HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/26/1992CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
OCTOBER 26, 1992
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m., at
the South Coast Air Quality Management District
Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar,
California.
ROLL CALL: Community Development Director James Destefano,
Associate Planner Robert Searcy, and Planning
Technician Ann Lungu.
OLD BUSINESS: PT/Lungu reported that Administrative Development
Review No. 92-14 is a request, by Mr. James Woo, to
ADR 92-14 construct an addition of approximately 3,800 sq.
ft., to an existing 3,048 sq. ft. single family
residence, located at 23655 Falcon View. He also
proposes to add tennis courts, a swimming pool,
walls varying in height from 42 inches to 6 feet, a
three car garage, and a bedroom, with a storage
area, and a restroom on the second story over the
garage. The site is approximately 1.5 acres, zoned
R-1, 40,000, with a General Plan designation of
40,000 square feet. It is surrounded by
residential sites. There are no restrictions on
the site, and all setback requirements by code are
met. However, because the area has undergone a
sewer feasibility study, which does have an effect
on this property, the applicant must provide staff
with a hydrology report, and information on seepage
pits. Furthermore, the walls, currently being
constructed by the applicant, are not placed in the
proper position, and the applicant, if the project
is approved, must either submit a variance, or make
the existing walls comply to code requirements.
Staff recommended that the project be approved,
subject to the conditions in the resolution.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Rick Yeh, the architect, residing at 1432 Del
Haven, West Covina, noted the following changes:
the swimming pool has been moved approximately 10
feet to the south; there will be a 42 inch high
block wall in front of the property, treated with
stucco to match the house; and the correct size of
the addition is 3,661 sq. ft., and the correct size
of the existing house is 3,048 sq. ft..
In response to CDD/De5tefano, Mr. Woo indicated he
had reviewed the staff report and conditions, and
acquiesced to a sewer district, in the future.
The Public Hearing was closed.
CDD/DeStefano stated the following: the walls, in
the front setback, must be 42 inches high; there is
no objection to changing the treatment of the wail
to stucco to match the home; the applicant should
- - { , — a,[ 7 "17'1[7T7F' • i,.1.,.. - . r' —` ' -: "!" 1 ' . - - - _`
October 26, 1992 Page 2
contact the City Building Department to assure that
fencing surrounding the pool area is adequate; a
condition will be added that the applicant must
submit a lighting plan, specifically for the tennis
courts; the staff report will be corrected to
properly indicate the size of the addition and the
size of the existing home; and the proposed project
is in character with the existing homes in the
area. CDD/DeStefano approved Administrative
Development Review 92-14, with the changes to the
conditions, as indicated.
ADR 92-17 PT/Lungu reported that ADR 92-17 is a request, by
Dr. and Mrs. Pollywall, to construct a new 7,595
sq. ft. two story single family residence, located
on Diamond Knoll Lane, with a contemporary
architectural style of mainly stucco and glass
block, and a rock roof. The project includes two
garages with two bays each, a swimming pool, spa,
and walls. The property is currently vacant, is
located in "The Country", and is a Piermarini
project. It is approximately 1.04 acres, with a
buildable pad of .31 acres. There are no building
rights restrictions on the site. The zone is R-1
10,000, with a General Plan land use designation of
RR. It is surrounded by residential sites. All
the setback requirements are met. There are no oak
trees on the site. The applicant will need to
obtain approval from the architectural committee in
"The Country". The applicant is proposing some
wall construction, within the 20 foot front yard
setback, that is higher than 42 inches. These will
need to be lowered to 42 inches to meet the code.
Staff recommended that the project be approved,
subject to the conditions in the resolution.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Doyle Barker, the architect with Jeffery Group,
Inc., located at 34179 Golden Lantern, #202; Dana
Point, stated that they concur with staff's
recommendations. The proposed plan is for a
simple, luxury type of home, with a contemporary
elevation that keeps the profile of the house lower
than the norm. The design of the second story
gives relief visually from the street, as does the
stepping of the retaining walls in the backyard.
The Public Hearing was closed.
CDD/DeStefano approved ADR 92-17, subject to the
following: the applicant must provide a more
detailed chip board that deals with colors and
materials, incorporating the color for the steel
-- -
October 26, 1992 Page 3
r
treatment and the block; the applicant should
utilize a different color that downplays the stark
white color that is proposed; the site plan needs
to be amended to indicate the architects desire to
relocate the pool, and to relocate the pool
'equipment/ compressor area, on the north side of the
house, adjacent to the garage on the northside of
the home;, and the applicant needs to submit a
detailed lighting plan for staff's review and
approval.
ADR 92-16 CDD/DeStefano stated that Administrative
Development Review 92-16 will be opened and
continued to the meeting of November 9, 1992.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
AP/Searcy stated that the project was renoticed
because it was not certain if the project had been
properly noticed. The applicant needs to submit a
revised landscape plan softening the landscape
around the property. Furthermore, there is a legal
situation, involving the Title Company, that needs
to be resolved.
The Public Hearing was continued to the meeting of
November 9, 1992 at 6.00 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:42 p.m.
Respectivel ,
Ja s DeStefano
Director of Community Development
1LD BUSI
I--,--'.1111 ",I — I 11j,
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m., at the South Coast Air Quality Management
District Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
ROLL CALL: Community Development Director James DeStefano, Associate Planner Robert Searcy, and
Planning Technician Ann Lungu.
PT/Lungu reported that Administrative Development Review No. 92-14 is a request, by Mr. James Woo, to ADR 92-14 construct
an addition of approximately 3,800 sq.
ft., to an existing 3,048 sq. ft. single family residence, located at 23655 Falcon View. He also proposes to add
tennis courts, a swimming pool, walls varying in height from 42 inches to 6 feet, a
three car garage, and a bedroom, with a storage area, and a restroom on the
second story over the garage. The site is approximately 1.5 acres, zoned R-1,
40,000, with a General Plan designation of 40,000 square feet. It is surrounded
by residential sites. There are no restrictions on the site, and all setback
requirements by code are met. However, because the area has undergone a
sewer feasibility study, which does have an effect on this property, the applicant
must provide staff with a hydrology report, and informationon seepage pits.
Furthermore, the walls, currently being constructed by the applicant, are not
placed in the proper position, and the applicant, if the project is approved, must
either submit a variance, or make the existing walls comply to code requirements.
Staff recommended that 'the project be approved, subject to the conditions in the
resolution.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Rick Yeh, the architect, residing at 1432 Del Haven, West Covina, noted the
following changes: the swimming pool has been moved approximately 10 feet to
the south; there will be a 42 inch high block wall in front of the property, treated
with stucco to match the house; and the correct size of the addition is 3,661 sq.
ft., and the correct size of the existing house is 3,048 sq. ft..
In response to CDD/DeStefano, Mr. Woo indicated he had reviewed the staff
report and conditions, and
acquiesced to a sewer district, in the future-. The Public Hearing was closed.
CDD/DeStefano stated the following: the walls, in the front setback, must be 42
inches high; there is no objection to changing the treatment of the wall to stucco
to match the home; the applicant should
October 26p 1992 Page 2
contact the City Building Department to assure that f encing surrounding
the pool area is adequate; a condition will be added that the applicant
must submit a lighting plan, specifically for the tennis courts; the staff
report will be corrected to properly indicate the'size of the addition and the
size of the existing home; and the proposed project is in character with the
existing homes in the area. CDD/DeStefano approved Administrative
Development Review 92-14, with the changes to the conditions, as
indicated.
ADR 92-17 PT/Lungu reported that ADR 92-17 is a request, by Dr. and Mrs. Pollywall, to construct
a new 7,595 sq. ft. two story single family residence, located on Diamond
Knoll Lane, with a contemporary architectural style of mainly stucco and
glass block, and a rock roof. The project includes two garages with two
bays each, a swimming pool, spa, and walls. The property is currently
vacant, is located in "The Country", and is a Piermarini project. It is
approximately 1. 04 acres, with a buildable pad of .31 acres. There are no
building rights restrictions on the site. The zone is R-1 10,000, with a
General Plan land use designation of RR. It is surrounded by residential
sites. All the setback requirements are met. There are no oak trees on the
site. The applicant will need to obtain approval from the architectural
committee in "The Country". The applicant is proposing some wall
construction, within the 20 foot front yard setback, that is higher than 42
inches. These will need to be lowered to 42 inches to meet the code. Staff
recommended that the project be approved, subject to the conditions in
the resolution.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Doyle Barker, the architect with Jeffery Group, Inc., located at 34179
Golden Lantern, #202, Dana Point, stated that they concur with staff's
recommendations. The proposed plan is for a simple, luxury type of home,
with a contemporary elevation that keeps the profile of the house lower
than the norm. The design of the second story gives relief visually from the
street, as does the stepping of the retaining walls in the backyard.
The Public Hearing was closed.
CDD/DeStefano approved ADR 92-17, subject to the following: the
applicant must provide a more detailed chip board that deals with colors
and materials, incorporating the color for the steel
77r7P T77' - 1 - --Ir- I----1--------
October 26„ 1992 Page 3
treatment and the block; the applicant should utilize a different color that
downplays the stark white color that is proposed; the site plan needs to be
amended to indicate the architects desire to relocate the pool, and to
relocate the pool 'equipment/ compressor area, on the north side of the
house, adjacent to the garage on the northside of the home; and the
applicant needs to submit a detailed lighting plan . f or stat f I s review and
approval.
ADR 92-16 CDD/De Stefano stated that Administrative Development Review 92-16 will be opened and
continued to the meeting of November 9, 1992.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
AP/Searcy stated that the project was renoticed because it was not certain
if the project had been properly noticed. The applicant needs to submit a
revised landscape plan softening the landscape around the property.
Furthermore, there is a legal situation, involving the Title Company, that
needs to be resolved.
The Public Hearing was continued to the meeting of November 9, 1992 at
ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:42 p.m.
Respectively, —s NDe
Ja s DeStefano Stefa Director of Community
Development
MATTERS FROM Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig Lane,
THE AUDIENCE: reminded the Commission that the referendum is a
legal action, and that they should be concerned
about some of the legal stipulations. It was this
Planning Commission that passed the General Plan
with major revisions that have caused part of the
problem regarding the referendum.
Don Schad, residing at 1824 Shaded Wood Road,
complimented the Planning Commission on the superb
job done on the Tree Ordinance, prior to it's
demise by the City Council.
CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Meyer requested that the minutes be continued to
the next meeting because he did not receive copies
Minutes of within his packet.
Sept. 14 &
Oct. 12, 1992 Chair/ Flamenbaum requested that the Minutes of
October 12, 1992 be amended to accurately reflect
that he voted against approval of Resolution 92-19.
The Commission concurred to continue the minutes of
September 14, 1992, and October 12, 1992 to the
next meeting.
CONTINUED CDD/DeStefano presented the staff report regarding
PUBLIC HEARINGS: a City initiated request to adopt hillside
management standards. The City Council, in October
ZCA 92-2 of 1990, adopted interim hillside management
(Hillside standards which outlined a series of requirements
Management and standards for developing and preserving
Ordinance) hillside areas. There have been a few projects
that have been processed through the City system
under those development standards. Only one
project, a 19 acre site on Derringer Lane, in "The
Country", has been approved. Generally, the
standards outline a much less typical linear cut
and fill method of grading, utilizing a much more
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 26, 1992
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at
7:05 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management
District Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond
Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE:
Commissioner Meyer.
ROLL CALL:
Commissioners: Meyer, Grothe, Vice Chairman
MacBride, and Chairman Flamenbaum. Commissioner Li
was absent.
Also present were Community Development Director
James DeStefano, Associate Planner Robert Searcy,
Planning Technician Ann Lungu, Assistant City
Attorney Bill Curley, Deputy City Attorney Craig
Fox, and Contract Secretary Liz Myers.
MATTERS FROM Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig Lane,
THE AUDIENCE: reminded the Commission that the referendum is a
legal action, and that they should be concerned
about some of the legal stipulations. It was this
Planning Commission that passed the General Plan
with major revisions that have caused part of the
problem regarding the referendum.
Don Schad, residing at 1824 Shaded Wood Road,
complimented the Planning Commission on the superb
job done on the Tree Ordinance, prior to it's
demise by the City Council.
CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Meyer requested that the minutes be continued to
the next meeting because he did not receive copies
Minutes of within his packet.
Sept. 14 &
Oct. 12, 1992 Chair/ Flamenbaum requested that the Minutes of
October 12, 1992 be amended to accurately reflect
that he voted against approval of Resolution 92-19.
The Commission concurred to continue the minutes of
September 14, 1992, and October 12, 1992 to the
next meeting.
CONTINUED CDD/DeStefano presented the staff report regarding
PUBLIC HEARINGS: a City initiated request to adopt hillside
management standards. The City Council, in October
ZCA 92-2 of 1990, adopted interim hillside management
(Hillside standards which outlined a series of requirements
Management and standards for developing and preserving
Ordinance) hillside areas. There have been a few projects
that have been processed through the City system
under those development standards. Only one
project, a 19 acre site on Derringer Lane, in "The
Country", has been approved. Generally, the
standards outline a much less typical linear cut
and fill method of grading, utilizing a much more
October 26, 1992 Page 2
softened approach using contours, and a technique
called land form grading. The Planning Commission
has reviewed the document for the past couple of
months, and revisions have been incorporated to the
document. The only -major issue remaining issue
before the Planning Commission is to determine
whether or not the Commission desires the inclusion
of a slope density formula and/or a related
preservation of natural area formula. Certain
Planning Commission members have indicated a desire
for a slope density formula as a means to respond
to the community's desire to reduce density in
hillside areas. Most hillside cities have slope
density formulas, but can not articulate why those
ordinances were created, or how the formulas were
computed. Staff believes that the overall design
of the hillside should be determined by, the
General Plan Land use classification for the
hillside area, and, as a result of site
characteristics, environmental factors, and the
city's development review 'authority. A slope
density formula is not necessary in terms of
determining the overall best land form and
development for a hillside area. Staff- has
attached copies of slope density formulas from
nearby hillside cities for comparative purposes.
Staff recommend that the Commission review the
revised Hillside Management Ordinance and recommend
that the Ordinance be approved without a slope
density formula and forwarded to the City Council
for consideration.
Chair/Flamenbaum inquired if staff is recommending
that the Commission approve the revised Hillside
Management Ordinance without the formula for
calculating average slope, or without slope
categories found on page 9.
CDD/DeStefano stated that it is staff's
recommendation that no such calculating formula be
a part of the Ordinance, but that calculating the
average slope should remain, without creating the
penalty of decreasing density based upon that
average slope. It is recommended that the
incomplete graphic on page 9 be deleted, but that
the slope categories on page 9 and 10 remain.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Max Maxwell recalled that such a formula was
suggested by GPAC but later eliminated from the
General Plan. Therefore, there is nothing in the
General Plan that has a correlation relating to the
density of a development on a hillside. The
�,,m R e., e. � �.1 _.�r,�.AS, i L�, ��•I- �� � � ���� � .�....�� ��; ., � �i4'1,I f._ .-..`I.,_i���S:nti'.A���'cry.'.�id��.�'.tl`tie,4��.PIe�v,L,�l�N.t��.4a.;..i4a��2fu�i..'Y�?,a,"�",8i�:
October 26, 1992 Page 3
I
citizens want the hillsides preserved, and a
simplified formula should be included.
Barbara Beach Cushane, residing at 2021 Peaceful
Hill Road, stated that she moved to Diamond Bar
because there was green land, and she would be
opposed to any suggestion that limits open space.
Clair Harmony, residing at 24139 Afamado Lane,
inquired how the Ordinance will protect the
ridgelines as related to the Bramalea California,
Inc. project and Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU).
Chair/Flamenbaum explained to Mr. Harmony that the
Planning Commission has not been presented with any
proposed plan for development on the Bramalea
property, in regards to the MOU. The Ordinance
does attempt to address ridgelines, as well as the
general grading characteristics of hills, to
restore them to as natural state as possible.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
C/Meyer distributed his memorandum regarding his
proposed modifications to the draft Hillside
` Management Ordinance. The following is a
summarization of his concerns: hillsides cannot
support the densities of flat land; the proposed
special development standards, of 10%, could impose
significant costs to development; the development
standards should not become applicable until the
average slope of the property is at least 25%; the
General Plan defines significant slope as 25% and
above, with a policy for preserving open space, and
reducing grading practices and removal of dirt;
land form grading requires the displacement of more
material, than is generally required with
conventional grading practices, and achieves a
smaller building pad; the proposed Hillside
Management Ordinance does not include a procedure
for modification of the standards; the modification
procedure should include provisions for public
input and should have clearly defined goals that
the City would expect a developer to aspire to;
there should be some findings of fact that the
approval body must make in order to grant a
modification of the development standards; a slope
density formula should be created to establish the
policy that the size of the lot shall be correlated
to the average slope of the property, recognizing
that there is a difference between flat land and
hillside development. He suggested that the City
focus in on a community that already has the
experience for hillside development, that meets our
October 26, 1992 Page 4
goal or vision for our hillsides, instead of
recreating the wheel.
C/Grothe stated that it was his understanding that,
once the technique is learned, land form grading
moves considerably less dirt, and costs
considerably less money than conventional grading.
He believes the special development standard should
stay at 10%. The lot seize is not near as important
as the preservation of the lots and the natural
grade. As much of the land, as possible, should be
left ungraded, getting away from the standard
grading cuts and fills.
C/Meyer stated that he concurs with the importance
of preserving the natural topography, and getting
away from the typical cut and fill method of
grading. However, he concurs with the concept used
by the City of La Habra. Heights, which has very
minimal grading standards. Their concept is to
move the minimum amount of dirt possible to allow
development to occur. They allow and accommodate
hillside development, and maintain a significant
amount of open area. It is a balance that has to a.r
be achieved parcel by parcel. Because most
projects will not be able to comply with the h`
standards in the Hillside Management Ordinance, a
forum for modification must be created on a site
specific review. Staff is envisioning the CUP
process for such a forum. However, there are no
specific standards in place to review such
variances.
CDD/DeStefano confirmed the existence of a CUP
process to propose a development within a hillside
area. The Hillside Ordinance has various
discussion points that allow for design review by
the Planning Commission or the City Council. It is
designed more for the initial subdivision. There
is also a Development Review Ordinance that sets
forth compatibility characteristics, and
architectural and design characteristics. It is
specifically set aside for the final product. Both
ordinances are created as design ordinances, and
both have flexibility for the unique situation that
each lot in Diamond Bar is going to present. .
Following discussion, Motion was made by
VC/MacBride, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED to
approve the Hillside Management Ordinance without a
slope density formula, and deleting the graphic on
page 9.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Grothe, VC/MacBride, and
Chair/Flamenbaum.
71:YJI�a,"a4 .L", n` 'tr"�rn�Emlu'N, d,
October 26, 1992
Page 5
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Li.
C/Meyer stated that, for the record, he does not
oppose Hillside Management, but feels the proposed
Ordinance has flaws in it that should be corrected.
Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 8:15 p.m.
to be reconvened in Room CC -2 for a study session
on the Presentation on South Pointe Master Plan.
Chair/Flamenbaum reconvened the meeting at 8:30
p.m.
Presentation
CDD/DeStefano presented the staff report regarding
of South
the proposed 170 acre South Pointe Master Plan,
Pointe
located north of Pathfinder Road, west of Brea
Master Plan
Canyon Road, south of the residential construction
nearest Colima, and east of the City property
boundary limits. He introduced the following
individuals: Councilmen Werner; Hardy Strozier,
Project Manager for the Master Plan; Jan Dabney,
representing RnP Development; Mike Church,
representing Arciero & Sons; Armed Patel, with the
Sasak Corporation; Mr. Ronald Hockwalt, District
Superintendent of the Walnut Valley Unified School
District (WVUSD); and Clay Chapmut, Assistant
Superintendent of the WVUSD. The site is comprised
of the following 5 major property owners, each with
a basic desire to develop this area; the School
District, property owner of 31 acres, and desires a
permanent middle school; the City of Diamond Bar is
the owner of a 7 acre strip along Brea Canyon Road,
is in a lease purchase contract for the 4 acre
Water District site, and is the owner of the 2.7
acre Larkstone Park site, with a desire to resolve
the issue of the trade of the land with the WVUSD;
RnP Development, owner of 78 acres, south of the
School District site, desires to develop a 40 acre
residential, 15 acre commercial, and approximately
25 acre open space product; Arciero & Sons, owner
of approximately 41 acres, east of the school
property, desires to construct 93 homes and a 6
acre commercial site; and Mr. Patel, owner of 7
acres, adjacent to Morning Sun, desires to develop
his acreage. The City saw this desire for
development as an opportunity to master plan 5
different sites, instead of having 5 independent
developments. The WVUSD has a 400,000 cubic yard
L�
Hill on their site that needs to be removed in
order to construct the permanent middle school. The
fill is to be relocated on the Arciero & Sons
property. The City and the WVUSD desire to resolve
October 26, 1992 Page 6
the issue of Larkstone Park. The developers have an
interest in developing the vacant land that they
own, and have a proposal, generally, to merge
several public and private interests into a
development with an opportunity for public benefit.
The developments provide an opportunity to resolve
the traffic problems that exist from buses and
automobiles traveling Larkstone and Lemon to get to
the school site, and resolves the need, of a looped
water system and storm drain improvements for the
permanent school site. Mr. Patel, by participating
in this overall master plan, has an opportunity to
link Diamond Bar, utilizing utilities and grading.
The City has an opportunity to not only resolve the
various issues, but to receive some future economic
benefit. The developers propose the development of
acreage for a commercial center site of 15+ acres,
and a recreational site of 25 acres, resolving a
deficiency in our parks and recreation system.
There is an opportunity to resolve traffic issues
in terms of needed signalization, and the widening
of Brea Canyon Road. The issues are significant
vacant land, particularly on the RnP property,
which has been identified in the General Plan, as a
biological resource, and the Arciero property,
which both contain significant Oak and Walnut
woodland. Though the acreage, has been vacant for
many years, it is privately held and has
development rights. Through a variety of State
laws, the developers have the ability to request
further development rights from the City.
CDD/DeStefano stated that the principal developers
will now briefly discuss their project proposal.
Chair/Flamenbaum inquired of the location and the
size of the proposed secondary road. He also
inquired if there were other benefits to the City
to tie all the parcels together, as opposed to
separately considering the South Pointe Middle
School Project and the Arciero Development.
CDD/DeStefano stated that the proposed secondary
road would likely become a residential collector
street, located off of Brea Canyon Road (generally,
across from Chuck -E -Cheese), traversing the RnP
area, and heading to the cul-de-sac at the end of
Larkstone Drive. He then explained that the
benefit, to the City, of tying all the parcels
together is that the utility systems would be r„
looped together (such as the streets, the storm
drains, and the water lines), resolving the
proposed land use patterns at one time, and
recreational park spare needs, grading pattern and
site planning.
: "x r:: ' ° ;'I_M! ' s ,�,, ::�
October 26, 1992 Page 7
i
Mr. Patel requested CDD/DeStefano to summarize Mr.
Patel's proposed project.
CDD/DeStefano stated that Mr. Patel owns 7 acres of
property adjacent to Morning Sun, which is in the
County area adjacent to the western edge of Diamond
Bar. He is proposing a project that subdivides his
7 acres into 26 lots, with lot sizes of 8,000 feet
to 9,600 feet, and pad sizes of about 6,900 to
7,500 feet. The area is currently zoned up to
6DU/acre, but is classified by the General Plan at
3DU/acre.
Jan Dabney, Senior Partner of JC Dabney &
Associates, representing RnP Development and
Arciero presented the general concept of the master
plan, stated that RnP asked him to approach the
City, 2 years ago, on the development potential of
the 78 acres, not knowing at that time, that Mr.
Arciero has been in the process for three years of
trying to develop his parcel. RnP approached City
Manager Van Nort, as well as CDD/DeStefano, to
indicate interest in meeting with the Council
members, on a one by one basis, to see what they
felt the property warranted, and what the community
needed. Mr. Dabney, and one of the then owners,
met with the City Manager and two Council members
at a time throughout the day. Several concerns
were brought up by each Council members, many of
which were environmental concerns, and some of
which were concerns with the traffic impact on the
Larkstone surrounding area due to the school
development. Mr. Dabney indicated that they had
also met with the WVUSD. The Council, as a whole,
was basically concerned with the development of the
South Pointe Middle School. After talking with the
Council members, which included Councilmen Nardella
at that time, felt that consideration for
recreational facilities, traffic mitigation, etc.
was a necessary part of this development. There
was a strong concern about the development in the
area, based on what the developers could do for the
community, and how the community could benefit from
our development. They requested that we produce a
focus biological study on Sandstone Canyon before
they made any decision whether or not there was
development potential there or not. We provided a
preliminary biological review for the Canyon,
prepared by Robert Bein, Williams and Frost, an
environmental company, not as a public document,
but as a courtesy to help the Council evaluate the
area. City Manager Van Nort and CDD/DeStefano
suggested that -we take the 170 acres, remove all
October 26, 1992 Page 8
CDD/DeStefano stated that Hardy Strozier, the
City's Project Manager, will merge all the plans
together and begin to resolve some of the
differences between the maps.
Dr. Hockwalt, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum,
stated that the design plan presented, for the
Middle School, has been submitted and approved by
the State.
Jan Dabney stated that the proposed RnP
� 9J
development, of it's 77.8 acres, has 26 acres of
park, 22 acres of commercial, and approximately 92
residential lots, with the transferring of land in
which RnP obtains 2.8 acres, and transfers 26 acres
of property to the City for parks facilities. The
_ _ _1,_. __ -711'M, v� � `3i-E_�'° ' I"Y"�C _4_
the property ownership lines, and approach this
development, based on the 170 gross acres, and let
the residential lots or parks fall out within the
development. The WVUSD basically agreed that this
was a fine concept, as long as the school was
situated on the purchased property. The City,
Arciero,' and RnP, basically got together and
planned what they felt was a possible development
sequence for specific environmental issues. We
went through many numerous conceptual type
configurations on development, never based on any
specific number of residential units, acreage of
commercial, or of park, but rather based on the
concept of where these items should be within the
170 acres. The City and .WVUSD do desire to work
together within this master plan to create
additional benefit, not specifically for the
school, or specifically for the City treasury, but
for the community at large. The Arciero
Development, as of today, has been in the approval
process for about five years. They sold property
to the school district, with the understanding that
they would remove the 400,000 additional yardage
off the site. Mr. Arciero presented subdivision
plans to the City but had trouble with the approval
process because there was'not enough benefit to the
community. One of the problems that the Arciero
Development had was that his secondary access road
would have to either continue through Larkstone
Drive, or down'Rapid View. Mr. Arciero was asked
to join with RnP, the City, and the WVUSD to go
through this master plan, thus removing the impact
of his traffic out of the Rapid View cul-de-sac,
and improving the internal circulation. Mr Patel's
submitted map gives through access and emergency
access across the entire project without going
through the existing subdivision within the City.
CDD/DeStefano stated that Hardy Strozier, the
City's Project Manager, will merge all the plans
together and begin to resolve some of the
differences between the maps.
Dr. Hockwalt, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum,
stated that the design plan presented, for the
Middle School, has been submitted and approved by
the State.
Jan Dabney stated that the proposed RnP
� 9J
development, of it's 77.8 acres, has 26 acres of
park, 22 acres of commercial, and approximately 92
residential lots, with the transferring of land in
which RnP obtains 2.8 acres, and transfers 26 acres
of property to the City for parks facilities. The
_ _ _1,_. __ -711'M, v� � `3i-E_�'° ' I"Y"�C _4_
F--,
October 26, 1992 ?age 9
proposal would incorporate a secondary street out
to Morning Sun. In response to C/Meyer, he stated
that the proposed density for the RnP proposal is
1.53 units per acre, based upon the gross of the
residential area.
In response to Chair/Flamenbaum, Jan Dabney stated
that the EIR incorporates the entire 170 acre
project, including some parameters of the School
District.
VC/MacBride inquired how much of the "blue line"
stream will be preserved with this development
project.
Jan Dabney stated that, in this proposal, the blue
line stream that runs to the Canyon would be
entirely filled in. In the 27 acre park site, 15
acres of the park site would be set aside in its
natural setting, and include additional plantings,
off the developed area, and transferred into that
natural setting. One of the requests of the
Council was that we ensure that the open space and
�- open area, including the two areas that belong to
the homeowners association currently, have a means
for migration for any animal life.
-C/Meyer inquired if this project would comply with
the concept in the Hillside Management Ordinance.
Jan Dabney noted that the project has many grades
that exceed 10%. With land form grading, a lot of
yardage most be moved to preserve as much existing
features as possible, yet still yield enough
density to warrant the additional cost of grading.
It is a common misconception that landform grading
actually is an economical way to approach this
development project. Landform grading gives the
original appearance of the project, keeping the
ridgelines and hillsides intact, but it also drives
up the costs. We have, throughout this project,
used land form grading. The master plan team has
done all the hydrology studies, traffic studies,
and drainage studies. This development will
resolve some of the drainage problems existing on
Larkstone Drive.
CDD/DeStefano summarized the proposed project as
follows: a 31 acre School District site with a
permanent facility; a 25 acre park or open space
site; a 30 acre commercial site; and about 85 acres
of residential development that would house
approximately 220 dwelling units.
1, 11 i11111H1 !I I
October 26, 1992 Page 10
Hardy Strozier, of the Planning Associates, stated
that a Master Development Plan, a Development
Agreement outlining the different trade offs and
benefits to the City and the developer, and a full
EIR will come to the City for review. - It is
anticipated that the EIR can be published around
mid November of 1992. This project can
realistically come before the Planning Commission
some time mid January of 1993.
Chair/Flamenbaum inquired why the school's
improvements have to be incumbered by the rest of
this project.
Hardy Strozier explained that the school's. EIR
contemplates the Arciero project. If the school
district were to change it's project, another EIR
would be required, which would further delay the
construction of South Pointe Middle School.
Furthermore, the various water systems, needed to
serve the school, comes through the Arciero and RnP
properties. Also, the secondary circulation
system, that would access the school, is viable and
necessary.
CDD/DeStefano stated that the City Council, as
indicated by Mr. Dabney, has previewed this
project, the School Board previewed- the project
about 2 weeks ago, and the Parks and Recreation
Commission, and the Traffic and Transportation
Commission will have a similar introductory session
of this Master Plan. The City staff, the City
consultant, and the Development members are
available to answer any questions.
Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 9:40 p.m.
The meeting was reconvened at 9:50 p.m.
Don Schad, Vice President of the Homeowners
Association, described Sandstone Canyon as a living
biological laboratory because it has forms of
vegetation found no place else, and it has
everything [vegetation], in one place, that is
scattered throughout Diamond Bar. Sandstone Canyon
is our most precious gift in the City: the
children love it; it maintains itself at no cost to
any one; and many programs of all the sciences
could be included just by retaining this for the
citizens. He addressed the Commission regarding an
alternative plan for Sandstone Canyon, and -.
highlighted the following: a Children's Wilderness
Museum; a nature trail; preserving the heritage
trees; an astronomical observatory; educational
programs; and the Middle School. He beseeched the
711:' d. "" ". _1"�....L„ r .r T. r,; �! c'a.W t"' ,.. '..! '"1:. .m., �...� s i, I, +�;. i�„- �,+. ,( ,, .�f 0,ldAAd 1 A .J.rtX.tw F't1'n ii,uiq', a N4k aL'^W: Yta:��
October 26, 1992 Page 11
:1
Commission to see how magnificent the wilderness
.area is before making a determination. He
suggested that Sandstone Canyon be deeded to the
Tonner Canyon Wilderness Conservancy.
Max Maxwell informed the Commission that Mr. Schad
has his own conservancy, the Tonner Canyon
Wilderness Conservancy, and has the support from
the other conservancy in Southern California.
Clair Harmony inquired what will happen to the
hillsides along Brea Canyon as a result of this
project. He also inquired of the development plans
for the City's property along Tonner Canyon, and
how it ties into this project.
Chair/Flamenbaum explained to Mr. Harmony that
because the Planning Commission has not received
any information regarding those areas, the
Commission is unable to respond to his questions.
Norman Beach Cushane, residing at 2021 Peaceful
Hills Road, stated the following: Williman J.
Brock, in 1980, sold all the homes on top of the
! hill, and the land below is extremely unstable; the
l Pathfinder Homeowners Association owns the RnP land
by Mr. Patel's property; and Mr. Patel only owns
three house lots, not 7 acres, and pays homeowners
dues. He also pointed out the LA County flood
control easement by the blue line stream.
Jan Dabney stated he has thoroughly reviewed the
legal documents, and RnP owns the entire 78 acres.
The two lots, indicated by Mr. Cushane, was
originally owned by the Homeowners Association but
these parcels were removed, by amendment to the
Homeowner's documents, in 1982.
Barbara Beach Cushane pointed out that the
Homeowners Association pays taxes on this land, and
has done so since 1983. We are required to assure
that the grade does not fail. The State Department
has required that we put thousands of dollars in
escrow, so that if there is land slippage we are
responsible to repair it.
Jan Dabney also noted that there are no flood
--.a control easements, on the easterly side of RnP's
77.83 acres of property, as it approaches the blue
line stream.
Norman Beach Cushane stated that their property
will be ruined, if this land is developed, because
October 26, 1992
Page 12
of the increase in noise and because of the effects
site;
of development.
this economy, only to have
Tom Van Winkle, a resident, inquired if there will
be a noticed EIR scoping session. He stated that
I' ^,
the area "A" triangle should be included in the
noticing radius because the area would be impacted
by the increased traffic from this development.
Hardy Strozier stated that a full EIR is being
prepared. The draft EIR will be circulated to
responsible agencies and residents, within the
noticing radius, and given an opportunity to
respond to the document, and raise issues.
Ann Flesher, residing at 20647 Larkstone Drive,
inquired of the intent to mitigate the problems on
Larkstone Drive such as drainage, before the next
rainfall, traffic, and vandalism to property from
school children.
Hardy Strozier explained that alternative plans
site;
were prepared in order to contemplate different
this economy, only to have
scenarios for the EIR, such as through traffic,
non -through traffic, recreation uses at different
I' ^,
intensities, and so forth, so that the Commission
gets the full range of development, and no
development, opportunities in the area.
Max Maxwell suggested that the impacts of CalTrans
plans to widen the 57 freeway be considered in the
EIR, as well as the plans to widen the Pathfinder
bridge.
Clair Harmony inquired if the intent is to put the
proposed commercial area along the City property on
Brea Canyon Road.
Chair%Flamenbaum stated that it appears that there
is a 27 to 30 acre commercial area proposed north
of the proposed secondary road, and west on Brea
Canyon Road.
Barbara Beach Cushane inquired if a study was done
to confirm that there are tenants for this proposed
commercial area since so many commercial centers
throughout the City have vacancies.
Jan Dabney stated that no study has been conducted.
The proposed plan does not show any type of
y!
development on that commercial area. No_one will
-`
spend millions of dollars to construct a commercial
site;
in
this economy, only to have
it sit vacant.
�•
I' ^,
z
October 26, 1992 Page 13
CDD/DeStefano explained that the Draft EIR will
consider a variety of conceptual alternatives,
including a density substantially less than this
project, and a density more than this project, for
study purposes. The DEIR will show alternatives
for commercial development in order to address
various issues, including projected traffic
patterns.
Jan Dabney stated that the final development
concept will be a product of the Planning
Commission's, the Council's, and the public's
input.
George Berret, a member of the Pathfinder
Homeowners Association, asked what process is used
to select a member of the Planning Commission.
Chair/Flamenbaum explained that the Commissioners
are appointed by the City Council, and can be
removed by the City Council.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED.UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at
10:50 p.m.
Respectively,
James DeStefano
Secretary
Attest:
Bruce Flamenbaum
Chairman