil
erosion through the diversion or increased flow of surface waters which cannot be
satisfactorily mitigated, and
C. That in addition to the above facts at least one of the following findings apply:
1. That the removal or relocation of the oak tree(s) proposed is necessary as
continued existence at present location(s) frustrates the planned improvement
or proposed use of the subject property to such an extent that:
a. Alternative development plans cannot achieve the same permitted
density or that the cost of such alternative would be prohibitive, or
b. Placement of such tree(s) precludes the reasonable and efficient use of
such property for a use otherwise authorized, or
2. That the oak tree(s) proposed for removal or relocation interfere with utility
services or streets and highways either within or outside of the subject
property and no reasonable alternative to such interfere exists other than
removal of the tree(s), or
3. That the condition of the oak tree(s) proposed for removal with reference to
seriously debilitating disease or danger of falling is such that it cannot be
remedied through reasonable preservation procedures and practices.
Date: f(9 -J,
(, - qFz Applicant's Signature LA �,
[ ] The subject property contains no oak trees.
[ ] The subject property contains one or more oak trees, however the applicant
anticipates that no activity (grading and/or construction) will take place within five
(S) feet of the outer dripline of any oak tree.
[ x ] The subject property contains one or more oak trees and the applicant states that
activity (grading and/or construction) will take place within five (5) feet of the outer
dripline of any oak tree. an Oak Tree Permit has been or will be applied for prior
to any activity taking place on the property.
4r6 1/28/9s
(A "4cint's Signature) (Date)
Marybet M rray
P.ECEI�IEU cOt�iMUu1TY
E POLYTECyy�
s 17 t',t 9:.51
c _-
z19 z
April 17, 1995
POMONA
Mr. Rob Searcy
Office of City Planning
City of Diamond Bar
21660 East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 917.65-4177
Dear Mr. Searcy:
3801 West Temple Avenue
Pomona, California 91768-4032
Telephone (714) 869-3454
Geological Sciences
College of Sciences
On 3rd April I undertook a brief on-site survey (with Chuck Hewitt)
of the tracts discussed in the SEATAC meeting on that same morning.
The site was covered with loose, surf icial material, apparently
recently disked, and a variety of remaining vegetation. No rock
outcrops were visible, and the only evidence of the underlying
sedimentary units were ripped up boulders (not in place) of a
yellow silty, somewhat feldspathic sandstone which, presumably,
belongs to the La Vida Member of the Puente Formation of Late
Miocene age. No invertebrate or vertebrate fossils were observed
in the disturbed sedimentary rock fragments.
Because of the ground cover, and lack of any undisturbed outcrops,
no stratal bedding planes were observed "daylighting" in the study
area and no geologic attitudes could be taken. Based on
information available to me at the above -noted SEATAC meeting (3rd
April 1995), I understand that the slope in the project area was
evaluated for possible failure by consulting engineers. Moreover,
I have been informed that the tracts of the Los Brisas project,
immediately north of the anticipated project site, were built upon
a corrected slope which involved the emplacement of four shear keys
with appropriate compacted fill.
Based on this information available to me, I know of no geologic
conditions presently existing at the project site which require
further geotechnical remediation.
You s've y'truly,
David R. Berry, Ph.D.
Professor, Geological Zi�ees
DRB:rab
Agriculture . Arts . Business Administration . Engineering Environmental Design . Science
School of Education . Center for Hospitality Manage—ent
COMMUNI.� Y ���.
RECOVED
DEV�?P�MENT , <
,
iwL
a,
A, {tS3 nrR 18 Phi �2 38
'
n
Fj
k
a
Ann':J:`Lungu;::Assistant
Planner;
_, Czty of ,Diamond
-�
21660 .ECopley Drive; •Suite 100_;
- .
Diamond Bar ,;CA-91765-4177
Dear Ann
V zWzth regards to the' SEATAC
review of the Doleza1 Family Limited
r Partnership Pr, ect.Tarcel
Map No-23382,,thte}mit2gated negative
declaration no ` 95-2;
the SEATAC committee meeting and -site
4.
_ visitation indicates no'
add itional recommendations or-changes in
>
the existing negative declaration
-
_.:Please consider..;this 'report;
combined with "Dr. David -Barry's_
yi information the final report
from SEATAC for this
project.
F , 'Very. Sincerely
_
;? Charles F. Hewitt, SEATAC
Chairman
w
Z.
Via`
WALN
:TER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS 271 �bLth�Btoart n P.O. Box 508
Edward N. Layton Walnut California 91789-3002 • (909) 595-1268 (818) 964-6551
President FAX (909) 594-9532
Election Division III
William G. Wentworth
Vice President
Election Division I February 13, 1995
Donald L. Nettles
Vice President
Election Division N
Richard C.Engdahl
Assistant Treasurer
Election Division II
Keith K. Gunn
Director Ms. Ann J. Lungu
Election Division V Assistant Planner
-STAFF: City of Diamond Bar
Edmund M. Biederman 21660 E. Copley Dr., Suite 100
General Manager
Secretary Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177
Norman R. Miyake
Treasurer RE: Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382
LEGAL COUNSEL:
H. Jess Seneca)
• Dear Ms. Lungu:
A review of the map submitted on February 1, 1995, indicates no unusual problems in
furnishing this development with water in sufficient amounts for both domestic and fire
protection purposes.
The. development is located within the boundaries of our District and can be served
from an existing 12 -inch asbestos cement, Class 150 main in Steeplechase Lane. The
elevation of the development is such that it will be serviced off our 1200 zone,
affording it static water pressure of between 60 PSI and 75 PSI. Fire protection
requirements should be determined by the fire department. In addition to. any direct
costs to install water facilities for the project, the developer will be subject to acreage
charges and perhaps other assessments. Details of these fees will be provided upon
request.
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
Very truly yours,
WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT,
BRYAN LEWIS
Director of Planning and Projects
BL:aan
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FIRE DEPARTMENT
FIRE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS - INCORPORATED AREAS
Hop
DATE Jr -LH 1 P % �7' Jr CITY OF
SUBJECT:
LOCATION :.
FIRE FLOW
[ ] Hydrants and fire flow are adequate to meet current Fire
Department requirements.
[e� The required fire flow for public fire hydrants at this
location is I Z 5b _ gallons per minute at 20 psi for a duration
of 2 hours, over and above maximum daily domestic demand.
[ ] The required on-site fire flow for private on-site hydrants is
gallons per minute at 20 psi. Each private on-site
hydrant must be capable of flowing T—r gallons per minute
at 20 psi with any two hydrants flowing simultaneously.
[ VJ Fire Hydrant requirements as follows:
Install ( Public Fire Hydrant(s). Install Private
On-site Face Hydrant(s). Upgrade Public Fire Hydrant(s).
[V< All hydrants shall measure 611.x 4" x 2-1/2" brass or bronze,
conforming to current AWWA standard C503 or approved equal.
All hydrants shall be installed a minimum of 25' from a
structure or protected by a (2) two hour fire wall.
[V Location: As per map on file with this office. ,
PIS S+aep1ce4%5C. C», 13c•t-wce^ Lot- 2 g 3.
[v� other location:
['Nf"' All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and
accepted prior to construction. Vehicular access must be
provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction.
[.] Additional on-site hydrants may be required during the building
permit process.
[ ] Upgrade not necessary, if existing hydrant meets fire flow
,(� requirements.
[`�J Comments: �J` eJ�Iirt Co,+ap�G�t�/ l fCl �/t�o ( a�1t l�tr"� 47n
Lai.;
All
All hydrants shall be installed in conformance with Title 20,
L.A. County Government Code or appropriate city regulations.
This shall include minimum six-inch diameter mains.
Arrangements to meet these requirements nust be made with the
water purveyor serving the area.
ZONE MAP
BY DATE FEB 6 1995
FIRE PREVENTION ENGINEERING SECTION - (213) 590-4125
266
v1/94 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FIRE DEPARTMENT
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISIONS
INCORPORATED CITIES
wt?teT/PARCEL MAP NO. ?aT3$
t� TENTATIVE MAP DATE
CITY , is ma,, d Mar
(y00'0 This property is located within the areas described by the Forester and Fire Warden as Fire Zone 4 and future
comply construction must with applicable code requirements.�,� CI� AqS a Cj
(Y Provide water mains, fire hydrants, and fire flows as required by county Forester and Fire.Warden for all land
shown on the map to be recorded.
[ ] The final concept map which has been submitted to this Department for review has fulfilled the conditions of
/ approval recommended by this Department for access only.
tl/i�Provide Fire Department and City approved street signs, building address rnmbers prior to occupancy.
[bT Fire Department access shalt be extended to within 150 feet distance of any portion 'of structure to be built.
(] The County Forester and Fire Warden is not setting requirements for water mains, fire hydrants and fire flows as
a condition of approval for this division land as presently zoned and submitted.
[We Access shall comply with Section 10.207 of. the Fire Code which requires all weather access. All weather access
/ may require paving.
[Yi Where driveways extend further than 300 feet and are of single access design, turnarounds suitable for fire
protection equipment use shall be provided and shown on the final cap. Turnarounds shall be designed,
constructed and maintained to insure their integrity for Fire Department use. Where topography dictates]
turnarounds shall be provided for driveways which extend over 150 feet.
[ ] The private driveways shall be indicated on the final map as "FIRE LAHc".and shalt be maintained in accordance
with the Los Angeles County Fire Code.
C ] There are no additional fire hydrants or fire flows required for this division of land. Requirements for fire
protection water and access will be determined at the time of building permit issuance.
Cvl All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior to construction. Vehicular access must
be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction.
[ ]Additional fire protection systems shall be installed in lieu of suitable access and/or fire protection water.
[lam] Comments: MC1;Ml fcnjrl. Zo 4x,.f- WtcZc C�Cc� �oc(
o In, GJr c.L -,I rte. n4 -la4- -#� 7 _ Tt, i c r c f7-,. -J Pt t_,
7A
n
o 4- —Lrc T Ali S zn -t Ai
LS 13rISq_S CooMi•jiti.�re/►ec+ aS c3.1`l�.ti ucet�iC�S$tt
., ANN
�UJNJG U
KLEINFELDER
—
April 26, 1995
Project No. 58-4234-011001
Ms. Anne Garvey
CITY OF DLkMOND BAB
m
21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 100
rn m
Diamond Bar, California 91765
ca o
.SUBJECT: Geotechnical Engineer Report Review
Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382, Diamond Bar, California
�?
C) c
REFEREI m: Response to Geotechnical Review for
Dated April 7, 1995, Prepared by Earth Systems Consultants,
Project No. B -7699-V9
Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Report for
Tentative Parcel Map 23382, Diamond Bar, California,
Dated February 20, 1992, Prepared by Earth Systems Consultants,
Project No. B -7699-V9
Dear Ms. Garvey:
At your request, we have reviewed the referenced response to our geotechnical comments dated
February 15, 1995. The responses, supporting calculations, and reference material satisfactorily
addressed our comments and we have no additional recommendations or comments.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any questions
or require
additional information please contact us.
Sincerely,
KLEE\'FELDER, INC.
Q�dtt��lpNq
l
Eric W. Noel, P.E. < 2 ohn S. an P.E., G.E. f -z
co m Manager, Geotechnical Se .
Project Engineer ,,, C rJ:}� k_,t • { NL
j g No. C5 5 3
G 3o ys,
Exp.
a,. r� m- ;_.nvi uc:9 39G-0335 OF G`7�-�
MEMORANDUM
City of Diamond Bar
To: Ann Lungo
From: Mike Myers via: George Wentz, City Engineer
Date: May 3, 1995
Subject: Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 (Dolezal)
The City Engineer has previously advised the Planning Department and the subdivider
of its understanding of the detailed treatment of the Steeplechase Lane/Hawkwood
Road interconnection configuration. It was the City Engineer's understanding that
Hawkwood Road, a public street, would be improved (along with the necessary
dedication of right-of-way) in accordance with the City standards for residential cul-
de-sac. Steepiechase Lane, a private street, would terminate/intersect with the
internal street improvements planned in VTTM 47850 via a City standard residential
"knuckle" (not cul-de-sac). The "private" and the "public" street would be
interconnected, but separated by a gate, for emergency use only. See attached .
sketch showing this configuration which includes a City standard "offset" cul-de-sac.
This understanding was derived from the interpretation of Engineering Condition 25
contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 91-23, recommending approval of
VTTM 47850.
The Subdivider's Engineer (also the Engineer for the subdivider of VTTM 47850)
advises that neither Subdivider desires to construct the improvements to Hawkwood
Road in accordance with the City standard plans. Instead both prefer the
configuration shown on the map of Tentative Parcel Map 23382.
Both the City standard and the subdivider's proposed configuration include emergency
gated access between the public street and the private street and both provide for a
continuous utility corridor. While the Subdivider's preferred configuration will work,
two primary functions of the City standard cul-de-sac are sacrificed - the necessary
roadway radius for convenient turning around of vehicles is lost and the additional
roadway and right-of-way frontage for on -street parking and adjacent property
access are not realized.
.25. Cul-de-sacs, in accordance with all applicable City
Standards, must be constructed at the terminus ends of
Hawkwood Road (public) and Steeplechase Lane (private).
g-pVS/91 11:49 1995 AT 613117 PAUE 4 UlKinirw
01 '95 IV14 KtiSAKER SM DIEGO
n4
-A
P
I
DEPT
HAY
CITY OF
DIAMOND
BAR
Agenda Item 6 1...— TPM No. 23382
Parcel Map found in project file.
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
REPORT DATE:
MEETING DATE:
CASE/FILE NUMBER:
APPLICATION REQUEST:
PROPERTY LOCATION:
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT:
City of Diamond Bar
pLANNING COMNUSSION
Staff Report
7.1
April 18, 1995
May 8, 1995
Conditional Use Permit
No. 95-1 and Development
Review No. 95-1
To amend Conditional Use
Permit No. 1634(1) in
order to approve con -
struction of a two story
sanctuary structure with
a cellar and two
temporary modular units;
and to ensure -compliance
with applicable design
standards.
3255 S. Diamond Bar Blvd.
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Evangelical Free Church
of Diamond Bar
3255 S. Diamond Bar Blvd.
Diamond;Bar, CA 91765
SUMMARY:
The applicant is requesting approval to construct a two story
th a cellar and install two temporary modular
sanctuary structure wi
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.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional
Use Permit No. 95-1 and Development Review No. 95-1, Findings of
Fact, and conditions as listed within the attached resolution.
1
BACKGROUND:
The property owner/ applicant, Evangelical Free Church of Diamond
Bar is requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1
(pursuant to Code Section 21.20. 100 and 22.56, Part 1) to amend
Conditional Use Permit No. 1634(1) in order to construct a two
story sanctuary structure with a cellar and two temporary modular
classroom units. The property owner/applicant is requesting
approval of Development Review No. 95-1 (pursuant to Code Section
22.72.020) which ensures that the proposed project complies with
all applicable local design guidelines, standards, and ordinances.
The original Conditional Use Permit (CUP 1634(1)) was approved by
Los Angeles County in November 1980. This grant permitted the
church facility's development in three phases, within ten years.
Phase I would include a multi-purpose room, classrooms, and
offices. Phase II would include a nursery and classrooms. Phase
III would include the main sanctuary and classrooms. At the
conclusion of the ten years, the three phases were not completed.
After the City's incorporation, the applicant requested an
extension of time to continue the site's development. The Planning
Commission reviewed this request on November 19, 1990, continued
the public hearing to February 11, 1991, and concluded their review
on March 11, 1991..At that time, the Commission failed to achieve
a majority consensus as to how best balance the development needs.
The City Council, at a,duly notice public hearing held on May 21,
1991, heard testimony in regard to the extension of time request.
After due deliberation, the Council granted the extension with
conditions.
The City Council's grant modified a Los Angeles County condition of
approval to read as follows:
"The proposals may be constructed in three phases; but it
shall consist of no more than three such construction phases
and all construction phases must be completed within fifteen
(15) years of the date of this grant".
Therefore, the Council granted the extension to November 195.
9
Additionally, the Council's grant included Attachment "A1° (refer to
staff report attachment). Attachment "A" is a tree preservation
plan to preserve and maintain the scenic beauty of the project
site.
The purpose of the applicant's current request is to remove the
time constraints imposed by the CUP 1631(1) and obtain approval for
Phase.III's construction changes.
ANALYSIS:
The project site is a 2.37 acre triangular shaped lot. It is
located at 3255 South Diamond Bar Boulevard. The project site is
developed with the following: a 4,524 square foot one story
structure utilized as a sanctuary (Phase I); a 3,200 square foot
two story structure utilized as classrooms (Phase II); a playground
area between the two structures; and a parking area with 41 on-site
parking spaces. Forty-nine (49) percent of the project site is
devoted to landscaped areas. Part of the landscaped area includes
a grassy knoll located on the site's northeastern portion. The
grassy knoll contains several tree species including two oak trees.
The project site is within the Single Family Residential -Minimum
Lot Size 7,500 Square Feet (R-1-7,500) Zone. The draft General
Plan land use designation for this project is General Commercial
(C). Generally, the following zones surround the subject 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 south is the Single
Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 10,000 Square Feet (R-1-10,000)
Zone; and to the west are the Restricted Business (C-1) and
Commercial. Planned Development (CPD) Zones. The northwesterly
property line is adjacent to a Los Angeles Country flood control
channel.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
A church facility located within a residential zone, pursuant to
Code, requires a Conditional Use Permit. The Conditional Use
Permit's purpose is to ensure proper integration with existing or
permitted uses within the residential zone. Conditional Use Permit
No. 95-1 is to ensure that the proposed revisions (to existing CUP
1634 (1)) are integrated into the site and 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.
Secondly, the applicant desires to obtain approval for revisions to
the original approval. The original approval consists of a
classroom structure in the grassy knoll (refer to Exhibit "A", page
one, Phase I) which will be deleted., Additionally, two modular
temporary classroom units are needed until the proposed sanctuary
structure is completed. Therefore, Phase .III consists of the
sanctuary structure and the two temporary modular units.
Since the applicant is apply 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 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 a church activities. Therefore, it is not in the
communities best 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 a.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 space, two
of which are handicapped spaces. Pursuant to Code Section
22.52.1095, every church, temple or other similar place used in
whole or in part for the gathering together of persons for worship,
deliberation or meditation shall provide, within 500 feet, one
parking space for each five persons, base on the occupant load of
the largest assembly area as determined by the Building official.
The largest assembly 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.
As part of Phase III, 35 additional parking spaces will be
provided, three of which will be handicapped spaces. The total on-
site parking spaces will be 76. According to Code, not more than
40 percent of the required number of parking spaces may be compact.
Approximately, twenty percent of the proposed on-site parking could
be compact, thereby providing the required 78 on-site parking
spaces. Compliance with the current State handicapped
accessibility regulations is required.
According to the City Engineer, the proposed parking lot design
provides "dead end" drive aisles that are over 200 feet long. The
applicant is required to provide a revised site plan which details
the aisle terminus.and adequate vehicular turn around to the City
Engineer's satisfaction. Two-way drive aisles shall be a minimum
of 26 feet and parking stall depth shall be 18 inches.
Additionally, the Los Angeles County Fire Department may require
such turn around to be suitable for fire apparatus and the posting
of aisles as "Fire Lane No Parking". The Fire Department is
reviewing the proposed plans. 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. Pursuant to Attachment "A", the Tree Preservation Plan
condition of approval for CUP 1634(1), specific on-site trees are
to be preserved or replaced in the event of removal or damage.
4
This plan is precluded in the event of future extensions, request
for additional permits, removal of trees due to the Church's future
growth and redevelopment plans. However, oak trees located within
the grassy knoll are subject to provisions of Code Section
22.56.2050. The approval of Phase III does not effect the existing
oak trees.
The proposed site plan does not include parking lot lighting. Any
futureng in
parking mannerhat do s not create glare or direct ting requires nilluminationt and l
aon to
neighboring properties.
The submitted plans do not indicate on-site trash enclosures. The
an indicating
locationt of required
gtrevisedo submit a s
trash enclosure whichwillaccommodate h
o commodate a
recycling bin.
The proposed grading quantities include 2,960 cubic yards of soil
from the excavation of the sanctuary structure's cellar. One
hundred and seventy-two (172) cubic 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.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW:' -
The purpose of Development Review Ordinance No.5 (1990) is to
ensure that development projects comply with all applicable local
design guidelines, standards, and ordinances; minimize adverse
effects on surrounding properties and the environment; ensure
consistency with the General Plan; and promote high aesthetic and
functional standards that will compliment and add to the physical,
economic, and social character of Diamond Bar.
An application for Development Review is required for any and all
commercial, industrial, and institutional development which
proposes the following: new construction on vacant property;
structural additions, reconstruction, or new buildings which are
equal to 50 percent of the gross floor area of existing on-site
building(s), or have a minimum of 10,000 square feet in gross floor
area; and/or substantial change or intensification of land use.
Pursuant to the Development Review Ordinance, the proposed project
requires an application for development review because the 14,568
square foot sanctuary structure equals 50 percent of the existing
on-site buildings' 7,724 square foot gross floor area and the
intensification of use.
The proposed sanctuary structure is two stories with a cellar. The
first story contains the church's main assembly area, classrooms,
restrooms, kitchen, projection access, vestibules, and foyer. The
second story contains the projection room, classroom and attic.
The cellar contains classroom, restro,nd storage
the areas.
The
present sanctuary structure, upon
completion
sanctuary structure, will be utilized for the church's business
off ices.
The following is a comparison of City's development standards for
R-1-7,500 Zone and the proposed project's development standards.
City's Development Standards
Projeat!
Planning Commission, subject to appeal to the City Council, may
extend any suchapproval for two successive periods not to exceed
six months each, upon showing of good cause,if a written
application extension is filed 14 days prior .to the grant's
expiration.
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.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
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 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin
and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on April 14, 1995. Public
hearing notices were Mailed to approximately 60 property owners
within a 500 foot radius of the project site on April 11, 1995.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve 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 attached resolution.
Prepared by:
nn J. u sistant Planner
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution of Approval
2. Exhibit "A" - site plan, floor plan, elevations, and
sections dated May 8, 1995
3. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-1
4. Application
5. Memorandum from the Building Official dated April 20, 1995
6. Memorandum from the City's Engineer dated
No.
April1 41and1 5it's
7. City Council Resolution of Approval
Attachment "A"
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 95 -SS
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 95-11 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 USE PERMIT NO. 1634(1)
FOR A CHURCH FACILITY LOCATED AT 3255 SOUTH
DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD (TRACT 33417, LOT 19).
A. Rec__i__tals
1, The.property owner/applicant, Evangelical Free Church of
Diamond -Bar, filed the "Applications" for Conditional Use
5-1 for a
Permit No. 95-1 and Development Review
ary9 structure
request to construct a two story
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, C
nia, as described in the tittle of this Resolution. H-
ereinafter,in this Resolution, the subjections Conditional I are Use Permit and Devel pmcntiReview app
re-
ferredlicato as the "App
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 requirementsof the California Government
nt Code
Section 57376, the City Council of the City the
Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 1, thereby adopting
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 Cocable de of t to county of Los
Angeles now currently Pp the subject Application, within
applications, including
the City Of Diamond Bar.
3. The City of Diamondactionar walacks an takeooperative General subject
Accordingly, to the Draft General
application, as to consistency
Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Office
B.
of Planning and Research extension granted pur to
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.
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.
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.
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 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 the initial
study review 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:.
(a) The project relates to a 2.37 acre amon
shaped lot located at 3255 South Diamond
Boulevard. 'C
(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 t
tructure utilized as classrooms; a playground
ar
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)
c).(d) Generally, the following zones surround the
project site: to the north and east is the Single
Family Residential-MinimumLosizewest50
tothe arequare the
Feet (R-1-7,500) Zone;
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)
(e) The nature, condition and size of the site has
been considered. The site is equate in size to
accommodate the proposed profect
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
tial
(f) The proposed project will not be in substantial
conflict with the draft General Plan,
ordinances, and state requirements.
(g) The proposed project will not adversely affectthe
health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons
residing or working in the surrounding area.
not
(h) The proposed project will ent orevaluationlof
detrimental to the ersonsnjoym
lo located in the vicinity
property of other p
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 isiz,
e and
shape
ato
accommodate the yards, walls,
loading . facilities, landscaping and other
development features prescribed within
ordinances, or as otherwise required in order
integrate the use with uses in the surroundin , ,
area.
(k) 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.
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 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
i�
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
conformance to plans dated May 8, 1995, labC
Exhibit "A" as submitted and approved by
Planning Commission.
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
and
residential, commercial, construction,
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.
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 a minimum width
of eight (8) feet and a minimum length of 18 feet.
Compact parking stalls shall have
and
a minimum miwidth
of seven (7) feet six (6)
mum
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..
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.
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.
The two temporary modular classroom units shall be
removed when the Certificate of Occupancy is
issued for the two story sanctuary structure.
(g) The existing one story
utilized for a sanctuary
shall cease functioning as
issuance of a Certificate of
story sanctuary structure.
structure curr
and business. offi
a sanctuary upon t
Occupancy for the tw
(h) Substantial construction shall occur for the two
story sanctuary structure within two years of this
grant's approval. If substantial construction has
not occurred, the applicant shall be required to
obtain Administrative Development Review approval
to ensure compliance with the City's current
design standards and the Planning Commission's
approval. Substantial alteration of the two story
sanctuary structure's architectural design shall
require the applicant to obtain Development Review
approval.
(i) Approval of this grant supersedes and repeals
Conditional Use Permit No. 1634(1).
(j) The applicant shall comply with all Planning and
Zoning Division, Building and Safety Division,
Engineering Department, and Los Angeles County
Fire Department requirements.
(k) 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.
(1) 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.
(m) 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.
v�
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;
e
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE STH DAY OF MAY, 1995, BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
BY:
Bruce Flamenbaum, Chairman
I, James DeStefano, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the
City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular
Commission held on the 8th day of May,
meeting of the Planning
1995, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
James DeStefano, Secretary
[1
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 95-1
March 20, 1995
Case Number: Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1 and Development
Review No. 95-1
Applicant: Evangelical Free Church of Diamond Bar
3255 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Proposal: A request to revise existing Conditional Permit
No. 1634(1). The revision includes 14,568 square
foot three story structure which incorporates a
sanctuary, classrooms, kitchen, and storage areas.
Additionally, the revision includes two portable
classrooms (24' X 40, each) which will be removed
upon the completion of the three story structure.
Location: 3225 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Initial study Environmental Findin s:
1. Earth. (a -g)
The proposed project includes the construction of a three
classrooms,
story building which incorporates a sanctuary,
kitchen, and storage areas. In order
to construct the third
0
story (cellar), approximately 2, cubic
Will be excavated. one hundred and seventy-two (172)
yards of the earth will be dispersed in the western portion
of the parking lot. The remaining 2,788 cubic yards of
earth will be exported.
The project site is developed with a 4,524 square foograding
structure, parking lot, and lawn area. o he proposed
e
is
will not alter the existing topography ground
sursurfacfac and
relief features. The.proposed gradinginsignificant
the remaining 2,788 cubic yard7, of earth will be exported.
The proposed project will not create unstable earth
conditions or changes in the geologic
substructure
s oThere
destroy any unique geological or phy
is a knoll in the northern portion of the site. However,
1
development is not contemplated for this area. The area
sited for development is flat. Therefore, unstable slope
conditions will not occur.
Findings: The proposed project will not have a significant
effect on the environment.
2. Air. (a -c)
The proposed project will generate short-term pollutants.
These pollutants will be generated locally by construction
equipment emissions and dust from grading activities. The
project's developer is required to protect against windblown
soil erosion during grading and emissions from construction
equipment. Combining protection measures required in the
Uniform Building Code and SCAQMD Rule 403, these impacts
will be regulated. Additionally, the proposed project is
not anticipated to result in the creation of objectionable
odors, alteration of air movements, moisture, moisture,
temperature, or climate.
Findings: The proposed project will not have a significant
effect on the environment. However, existing regulations
mitigate potential impacts to a level of insignificant.
3. Nater. (a -i)
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in changes
in current, direction or flow rate of water, amount of
surface water in any body of water, or the quality of water.
Additionally, the proposed project will not create or expose
people to water related hazards, reduce the supply of water.
The diminutive increase in off-site runoff due to site
development is insignificant.
Findings: The proposed project will not have a significant
effect on the environment.
4. Plant Life. (a -e) and 5. Animal Life (a -d)
The project site is an existing development. As such, it
does not have any unique or endangered species of plant or
animal life.
Findings: Site development will not have a significant
effect on plant or animal life.
6. Noise. (a -b)
The site's development will result in the generation of.
noise for the short-term only. The short-term construction
noise will be generated locally during the construction of
F
the sanctuary building. The existing ambient noise is
generated by daily traffic on Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea
Canyon Road. The sanctuary building's use is not likely to
increase the area's ambient noiselevel. Cie project's
developer is required to comply with
s Noise
Ordinance.
Findings: The proposed project will not have a significant
effect on local noise levels. However, existing City
regulations mitigated potential impacts to a level of
insignificant.
7. Light and Glare. (a)
The proposed project will not result in significant new
light or glare or contribute significantly to existing
levels of light and glare. The project site is an existing
development located on Diamond Bar Boulevard, adjacent to a
small shopping center near the intersection of Diamond Bar
Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road. As such, higher levels of
light and glare may exist. As a result, the addition of the
sanctuary building and two portable classrooms will not
increase the area's light and glare.
Findings; Due to the small scale of the proposed project,
it will not have a significant effect on the generation of
light and glare.,
8. Land Use. (a)
The proposed project does not alter the present or planned
land use of the site or the area. The proposed and existing
use is permitted in the zone with a Conditional Use Permit.
The present use is operating under Conditional Use Permit
1643(1). The proposed project is a revision to the
No.
existing Conditional Use Permit.
Findings: The proposed project will not have a significant
effect on land use.
g. Natural Resources. (a)
The proposed project does not significantly increase the use
of any natural resources. The developer and property owner
are required to comply with existing regulations to reduce
solid waste and are encouraged to recycle which further
minimizes the consumption of natural resources.
Find_ ings: The proposed project will not have a significant
effect on natural resources.
3
10. Risk of Upset. (a -b) and 17. Human Health. (a -b)
The proposed project may involve temporary storage of fuel
and oil for utilization by construction equipment. The risk
of spillage and/or leakage of small quantities of fuel and
oil is remote. Additionally, this potential exists at any
construction site. The project will not involve the risk of
explosion or the release of hazardous substances nor
interfere with emergency response plans or emergency
evacuation plans. The project's developer is required to
comply with existing regulations to protect against risk of
spillage and/or leakage of toxic materials.
Findings: Due to the project's small scale and existing
regulations in effect, it will not result in a significant
risk of upset or health hazard.
11. Population. (a) and 12. Housing. (a)
The site's development is existing. The proposed
construction is for a church facility's appurtenant uses.
As such, the proposed project will not result in an increase
of population or housing stock.
Findings: The proposed project will have an insignificant
effect on population and housing stock needs.
13. Transportation/circulation. (a -f)
The project site is developed with a church facility. The
proposed project will not substantially increase traffic,
alter circulation patterns of people or goods, or water,
rail or air traffic. Additionally, the project will not
impact existing transportation systems or increase traffic
hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians.
However, additional parking may be required for the
expansion. The project's owner is required to comply with
the City's parking requirements.
Findings: Due to the regulations in effect, the proposed
project will not have a significant effect on transportation
and circulation.
14. Public Services. (a), 15. Energy. (a -b), and
16. Utilities. (a)
The project site is developed with a church facility. The
proposed construction will not increase the demand for
public services. Additionally, the hours of operation will
not expand due to the proposed development. As a result,
the diminutive increase in energy and utilities is
insignificant.
Find�nas: The proposed project will not have a significant
effect on public services, energy, and utilities.
18. Aesthetics. (a)
The project site is developed with a church facility. All
new materials and colors utilized for the new sanctuary
structure will match the existing building on the site. The
portable, classrooms will be painted to match the existing
building. The proposed project will not obstruct any scenic
vistas or views open to the public, or be offensive to the
public view. Additionally, this project.is being processed
as a Development Review (design review) in conjunction with
the Conditional Use Permit.
Findings: Under the above mentioned conditions and the
City's Development Review ordinance, the proposed project is
not considered to be aesthetically significant.
19. Recreation. (a) and 20. cultural Resources. (a -d)
The project site is developed with a church facility. The
addition of a sanctuary and two portable classrooms will not
impact the quality or quantity of existing recreational
opportunities. Asa developed site, the proposed project
will not alter or destroy prehistoric or historic
archaeological conditions or create an impact on cultural
values, religious or sacred uses. No cultural resources
have been identified on-site.
Findings: The proposed project will not have a significant
- effect on recreation and cultural resources.
21. Mandatory Finding of Significance. (a -d)
The project site, an existing church facility, is previously
disturbed by its development. It does not contain rare or
endangered species, or cultural resources. This small scale
project does not have the potential to achieve short-term to
the disadvantage .of long-term environmental goal; nor impose
impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively
considerable. It complies with the draft General Plan and
existing zoning Code. The proposed project does not involve
the use of hazardous materials, pose the risk of explosion;
nor is it located in close proximity of such uses.
Findings: Approval of the proposed project and its ultimate
construction is not anticipated to cause substantial adverse
effects directly or indirectly on human beings, the
environment, and animal and/or plant life.
1. Background
1. Name of Applicant: Evan elic 1 Free Church of Di and B r
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 3255 South Diamond Bar Boulevard
Diamond Bar CA 91765 90 594-7604
3. Name, Address and Phone of Project Contact: r r Mark Honner 32SS South
Diamond Bar Boulevard Diam nd B r CA 9176 9 594-7604
4. Date of Environmental Information Submittal: February 23 1995
g, Date of Environmental Checklist Submittal: February
23 1995
6. Lead Agency (Agency Required Checklist): it of Diamond Bar —
7. Name of Proposal if applicable (Tract No. if Subdivision): CMd!'^^At Use Permit
No. 95-1 and Develo went R view No. 5-1
g. Related Applications (under the authority of this environmental determination):
No
YES NO
Variance: X
X
Conditional Use Permit: X
Zone Change: X
General Plan Amendment:
Development Review:
(Attach Completed Environmental Information Form)
H. Environmental Impacts:
(Explanations and additional information to supplement all "yes" and 'possibly " answers are
required to be submitted on attached sheets)
YES NO POSSIBLY
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in
geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
C. Change in topography or ground surface
relief features?
d. The destruction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical feature?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, `either on or off the site?
f. Changes in deposition, erosion of stream
banks or land adjacent to standing water,
changes in siltation, deposition or other
processes which may modify the channel of
constant or intermittently flowing water as
well as the areas surrounding permanent or
intermittent standing water?
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes; landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
2. Air. Will the proposal result ins
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
C. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
temperature, or any, changes in climate,
either locally or regionally?
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents or the course or
direction of water movements?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface
run-off?
C. Alterations of the course or flow of flood
waters?
d. Changes in the amount of surface water in
any body of water?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any
alteration of surface water quality
including but not limited to dissolved
oxygen and turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in
geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
C. Change in topography or ground surface
relief features?
d. The destruction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical feature?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, `either on or off the site?
f. Changes in deposition, erosion of stream
banks or land adjacent to standing water,
changes in siltation, deposition or other
processes which may modify the channel of
constant or intermittently flowing water as
well as the areas surrounding permanent or
intermittent standing water?
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes; landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
2. Air. Will the proposal result ins
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
C. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
temperature, or any, changes in climate,
either locally or regionally?
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents or the course or
direction of water movements?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface
run-off?
C. Alterations of the course or flow of flood
waters?
d. Changes in the amount of surface water in
any body of water?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any
alteration of surface water quality
including but not limited to dissolved
oxygen and turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters?
YES NO POSSIBLY
X
X
X
4.
X
X
X
X
x
5
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
g,
Change in the quantity of ground waters,
either through direct additions or
of
withdrawals, or through interception an
aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h.
Substantial reduction in the amount of
water otherwise available for public water
supplies?
i.
Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding?
plant
Life. will the proposal result in:
a.
Change in the diversity of species, or
number of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic
plants)?
b.
Reduction in the numbers of any unique rare
of endangered species of plants?
Reduction in the size of sensitive habitat
C.
areas or plant communities which are
recognized as sensitive?
d.
Introduction of new species of plants into
an area, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species?
I.
e.
Reduction in acreage of any agricultural
crop?
Animal Life. will the proposal result in:
a.
Change in the diversity of species,birder
number of any species of animals
land animals including reptiles, fish, and
shellfish, benthic organisms and insects)?
b.
Reduction in the numbers of nay unique rare
or endangered species of animals?
Introduction of new species of animals into
C.
an area, or in a barrier to the normal
of resident species?
migration or movement
d.
Reduction in size or deterioration in
quality of existing fish or wildlife
habitat?
6. Noise. will the proposal result in:
a.
Significant increases in existing noise
levels?
b.
Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
7. Light and Glare. will the proposal result in:
a. Significant new light and glare or
contribute significantly to existing levels
of light and glare?
S. Land Use. will the proposal result in:
a. A substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use in an area?
YES NO POSSIBLY,
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
X
a. An increase in the rate of use of any
natural resources?
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal result in:
X
a. A risk of an explosion or the release of
hazardous substances (including but not
limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident or
upset condition?
X
b. Probable interference with an emergency
response plan or an emergency evacuation
plan?
11. Population. Will the proposal:
X
a. Alter the location, distribution, density,
or growth rate of the human population of
an area?
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect:
X
a. Existing housing, or create a demand for
additional housing?
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal
result in:
X
a. Generation of Substantial additional
vehicular movement?
X
b. Effects on existing parking facilities or
demand for new parking?
X
C. Substantial impact on existing
transportation systems?
X
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people and
goods.
X
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air
traffic?
X
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
14. Public Services. Will the proposals
a. Have an effect upon, or result in the need
for new or altered governmental services in
any of the following areas:
X
1. Fire Protection?
X
2. Police Protection?
X
3. Schools?
X
4. Parke or other recreational
facilities?
X
5. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
X
6. other governmental services?
YES NO POSSIBLY
15. Energy. Will_the proposal result in:
X a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or
energy?
X b. Substantial increase in demand upon
existing energy sources or require the
development of new sources of energy?
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in%
X a. A need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to public utilities?
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
zard or potential
X a. Creation of health hazard n(excluding y health amental health)?
X b. Exposure of people to potential health
hazards?
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in:
X a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view
open to the public, or will the proposal
result in the creation of an aesthetically
offensive site open to the public view?
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in:
X a. An impact upon the quality
rtie t ity of
existing recreational oppotuni
20. Cultural.Resourcea. Will the proposal result in:
X a. The alteration of or the destruction of a
prehistoric or historic archaeological
site?
X b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building, structure
or object?
X C. A physical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values?
X d. Restrictions on existing religious or
sacred uses within the potential impact
area.
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance?
X a. Does the proposed project have the
potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self sustaining leveler threaten to
eliminate or significantly reduce a plant
or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
YES NO POSSIBLY
X b. Does the proposed project have the
potential to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals?
x C. Does the proposed project pose impacts
which are individually limited but
cumulatively considerable?
X d. Does the project pose environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION:
(Attach Narrative)
IV. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
g I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a
significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will not be
a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on the attached sheet have been
incorporated into the proposed project. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
roject
have a significant
effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL l
IMPACT
REPORT is required.
Date: March 17, 1995 Signature:
Title: Assitant Planner CA
For the City of Diamond Bar,
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190
(909)396-5676 Fax .(909)861-3117
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
Record Owner(s) Applicant
Case#5'
Recvd
Deposit $ r76(,W f
Receipt tq o K l
By
Applicant's Agent
Name_EVAPdGELICAL FREE C. , RM nr D AUQND rA2
(Last name first)
Address 3255 S. Diamond Bar Blvd ----
City.
Diamond Bar, Ca. 91765 _--------
Zip 91765
Phone(909 ) 594-7604 l /
(Attach separate sheet ifnecessary,nclunand names,
dreorreoses,andasigna)ures
of members of partnership s, joint ventures,
CONSENT: I consent toIthe sub\miion of the application accompanying this request
7
V�jyl - /, j�j,l Date'
Signed
(Alt recorded oun
Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that
the'information herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge.
printed Name: Mark Ho er
(Appli`cyant or ent), n
��L>p / ✓/�_.� _Date r}-1 L" ` 7 S
Signed �-" (Applicant or Agent)
n 3255 S. Diamond Bar Blvd
Locatio
(Street address or tract and lot number) .
zoning
Previous Cases
163 [�vti 24 7
Present Use of Site EVANGELICAL TREE CHURCH
Use applied forsame
Project Size (gross acres) 2 5 acres
project density
Domestic Water Source
Walnut Valleys Water Company/District
City Sewer Sanitation District
Method of Sewage disposal
Grading of Lots by Applicant? Yes
No
(Show necessary grading design on site plan or tent map)
APPROPRIATE BURDENS OF PROOF MUST ACCOMPANY REQUEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (all ownership comprising the proposed lot(s)/parcel(s)
Tract: 33417 Lot 19 A division of a portion of Sec 29
. TWP 2 s-R9W - SBM as per.map recorded in the book No. 909 page 37-39
inclusive - LA County:
Area devoted to structures 15% Landscaping/Open space 49
Residential Project: n/a and _- n/a-
(gross area) (No. of lots)
Proposed density
(Unita Acres)
Parking Required Provided
Standard 72 72
Compact
Handicapped
Total
0 0
3 3
75 75
(staff use)
PROJECT NUMBER(s):
INITIAL STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
Project Applicant (Owner): Project Representative:
EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH OF DIAMOND BAR Mark S. Hopper
NAME NA.4E
3255 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. (same)
ADDRESS ADDRESS
Diamond Bar Ca. 91765 (same)
(909) 594-7604 (same)
PHONE I PHONE
1. A c t i o n r e q u e s t e d a n d p r o. j e c t
xtend our Conditional Use Permit.
description; Update &e
2. Street location of project: 3255 S. Diamond Bar Blvd.
3a. Present use of site: EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH
3b. Previous use of site or structures: same
4. Please list all previous cases
(if any) related to this project
5. Other related permit/approvals required.
Specify type and granting agency.
6. Are you planning future phases of this project? N
If yes explain: The first building phase was completed in 1983. A second
building was comp ete in 1 92. A third phase - auditorium & classroom
building is planned for the future.
7. Project Area:
Covered by structures,.p3ving:
Landscaping, open space:
Total Area:
8. Number of floors: 2
9, Present zoning:
e=2 r
10. Water and sewer service:
Water Sewers
Domestic
Public — -
Does service exist at site? a Y N Y N
If yes, do purveyors have
capacity to meet demand of
project and all other approved
projects? Y N Y N
If domestic water or public sewers are not available, how will these services be
provided?
Residential Projects:
11.. Number and type of units:
12. Schools:
What school district(s) serves the property?
Are existing school facilities adequate to meet project needs?
YES NO
If not, what provisions will be made for additional
classrooms?
Non -Residential projects:
13. Distance to nearest residential use or sensitive use (school, hospital,
etc.) Adjacent to residential / school site across Diamond Bar Blvd.
Sniall buslnesses across flood channel
14. Number and floor area of buildings: (see plans)
15. Number of employees and shifts: six employees / one shift
16. Maximum employees per shift: 10
17. Operating hours: 8:00 AM — 11:00 PM
18. Identify any: End products
Waste products
Means of disposal
19. Do project operations use, store or produce hazardous substances such as oil, pesticides,
chemicals, pai radioactive materials?
YES NO
If yes, explain
20. Do your operations require any pressurized tanks?
YES &0
If yes, explain
21. Identify any flammable, reactive or explosive materials to be located on-site.
none
22. Will delivery or shipment trucks travel through residential areas to reach the nearest highway?
YES NO
If yes,. explain
B. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
1. Environmental Setting—Project Site
a.
Existing use/structures Church
b.
Topography/slopes,_ 2:1
*c.
Vegetation Grass & ground cover
*d.
Animals gophers
*e.
Watercourses Flood channel on west side of property
f.
Cultural/historical resources none
g.
Other
2. Environmental Setting -- Surrounding Area
a.
Existing uses structures (types, densities): R-1 (east)
School Site (south) / Commercial (west)
b.
Topography/slopes level pads
*c.
Vegetation lanrJgra ing
*d. Animals none
*e. Watercourses all graded
f. Culturanistorical resources
none
g. Other
3. Are there any major trees on the site, including oak trees?
YES NO
If yes, type and number:
4. Will any natural watercourses, surface flow patterns, etc., be changed through project
development?:
YES
(DO
If yes, explain:
* Answers are not required if the area does not contain natural, undeveloped land.
5. Grading:
Will the project require grading? YES NO
If yes, how many cubic yards?
Will it be balanced on site? YES NO
If not balanced, where will dirt be obtained or deposited?
(. Are there any identifiable landslides or other mayor geologic hazards on the property (including
uncompacted fill)?
YES 6i)
If yes, explain:
7. Is the property located within a high fire hazard area (hillsides with moderately dense vegetation)?
YES NO
Distance to nearest fire station: 1 mile
g. Noise:
Existing noise sources at site: n
Noise to be generated by project:
9. Fumes:
Odors generated by project: none
Could toxic fumes be generated?
10. What energy-conservin designs or material will be used?
economizer A/ units
CERTIFICATION: prtesent the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of
my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
may, 1
Tom•_
Date Signature
For:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE -BURDEN OF PROOF
In addition to the information required in the application, the
applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the Zoning
Board and/or Commission, the following facts:
A. That the requested use at the location proposed will not:
1. Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or
welfare of persons residing or working in the
surrounding area, or
2. Be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or
valuation of property of other persons located in
the vicinity of the site, or
3. Jeopardize, endangerpublic health, safety constituteor
menace to the public
welfare.
DiamondBar Evangelical Free Church has existed on the present
site since 1983 Over more than 10 years of operation the
church has provided service and benefit to the community and
has not been detrimental to the use or enjoyment of other
ro erties in the area With major activities on Sundays,
local traffic is not impacted..,.Churches have historically
proven to function well in local communities.
B. That the proposed site is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading
facilities, landscaping and other development features
prescribed in this Title 22, or as is otherwise required
in order to integrate said use with the uses in the
surrounding area.
The proposed site is adequate in size as designed per the
zoning co a on si e p an.
C. That the proposed site is adequately served:
1. -By highways or streets of sufficient width and
improved as necessary to carry the kind and
quantity of traffic such use would generate, and
2. By other public or private service facilities as
are required.
The church is located on a main arterial street (Diamond Bar
v with u utilities.
AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Ann Lung}, Assistant Planner
FROM: Dennis' A. Tarango, Building official
DATE: April d, 1995
SUBJECT: 3255 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. ( Evangelical Free -Church)
ZZ2011111:33UNII 23
Per your request, the Building. Division has reviewed the subject plans
for building type issues. The following items should be noted before
the plans are approved through the Architectural Design review process.
1. The submitted plans* shall meet all "A" & "E" occupancy requirements
e. restrooms, drinking fountains, fire alarms, etc.).
2. Plans shall conform to State and'Local Building Codes (i.e. 1991
editions of the Uniform Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical
Code, and 1990 edition of the National Electrical Code) as well as
the State Energy Code.
3. Plans shall be engineered to meet wind loads of 8o m.p.h. with an
exposure "C��.
4. All new handicapped parking shall comply to new State Handicapped
Accessible Regulations. Show compliance for I'van parking.
5.. The access doors shall be clearly marked with symbols.
6. Ramps shall be handicapped accessible.
Please contact me if you should have any questions.
DAT: fdl
MEMORANDUM
City of Diamond Bar
. To: Ann Lungo
From: Mike Myersfl4a: George Wentz, City Engineer
Date: April25, 1995
Subject: Preliminary Development Review, CUP 95-1 (Evangelical Free
Church) 3255 Diamond Bar Boulevard
It is my understanding that the applicant proposes to modify its present
CUP to delete any previously proposed construction (proposed classrooms
shown on sheet 1) on that knoll at the northerly portion of the project and
construct, along with previously proposed main sanctuary, the necessary
parking generally shown in darker shading on sheet 2. That parking shown
with lighter shading on sheet 2 in the area of the knoll is not proposed to
be constructed and is not to be considered for this CUP.
The applicant has indicated that no grading is expected. However, even
very minimal excavations and fills (which are necessary around the ,
building and in the area of the expanded parking) are likely to require an
amount of earthwork that exceeds the minimum requirements that
necessitate a grading permit. The applicant should be required, in
connection with a building permit, to make application for a grading
permit to include submittal of grading plans, prepared by a Civil Engineer,
to the City Engineer for approval.
At the request of the Church, the City Councjl recently approved temporary
limited time (Sunday only) parking on Diamond Bar Boulevard. This
request for modification of the CUP should specifically include the
requirement that any new construction, including temporary classrooms,
shall provide, at a minimum, the code required number of parking spaces
on-site.
Preliminary Development Review, CUP 95-1 April 25, [ 995
3255 Diamond Bar Boulevard (Evangelical Free Church) Page 2
The proposed parking lot design now provides for "dead end" drive aisles
that are over 200' long. The applicant should be required, in connection
with a building permit, to provided a site plan which details the aisle
terminus, as necessary, to provide adequate vehicular turn around to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Also, the Fire Department may require
such turn around to be suitable for fire apparatus and may require the
posting of aisles as "Fire Lane No Parking ". Two way drive aisle width
(for proposed parking) shall be a minimum of 26' (not 25' as shown) with a
standard parking bay depth of 18' (not 17' as shown) for the 90° parking
stalls proposed. All parking and drive aisles areas shall be paved.
ATTACHMENT "A"
CUP 1634-1
EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH OF DIAMOND BAR
1. TREE PRESERVATION PLAN
The purpose of this condition is to protect certain trees as
identified on Exhibit "A" entitled "Tree Preservation Plan" in
order to preserve and maintain the scenic beauty of this site.
All trees within thirty-five feet (351) of the property line, with
a circumference exceeding four feet (41) as measured forty-eight
inches (4811) from grade shall be preserved on the site. In the
event of removal or damage of trees intended to be preserved
herein, such removed or damaged trees shall be replaced by the
planting of three.trees, of aggregate equivalent species, size and
value, for. each removed or damaged tree. The aforementioned
replacement trees shall be placed on the site in a location
mutually selected, by the applicant and the City. All other trees
to be removed or relocated shall follow the provisions of Section
22.56.2050 of the Los Angeles County Codes pertaining to Oak Tree
Permits.
Trees may be removed incases of emergency caused by a hazardous or
dangerous condition as a result of disease, flood, fire, wind, or
lightning, as determined after visual inspection by the applicant,
the City, and a licensed forester with the Department of Los
Angeles County Forester and Fire Warden.
This modification with regard to Tree Preservation pertains to this
C.U.P. only, and shall not be effective in the future with regard
to future extensions, requests for additional permits and will not
preclude future removal of trees in the event of future church
growth and plans for redevelopment of the church. Removal of trees
in the future shall be subject to City regulations in effect at
that time.
2. PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN
No parking for services or uses conducted on this property shall be
provided on any neighboring residential streets. Any off-site
parking.in nearby commercial areas shall be done with the express
consent of owner or tenant. Parking, where legally permissible, is
permitted on Brea Canyon Road. This parking management plan is not'
intended to replace the provisions contained in C.U.P. 1634-1 and
is an addendum only.
Rev. 6-12-91
40
L
...........
r17
R-
io
l'`� l 959L6' V d
aan.�aazm�uv �
10 NI QI
MI Nl NI
,o
ud
a
M
tllZ alUlS'NIJ S7Llb WJ'lal VUauu10
yeeilS ieW.UnN 'PNB »fl PUwi�l�'S 99ZE
i
'.oeiaaWoulllow p
i
1�e pUOwo�d a €
do yoan4o eOJd Igolla6ugn3
9 k
NI MY
p tl
§yy�CS�dg$g§
y
tx§
tlrr�665L9tl1��� 9
p� �Wq
YVm V I
v Lo
0
_A
MM.�.a•• :� �..reu"�.
tom.
e,�
CD
aj
tllZ alUlS'NIJ S7Llb WJ'lal VUauu10
yeeilS ieW.UnN 'PNB »fl PUwi�l�'S 99ZE
i
'.oeiaaWoulllow p
i
1�e pUOwo�d a €
do yoan4o eOJd Igolla6ugn3
9 k
NI MY
p tl
§yy�CS�dg$g§
y
tx§
tlrr�665L9tl1��� 9
p� �Wq
YVm V I
��gg �gg yy
.1121 NI O
NI NI c91 e—
L:�j
) 'r ' \:q,V AIUV >
\\
.v/Joe
: P p2a_,i \&m„
..,
_ c
(
OM
§
2�
� )
O
TO\
,nd|
.
E^
2
0
jo tal VI a31 1631
Pv 6 1111101
1 "
log puowIDICI jo qojn!
eeid 1001106UDA3
'
40
C141
E
(D
cl-
uo
E-
0
0
cn
04
rill",
10
wl
`d'I
MI
IAI
101
[7I
VI
'01
----------
NI
I!. 1�11P�ll
10 WI U)l
:5 1
v
�p8puouap►Qdl�lalal>� `�
140AM40
C41 ml MI
C4,
U)
c -
0
AD
05
IR
N
r
0
4—
LM
ms0
a)
OI
'I I I I I I I I I I e'�tvu Mpg puowelQ �� a a
fl�l�l T�11 allllL�aLlII�21V
yanya 0e1 j loopaf>unn3 ; � i S � k
10 UN YI o71 I:AI NI
Uil oil 'FYI �i OI—
— IA
�I -qI MI )I
V
R5
0
N
NI tnt MI QI Wl
CN
R5
R5
eot
M 1
99z16V3 -up—lo
'MaB.0 P---Ia s 99zc
De PUOWDI(3
11
g
1
I a
�S,
31J,
Gold lDollGf3UDA3
3§
sDDID
]NY I HI JL
Ql O)l
M
lot
oi-
-
------- -------------------
----- - --------------------
----
7 --ill
to
ut0
to
8
-----------------------------
CN
R5
R5
I "rill 111
IA116 VO 'IN W --ICI 19116 VO We P-�C)
10='Od IN P—O's mc
,a 2 T[ 9 H N PUOLUOI H I .<] to qoinqo aoij -uA3
E >-r-
000
:6.
r iI
[i
i . ,
E3
Q CNn m
p cn �e D
3 0�.
o IIJ
4 -CL
'o° coo
9Q c
0
I I
�11111�1 11 'I}IJ 111111 )1f�` ® r A iog puownla s 9 i
i (ivl%l%(%vl%Ut�li. ( y Jl JI,
11 N-4,
f I 10 yoinya eajA la31196uon3
10 �I VI ell Nt NI 1111 moi' VI IA1 OI_
to
1ni vi MI ml NI IAI 1'7l 'FYI wl of
Fit® revie d by
on A o and is ready for
destruction by City Clerk