HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/20/2007•
• ounce e
n
t
1 a
�T\
�\ gj
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
6:30 p.m. — Regular Meeting
Tonight's meeting will be in memory of
Councilman Bob Zirbes.
The Government Center
South Coast Air Quality Management District/
Main Auditorium
21865 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Mayor Steve Tye
Mayor Pro Tem Jack Tanaka
Council Member Wen Chang
Council Member Carol Herrera
City Manager James DeStefano
City Attorney Michael Jenkins
City Clerk Tommye Cribbins
Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file
in the Office of the City Clerk and available on line at www.cityofdiamondbar.com. If you have questions regarding
an agenda item, please contact the City Clerk at (909) 839-7010 during regular business hours.
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 accommodation(s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting, must inform
the City Clerk a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting.
Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking in the Council Chambers.
The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper and encourages you to do the same.
DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING RULES
Welcome to the meeting of the Diamond Bar City Council. Meetings of the Diamond Bar City
Council are open to the public and are cablecast live on Channel 3. You are invited to attend
and participate.
PUBLIC INPUT
Members of the public may address the Council on any item of business on the agenda
during the time the item is taken up by the Council. In addition, members of the public may,
during the Public Comment period, address the Council on any consent calendar item or any
matter not on the agenda and within the Council's subject matter jurisdiction. Persons
wishing to speak should submit a speaker slip to the City Clerk. Any material to be submitted
to the City Council at the meeting should be submitted through the City Clerk.
Speakers are limited to five minutes per agenda item, unless the Mayor determines
otherwise. The Mayor may adjust this time limit depending on the number of people wishing
to speak, the complexity of the matter, the length of the agenda, the hour and any other
relevant consideration. Speakers may address the Council only once on an agenda item,
except during public hearings, when the applicant/appellant may be afforded a rebuttal.
Public comments must be directed to the City Council. Behavior that disrupts the orderly
conduct of the meeting may result in the speaker being removed from the Council chambers.
INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COUNCIL
Agendas for regular City Council meetings are available 72 hours prior to the meeting and
are posted in the City's regular posting locations, on DBTV Channel 3, and on the City's
website at www.ci.diamond-bar.ca.us. A full agenda packet is available for review during the
meeting, in the foyer just outside the Council chambers. The City Council may take action on
any item listed on the agenda.
ACCOMMODATIONS FOR THE DISABLED
A cordless microphone is available for those persons with
access the podium in order to make a public comment.
available by providing the City Clerk three business days
Please telephone (909) 839-7000 between 7:30 a.m.
Thursday and 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Fridays.
HELPFUL PHONE NUMBERS
mobility impairments who cannot
Sign language interpretation is
' notice in advance of a meeting.
and 5:30 p.m. Monday through
Copies of agendas, rules of the Council, CassetteNideo tapes of meetings: (909) 839-7010
Computer access to agendas: www.ci.diamond-bar.ca.us
General information: (909) 839-7000
F
ETING IS BEING BROADCAST LIVE BY TIME -WARNER FOR AIRING ON
L 3, AS WELL AS BY STREAMING VIDEO OVER THE INTERNET AND BY
AINING IN THE ROOM YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE
SED. THIS MEETING WILL BE RE -BROADCAST EVERY SATURDAY AT
9:00 A.M. AND EVERY TUESDAY AT 8:00 P.M. ON CHANNEL 3, AND IS ALSO
AVAILABLE ON THE CITY WEB SITE AT WWW.CITYOFDIAMONDBAR.COM
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
February 20, 2007
CALL TO ORDER:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
INVOCATION:
ROLL CALL:
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Next Resolution No. 2007-09
Next Ordinance No. 01(2007)
6:30 p.m.
Mayor
Pastor Mark Hopper,
Evangelical Free Church of Diamond
Bar
Council Members Chang, Herrera,
Mayor Pro Tem Tanaka, Mayor Tye
Mayor
1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
1.1 Presentation of Certificates of Recognition to Charlene Platon, Diamond
Bar High School and Eric Chen, Quail Summit Elementary School for
winning the AQMD 2007 Calendar Contest.
1.2 Proclaiming February 20, 2007 as "Wear Red Day for Women".
2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time reserved on each
regular meeting agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the public to
directly address the Council on Consent Calendar items or matters of interest to
the public that are not already scheduled for consideration on this agenda.
Although the City Council values your comments, pursuant to the Brown Act, the
Council generally cannot take any action on items not listed on the posted
agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the City Clerk
(completion of this form is voluntary) There is a five-minute maximum time limit
when addressing the City Council.
4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT: Under the Brown Act, members of the
City Council may briefly respond to public comments but no extended discussion
and no action on such matters may take place.
FEBRUARY 20, 2007 PAGE 2
5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting — February 22, 2007 — 7:00
p.m., AQMD/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 Copley Dr.
5.2 L.A. County Household Hazardous Waste/E-Waste Round Up — February
24, 2007 — 9:00 a.m. — 3:00 p.m. — Gateway Corporate Center, 1300
Block of Bridge Gate Dr.
5.3 Planning Commission Meeting — February 27, 2007 — 7:00 p,m.,
AQMD/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr.
5.4 City Council Meeting — March 6, 2007 — 6:30 p.m., AQMD/Government
Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR:
6.1 City Council Minutes:
(a) Study Session of February 6, 2007 — Approve as Submitted.
(b) Regular Meeting of February 6, 2007 — Approve as Submitted.
6.2 Planning Commission Minutes of January 9, 2007 - Receive and file.
6.3 Traffic and Transportation Commission Minutes of November 9, 2006
- Receive and file.
6.4 Ratification of Check Register - Approve Check Register containing
Checks dated February 1 through February 14, 2007 totaling $710,223.65.
Requested by: Finance Department
6.5 Adopt Resolution No. 2007 -XX: Supporting the Development of the
South Coast Air Quality Management District's Draft 2007 Air Quality
Management Plan Focusing on Mobile Source Controls.
Recommended Action: Adopt.
Requested by: City Manager
FEBRUARY 20, 2007 PAGE 3
6.6 Adopt Resolution No. 2007 -XX: Supporting Interstate 101605
Interchange Improvements and Completion of Interstate 10 HOV
Lane.
Recommended Action: Adopt.
Requested by: City Manager
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as matters may be heard.
7.1 Public Hearing — Consideration of General Plan Amendment No.
2005-01, Zone Change No. 2006-03, Development Agreement 2005-
01, Specific Plan No. 2005-01, Vesting Tentative Tract No. 063623,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-01, Development Review No. 2005-
27 and Tree Permit No 2005-06, Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act,
City's Subdivision Ordinance (Title 21) and Development Code (Title
22, Sections 22.22, 22.38, 22.48, 22.58, 22.60, 22, 22.70, and 22.62).
The Proposed Project Consists of a 99 -Unit Single—Family
Residential Subdivision, a Public Park and Open Space Areas on
Approximately 34.52 Acres, Located on Property South of Larkstone
Dr., East of Morning Sun Ave., West of Brea Canyon Rd., and
Northwest of Peaceful Hills Rd. (Related File: Environmental Impact
Report No. 2005-01). Continued from December 19, 2006,
January 16, 2007 and February 6, 2007.
Recommended Action: Open the Public Hearing, Receive Additional
Public Testimony and continue the matter to March 6, 2007.
Requested by: Community Development Department
7.2 Public Hearing — Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned
Development Overlay District No. 2006-01, Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 54081, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH No.
2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Hillside
Management Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2002-
02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13 a 16 Lot Residential Subdivision.
Recommended Action: Open the Public Hearing, Receive Testimony,
Close the Public Hearing and:
(1) Approve for First Reading, by Title Only, Waive Full Reading of
Ordinance No. OX (2007): Zone Change No. 2006-02, Planned
Development Overlay District No. 2006-01 and Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation
Report and Monitoring Program Changing the Existing Zoning from
R-1-10,000 to Low Density Residential -Planned Development
(RL -PD) for Property Located at the Southern Terminus of Crooked
FEBRUARY 20, 2007 PAGE 4
Creek Dr., (APN No. 8714-028-003).
(2) Adopt Resolution No. 2007 -XX: Approving Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 54081 and adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration No.
2006-03(SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program;
(3) Adopt Resolution No. 2007 -XX: Adopting Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129), and Mitigation
Report and Monitoring Program and Approving Hillside
Management and Planned Development Overlay District
Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2002-02 and
Tree Permit No. 2002-13 for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
54081, a 16 Lot Residential Subdivision, the Construction of
Retaining Walls that Exceed the Allowed Exposed Height Adjacent
to a Street and the Removal, Replacement and Preservation of Oak
and Walnut Trees.
Requested by: Community Development Department
8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
8.1 Procedure and Discussion for Filling City Council Vacancy.
Recommended Action: Discuss and Take Action/Direct Staff Accordingly.
Requested by: City Manager
9. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS:
10. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting will be adjourned in memory of Council Member
Robert `Bob" Zirbes.
r.
E
a
Agenda No. 6.1(a)
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 1rj% R A F T
STUDY SESSION: M/Tye called the Study Session to order at 6:09 p.m.
in Room CC -8 of the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center,
21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA.
Present: Council Members Chang, Herrera, Zirbes
(telephonically), MPT/Tanaka and Mayor Tye.
Also Present: James DeStefano, City Manager; David Doyle,
Assistant City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; David Liu, Public Works
Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Linda Magnuson, Finance Director;
Nancy Fong, Community Development Director; Ryan McLean, Senior Management
Analyst; Kimberly Molina, Assistant Engineer; Rick Yee, Sr. Engineer, Alfredo Estevez,
IS Technician, and Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk. Also present was Joel Falter,
Consultant with Katz Okitsu and Associates.
► NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PILOT PROJECT:
DPW/Liu reported the following percentage of residents were in support of the
program:
Area 1 — 59.9% support
Area 2 — 50%
Area 3 — Golden Prados 57.4, Rancheria/Jubilee 76.4%
Area 4 — Maple Hill 58.7%, Cliff Branch 64.4%
Area 5 — 41.6%
DPW/Liu stated that staff sent out about 3820 invitations to the all -day open
house. Approximately 100 residents attended the open house and offered their
comments to staff. During the one-on-one dialogue sessions most residents
while they did not like some of the measures felt the City was making a
concerted effort toward improving the quality of life in their community. Overall it
appeared from comments and input that the City had a very responsive program.
The number one comment was "help us reduce speeding in our neighborhoods"
and based on the data that goal has been achieved. Although some additional
data is needed, staff is prepared to move forward with certain changes and
modifications in accordance with the implemented measures.
M/Tye pointed out that the response numbers were not accurate because the
total number of responses per neighborhood should have been garnered from
only a portion of the 104 attendees.
Mr. Falter with Katz Okitsu and Associates stated that the intent of the questions
contained in the survey were to determine sentiment and not intended to be
considered "votes."
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 2 CC STUDY SESSION
CM/DeStefano said that staff would rework the numbers and articulate the data
in the regular meeting presentation.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Jo -Ann Carter, 1130 S. Calbourne Drive, wondered if
the City intended to implement any mitigation measures on her street which is in Area 5
because she had never received any notices about neighborhood meetings.
DPW/Liu stated that staff received additional requests from other areas including
Calbourne and would be looking into the matter.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Tye adjourned the
Study Session at 6:35 p.m.
TOMMYE CRIBBINS, City Clerk
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of
2007.
STEVE TYE, Mayor
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL Agenda No. 6.1(b)
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
FEBRUARY 6, 2007
DIR"AFT
CLOSED SESSION: 5:30 p.m., Room CC-8
► Government Code Section 54956.9(a) — Pending Litigation — Two cases
1) People of the State of California v. Ratan Hospitality, LLS (Scribbles)
Case No. BC351925
2) Diamond Bar v. Southern California Edison
LACSCC — No. BC351266
► Government Code Section 54956.8 — Conference with Real Property Negotiator
Property Address:
Agency Negotiator:
Under Negotiation:
Summitridge Mini -Park
APN #8701013902
City Manager
Price and Terms
Public Comments on Closed Session Agenda:
Closed Session adjourned at 6:07 p.m.
STUDY SESSION:
6:09 p.m., Room CC -8
► Neighborhood Traffic Management Program Pilot Project
Study Session adjourned at 6:35 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Tye called the Regular City Council meeting to
order at 6:43 p.m. in The Government Center/SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr.,
Diamond Bar, CA.
CA/Jenkins reported that during tonight's Closed Session no public comments were
received and that Council discussed the items listed on the agenda with no reportable
actions taken. Closed Session was adjourned at approximately 6:07 p.m. to the Study
Session.
M/Tye reported that tonight's Study Session included a staff presentation regarding the
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program Pilot Project, which is also included in
tonight's regular meeting.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C/Herrera led the Pledge of Allegiance.
INVOCATION: Ab Kastle, Diamond Canyon Christian Church gave the
invocation.
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL
ROLL CALL: Council Members Chang, Herrera, Zirbes,
(telephonically), Mayor Pro Tem Tanaka, and Mayor Tye.
Staff Present: James DeStefano, City Manager; David Doyle, Assistant
City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; Bob Rose, Community Services Director;
Nancy Fong, Community Development Director; Linda Magnuson, Finance Director; Ryan
McLean, Senior Management Analyst; Rick Yee, Senior Engineer; Kimberly Molina,
Assistant Engineer; Joyce Lee, Management Analyst; Alfredo Estevez, IS Tech and
Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Submitted.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
1.1 M/Tye presented a Certificate of Recognition and City Pin to Suzanne Middle
School teacher Helen Papadopoulous, California Teacher of the Year for
2007. Jody Roberto representing Assemblyman Bob Huff's office also
presented a Certificate to Ms. Papadopoulos.
BUSINESS OF THE MONTH:
1.2 M/Tye presented a City Plaque to Mr. G's Pizzeria & Pasta Restaurant, 2767
S. Diamond Bar Boulevard (Country Hills Towne Center) as New Business of
the Month for February 2007. Owners Mary and Meddy Gorgani attended
later in the evening.
2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
2.1 January 20, 2007 E -Waste Collection Event
MA/Lee reported that on January 20, 2007 the City in partnership with ARC
International Corporation hosted an E -Waste Collection event in the City Hall
parking lot. MA/Lee gave a power point presentation depicting the event that
resulted in the collection of 54,184 pounds collected for recycling and
diversion from the landfill. The collection included 24,675 pounds consisting
of 189 televisions and 402 computer monitors; 182 pounds of batteries;
29,327 pounds of other electronics; 110 fluorescent tubes. As a result of this
event ARC will refund to the City $4,935 for the TV's and monitors. The
monies will be used for future recycling programs and for the residents of
D.B. The City plans another E -Waste Collection event in about six months.
2.2 MTA Bus Route 684 Status Update
DPW/Liu stated that Route line 684 currently runs from the Brea Mall through
D.B. via Diamond Bar Blvd. concluding at the Pomona Transit Center. At
this point Foothill Transit is interested in modifying their Route Line 193 to
possibly provide service through D.B. to the Brea Mall. Foothill plans to
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL
recommend this modification to their Board in early February and Foothill
staff has been directed to determine whether the consolidation is possible. If
approved, the recommendation will be taken to the governing board in May
for consideration and final approval. If approved, the updated line could
begin operating in September 2007. MTA indicated to staff that should the
Foothill proposal be approved they would not cancel their line 684 until
September 2007 to provide a seamless transition.
2.3 Caltrans State Route 57/60 HOV/Carpool Lane Update.
DPW/Liu reported that last Friday Caltrans reopened the westbound SR60 at
Brea Canyon Rd. and the carpool lane interchange is scheduled to open by
the end of February.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Julie McCasland, Diamond Bar Library Children's
Librarian, announced events scheduled for February 2007 and provided flyers
indicating dates, times and performers/events. She invited Council and the public to
participate.
Michael Spence, 21825 Narato PI., announced that on March 12th D.B.H.S. would
host its first Swim Meet at Walnut High School beginning at 12:00 noon. He invited
the Council and residents to come out and support the Diamond Bar High School
Swim Team.
Allen Wilson said he was concern about an article that appeared in the San Gabriel
Valley Tribune last week about the City's possible participation in the AERA Energy
Project and the proposal to gain a retail center/hotel by moving the existing golf
course. He wanted to know if there was a potential buyer for the existing golf
course property and whether a vote would be held to determine whether the
property would be rezoned under a General Plan amendment from Open Space to
Retail.
4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS: CM/DeStefano responded to Mr.
Wilson by stating that the City Council has been looking at the possibilities of how to
enhance the local revenue base in order to pay for ongoing services as well as, new
and expanded services into the future. Staff is looking at the potential re -use of
various properties within the City including the golf course. As one of its goals and
objectives the City Council has asked staff to begin exploring these properties and
issues. This exploration will lead to a great amount of public dialogue on potentially
doing something with the existing golf course. The County of Los Angeles owns the
property and as such, any and all efforts to do anything with the property would
require the approval of the County. There has been no specific plan proposed.
There is no buyer and the property is not being marketed. It is being explored for
potential use other than a golf course. The City is at the very preliminary stages of
such an exploration and will be communicating with the public within the next few
months with regard to the possibilities — not what the staff or Council wants, but to
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL
talk with the community about what it wants. The community has, over the years,
indicated it wants more places to shop, eat and to go for entertainment. The golf
course creates a potential site for that type of environment as well as a potential site
for new housing, more public uses, more park and recreational use, and so forth.
'The golf course will be impacted in future years with a likely expansion of the
SR57/60 freeway to deal with the weaving problems and increase in vehiculartrips.
No decisions have been made regarding the existing golf course property other
than for the Council to ask staff to begin preliminary studies and nothing will occur
without extensive public input. The County of Los Angeles has indicated that it
would not allow the golf course to be eliminated as an asset from the County's
system. Thus, the City has been exploring the possibility of relocating the golf
course to a location within or immediately adjacent to D.B. Accordingly, the City
Council has publicly decided to seek acquisition of property south of Pathfinder Rd.
west of the current City limits. Adjacent to that property is the AERA Energy
proposal and AERA has approached D.B. regarding consideration of their proposal
to develop a residential home project that includes parks, fire stations, schools, etc.
That project also has many years of process in its future. The City Council will take
a close look at whether such a project is appropriate for D.B. through public
meetings and public hearings. D.B. is a long way from deciding whether it is
appropriate to engage in entertaining approval of that type of a project.
C/Herrera asked if the golf course was designated as Open Space and would
require a vote to re -designate.
CM/DeStefano responded that the golf course was designated in the City's Master
Plan as "Golf Course" which is different from the General Plan designation and its
discussion about open space. In 1999 the City Council acted to change the
General Plan to state that any property that was designated "open space" would
require a vote of the people in order to change its designation. The golf course
property has more of a commercial/recreational category designation known as
"Golf Course" and does not require a vote of the people to change the designation.
SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting — February 8, 2007 — 7:00
p.m., Hearing Board Room, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
5.2 Planning Commission Meeting — February 13, 2007 — 7:00 p.m., Auditorium,
AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
5.3 President's Day Observance — February 19, 2007 — In observance of
President's Day, City Offices will be closed. City Offices will reopen
Tuesday, February 20, 2007.
5.4 City Council Meeting — February 20, 2007 — 6:30 p.m., Auditorium,
AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL
5.5 L.A. County Household Hazardous Waste/E-Waste Round Up — February
24, 2007 — 9:00 a.m. — 3:00 p.m. — Gateway Corporate Center, 1300 Block
of Bridge Gate Dr.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Chang moved, C/Herrera seconded to approve the
Consent Calendar as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Herrera, MPT/Tanaka, M/Tye
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Zirbes
6.1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
6.1.1 Study Session of January 16, 2006 — as Submitted.
6.1.2 Regular Meeting of January 16, 2006 — as Amended.
6.2 RECEIVED AND FILED PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — Regular
Meeting of December 12, 2006.
6.3 RECEIVED AND FILED PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
MINUTES —
6.3.1 Regular Meeting of September 28, 2006
6.3.2 Regular Meeting of November 16, 2006
6.4 RATIFIED CHECK REGISTER — containing checks dated January 11,
through January 31, 2007 totaling $1,433.565.06.
6.5 APPROVED TREASURER'S STATEMENT — month of December 2006.
6.6 REJECTED CLAIMS:
a) Filed by William Schoenhofen on December 5, 2006
b) Filed by Daniel J. Koretoff on October 27, 2006.
6.7 APPROVED EXONERATION OF SURETY BOND NO. 6042581 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $160,000 AND BOND NO. 6110216 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$8,000 POSTED BY PULTE HOME CORP. FOR TRACT NO. 52267 TO
COMPLETE DOMESTIC AND RECLAIMED WATER IMPROVEMENTS
AND DECK REMOVAL.
6.8 TRANSMITTED COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR
THE GOVERNMENTAL FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2006.
6.9 APPROVED REQUEST FOR FINAL PAYMENT OF $8,000 FROM THE
COALITION FOR PRACTICAL REGULATION (CPR) FOR THE TRASH
TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD (TMDL) APPEAL LITIGATION
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL
6.10 DENIED REQUEST FOR $6,000 FROM THE COALITION FOR PRACTICAL
REGULATION (CPR) FOR THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE
ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT LITIGATION.
6.11 APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 2007-06: APPROVING FINAL PARCEL
MAP NO. 61702 FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF A 13.69 ACRE SITE
(TARGET DEVELOPMENT) INTO THREE PARCELS LOCATED ON THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE AND GRAND
AVENUE RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2007-04 IN ITS ENTIRETY.
6.12 AWARDED CONTRACT TO ADVANCED INFRASTRUCTURE
MANAGEMENT, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $46,600 FOR
INFRASTRUCTURE VALUATION AND ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN
ACCORDANCE WITH GASB34.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
7.1 CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2005-01, ZONE
CHANGE NO. 2006-03, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2005-01, SPECIFIC
PLAN NO. 2005-01, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 63623,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005-01, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO.
2005-27 AND TREE PERMIT NO. 2005-06, PURSUANT TO THE
SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, CITY'S SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE (TITLE 21)
AND DEVELOPMENT CODE (TITLE 22, SECTIONS 22.22, 22.387, 2248,
2258, 22.60, 22.70 AND 22.62). THE PROPOSED PROJECT CONSISTS
OF A 99 -UNIT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, A PUBLIC
PARK AND OPEN SPACE AREAS ON APPROXIMATELY 34.52 ACRES,
LOCATED ON PROPERTY SOUTH OF LARKSTONE DRIVE, WEST OF
MORNING SUN AVENUE, WEST OF BREA CANYON ROAD, AND
NORTHWEST OF PEACEFUL HILLS ROAD. (RELATED FILE:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2005-01). (CONTINUED FROM
DECEMBER 19, 2006 and JANUARY 16, 2007)
DCM/DeStefano recommended that the City Council reopen the Public
Hearing to receive testimony and continue the matter to February 20, 2007 to
allow time for the applicant to complete traffic studies for the proposed
project.
M/Tye reopened the Public Hearing.
Kingdon Chew, 20447 Tam Oshanter Dr. recommended that with the
increased traffic from the proposed project a stop sign be placed on Colima
Rd. and Walnut Leaf Dr.; stop signs on Wind Terrace and Leann Terrace at
the Walnut Leaf Dr. entry; and on Walnut Leaf Dr. two stop signs
southbound and northbound; speed humps at the golf course; stop signs on
both sides of Tam Oshanter at the intersections of Chapel Hill Dr. and at
Chapel Hill Dr. southbound and two additional stop signs on Chapel Hill Dr.
north and southbound; and, also consider speaking with the Rowland
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL
Heights school bus director to consider moving the school bus stop on
Walnut Leaf to provide for a line of sight in both directions.
Russell Kepler, 1522 Dab Court (at Larkstone) said he was not necessarily
opposed to the project and understood that there would be only one
ingress/egress from the project and one emergency ingress/egress. He
encouraged the City to include two ingress/egress points, one at Morning
Sun and one at Larkstone. He commented on the traffic study and
encouraged implementation of traffic calming measures to ensure the safety
of school children. He asked for clarification about how far the entry would
be from the back of his back wall, whether there would be some kind of
sound abatement and whether landscaping was planned behind his home.
Kurt Nelson, applicant, said that the augmented traffic information would
address the speakers' concerns. He concurred with staff's recommendation
to continue the public hearing to February 20, 2007.
C/Herrera moved, C/Chang seconded to continue the matter to February 20,
2007 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Herrera, MPT/Tanaka,
M/Tye
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Zirbes
7.2 RESOLUTION NO. 2007-07: CONSIDERATION OF A COMPREHENSIVE
SIGN PROGRAM NO. 2006-04, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-01
AND VARIANCE NO. 2006-04 PURSUANT TO THE DEVELOPMENT
CODE TITLE 22, SECTIONS 22.36.060, 22.58 AND 22.54. THE
PROPOSED PROJECT CONSISTS OF A COMPREHENSIVE SIGN
PROGRAM FOR THE COUNTRY HILLS TOWNE CENTER, A VARIANCE
TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED MONUMENT SIGN SETBACK FROM
PROPERTY LINE AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
MODIFICATIONS TO AN EXISTING NON -CONFORMING PYLON SIGN.
CDD/Fong presented the staff report. The proposed sign program consists
of two center identification monument signs, two monument tenant
identification signs flanking the center's entry; three sets of monument signs
perpendicular to Diamond Bar Blvd.; one combined for Burger King and KFC
and another sign for multi -tenant identification. Staff believes that there is
sufficient justification for the monument sign to remain in its current location
and include a new sign to set back two feet from the property line. Also
proposed is a set of on-site directional signs to point drivers to specific types
of tenants. Two additional monument signs lie on each of the side streets,
Cold Springs and Fountain Springs to identify types of businesses. The
current code does not include the type of pylon sign that exists; however,
through the Conditional Use Permit the sign could be maintained and
renovated to what has been proposed. During its review the Planning
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL
Commission suggested the applicant place street numbers on the pylon sign
to identify addresses. Also proposed are wall signs for the buildings that
house some of the major tenants. The applicant has proposed that the wall
signs provide 25% of the space for non-English signage. On January 23rd
the Planning Commission reviewed the sign program, found that it met the
code and recommended City Council approval of Sign Program No. 2006-04,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-01 and Variance No. 2006-04.
CDD/Fong confirmed to C/Herrera that 75% of the sign face would contain
English characters and numbers and the remaining 25% could contain non-
English characters and numbers.
M/Tye referred to Page 7 of the insert and asked if there were 10 monument
signs proposed for this project. He said he could not think of another project
in D.B. that had so many monument signs.
CDD/Fong agreed and stated that the Comprehensive Sign Program allowed
flexibility. The Sign Ordinance also allows different types of monument signs
i.e. center identification signs, tenant identification signs, etc. and could also
maintain the existing pylon signs. Three monument signs exist, one of which
belongs to and is owned by AAA. This shopping center is very different from
other shopping centers in D.B. For example, the center is 20 ft. below street
level and is very difficult to view from the street and all of the tenants need
exposure to the street grade.
M/Tye opened the Public Hearing.
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, M/Tye closed the
Public Hearing.
M/Tye felt the proposal was aesthetically pleasing and that D.B. would be
able to enjoy a completely refurbished center. He was concerned about the
number of signs and asked Mr. McCarthy to understand that the City Council
would do everything possible to help him make the center profitable and
hoped that Mr. McCarthy would give the same consideration to his tenants.
C/Chang thanked staff for a good presentation. The project is moving
forward and the property owner is realizing his commitment to revitalize the
center. He was very happy that non-English lettering would not exceed 25%
because D.B. wants to be friendly to everyone. The shopping center
is very accessible and parking spaces are ample in size.
C/Chang moved, C/Tanaka seconded to approve Sign Program 2006-04,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-01 and Variance No. 2006-04. Motion
carried by the following Roll Call vote:
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL
Q
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Herrera, MPT/Tanaka,
M/Tye
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Zirbes
COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
8.1 RESOLUTION NO. 2007-08: AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2006-07
MUNICIPAL BUDGET.
FD/Magnuson reported that the mid -year budget amendment proposes that
the estimated General Fund resources be increased by $572,420 to a total of
$23,782,780. Included in the revenue changes are slight adjustments to
property taxes and other taxes to more closely reflect the actual revenues
received so far this fiscal year. State subventions were increased by
$138,450 to reflect higher than anticipated vehicle license fee, property tax
and in -lieu fee payments. Other major revenue adjustments have to do with
developer related fees such as the planning developer fees in the amount of
$290,000 and traffic mitigation fees amounting to $246,000, which were
received as a result of the Target and Brookfield Homes development. The
changes in the General Fund expenditures total an increase of $63,860.
These changes include an increase to the Special Legal Services to cover
additional costs associated with various lawsuits that have confronted the
City. The General Government Professional Services Expenditure Account
has been increased by $60,000 to pay for property tax administration
charges assessed by Los Angeles County. Law Enforcement Fees have
increased by $70,000 for Special Event Fees, an amount offset by revenues.
Staff believed that once Target and Brookfield projects were completed
traffic enforcement would no longer be needed for Calvary Chapel traffic
enforcement. However, enforcement continues. The Building and Safety
Contract and Services Budget were decreased by $20,450 to partially fund a
new City permit technician. Salaries and benefits were increased for
Community Services by $86,310 to eliminate staff charges in the Landscape
and Lighting Assessment Districts. As an offset, staff eliminated the $90,000
budget for landscaping for City owned land at Brea Canyon Rd. and
Diamond Bar Blvd. Decreases in the Public Works and Engineering contract
services are due to less than anticipated development activities that require
inspection and plan check. The amendment proposes changes to several
CIP projects. Overall, the mid -year budget amendment proposes an
increased estimate in revenues of $1,076, 940 for all funds and an overall
increase in appropriations of $465,970 for all funds for an overall increase in
fund balances throughout the City including General Fund and Special Funds
of $610,870. If the City Council chose to include the "Movies Under the
Stars" program the anticipated cost for FY06/07 would be $24,300 for the
purchase of the projector, screen, advertising, etc. If approved, the mid -year
budget would be modified accordingly.
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 10 CITY COUNCIL
CM/DeStefano stated that revenues exceed expenditures. Staff is
requesting Council consideration regarding incorporation of "Movies in the
Park" to allow sufficient time to plan a summer series. The $24,000 figure
includes the cost of equipment that would be used for many years hence
rather than renting the equipment at a very high cost each year. Thereafter,
an annual cost of about $4,000 is assumed for seven nights of movies to be
coordinated with seven concerts in the park during the summer with movies
to be shown free of charge immediately following the concert in the park.
CM/DeStefano assured the City Council that the financial state of the City
remained strong.
C/Herrera said she appreciated staff's diligence and also appreciated current
and past Councils that have consistently spent wisely and amassed reserves
of nearly $30 Million, which has allowed the City to build a community center
and continue to take in more than it spends. As a result, she supported all of
staff's recommendations.
C/Chang agreed with C/Herrera's comments. The City continues to spend its
money wisely while continuing to improve the quality of life.
There was no one present who wished to speak on this item.
C/Herrera moved, C/Chang seconded to adopt Resolution 2007-08. Motion
carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Herrera, MPT/Tanaka,
M/Tye
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Zirbes
8.2 CONSIDERATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM (NTMP) PILOT PROJECT.
PWD/Liu presented the staff report that contained background information,
results of the survey and open house and recommendations.
Joel Falter, Katz Okitsu & Associates gave a power point presentation and
overview of the NTMP project from October 2005 to date. He explained the
types of mitigation measures installed in the fall of 2006 for each of the five
areas. Typically, it is recommended that these pilot measures be monitored
for at least six months prior to making recommendations. Since there was a
high level of pubic interest it was decided to move forward to determine
whether to continue as prescribed or make adjustments. Mr. Falter
explained that staff asked for feedback from the residents and overall there
is a positive reaction to the program thus far. In Area 1 about two-thirds find
the program effective, the community is split about 50/50 as to whether they
like the particular tool that was installed and about 60% want the program
continued. Data for Area 2 is similar to Areal with slightly more than half of
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 11 CITY COUNCIL
the residents favoring the program and about 50/50 as to whether they like
the tool that was installed. On Castle Rock about 55% of the people do not
like the program and there is a 50/50 split as to whether people want to see
the program continued. Area 3 residents were most vocal. The data shows
that volumes have remained about the same, there have been some
reductions in speed and some have stayed the same. The primary tool on
Rancheria that has generated a lot of public interest and discussion is a
temporary traffic circle. It is very clear from the comments received that over
80% of the people do not find the tool effective and almost two-thirds of the
residents do not want the program to continue on their street. On Golden
Prados a little more than half of the people find the program effective, they
like the tool that has been installed and want the program continued.
Changes in Area 4 have produced minimal changes but staff believes the
tools are valuable in slowing traffic. Comments from residents on Maple Hill
and Cliffbranch have been mostly positive, they like the tools that were
installed and want the program continued on their streets. There have been
reductions in travel speeds in Area 5. Nearly 60% of residents in this area
found the devices were not effective and a little more than half do not want
the program continued and clearly do not want the tools on their street to be
maintained.
DPW/Liu stated that based on the data the goals have been achieved.
However, there have been traffic volume changes on selected roadway
segments, specifically in the Lycoming and Glenwood neighborhoods and
these anomalies can be attributed to the closing of Brea Canyon Rd. causing
motorists to use Lycoming as an alternative route. Staff continues to monitor
the situation with the Sheriff's Department. In addition, staff has received
comments that there is increased traffic on Bower Cascade and
Charmingdale. Accordingly, staff will recommend to the City Council that this
evaluation process continue to make sure that the changes are not causing
negative impacts to adjacent streets. In Area 1 the most common comment
is that residents want speed humps instead of speed bumps. Residents in
Area 2 do not like the Texas dots. Residents of Castle Rock requested
speed cushions between Fountain Springs and Cold Springs. Residents on
Golden Prados would prefer stop signs instead of Texas dots. Residents on
Rancheria and Jubilee feel the tools are a waste of money, they like speed
cushions and prefer stop signs instead of Texas dots. In Area 4 the Maple
Hill residents have requested installation of devices on adjacent streets.
Cliffbranch and Bella Pine residents like the speed cushions and adjacent
residents want measures on their streets. In Area 5 there were several
comments about residents wanting a traffic signal and comments about cut -
through traffic. Staff also received comments from residents who were in
favor of the tools and others that wanted the tools removed. Based on data
received today and staff's observations and analysis, staff recommends
some field modifications to the prior projects. 1) removal of the two traffic
circles from Rancheria Rd; 2) removal of the Texas dots from Golden Prados
at Hopi St.; 3) removal of the Texas dots from Fountain Springs; 4) removal
of some of the Texas dots on Maple Hill that prevented adequate
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 12 CITY COUNCIL
ingress/egress of the Maple Hill Elementary School and Maple Hill Park
driveways; 5) add additional advisory speed signage at various locations in
coordination with the speed cushions; 6) continue to evaluate and consider
the reduction of speed cushions along Sunset Crossing Rd.; and, 7) continue
to work with the community to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the
remaining pilot program approvals that were installed and continue to work
with the Sheriff's Department to monitor the traffic operations in the program
areas to ensure motorist compliance with all traffic regulations.
DPW/Liu stated that in order to refine the City's Neighborhood Traffic
Management Program process, staff further recommends that clarifications
be made to the current manual and guidelines adopted by the City Council
on October 4, 2005. These changes would qualify how residents would
initiate the process (Section 1.4.1). Bullet 1 would be changed to read: "The
City receives a written request to mitigate a traffic concern..." and add "by a
petition of 51 percent of the households on the affected streets." Bullet 3
would be changed to read. "a meeting for the residents along the affected
streets will be held to discuss their concerns and gather firsthand
information." DPW/Liu concluded that the NTMP represents the City's
commitment to the safety and livability of every neighborhood. The pilot
project serves as a demonstration to residents and the traffic calming
measures serve as visual examples. The ultimate solution requires changing
driving and travel behavior and this process provides a method for residents
to identify, prioritize and address neighborhood traffic problems. The
process requires careful planning, a willingness to change habits and
community consensus -building. Staff recommends that the City Council
approve modifications to the existing Neighborhood Traffic Management
Program pilot project areas as identified and continue to monitor the program
over the next five months at which time additional speed and volume data
would be collected. Once a thorough engineering analysis is completed staff
would return to Council with a final report of the pilot projects. Staff
recommends that the City Council receive and file tonight's presentation,
approve the proposed modifications, direct staff to continue engineering
evaluation of the pilot projects and approve the modifications to the
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program Manual and Guidelines.
C/Herrera asked if there would be replacement tools put in place with the
removal of the traffic circles on Rancheria.
DPW/Liu responded that the residents have asked for installation of stop
signs and the first step in the process would be for staff to conduct a stop
sign warrant study in accordance with the required criteria. The results of the
study will be presented to the residents and if stop signs are not warranted
staff will ask the residents to consider other options.
M/Tye asked if the curb south of Northminister Church would be restored
when the traffic circles were removed.
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 13 CITY COUNCIL
DPW/Liu responded affirmatively.
M/Tye remarked that the January 20 open
presentation by staff and the City's consultant
attending and expressing their concerns and
experience for all involved.
house was an outstanding
s. He thanked residents for
felt it was a great learning
Jo -Ann Carter, 1130 S. Calbourne Dr. commented that there was extensive
speeding on her street and that it was being used by cut -through traffic from
Walnut Springs Dr. to Walnut Dr. South. She said the problem was brought
to the attention of the Traffic and Transportation Commission several months
ago at which time she was told that a neighborhood survey would be
conducted and questionnaires would be sent out to the residents, neither of
which was done. She attended the open house and felt staff was very
accommodating and that the event was very informative. She asked that her
area be considered for traffic control mitigation and that Sgt. Blasnek had
committed to checking out the area on a regular basis. She said she felt she
lived in the outcast part of D.B.
Mike Jestrab, 435 Charmingdale Rd. stated that he and some of his
neighbors were never notified about any neighborhood meetings. He asked
that when changes are contemplated in neighborhoods, that all affected
residents be notified prior to the City making changes. He became involved
after the Texas dots were installed. Rancheria/Casa Loma intersection is a
three-way intersection and the Texas dots slow the traffic coming off of
Rancheria but do not slow the traffic coming down the hill. He felt the data
compiled by staff was not representative of the residents' concerns. He said
he was also concerned whetherfire trucks would be able to navigate through
the area and the fact that there were no options for enforcing Texas dots.
Gil Jones, 23527 Casa Loma Dr., said he was pleased to learn that the
circles would be removed from Rancheria and Casa Loma. He was never
notified about any meetings and was not aware of the installation of calming
devices until he saw the dots being installed. He was also concerned about
whether anyone was looking at the feasibility of these devices prior to
installation because taxpayer dollars were being spent on these tools.
Navanit Lal, 23577 Jublilee Ln. presented a petition to the City Council
signed by 22 residents who were in favor of removing the Texas dots and the
speed bumps on their street as soon as possible.
Nashita Lal, also of 23577 Jubilee Ln. said that children were always playing
inside the circle and she felt it presented a hazard to their safety. Also, there
are a number of elderly and disabled individuals who live on the street and
the dots seem to cause more problems for them. There is not a lot of traffic
volume. However, people speed down the hill. She would appreciate it if
there were "yield" signs placed at every corner adjacent to the traffic circles
because there is no signage it causes confusion and near collisions when
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 14 CITY COUNCIL
people do not realize they are approaching a traffic circle. If the traffic circles
were removed it would be better to place the stop or yield signs on the
opposing streets and not the main street. She suggested that in the future
staff place a large sign on the street to notify residents about projects. There
was a sign on Goldrush that indicated the area was being patrolled and felt
similar signs in other areas would be a great deterrent.
Craig Clute, 21217 Fountain Springs Rd. said he receives and reads all
notices regarding these and other City issues. He opposes removal of the
mitigation measures and opposes additional signage impacts. He voiced his
support for what staff, City Council and the Traffic and Transportation
Commission have continued to pursue with projects such as the NTMP
program. These types of projects require patience and persistence on the
part of staff, engineers and residents in finding compromising solutions for
some of the City's worst traffic issues especially in residential areas, near
schools, parks and churches. For ten years residents have asked the City to
mitigate and manage traffic concerns. In the past the City has supported
hiring more law enforcement officers and has worked more closely with
school districts, established prima facia speed limits, installed signals and
stop signs. The City has worked diligently to push for the 57160 HOV project
now under construction, has addressed parking problems at numerous
locations and has implemented neighborhood studies and improvements
allowing for safer and calmer community streets. In Area 2 Fountain Springs
Rd. has seen at least a 10 -mile an hour reduction in speed since the pre -95
levels when speeds were at close to 50 mph. In the area of Castle Rock
Elementary School speeds have been reduced by 10 mph. Speeds have
been reduced at the Evergreen Springs Elementary School site and at the
Heritage Park location along Brea Canyon Rd. Parking issues around
D.B.H.S. have been greatly improved. Substantial traffic flow improvements
have been implemented at Chaparral Middle School. Similar improvements
are seen at other study areas. The City has made some great improvements
over the many years and he hoped the City would continue to support future
mitigation measures and support more permanent improvement such as
landscaping and additional enforcement and education. It takes time and
commitment for these measures to work. Many residents support the City's
efforts and thank the City for its time and commitment.
Robert Derefield, 22167 Jubilee Ln. said he too wanted the speed cushions
removed from his street.
M/Tye closed public comments.
C/Herrera said she appreciated staff's responses to public requests that this
be looked at sooner than the originally scheduled six-month timeline and for
scheduling an open house so that residents could offer their input. The City
lies between two major freeways and is deluged with and greatly impacted by
regional traffic problems. Change is difficult and residents need to learn to
drive more slowly and remain cautious and alert. In an effort for the City to
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 15 CITY COUNCIL
provide traffic solutions to its neighborhoods careful consideration was given
to traffic engineering solutions that have proved to be very effective in other
areas. She was pleased that this matter would be reviewed again in five
months.
C/Chang commended staff for their efforts and in depth study of this issue.
Generally, the City bases its programs on input from the residents and
moves forward in a methodical manner to provide information to the
community prior to initiating studies and programs. He asked residents to
please read letters, news bulletins and publications from the City because
they contain information that directly affects each and every resident.
MPT/Tanaka asked residents to please be patient through this process and
give the Council input so that the City can provide the best possible
solutions.
M/Tye said that what he appreciated about the program was that it was a
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program. He lives on a cul-de-sac with
16 homes and his neighborhood is different from every other neighborhood
in town. This was not a "one size fits all" solution to traffic problems. Not
only does the City have cut -through traffic problems it has many residents to
the east who have only one way to get to Los Angeles and Orange Counties
for their jobs. Often drivers pass through the City and the City needs to give
drivers a way to stay on the freeway and traffic calming measures do that.
This is a process and a very well managed process. After attending the
January 20 open house he realized that these traffic -calming measures at
least got people talking. He wanted to understand how a change to 51
percent would apply and whether it would include residents only on a certain
street and whether the percentage was comprised of households or
respondents. With an eye toward improving traffic in a neighborhood and
citywide the City will continue to work with this program. He again
complimented DPW/Liu and Mr. Falter for their presentation and for being
open and flexible throughout the process.
C/Herrera moved, C/Chang seconded to receive and file tonight's
presentation, approve the proposed modifications, direct staff to continue
engineering evaluation of the pilot projects and approve the modifications to
the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program Manual and Guidelines.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
Chang, Herrera, MPT/Tanaka,
M/Tye
None
Zirbes
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 16 CITY COUNCIL
8.3 CONSIDERATION OF BATTING CAGES AT PANTERA AND PETERSON
PARKS.
CSD/Rose stated that in early 2004 Council, staff and local sports
organizations met on numerous occasions to discuss needs of the various
sports organizations and to create ideas for acquiring additional park space
to accommodate sports facilities and to determine ways to enhance existing
facilities. Additional park space was not acquired and the task force
recognized the need for precise scheduling and maximum field space use.
The Parks and Recreation Commission recommended staff research
installation of batting cages to allow fields to be used for other activities and
to allow simultaneous use of the grass field portion of the parks by the youth
soccer teams. The City's contract landscape architect from David Evans &
Associates determined that Peterson and Pantera parks would provide
excellent opportunities for quality batting cages. Concepts were presented
during public meetings in the affected neighborhoods. In an effort to respond
to public concerns regarding installation of a cage at Pantera Park, staff held
a simulated batting cage demonstration on December 14. 148 notices were
mailed to addresses located near the park and twelve residents attended the
demonstration during which decibel levels were recorded. Notices were
mailed to 209 addresses near Peterson Park advising them of the November
23 meeting at Diamond Point Elementary School. Seven individuals
attended the meeting and no one opposed installation of a batting cage at
Peterson Park. There was no simulation conducted at Peterson Park
however, staff recorded ambient levels on December 13. At their regular
January 25 meeting the Parks and Recreation Commission considered
construction of batting cages at Pantera and Peterson parks. Notices of the
meeting were mailed to 357 addresses nearthe park. Three residents spoke
at the Commission meeting, two in favor and one questioned the need and
cost for batting cages at Pantera Park. The Parks and Recreation
Commission voted to recommend City Council approval of construction of
batting cages at Peterson Park and that construction of batting cages at
Pantera Park be delayed until after the batting cages at Peterson Park had
been constructed allowing time for review of usage to determine use pattern
of the batting cages, visualize how the cages might look at Pantera based on
the look at Peterson Park, determine if there were any safety or lighting
issues and provide time to develop and refine a use policy for the batting
cages. The majority of the Commissioners made it clear they do not oppose
the eventual construction of batting cages at Pantera Park.
CSD/Rose stated that staff proposes to construct two batting cages at each
park for use by sports organizations at both Pantera and Peterson Parks as
a single construction project with the batting cage at Peterson Park located in
a single structure on the first base side of the field near Golden Springs Dr.
and the batting cage at Pantera Park located in a single structure on the third
base side of the ball field near Bow Creek. The two batting cages at each
park would be side by side enclosed with chain link fencing on all sides and
top. The surface material would be decomposed granite and the user groups
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 17 CITY COUNCIL
would provide the pitching machines. Electrical access would be available in
each batting cage and the existing ball field lights would provide lighting for
the cages. Staff believes construction should take place at the same time for
both parks to provide economy of scale and possibly save the City about 5%
or $5,600. The estimated cost for both parks is $132,669 that would be paid
from the current budget of $149,650 in Park Development Funds for the
project. Notices were sent to residents near both parks about tonight's
agenda item.
There were no public comments offered.
C/Chang felt it was a good project and supported staff's recommendation.
MPT/Tanaka agreed that it was a positive project because staff was able to
convey the safety of the facility and how the cages would result in better use
of the parks.
C/Herrera said that over the past several years the task force has studied
better use of the City's fields. Most recently lighting was added to the
Lorbeer Middle School fields, which increased use of the fields and the City
intends to spend more than $1 million to upgrade the quality of the fields so
that more youth organizations are provided greater opportunities. The
Sports Task Force wanted batting cages for the youth and the City is
responding. She supported this agenda item.
M/Tye attended the preliminary meetings and staff addressed resident's
concerns at follow up meetings to allay fears that the use would create
additional noise. In fact, the simulation showed that traffic would create
more noise than the pitching machines. Bottom line is that these batting
cages will enhance greater and more effective use of the limited resources
the City has.
C/Chang moved, C/Herrera seconded to approve staffs recommendation to
construct batting cages at both Peterson and Pantera parks as a single
construction project for a total estimated cost of $132,669. Motion carried by
the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Herrera, MPT/Tanaka,
M/Tye
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Zirbes
9. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTSICOUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS:
C/Chang said the City Council continues to work on behalf of the community to
uphold its level of service while continuing to build its reserves. He commended the
residents for participating in the E -Waste program. He spoke about the agenda
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 18 CITY COUNCIL
items that were approved by Council this evening to help improve the community.
He wished everyone a Happy Chinese New Years and wished them peace and
prosperity.
C/Herrera said it was always good to see the City Council acting on the wishes of
the residents. Everything Council Members do is for the benefit of the residents.
Traffic continues to be an aggravation in the City as it has been for a number of
years. It is important for this City Council to work with other organizations and
municipalities to affect regional change. Phyllis Papen, the City's first mayor began
working to improve the regional traffic situation, a situation that has grown
increasingly worse with the passage of time. Phyllis became involved with different
organizations in order to affect solutions that would benefit D.B. and as such, was
an alternate on the MTA Board where she appealed to Caltrans to make sure it got
on a funding list for allocation of monies to create carpool lanes, a project that
began four years ago. Bob Huff was very involved in LA Council of Governments
and with Alameda Corridor East Construction Authority because he and others
realized that with goods movement and products coming into California ports that
there would be a significant increase in truck traffic as well as train traffic. As a
result, the grade separation project on Brea Canyon Rd. is underway to provide
trains the ability to move through areas without stopping at train crossings and
results in quieter neighborhoods because trains will no longer need to blow their
whistles at crossings that no longer exist. In 1998-1999 Eileen Ansari was involved
with Contract Cities and Bob Huff was involved with COG and she was President of
the LA County Division for the League of California Cities and each person went to
the cities in those organizations seeking resolutions in support of the fight against
Lanterman and the State of California wanting to bring forensic clients to the area.
Because of this work these individuals affected a very positive outcome for D.B. and
were able to get the State to withdraw its plans. At this time D.B. is still suffering
from increasing traffic. There are more trucks and trains and the SR57/60
interchange is a huge problem with accidents occurring daily and traffic leaving the
freeway and moving through the City. The air pollution in this area is worse than in
surrounding areas because vehicles are moving at a very slow pace. It is important
for everyone to work together to get solutions and funding. The City has been
successful in getting long-term funding options on MTA and SKAG lists for the final
fix of the SR57/60 interchange. D.B. formed a coalition of cities, which she chairs,
to get funding from Caltrans and from the Federal Government. The Councils'
primary responsibility and concern is to focus what will most benefit the residents
and the City.
MPT/Tanaka attended Neighborhood Watch meetings and thanked Deputy St.
Amant for his presentations and to the Sheriff's Department for responding to
residents' concerns. He and M/Tye attended the Friends of the Library Volunteer
Appreciation dinner; he and C/Herrera attended the St. Denis Leadership Awards
dinner; he attended the D.B. 4 -Youth meeting and reported thatthe WUSD adopted
the plan; attended a grand opening at the Diamond Bar Plaza building and one at
the Wells Fargo Bank. He also attended the WCCA meeting and thanked
CM/DeStefano for his excellent presentation regarding the potential land purchase
involving the AERA project. He thanked former staff member Ryan Wright for his
FEBRUARY 6, 2007 PAGE 19 CITY COUNCIL
service to D.B.
M/Tye said he appreciated Council Members' involvement in meetings and
community affairs and their focus in listening to residents and work toward making
the community better. He congratulated C/Herrera on her participation in getting
LA County to vote to join COG. He congratulated staff and the consultant for their
participation in the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program pilot project. It is
affirmation that the City is making every effort to render its neighborhoods as livable
as possible. He offered kudos to Mark St. Amant for his presentation to the
Cherrydale Neighborhood Watch members. Last Saturday he, Assemblyman Huff
and MPT/Tanaka attended the Wells Fargo open house and were pleased to
welcome them back to D.B. He wished Chinese citizens Gung Hay Fat Choy,
Chinese New Year, Year of the Pig.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Tye adjourned the Regular City
Council meeting at 9:50 p.m.
TOMMYE CRIBBINS, CITY CLERK
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of 12007.
STEVE TYE, MAYOR
Agenda No. 6.2
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 9, 2007
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Nelson called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality
Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar,
California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chairman Torng led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Kathleen Nolan, Osman
Wei, Vice Chairman Tony Torng and Chairman Steve Nelson.
Also present: Nancy Fong, Community Development Director; Ann
Lungu, Associate Planner; Gregg Kovacevich, Assistant City Attorney, Peter
Lewandowski, Consultant, and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered.
3 APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Submitted
4 CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 12, 2006.
VC/Torng moved, C/Nolan seconded to approve the Minutes of
December 12, 2006, as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5. OLD BUSINESS:
6. NEW BUSINESS:
COMMISSIONERS
COMMISSIONERS
COMMISSIONERS
None
None
VC/Torng, Nolan, Lee, Wei,
Chair/Nelson
None
None
JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
7.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
7.1 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No 54081, Zone Change No. 2006-02/
Planned Development, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18 Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree
Permit No. 2002-13 — In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, City's
Subdivision Ordinance — Title 21, Development Code — Title 22, Sections
22.14, 22.58, 22.22, 22.54 and 22.38, the proposed project was a 22 lot
subdivision on a site of approximately 12.9 acres that would provide for the
development of 16 single-family detached homes on individual parcels
ranging in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to 10,506 square feet.
The proposed project would include the construction of private streets,
graded pads, manufactured slopes and retaining walls; an easement for a
public pedestrian trail in a portion of proposed open space areas, and the
removal of a portion of existing vegetation.
The current zoning of the project site is R-1-10,000. The Zone Change to
RL/Planned Development Overlay provides for compliance with the General
Plan land use designation and maximum flexibility in the site planning and
design, thereby allowing smaller lots in order to retain more open space
within the project boundaries. The Conditional Use Permit relates to grading
and development within a hillside area. The Variance relates to retaining
walls that are proposed at a height greater than six feet. The Tree Permit
relates to the removal, replacement and protection of oak and walnut trees.
(Continued from December 12, 2006)
PROJECT ADDRESS:
PROPERTY OWNER/
APPLICANT:
At the southern terminus of
Crooked Creek Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Daniel Singh
Jewel Ridge, LLC
10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232
AssocP/Lungu presented staffs report and provided the Planning
Commissioners with photographs and responses to Commissioner's
requests and concerns at the December 12, 2006, public hearing. Also in
accordance with the Commission's request, the applicant submitted a
revised landscape plan that shows a variety of tree and size planted 12 -feet
on center. Staff revised the condition to the resolution accordingly.
JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
Additionally, in accordance with the Commission's request, the applicant
provided information and structural drawings depicting the type of wall
system proposed and included renditions of types of planting materials to be
planted in the cells of the wall system.
Following the presentation AssocP/Lungu said that the Planning Commission
had the following options: 1) approve a resolution recommending City
Council approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03, Zone
Change No. 2006-02/Panned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit
No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13;
2) recommend approval to the Council with additional conditions;
3) recommend approval to the City Council with elimination of some lots;
4) direct the applicant to redesign the project, or 5) recommend City Council
denial of the project. She recited new conditions added to the resolution in
accordance with the Commission's recommendations.
AssocP/Lungu stated that Planning Commissioners were provided a copy of
a letter from Gregory Shockley, 3711 Crooked Creek Drive that discussed his
thoughts about the project.
Chair/Nelson declared the continued public hearing open and asked for
comments.
Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge Estates, again explained the project and its
history. He said that at each public hearing on this project staff has
recommended approval and the applicant has complied with and exceeded
every request made by the Commission. He believed it would be somewhat
unusual for people driving down the freeway to focus on the development.
Steve Miller, Ladera Systems, Costa Mesa, introduced the Planning
Commission to the segmental block retaining wall system that was proposed
for use on the project site and discussed its application using vegetation to
landscape its face using a power point presentation.
C/Lee asked Mr. Miller if he was a professional engineer and Mr. Miller
responded that he was a geologist. C/Lee referred to a resident's comment
that this type of wall system tends to be used for commercial projects rather
than residential projects. Mr. Miller responded that the resident must not be
very familiar with the product because there were many single-family home
JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
residential construction projects using this type of system and said found the
resident's comment to be irrelevant.
VC/Torng asked about the earthquake load and Mr. Miller said it was very
common to apply a surcharge during the analysis. His firm follows AASHTO
or NCMA design guidelines. In both cases the site static earthquake loading
is applied. The geotechnical engineers take site conditions, proximity to
most active earthquake faults, the maximum credible number (size) of an
earthquake that would occur on that particular fault and make
recommendations for peak route accelerations. Mr. Miller indicated to
VC/Torng that the most sizeable earthquake would be about 7.0 and
dynamic factors of safety are commonly 75 percent of static factors.
VC/Torng asked Mr. Miller if he was pretty sure it would be safe and
Mr. Miller responded that his firm would follow all applicable building codes
and generally accepted procedures and design methodologies for design of
retaining walls.
Gregory Shokley asked what would happen if the wall failed.
Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing.
There were no disclosures by the Commissioners.
Chair/Nelson asked Mr. Miller to respond to Mr. Shokley's question, what
would happen to the houses below if the wall failed. Mr. Miller said he was
not afraid to say that there are failures in construction. His experience with
retaining walls when they fail — especially geo-synthetic retaining walls, with
which he has a fair amount of experience, is usually in the facing element.
He has never seen a reinforced geo-grid zone fail. Therefore, the area of
failure lies within several feet of the retaining wall depending on the height.
VC/Torng said the key question was whether there was a safety issue and
could there be a large area of damage due to seismic activity. Mr. Miller
responded that certainly depending on where a house is located with respect
to the retaining wall is apropos. If the retaining wall was 12 feet high and the
house was three feet away and there were to be an issue regarding the
stability of the wall the panels could fall near the house. Engineers formulate
designs for what is understood and what is known and engineers cannot
design for what they do not know. A meteor could hit the earth near this
project site any time in the future and could impact the performance of the
JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
project. What engineers do is design things to standards of practice and
they are built and inspected to the standards of practice and when projects
do that there are no problems.
Chair/Nelson asked how far from the toe of the proposed retaining wall
assemblage the nearest residential structure was located. Mr. Singh
responded that he believed there was a 10 -foot distance between the
existing walls and the proposed walls and that most houses have a 25-40
foot rear yard; therefore the distance from the proposed retaining wall to the
actual residence would be from 35 to 60 feet before the first six-foot wall.
The planting distance between the lowest wall and the next wall up the slope
is five feet and there are five feet between each wall thereafter. Each wall is
six feet high and the total height is 18 feet. Mr. Miller said that visually, the
worst case scenario would be the entire embankment failing — the geo-grid
structure as well as the facing elements and traditionally, engineers use a 2:1
rule where the total height would fail at a slope of 2:1. Therefore, the
resulting influence of a complete failure would be about 36 feet.
C/Nolan asked Mr. Shokley to give the Commission specific failure
information. Mr. Shokley responded that he cited three examples in the letter
he addressed to the Commission and that there are more. He said he could
find a number in the Journal of Civil Engineering. Most failures are failure of
soil due to over watering. He cited failures near Cal State LA and Universal
City. His concern was whether the 16 homes would have the resources to
rebuild and or repair their homes and the homes below them in case of
failure or would the City be held responsible.
CDD/Fong stated that the City's Engineering staff has placed a condition on
this property that the applicant submit very detailed information by engineers
and geotechnical engineers to assure that the geological concerns were
addressed in the design of the wall. Staff is not saying that this is the only
material that can be approved; however, the applicant has proposed the
system and material and staff reviews the application to make certain that it
meets best practices and standards. City staff must conduct a thorough
review of the proposed materials to make sure that they are adequate for the
project and site.
CDD/Fong responded to C/Lee that Diamond Bar and southern California is
earthquake country and no one could define what would happen if a big
earthquake occurred because it would be based on pure speculation.
JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
However, engineers and technical staff are experts in this area and apply
standards to all projects to make certain that the best practices and
standards are met based upon what the experts know.
ACA/Kovacevich explained that when the Commission makes its decision
this evening that the decision must be supported by "Findings of Fact" and
those findings have to be supported by substantial evidence. Substantial
findings consist of 1) facts, 2) expert opinion based on facts; and,
3) reasonable assumptions based or predicated on facts. In the record
tonight there is no substantial evidence of any risk of catastrophic failure or
any other matters of concern. On the other hand, there is substantial
evidence for success in the form of expert opinion from a geologist based on
fact as presented in the public hearing process and related materials.
C/Nolan moved, C/Wei seconded, to adopt a resolution recommending City
Council approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03, Zone
Change No. 2006-02/Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit
No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13. Motion
carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan, Wei, C/Torng,
Chair/
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None
CDD/Fong explained that this project moves to the City Council for
consideration and residents will have an opportunityto offer further testimony
in that venue.
8. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTSIINFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
CDD/Fong pointed out to VC/Torng that in accordance with the conditions of
approval for the project discussed this evening the homeowners' association is
responsible for maintenance of the common open space area and the retaining
walls. With respect to VC/Torng's comment about the number of times this project
has been before the Planning Commission, it is outside of staff's control. Staff
attempts to present all pertinent information to the Commission at the initial public
hearing and can only prepare the information if the applicant provides the
information. Sometimes applicants provide sufficient information to move the
projects forward and if the Commission requests additional information it leads to
JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
continuances until the applicant is able to prepare and provide the requested
information. Therefore, staff has little control over whether the applicant is going to
prepare the information the Commission wants. Different applicants have different
styles. Staff strives to make certain that the necessary minimum amount of
information is provided before bringing a project before the Planning Commission.
VC/Torng asked his colleagues to have more trust that the City's engineering staff
would make certain that projects were properly designed and constructed.
C/Lee said he voted "no" on this project because he was not confident that such a
high retaining wall should be constructed behind residential homes. He also felt the
project was not compatible with the appearance of the surrounding neighborhoods.
C/Wei said he shared C/Lee's concerns but he has confidence in the City's
engineers and in that respect he echoed VC/Torng's opinion that the City's
engineers would do everything possible to protect life and property. He said he
appreciated staff's participation and explanation.
Chair/Nelson thanked the applicant for providing the Commission with the aerial
simulations because it was exactly what he had requested the first time he asked for
the information. He suggested staff retain the photos to use as examples of what
the City would like to have applicants produce for future projects. Chair/Nelson said
this was not a slam-dunk approval for him and he agreed with C/Lee's comments.
His vote for approval was based on the merits of the project, a project that was
pared back from its original design. An environmental analysis indicates that there
are no unavoidable significant adverse impacts as a result of this project. This
Commission added conditions and mitigation measures and he became satisfied
that the project mitigated potential adverse impacts to the degree practicable and to
be reasonably expected. He said his vote was also predicated on a perspective he
gained when he attended a SCAG conference in Ontario a couple of years ago.
The growth projections for the Inland Empire region including Diamond Bar were
such that by the year 2015 six million additional people would occupy the area and
the shocking statistic is that 70-75 percent comes from inside the area. He said he
has a very strong sense of responsibility for this City to do its fair share of providing
for that population growth — certainly not at any significant environmental cost and
not at the cost of human welfare and safety. Unfortunately, this project impacts in a
serious way several residences and yet it does not compel him to set aside the
responsibility he feels. Everyone has to do his part. In looking at the simulation he
was gratified that the project did not creep up the hill to the ridgeline. He hoped that
the applicant understood his need to see exactly what was intended for this project
and he hoped that the residents who had expressed their honest and sincere
opposition would also understand that perspective.
JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION
9. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS.
CDD/Fong stated that the 2007 Planners Institute would be held in San Diego from
March 21 to March 23. Commissioners who plan to attend should call
SAA/Marquez to make reservations.
9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects.
10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in tonight's agenda.
ADJOURNMENT: adjourned the re ular mher esiness before eting ng at 8 12 phm Planning Commission,
Acting Chairman Lee add 9
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 9th day of January, 2007.
Attest:
Respectfully Submitted,
�pfiby+-ong
Community
Go'
48e veNelson, Chairman
Director
Agenda No. 6.3
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING
NOVEMBER 9, 2006
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Shah called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality
Management/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar,
California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Lin led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL: Commissioners Jimmy Lin, Kenneth Mok, Liana
Pincher, Vice Chairman Michael Shay, and Chairman Jack Shah.
Also Present: David Liu, Public Works Director; Rick Yee, Senior
Engineer; Kimberly Molina, Associate Engineer, and Marcy Hilario, Senior Administrative
Assistant.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes of the October 12, 2006 meeting
C/Lin moved, C/Mok seconded to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried
by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
Lin, Mok, Chair/Shah
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
Pincher, VC/Shay
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
II. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Robert Hsieh, a 20 -year resident who resides in the
Summitridge/Leyland area, complained about traffic problems, potholes, cut through
traffic and wondered why the City had not installed cameras to catch violators.
Although he has heard a lot of dialogue about the City's attention to traffic concerns,
in his opinion, the problem has gotten worse and not improved. He said it takes him -
45 minutes from Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road to Diamond Bar
Boulevard and Grand Avenue - about 3 miles, during peak hours. He wondered why
D.B. residents should have to suffer for cut -through traffic. He recommended repairs
be made during late night hours, that the traffic signal lights be synchronized to allow
for better traffic flow and cameras be installed at Diamond Bar Boulevard and Grand
Avenue to catch traffic violators. He also recommended that the through streets be
turned into toll roads except for D.B. residents.
III.
Patrick Ray thanked the City for installing speed cushions on Cliffbranch Drive
because it has slowed down some of the traffic although there are many vehicles that
do not slowdown for the speed cushions. He asked the City to approve installation of
Texas dots down the middle or side of his street. However, after the last Council
meeting he drove his street and realized his request made no sense because the
distance between the driveways was too short. However, he felt that the white and
NOVEMBER 9, 2006 PAGE 2 T&T COMMISSION
yellow street markers would help guide the traffic. He was also concerned about the
Diamond Bar Boulevard/Grand Avenue intersection traffic. Like the previous speaker,
Mr. Ray wondered if the City had considered installing cameras at that intersection
and other intersections to catch traffic violators.
SENee responded to public speakers that the situation on Diamond Bar Boulevard
has worsened to some degree due to construction of the Grand Avenue
improvements that extend from Cahill Place to Rolling Knoll. Staff has taken
measures to address traffic concerns by conducting the major portion of paving and
grinding at night. Work began last Sunday and should be completed by tomorrow
night. Other factors have affected Diamond Bar Boulevard traffic flow. For example,
as the paving was laid down it created a transition from the existing pavement to the
new pavement, which happened to occur at the intersection of Diamond Bar
Boulevard and Grand Avenue. Traffic slows down for the transition bump. Another
reason forthe recent congested traffic flow was due to a communications breakdown
between the advance loops and controllers for the intersection. In order to
accommodate construction, the contractor installed wireless video detection cameras
at the intersection the week prior to commencement of paving work, which appeared
to be working but ultimately contributed to the breakdown. As a result, the City's
traffic engineer has modified the timing of the signal to accommodate the fact that the
advance loops were not working. In the meantime, the adjustment will serve to
mitigate the condition experienced over the last couple of nights.
C/Lin explained to Mr. Hsieh that the Traffic and Transportation Commission is an
advisory body to the City Council. There is no short-term solution to Mr. Hsieh's
concerns and solutions are two -fold: Either increase the capacity of the street or
better manage the traffic. D.B. has a capacity problem and has struggled to
determine whether Grand Avenue and Diamond Bar Boulevard should be widened
from two to three lanes. If Grand Avenue were widened, it would take some of the
businesses along the street. Over the years the City Council has elected to go with
the traffic management solution. The City has been working diligently on signalization
to increase the traffic capacity and efficiency. With respect to stop signs, there is a
Uniform Traffic Control Handbook that dictates what cities must follow to determine
whether a stop sign is warranted. He said he was certain staff had done a very
thorough job in determining that every stop sign installation was warranted. Warrants
are not governed by traffic volume alone. There are 11 different warrants. He offered
that if Mr. Hsieh wanted more information he could contact staff. Until the problems
of the SR57/60 are completely solved so that traffic moves freely and quickly through
the area, drivers will take the path of least resistance by cutting through D.B. streets
such as Diamond Bar Boulevard. C/Lin recommended that staff limit construction on
Grand Avenue and Diamond Bar Boulevard to off-peak hours.
PWD/Liu stated that D.B. is faced with regional traffic issues and the existing
roadways do not offer choices. D.B. is looking for a solution to fix the SR57/60
interchange, which is the ultimate solution to the City's traffic problems. At this time,
D.B., City of Industry and the MTA have joined forces and are funding a feasibility
study to determine options to address the long-term needs along the two-mile
corridor. The study should be concluded by Spring, 2007. Tonight's agenda includes
NOVEMBER 9, 2006 PAGE 3 T&T COMMISSION
IV.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
updates on regional projects designed to address these problems. Until there is a
regional solution for the SR57/60 interchange D.B. will continue to experience the
current daily traffic along its major arterials. Three years ago, the City implemented a
citywide traffic signal synchronization project. In order to ensure the longevity of the
City's infrastructure, D.B. must work within its budget to implement major roadway
projects. When construction is taking place, staff works to minimize the impacts to
residents and businesses. During the next 18 months the City will be building a traffic
control center that will interconnect all traffic signals within the City and the City will be
able to manage citywide traffic from a central location. There are many challenges
and the City believes there are a number of potential opportunities. He also spoke
about the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program and referred speakers to
Agenda Item IX. H. He announced there would be a series of five or six follow up
meetings forthe pilot program scheduled to begin in Januaryto continue working with
the residents along the 12 affected streets.
CONSENT CALENDAR: None
ITEMS FROM STAFF
A. Traffic Enforcement Update - Received and filed on the following items:
Citations: August — October 2006
2. Collisions: August — October 2006
3. . Street Sweeping: August — October 2006
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS: None
STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS None
ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS
VC/Shay stated that one of the most important aspects of stop sign warrants was
safety and staff gives careful consideration to installation of stop signs.
C/Mok said he was an original homeowner in Mr. Hsieh's area. He lives on Longview
Drive close to Leyland and understands Mr. Hsieh's concern about the speed
cushions and stop signs. C/Mok said he welcomed the stop signs because people
race down the street. He said he believed the stop signs were located near cul-de-
sacs to slow the downhill traffic.
C/Pincher said she and her husband attended a Scout Dogs of the United States
conference in South Carolina and she was very impressed with the "forgotten
heroes". She was also very impressed with the slurry seal in her zone and found the
project was handled in a very unobtrusive manner. She pointed out that the
NOVEMBER 9, 2006 PAGE 4 T&T COMMISSION
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program made the front page of the City News
and offered kudos to the staff members who write these types of articles. She said
she was pleased to see that there was good publicity about what was happening in
the City. She encouraged anyone who had questions to talk with staff.
C/Lin urged Mr. Hsieh to attend the next City Council meeting to repeat some of the
statements he made this evening.
Chair/Shah said the landscaping along Grand Avenue was beautiful and thanked staff
for their efforts. The Target opening and street improvement was well coordinated
and the traffic impacts were minimal. He said the Commission appreciates public
input and that comments are taken under advisement.
IX. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
AE/Molina referred to an e-mail from a resident regarding illegal left turns occurring
out of the Denny's driveway when drivers turn left onto Pathfinder, a turn restricted by
the double yellow line. The resident requested that a "Right -Turn -Only" sign be
installed at the driveway egress. However, the driveway is private property and the
City does not have the authority to install a sign. Therefore, staff intends to send the
request to the property owner that they consider installing the sign. In the meantime,
the Sheriff's Department monitors the area as frequently as possible and issues
tickets to offenders.
AE/Molina stated that a second request referred to a blind spot along southbound
Diamond Bar Boulevard at the Albertson's shopping center right turn -in between
Albertson's and the Post Office. Staff investigated the request and said she would be
in touch with the requester to get additional information. From staffs perspective, the
blind spot may be a result of private property landscaping. If that is the case, staff
intends to work with the property owner to mitigate the concern.
A. Caltrans 57/60 Freeway Construction Project
PWD/Liu reported that according to Caltrans the project was on schedule and
scheduled to be completed by December 2006. The westbound on-ramp to
the SR60 at Brea Canyon Road is scheduled to be open by mid December.
B. Grand Avenue Improvements Project — Phases I&II
SE/Yee stated that outstanding items include additional landscaping, utility
adjustments and striping of the new pavement. Full completion of the project
is slated for mid December.
C. Traffic Signal modifications and Installations Project
SE/Yee reported that there were a number of left -turn protected/permissive
signals that would be installed at the following locations: Brea Canyon Road
at Silver Bullet; Diamond Bar Boulevard at Mountain Laurel; Golden Springs
NOVEMBER 9, 2006 PAGE 5 T&T COMMISSION
Drive and Prospectors Road; Diamond Bar Boulevard at Highland Valley; and,
Diamond Bar Boulevard and Shadow Canyon. In addition, segments of signal
interconnect are being installed as part of this project. The portion between
Cahill and Rolling Knoll on Grand Avenue was completed and there is some
additional outstanding interconnect from Rolling Knoll up to Summitridge on
Grand Avenue and Highland Valley Road still to be completed.
D. Target/Brookfield Homes Project
A/E Molina reported that Target is moving full speed ahead in anticipation of
the upcoming holiday season and negotiations are underway for ultimate
development of restaurants on the two vacant pads. Last week was the grand
opening of the 10 -unit attached Brookfield townhouses, which are now open
for public viewing. All models are open and detached homes are selling
briskly.
E. Industry's Grand Avenue Bridge Widening/Interchange Project
PWD/Liu reported that the project report is nearly complete. Currently, five
alternatives are being considered and all of the alternatives involve widening
the over -crossing at Grand Avenue in order to increase the number of lanes
from four lanes up to eight lanes. Some of the proposed alternatives would
significantly impact the golf course property. Environmental documents will be
circulated in the next few months. The bridge -widening project is anticipated
to commence in 2009.
F. Lemon Avenue On/Off Ramps Project
PWD/Liu stated that the primary purpose of this project was to relieve
congestion in D.B. in the vicinity of Brea Canyon Road and Golden Springs
Drive intersection. Three alternatives are being considered that would include
on and off ramp connections. One of the alternatives includes a service road
running parallel to the SR60 connecting Brea Canyon Road to the east and
Lemon Avenue to the west.
G. Prospectors Road Street Rehabilitation Project
AE/Molina reported that staff reviewed the plans and minor modifications were
requested prior to advertising for bids. Staff anticipates bids will go out the
beginning of January.
H. NTMP Pilot Project
AE/Molina reported that construction was completed and staff anticipates
taking a Notice of Completion to the City Council on November 21. The next
step includes traffic data collection. Surveys will be sent to the affected
residences in the pilot project areas. Once the surveys are analyzed
neighborhood meetings will be scheduled for January and February.
NOVEMBER 9, 2006 PAGE 6 T&T COMMISSION
Washington Street Cul -de -Sac
AE/Molina reported that staff completed the plan check and anticipates
advertising for bids in January with a contract award anticipated for February.
This project is designed to install the permanent cul-de-sac at the end of
Washington Street to disallow through traffic to the City of Industry.
J. Brea Canyon Road ACE Grade Separation Project
SE/Yee stated that southbound Brea Canyon Road between Washington
Street and Spanish Lane is shut down. One northbound lane remains open.
Construction of the shufly continues prior to construction of the bridge over
crossing. Full closure of Brea Canyon is tentatively set for December 8.
K. SR57/60 Feasibility Study
PWD/Liu stated that this is a feasibility study of the long-term physical options
for the interchange area. MTA is collecting additional traffic data and intends
to present several alternatives in 2007. Staff intends to study the alternatives
to see how they fit into the design alternatives for the Grand Avenue Bridge
Widening Projects.
L. Pomona Valley Intelligent Transportation System (PVITS)
SE/Yee stated that since the last Commission meeting, staff interviewed the
short list of consultants being considered for this project. Staff is currently
checking references and has not yet come to a final decision until some of the
installations in the area can be verified as meeting the needs of the City. Staff
hopes to make its decision by early December.
XII. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE CITY EVENTS: As listed in the Agenda.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Traffic and
Transportation Commission, Chair/Shah adjourned the meeting at 8:25 p.m.
Respec ly,
David G. Liu, Secretary
Agenda # 6 4
Meeting Date: February 20, 2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members f the City Council
FROM: James DeStefano, City Mana e
TITLE: Ratification of Check Register dated eb uary 1, 2007 through February
14, 2007 totaling $710,223.65.
RECOMMENDATION:
Ratify.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Expenditure of $710,223.65 in City funds.
BACKGROUND:
The City has established the policy of issuing accounts payable checks on a weekly
basis with City Council ratification at the next scheduled City Council meeting.
DISCUSSION:
The attached check register containing checks dated February 1, 2007 through
February 14, 2007 for $710,223.65 is being presented for ratification. All payments
have been made in compliance with the City's purchasing policies and procedures.
Payments have been reviewed and approved by the appropriate departmental staff and
the attached Affidavit affirms that the check register has been audited and deemed
accurate by the Finance Director.
PREPARED BY:
Linda G. Magnuson
Finance Director
REVIEWED BY:
Finance Director
Assistant City M ager
Attachments: Affidavit and Check Register — 02/01/07 through 02/14/07.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
CHECK REGISTER AFFIDAVIT
The attached listings of demands, invoices, and claims in the form of a check register
including checks dated February 1, 2007 through February 14, 2007 has been audited
and is certified as accurate. Payments have been allowed from the following funds in
these amounts:
Fund #
Description
Amount
001
General Fund
$466,015.80
112
Prop A - Transit Fund
26,728.42
115
Int. Waste Mgt Fund
27,048.92
118
AB2766 - AQMD Fund
1,348.19
125
CDBG Fund
14,085.95
126
Citizens Option for Public Safety Fd
4,400.00
138
LLAD #38 Fund
1,218.41
139
LLAD #39 Fund
1,218.41
141
LLAD #41 Fund
1,218.26
250
Capital Improvement Project Fund
166,941.29
$710,223.65
Signed:
Linda G. Magnuson
Finance Director
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date
Check Number
Vendor Name
Transaction Description
Fund/ Dept
Acct #
Amount
Total Check Amount
2/8/2007
07 -PP 03
PAYROLL TRANSFER
P/R TRANSFER-07/PP 03
125
10200
1,556.70
$138,166.98
2/8/2007
74177
PAYROLL TRANSFER
P/R TRANSFER-071PP 03
138
10200
1,218.41
$1,032.00
2/8/2007
PAYROLL TRANSFER
P/R TRANSFER-07/PP 03
139
10200
1,218.41
2/8/2007
PAYROLL TRANSFER
P/R TRANSFER-07/PP 03
112
10200
5,202.30
2/8/2007
PAYROLL TRANSFER
P/R TRANSFER -07/1313 03
115
10200
6,590.55
2/8/2007
PAYROLL TRANSFER
P/R TRANSFER-07/PP 03
118
10200
1,348.19
2/8/2007
PAYROLL TRANSFER
P/R TRANSFER-07/PP 03
001
10200
119,814.16
2/8/2007
PAYROLL TRANSFER
P/R TRANSFER-07/PP 03
141
10200
1,218.26
2/8/2007 1 07-PP03A 1PAYROLL TRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-07/PP 03A 1 001 1 10200 1 9,927.811 $9,927.81
2/2/2007
74175
JABRAKADOODLE CORP
CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER
0015350
45320
160.00
$264.00
2/2/2007
ABRAKADOODLE CORP
CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER
0015350
1
45320
1 104.00
2/2/2007
74176
ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES INC
SPL EVENT INS -OCT -DEC 06
001
1 23004 1
7,995.051
$7,995.05
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
SLOPE REPAIR -DBC
2505310
46415
330.00
2/2/2007
74177
JANGELS BASEBALL
EXCURSION -DAY CAMP
10015350
42410 1
1,032.001
$1,032.00
2/2/2007
74178
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
PROF.SVCS-EN 06-528
001
23012
180.00
$2,862.50
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
SLOPE REPAIR -DBC
2505310
46415
330.00
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
PROF.SVCS-EN 05-486
001
23012
412.50
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-528
001
23012
32.40
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-528
001
34650
-32.40
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
PROF.SVCS-EN 06-534
001
23012
330.00
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-534
001
23012
59.40
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-534
001
34650
-59.40
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
PROF.SVCS-EN 06-534
001
23012
330.00
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-534
001
23012
59.40
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-534
001
34650
-59.40
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
PROF.SVCS-EN 06-534
001
23012
330.00
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-534
001
23012
59.40
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-534
001
34650
-59.40
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
ADMIN FEE -EN 04-413
001
23012
171.00
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
ADMIN FEE -EN 04-413
001
34650
-171.00
2/2/2007
ARROYO GEOTECHNICAL CORP
PROF.SVCS-EN 04A13
001
23012
950.00
Page 1
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date
Check Number
Vendor Name
Transaction Description
Fund/ Dept
Acct #
Amount
Total Check Amount
2/2/2007
74179
AT & T
PH -SVCS -GENERAL
0014090
42125
19.54
$19.54
2/2/2007
74180
ATHLETIC WORLD ADVERTISING
FALL 07
0014095
42115
309.99
$619.98
2!2/2007
ATHLETIC WORLD ADVERTISING
FAD-DIB3HS-DHS
SPRING 07
0014095
42115
309.99
2/2/2007
74181
BONTERRA CONSULTING INC.
PROF.SVCS-FER 96-1
001
23011
1,594.38
$1,594.38
2/2/2007
BONTERRA CONSULTING INC.
ADMIN FEE-FER 96-1
001
23011
286.99
2/2/2007
74186
BONTERRA CONSULTING INC.
ADMIN FEE-FER 96-1
001
34430
-286.99
$1,215.00
2/2/200774182
74184
MARIA BOTROUS
PK REFUND -DBC
001
23002
350.00
$282.00
2/2/2007
MARIA BOTROUS
PROPERTY DAMAGE -DBC
001
36615
68.00
2/2/2007 1 74183 ROB BRANTLEY PK REFUND -DBC 1 001 1 23002 1 350.00 $350.00
2/2/2007
74184
JBSN SPORTS CORP
SUPPLIES -RECREATION
0015350
41200
955.28
$1,250.56
2/2/2007
BSN SPORTS CORP
SUPPLIES-PANTERA PK
0015340
42210
295.28
2/2/2007
74185
SHARON BUTLER]
CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER
0015350
45320
84.00
$84.00
2/2/2007
CDW GOVERNMENT INC.
COMP MAINT-HARDWARE
0014070
42205
789.20
2/2/2007 1
74186
CAROLWOOD PRODUCTIONS
PROF.SVCS-SYC CYN PK
0014095
R44000
1,215.00
$1,215.00
2/2/2007
74187
CATALINA BALLAST BULB COMPANY
SUPPLIES -DBC
1 0015333
1 41200
84.20
$84.20
2/2/2007
74188
CDW GOVERNMENT INC.
COMP MAINT-HARDWARE
0014070
42205
2,171.76
$3,003.90
2/2/2007
CDW GOVERNMENT INC.
COMP MAINT-HARDWARE
0014070
42205
789.20
2/2/2007
CDW GOVERNMENT INC.
COMP MAINT-HARDWARE
0014070
41200
42.94
2/2!2007 1 74189 TINA CHANG ICONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 1 0015350 1 45320 108.00 $108.00
2/2/2007
74190
1JEALINE CHAVEZ
PK REFUND -DBC
001
23002
500.00
$293.20
2/2/2007
JEALINE CHAVEZ
PROPERTY DAMAGE
001
36615
1 -206.80
2/2/2007
74191
CINGULAR WIRELESS
CELL CHRGS-POOL VEH
0014090
42125
11.44
$34.32
2/2/2007
CINGULAR WIRELESS
CELL CHRGS-POOL VEH
0014090
42125
11.44
2/2/2007
CINGULAR WIRELESS
CELL CHRGS-POOL VEH
0014090
42125
11.44
2/2/2007 1 74192 ICITY OF WALNUT SVCS -YOUTH COUNSELING 1264411 1 44000 1 4,400.00 $4,400.00
Page 2
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date I Check Number
Vendor Name
Transaction Description I Fund/ Dept I Acct # I Amount I Total Check Amount
2/2/2007 74193 ICITY OF WALNUT CCCA CONF-1/8/2007 1 0014030 1 42330 1 362.231 $362.23
2/2/2007
2/2/2007
74194
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2006-189
PROF.SVCS-FPL 2005-147
001
001
34430
23010
-478.80
$14,107.50
2/2/2007
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2005-147
001
23010
8,455.00
1,521.90
36615
23002
2/2/2007
$316.00
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2005-147
001
34430
-1,521.90
JANITORIAL SVCS -PARKS
JANITORIAL SVCS -DBC NOV
JANITORIAL SVCS -PARKS
JANITORIAL SVCS -DBC DEC
2/2/2007
42210
45300
42210
45300
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
PROF.SVCS-FPL 2004-85
001
23010
190.00
2/2/2007
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2004-85
001
23010
34.20
2/2/2007
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2004-85
001
34430
-34.20
2/2/2007
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2006-224
001
34430
-115.43
2/2/2007
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
PROF.SVCS-FPL 2006-189
001
23010
2,660.00
2/2/2007
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2006-189
001
23010
478.80
2/2/2007
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
CONTRACT SVCS-PLNG
0015210
44000
855.00
2/2/2007
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
PROF.SVCS-FPL 2006-224
001
23010
641.25
2/2/2007
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2006-224
001
23010
115.43
2/2/2007
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
CONTRACT SVCS-PLNG
0015210
44000
522.50
2/2/2007
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
CONTRACT SVCS-PLNG
0015210
44000
332.50
212/2007
CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
CONTRACT SVCS-PLNG
0015210
44000
451.25
2/2/2007 74195 JDAY & NITE COPY CENTER PRINT SVCS-PLNG 0015210 1 42110 1 344.241$344.24
2/2/2007
2/2/2007
74196
DENNIS CAROL
DENNIS CAROL
PROF.SVCS-PLNG MTG
PROF.SVCS-PLNG COMM
0015210
0015210
44000
44000
250.00
100.00
$350.00
2/2/2007
2/2!2007
74197
JAYESH DESAI
JAYESH DESAI IPK
PROPERTY DAMAGE -DBC
REFUND -DBC
001
001
36615
23002
-34.00
350.00
$316.00
2/2/2007
2/212007
2/2/2007
2/2/2007
74198
DH MAINTENANCE
DH MAINTENANCE
DH MAINTENANCE
DH MAINTENANCE
JANITORIAL SVCS -PARKS
JANITORIAL SVCS -DBC NOV
JANITORIAL SVCS -PARKS
JANITORIAL SVCS -DBC DEC
0015340
0015333
0015340
0015333
42210
45300
42210
45300
725.00
12,006.50
725.00
12,006.50
$25,463.00
2/2/2007 74199 IDIAMOND BAR IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION AD -E -WASTE COLLECTION 0014095 42115 450.00 $450.00
2/2/2007 74200 DIAMOND BAR INTERNATIONAL DELI MTG SUPPLIES -GENERAL 0014090 42325 230.001 $230.00
Page 3
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
c
heck Date Check Number
2i2nnn7 I 7d9M lrliARAnKIM nen
vemur IVame
Transaction Description I Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount
2/2/2007 I 74203 IDOG DEALERS INC CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 0015350 45320 20.40 $20.40
L22/2/2007
/2/2007
1 74204
JENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRTN-SYC CYN PK
RETENTIONS PAYABLE
2505310
250
1 46415
20300
2/2/2007
74205
EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT
EXPRESS MAIL -FPL 2006-213
001
23010
2/2/2007
EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT
EXPRESS MAIL -FPL 2006-208
001
23010
2/2/2007
EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT
EXPRESS MAIL -FPL 2006-201
001
23010
Page 4
167,868.10$151,081.29
-16,786.81
14.401 $100.80
14.40
14.40
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date
Check Number
Vendor Name
Transaction Description
001
Fund/ Dept
2/2/2007
2/2/2007
2/2/2007
2/2/2007
74205...
EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT
EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT
EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT
EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT
EXPRESS MAIL -FPL 2006-201
EXPRESS MAIL -FPL 2006-213
EXPRESS MAIL -FPL 2006-208
EXPRESS MAIL -FPL 2002-63
001
001
001
001
2/2/2007 74206 DAVID FERNANDEZ CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 0015350 45320 1 1,147.50 $1,147.50
2/2/2007 74207 GRAND MOBIL VEH MAINT-COMM SVCS 0015310 42200 262.81 $930.56
2/2/2007 GRAND MOBIL VEH MAINT-ROAD MAINT 0015554 42200 1 667.75
2/2/2007
Acct #
Amount
Total Check Amount
001
23010
14.40
$100.80...
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-518
23010
14.40
001
HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
23010
14.40
2/2/2007
115.94
23010
14.40
0015551
2/2/2007
2/2/2007 74206 DAVID FERNANDEZ CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 0015350 45320 1 1,147.50 $1,147.50
2/2/2007 74207 GRAND MOBIL VEH MAINT-COMM SVCS 0015310 42200 262.81 $930.56
2/2/2007 GRAND MOBIL VEH MAINT-ROAD MAINT 0015554 42200 1 667.75
2/2/2007
74208
HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
PROF.SVCS-EN 06-523
001
2/2/2007
45223
HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-518
001
2/2/2007
001
HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
PROF.SVCS-PLAN CHECK
0015551
2/2/2007
115.94
HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
PROF.SVCS-PLAN CHECK
0015551
2/2/2007
23012
HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-523
001
2/2/2007
HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
PROF -SVCS -PLAN CHECK
0015551
2/2/2007
HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-518
001
2/2/2007
HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
PROF.SVCS-EN 06-518
001
2/2/2007
HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
PROF.SVCS-PLAN CHECK
0015551
2/2/2007
HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
ADMIN FEE -EN 06-523
001
23012
225.00
$1,686.14
34650
-41.00
PK REFUND -DBC
45223
198.75
500 00
45223
342.25
001
34650
-56.25
$450.00
45223
115.94
45300
23012
41.00
23012
164.00
R45223
640.20
23012
56 25
2/2/2007 74209 SHIRLEY HELMER SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS 0015350 41200 26.61
$26.61
2/2/2007 74210 HOLLYWOOD BOWL EXCURSION -JULY 4TH 0015350 1 45310 1334.001 $334.00
2/2/2007 I 74211 (HOTEL NIKK _SAN FRANCISCO
2/2/2007 74212 MARIAN HYAMS
2/2/2007 1 74213 ICHRISTINA IHRIG
2/2/2007 I 74214 (INLAND ROUNDBALL OFFICIALS
I 0014030
2/2/2007
2/2/2007
2/2/2007
74215
INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN
INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN
INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN
LEAGUE CONF-R MCLEAN
I 0014030
42330
419,52
$419.52
PK REFUND -DBC
001
23002
500 00
$500 00
PK REFUND -DBC
001
36615
450.001
$450.00
OFFICIAL SVCS -JAN 07
0015350
45300
440.00
$440.00
LEGAL AD -FPL 2006-248
001
23010
178.50
$607.25
LEGAL AD -FPL 2006-212
001
23010
207.50
LEGAL AD -FPL 2004-85
001
23010
221.25
Page 5
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount
2/2/2007 74216 INT'L COUNCIL OF SHOPPING CENTERSMEMBERSHIP DUES -COUNCIL 0014010 1 42315 1 50.00 $50.00
2/2/2007 74217 ARJAN JETHWANI PK REFUND -DBC 001 23002 550.00 $482.00
2/212007 ARJAN JETHWANI PROPERTY DAMAGE 001 36615 68.00
2/2/2007
74220
BENNY LIANG
PK REFUND -DBC
001
36615
405.00
$405.00
2/2/2007
74221
ILOS ANGELES ROYAL VISTA GOLF COURSE
CONTRACT SVCS -FALL
0015350
42140
432.00
$432.00
-67.41
2/2/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES-P/INFO
0014095
41200
2/2/2007
74222
MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK
FEB 07 -EAP PREMIUMS
001
21115
152.90
$152.90
195.00
2/2/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
0015350
41200
2/2/2007
74223
NINA MONZON
RECREATION REFUND
001
34780
53.001
$53.00
67.20
2/2/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
FILE CABINETS-P/INFO
0014095
46220
2/2/2007
74224
INATIONAL TELEPHONE MESSAGE CORP INC
JANNL MAINT-PHONE MESSAGE
1 0014090
42125
37.00
$37.00
2/2/2007
212/2007
74225
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
CREDIT MEMO-P/WORKS
0015510
41200
27.28
$2,673.13
CREDIT MEMO-P/WORKS
1155516
41200
-67.41
2/2/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES-P/INFO
0014095
41200
2/2/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -DBC
0015333
41200
195.00
2/2/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
0015350
41200
58.77
41.53
2/2/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
0015350
41200
67.20
2/2/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
FILE CABINETS-P/INFO
0014095
46220
2,090.48
2/2/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES-P/INFO
0014090
41200
15.86
2/2/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -DBC
0015333
41200
43.94
2/2/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -GENERAL
0014090
41200
14.49
2/2/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -GENERAL
0014090 1
41200 1
65.52
Page 6
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date
Check Number
Vendor Name
Transaction Description
Fund/ Dept
Acct #
Amount
Total Check Amount
2/2/2007
74225...
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -GENERAL
0014090
41200
128.78
$2,673.13 ...
2/2/2007
74227
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -CITY MANAGER
0014030
41200
12.06
$2,770.00
2/2/2007
74228
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -INFO SYS
0014070
41200
24.05
$20.00
2/2/2007
74232
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -GENERAL
0014090
41200
10.14
$242.17
2/2/2007 1
74226
JPAETEC COMMUNICATIONS INC.
LONG DIST PH SVCS-JAN/FEB
0014090
1 42125
782.97
$782.97
2/2/2007
74239
KANU PATEL
PK REFUND -DBC
001
1 36615
0.50
$350.00
2/2/2007 1
74227
IPANTAGES THEATRE
EXCURSION -WICKED SHOW
0015350
1 45310
2,770.00
$2,770.00
2/2/2007 1
74228
IMANSIPAREKH
RECREATION REFUND
001
1 34780
20.00
$20.00
2/2/2007
74229
KANU PATEL
PK REFUND -DBC
001
23002
100.00
$99.50
2/2/2007
74239
KANU PATEL
PK REFUND -DBC
001
1 36615
0.50
$350.00
2/2/2007 1
74230
IPOMONA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
RENTAL -WINTER SNOW FEST
0015350
42140
135.001
$135.00
2/2/2007
74239
STRADLING YOCCA CARLSON & RAUTH
LEGAL SVCS-WIFI
0014020 1
44021
5,147.80
$350.00
2/2/2007
74231
IPOMONA VALLEY YMCA
PROCEEDS -SNOW FEST
1 0015350
45300
242.171
$242.17
2/2/2007
74232
IPOMONA VALLEY YMCA
PROCEEDS -SNOW FEST
1 0015350
45300
242.17
$242.17
2/2/2007
74233
IREINBERGER PRINTWERKS
PRINT SVCS -BUS CARDS
0014095
42110
70.36
$70.36
2/2/2007
74234
ISAN GABRIEL VALLEY ECONOMIC PARTNER
MTG-N FONG 2/23
0015240
42330
105.00
$105.00
2/2/2007
74235
NINA SHAH
IRECREATION REFUND
001
34740
116.001
$116.00
2!2/2007
74236
ISIMPSON ADVERTISING INC
DESIGN SVCS -NEWSLETTER
0014095
44000
1,100.00
$1,100.00
2/2/2007
74237
STRADLING YOCCA CARLSON & RAUTH
LEGAL SERVICES - LIBRARY
0014020
44021
20,000.00
$25,147.80
2/2/2007
74239
STRADLING YOCCA CARLSON & RAUTH
LEGAL SVCS-WIFI
0014020 1
44021
5,147.80
$350.00
2/2/2007
74238
TENNIS ANYONE
CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER
1 0015350
1 45320 1
2,508.80
$2,508.80
2/2/2007 1
74239
IJOHN TERRY
PK REFUND -DBC
1 001
23002 1
350.001
$350.00
2/2/2007 1
74240
ITHE KOSMONT COMPANIES
CONSULTANT SVCS -DEC 06
1 0015240
R44000 1
250.00
$250.00
Page 7
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date
Check Number
Vendor Name
Transaction Description
Fund/ Dept
Acct #
Amount
Total Check Amount
2/2/2007
74241
THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER GR
LEGAL AD -FPL 2006-212
001
23010
232.42
$935.56
2/2/2007
74249
THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER GR
LEGAL AD-PLNG
0015210
42115
209.88
$512.95
2/2/2007
THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER GR
LEGAL AD -FPL 2004-85
001
23010
245.16
2/2/2007
THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER GR
LEGAL AD -FPL 2006-248
001
23010
248.10
2/2/2007
74242
TIME WARNER
INTERNET SVCS -HERITAGE PK
0015340
42126
23.49
$68.44
2/2/2007
TIME WARNER
MODEM SVCS -COUNCIL
0014010
42130
44.95
2/2/2007 1 74243 JUNITED PARCEL SERVICE EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL 1 0014090 1 42120 38.211 $38.21
2/2/2007
74244
CLAUDIA VERDUZCO
PK REFUND -DBC
001
23002
600.00
$532.00
2/2/2007
CLAUDIA VERDUZCO
PROPERTY DAMAGE
001
36615
-68.00
2/2/2007
74245
VERIZON CALIFORNIA
PH.SVCS-DBC
0015333
42125
226.70
$406.16
2/2/2007
VERIZON CALIFORNIA
PH.SVCS-MAPLE HILL
0015340
42125
89.73
2/2/2007
74249
VERIZON CALIFORNIA
PH.SVCS-REAGAN
0015340
42125
89.73
$512.95
2/2/2007
74246
VERIZON WIRELESS -LA
CELL CHRGS-EOC
0014440
42125
0.05
$249.14
2/2/2007
VERIZON WIRELESS -LA
CELL CHRGS-I.T
0014070
42125
50.69
2/2/2007
74249
VERIZON WIRELESS -LA
CELL CHRGS-I.T
0014070
42125
50.69
$512.95
2/2/2007
VERIZON WIRELESS -LA
CELL CHRGS-CM
0014030
42125
102.96
2/2/2007
VERIZON WIRELESS -LA
CELL CHRGS-EOC
0014440
42125
44.70
2/2/2007
VERIZON WIRELESS -LA
CELL CHRGS-EOC
0014440
42125
0.05
2/2/2007
74247
VISION SERVICE PLAN
FEB 07 -VISION PREM
_T
001
21107
1,253. 06
$1,299 .83
2/2/2007
VISION SERVICE PLAN
FEB 07 -COBRA VISION
001
21107
46.77
2/2/2007
74248
IWALNUT VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST
IFACILITY RENTAL-REC
1 0015350
1 42140 1
1,520.00
$1,520.00
2/2/2007
WELLS FARGO BANK
MTG-COUNCIL
0014010
42325
37.08
2/2/2007
74249
WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY
SUPPLIES -DBC
0015333
1 41200 1
512.951
$512.95
2/2/2007
74250
WELLS FARGO BANK
CCA LEG CONF-COUNCIL
0014010
42330
665.24
$820.95-
2/2/2007
WELLS FARGO BANK
MTG-COUNCIL
0014010
42325
37.08
2/2/2007
WELLS FARGO BANK
MTG-COUNCIL W/ HUFF
0014010
42325
96.70
2/2/2007
WELLS FARGO BANK
MTG-COUNCIL W/MAYOR
0014010
42325
21.93
Page 8
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date
Check Number
Vendor Name
Transaction Description
Fund/ Dept
Acct #
Amount
Total Check Amount
2/2/2007
74251
WELLS FARGO BANK
LEAGUE MTG-CMGR
0014030
42330
425.00
$1,331.75
2/2/2007
74254
WELLS FARGO BANK
CCCA MTG-CMGR
0014030
42330
236.11
$1,024.46
2/2/2007
WELLS FARGO BANK
CCCA MTG-CMGR
0014030
42330
670.64
2/2/2007
74252
WELLS FARGO BANK
MTG-DOYLE
0014030
42325
7.50
$565.94
2/2/2007
WELLS FARGO BANK
CALPELRA MBRSHP-CROSS
0014060
42315279.22
2/2/2007
74254
WELLS FARGO BANK
CALPELRA MBRSHP-DOYLE
0014030
42315
279.22
$1,024.46
2/2/2007
74253
IWELLS FARGO BANK
ILEAGUE OF CA MTG-COUNCIL
0014010
1 42330 1
564.081
$564.08
2/2/2007
74254
IWELLS FARGO BANK
ICCCAL LEG CONF-COUNCIL
0014010
1 42330 1
1,024.461
$1,024.46
2/2/2007
74255
IWINDOR
HIP PROG-310 BALLENA
1255215
1 44000 1
.518.001
$518.00
2/2/2007
74256
JDAVID WOO
RECREATION REFUND
001
1 36615 1
400.00
$400.00
2/6/2007
74257
IRYAN MCLEAN
PER DIEM -LEAGUE CM CONF
0014030
1 42330 1
210.00
$210.00
2/8/2007
74258
JADVANTEC CONSULTING ENGINEERS INC
ITRAFFIC MAINT-DEC 06
0015510
1 44000 1
4,821.601
$4,821.60
2/8/2007 1
74259
JAEP WORKSHOPS
CEQA TRNG-A LUNGU
1 0015210
1 42340 1120.00
$120.00
2/8/2007
74260
JAEP WORKSHOPS
MEMBERSHIP DUES-FONG
0015210
42315
120.001
$120.00
2/8/2007
74261
JALL WEATHER ROOFING
IHIP PROG-2480 SUNBRIGHT
1255215
44000
9,540.001
$9,540.00
2/8/2007
74262
ICARMEL ARCHES
PK REFUND -HERITAGE
001
23002
200.00
$200.00
2/8/2007
74263
IBENESYST
219/07-P/R DEDUCTIONS
001
21105
381.91
$381.91
2/8/2007
74264
BLUESKY CAFE
JMTG SUPPLIES-H/R
1 0014060
42325
62.521-
2.52
2/8/2007
2/8/2007 1
74265
IBUREAU VERITAS NORTH AMERICA INC
TRNG-EMP REQ PARTNER
0014060
42340
500.001
$500.00
2/8/2007
74266
JIVONNE CAMACHO
PK REFUND -HERITAGE
001
23002
200.001
$200.00
218/2007
74267
IJESS CARBAJAL
RECREATION REFUND
001
34730
100.00
$100.00
Page 9
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date
Check Number
Vendor Name
��]
Transaction Description
Fund/ Dept
Acct #
Amount
Total Check Amount
2/8/2007
74268
CAREONE MEDICAL CENTER
REFUND -TEMP SIGN
001
34430
100.001
$100.00
2/8/2007 1
74269
ICITY OF SIGNAL HILL
MEMBERSHIP DUES -2007
1 0015510
1 44240 1
1,250.001
$1,250.00
2/8/2007
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES INC
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2005-130
001
23010
356.40
2/8/2007 1
74270
ID & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC
BLDG & SFTY SVCS -DEC 06
0015220
1 45000 1
17,679.92
$17,679.92
2/8/2007 1
74271
JDAPEER ROSENBLIT & LITVAK LLP
ILEGAL SVCS -DEC 06
0015230
1 45213 1
337.501
$337.50
2/8/2007
74272
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES INC
PROF.SVCS-FPL 2005-130
001
23010
1,980.00
$1,980.00
2/8/2007
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES INC
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2005-130
001
23010
356.40
2/8/2007
74274
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES INC
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2005-130
001
34430
-356.40
$40.30
2/8/2007 1
74273
JDAVID J. GRUNDY
P & R COMM -JAN 07
1 0015350
1 44100 1
45.001
$45.00
2/8/2007
DELTA DENTAL
FEB 07 -COBRA PREM
001
21104
188.99
2/8/2007 1
74274
IJAMES DESTEFANO
REIMB-CCCA CONF
1 0014030
1 42330 1
40.301
$40.30
2/8/2007 1
74275
IDELTA CARE PMI
IFEB 07 -DENTAL PREM
1 001
21104 1
387.951
$387.95
2/8/2007
1 74276
DELTA DENTAL
FEB 07 -DENTAL PREM
001
21104
2,592.46
$2,781.45
2/8/2007
DELTA DENTAL
FEB 07 -COBRA PREM
001
21104
188.99
2/8/2007
71,277
DENNIS CAROL
PROF.SVCS-P&R COMM
0015310
44000
175.00
$325.00
2/8/2007
IDENNIS CAROL
PROF.SVCS-T&T MTG
0015510
1 44000
150.00
2/8/2007
74278
IDEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC MAINT-NOV 06
1 0015554
1 45507 1
1,107.661
$1,107.66
2/8/2007
74279
IDIRECT CONNECTION INCORP
IMAIL SVCS -CALENDARS
1155515
1 42110 1
391.41
$391.41
2/8/2007
74280
DMS CONSULTANTS CIVIL ENGINEERS INC
JENG SVCS -WASHINGTON ST
2505510
1 R46411
2,930.00
$2,930.00
2/8/2007
74281
IDOGGIE WALK BAGS INC
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
0015310
1 41200
833.131
$833.13
2/8/2007
74282
ALFREDO ESTEVEZ
IPER DIEM-MCDST TRNG
0014070
1 42340
210.001
$210.00
2/8/2007
74283
IEVERGREEN INTERIORS
IPLANT SVCS -DBC JAN 07
0015333
=45300 1 777
65.00
$165.00
2/8/2007
74284
1EXTERIOR PRODUCTS INC
SUPPLIES -BANNERS
1 0015350 1
41200 1
339.261
$339.26
Page 10
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date
Check Number
Vendor Name Transaction Description
Fund/ Dept
Acct # Amount
Total Check Amount
2/8,2007
74285
ANDREA FLORENTINUS PK REFUND-PANTERA
001
23002 100.00
$100.00
2/8/2007 1
74286
FRANCHISE TAX BOARD
SLRY ATTCHMT-2/9/07
1 001
1 21114 1
390.40
$390.40
2/8/2007
GRAND MOBIL
VEH MAINT-NGHBRHD IMP
0015230
42200
29.95
2/8/2007 1
74287
GO LIVE TECHNOLOGY INC
IENG CONSULTNG SVC-JAN/FEB
1 0014070
1 44000 1
5,250.00
$5,250.00
2/8/2007
74288
GRAND MOBIL
VEH MAINT-POOL VEH
0014090
42200
32.38
$563.53
2/8/2007
GRAND MOBIL
VEH MAINT-NGHBRHD IMP
0015230
42200
29.95
2/8/2007
74290
GRAND MOBIL
VEH MAINT-POOL VEH
0014090
42200
69.00
$570.00
2/8/2007
GRAND MOBIL
VEH MAINT-POOL VEH
0014090
42200
432.20
2/8/2007 1
74289
GRAPHICS UNITED
1PRINT SVCS -FEB NEWSLETTER
1 0014095
1 44000 1
1,746.28
$1,746.28
2/8/2007
HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
SUPPLIES -PARKS
0015340
1 42210
40.76
2/8/2007 1
74290
HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
PROF.SVCS-SUSMP
1 1155515
1 44000 1
570.00
$570.00
2/8/2007 1
74291
LEW HERNDON
P & R COMM -JAN 07
1 0015350
1 44100 1
45.00
$45.00
2/8/2007 1
74292
HIRSCH & ASSOCIATES INC.
DESIGN SVCS-SYC CYN PK
2505310
1 R46415
12,600.00
$12,600.00
2/8/2007
74293
HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
SUPPLIES -DBC
0015333
41200
519.02
$559.78
2/8/2007
HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
SUPPLIES -PARKS
0015340
1 42210
40.76
2/8/2007
74294
HOT SHOTS ATHLETIC APPAREL INC
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
0015350
1 41200 1
7.30
$7.30
2/8/2007
74295
INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN
LEGAL AD -FPL 2004-85
001
23010
216.25
$216.25
2/8/2007
74296
JINSTITUTE OF KNOWLEDGE
PK REFUND-REAGAN
001
1 23002 1
50.00
$50.00
2/8/2007
74297
KENS HARDWARE
SUPPLIES -ROAD MAINT
0015554
1 41250 1
64.29
$64.29
2/8/2007 1
74298
ILA COUNTY DEPT. OF HEALTH SERVICES
MONITORING SVCS-BACKLOW
1 0015340
1 42210 1
36.00
$36.00
2/8/2007
74299
LANTERMAN DEV CENTER/COMM INDUSTRIE
IPARKWAY MAINT-JAN 07
1 0015558
1 455031,906.36
$1,906.36
2/8/2007
74300
CYNTHIS LAU
PK REFUND-REAGAN
1 001
1 23002 1
50.00
$50.00
2/8/2007
74301
LDM ASSOCIATES INC.
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2006-213
1 001 1
34430 1
-87.75
$3,727.50
Page 11
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date
Check Number
Vendor Name
Transaction Description
Fund/ Dept
Acct #
Amount
Total Check Amount
2/8/2007
74301...
LDM ASSOCIATES INC.
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2006-241
001
34430
-138.38
$3,727.50 ...
2/8/2007
74303
LDM ASSOCIATES INC.
PROF.SVCS-FPL 2006-213
001
23010
487.50
$50.00
2/8/2007
LDM ASSOCIATES INC.
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2006-213
001
23010
87.75
2/8/2007
74304
LDM ASSOCIATES INC.
HIP PROG-DEC O6
1255215
44000
2,471.25
$65.00
2/8/2007
LDM ASSOCIATES INC.
PROF.SVCS-FPL 2006-241
001
23010
768.75
2/8/2007
74305
LDM ASSOCIATES INC.
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2006-241
1 001
23010
138.38
$45.00
2/8/2007 1
74302
ILEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
MTG-COUNCIL
1 0014010
1 42325 1
35.001
$35.00
2/812007
MOONLIGHT PRESS
PRINT SVCS-P/WORKS
0015510
42110
190.52
2/8/2007 1
74303
IVIRGINIA LEAGUE
PK REFUND -MAPLE HILL
001
123002 1
50.001
$50.00
2/8/2007 1
74304
JKWANG HO LEE
PLNG COMM -DEC O6
0015210
44100 1
65.00
$65.00
2/8/2007 1
74305
IBENNY LIANG
P & R COMM -JAN 07
1 0015350
1 44100 1
45.00
$45.00
2/8/2007 1
74306
ILOS ANGELES COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS
INDUSTRIAL WASTE-NOV O6
10015510
1 45530 1
80.97
$80.97
2/8/2007
74307
IMAGNET STREET
PRINT SVCS -ST SWEEPING
1155515
1 42110 1
9,922.00
$9,922.00
2/8/2007
74308
JANIL MEHTA
JPK REFUND -DBC
001
23002
500.00
$500.00
2/8/2007 1
74309
IMERCURY DISPOSAL SYSTEMS INC
RECYCLING -BATTERIES
1155515
1 44000 1
91.00
$91.00
2/8/2007 1
74310
IMITCHELL PEST CONTROL INC
IPEST CNTRL SVCS -MT LAUREL
0015340
42210 1
760-001
$760.00
2/8/2007 1
74311
IMITY LITE INC
TABLES -DBC
1 0015333
46250 1
452-351
$452.35
2/8/2007 1
74312
IMOE31LE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INCORP
SUPPLIES -DBC
1 0015333
1 41200 1
8.001
$8.00
2/8/2007
74313
MOONLIGHT PRESS
PRINT SVCS-PLNG
0015210
42110
190.52
$381.04
2/812007
MOONLIGHT PRESS
PRINT SVCS-P/WORKS
0015510
42110
190.52
2/8/2007
74314
MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING RESOURCES
ENG CONSLTNG SVCS -DEC 06
0015510
45221
3,252.50
$16,075.00
2/8/2007
MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING RESOURCES
ENG CONSULTNG SVCS-NOV 06
0015510
45221
3,420.00
2/8/2007
MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING RESOURCES
CONSULTANT SVCS -JAN 07
0015510
45221
9,402.50
2/8/2007 1 74315 INATIONAL ENTERTAINMENT TECH INC SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS 1 0015350 1 41200 1 1,145.701 $1,145.70
Page 12
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date I Check Number
Vendor Name
Transaction Description I Fund/ Dept I Acct # I Amount I Total Check Amount
2/8/2007 1
74316
STEVE G NELSON
JPLNG COMM -DEC 06
1 0015210
44100
65.00
$65.00
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -DBC
0015333
41200
156.29
2/8/2007 1
74317
SOCORRO NIETO
PK REFUND-PANTERA
1 001
23002
50.00
$50.00
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
0015350
41200
65.72
2/8/2007 1
74318
KATHLEEN ERIN NOLAN
PLNG COMM -DEC 06
1 0015210
44100 1
65.00
$65.00
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES-P/INFO
0014095
41200
2.74
2/8/2007 1
74319
NORTHERN SAFETY CO
SUPPLIES -GENERAL
1 0014090
41200 1
43.75
$43.75
2/8/2007
74320
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
0015350
41200
42.50
$3,488.04
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -DBC
0015333
41200
156.29
2/8/2007
74323
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -DBC
0015333
41200
109.94
$420.00
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
0015350
41200
65.72
2/8/2007
74324
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
0015350
41200
381.40
$50.00
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES-P/INFO
0014095
41200
2.74
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES-PLNG
0015210
41200
306.08
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
0015310
46250
757.74
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -GENERAL
0014090
41200
527.48
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -GENERAL
0014090
41200
13.96
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -GENERAL
0014090
41200
202.31
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -FINANCE
0014050
41200
276.36
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES-H/R
0014060
41200
146.76
2/8/2007
OFFICEMAX CONTRACT INC
SUPPLIES -GENERAL
0014090
41200
498.76
2/8/2007
74321
OLYMPIC STAFFING SERVICES
TEMP SVCS -WK 1/5
0015210
44000
476.64
$794.40
2/8/2007
OLYMPIC STAFFING SERVICES
TEMP SVCS -WK 1/25
0015210
44000
158.88
2/8/2007
74323
OLYMPIC STAFFING SERVICES
TEMP SVCS -WK WK 1/21
0015310
44000
158.88
$420.00
2/8/2007 1
74322
ITED OWENS
P & R COMM -JAN 07
0015350
44100 1
45.00
$45.00
2/8/2007
IPERS RETIREMENT FUND
RETIRE CONTRIB-EE
001
21109
8,446.52
2/8/2007 1
74323
CAMERON PATTON
OFFICIAL SVCS-JAN/FEB 07
0015350
1 45300 1
420.00
$420.00
2/8/2007 1
74324
DONNA PAYNE
RECREATION REFUND
001
1 34730 1
50.00
$50.00
2/8/2007
1 74325
PERS RETIREMENT FUND
SURVIVOR BENEFIT
001
21109
45.57
$21,826.70
2/8/2007
IPERS RETIREMENT FUND
RETIRE CONTRIB-EE
001
21109
8,446.52
Page 13
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date
Check Number Vendor Name
Transaction Description
Fund/ Dept
Acct #
Amount
Total Check Amount
2/8/2007
74325... PERS RETIREMENT FUND
RETIRE CONTRIB-ER
001
21109
13,334.61
$21,826-70...
218/2007
74326
IR F DICKSON COMPANY
DEBRIS SVCS -DEC 06
1155515
45500
7,033.38
$25,680.26
2/8/2007
R F DICKSON COMPANY
STREET SWEEPING -DEC 06
0015554
45501
1
1 18,646.88
$100.00
202007 74327 IRUTH M. LOW IP & R COMM -JAN 07 1 0015350 1 44100 1 45.001 $45.00
2/8/2007
74328
S C SIGNS & SUPPLIES LLC
SUPPLIES -ROAD MAINT
0015554
41250
212.17
$1,019.72
2/8/2007
S C SIGNS & SUPPLIES LLC
SUPPLIES -ROAD MAINT
0015554
41250
250.06
$100.00
2/8/2007
74330
S C SIGNS & SUPPLIES LLC
SUPPLIES -ROAD MAINT
0015554
41250
557.49
$200.00
2/8/2007 1
74329
ISAFEWAY SIGN COMPANY
SUPPLIES -ROAD MAINT
1 0015554
41250 1
134.241
$134.24
2/8/2007
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SVCS.
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2005-147
001
23010
345.78
$100.00
2/8/2007 1
74330
IROBERT SANTOS
JPK REFUND -HERITAGE
001
23002 1
200.001
$200.00
2/8/2007
74331
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SVCS.
PROF.SVCS-FPL 2005-147
001
23010
1,921.00
$1,921.00
2/8/2007
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SVCS.
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2005-147
001
23010
345.78
$100.00
2/8/2007
74333
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SVCS.
ADMIN FEE -FPL 2005-147
001
34430
-345.78
$346.55
2/8/2007
74332
ISIGN CONTRACTORS INC
BANNERS -ARMED FORCES
0015350
45300
4,095.591
$4,095.59
2/8/2007
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
ELECT SVCS -TRAFFIC CONTRL
0015510
42126
51.04
$100.00
2/8/2007
74333
ISIRCHIE FINGER PRINT LAB INC
SUPPLIES -SHERIFF
0014411
41200
346.551
$346.55
2/8/2007
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
ELECT SVCS -TRAFFIC CONTRL
0015510
42126
97.52
2/8/2007 1
74334
ISMART & FINAL
SUPPLIES -BINGO
0015350
41200
212.16
$212.16
2/8/2007
74335
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
ELECT SVCS -TRAFFIC CONTRL
0015510
42126
33.25
$419.83
2/8/2007
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
ELECT SVCS -TRAFFIC CONTRL
0015510
42126
51.04
$100.00
2/8/2007
74337
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
ELECT SVCS -TRAFFIC CONTRL
0015510
42126
74.12
2/8/2007
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
ELECT SVCS -TRAFFIC CONTRL
0015510
42126
97.52
2/8/2007
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
ELECT SVCS -TRAFFIC CONTRL
0015510
42126
22.19
2/8/2007
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
ELECT SVCS -TRAFFIC CONTRL
0015510
42126
52.19
2/8/2007
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
ELECT SVCS -TRAFFIC CONTRL
0015510
42126
44.76
2/8/2007
ISOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA EDISON
JELECT SVCS -TRAFFIC CONTRL
0015510
1 42126
44.76
2/8/2007 1
74336
ISOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL
AD -JOB ANNOUNCEMENT
1 0015350
1 42115 1
150.001
$150.00
$100.00
2/812007 1
74337
ISTATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT
ISLRY ATTCHMT-BY0426064
1 001
21114
100.001
Page 14
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date I Check Number
Venoor Name
Transaction Description I Fund/ Dept I Acct # I Amount I Total Check Amount
2/8/2007
74338
STITCHES UNIFORMS & EMBROIDERY
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
0015310
41200
124.49
$207.85
2/8/2007
74340
ISTITCHES UNIFORMS & EMBROIDERY
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
0015310
41200
1
83.36
1,639.181$1,639.18
2/8/2007
74339
ITRAFFIC DATA SERVICES INC
ITRAFFIC DATA-BREA CYN
0015551
45222
598.001
$598.00
2/8/2007
74340
ITRANE SERVICE GROUP
MAINT-DBC
1 0015333
42210
305.00
1,639.181$1,639.18
$305.00
2/8/2007
74341
ITRENCH PLATE RENTAL CO
JEQ RENTAL -ROAD MAINT
0015554
42130
120.00
$120.00
2/8/2007
74342
ILIDIANA TREVINO
PK REFUND -HERITAGE
001
23002
200.00
1 42140
$200.00
2/8/2007
74343
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE
1EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL
0014090
42120
37.44
$37.44
2/8/2007 1
74344
JUS POSTAL SERVICE (HASLER)
POSTAGE -MAIL SYSTEMS
1 0014090
42120
5,000.001
$5,000.00
2/8/2007
74345
US POSTMASTER
MAIL -ST SWEEPING MAGNET
1155515
1 42120
2,467.231
$2,467.23
2!8/2007
74346
IVANTAGEPOINT TRNSFR AGNTS-303248219!07-P/R
DEDUCTIONS
1 001
21108
26,393.98
$26,393.98
2/8/2007
74347
IWALNUT HILLS FIRE PROTECTION CO
SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS
1 0015310
41200
62.511
$62.51
2/8/2007
74348
JOSMAN WEI
PLNG COMM -DEC 06
1 0015210
44100
65.001
$65.00
2/8/2007
74349
WEST COAST MEDIA
ROUNDUP
00140952/8/2007
23002
50.00
$150.00
2/812007
2/8/2007
WEST COAST MEDIA JAD-HHW
S-EASTER/STATE OF CITY
0014095
42115
1,050.00
1,639.181$1,639.18
2/8/2007
74350
IKEISHA LAKEY WRIGHT
PK REFUND-PANTERA
001
23002
50.00
$150.00
2/812007
2/8/2007
KEISHA LAKEY WRIGHT
JPK REFUND-PANTERA
001
23002
100.00
1,639.181$1,639.18
2/8/2007
74351
JYI TONY TORNG
PLNG COMM -DEC O6
0015210
44100
65.00
$65.00
2/8/2007
74352
IZUMAR INDUSTRIES INC
SUPPLIES -ROAD MAINT
0015554
1 41250 1
1,639.181$1,639.18
2/14/2007
74353
IPARTIES BY PANACHE CORP
IMEMORIAL RECEPT-2/16
0014090
42325
2,265.00
$2,265.00
2/2/2007
W/T #18
UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA, NA
ILEASE PYMT-DBC
1 0014090
1 42140
57,925.20
$57,925.20
Page 15
City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 02/01/07 thru 02/14/2007
Check Date I Check Number
venaor Name I Transaction Description I Fund/ Dept I Acct # --F Amount I Total Check Amount
Page 16
$710,223.65
Agenda # 6 _ s
Meeting Date: February 20 2007
CITY COUNCIL
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members f tie City Council
VIA: James DeStefano, City Mana e2f
TITLE: APPROVAL OF SUBCOMMITTEEECOMMENDATION TO SUPPORT THE AIR
QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT'S DRAFT 2007 AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT
PLAN VIA RESOLUTION AND LETTER
RECOMMENDATION:
The Legislative Subcommittee recommends that the City Council support the development of the
South Coast Air Quality Management District's (AQMD) Air Quality Management Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact on the City of Diamond Bar.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION:
The Legislative Subcommittee meets with staff on a regular basis to discuss and analyze legislative
matters and their potential effects on the City. At the January 16, 2007 City Council Study Session,
Rainbow Yeung presented the AQMD's Air Quality Management Plan to the Council and City Staff
and requested the City's support for the creation of the document itself.
The Plan finds that although Southern California Air Quality has improved tremendously in recent
decades, the region still faces potentially severe health impacts and lags behind looming federal
emission reduction standards that could bring significant economic and administrative sanctions to
the area. To improve air quality conditions more rapidly to meet federal standards, the Plan focuses
on implementing new and effective emission reduction measures for mobile sources such as cars,
trucks, ships, trains, and planes. The Plan is currently in its draft form, with a final report due in the
coming months.
Diamond Bar is in the unique position of hosting a major Southern California freeway interchange
within the City Limits. This highly traveled trade corridor is a significant contributor to area air quality
issues, and the City Council has shown a desire to remain committed to the continued improvement
of air quality in the area. After reviewing the scope of the document, both the City Council Legislative
Subcommittee and City Staff recommend the support of the development of the AQMD's Air Quality
Management Plan, as the proposal is a primary step in further air quality improvement in the region.
If support of the Plan is approved by the City Council, the attached resolution and letter of support will
be sent to the AQMD.
Prepared by:
Ryan cLean, Senior Management Aalyst
Attachments
1. Resolution No. 2007 -XX, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR IN SUPPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTH COAST AIR
QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT'S DRAFT 2007 AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOCUSING ON MOBILE SOURCE CONTROLS
2. Letter of Support for the AQMD's Draft 2007 Air Quality Management Plan
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IN SUPPORT OF
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT'S
DRAFT 2007 AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN FOCUSING ON MOBILE SOURCE
CONTROLS
A. RECITALS.
WHEREAS, the over 16.5 million individuals residing within the jurisdictional boundaries of the South
Coast Air Quality Management District are impacted by the poorest air quality in the nation, despite
some of the most advanced pollution control requirements in the world yielding dramatic
improvements in recent decades;
WHEREAS, health studies conducted in this region repeatedly show that residents are suffering
significant health effects from today's air pollution, including cancer and chronic conditions, such as
asthma, emphysema, and heart and pulmonary diseases, among others;
WHEREAS, the California Air Resources Board recently estimated that approximately 8,200
Californians die prematurely each year as a result of air pollution, and that residents who live, work,
or go to school in close proximity to marine port and goods -movement activities are subjected to
unhealthful levels of air pollution, resulting in numerous health problems;
WHEREAS, a landmark study noted that the lungs of children born in Southern California today are
not likely to fully develop and may never recover from smog's damage, and that children are
especially susceptible to the harmful effects of air pollution;
WHEREAS, this region has exceeded the health -based federal 8 -hour ozone standard on 86 days in
2006;
WHEREAS, the recently revised 24-hour PM2.5 standard is more stringent and more health -
protective than the prior clean air standards;
WHEREAS, there is a fast -approaching PM2.5 attainment deadline of 2015, and an even more
challenging 8 -hour ozone attainment deadline of 2021 or 2024, necessitating additional emissions
reductions;
WHEREAS, failure to meet these deadlines will prolong the adverse health impacts to residents and
could trigger significant federal economic and administrative sanctions on this region;
WHEREAS, the South Coast Air Quality Management (AQMD) has the responsibility to draft and
implement a plan to bring this region into compliance with clean air standards, and is about to issue
the Draft 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP);
WHEREAS, AQMD's primary regulatory authority to reduce air pollution is limited to reducing
emissions from stationary sources, such as power plants, refineries, chemical plants, gas stations,
industrial facilities as well as operational requirements for mobile sources - and the AQMP addresses
the need to further reduce emissions from all sources to help reach clean air goals;
WHEREAS, stationary sources have already have reduced emissions upwards of 90% and mobile
sources are the primary source of emissions in the basin and remain comparatively under -regulated;
WHEREAS, the AQMP has identified that the majority of emissions reductions must be achieved
through further control of mobile sources — including, but not limited to cars, trucks, ships, trains, and
planes;
WHEREAS, the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have
most of the authority over mobile source emissions, and the Southern California Association of
Governments is responsible for developing the plan's transportation control measures;
WHEREAS, the Draft AQMP focuses on additional measures that the California Air Resources Board
and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency can implement to reduce mobile source emissions,
especially from locomotives and ocean-going ships;
B. RESOLUTION.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That by adoption of this resolution, the City of Diamond Bar declares that there is an urgf
need for all responsible authorities to expeditiously adopt and aggressively implement effective coni
strategies to reduce emissions as quickly as possible, and;
SECTION 2. That the City of Diamond Bar strongly supports the development of the South Coast
Quality Management District's Draft 2007 Air Quality Management Plan focusing on mobile source contrc
and;
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2007.
Steve Tye, Mayor
I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was passed, adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Diamond Bar held on 20th day of February, 2007, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ATTEST:
Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
February 20, 2007
Air Quality Management District
Barry Wallerstein, Executive Director
RE: City of Diamond Bar Support of Draft AQMP
Dear Mr. Wallerstein:
Recently, the Diamond Bar City Council Legislative Subcommittee met to review the AQMD's Draft
Air Quality Management Plan, which would focus on stricted mobile source controls. The
subcommittee recommended to the full City Council that they support the development of the Plan.
Subsequently, on February 20, 2007, the Diamond Bar City Council voted to support it.
Despite some of the most advanced pollution control requirements in the world yielding dramatic
improvements in recent decades, the 16 %2 million residents in this region continue to be impacted by
the poorest air quality in the nation. Health studies conducted in this region repeatedly show that
residents are suffering significant heath effects from today's air pollution, including cancer and chronic
conditions such as asthma, emphysema, and heart and pulmonary diseases, among others.
The South Coast Air Basin exceeded the health -based federal 8 -hour ozone standard on 86 days in
2006, and the recently revised 24-hour PM2.5 standard is more stringent and more health -protective
than the prior clean air standards. There is a fast -approaching PM2.5 attainment deadline of 2015,
and an even more challenging 8 -hour ozone attainment deadline of 2021, necessitating additional
emissions reductions. Any failure to meet these deadlines will prolong the adverse health impacts to
residents and could trigger significant federal economic and administrative sanctions on this region.
The South Coast Air Quality Management District has the responsibility to draft and implement a plan
to bring this region into compliance with clean air standards, and is about to issue the draft plan. The
Draft AQMP has identified that a majority of the emission reductions must be achieved through further
control of mobile sources — including, but not limited to cars, trucks, ships, trains, and planes. The
California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have most of the
authority over mobile source emissions, and the Southern California Association of Governments is
responsible for developing the plan's transportation control measures.
The City of Diamond Bar supports the development of the Draft AQMD focusing on mobile source
controls, and declares an urgent need for all responsible authorities to expeditiously adopt and
aggressively implement effective control strategies to reduce emissions as quickly as possible.
Sincerely,
Steve Tye
Mayor, City of Diamond Bar
Agenda # 6.6
Meeting Date: February 20, 200
CITY COUNCIL -'� , �� AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and Member he City Council
VIA: James DeStefano, City Man e
TITLE: APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION INUPPORT OF INTERSTATE 10/605
INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS AND COMPLETION OF INTERSTATE 10 HOV
LANE
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the resolution.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact on the City of Diamond Bar.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION:
The City of Baldwin Park has requested the City's support for transportation infrastructure
improvements to the Interstate 10/605 interchange as well as completion of the Interstate 10
HOV/carpool lanes. Such improvements would be designed to improve traffic congestion and
highway capacity throughout the region.
The quest to secure the necessary funding to improve these important transportation corridors is one
that requires a strong support network. As a key player in regional transportation advocacy efforts,
the City of Diamond Bar's support for transportation projects that may assist in easing traffic at the
overburdened SR -57/60 interchange is very important. It may also serve in building strong allies as
the City builds consensus and support for a SR 57/60 interchange "final fix" project in the coming
years.
Prepared by:
Ryan Mc an, Senior Management Analyst
Attachments
1. Resolution No. 2007 -XX, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR IN SUPPORT OF INTERSTATE 10/605 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS
AND COMPLETION OF INTERSTATE 10 HOV LANE
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IN SUPPORT OF
INTERSTATE 10/605 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS AND COMPLETION OF INTERSTATE
10 HOV LANE
A. RECITALS.
WHEREAS, the San Gabriel Velley will experience a significant increase in population and jobs that
will generate additional vehicle trips on the region's highways and roads, impacting the quality of life
throughout the area; and
WHEREAS, the San Gabriel Valley's existing freeway system and public transportation infrastructure
cannot accommodate or maintain the level of service currently existing; and
WHEREAS, limited improvements to the existing freeway system have been proposed or completed
within the San Gabriel Valley to accommodate the significant population and employment increases;
and
WHEREAS, Interstate 10 HOV lanes between the 605 and 75 Freeways is the only section of HOV
lane that has yet to be completed.
B. RESOLUTION.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That by adoption of this resolution, the City of Diamond Bar declares its support for the
completion of improvements to the Interstate 10/605 Interchange and the extension of Interstate 10
HOV lanes from the 605 Freeway to the 57 Freeway.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2007.
Steve Tye, Mayor
I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was passed, adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Diamond Bar held on 20th day of February, 2007, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ATTEST:
Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
Agenda # 7.1
Meeting Date: February 20 2007
CITY COUNCIL'��`, '' F '` '� _...
�- AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and Memka2p he City Council
VIA: James DeStefano, City MaTITLE: Consideration of General endment No. 2005-01, Zone Change No. 2006-03,
Development Agreement 2005-01, Specific Plan No. 2005-01, Vesting Tentative Tract
No. 063623, Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-01, Development Review No. 2005-27
and Tree Permit No. 2005-06, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, City's Subdivision
Ordinance (Title 21) and Development Code (Title 22, Sections 22.22, 22.38, 22.48,
22.58, 22.60, 22, 22.70, and 22.62). The proposed project consists of a 99 -unit single-
family residential subdivision, a public park and open space areas on approximately
34.52 acres, located on property south of Larkstone Dr., east of Morning Sun Ave., west
of Brea Canyon Rd., and northwest of Peaceful Hills Rd. (Related File: Environmental
Impact Report No. 2005-01). CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER 19, 2006, JANUARY 16
AND FEBRUARY 6, 2007
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council open the public hearing, receive additional public testimony
and continue the hearing to March 6, 2007.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On January 16, 2007, the City Council opened the continued public hearing and received additional
public testimony regarding the above-described project. The Council, at the request of staff with the
concurrence of the applicant, continued the hearing to February 6 and February 20, 2007. The
applicant's consultant is updating traffic information. For this reason; staff and the applicant, request
Council contyue the public hearing to March 6, 2007.
Nrepared By Nncy F g, AICP
Community Dee ent Director
Attachment
1. Letter from Applicant requesting continuance
Reviewed By Dave Doyle
Assistant City Manager
2/20 Council meeting. Page 1 of 1
Nancy Fong
From: Kurt Nelson [knelson@jcchomes.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 1:39 PM
To: Nancy Fong
Cc: Steve Schwartz; darren.mccleve@lewisop.com
Subject: 2/20 Council meeting.
Dear Nancy,
This is to confirm our concurrence that the public hearing for our South Pointe West project be re -opened
to receive any additional public input, with the matter then continued to the next available council hearing.
Kurt Nelson
JCCL So. Pointe West, LLC
2/15/2007
CITY COUNCIL
TO: Honorable Mayor and Membe
VIA: James DeStefano, City Ma
Agenda # 7 - 2
Meeting Date: February 20, 2007
e City Council
AGENDA REPORT
TITLE: ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006-02 A�D PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY
DISTRICT NO. 2006-01, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 54081,
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-18, VARIANCE NO. 2002-02 AND
TREE PERMIT NO. 2002-13 — A 16 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the following:
• Ordinance No. (2007) approving first reading of Zone Change No. 2006-02 and
Planned Overlay District No. 2006-01 which allows flexibility in design, density and
intensity;
Resolution No. 2007- approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 and
adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and
Mitigation Monitoring Program; and
• Resolution No. 2007- , approving Hillside Management Conditional Use Permit
No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2002-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13.
BACKGROUND:
The review process for the proposed project began in November 2002. By mid 2006, many
of the identified issues and concerns regarding retaining wall heights, environmental issues,
grading, air quality assessment, noise analysis, revegetation and adequacy of the
geotechnical report were addressed. In September 2006, the applicant submitted revised
plans that were deemed complete and adequate and the environmental document was
completed and circulated.
The project's first Planning Commission public hearing occurred on October 10, 2006. After
receiving information from the applicant and public comments, the Commission continued the
hearing to November 28, 2006. The continuance allowed the applicant additional time to
address the Commission's concerns. Because the applicant did not adequately address the
Commission's concerns, the public hearing was continued to December 12, 2006 and then to
January 9, 2007. On January 9, 2007, the Commission concluded the public hearing and
after their deliberation recommended approval of the project to City Council.
ANALYSIS:
A. Summary of Proposed Project
The project site is located at the terminus of Crooked Creek Drive (APN# 8714-028-
003). The applicant, Daniel Singh of Jewel Ridge, LLC, is requesting approval to
subdivide an irregular shaped hillside parcel of approximately 12.9 acres into 16
residential lots. In general, the project site slopes down to the south and west and
slopes up to the east. It is characterized by a steep western facing slope
approximately 200 feet high and level canyon to the westerly side adjacent to the flood
control channel.
The lots will range in size from 5,705 to 10,506 square feet with a majority of the lots
between 6,229 to 7,325 square feet. Each lot will be graded with a development pad
for future homes. In addition to the 16 residential lots, the project will consist of four
letter lots identified as Lots "A", "B", "C" and "D". These lots will be common lots
maintained by the homeowners' association which will be formed in the future. Lot "C"
will be used for on-site mitigation for the replacement of oak and walnut trees and
understory.
Streets "A" and "B" are proposed as private streets with sidewalk, curb and gutter on
the side of the street development with homes. Street "A" is a continuation of Crooked
Creek Drive and Street "B" intersects Street "A" at the project entrance which will not
be gated. The request also consists of relocating an existing recreational trail
pursuant to the City's Trails Master Plan. The proposed on-site trail head and
pedestrian trail easement is identified on the map. It will be located on the east side
of Street "A" and adjacent to the southern boundary of the map.
The project site is difficult to develop because of environmental constraints that include
steep slopes, elevation differences, and native vegetation such as oak and walnut
trees and understory. Because of the elevation differences between existing
development on Crooked Creek Drive and the undeveloped area adjacent to the
project's southern boundary, five, six and ten feet high retaining walls are needed to
create the buildable pads, streets and a pedestrian trail. For retaining walls adjacent
to the homes on Crooked Creek Drive, plant material will be larger in size and planted
closer together to initially create mature landscape screening. Furthermore, retaining
walls located adjacent to the streets will be constructed from a geo-grid lock and load
system that allows plants and irrigation to be integrated with the wall. The series of
three retaining walls to be located adjacent to the pedestrian trail easement were
proposed to be ten feet high. Due to the Commission's concern about the height, the
applicant submitted a revised preliminary landscape plan showing the walls reduced to
a height of five feet. The City's engineering consultant, Hall & Foreman, believes the
five foot height of each wall, as located on the plan, is not possible because lowering
the height of the walls to five feet would affect the earthwork cut into the slope
considerably. As a result, a variance approval is needed for wall heights of ten feet.
2
The main concern discussed and addressed during the public hearing process was the
view impact, grading, retaining walls and second story of the future homes will be
visible from the north bound SR -57 freeway. However with the maturity of the project's
landscaping, the view of the project from the freeway will be minimal. Additionally,
existing plant material between the freeway and the project site will add to the
screening. Other concerns expressed at the public hearing related to safety during
construction and additional traffic from the project. For safety, the applicant is required
to provide a construction traffic safety mitigation plan that addresses lane closures,
truck routes, traffic control measures, street cleaning, etc. for the City's review and
approval. A traffic study was prepared for the project and reviewed and accepted by
the City. The study examined daily and peak hour trips and showed that the project
will add trips to the local roadways. However, the study stated that added trips will not
require signalization or additional traffic mitigation.
B. Summary of October 10 2006 Planning Commission Hearing
The Planning Commission opened the public hearing and received comments from
nine residents of Crooked Creek Drive. Comments from the residents and
Commission were generally related to: tree replacement' ratios of healthy and dead
trees; retaining wall heights; preliminary landscape and fuel modification plans: and
views of the project from the SR -57 freeway and from the back yards of the existing
homes on Crooked Creek Drive that abut the proposed project.
As a result of the Commission's and residents' concerns, the Commission directed the
applicant to provide:
1. Fuel modification and preliminary landscape plans that document that the oak
and walnut trees removed will be mitigated to a level of less than significant;
2. Lower the height of the three retaining walls adjacent to the proposed
pedestrian trail easement located on the east side of Street "A";
3. Photographs of the project site from different locations along the SR 57 freeway
and photographic simulations from the same locations after grading and at five
and ten year intervals; and
4. Photographs of the view from the back yards of existing homes on Crooked
Creek Drive and artist's renderings at five and ten year intervals.
In order for the applicant to address the above concerns, the Commission continued
the public hearing to November 28, 2006.
C. Summary of November 28 2006 Planning Commission Continued Hearing
In response to the Planning Commission's direction, the applicant provided the
Commission with the following information.
Fuel modification and preliminary landscape plans showing healthy oak and
walnut trees replaced at a 3:1 ratio and dead oak and walnut trees replaced at a
1:1 ratio for a total replacement of 413 replacement trees.
Commission Comments: The Commission determined that the fuel modification
and preliminary landscape plans, with the replacement oak and walnut trees
together with understory and indigenous vegetation to the open space area,
would function as an extension of the existing hillside.
2. Photographic views and simulations from 13 locations along the SR 57 freeway;
Commission Comments: The Commission believed that the photographic
simulations did not provide an accurate picture of the project site at certain
vistas from the north and south bound SR 57 freeway. The Commission again
directed the applicant to provide photographic simulation at five and ten year
intervals.
3 A revised preliminary landscape plan that shows the three ten -foot high
retaining walls adjacent to the proposed pedestrian trail reduced to five feet
each.
Commission Comments: The Commission was satisfied with the reduction of
the retaining walls' height. However, the City's engineering consultant believes
the five foot height of each wall, as located on the plan, is not possible because
lowering the height of the walls would affect the earthwork cut into the slope
considerably. As a result, a variance approval is needed for wall heights of ten
feet.
4. Photographic views and artist's renderings of views from the back yards of
three homes on Crooked Creek Drive that abut the project site.
Commission Comments: The renderings indicated that the retaining walls
would be seen from the homes. The applicant did not provide photographic
simulations at five and ten year intervals as directed.
The public hearing was continued to December 12, 2006 to allow the applicant
additional time to provide the photographic simulations at five and ten year intervals.
D. Summary of December 12 2006 Planning Commission Continued Hearing
In response to the Planning Commission's direction, the applicant provided the
following information.
Artist's renderings showing that the view from the first and second story of the
homes on Crooked Creek Drive that abut the project site are the same. The
applicant stated that due to the twenty-five foot difference in elevation between
the homes on Crooked Creek Drive and pad areas of the proposed project, a
series of three retaining walls, each six feet tall, are needed; and landscaping
would be used in front of the walls to mitigate the view.
2. Photographic simulations from the north bound SR -57 freeway as requested by
the Commission were not provided.
4
The Commission accepted the artist's renderings of the view from the homes on
Crooked Creek Drive. However, the Commission directed the applicant to provide the
photographic simulations from three specific locations along the north bound SR 57
freeway. To allow the applicant additional time to provide the photographic
simulations, the Commission continued the public hearing to January 9, 2007.
E. Summary of January 9 2007 Planning Commission Continued Hearinq
In response to the Planning Commission's direction, the applicant presented
photographic views and simulations from the north bound SR 57 freeway at the three
locations specified by the Commission. The photographic simulations showed current
views and simulations after grading and at five and ten year intervals. Graded slopes
and new homes would be seen from the freeway. However, the more mature the
vegetation is on the slopes and in planter areas between the walls, the more the
project will be screened from the freeway.
The Commission was satisfied with the photographic simulations provided by the
applicant. After public comments, the public hearing was closed. The Commission
deliberated on all the information presented and recommended approval of the
proposed project to the City Council.
F. Environmental Review
The proposed project is subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
an Initial Study was prepared by the City's environmental consultant, Environmental
Impact Sciences. The following is a table displaying the environmental factors with
impacts and those without:
No Impact
Potential Significant Impact
Agricultural Resources
Aesthetics
Land Use and Planning
Air Quality
Mineral Resources
Transportation/Traffic
Hydrology and Water Quality
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
Public Services
Biological Resources
Population/Housing
Recreation
Cultural Resources
Noise
Utilities and Service Systems
According to CEQA, mitigation measures are required for those environmental factors
that have potential significant impacts. The mitigation measures when incorporated
into the project will reduce the potential significant impact to less than significant. As a
result, the City has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration can be issued for
this project. The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was distributed and
circulated on July 28, 2006 to all affected agencies for a 30 -day review period ending
on August 28, 2006. At the conclusion of the public review period, comments received
were responded to and included as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The
Planning Commission reviewed the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program and determined that it was prepared in compliance with
CEQA guidelines.
CITY COUNCIL OPTIONS:
The City Council may:
1. Approve the proposed project as recommended by the Planning Commission;
2. Modify conditions of approval set forth in the resolutions.
3. Continue the proposed project to a date certain;
4. Direct the applicant to redesign the project and remand the project to the
Planning Commission
5. Deny the project.
If the Council concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation then adoption of the
ordinance and resolutions should be in the following sequence:
1. Approve the first reading of Zone Change and Planned Overlay District
Ordinance No. (2007);
2. Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2007– adopting Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring
Program and approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. 2007– —'approving Hillside Management Conditional
Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2002-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley
Tribune on February 1, 2007. A display board was posted on the project site January 24,
2007. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 209 property owners within a
1,000 -foot radius of the project site and the public notice was posted in three public places by
January 29, 200. Pursuant to Public Resource Code, Section 21092.5, agencies
commenting on the project's Mitigated Negative Declaration were notified in writing of the
February 20, 2007 City Council public hearing on January 29, 2007. Furthermore, the Notice
of Public Hearing and Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was post with the Los
Angeles County Clerk on January 30, 2007.
PREPARED BY:
Ann J. Lu u,
Associate Planner
M
REVIEWED BY:
Nancy Fong, AI
Community DeN
David Doyle,
Assistant City Manager
nt
Attachments:
1. Ordinance No. (2007) approving Zone Change No. 2006-03 and Planned
Development Overlay District No. 2006-01;
2. Resolution No. 2007- approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081; and
adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and
Mitigation Monitoring Program;
3. (No attachment);
4. Resolution No. 2007-, approving Hillside Management Conditional Use Permit
No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2002-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13;
5. Exhibit "A" — Vesting Tentative Map No. 54081 dated October 10, 2006;
6. Exhibit "B" — Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and
Mitigation Monitoring Program;
7. Exhibit "C" — Response to Comments;
8. Chronology of VTTM 54081;
9. Planning Commission Minutes dated October 10, November 28, December 12, 2006
and January 9, 2007;
10. Planning Commission Staff Reports dated October 10, November 28, December 12,
2006 and January 9, 2007;
11. Conceptual Landscape Plan and Fuel Modification Plan; and
12. Photographic Simulations and Artists Renderings.
7
CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE NO. XX (2007)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006-02, PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT NO. 2006-01 AND MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2006-03 (SCH # 2006071129) AND
MITIGATION REPORT AND MONITORING PROGRAM WHICH
CHANGES THE EXISTING ZONING FROM R-1-10,000 TO LOW
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL -PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (RL -PD) FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF CROOKED
CREEK DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (APN NO. 8714-028-
003).
A. RECITALS
The property owner/applicant, Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge, LLC, has filed
an application for Zone Change No. 2006-02 for a property identified as
APN No. 8714-028-003 located at the southern terminus of Crooked
Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Hereinafter in
this Resolution, the subject Zone Change shall be referred to as the
"Application."
2. On January 30, 2007, public hearing notices were mailed to approximately
209 property owners of record within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site.
In accordance with Public Resource Code, Section 21092.5, on January
30, 2007, agencies that responded to the project's Mitigated Negative
Declaration were notified in writing of the February 20, 2007, City Council
public hearing. On January 30, 2007, public hearing notices were posted
in three public places within the City of Diamond Bar and the project site
was posted with a display board. On February 1, 2007, notification of the
public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley
Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers.
3. On February 20, 2007, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar
conducted a duly notice public hearing and concluded the public hearing
on the Application.
City council Ordinance No. XX (2007)
B. RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of
the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. This City Council 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 Council hereby finds that the project identified above in this
Resolution required a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). MND No.
2006-03 (SCH # 2006071129) has been prepared according to the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 30 day public review period for
the MND began July 28, 2006, and ended August 28, 2006. Furthermore,
the city councii has reviewed the MND and related documents in reference
to the Application.
3. Based on substantial evidence presented to the City Council during the
above referenced meeting on February 20, 2007, including the written and
oral staff report, together with public testimony, the City Council hereby
finds as follows:
Zone Change
(a) The project relates to vacant land located at the southern terminus
of Crooked Creek Drive, east of the SR -57 Freeway, Brea Canyon
Road and Brea Canyon flood control channel and north of the City's
southern boundary. It is an irregular shaped hillside parcel of
approximately 12.9 acres, sloping down to the south and west and
sloping up to the east.
(b) Generally the following zones and uses surround the project site: tc
the north and east is the R-1-9,000 zone and residences; to the
west is the R-1-7,500 zone and residences, flood control channel
and SR -57; and to the south is the A-2-1 zone and vacant land.
(c) The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Low
Density Residential (RL) Maximum 3 DU/AC and a current zoning
designation of Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot Size 10,000
square feet (R-1-10,000) which was a Los Angeles County
nomenclature adopted when the City was incorporated.
(d) The Application request is for approval to change the existing
zoning designation of R-1-10,000 to Low Density Residential (RL -
PD) which is a City nomenclature.
2
City council Ordinance No. XX (2007)
(e) In accordance to the General Plan, the maximum gross density for
the RL land use designation is 3.0 dwelling units per acre or less.
The Commission has determined that the Low Density Residential
(RL) zone implements the Strategies of the General Plan.
(f) The property will be able to adhere to the development standards
for the RL zoning district as prescribed in the City's Development
Code.
(g) The Planned Development Overlay District is needed to reduce the
square footage of each lot in order to preserve the open space
identified as Lot "C". As such, the project. has been reduced to 16
dwelling unit on 12.9 gross acres or a density of 0.81 dwelling units
per acre.
(h) The Planned Development Overlay District is consistent with the
General Plan goals and policies in that clustering is used in order to
preserve open space and natural resources.
(i) With the Planned Development Overlay District, the future
detached single-family residences will still be able to comply with all
required Development Code and Municipal Code standards.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraph 1, 2, and 3
above, the City Council approves the zone change from Single Family
Residence -Minimum Lot Size 10,000 square feet (R-1-10,000) to Low
Density Residential (RL).
The City Council shall:
M_
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Ordinance; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Ordinance by certified mail: tc
Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge, LLC, 10365 W. Jefferson Blvd., Culver City,
CA 90232
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF
2007, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
Steve Tye, Mayor
3
City council Ordinance No. XX (2007)
I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Diamond Bar held on day of and was finally passed,
at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, held on the
day of 2007, by the following vote:
AYES:
Council Members:
NOES:
Council Members:
ABSENT:
Council Members:
ABSTAIN:
Council Members:
rommye Cribbins, City Clerk
4
City council Ordinance No. XX (2007)
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE MAP NO. 54081 AND
ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2006-03 (SCH
#2006071129) AND MITIGATION REPORT AND MONITORING PROGRAM
AS SET FORTH THEREIN FOR A 16 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF CROOKED CREEK
DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA.
A. RECITALS
The property owner/applicant, Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge, LLC, has filed an
application for approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 and
adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program, as described in the title of
this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Map, Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be referred to
as the "Application."
2. On January 30, 2007, public hearing notices were mailed to approximately
209 property owners of record within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site. In
accordance with Public Resource Code, Section 21092.5, on January 30,
2007, agencies that responded to the project's Mitigated Negative
Declaration were notified in writing of the February 20, 2007, City Council
public hearing. On January 30, 2007, public hearing notices were posted in
three public places within the City of Diamond Bar and the project site was
posted with a display board. On February 1, 2007, notification of the public
hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers.
3. On February 20, 2007, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar
conducted a duly noticed public hearing and concluded the public hearing on
the Application.
B. RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the
City of Diamond Bar as follows:
This City Council 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 Council hereby finds that the project identified above in this
Resolution required a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). MND
No. 2006-03 (SCH # 2006071129) has been prepared according to the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 30 day public review period forthe
MND began July 28, 2006, and ended August 28, 2006. Furthermore, the
City Council has reviewed the MND and related documents in reference to
the Application.
3. The City Council hereby specifically finds and determines that, having
considered the record as a whole, including the findings set forth below, and
changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned
upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence
before this City Council that the project proposed herein will have the
potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which
the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this City Council
hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5
(d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the City Council
hereby finds and determines that changes and alterations have been
required in or incorporated into and conditioned upon the project specified in
the application, which mitigate or avoid significant adverse environmental
impacts identified in MND No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129.)
5. The City Council hereby adopts MND No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) and
Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program attached herein as Exhibit "B" and
hereby incorporated by reference.
6. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this City Council
hereby finds as follows:
(a) The project relates to vacant land located at the southern terminus of
Crooked Creek Drive, east of the SR -57 Freeway, Brea Canyon Road
and Brea Canyon flood control channel and north of the City's
southern boundary. It is an irregular shaped hillside parcel of
approximately 12.9 acres, sloping down to the south and west and
sloping up to the east.
(b) The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Low
Density Residential (RL) Maximum 3 DU/AC.
(c) The project site is within the Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot
Size 10,000 Square Feet (R-1-10,000) Zone. However, Zone Change
No.2006-02 within City Council Ordinance No. XX (2007) approves
the zone change from R-1-10,000 to Low Density Residential (RL)
Planned Development (PD) Overlay for General Plan compliance.
2
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
(d) Generally the following zones and uses surround the project site: to
the north and east is the R-1-9,000 zone and residences; to the west
is the R-1-7,500 zone and residences, flood control channel and
SR -57; and to the south is the A-2-1 zone and vacant land.
(e) The Application request includes the following: a 16 lot residential
subdivision on 12.9 acres; Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program; a zone change from R-1-
10,000 to RL/PD; grading and development in a hillside area;
retaining walls adjacent to the street that exceed the allowable
exposed height; and the removal and replacement of oak and walnut
trees.
Tentative Map Findings Pursuant to Subdivision Code Section 21.20 the City
Council has made the following required findings:
(f) The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Low
Density Residential/Maximum 3 Du/Ac (RL). The General Plan
describes this designation as a residential land use category for
detached single-family residences with a maximum density allowed
for new subdivisions as three dwelling unit per acre or less. The
proposed map is a 16 lot subdivision with a gross density of 0.81
dwelling units per acre, which is consistent with the General Plan.
Additionally, the proposed map, as designed, with the incorporation of
landform grading, the extension of Crooked Creek Drive (referred to
as Street "A" on the map), revegetation of slopes, and installation of
sewers and drainage facilities is in accordance with the Objectives
and Strategies of the General Plan. Furthermore, the proposed land
use represents an extension of the existing development pattern in
the project area and the subject property could be characterized as an
"infill" site. As a result, VTTM 54081 is consistent with the General
Plan including its design and improvements.
(g) The project site is approximately 12.9 gross acres. VTTM 54081
proposes to subdivide 12.9 gross acres into 16 residential lots for the
development of 16 detached single-family residences with two streets
and four open space lot for revegetation. As such, the proposed gross
density is 0.81 dwelling units per acre. In accordance to the General
Plan, it is possible to subdivide the project site into approximately 30
lots with two streets. However, a lower density is proposed in orderto
preserve the open space identified on the as Lot "C". Additionally, the
MND prepared for this project reviewed the suitability of the project
site, circulation, grading, aesthetics, land use, etc. The MND
concluded that the proposed map would not have a significant effect
on the environment and with the incorporation of mitigation measures.
3
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
Therefore, the project site is physically suitable for the proposed type
of development and density,
(h) The MND for this project analyzed whether or not the proposed map
would cause substantial environmental damage or injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat. The MND concluded that with the
implementation of mitigation measures as prescribed in the Mitigation
Report and Monitoring Program summarized as follows, it is
anticipated that the proposed map's impacts would be reduced to a
level "less than significant" and the design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial
environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
Aesthetics.
According to the MND, the environmental issue related to
Aesthetics has the potential to be significant unless mitigated
to a level of less than significant. The proposed series of
retaining walls located along or near rear property lines may
partially impede existing views. In order to mitigate the view of
the retaining walls, landscaping with irrigation will be used
within the wall cells and planter areas between and in front of
all retaining walls.
2. Air Quality.
Environmental issues related to Air Quality affected by dust
and particulate matter may be potentially significant during
grading and construction. The applicant is required to: water all
exposed surfaces three times daily; limit off-road trucks to no
more than 15 mph; use soil stabilizers; replace ground cover in
disturbed area as quickly as feasible; and cover all stockpiles.
Additionally, all exterior point for on-site residential units will
conform to specific specification that will reduce volatile
organic compounds (VOC).
3. Transportation/Traffic.
The project entry will be a "traffic roundabout". According to
the MND, roundabouts are a traffic calming device that
reduces speed. However due to the intersecting of Streets "A"
and "B" at the roundabout, a conflict point for vehicles,
bicycles, or pedestrians may occur. As a result, the final
design, development plans, and geometrics of all on-site
streets shall be approved by the City Engineer and comply with
the City's street standards.
4
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
4. Hazards/Hazardous Materials.
Project site is located directly adjacent to a "Very High Fire
Hazard Zone". As a result, the applicant is required to prepare
and submit a fuel modification plan to the City and Fire
Department for approval and comply with all fire codes.
Additionally, the applicant is required to prepare a construction
fire prevention and control plan outlining all activities that will
occur during construction, access through the project site and
fire safety and suppression for approval by the Fire
Department and City.
5. Biological Resources.
A biological assessment acknowledges that walnut and oak
woodlands and California black walnut and oak trees exist at
the project site. In recognition of a potentially significant impact
to biological resources, mitigation measures that will reduce
the impacts to significantly less are as follows: replacement of
oak and walnut trees at a 3:1 ratio on-site and off-site locations
and oak and walnut woodlands with a five year monitoring plan
funded by the applicant; on-site grading activities must occur
prior to April 2007, or a new biological survey must be
conducted to reassess the presence or absence of protected
biological resources; information regarding biological resource
must be in the covenant, conditions and restrictions (CC&R's);
landscape plans for all common areas shall incorporate
replacement species, native drought -tolerant, non-invasive
plant species and weed prevention and control; and all
construction and material staging activities must be confined
within the project boundaries
(i) The MDN analyzed impacts related to the design of the subdivision
and improvements related to the project. Mitigation measures related
to air quality, hazards and hazardous materials and traffic will be
incorporated into the proposed map. Mitigation measures are
summarized for these environmental issues and discussed above in
Item (h). Additionally, the project will be required to comply with the
following: manufactured slopes will be designed at a slope ratio of no
steeper 2:1; Uniform Building Code compliance will be required; all
grading will be performed under the observation of a registered
geotechnical engineer; comply with all Los Angeles County Fire
Department code will be required; all property owners will be provided
with a disclosure statement identifying the responsibility of maintaining
the fuel modification zones as defined in the approved Fuel
Modification Plan. As a result, the proposed project's design or type of
5
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
improvements is not likely to cause serious public health or safety
problems.
(j) The proposed project also consists of relocating an existing
recreational trail pursuant to the City's Trails Master Plan.
Additionally, the Trails Master Plan identifies a potential "Class A" trail
head in proximity to the project site. The proposed on-site trail head
and pedestrian trail easement is identified on the map. The applicant
will be required to dedicate to the City an irrevocable easement of 20
feet for the pedestrian trail. The easement will be located on the east
side of Street "A" and adjacent to the southern boundary of the map.
At the entrance of the tract in Lot "A", a sign/kiosk will be installed
identifying the trail. Improvements for the trail are set forth as
conditions of the project. Therefore, 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 within the
proposed subdivision.
(k) According to the MND prepared forthis project, environmental issues
related to hydrology and water quality are "less than significant" and
discharge sewerage would not result in violation of existing
requirements prescribed by the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board.
(I) A geotechnical report was prepared for this project and reviewed by
the City. The report was approved with conditions that are
incorporated into the project design. Additionally, the MND prepared
for this project indicates that with the implementation of these
conditions in combination with applicable Municipal Code and UBC
requirements and appropriate engineering practices will ensure
impacts related to geology will be "less than significant".
(m) The proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan land
use designation of Low Density Residential (RL). It will be graded in
compliance with the City's applicable hillside management and
development standards. The physical size and design of the proposed
subdivision will allow for compliance with the City's Development
Code standards for the construction of detached single family
residences. The proposed map is in compliance with the Subdivision
Map Act and is consistent with the City's Subdivision Ordinance -Title
21.
7. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the City Council
hereby adopts Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 and Mitigation
Report and Monitoring Program (SCH # 2006071129) and approves VTTM
54081 subject to the following conditions and Standard Conditions attached
and referenced herein:
6
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
a. GENERAL
This approval shall be null and void and of no effect unless the
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH
# 2006071129) and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program
is adopted and VTTM No. 54081, Zone Change No. 2006-02,
Planned Development Overlay, Conditional Use Permit
No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit
No. 2002-13 are approved. This approval is valid for three
years. Two extensions of time, one year each, may be
approved in accordance to Development Code Section 22.66.
b. SITE DEVELOPMENT
A trail is located within the project site. Prior to final map
approval, applicant shall dedicate to the City an irrevocable
easement of 20 feet adjacent to the southern boundary of the
map and 10 feet on the east side of Street "A" for the
pedestrian trail. Easement shall be identified on the map.
2. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit a detail plan
indicating a trail width of 10 feet that is ADA accessible with a
three foot wide planter in front of the wall adjacent to the trail.
The detail plan shall also delineate the following: trail surface
of decomposed granite; trail head located at the end of Street
"A" and adjacent to the southern boundary of the map;
seating/bench; trash container; shade; and sign/kiosk at the
entrance of the tract within Lot A. Prior to final map approval,
the detail plan of the trail shall be reviewed and approved by
the Community Development Director. Improvements to
Lot "A" shall be completed prior to final inspection and
issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy of the first house.
3. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall design the 20 foot
trail adjacent to the southern boundary of the map for review
and approval of the Community Development Director. To
insure the development of this section of the trail, the applicant
shall submit a bond or cash deposit to the City for the
estimated development cost of this section of the trail. The
bond or cash deposit shall remain with the City until such time
as this section of the trail is developed or the easement is
vacated.
4. Because of the trail head location, Lots 8 and 9 shall be
designed with a common driveway. Prior to final map
approval, applicant shall submit a detail plan delineating the
7
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
common driveway to be reviewed and approved by the
Community Development Director.
5. Retaining walls shall not exceed a maximum exposed height of
six feet. Retaining walls located on the east side of Street "A"
and adjacent to the pedestrian trail easement shall not exceed
an exposed height of 10 feet.
6. Walls with an exposed height of 10 feet shall be constructed
by using a geo-grid lock and load retaining wall system in earth
tone color. Irrigation shall be incorporated into the retaining
wall system with pockets in the wall for plant material. All other
retaining walls shall be constructed from split face block with
caps of the same material. Plant material shall be the kind that
cascades down the wall. Prior to final map, applicant shall
provide a retaining wall plan delineating the irrigation and
species, quantity and size of all plant material within the wall
system. For the planter areas between and in front of the
walls, trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size and planted
eight feet on center. Shrubs shall be a minimum size of five
gallons and planted three feet on center. Appropriate vines
shall be planted between the shrubs to cover the walls. All
landscaping and irrigation plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the Community Development Director.
7. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit a detail plan
that includes landscaping/irrigation for the circle entry into the
project. Prior to final map approval, the detail plan shall be
reviewed and approved by the Community Development
Director.
8. All open space lots/common lots (Lots "A", "B", "C" and "D")
shall remain as open space/common lots and shall be
identified on the final map as such granting the City the right to
prohibit the erection of structures and including any
construction activities on any said lot.
9. This project shall comply with the adopted Mitigation
Monitoring Program.
10. Uses permitted in the RL zoning district as listed in the
Development Code shall be the only uses allowed in the RL -
PD zoning designation for the project site.
11. Oak and walnut trees removed shall be replaced at a 3:1
ration. Dead or dying oak and walnut trees removed shall be
replaced at a 1:1 ratio
8
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
12. Prior to final map, the applicant shall provide a revised
landscape plan for the Planning Division review and approval
that shows trees, shrubs and vines in the planter areas
between the retaining walls which are adjacent to the property
lines of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive and Brea Canyon
Flood Control Channel shall . The landscape plan shall show
the following: ornamental evergreen trees at 24, 36 and 48
inch box sizes, planted 12 feet on center with 50 percent at 24
inch box, 25 percent at 36 inch box and 25 percent at 48 inch
box; shrubs in 5 and 10 gallon sizes, planted 3 feet on center
with 75 percent at 5 gallon size and 25 percent at 10 gallon
size; and vines in 5 gallon size planted 5 feet on center.
13. Prior to issuance of any construction permits or grubbing of the
site, whichever comes first, the applicant shall submit a
construction traffic safety mitigation plan that addresses such
items as, but not limited to: lane closures, truck routes, traffic
control measures for the construction area, street cleaning,
etc., for the City's review and approval
C. PUBLIC WORK/ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Prior to final map approval and in conjunction with the grading
plan, applicant shall submit a detailed plan showing the
location, planned depth and design of the recommended
caisson/tiebacks along with structural calculations supporting
their design with geotechnical input from the geotechnical
consultant. The submittal shall be approved by the Public
Works/Engineering Department and Building and Safety
Division prior to final map.
2. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit to the Public
Works/Engineering Department the design of the geogrid-
stablized slope prepared by a qualified licensed engineer using
the parameters provided. The design shall be prepared by an
engineer familiar with geogrid slope design and shall be
reviewed and wet stamped by the developer's geotechnical
consultant. The design and supporting calculations shall be
submitted to the Public Works/Engineering Department and
Building and Safety Division for approval prior to final map.
d. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION
Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit to the
Building and Safety Division the design of all retaining walls for
review and approval concurrently with the grading plan check.
9
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
e. LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE PREVENTION
Access shall comply with Section 902 of the Fire Code, which
requires all weather access. All weather access my require
paving.
2. Fire Department access shall be extended to within 150 feet
distance of any exterior portion of all structures.
3. 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 map.
Turnarounds shall be designed, constructed and maintained to
insure their integrity for Fire Department use. Where
topography dictates, turnarounds shall be provided for
driveways that extend over150 feet in length.
4. Private driveways shall be indicated on the final map as
"Private Driveway and Fire Lane" with the widths clearly
depicted and shall be maintained in accordance with the Fire
Code.
5. The property is located within the area described by the Fire
Department a "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone". A "Fuel
Modification Plan" shall be submitted and approved prior to
final map clearance. (Contact Fuel Modification Unit, Fire
Station #32, 605 N. Angelino Avenue, Azusa, CA 91702-2904,
Phone (626-969-5205, for details.)
6. Applicant shall provide Fire Department or City approved street
signs and building access numbers prior to occupancy.
7. Applicant shall provide water mains, fire hydrants and fire flows
as required by the County of Los Angeles Fire Department, for
all land shown on map which shall be recorded.
8. Fire hydrant shall conform to the following requirements:
(a.) Install three public fire hydrants;
(b.) Upgrade/verify one existing public fire hydrant;
(c.) Measure 6" x 4" x 2Y2" brass or bronze, conforming to
current AWWA standards C503 or approved equal;
(d.) On site hydrants shall be installed a minimum of 25 feet
form a structure or protected by two hour fire wall'
10
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
9. The required fire flow for public fire hydrants at this location
shall be 1250 gallons per minute at 20 psi for duration of two
hours, over and above maximum daily domestic demand. One
hydrant flowing simultaneously, may be used to achieve the
required fire flow
The City Council shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to:
Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge Estates, LLC, 10365 W. Jefferson Blvd., Culver
City, CA 90232
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2007, BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
Steve Tye, Mayor
I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly
introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular
meeting held on the 201h day of February 2007, by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members:
NOES: Council Members:
ABSENT: Council Members:
ABSTAIN: Council Members:
Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
11
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
USE PERMITS, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL
NEW AND REMODELED STRUCTURES
PROJECT #: VTTM No. 54081, MND No. 2006-03, ZC No. 2006-02/Planned
Development Overlay, CUP No. 2002-18, VAR No. 2002-02 and
TP No. 2002-13
SUBJECT: Sixteen lot residential subdivision
APLICANT: Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge, LLC
LOCATION: Southern Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION AT (909) 839-
7030, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9(b) (1), the applicant
shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and its officers, agents
and employees, from any claim, action, or proceeding to attack, set-aside,
void or annul, the approval of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 brought
within the time period provided by Government Code Section 66499.37. In
the event the city and/or its officers, agents and employees are made a party
of any such action:
(a) Applicant shall provide a defense to the City defendants or at the
City's option reimburse the City its costs of defense, including
reasonable attorneys fees, incurred in defense of such claims.
12
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
(b) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the
City descendents. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any
claim, action of proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense
thereof.
2. Applicant shall include signed copies of the Planning Commission Resolution
of Approval Nos. 2007-01, 2007-02, 2007-03, Standard Conditions, and all
environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The
sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the
construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped
by a licensed Engineer/Architect.
3. Revised plans (such as but not limited to site plan, elevations,
landscape/irrigation plan, grading plan, etc.,) incorporating all Conditions of
Approval shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval prior
to the plan check.
4. Notwithstanding any previous subsection of the resolution, the Department of
Fish and Game requires payment of the fee pursuant to Section 711.4 of that
Fish and Game Code. Said payment shall be made by the applicant to the
city within five days of this approval.
5. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance with the
conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable regulations.
6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the
Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and any applicable
Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
7. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be
coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as
grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map
approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has
commenced, whichever comes first.
8. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced
thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed.
B. FEES/DEPOSITS
Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to Planning,
Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works/Engineering Department and
Mitigation Monitoring) at the established rates, prior to final map approval,
issuance of building or grading permit (whichever comes first), as required by
the City. School fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permit.
13
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
In addition, the applicant shall pay all remaining prorated City project review
and processing fees prior to the map's recordation or issuance of building
permit, whichever come first.
2. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall pay a fee to the City in -lieu of
dedication for parkland pursuant to Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 21.32.
3. Prior to any public hearing or final map approval, all deposit accounts for the
processing of this project shall have no deficits.
4. Notwithstanding any previous subsection of the resolution, the Department of
Fish and Game required payment of the fee pursuant to Section 711.4 of that
Fish and Game Code. Said payment shall be made by the applicant to the
city within five days of this grant's approval.
C. TIME LIMITS
This approval shall not be effective for any purpose until the applicant and
owner of the property involved have filed within 15 days of approval of this
map, at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department/
Planning Division an Affidavit of Acceptance stating that they are aware of
and agree to accept all the conditions of this approval.
2. In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66463.5,
VTTM No. 54081 is valid for three years. An extension of time may be
requested in writing and shall only be considered if submitted to the city no
less than 60 days prior to the approval's expiration date. Final map approval
will not be granted unless the map is in substantial compliance with
VTTM No. 54081 including all conditions and the applicant has entered into a
subdivision improvement agreement to the satisfaction of the City Attorney.
D. SITE DEVELOPMENT
The project site shall be developed in substantial conformance with
VTTM No. 54081 except as conditions herein, and as conditioned in
Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit
No. 2002-13 submitted to and recommended approval by the Planning
Commission to the City Council collectively referenced herein as Exhibit "A" -
the subdivision map, Exhibit "B" — Mitigated Negative Declaration
No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program dated
July 2006, as modified herein.
2. The Mitigation Monitoring Program outlined in Mitigated Negative Declaration
No. 2006-03 (SCH # 2006071129) and approved by the City shall be
implemented and complied with rigorously. The mitigation monitoring fees
shall. be deposited with the City 90 days prior to the issuance of a grading
14
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
permit. All costs related to the ongoing monitoring shall be secured from the
applicant and received by the City prior to the approval of the final map.
3. Proposed future custom single-family residential units shall comply with the
City's Development Review process.
4. A Home Owner's Association (HOA) shall be formed. The HOA shall have
Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) and Articles of Incorporation of the
HOA are subject to the approval of Planning Division and Public
Works/Engineering Department and the City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be
recorded concurrently with the final map or prior to the issuance of any City
permits, which ever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the
City Engineer. The HOA shall submit to the Planning Division a list of the
names and addresses of the officers on or before January 1 of each and
every year and whenever said information changes.
5. Prior to the final map recordation or issuance of building permit, whichever
come first, the application shall provide the City with a "Buyer's Awareness
Package." for the City's review and approval. The "Buyer's Awareness
Package" shall include, but is not limited to, information pertaining to
geological issues regarding the property, wildlife corridors, oak and walnut
trees, natural vegetation preservation issues, maintenance program for
urban pollutant basins, fuel modification, all mitigation measures within the
Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program and Exhibit "A" which delineates
each lot's building envelope, explanatory information pertaining to restrictions
on the use of properties as necessary, and similar related matters. The
applicant shall give each buyer a copy of the "Buyer's Awareness Package"
and shall document their receipt of the same in the escrow instructions of
each lot and document their receipt to the City.
6. Applicant, through the "Buyer's Awareness Program" shall segregate green
waste for reuse as specified under the City's Source Reduction Recycling
Element, and County Sanitation District's waste division policies.
7. All single-family residential units shall be required to obtain Development
Review approval. Additionally, single-family residential dwelling units shall
use the following development standards:
a. Front yard setback minimum 20 feet from front property line;
b. Side yard setbacks minimum five and 10 feet from the from the edge
of the buildable pad or side property lines,. whichever is applicable;
C. Distance between single-family residential dwelling units shall be a
minimum 15 feet;
d. Rear yard setback 20 feet from the edge of the buildable pad or rear
property line, whichever is applicable; and
15
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
e. Accessory structures shall utilize setback distances from the edge of
pad or property line whichever is applicable and be consistent with the
RUPD zoning district at the time of permit issuance.
8. All ground -mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, air
conditioning condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and
adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or
masonry walls, berms, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning
Division.
9. Prior to final map approval or issuance of building permit, whichever come
first, street names shall be submitted for City review and approval. Street
names shall not duplicate existing streets within the City of Diamond Bar's
postal service zip code areas.
10. House numbering plans shall be submitted to and approved by the City prior
to issuance of building permits. All building numbers and individual units shall
be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination.
House numbering plans shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer prior to issuance of building permits.
11. All lighting fixtures adjacent to interior property lines shall be approved bythe
Planning Division as to type, orientation and height.
12. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be
reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of
building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height,
and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties.
E. LANDSCAPE, PRESERVED AND PROTECTED TREES
Prior to final map approval, a detailed landscape/irrigation plans shall be
prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted to the Planning
Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits and
recordation of the map, which ever occurs first.
2. Prior to final map approval, a fuel modification plan for landscape/irrigation
prepared by a registered landscape architect shall be submitted for Planning
Division review and approval.
3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or the initiation of any activity that
involves the removal/disturbance of oak and walnut woodland habitat; the
applicant shall develop a detail oak and walnut woodland mitigation plan in
accordance with the Mitigated Negative Declaration's Mitigation Report and
Program and submit the plan to the City for review and approval. Mitigation
shall include offsite preservation and or restoration at no less than 1:1
acreage ratio. The native trees protected under the City's tree preservation
16
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
and protection standards require a minimum replacement ratio of 3:1. It is
estimated that a total of 269 trees will be removed. However, 197 are oak
and walnut trees have deteriorated to the point of dying or are dead. The
remaining 72 trees (43 oak and 29 walnuts) are considered healthy and will
be removed due to the project's development. Any off-site mitigation shall be
in accordance with the requirements and approval of the California
Department of Fish and Game. If in -lieu fees are used for a part of or all
mitigation, this mitigation method shall also be in accordance with the
requirements and approval of the California Department of Fish and Game
and the City of Diamond Bar.
4. Prior to the issuance of any permits, the applicant shall submit revegetation
landscape and irrigation plans for slopes within the project site for Planning
Division review and approval. Said slope shall be landscaped at the
completion of grading activities. All slope planting, irrigation and revegetation
areas shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by
the developer until each individual unit/lot is sold and occupied by the buyer.
Prior to releasing occupancy for the unit/lot, an inspection shall be conducted
by the Planning Division to determine that the vegetation is in satisfactory
condition.
F. SOLID WASTE
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.
2. Mandatory solid waste disposal services shall be provided by the City
franchised waste hauler to all parcels/lots or uses affected by approval of this
project.
3. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-ups shall be for
individual units with all receptacles shielded from public view.
17
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT, (909) 839-7040, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. GENERAL
A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions,
fencing, and weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings,
shall be submitted for review and approval prior to approval and recordation
of the Final Tract Map and prior to approval of street improvement and
grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including
fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements.
2. A title report/guarantee showing all fee owners, interest holders, and nature
of interest shall be submitted for final map plan check. An updated title
report/guarantee and subdivision guarantee shall be submitted ten (10)
business days prior to final map approval.
3. A permit from the Los Angeles County Public Works Department shall be
required for work within its right-of-way or connection to its facilities.
4. Any existing easement for open space, utilities, riding and hiking trials shall
be relocated and/or grading performed, as necessary, to provide, for the
portion within the project site, practical access for the intended use.
5. Prior to final map approval, written certification that all utility services and any
other service related to the site shall be available to serve the proposed
project and shall be submitted to the City. Such letters shall be issued by the
district, utility and cable television company, within ninety (90) days prior to
final map approval.
6. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit to the City Engineer the
detail cost estimates for bonding purposes of all public improvements.
7. Prior to final map approval, if any public or private improvements required as
part of this map have not been completed by applicant and accepted by the
City, applicant shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City and shall
post the appropriate security.
8. Prior to final map approval all site grading, landscaping, irrigation, street,
sewer and storm drain improvement plans shall be approved by the City
Engineer, surety shall be posted, and an agreement executed guaranteeing
completion of all public and private improvements.
18
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
9. Prior to issuance of grading permits, surety shall be posted and an
agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all drainage facilities
necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
10. Any details or notes which may be inconsistent with requirement or
ordinances, general conditions or approval, or City policies shall be
specifically approved in other conditions or ordinance requirements are
modified to those shown on the tentative parcel map upon approval by the
Advisory agency.
11. All identified geologic hazards within the vesting tentative tract map
boundaries which cannot be eliminated as approved by the City Engineer
shall be indicated on the final map as "Restricted Use Area" subject to
geologic hazard. The applicant shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit
the erection of buildings or other structures within such restricted use areas
shown on the final map.
12. Easements for disposal of drainage water onto or over adjacent parcels shall
be delineated and shown on the final map, as approved by the City Engineer.
13. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient street, sewer, and
drainage improvements shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to
assure secondary access, proper outfall for sewers and drainage protection
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond
to lot lines shown on the final map.
14. Prior to any work performed in the street right-of-way, fees shall be paid and
a construction permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Department in
addition to any other permits required.
15. Applicant shall label and delineate on the final map any private drives or fire
lanes to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
16. Easements, satisfactory to the City Engineer and the utility companies, for
public utility and public services purposes shall be offered and shown on the
final map for dedication to the City.
17. After the final map records, applicant shall submit to the Public
Works/Engineering Department, at no cost to the City, a full size reproducible
copy of the recorded map. Final approval of the public improvements shall
not be given until the copy of the recorded map is received by the Public
Works/Engineering Department.
18. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall provide to the City as built mylars,
stamped by appropriate individuals certifying the plan for all improvements at
no cost to the City.
19
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
19. Applicant shall contribute funds to a separate engineering trust deposit
against which charges can be made by the City or its representatives for
services rendered. Charges shall be on an hourly basis and shall include
any City administrative costs.
20. Applicant shall provide digitized information in a format defined by the City
for all related plans, at no cost to the City.
21. All activities/improvements proposed for this VTTM No. 54081 shall be wholly
contained within the boundaries of the map. Should any off-site
activities/improvements be required, approval shall be obtained from the
affected property owner and the City as required by the City Engineer.
B. GRADING
1. No grading or any staging or construction shall be performed prior to final
map approval by the City Council and map recordation. All pertinent
improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map
approval by the City Council.
2. Retaining wall location shall be shown on the grading plan and submitted
with a soils report to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review
and approval concurrently with the grading plan check.
3. Exterior grading and construction activities and the transportation of
equipment and materials and operation of heavy grading equipment shall be
limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Saturday. Dust generated by grading and construction activities shall be
reduced by watering the soil prior to and during the activities and in
accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 402 and
Rule 403. Reclaimed water shall be utilized whenever possible. Additionally,
all construction equipment shall be properly muffled to reduce noise levels.
4. All equipment staging areas shall be located on the project site. Staging
area, including material stockpile and equipment storage area, shall be
enclosed within a 6 foot -high chain link fence. All access points in the
defense shall be locked whenever the construction site is not supervised.
5. Precise grading plans for each lot shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department/Planning Division for approval prior to issuance of
building permits. (This may be on an incremental or composite basis).
6. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California
Building Code, City Grading Ordinance, Hillside Management Ordinance and
acceptable grading practices.
20
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
7. The maximum grade of driveways serving building pad areas shall be 15
percent. In hillside areas driveway grades exceeding 10 percent shall have
parking landings with a minimum 16 feet deep and shall not exceed five (5)
percent grade or as required by the City Engineer. Driveways with a slope of
15 percent shall incorporate grooves for traction into the construction as
required by the City Engineer.
8. 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. Prior to the issuance of a
grading permit, 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; a projection plane shall have a 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.
i. 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 final map.
9. Prior to issuance of grading permits, storm drain improvement plans shall be
approved by the City Engineer and Los Angeles County Public Works
Department and surety shall be posted and an agreement executed
guaranteeing completion of all drainage facilities to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
21
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
10. Final grading plans shall be designed in compliance with the
recommendations of the final detailed soils and engineering geology reports.
All remedial earthwork specified in the final report shall be incorporated into
the grading plans. Final grading plans shall be signed and stamped by a
California registered Civil Engineer, registered Geotechnical Engineer and
registered Engineering Geologist and approved by the City Engineer.
11. A Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP) conforming to
City Ordinance is required to be incorporated into the grading plan and
approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall incorporate Structural or
Treatment Control Best Management Practices for storm water runoff into
the grading plans for construction and post -construction activities
respectively.
12. All slopes shall be seeded per landscape plan and/or fuel modification plan
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
and a permanent irrigation system shall be installed.
13. An erosion control plan shall be approved by the City Engineer. Erosion
control plans shall be made in accordance to the City's NPDES
requirements.
14. Submit a stockpile plan showing the proposed location for stockpile for
grading export materials, and the route of transport.
15. Prepare a horizontal control plan and submit concurrently with the grading
plan for review and approval.
16. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, a pre -construction meeting must be
held at the project site with the grading contractor, applicant, and city grading
inspector at least 48 hours prior to commencing grading operations.
17. Rough Grade certifications by project soils engineer shall be submitted prior
to issuance of building permits for the foundations of structures. Retaining
wall permit may be issued without a rough grade ,certificate.
18. Final Grade certifications by project soils engineer and civil engineers shall
be submitted to the Public Works/Engineering Department prior to the
issuance of any project final inspections/certificate of occupancy.
C. DRAINAGE
1. All terrace drains and drainage channels shall be constructed in muted earth
tones so as not to impart adverse visual impacts. Terrace drains shall follow
22
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
landform slope configuration and shall not be placed in an exposed
positions. All down drains shall be hidden in swales diagonally or curvilinear
across a slope face.
2. 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
entering, leaving, or within a parcel relative to which a building permit is
requested.
3. All identified flood hazard locations within the tentative map boundaries
which cannot be eliminated as approved by the City Engineer shall be shown
on the final map and delineated as "Flood Hazard Area."
4. Storm drainage facilities shall be constructed within the street right-of-way or
in easements satisfactory to the City Engineer and the Los Angeles County
Flood Control Districts. All storm drain facilities plans shall be plan checked
by the City and County of Los Angeles and all fees required shall be paid by
the applicant.
5. A final drainage study and final drainage/storm drain plan in a 24" x 36" sheet
format shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer and Los
Angeles Public Works Department prior to grading permit. All drainage
facilities shall be designed and constructed as required by the City Engineer
and in accordance with 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.
6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a complete hydrology and hydraulic
study shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer registered in the State of
California to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Los Angeles Public
Works Department.
7. A comprehensive maintenance plan/program shall be submitted concurrently
with the storm drain plans to the Public Works/Engineering Department for
review and approval by the City Engineer.
D. STREET IMPROVEMENT
The applicant shall replace and record any centerline ties and monuments
that are removed as part of this construction with the Los Angeles County
Public Works Survey Division.
2. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall provide written
permission to the satisfaction of the City from any property owners which will
be affected by offsite grading.
23
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
3. Street improvement plans in a 24" x 36" sheet format, prepared by a
registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer. Streets shall not exceed a maximum slope of 12 percent.
4. New street centerline monuments shall be set at the intersections of two or
more streets, intersections of two or more streets, intersections of streets
with tract boundaries 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.
5. The design and construction of private street improvements shall be set to
City and County standards and designed to a design speed of 35 mph.
6. Priorto final map recordation, the applicant shall submit plans delineating the
improvement and extension of Crooked Creek Drive forthe City's review and
approval. The improvement and extension shall occur within the project site
boundaries of the proposed map. The improvement and extension of
Crooked Creek Drive shall be completed prior to final inspection of grading
activities.
E. UTILITIES
Easements, satisfactory to the City Engineer and the utility companies, for
public utility and public services purposes shall be offered and shown on the
detailed site plan for dedication to the City.
2. Prior to final map approval, a water system with appurtenant facilities to
serve all lots/parcels in the land division designed to the Walnut Valley Water
District (WVWD) specifications shall be provided and approved by the City
Engineer. The system shall include fire hydrants of the type and location as
determined by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The water mains
shall be sized to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department.
3. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall construct or enter into an
improvement agreement with the City guaranteeing construction of the
necessary improvements to the existing water system according to Walnut
Valley Water District (WVWD) specifications to accommodate the total
domestic and fire flows as may be required by the City Engineer, WVWD and
Fire Department.
4. Prior to final map approval or issuance of building permit whichever comes
first, written certification that all utility services and any other service related
to the site shall be available to serve the proposed project and shall be
submitted to the City. Such letters shall be issued by the district, utility and
24
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
cable television company, if applicable, within ninety (90) days prior issuance
of grading permits.
5. Prior to recordation of final map, applicant shall provide separate
underground utility services to each parcel per Section 21.30 of Title 21 of
the City Code, including water, gas, electric power, telephone and cable TV,
in accordance with the respective utility company standards. Easements
required by the utility companies shall be approved by the City Engineer.
6. Applicant shall relocate and underground any existing on-site utilities to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and the respective utility owner.
7. Underground utilities shall not be constructed within the drip line of any
mature tree except as approved by a registered arborist.
F. SEWERS
Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit a sanitary sewer area
study to the City and County Engineer to verify that capacity is available in
the sewerage system to be used as the outfall 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 County Engineer.
2. 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 the City or District 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 and surety shall be provided
and an agreement executed prior to approval of the final map.
3. Applicant shall obtain connection permit(s) from the City and County
Sanitation District prior to issuance of building permits. The area within the
tentative map boundaries shall be annexed into the County Consolidated
Sewer Maintenance District and appropriate easements for all sewer main
and trunk lines shall be shown on the final map and offered for dedication on
the final map.
4. Applicant, at applicant's sole cost and expense, shall construct the sewer
system in accordance with the City, Los Angeles County Public Works
Division and County Sanitation District Standards prior to occupancy.
G. TRAFFIC MITIGATIONS
All traffic mitigations shall be implemented and constructed in accordance
with the traffic report prepared by Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc. dated
October 2002 and revised September 2003 and conditions of project
25
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
for the VTTM No. 54081, prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION,
(909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Plans shall conform to State and Local Building Code (i.e., 2001 California
Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and
the 2001 National Electrical Code) requirements and all other applicable
construction codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of plan
check submittal.
2. Submit Public Works/Engineering Department approved grading plans
showing clearly all finish elevations, drainage, and retaining walls locations.
3. All retaining walls shall be submitted to the Building & Safety and Public
Work Departments for review and approval.
4. Submit grading plans showing clearly all finish elevations, drainage, and
retaining wall locations. No building permits shall be issued prior to
submitting a pad certification.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE
PREVENTION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Emergency access shall be provided, maintaining free and clear, a minimum
28 foot at all times during construction in accordance with Fire Department
requirements.
2. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for combustible construction,
evidence shall be submitted to the Fire Department that temporary water
supply for fire protection is available pending completion of the required fire
protection system.
3. Prior to recordation, the final map shall comply with all Fire Department
requirements.
END
26
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2006-03
(SCH #2006071129) AND MITIGATION REPORT AND MONITORING
PROGRAM AND APPROVING HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT AND PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
2002-18, VARIANCE NO. 2002-02 AND TREE PERMIT NO. 2002-13 FOR
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 54081, A 16 LOT RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISION, THE CONSTRUC-TION OF RETAINING WALLS THAT
EXCEED THE ALLOWED EXPOSED HEIGHT ADJACENT TO A STEET
AND THE REMOVAL, REPLACEMENT AND PRESERVATION OF OAK
AND WALNUT TREES. THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT SOUTHERN
TERMINUS OF CROOKED CREEK DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
(APN NO. 8714-028-003)
A. RECITALS
The property owner/applicant, Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge, LLC, has filed an
application for Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Planned Development
Overlay District No. 2006-01, Variance No. 2002-02 and Tree Permit
No. 2002-14 for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 as described in the
title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional
Use Permit, Planned Development Overlay, Variance and Tree Permit shall
be referred to as the "Application."
2. On January 20, 2007, public hearing notices were mailed to approximately
209 property owners of record within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site.
In accordance with Public Resource Code, Section 21092.5, on January 30,
2007, agencies that responded to the project's Mitigated Negative
Declaration were notified in writing of the February 20, 2007, City Council
public hearing. On January 30, 2007, public hearing notices were posted in
three public places within the City of Diamond Bar and the project site was
posted with a display board. On February 1, 2007, notification of the public
hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers.
3. On February 20, 2007, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar
conducted a duly noticed public hearing and concluded the public hearing on
the Application.
B. RESOLUTION.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the
City of Diamond Bar as follows:
This City Council 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 Council hereby finds that the project identified above in this
Resolution required a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). MND
No. 2006-03 (SCH # 2006071129) has been prepared according to the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 30 day public review period for the
MND began July 28, 2006, and ended August 28, 2006. Furthermore, the
City Council has reviewed the MND and related documents in reference to
the Application.
3. The City Council hereby specifically finds and determines that, having
considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and
changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned
upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence
before this City Council that the project proposed herein will have the
potential of an adverse effect on wildlife resources orthe habitat upon which
the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this City Council
hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5
(d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this City Council
hereby finds as follows:
(a) The project relates to vacant land located at the southern terminus of
Crooked Creek Drive, east of the SR -57 Freeway, Brea Canyon Road
and Brea Canyon flood control channel and north of the City's
southern boundary. It is an irregular shaped hillside parcel of
approximately 12.9 acres, sloping down to the south and west and
sloping up to the east.
(b) The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Low
Density Residential (RL) Maximum 3 DU/AC.
(c) The project site is within the Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot
Size 10,000 Square Feet (R-1-10,000) Zone. However, Zone Change
No.2006-02 within Planning Commission Resolution No. 2006-43
recommends that the City Council approve the zone change from
R-1-10,000 to Low Density Residential -Planned Development
(RL -PD) for General Plan compliance.
2
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
(d) Generally the following zones and uses surround the project site: to
the north and east is the R-1-9,000 zone and residences; to the west
is the R-1-7,500 zone and residences, flood control channel and
SR -57; and to the south is the A-2-1 zone and vacant land.
(e) The Application request includes the following: a 16 lot residential
subdivision on 12.9 acres; Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program; a zone change from R-1-
10,000 to RL/PD; grading and development in a hillside area;
retaining walls adjacent to the street that exceed the allowable
exposed height; and the removal and replacement of oak and walnut
trees.
Conditional Use Permit for Hillside Management
In accordance to Municipal Code Section 22.22.150, pertaining to required
findings for a Conditional Use Permit for hillside development, the City
Council finds as follows:
(f) The proposed map is a 16 lot residential subdivision for the eventual
development of 16 single- homes. The map approval includes grading
the project site to create buildable pads for each lot, Streets "A" and
"B" within the map's boundaries of the project site with Street "A" as
an extension of Crooked Creek Drive, the revegetation of Open
Space Lots "A", "B", "C" and "D". The proposed project will result in
changes in the existing topography of the project site. Grading will
create manufactured slopes at a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) ratio
utilizing a landform grading technique. As a result, manufactured
slopes will have characteristics resembling slopes created by nature.
Round -off cut edges will be utilized to conform to the natural grade.
Proper transitioning to natural slopes will be achieved through the use
of irregular curvilinear shapes that will blend into the adjoining
topography. Revegetation of the manufactured slope will be applied in
patterns which occur in nature. Down slope drainage devices will be
designed to follow the natural lines of the landform graded
manufactured slopes, or tucked away in special swale and berm
combinations in order to conceal the drains from view. Therefore, the
proposed project will provide the appearance of natural topographic
features by means of landform grading so as to blend man-made or
manufactured slopes into the natural topography.
(g) The proposed project is located on an "in fill" parcel that is surround
by existing detached single-family residences that have a General
Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential (RL) Maximum
3 Du/Ac. The zoning designation as prescribed in Zone Change
3
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
No. 2006-02 for this project also requires maximum 3 Du/Ac. The
proposed 16 single-family residential lots will vary in size from 5,705
to 10,506 square feet, with a majority of the lot sizes between 6,229 to
7,325 square feet which is smaller than the minimum 10,000 square
feet which is specified in this zoning district. With the approved
Planned Development Overlay District, the proposed project is
consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and
standards of the Development Code. The reason for using the
Planned Development Overlay District is to reduce the square footage
of each lot in order to preserve the open space identified as Lot "C".
As such, the project has been reduced toll dwelling unit or a density
of 0.81 dwelling units per acre and will provide approximately 8.89
acres or 69 percent of the project site in open space, which is in
compliance with the General Plan and proposed Zone Change for this
project. As such, the proposed project will preserve the open space
in Lot "C".
(h) MND No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program
(SCH #2006071129) has been prepared for this project and has
analyzed visual impacts, scenic resources, drainage courses,
watershed areas, steep slopes and vernal pools. According to the
MND, the project site is not considered a scenic vista, view corridor,
or watershed area. Additionally, the project site does not contain
vernal pools, major natural topographic feature, drainage courses or
steep slopes. However, the one slope area is located on open space
Lot "C" which is being preserved.
(i) According to the MND prepared for the project site, the project site
does not contain prominent landmark features, significant ridgeline, or
natural rock outcropping. However, the project does have protected
trees and woodlands.
According to the project biological assessment prepared for this
project and discussed in the MND, the proposed project will impact
11.5 acres of mixed Coast Live Oak and California walnut woodland
with understory dominated by poison oak. This woodland acreage is
identified by the California Department of Fish and Game as a
sensitive resource and has a minimum replacement ratio of 1:1. A
survey indicates that a total of 468 oak and walnut trees exist on the
project site. A total of 269 of these trees will be removed due to the
proposed grading. However, 197 oak and walnut trees had
deteriorated to the point of dying or dead. The remaining 72 trees (43
oaks and 29 walnuts) are considered healthy and recommend for
replacement at a 3:1 ratio per the City's Tree Permit requirements.
Mitigation will include a combination of on-site and/or off-site
preservation, enhancement and/or restoration. The applicant will
4
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
implement the mitigation plan, as approved by the City and according
to the guidelines and performance standards of the plan. Therefore,
the environmental effect will be reduced to "less than significant".
Q) The proposed map will cause the eventual development of 16
detached single-family homes. The homes will be required to comply
with development standards set forth by conditions of approval within
this resolution that relate to setbacks, building height and the location
of accessory structures. Additionally, future homes will be required to
obtain approval through the City's Development Review process.
Colors and material will be required to be compatible with other
homes in the surrounding area. Furthermore, the City's Design
Guidelines will also apply to the development of future homes.
Foundation design will be required to comply with the California
Uniform Building Code.
(k) The proposed project will confine development to adjacent to its
western boundaries and will leave the majority of the eastern portion
and most of the area adjacent to the southern boundary as open
space and is referred to on the map as Lot "C". Therefore, a portion
of this area will not be graded at all. The remaining area will use
landform grading and will revegetate the grading area pursuant to the
MND and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program.
(1) At this time, the construction of residential units is not part of the
application request. The future development will be required to obtain
approval through the City's Development Review process and comply
with the City's Design Guidelines and comply with development
standards set forth in this resolution. This process analyzes building
designs, locations, and arrangements, privacy and protection.
(m) Grading will create manufactured slopes at a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical)
ratio utilizing a landform grading technique. As a result, manufactured
slopes will have characteristics resembling slopes created by nature.
Round -off cut edges will be utilized to conform to the natural grade.
Proper transitioning to natural slopes will be achieved through the use
of irregular curvilinear shapes that will blend into the adjoining
topography. Revegetation of the manufactured slopes will be applied
in patterns which occur in nature, thereby minimizing the visual effect
of grading. The revegetation will be accomplished with suitable plant
material requiring minimal cultivation and irrigation in order to thrive,
thereby fostering slope stability and minimizing the potential for
erosion.
5
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
(n) The utilization of street designs and improvements which serve to
minimize grading alterations and harmonize with the natural contours
and character of the hillside.
The proposed project is located directly at the southern terminus of
Crooked Creek Drive. The project proposes two private streets,
identified as Streets "A" and "B" with Street "A" as an extension of
Crooked Creek Drive and the only access to the project site. It is
required that the extension align with the existing section of Crooked
Creek Drive. All improvements to streets will be constructed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Conditional Use Permit for Planned Development Overlay District
In accordance to Municipal Code Section 22.22.150, pertaining to required
findings for a Conditional Use Permit for Planned Development Overlay
District, the City Council finds as follows:
(o) Zone Change 2006-02 will change the existing zoning from R-1-
10,000 to Low Density Residential (RL) Maximum 3 Du/Ac which is
consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the project
site. However, the Planned Development Overlay is needed to reduce
the square footage of each lot in order to preserve the open space
identified as Lot "C". As such, the project has been reduced to 16
dwelling unit on 12.9 gross acres or a density of 0.81 dwelling units
per acre. With the Planned Development Overlay lots will be reduced
in size and will vary from 5,705 to 10,506 square feet, with a majority
of the lot sizes between 6,229 to 7,325 square feet. With the
proposed lot sizes and Planned Development Overlay, the future
detached single-family residences will still be able to comply with all
required Development Code and Municipal Code standards.
(p) The General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential
(RL) Maximum 3 Du/Ac. The proposed project is consistent with the
General Plan. It has a proposed gross density of 0.81 dwelling units
per acres, which meets the General Plan land use designation for the
project site. Additionally, the project uses landform grading and
retains a natural area (open space/Lot "C") by clustering the
development mainly in the western portion of the project site.
Furthermore, the proposed project is using a Planned Development
Overlay that is consistent with the goals and policies of the General
Plan. There is no applicable specific plan that applies to the project.
6
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
(q) As discussed in Finding (g), (j), (1) and (o) above, the design, location,
size and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible
with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity.
(r) The subject site is physically suitable forthe type and density/intensity
of use being proposed including access, provision of utilities,
compatibility with adjoining land uses, and the absence of physical
constraints as described in Findings (g), (j), (1) and (o) above.
(s) The MND and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program reviewed
issues related to public interest, health, safety and improvement
related to this project. It was found that the project will not have a
significant effect on these issues. In some instances mitigation
measures are incorporated into the project to ensure that the project's
effect on these issues will be "less than significant". Therefore,
granting the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the
public interest, health, safety, injurious to persons, property, or
improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is
located.
(t} The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The
proposed project required a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND).
MND No. 2006-03 (SCH # 2006071129) has been prepared
according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder.
Variance
In accordance to Municipal Code Section 22.54.040, pertaining to required
findings for a Variance, the City Council finds as follows:
(u) In accordance with Development Code Section 22.524, an application
for a Variance may be filed and considered in order to increase
retaining walls heights from the allowed six feet depending on
topography constraints. Development Code Section 22.22 requires
retaining walls not exceed three feet in exposed height adjacent to a
street. Additionally, retaining walls adjacent to the street shall be no
more than three terraced or stepped walls.
The applicant proposes retaining walls adjacent to Streets "A" and "B'
at exposed heights of five and six feet, which do not exceed three
terraced walls. These walls are needed to create a cut into open
space Lot "C" for the new streets due to the grade differences
between the new streets and Lot "C".
7
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
The City's Trails Master Plan delineates a trail that traverses the
project site. To create a useable pedestrian trail with trail head that
connects to existing or planned trails, the trail must be relocated.
Retaining walls are needed to create the walking trail area adjacent to
Street "A" taking access from existing Crooked Creek Drive.
Retaining walls will cut into open space Lot "C" adjacent to Street "A".
The proposed retaining walls will be set back approximately ten feet
more then as shown on the map. Changing the location of the walls
will increase their exposed height to approximately ten feet. As a
result, Variance approval is required for the increased height of these
proposed retaining walls. A geo-rid retaining wall system with cells for
plant material will be used for all retaining walls.
(v) Granting the Variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other property
owners in the same vicinity and zoning districts and denied to the
property owner for which the Variance is sought.
As referenced above in Finding (u), granting the Variance is
necessary in orderto relocate and create the pedestrian trail pursuant
to the City's Trails Master Plan and the topographical constraints of
the project site related to the preservation of open space Lot "C
(w) Due to the constraints of the project site related to topography and an
increase in wall heights will allow the applicant to develop the project
site with buildable pads, trail easement and open space. Therefore,
granting the Variance will be consistent with the General Plan. The
project area does not have a specific plan. Before the issuance of any
City permits, the proposed project is required to comply with all
conditions within the approved resolutions for this project, landscaping
requirements for screening the walls along with geo-grid wall system
and the Building and Safety Division, Public Works Department, and
Fire Department requirements. The referenced agencies through the
permit and inspection process will ensure that the proposed project
and retaining walls are not detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
Tree Permit
In accordance to Municipal Code Section 22.38.110, pertaining to required
findings for a Variance, the City Council finds as follows:
(x) According to the MND and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program
prepared for the project site, focused surveys were prepared for
8
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
native trees and special status plants/vegetation. The potential
significance of environmental impacts on biological resources has
been assessed. According to the project biological assessment, the
proposed project will impact 11.5 acres of mixed Coast Live Oak and
California walnut woodland with understory dominated by poison oak.
This woodland acreage is identified by the California Department of
Fish and Game as a sensitive resource and has a minimum
replacement ratio of 1:1. A survey indicates that a total of 468 oak
and walnut trees exist on the project site. A total of 269 of these trees
will be removed due to the proposed grading. However, 197 oak and
walnut trees had deteriorated to the point of dying or dead. The
remaining 72 trees (43 oaks and 29 walnuts) are considered healthy
and recommend for replacement at a 3:1 ratio per the City's Tree
Permit requirements. Mitigation will include a combination of on-site
and/or off-site preservation, enhancement and/or restoration. The
applicant will implement the mitigation plan, as approved by the City
and according to the guidelines and performance standards of the
plan.
5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the City Council
hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18 for hillside
development and Planned Development Overlay, Variance No. 2006-02 and
Tree Permit No 2002-13 for VTTM No. 54081 subject to the following
conditions and Standard Conditions attached and referenced herein:
a. GENERAL
This approval shall be null and void and of no effect unless the
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH
# 2006071129) and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program
is adopted and VTTM No. 54081, Zone Change No. 2006-02,
Planned Development Overlay, Conditional Use Permit
No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit
No. 2002-13 are approved. This approval is valid for three
years. Two extensions of time, one year each, may be
approved pursuant to Development Code Section 22.66.
b. SITE DEVELOPMENT
A trail is located within the project site. Prior to final map
approval, applicant shall dedicate to the City an irrevocable
easement of 20 feet adjacent to the southern boundary of the
map and 10 feet on the east side of Street "A" for the
pedestrian trail. Easement shall be identified on the map.
9
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
2. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit a detail plan
indicating a trail width of 10 feet that is ADA accessible with a
three foot wide planter in front of the wall adjacent to the trail.
The detail plan shall also delineate the following: trail surface
of decomposed granite; trail head located at the end of Street
"A" and adjacent to the southern boundary of the map;
seating/bench; trash container; shade; and sign/kiosk at the
entrance of the tract within Lot A. Prior to final map approval,
the detail plan of the trail shall be reviewed and approved by
the Community Development Director. Improvements to Lot "A"
shall be completed prior to final inspection and issuance of the
Certificate of Occupancy of the first house.
3. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall design the 20 foot
trail adjacent to the southern boundary of the map for review
and approval of the Community Development Director. To
insure the development of this section of the trail, the applicant
shall submit a bond or cash deposit to the City for the
estimated development cost of this section of the trail. The
bond or cash deposit shall remain with the City until such time
as this section of the trail is developed or the easement is
vacated.
4. Because of the trail head location, Lots 8 and 9 shall be
designed with a common driveway. Prior to final map
approval, applicant shall submit a detail plan delineating the
common driveway to be reviewed and approved by the
Community Development Director.
5. Retaining walls shall not exceed a maximum exposed height of
six feet. Retaining walls located on the east side of Street "A"
and adjacent to the pedestrian trail easement shall not exceed
an exposed height of 10 feet.
6. Walls with an exposed height of ten feet shall be constructed
by using a geo-grid lock and load retaining wall system in earth
tone color. Irrigation shall be incorporated into the retaining
wall system with pockets in the wall for plant material. All other
retaining walls shall be constructed from split face block with
caps of the same material. Plant material shall be the kind that
cascades down the wall. Prior to final map, applicant shall
provide a retaining wall plan delineating the irrigation and
species, quantity and size of all plant material within the wall
system. For the planter areas between and in front of the
walls, trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size and planted
10
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
eight feet on center. Shrubs shall be a minimum size of five
gallons and planted three feet on center. Appropriate vines
shall be planted between the shrubs to cover the walls. All
landscaping and irrigation plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the Community Development Director.
7. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit a detail plan
that includes landscaping/irrigation for the circle entry into the
project. Prior to final map approval, the detail plan shall be
reviewed and approved by the Community Development
Director.
8. All open space lots/common lots (Lots "A", "B", "C" and "D"
shall remain as open space/common lots and shall be
identified on the final map as such granting the City the right to
prohibit the erection of structures and including any
construction activities on any said lot.
9. This project shall comply with the adopted Mitigation
Monitoring Program.
10. Uses permitted in the RL zoning district as listed in the
Development Code shall be the only uses allowed in the RL -
PD zoning designation for the project site.
11. Oak and walnut trees removed shall be replaced at a 3:1
ration. Dead or dying oak and walnut trees removed shall be
replaced at a 1:1 ratio
12. Prior to final map, the applicant shall provide a revised
landscape plan for the Planning Division review and approval
that shows trees, shrubs and vines in the planter areas
between the retaining walls which are adjacent to the property
lines of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive and Brea Canyon
Flood Control Channel shall . The landscape plan shall show
the following: ornamental evergreen trees at 24, 36 and 48
inch box sizes, planted 12 feet on center with 50 percent at 24
inch box, 25 percent at 36 inch box and 25 percent at 48 inch
box; shrubs in 5 and 10 gallon sizes, planted 3 feet on center
with 75 percent at 5 gallon size and 25 percent at 10 gallon
size; and vines in 5 gallon size planted 5 feet on center.
13. Prior to issuance of any permits or grubbing of the site,
whichever comes first, the applicant shall submit a construction
traffic safety mitigation plan that addresses such items as, but
not limited to: lane closures, truck routes, traffic control
11
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
measures for the construction area, street cleaning, etc. for the
City's review and approval.
C. PUBLIC WORK/ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Prior to final map approval and in conjunction with the grading
plan, applicant shall submit a detailed plan showing the
location, planned depth and design of the recommended
caisson/tiebacks along with structural calculations supporting
their design with geotechnical input from the geotechnical
consultant. The submittal shall be approved by the Public
Works/Engineering Department and Building and Safety
Division prior to final map.
2. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit to the Public
Works/Engineering Department the design of the geogrid-
stablized slope prepared by a qualified licensed engineer using
the parameters provided. The design shall be prepared by an
engineer familiar with geogrid slope design and shall be
reviewed and wet stamped by the developer's geotechnical
consultant. The design and supporting calculations shall be
submitted to the Public Works/Engineering Department and
Building and Safety Division for approval prior to final map.
d. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION
1. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit to the
Building and Safety Division the design of all retaining walls for
review and approval concurrently with the grading plan check.
e. LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE PREVENTION
Access shall comply with Section 902 of the Fire Code, which
requires all weather access. All weather access my require
paving.
2. Fire Department access shall be extended to within 150 feet
distance of any exterior portion of all structures.
3. 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 map.
Turnarounds shall be designed, constructed and maintained to
insure their integrity for Fire Department use. Where
topography dictates, turnarounds shall be provided for
driveways that extend over150 feet in length.
12
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
4. Private driveways shall be indicated on the final map as
"Private Driveway and Fire Lane" with the widths clearly
depicted and shall be maintained in accordance with the Fire
Code.
5. The property is located within the area described by the Fire
Department a "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone". A "Fuel
Modification Plan" shall be submitted and approved prior to
final map clearance. (Contact Fuel Modification Unit, Fire
Station #32, 605 N. Angelino Avenue, Azusa, CA 91702-2904,
Phone (626-969-5205, for details.)
6. Applicant shall provide Fire Department or City approved street
signs and building access numbers prior to occupancy.
7. Applicant shall provide water mains, fire hydrants and fire flows
as required by the County of Los Angeles Fire Department, for
all land shown on map which shall be recorded.
8. Fire hydrant shall conform to the following requirements:
(a.) Install three public fire hydrants;
(b.) Upgrade/verify one existing public fire hydrant;
(c.) Measure 6" x 4" x 2Y2" brass or bronze, conforming to
current AWWA standards C503 or approved equal;
(d.) On site hydrants shall be installed a minimum of 25 feet
form a structure or protected by two hour fire wall'
9. The required fire flow for public fire hydrants at this location
shall be 1250 gallons per minute at 20 psi for duration of two
hours, over and above maximum daily domestic demand. One
hydrant flowing simultaneously, may be used to achieve the
required fire flow
The City Council shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to:
Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge Estates, LLC, 10365 W. Jefferson Blvd., Culver
City, CA 90232
13
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2007, BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
Steve Tye, Mayor
I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was
duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond
Bar, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 20th day of February 2007,
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members:
NOES: Council Members:
ABSENT: Council Members:
ABSTAIN: Council Members:
Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk
14
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
USE PERMITS, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL
NEW AND REMODELED STRUCTURES
PROJECT #: VTTM No. 54081, MND No. 2006-03 ZC 2006-02 Planned
Development Overlay, CUP 2002-18 VAR 2002-02 and
TP No. 2002-13
SUBJECT: Sixteen lot residential subdivision
APLICANT: Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge LLC
LOCATION: Southern Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION AT (909) 839-
7030, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9(b) (1), the applicant
shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and its officers, agents
and employees, from any claim, action, or proceeding to attack, set-aside,
void or annul, the approval of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 brought
within the time period provided by Government Code Section 66499.37. In
the event the city and/or its officers, agents and employees are made a party
of any such action:
(a) Applicant shall provide a defense to the City defendants or at the
City's option reimburse the City its costs of defense, including
reasonable attorneys fees, incurred in defense of such claims.
15
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
(b) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the
City descendents. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any
claim, action of proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense
thereof.
2. Applicant shall include signed copies of the Planning Commission Resolution
of Approval Nos. 2007-01, 2007-02, 2007-03, Standard Conditions, and all
environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The
sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the
construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped
by a licensed Engineer/Architect.
3. Revised plans (such as but not limited to site plan, elevations,
landscape/irrigation plan, grading plan, etc.,) incorporating all Conditions of
Approval shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval prior
to the plan check.
4. Notwithstanding any previous subsection of the resolution, the Department of
Fish and Game requires payment of the fee pursuant to Section 711.4 of that
Fish and Game Code. Said payment shall be made by the applicant to the
city within five days of this approval.
5. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance with the
conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable regulations.
6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the
Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and any applicable
Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
7. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be
coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as
grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.,) or prior to final map
approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has
commenced, whichever comes first.
8. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced
thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed.
B. FEES/DEPOSITS
1. Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to Planning,
Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works/Engineering Department and
Mitigation Monitoring) at the established rates, prior to final map approval,
issuance of building or grading permit (whichever comes first), as required by
the City. School fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permit.
In addition, the applicant shall pay all remaining prorated City project review
16
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
and processing fees prior to the map's recordation or issuance of building
permit, whichever come first.
2. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall pay a fee to the City in -lieu of
dedication for parkland pursuant to Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 21.32.
3. Prior to any public hearing or final map approval, all deposit accounts for the
processing of this project shall have no deficits.
4. Notwithstanding any previous subsection of the resolution, the Department of
Fish and Game required payment of the fee pursuant to Section 711.4 of that
Fish and Game Code. Said payment shall be made by the applicant to the
city within five days of this grant's approval.
C. TIME LIMITS
This approval shall not be effective for any purpose until the applicant and
owner of the property involved have filed within 15 days of approval of this
map, at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department/
Planning Division an Affidavit of Acceptance stating that they are aware of
and agree to accept all the conditions of this approval.
2. In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66463.5, VTTM
No. 54081 is valid for three years. An extension of time may berequested in
writing and shall only be considered if submitted to the city no less than 60
days prior to the approval's expiration date. Final map approval will not be
granted unless the map is in substantial compliance with VTTM No. 54081
including all conditions and the applicant has entered into a subdivision
improvement agreement to the satisfaction of the City Attorney.
D. SITE DEVELOPMENT
1. The project site shall be developed in substantial conformance with VTTM
No. 54081 except as conditions herein, and as conditioned in Conditional
Use. Permit No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit
No. 2002-13 submitted to and recommended approval by the Planning
Commission to the City Council collectively referenced herein as Exhibit "A"
- the subdivision map, Exhibit "B" — Mitigated Negative Declaration
No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program dated
July 2006, as modified herein.
2. The Mitigation Monitoring Program outlined in Mitigated Negative Declaration
No. 2006-03 (SCH # 2006071129) and approved by the City shall be
implemented and complied with rigorously. The mitigation monitoring fees
shall be deposited with the City 90 days prior to the issuance of a grading
17
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
permit. All costs related to the ongoing monitoring shall be secured from the
applicant and received by the City prior to the approval of the final map.
3. Proposed future custom single-family residential units shall comply with the
City's Development Review process.
4. A Home Owner's Association (HOA) shall be formed. The HOA shall have
Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) and Articles of Incorporation of the
HOA are subject to the approval of Planning Division and Public
Works/Engineering Department and the City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be
recorded concurrently with the final map or prior to the issuance of any City
permits, which ever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the
City Engineer. The HOA shall submit to the Planning Division a list of the
names and addresses of the officers on or before January 1 of each and
every year and whenever said information changes.
5. Prior to the final map recordation or issuance of building permit, whichever
come first, the application shall provide the City with a "Buyer's Awareness
Package." for the City's review and approval. The "Buyer's Awareness
Package" shall include, but is not limited to, information pertaining to
geological issues regarding the property, wildlife corridors, oak and walnut
trees, natural vegetation preservation issues, maintenance program for
urban pollutant basins, fuel modification, all mitigation measures within the
Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program and Exhibit "A" which delineates
each lot's building envelope, explanatory information pertaining to restrictions
on the use of properties as necessary, and similar related matters. The
applicant shall give each buyer a copy of the "Buyer's Awareness Package"
and shall document their receipt of the same in the escrow instructions of
each lot and document their receipt to the City.
6. Applicant, through the "Buyer's Awareness Program" shall segregate green
waste for reuse as specified under the City's Source Reduction Recycling
Element, and County Sanitation District's waste division policies.
7. All single-family residential units shall be required to obtain Development
Review approval. Additionally, single-family residential dwelling units shall
use the following development standards:
a. Front yard setback minimum 20 feet from front property line;
b. Side yard setbacks minimum five and 10 feet from the from the edge
of the buildable pad or side property lines, whichever is applicable;
C. Distance between single-family residential dwelling units shall be a
minimum 15 feet;
d. Rear yard setback 20 feet from the edge of the buildable pad or rear
property line, whichever is applicable; and
18
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
e. Accessory structures shall utilize setback distances from the edge of
pad or property line whichever is applicable and be consistent with the
RL/PD zoning district at the time of permit issuance.
8. All ground -mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, air
conditioning condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and
adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or
masonry walls, berms, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning
Division.
9. Prior to final map approval or issuance of building permit, whichever come
first, street names shall be submitted for City review and approval. Street
names shall not duplicate existing streets within the City of Diamond Bar's
postal service zip code areas.
10. House numbering plans shall be submitted to and approved by the City prior
to issuance of building permits. All building numbers and individual units shall
be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination.
House numbering plans shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer prior to issuance of building permits.
11. All lighting fixtures adjacent to interior property lines shall be approved by the
Planning Division as to type, orientation and height.
12. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be
reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of
building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height,
and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties.
E. LANDSCAPE, PRESERVED AND PROTECTED TREES
Prior to final map approval, a detailed landscape/irrigation plans shall be
prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted to the Planning
Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits and
recordation of the map, which ever occurs first..
2. Prior to final map approval, a fuel modification plan for landscape/irrigation
prepared by a registered landscape architect shall be submitted for Planning
Division review and approval.
3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or the initiation of any activity that
involves the removal/disturbance of oak and walnut woodland habitat; the
applicant shall develop a detail oak and walnut woodland mitigation plan in
accordance with the Mitigated Negative Declaration's Mitigation Report and
Program and submit the plan to the City for review and approval. Mitigation
shall include offsite preservation and or restoration at no less than 1:1
acreage ratio. The native trees protected under the City's tree preservation
19
City Council Resoludon No. 2007 -XX
and protection standards require a minimum replacement ratio of 3:1. It is
estimated that a total of 269 trees will be removed. However, 197 are oak
and walnut trees have deteriorated to the point of dying or are dead. The
remaining 72 trees (43 oak and 29 walnuts) are considered healthy and will
be removed due to the project's development. Any off-site mitigation shall be
in accordance with the requirements and approval of the California
Department of Fish and Game. If in -lieu fees are used for a part of or all
mitigation, this mitigation method shall also be in accordance with the
requirements and approval of the California Department of Fish and Game
and the City of Diamond Bar.
4. Prior to the issuance of any permits, the applicant shall submit revegetation
landscape and irrigation plans for slopes within the project site for Planning
Division review and approval. Said slope shall be landscaped at the
completion of grading activities. All slope planting, irrigation and revegetation
areas shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by
the developer until each individual unit/lot is sold and occupied by the buyer.
Prior to releasing occupancy for the unit/lot, an inspection shall be
conducted by the Planning Division to determine that the vegetation is in
satisfactory condition.
F. SOLID WASTE
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.
2. Mandatory solid waste disposal services shall be provided by the City
franchised waste hauler to all parcels/lots or uses affected by approval of this
project.
3. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-ups shall be for
individual units with all receptacles shielded from public view.
20
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT, (909) 839-7040, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. GENERAL
1. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions,
fencing, and weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings,
shall be submitted for review and approval prior to approval and recordation
of the Final Tract Map and prior to approval of street improvement and
grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including
fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements.
2. A title report/guarantee showing all fee owners, interest holders, and nature
of interest shall be submitted for final map plan check. An updated title
report/guarantee and subdivision guarantee shall be submitted ten (10)
business days prior to final map approval.
3. A permit from the Los Angeles County Public Works Department shall be
required for work within its right-of-way or connection to its facilities.
4. Any existing easement for open space, utilities, riding and hiking trials shall
be relocated and/or grading performed, as necessary, to provide, for the
portion within the project site, practical access for the intended use.
5. Prior to final map approval, written certification that all utility services and any
other service related to the site shall be available to serve the proposed
project and shall be submitted to the City. Such letters shall be issued by the
district, utility and cable television company, within ninety (90) days prior to
final map approval.
6. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit to the City Engineer the
detail cost estimates for bonding purposes of all public improvements.
7. Prior to final map approval, if any public or private improvements required as
part of this map have not been completed by applicant and accepted by the
City, applicant shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City and shall
post the appropriate security.
8. Prior to final map approval all site grading, landscaping, irrigation, street,
sewer and storm drain improvement plans shall be approved by the City
Engineer, surety shall be posted, and an agreement executed guaranteeing
completion of all public and private improvements.
21
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
9. Prior to issuance of grading permits, surety shall be posted and an
agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all drainage facilities
necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
10. Any details or notes which may be inconsistent with requirement or
ordinances, general conditions or approval, or City policies shall be
specifically approved in other conditions or ordinance requirements are
modified to those shown on the tentative parcel map upon approval by the
Advisory agency.
11. All identified geologic hazards within the vesting tentative tract map
boundaries which cannot be eliminated as approved by the City Engineer
shall be indicated on the final map as "Restricted Use Area" subject to
geologic hazard. The applicant shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit
the erection of buildings or other structures within such restricted use areas
shown on the final map.
12. Easements for disposal of drainage water onto or over adjacent parcels shall
be delineated and shown on the final map, as approved by the City Engineer.
13. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient street, sewer, and
drainage improvements shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to
assure secondary access, proper outfall for sewers and drainage protection
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond
to lot lines shown on the final map.
14. Prior to any work performed in the street right-of-way, fees shall be paid and
a construction permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Department in
addition to any other permits required.
15. Applicant shall label and delineate on the final map any private drives or fire
lanes to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
16. Easements, satisfactory to the City Engineer and the utility companies, for
public utility and public services purposes shall be offered and shown on the
final map for dedication to the City.
17. After the final map records, applicant shall submit to the Public
Works/Engineering Department, at no cost to the City, a full size reproducible
copy of the recorded map. Final approval of the public improvements shall
not be given until the copy of the recorded map is received by the Public
Works/Engineering Department.
18. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall provide to the City as built mylars,
stamped by appropriate individuals certifying the plan for all improvements at
no cost to the City.
22
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
19. Applicant shall contribute funds to a separate engineering trust deposit
against which charges can be made by the City or its representatives for
services rendered. Charges shall be on an hourly basis and shall include
any City administrative costs.
20. Applicant shall provide digitized information in a format defined by the City
for all related plans, at no cost to the City.
21. All activities/improvements proposed for this VTTM No. 54081 shall be wholly
contained within the boundaries of the map. Should any off-site
activities/improvements be required, approval shall be obtained from the
affected property owner and the City as required by the City Engineer.
B. GRADING
No grading or any staging or construction shall be performed prior to final
map approval by the City Council and map recordation. All pertinent
improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map
approval by the City Council.
2. Retaining wall location shall be shown on the grading plan and submitted
with a soils report to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review
and approval concurrently with the grading plan check.
3. Exterior grading and construction activities and the transportation of
equipment and materials and operation of heavy grading equipment shall be
limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Saturday. Dust generated by grading and construction activities shall be
reduced by watering the soil prior to and during the activities and in
accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 402 and
Rule 403. Reclaimed water shall be utilized whenever possible. Additionally,
all construction equipment shall be properly muffled to reduce noise levels.
4. All equipment staging areas shall be located on the project site. Staging
area, including material stockpile and equipment storage area, shall be
enclosed within a 6 foot -high chain link fence. All access points in the
defense shall be locked whenever the construction site is not supervised.
5. Precise grading plans for each lot shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department/Planning Division for approval prior to issuance of
building permits. (This may be on an incremental or composite basis).
6. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California
Building Code, City Grading Ordinance, Hillside Management Ordinance and
acceptable grading practices.
23
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
7. The maximum grade of driveways serving building pad areas shall be 15
percent. In hillside areas driveway grades exceeding 10 percent shall have
parking landings with a minimum 16 feet deep and shall not exceed five (5)
percent grade or as required by the City Engineer. Driveways with a slope of
15 percent shall incorporate grooves for traction into the construction as
required by the City Engineer.
8. 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. Prior to the issuance of a
grading permit, 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; a projection plane shall have a 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.
i. 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 final map.
9. Prior to issuance of grading permits, storm drain improvement plans shall be
approved by the City Engineer and Los Angeles County Public Works
Department and surety shall be posted and an agreement executed
guaranteeing completion of all drainage facilities to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
24
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
C.
10. Final grading plans shall be designed in compliance with the
recommendations of the final detailed soils and engineering geology reports.
All remedial earthwork specified in the final report shall be incorporated into
the grading plans. Final grading plans shall be signed and stamped by a
California registered Civil Engineer, registered Geotechnical Engineer and
registered Engineering Geologist and approved by the City Engineer.
11. A Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP) conforming to
City Ordinance is required to be incorporated into the grading plan and
approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall incorporate Structural or
Treatment Control Best Management Practices for storm water runoff into
the grading plans for construction and post -construction activities
respectively.
12. All slopes shall be seeded per landscape plan and/or fuel modification plan
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
and a permanent irrigation system shall be installed.
13. An erosion control plan shall be approved by the City Engineer. Erosion
control plans shall be made in accordance to the City's NPDES
requirements.
14. Submit a stockpile plan showing the proposed location for stockpile for
grading export materials, and the route of transport.
15. Prepare a horizontal control plan and submit concurrently with the grading
plan for review and approval.
16. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, a pre -construction meeting must be
held at the project site with the grading contractor, applicant, and city grading
inspector at least 48 hours prior to commencing grading operations.
17. Rough Grade certifications by project soils engineer shall be submitted prior
to issuance of building permits for the foundations of structures. Retaining
wall permit may be issued without a rough grade certificate.
18. Final Grade certifications by project soils engineer and civil engineers shall
be submitted to the Public Works/Engineering Department prior to the
issuance of any project final inspections/certificate of occupancy.
DRAINAGE
All terrace drains and drainage channels shall be constructed in muted earth
tones so as not to impart adverse visual impacts. Terrace drains shall follow
25
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
landform slope configuration and shall not be placed in an exposed
positions. All down drains shall be hidden in swales diagonally or curvilinear
across a slope face.
2. All drainage improvements necessary for dewatering and protecting the
subdivided properties shall be installed priorto 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.
3. All identified flood hazard locations within the tentative map boundaries
which cannot be eliminated as approved by the City Engineer shall be shown
on the final map and delineated as "Flood Hazard Area."
4. Storm drainage facilities shall be constructed within the street right-of-way or
in easements satisfactory to the City Engineer and the Los Angeles County
Flood Control Districts. All storm drain facilities plans shall be plan checked
by the City and County of Los Angeles and all fees required shall be paid by
the applicant.
5. A final drainage study and final drainage/storm drain plan in a 24" x 36" sheet
format shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer and Los
Angeles Public Works Department prior to grading permit. All drainage
facilities shall be designed and constructed as required by the City Engineer
and in accordance with 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.
6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a complete hydrology and hydraulic
study shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer registered in the State of
California to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Los Angeles Public
Works Department.
7. A comprehensive maintenance plan/program shall be submitted concurrently
with the storm drain plans to the Public Works/Engineering Department for
review and approval by the City Engineer.
D. STREET IMPROVEMENT
The applicant shall replace and record any centerline ties and monuments
that are removed as part of this construction with the Los Angeles County
Public Works Survey Division.
2. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall provide written
permission to the satisfaction of the City from any property owners which will
be affected by offsite grading.
26
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
3. Street improvement plans in a 24" x 36" sheet format, prepared by a
registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer. Streets shall not exceed a maximum slope of 12 percent.
4. New -street centerline monuments shall be set at the intersections of two or
more streets, intersections of two or more streets, intersections of streets
with tract boundaries 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.
5. The design and construction of private street improvements shall be set to
City and County standards and designed to a design speed of 35 mph.
6. Prior to final map recordation, the applicant shall submit plans delineating the
improvement and extension of Crooked Creek Drive forthe City's review and
approval. The improvement and extension shall occur within the project site
boundaries of the proposed map. The improvement and extension of
Crooked Creek Drive shall be completed prior to final inspection of grading
activities.
E. UTILITIES
1. Easements, satisfactory to the City Engineer and the utility companies, for
public utility and public services purposes shall be offered and shown on the
detailed site plan for dedication to the City.
2. Prior to final map approval, a water system with appurtenant facilities to
serve all lots/parcels in the land division designed to the Walnut Valley Water
District (WVWD) specifications shall be provided and approved by the City
Engineer. The system shall include fire hydrants of the type and location as
determined by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The water mains
shall be sized to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department.
3. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall construct or enter into an
improvement agreement with the City guaranteeing construction of the
necessary improvements to the existing water system according to Walnut
Valley Water District (WVWD) specifications to accommodate the total
domestic and fire flows as may be required by the City Engineer, WVWD and
Fire Department.
4. Prior to final map approval or issuance of building permit whichever comes
first, written certification that all utility services and any other service related
27
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
to the site shall be available to serve the proposed project and shall be
submitted to the City. Such letters shall be issued by the district, utility and
cable television company, if applicable, within ninety (90) days prior issuance
of grading permits.
5. Prior to recordation of final map, applicant shall provide separate
underground utility services to each parcel per Section 21.30 of Title 21 of
the City Code, including water, gas, electric power, telephone and cable TV,
in accordance with the respective utility company standards. Easements
required by the utility companies shall be approved by the City Engineer.
6. Applicant shall relocate and underground any existing on-site utilities to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and the respective utility owner.
7. Underground utilities shall not be constructed within the drip line of any
mature tree except as approved by a registered arborist.
F. SEWERS
1. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit a sanitary sewer area
study to the City and County Engineer to verify that capacity is available in
the sewerage system to be used as the outfall 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 County Engineer.
2. 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 the City or District 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 and surety shall be provided
and an agreement executed prior to approval of the final map.
3. Applicant shall obtain connection permit(s) from the City and County
Sanitation District prior to issuance of building permits. The area within the
tentative map boundaries shall be annexed into the County Consolidated
Sewer Maintenance District and appropriate easements for all sewer main
and trunk lines shall be shown on the final map and offered for dedication on
the final map.
4. Applicant, at applicant's sole cost and expense, shall construct the sewer
system in accordance with the City, Los Angeles County Public Works
Division and County Sanitation District Standards prior to occupancy.
28
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
G. TRAFFIC MITIGATIONS
All traffic mitigations shall be implemented and constructed in accordance
with the traffic report prepared by Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc. dated
October 2002 and revised September 2003 and conditions of project
approval for the VTTM No. 54081, prior to issuance of the certificate of
occupancy
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION,
(909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
Plans shall conform to State and Local Building Code (i.e., 2001 California
Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and
the 2001 National Electrical Code) requirements and all other applicable
construction codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of plan
check submittal.
2. Submit Public Works/Engineering Department approved grading plans
showing clearly all finish elevations, drainage, and retaining walls locations.
3. All retaining walls shall be submitted to the Building & Safety and Public
Work Departments for review and approval.
4. Submit grading plans showing clearly all finish elevations, drainage, and
retaining wall locations. No building permits shall be issued prior to
submitting a pad certification.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE
PREVENTION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Emergency access shall be provided, maintaining free and clear, a minimum
28 foot at all times during construction in accordance with Fire Department
requirements.
2. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for combustible construction,
evidence shall be submitted to the Fire Department that temporary water
supply for fire protection is available pending completion of the required fire
protection system.
3. Prior to recordation, the final map shall comply with all Fire Department
requirements.
END
29
City Council Resolution No. 2007 -XX
INITIAL STUDY AND DRAFT
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 54081
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
Lead Agency:
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
21825 Copley Drive `
Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178
Applicant:
JEWEL RIDGE, LLC
10365 West Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, California 90232
July 2006 "''' •' a •. " �
ATTACHMENT 0 U
_GV
DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATESNESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 54081
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
July 2006
NAME, IF ANY, AND A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT. Jewell Ridge Estates.
Proposed is a 22 -lot residential subdivision, allowing for the development of 16 single-family detached
homes on individual parcels ranging in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to 10,506 square
feet. The average lot size for the residential lots will be approximately 6,892 square feet. The project
includes the construction of a 42 -foot wide private street, the retention of a portion of the property as
open space, and may include the construction of a "pedestrian trail" allowing public access into a
portion of the proposed open space areas. In addition to the approval or conditional approval of the
proposed vesting tentative map, other discretionary actions under consideration by the City include,
but may not be limited to, the issuance of a conditional use permit, variance, protected tree permit,
grading permit, and such other discretionary permits and approvals as may be required by the City or
by other Responsible Agencies for the construction and habitation of the project site.
2. LOCATION. The approximately 12.9 -acre project site is located adjacent to the southern corporate
boundaries of the City of Diamond Bar, within an incorporated area of eastern Los Angeles County.
More specifically, the project is located near the southern terminus of Crooked Creek Drive,
approximately two blocks east of the Orange (SR -57) Freeway and Brea Canyon Road and east of an
existing concrete -lined flood control channel (Brea Canyon Channel), maintained by the Los Angeles
County Department of Public Works, Flood Control Division.
3. LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON. Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner, City of Diamond Bar,
Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21825 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar,
California 91765-4178.
4. ENTITY OR PERSON UNDERTAKING PROJECT. Daniel Singh, Jewell Ridge, LLC, 10365
Jefferson Boulevard, Culver City, California 90232
The Lead Agency, having reviewed the "Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration: Jewel
Ridge Estates - Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081" (City of Diamond Bar, May 2006) (Initial Study) and
having considered the comments received prior to and submitted at the public meetings of the Lead
Agency at which time the project was considered, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project,
as mitigated to include those measures contained in the Initial Study, will not have a significant effect on
the environment. The reasons supporting the Lead Agency's findings are as follows:
A. The Lead Agency prepared an Initial Study for the purpose of assessing the potential impacts
associated with the construction and habitation of the proposed residential development project. The
Initial Study included a detailed analysis of a broad range of environmental issues and incorporated
information from a number of technical studies conducted for the purpose of assessing those impacts.
B. The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence before the Lead Agency that the
proposed project, as modified to incorporate those mitigation measures identified therein, will have a
significant effect on the environment. Inclusion of the mitigation measures identified by the Lead
Agency will result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of the project's potentially significant
environmental effects and will reduce all such impacts to below a level of significance.
C. The project proponent has agreed to incorporate those mitigation measures, as identified in the Initial
Study, as conditions of project approval. Prior to taking any action on the proposed project, the Lead
Agency will adopt a mitigation reporting and monitoring program outlining the manner in which each
of those mitigation measures will be implemented.
A copy of the Initial Study is on file at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department,
Planning Division, 21825 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178 and can be reviewed
during the regular business hours of the Lead Agency.
This page intentionally left blank.
INITIAL STUDY AND DRAFT
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 54081
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
Lead Agency:
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISON
Attn: Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner
21825 E. Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177
(909) 861-3117 FAX
(909) 839-7032
Applicant:
JEWEL RIDGE, LLC
Attn: Daniel Singh
10365 Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, California 90232
(310) 945-3036 FAX
(310) 945-3030
July 2006
." -
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table of Contents
List of Sections
Section Paqe
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES -1
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1
Introduction to the Initial Study
1-1
1.2
California Environmental Quality Act Compliance
1-2
1.3
Initial Study Purpose and Intent
1-2
1.4
Required Contents of an Initial Study
1-3
1.5
Document Format
1-3
1.6
Agencies, Organizations, and Individuals
Associated with the Proposed Project
1-4
1.7
Tiering of Environmental Documents
1-7
1.8
Documents Incorporated by Reference
1-7
1.9
Custodian of Documents
1-10
1.10
Independent Judgment
1-10
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2-1
2.1
Project Location
2-1
2.2
Project Description
2-1
Vesting Tentative Tract Map
2-2
2.3
Discretionary Actions
2-4
2.4
Applicant -Nominated Environmental Compliance Activities
2-9
Biological Resources
2-10
Cultural Resources
2-10
Geology and Soils
2-10
Engineering Geology
2-10
Protected Trees
2-10
Traffic and Circulation
2-11
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3-1
3.1
Introduction to the Environmental Setting
3-1
3.2
Environmental Setting
3-1
3.2.1 Aesthetics
3-1
3.2.2 Agricultural Resources
3-3
3.2.3 Air Quality
3-4
SCAQMD Rules and Regulations
3-5
CEQA Air Quality Handbook
3-7
3.2.4 Biological Resources
3-8
Landscape and Irrigation Plan Requirements
3-9
Tree Preservation and Protection
3-10
Los Angeles County Significant Ecological Areas
3-11
California Natural Diversity Data Base
3-11
Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act
3-13
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Initial Study - Table of Contents Page i
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page ii Initial Study — Table of Contents
List of Sections (Continued)
Section
Page
Biological Resource Assessment
3-14
Proposed Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher
3-15
3.2.5 Cultural Resources
3-16
3.2.6 Geology and Soils
3-17
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
3-17
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
3-19
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
3-20
3.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
3-27
3.2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
3-28
Water Quality Control Plan — Los Angeles Region
3-28
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works
3-29
Federal Emergency Management Agency
3-31
Soil -Slip Susceptibility Maps
3-32
Hydrology Study
3-33
3.2.9 Land Use and Planning
3-33
3.2.10 Mineral Resources
3-34
3.2.11 Noise
3-37
3.2.12 Population and Housing
3-38
Regional Housing Needs Assessment
3-39
3.2.13 Public Services
3-40
Walnut Valley Unified School District Fee Justification Study
3-41
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
3-42
Los Angeles County Fire Department
3-42
3.2.14 Recreation
3-45
3.2.15 Transportation and Traffic
3-46
Traffic Study
3-47
3.2.16 Utilities and Service Systems
3-48
4.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS
4-1
4.1
Introduction to Impact Analysis
4-1
4.2
Threshold of Significance Criteria
4-1
4.3
1995 General Plan Programmatic Mitigation Measures
4-2
4.4
Topic Specific Environmental Evaluation
4-3
4.4.1 Aesthetics
4-3
4.4.2 Agricultural Resources
4-5
4.4.3 Air Quality
4-5
4.4.4 Biological Resources
4-9
4.4.5 Cultural Resources
4-15
4.4.6 Geology and Soils
4-16
4.4.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4-18
4.4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
4-22
4.4.9 Land Use and Planning
4-25
4.4.10 Mineral Resources
4-26
4.4.11 Noise
4-26
4.4.12 Population and Housing
4-28
4.4.13 Public Services
4-29
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page ii Initial Study — Table of Contents
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
List of Sections (Continued)
Section Page
4.4.14 Recreation 4-32
4.4.15 Transportation and Traffic 4-32
4.4.16 Utilities and Service Systems 4-35
4.4.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance 4-37
5.0 PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION 5-1
5.1 Introduction to Preliminary Determination 5-1
5.2 Preliminary Findings 5-1
6.0 REFERENCES 6-1
List of Appendix
Appendix
A Environmental Checklist
List of Figures
Figure Page
2-1
Regional Vicinity Map
2-3
2-2
Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Map
2-4
2-3
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081
2-5
3-1
Proposed Revisions to the County of Los Angeles Significant Ecological Areas
3-12
3-2
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher
3-16
3-3
Official State Seismic Hazard Zone Map
Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle
3-21
3-4
Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 30'x 60' Quadrangle
3-22
3-5
Quaternary Geology of a Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Quadrangle
3-23
3-6
Landslide Inventory within a Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Quadrangle
3-24
3-7
Official Map: Special Studies Zones
Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle
3-25
3-8
Project Geology Map
3-26
3-9
Hydrologic Units with Areas and Subareas
3-30
3-10
Portion of FEMA FIRM No. 06504309808
3-32
3-11
Soil -Slip Susceptibility Map
3-35
3-12
Yorba Linda Quadrangle 50 -Year 24 -Hour Rainfall Distribution Map
3-36
3-13
Natural Hazard Disclosure Map for a Portion of Los Angeles County
3-43
4-1
Vehicle Conflict Points for "T" Intersections with Single -Lane Approaches
4-34
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Initial Study — Table of Contents Page iii
List of Tables
Table
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
ES -1
Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
ES -3
ES -2
Draft Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program
ES -12
1-1
Agencies, Organizations, and Individuals Associated with the Proposed Project
1-5
3-1
California Natural Diversity Data Base Records Search — Yorba Linda Quadrangle
3-13
3-2
Existing (2 -Day Average) Daily Roadway Values
3-48
3-3
Intersection Capacity Utilization Summary
3-48
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page iv Initial Study — Table of Contents
h:
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency) has received and deemed complete an
application from Jewel Ridge, LLC (Applicant) for the development of an approximately 12.9
acre site located at the existing terminus of Crooked Creek Lane, bordering the southern
corporate boundaries of the City. As presently proposed, the Applicant seeks City approval to
subdivide the project site to create a 22 -lot residential subdivision, allowing for the development
of 16 single-family detached homes. In addition to the approval of a vesting tentative tract map
(Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081), the Applicant seeks City approval of a number of additional
discretionary actions, including a conditional use permit, variances and/or exceptions_
In compliance with Section 15063(a) of the Guideline for the Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines), following preliminary review, the Lead
Agency shall conduct an initial study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on
the environment. If the agency determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of
the project may cause a significant effect on the environment, the agency is directed to: (1)
prepare an environmental impact report (EIR); or (2) use a previously prepared EIR which the
agency determines would adequately analyze the project at hand; or (3) determine, pursuant to
a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process, which of the project's effects were
adequately examined by an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
If the agency determined that there is no substantial evidence that the project or any of its
aspect may cause a significant effect on the environment, the agency is authorized to prepare
either a negative declaration or a mitigated negative declaration. A negative declaration
constitutes a written statement by the agency briefly describing the reasons that a proposed
project will not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, does not require the
preparation of an EIR. A mitigated negative declaration means a negative declaration prepared
for a project when the initial study has identified potentially significant effects on the
environment but: (1) revisions to the project plans or proposals, made by or agreed to by the
applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released, would avoid
the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the
environment would occur; and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record
that the project, as revised, may have a significant environmental effect_
Independent of an agency's decision whether to prepare an EIR or process a proposed project
through a negative declaration or a mitigated negative declaration, a project's environmental
document does not determine whether the agency approves, conditionally approves, or denies
a proposed project. The environmental process is both an informational tool designed to
provide an environmental basis for an agency's decisions and a means of soliciting public and
agency comments concerning the possible environmental implication of an agency's actions.
This "Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration: Jewel Ridge Estates - Vesting Tentative
Tract No. 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (Initial Study) has been prepared in fulfillment of that
requirement. Based on the analysis presented in this Initial Study, prior to the consideration of
any mitigation measures, the Lead Agency has determined that the proposed project would
result in one or more significant or potentially significant environmental effects relative to the
following topical issues: (1) aesthetics; (2) air quality; (3) biological resources; (4) hazards and
hazardous materials; and (5) transportation and traffic. In response to those potentially
significant environmental effects, a number of mitigation measures have been identified by the
Lead Agency. In addition, additional mitigation measures have been formulated by the Lead
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Initial Study — Executive Summary Page ES -1
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Agency in order to reduce other less -than -significant impacts to the maximum extent feasible.
The Applicant has agreed to incorporate each of the mitigation measures recommended herein.
The State CEQA Guidelines encourage agencies to utilize "tiering" when a previous CEQA
document. As indicated in Section 15152(a) therein: "'Tiering' refers to using the analysis of
general matters contained in a broader EIR (such as one prepared for a general plan or policy
statement) with later EIRs and negative declarations on narrower projects; incorporating by
reference the general discussions from the broader EIR; and concentrating the later EIR or
negative declaration solely on the issues specific to the later project." This "second-tier"
analysis incorporates information contained the "Final Environmental Impact Report for the City
of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No. 91041083" (City of Diamond Bar, July 14, 1992),
"Master Environmental Assessment - City of Diamond Bar" (City of Diamond Bar, July 14,
1992), "Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar
General Plan, SCH No. 91041083" (City of Diamond Bar, July 25, 1995), and
"Implementation/Mitigation Monitoring Program" (City of Diamond Bar, July 25, 1995).
Presented in Table ES -1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures) is a
summary of the impacts and mitigation measures identified herein, including a listing of the
programmatic mitigation measures adopted by the City and contained in the 1995 addendum
and mitigation monitoring program. Each of the mitigation measures recommended as
conditions of project approval in this Initial Study and an outline of the manner in which each of
those measures will be implemented by the Lead Agency is listed in Table ES -2 (Draft
Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program).
As mitigated, this Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence before the Lead
Agency that the proposed project will have a significant effect on the environment. Inclusion of
the mitigation measures identified by the Lead Agency will result in the avoidance or substantial
reduction of the project's potentially significant effects to a level deemed by the Lead Agency to
be below a level of significance. Based on the information contained in this Initial Study, the
Lead Agency's preliminary determination is that a mitigated negative declaration is the
appropriate manner of CEQA compliance for the proposed project.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page ES -2 Initial Study — Executive Summary
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study — Executive Summary July 2006
Page ES -3
Table ES -1
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
MEASURES
m�'a�
:" ;� � , , �19�,��G t ro. ra�. a ' tt � e � ,. ;
I
o��'� � •,;.
Maintain residential areas which protect natural resources, hillsides, and scenic areas. (a)
Development in hillside areas should be designed to be compatible with surrounding natural
areas, compatible to the extent practical with surrounding development, aesthetically pleasing,
and provide views from development, but not at the expense
of views of the development. (b)
Earthwork in hillside areas should utilize contour or landform grading. (c) Minimize grading to
retain natural vegetation and topography (Strategy 1.2.3, Land Use Element).
Mitigation Measure No, 1. Prior to the issuance
of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit
and, when deemed acceptable, the Community
Require that new developments be designed so as to respect the views of existing development;
provide view corridors which are oriented toward existing or proposed community amenities, such
as park, open space, or natural features (Strategy 2.2.4,
Development Director and City Engineer shall
Land Use Element).
approve detailed retaining wall, landscape, and
Promote incorporation of hillside features into project designs (Strategy 3.3,2, Land Use Element).
irritn
elementtspwill be fully nit grat d how i oetheree wall
Limit grading to the minimum necessary (Strategy 3.3.4, Land Use Element).
design. The landscape and Irrigation plans shall
Aesthetics
be signed by a landscape architect and shall
specify and quantify the plant
Less than
Require contour or landform grading, clustering of development, or other means to minimize
visual and environmental impacts to ridgelines or prominent slopes (Strategy 1.1.1, Resource
ent Element).
ManaEwellings,
palette,
characteristics of the plants selected, watering
Significant
requirements including frequency, and specify
atest extent possible, require that dwelling units, structures and landscaping be sited in
how water will be dispersed. Landscape plans
which protects views from existing development, retains opportunities for views from
shall also include performance standards relative
preserves or enhances vistas, particularly those seen from public places, preserves
to amount of surface coverage and plant
es, natural hydrology, native plant materials, and areas of visual interest, ermit
survivability. Specified landscape performance
vegetation as part of a City or Fire District approved fuel modification program
standards shall be binding on the homeowners'
.1.7, Resource Management Element).
association.
Utilize grading permit procedures to ensure that site designs for development proposals for
hillside areas conform to the natural terrain, and consider the visual aspects (Strategy 1.1.8,
Resource Management Element).
Agricultural
Resources
No applicable programmatic mitigation measures have been identified.
None Required
Less than
Significant
Promote the provision of non-polluting transportation alternatives such as a Citywide system of
bikeways and pedestrian sidewalks (Strategy 1.9.1, Public Health and Safety Element)
Mitigation Measure No. 2. During project grading
and construction, the following additional actions
will be implemented by the Applicant: (1) three
Air Quality
Ensure that site designs facilitate rather than discourage pedestrian movement between nearby
times daily watering of all exposed surfaces; (2)
uses (Strategy 1.9.5, Public Health and Safety Element).
three times daily watering of unpaved roads; (3)
Less than
limit off-road trucks to no more than 15 mph; (4)
Significant
Require grading plans to include appropriate and feasible measures to minimize fugitive dust
application of soil stabilizers to inactive areas; (5)
replace ground cover in disturbed areas as
(Strategy 1.9.6, Public Health and Safety Element),
quickly as feasible; and (6) cover (apply
stabilizer) to all stockpiles.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study — Executive Summary July 2006
Page ES -3
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table ES -1 (Continued)
cI11RA ADV nG I=AIVIR[1NMFNTAI IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Initial Study— Executive Summary Page ES -4
LL ac
Mitigation Measure No. 3. All exterior paints
utilized in the initial construction of on-site
dwelling units shall conform to the following
Air Quality
specifications: (1) all primers shall contain less
(Continued)
than 0.85 pound per gallon (102 grams/liter) of
volatile organic compounds (VOC); and (2) all
top coats shall contain less than 0.07 pound per
gallon (8 grams/liter) of VOC.
To preserve significant environmental resources within proposed developments, allow clustering
Mitigation Measure No. 4. Prior to the issuance
of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a
or transferring of all or part of the development potential of the entire site to a portion of the site,
revised protected tree survey based on the
thus preserving the resources as open space, and mandating the dedication of those resources
approved site plan, the revised grading plan
to the City or a conservancy (Strategy 1.5.6, Land Use Element).
prepared in response to that site plan and
Encourage clustering within the most developable portions of project sites to preserve open
following review by the City Engineer, and
incorporating each of the City s comments
space and/or other natural resources. Such development should be located to coordinate with
formulated i
long-term plans for active parks, passive (open space) parks, and preserve natural open space
Estates within the City of Diamond Bar
areas (Strategy 1.6.4, Land Use Element).
Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081"
(Don Case Arborist, February The
revised protected tree survey shhallll inclnclude an
To the greatest extent possible, require that dwelling units, structures and landscaping be sited in
a manner which: protects views for existing development, retains opportunities for views from
exhibit depicting the on-site and off-site location
dwellings, preserves or enhances vistas, particularly those seen from public places, preserves
of all protected trees on the project site (whether
mature trees, natural hydrology, native plant materials, and areas of visual interest, permit
located In the City or within adjacent County
removal of vegetation as part of a City or Fire District approved fuel modification plan (Strategy
areas) located within the limits of proposed
Biological
1.1.7, Resource Management Element).
grading, within the limits of the fuel modification
Less than
Resourceszone
as outlined in the Applicant's "fuel
modification plan; and any additional area(s)
Significant
New development should include the preservation of significant trees of cultural or historic value
(Strategy 1.1.12, Resource Management Element).
beyond those limits identified by the arborist, the
City Engineer, and the Los Angeles County Fire
Maintain, protect, and preserve biologically significant areas, including SEA 15, riparian areas,
Department as comprising an area within which
oak and walnut woodlands, and other areas of natural significance, providing only such
direct or indirect impacts to protected trees could
recreational and cultural opportunities as can be developed in a manner sensitive to the
reasonably be anticipated.
environment (Objective 1.2, Resource Management Element).
Mitigation Measure No. 5. Prior to the issuance
of a grading permit, a "California walnut
woodland and coast five oak woodlands"
Recognizing the significance of SEA 15 ecological resources, support further definition of the
mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City of
Diamond Bar designed to mitigate not only the
extent and intensity of such resources to provide needed additional information for the purpose
loss of individual protected trees but also the loss
and intent of preservation of this area (Strategy 1.2.1, Resource Management Element).
or diminishment of the existing southern coast
live oak and California walnut woodland habitat
located on and adjacent to the project site.
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Initial Study— Executive Summary Page ES -4
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
I.iry or uiatnono tsar
Initial Study — Executive Summary July 2006
Page ES -5
Table ES -1 (Continued)
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND
rq
MITIGATION MEASURES
NEI=
Ensure that all development, including roads, proposed adjacent to riparian and other biologically
sensitive habitats avoid significant impacts to such areas. Require that new development
proposed in such locations be designed to minimize or eliminate impacts on environmentally
sensitive areas, protect the visual seclusion of forage areas from road intrusion by providing
vegetative buffering, provide wildlife movement linkages to water, food, shelter and nesting,
provide vegetation that can be used by wildlife for cover along roadsides, avoid intrusion of night
g
Mitigation Measure No. 5 (Continued).
lighting into identified areas through properly designed lighting systems, allow wildlife and
In addition to satisfying the minimum
migration access by use of tunnels or other practical means, replace fresh drinking water for
wildlife when natural water areas are removed or blocked, to the
replacement ratio set forth in Section ands) 1 t
(Tree Replacement/ Relocation Standards) the
greatest extent possible,
prevent street water runoff from flowing into natural or blueline streams (Strategy 1.2.2, Resource
Management Element).
Municipal Code, the an shall quire
u
and specify the selective gon� on -on siteor off-site
planting of replacement trees and typically
Take an active role in pursuing the preservation of environmentally sensitive canyon areas in
associated vegetation in a characteristic
their natural state (Strategy 1.2.4, Resource Management Element)
woodland assemblage. The mitigation plan shall
be prepared by a licensed landscape architect
To the greatest extent possible, provide for preservation of flora and fauna (Strategy 1.2.5,
Resource Management Element).
and
implempossesentgation of habitat mitigation planrecent experience In the s In
County areas. The resulting aggregation of trees
and associated vegetation shall seek to establish
Biological
a natural, viable plant community in the area of
Resources
(Continued)
that replacement, as opposed to the
indiscriminant distribution of replacement trees at
Less than
various locations throughout the project area.
The mitigation plan shall further specify the
Significant
Applicant's proposed schedule for the
effectuation of that plan, describe the
performance expectations for plant survival,
present an outline for a minimum five-year
monitoring plan that will be initiated and funded
by the Applicant, and describe the manner in
which those monitoring activities will be funded
and performance will be verified. The City shall
independently review the proposed mitigation
plan and shall Identify those changes, if any, that
are required to that plan based on the findings of
that independent review. The Applicant shall
reimburse the City for any costs incurred in
conducting that review and shall amend the plan
based on the City's directives.
I.iry or uiatnono tsar
Initial Study — Executive Summary July 2006
Page ES -5
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table ES -1 (Continued)
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
mp c
Mitigation Measure No. 6. If on-site grading
activities have not commenced prior to April 3,
2007 (the date of the most recent biological field
survey), in accordance with the provisions of an
approved grading plan, the Applicant shall
withhold commencement of any and all grading
operations, excluding emergency activities,
pending the submission and acceptance by the
City of a new biological survey conducted to
reassess the presence or absence of protected
biological resources on and adjacent to the site.
Mitigation Measure No. 7. All initial purchasers of
real property within the tract map boundaries shall
be notified, in writing through their respective
residential purchase contract, that access to
designated open space areas is prohibited except
along approved and designated trails and via
designated access points. Pedestrians and
bicycles shall be permitted only on approved and
designated trails.
Biological
Resources Mitigation Measure No. 8. Conditions, covenants,
(Continued) and restriction (CC&R) shall specify that the
following activities and uses shall be expressly
prohibited within designated open space areas:
unauthorized entry; use of motorized vehicles;
possession of firearms Including air or gas
propelled weapons, slings and sling -shots;
collection or possession of native plants or
wildlife, collecting wood, or engaging in activity to
harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill,
trap, poison, capture or collect wildlife; smoking or
the use of fire; unauthorized trail construction; and
removal, defacement or damage to natural
features. CC&Rs shall be enforceable and
contain provisions sufficient to deter violations.
Mitigation Measure No. 9. Landscape plans for all
landscaped common, open space, and fuel
modification zone areas shall incorporate native,
drought -tolerant, non-invasive plant species.
Exotic plant species listed by the California Exotic
Plant Pest Council as noxious weeds shall be
prohibited for use as landscaping material.
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Initial Study — Executive Summary Page ES -6
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
l+lry OT Ulamona bar
Initial Study — Executive Summary July 2006
Page ES -7
Table ES -1 (Continued)
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation Measure No. 9 (Continued).
Landscape plans shall include weed prevention
and control measures Including, but not limited to:
(1) use of only certified weed -free hay, straw, and
other organic mulches to control erosion; and (2)
use only certified weed -free seed for the
Biological
reclamation of disturbed areas.
Resources
Mitigation Measure No. 10. All construction and
(Continued)
material staging activities and all equipment
marshalling activities that need to occur in close
proximity to the project site shall be confined to
the property limits and shall not include any on-
site or off-site areas extending beyond the City
authorized limits of project specific grading. To
the maximum extent feasible, all such activities
shall occur at the greatest possible separation
distance from any near -site sensitive receptors.
None Required
Less than
Significant
Resources
No applicable programmatic mitigation measures have been identified.
Mitigation Measure No. 11. The project design
and development shall incorporate and the
Applicant shall Include, conduct, perform, and
ss of life, physical injury, and property damage from seismic
undertake all design and development
=andother
ologic hazards (Objective 1.1, Public Health and Safet y
recommendations contained in the project's
geotechnical investigation(s), Including, but not
necessarily limited to, those contained in
GeoEnviron Engineering Consultants Inc.'s
Geology
"Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and
and
Engineering Geology Investigation — Proposed
Soils
Residential Development, Southern End of
Less than
Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, California,
Significant
APN #8714028003" (February 15, 2003),
GeoSoils Consultants, Inc.'s "Response to
As required by the Uniform Building Code, require site-specific geotechnical investigation be
performed to determine appropriate design parameters for
Geotechnical Review Sheet dated September 17,
2004 by Leighton and Associates for the City of
construction of public and private
facilities in order to minimize the effects of any geologic and seismic hazard on such
Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract
development (Strategy 1.1.2, Public Health and Safety Element).
54081, Diamond Bar, California" (September 26,
2005), and in any subsequent design -level
investigation(s) that may be conducted for the
proposed project, except where otherwise
expressly authorized by the City Engineer.
l+lry OT Ulamona bar
Initial Study — Executive Summary July 2006
Page ES -7
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table ES -1 (Continued)
er rRer.enw nV CAIvIDr%KIftfiPNITA1 1MPACTS AN(] MITIGATION MEASURES
Noise Apply mitigation measures as needed to noise generators and receptors to ensure that Less than
(Continued) adopted noise standards are met and to protect land uses from excessive noise Impacts None Required Significant
(Strategy 1.10.9, Public Health and Safety Element).
Maintain residential areas which provide for ownership of single family housing and
require that new development be compatible with the prevailing character of the
surrounding development (Strategy 1.24, Land Use Element).
Population and[pjrovide opportunities for development of suitable housing to meet the diverse needs of None Required Less than
Housing existing and future residents (Goal 2, Housing Element). Significant
Promote the expeditious processing and approval of residential projects that meet
General Plan policies and City regulatory requirements (Policy 4.2, Housing Element).
Require that dwelling units and structures within hillside areas be sited in such a manner
as to utilize ridgelines and landscape plant materials as a backdrop for the structures
and the structures themselves to provide maximum concealment of cut slopes (Strategy
1.1.2, Resource Management Element).
Protect existing residents and businesses from the cost of financing infrastructure aimed
at supporting new development or the intensification of development (Strategy 1.1.2,
Public Services and Facilities Element).
Require the construction of water, sewer, drainage and other necessary public facilities
prior to or concurrent with each new development (Strategy 1.1.3, Public Services and
Public Facilities Element).
Services Require the project sponsor to provide all necessary infrastructure improvements
(including the pro rata share of system -wide improvements) (Strategy 1.14, Public
Services and Facilities Element).
Require all new housing subdivisions be connected to a public sewerage system
(Strategy 1.1.6, Public Services and Facilities Element).
Within new residential developments, encourage organizations of individual
neighborhoods and discourage through traffic on local streets while maintaining
pedestrian and bicycle continuity and encourage neighborhood parks, improvement
programs and social events (Strategy 1.5.3, Public Services and Facilities Element).
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study — Executive Summary
Mitigation Measure No. 15. Concurrent with the
recordation of the final tract map, the Applicant
shall dedicate to the City an irrevocable
easement or similar instrument and post a cash
bond or other similar Instrument, acceptable to
the City Attorney, allowing for the construction,
operation, and maintenance of a trail head,
recreational trail, and such other related uses
and facilities as may be identified by the
Community Development Director.
Mitigation Measure No. 16. Unless otherwise
determined by the Community Development
Director, prior to the issuance of a grading
permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when
deemed acceptable, the Community
Development Director shall approve detailed
improvement plans for the on-site trail head and
recreational trail, including all related uses and
facilities identified by the Community
Development Director. Trail improvement plans
and specifications, if required, shall be included
in the project's landscape plans and in such
other plans as may be determined by the
Community Development Director.
Less than
Significant
July 2006
Page ES -10
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table ES -1 (Continued)
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Cit of Di— d B
Y on ar
Initial Study – Executive Summary July 2006
Page ES -11
Pursue the development of a system of greenbelts within the community (Strategy 1.3.6,
Resource Management Element),
Recreation
None Required
Less than
Significant
Develop recreational facilities emphasizing active and passive recreational areas
(Strategy 1.3.7, Resource Management Element),
Preclude the connection of roadways from adjacent jurisdictions into the City unless
demonstrable benefits to Diamond Bar residents and businesses
are indicated (Strategy
1.1.1, Circulation Element).
Pursue other traffic measures to enhance circulation and transient traffic movement
(Strategy 1.2.3, Circulation Element).
Prevent the creation of new roadway connections which adversely impact existing
neighborhoods (Strategy 1.3.1, Circulation Element).
Mitigation Measure No. 17. Prior to the
recordation of the final map, the Applicant shall
Less than
Significant
Transportation
submit and, when deemed acceptable, the City
Engineer shall approve final design and
development plans and geometrics for all
proposed on-site street improvements and,
unless otherwise authorized, conform to the
Design new developments and their access points in such a way that the capacity of
and Traffic p Y p ty
local streets is not exceeded (Strategy 1.3.3, Circulation Element).
Work to ensure that any new development is provided with adequate accessEwithin
the City of Diamond Bar (Strategy 2.2.1,
Circulation Element),
Diamond Bar Development Improvement
Standards, Requirements and Guidelines.
7Lessthan
Consider all opportunities to expand and maintain pedestrian access routes hout
the City (Strategy 3.1.6, Circulation Element).
Significant
All new development shall be required to provide mitigation measures. Such measures
could include improvements or traffic impact fees
(Strategy 3.2.1, Circulation Element).
Protect existing residents and businesses from the cost of financing infrastructure aimed
at supporting new development or the intensification of development (Strategy 1.1.2,
blic Services and Facilities Element).
rRequire:the
construction of water, sewer, drainage and other necessary public facilitiesor to concurrent with each new development (Strategy 1.1.3, Public Services andcilitieElement).Utilities
quire the project sponsor to provide all necessary infrastructure improvements
and (including the pro rata share of system -wide improvements)
(Strategy 1.1.4, Public
Service Systems Services and Facilities Element).
None Required
Less than
Significant
new housing subdivisions be connected to a public sewerage system
.1.6, Public Services and Facilities Element).
RLpedestrian
residential developments, encourage organizations of individual
ods and discourage through traffic on local streets while maintaining
and bicycle continuity and encourage neighborhood parks, improvement
nd social events (Strategy 1.5.3, Public Services and Facilities Element).
Cit of Di— d B
Y on ar
Initial Study – Executive Summary July 2006
Page ES -11
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table ES -2
MOACY RA1 r1f`_AT1nN 09=0nRTINCZ ANIS MnNITIGRING PROGRAM
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Initial Study — Executive Summary Page ES -12
Aesthetics. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed
acceptable, the Community Development Director and City Engineer shall approve detailed retaining Community
wall, landscape, and irrigation plans identifying how those three elements will be fully integrated into Development
Prior to
the wall design. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be signed by a landscape architect and shall Director
Issuance
1
specify and quantify the plant palette, characteristics of the plants selected, watering requirements AND
of Grading
including frequency, and specify how water will be dispersed. Landscape plans shall also include City Engineer
Permits
performance standards relative to amount of surface coverage and plant survivability. Specified
landscape performance standards shall be binding on the homeowners' association.
Air Quality. All exterior paints utilized in the initial construction of on-site dwelling units shall conform
Community
On-going
to the following specifications: (1) all primers shall contain less than 0.85 pound per gallon (102
Development
during
2
grams/liter) of volatile organic compounds (VOC); and (2) all top coats shall contain less than 0.07
Director
Construction
pound per gallon (8 grams/liter) of VOC.
During project grading and construction, the following additional actions will be implemented by the
Applicant: (1) three times daily watering of all exposed surfaces; (2) three times daily watering of
Community
On-going
3
unpaved roads; (3) limit off-road trucks to no more than 15 mph; (4) application of soil stabilizers to
Development
during
inactive areas; (5) replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as feasible; and (6) cover (apply
Director
Construction
stabilizer) to all stockpiles.
Biological Resources. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a revised
protected tree survey based on the approved site plan, the revised grading plan prepared in response
to that site plan and following review by the City Engineer, and incorporating each of the City's
comments formulated in response to the "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar —
Prior to
Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004). The revised
Community
Issuance
4
protected tree survey shall include an exhibit depicting the on-site and off-site location of all protected
Development
of Grading
trees on the project site (whether located in the City or within adjacent County areas) located within
Director
Permit
the limits of proposed grading, within the limits of the fuel modification zone as outlined in the
Applicant's "fuel modification plan," and any additional area(s) beyond those limits identified by the
arborist, the City Engineer, and the Los Angeles County Fire Department as comprising an area within
which direct or indirect impacts to protected trees could reasonably be anticipated.
Biological Resources. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a "California walnut woodland and
Prior to
coast live oak woodlands" mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City of Diamond Bar designed to
Community
Issuance
5
mitigate not only the loss of individual protected trees but also the loss or diminishment of the existing
Development
of Grading
southern coast live oak and California walnut woodland habitat located on and adjacent to the project
Director
Permit
site.
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Initial Study — Executive Summary Page ES -12
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study — Executive Summary July 2006
Page ES -13
Table ES -2 (Continued)
DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITIORING
PROGRAM
a�
In addition to satisfying the minimum replacement ratio set forth in Section 22.38.130 (Tree
Replacement/ Relocation Standards) of the Municipal
Code, the mitigation plan shall require and
specify the selective on-site or off-site planting of replacement trees and typically associated
vegetation in a characteristic woodland assemblage. The mitigation plan shall be prepared by a
licensed landscape architect
possessing recent experience in the design and implementation of
habitat mitigation plans in County areas. The resulting aggregation of trees and associated vegetation
5
shall seek to establish a natural, viable plant community in the area of that replacement, as opposed
to the indiscriminant distribution of replacement trees
(cont.)
at various locations throughout the project area.
The mitigation plan shall further specify the Applicant's proposed schedule for the effectuation of that
plan, describe the performance expectations for plant survival, present an outline for a minimum five-
year monitoring plan that will be initiated and funded by the Applicant, and describe the manner in
which those monitoring activities will be funded
and performance will be verified. The City shall
independently review the proposed mitigation plan and shall identify those changes, if any, that are
required to that plan based on the findings of that independent review. The Applicant shall reimburse
the City for any costs incurred in conducting that
review and shall amend the plan based on the City's
directives.
Biological Resources. If on-site grading activities have not commenced prior to April 3, 2007 (the date
of the most recent biological field survey), in accordance
6
with the provisions of an approved grading
plan, the Applicant shall withhold commencement of any and all grading operations, excluding
Community
Prior to
emergency activities, pending the submission and acceptance by the City of a new biological survey
conducted to reassess the presence or absence
Development
Director
issuance
of Grading
of protected biological resources on and adjacent to
the project site.
Biological Resources. All initial purchasers of real property within the tract map boundaries shall be
notified, in writing through their respective residential purchase contract, that access to designated
Community
permit
Prior to
7
open space areas is prohibited except along approved and designated trails and via designated
access points. Pedestrians and bicycles shall be ermined only on a
P y approved and designated trails.
Development
Director
Issuance of
Occupancy
Biological Resources. Conditions, covenants, and restriction (CC&R) shall specify that the following
Permit
activities and uses shall be expressly prohibited within designated open space areas: unauthorized
entry; use of motorized vehicles; possession of firearms
8
including air or gas propelled weapons, slings
and sling -shots; collection or possession of native plants or wildlife, collecting wood, or engaging in
activity to harass,
Community
Development
Prior to
Issuance of
harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, poison, capture or collect wildlife;
smoking or the use of fire; unauthorized trail
Director
Occupancy
construction; and removal, defacement or damage to
natural features. CC&Rs shall be enforceable and contain provisions sufficient to deter violations.
Permit
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study — Executive Summary July 2006
Page ES -13
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table ES -2 (Continued)
—1-1 A rT &A1T1Pl ATle%kl OCOnOTIAIr eMn IUInAI1TlnRIN(, PROGRAM
uuU
City of Diamond Bar jury S-14
Initial Study — Executive Summary Page ES -14
k
Biological Resources. Landscape plans for all landscaped common, open space, and fuel
modification zone areas shall incorporate native, drought -tolerant, non-invasive plant species. Exotic Prior to
plant species listed by the California Exotic Plant Pest Council as noxious weeds shall be prohibited Community Approval
9
for use as landscaping material. Landscape plans shall include weed prevention and control Development of Final
measures including, but not limited to: (1) use of only certified weed -free hay, straw, and other organic Director Tract Map
mulches to control erosion; and (2) use only certified weed -free seed for the reclamation of disturbed
areas.
Biological Resources. All construction and material staging activities and all equipment marshalling
activities that need to occur in close proximity to the project site shall be confined to the property limits
Community
On-going
10
and shall not Include any on-site or off-site areas extending beyond the City authorized limits of
Development
during
project -specific grading. To the maximum extent feasible, all such activities shall occur at the greatest
Director
Construction
possible separation distance from any near -site sensitive receptors.
Geology and Soils. The project design and development shall incorporate and the Applicant shall
include, conduct, perform, and undertake all design and development recommendations contained in
the project's geotechnical investigation(s), including, but not necessarily limited to, those contained in
GeoEnviron Engineering Consultants Inc.'s "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering
Prior to
Issuance
11
Geology Investigation — Proposed Residential Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive,
City Engineer
of Grading
Diamond Bar, California, APN #8714028003" (February 15, 2003), GeoSoils Consultants, Inc.'s
"Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated September 17, 2004 by Leighton and Associates for
Permit
the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California"
(September 26, 2005), and in any subsequent design -level investigations) that may be conducted for
the proposed project, except where otherwise expressly authorized by the City Engineer.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Prior to the commencement of any on-site grading, grubbing, and
construction activities, the Applicant will prepare and jointly submit to the City and to the Los Angeles
Prior to
County Fire Department (LACFD) a construction fire prevention and control plan outlining those
Community
activities to be undertaken by the Applicant and/or others during the construction period to ensure the
Development
Issuance
of Grading
12
provision of adequate continuing access to and through the project site and outlining plans for fire
Director
safety and suppression. The construction fire prevention and control plan shall address all phases of
Permit
project construction. The plan shall not be deemed adequate and no on-site grading, grubbing, and
construction activities can commence until the plan is jointly accepted by the LACFD and by the City.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Approval of the final tract map shall only occur after approval by
the LACFD following the Applicant' demonstrated compliance with all applicable conditions of
Community
Development
Prior to
Approval
13
and
approval for subdivision, water system requirements, and such other conditions and recommendations
Director
of Final
Tract Map
that may be identified by the LACFD for the proposed project.
uuU
City of Diamond Bar jury S-14
Initial Study — Executive Summary Page ES -14
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table ES -2 (Continued)
DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITIORING PROGRAM
Hydrology and Water Quality. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit
and, when deemed acceptable, the City Engineer shall
14
approve a revised project -specific hydrologic
study consistent with the approved tentative map. All drainage structures and associated facilities and
Prior to
improvements shall be subject to final design and engineering review and approval b the Ci
Engineer and, if subject to County pp y �'
1 tyjurisdiction, by the Los Angeles
City Engineer
Issuance
of Grading
Works. County Department of Public
Permit
blic Services. Concurrent with the recordation of the final tract map, the Applicant shall dedicate to
City an irrevocable easement or similar instrument
115instrument,
and post a cash bond or other similar
acceptable to the City Attorney, allowing for the construction, operation, and maintenance
trail head, recreational trail, and such other
Community
Development
Prior to
Approval
related uses and facilities as may be identified by the
mmunity Development Director.
Director
of Final
Tract Map
Public Services. Unless otherwise determined by the Community Development Director, prior to the
issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit
16
and, when deemed acceptable, the
Community Development Director shall approve detailed improvement plans for the on-site trail head
and recreational trail, including all related uses and facilities
Community
Prior to
identified by the Community Development
Director. Trail improvement plans and specifications, if required, shall be included in the project's
landscape plans and in such other be
Development
Director
Issuance
of Grading
plans as may determined by the Community Development
Director.
Permit
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study — Executive Summary July 2006
Page ES -15
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
This page intentionally left blank.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page ES -16 Initial Study — Executive Summary
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE INITIAL STUDY
The City of Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency') has received and subsequently deemed
complete an application from Jewel Ridge, LLC (Applicant2) for the development of an
approximately 12.9 acre 3site located at the existing terminus of Crooked Creek Lane, bordering
the southern corporate boundaries of the City. As presently proposed, the Applicant seeks City
approval to subdivide the project site for the purpose of constructing up to 16 single-family
detached dwelling units on the resulting residential parcels.
The current development application has been under review by the Community Development
Department, Planning Division (Department) since 2003. During that time period, the project
has undergone a number of design changes, including a reduction in the number of dwelling
units, elimination of proposed private access gates, and changes in proposed lot sizes and
configuration. Although no formal architectural plans have been submitted for the current
development application, conceptual plans were submitted to the City by the Applicant as part of
an earlier (under review by the City during 2003-2004) development concept and demonstrating
that all residential lots could be suitably developed for the proposed use.
Similarly, as part of the Applicant's original 2003-2004 submission, a number of technical
studies were requested from the Applicant by the City. The information presented in those
studies reflected the conditions that then existed on the project site and examined the potential
impacts associated with a more intensive residential development project. Because those
studies assumed both a greater number of dwelling units and greater level of disturbance of the
project site, the information presented therein can be assumed to reflect a worst-case scenario
from an environmental perspective. Except as noted, the Department has not required the
Applicant to submit revised and updated technical studies examining a lesser level of
development.
This environmental analysis, conducted in accordance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as codified in Section 21000 et seq. of the Public Resources
Code (PRC), and the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality
Act (State CEQA Guidelines), as codified in Section 15000 et seq. in Title 14 of the California
Code of Regulations (CCR), is intended to provide the environmental basis for any and all
discretionary actions that may be required from the City and from other governmental entities for
the development of the project site for the contemplated land use.
'/ As defined in Section 15367 in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, a "lead agency" is defined
as the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project. The lead agency will
decide whether an environmental impact report or negative declaration will be required for the project and will cause
the document to be prepared. The term "Lead Agency," as used herein, refers to the City of Diamond Bar.
2/ Reference to the "Applicant" herein is assumed to be inclusive of the contractors and subcontractors
required for the construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed project and is inclusive of any subsequent
holder(s) of real property interests in the subject property, other than the owners of the single-family homes that will
be constructed within the tract map area site, the City of Diamond Bar, and any other public agencies that may
become holders of any real property interests within the tract map boundaries.
3/ All acreage figures, square footages, and other dimensional and volumetric references cited herein are
provided for descriptive purposes only and represent approximations and/or rounded numbers and should, therefore,
not be construed as exact_ As the project moves forward through the permitting process, minor variations to these
numbers can and should reasonably be expected, such that there inclusion herein is not intended to unreasonably
restrict the ability of the City or the Applicant from modifying the proposed project.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Introduction July 2006
Page 1-1
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
1.2 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT COMPLIANCE
As defined in Section 21065 of CEQA, a "project" is defined as any of the following: (a) an
activity directly undertaken by any public agency; (b) an activity undertaken by a person which is
supported, in whole or in part, through contracts, grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of
assistance from one or more public agencies; and/or (c) an activity involving the issuance to a
person of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public
agencies. The State CEQA Guidelines further defines a "project" as comprising "the whole of
an action, which has a potential for resulting in a physical change in the environment, directly or
ultimately," including "[a]n activity involving the issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license,
certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies .,,4 Since the proposed
project will require one or more discretionary actions from the City, those activities that are the
subject of this environmental review constitute a "project" subject to the provisions of CEQA and
its implementing guidelines.
Upon receipt of an application for a proposed activity, CEQA provides a three-step structure to
guide public agencies in their environmental compliance efforts. Under the first step, if a
proposed project is determined to be statutorily or categorically exempt from CEQA, no further
agency evaluation is required. None of the statutory or categorical exemptions outlined in the
State CEQA Guidelines appear applicable to the proposed project.
If there is a possibility that the project may have a significant environmental effect, under the
second step, the agency must prepare an "initial study" as a means of assessing the nature and
significance of those impacts. The precise nature of the third step is dependent upon the
findings of the initial study. If the initial study reveals no substantial evidence that the proposed
project will not have a significant environmental effect, the agency may complete either a
"negative declaration" (ND) or a "mitigated negative declaration"5 (MND) briefly describing the
reasons supporting that determination. If, however, the initial study concludes that the proposed
project will or may have a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency is required to
commence preparation of an "environmental impact report" (EIR) in order to more thoroughly
evaluate the precise nature of those impacts and to explore alternatives to the proposed action
that could reduce or eliminate those significant or potentially significant environmental effects.
1.3 INITIAL STUDY PURPOSE AND INTENT
In accordance with Section 15003(g) of the State CEQA Guidelines, "the purpose of CEQA is
not to generate paper, but to compel government at all levels to make decisions with
environmental consequences in mind." The CEQA process is part of a comprehensive planning
program undertaken by those public agencies responsible for approving, conditionally
approving, or denying a proposed project and documents the efforts of those agencies to
evaluate the potential environmental costs associated with a proposed development application.
°/ Section 15378[a][3], State CEQA Guidelines.
5/ As defined in Section 21064 of CEQA, a,, negative declaration' means a written statement briefly
describing the reasons that a proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and does not
require the preparation of an environmental impact report." As further defined in Section 21064.5 of CEQA, a
"'mitigated negative declaration' means a negative declaration prepared for a project when the initial study has
identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made
by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public
review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment
would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the public agency that the
project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment."
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 1-2 Initial Study - Introduction
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
This "Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration: Jewel Ridge Estates - Vesting Tentative
Tract No. 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (Initial Study) was prepared for the purpose of: (1)
identifying the project's potential environmental impacts; (2) providing the Lead Agency with
information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an EIR, a ND, or a MND; (3)
enabling the Applicant to modify the proposed project in order to mitigate any adverse impacts
before an EIR is prepared; (4) facilitating environmental assessment early in a project's design
and development process; (5) providing factual documentation for the findings in a ND or MND,
if supported by the information and analysis presented in the Initial Study, that the proposed
project will not have a significant effect on the environment; (6) eliminating the preparation of an
unnecessary EIR if, based upon a reasonably diligent review, no significant environmental
impacts are associated with a proposed project or remain following the application of feasible
mitigation measures; (7) determining whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the
proposed project; and (8) assisting in the preparation of an EIR, if one is required, by focusing
the EIR on the effects determined to be significant, identifying the effects determined not to be
significant, and explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would
not, in fact, be significant.
This Initial Study provides the City, other governmental agencies, and the general public with
detailed information concerning the proposed project and its potential environmental effects.
This analysis has been undertaken by the City to: (1) determine the magnitude of those effects;
(2) identify feasible mitigation measures and other actions that are or may be available to the
City and/or to the Applicant to reduce or avoid any significant effects associated with the
proposed project; and (3) determine the post -mitigated level of significance of the resulting
impacts. Information contained in this Initial Study will serve as the factual basis to support the
City's election to prepare a ND or MND or to narrow the scope of the requisite EIR, should the
Lead Agency subsequently determine that an EIR is required for the proposed action.
It is not the function of this Initial Study to evaluate alternatives to the proposed project or to
determine whether the proposed land use could be better accommodated at another location.
The Lead Agency must respond to the application now before the City and approve,
conditionally approve, or deny the Applicants' request for those discretionary actions that may
be necessary to allow for the project's effectuation. Should this Initial Study determine or should
the Lead Agency subsequently elect to commence the preparation of an EIR for the proposed
project, that document would include an analysis of a reasonable range of alternatives for the
project site. CEQA does not obligate an agency to conduct that same level of analysis when a
project, either as proposed or as subsequently modified, qualifies for a ND or a MND.
1.4 REQUIRED CONTENTS OF AN INITIAL STUDY
Section 15063(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that an initial study shall contain: (1) a
description of the project, including the location of the project; (2) an identification of the
environmental setting; (3) an identification of environmental effects by use of a checklist, matrix,
or other method provided that entries are briefly explained to show the evidence to support the
entries; (4) a discussion of ways to mitigate any significant effects identified; (5) an examination
of whether the project is compatible with existing zoning and local land use plans; and (6) the
name of the person or persons who prepared or participated in the document's preparation.
1.5 DOCUMENT FORMAT
This Initial Study is divided into a number of sections corresponding, either directly or indirectly,
with the analytical requirements for an adequate CEQA record. Those sections include:
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Introduction July 2006
Page 1-3
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
■ Section 1.0 (Introduction) provides a general introduction to the proposed project and to
the CEQA process, introduces those agencies, organizations, and individuals associated
with the project, and identifies those documents incorporated herein by reference.
Section 2.0 (Project Description) provides a more thorough description of the project site
and a more detailed description of both the proposed project and the proposed actions
now under consideration by the City and by other responsible agencies. 6
Section 3.0 (Environmental Setting) presents a general overview of the physical setting
in which the proposed action would occur or the regulatory setting germane to each of
the topical issues addressed herein. This description serves to provide important
baseline data against which the project's potential environmental impacts can be
predicted, focusing on the physical change to the existing environment predicated by the
project and tempered by the regulatory environment in which the project will operate.
Section 4.0 (Impact Analysis) presents the City's evaluation of the project's potential
environmental consequences and includes or references the supportive information
used to derive the Lead Agency's preliminary conclusions concerning the potential
magnitude of those environmental effects and the potential need for mitigation or other
actions to reduce the significant impacts of the proposed project.
Section 5.0 (Preliminary Determination) presents the Lead Agency's preliminary
determination whether the proposed project, as proposed or as subsequently modified,
will generate significant environmental effects.
Section 6.0 (References) identifies the technical and related documents cited herein,
excluding those prepared by or for the Applicant, and the City's independent evaluation
of those studies considered by the Lead Agency in the analysis of project -related impact.
Certain information relevant or potentially relevant to the City's deliberations concerning the
proposed project and its potential environmental effects, including the "Environmental Checklist
Form," has been included in the accompanying technical appendix.
1.6 AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS ASSOCIATED
WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Presented in Table 1-1 (Agencies, Organizations, and Individuals Associated with the Proposed
Project) is a preliminary listing of those agencies, organizations, and individuals associated with
the proposed project, including: (1) responsible agencies that may be required to take one or
more discretionary actions concerning the proposed project and who may be required to utilize
the City's CEQA documentation as the environmental basis for their own independent
deliberations; and (2) trustee agencies' having jurisdiction by law over the natural resources
affected by the proposed project.
6/ As defined in Section 15381 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the term "responsible agency" means "a
public agency which proposes to carry out or approve a project, for which lead agency is preparing or has prepared
an EIR or negative declaration. For the purpose of CEQA, the term 'responsible agency' includes all public agencies
other than the lead agency which have discretionary approval power over the project."
7/ A "trustee agency" means "a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by
the project which are held in trust for the people of the State of California" (Section 15386, State CEQA Guidelines).
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 14 Initial Study - Introduction
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table 1-1
AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT
City of Diamond Bar
Community Development Department, Planning Division
Lead Agency Attn: Nancy Fong, Director
21825 E. Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177
(909)839-7030
Applicant's
Transportation and Traffic Engineering
Environmental Impact Sciences
City's Consulting
Traffic Engineer
Attn: Peter Lewandowski, AICP
CEQA Consultant
Yorba Linda, California 92886-6058
26051 Via Concha
(714) 970-6247
Project Designer
Mission Viejo, California 92691-5614
Attn: Don Winslow, PE
(949) 837-1195
20955 Pathfinder Road, Suite 230
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
City's Consulting
(909) 598-1782
Attn: David C. Smith, RCE 46222
Geotechnical
10532 Acacia Street Suite B-6
Engineer
2130E.4 `h Street, Suite 100
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Santa Ana, Califomia 92705
(909) 484-2205
Applicant's
Transportation and Traffic Engineering
City's Consulting
Attn: Warren C. Siecke, PE
Traffic Engineer
20142 Canyon Drive
Yorba Linda, California 92886-6058
Applicant's
(714) 970-6247
Project Designer
Charles Abbott Associates, Inc.
Attn: Don Winslow, PE
20955 Pathfinder Road, Suite 230
Diamond Bar, California 91765
City's Consulting
(909) 598-1782
Civil Engineers
DGA Consultants, Inc.
Attn: James Eldridge
2130E.4 `h Street, Suite 100
Santa Ana, Califomia 92705
(714)568-0200
Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc.
City's Consulting
Attn: R. Mitchel Beauchamp, President
Biological Consultant
P.O. Box 985
National City, California 91951-0985
(619) 477-5333
Jewel Ridge, LLC
Attn: Daniel Singh
Applicant
10365 Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, California 90232
(310) 945-3030
Applicant's
Philip Gustafson, RCE 13875
Project Engineer
1843 Business Center Drive
Duarte California 91010
E -Design International
Applicant's
Attn: Shekar Ganti
Project Designer
5209 Augustine Drive
Culver City, California 90230
(310) 397-4264
Y o iamond Bar
Initial Study - Introduction July 2006
Page 1-5
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table 1-1
AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc.
Attn: Jerry T. Overland, TE 1579
Applicant's 25876 The Old Road, Suite 307
Traffic Engineer
Santa Clarita, California 91381
(661)799-8423
GeoSoils Consultants, Inc.
Attn: Rudy F. Ruberti, CEG
6634 Valjean Avenue
Van Nuys, California 91406
Applicant's
(818) 785-2158
GEO Environ
Geotechnical Engineers
Attn: Jabed Masud, Project Engineer
3904 E. Miraloma Avenue, Suite I
Anaheim, California 92806
(714) 632-3190
Gary M. Gantney, PE
Applicant's
5042 N. Langham Avenue
Civil Engineer
Covina, California 91724
(626) 915-0883
Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc.
Attn: Ken Halama
223 62nd Street
Newport Beach, California 92663
Applicant's
(949) 646-8958
Bonterra Consulting
Biological Consultant
Attn: Marc Blain
320 N. Halstead Street, Suite 130
Pasadena, California 91107
(626) 351-2000
Don Case, Arborist
Applicant's
3117 San Juan Drive
Arborist
Fullerton, California 92635
(714) 879-0798
Archaeological Consultant
Applicant's
Attn: Louis James Tartaglia, Ph.D.
Cultural Resource
3154 Rikkard Drive
Consultant
Thousand Oaks, California 91362
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works
Waterworks/Sewer Maintenance/Flood Management/Solid Waste Divisions
Potential
Attn: Donald L. Wolfe, Director
Responsible Agencies
900 South Fremont Avenue
Alhambra, California 91803
626) 458-5100
California Department of Fish and Game, South Coast Region 5
Attn: Chuck Raysbrook, Regional Manager
Potential
4949 Viewridge Avenue
Trustee Agency
San Diego, California 92123
(619) 467-4200
Source: Environmental Impact Sciences
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 1-6 Initial Study - Introduction
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Although the list seeks to be inclusive of all agencies now known to the City from whom
discretionary permits or approval may be required, should the City ultimately approve or
conditionally approve the proposed project, other governmental agencies may be identified as
the project moves forward through the permit process. The City's failure to list any local, State,
or federal agency as a potential responsible agency herein does not preclude that agency from
utilizing the City's CEQA documentation as the environmental basis for any later discretionary
action(s) that may be required for the project's construction and habitation.
1.7 TIERING OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS
As indicated in Section 15152 of the State CEQA Guidelines: "'Tiering' refers to using the
analysis of general matters contained in a broad EIR (such as one prepared for a general plan
or policy statement) with later EIRs and negative declarations on narrower projects;
incorporating by reference the general discussions from the broader EIR; and concentrating the
later EIR or negative declaration solely on the issues specific to the later project." As further
indicated in Section 15152(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines: 'Where an EIR has been prepared
and certified for a program, plan, policy, or ordinance consistent with the requirements of this
section, any lead agency for a later project pursuant to or consistent with the program, plan,
policy, or ordinance should limit the EIR or negative declaration on the later project to effects
which: (a) Were not examined as significant effects on the environment in the prior EIR; or (2)
Are susceptible to substantial reduction or avoidance by the choice of specific revisions to the
project, by the imposition of conditions, or other means."
Pursuant to Section 15152(e) of the State CEQA Guidelines: "Tiering under this section shall be
limited to situations where the project is consistent with the general plan and zoning of the city
or county in which the project is located, except that a project requiring a rezone to achieve or
maintain consistency with a general plan may be subject to tiering."
Two "program -level" or "first-tier" environmental analyses have been conducted that include the
project site and assume the subsequent development of that property in accordance with the
adopted I policies of the City. Those earlier environmental studies were prepared by the Lead
Agency for the 1992 "City of Diamond Bar General Plan" (City of Diamond Bar, July 14, 1992)
(1992 General Plan) and the 1995 "City of Diamond Bar General Plan" (City of Diamond Bar,
July 25, 1995) (1995 General Plan). Those first-tier CEQA documents serve as valuable tools
in understanding both the existing environmental setting and the anticipated long-term
environmental impacts associated with development activities undertaken within the City and
conducted in accordance with the City's land use and related policies. As indicated in Section
1_8 (Documents Incorporated by Reference), this project -level assessment has been tiered from
CEQA documentation prepared by the City for the 1992 General Plan and 1995 General Plan.
1.8 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Section 15150(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines authorizes NDs, MND, and EIRs to "incorporate
by reference all or portions of another document which is a matter of public record or is
generally available to the public" and relates, either directly or indirectly, to the proposed project
or provides additional information concerning the project's environmental setting and/or the
impacts that may result therefrom. Through incorporation, the Lead Agency is able to enter
technical information into this CEQA document without having to physically incorporate the body
of that information as part of the text subsequently circulated for public review and comment.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Introduction July 2006
Page 1-7
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Those documents that are potentially relevant to the discussion of the existing environmental
setting and/or potentially relevant to the assessment of the project's potential environmental
impacts include, but may not be limited to:
■ Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No.
91041083 (City of Diamond Bar, July 14, 1992), Master Environmental Assessment -
City of Diamond Bar (City of Diamond Bar, July 14, 1992), Addendum to the Final
Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH No.
91041083 (City of Diamond Bar, July 25, 1995), and Implementation/Mitigation
Monitoring Program (City of Diamond Bar, July 25, 1995).
The "Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan, SCH
No. 91041083" (1992 General Plan FEIR) constituted a program -level assessment of the
potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the plans and
policies outlined in the 1992 General Plan. The 1992 General Plan FEIR provided
substantial and useful background information concerning the environmental setting
within the City as well as a program -level assessment of the potential impacts that could
occur as a result of the 1992 General Plan's implementation.
The "Master Environmental Assessment — City of Diamond Bar" (1992 General Plan
MEA) provided a comprehensive database encompassing the existing (1992) physical,
social, environmental, and economic conditions influencing future planning decisions in
the City. The document presented a generalized description of the community, described
those existing conditions affecting the City, and identified issues and opportunities
associated with a number of technical areas relevant to this environmental analysis.
The "Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar
General Plan, SCH No. 91041083" (1995 Addendum), prepared in response to a petition
to repeal the City's approval of the 1992 General Plan and the City's subsequent
preparation of a revised City-wide planning document, examined the potential
environmental impacts associated with the approval and effectuation of the 1995
General Plan. As indicated in the 1995 Addendum, "the Final EIR identified six
unavoidable adverse environmental impacts [biological resources, transportation/
circulation, air quality, acoustic environment, land use, public services and facilities]
associated with General Plan implementation. Mitigation measures identified in the Final
EIR will substantially mitigate these significant environmental effects.s8
As indicated in Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Diamond Bar Incorporating Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the
Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and
Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), adopted
by the City Council on May 9, 1995, although the mitigation measures contained in the
General Plan FEIR which were prepared in connection with the 1992 General Plan
"remain current and valid," a new mitigation monitoring program, identified as the 1995
General Plan's "Implementation/Mitigation Monitoring Program" (1995 General Plan
Mitigation Monitoring Program), was adopted by the City. Programmatic mitigation
measures presented in the 1995 Addendum and subsequently adopted by the City have
been considered in the derivation of the mitigation measures recommended herein.
S/ City of Diamond Bar, Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar
General Plan, SCH No. 91041083, July 25, 1995, p. 4.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 1-8 Initial Study - Introduction
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Copies of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, 1992 General Plan MEA, 199
General Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program, and 1995 General Plan are all available 5 Addendum, 1995
for review
at the Department (21825 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar) during the regular business hours of
the City.
In addition to the above referenced programmatic documents, a number of technical reports
addressing various aspects of the proposed project have been prepared by or for the Lead
Agency or have been submitted by or on behalf of the Applicant and have been reviewed by the
City. Information contained in those technical reports, as well as the findings of the City's
independent review of those reports, have been considered and, where applicable, incorporated
into this project -level CEQA analysis. Those reports, which are incorporated herein by
reference and which by this reference made part hereof, include:
(1) "Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California"
(Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., December 11, 2003);
(2) "Biological Assessment — Jewel Ridge Estates Project, City of Diamond Bar, Los
Angeles County, California" (Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc., November
2002);
(3) "Cultural Resource Survey Report — Parcel 4 of Parcel Map No. 7409, Diamond Bar,
California" (Louis James Tartaglia, Ph.D., October 30, 2002);
(4) "Interim Engineering Geologic Review, Proposed Residential Tract, Southern End of
Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Calif., Project No. 3375" (Ray A. Eastman,
February 5, 2003);
(5) "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative
Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004);
(6) "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation —
Proposed Residential Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond
Bar, California, APN #8714028003" (GeoEnviron Engineering Consultants, Inc.,
February 15, 2003);
(7) "Preliminary Report, Order No. 11045031-X49" (Chicago Title Company, February 7,
2001);
(8) "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated January 10, 2006 by Leighton and
Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081,
Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoils Consultants, Inc., February 3, 2006);
(9) "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated September 17, 2004 by Leighton and
Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081,
Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoils Consultants, Inc., September 26, 2005);
(10) "Third Party Tree Inventory Review of the Jewel Ridge Estates Property, City of
Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County" (Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc.,
November 3, 2003);
(11) "Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision Located at the
Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive (Approximately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in
the City of Diamond Bar)" (Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc., October 2002, Revised
September 2003); and
(12) W.T.T. 54081 Existing and Proposed Hydrology" (Gary M. Gantney, November 4, 2002).
Each of the above referenced reports was independently reviewed by the City and, in many
cases, revised studies or other supplemental information provided in response to that review.
Because of the size of those documents and/or the exhibits contained therein.
y o Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Introduction July 2006
Page 1-9
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
In addition, the Applicant has provided the City with a number of letters from the Applicant's
technical consultants, addressing specific aspects of the proposed project and/or responding to
specific informational requests, and from individual service purveyors. Those letters include, but
may not be limited to: (1) "Results of Spring Habitat Assessment Survey on the Jewel Ridge
Estates Project Site (Tentative Tract 54081), in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County,
California" (Marc Blain, April 13, 2004); (2) "Results of California Gnatcatcher Habitat
Assessment on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site (Tentative Tract 54081), In the City of
Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California (Marc Blain, April 15, 2004); (3) "Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 (Entry/Exit Design Review)" (Jerry T. Overland, Overland Traffic
Consultants, Inc., April 14, 2004); (4) "Response to the Protected Tree Inventory Review by
Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc." (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004); and (5)
"Review of Biological Resources on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site in the City of Diamond
Bar, California" (Bonterra Consulting, April 21, 2006).
Various service providers have provided the City with "will serve" letters, demonstrating the
ability of those providers to fully and effectively service the needs of the proposed development.
Those letters include, but may not be limited to: (1) "Will Serve Letter for Jewel Ridge Estates,
TTM 54801" (Ed Davis, Technical Services, North Region, The Gas Company, October 29,
2002); (2) "Will Serve Letter for the Tentative Tract Map No. 54081" (Mel Whiteaker, Associate
Planner, Technical Services, North Region, Southern California Gas Company, October 27,
2003); and (3) "Proposed Tract 54081 at Crooked Creek Dr." (Stephen J. Kerman, Customer
Service Planner, Southern California Edison, October 17, 2003).
The above referenced reports, letters, and correspondences are available for review at the
Department during the regular business hours of the City.
1.9 CUSTODIAN OF DOCUMENTS
As required under Section 15074(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines, "[w]hen adopting a negative
declaration or mitigated negative declaration, the lead agency shall specify the location and
custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon
which its decision is based." Without predetermining the actions of the decision-making body,
the Lead Agency has designated Nancy Fong, Director, Community Development Department,
as the "custodian" of documents upon which that decision or those decisions will be made.
Copies of all documents comprising the project's environmental review record can be reviewed at
the office of the Lead Agency (City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department,
Planning Division, 21825 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177) during the
regular business hours of the City.
1.10 INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT
The information presented in this Initial Study reflects the independent judgment of the City
relative to the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts resulting from the
construction and operation of the proposed project and presents the Lead Agency's preliminary
findings based on a detailed analysis of the project's potential environmental impacts. The Lead
Agency has neither made a predetermination concerning the manner of CEQA documentation
nor the outcome of the environmental review and decision-making processes. No reference is
inferred or implied herein regarding any final action or predetermination by the City's advisory or
decision-making bodies or the advisory or decision-making bodies of any other public agency
with jurisdiction over the project or the resources contained thereupon concerning the proposed
project or the adequacy of the project's environmental documentation.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 1-10 Initial Study - Introduction
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The project site is located in the City of Diamond Bar, an incorporated community situated along
the western edge of Los Angeles County (County). As illustrated in Fiqure 2=1 (Regional
Vicinity Map), the City is bordered on the south by unincorporated County lands, identified by
the County as the "South Diamond Bar Land Use Policy Area," and by the Firestone Boy Scout
Reservation, which was purchased by the City of Industry in 2003. The western approximately
two-thirds of the Firestone Boy Scout Reservation lies within County designated Significant
Ecological Area No. 15 (SEA -15). West of the City is both another County unincorporated
area, located within the "Rowland Heights Community Planning Area" and the City of Industry.
To the north, the Cities of Walnut and Pomona abut the City's jurisdiction but do not border the
project site. To the east of the City's corporate boundaries is the City of Chino Hill, located in
San Bernardino County.
The currently vacant property, identified as Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel No. 8714-
028-003, Is illustrated in Figure 2-2 (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Map). As indicated
therein, the approximately 12.9 acre site is located in the southwestern corner of the City, east
of the Orange (SR -57) Freeway. The site's southern boundary is also the southern border of
the City. Directly adjacent to the project's southern boundary is a narrow strip of land owned by
the Shell Oil Company, beyond which lies an 80 -foot wide Southern California Edison (SCE)
easement containing an overhead high-voltage electrical transmission line. As its nearest
location, the SCE easement is approximately 75 feet from the project's southern boundary.
Vehicular access to the property is provided from Crooked Creek Drive. Crooked Creek Drive is
located approximately two blocks east of Brea Canyon Road. The Orange Freeway parallels
Brea Canyon Road in the general area of the project site. The project site is bordered on the
west by concrete -lined flood control channel (i.e., Brea Canyon Channel), maintained by the Los
Angeles County Department of Public Works, Flood Control Division. That flood control facility
is not part of the project site and no encroachment thereupon is planned or proposed.
2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Proposed is a 22 -lot residential subdivision (Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081), allowing for the
development of 16 single-family detached homes (Lots "1-16") on individual parcels ranging in
size from approximately 5,705 square feet to 10,506 square feet. The average lot size for the
residential lots will be approximately 6,892 square feet.
The project is proposed as a private, ungated residential enclave, accessible by means of an
internal roadway system comprised of two new 42 -foot wide private streets (Streets "A -B"). In
addition to their fee simple ownership interests in the land beneath their homes and the
improvements thereupon, each homeowner will own an undivided interest in the streets,
sidewalks, and other common open space areas. All future home sites will be located on the
west or down-slope side of the proposed internal roadways.
The tentative tract map identifies four common "open space" lots (Lots "A -D"). One of those
parcels (Lot "A") abuts an existing residences located at the current terminus of Crooked Creek
Drive. Although its use is not specified other than "open space," the parcel would likely serve as
'/ Parcel No. 4, Parcel Map No. 7409, as recorded in Book 74, Pages 3 and 4 in the Office of the County
Recorder of the County of Los Angeles.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Project Description July 2006
Page 2-1
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
a landscaped entry and could serve a limited passive recreational function. Two of the "open
space" lots (Lots "B" and "D") encompass the terraced retaining walls, inclusive of the
intervening landscaped areas adjoining and between the walls (excluding the private areas of
abutting properties) which frame the western, southern, and northern edges of the property.
The remaining "open space" lot (Lot "C") comprises the majority of the site and includes those
areas located to the east of the internal streets (Streets "A" and "B"). Those portions of Lot "C"
not impacted by grading operations will be retained as natural open space.
No public dedication or conveyance of any of the four "open space" lots is currently proposed.
A "trail head" and "pedestrian trail" is, however, depicted in the tentative tract map within Lot "C."
Similarly, a 20 -foot wide "public access easement" is depicted at the end of Street "A," abutting
the adjoining property to the south, in order to provide for emergency access.
A homeowners' association (HOA) will be created and will manage all common areas retained
by homeowners. The HOA will impose assessments on individual property owners to fund the
maintenance of those common areas.
Prior to recordation of the final subdivision map, a project -specific set of covenants, conditions,
and restrictions (CC&Rs) will be formulated and will provide for the establishment of the HOA.
The City may require that the CC&Rs be approved by the City Attorney and/or by the City
Council prior to the recordation of the final subdivision map. As such, the City has the authority
to modify the Applicant -proposed CC&Rs to ensure their compliance with public policy (e.g.,
elimination of any discriminatory provisions).
Membership in and support of an HOA, which will control and manage the maintenance of all
common areas and facilities, shall be mandatory for all property owners. The HOA will be
formed to manage the maintenance of private streets, street lights, storm drain systems, and
designated non-public open space areas within the project boundaries. The HOA will be
responsible for maintaining landscaped and improved areas not the separate responsibility of
individual property owners. Maintenance responsibilities will further include street sweeping,
repair, and replacement. HOA fees will be established and collected in accordance with
applicable California Department of Real Estate (DRE) guidelines.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map
As illustrated in Figure 2-3 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081), proposed is the
subdivision of the project site for the purpose of creating 16 single-family residential parcels
(Parcels 1-16). In addition, four "open space" lots (Lots A -D) will be created and two private
street parcel (Streets "A" and "B") created. The private on-site street system will be comprised
of a minimum 42 -foot wide right-of-way2 and will extend from the existing terminus of Crooked
Creek Drive to access the individual residential parcels. Since housing is proposed only on one
side of the street, a sidewalk would be constructed only along that side of the street containing
residential dwellings.
Z/ As indicated in the Circulation Element of the 1995 General Plan, roadway classification right-of-way
width classifications have been established. As indicated therein, the right-of-way for a "local residential street,"
defined as a street designed to serve adjacent residential land uses only, is defined as 44-60 feet (see Circulation
Element, Table V-1).
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 2-2 Initial Study - Project Description
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
The Applicant has identified the project as a "vesting tentative ma p,,3 which, if approved, will
confer upon the Applicant or a subsequent holder of real property interests a vesting right to
proceed with the development in substantial compliance with the ordinances, policies, and
standards described in Section 66474.2 of the California Government Code.4
3/ As defined in Section 66424.5 in Chapter 1 (General Provisions and Definitions) in Division 2
(Subdivisions) of the California Government Code: "(a) 'Tentative map' refers to a map made for the purpose of
showing the design and improvement of a proposed subdivision and the existing conditions in and around it and need
not be based upon an accurate or detailed final survey of the property. (b) 'Vesting tentative map' refers to a map
which meets the requirements of subdivision (a) and Section 66452." As further indicated in Section 66452.6(g)
therein: `The rights conferred by a vesting tentative map as provided by Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section
66498.1) shall last for an initial time period, as provided by ordinance, but shall not be less than one year or more
than two ears beyond the recording of the final map."
/ Referencing Section 66474.2(a) of the California Government Code: "Except as otherwise provided in
subdivision (b) or (c), in determining whether to approve or disapprove an application for a tentative map, the local
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Project Description July 2006
Page 2-3
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Big IN
Apr M
4-4
WOW
Ago
r., •
,LOQ67
PUENTE
5 (D 3
4 Figure 2-2
PM 113-33±AC LOS ANGELES
W, COUNTY
PARCEL MAP
7 --Nj Source: Los Angeles County
-13.40 CH
tom..■
As indicated in Section 21.20.130(5)(c) of the "City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code" (Municipal
Code), with regard to vesting tentative map approvals, "[s]ubsequent land use permits, building
permits, extensions of time or other entitlements filed on parcels created by the subdivision may
be conditioned or denied only if the review authority determines that: (1) A failure to do so would
place the residents of the subdivision or the immediate community, or both, in a condition
dangerous to their health or safety, or both; or (2) The condition or denial is required, in order to
comply with state or federal law."
2.3 Discretionary Actions
Approval or conditional approval of the proposed project will require a number of discretionary
actions by the City and other responsible agencies including, but not necessarily limited to:
Vesting Tentative Tract Map.5 As proposed, the Applicant seeks City approval of a 22 -
lot (16 dwelling units) vesting tentative tract map.
agency shall apply only those ordinances, policies, and standards in effect at the date the local agency has
determined that the application is complete pursuant to Section 65943 of the Government Code."
5/ As indicated in Section 21.20.130 (Vesting Tentative Maps) of the Municipal Code: "The approval of a
vesting tentative map shall not be granted unless the review authority first determines that the intended development
of the subdivision is consistent with the zoning regulations applicable to the property at the time of filing, in addition to
all other findings required for tentative map approval by section 21.20.080 (Tentative map approval or disapproval)"
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 2-4 Initial Study - Project Description
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Figure 2-3 (1 of 2)
. VESTING
TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP
NO. 54081
AND CROSS
SECTIONS
source: Jewel Ridge, LLC
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study — Project Description July 2006
Page 2-5
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
PROPERTY LINE
LOT !E
1
i
Vi T.M 5FG8;
n
LOT 1
LOT 7
J
VTTM 54081
TRACT 25989 I
i
/
y cFc. c?in
SUPPORTED
CEG—GRID
-- FABRIC SUPPED
RFTAINIfVG
RETAINING KALI
SECTION
A -A
xN ApM[
//
"ROPER 7? LIP✓E --
I
SECTION B -B
AW A AN[
LOT 9
VTTV 54081
GEO—GRID
FABRIC SUPPORTED
RETAINING WALL
OT a "----
_
\
> cc rRro
T. nr g r s✓r ort
RE AIN IG wa: ___ / a_ rvNuac wrtt
M � /
\ "I COT F -
SECTION O—D
I�
LOT 15 ----- CEG—GRID
17TM ,54081 � FABRIC SUPPORTED
— J RETAINI.NC W/1LL
SECTION E -E
,w� m scut
PROPERTY LINE
I
I;n LOTT.
LOT 84
TRACT 2,5989
I
SECTION C- C
W A�
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study — Project Description
R?OPEPT?' _;P:E --
LOT !E
Vi T.M 5FG8;
J
;Rnc* 291153�
__
y cFc. c?in
SUPPORTED
I
RFTAINIfVG
SECTION F -F
Figure 2-3 (2 of 2)
VESTING
TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO.
54081
AND CROSS
SECTIONS
Source: Jewel Ridge, LLC
July 2006
Page 2-6
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
• Conditional Use Permit.6 The following conditional use permits (CUPs) will or may be
required for the proposed residential development: (1) Planned Development'; and (2)
Hillside Development Standards.$
Variances.9 The following variances will or may be required for the proposed residential
development: (1) minimum lot size standards'°; and (2) street standards."
Exceptions. Although the Applicant has not submitted a written request for an
exception(s) to any of the provisions of Title 21 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code,
Section 21.03.050 (Exceptions to Subdivision Standards) provides the City with an
alternatives means to modify subdivision standards on a project -by -project basis.
Reference to these code provisions herein is intended to ensure full disclosure and
provide both the City and the Applicant with an alternative procedural option should site-
specific and project -specific conditions so warrant.
6/ As defined in Section 22.80.020 (Definitions of Specialized Terms and Phrases) of the Municipal Code, a
"conditional use" is defined as a "use of land identified by article II (Zoning Districts and Allowable Land Uses) as
being allowed in a particular zoning district subject to conditional use permit approval in compliance with chapter
22.58 (Conditional Use Permits)."
'/ As indicated in Section 22.14.030 (Planned Development [PD] Overlay District) in Chapter 22.32
(Planned Development Standards) of the Municipal Code, a CUP is required for all development proposed on a site
subject to the "Planned Development (PD) Overlay District."
81 As indicated in Section 22.22.020 (Applicability) in Chapter 22.22 (Hillside Management) of the Municipal
Code, hillside developments shall be subject to the approval of a CUP in compliance with Chapter 22.58. As defined
therein, the standards contained in that chapter apply to all uses and structures within areas having a slope of ten
percent or greater. The average slope of the project site has been calculated to be 24.35 percent. Referencing
Section 22.22.050 (Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines) of the Municipal Code, exceptions to the City's
hillside development standards "may be approved through the conditional use permit process, when the commission
determines that the exceptions would not materially affect the intent of the standards and guidelines.
/ As indicated in Section 22.54.010 (Purpose) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code: an
adjustment "may only be granted when, because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including
location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other conditions, the strict application of this development code
denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zoning
districts or creates an unnecessary, and non -self-created, hardship or unreasonable regulation which makes it
obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards."
/ Pursuant to Section 22.08.040 (Residential Zoning District General Development Standards) in Title 22
(Development Code) of the Municipal Code: "Subdivisions, new land uses and structures, and alterations to existing
land uses and structures, shall be designed, constructed, and/or established in compliance with the requirements in
Table 2-4, in addition to the applicable development standards in article III (Site Planning and General Development
Standards)." In accordance with Table 2-4 (Residential District General Development Standards), the minimum lot
size for residential parcels located with the "RL" district shall be 10,000 square feet. As further indicated therein:
"Condominium, townhome, or planned development projects may be subdivided with smaller parcel sizes for
ownership purposes, with the minimum lot area requirement determined through the subdivision review process,
provided that the overall development site complies with the lot area requirements of this chapter." As such, a
variance for lot sizes less than 10,000 square feet may not be required but is included herein to ensure full disclosure
of the full range of discretionary actions that may be taken by the Lead Agency with regards to the proposed project.
"/ As required under Section 21.30.030(4) in Title 21 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code: "New streets
proposed or required within a new subdivision or adjacent to a new subdivision shall be located and designed as
follows, and in compliance with the Diamond Bar Development Improvement Standards, Requirements and
Guidelines." With regards to right-of-way and surfaced width, the width of the right-of-way and improved surface of
streets shown on a tentative map shall be as provided by the Diamond Bar Development Improvement Standards,
Requirements and Guidelines (Section 21.30.030[4][b] of the Municipal Code). Private streets shall be designed to
the same standard as public streets (Section 21.30.030[5] of the Municipal Code). Proposed subdivisions shall be
designed to provide rights-of-way for pedestrian paths, bikeways, and multiple -use trails, consistent with the
Circulation Element of the 1995 General Plan and/or the Citywide Comprehensive Parks Master Plan, as applicable
(Section 21.30.030[6] of the Municipal Code).
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Project Description July 2006
Page 2-7
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
■ Tree Preservation and Protection .12 Based on the findings of a protected tree survey,
prior to the Applicant's initiation of recent geotechnical investigations which resulted in
the authorized removal of a number of protected trees, a total of approximately 202
trees13 were identified within either the previously proposed grading limits or had the
potential to be severely impacted by proposed grading operations. In addition,
approximately 27 additional trees, located within the 50 -foot buffer zone and in close
proximity to the previously identified grading limits, could be affected.
in accordance with Section 22.38.130 (Tree Replacement/Relocation Standards),
residential parcels greater than 20,000 square feet shall be planted at a minimum 3:1
replacement ratio.14 The Community and Development Services Director (Director) or
the Planning Commission may grant exceptions to these requirements or may require
additional replacement trees based on specified considerations. The Applicant is
currently proposing replacement "on a 2:1 basis."15
Grading Permit.16 As indicated in Section 15.00.310 (California Building Code -
Adopted), the California Building Code, 2001 Edition (Part 2, Title 24, California Code of
Regulations) and the appendices thereto, which incorporate and amend the "Uniform
Building Code" (1997 Edition), as published by the International Conference of Building
12/ Pursuant to Section 22.38.050 (Tree Removal Permit or Tree Pruning Permit Required) in Chapter 22.38
(Tree Preservation and Protection) of the Municipal Code: "No person shall remove or relocate a protected tree or
develop within the protection zone of a protected tree without first obtaining a tree removal permit from the director.
No person shall prune a protected tree without first obtaining a tree pruning permit from the director if branches are to
be pruned that are over four inches in diameter at the point of the cut. The maximum amount allowed for the pruning
of a protected tree shall be 20 percent, except for oak trees which shall be ten percent." As defined in Section
22.38.030 (Protected Trees) therein, "protected trees" include: (1) native oak, walnut, sycamore and willow trees with
a diameter at breast height (DBH) of eight inches or greater; pepper trees with a DBH of eight inches or greater
where appropriate; (2) trees of significant historical or value as designated by the City Council (Council); (3) trees of
significant historical or value as designated by the Council; (4) any tree required to be planted as a condition of
approval for a discretionary permit; and (5) a stand of trees, the nature of which makes each tree dependent upon the
others for survival. As further indicated in Section 22.38.070 (Tree Removal in Conjunction with a Discretionary
Permit) of the Municipal Code, when the removal or relocation of a protected tree is proposed in connection with an
application for another discretionary permit, the director may waive the requirement of a separate tree removal permit
and require necessary information to be submitted as part of the discretionary permit application. All of the standards
of this chapter, including Section 22.38.130 (Tree Replacement/Relocation Standards) and Section 22.38.140 (Tree
Protection Standards) shall apply to the approval of a discretionary permit.
t3 As indicated in the Applicant's "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree
Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004): "There are a total of 202 trees to be removed
comprised of 195 trees within the grading limit and 7 severely impacted trees within the buffer zone. However, of the
202 trees, there are 104 trees that have deteriorated to the point that they have been evaluated as dying or dead,
therefore, only 98 trees should be considered to be removed since they have the minimum health standards for
preservation. The 98 trees consist of 36 Oaks and 62 Walnuts" (p. 1).
14/ As indicated in the Applicant's "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree
Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004): "only 98 trees would require replacement
since the remaining trees identified for removal are so deteriorated that they are dying or almost dead ...Trees
removed; as a result of project implementation shall be replaced on a 2:1 basis" (p. 5).
t5/ Op. Cif., Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract
540811,p) . 5.
6/ Pursuant to Section 22.22.080 (Grading) in Chapter 22.22 (Hillside Management) of the Municipal Code:
"Limitations on project grading amounts and configurations will be decided on a case-by-case basis under the
conditional use permit process." As further indicated in Section 22.22.150 (Evaluation of Conditional Use Permit
Application) therein, the City is required to evaluate a CUP application for hillside development based on a number of
specified objectives, including a determination whether the project promotes the preservation of natural topographic
features and appearances by means of landform grading so as to blend man-made or manufactured slopes into the
natural topography." As further indicated in Section 22.02.050 (Additional Permits and Approvals may be Required)
of the Municipal Code: "An allowed land use that has been granted a land use permit, or is exempt from a land use
approval, may still be required to obtain city permits or approvals before the use is constructed, or otherwise
established and put into operation."
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 2-8 Initial Study - Project Description
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Officials, constitute the City's building code. Procedures for the review and processing
of grading permits are enumerated, in part, in Appendix Chapter 33 (Excavation and
Grading) of the 1997 "Uniform Building Code" (UBC)." As indicated in Section
15.00.320 (Same - Amendments) of the Municipal Code, amending Section 3309.1 of
the UBC: "Except as exempted in section 3306 of this chapter 33 (Appendix), no person
shall do any grading without first obtaining a grading permit from the city engineer."
The distinction between discretionary and ministerial actions can often be unclear. In order to
ensure full public disclosure, other discretionary and/or ministerial actions associated with the
proposed project include, but may not be limited to, issuance of building and related permits,
plot plan review (Chapter 22.47, Municipal Code), and development plan review (Chapter 22.48,
Municipal Code). Each of those actions has been considered herein and is explicitly made a
part of this environmental review.
2.4 Applicant -Nominated Environmental Compliance Activities18
A number of technical studies have been prepared by or for the Applicant and submitted for the
City's review and consideration. A number of those studies include recommended actions,
conditions, and/or mitigation measures designed to address specific impacts associated with the
proposed project. Since those reports were prepared by or for the Applicant and subsequently
submitted to the City as part of the Applicant's development application, the City has assumed
that each of the recommended actions, conditions, and/or measures presented herein constitute
self-imposed environmental compliance activities that the Applicant has voluntarily elected to
incorporate into the design, development, and operation of the proposed project.
In incorporating these Applicant -nominated actions, conditions, and/or measures herein, the
Lead Agency is not commenting on the precise nature of the language presented (other than as
noted) and neither endorsing nor accepting each such action, condition, and/or measure in the
form and format now presented. There inclusion herein is intended to: (1) provide further
definition of the current development application and proposed project now under consideration
by the City; and (2) facilitate discussion and consideration of these actions, conditions, and/or
measures as part of the Lead Agency's subsequent deliberations with regards to the proposed
project and its potential environmental effects.
Each of the Applicant -nominated actions, conditions, and/or measures have been included as
part of the project description. Terms such as "should" or "may" have, however, been modified
from their original form by the City in order to reflect a more definitive commitment on the part of
the Applicant. Additionally, all references to the "contractor" have been replaced with reference
to the "Applicant" since the project proponent is applying for the specified discretionary actions
and not the Applicant's construction contractor and since the term "Applicant" is intended to be
inclusive of all contractors working under the direction of the Applicant or the Applicant's agents.
The City -initiated changes to the precise language of each Applicant -nominated action,
condition, and/or measure is noted through the use of underlining.
X71 The UBC is published by the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), now the International
Code Council (ICC), one of three mode code groups in the country, and is used by most agencies in southern
California as the basis for their building codes.
18/ Mitigation measures contained in the project's "Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates,
Diamond Bar, California" (Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., December 11, 2003) have not been included herein
since that study was conducted by the City and not submitted by the Applicant. As such, those recommended
measures do not constitute "Applicant -nominated" actions but constitute mitigation under CEQA.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Project Description July 2006
Page 2-9
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Biological Resources
Any potential impacts to breeding birds shall be avoided by grading outside of the
breeding season or by avoiding active nests until the breeding cycle is completed.19 The
nest locations shall be flagged and a 100 -foot buffer places around the nest until
breeding is complete.20
Cultural Resources
All surface and subsurface modifications (i.e., grading activities) shall be confined to only
those areas of absolute necessity to reduce any form of impact on unrecorded (buried)
cultural resources that may exist within the confines of the project area.21
Geology and Soils
Note. Although too numerous to itemize herein, specific design and development
recommendations are presented in the following studies: (1) `Preliminary Geotechnical
Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation — Proposed Residential
Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, California, APN
#871402800"3 (GeoEnviron Engineering Consultants Inc., February 15, 2003); and (2)
"Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated September 17, 2004 by Leighton and
Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081,
Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoils Consultants, Inc." September 26, 2005).
Engineering Geology
Site inspections shall be made by the project geologist during grading and construction
in order to verify the geologic conditions encountered and, of course, additional
recommendations may be required if conditions other than anticipated are found.12
Protected Trees
All on-site and off-site open space areas shall be buffered in a manner that discourages
encroachment by the new human inhabitants. Deed restrictions regulating the operation
of motorized off-road vehicles and limiting trail access shall be developed with the intent
of protecting the open space areas from these potentially adverse influences.
Since construction is planned in the vicinity of native trees, efforts shall be exercised, to
the extent possible, to avoid their damage or removal.
Approximately ninety-eight trees including approximately 36 oaks and 62 walnut trees,
removed as a result of project implementation shall be replaced on a 2:1 basis. Each
replacement tree shall be a minimum box size of 24 inches for six or fewer replacement
trees. For greater than six replacement trees, the sizes shall be determined by the
Director.
19/ Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc., Biological Assessment — Jewel Ridge Estates Project, City
of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, November 2002, p. 13.
"/ Ibid., p. 12.
21/ Louis James Tartaglia, Ph.D., Cultural Resource Survey Report — Parcel 4 of Parcel Map No. 7409,
Diamond Bar, California, October 30, 2002, p. 22.
22/ Ray A. Eastman, Interim Engineering Geologic Review, Proposed Residential Tract, Southern End of
Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Calif., Project No. 3375, February 5, 2003, p. 4.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 2-10 Initial Study - Project Description
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
• Replacement trees shall be properly cared for and maintained for 2 years and replaced
by the Applicant or permittee if mortality occurs within that period. Where feasible,
replacement trees shall consist exclusively of indigenous oak trees and shall be certified
as being grown form a seed source collected in Los Angeles or Ventura Counties.
Replacement trees shall be planted and maintained on the subject property and, if
feasible, in the same general area from which the trees were removed. The
replacement process of trees shall be supervised in the field by the arborist.
Common avenues of damage to preserved and newly planted trees that must be
avoided include: (1) overwatering, (2) underwatering, (3) soil compaction above the root
zone, (4) drainage alteration, and (5) poisoning by weed inhibitors used in conjunction
with paving activities.
No cutting, grading, filling, trenching or other restructuring of the soil shall take place
within the drip-line of a preserved tree. Should a trench, retaining wall, or other
construction requiring any of these procedures is necessary, a qualified expert shall be
present during construction.
Landscaping requiring irrigation shall not be planted within the drip-line of trees due to
the susceptibility of the trees to root rot, caused by excessive unseasonable irrigation.
The design and installation of landscape irrigation systems outside the drip-line of the
oaks shall be such that the area within the drip-line is not wetted during operation of the
system. In addition, surface runoff from impermeable surfaces shall be directed away
from the trees; where the natural topography has been altered, provisions shall be made
for drainage away from the tree trucks so that water will not pond or collect within the
drip-line of any tree.
A temporary chain-link fence not less than 4 feet in height shall be installed around the
encroachment zone of trees within the 50-foot zone adjacent to development grading.
Fencing shall be in place prior to commencement of any activity on the subject property.
This fencing shall remain in place throughout the entire period of development and shall
not be removed without written authorization of the Director.
To ensure compliance with the above mitigation measures, a resource management
plan and mitigation-monitoring program shall be designed for the on-site walnut and oak
trees established as a condition of project approva1.23
Traffic and Circulation
New homeowners shall be informed that they are joining an existing neighborhood and
they need to respect the area's existing environment.
The posting of speed limit signs for traffic leaving the new subdivision at the existing
terminus of Crooked Creek Drive is re uired.2a
23/ Don Case Arborist, Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report,
Tentative Tract 54081, February 5, 2004, pp. 5-6.
24/ Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc., Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision
Located at the Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive (Approximately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of
Diamond Bar, October 2002, Revised September 2003, p. 28_
Cit of D'
y iamond Bar
Initial Study - Project Description July 2006
Page 2-11
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
This page intentionally left blank.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 2-12 Initial Study - Project Description
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
As required under Section 15063(d)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the initial study shall
include "an identification of the environmental setting." This description of the existing
environmental setting presents a general overview of the local regulatory setting and the
physical environmental setting in which the proposed action would occur and serves to present
applicable or potentially applicable background information that may be relevant to the
assessment of the project's potential environmental impacts. It is, however, neither the intent of
this section to be inclusive of all information and regulations germane to a specific topical issue
nor to present the same level of detail that might be otherwise included in a project -level EIR.
In order to facilitate cross-referencing with the Lead Agency's analysis of potential
environmental effects, as presented in Section 4.0 (Environmental Evaluation), the following
discussion of the project's existing environmental setting addresses, in the sequence presented
therein, each of the topical issues contained in the City's "Environmental Checklist Form"
(Checklist), included in Appendix A (Environmental Checklist), as extracted from Appendix G of
the State CEQA Guidelines. The order in which these topics are addressed is not intended to
indicate either the real or perceived magnitude or severity of the potential impacts that are likely
or that could occur with respect to those issues or to suggest any prioritization with regards to
the real or perceived local or regional importance of each environmental issue under
consideration. The Checklist constitutes a standardized form that is used both by the Lead
Agency and by the preponderance of other governmental entities in California to examine the
environmental consequences of projects subject to the provisions of the CEQA.
Based on the project -specific characteristics of the proposed project and the site-specific
characteristics of the project site, certain topical issues presented in the Checklist are clearly not
applicable to the environmental analysis of the proposed project. Where, in the judgment of the
Lead Agency, a specific topical issue is deemed not to be applicable to the proposed project,
the rationale for the termination of further analysis of that issue is presented herein.
3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.2.1 Aesthetics
In accordance with Section 21000(b) of CEQA, "[ijt is necessary to provide a high-quality
environment that at all times is healthful and pleasing to the senses and intellect of man."
Pursuant to Section 21001(b) of CEQA, it is the policy of the State to "[flake all actions
necessary to provide the people of this State with clean air and water, enjoyment of aesthetics,
natural, scenic, and historic environmental qualities, and freedom from excessive noise."
As indicated in the 1992 General Plan FEIR, 1992 General Plan MEA, and 1995 Addendum, the
discussion and analysis of "aesthetics" focused on landforms and topography. Reference to
"landforms" and "topography," as described herein, relates to the visual quality impacts
associated with the physical change to a site produced by a project's proposed grading
operations. Related geological, hydrologic, and biological issues associated with those grading
operations are separately addressed under their corresponding sections of this Initial Study.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-1
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FOR focused on specific
policies presented in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on
"landform and topography" could be effectively mitigated to below a level of significance. In
addition, based, in part, on the findings of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum
concluded that program -level impacts on "landform and topography" were "determined to be
mitigable to less -than -significant levels."'
The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that relate, either directly or indirectly, to the
preservation and enhancement of the community's visual quality. Those policies include, but
are not necessarily limited to, the following:
■ Maintain residential areas which protect natural resources, hillsides, and scenic areas.
(a) Development in hillside areas should be designed to be compatible with surrounding
natural areas, compatible to the extent practical with surrounding development,
aesthetically pleasing, and provide views from development, but not at the expense of
views of the development. (b) Earthwork in hillside areas should utilize contour or
landform grading. (c) Minimize grading to retain natural vegetation and topography
(Strategy 1.2.3, Land Use Element);
■ Require that new developments be designed so as to respect the views of existing
development; provide view corridors which are oriented toward existing or proposed
community amenities, such as park, open space, or natural features (Strategy 2.2.4,
Land Use Element);
■ Promote incorporation of hillside features into project designs (Strategy 3.3.2, Land Use
Element);
■ Limit grading to the minimum necessary (Strategy 3.3.4, Land Use Element);
• Require contour or landform grading, clustering of development, or other means to
minimize visual and environmental impacts to ridgelines or prominent slopes (Strategy
1.1.1, Resource Management Element);
■ To the greatest extent possible, require that dwelling units, structures and landscaping
be sited in a manner which protects views from existing development, retains
opportunities for views from dwellings, preserves or enhances vistas, particularly those
seen from public places, preserves mature trees, natural hydrology, native plant
materials, and areas of visual interest, permit removal of vegetation as part of a City or
Fire District approved fuel modification program (Strategy 1.1.7, Resource Management
Element); and
• Utilize grading permit procedures to ensure that site designs for development proposals
for hillside areas conform to the natural terrain, and consider the visual aspects (Strategy
1.1.8, Resource Management Element).
As indicated in Section 22.16.130 (View Protection) in Chapter 22.16 (General Property
Development and Use Standards) of the Municipal Code: (1) the development of new projects
shall respect the views of existing residential uses; new structures shall be located in a manner
that preserves views by creating view corridors; (2) new developments that are within the
viewshed of existing residential uses shall be kept as low as possible to reduce or eliminate the
possibility of blocking views; and (3) in reviewing projects with potential view blockage impacts,
the council, commission, or director shall refer to the view protection guidelines in the City's
"Citywide design guidelines" manual.
11 Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083, p. 4.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-2 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
The State Scenic Highway System includes a list of highways that are either eligible for
designation as scenic highways or have been so designated. These highways are identified in
Section 263 of the California Streets and Highways Code (S&HC). The status of a State Scenic
Highway changes from "eligible" to officially "designated" when the local jurisdiction adopts a
scenic corridor protection program, applies to the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) for scenic highway approval, and receives notification from Caltrans that the highway
has been designated as a scenic highway. When a city or county nominates an eligible scenic
highway for official designation, it must identify and define the highway's scenic corridor and
adopt ordinances to preserve the scenic quality of the corridor or document such regulations
that already exist (scenic corridor protection program). Official scenic highway status places no
restrictions for making improvements on scenic highways; however, Caltrans works with local
agencies to coordinate transportation proposals and maintenance activities and to ensure the
protection of scenic corridors to the maximum extent feasible.
As indicated in Section 263.4 of S&HC, the State Scenic Highway system shall include "Route
57 from Route 90 to Route 60 near Industry." That segment of the SR -57 Freeway between the
Angeles, however, remains an "eligible" State Scenic Highway (Not OfficialSR-57/SR-60 Freeway interchange southward to the southern boundary of the County signated)
of Los
ly De
pending the adoption of a City or County scenic corridor protection program. No such program
has yet to be adopted by either the City or by the County. As part of the County's current
comprehensive update to the "County of Los Angeles General Plan" (County General Plan),
however, a "draft scenic highways" plan (undated) has been formulated and identifies that
portion of the SR -57 Freeway between the SR -60 Freeway and the southern County border as
a "proposed scenic highway."
3.2.2 Agricultural Resources
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the accompanying resolution, the
1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following "land use" impact could not be mitigated
to below a level of significance: "Potential alteration of open space and agricultural lands within
the City."2 Although "agricultural resources" were not explicitly addressed in the 1995
Addendum, the accompanying resolution concluded that all previously identified significant
environmental impacts, except for "air quality," would be reduced to a less -than -significant
level.3 As indicated in the Resource Management Element of the 1995 General Plan, although
the City began as an agricultural community, it has evolved into a residential suburban
community. As indicated therein, at the time of its adoption, cattle grazing was the only
agricultural activity that remained as a reminder of the City's heritage.4
Cattle grazing activities have been recently observed south of the project site, on abutting lands
located in unincorporated Los Angeles County. Since the project site is fenced and since the
lower and more accessible portions of the project site were, when observed, covered with
Z/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the
Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of
Overriding, Considerations), p. 5.
/ City of Diamond Bar, Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar
Incorporating Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan
Environmental Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act),
adopted by the City Council on May 9, 1995, Exhibit A, p. 4.
% City of Diamond Bar, City of Diamond Bar General Plan, Resource Management Element, adopted July
25, 1995, p. III -9.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-3
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
invasive grasses, there exists no evidence that cattle grazing activities now occur on the subject
property. Since the project site does not current support any agricultural use and since the
site's topography and vegetative cover suggests that no commercial agricultural or other farm -
related use has recently occurred on the project site, the City has determined that this topical
issue is not germane to an assessment of the proposed project and has discontinued further
discussion or analysis of potential project -related impacts on local or regional agricultural
resources.
3.2.3 Air Quality
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. Those measures related primarily to energy
conservation, use of alternative transportation, and implementation of transportation demand
management (TDM) programs. As indicated in the implementing resolution, the 1992 General
Plan FEIR concluded that the following "air quality" impacts could not be mitigated to below a
level of significance: "(a) Short-term air quality impacts associated with the construction phases
of development (e.g., construction equipment, emissions, etc.). (b) Long-term stationary and
mobile source air emission increases.s5
As indicated in the 1995 Addendum, "strategies identified in the Final EIR intended to reduce air
emissions are also included in the 1995 General Plan ... but not below the significant level '6
Notwithstanding those actions identified in the 1995 Addendum and 1995 General Plan, the City
concluded that the following air quality impacts would remain significant: "(a) Short-term air
quality impacts associated with the construction phases of development such as from fugitive
dust and construction equipment. (b) Long-term stationary and mobile source air emission
increases."'
The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that relate, either directly or indirectly, to air
quality and the reduction of air emissions. Those policies include, but are not necessarily
limited to, the following:
Promote the provision of non-polluting transportation alternatives such as a Citywide
system of bikeways and pedestrian sidewalks (Strategy 1.9.1, Public Health and Safety
Element);
Ensure that site designs facilitate rather than discourage pedestrian movement between
nearby uses (Strategy 1.9.5, Public Health and Safety Element); and
Require grading plans to include appropriate and feasible measures to minimize fugitive
dust (Strategy 1.9.6, Public Health and Safety Element).
Section 22.16.030 (Air Emissions) in Chapter 22.16 (General Property Development and Use
Standards) of the Municipal Code, however, includes specific standards regarding air
emissions. As required therein, those land use activities that have the potential to create
5/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the
Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of
Overriding Considerations), adopted by the City Council on July 14, 1992, p. 5.
/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083, p. 9.
7/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating
Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental
Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), adopted by the
City Council on May 9, 1995, Exhibit A, p. 4.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-4 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
fugitive dust emissions shall be conducted in a manner so as to create as little dust or dirt
emission beyond the boundary line of the parcel as possible. Standards applicable to those
projects include, but not limited to, the following: (1) Scheduling - Grading activities shall be
scheduled to ensure that repeated grading will not be required, and that implementation of the
proposed land use will occur as soon as possible after grading; (2) Operations during high
winds - Clearing, earth -moving, excavation operations, or grading activities shall cease in high
wind conditions when dust blows and control methods are no longer effective; (3) Area of
disturbance - The area disturbed by clearing, demolition, earth -moving, excavation operations,
or grading shall be the minimum required to implement the allowed use; (4) Dust control -
During clearing, demolition, earth -moving, excavation operations, or grading, dust emissions
shall be controlled by regular watering, paving of construction roads or other dust -preventive
measures (e.g., hydroseeding), subject to the approval of the building official and city engineer;
(5) On-site roads - On-site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible, watered periodically with
reclaimed water, whenever possible, or stabilized in an environmentally safe manner; (6)
Revegetation - Graded areas shall be revegetated as soon as possible in compliance with the
approved landscape plan and any conditions of approval; and (7) Fencing - Appropriate fences
or other means may be required by the director to contain dust and dirt within the parcel.
The Municipal Code further acknowledges that the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) has established daily and quarterly significance thresholds for construction exhaust
emissions, as identified in the SCAQMD's "CEQA Air Quality Handbook" (South Coast Air
Quality Management District, April 1993). All land use activities shall be conducted in a manner
consistent with the provisions of the Air Quality Management Plan. Exhaust emissions shall be
calculated for each stage of grading and construction proposed. If exhaust emissions from
construction activities (including fugitive dust) exceed daily or quarterly significance thresholds,
the project proponent shall coordinate with the SCAQMD to determine the appropriate mitigation
measures to minimize exhaust emissions, including prohibiting truck idling in excess of two
minutes, and shall be subject to compliance with the SCAQMD rules and regulations pertaining
to construction emissions (Section 22.16.030[c], Municipal Code).
SCAQMD Rules and Regulations
The SCAQMD has jurisdiction over an area of 10,473 square miles (referred to hereafter as the
District), consisting of the four -county South Coast Air Basin (i.e., Orange County and the non -
desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties) and the Riverside
County portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin and the Mojave Desert Air Basin. The South Coast
Air Basin (SCAB) exceeds State and federal air quality standards for PM10 and
"serious non -attainment area." is classified as a
In December 1996, the SCAQMD adopted the 1997 "Air Quality Management Plan" (1997
AQMP), which included the 1997 PM10 State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the SCAB. The
1997 AQMP included a request for extension of the federal PM'0 attainment deadline from 2001
to 2006. Under the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), the request had to be accompanied by a
commitment to adopt and implement Best Available Control Measures (BACM).
The SCAQMD is responsible for reducing emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect
sources. In furtherance of that objective, the SCAQMD has promulgated a series of rules and
regulations governing specific activities performed within the SCAB, binding on all parties
conducting those activities. Two of those rules addressing fugitive dust (PM,()) are briefly
described below. These rules contain nuisance provisions giving SCAQMD inspectors broad
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-5
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
latitude to enforce dust abatement, particularly in the event of a nuisance complaint.
Compliance with these rules is mandatory for all large-scale construction projects.
■ Rule 402. Rule 402 (Nuisance) is a nuisance provision that states that a person shall
not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other
material that may: (1) cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any
considerable number of persons or to the public; (2) endanger the comfort, repose,
health, or safety of any such persons or the public; and/or (3) cause or have a natural
tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.
Rule 403. Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) sets requirements for control and monitoring to any
activity or man-made condition capable of generating fugitive dust. Basically, the rule
requires that all parties shall: (1) not cause or allow the emissions of fugitive dust from
any active operation, open storage pile, or disturbed surface area so that the presence
of such dust remains visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line; (2) utilize one
or more reasonably available control measures to minimize fugitive dust emissions from
each fugitive dust source type which is part of any active operation; (3) not cause or
allow PM10 levels to exceed 50 micrograms per cubic meter in the air when determined
by simultaneous upwind and downwind sampling (sampling may be exempted when
fugitive dust control measures are implemented); and/or (4) prevent visible particulate
matter from being deposited upon paved roads as a direct result of their operations.
Special conditions are required when wind gusts exceed 25 miles per hour (mph).
These additional measures include a cessation of all active operations or further
enhancement of watering (i.e., every hour) and/or use of chemical stabilizers.8
In accordance with SCAQMD Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings), which is "applicable to any
person who supplies, sells, offers for sale, or manufacturers any architectural coating for in the
District that is intended to be field applied to stationary structures or their appurtenances, and to
mobile homes, pavements or curbs; as well as any person who applies or solicits the application
of any architectural coating within the District" (Rule 1113[a]), except as otherwise provided, "no
person shall supply, sell, offer for sale, manufacture, blend, or repackage any architectural
coating for use in the District which, at the time of sale or manufacture, contains more than 250
grams of VOC per liter of coating (2.08 pounds per gallon), less water, less exempt compounds,
and less any colorant added to tint bases, and no person shall apply or solicit the application of
any architectural coating within the District that exceeds 250 grams of VOC per liter of coating"
(Rule 1113[c][1]).
SCAQMD Rule 1186 (PM10 Emissions from Paved and Unpaved Roads, and Livestock
Operations) impose specific obligations on the owners or operators of paved or unpaved public
roads. Those requirements include, but are not limited to: (1) any owner of operator of a paved
public road on which there is visible roadway accumulations (defined to mean the deposit of
particulate matter onto paved roads as a result of wind or water erosion, haul vehicle spillage, or
any other event excluding vehicular track -out (defined as any bulk material that adheres to and
agglomerates on the exterior surface of motor vehicles, haul trucks, and equipment, including
tires, that have been released onto a paved road and can be removed by a vacuum sweeper or
broom sweeper under normal operating conditions) which results in the accumulation of visible
roadway dust covering a contiguous area in excess of 200 square feet) shall begin removal of
8/ On April 2, 2004, the SCAQMD's Board of Directors certified "Final Environmental Assessment for
Proposed Amended Rules 403 -Fugitive Dust, 403.1 -Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control Requirements for Coachella
Valley Sources and 1186-PM10 Emission Reductions from Paved and Unpaved Roads, and Livestock Operations,
SCAQMD No. 012804KCS" (SCAQMD, April 2, 2004) revising, in part, Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust).
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-6 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
such material through street cleaning within 72 hours of any notification of the accumulation and
shall completely remove such material as soon as feasible); (2) beginning on January 1, 2006,
any owner or operator of a public or private paved road shall construct, or require to be
constructed, all new or widened paved roads in accordance with the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines or the applicable equivalent
locally adopted guidelines for curbing, width of shoulder, and medians as specified in the rule;
and (3) any owner or operator of an unpaved public road in the SCAB shall annually treat
unpaved roads that have greater than the average daily trips (ADT) or all unpaved roads in its
jurisdiction (as determined by the owner/operator) beginning January 1, 1998 and each of eight
calendar years thereafter by either (a) paving at least 1 mile of such roads using typical roadway
materials, (b) applying chemical stabilization to 2 miles of such roads in sufficient quantities to
maintain a stabilized surface, or (c) taking one or more of the following actions on 3 miles of
such roads (i) installing signage at '/ intervals that prohibits vehicular speeds in excess of 15
mph, as authorized by California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 22365, (ii) installing speed control
devices (e.g., speed bumps) every 500 feet, and/or (iii) maintaining the roadway in such a
manner that inhibits vehicular speeds in excess of 15 mph.
CEQA Air Quality Handbook
The SCAQMD's "CEQA Air Quality Handbook" (Handbook) was prepared to serve as guidance
to assist local governmental entities in developing environmental documents pursuant to CEQA.
As indicated therein, "[p]lanners and project proponents may determine if a project is likely to be
significant by screening the project using Table 6-2" and "Table 6-3 provides a screening table
for determining when a project's construction emissions could exceed the threshold of
significance."9 In accordance therewith, a project can be presumed not to generate a significant
construction and/or operational air quality impact if the project does not exceed the thresholds
identified in Table 6-2 (Screening Table for Operation — Daily Thresholds of Potential
Significance for Air Quality) and Table 6-3 (Screening Table for Construction — Quarterly
Thresholds of Potential Significance for Air Quality).
As indicated in Table 6-2 (Screening Table for Operation — Daily Thresholds of Potential
Significance for Air Quality) in the Handbook, a residential project can be presumed not to
produce a significant operational impact if the project is a single-family development consisting
of 166 or fewer dwelling units. Since the proposed project is comprised of only 20 units, or
about 12 percent of the SCAQMD's screening table threshold, it can be presumed that the
project's operational emissions would be at a less -than -significant level.
As further indicated in Table 6-3 (Screening Table for Construction — Quarterly Thresholds of
Potential Significance for Air Quality) in the Handbook, from a construction perspective, a
single-family residential development project would be presumed to produce a less -than -
significant impact if the project included less than 1,309,000 square foot gross floor area (GFA)
and where to involve the grading of less than 177 acres.
Although no architectural plans have been submitted by the Applicant, assuming that each
dwelling unit were to contain a GFA of 3,500 square feet, the resulting square footage (56,000
square feet) would remain substantially below the SCAQMD's screening table threshold. Since
the project site contains only approximately 12.9 acres, the screening table's grading threshold
would not be exceeded. As such, it can be presumed that the project's construction -term
emissions would be at a less -than -significant level.
9/ South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993, pp. 6-2 and 6-4.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-7
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
3.2.4 Biological Resources
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the implementing resolution, the
1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following programmatic impacts on "biological
resources" could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "(a) Loss of vegetation and
wildlife displaced from potential development areas. (b) Potential removal of woodlands and
riparian brush.n10
As indicated in the 1995 Addendum: "In addition to the mitigation measures identified in the
Final EIR, some new strategies addressing preservation of biological resources have been
included in the 1995 General Plan" and "[t]hese additional strategies are expected to further
lessen impacts on biological resources as identified in the Final EIR."11 The City's implementing
resolution concluded that, based on the additional analysis presented in the 1995 Addendum,
the previously identified significant impacts on "biological resources" would, in fact, be less than
significant. 12
The 1995 General Plan includes a number of policies that address, either directly or indirectly,
biological resources that may be applicable at the project level. Relevant policies include, but
may not be limited to, the following:
To preserve significant environmental resources within proposed developments, allow
clustering or transferring of all or part of the development potential of the entire site to a
portion of the site, thus preserving the resources as open space, and mandating the
dedication of those resources to the City or a conservancy (Strategy 1.5.6, Land Use
Element);
Encourage clustering within the most developable portions of project sites to preserve
open space and/or other natural resources. Such development should be located to
coordinate with long-term plans for active parks, passive (open space) parks, and
preserve natural open space areas (Strategy 1.6.4, Land Use Element);
To the greatest extent possible, require that dwelling units, structures and landscaping
be sited in a manner which: protects views for existing development, retains
opportunities for views from dwellings, preserves or enhances vistas, particularly those
seen from public places, preserves mature trees, natural hydrology, native plant
materials, and areas of visual interest, permit removal of vegetation as part of a City or
Fire District approved fuel modification plan (Strategy 1.1.7, Resource Management
Element);
New development should include the preservation of significant trees of cultural or
historic value (Strategy 1.1.12, Resource Management Element);
Maintain, protect, and preserve biologically significant areas, including SEA 15, riparian
areas, oak and walnut woodlands, and other areas of natural significance, providing only
such recreational and cultural opportunities as can be developed in a manner sensitive
to the environment (Objective 1.2, Resource Management Element);
10/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the
Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of
OverridinConsiderations), p. 5.
1 / Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083, p. 6.
12/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating
Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental
Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), Exhibit A, pp. 3-4.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-8 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
• Recognizing the significance of SEA 15 ecological resources, support further definition
of the extent and intensity of such resources to provide needed additional information for
the purpose and intent of preservation of this area (Strategy 1.2.1, Resource
Management Element);
• Ensure that all development, including roads, proposed adjacent to riparian and other
biologically sensitive habitats avoid significant impacts to such areas. Require that new
development proposed in such locations be designed to minimize or eliminate impacts
on environmentally sensitive areas, protect the visual seclusion of forage areas from
road intrusion by providing vegetative buffering, provide wildlife movement linkages to
water, food, shelter and nesting, provide vegetation that can be used by wildlife for cover
along roadsides, avoid intrusion of night lighting into identified areas through properly
designed lighting systems, allow wildlife and migration access by use of tunnels or other
practical means, replace fresh drinking water for wildlife when natural water areas are
removed or blocked, to the greatest extent possible, prevent street water runoff from
flowing into natural or blueline streams (Strategy 1.2.2, Resource Management
Element);
■ Take an active role in pursuing the preservation of environmentally sensitive canyon
areas in their natural state (Strategy 1.2.4, Resource Management Element); and
• To the greatest extent possible, provide for preservation of flora and fauna (Strategy
1.2.5, Resource Management Element).
As required under Section 22.16.040 (Environmental Resource Protection) in Chapter 22.16
(General Property Development and Use Standards) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the
Municipal Code: "Development proposals shall be evaluated in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code § 21.000 et seq.), city and general plan
environmental policies including, but not limited to, open space habitat, sensitive biological and
botanical resources; rare, threatened and/or endangered species; air quality; mineral resources;
archaeological resources; and geologic hazards."
Landscape and Irrigation Plan Requirements
As required under Section 22.24.030 (Landscape Plan Requirements) in Chapter 22.24
(Landscape Standards) of the Municipal Code: "A preliminary landscape plan shall be submitted
as part of an application for a land use entitlement, for new development, and the significant
expansion or redevelopment of an existing use as determined by the director." As further
required in Section 22.24.040 (Landscape Area Requirements), landscaping shall be provided
as follows: (1) all setback and open space areas required under the development code shall be
landscaped, except where a required setback is occupied by a sidewalk or driveway or where a
required setback is screened from public view and it is determined by the director that
landscaping is not necessary to fulfill the purposes of this chapter; (2) all areas of a project site
not intended for a specific use shall be landscaped unless it is determined by the director that
landscaping is not necessary to fulfill the purposes of this chapter, and (3) new single-family
developments shall provide landscaping with an automatic irrigation system for the area of the
site between the street curb and the front of the structure from side property lines.
As further required under Section 3316.4(b) (Planting and Irrigation Plans and Specifications) in
Title 15 (Building and Construction Safety) of the Municipal Code: "For grading which includes
cut slopes more than five feet in height; or fill slopes supporting structures or more than three
feet in height; or natural slopes disturbed more than ten feet in surficial extent by the grading
operations planting and irrigation plans and specifications shall be submitted for approval of the
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-9
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
city engineer. For all manufactured slopes more than 20 feet in height or natural slopes
disturbed more than 20 feet in surficial extent by grading operations plans shall be prepared and
signed by a civil engineer or landscape architect."
Tree Preservation and Protection
As further indicated in Section 22.38.010 (Purpose) in Chapter 22.38 (Tree Preservation and
Protection) of the Municipal Code, the "general plan, as the overall policy document for the city,
requires the preservation and maintenance of native trees including oak, walnut, sycamore,
willow, significant trees of cultural or historical value and pepper trees where appropriate. The
purpose of this chapter is to protect and preserve these trees and when removal is allowed as a
result of new development to require their replacement." The provisions of the City's tree
preservation and protection ordinance are applicable in all zoning districts to the removal,
relocation or pruning of "protected trees," as provided in Section 22.38.030 (Protected Trees).
As indicated in Section 22.38.040 (Damaging Protected Trees Prohibited), except as provided in
Section 22.38.060 (Exemptions), no person shall cut, prune, remove, relocate, or otherwise
destroy a "protected tree." In addition, the topping of "protected trees" is prohibited.
As defined in Section 22.38.030 (Protected Trees), a "protected tree" is any of the following: (1)
native oak, walnut, sycamore and willow trees with a DBH of eight inches or greater; pepper
trees with a DBH of eight inches or greater where appropriate; (2) trees of significant historical
or value as designated by the City Council; (3) trees required to be preserved or relocated as a
condition of approval for a discretionary permit; (4) any tree required to be planted as a
condition of approval for a discretionary permit; and (5) stand of trees, the nature of which
makes each tree dependent upon the others for survival.
As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004 submittal, the Applicant submitted and the City reviewed a
protected tree report. That and a subsequent report, entitled "Jewel Ridge Estates within the
City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist,
October 29, 2002) and "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree
Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004), encompassed both the
area located within the proposed grading limits and expending 200 -feet beyond those limits.
Each tree was assigned an identification number and a corresponding tag was affixed to each
tree. These tag numbers are utilized in the protected tree report for the purpose of identification
and description. All trees 25 inches or more in circumference (8 -inch diameter) and multiple
trunk trees with a combined circumference of at least 38 inches (12 -inch diameter), as
measured 4.5 feet above mean natural grade, were tagged. The physical structure of each tree
was evaluated. Measurements of the diameter of the tree's canopy, plus five feet, were taken in
order to establish the protected zone. An assessment of the aesthetics of the trees was
conducted, considering such factors as symmetry, broken branches, unbalanced crown,
excessive horizontal branching. An aesthetic rating was then assigned.13 In addition, the health
of each tree was evaluated and rated.14
13/ The following description of the aesthetic rating system is provided: (1) A — Tree crown is typical of these
species and has a good branching structure; (2) B — Tree has uneven characteristic of crown; branch or trunk
structure that is considered minor; (3) C, D, and E — Trees indicate progressively more secure crown branch or truck
distortion such that the trees would not make acceptable landscape specimens.
t4/ The following description of the health rating system is provided: (1) A — Tree is healthy and vigorous
and is reasonably free from signs of disease; (2) B — Tree with reduced vigor, insect problems, minor amount of
dieback, and/or moderate amount of leaf edge browning; (3) C — Tree with high amount of leaf, twig, and small
branch dieback, thinning of the crown, and/or wounds that are slow to recover; (4) D — Tree with major dieback of the
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-10 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
A total of 463 trees were surveyed. The type, location, and health of those trees is presented in
"Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract
54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004). Of these, four trees were twice listed due to the
closeness of their trunks. An additional six trees, such as toyon, were not counted since they do
not constitute protected trees under the City's ordinance. Eleven trees were assigned the same
number as the adjacent tree, with the letter "A" or "B" assigned. These revisions resulted in a
net number of 464 surveyed trees.
Following the preparation of that tree survey, the Applicant obtained City authorization to
conduct a detailed geotechnical investigation which included subsurface boring. In order to
obtain equipment access, one or more protected trees were removal and/or selectively pruned.
Similarly, since the preparation of the 2004 survey, trees have continued to mature. As a result,
one or more trees not previously meeting the Municipal Code's size requirements may now
meet those standards. Although representing a reasonable approximation of the number of
ordinance -size protected trees that exist on the site, the number specified may not precisely
reflect the number of protected trees that now exist within the tract map boundaries.
Los Angeles County Significant Ecological Areas
As part of the ongoing County General Plan update, numerous revisions to the County's existing
significant ecological areas (SEA) are under consideration. As illustrated in Figure 3-1
(Proposed Revisions to the County of Los Angeles Significant Ecological Areas), the County is
considering the expansion of a number of existing SEAs and the creation of a new 13Couacre
Puente Hills SEA. The project site is not, however, located within either an existing or 421 proposed
City or County designated SEA. Other than the presence of City protected trees and with the
possible exception of the Cooper's hawk (Accipier cooperir) and the northwestern San Diego
pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax), site-specific biological resource surveys have not
identified the presence of sensitive biological resources within the subject property.
California Natural Diversity Data Base
The California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) is a valuable repository of rare plant and
animal information maintained by the Habitat Conservation Division of the California Department
of Fish and Game (CDFG). The primary function of the CNDDB is to gather and disseminate
data on the status and locations of rare and endangered plants, animals, and vegetation types.
The California Native Plant Society (CLAPS) is a substantial contributor to the database. The
CNDDB only records actual sightings of rare species and natural communities. 15
In order to identify the range of sensitive species and plant communities that may exist on the
project site, a CNDDB records search of the 7.5 -Minute United States Geological Survey
(USGS) Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle was conducted in 2004. The findings of the
CNDDB search are presented in Table 3-1 (California Natural Diversity Data Base 2004
Records Search — Yorba Linda Quadrangle). It is noted that the area comprising the USGS 7.5 -
minute quadrangle is approximately 64 square miles and, therefore, encompasses a geographic
area substantially larger than the project site. As such, the information contained in the CNDDB
is not necessarily indicative of those resources found on the project site.
main branches, large cuts and/or wounds, extensive trunk rot and/or decay and very sparse leaf growth, exemplifying
a tree in a5dying state; and (5) E — Tree is dead.
oxanne, The
ural
Species a d Vegetation, Fremont a, Volume California 29:3-4t Diversity CalliforniaDepartment Naturalatabase: A rtment of Fish and Game, July/October 2001, pp.
57-62.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-11
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
NOTE: This map is a component of the Los Angeles County General
Plan Update Program. It is a working draft, which will be refined after
the public review period. Information within cities is for reference
only. Significant Ecological Area boundaries that overlap into city
boundaries are shown for biotic continuity only. Significant Ecological
Area policy and regulations are not applicable within city boundaries.
All suggestions for modifications to the maps contents received prior
to June 1, 2004 will be considered by County staff when revising the
map in preparation for public hearings by the Regional Planning
Commission. Written comments and supporting documentation should
be submitted to the Department of Regional Planning General Plan
Development Section (address: 320 W. Temple Street. Los Angeles, CA
90012; fax: 213-626 0434; or a mail: generalplan@planning.co.la.ca.us).
Figure 3-1
PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREAS
Source: County of Los Angeles
The Applicant's biological assessment acknowledges that habitat on the project site does have
potential to support a variety of unlisted sensitive species such as the northern red -diamond
rattlesnake (Crotalis Tuber ruber), Cooper's hawk (Accipier cooperil), and the northwestern San
Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax).n16 Cooper's hawk is a California Species of
Special Concern(no federal status). As indicated by the CDFG, habitat destruction, mainly in
lowland riparian areas, is probably the main threat to this species, although direct or indirect
human disturbance at nest sites can be equally detrimental. Illegal take of nestings is also a
potential threat, especially in populated areas. 17
The northwestern San Diego pocket mouse is a California Species and Special Concern (no
federal status) and, as indicated in a November 15, 1994 Federal Register notice, is being
reviewed by the USFWS for possible addition to the list of endangered and threatened wildlife
under the FESA.
76/ Marc Blain, Results of Spring Habitat Assessment Survey on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site
(Tentative Tract 54081), in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, April 13, 2004, p. 1.
t7/ Remsen, J_V., Jr., Bird Species of Special Concern in California, Cooper's Hawk, California Department
of Fish and Game, 1978.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-12 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table 3-1
CALIFORNIA NATURAL DIVERSITY DATA BASE 2004 RECORDS SEARCH
YORBA LINDA QUADRANGLE
Animals
Long-eared owl Asio otos None None
Coastal California gnatcatcher Poliop0la califomica califomica Threatened' None4
Least Bell's vireo Vireo bellii pusillus Endangered Endangered
Southwestern pond turtle Emys (=Clemmys) marmorata pallida Species of Concern3 None°
Coast (San Diego) homed lizard Phrynosoma coronatum (b/ainvillei) None None
Coast patch -nosed snake Salvadora hexalepis virgultea None None'
Northern red -diamond rattlesnake Crotalus ruberruber None None
Plants
Southern tarplant Centromadia parryi ssp. australis None None4
Many -stemmed dudleya Dudleya multicaulis None None
Chaparral sand -verbena Abronia villosa var. aurita None None
Santa Ana River woolly -star Eriastrum densifolium ssp. sanctorum Endangered Endangered
Intermediate mariposa lily Calochortus weedd var. intermedius None Nones
Plant Communities
South em coast live oak
Southern coast live oak
riparian forest
riparian forest
None
None
Southern willow scrub
Southern willow scrub
None
None
California walnut woodland
California walnut woodland
None
None
Notes:
1. Animal species listed as "threatened" do not automatically have protection under the Federal Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (FESA). The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), however, has applied most
of the same protection provided for "endangered" species to "threatened"
species. This is authorized through
Section 4(d) of the FESA.
2. Listing as "endangered" gives species protection under Section 9 of the FESA, which
prohibits the take of a
federally -listed endangered species.
3. "Species of Concern" is an informal term used by the USFWS to refer to those species that the USFWS believes
might be declining or be in need of concentrated
conservation actions to prevent their decline. These species
receive no legal protection and the term does not mean that they will eventually be proposed for listing.
4. Identified as a California "Species of Special Concern," defined as species whose declining population levels,
limited ranges, and/or continuing threats have them
made vulnerable to extinction.
5. California Native Plant Society (CNPS) List 16 (Rare, threatened, or endangered in California
and elsewhere).
Source: California Natural niv lrcih, n -r- g A
ase, pn12004
Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act
There exist a wide range of federal and State statutes and regulations promulgated to protect
and preserve biological resources including, but not limited to, the Federal Endangered Species
Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544), the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C.
1251 et seq.), the California Endangered Species Act (Section 2050-2116, California Fish and
Game Code), and the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (16 U.S.C. 703-712) (MBTA).
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-13
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
The MBTA establishes a federal prohibition, unless permitted by regulations, to "pursue, hunt,
take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture or kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to purchase,
purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, cause to be shipped, deliver for transportation, transport,
cause to be transported, carry, or cause to be carried by any means whatever, receive for
shipment, transportation or carriage, or export, at any time, or in any manner, any migratory
bird, included in the terms of this Convention ... for the protection of migratory birds ... or any
part, nest, or egg of any such bird" (16 U.S.C. 703). The MBTA decreed that all migratory birds
and their parts (including eggs, nests, and feathers) are fully protected. Under this action, the
federal government is provided with the authority to establish threshold regulations that govern
the hunting and management of listed species. The list of migratory birds protected under the
MBTA appears in Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Parts 10.13 and 17.11.
Biological Resource Assessment
As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004 submission, the Applicant submitted and the City reviewed
a site-specific biological assessment (i.e., "Biological Assessment — Jewel Ridge Estates
Project, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (Environmental & Regulatory
Specialists, Inc., November 2002).^ That nearly 4 -year old assessment was based on a single
day field study conducted during a non -optimal time period (October 7, 2002) when certain
sensitive plant species might not otherwise be evident on the project site and included no
detailed analysis of either the potential presence of the coastal California gnatcatcher of other
sensitive species, as identified in the CNDDB. As a result, the City requested that the Applicant
prepare and present a supplemental biological assessment.
As indicated in the original report, approximately 1.408 acres on the project site where
categorized as "Non -Native Annual Grasslands" and approximately 11.475 acres where
categorized as "Mixed Coast Live Oak/California Walnut Woodlands.08 As further indicated
therein: "The California Department of Fish and Game considers California walnut woodlands a
Top Priority Rare Natural Community with a sensitivity ranking of S2.1. This ranking indicates
that the habitat is threatened and that it occurs in only 6 to 20 locations and/or that there are
between 2,000 and 10,000 acres remaining in California.it9 State rank (S -rank) contains a
threat designation, such that "S2.1" refers to a species or vegetative community with between
1,000-3,000 individuals or 2,000-10,000 acres with is "very threatened. ,20
The southern California black walnut (Juglandaceae Juglans var. californica) is almost entirely
restricted to this region. The current distribution of this species is highly fragmented and
reduced compared with its original distribution. It is almost entirely (89.3 percent) on private
land, with remnant populations in the Santa Clara River drainage, Simi Hills, Santa Susana
Mountains, Santa Monica Mountains, San Jose Hills, Puente Hills, and Chino Hills.21
As requested by the City, a subsequent site visit was conducted by a qualified biologist on April
3, 2006 and the adequacy of the November 2002 report critically examined. As indicated by the
Applicant's consulting biologist, "the descriptions of the biotic resources in the report remain
accurate to date. The biotic conditions are unchanged at the level of detail which they are
1e/ Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc., Biological Assessment — Jewel Ridge Estates Project, City
of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, November 2002, Figure 3 (Vegetation Communities Map).
t91 /bid., p. 9.
201
California Department of Fish and Game, Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List, Natural
Diversity Database, April 2004, p. iv.
21/ Davis, F.W., et al., The California Gap Analysis Project - Final Report, University of California, Santa
Barbara, 1998, Appendix SW (The Southwestern California Region).
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-14 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
described. Any potential differences in the conditions present at the time of the original survey
work and the present are considered inconsequential. As a result, the conclusions regarding
the potential or lack of potential for each special status species remains accurate."'
Proposed Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher
"Critical habitat" is a term used in the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.
1531-1544) (FESA) that refers to specific geographic areas that are essential for the
conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require special management
considerations.23 Areas not occupied by the species may be designated if these areas are
essential to the conservation of the species.
As specifically defined in Section 5(A) -(B) of the FESA: "(A) The term "critical habitat" for a
threatened or endangered species means (i) the specific areas within the geographical area
occupied by the species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the provisions of section 4 of
this Act, on which are found those physical or biological features (1) essential to the
conservation of the species and (11) which may require special management considerations or
protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the
time it is listed in accordance with the provisions of section 4 of this Act, upon a determination
by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species. (B) Critical
habitat may be established for those species now listed as threatened or endangered species
for which no critical habitat has heretofore been established as set forth in subparagraph (A) of
this paragraph." Section 7 of the FESA (16 U.S.C. 1536) requires that federal agencies refrain
from contributing to the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. This requirement
is in addition to the prohibition against jeopardizing the continued existence of a listed species
and is the only mandatory legal consequence of a critical habitat designation.
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) recently proposed the establishment of a
critical habitat designation for the coastal California gnatcatcher (Poliopti/la calffibmicus). The
coastal California gnatcatcher was listed as threatened on March 30, 1993 (58 FR 16742). On
October 24, 2000, the USFWS published a final determination of critical habitat (65 FR 63680).
Several lawsuits were subsequently filed challenging various aspects of the designation,
including the adequacy of the economic analysis. The USFWS subsequently requested
permission to prepare a new economic analysis. On June 11, 2002, the court granted the
USFWS' request for a remand of the critical habitat designation to allow the USFWS to
reconsider the economic impact associated with designating any particular area as critical
habitat. The court ordered the USFWS to complete a new proposed rule by April 11, 2003.
Areas designated as critical habitat in the USFWS' 2000 final rule retain their designation until a
new, revised final critical habitat designation becomes effective.
A new proposed rule for the designation of critical habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher
was published in the Federal Register on April 24, 2003 (68 FR 20228). As depicted in Figure
2-22 (Proposed Critical Habitat Designation for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher) and as
described in the Federal Register notice, the following proposed critical habitat unit is located in
221 Bonterra Consulting, Review of Biological Resources on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site in the City
of Diamond Bar, California, April 21, 2006.
231 Critical habitat affects federal agencies by requiring them to evaluate the effects that any activities they
fund, authorize, or carry out may have on listed species. Agencies are required to ensure that such activities are not
likely to jeopardize the survival of a listed species or adversely modify its critical habitat. Designation of critical does
not constitute a land management plan nor does it signal any intent of the government to acquire or control the land.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-15
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
proximity to the project site: "Unit 9: East Los Angeles County. Unit 9 encompasses
approximately 9,410 hectare (22,595 acres) within the Montebello Hills, Puente -Chino -Hills, and
East and West Coyote Hills areas. Core populations are known from the Montebello Hills, south
slopes of the Puente -Chino Hills from Whittier east to Yorba Linda, and the East and West
Coyote Hills. The Brea Canyon Landfill is not proposed as critical habitat, but it represents a
significant potential restoration area to support these remaining populations. The unit also
provides the primary connectivity between core gnatcatcher populations and sage scrub habitat
within the Central -Coastal Subregions of the Orange County NCCP (Unit 7), the Western
Riverside County MSHCP (Unit 10), and the Bonelli Regional Park core population within the
East Los Angeles (Unit 12)."
LOS ANGELES
COUNTY r
1
Figure 3-2
r PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION
FOR THE COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER
Source: United States Fish and Wildlife Service
The project site is located about 0.9 miles north of the proposed critical habitat for the coastal
California gnatcatcher. That there exists no substantial urban development between the
proposed critical habitat area and the project site that would prevent or otherwise impede
dispersal and foraging opportunities extending northward toward the subject property. There is,
however, no evidence that any such dispersal or foraging does occur.
3.2.5 Cultural Resources
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on a
specific policy in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on "cultural
resources" could be mitigated to below a level of significance. Based, in part, on the findings of
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-16 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum concluded that program -level impacts on
"cultural resources" were "determined to be mitigable to fess -than -significant levels.n24
As indicated in "Cultural Resource Survey Report" (Louis James Tartaglia, Ph.D., October 30,
2002), which examined the potential for the presence of cultural resources on the project site,
"[n]o known buried cultural resources have been documented for the project property.
Therefore, clearance for cultural resources for the entire project area is hereby given."25 A copy
of that report is on file with the City's Community and Development Services Department.
Based on the absence of cultural resources, the City has concluded that this environmental
issue is not germane to an assessment of the proposed project and has discontinued further
discussion or analysis of potential project -related impacts on historic or prehistoric resources.
3.2.6 Geology and Soils
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
policies presented in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on "earth
resources and seismicity" could be effectively mitigated to below a level of significance. In
addition, based, in part, on the findings of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum
concluded that program -level impacts on "earth resources and seismicity" were "determined to
be mitigable to less -than -significant levels.i26
The 1995 General Plan includes a number of policies that address, either directly or indirectly,
geology and soils that may be applicable at the project level. Relevant policies include, but may
not be limited to, the following:
Minimize the potential for loss of life, physical injury, and property damage from seismic
groundshaking and other geologic hazards (Objective 1.1, Public Health and Safety
Element); and
As required by the Uniform Building Code, require site-specific geotechnical
investigation be performed to determine appropriate design parameters for construction
of public and private facilities in order to minimize the effects of any geologic and seismic
hazard on such development (Strategy 1.1.2, Public Health and Safety Element).
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
Prompted by damaging earthquakes in 1990, the State Legislature passed the Seismic Hazards
Mapping Act (SHMA), codified in Division 2, Chapter 7.8 of the PRC, which became operative
on April 1, 1991. The SHMA was adopted for the purpose of protecting the public from the
effects of strong ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides or other ground failure, and other
hazards caused by earthquakes. As required therein, the California Department of
Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (DMG)27 was directed to delineate the various
"seismic hazard zones" located throughout the State. Under the SHMA, the State Mining and
24/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083, P. 4.
25 26/ Tartaglia, Louis James Ph.D., Cultural Resource Survey Report, October 30, 2002, p. 22.
/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083, p. 4.
27/ Now renamed the California Geological Survey (CGS).
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-17
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Geology Board (SMGB) was further charged with the mandate to prepare additional regulations,
policies, and criteria, to guide cities and counties in their implementation of the law.
The SMGB's "Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special
Publication No. 117n28 provides guidelines for evaluating and mitigating seismic hazards, other
than surface fault rupture, and for recommending mitigation measures as required under
Section 2695(a) of the PRC. As defined in Section 2693(c) of the PRC, "mitigation" means
those measures that are consistent with established practice and that will reduce seismic risk to
acceptable levels." As further defined in Section 3721(a) therein, "acceptable level" means that
level that provides reasonable protection of the public safety, though it does not necessarily
ensure continued structural integrity and functionality of the project."
The project site is located in the southern portion of Section 29, Township 2 South, Range 9
West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, as shown on the United States Geological Survey
(USGS) 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle. The USGS 7.5 -minute maps are
generally at a scale of 1:24,000 -scale quadrangle series. The area portrayed on each sheet
ranges from 64 square miles at Latitude 300 North to 49 square miles at Latitude 490 North.
The applicable section of the State map, as prepared by the California Department of
Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, is presented in Figure 3-3 (Official State Seismic
Hazard Zone Map - Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle).
As illustrated therein, portions of the project site contain the following "zones of required
investigation": (1) Liquefaction — Areas where historical occurrence of liquefaction, or local
geological, geotechnical and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground
displacements such that mitigation, as defined in Section 2693(c) of the PRC, would be
required; and (2) Earthquake -Induced Landslides — Areas where previous occurrence of
landslide movement or local topographic, geological, geotechnical and subsurface water
conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacement such that mitigation, as
defined in Section 2693(c) of the PRC, would be required. As defined in Section 2693(c) of the
PRC: "'Mitigation' means those measures that are consistent with established practice and that
will reduce seismic risk to acceptable levels. -
As stipulated in Section 3724 (Specific Criteria for Project Approval) of the PRC: "(a) A project
shall be approved only when the nature and severity of the seismic hazards at the site have
been evaluated in a geotechnical report and appropriate mitigation measures have been
proposed. (b) The geotechnical report shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer or
certified engineering geologist, having competence in the field of seismic hazard evaluation and
mitigation. The geotechnical report shall contain site-specific evaluations of the seismic hazard
affecting the project, and shall identify portions of the project site containing seismic hazards.
The report shall also identify any known off-site seismic hazards that could adversely affect the
site in the event of an earthquake." As authorized in Section 3725 (Waivers of Geotechnical
Report Requirements), under certain conditions, the lead agency may determine that the
geological and geotechnical conditions at the site are such that public safety is adequately
protected and no mitigation is required.
In addition to the required mapping, DMG has prepared a seismic hazard zone report for the
Yorba Linda quadrangles. That report summarizes the methods and sources used to prepare
the corresponding seismic hazard zone map. As indicated in the "Seismic Hazard Zone Report
28/ State Mining and Geology Board, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California,
Special Publication No. 117, March 13, 1997.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-18 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
010: Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Yorba Linda 7.5 -Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles and
Orange Counties, California" (California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and
Geology, 1997 [Revised 2001]): "The northern two-thirds of the quadrangle is made up of the
Puente and Chino Hills, which are crossed by Brea, Tonner, Carbon and Telegraph canyons.
Within Los Angeles County, most of Diamond Bar and a small part of the City of Industry occur
in the northern corner of the quadrangle ... In the Yorba Linda Quadrangle the liquefaction zone
is restricted to the bottoms of canyons and the alleviated lowlands in the northwestern corner.
The occurrence of landslide -prone rocks, manifested by widespread and abundant landslides in
the hilly areas, especially in the Chino Hills, contributes to an earthquake -induced landslide
zone that covers about 34 percent (14,700) acres [sic] of the quadrangle."29
The generalized geology of that portion of the Yorba Linda quadrangle that includes the project
site is presented in Fiqure 3-4 (Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 30' x 60'
Quadrangle) and Figure 3-5 (Quaternary Geology of a Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda
Quadrangle). As illustrated, the lower portions of the project site are comprised of younger
Quaternary alluvium (Map Symbol Qya) while the remainder of the site is comprised of Tertiary
sedimentary rock (Map Symbol Ts). The DMG report notes: "Boreholes drilled in the Diamond
Bar area penetrate alluvium deposited on floor of Brea Canyon. These near -surface sediments
are described as being composed mainly of clayey silt, silty fine-grained sand, fine- to medium -
grained sand, and gravely sand, generally loose to moderately dense, '30
DMG geologists compiled the existing landslides in the Yorba Linda quadrangle from published
regional landslide maps, field observations, analysis of aerial photographs, and interpretation of
landforms on current and older topographic maps. That portion of the landslide inventory map
that encompasses the project site is presented in figure 3-6 (Landslide Inventory within a
Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Quadrangle).
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (APEFZA), formally called the Alquist-Priolo
Special Studies Zone Act, codified in Section 2621 et seq. in Chapter 7.5 of Division 2 of the
PRC, was adopted to "provide policies and criteria to assist cities, counties, and State agencies
in the exercise of their responsibilities to prohibit the location of developments and structures for
human occupancy across the trace of active faults.i31 An "active fault" is defined as one along
which surface displacement has occurred within Holocene time (during the past 11,000 years).
The purpose of the APEFZA is to regulate land development near active faults in an effort to
mitigate the hazard of surface fault rupture. The law requires the State Geologist to establish
regulatory zones, known as "earthquake fault zones,"32 around the surface traces of active faults
and to issue appropriate maps. The maps are then distributed to all affected cities, counties,
and State agencies for use in planning and controlling development activities. Under the
29/ California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Seismic Hazard Zone Report
010: Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Yorba Linda 7.5 -Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles and Orange Counties,
California, 1997 (Revised 2001), p. vii.
30/ Ibid., pp. 7-8.
31/
32Section 2621.5(a), Chapter 7.5, Division 2, PRC.
/ "Earthquake fault zones" are regulatory zones that encompass surface traces of active faults that have a
potential for future surface rupture. Areas that are so designated contain active faults that may pose a risk of surface
rupture to existing or future structures. If a property is undeveloped, a fault study may be required before the parcel
can be subdivided or before most structures can be permitted. If a property is developed, the APEFZA requires that
all real estate transactions within the "earthquake fault zone" must contain a disclosure of those potential hazards by
the seller to prospective buyers.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-19
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
APEFZA, local agencies must regulate activities within those zones, as defined by an
appropriate setback from the fault trace.
Pursuant to Section 2623 of the PRC, "cities and counties shall require, prior to the approval of
a project, a geologic report defining and delineating any hazard of surface fault rupture. If the
city or county finds that no undue hazard of that kind exists, the geologic report on the hazard
may be waived, with the approval of the State Geologist." The geologic report required under
the APEFZA must meet the criteria and policies established by the SMGB, as codified in
Sections 3600-3603, Article 3, Title 14, CCR. The applicable APEFZA map is presented in
Figure 3-7 (Official Map: Special Studies Zones — Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda
Topographic Quadrangle). As illustrated therein, the nearest earthquake fault zone is located
south of the project site and is associated with the Whittier fault zone, located about 1.25 miles
south of the project site.
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004 submission, the Applicant submitted and the City reviewed
a number of geotechnical reports, include: (1) "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and
Engineering Geology Investigation — Proposed Residential Development, Southern End of
Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, California, APN #8714028003" (Geo Environ Engineering
Consultants, Inc., February 15, 2003); (2) "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated
September 17, 2004 by Leighton and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of
Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoils Consultants, Inc., September 26,
2005); and (3) "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated January 10, 2006 by Leighton
and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond
Bar, California" (GeoSoils Consultants, Inc., February 3, 2006). Copies of those reports are on
file with the Department. A copy of the project geologic map is presented in Figure 3-8 (Project
Geologic Map). The following information is extracted, in part, from those site-specific analyses.
Geologic Conditions. The project site is located in the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic
Province which extends southeasterly from the San Gabriel Mountains into Baja
California, Mexico. The major geologic formations in the region include alluvium at the
valley floors and sedimentary bedrock in the mountain terrain. Major earthquake faults
include, but are not limited to, the nearby Whittier, Sierra Madre, and Cucamonga
systems. Geology of the site consists of four basic units: sedimentary bedrock, landslide
debris, colluvium, and fill. The bedrock is assigned to the La Vida member of the Puente
Formation and consists mainly of firm, gray and brown, shale with siltstone, and fine to
medium grained sandstone beds. The associated strata are highly folded/faulted and
have dips of 5-45 degrees towards a variety of directions.
Geology on the project site consists of four basic units: sedimentary rock, landslide
debris, colluvium, and fill. Landslide masses involve three areas of about 1 to 2 acres
each that are located in the northeasterly, southwesterly and southeasterly sides of the
site. The related debris is present as major wedges of about 10 to 40 feet in depth and
same consists mainly of medium firm, gray and brown, clayey fine to medium grained (f-
m) sand and f -m sandy silt with abundant rock fragments -boulders and caliche.33
33/ Op. Cit., Interim Engineering Geologic Review, Proposed Residential Tract, Southern End of Crooked
Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Calif., Project No. 3375, p. 2.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-20 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-23
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Usting landslides
i Shear test sample location
Figure 3-6
LANDSLIDE INVENTORY
WITHIN A PORTION OF THE
7.5 -MINUTE YORBA LINDA QUADRANGLE
Source: California Department of Conservation
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-24 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Bedrock conditions favorable to gross stability occupy about 40 percent of the site
whereas areas of gross instability with respect to massive grading as related to the
presence of landslide masses and adversely folded bedrock strata occupy the other
about 60 percent.34
Groundwater. Groundwater seepage was encountered at depths of 20-30 at the test
boring in the alluvium section of the project site.35
3.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
Policies presented in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on
"hazardous materials" could be effectively mitigated to below a level of significance. In addition,
based, in part, on the findings of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum concluded
that program -level impacts on "hazardous materials" were "determined to be mitigable to less -
than -significant levels. 06 Although the 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that
relate, either directly or indirectly, to "hazards and hazardous materials," none of those policies
appear applicable at the project -specific level.
In recognition of the potential hazards to underground pipelines associated with grading and
associated earthmoving activities, the State has imposed certain requirements regarding
excavation activities in proximity to underground infrastructure.37 As required under Section
4216.2(a) of the CGC: "Except in an emergency, every person planning to conduct any
excavation shall contact the appropriate regional notification center, at least two working days,
but not more than 14 calendar days, prior to commencing that excavation, if the excavation will
be conducted in an area which is known, or reasonably should be known, to contain subsurface
installations other than the underground facilities owned or operated by the excavator and, e
practical, the excavator shall delineate with white paint or other suitable markings the area n i
excavated." As further indicated in Section 4216.9(a) of the CGC: "No permit to excavate
issued by any local agency, as defined in Section 4216, or any state agency, shall be valid
unless the applicant has been provided an initial inquiry identification number by a regional
notification center pursuant to Section 4216.2. 38
As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004 submission, the Applicant submitted and the City reviewed
a Phase I environmental site assessment (ESA). The ESA was conducted to determine "the
Potential for the presence of petroleum products (e.g., oils) and/or hazardous materials on the
site or that have migrated on site from adjacent properties. The investigation included a site
inspection, adjacent property exterior inspection, interviews with City of Los Angeles Building
Department and Los Angeles County Health Department, California State officials, and a review
of appropriate Federal, State, County, and City historical and environmental records. '39 The
Phase I ESA concluded that no above ground storage tanks containing either petroleum
3'l Ibid., p. 3.
3sI Ibid., p. 2.
36/ Op Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083, p. 4.
38/ Chapter 3.1 (Protection of Underground Infrastructure), Article 3, Sections 4215-4216.9, CGC.
/ As defined in Section 4216(h) of the CGC, a "regional notification center' is defined to mean "a nonprofit
association or other organization of operators of subsurface installations which provides advance warning of
excavations or other work close to existing subsurface installations, for the purpose of protecting those installations
from damage, removal, relocation, or repair."
Drive, Diamond eBar, Los Angeles Co nryrCalifornia, May 10, 2004 ental Site Assessmentp' Property at Southern End of Crooked Creek
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-27
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
products or liquid hazardous chemical and no underground storage tanks containing petroleum
products and liquid hazardous chemical existed on the project site. The study found three sites
listed by the Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Information System (LUST) and three
underground storage tanks (USTs) were identified within Y2 mile of the subject property.4o
3.2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
policies presented in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on
"drainage and flood control" could be effectively mitigated to below a level of significance. In
addition, based, in part, on the findings of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum
concluded that program -level impacts on "drainage and flood control" were "determined to be
mitigable to less -than -significant levels."41
The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that address, either directly or indirectly,
hydrology and water quality and that may be applicable to the proposed project. Those policies
include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
■ Minimize the potential for loss of life, physical injury, property damage, public health
hazards, and nuisances from the effects of a 100 -year storm and associated flooding
(Objective 1.2, Public Health and Safety Element);
■ Where applicable, as a prerequisite to new development or the in
of existing
development, ensure that a drainage study has been completed by a qualified engineer,
certifying that the proposed development will be adequately protected, and that
implementation of the development proposal will not create new downstream flood
hazards (Strategy 1.2.1, Public Health and Safety Element); and
■ Require development to meet the requirements of the County's urban stormwater
discharge permit (Strategy 1.8.3, Public Health and Safety Element).
As indicated in the MEA, the stream located directly west of the project site is identified as "Brea
Canyon Creek.n42 As further indicated therein: "The Los Angeles County Department of Public
Works indicates no major maintenance problems for this channel other than periodic cleaning
and desilting in the unincorporated portions south of the City." Directly south of the subject
property, through the Tonner Canyon area, the MEA identifies the need for "[i]mprovements to
Brea Canyon Channel, connecting Public Drain 493 and 418 upstream with private facilities
downstream.'.43
Water Quality Control Plan — Los Angeles Region
Responsibility for protecting the State's water quality rests with the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) and its nine regional water quality control boards (RWQCBs). The
SWRCB was established by the 1967 California Legislature to administer the State's water
quality and water rights functions. In addition to administering water rights programs, the
SWRCB, together with the RWQCBs, enforce pollution control standards to protect the State's
rivers, lakes, groundwater basins, and shoreline. The SWRCB addresses water rights issues,
40/ Ibid., pp. 3-4.
41/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083, p. 4-
42/ City of Diamond Bar, 1992 Master Environmental Assessment - City of Diamond Bar, July 14, 1992,
Figure II -C-1 (Drainage Basins).
43/ Ibid., p. II -C-9.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-28 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
sets Statewide policies, and develops regulations for the implementation of those water quality
control programs mandated by federal and State statutes and regulations. Individual regional
boards develop and implement water quality control plans that consider beneficial uses, water
quality characteristics, and water quality problems. The project site is located within the
jurisdiction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (LARWQCB).
The LARWQCB's 1994 "Water Quality Control Plan — Los Angeles Region" (Basin Plan)` is
designed to preserve and enhance water quality and protect the beneficial uses of the regional
waters. The Basin Plan: (1) designates beneficial uses for surface and groundwaters; (2) sets
narrative and numerical water quality objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect
the designated beneficial uses and conform to the State's anti -degradation policy; and (3)
describes implementation programs to protect all waters in the region.
For planning purposes, as illustrated in Figure 3-9 (Hydrologic Units with Areas and Subareas),
the LARWQCB further divides the regions surface waters into hydrologic units, hydrologic areas
(HA), and hydrologic subareas (HSA). The project site is located within the Los Angeles —San
Gabriel Hydrologic Unit, the Anaheim Hydrologic Area (405.60), and the La Habra Hydrologic
Subarea (405.62), all part of the San Gabriel River watershed. As described in the Basin Plan:
"The San Gabriel River watershed, totaling more than 136,000 acres, has extensive areas of
undisturbed riparian and woodland habitats."as
As indicated in the Basin Plan, generalized surface water problems evident throughout the
region include: (1) poor mineral quality in some areas; (2) bio -accumulation of toxic compounds
in fish and other aquatic life; (3) impacts from increased development and recreational uses; (4)
in -stream toxicity from point and non -point sources; (5) diversion of flows necessary for the
propagation of fish and wildlife populations; (6) channelization, dredging, and other losses of
habitat; (7) impacts from transient camps located along creeks and lagoons; (8) illegal dumping;
(9) introduction of non-native plants of little value to the biota and clog streams; (10) impacts
from sand and gravel mining operations; (11) natural oil seeps; and (12) eutrophication and the
accumulation of toxic pollutants in surface waters.as
Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires the State to identify surface
waters that do not meet applicable water quality standards with certain technology-based
controls. The list of waters identified under Section 303(d) must include a description of the
pollutants causing impairment and a priority ranking for purposes of development of total
maximum daily loads (TMDLs). Section 303(d) listed waters represent those waters for which
effluent limitations are not sufficient to meet water quality standards. TMDL is a number that
represents the assimilative capacity of water for a particular pollutant or the amount of a
particular pollutant that water can receive without impact to its beneficial uses.
Various reaches of the San Gabriel River are on the Section 303(d) list due to nitrogen and its
effects, trash, PCBs and pesticides, metals, and coliform.
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works
The Los Angeles basin is periodically subject to devastating floods resulting in substantial
property damage. Such damage is intensified by debris flows resulting from the destruction of
44/ California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, Water Quality Control Plan — Los
Angeles Region, adopted June 13, 1994.
4s/ Op. Cit., Los Angeles Region, Water Quality Control Plan — Los Angeles Region, p. 1-16.
J lbid., p. 1-1 9.
city of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-29
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
the watershed by major brush fires. In recognition of and in response to those conditions, the
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) manages and maintains County
flood control facilities within the major rivers and channels throughout the County.
The LACDPW's Flood Control Division is responsible for operating and maintaining major flood
control facilities located throughout the County for which the County has accepted responsibility.
The Flood Control Division only maintains those flood control facilities that are part of the
County -maintained flood control system and provides no review, management, or on-going
maintenance of private facilities. The LACDPW's "Hydrology Manual" establishes the County's
hydrologic design procedures and policies on levels of flood protection_ On January 31, 2005,
the County adopted the LACDPW's "Interim Peak Flow Standard,s47 applicable to "discretionary
priority projects" (e.g., housing developments of 20 or more units) located in areas tributary to
the San Gabriel River and certain other areas. Under those standards, the County stipulates
that all post -development runoff from a 2 -year, 24-hour storm and 50 -year capital storm shall
not exceed the pre -development peak -flow rate. These interim standards are intended to
protect against increased streambed erosion resulting from post -development increases in peak
flows and flow durations and changes in the riparian habitat resulting from increases in the low
flows and flow durations from development.
"/ County of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Interim Peak Flow Runoff Criteria for New
Development, January 31, 2005, as contained in correspondence from Donald L. Wolfe, Acting Direct of Public
Works to Jonathon Bishop, Executive Officer, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-30 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Under the provisions of the County's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permit (NPDES No. CAS004001), as issued by the LARWQCB on December 13, 2001, the
Flood Control Division is designated as the Principal Permittee and the cities within the County
are designated as Co -Permittees. The Principal Permittee coordinates and facilitates activities
necessary to comply with permit requirements but is not responsible for ensuring compliance by
any of the Co -Permittees.
Under the provisions of the County's NPDES Permit, the following specific requirements have
been established for single-family hillside homes designed to reduce the impact of development
on natural areas: (1) conserve natural areas; (2) protect slopes and channels; (3) provide storm
drain system stenciling and signage; (4) divert roof runoff to vegetated areas before discharging
unless the diversion would result in slope instability; and (5) direct surface flow to vegetated
areas before discharge unless the diversion would result in slope instability.48 Those categories
of projects identified in the NPDES Permit as requiring Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation
Plans (SUSMPs) (e.g., 10+ home subdivisions) are required to submit, for County review, a
drainage concept and stormwater quality plan. Details of facilities and measures identified by the
project proponent to mitigate impacts on water quality are to be shown on improvement plans and
reviewed as part of those plans.as
Two of the most important requirements of the SUSMP are the specific treatment and design
sizing criteria for Best Management Practices (BMPs). These criteria require that developments
shall contain BMPs to infiltrate or treat the storm water runoff (volume or flow rate) generated
from 0.75 inches of rainfall over 24 hours (determined to represent the 85`h percentile of storm in
Los Angeles County). The SUSMP also includes the following eight general requirements: (1)
maintain pre -development peak storm water runoff discharge flows where increases in flows or
rates will result in increased potential for downstream erosion; (2) conserve natural areas; (3)
minimize storm water pollutants of concern; (4) protect slopes and channels; (5) provide storm
drain system stenciling and signage; (6) properly design outdoor material storage areas; (7)
properly design trash storage areas; and (8) provide proof of ongoing BMP maintenance.
Federal Emergency Management Agency
The Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA)50 flood insurance rate maps (FIRM)
identify those areas„ located within the 100 -year flood boundary, which are termed "Special
Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). A 100 -year flood does not refer to a flood that occurs once
every 100 years but referstoa flood level with a one percent chance of being equaled or
exceeded in any given year. The SFHAs are subdivided into insurance risk rate zones. Areas
between the 100 and 500 -year flood boundaries are termed "moderate flood hazard areas."
Areas located outside the 500 -year flood boundary, are termed "minimal flood hazard areas."
48/ Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Development Planning for Storm Water Management:
A Manual for the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan, September 2002, pp. 1-4, 2-2, and 3-11.
49/ Ibid., p. 2-1.
50/ On March 1, 2003, FEMA became part of the United States Department of Homeland Security.
51/ As defined in the Standard Flood Insurance Policy, "flood" is defined as "la] general and temporary
condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from overflow of inland or tidal waters or from
the unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source."
52/ Floods are described in terms of probability, as expressed in percentage rather than in terms of return
period (recurrence interval). Return period (the N -year flood) and probability (p) are reciprocals, that is, p = 1/N. A
flood having a 50 -year return frequency (Q50) is commonly expressed as a flood with the probability of recurrence of
0.02 (2 percent chance of being exceeded) in any given year.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-31
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
As illustrated in Figure 3-10 (Portion of FEMA FIRM No. 065043098013), the project site is
located in "Zone C" (No Shading). The subject property is not located within an area subject to
either 100 -year or 500 -year flood inundation. Areas designated as "Zone C" (minimal flooding)
do not have known flood hazards.
Figure 3-10
PORTION OF FEMA FIRM NO. 06504309808
Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Soil -Slip Susceptibility Maps
As indicated by the USGS, debris flows (commonly referred to as mudslides or mudflow) are a
common and widespread phenomenon during periods of intense winter rainfall in southern
California. These debris flows originate as small, shallow landslides, commonly referred to as
soil slips. Unlike "bedrock" or "deep-seated" landslides that are generally recognizable for long
periods of time, soil slip -debris flow scars quickly "absorb" into the ambient physiography
leaving little, if any, record of their prior existence. ss Soil slips pose relatively little hazard at the
site of the initial failure but the debris flow can be a serious hazard to people and structures in
its path. Slope has long been recognized as a critical factor in generating soil slip.
The USGS, working in cooperation with the California Geological Survey, has prepared soil -slip
susceptibility maps encompassing the Santa Ana 30' x 60' Quadrangle, representing a
531 Morton, D.M., Alvarez, R.M., and Campbell, R.H., Preliminary Soil -Slip Susceptibility Maps, Southwestern
Califomia Open -File Report 03-17, United States Geological Survey, 2003, pp. 3-4.
�4i Ibid., p.7.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-32 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
unnr aun suwu scar
j PROJECT SITE
FIRM
Itm m E lun MAP
to
us VWA= 09'1'A'.
RINCOLNSR
GRANT /�L�A
LAND GRANTMWI 4
i
GYiFI11rdJ'
tin B
aZEY=/Yt L r�if
ar.ra,..Qa,m
v.J�i71.7 s „4�" -` 1 2 S
�yJ^� p
T2
0'5,
Figure 3-10
PORTION OF FEMA FIRM NO. 06504309808
Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Soil -Slip Susceptibility Maps
As indicated by the USGS, debris flows (commonly referred to as mudslides or mudflow) are a
common and widespread phenomenon during periods of intense winter rainfall in southern
California. These debris flows originate as small, shallow landslides, commonly referred to as
soil slips. Unlike "bedrock" or "deep-seated" landslides that are generally recognizable for long
periods of time, soil slip -debris flow scars quickly "absorb" into the ambient physiography
leaving little, if any, record of their prior existence. ss Soil slips pose relatively little hazard at the
site of the initial failure but the debris flow can be a serious hazard to people and structures in
its path. Slope has long been recognized as a critical factor in generating soil slip.
The USGS, working in cooperation with the California Geological Survey, has prepared soil -slip
susceptibility maps encompassing the Santa Ana 30' x 60' Quadrangle, representing a
531 Morton, D.M., Alvarez, R.M., and Campbell, R.H., Preliminary Soil -Slip Susceptibility Maps, Southwestern
Califomia Open -File Report 03-17, United States Geological Survey, 2003, pp. 3-4.
�4i Ibid., p.7.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-32 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 -
preliminary regional assessment of the relative susceptibility for initiating soil slip -debris flows
during periods of intense winter rains. The maps depict only the points of origin of soil slips and
do not address the subsequent coarse of a debris flow or the distance a debris flow would
travel. As intended by the USGS, "the map may help identify locations where the relative
potential for hazard is greater. ,55 As illustrated in Fiqure 3-11 (Soil -Slip Susceptibility Map), a
portion of the project site is identified as contained a "moderate susceptibility" soil -slip potential.
Hydrology Study
As illustrated in Figure 3-12 (Yorba Linda Quadrangle 50 -Year 24 -Hour Rainfall Distribution
Map), as extracted from the County Sedimentation Manual, the project site is depicted as being
located generally within the vicinity of a maximum 8.0 -inch 50 -year, 24-hour isohyetal line.56 As
further depicted therein, the site's debris production area (DPA) is classified as "NA" and the
site's soil classification is described as "Altamont Clay Loam" (002).
The Applicant submitted and the City reviewed a site-specific hydrology study, entitled "V.T.T.
54081 Existing and Proposed Hydrology" (Gary M. Gantney, November 4, 2002). Additional
information concerning the project setting is presented therein.
3.2.9 Land Use and Planning
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the implementing resolution, the
1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following significant land use impact could not be
mitigated: "Potential alternation of open space and agricultural lands within the City."57 The
1995 Addendum further indicated: "In addition to the mitigation measures identified in the Final
EIR, some new strategies relevant to land use have been included in the 1995 General Plan.i58
The implementing resolution stated that "[a]lthough the City Council found in Resolution 9243
that the impacts from implementation of the 1992 General Plan on biological resources,
circulation/transportation, air quality, acoustical environment, land use, and public services and
facilities may be unavoidable adverse impacts, the City Council now finds, based on the Final
Environmental Impact Report and the Addendum," air quality impacts would remain significant.59
The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that address, either directly or indirectly,
land use. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
• Maintain the integrity of residential neighborhoods by discouraging through traffic and
preventing the creation of new major roadway connections through existing residential
neighborhoods (Strategy 1.2.2, Land Use Element);
"I /bid., p. 11.
56/ Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Sedimentation Manual, Hydraulic/ Water Conservation
Division, June 1993, Appendix A.
57/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the
Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of
Overriding Considerations), p. 5.
/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083,p.12.
59/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating
Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental
Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), Exhibit A, pp. 3-4.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-33
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
■ Maintain residential areas which protect natural resources, hillsides, and scenic areas.
(a) Development in hillside areas should be designed to be compatible with surrounding
natural areas, compatible to the extent practical with surrounding development,
aesthetically pleasing, and provide views from development, but not at the expense of
views of the development. (b) Earthwork in hillside areas should utilize contour or
landform grading. (c) Minimize grading to retain natural vegetation and topography
(Strategy 1.2.3, Land Use Element);
• Maintain residential areas which provide for ownership of single family housing and
require that new development be compatible with the prevailing character of the
surrounding neighborhood (Strategy 1.2.4, Land Use Element);
■ To preserve significant environmental resources within proposed developments, allow
clustering or transferring of all or part of the development potential of the entire site to a
portion of the site, thus preserving the resources as open space, and mandating the
dedication of those resources to the City or a conservancy (Strategy 1.5.6, Land Use
Element); and
■ Encourage clustering within the most developable portions of project sites to preserve
open space and/or other natural resources. Such development should be located to
coordinate with long-term plans for active parks, passive (open space) parks, and
preserve natural open space areas (Strategy 1.6.4, Land Use Element).
As indicated on the City's "Land Use Map," the project site is designated "RL Low Density
Residential (Max. 3 DU/Acre)." As further indicated in the City's Zoning Map, the approximately
12.9 -acre project site is zoned "R-1 20,000." As indicated in Note 1 in Table 2-4 (Residential
District General Development Standards) in Section 22.08.040 (Residential Zoning District
General Development Standards) in Chapter 22.08 (Residential Zoning Districts) of the
Municipal Code, "projects may be subdivided with smaller parcel sizes for ownership purposes,
with the minimum lot area requirement determined through the subdivision review process,
provided that the overall development site complies with the lot area requirements of this
chapter." As described in Section 22.08.020 (Purposes of Residential Zoning Districts) in the
Municipal Code: "The maximum allowed density for new residential subdivisions within this
zoning district will be three dwellings per gross acre. The RL zoning district is consistent with the
low density residential land use category of the general plan."
3.2.10 Mineral Resources
As indicated in the MEA, all lands within the City are categorized as MRZ-1 (Areas where
adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is
judged that little likelihood exists for their presence) and MRZ-3 (These areas incorporate land
containing mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data),
as defined by the California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology. As
further indicated therein: "The only areas that could contain significant aggregate resources
(MRZ-3) would be within the Soquel member of the Puente Formation" and "siltstones of the
Puente Formation are generally unsuitable for use as aggregate 60
The site's bedrock is assigned to the La Vida member of the Puente Formation, consisting
mainly of firm, gray and brown, shale with siltstone and fine -medium sandstone beds.61 As
such, no significant mineral deposits exist on the project site.
60/ Op. Cif., Master Environmental Assessment - City of Diamond Bar, p. II -B-17.
61/ Geo Environ Engineering Consultants, Inc., Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering
Geology Investigation — Proposed Residential Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar,
California, APN #8714028003, p. 8.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-34 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
4
m
'WW2 00
090 i
)\ DPA -7 ��O
v 002 '/
017 ,! f
2
002 ooz >:v/i.r1 J
090 � 1 .-
l%_
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
17
I
/i 090
1 �
002 J,
002
090
1'%a 1)
co
ON
1 f�
090
\ ; L 002
1 1 090
002 J.
„' � 1'� Ol6
{
... 1 4
Ot. / j
J
l
x 017 r l
"-. Ao2\ �� .-moi•` �. AJ Lt�J
f �'
/'/"t i 1'
Lr�
�7
Ow
�,�SK
016 �'� -. /.`�
'7Y^- 016
013. 3 ;'. !''i�•J
N f��
-.
yi1fp 012 , - % _ A,
- -, ---r, f,:' ��
iid13�/1
)� - ` 012
(r�
Fr
` �� , f c
002
Figure 3-12
YORBA LINDA QUADRANGLE 50 -YEAR 24-HOUR
RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION MAP
Source: Los Angeles county Department of Public Works
NOT TO
SCALE
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-36 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Since the project site does not contain commercial -grade soils materials, the City has
determined that this topical issue is not germane to the proposed project and has discontinued
further analysis of potential project -related impacts on local or regional mineral resources.
3.2.11 Noise
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the implementing resolution, the
1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following programmatic impacts on the "acoustical
environment" could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "(a) Short-term acoustical
impacts during grading, infrastructure installation and building construction. (b) Long-term
acoustical impacts occurring from increased traffic and urban activities. ,62
As indicated in the 1995 Addendum: "In addition to the mitigation measures identified in the
Final EIR, some new strategies relevant to the acoustical environment have been included in
the 1995 General Plan" and "will further reduce impacts on the acoustic environment as
identified in the General Plan Final EIR."63 As indicated in the implementing resolution,
"[a)Ithough the City Council found in Resolution 9243 that the impacts from implementation of
the 1992 General Plan on biological resources, circulation/transportation, air quality, acoustical
environment, land use, and public services and facilities may be unavoidable adverse impacts,
the City Council now finds, based on the Final Environmental Impact Report and the
Addendum" that only air quality impacts would remain significant .64
The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that address, either directly or indirectly,
noise and that may be applicable to the proposed project. Those policies include, but are not
necessarily limited to, the following:
• Consider noise issues in land use planning and development permit processing to
require that noise generated by one use or facility does not adversely affect adjacent
uses or facilities (Objective 1.10, Public Health and Safety Element);
• Within identified 65 dB CNEL noise contours, require that site-specific noise studies be
prepared to verify site-specific noise conditions and to ensure that noise considerations
are included in project review (Strategy 1.10.1, Public Health and Safety Element);
• Within identified 65 dB CNEL noise corridors, ensure that necessary reduction measures
are applied to meet adopted interior and exterior noise standards (Strategy 1.10.2,
Public Health and Safety Element);
• Through the CEQA process, analyze new projects which might have a significant impact
on noise sensitive land uses (projects are defined as actions having the potential to
unreasonably increase projected CNEL noise levels). Require demonstrated empirical
mitigation measures to ensure that adopted noise standards within sensitive land use
areas are not exceeded as the result of the proposed project. Mitigation measures shall
be verified by field measurements after construction. Prior to occupancy, if the required
62/ Op. Cit., Resolution 9243 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the
Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of
Overriding Considerations), p. 5.
/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083, pp. 10-11.
64/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating
Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental
Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), Exhibit A, pp. 3-4.
Cit f
Y o Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-37
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
level of mitigation is not achieved, further corrective action will be required (Strategy
1.10.5, Public Health and Safety Element); and
• Apply mitigation measures as needed to noise generators and receptors to ensure that
adopted noise standards are met and to protect land uses from excessive noise impacts
(Strategy 1.10.9, Public Health and Safety Element).
As indicated in Section 22.28.070 (Noise Zones Designated) in Chapter 22.28 (Noise Control) of
the Municipal Code, all residential properties within the City are designated to be within "Noise
Zone II." In accordance with the provisions of Section 22.28.080 (Exterior Noise Standards)
therein, the exterior noise level standard within this zone is 45 decibels (dB) between the hours
of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM and 50 dB between the hours of 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM.
As illustrated in the 1995 General Plan (Figure IV -4: Projected Future Noise Contours), the
western portion of the project site is located within the 65 dB CNEL contour. As further
indicated therein (Table IVA : Noise Standards), single-family residential projects located within
areas subject to noise levels within the 60-65 dB CNEL range are considered to be
"conditionally acceptable" (i.e., New construction or development should be undertaken only
after a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation
features included in the design). Single-family residential projects located within area subject to
noise levels within the 65-75 dB CNEL range are considered "normally unacceptable" (i.e., New
construction or development should generally be discourages; if new construction or
development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made
and needed noise insulation features included in the design.65 As indicated in Strategy 1.10.1,
as found in the Public Health and Safety Element of the 1995 General Plan, a site-specific noise
study should be prepared for the proposed project.
The current noise environment within the general project area is dominated by traffic -generated
noise along the SR -57 Freeway. In order to characterize on-site noise levels, field
measurements were taken at three locations (i.e., northernmost portion of the site near the
terminus of Crooked Creek Drive; approximately 100 feet to the south, southernmost portion of
the site where the proposed cul-de-sac will be located) on an unspecified weekday date for
unspecified durations. Occasionally, measurements peaked above the 61 dBA sound level. No
readings above 65 dBA were recorded during the field measurements.56
3.2.12 Population and Housing
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
policies presented in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on
`socioeconomics (housing) could be effectively mitigated to below a level of significance. In
addition, based, in part, on the findings of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum
concluded that program -level impacts on "socioeconomics (housing)" were "determined to be
mitigable to less -than -significant levels."67
Unlike other elements of the 1995 General Plan, the City's Housing Element must be updated
every five years. The 2000 Housing Element contains numerous policies that relate, either
65/ City of Diamond Bar, 1995 General Plan City of Diamond Bar General Plan, July 25,1995, Public Health
and Safe t Element, p. IV -15.
/ Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar,
California December 11, 2003.
6%/ Op. Cif., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083, p. 4.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-38 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
directly or indirectly, to the provision of housing within the City. Those policies include, but are
not necessarily limited to, the following:
• Maintain residential areas which provide for ownership of single family housing and
require that new development be compatible with the prevailing character of the
surrounding development (Strategy 1.24, Land Use Element);
[P]rovide opportunities for development of suitable housing to meet the diverse needs of
existing and future residents (Goal 2, Housing Element);
■ Promote the expeditious processing and approval of residential projects that meet
General Plan policies and City regulatory requirements (Policy 4.2, Housing Element);
• Require that dwelling units and structures within hillside areas be sited in such a manner
as to utilize ridgelines and landscape plant materials as a backdrop for the structures
and the structures themselves to provide maximum concealment of cut slopes (Strategy
1.1.2, Resource Management Element).
As indicated in the 2000 Housing Element, the project site is identified as a "housing opportunity
area," defined as one of a number of vacant sites located within the City that may be available
for housing development.
Regional Housing Needs Assessment
As indicated in the Southern California Association of Government's (SCAG) "Regional
Comprehensive Plan and Guide ,611 (RCPG), substantial population growth is forecast within the
SCAG region. The regional housing needs assessment69 (RHNA) is a key tool for SCAG and its
member governments to plan for that growth by focusing on existing and future housing needs,
including new construction. The current RHNA serves to quantify the need for housing within
each jurisdiction between 1998 and 2005. The existing need assessment examines key
variables from the most recent United States Census to measure ways in which the housing
market is not meeting the needs of current residents. The future need for housing is determined
primarily by the forecasted growth in households in a community.
The City's adopted RHNA new construction need is identified as 144 dwelling units, including
housing needs for the following income categories: (1) Very Low Income — 23 units; (2) Low
Income — 17 units; (3) Moderate Income — 27 units; and (4) Above Moderate Income — 76 units.
It is assumed that the project seeks to response to a portion of the "above moderate income"
housing need identified in the RHNA.
3.2.13 Public Services
The 1992 General Plan FEIR, 1995 Addendum, and 1995 General Plan do not make a clear
distinction between public services and utilities and service systems, as those terms are utilized
in the Checklist. The 1995 General Plan combines solid waste, wastewater, flood control
facilities, parks, law enforcement, libraries, schools, postal services, emergency services,
disaster preparedness, and gas and electrical services all as part of the City's Public Services
and Facilities Element.
68/ Southern California Association of Governments, Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide, March 1996.
69/ SCAG is mandated by Section 65584 et seq. of the CGC to determine the existing and projected housing
needs for its region, as well as the share of this need to be allocated to individual cities and counties in the SCAG
region. This determination is called the Regional Housing Needs Assessment. The process for establishing a
regional housing needs allocation plan is set forth in Section 65584 of the CGC.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-39
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
For the purpose of this environmental review, public services are assumed to include police and
fire protection, schools, and libraries. Potable water, wastewater, and solid waste are
addressed in Section 3.2.16 (Utilities and Service Systems). Storm water conveyance is
separately addressed under Section 3.2.8 (Hydrology and Water Quality) and parks are
separately addressed under Section 3.2.14 (Recreation) herein.
Southern California Edison (SCE) is regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC) and is required to provide electrical service to proposed projects within its jurisdiction in
accordance with the rules and regulations on file with the CPUC. Coordination for that service
typically occurs between SCE and the project proponent during the preliminary design phase.
Coordination ensures that the nature, design, and timing of electrical service improvements are
adequate to serve the project and occur in compliance with the State's energy conservation
requirements (Titles 24 and 25, CCR). As such, no further discussion of electrical service is
provided herein. Similarly, the Southern California Gas Company is the supplier of natural gas
in the project area. The Southern California Gas Company is regulated by the CPUC and is
required to provide service to all new customers in accordance with the rules and regulations on
file with the CPUC. The gas company continues to develop additional energy supplies while
seeking efficiencies relative to existing consumption. Existing distribution facilities in the general
project area appear adequate to serve anticipated project demands. As such, no further
discussion of natural gas service is provided herein.
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the accompanying resolution, the
1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following programmatic impacts on "public services
and facilities" could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "[a] Increased demand on
fire, police protection, schools, libraries, health services, solid waste disposal and telephone
services; [b] increased consumption of water and energy supplies; and [c] increased waste-
water generation/treatment demand."70
As indicated in the 1995 Addendum: "1995 General Plan strategies are more comprehensive.""
As further indicated in the accompanying resolution, "[a]lthough the City Council found in
Resolution 9243 that the impacts from implementation of the 1992 General Plan on biological
resources, circulation/transportation, air quality, acoustical environment, land use, and public
services and facilities may be unavoidable adverse impacts, the City Council now finds, based
on the Final Environmental Impact Report and the Addendum" that only air quality impacts
would remain signifiicant.72
The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that relate, directly or indirectly, to public
services and facilities. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
Protect existing residents and businesses from the cost of financing infrastructure aimed
at supporting new development or the intensification of development (Strategy 1.1.2,
Public Services and Facilities Element);
70/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the
Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of
OverridinConsiderations), pp. 5-6.
'/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No_ 91041083, p. 15.
72/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating
Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental
Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), Exhibit A, pp. 3-4.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-40 initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
• Require the construction of water, sewer, drainage and other necessary public facilities
prior to or concurrent with each new development (Strategy 1.1.3, Public Services and
Facilities Element);
• Require the project sponsor to provide all necessary infrastructure improvements
(including the pro rata share of system -wide improvements) (Strategy 1.1.4, Public
Services and Facilities Element);
• Require all new housing subdivisions be connected to a public sewerage system
(Strategy 1.1.6, Public Services and Facilities Element); and
• Within new residential developments, encourage organizations of individual
neighborhoods and discourage through traffic on local streets while maintaining
pedestrian and bicycle continuity and encourage neighborhood parks, improvement
programs and social events (Strategy 1.5.3, Public Services and Facilities Element).
As authorized under Section 17620(a) of the California Education Code (CEC) and Section
65995(b) of the California Government Code (CGC), local school districts are authorized to
impose and collect school impact fees for all residential and non-residential development
activities that occur within their jurisdiction to off -set the costs associated with the new students
that result directly from the construction of new homes and indirectly from the creation of new
employment opportunities. When noticed of a school facility exaction, a city or county may not
issue a building permit to an affected development project until the school district has certified
that the project has either complied with the school board's resolution or is not subject to the
exaction (Section 53080, CGC).
Referencing Section 65995(h) of the CGC, "[tjhe payment or satisfaction of a fee, charge, or
other requirement levied or imposed pursuant to Section 17620 of the Education Code in the
amount specified in Section 65995 and, if applicable, any amounts specified in Section 65995.5
or 65995.7 are hereby deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any
legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or
development of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization as
defined in Section 56021 or 56073, on the provision of adequate school facilities."
Walnut Valley Unified School District Fee Justification Study
The project site is located within the boundaries of the Walnut Valley Unified School District
(WVUSD). On May 5, 2004, the WVUSD's Board of Directors adopted the finding presented in
the updated "Justification Report for the Walnut Valley Unified School District — This Study
Established the Justification for the Imposition of Developer Fees Pursuant to Applicable Law as
of March 2004" (Calwell Flores Winters, Inc., adopted May 5, 2004). As indicated therein, the
WVUSD found justification in imposing a fee of $6.40/square foot for residential development.73
That fee, however, exceeds the fee limitation established by the State Allocation Board (SAB).
On January 25, 2006, the SAB increased the amount of the statutory maximum Level 174 school
fees which may be levied by a school district on new development. As authorized by the SAB,
73/ Calwell Flores Winters, Inc., Justification Report for the Walnut Valley Unified School District — This
Study Established the Justification for the Imposition of Developer Fees Pursuant to Applicable Law as of March
2004, undated, p. 2.
74/ Level I fees are the current statutory fees allowed under Section 17620 of the CEC_ This code section
Provides the basic authority for school districts to levy fees against residential and commercial construction for the
purpose of funding school construction and reconstruction. Level II fees are outlined in Section 65995.5 of the CGC
and allow a district to impose a higher fee on residential construction if certain conditions are met. Level III fees are
outlined in Section 65995.7 of the CGC. If State funding becomes unavailable, this section authorizes a district that
approved the collection of Level II fees to collect a higher fee on residential construction.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-41
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
the maximum Level 1 fees were increased to $2.63 per assessable square foot of residential
construction and $0.42 per square foot of enclosed and covered space for commercial and
industrial development.
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
The City contracts with the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department (LACSD) for law
enforcement services. The project site is located within the patrol area of Walnut/Diamond Bar
Sheriff's Station (21695 East Valley Boulevard, Walnut) and the Diamond Bar Sheriff Service
Center (23449 Golden Springs Drive, Diamond Bar).
Los Angeles County Fire Department
Fire protection and paramedic services are provided to the general project area under contract
to the County of Los Angeles Fire Department (LACFD). The nearest (first response) LACFD
facility to the project site is Fire Station 120 (Battalion Headquarters/Engine Company), located
at 1051 South Grand Avenue, Diamond Bar.
Sections 51175-51188 to the CGC requires the California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection (CDF), acting in cooperation with local fire authorities, to identify Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) within designated State Responsibility Areas (SRAs). Those
VHFHSZs located in the general project area, as determined by the CDF, are illustrated in
Figure 3-13 (Natural Hazard Disclosure Map for a Portion of Los Angeles County). As
illustrated therein, the project site is identified as being located within a "wildland areas that may
contain substantial forest fire risks and hazards" and directly adjacent to "very high fire hazard
severity zone." As defined in Section 223-V of Title 32 of the County Code, the "Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zone" is defined to mean those "areas that are highly vulnerable to wildfire.
The designation of such zones shall be made by the Board of Supervisors and shall be based
on fuel loading, slope, fire weather and other relevant factors in accordance with Chapter 6.8 of
Title 5 of the California Government Code commencing with Section 51175."
The following standards have been established by the Los Angeles County Fire Department
(LACFD) for single-family dwellings located in a VHFHSZ (Fire Zone 4): (1) the water system is
capable of delivering 1,250 gallons per minute (gpm) at 20 pounds per square inch (psi) for two
hours; (2) the distance from the structure to the fire hydrant does not exceed 450 feet via
vehicular access; and (3) the proposed construction must be within 150 feet of a vehicular
access roadway that is a minimum of 20 feet wide, paved with concrete or asphalt and does not
exceed 15 percent grade.75 More specifically, the LACFD's "Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines
for Projects Located in Fire Zone 4 or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zonesi76 provide a set of
procedures and standards designed to implement the requirements of the "Los Angeles County
Fire Code" (Fire Code), codified in Title 32 of the County Code.
75/ Los Angeles County Fire Department, Prevention Bureau, Information on Fire Flow Availability for
Building Permit, Form 195, January 2002.
76/ County of Los Angeles Fire Department, Prevention Bureau, Forestry Division, Brush Clearance Section,
Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire Zone 4 or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones,
January 1998.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 342 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
LEGEND
WILDL AREATHAT MAY MWAM bUBSTA^. AL
Puvmt m Sufin JI.S dtle Rife 0.ew�e
Cele Tl w�caf�A6ngeR� Sli�im+m
Ik�ma<mpuv�mofSasYm LYI of
.. ..J kRMi fleomSVC'�AOMioWIY•ilu
CdewleirgsrH'ry ;rS fk.�n...
�1O.:H11+m �� �m Dgemlm
fMVF m^In^Y W File Raomm� Im.wml iwo
aamlcmli.� q�nmmxkl a bxlgeny fe
P�Im Peowa Cde ioEmoi Jlf.^d1h
VE0.1' HIGH FlRE NAIA0.D SEVE0.T' 20.4E. AB]�%
�� Re1r11m5NYm 511 T�MIM1cf vmne(oJ�.
lAem.mdRe pgrn. �mjm mEm
w�� � MSRbm 511lC M1h
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting
Figure 3-13
NATURAL HAZARD DISCLOSURE MAP
FOR A PORTION OF
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
Source: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
July 2006
Page 3-43
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
This page intentionally left blank.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-44 initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
As specified in the LACFD's "Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire
Zone 4 or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones," fuel modification plans are required for all
tentative map approval or building permits on or after January 7, 1996. A "fuel modification
plan" identifies specific zones within a property that are subject to fuel modification. A "fuel
modification zone" is a strip of land where combustible native or ornamental vegetation has
been modified and/or partially or totally replaced with drought tolerant, fire resistant plants."
Current code requirements for subdivisions, including access, fire flow, fire sprinklers, water
storage, and fire resistive construction techniques, are considered and credited, where
appropriate, by the LACFD in establishing the final fuel modification requirements. The size and
type of the fuel modification �gzone(s) will be determined by the LACFD upon review of
preliminary development plans.
3.2.14 Recreation
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
Policies presented in the 1992 General Plan and concluded that program -level impacts on
"recreation and open space" could be effectively mitigated to below a level of significance. In
addition, based, in part, on the findings of the 1992 General Plan FEIR, the 1995 Addendum
concluded that program -level impacts on "recreation and open space" were "determined to be
mitigable to less -than -significant levels."79
The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that relate, either directly or indirectly, to
recreation. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
• Pursue the development of a system of greenbelts within the community (Strategy 1.3.6,
Resource Management Element); and
• Develop recreational facilities emphasizing active and passive recreational areas
(Strategy 1.3.7, Resource Management Element).
As authorized under Section 66477 of the CGC (Quimby Act), cities and counties have the
authority to pass ordinances requiring that developers set aside land, donate conservation
easements, or pay fees for park improvements. The goal of the Quimby Act is to require
developers to help mitigate the impacts of new development on existing park resources. As
specified in Section 66477(b) therein, "the dedication of land, or the payment of fees, or both,
shall not exceed the proportionate amount necessary to provide three acres of park area per
1,000 persons residing within a subdivision subject to this section, unless the amount of existing
neighborhood and community park area, as calculated pursuant to this subdivision, exceeds
that limit, in which case the legislative body may adopt the calculated amount as a higher
standard not to exceed five acres per 1,000 persons residing within a subdivision subject to this
section." Section 66477(c) of the CGC further stipulates that "[tjhe land, fees, or combination
thereof are to be used only for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing
neighborhood or community park or recreational facilities to serve the subdivision."
As authorized under Section 21.32.040 (Park Land Dedications and Fees) in Chapter 21.32
(Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code: "As a condition of tentative map approval, the subdivider
77/ Ibid., p. 1
7e/ Ibid., pp. 2-3.
79/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083, p. 4.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-45
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
shall dedicate land and/or pay a fee in compliance with this section for the purpose of
developing new or rehabilitating existing park or recreation facilities to serve the subdivision."
The amount of acreage required to be dedicated by a residential subdivider for park and
recreational purposes is based on the number and type of dwelling units and is computed using
the following formula: X = 0.005(UP) where "X' is the amount of parkland required in acres, "U"
is the total number of approved dwelling units, and "P" is 3.4 for single-family dwellings.
In subdivisions of over 50 lots, the city may require the subdivider to dedicate both land and pay
a fee. Only the payment of fees shall be required in subdivisions of 50 parcels or less. If the
subdivider provides park and recreational improvements on dedicated land, the value of the
improvements together with any installed equipment shall be a credit against the required fees
or land. Each park site proposed for dedication in compliance with this section shall be
physically suited for the intended use.
In May 2001, the City adopted a "City of Diamond Bar Recreational Trails and Bicycle Route
Master Plan" (Trails Master Plan). As indicated therein, the plan identifies "five trails completely
within the City of Diamond Bar; one trail partially within the City — Skyline (Schabarum) Traill;
and one trail head which provides access to a trail outside the City limits (Tonner Canyon)."
As depicted in the Trail Master Plan, the Tonner Canyon Trail parallels the southern boundary of
the City and includes a proposed trailhead in the vicinity of the project site. The project site is
specifically identified and illustrated in the Trails Master Plan. The plan states: "Three
properties exist at the City's southerly limits, the use of which could be beneficial in the
development of a trail head and access to the County's Skyline (Schabarum) Trail Extension
and to the Tonner Canyon Trail. These properties are located at the southerly City limits in the
vicinity of Crooked Creek Drive and Running Branch Road. One is located within the City limits
and two are located in unincorporated County territory."81
Designated trail heads are categorized based on the types of facilities proposed in the Trails
Master Plan. With regards to Tonner Canyon Trail, the plan depicts a "Class A trail head in the
vicinity of the terminus of Crooked Creek Drive or Running Branch Road. The development of
this trail head improvement should be linked to improved maintenance of the Skyline Trail
Extension (Schabarum Trail) by the County of Los Angeles .,,82
"Class A" trailheads are intended
to include or may include the following facilities: parking, information kiosk, bike rack, drinking
fountain, picnic table, shade trees or structure, trash container. 83
3.2.15 Transportation and Traffic
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the accompanying resolution, the
1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following programmatic impact on
"transportation/circulation" could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "Contribution
to the local and area -wide need for expanded transportation systems.i84
80/ City of Diamond Bar, City of Diamond Bar Recreational Trails and Bicycle Route Master Plan, May 15,
2001, p. 13.
81/ Ibid., p. 75.
82/ ibid., p. 16.
e3/ Ibid., Table 2, p. 17-
134/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the
Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of
Overriding Considerations), p. 5.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-46 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
As indicated in the 1995 Addendum: "In addition to the mitigation measures identified in the
Final EIR, some new strategies related to circulation have been included in the 1995 General
Plan" and "[t]hese additional measures will further lessen circulation impacts as identified in the
Final EIR."85 As further indicated in the accompanying resolution, "[a]lthough the City Council
found in Resolution 9243 that the impacts from implementation of the 1992 General Plan on
biological resources, circulation/transportation, air quality, acoustical environment, land use, and
public services and facilities may be unavoidable adverse impacts, the City Council now finds,
based on the Final Environmental Impact Report and the Addendum" that only air quality
impacts would remain significant.ss
The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that address, either directly or indirectly,
transportation and traffic and that may be applicable to the proposed project. Those policies
include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
■ Preclude the connection of roadways from adjacent jurisdictions into the City unless
demonstrable benefits to Diamond Bar residents and businesses are indicated (Strategy
1.1.1, Circulation Element);
• Pursue other traffic measures to enhance circulation and transient traffic movement
(Strategy 1.2.3, Circulation Element);
■ Prevent the creation of new roadway connections which adversely impact existing
neighborhoods (Strategy 1.3.1, Circulation Element);
• Design new developments and their access points in such a way that the capacity of
local streets is not exceeded (Strategy 1.3.3, Circulation Element);
• Work to ensure that any new development is provided with adequate access from within
the City of Diamond Bar (Strategy 2.2.1, Circulation Element);
Consider all opportunities to expand and maintain pedestrian access routes throughout
the City (Strategy 3.1.6, Circulation Element); and
All new development shall be required to provide mitigation measures. Such measures
could include improvements or traffic impact fees (Strategy 3.2.1, Circulation Element).
Traffic Study
The Applicant submitted and the City reviewed a traffic study conducted to assess the potential
traffic -related impacts attributable to the site's development. That study, entitled "Traffic
Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision Located at the Terminus of
Crooked Creek Drive (Approximately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of Diamond
Bar)" (Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc., October 2002, Revised September 2003),87 presented
a detailed evaluation of existing and future traffic conditions at the following nine study area
intersections and residential street segments: (1) Diamond Bar Boulevard/Brea Canyon Road;
(2) Diamond Bar Boulevard/SR-57 Freeway Northbound (NB) Ramps; (3) Brea Canyon
Cutoff/SR-57 Freeway Southbound (SB) Ramps; (4) Crooked Creek Drive south of Gold Run
Drive; (5) Gold Run Drive east of Castle Rock Road; (6) Castle Rock Road south of Gold Run
as/ Op Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083, p. 8.
86/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating
Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental
Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), Exhibit A, pp. 3-4.
8 / Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc., Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision
Located at the Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive (Approximately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of
Diamond Bar), October 2002, Revised September 2003.
Crty of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-47
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Drive; (7) Castle Rock Road north of Gold Run Drive; (8) Silver Bullet Drive east of Brea
Canyon Road; and (9) Copper Canyon Drive east of Brea Canyon Road.
Daily traffic counts were conducted for two days on the local streets serving the project site.
The results of the two-day average daily traffic counts are shown in Table 3-2 (Existing [2 -Day
Average] Daily Roadway Values). As indicated, daily volumes are the highest on Copper
Canyon Road. Silver Bullet Drive also provides a connection to Brea Canyon Road but has
significantly less traffic volumes, notwithstanding the presence of a traffic signal.
Table 3-2
EXISTING (2 -DAY AVERAGE) DAILY ROADWAY VALUES
Copper Canyon Drive (East of Brea Canyon Road)
3,019
D
Silver Bullet Drive (East of Brea Canyon Road)
943
A
Castle Rock Road (North of Gold Run Drive)
2.222
B
Castle Rock Road (South of Gold Run Drive)
868
A
Gold Run Drive (East of Castle Rock Drive)
2,545
C
Crooked Creek Drive (South of Gold Run Drive)
396
A
Source: Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc.
An analysis of morning (AM) and evening (PM) peak -hour traffic conditions was conducted at
the following three intersections: (1) Diamond Bar Boulevard/Brea Canyon Road (traffic signal);
(2) Diamond Bar Boulevard/SR-57 Freeway NB Ramps (traffic signal); (3) Brea Canyon
Cutoff/SR-57 Freeway SB Ramps (stop sign controlled off ramp). As shown in Table 3-3
(Intersection Capacity Utilization Summary), the intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard/Brea
Canyon Road is currently operating at Level of Service (LOS) `E" during the AM peak hour. The
existing LOS is primarily due to the heavy westbound left -turn volume from Diamond Bar
Boulevard to southbound Brea Canyon Road.
Table 3-3
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION SUMMARY
Source: Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc.
3.2.16 Utilities and Service Systems
Programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 1992 General Plan FEIR focused on specific
policies presented in the 1992 General Plan. As indicated in the accompanying resolution, the
1992 General Plan FEIR concluded that the following programmatic impact on "public services
and facilities" could not be mitigated to below a level of significance: "[1] Increased demands on
fire, police protection, schools, libraries, health services, solid waste disposal and telephone
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-48 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
services; [2] Increased consumption of water and energy supplies; and [3] Increased waste-
water generation/treatment demands."
As indicated in the 1995 Addendum: "The Public Services and Facilities Element contained in
the 1995 General Plan is more comprehensive than the 1992 Element" and "[t]he strategies
added to the 1995 General Plan are intended to further reduce impacts."89 The City's
implementing resolution concluded that, based on the additional analysis presented in the 1995
Addendum, the previously identified significant impacts on "public services and facilities" would,
in fact, be less than significant.90
The 1995 General Plan contains numerous policies that relate, either directly or indirectly, to
utilities and service systems. Those policies include, but are not necessarily limited to, the
following:
• Protect existing residents and businesses from the cost of financing infrastructure aimed
at supporting new development or the intensification of development (Strategy 1.1.2,
Public Services and Facilities Element);
• Require the construction of water, sewer, drainage and other necessary public facilities
prior to or concurrent with each new development (Strategy 1.1.3, Public Services and
Facilities Element);
• Require the project sponsor to provide all necessary infrastructure improvements
(including the pro rata share of system -wide improvements) (Strategy 1.1.4, Public
Services and Facilities Element);
• Require all new housing subdivisions be connected to a public sewerage system
(Strategy 1.1.6, Public Services and Facilities Element); and
• Within new residential developments, encourage organizations of individual
neighborhoods and discourage through traffic on local streets while maintaining
pedestrian and bicycle continuity and encourage neighborhood parks, improvement
programs and social events (Strategy 1.5.3, Public Services and Facilities Element).
Water service to the project site is provided by the Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD). In
Fiscal Year 2002-2003, the WVWD provided 24,339 acre feet of water to its residential and
business consumers. The WVWD is dependent upon an imported potable water supply
obtained almost entirely from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), the
sole importer of water to this area, through a wholesale member agency, Three Valleys
Municipal Water District (TVMWD). The water is treated at MWD's F.E. Weymouth Filtration
Plant, located in the City of La Verne, prior to being conveyed to the WVWD's terminal storage
reservoir for distribution within the district's water supply system. Potable ground water is not
available within the district's boundaries owing to the characteristics of the local groundwater
basin, which is a narrow, shallow, dense aquifer high in total dissolved solids and nitrate
concentrations.
88/ Op. Cif., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the
Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of
Overriding Considerations), pp. 5-6.
Ulj/ Op. Cit., Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Diamond Bar General Plan,
SCH No. 91041083, p_ 15.
90/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating
Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental
Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), Exhibit A, pp. 3-4.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Environmental Setting July 2006
Page 3-49
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
The County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (CSDLAC) are a confederation of special
districts serving the County's wastewater and solid waste management needs. The CSDLAC's
service area covers about 800 square miles, encompassing 78 cities and unincorporated
County areas, and includes the City. The CSDLAC are comprised of 25 separate (23 active)
sanitation districts working cooperatively under a Joint Administration Agreement (JAA). Each
district has a separate board of directors consisting of the presiding officer of the governing
bodies of the local jurisdictions situated within that district. The CSDLAC owns, operates, and
maintains over 1,300 miles of main truck sewers and 11 wastewater treatment plants with a total
permitted capacity of 627.8 million gallons per day (mgd). The CSDLAC's sewerage system
currently conveys and treats approximately 510 mgd of wastewater.91
The project site is located within County Sanitation District No. 21. County Sanitation District
No. 21, in combination with 16 other districts, are signatories to a Joint Outfall Agreement which
provides for a regional, interconnected system of facilities known as the Joint Outfall System.
The CSDLAC constructs, operates, and maintains trunk sewers and wastewater treatment and
disposal facilities serving residential, industrial, institutional, and commercial users throughout a
major portion of the County. Local wastewater collection systems (lateral sewers) are
constructed, operated, and maintained by other public agencies, including the County and
various cities. Such systems are typically tributary to and discharge into the CSDLAC's
sewerage systems. Operation and maintenance of local sewers and laterals and the collection
and the transport of solid wastes to CSDLAC facilities are the responsibilities of local
jurisdictions. Sewer facilities within the City are regulated under the provisions of Chapter 13.00
(Sewers and Sewage Disposal) in Title 13 (Utilities) of the Municipal Code.
Municipal sewer flows generated within the City are treated at the CSDLAC's Joint Water
Pollution Control Plant (24501 South Figueroa Street, Carson). The facility provides both
primary and secondary treatment for approximately 320 million gallons of wastewater per day.
In addition, the CSDLAC operate a comprehensive solid waste management system serving the
needs of a large portion of the County. This system presently includes three active sanitary
landfills (Calabasas, Puente Hills, Scholl Canyon), two transfer and material recovery facilities
(iSouth Gate, Downey), five refuse -to -energy facilities (i.e., Calabasas, Commerce, Puente Hills,
Southeast Resource Recovery Facility [SERRF], Palos Verdes, Spadra), two full-service recycle
centers (Palos Verdes, Puente Hills). In addition to those solid waste facilities operated by the
CSDLAC, there are numerous privately owned and operated solid waste facilities (e.g., landfills,
transfer stations) located throughout the region that could be potential recipients of municipal
solid waste (MSW) generated from the project or from the general project area.
The California Integrated Solid Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), codified in Division
30, Section 40000 et seq. of the PRC, requires every city and county in the State to reduce or
recycle 25 percent of the solid wastes disposed in landfills by the year 1995 and 50 percent by
the year 2000. For those jurisdictions unable to meet AB 939 diversion objectives and
established deadlines, monetary penalties can be imposed against those agencies.
Refuse and recycling service is provided to City residents by Waste Management Inc. In 2002,
fifty-three percent of the waste collected in the City was recycled .92
91/ County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, Draft Palmdale Water Reclamation Plant Disinfection
Facilities Plan, January 2004, p. 1-1.
92/ City of Diamond Bar, General Plan Annual Report - Period Beginning January 1, 2002 and Ending
December 31, 2002.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 3-50 Initial Study - Environmental Setting
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No, 54081
4.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS
4.1 INTRODUCTION TO IMPACT ANALYSIS
As required under Section 15063(d)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, an initial study shall
contain "an identification of the environmental effects [of the proposed project by use of a
checklist, matrix, or other method, provided that entries on a checklist or other form are briefly
explained to indicate that there is some evidence to support the entries. The brief explanation
may be either through a narrative or a reference to another information source such as an
attached map, photographs, or an earlier EIR or negative declaration." A "sample format"' for
that checklist is included in the State CEQA Guidelines and has been used by the City herein as
a means of identifying and evaluating the project's potentially significant environmental impacts.
The following analysis, in combination with the information presented in Section 2.0 (Project
Description) and Section 3.0 (Environmental Setting) and the program -level assessments
contained in the 1992 General Plan FEIR and 1995 Addendum, contains the supportive
information utilized by the Lead Agency in the derivation of those preliminary conclusions
presented in the accompanying "Environmental Checklist Form" (Checklist), included in
Appendix A (Environmental Checklist), and the preliminary findings of the Lead Agency relative
to the continuing presence or absence of unmitigable significant environmental effects, as
presented in Section 5.0 (Preliminary Determination).
Under CEQA, impacts can be both beneficial and adverse. A determination whether an effect is
adverse or beneficial may be based, in part, on the judgment and perspective of the individual
reviewer. As indicated in Section 15064(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines: "In determining
whether an effect will be adverse or beneficial, the lead agency shall consider the views held by
members of the public in all areas affected as expressed in the whole record before the lead
agency." In completing the Checklist, the City has not sought to determine whether a particular
effect is either adverse or beneficial, rather the Lead Agency has sought only to indicate
whether the resulting physical change to the existing environmental setting is significant from an
environmental perspective.
4.2 THRESHOLD OF SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
As indicated under Section 15064(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, "determining whether a
project may have a significant effect plays a critical role in the CEQA process." This
determination influences an agency's determination concerning whether or not to commence
the preparation of a negative declaration or an EIR and determines whether mitigation
measures will be required once a negative declaration or EIR is commenced.2
Section 15064 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides the basic guidance to lead agencies in
determining the significance of a project's effects. Referencing Section 15064(b) therein: "the
determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for
'/ Section 15063(f), State CEQA Guidelines.
2/ CEQA specifies that judgments of "significance" are made at three different points in the environmental
review process: (1) in determining whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment and thus
requires the preparation of an EIR (Section 21082.2[a], CEQA); (2) if an EIR is prepared, in the EIR's discussions of
which environmental impacts are, in fact, significant and thus warrants mitigation (Section 15126.4[a][4], State CEQA
Guidelines); and (3) if an EIR is prepared, in making findings following the document's completion whether a project's
significant environmental effects have been avoided or substantially reduced (Section 21081 [a], CEQA).
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-1
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
careful judgment on the part of the public agency involved, based to the extent possible on
scientific and factual data. An iron clad definition of significant effect is not always possible
because the significance of an activity may vary with the setting." Section 15065 of the State
CEQA Guidelines identified the conditions where lead agencies are mandated to determine
significance and either commence the preparation of an EIR or impose mitigation (through use
of a MND in lieu of an EIR) to reduce the identified effect to a less -than -significant level.
No thresholds of significance where identified in the 1992 General Plan FOR or in the 1995
Addendum. In the absence of contrary evidence, the City has, therefore, elected to utilize the
standards of significance contained in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines as the basis
for determining whether the project's potential impacts would be deemed significant. To the
extent that other public agencies have formulated, recommended, or adopted threshold of
significance criteria for use by local agencies in their CEQA process, the Lead Agency has
considered those standards known to the City in its independent assessment of the project's
potential impacts and, when deemed applicable and absent any fair argument to the contrary,
has, as noted, applied those standards to the determination of potential significance.
4.3 1995 GENERAL PLAN PROGRAMMATIC MITIGATION MEASURES
As more thoroughly described in Section 1.0 (Introduction) herein, this "second-tier" analysis
serves to build upon the environmental record established by the Lead Agency and contained in
the 1992 General Plan FEIR and 1995 Addendum. Referencing Resolution No. 92-43: "This
City Council finds that although the Final EIR identifies certain significant environmental effects
that will result if the proposed General Plan is adopted, all significant effects can feasibly be
mitigated or avoided [sic] have been reduced to the extent feasible by the imposition of
mitigation measures contained within the Final EIR and Mitigation Monitoring Plan."3 As further
indicated in Resolution No. 95-20, "the mitigation measures contained in the Final
Environmental Impact Report which was prepared in connection with the 1992 General Plan
remain current and valid and a revised Mitigation Monitoring Program is hereby made a part of
the Final Environmental Impact Report for the 1995 General Plan to ensure implementation of
the mitigation measures identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report."4
As indicated in the 1995 General Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program, "the goals, objectives,
policies, and specific actions, are the proposed mitigation measures of the updated General
Plan."5 As further indicated therein, the 1995 Addendum will "be consulted to determine
whether a specific project is consistent with the General Plan ."6
As indicated in Section 3.0 (Environmental Setting), for most of the topical issues addressed in
the Checklist, programmatic mitigation measures (presented in the form of policy statements in
the 1995 General Plan) were previously adopted by the City. Each of those programmatic
measures is presented in Table ES -1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation
Measures) under the corresponding topical heading most germane to each such measure.
3/ Op. Cit., Resolution 92-43 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Certifying the
Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar and Adopting a Statement of
Overriding Considerations), pp. 4-5.
/ Op. Cit., Resolution No. 95-20 (A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Incorporating
Resolution No. 92-43 by Reference and Certifying the Adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Environmental
Impact Report and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), adopted by the
City Council on May 9, 1995, p. 3.
5/ City of Diamond Bar, Implementation/Mitigation Monitoring Program, July 25, 1995, p. MMP -5-
61 Ibid., p. MMP -4.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-2 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
The inclusion of program -level mitigation measures therein is intended for informational
purposes only and is designed to facilitate the formulation of project -level mitigation measures
when the resulting analysis concludes that project -related impacts would manifest at a
significant or potentially significant level. By their inclusion, it is not the intent of the Lead
Agency to impose those program -level mitigation measures as project -level conditions.
Following the release of this Initial Study and upon receipt of any subsequent comments that
may be received by the City in response thereto, the Lead Agency could elect to determine that
any or all of those program -level mitigation measures identifireed therein or contained elsewhe
in the 1995 General Plan, the 1995 Addendum, or the 1995 General Plan Mitigation Monitoring
Program are applicable to the proposed action and appropriately constitute project -level
mitigation measures and/or conditions of project approval.
4.4 TOPIC -SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Presented below is the City's preliminary response to each of the items raised in the Checklist.
The information presented herein may be subsequently revised based on comments received
by the Lead Agency from other responsible or trustee agencies and from the general public
following the dissemination of any environmental notices resulting from the City's independent
environmental review of the proposed project.
In assessing each topical issue, it is assumed that the proposed project will be constructed,
operated, and maintained in strict compliance with all applicable federal, State, and local laws,
rules, regulations, standards, and associated requirements applicable to the precise nature of
the proposed use. Since statutory and/or regulatory provisions applicable to those operations
and activities constitute pre-existing obligations, compliance with those pre-existing provisions is
not identified either as recommended mitigation measures or conditions of approval herein.
4.4.1 Aesthetics
(a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Significant unless Mitigation Incorporated. In proximity to the project site, the SR -57
Freeway is "eligible" for State Scenic Highway designation and, although not formally
adopted by the County, is presently identified as a "proposed scenic highway" in the on-
going County General Plan update which is presently underway. Pending a formal
designation of that roadway as a State Scenic Highway, no view preservation or scenic
corridor protection policies or regulations now govern development activities located
within that roadway's existing viewshed. Additionally, the 1995 General Plan does not
define the existence of any scenic vistas within the City and neither the 1992 General
Plan FOR nor the 1995 Addendum identifies any scenic vistas within or adjacent to the
City or contain any program -level view preservation measures.
A limited number of adjoining and proximal properties presently possess a view of all or
portions of the project site. Following the site's development, those existing views will be
modified from that of an open space setting to an altered setting possessing both urban
and open space visual elements. Those views likely to be most impacted are from those
abutting properties located on Crooked Creek Drive. Southeasterly oriented, fore-
ground views from Lots 76-84 of Tract Map No. 25989, located along the southeasterly
side of Crooked Creek Drive and located at a lower elevation that the adjoining portion of
Cit of D'
y iamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-3
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
the project site, will change from those of an undeveloped hillside area to a series of 6 -
foot tall, stair -stepping retained walls, above which will be constructed rear -yard fences
for single-family homes.
Each of those property owners currently have some type of wall (e.g., masonry, wood,
chain link) located along or near their rear property lines. Wall height is generally
assumed to be about five feet above finish grade. As such, existing views of the project
site are partially impeded by the presence of those existing perimeter walls.
Because of the elevational differences, east -facing views from those residences are
dominated by the slope area that abuts those properties. As such, the perceived visual
character of a limited number of private views will change substantially.
As proposed and as illustrated on the Applicant's landscape plan, a planting strip will be
retained at the base of the retaining walls and in the 5 -foot wide terraced area separating
the individual walls. As the Applicant's proposed slope and wall landscaping matures
and the proposed walls become less dominant visual elements as a result of that
landscaping, the resulting change may diminish over time.
Additionally, southwesterly oriented, middle -ground views from Lots 79-85 of Tract
29053, located on the westerly side of Running Branch Road and at a higher elevation
than the adjoining portion of the project site, will be altered as the existing view by
residents changes from an undeveloped property to one containing both urban and open
space elements. Since these views are generally across the project site to more distant
areas located to the west of the SR -57 Freeway, the resulting visual impacts will be less
perceptible than those from Crooked Creek Drive.
In recognition of the presence of potentially significant aesthetic impacts, the following
mitigation measure is recommended:
0 Mitigation Measure No. 1. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the
Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the Community
Development Director and City Engineer shall approve detailed retaining wall,
landscape, and irrigation plans identifying how those three elements will be fully
integrated into the wall design. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be
signed by a landscape architect and shall specify and quantify the plant palette,
characteristics of the plants selected, watering requirements including frequency,
and specify how water will be dispersed. Landscape plans shall also include
performance standards relative to amount of surface coverage and plant
survivability. Specified landscape performance standards shall be binding on the
homeowners' association.
As mitigated, the potentially significant aesthetic impacts associated with the proposed
project can be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
(b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to,
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.1(a) above.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-4 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
(c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site
and its surroundings?
Significant unless Mitigation Incorporated. SeeResponse No. 4.
4 1(a) above.
(d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. Presently no artificial light sources exist on the project site.
Project implementation will, therefore, result in the introduction of new sources of light,
such as new street lighting, interior and exterior structural lighting, decorative landscape
lighting, security lighting, and automobile headlights. Those new light sources, in
combination with site grading, infrastructure improvements, and new residential
dwellings, will change the existing visual character of the property. The property is,
however, designated for an urban use and abuts existing residential areas along three of
its four sides. As such, new introduced lighting will neither change the overall visual
character of the general area nor substantially contribute to the existing sky -glow effect
associated with areawide night lighting.
4.4.2 Agricultural Resources
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects,
lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment
Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to
use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmlands.
(a) Would the project convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of Statewide
importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring program of the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
No Impact. The project site does not contain any State or locally designated "Prime
Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance."
(b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act
contract?
No Impact. The project site is not currently subject to a Williamson Act contract.
(c) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their
location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
No Impact. See Response No 4.4.2(a).
4.4.3 Air Quality
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management
or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determination.
Cit of Di
y amond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-5
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
(a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
plan?
Less than Significant Impact. As indicated in City -initiated "Air Quality & Noise Analysis
— Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California" (Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc.,
December 11, 2003),' as initiated by the City as part of the Applicant's 2003-2004
submittal, a project's consistency with the existing "Air Quality Management Plan"
(AQMP)8 is determined through an assessment of the following inquiries: (1) Will the
proposed project result in an increase in the frequency or severity of an existing air
quality violation or contribute to the continuation of an existing air quality violation? (2)
Will the proposed project exceed the assumptions included in the AQMP or other
regional growth projections relevant to the AQMP's implementation? The first question
is addressed in Response No. 4.4.3(b). The second question is addressed herein.
Applicable air quality plans are based on current land use policies. A residential project
relates to the AQMP through the land use and growth assumptions used to forecast air
emissions. The AQMP is based on the designated land use within the regional air basin,
as contained in local general plans.
To the extent that the proposed development is consistent with the land use policies of
the 1995 General Plan, it is, by inference, also consistent with the AQMP. Such
consistency implies that the project will not create any unanticipated regional air quality
impacts because such impacts have already been incorporated within the framework of
the regional air quality planning process. If, however, approval of the proposed project
allows for a greater intensity of development than currently anticipated under local land
use plans, such growth inducement may create a regional air quality planning
inconsistency. That inconsistency, if substantial, could potentially create a significant air
quality impact even though the incremental impact from the project might be de minimus
on a regional scale.
As indicated in the "Land Use Map" (adopted July 25, 1995), the approximately 12.9
acre project site is designated "RL Low Density Residential (Max. 3 DU/Acre)." Based
on that designation, assuming that the entire site was to be developed for residential
use, a total of 38.7 dwelling units could be constructed on the subject property. As a
result, the maximum allowable development authorized under the 1995 General Plan
would be 38 dwelling units. The corresponding zoning for the project site is "R-1
20,000." Under existing zoning, a total of 28 dwelling units could be developed on the
project site. Since only 16 dwelling units are now proposed, the project meets the
second criteria for consistency with the AQMP.
(b) Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air qualify violation?
71 As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004, a number of studies were conducted both by the Lead Agency and
by the Applicant for a more intensive residential use of the project site. Although the current development application
contains a lesser number of residential units, the Lead Agency has not performed a detailed revised air quality
analysis since the previous study allows for a worst-case assessment of the project's potential air quality impacts.
8/ The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG) are the agencies responsible for preparing the AQMP for the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB).
Since 1979, a number of AQMPs have been prepared. The most recent comprehensive plan currently now fully
approved by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is the 1997 "Air Quality Management
Plan," which includes a variety of strategies and control measures.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-6 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Significant unless Mitigation Incorporated. As indicated in "Air Quality & Noise
Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California" (Blodgett/Baylosis Associates,
Inc., December 11, 2003), prior to consideration of any possible mitigation, operational
emissions attributable to a higher intensity residential development was found to not
exceed the threshold standards recommended by the SCAQMD.
Air emissions attributable to construction activities were, however, projected to result in
the generation of short-term air emissions for reactive organic gases (ROG) that were
above the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria. All other criteria emissions were
projected to occur at levels below the SCAQMD's standards. As indicated in the
independent air quality analysis conducted for the City: "The construction activities may
generate up to 82 pounds per day of ROG while the daily threshold limit is 55 pounds
per day. ROG are precursors to ozone formation. This is important in that the SCAB is
currently non -attainment for ozone.n9
The following potential mitigation measures were identified in that air quality
assessment: (1) to mitigate dust and particulate matter generated during construction
and site preparation activities, SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, which requires
regular watering of exposed soils during earth moving operations; (2) during grading and
construction phases, Crooked Creek Drive must be swept on a daily basis to reduce
fugitive dust emissions; (3) all trucks hauling debris removed during clearance and
grading operations must be covered; (4) the applicant will be required to pay for the
drapery cleaning services for those residences located immediately adjacent to the
project site at the conclusion of the grading and brush clearing activities; (5) the
applicant will be required to pay for the pool cleaning services of those residences
located immediately adjacent to the project site at the conclusion of the grading and
brush clearance activities; (6) the applicant will be required to maintain construction
equipment in tune to reduce heavy equipment emissions; and (7) the applicant will be
required to use low emission architectural coatings approved by the SCAQMD.10 None
of those potential measures, however, serve to mitigate or reduce ROG emissions. As
such, the identified actions do not effectively address the project's significant air quality
impact and have not been expressly brought forward as mitigation measures herein.
Compliance with applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations will serve to reduce many
construction -term criteria emissions. The City can, however, impose more stringent
standards in order to further reduce short-term impacts. Those additional requirements
are identified as a recommended mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure No 2) herein.
ROG emissions" are, in large part, associated with the application of paints and
architectural coatings. The projected 81.63 pounds per day of ROG, as indicated in the
referenced air quality analysis, is based on coatings having a VOC content of 250 grams
per liter. The computer modeling used to derive the estimate of ROG emissions
assumed compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). As required
therein, the SCAQMD prohibits the sale, manufacturer, or application of any architectural
9/ Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar,
California, December 11, 2003, pp. 5-6.
10/ ibid., Pp. 6-7.
"/ In SCAQMD documents, the inclusive term "reactive organic compounds" generally describes and is
gradually replacing the separate terms "reactive organic gases" (ROG), "volatile organic compounds" (VOC), and
"hydrocarbons" (HC), except in cases where such separation provides additional clarification and definition. For
purposes of this analysis, these terms are used synonymously herein.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-7
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
coating containing more than 250 grams of volatile organic compounds (VOC) per liter of
coating (2.08 pounds per gallon), less water, less exempt compounds.
There are, however, a variety of coatings that are low in VOCs. Several of the primers
have VOC contents of less than 0.85 pound per gallon (100 grams/liter) (e.g., Dulu)Jm
professional exterior primer 100 percent acrylic), while topcoats can be less than 0.07
pound per gallon (8 grams/liter) (e.g., Lifemaster 2000-SeriesTM). Assuming two coats of
primer and one topcoat, a specification that all primers shall contain less than 0.85
pound per gallon (102 grams/liter) of VOC and that all topcoats shall contain less than
0.07 pound per gallon (8 grams/liter) of VOC would result in an average VOC content of
no more than 71 grams per liter.
ROG emissions from paints and coatings would, therefore, be reduced from an
estimated 81.83 to 23.24 pounds/day. When ROG emissions from grading activities are
added (i.e., 6.65 pounds/day), total construction -term ROG emissions would be
projected to be below the SCAQMD threshold criteria of 55 pounds/day. The use of
these low-VOC coatings would, therefore, substantially reduce VOC emissions
associated with the application of paints and coatings and "the ROG emissions may be
reduced to levels that are less than significant by using these low emission architectural
coatings. In order to reduce ROG emission, a mitigation measure (Miti4ation Measure
No. 3) has been recommended specifying the use of low-VOC coatings.
In recognition of the presence of a potentially significant construction -term air quality
impact, the following mitigation measures are recommended:
• Mitigation Measure No. 2. During project grading and construction, the following
additional actions will be implemented by the Applicant: (1) three times daily
watering of all exposed surfaces; (2) three times daily watering of unpaved roads;
(3) limit off-road trucks to no more than 15 mph; (4) application of soil stabilizers
to inactive areas; (5) replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as
feasible; and (6) cover (apply stabilizer) to all stockpiles.
■ Mitigation Measure No. 3. All exterior paints utilized in the initial construction of
on-site dwelling units shall conform to the following specifications: (1) all primers
shall contain less than 0.85 pound per gallon (102 grams/liter) of volatile organic
compounds (VOC); and (2) all top coats shall contain less than 0.07 pound per
gallon (8 grams/liter) of VOC.
The Applicant shall comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations regarding
particulate emissions. As mitigated, the significant air quality impact associated with the
proposed project can be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
(c) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or
State ambient air quality standards (including releasing emissions that exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Less than Significant Impact. The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is classified by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) as an extreme non -attainment
12/ Op. Cit., Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California, p. 6.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-8 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
area for ozone (1 -hour) and a non -attainment area for ozone (8 -hour), a serious non -
attainment area for carbon monoxide (CO), and a non -attainment area for oxides of
nitrogen (NOx), particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM,o), and particulate matter
less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5). The SCAB is classified by the State as non -attainment for
ozone (1 -hour), PM2.5i and non -attainment -transitional for PM,(). Based on the analysis
presented in the project's air quality assessment, none of these pollutants are projected
to occur at levels above the recommended SCAQMD threshold standards.
In accordance with SCAQMD methodology, any project that results in criteria air
emissions that are below or that can be mitigated to a level below the daily threshold of
significance criteria is not considered to be significant on a cumulative basis.
(d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial air pollutant concentrations?
Less than Significant Impact. An impact is potentially significant if emission levels
exceed the State or federal ambient air quality standards and expose sensitive receptors
to substantial pollutant concentrations. Because carbon monoxide (CO) is produced in
greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the
atmosphere, adherence to ambient air quality standards is typically demonstrated
through an analysis of localized CO "hot spot" concentrations.
As indicated in "Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar,
California" (Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., December 11, 2003), "a number of
sensitive receptors are located near the project site. These receptors will not be
exposed to significant carbon monoxide (CO) emissions generated from the future
development. No carbon monoxide (CO) hot -spot will be generated by future project
traffic."13
(e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
Less than Significant Impact. Odors are one of the most obvious forms of air pollution to
the general public. Odors can present significant problems for both the source and the
surrounding community. Although offensive odors seldom cause physical harm, they
can cause agitation, anger, and concern to the general public.
The only potential odors associated with the project are from the application of asphalt
and paint during the construction period and from diesel emission generated by
construction vehicles and equipment. Those odors, if perceptible beyond the project
boundaries, are common in the environment, would be of limited duration, and would not
be projected to persist beyond the construction period. Any odor impacts would,
therefore, not be considered significant.
4.4.4 Biological Resources
(a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) ?
13l Op. Cit., Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California, p. 6.
Cit f D'
Y o lamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-9
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004
submission, the Applicant submitted and the City reviewed two previous biological
studies for the proposed project. As indicated in "Biological Assessment — Jewel Ridge
Estates Project, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (Environmental &
Regulatory Specialists, Inc., November 2002), the project site "does not contain the
habitat characteristic of the five sensitive plant species" and the site "contains no habitat
that would support any species listed as either threatened or endangered by the State
and Federal resource agencies."14 The 2002 report does, however, acknowledge that
the site "contains habitat that may support the list of Species of Special Concern" and
"11.5 acres of mixed community of California walnut woodland and coast live oak
woodland" and "[a]ny impacts to these resources must be considered significant.n15
As indicated in Table 3-1 (California Natural Diversity Data Base Records Search —
Yorba Linda Quadrangle), three sensitive plant communities have been identified within
the area comprising the USGS 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle (i.e.,
southern coast live oak riparian forest, southern willow scrub, and California walnut
woodland). As further indicated in the 2004 biological report, "[t]]wo sensitive species
were observed on the property during the spring survey: the walnut/oak woodland (a
CDFG highest priority community) and California black walnut trees (Juglans californica
var. californica) (California Native Plant Society List 4)"16
Based on the declaration of the Applicant's biologist (i.e., "Any impacts to these
resources must be considered significant"), in addition to compliance with the City's
protected tree ordinance, additional mitigation is, therefore, required in response to the
project -related impacts on "California walnut woodland and coast live oak woodlands."
Although tree replacement requirements under the protected tree ordinance will serve to
compensate for the lost of individual protected trees, the planting of replacement trees
will not sufficiently compensate for the impacts on these plant communities and the
habitats those communities support. In addition, since the biological assessment did not
specifically addressed fuel modification requirements beyond the limits of proposed
grading, as may be imposed by the IACFD in accordance with the VHFHSZ (Fire Zone
4) requirements, actual project -related impacts on biological resources could potentially
exceed those identified by the project's biologist and arborist. In contrast, although the
protected tree survey did consider potential impacts beyond the proposed grading limits
(e.g., A total of 59 trees within the 50 -foot buffer zone are in close proximity to the
grading and will be affected ,17), the precise nature of any fuel modification requirements
have not yet been established by the LACFD and could potentially exceed the spatial
limits of that survey (i.e., extend beyond the 50 -foot buffer).
In contrast, based on the Applicant's own declarations, as contained in the "Oak Tree
Permit Application," dated November 6, 2002, in response to the inquiry: "How many oak
trees will be cut, removed, relocated or damaged," the Applicant declares "269 of which
only 72 are considered healthy enough for preservation."
14/ Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc., Biological Assessment — Jewel Ridge Estates Project, City
of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, November 2002, p. 11.
1s/ Ibid.
16/ Marc Blain, Results of Spring Habitat Assessment Survey on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site
(Tentative Tract 54081), in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, April 13, 2004, p. 2.
17/ Don Case Arborist, Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report,
Tentative Tract 54081, February 5, 2004, p. 1.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-10 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Since the protected tree survey did not consider the currently proposed grading plan, the
information contained in that survey is not necessarily indicative of the potential impacts
associated with the current project. In assessing the 2003-2004 development
application, based on a City -sponsored assessment of the Applicant's protected tree
survey, the City's independent consultant concluded: (1) the trees located in the south-
central portion of the site need to be remapped; (2) areas of the map where tagged tree
numbers appear twice should be investigated (this will allow for the correct mapping
location of the respective tree, or determine if the same tag was used twice); (3) an
additional site visit should be conducted to determine the actual number of California
black walnut trees; and (4) health ratings of the trees should be changed from those
mentioned in the Applicant's protected tree report to those recorded by the City's
consultant.18
As specified in Section 22.38.130 (Tree Replacement/Relocation Standards) in the
Municipal Code: "Residential parcels greater than 20,000 square feet and commercial
and industrial properties shall be planted at a minimum of 3:1 ratio." In contrast, the
Applicant is currently proposing replacement "on a 2:1 basis."19 As specified in Section
22.38.130(b) of the Municipal Code, the Director and/or the Planning Commission is
authorized to grant an "exception" (or require additional replacement trees) to the City's
3:1 replacement standard.
In recognition of the presence of a potentially significant direct biological resource
impact, the following mitigation measures are recommended:
Mitigation Measure No. 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the
Applicant shall submit a revised protected tree survey based on the approved
site plan, the revised grading plan prepared in response to that site plan and
following review by the City Engineer, and incorporating each of the City's
comments formulated in response to the "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of
Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case
Arborist, February 5, 2004). The revised protected tree survey shall include an
exhibit depicting the on-site and off-site location of all protected trees on the
project site (whether located in the City or within adjacent County areas) located
within the limits of proposed grading, within the limits of the fuel modification
zone as outlined in the Applicant's "fuel modification plan," and any additional
area(s) beyond those limits identified by the arborist, the City Engineer, and the
Los Angeles County Fire Department as comprising an area within which direct
or indirect impacts to protected trees could reasonably be anticipated.
Mitigation Measure No.5. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit a
"California walnut woodland and coast live oak woodlands" mitigation plan shall
be submitted to the City of Diamond Bar designed to mitigate not only the loss of
individual protected trees but also the loss or diminishment of the existing
southern coast live oak and California walnut woodland habitat located on and
adjacent to the project site. In addition to satisfying the minimum replacement
ratio set forth in Section 22.38.130 (Tree Replacement/ Relocation Standards) of
16/ Pacific Southwest Biological Consultants, Third Party Tree Inventory Review of the Jewel Ridge Estates
Property, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, November 3, 2003, p. 5.
1g/ Op. Cit., Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar — Protected Tree Report, Tentative Tract
54081, p. 5.
Cit
y of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-11
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
the Municipal Code, the mitigation plan shall require and specify the selective on-
site or off-site planting of replacement trees and typically associated vegetation in
a characteristic woodland assemblage. The mitigation plan shall be prepared by
a licensed landscape architect possessing recent experience in the design and
implementation of habitat mitigation plans in County areas. The resulting
aggregation of trees and associated vegetation shall seek to establish a natural,
viable plant community in the area of that replacement, as opposed to the
indiscriminant distribution of replacement trees at various locations throughout
the project area. The mitigation plan shall further specify the Applicant's
proposed schedule for the effectuation of that plan, describe the performance
expectations for plant survival, present an outline for a minimum five-year
monitoring plan that will be initiated and funded by the Applicant, and describe
the manner in which those monitoring activities will be funded and performance
will be verified. The City shall independently review the proposed mitigation plan
and shall identify those changes, if any, that are required to that plan based on
the findings of that independent review. The Applicant shall reimburse the City
for any costs incurred in conducting that review and shall amend the plan based
on the City's directives.
Mitigation Measure No. 6. If on-site grading activities have not commenced
prior to April 3, 2007 (the date of the most recent biological field survey), in
accordance with the provisions of an approved grading plan, the Applicant shall
withhold commencement of any and all grading operations, excluding emergency
activities, pending the submission and acceptance by the City of a new biological
survey conducted to reassess the presence or absence of protected biological
resources on and adjacent to the site.
As indicated in the 2004 biological resource assessment: "The habitat on the project site
does have potential to support a variety of unlisted sensitive species such as the
northern red -diamond rattlesnake (Crotalis ruber Tuber), Cooper's hawk (Accipier
cooperii), and the northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax).
Although not located on the project site, a number of the species listed in Table 3-1
(California Natural Diversity Data Base Record Search — Yorba Linda Quadrangle) could
exist in the general project area (e.g., Tonner Canyon). As indicated by the CDFG, with
regards to the coastal horned lizard, the negative effects of human disturbance are not
limited to the immediate vicinity of land disturbance or human habitation, sometimes
effects are manifest at considerable distances (e.g., domestic cats have been observed
to eliminate horned lizards within a several square kilometer area from a cat's home
base)."
Although biological surveys have not been conducted by the Applicant beyond the
boundaries of the project site and no such surveys have been submitted for the City's
consideration, indirect impacts on biological resources can be anticipated beyond the
project boundaries. Based, in part, on the County's proposed expansion of an existing
SEA (SEA 15: Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills) and the establishment of a new SEA south of
but not inclusive of the project site (Puente Hills SEA), as now included in the on-going
20/ Marc Blain, Results of Spring Habitat Assessment Survey on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site
(Tentative Tract 54081), in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, Califomia, April 13, 2004, p. 1.
21/ California Department of Fish and Game, Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in
California, California Horned Lizard, 1994.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-12 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
planning activities comprising the County General Plan update, it is evident that a rich
biological diversity exists in nearby County unincorporated areas.
Causal factors generated by human activities may be collectively termed "harassment."
Harassment is defined as those activities of man and his associated domestic animals
that increase the physiological costs of survival or decrease the probability of successful
reproduction in wildlife populations. The most common forms of harassment that
accompany development include increased human presence, construction and
background noise, light intrusion, the introduction of non-native species (e.g., pets and
ornamental plants), and the introduction of environmental contaminants. The effects of
harassment manifest primarily on wildlife and predominately occur through habitat
degradation. Although the impacts of harassment are not as complete as total habitat
removal, they can nonetheless be significant.
In recognition of presence of a potentially significant indirect biological resource impact,
the following mitigation measures are recommended:
Mitigation Measure No. 7. All initial purchasers of real property within the tract
map boundaries shall be notified, in writing through their respective residential
purchase contract, that access to designated open space areas is prohibited
except along approved and designated trails and via designated access points.
Pedestrians and bicycles shall be permitted only on approved and designated
trails.
Mitigation Measure No. 8. Conditions, covenants, and restriction (CC&R) shall
specify that the following activities and uses shall be expressly prohibited within
designated open space areas: unauthorized entry; use of motorized vehicles;
possession of firearms including air or gas propelled weapons, slings and sling-
shots; collection or possession of native plants or wildlife, collecting wood, or
engaging in activity to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,
poison, capture or collect wildlife; smoking or the use of fire; unauthorized trail
construction; and removal, defacement or damage to natural features. CC&Rs
shall be enforceable and contain provisions sufficient to deter violations.
Mitigation Measure No. 9. Landscape plans for all landscaped common, open
space, and fuel modification zone areas shall incorporate native, drought -
tolerant, non-invasive plant species. Exotic plant species listed by the California
Exotic Plant Pest Council as noxious weeds shall be prohibited for use as
landscaping material. Landscape plans shall include weed prevention and
control measures including, but not limited to: (1) use of only certified weed -free
hay, straw, and other organic mulches to control erosion; and (2) use only
certified weed -free seed for the reclamation of disturbed areas.
Based on the findings of a April 4, 2004 field survey, the Applicant's biologists (California
Gnatcatcher 10[a] Permit No. TE001075-0) concluded that the "Jewel Ridge Estates
project site has no potential to support the California gnatcatcher."22 Additional
correspondence, dated April 21, 2006, was submitted to the City by the same biologist,
as countersigned by another qualified biologist, operating under contract to the
22/ Marc Blain, Results of California Gnatcatcher Habitat Assessment on the Jewel Ridge Estates Project
Site (Tentative Tract 54081), In the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, April 15, 2004.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-13
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Applicant. Based on a subsequent site reconnaissance survey conducted on April 3,
2006, with regards to the 2002 biological assessment, the biologist noted that "the
descriptions of the biotic resources in the [2002] report remain accurate to date. The
biotic conditions are unchanged at the level of detail which they are described. Any
potential differences in the conditions present at the time of the original survey work and
the present are considered inconsequential. As a result, the conclusions regarding the
potential or lack of potential for each special status species remain accurate."'
Project -related and cumulative biological impacts could exceed those levels addressed
herein if grading or construction staging activities were to extend beyond the confines of
the assumed limits of grading. In order to reduce those potential impacts, the following
mitigation measure is recommended:
Mitigation Measure No. 10. All construction and material staging activities and
all equipment marshalling activities that need to occur in close proximity to the
project site shall be confined to the property limits and shall not include any on-
site or off-site areas extending beyond the City authorized limits of project —
specific grading. To the maximum extent feasible, all such activities shall occur
at the greatest possible separation distance from any near -site sensitive
receptors.
As mitigated, the potentially significant direct and indirect biological resource impacts
associated with the proposed project can be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
(b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or
by the CDFG or USFWS?
Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. See Response No. 4.4.4(a) above.
(c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
No Impact. No wetlands, marshes, vernal pools, or coastal areas exist on the project
site. In the absence of those on-site resources, no direct or indirect project -related
impacts are anticipated on any waters of the United States.
(d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less than Significant Impact. Since the project site is surrounded on three sides by
existing residential development, although undeveloped areas located to the south of the
project site likely serve a significant wildlife movement function, the project site does not
itself play any substantial role in facilitating wildlife movement between existing open
23/ Correspondence from Ann M. Johnson, Principal, Biological Services and Marc Blain, Biological
Resources Manager to Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge Estates LLC (Subject: Review of Biological Resources on the
Jewel Ridge Estates Project Site in the City of Diamond Bar, California), April 21, 2006.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-14 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
space areas. As such, the site's development would not substantially impede wildlife
movement or adversely affect any migratory wildlife.
(e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less than Significant Impact. The project appears to generally comply with all applicable
local policies and ordinances formulated to protect biological resources.
(f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat
conservation plan?
Less than Significant Impact. Neither the project site nor directly adjacent areas are
located in or under consideration for inclusion into any planned, proposed, or adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or
other local, regional of State habitat conservation planning area. South of the project
site, on non-contiguous property, is an existing SEA (SEA 15: Tonner Canyon/Chino
Hills). As part of the current planning activities now comprising the on-going
comprehensive County General Plan update, that existing SEA may be expanded
(Puente Hills SEA) to encompass a substantially larger area, extending northward and
abutting the project site.
No current or proposed City or County plans, however, contemplate the preservation of
the project site or the inclusion of the subject property into the existing or proposed SEA
boundaries.
4.4.5 Cultural Resources
(a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic
resource as defined in Section 95064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines?
No Impact. No significant historic, prehistoric, or paleontological resources and no
evidence of human remains have been identified on or near the project site.
(b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines?
No impact. See Response No. 4 4 5(a) above.
(c) Would the project, directly or indirectly, destroy a unique paleontological resource, site,
or unique geologic feature?
No Impact. See Response No 4 4 5(a) above.
(d) Would the project disturb human remains including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
No Impact. See also Response No 4 4 5(a) above.
ity of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-15
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
4.4.6 Geology and Soils
(a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: (i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued
by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known
fault? (ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including
liquefaction? (iv) Landslides?
Less than Significant. As illustrated in Figure 3-6 (Official Map: Special Studies Zones —
Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle), the project site is not
located within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (APEFZA)
special study area. However, as indicated in Figure 3-3 (Official State Seismic Hazard
Zone Map — Portion of the 7.5 -Minute Yorba Linda Topographic Quadrangle), portions of
the project site contain the following "zones of required investigation": (1) liquefaction
(i.e., areas where historical occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological, geotechnical
and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements
such that mitigation, as defined in Section 2693[c] of the PRC, would be required); and
(2) earthquake -induced landslides (i.e., areas where previous occurrence of landslide
movement or local topographic, geological, geotechnical and subsurface water
conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacement such that mitigation,
as defined in Section 2693[c] of the PRC, would be required).
In recognition of those potential hazards and pursuant to City requirements, a site-
specific geotechnical investigation was conducted by the Applicant and independently
reviewed by the City. That geotechnical investigation includes the following studies: (1)
"Interim Engineering Geologic Review, Proposed Residential Tract, Southern End of
Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Calif., Project No. 3375" (Ray A. Eastman,
February 5, 2003); (2) "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology
Investigation — Proposed Residential Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek
Drive, Diamond Bar, California, APN #8714028003" (GeoEnviron Engineering
Consultants, Inc., February 15, 2003); (3) "Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet
dated September 17, 2004 by Leighton and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar,
Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoils
Consultants, Inc., September 26, 2005); and (4) "Response to Geotechnical Review
Sheet dated January 10, 2006 by Leighton and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar,
Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (GeoSoils
Consultants, Inc., February 3, 2006).
With regards to the project's potential geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils impacts,
a number of recommended actions are presented in the above referenced studies and
constitute Applicant -nominated environmental compliance activities that, as a result of
their inclusion in Applicant -submitted studies, are included as part of the project
description. Because of the inclusion of those actions therein, each of those Applicant -
nominated actions do not constitute mitigation measures under CEQA.
Although the identified impact does not elevate to a level of significance, in order to
ensure the inclusion of the recommendations presented in the project's geotechnical
investigation(s), the Lead Agency has formulated a mitigation measure requiring that all
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-16 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
the recommendations presented by the project's engineering geologist and geotechnical
engineer be incorporated into the project's subsequent design and development.
0 Mitigation Measure No. 11. The project design and development shall
incorporate and the Applicant shall include, conduct, perform, and undertake all
design and development recommendations contained in the project's
geotechnical investigation(s), including, but not necessarily limited to, those
contained in GeoEnviron Engineering Consultants Inc.'s "Preliminary
Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation — Proposed
Residential Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar,
California, APN #8714028003" (February 15, 2003), GeoSoils Consultants, Inc.'s
"Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated September 17, 2004 by
Leighton and Associates for the City of Diamond Bar, Department of
Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (September 26, 2005), and
in any subsequent design -level investigation(s) that may be conducted for the
proposed project, except where otherwise expressly authorized by the City
Engineer.
Implementation of the recommended mitigation measure, in combination with the
applicable Municipal Code and UBC requirements and appropriate engineering practices
will ensure that this impact remains at a less -than -significant level.
(b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil?
Less than Significant Impact. The County and municipalities within the County
implement a municipal storm water program to reduce storm water and urban runoff
pollutant under the requirements of RWQCB Order No. 01-182 (NPDES No.
CAS004001). In compliance with the permit, the City, as a Co -Permittee, has
implemented a storm water quality management program (SQMP) that requires that a
"Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan" (SUSMP) be prepared that includes
appropriate BMPs and guidelines to reduce pollutants in storm water to the maximum
extent practicable (MEP). As specified under that permit, the project's SUSMP shall
contain a list of minimum required BMPs. In addition, prior to the issuance of a grading
permit, the Applicant must obtain a general construction activity storm water permit that
shall include a separate "Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan" (SWPPP) with details
of BMPs.
The project's compliance with applicable permit requirements will ensure that storm
water discharge, including potential water -borne soil erosion, will not adversely impact
receiving water quality.
(c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-site or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No 4 4 6(a) above.
(d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risk to life or property?
Y of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-17
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Less than Significant Impact. Expansive soils are characterized by their ability to
undergo significant volume change (shrink or swell) due to variations in moisture
content. Changes in soil moisture content can result from rainfall, landscape irrigation,
utility leakage, roof drainage, perched groundwater, drought, or other factors and may
cause unacceptable settlement or heave of structures, concrete slabs supported -on -
grade, or pavements supported over these materials.
Expansive soils possess a shrink -swell characteristic. Shrink -swell is the cyclic change
in volume (expansion and contraction) that occurs in fine-grained clay sediments from
the process of wetting and drying. Structural damage may occur over a long period of
time, usually the result of inadequate soil and foundation engineering or the placement
of structures directly on expansive soils. Expansive soils may, among other things,
cause foundations and flatwork to heave and become damaged.
As indicated in the Applicant's engineering geology report: "Major portions of the
geologic units are anticipated to be expansive and precautions are required relative
thereto." 24 Potential expansive soil impacts can be effectively mitigated through
compliance with Municipal Code and UBC requirements, appropriate engineering
practices, and implementation of specified design and development recommendations.
With regards to the project's potential geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils impacts,
a number of recommended actions are presented in Section 2.4 (Applicant -Nominated
Environmental Compliance Activities) and constitute Applicant -nominated environmental
compliance activities that are included as part of the project description. In addition, a
mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure No. 11) has been formulated requiring that all
the recommendations presented in the project's geotechnical investigation be
incorporated into the project's design and development.
Implementation of the recommended mitigation measure, in combination with the
applicable Municipal Code and UBC requirements and appropriate engineering practices
will reduce this potential impact to a less -than -significant level.
(e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks
or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
No Impact. No aspect of the project would involve the use of septic tanks or other
alternative wastewater disposal systems.
4.4.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
(a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than Significant Impact. Nearly all land uses consume some quantity of hazardous
materials and generate some quantity of hazardous wastes. With regards to the
proposed project, those materials and those wastes will likely be limited to paints,
cleaners, solvents, and pesticides, as typically associated with residential uses.
24l Op. Cit., Interim Engineering Geologic Review, Proposed Residential Tract, Southern End of Crooked
Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Calif., Project No. 3375, p. 4.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-18 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Additionally, limited quantities of pathogens may be present in those municipal solid
wastes (MSW) generated by the project, in the form of disposable diapers, sanitary
napkins, pet feces, and other similar wastes.
The quantities of any such materials, either located or consumed on the project site,
would be comparable to other similarly sized residential uses located throughout the
community. As such, no inordinate hazards would be associated with the
implementation and operation of the proposed project.
(b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. No aspect of the proposed project has the potential to
result in the accidental release of substantial quantities of hazardous materials.
Based on the information contained in a preliminary title report, as submitted by the
Applicant, 25 no evidence of underground pipelines, traversing the project site, has been
identified. Notwithstanding the information contained therein, the Applicant is still
required to comply with Sections 4216.2(a) and 4216.9(a) the CGC. Compliance with
those requirements, which is mandatory for all contractors, will ensure that any grading
activities as may be required for the project's development, operation, and on-going
maintenance fully considers and avoids potential impacts upon any "subsurface
installation" (i.e., any underground pipeline, conduit, duct, wire, or other structure, except
non -pressurized sewer lines, non -pressurized storm drains, or other non -pressurized
drain lines) that may exist within the area of proposed ground disturbance.
(c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
No Impact. The project site is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school and no hazardous emissions are associated with the proposed project.
(d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on alist of hazardous materials
sites compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code and
create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. Groundcover (in the form of non-native grasses) covered
most of the site, thus obscuring visibility. In response, the City requested and the
Applicant submit a Phase I environmental site assessment conducted for the purpose of
assessing the presence or absence of the range of contaminants within the scope of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information
System (CERCLA), petroleum products, and other environmental hazards on the project
site at levels that may require further investigation and/or remediation (e.g. actionable
levels).
As indicated in "Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Property at Southern End of
Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (Geo Environ, May
25/ Chicago Title Company, Preliminary Report, Order No. 11045031-X49, February 7, 2001.
C'
ity a, Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-19
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
10, 2004), "only a low potential is considered to exist for the soil and/or groundwater of
the subject property to have been impacted with hazardous substances as a result of
past or current subject property usage" and "no further assessment of the subject
property is considered necessary at this time." No mitigation measures or other
recommended actions were identified therein and no mitigation measures are
recommended or required by the Lead Agency.
(e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. The project site is neither located within an airport land use planning area
nor within two miles of a public airport or public use airport.
(� For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the area?
No Impact. The project site is not located in close proximity to any private airstrip.
(g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. The project site has neither been included in an emergency response plan
nor designated a part of any emergency response planning area. As such, project
implementation will not physically interfere with any emergency evacuation plan.
(h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death
involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. As illustrated in Figure 3-11 (Natural
Hazard Disclosure Map for a Portion of Los Angeles County), the project site is identified
as being located within a "wildland area that may contain substantial forest fire risks and
hazards" and directly adjacent to "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone."
One of the key provisions of the "Los Angeles County Fire Code" (Fire Code),27 codified
in Title 32 of the County Code, relative to Fire Zone 4 standards, is contained in Section
1117.2.1 therein. In accordance therewith, a "fuel modification plan" is required for
development activities proposed within a VHFHSZ. As more thoroughly described
therein: "A fuel modification plan, a landscape plan and an irrigation plan approved by a
registered landscape architect shall be submitted with any subdivision of land or prior to
any new construction, remodeling, modification or reconstruction of a structure where
such remodeling, modification or reconstruction increases the square footage of the
existing structure by 50% or more within any 12 month period and where the structure or
26/ Op. Cit., Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Property at Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive,
Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, pp. 3 and 4.
27/ As indicated in Section 16.00.010 (Adopted) in Title 16 (Fire Safety) of the Municipal Code: "Except as
hereinafter provided in this title, Title 32, Fire Code, of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended and in effect on
July 1, 1999, which constitutes an amended version of the California Fire Code, 1998 Edition (Part 9 of Title 24 of the
California Code of Regulations), including Appendix I -C and excluding all other appendices, is hereby adopted by
reference and shall constitute and may be cited as the fire code of the City of Diamond Bar."
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-20 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
subdivision is located within areas designated as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
or Fire Zone 4 in the County Building Code. Every fuel modification plan, landscape
plan and irrigation plan shall also be reviewed and approved by the forestry division of
the fire department for reasonable fire safety (Ord. 95-0063 § 70 (part), 1995)."
Since the Fire Code specifies the Applicant's obligation to prepare and submit a "fuel
modification plan, a landscape plan and an irrigation plan approved by a registered
landscape architect," those requirements are not again repeated as mitigation measures
herein. The precise nature of those fuel modification, landscape, and irrigation plans,
however, could result in additional impacts to on-site and near -site biological resources,
including protected trees. In recognition of those requirements, the City has formulated
a recommended mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure No 2) designed to ensure
consistency between the project's biological resource compliance requirements and the
public safety considerations imposed by the LACFD.
The LACFD has submitted correspondence to the City in response to the LACFD's
review of the proposed tentative tract map. The following "conditions of approval for
subdivision" were identified therein: (1) access shall comply with Section 902 of the Fire
Code, which requires all weather access; all weather access may require paving; (2) fire
department access shall be extended to within 150 feet distance of any exterior portion
of all structures; (3) 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 map; turnarounds shall be designed, constructed, and
maintained to insure there integrity for fire department use; where topography dictates,
turnarounds shall be provided for driveways that extend over 150 feet in length; (4)
Private driveways shall be indicated on the final map as "private driveway and firelane"
with the widths clearly depicted and shall be maintained in accordance with the Fire
Code; all required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested, and accepted prior to
construction; (5) vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable
throughout construction to all required fire hydrants; all required fire hydrants shall be
installed, tested, and accepted prior to construction; (6) this property is located within the
area described by the LACFD as "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone" (formally Fire
Zone 4); a "fuel modification plan" shall be submitted and approved prior to final map
clearance; and (7) provide the LACFD or the City approved street signs and building
access numbers prior to occupancy.
In addition, the LACFD has identified the following "water system requirements" for the
Proposed project: (1) provide water mains, fire hydrants, and fire flows as required by the
LACFD for all land shown on map which shall be recorded; (2) the required fire flow for
public fire hydrants at this location is 1,250 gallons per minute (gpm) at 20 pounds per
square inch (psi) for two hours, over and above maximum daily domestic demand; one
hydrant may be used to achieve the required fire flow; (3) fire hydrant requirements are
as follows (a) install 3 public fire hydrants and (b) upgrade/verify 1 existing public fire
hydrant; (4) all hydrants shall measure 6"x4"x2'/2" brass or bronze, conforming to current
AWWA standard C503 or approved equal; all on-site fire hydrants shall be installed a
minimum 25 feet from a structure or protected by a 2 -hour rated firewall; (5) all required
fire hydrants shall be installed, tested, and accepted or bonded for prior to final map
approval; vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout
29/ Correspondence (Conditions of Approval for Subdivision — Incorporated) from Claudia Soiza, Land
Development Unit, Fire Prevention Division, Los Angeles County Fire Department, dated December 9, 2003.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-21
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
construction; and (6) upgrade not necessary, if existing hydrant(s) meet(s) fire flow
requirements. 29
In recognition of the site's designation, as established by the California Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection, and notwithstanding the Applicant's obligations under the
provisions of the Fire Code, the following mitigation measures are recommended in
response to the project's potentially significant impacts:
Mitigation Measure No. 12. Prior to the commencement of any on-site grading,
grubbing, and construction activities, the Applicant will prepare and jointly submit
to the City and to the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) a
construction fire prevention and control plan outlining those activities to be
undertaken by the Applicant and/or others during the construction period to
ensure the provision of adequate continuing access to and through the project
site and outlining plans for fire safety and suppression. The construction fire
prevention and control plan shall address all phases of project construction. The
plan shall not be deemed adequate and no on-site grading, grubbing, and
construction activities can commence until the plan is jointly accepted by the
LACFD and by the City.
Mitigation Measure No. 13. Approval of the final tract map shall only occur after
approval by the LACFD and following the Applicant' demonstrated compliance
with all applicable conditions of approval for subdivision, water system
requirements, and such other conditions and recommendations that may be
identified by the LACFD for the proposed project.
Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, in combination with the
applicable Municipal Code and UBC requirements and appropriate engineering
practices, will reduce this potential impact to a less -than -significant level.
4.4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
(a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the jurisdiction of the
Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (LARWQCB) and is subject
to the water quality standards contained in the "Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles
Region" (LARWQCB, June 13, 1994) (Basin Plan). In addition, the project, as a "non -
point" discharge source, is subject to compliance with the provisions and standards for
municipal storm water and urban runoff discharges specified in the Permittee's NPDES
permit (NPDES No. CAS004001). Since the project involves more than ten dwelling
units, the Applicant is required to prepare a SUSMP and identify applicable BMPs to
control storm water pollution from sediments, erosion, and construction materials leaving
the construction site. Compliance with those requirements and standards will ensure
that the project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements.
29/ Correspondence (Water System Requirements — Incorporated) from Claudia Soiza, Land Development
Unit, Fire Prevention Division, Los Angeles County Fire Department, dated December 9, 2003.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-22 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
(b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a
lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting
wells would drop to a level which would not support existing or planned land uses for
which permits have been granted)?
Less than Significant Impact. Grading activities are not projected to occur at depths
likely to encounter subsurface groundwater. As such, groundwater will not be impacted
by direct interference.
To the extend that regionwide groundwater resources are utilized to provide potable
water for human consumption, the introduction of new housing units will serve to
incrementally increase existing regional demands for those resources. Based on the
project size and the number of individuals now residing within the regional, the project's
impacts on those resources would be de minimus.
(c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on the site or off the site?
Less than Significant Impact. As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004 submittal, the
Applicant submitted and the City reviewed a hydrology study for the project site. As
indicated in W.T.T. 54081 Existing and Proposed Hydrology" (Gary M. Gantney,
November 4, 2002), total storm water drainage discharged from the project site will
increase from 41.2 cubic feet per second (cfs) under pre -project conditions to 46.8 cfs
following project implementation. Storm waters discharged from the project will be
conveyed, via on-site storm water conduits, to the abutting Brea Canyon Channel.
Based on the information presented in the project's hydrologic study, the City Engineer
conditionally concluded that "post development hydrology is adequately stated."30
Although the identified impact does not elevate to a level of significance, in order to
ensure the inclusion of the City's recommendations, the Lead Agency has formulated a
mitigation measure requiring the City's and/or the County's approval of all project -related
drainage improvements.
Mitigation Measure No. 14. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the
Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the City Engineer shall
approve a revised project -specific hydrologic study consistent with the approved
tentative map. All drainage structures and associated facilities and
improvements shall be subject to final design and engineering review and
approval by the City Engineer and, if subject to County jurisdiction, by the Los
Angeles County Department of Public Works.
Implementation of the recommended mitigation measure, in combination with applicable
City and County requirements and appropriate engineering practices, will ensure that
this impact remains at a less -than -significant level.
30/ Memorandum (Subject: Tentative Tract Map 54081 — Tentative Map Hydrology — Second Review — P.O.
13026 from Don Winslow to John Ilasin, November 3, 2003.
f".
of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-23
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
(d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on the site or off the site?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.8(c) above.
(e) Would the project create or contribute to runoff water which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.8(c) above.
(t) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.6(a) above.
(g) Would the project place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
No Impact. As illustrated in Figure 3-9 (Portion of FEMA FIRM No. 06504309806), the
project site is included in FEMA's FiRM No. 0650430098013. As depicted therein, the
project site is located in "Zone C" and is not located within an area subject to either 100 -
year or 500 -year flood inundation.
(h) Would the project place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures that would
impede or redirect flood flow?
No Impact. See Response No. 4.4.6(8) above.
(i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death
involving flooding including flooding as a result of failure of a levee or dam?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.6(x) above.
6) Would the project be subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Less than Significant Impact. A seiche is the sloshing of a closed body of water (e.g.,
reservoir, swimming pool) from earthquake shaking. The project site is neither located
adjacent to an existing waterbody nor includes the development of a substantial water
element that would have the potential to spill a substantial quantity of water during an
earthquake event. Since the project site is not located in a coastal setting, the potential
hazards associated with a seismic sea wave (tsunami) are considered to be minimal.
The Applicant's geotechnical report concludes that the "proposed development will be
safe from landslides, settlement and slippage when grading has been completed in
accordance with the recommendations of this report."31 Those recommended actions
31/ Op. Cit., Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Investigation — Proposed
Residential Development, Southern End of Crooked Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, California, APN #8714028003, p. 11.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-24 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
are presented in Section 2.4 (Applicant -Nominated Environmental Compliance Activities)
and constitute Applicant -nominated environmental compliance activities that are
included as part of the project description. As such, those recommended actions are not
repeated as mitigation measures herein.
Hillside areas not routinely susceptible to mudflow hazards, however, may be subject to
debris flows following a wildfire event and winter rains. Compliance with Fire Code
requirements, in combination with those mitigation measures identified herein, will
reduce potential fire risks to a less -than -significant level. In the event of a wildland fire,
the HOA, the LACFD, the City, and other emergency planning agencies would assess
debris flow risks and take appropriate actions to protect lives and property.
4.4.9 Land Use and Planning
(a) Would the project physically divide an established community?
Less than Significant Impact. Since the project site is designated for residential use in
the 1995 General Plan ("RL Low Density Residential [Max. 3 DU/Acre]") and City Zoning
Map ("R-1 10,000") and because the project site is surrounded on three sites by existing
single-family residential uses, the subject property could be appropriately categorized as
an "infill" site. Additionally, no authorized public use of the property is now provided.
The site's development will not, therefore, foreclose an authorized public use.
The project design includes a "public access easement," inclusive of a "20' wide
easement for possible future fire," extending southward from the proposed southern cul-
de-sac to the adjoining property to the south. That retained easement will allow for
emergency access and could facilitate emergency response activities benefiting both the
proposed project and other abutting properties.
The proposed land uses represents an extension of development patterns already
present in the general project area. As such, the construction of new market -rate
housing will likely serve to complement and enhance the character of the existing
neighborhood.
(b) Would the project conflict with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations of an
agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect?
Less than Significant Impact. As indicated in the 1992 General Plan FEIR and 1995
Addendum, general plan policies constitute program -level mitigation measures that, at
the City's discretion, could be either applied at the project level or modified to become
project conditions.
The 1995 General Plan and the Municipal Code contain a broad diversity of plans,
policies, and regulations governing development activities within the community. Not all
plans, policies, and regulations are applicable to all projects and, based on the diversity
of those policies, there likely exist certain statements that could be construed as either
favoring or opposing any development activity within the City. Presented in Table 4-1
(Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures) are those 1995 General
Plan policies that appear most applicable to the proposed project.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-25
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
As part of the City's deliberations regarding the proposed project, the Planning
Commission and City Council must determine whether the proposed project complies
with the policies presented in the 1995 General Plan and make appropriate findings. If
the project's decisionmakers independently determine that the proposed project does
not conform to those policies, the City could not then approve the project as submitted.
If the project were not to be approved, then no physical changes would occur to the
project site and no land use impacts would manifest therefrom.
(c) Would the project conflict with an applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.4(f).
4.4.10 Mineral Resources
(a) Would the project result in loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be
of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. The site does not contain known mineral resources that would be of
substantial value to the locale, to the region, or to the residents of the State.
(b) Would the project result in loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
No Impact. See Response No. 4.4.10(a).
4.4.11 Noise
(a) Would the project result in expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
Less than Significant Impact. The following information is extracted from the "Air Quality
& Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California" (Blodgett/Baylosis
Associates, Inc., December 11, 2003),32 conducted for the purpose of assessing project -
related impacts on the existing noise environment. With regards to construction -term
impacts, the acoustical analysis concluded: "Adherence to City Code requirements will
ensure that any potential noise levels are less than significant." 33
The following potential construction -related mitigation measures were identified in the
above referenced acoustical analysis: (1) the grading and building contractor must
adhere to the requirements of the City of Diamond Bar Noise Control Ordinance; (2)
construction staging areas must be located away from the existing residences located to
the north along Crooked Creek Drive; and (3) the residential units must employ double -
paned windows, insulation, and other construction techniques to ensure that interior
32/ As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004, a number of studies were conducted both by the Lead Agency and
by the Applicant for a more intensive residential use of the project site. Although the current development application
contains a lesser number of residential units, the Lead Agency has not elected to perform a revised acoustical
analysis since the previous study allows for a worst-case assessment of the project's potential noise -related impacts.
33/ Op. Cit., Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar, California, p. 11.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-26 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
noise levels are reduced to 40 dBA (CNEL).34. Since some of those measures merely
cite preexisting obligations and in the absence of any significant construction -related
acoustical impact, those actions have not been expressly brought forward as mitigation
measures herein.
Relative to operational impacts, field measures identified a maximum on-site ambient
noise level of 62.5 dBA. Based on the site's proximity to the SR -57 Freeway, that noise
is likely attributable to traffic traveling along that roadway. Since the 1995 General Plan
(Noise Element) stipulates that the exterior noise level at residential locations should not
exceed 65 CNEL, the ambient noise environment is potentially conducive to a residential
land use.
The 1995 General Plan further stipulates that interior noise levels at residential locations
should not exceed 45 CNEL. Since typical construction practices will result in a 20-
decible35 to 27-decible36 reduction in interior noise levels, as compared to the exterior
noise environment with the windows closed, no additional architectural features are
required to allow for the attainment of that standard. Use of double -pane windows and
insulation are already preexisting obligations under the provisions of California's energy
(Title 24) standards.
(b) Would the project result in expose persons to or generate excessive ground -borne
vibration or ground -borne noise levels?
Less than Significant Impact. Vibratory compactors or rollers, pile drivers, and use of
explosives have the potential to generate perceptible ground vibration. It is noted that
the use of either explosives or pile drivers is not planned, required, nor anticipated
during project construction.
As indicated in the Applicant's engineering geology report, "the footing excavations and
detailed work areas may require heavy ripping and jackhammer work due to zones of
hard rock and boulders."37 As a result, during construction, some use of equipment
capable of generated ground -borne vibration is anticipated.
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) notes: "With the exception of a
few instances involving pavement breaking, pile driving, all Caltrans construction
vibration measurements have been below the 5 mm/s (0.2 in/sec) architectural damage
risk level for continuous vibration ... Other construction activities and equipment, such as
D-8 and D-9 Caterpillars, earthmovers and haul trucks have never exceeded 2.5 mm/s
(0.10 in/sec) or one half of the architectural damage risk level, at 3 m (10 ft.)...[Tjhe
probability of exceeding architectural damage risk levels for continuous vibration from
construction and trains is very low and from freeway traffic practically non-existent.
However, if vibration concerns involve pavement breaking, extensive pile driving, t.
341 Blodgett/Baylosis Associates, Inc., Air Quality & Noise Analysis — Jewel Ridge Estates, Diamond Bar,
California, December 11, 2003, p. 12.
3s/ United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Noise Guidebook, March 1985.
! United States Environmental Protection Agency, Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite
to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety (Technical Report 550/9-74-004), 1974.
37/ Op. Cit., Interim Engineering Geologic Review, Proposed Residential Tract, Southern End of Crooked
Creek Drive, Diamond Bar, Calif., Project No. 3375, p. 4.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-27
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
trains, 7.5 m (25 ft) or less from normal residences, buildings, or unreinforced structures,
damage is a real possibility. ,38
Caltrans further indicates that annoyance "is highly subjective, and does not take into
consideration elderly, retired, ill, and other individuals that may stay home more often
than the 'average' person. Nor does it account for people involved in vibration sensitive
hobbies or activities, and people that like to relax in quiet surroundings without noticing
vibrations. The threshold of perception, or roughly 0.25 mm/s (0.01 in/sec) may be
considered annoying by those people. Low level vibrations may also cause secondary
vibrations and audible effects such as a slight rattling of doors, windows and dishes,
resulting in additional annoyance. Annoying low frequency airborne noise can
sometimes accompany earth -borne vibrations.s39
Jackhammering would have substantially less potential to contribute to ground -borne
vibrations than pavement breaking or pile driving. Although potentially annoying,
vibratory impacts associated with the use of jackhammers is, therefore, assumed to be
less than significant and not mitigation is required or recommended.
(c) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.11(a) above.
(d) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.11(a) above.
(e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The project is located in excess of two miles from any public airport or public
use airport.
(t) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The project is not located within close proximity of a private airstrip.
4.4.12 Population and Housing
(a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g.,
proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., extension of roads or other
infrastructure) ?
3e/ California Department of Transportation, Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations, Technical
Advisory, Vibration (TAVO-2-01-R9601), February 20, 2002, pp. 15 and 18.
3s/ Ibid., p. 18.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-28 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Less than Significant Impact. Proposed is a 16 -unit residential subdivision. As indicated
in the 1992 General Plan MEA, the average household size in the City is 3.49
individuals. Based on that per household rate, an additional 56 individuals would occupy
the project site. In 2000, the United States Census reported a City population of 56,287
individuals. The project's contribution to the City's population is, therefore, de minimus.
(b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. No existing housing units will be displaced as a result of the proposed
project.
(c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction
of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. See Response 4.4.12(b) above.
4.4.13 Public Services
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the pof
rovision
new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives
for any of the following public services:
(a) Fire protection?
Less than Significant Impact. As indicated in Response No 4 5 7(h) herein, the LACFD
has reviewed the previous, higher density development application and submitted
comments to the City. Those comments include a specific set of LACFD-recommended
conditions. In addition, the City has formulated a recommended mitigation measure
(Mitigation Measure No 13) that would require both evidence of compliance with those
conditions and additional project review by the LACFD. The project is also subject to the
provisions of the Fire Code (e.g., fuel modification zone). As such, impacts on the
LACFD, its resources, and its facilities would be less than significant.
(b) Police protection?
Less than Significant Impact. During construction, a minor demand for additional police
services may occur during the project's construction phase. Such services include, but
may not be limited to, consultation during plan check, routine surveillance of the
construction site by regular patrol units, potential investigations of theft of or vandalism
to construction equipment and materials, and enforcement of local speed limits near the
construction site. In addition, if construction activities result in the discharge of dirt or
other debris along local roadways, haul drivers can be cited
California Vehicle Code. under the provisions of the
Provision of those police services would neither require construction of any new police
department facilities nor necessitate the physical alteration of any existing Los Angeles
County Sheriffs Department (LACSD) facilities. No substantial adverse short-term
cit f
y o Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-29
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
impacts to police protection services or facilities would occur during project's
construction.
Once operational, the proposed project will result in an incremental increase in the City's
population. New residential projects incrementally contribute to existing demands on
LACSD resources. However, there presently exists no direct mechanism to equate crime
propensity to local land use decisions. The LACSD has not established a functional
mechanism for the County to collect LACSD impact fees for the impacts generated by
new residential development. Funding for LACSD personnel, equipment, and facilities is
typically derived through ad valorum taxation and based on yearly allocations by the
County Board of Supervisor that occur through the County's annual budget process.
Increased property valuation provides a mechanism whereby the County, at its discretion,
has the ability to augment existing LACSD resources to accommodate reasonably
anticipated project -related County and local demands.
Although the project's traffic study acknowledge that the "additional single family homes
added to Crooked Creek Drive probably will result in more occurrences of Speeding "40
routine law enforcement activities can serve as a deterrent to speeding. As such, since
the project does not create an unsafe travel environment, the resulting impacts would
not be deemed significant.
(c) Schools?
Less than Significant Impact. As indicated in the WVUSD's "Justification Report for the
Walnut Valley Unified School District," the WVUSD has determined that, on average,
each new single-family dwelling unit constructed within the district's boundaries will
generate 0.720 new students, including 0.253 grade kindergarten (K) through 6
students, 0.192 grade 7-9 students, and 0.275 grade 9-12 students. Based on those
student generation rates, the proposed 16 -unit single-family housing project will likely
add around 11.5 new students to WVUSD schools, including about 4.1 grade K-6
students, about 3.1 grade 7-9 students, and about 4.4 grade 9-12 students.
Based on projected areawide growth, the fee justification study concludes: "It is
projected that for residential development, the District will need $15,022,927 in 2004
dollars to finance projected future needs for K-12 school facilities. These cost
projections are based on the current residential construction schedule, current pupil per
dwelling unit yield ratios and SFP [School Facilities Program] facilities construction
standards. Residential developer fee revenues are projected to be $5,208,000 for the
District, leaving a shortfall of $9,814,927 for financing future needs for the District."41
Although Applicant contributions will not fully offset the project's potential impacts on
local school facilities, the payment of school impact fees constitutes full mitigation for the
impacts of residential development on affected school districts (Section 65995[h], CGC).
Since the payment of those fees constitutes a pre-existing obligation, no additional
mitigation measures have been identified herein.
40i Op. Cif., Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision Located at the Terminus
of Crooked Creek Drive (Approximately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of Diamond Bar), October 2002,
Revised September 2003, p. 28.
41! Calwell Flores Winters, Inc., Justification Report for the Walnut Valley Unified School District — This
Study Established the Justification for the Imposition of Developer Fees Pursuant to Applicable Law as of March
2004, adopted May 5, 2004, p. 14.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-30 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
(d) Parks?
Less than Significant Impact. Project -specific park demands can be calculated in
ca
accordance with the formula provided in Section 21.32.040 (Park Land Deditions and
Fees) in Chapter 21.32 (Subdivisions) in the Municipal Code (X = 0.O05(UP) where "X' is
the amount of parkland required in acres, "U" is the total number of approved dwelling
units, and "P" is 3.4 for single-family dwellings). In accordance therewith, the proposed
16 -unit subdivision would generate a need for 0.27 acres (approximately 11,850 square
feet) of additional parkland within the City. Because the on-site open space areas do not
constitute "useable" areas available for recreational use, those
areas do not
serve as real property offsets. Payment of applicable Quimby Act fees e constitutes full
mitigation for project -related park requirements.
The project site is specifically identified as a possible location for a "recreational trail" in
the City's Trails Master Plan. As defined therein, recreational trails "are rustic in nature,
typically not paved, and are found in the City's parks and open space areas and along
government or utility -owned easements. Recreational trails are suitable for the use of
hikers, casual walkers, and, in some instances, mountain bicyclists and equestrians.ms
,12
No specific cost estimates are provided for trail segments but identified cost ite
include land acquisition, plan preparation, grading, and the installation of guard rails. In
addition, the Trails Master Plan identifies a potential "Class A" trail head in proximity to
the project site. The estimated cost to construct a "Class A" trail head is $7Amit0,000 to
$85,000, with the majority of that cost ($61,450 to $66,300) being associated with the
provision of parking.
A proposed on-site "trail head" and "pedestrian trail" is identified on the tentative tract
map. The "pedestrian trail" provides non -motorized access to the major retained open
space area (Lot C). Although the inclusion of an on-site trail appears consistent with the
Trails Master Plan, no design or development details concerning that trail segment have
been included with the development application. Similarly, since the proposed on-site
street improvements are identified as a private street, there may exist access restrictions
and in -tract parking limitations affecting the proposed trail segment. Additionally,
responsibilities for trail segment maintenance (e.g., homeowners' association) are not
presently addressed in the development application.
Although the identified impact does not elevate to a level of significance, in order to
facilitate the implementation of the proposed "pedestrian trail," the Lead Agency has
formulated mitigation measures requiring both the conveyance of an easement for trail
and related purposes and requiring further design -level detail of the proposed
improvements.
Mitigation Measure No. 15. Concurrent with the recordation of the final tract
map, the Applicant shall dedicate to the City an irrevocable easement or similar
instrument and post a cash bond or other similar instrument, acceptable to the
City Attorney, allowing for the construction, operation, and maintenance of a trail
head, recreational trail, and such other related uses and facilities as may be
identified by the Community Development Director.
10. 42/ Op. Cit., City of Diamond Bar, City of Diamond Bar Recreational Trails and Bicycle Route Master Plan, p.
43/ Ibid., Table 5, p. 40.
City of Diamo d B
Dia— 1
ar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-31
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Mitigation Measure No. 16. Unless otherwise determined by the Community
Development Director, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant
shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the Community Development
Director shall approve detailed improvement plans for the on-site trail head and
recreational trail, including all related uses and facilities identified by the
Community Development Director. Trail improvement plans and specifications, if
required, shall be included in the project's landscape plans and in such other
plans as may be determined by the Community Development Director.
Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures will ensure that public service
impacts remain at a less -than -significant level.
(e) Other public facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. The following two additional "public facilities" are
addressed herein: library services and private street maintenance.
Each new residential unit constructed within the City will impose an incremental demand
on County library services. Although not applicable to projects located within the
incorporated boundaries of the City, the County has established a library mitigation fee
program. Since the City has not adopted either the County's or another library fee
program, no library fees will be assessed against the proposed project.
4.4.14 Recreation
(a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.13(d) above.
(b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.13(d) above.
4.4.15 Transportation and Traffic
(a) Would the project cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume -to -capacity ratio on roads, or congestion
at intersections)?
Less than Significant impact. As part of the Applicant's 2003-2004, the Applicant
submitted and the City reviewed a project -specific traffic study for a higher intensity
residential use of the project site. As indicated in "Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single
Family Residential Subdivision Located at the Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive
(Approximately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of Diamond Bar)"
(Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc., October 2002, Revised September 2003), "[t]he
capacity analysis conducted for the proposed 20 single family home subdivision
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-32 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
estimated to add approximately 192 daily vehicular trips with 15 morning
and 20 trips during the afternoon peak hour trips
ork will not
significantly impact any of the study intersections the
ys analyzed dstreet �in he traffic
impact report. ,44
With regards to the project's potential traffic impacts (as associated with a 20 -unit
residential development), a number of recommended actions are presented in Section
2_4 (Applicant -Nominated Environmental Compliance Activities) and constitute
Applicant -nominated environmental compliance activities that are included as part of the
project description. As such, those actions are not repeated as mitigation measures
herein.
(b) Would the project exceed, individually or cumulatively, a level of sery
highways? ice standard
established by the County congestion management agency for designed roads or
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4 4 15(a) above.
(c) Would the project result in a change in air traffic pattems, including either an increase in
traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
No Impact. No aspect of the project will alter existing air traffic patterns.
(d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Significant unless Mitigation Incorporated. Proposed at the project entryway is a
"traffic roundabout." While roundabouts and other traffic calming designs can be
effective in reducing vehicle speed, those elements may introduce additional safety
considerations that might not otherwise exist if a typical street link were to be provided.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), however, notes: "Roundabouts may
improve the safety of intersections by eliminating or altering conflict types, by reducing
speed differentials at intersections, and by forcing drivers to decrease speeds as they
proceed into and through the intersection." 45 As further indicated therein: "The
frequency of crashes at an intersection is related to the number of conflict points at an
intersection, as well as the magnitude of conflicting flows at each conflict point. A
conflict point is a location where the paths of two motor vehicles, or a vehicle and a
bicycle or pedestrian queue, diverge, merge, or cross each other. ,46
As illustrated in Figure 4-1 (Vehicle Conflict Points for "T" Intersections with Single -Lane
Approaches), when comparing a "T" intersection and a single -lane roundabout, the
number of vehicle -vehicle conflict points for roundabouts decreases from nine to six for
three -leg intersections. However, the FHWA states that, besides conflicts with other
road users, "the center island of a roundabout presents a particular hazard that may
result in over -representation of single -vehicle crashes that tend to occur during periods
44/ Op. Cit., Traffic Analysis for a Proposed Single Family Residential Subdivision Located at the Terminus
of Crooked Creek Drive (Approximately 745 Feet South of Gold Run Drive in the City of Diamond Bar), October 2002,
Revised September 2003, p. 28.
P. 103. as/ Federal Highway Administration, Roundabouts: An Informational Guide, FHWA-RD-00-067, June 2000,
46/ Ibid., P. 104.
City of Dia d B
mon ar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-33
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
of low traffic volume. At cross intersections, many such violations may go unrecorded
unless a collision with another vehicle occurs." 47
Figure -1
VEHICLE CONFLICT POINTS FOR "T" INTERSECTIONS
4NS
WITH SINGLE -LANE APPROACHES
Source: Federal Highway Administration
Although not provided in direct response to the current tract map configuration, the City's
consulting traffic engineer had, based on a review of the Applicant's 2003-2004
development application, concluded: "There do not appear to be any significant
deficiencies in the proposed street design. There is no indication the project would
increase hazards due to a design feature provided the proposed roundabout is designed
per acceptable guidelines ... Three of the predominate types of collisions are: (1) failures
to yield at entry to circulating vehicles, (2) single vehicle run-off the circulatory roadway,
and (3) single vehicle run -into the central island.. To reduce the severity of single
vehicle crashes, special attention should be accorded to improving visibility and avoiding
or removing any hard obstacles on the central island."48
Since the creation of a potentially hazardous design element would constitute a
significant impact, in order to ensure that safety issues are fully considered in roadway
design, the following mitigation measure has been recommended:
■ Mitigation Measure No. 16. Prior to the recordation of the final map, the
Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the City Engineer shall
approve final design and development plans and geometrics for all proposed on-
site street improvements and, unless otherwise authorized, conform to the
Diamond Bar Development Improvement Standards, Requirements and
Guidelines.
If, during construction, equipment or material staging activities were to occur along those
local streets located in proximity to the project site, the presence of that equipment and
those materials could interfere with the use of those streets by residences and by other,
47/ Ibid., pp. 105 and 116.
48/ Memorandum (Subject: VTTM 54081) from Fred Alamolhoda to Warren Siecke, Warren C. Siecke
Transportation and Traffic Engineering, May 17, 2004, p. 2.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-34 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
could reduce available on -street parking, and could impede access by emergency
equipment and personnel. In order to ensure that construction activities do not produce
off-site impacts, a mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure No 10) has been formulated
requiring that all construction and material staging activities and all equipment
marshalling activities be confined to the property limits and not include any on-site or off-
site areas. Although this measure would not preclude construction workers from parking
along Crooked Creek Drive, it would prohibit the parking, storage, and maintenance of
construction vehicles and equipment along that roadway.
Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures will reduce potential
transportation and traffic impacts to a less -than -significant level.
(e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No 4 4 15(d) above.
(� Would the project result in inadequate parking capacity?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed 42 -foot wide private street right-of-way is
sufficient to accommodate off-site parking on both sides of the street without impeding
through traffic or emergency access. It is, however, noted that, with regards to public
streets, the Circulation Element of the General Plan specified "roadway classification
right-of-way width" for "residential" (local) streets is 44-60 feet North of the project
-foot right-of-way. The transition between
site, Crooked Creek Drive is an improved 60
the two rights-of-way would occur at the proposed roundabout.
(9) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans or
altemative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? programs supporting
No Impact. No changes or other modifications are proposed to any existing alternative
transportation facilities operated by or operating within the City.
4.4.16 Utilities and Service Systems
(a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB?
Less than Significant Impact. The design capacities of the Sanitation Districts of Los
Angeles County (CSDLAC) wastewater treatment plants are based on population
forecasts contained in Southern California Association of Government's (SCAG) "Regional
Comprehensive Plan and Guide" (RCPG). The RCPG is part of the "Air Quality
Management Plan" (AQMP). The AQMP and RCPG are jointly prepared by the SCAQMD
and SCAG as a requirement of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA).
In order to conform to the AQMP, all expansions of CSDLAC facilities must be sized and
service phased in a manner that ensures consistency with the Growth Management
Element (GME) of the RCPG. The GME contains a regional forecast for the Counties of
Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial, as prepared by
SCAG. Specific policies in the RCPG that deal with the management of growth are
incorporated into the AQMP's strategies to improve air quality in the SCAB. The available
49/ Op. Cit., City of Diamond Bar General Plan, Circulation Element, p. V-6.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study - Impact Analysis July 2006
Page 4-35
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
capacity of the CSDLAC's treatment facilities is assumed to be limited to those levels
associated with approved growth identified in the RCPG.
Projects that are consistency with local general plans are, therefore, adequately
accommodated by CSDLAC wastewater treatment facilities. Conversely, projects that are
not consistent with existing general plan and which would generate wastewater quantities
in excess of those levels that could otherwise be generated based on allowable land uses
may not be adequately accommodated by CSDLAC facilities.
Since the 1995 General Plan designates the project site for residential use and since the
density standards presented therein would authorize a greater number of dwelling units
than now proposed, the project is presumed to be adequately serviced by CSDLAC
facilities. As a result, impacts upon those facilities would be less than significant.
(b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
Less than Significant Impact. Based on water supplies that are currently available, the
MWD has in place the existing capacity to: (1) meet 100 percent of its member agencies'
projected supplemental demands over the next twenty years in average and wet years;
(2) meet 100 percent of its member agencies' projected supplemental demand over the
next 15 years in multiple dry years; and (3) meet 100 percent of its member agencies'
projected supplemental demand over the next ten years in single dry years.50
As a result, it can be assumed that sufficient water resources are available to meet the
local demand imposed those current and planned development activities authorized
under existing general and regional plans. To the extent that the proposed project is
determined by the City Council to be in compliance with those plans, sufficient water and
wastewater facilities would be available to accommodate project -specific demands.
See also Response No. 4.4.16(a) above.
(c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
Less than Significant Impact. New on-site storm water facilities will be constructed to
safely convey storm waters from the project site into existing County storm drain facilities
(Brea Canyon Channel). Sufficient capacity remains in the facility to accommodate
project -generated flows.
See also Response No. 4.4.8(c) above.
(d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.16(b) above.
50/ Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Report on Metropolitan's Water Supplies, February
11, 2002.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-36 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
(e) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that
serves or may serve the project that has inadequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
Less than Significant Impact. See Response No. 4.4.16(a) above.
(f) Would the project be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
Less than Significant Impact. Waste haulers operating within the City determine the
solid waste management facility where wastes are disposed. As such, they have the
ability to transport municipal solid wastes (MSW) to facilities with sufficient remaining
capacity. The nearest County operated landfill to the project site is the Puente Hills
Landfill (2800 South Workman Mills Road, Whittier). As indicated by the County,
sufficient capacity at that facility exists to accommodate waste demands through 2013.
(g) Would the project comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related
to solid waste?
No Impact. The project will fully comply with all applicable federal, State, and local
statutes and regulations relating to solid waste.
4.4.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance
(a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fishAvildlife species, cause a fish/wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant/animal community, reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare%ndangered plant/animal, or eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California history/prehistory?
Less than Significant Impact. As mitigated, the proposed project will not result in the
degradation of the existing environment, result in any substantial reduction in the habitat
of any fish or wildlife species, cause any existing fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, eliminate or reduce the range of any protected plant or animal
species, or eliminate important examples of major periods in the State's history or
prehistory.
(b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable?
Less than Significant Impact. The project will not generate impacts that are individually
limited but cumulatively considerable.
(c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than Significant Impact. As mitigated, the proposed project does not have the
potential to cause substantial adverse impacts on human beings, either directly or
indirectly.
511 County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, Continued Operation of the Puente Hills Landfill,
Executive Summary of the Draft Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 2000041066, June 2001, P-
1.0-10.
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Initial Study - Impact Analysis Page 4-37
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
This page intentionally left blank.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 4-38 Initial Study - Impact Analysis
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
5.0 PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION
5.1 INTRODUCTION TO PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION
The Lead Agency shall prepare a proposed mitigated negative declaration (MND) when the
Initial Study identifies potentially significant effects but "revisions in the project plans or
proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed mitigated negative
declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the
effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur" (Section 15070[b][1], State
CEQA Guidelines). If the Initial Study identify and the Lead Agency subsequently adopt
mitigation measures "for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of
approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment" (Section 21081.6,
CEQA), the Lead Agency is required to prepare a "mitigation reporting and monitoring program"
(MRMP) outlining the agency's proposed method of compliance with those measures. A
determination that a proposed action meets the standards for a MND can only be made if "there
is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record" that the project, as proposed or as
subsequently modified, would result in the generation of a significant environmental impact
(Section 21080[c], CEQA).
5.2 PRELIMINARY FINDINGS
Based on the analysis presented herein, prior to the consideration of any project -level mitigation
measures, the Lead Agency has determined that the proposed project has the potential to result
in one or more potentially significant environmental effects. Based on that determination, the
Lead Agency has identified a number of recommended project -level mitigation measures that, if
implemented, would reduce those impacts to below a level of significance.
Pursuant to CEQA requirements, the Lead Agency has prepared and is circulating, with this
Initial Study, a draft mitigation reporting and monitoring program (MRMP) demonstrating the
manner in which each of those recommended mitigation measures would be implemented. The
Lead Agency's draft MRMP is included in Table ES -1 (Draft Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring
Program) herein.
This Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence before the Lead Agency that the
proposed project, as modified to incorporate those mitigation measures identified therein, will
have a significant effect on the environment. The imposition of the mitigation measures
recommended by the Lead Agency as conditions of project approval will result in the avoidance
or substantial reduction of the project's potentially significant effects and would serve to reduce
those effects to a level, deemed by the Lead Agency, to be below a level of significance.
As a result, pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the project, as
subsequently modified to include each of the recommended mitigation measures, is eligible for
processing under a MND since no significant environmental effects will likely result from the
construction and subsequent habitation of the proposed project. A draft MND has been
prepared by the City and is being circulated with this Initial Study.
The Lead Agency encourages the public and other governmental agencies to submit written
comments on this Initial Study and draft MND. The Lead Agency will consider those comments
and the issues raised herein prior to taking any formal action on the proposed project.
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Initial Study — Preliminary Determination Page 5-1
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
This page intentionally left blank.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 5-2 Initial Study — Preliminary Determination
J
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
6.0 REFERENCES
• Bittman, Roxanne, The California Natural Diversity Database: A Natural Heritage
Program for Rare Species and Vegetation, Fremontia, Volume 29:3-4, California
Department of Fish and Game, July/October 2001.
■ Blakeley, Edward J. and Mary Gail Snyder, Mary Gail, Fortress America: Gated
Communities in the United States, 1997.
• California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Seismic Hazard
Zone Report 010: Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Yorba Linda 7.5 -Minute
Quadrangle, Los Angeles and Orange Counties, California, 1997 (Revised 2001).
• California Department of Fish and Game, Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and
Lichens List, Natural Diversity Database, April 2004.
• California Department of Transportation, Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations,
Technical Advisory, Vibration (TAVO-2-01-R9601), February 20, 2002.
• California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, Water Quality
Control Plan — Los Angeles Region, adopted June 13, 1994.
• California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, Watershed
Management Initiative Chapter, December 2001.
• Calwell Flores Winters, Inc., Justification Report for the Walnut Valley Unified School
District — This Study Established the Justification for the Imposition of Developer Fees
Pursuant to Applicable Law as of March 2004.
■ City of Diamond Bar, City of Diamond Bar General Plan, July 25, 1995.
• City of Diamond Bar, General Plan Annual Report - Period beginning January 1, 2002
and ending December 31, 2002.
• City of Diamond Bar, City of Diamond Bar Recreational Trails and Bicycle Route Master
Plan, May 15, 2001.
• County of Los Angeles Fire Department, Prevention Bureau, Forestry Division, Brush
Clearance Section, Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire Zone 4
or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, January 1998.
■ County of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles General Plan, adopted November 25,
1980.
• County of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County Code.
■ County of Los Angeles, Significant Ecological Area Technical Advisory Committee
(SEATAC), SEATAC Report and Comments, September 9, 2002.
• County of Los Angeles Fire Department, 2001 Statistical Summary, 2002.
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Initial Study — References Page 6-1
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
■ County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, Continued Operation of the Puente
Hills Landfill, Executive Summary of the Draft Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2000041066, June 2001.
■ County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, Draft Palmdale Water Reclamation
Plant Disinfection Facilities Plan, January 2004.
■ Davis, F.W., et al., The California Gap Analysis Project - Final Report, University of
California, Santa Barbara, 1998.
• Federal Highway Administration, Roundabouts: An Informational Guide, FHWA-RD-00-
067, June 2000.
■ Helsley, Robert W. and William C. Strange, Gated Communities and the Economic
Geography of Crime, Journal of Urban Economics, 46(1), 1999.
■ International Conference of Building Officials, Uniform Building Code, 1997.
■ Los Angeles County Fire Department, Prevention Bureau, Information on Fire Flow
Availability for Building Permit, Form 195, January 2002.
■ Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Development Planning for Storm
Water Management: A Manual for the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan,
September 2002.
■ Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning (PCR Services Corporation,
Frank Hovore & Associates, FORMA Systems), Biological Resource Assessment of the
Proposed Puente Hills Significant Ecological Area, November 2000.
■ Los Angeles County (PCR Services Corporation, Frank Hovore & Associates, FORMA
Systems), Los Angeles County Significant Ecological Area Update Study 2000 —
Background Report, November 2000.
■ Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Report on Metropolitan's Water
Supplies, February 11, 2002.
■ Morton, D.M., Alvarez, R.M., and Campbell, R.H., Preliminary Soil -Slip Susceptibility
Maps, Southwestern California, Open -File Report 03-17, United States Geological
Survey, 2003.
■ Remsen, J.V., Jr., Bird Species of Special Concern in California, Cooper's Hawk,
California Department of Fish and Game, 1978.
• South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993.
■ South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Environmental Assessment for
Proposed Amended Rules 403 -Fugitive Dust, 403.1 -Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control
Requirements for Coachella Valley Sources and 1186-PM10 Emission Reductions from
Paved and Unpaved Roads, and Livestock Operations, SCAQMD No. 012804KCS, April
2, 2004.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 6-2 Initial Study — References
f
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
• Southern California Association of Governments, Regional Comprehensive Plan and
Guide, March 1996.
• State Mining and Geology Board, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic
Hazards in California, Special Publication No. 117, March 13, 1997.
■ United States Environmental Protection Agency, Information on Levels of Environmental
Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety
(Technical Report 550/9-74-004), 1974.
• United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Noise Guidebook,
March 1985.
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Frequently Asked Questions about the New
Proposed Designation of Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher,
February 4, 2000.
City of Diamond Bar
Initial Study — References July 2006
Page 6-3
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
This page intentionally left blank.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 6-4 Initial Study — References
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Appendix A
Environmental Checklist
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Initial Study — Technical Appendix
This page intentionally left blank.
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
1. Project Title:
Jewel Ridge Estates (Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081)
2. Lead Agency Name/Address:
City of Diamond Bar
Community Development Department — Planning Division
21825 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177
3. Contact Person/Telephone No.:
Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner (909) 839-7032
4. Project Location:
Situs Pending (City of Diamond Bar)
Southern Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive
Los Angeles County Assessor Parcel No. 8714-028-003
Thomas Bros. Map Book Reference: Page 709 (G-1)
5. Project Sponsor Name/Address:
Jewel Ridge, LLC
10365 Jefferson Boulevard, Culver City, CA 90232
Attn: Daniel Singh (626)305-8454
6. General Plan Designation:
RL Low -Density Residential (Max. 3.0 DU/Acre)
7. Zoning Designation:
RL -10,000 (Low Density Residential — 10,000 sq. ft. min.)
8. Description of Project:
Proposed is a 22 -lot residential subdivision, allowing for the
development of 16 single-family detached homes on individual
parcels ranging in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to
10,506 square feet. The average lot size for the residential
parcels will be approximately 6,892 square feet. In addition to
the approval or conditional approval of a vesting tentative map,
other discretionary actions under consideration by the City
include, but may not be limited to, the issuance of a conditional
use permit(s), variance(s), protected tree permit(s), and grading
permit(s), and such other discretionary permits and approvals as
may be required by the City or other responsible agencies for the
construction and habitation of the project site.
9. Surrounding Land Uses
North: Single-family Residential (City of Diamond Bar)
and Setting:
South: Vacant (Los Angeles County - Unincorporated)
East: Single-family Residential (City of Diamond Bar)
West: Single-family Residential and Los Angeles County
flood control facility (City of Diamond Bar)
10. Other agencies whose approval
(1) Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region
is or may be required:
(2) Los Angeles County Department of Public Works
Environmental Factors Potentially
Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be
potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as
indicated by the checklist on the following
pages.
■ Aesthetics ■
Hazards/Hazardous Materials ❑ Public Services
❑ Agricultural Resources ❑
Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Recreation
■ Air Quality ❑
Land Use ❑ Transportation/Traffic
■ Biological Resources ❑
Mineral Resources ❑ Utilities/Service Systems
❑ Cultural Resources ❑
Noise ❑ Mandatory Findings of
❑ Geology/Soils ❑
Population/Housing Significance
City of Diamond Bar
Environmental Checklist
July 2006
Page A-1
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
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 El
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 revisions in the project have been made or ■
agreed to by the project proponent. 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. El
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant ❑
unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets,
if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain
to be addressed.
I find that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all ❑
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have
been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including
revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is
required.
Signature Date
Ann Lunqu, Associate Planner City of Diamond Bar
Printed Name Lead Agency
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
(1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question.
A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the
impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault
rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific
factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,
based on the project -specific screening analysis).
(2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
(3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with
mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial
evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact"
entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
(4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a
"Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page A-2 Environmental Checklist
so
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section
XVII, "Earlier Analyses" may be cross-referenced).
(5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process,
an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
(a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
(b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis.
(c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document
and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
(6) Lead Agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
outside document should, where applicable, include a reference to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated.
(7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
(8) The is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead
agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's
environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
(9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
(a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
(b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact too less than significance.
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Environmental Checklist Page A-3
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
I. Aesthetics. Would the project:
(a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
❑
■
❑
❑
(b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State
❑
❑
■
❑
scenic highway?
(c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the
❑
■
E]site
and its surroundings?
(d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
❑
❑
■
❑
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
II. Agricultural Resources. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental
effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)
prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmlands. Would the project:
(a) Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of
Statewide importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
❑
❑
❑
■
Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
(b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson
❑
❑
❑
■
Act contract?
(c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to
❑
❑
❑
■
non-agricultural use?
111. Air Quality. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determination. Would the project:
(a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
❑
❑
■
❑
Ian?
(b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an
0
■
❑
❑
existing or projected air quality violation?
(c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an
applicable federal or State ambient air quality standards
❑
❑
■
❑
(including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds
for ozone precursors)?
(d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial air pollutant
❑
❑
■
❑
concentrations?
(e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
❑
❑
■
❑
people?
IV. Biological Resources. Would the project:
(a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game (CDFG) or United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USFWS ?
(b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,
❑
■
❑
❑
policies, regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS?
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page A-4 Environmental Checklist
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
-. � • --'V aneu un ieuerany protecteo wetlands
as defined by Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) ❑
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
❑
❑
■
other
means?
(d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident
or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife
❑
❑
■
❑
nursery sites?
(e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree reservation policyor ordinance?
❑
ElEl■
(f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
-
Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or
❑
❑
■
❑
other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation Ian?
V. Cultural Resources. Would the project:
(a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historic resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA
❑
❑
❑
■
Guidelines?
(b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the State
❑
❑
❑
■
CEQA Guidelines?
(c) Directly or indirectly, destroy a unique paleontological resource,
site, or unique geologic feature?
❑
❑
❑
■
(d) Disturb human remains including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
❑
❑
❑
■
VI. Geology and Soils. Would the project:
(a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: (i)
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
❑
❑
■
❑
State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence
of a known fault? (ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (iii) Seismic -
related ground failure including liquefaction? iv Landslides?
(b) Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil?
■
El(c)
-El❑
Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result
in on-site or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
❑
❑
■
❑
liquefaction, or collapse?
(d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risk to life or
❑
❑
■
❑
property?
(e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or altemative wastewater disposal systems where sewers
❑
❑
❑
■
are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the project:
(a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through ❑
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? ■ F1(b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into the 09 ❑ ■ ❑
environment?
%.rty of Ulamond Bar
Environmental Checklist July 2006
Page A-5
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page A-6 Environmental Checklist
(c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
❑
❑
❑
■
mile of an existing or proposed school?
(d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the
❑
❑
❑
■
California Government Code and create a significant hazard to
the public or to the environment?
(e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
❑
❑
❑
■
public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
(f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in
❑
❑
❑
■
the area?
(g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
❑
❑
❑
■
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation Ian?
(h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or
death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are
❑
■
❑
❑
adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed
withwildlands?
Vlll. Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the project:
(a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
El
❑
■
11
requirements?
(b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be
I
a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
❑
❑
■
❑
groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting
wells would drop to a level which would not support existing or
planned land uses for which permits have been granted)?
(c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,
❑
❑
■
❑
in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on
the site or off the site?
(d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,
❑
❑
■
❑
or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on the site or off the site?
(e) Create of contribute to runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or
❑
❑
■
❑
provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
(f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
❑
❑
■
❑
(g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or
❑
❑
❑
■
other flood hazard delineation map?
(h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures that would
❑
❑
❑
■
impede or redirect flood flow?
(i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or
death involving flooding including flooding as a result of failure of a
❑
❑
❑
■
levee or dam?
0) Be subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
❑
❑
■
❑
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page A-6 Environmental Checklist
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
(a) Physically divide an established community?
❑
❑
■
❑
(b) Conflict with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations of
an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the
❑
❑
■
❑
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
(c) Conflict with an applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
❑
❑
■
❑
X. Mineral Resources. Would the project:
(a) Loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of the state?
❑
❑
❑
■
(b) Loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery
site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
❑
❑
❑
■
use Ian?
XI. Noise. Would the project result in:
(a) Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
❑
❑
■
❑
applicable standards of other agencies?
(b) Expose persons to or generate excessive ground -borne vibration
or round -borne noise levels?
❑
❑
■
❑
(c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without theproject?
❑
❑
■
❑
(d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the roject?
❑
❑
■
❑
(e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project expose people
El❑
❑
■
residing or working in the pro'ect area to excessive noise levels?
(f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
❑
❑
❑
excessive noise levels?
XII. Population and Housing. Would the project
(a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly
(e.g., proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g.,
❑
❑
■
❑
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
(b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
❑
❑
❑
■
(c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
❑
❑
❑
■
XIII. Public Services. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services:
(a) Fire protection? ❑ � ■ ❑
(b) Police protection? ❑ El■ ED]
Schools? - El(d)
■ ❑
Parks? - -'
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
(e) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
P
Environmental Checklist age 006
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page A-8 Environmental Checklist
IVX. Recreation.
(a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
❑
❑
■
❑
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
(b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might
❑
❑
■
❑
have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
XV. Transportation and Traffic. Would the project:
(a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in
a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
❑
❑
I ■
❑
volume -to -capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
(b) Exceed, individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the County congestion management agency for
❑
❑
■
❑
designed roads or hi hwa s?
(c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase
in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial
❑
❑
❑
■
safety risks?
(d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
❑
■
❑
❑
equipment)?
❑
(e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
❑
■
❑
(f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
❑
■
❑
(g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
_❑
❑
❑
❑
M
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
XVI. Utilities and Service Systems. Would the project:
(a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
(b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
❑
❑
■
❑
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
(c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which
❑
❑
❑
■
could cause significant environmental effects? _
(d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded
❑
❑
■
❑
entitlements needed?
(e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that
serves or may serve the project that has inadequate capacity to
❑
❑
■
❑
serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's
existing commitments?
(f) Be servedbya landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to
❑
❑
■
❑
accommodate theproject's solid waste disposal needs?
(g) Comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations
❑
❑
❑
■
related to solid waste?
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page A-8 Environmental Checklist
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
(a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish/wildlife
species, cause a fish/wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant/animal community,
❑
❑
❑
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare/endangered
plant/animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California histo / rehisto
(b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
El
F1
■
El
considerable?
(c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
❑
❑
M
❑
indirectly?
City of Diamond Bar July 2006
Environmental Checklist Page A-9
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
This page intentionally left blank.
July 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page A-10 Environmental Checklist
Environmental Impact Sciences
26051 Via Concha
Mission Viejo, California 92691-5614
(949) 837-3935 FAX
(949) 837-1195
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
INITIAL STUDY AND DRAFT
MITIGATED NEGATNE DECLARATION
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO, 54081
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
Applicant:
JEWEL RIDGE, LLC
10365 West Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, California 40232
October 2006
z
ATTACHMENT :"U -T
This page intentionally left blank.
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
INITIAL STUDY AND DRAFT
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 54081
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
Lead Agency:
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISON
Attn: Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner
21825 E. Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177
(909) 861-3117 FAX
(909) 839-7032
Applicant:
JEWEL RIDGE, LLC
Attn: Daniel Singh
10365 Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, California 90232
(310) 945-3036 FAX
(310) 945-3030
October 2006
This page intentionally left blank.
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table of Contents
List of Sections
Section Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Introduction to this Response to Comments 1
1.2 CEQA Requirements 1
1.3 Relationship to the Initial Study 2
1.4 Review Period 3
2.0 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
8
Comment Letter No. 1
Michael J. Mulligan, Deputy Regional Manager
California Department of Fish and Game g
Comment Letter No. 2
John Beauman, Chairperson
Wildlife Corridor Conservation Authority 14
Comment Letter No. 3
Ruth J. Frazen, Engineering Technican
County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County is
3.0 PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION 20
List of Tables
Table
1 List of Commentors 3
2 Revised Draft Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program 4
List of Attachments
Attachment
A Comment Letters
B Notice of Availability
City of Diamond Bar October 2006
Response to Comments Page i
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Diamond Bar
October 2006 Response to Comments
Page ii
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION TO THIS RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
In response to a development application submitted by Jewel Ridge, LLC (Applicant) and in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Guidelines for the
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines) the
Community Development Department (Department) of the City of Diamond Bar (City or Lead
Agency) prepared and disseminated an independent environmental assessment of that project,
entitled "Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration: Jewell Ridge Estates - Vesting
Tentative Tract No. 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (Initial Study). Based on the information
and analysis contained in the Initial Study, it was the preliminary determination of the
Department that the proposed Jewel Ridge Estates - Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081 (Jewell
Ridge Estates) project meet CEQA requirements for processing under a "Mitigated Negative
Declaration" (MND).
Following the preparation of the Initial Study, the City provided formal notice of the existence of
the Jewel Ridge Estates project and solicited comments from other governmental agencies and
from the general public concerning the potential environmental impacts that might occur should
that project be approved and constructed, the adequacy of the Department's independent
environmental assessment, the appropriateness of the preliminary findings presented therein,
and the project's eligibility for processing under a MND_
The following information presents the Department's response to all written comments received
by the City following the Lead Agency's dissemination of the Initial Study and draft MND. The
City has considered each of the written comments received and has formulated a technical
response to each of the issues, concerns, and inquires raised in correspondence submitted to
the Lead Agency. Each of the letters received and the Department's responses thereto are
provided herein.
1.2 CEQA REQUIREMENTS
As indicated in Section 15064(k) of the State CEQA Guidelines: "An agency will normally take
up to three separate steps in deciding which document to prepare fora project subject to CEQA.
In the first step the lead agency determines whether the project is subject to CEQA at all ... if
the project is not exempt, the lead agency takes the second step and conducts an initial study to
determine whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. If the initial
study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect,
the lead agency prepares a negative declaration. If the initial study shows that the project may
have a significant effect, the lead agency takes the third step and prepares an EIR."
Section 21091(d) of CEQA mandates that "the lead agency shall consider any comments it
receives on a draft environmental impact report or a proposed negative declaration, which are
received within the public comment period." Pursuant to Section 15074(b) of the State CEQA
Guidelines: "Prior to approving a project, the decision-making body of the lead agency shall
consider the proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration together with any
comments received during the public review process_ The decision-making body shall adopt the
proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration only if it finds on the basis of
the whole record before it (including the initial study and any comments received), that there is
City of Diamond Bar
Response to Comments October 2006
Page 1
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that
the negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration reflects the lead agency's
independent judgment and analyses."
Referencing Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines: "A public agency shall prepare or
have prepared a proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration for a project
subject to CEQA when: (a) The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence, in light
of the whole record before the agency, that the project may have a significant effect on the
environment, or (b) The initial study identifies potentially significant effects, but: (1) Revisions in
the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed
mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the
effects or mitigate the effects to apoint where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2)
There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the project
as revised may have a significant effect on the environment."
Although neither CEQA nor the State CEQA Guidelines require the City to prepare written
response to comments received on projects being processed through the use of a MND, in
order to assist the Lead Agency in its independent determination concerning whether the Jewel
Ridge Estates project is ultimately eligible for a MND or whether the City is obligated to proceed
with the preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR), the Department has elected to
prepare this "Response to
and this RTCRshall serve, nnt. wholehInitial
comments received thereupon, ipart, as he bass for he
,
Lead Agency's final determination.
This document: (1) provides the Lead Agency's responses to those written comments received
by the City on the Initial Study; (2) presents the Lead Agency's subsequent environmental
analyses conducted in response to those comments; and (3) presents the Lead Agency's
preliminary conclusions concerning the presence of any significant or potentially significant
environmental effects resulting from the City's potential approval or conditional approval of the
proposed Jewel Ridge Estates project, as more thoroughly. described in the Initial Study.
3 RELATIONSHIP TO THE INITIAL STUDY
Although produced following the dissemination of the Initial Study, this RTC serves to further
augment the information and environmental analysis presented therein. The Initial Study, this
RTC, and the revised draft mitigation reporting and monitoring program (MRMP) will collectively
be considered by the City's advisory and decision-making bodies prior to the formulation of any
recommendations concerning or any determination by those bodies to approve or conditionally
approve the Jewel Ridge Estates project, including any and all discretionary actions as may be
required from the City for the project's approval, construction, and occupancy. Alternatively,
should the City elect to deny the Applicant's development request, the Lead Agency is not
required to first make a CEQA determination. Should the City elect to act affirmatively, the
deliberations of the City's advisory and decision-making bodies will be conducted in light of the
project's potential environmental effects, as reflected in the project's administrative record_
Following the dissemination of the Initial Study, a number of written comments were received by
the Lead Agency concerning the environmental assessment presented therein. All written
comments received by the City prior to the publication of this RTC document, including the City's
written responses thereto, are presented herein and, by their inclusion, become part of the
City of Diamond Bar
October 2006 Response to Comments
Page 2
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
project's environmental review record. The Lead Agency's response to each of those written
comments is presented in Section 2.0 (Response to Comments).
Each letter has been assigned a number, denoting the sequence in which those comments are
addressed herein. Individuals seeking to compare each comment with the Lead Agency's draft
response can, therefore, locate each correspondence in Attachment A (Comment Letters) by
the number assigned. Individual comments contained in each communiqu6 have also been
numbered for ease of reference. For example, reference to Comment No. 1-2 denotes
Comment No. 2 in Letter No. 1. Table 1 (List of Commentors) list those entities that submitted
written comments to the Lead Agency with regards to the Initial Study and draft MND and
indicates the corresponding reference number that has been assigned each communique.
Table 1
LIST nF r nMMFMTnRC
No
Commentor
Letter Dated
Letter Received'
Michael J. Mulligan, Deputy Regional Manager
1
California Department of Fish and Game
4949 Viewridge Avenue
August 31, 2006
August 31, 2006
San Diego, California 92123
John Beauman, Chairperson
2
Wildlife Corridor Conservation Authority
407 W. Imperial Highway, Suite H, PMB 230
August 30, 2006
September 5, 2006
Brea, California 92821
Ruth J. Frazen, Engineering Technician
3
County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
1955 Workman Mill Road
August 3, 2006
August 7, 2006
Whittier, California 90601-1400
As a result of the comments received on the Initial Study, the Lead Agency's responses to those
comments, and the project's continuing environmental analysis, a number of new and/or modified
mitigation measures have been identified. Those measures, in combination with those mitigation
measures identified in the Initial Study, are included in Table 2 (Revised Draft Mitigation
Reporting and Monitoring Program).
Based on the information presented in the Initial Study, the comments received by the Lead
Agency following the dissemination of that document, and the Lead Agency's responses to those
comments, presented in Section 3.0 (Determination) is the Department's preliminary conclusions
concerning the potential significance of the project's identified environmental impacts and the
Department's preliminary determination as to the appropriate manner of CEQA compliance.
Should the Planning Commission and the City Council concur with the Department's preliminary
conclusions and preliminary determination, those conclusions and that determination shall
represent the findings of the Lead Agency with regards to the proposed project and its
compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines.
1.4 REVIEW PERIOD
As indicated in the City's "Notice of Availability," included in Attachment B (Notice of
Availability), the noticed comment period for the submission on comments on the Initial Study
started on July 28, 2006 and ending on August 28, 2006.
City of Diamond Bar October 2006
Response to Comments Page 3
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table 2
REVISED DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONS ITIORING PROGRAM
No.
Project Level;Mitigafiori Measure�"yc tr .
Aesthetics. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed
acceptable, the Community Development Director and City Engineer shall approve detailed retaining wall,
landscape, and irrigation plans identifying how those three elements will be fully integrated into the wall
1 e signed by a landscape architect and shall specify and
design. The landscape and irrigation plans shall b
quantify the plant palette, characteristics of the plants selected, watering requirements including
frequency, and specify howwaterwill be dispersed. Landscape plans shall also include performance
standards relative to amount of surface coverage and plant survivability. Specified landscape
performance standards shall be binding on the homeowners' association.
Air Quality. All exterior paints utilized in the initial construction of on-site dwelling units shall conform to
2 the following specifications: (1) all primers shall contain less than 0.85 pound per gallon (102 grams/liter)
of volatile organic compounds (VOC); and (2) all top coats shall contain less than 0.07 pound per gallon (8
grams/liter) of VOC.
During project grading and construction, the following ------------
additional actions will be implemented by the
Applicant: (1) three times daily watering of all exposed surfaces; (2) three times daily watering of unpaved
3 roads; (3) limit off-road trucks to no more than 15 mph; (4) application of soil stabilizers to inactive areas;
(5) replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as feasible; and (6) cover (apply stabilizer) to all
stockpiles.
Biological Resources. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a revised
protected tree survey based on the approved site plan, the revised grading plan prepared in response to
that site plan and following review by the City Engineer, and incorporating each of the City's comments
formulated in response to the "Jewel Ridge Estates within the City of Diamond Bar— Protected Tree
Report, Tentative Tract 54081" (Don Case Arborist, February 5, 2004). The revised protected tree survey
4 shall include an exhibit depicting the on-site and off-site location of all protected trees on the project site
County areas) located within the limits of proposed grading,
(whether located in the City or within adjacentoutlined in the Applicant's "fuel modification plan," and any
within the limits of the fuel modification zone
by the arborist, the City Engineer, and the Los Angeles
additional area(s) beyond those limits identified
within which direct or indirect impacts to protected trees
County Fire Department as comprising an area
could reasonably be anticipated.
Biological Resources. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a "California walnut woodlands and coast
live oak woodlands" mitigation plan, including both the identification of a mitigation site(s) and a
performance schedule addressing the survivability of replacement species, shall be submitted to and,
when deemed acceptable, accepted by the City of Diamond Bar. The mitigation plan shall be designed to
5A mitigate for nat only the loss of individual protected trees but also the loss or diminishment of the existing
southern coast live oak and California walnut woodland habitat located on and adjacent to the project site.
The required mitigation shall be prepared by a licensed biologist and shall provide for a not -less -than 1:1
mitigation for California walnut woodlands and coast live oak woodlands impacted by proposed grading
operations and fuel modification requirements
City of Diamond Bar
Response to Comments
Community
Prior to
Development
Issuance
Director
of Grading
AND
Permits
City Engineer
Community I On-going
Development during
Director Construction
Community On-going
Development during
Director Construction
Prior to
Community Issuance
Development of Grading
Director Permits
Prior to
Community Issuance
Development of Grading
Director ' Permits
October 2006
4
Page
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
City of Diamond Bar
Response to Comments October 2006
Page 5
Table 2 (Continued)
REVISED DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITIORING
PROGRAM
No. - ;yz���'
Protect Level`Mrtigation Measure.;
,Compliance
twMttigation
.
Verification
Verification ..
' Milestone
NamelDate
Woodlands restoration efforts shall include the use of locally collected nuts or saplings grown from
locally collected nuts. Appropriate understory species shall be included in the
mitigation plan to enhance
5A structural diversity. The area upon which mitigation occurs shall be monitored and managed for a
(Cont.) minimum of five years to ensure success of the restoration effort. The Applicant shall post a
performance bond or other financial instrument
acceptable to the City Attorney sufficient to cover the
costs of required mitigation and monitoring.
Biological Resources. Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map and/or issuance of a grading or
grubbing permit, whichever event were to first occur, and following the submission of a fuel modification
plan to the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD)
and a final grading plan to the City, the
Applicant shall arrange and the Applicant's consulting biologist landscape
and architect shall attend an
on-site meeting with the Deputy Regional Manager of the California Department of Fish and Game
(CDFG) or the Deputy Regional Manager's designated representative to discuss mitigation plans and
woodland restoration efforts formulated in response to impacts
Prior to
Final Map
5B
project -related to woodland areas.
Following that meeting the Applicant shall concurrently submit a detailed California walnut woodlands
Community
Approval
and coast live oak woodlands mitigation plan to the City, to the CDFG, and to the LACFD along with
evidence of proof of receipt by the CDFG and the LACFD.
Development
AND
Prior to
The CDFG and the LACFD shall be afforded
an additional 30 -day opportunity to comment on the draft mitigation plan, At the end of that comment
Director
Issuance
period, the City, at its sole discretion, may accept the plan as submitted by the Applicant for further
of Grading
processing or request further revisions based on its own independent assessment and/or based on
Permits
comments received from the CDFG and/or the LACFD. The City reserves the right to impose additional
measures, conditions, and/or design, landscape, and irrigation requirements as a result of its
subsequent review of the mitigation fuel
and modification plans.
Biological Resources. If project activities cannot feasibly avoid the breeding season for migratory, non -
game native bird species, beginning thirty days prior to the disturbance of suitable nesting habitat, the
Applicant shall arrange for weekly bird surveys to detect any
protected native birds in the habitat to be
removed and any other such habitat within 300 feet or the construction work area (within 500 feet for
raptors). Those surveys, conducted by a qualified biologist with experience in conducting breeding bird
surveys, shall continue on a weekly basis with the last survey being conducted no more than three days
5C
prior,to the initiation of grading and grubbing activities. If a protected native bird is found, the Applicant
shaldelay all disturbance activities in suitable nesting habitat
Community
Prior to
or within 300 feet of nesting habitat (within
500 feet for raptor nesting habitat) until August 31 or continue the surveys in order to locate any nests. If
Development
Issuance
an active nest is located, clearing and construction within 300 feet of the nest (within 500 feet for raptor
Director
of Grading
nests) shall be postponed until the nest is vacated and juveniles have fledged and when there is no
Permits
evidence of second attempt at nesting. Limits of construction to avoid a nest shall be established in the
field with flagging and stakes or construction fencing. Construction personnel shall be instructed on the
sensitivity of the area. The Applicant shall record the results of the recommended protective measures
described above to document compliance with applicable State
and federal laws pertaining to the
protection of native birds.
City of Diamond Bar
Response to Comments October 2006
Page 5
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No, 54081
Table 2 (Continued)
REVISED DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING MO
No. "` Project Level Mlttgation Measured`{ *+
Biological Resources. If on-site grading activities have not commenced prior to April 3, 2007 (the date of
the most recent biological field survey), in accordance with the provisions of an approved grading plan,
6 the Applicant shall withhold commencement of any and all grading operations, excluding emergency
activities, pending the submission and acceptance by the City of a new biological survey conducted to
reassess the presence or absence of protected biological resources on and adjacent to the project site.
Biological Resources. All initial purchasers of real property within the tract map boundaries shall be
7 notified, in writing through their respective residential purchase contract, that access to designated open
space areas is prohibited except along approved and designated trails and via designated access
points. Pedestrians and bicycles shall be permitted only on approved and designated trails.
Biological Resources. Conditions, covenants, and restriction (CC&R) shall specify that the following
activities and uses shall be expressly prohibited within designated open space areas: unauthorized
entry; use of motorized vehicles; possession of firearms including air or gas propelled weapons, slings
8 and sling -shots; collection or possession of native plants or wildlife, collecting wood, or engaging in
activity to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, poison, capture or collect wildlife; smoking
or the use of fire; unauthorized trail construction; and removal, defacement or damage to natural
features. CC&Rs shall be enforceable and contain provisions sufficient to deter violations.
Biological Resources. Landscape plans for all landscaped common, open space, and fuel modification
zone areas shall incorporate native, drought -tolerant, non-invasive plant species. Exotic plant species
9 listed by the California Exotic Plant Pest Council as noxious weeds shall be prohibited for use as
landscaping material. Landscape plans shall include weed prevention and control measures including,
but not limited to: (1) use of only certified weed -free hay, straw, and other organic mulches to control
erosion; and (2) use only certified weed -free seed for the reclamation of disturbed areas.
Biological Resources. All construction and material staging activities and all equipment marshalling
activities that need to occur in close proximity to the project site shall be confined to the property limits
lo and shall not include any on-site or off-site areas extending beyond the City authorized limits of project -
specific grading. To the maximum extent feasible, all such activities shall occur at the greatest possible
separation distance from any near -site sensitive receptors.
Geology and Soils. The project design and development shall incorporate and the Applicant shall
include, conduct, perform, and undertake all design and development recommendations contained in the
project's geotechnical investigation(s), including, but not necessarily limited to, those contained in
GeoEnviron Engineering Consultants Inc.'s "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering
1 oked Creek Drive,
Geology Investigation — Proposed Residential Development, Southern End of Cro
Diamond Bar, California, APN #8714028003" (February 15, 2003), GeoSoils Consultants, Inc.'s
"Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet dated September 17, 2004 by Leighton and Associates for the
City of Diamond Bar, Department of Engineering, Tract 54081, Diamond Bar, California" (September 26,
2005), and in any subsequent design -level investigation(s) that may be conducted for the proposed
th rwise expressly authorized by the City Engineer.
,ROGRAM
Prior to
'o 1P Mitigtton . Verification
Jerification
=Milestone; NamelDate
Occupancy
Prior to
Community
Issuance
Development
of Grading
Director
Permits
of Final
Prior to
Community
Issuance of
Development
Occupancy
Director
Permits
Prior to
Issuance
City Engineer of Grading
Permit
project, except where o e
October 2006
Paae 6
City of Diamond Bar
Response to Comments
Prior to
Community
Issuance of
Development
Occupancy
Director
Permits
Prior to
Community
Approval
Development
of Final
Director
Tract Map
Community
On-going
Development
during
Director
Construction
Prior to
Issuance
City Engineer of Grading
Permit
project, except where o e
October 2006
Paae 6
City of Diamond Bar
Response to Comments
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Table 2 (Continued)
R1=VISGr1 noAc-r amm P%AT,r,., —
No.
ti •, • •, „r., ��. r%=f-VM 1 nv vANU MUNI I IVRING
Proj ect-Level Mitigation Measure
PROGRAM
9
Verifpcat on
Mile tone
Nar a/Date
Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Prior to the commencement of any on-site grading, grubbing, and
construction activities, the Applicant will prepare and jointly submit to the City and to the Los Angeles
County Fire Department (LACFD) a construction fire
12
prevention and control plan outlining those activities
to be undertaken by the Applicant and/or others during the construction period to ensure the provision of
Community
Prior to
adequate continuing access to and through the project site and outlining plans for fire safety and
Development
Issuance
suppression. The construction fire prevention and control plan shall address all phases of project
Director
of Grading
construction. The plan shall not be deemed adequate and no on-site grading, grubbing, and
Permit
construction activities can commence until the plan is jointly accepted by the LACFD and by the City.
13
Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Approval of the final tract map shall only occur after approval by the
LACFD and following the Applicant' demonstrated compliance
Community
Prior to
with all applicable conditions of approval
division, water system requirements, and such other conditions and recommendations that may
Development
Approval
tified by the LACFD for the proposed project.
Director
of Final
Tract Map
gy and Water Quality. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and,
tl4n
eemed acceptable, the City Engineer shall approve a revised project -specific hydrologic study
Prior to
nt with the approved tentative map. All drainage structures and associated facilities and
ments shall be subject to final design
City EngineerIssuance
and engineering review and approval by the City Engineer
and, if subject to County jurisdiction, by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works,
of Grading
Permit
Public Services. Concurrent with the recordation of the final tract map, the Applicant shall dedicate to
15
the City an irrevocable easement or similar instrument and post a cash bond or other similar instrument,
acceptable to the City Attorney, allowing for the construction,
Community
Prior to
Approval
operation, and maintenance of a trail head,
recreational trail, and such other related uses and facilities as may be identified by the Community
Development
Director
of Final
Development Director,
Tract Map
Public Services. Unless otherwise determined by the Community Development Director, prior to the
issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the Community
16
Development Director shall approve detailed improvement plans for the on-site trail head and
Community
Prior
recreational trail, including all related uses and facilities identified by the Community Development
Director. Trail improvement plans and specifications, if
Development
Issuance
c
Grading
required, shall be included in the project's
landscape plans and in such other plans as may be determined by the Community Development
Director
of
Permit
Director.
Cit of Dia- d B
y on ar
Response to Comments October 2006
Page 7
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
2.0 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
2.1 COMMENTS FROM PUBLIC AGENCIES
Comment Letter No. 1
Michael J. Mulligan, Deputy Regional Manager
California Department of Fish and Game
4949 Viewridge Avenue
San Diego, California 92123
(Letter dated August 31, 2006)
Comment No. 1-1: The Department of Fish and Game (Department) has reviewed the
above -referenced Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), which we
received on August 1, 2006, and has identified potential effects of this
project on biological resources and regional conservation planning. The
Department is a Trustee Agency and a Responsible Agency pursuant to
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Sections 15386 and
15381, respectively, and is responsible for the conservation of the State's
biological resources, pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act,
and other sections of the California Fish and Game Code. On August 29,
2006, you granted us a two-day extension on the public comment period
for this MND. We appreciate your extension.
The 12.88 -acre Jewel Ridge Estates project site is located at the southern
terminus of Crooked Creek Lane in the southern boundary of the City of
Diamond Bar (City), Los Angeles County (County). The proposed project
is the subdivision of the project into 16 lots with single-family detached
residences, two street lots, and 4 "open space" lots (i.e., a total of 22
lots). The project is surrounded by the concrete -lined flood control
channel of Brea Canyon Channel to the north, and undeveloped
oakiwalnut woodland and nonnative grassland which the County of Los
Angeles has proposed as Significant Ecological Area.
The project is vegetated with 1.048 acres of annual grassland and 11.475
acres mixed coast live oak/California walnut woodland. The MND
indicates that the project would result in the removal of approximately 36
oaks and 62 California walnut trees (98 trees), and that an additional 59
trees within the 50 -foot fuel modification zone are in close proximity to the
grading would be affected.
The Department offers the following comments and recommendations
based on the information included in the MND, and our general
knowledge of the biological resources in the County.
Response No. 1-1: The introductory comment from the California Department of Fish and
Game ges alreadyreceipt
conta contained Initial
thatStudy
docum document. nThiiss
and presentsresents information
comment is acknowledged and no further response is necessary.
City of Diamond Bar
October 2006 Response to Comments
Pages
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Comment No. 1-2: Oak and Sycamore Tree Mitigation. The Department typically requires
that the loss of walnut, oak, and sycamore woodlands be mitigated in a
manner that preserves habitat functions and values. Therefore, in
addition to the 98 trees the MND requires to be replaced, impacts to
11.475 acres of oak/walnut woodland habitat should also be fully
mitigated. Plantings should occur at appropriate spacing to assure the
integrity of the woodland habitat is preserved. Therefore, additional acres
of planting might be required off site to accommodate all the replacement
trees. Woodland restoration should use locally collected nuts or saplings
grown from collected nuts. Appropriate understory species should be
included in the mitigation plan to enhance structural diversity of the
mitigation site. If the four proposed "open space" lots are intended for
mitigation of woodland habitat, the open space lot configuration should be
identified and planned to be contiguous with adjacent woodland habitat
and comparable in function and value to the acreage impacted by
development. The mitigation sites should be monitored and managed for
a minimum of five years to ensure success of the restoration effort. The
Department requests to meet with the City and applicant as appropriate,
to discuss the appropriate mitigation for the loss of woodland habitats.
The meeting should occur prior to the preparation of the final MND so that
the document reflects the mitigation we discuss.
Response No. 1-2: The Initial Study includes a number of mitigation measures designed to
address potential impacts upon biological resources. As proposed,
Mitigation Measure No. 5 states: "Prior to the issuance of a grading
permit, a 'California walnut woodlands and coast live oak woodlands'
mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City of Diamond Bar designed to
mitigate not only the loss of individual protected trees but also the loss or
diminishment of the existing southern coast live oak and California walnut
woodland habitat located on and adjacent to the project site." As
evidenced by that measure, it is the intent of the City to seek like -kind
mitigation for project -induced impacts on California walnut woodlands and
coast live oak woodlands.
The 11.475 -acre figure cited reflects the entire on-site "Mixed Coast Live
Oak/California Walnut Woodlands" community and is not a statement of
the portion or percentage of that habitat area located within the limits of
grading. Since a substantial portion of the project site will be retained an
undisturbed open space, subject to the final grading permit and County -
imposed fuel modification zone requirements, the total acreage of
sensitive habitat area impacted would be substantially less. In
accordance with that intent and in response to the CDFG's comments,
Mitigation Measure No. 5 has been revised to read:
Mitigation Measure No. 5A. Prior to the issuance of a grading
permit, a "California walnut woodlands and coast live oak
woodlands" mitigation plan, including both the identification of a
mitigation site(s) and a performance schedule addressing the
survivability of replacement species shall be submitted to and,
when deemed acceDtable accepted by the City of Diamond Bar.
City of Diamond Bar
Response to Comments October 2006
Page 9
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
The mitigation plan shall be designed to mitigate for not only the
loss of individual protected trees but also the loss or diminishment
of the existing southern coast live oak and California walnut
woodland habitat located on and adjacent to the project site. The
required mitigation shall be prepared by a licensed biologist and
shall provide for a not -less -than 1:1 mite anon for California walnut
woodlands and coast live oak woodlands impacted by proposed
gradinq operations and fuel modification requirements.
Woodlands restoration efforts shall include the use of locally
collected nuts or saplings grown from locally collected nuts.
App ropriate understory species shall be included in the mitigation
Ian to enhance structural diversity. The area upon which
mitigation occurs shall be monitored and managed for a minimum
of five ears to ensure success of the restoration effort. The
A licant shall ost a erformance bond or other financial
instrument acce table to the city Attorney sufficient to cover the
costs of required mitigation and monitoring.
Although the Department concurs that a meeting with representatives of
the CDFG would be advisable prior to the initiation of any grading or
grubbing operations, the Department believes that any such meeting
would be premature pending a determination by or indication of the
Planning Commission and City Council intent to approve, conditional
approve, or deny the proposed project. In order to ensure that a pre -
development meeting occurs prior to the commencement of any physical
disturbance to the project site, the Department has identified the following
additional mitigation measure:
Mitigation Measure No. 5B. Prior to the approval of the final
subdivision map and/or issuance of a grading or grubbing permit,
whichever event were to first occur, and following the submission
of a fuel modcation
in to the Los Angeles County Fire
Department (LACFD) and a final grinq plan to the Ci the
Applicant shall arrange and the Aadpplicants consulting biologist
and landscape architect shall attend an on-site meeting with the
De u Regional Manager of the California Department of Fish
and Game (CDFG) or the Deputy Regional Manaqer's designated
ns and
re resentative to discuss mita anon tawoodland
restoration efforts formulated in response tor
oject-related
impacts to woodland areas. Following that meeting the Applicant
shall concurrent) submit a detailed California walnut woodlands
and coast live oak woodlands mitigation plan to the City, to the
CDFG and to the LACFD along with evidence of proof of receipt
b the CDFG and the LACFD. The CDFG and the LACFD shall
be afforded an additional 30 -day OPPOrlun"y to comment on the
draft mitigation plan. At the end of that comment period, the Ci
at its sole discretion may accept the plan as submitted by the
A licant for further roces,sing or request further revisions based
on its own inde endent assessment and/or based on Comments
City of Diamond Bar
October 2006 Response to Comments
Page 10
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
received from the CDFG and/or the LACFD The City reserves
the right to impose additional measures conditions and/or design
landscape, and irrigation requirements as a result of its
subsequent review of the mitigation and fuel modification plans
The recommended revisions to Mitigation Measure No. 5 (including the
identification of Mitigation Measure No. 513) does not constitute a
substantial revision to the Initial Study within the meaning of Section
15073.5(b)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Comment No. 1-3: The final MND should require that the Department be given the
opportunity to review and approve the "California Walnut Woodland and
Coast Live Oak Mitigation Plan" proposed as Mitigation Measure No. 5 (p.
4-11) prior to the issuance- of a grading permit to assure that the
mitigation is "designed to mitigate not only the loss of individual protected
trees but also the loss or diminishment of the existing southern coast live
oak and California walnut woodland habitat located on and adjacent to
the property."
Response No. 1-3: As specified in Section 15040(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, CEQA
does not grant an agency new powers independent of the powers granted
to the agency by other laws. As such, CEQA cannot impose obligations
beyond those required by existing statutes and regulations.
Comment No. 1-4: The final MND should require that (a) trees are to be avoided by fencing
off and tagged to prevent equipment from operating in the drip line of
these trees, (b) oak and walnut tree trimming be conducted by or be
under the supervision of a licensed arborist with specific knowledge
regarding oak preservation. See the attached guidelines for preserving
oak trees, which are equally applicable to the walnut trees.
Response No. 14: The project is subject to compliance with the City's tree protection
ordinance, codified in Chapter 22.38 (Tree Preservation and Protection)
of the Municipal Code. As specified in Section 22.38.120 (Tagging), a
permanent tag, a minimum of two inches in length, shall be used for
identifying applicable trees. As further specified in Section 22.38.140
(Tree Protection Requirements) therein, barriers shall be placed at least
five feet outside the drip line of trees to be protected.
Similarly, as indicated in Section 2.4 (Applicant -Nominated Environmental
Compliance Activities) of the Initial Study, the proposed project includes
the following Applicant -imposed condition: A temporary chain-link fence
not less than 4 feet in height shall be installed around the encroachment
zone of trees within the 50 -foot zone adjacent to development grading.
Fencing shall be in place prior to commencement of any activity on the
subject property. This fencing shall remain in place throughout the entire
period of development and shall not be removed without written
authorization of the Director. In addition, to ensure compliance with the
above mitigation measures, a resource management plan and mitigation -
City of Diamond Bar
Response to Comments October 2006
Page 11
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
monitoring program shall be designed for the on-site walnut and oak trees
established as a condition of project approval.
Comment No. 1-5: Fuel Modification Zone. The MND should adequately address the need
for fuel modification zones and the associated impacts to adjacent
sensitive habitat. The MND states "the precise nature of any fuel
modification zone requirements have not yet been established by the Los
Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) and could potentially exceed
the spatial limits of that surveyed (i.e., extend beyond the 50 -foot buffer)."
The LACFD "Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines," issued in January 1998,
identify the fuel modification zone requirements for Fire Zone 4 areas
(which the MND identifies as the LACFD code for the project location).
Current County fire hazard abatement requirements include a minimum
30 -foot firebreak surrounding occupied structures. However,
the
Guidelines state that if the chief or commissioner finds that a 30 -foot
firebreak is not adequate "[the chief or commissioner] may notify all
affected owners of the property that they must clear all flammable
vegetation and other combustible growth or reduce the amount of fuel
content of a distance greater than 30 feet but not to exceed 200 feet."
It appears that the fuel modification zone will exceed bounds oot b The
ffer
surrounding the project limits and the property ry.
Department requests that the City provide us with documentation from the
LACFD confirming that fuel modification zone width proposed is
adequate. If it is not, the impacts on the woodland habitats need to be
requantified based on the fuel modification zone approved by the LACFD
and the final MND needs to reflect the adjusted impacts and mitigation
requirements. All fuel modification should be wholly on site, and the limits
of the fuel modification zone should be marked on the ground with
permanent stakes or similar method.
Response No. 1-5: As indicated in the Initial Study, the project site VHFis located
ce is subject
within a
designed "Very High Fire Hazard Safety Zone" ( ) a
to "Fire Zone 4" standards established by the Los Angeles County Fire
Department (LACFD), including compliance with the LACFD's "Fuel
Modification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire Zone 4 or Very
High Fire Hazard Severity Zones 11and the "Los Angeles County Fire
the
Code" (Fire Code). In accordance with those requirements, p o
approval of the tentative map or the issuance of building permits, the
Applicant is required to submit a fuel modification plan to the LACFD.
Mitigation Measure No. 513 specifies that the Applicant submit a fuel
modification plan to the LACFD prior to the approval of the final
subdivision map and/or issuance of any grading or grubbing permits and
provides the LACFD additional opportunities to review and comment on
that quiirrements anre fully c ns dered and incorporated into the final design
eon
r
Comment No. 1-6: Streambed Alteration Agreement. The proposed project is located
adjacent to Brea Canyon Channel. Although the MND determines that no
City of Diamond Bar
October 2006 Response to comments
Page 12
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
impacts to the channel would occur, if impacts occur to riparian trees (i.e.,
willows or sycamores) the Department will/may require a Streambed
Alteration Agreement, pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. of the Fish and
Game Code, with the applicant prior to the applicant's commencement of
any activity that will substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or
subsequently change the bed, channel, or bank (which may include
associated riparian resources) of a river, stream or lake, or use materials
from a streambed. The Department's issuance of a Streambed Alteration
Agreement for a project that is subject to the California Environmental
Quality Act requires CEQA compliance actions by the Department as a
Responsible Agency. As a Responsible Agency under CEQA, the
Department may consider the City's CEQA documentation for the project.
To minimize additional requirements by the Department pursuant to
Section 1600 et seq. and/or under CEQA, the final document should fully
identify the potential impacts to the lake, stream or riparian resources and
provide adequate avoidance, mitigation, monitoring and reporting
commitments for issuance of the agreement. A Streambed Alteration
Agreement notification form may be obtained by writing the Department of
Fish and Game, 4949 Viewridge Avenue, San Diego, California 92123-
1662, or by calling (858) 636-3160, or by accessing the Department's
web site at hftp://www.dfg.ca.gov/www.dfg.ca.gov/1600.
Response No. 1-6: The CDFG's jurisdiction under Section 1600 et seq. of the Fish and Game
Code is acknowledged. As now proposed, it does not appear that the
project is subject to CDFG permit requirements.
If the proposed project were to result in impacts upon any jurisdictional
waters, the Applicant bears an obligation to enter into a Streambed
Alteration Agreement (SAA) with the CDFG. Since the execution of a
SAA is a discretionary action, the CDFG must independently demonstrate
compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. If deemed
adequate by the CDFG, that agency is authorized to utilize the City's
CEQA analysis as the environmental basis for its own compliance
obligations. Alternative, if the CDFG deems the City's analysis to be
inadequate, it can initiate the preparation of additional CEQA compliance
documents.
Comment No. 1-7: If you have any questions or comments pertaining to this letter, please
contact Erinn Wilson at (562) 342 -7155 -
Response No. 1-7: This comment is acknowledged and no further response is necessary.
Comment Letter No. 2
John Beauman, Chairperson
Wildlife Corridor Conservation Authority
407 W_ Imperial Highway, Suite H, PMB 230
Brea, California 92821
(Letter dated August 30, 2006)
City of Diamond Bar
Response to Comments October 2006
Page 13
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Comment No. 2-1:
The Wildlife Corridor Conservation Authority (WCAA) provides the
following comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) No.
2006-03 for Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) No. 54081. WCCA was
established to provide for the proper planning, conservation,
the habitat and wildlife
environmental protection, and maintenance of
Whittier -Puente Hills and the Cleveland National
corridor between the
Forest in the Santa Ana Mountains.
Response No. 2-1:
The introductory comment from the Wildlife Corridor Conservation
of the Initial Study and draft MND and
Authority acknowledges receipt
present a brief summary of WCANs charter. This comment is
acknowledged and no further response is necessary.
Comment No. 2-2:
Some basic information regarding the extent of impacts to biological
was missing or not clear in the MND. WCAA recommends that
resources
the MND be revised and recirculated for public comment with this
least, a supplement staff report should
additional information. At the very
be to the Planning Commission and City Council with this
provided
information, once the project is considered for approval. Without this
and decision makers to
information, it is quite difficult for public reviewers
the real impacts of the project and to make meaningful
understand
comments regarding possible alternatives or project modifications. In
be
addition, WCCA recommends that some mitigation measures
modified.
to or separately derived by the Lead
Response No. 2-2:
No information has been presented
the need for the recirculation of
Agency that would appear to predicate
As indicated in Section 15073.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines,
the MND.
is only required when the document must be substantially
recirculation
revised after public notice of its availability has been given but prior to its
adoption. The term "substantial revision" is defined to mean: (1) a new,
avoidable, significant impact is identified and mitigation measures or
effect to
project revisions must be added in order to reduce the
or (2) the Lead Agency determines that the proposed
insignificance;
mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to
less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required.
Comment No. 2-3:
For example, it is not clear how many native walnut and oak trees would
trees and by encroachment),
be impacted by the project (by removal of
the direct project footprint, grading, and fuel modification.
including from
Page 2-10 of the MND states that approximately 98 trees(including
62 walnut trees) would be removed. Page 2-8
approximately 36 oaks and
states that 202 trees were identified in the grading limits, and
50 buffer zone and could be
approximately 27 trees were in the -foot
Page 4-10 refers to 269 trees thatt, removed,
t
affected. the
relocated or damaged. The MND (p. ) states that
walnut woodland and coast
11.5 acres of mixed community of California
The MND should clearly state how many acres of this
live oak woodland.
would be impacted by all aspects of the project. Mitigation
woodland
Measure No. 4 requires a revised protected tree survey. This is deferring
City of Diamond Bar
October 2006
Response to Comments
Page 14
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
the evaluation of environmental impacts. This "mitigation" measure that
requires an evaluation of environmental impacts does not satisfy the
intent of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Response No. 2-3: Although a protected tree survey was performed by a State -licensed
arborist, the precise number of trees impacted by grading and fuel
modification activities cannot be precisely determined. Final grading
limits have not been established and LACFD fuel -modification
requirements have not been definitively established. Estimates
concerning protected tree removal were based on previous grading plans
which involved both a greater number of dwelling units and more
extensive grading operations, and were based on the size of the trees
that existed at the time the survey was conducted. Additionally, the
number, condition, health, and status of on-site trees change overtime.
As the project proceeds through Planning Commission and City Council
review, further revisions to the project could occur. Subsequent project
revisions, if any, will likely occur with the overall environmental framework
presented in the Initial Study. Since the City has identified anticipated
impacts to protected trees and has formulated a mitigation measure
which stipulates that the precise number of protected trees be verified
prior to any project -related impacts upon those trees and contains clear
provisions concerning replacement obligations, the City has not deferred
either the analysis of the project's potential effects or the formulation of
mitigation in response thereto.
Comment No. 2-4: A figure should be included in the MND showing the extent of vegetation
communities overlain on the project and grading footprint and fuel
modification boundaries. In addition, the MND should explicitly state how
many acres of open space would remain, including how many acres of
undisturbed open space.
Response No. 2-4: Based on additional comments received from the CDFG and LACFD,
further revisions to the project's open space plan may be identified. The
final subdivision map and/or grading plan will delineate the amount of
undisturbed open space and engineered slope area on the project site.
Comment No. 2-5: WCCA concurs with several aspects of the tree mitigation plan (Mitigation
Measure No. 5, pp. 4-11 to 4-12) such as "seek[ing] to establish a natural,
viable plant community" and that the "plan shall ... be designed to mitigate
not only the loss of individual protected trees but also the loss or
diminishment of the existing southern coast live oak and California walnut
woodland habitat located on and adjacent to the project site."
However, additional specificity for the tree mitigation plan should be
included upfront, in the MND. A schedule for planting should be
proposed and should be enforceable. Otherwise, it is unclear when the
restoration would be implemented (e.g., within one year, 10 years, 50
years)? To maximize the benefit of the restoration for those resources to
be impacted, the trees (if installed off the impact area) should be installed
City of Diamond Bar October 2006
Response to Comments Page 15
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
prior to the vegetation removal or grading, or within six months of the
initiation of grading or construction. Restoration to occur within the
project impact area should occur as soon as possible, but before the
issuance of the certificates of occupancy.
In addition, proposed locations for restoration should be included in the
MND. At this time, it is not clear that there are available and suitable
areas onsite, and/or offsite, to accomplish the proposed restoration.
Response No. 2-5: See Response No. 1-2 above.
Comment No. 2-6: WCCA concurs that grading should occur outside the breeding .bird
season (p. 2-10). If tree removal occurs during grading season, a
breeding bird survey should be conducted. A buffer of 100 feet is not
typical for construction near raptor nests. A buffer of at least 500 feet
should be required for raptor nests, if construction cannot be avoided
during nesting season.
Response No. 2-6: Migratory, non -game native bird species are protected by international
treaty under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBYA). In
addition, Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the California Fish and
Game Code prohibits take of all birds and their active nests including
raptors and other migratory non -game birds (as listed under the MBTA).
As stipulated in the Initial Study, impacts to breeding birds "shall be
avoided by grading outside of the breeding season or by avoiding active
nest until the breeding cycle is completed. The nest locations shall be
flagged and a 100 -foot buffer placed around the nest until breeding is
complete" (p. 2-10). The breeding bird season generally runs from March
1.— August 31 (as early as February 1 for raptors).
In order to bring the Applicant's self-imposed migratory bird compliance
efforts (300 -foot survey radius) into compliance with the CDFG's
recommended standards (500 -foot survey radius), the Department has
identified the following additional mitigation measure:
Mitigation Measure 5C If project activities cannot feasibly avoid
the breeding season for migratory, non -game native bird species,
be ronin thi days prior to the disturbance of suitable nesting
habitat the Applicant shall arrange for weekly bird surveys to
detect an rotected native birds in the habitat to be removed and
any other such habitat within 300 feet of the construction work
area (within 500 feet for raptors). Those surveys, conducted by a
qualified biologist with experience in conducting breeding bird
s_urve s shall continue on a weekly basis with the last survey
bein conducted no more than three days prior to the initiation of
ra ina and grubbing activities. If a protected native bird is found
the Applicant. shall dela all disturbance activities in suitable
nesting habitat or within 300 feet of nesting habitat (within 500 feet
for raptor Westin habitat) until August 31 or continue the surveys
City of Diamond Bar
October 2006 Response to Comments
Page 16
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
in order to locate any nests If an active nest is located clearing
and construction within 300 feet of the nest (within 500 feet for
raptor nests) shall be postponed until the nest is vacated and
juveniles have fledged and when there is no evidence of second
attempt at nesting Limits of construction to avoid a nest shall be
established in the field with flagging and stakes or construction
fencing. Construction personnel shall be instructed on the
sensitivity of the area The Applicant shall record the results of the
recommended protective measures described above to document
compliance with applicable State and federal laws pertaining to
the protection of native birds
The inclusion of Mitigation Measure No. 5C does not constitute a
substantial revision to the Initial Study within the meaning of Section
15073.5(b)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Comment No. 2-7: The MND (p. 2-2) states that no public dedication or conveyance of any of
the four "open space" lots is currently proposed. However, Strategy 1.5.6
of the Land Use Element of the City's 1995 General Plan mandates the
dedication of. those [significant environmental] resources to the City or a
conservancy (p. ES -4). Sometimes the management goals of a
Homeowners' Association are in conflict with the maximum protection of
the open space. WCCA recommends that the undisturbed open space
be dedicated in fee simple to a public conservation agency. Fuel
modification areas could be dedicated to a public conservation agency, if
easements are granted to the Homeowners' Association. If a fee title
dedication is not possible, a conservation easement should be recorded
in favor of a public conservation agency and the City.
Response No. 2-7: The Applicant is not presently proposing the dedication of identified open
space lots to a public conservation agency but rather the retention of
those lots by the project's homeowners' association. As a standard
permit condition, the City typically specifies that the project's conditions,
covenants, and restrictions (CC&Rs) are reviewed and approved by the
City Attorney. Since the project's hillside open space lots are being
retained for the purpose of conservation, the City Attorney has the ability
to suggest modifications designed to ensure that primary intent.
In addition, Mitigation Measure No. 8 stipulates that the CC&Rs "shall
specify that the following activities and uses shall be expressly prohibited
within designated open space areas: unauthorized entry; use of
motorized vehicles; possession of firearms including air or gas propelled
weapons, slings and sling -shots; collection or possession of native plants
or wildlife, collecting wood, or engaging in activity to harass, harm,
pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, poison, capture or collect wildlife;
smoking or the use of fire; unauthorized trail construction; and removal,
defacement or damage to natural features. CC&Rs shall be enforceable
and contain provisions sufficient to deter violations."
City of Diamond Bar
Response to Comments October 2006
Page 17
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Comment No. 2-8: The subject site is adjacent to an area proposed as open space as part of
the Aera Master Planned Community. An open space a dedication the
pen
VTMM No. 54081 site would be complementary Yadjacent
space preserve that may ultimately result on the Aera property.
Response No. 2-8:
See Response No. 2-7 above.
Comment No. 2-9:
The MND (p. 2-2) states that a 20 -foot -wide "public access easement" is
the end of Street "A," abutting the adjoining property to the
depicted at
south, in order to provide for emergency access. The MND should be
this could be growth -inducing, by facilitating
explicit regarding whether
access to property to the south.
Response No. 2-9:
Since the proposed tract map is served by a single public roadway, the
is intended for emergency ingress and egress only.
referenced easement
As such, since no public dedication of that easement is proposed, its
establishment would not be growth inducing.
Comment No. 2-10:
Please provide us any revised CEQA documents and any notices of
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If
hearings for this project.
have any questions, please contact Judi Tamasi of our staff at the
you
above address, or by phone at (310) 589-3200, ext. 121.
Response No. 2-10:
This comment is acknowledged and no further response is necessary.
Comment Letter No. 3
Ruth J. Frazen, Engineering Technician
County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
1955 Workman Mill Road
Whittier, Califomia 90601-1400
(Letter dated August 3, 2006)
Comment No. 3-1: The County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (Districts) received
a Notice of Availability of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the subject
project on July 27, 2006. The proposed development is located within the
jurisdictional boundaries of District No. 21. We offer the following
comments regarding sewer service.
Response No. 3-1: The introductory comment from the County CSDLAC acknowledges ges receipt Sanitation
Angeles County ( ) of the Initial Study and
draft MND and presents information already contained in that document.
This comment is acknowledged and no further response is necessary.
Comment No. 3-2: The wastewater flow originating from thmainta sed by projectposed the will di scc car ge
to a local sewerline,
conveyance to the Districts' Diamond Bar Trunk Sewer, located in Brea
Canyon Road at Via Sorella. This 18 -inch diameter trunk sewer has a
design capacity of 12.3 million gallons per day (mgd) and conveyed a
peak flow of 4.9 mgd when last measured in 2005.
City of Diamond Bar
October 2006 Response to comments
Page 18
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Response No. 3-2: The information provided by the CSDLAC serves to augment that
presented in the Initial Study. The Initial Study indicated that project -
related impacts upon CSDLAC facilities would be less than significant
because the number of dwelling units proposed was less than the
maximum number of units theoretically allowable based on the General
Plan's land use designation. The Initial Study did not, however, include
recent flow data with regards to the remaining capacity of the Diamond
Bar Trunk Sewer. As indicated by the CSDLAC, sufficient capacity exists
in the receiving trunk sewer to accommodate the proposed development.
Comment No. 3-3: The wastewater generated by the proposed project will be treated at the
San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) located adjacent to the
City of Industry, which has a design capacity of 100 mgd and currently
processes an average flow of 88.4 mgd. Wastewater flows that exceed
the capacity of the San Jose Creek WRP, and all biosolids, are diverted
to and treated at the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant located in the City
of Carson.
Response No. 3-3: See Response No. 3-2 above.
Comment No. 3-4: The expected average flow from the project site is 4,160 gallons per day.
Response No. 3-4: See Response No. 3-2 above.
Comment No. 3-5: The Districts are empowered by the California Health and Safety Code to
charge a fee for the privilege of connecting (directly or indirectly) to the
Districts' Sewerage System or increasing the existing strength and/or
quantity of wastewater attributable to a particular parcel or operation
already connected. This connection fee is required to construct an
incremental expansion of the Sewerage System to accommodate the
proposed project, which will mitigate the impact of this project on the
present Sewerage System. Payment of a connection fee will be required
before a permit to connect to the sewer is issued. A copy of the
Connection Fee Information Sheet is enclosed for your convenience. For
more specific information regarding the connection fee application
procedures and fees, please contact the Connection Fee Counter at
extension 2727.
Response No. 3-5: The Applicant is response for coordination with the CSDLAC and for
obtaining any permits and paying any fees that may be imposed by the
CSDLAC.
Comment No. 3-6: In order for the Districts to conform to the requirements of the Federal
Clean Air Act (CAA), the design capacity of the Districts' wastewater
treatment facilities are based on the regional growth forecast adopted by
the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Specific
policies included in the development of the SCAG regional growth
forecast are incorporated into clean air plans, which are prepared by the
South Coast and Antelope Valley Air Quality Management Districts in
order to improve air quality in the South Coast and Mojave Desert Air
City of Diamond Bar October 2006
Response to Comments Page 19
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Basins as mandated by the CAA. All expansions of Districts' facilities
must be sized and service phased in a manner that will be consistent with
the SCAG regional growth forecast for the counties of Los Angeles,
Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial. The available
capacity of the Districts' treatment facilities will, therefore, be limited to
levels associated with the approved growth identified by SCAG. As such,
this letter does not constitute a guarantee of wastewater service, but is to
advise you that the Districts intend to provide this service up to the levels
that are legally permitted and to inform you of the currently existing
capacity and any proposed expansion of the Districts' facilities.
Response No. 3-6: As indicated in the Initial Study: "Since the 1995 General Plan designates
the project site for residential use and since the density standards
presented therein would authorize a greater number of dwelling units than
now proposed, the project is presumed to be adequately serviced by
CSDLAC facilities" (p. 4-36).
Comment No. 3-7: If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at (562) 908-
4288, extension 2717.
Response No. 3-7: This comment is acknowledged and no further response is necessary.
3.0 PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION
After considering each of the comments received by the Lead Agency, evaluating the draft
responses therein, and reconsidering the analysis presented in the Initial Study in light of those
comments and the Lead Agency's responses, the Department again concludes that there is no
substantial evidence before the Lead Agency presenting a fair argument that the approval,
construction, and habitation of the Jewel Ridge Estates project, as described in the Initial Study,
may have a significant effect on the environment. The Department, therefore, concludes:
Adoption and implementation of the mitigation measures identified by the Lead Agency
and included in the Initial Study will result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of
any and all of the project's potentially significant environmental effects and will reduce
those effects to a level deemed by the Lead Agency to be below a level of significance.
Based on this preliminary finding, pursuant to the requirements of CEQA and the State
CEQA Guidelines, the Lead Agency concludes that a MND is the appropriate form of
environmental documentation for the proposed Jewel Ridge Estates project.
The Lead Agency has prepared and, should the project be approved or conditionally
approved, will adopt a "Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program" (MRMP) outlining
the manner in which each mitigation measure will be implemented.
In making this determination, the Department is not stating that the proposed project is absent
any environmental effects. What the Department is stating is that the impacts that have been
identified will not manifest at a level deemed to be significant. Since the project will not produce
a significant effect on the environment, after mitigation, subject to the final determination of the
City Council, the Lead Agency is authorized under CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines to
prepare a MND as the appropriate form of environmental documentation for the proposed Jewel
Ridge Estates project.
October 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Page 20 Response to Comments
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Attachment A
Comment Letters
City of Diamond Bar October 2006
Response to Comments
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
This page intentionally left blank.
October 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Response to Comments
State of California - The Resources Agency ARNOW SCHWARZENEMER, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND CAMs:
http:!/,d`g.ca.gov
4949 VAewridge Avenue
San Diego, CA 92123
(858)4G7-4201
Axon I Luno
City of Diamond Aar
Coinmunity Development Department
Planning Division
21825 Capley Drive
I)iamand Aar, Cz_lifrarnda 91765-4178
909439-7032
Fzt. 409-861-3117
August 31, 2006
RECEIVED $ �l of
AUG 1 2446 r_ 1"
SWE CtEAA#MG # iQUSE
Commenb on the Ir itaal Study/Mitigated Nevti4e DedarsAon for the Jewel Ridge Estates
Vesting Tentative '7 Y*etNo. 54081 in the Chy of Diamond Bar,
Los Angeles County, California (SCM# 2006071129)
Dear Ms. Lungu:
The Department of Fish and Game (Depertmerit) has reviewed the above -referenced Witigatet
Negative Declaration (MIND), whim we received on Augast 1, 2006, and -has identified potential effects
of this project on biological resources mod regional cwseavgtion planning: The Department is a Trustee
Agen,:y and a Responsible Agency pursuant to the California Eztviroamental Quality Act (CEQA),
Sections 15386 and 15381, resspevtivciy, end is responsible for the conservation of the Stn's biological
Tmurces, pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act, and other sections of the California Fish
and Game Cotte. On Aug= 29, 2006, you granted us a two-day extension an the public comment
period for this U ND. Wa apprediaxe the extension.
The 1188�uere Jewel Ridge Estates project site is located at the southern terminus of Crooked
Creek Lane in the sou tb m boundary of the City of Diamond Har (City), Los .Angeles County (County).
The proposed project is the subdivision of the prnperty into 16 lots with single fsmiiy detached
residences, two stroof lots, amid 4 "apex► apnea" lots (Le., s total of 2216ts). The'property is surrounded
by the coneret&4iined flood control channel of Brea Canyon Channel to the north, and undeveloped
o*/walnut woodland and nonnative grassland which the County of Los Angeles has proposed as a
Sigaifii.mtEcologirrsl Area.
The project rite is vegetated with 1.048 acres 4f annual gesssland and I I A75 acres mixed coast
live oWCalifornia vadmt woodland. The MND indicates that the project would result in the removal of
approximately 36 oaks and 62 California vwalnut trees (98 trem). and that an addidonal 59 trees within
the 50 -foot fuol modification zone arc in close proximity to the grading would be acted.
Tho Department offers tho following oommeaft and recommendations based on the information
included in the iv ND, ,md our gmeral knowledge ofthe biological resources in the County,._
1-1
Ms. Ann 3. Luxtgu
August 31, 2006
Oak and Sycamore Tree tVliAgation
The Departnment typicaiiy rewires that she loss of walnut, oak, and sycamore woodlands be
mitigated in a manner that preserves habitat ftodons and values. Therefor=, in addition to the 9$ trees
the NM requires to be replaced, irapac is to 11.475 sores of o8]c/walriut wooriland. habitat should also be
fully mitigated. Plantings should occur at appropriate spacing to assure the integrity of the -woodland
habitat is preserved. Therefore, additional acres of planting might be required off site to accommodase-
all the replacement trees. Woodland restoration should use locally collected nuts or saplmi p grown from
collected nuts. Appropriate understory species should be included in the mitigaaon plan to enhance
structural diversity ofthe mitigation site. If the.four proposed "open space" lots are intended for
mitigation of woodland habitat, the open space lot configruation should he identified and planned to be
contiguous.with adjacent woodland habitat and comparable in function and value to the acreage
impazted by development. The mitigation sites should be monitored and managed for a mbAvaum of
five years to enswe suames: of the restoration afforr. The Department requem to meet with the City and
applicant as appropriate, to discuss the appropriate mitigation for the loss of woodland hobitats. The
meeting should occur prior to the preparation of the final NM so that the document reflects the
mitigation we discuss.
1-2
The final MINT? should require that the Department be given the oppoirturuty to review and
approve the CgWbmia Wabwr Woodland and Q= k& Oak &
]MYRn lcm proposed as 14fitigetivn
Measure No. 5 (page 4-3 l) prior to the issuance of a grading permit to assure that the mitigation is 1-3
"designed to raitigato rat only the loss of individual protected trees but also the loss or diminishment of
the existing southern coast live vale and California walnut woodlsmd habi=tat located on and adjacent to
the property.°'
The final MND should require that (a) trees that axe to be avoided be fenced o$' and tagged to
prevent equipment from operating in the drip line of these trees, (b) oak and walnut tree trimming be _ _ --
conducted by or be under the supervision of a licensed arborist with specific Imawledge. regarding oak 1-4
preservation.. See the attached guidelines for premving oak trees, which are equally applicable to the
walnut trees.
F� iev&64e
T. WdMND should adequatr^ly address the weed for fuel modific4on zoites and -the associated
impacts to adjacent sensitive habitat. The MND states "the precise nature of any fuel modification zone
requirements have not yet been establisbed by fie Loa Angeles Cotmty fte Department (i.,A.CPD) and
could potentially exceed the spatial limits of that surveyed {i.e., extend beyond the 50 -foot buffer)." The
L4,CFD FU81 MUdificatfott Pkat Guirldtines, issued in January 1 "s, ideno% the fuel modification zone
requirements for fire Zone 4 areas (Which the MND identifies as the T-ACFD code for tate project
notation.). Gir=t County fire hazard abaleiz ut requirements include aminimum 30 -foot firebreak
su Tmmding occupied stractitras.' However, the Guidelines state that if the eWef or commissioner finds
that a 30 -foot firebreak is not adequate "... ([the chief or commissioner] may notify all affected owners
Of the property that they must thio all flammable vegetation and other combustible growth or reduce the
amount of fuel content of a distance greater then 30 feet but not to exceed 200 feet..."
Ms. Arm I. Lungs
August 31, 2606
It appears that lite foal maMcstim zone will oI IX -1 tIe 50400t bt>tfer anXIMUW ng the pmoject
limits rmd the popmV bomdary- 'IU Dapumnent rat=Sts that the MY Favi& vs with doaumentaiion
fi the I.ACFt3 meg that diel mvtlaifte fim mom width prop med is adegttats. If it is Hats tine
irn wM on the wood and ftabitds nod to be wed based an dw fuel t NWwadun mnm acaved
by the LACFD, and the Fina[ UM nee& to reflect ttye adkmtad iatltaote sad mitlgtitim npkm m&
All fiat modi5oWm d ba wb DUy apt site, and them limits dtM ft1 mod+Scatiou ZDAC attmdd be
mwkad vn the: womd with g=mcnt stapes at sWOat zambod..
$AA
ThC ptmpeaal Project is ioodod 4sceat to the Brea Caa>iy« cx Chm ad. AWwuA the UM
debenn'aam dw no len" to ft dwsw would oc=, ifs Oem to um O.Z. wmaws or
$yu mom) ffie Depart mt willhnay requira a fittombed Alteeatiom Agrtmwa; pu m,a m to serosa
1600 et sag. oftbr R* and C=me Code, vajth tie gWlioemt prim to the applitmrt's of
UY WtMW thS wAll &Welty divert Or obstr= the anb all flow or MAMmdaUy dwnse the lied,
mho wt.'or book (wltiab mw 4 Wuk awoctatnd dpatiaet.tvsmmm) of s rives, 3dmm or ham, or m
Maid ftm a xaemtbed. 'Tile DePlwmeWs im m= of a or 3 awnbod-Ahandow Aff amaed :for a
projeet #haus subjet to ft his QudW Act (CEQ&) =Pbm CEQA, cumpliac¢e
aedm by the Duet as a, Regm m'bk A wy- A e it Resp mffile Agency mdor CEQA, IM
Det► aoettider tbYatYa CEQA tioegi:Yrznr lime project.. To al
adddan
,wV&emeM by them DquaUa rt ptamumm m Saedatt 1600 et sag. and/or tgtrler CEQA, the feud
da rt al mM Attly ldtmb* des pular mVocb to the kke, smmm or rim resmVeft mW provide
aclQgtnttG avaidame, micigmtzst, nwaitudug, =d reporting conmetittoeata JbR is""= Qf tiro 55mc o enL
A. Oftund d Ahmubm Agmxmcut nodfic alien fum may be abee = d by wtiMM to 'Fite Depownemm of
pmt and t3amk% 4449 VIMAdw Avemse, San DIW, ewe 92123-166% or by ealiag @SR) 636-
316(, or by =assing *a Dapmumm 's-vreb site ad httv:tlo w dw d&Lmgavwww. &,
1-6
Ai* bave asgy cna air coosateOI3 p iO9 m this IMM Pin" 0=04 RMM WHsm at (562) 342' --
1-7 t
cc: Erhmir1smmlc ,�i2 o)
Mate Cwwwomse
Ms. Atm J. Lunguu
August 31; 2006
Preserved oak trees shag be protected using the following rneasam:
A circle with a radius tzieasureMestt $nm the trunk of the tree to she tip of its longest limb dWI
constitute the dniplza a pr medon area for each tree. Umbs must not be cut bad in m&r to chew ge its
dripline. The area beneath the dripline its a oxitical portion of the mot zone and dcfincs the minimum
protected awca o£each tree. Removing limbs that makeup the droline does nDt change the profteted
area.
Any oak tracs on the site that requires p=ing shall be pruned by a certified wborist babore the start of
o onommdon work. All pruning shsU be in accordance with A.mesican Nidm d Standards Institute
(ANSI) A300 prang standards and the Internwdonal Society of Arborictftual (ISA) 'Tree Pruning
Guidelines."
No veNcles, const rruticeat equipmtent, mobile howdofffitcc, supplies, Materieb or amities shall be
driven, parked, stockpiled or locatsd within the dripline of oak trees.
Temporary protective fencing shall be installed at least one foot outside the dripline of the oak trees
before initiating coustructk* in Order to avoid damage to the tree canoes asci root systems.
No signs, ropes, cable (except those dant may be installed by a certified arborist to provide limb support)
or any other items shalt be attached to the oak trees. Small metallic numbecittg tags for preparing tree
mports and invfttories shall be allowed.
No grading (grade cuts or fills) shall be allowed within the driplitme of the oak tress.
Drainage Patterns on the site shall not be modified so that water eolleats or stands vtfthin, or is diverted
across, the dripline of any oak tri.
No tmaching shell be allowed within the dri plinc of oak trees.
Aft r project construction, a fact sheet describing the vallm and can of native oaks should be prepared
and distributed to all xeddew& At a Minimum, this fact sheet should encoutuge homeowners to avoid
un'leceMsY Fnmmg axil encourage, excW where a safety hazard occurs, the retention of snags. This
;Fact sheet should be prepared by a quali£ed biologist.
WILDUFF-ICORRIDOR CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
40 W. i APERIAL WN. SUCH H. PM$ 230.3REA, cALIF ORKA 92821
Te -t CVNE: (310)5093230
FAX: (3 1 0) 525-2408
-josM BEAUMAN
C14AfR
cn-rnr sREA
GA: -,Y WAT"
CALIFORNIA sTATE PARKS
'usuc MEMBER
LOS AK 3ELES CQUfM
August 30, 2€108
Ann J. Lungu, Assoclato Planner
City of Diamond Bar went
Community Development Dep
Planning Division
21825 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar. Calftmia 94765
C.'LS?MrA KM Comments renilllitlgated Negative Declaratlon.No. 200643 for
.xlFlt G� vesting Tentative Tract Map Na. -181,
ORANGE
COUrrf`r Brea.Canyon Watershed
FRED KUMN
cn Y OF LA NAURA "EK-- MG
Dear (Vis. Lungu:
JAGKTANAKA
Gt3V OF DIAMOND BAR
am { tgVpSR90N
cr-V of wwTnER
Et jZM3GTK C ^ -Mt
SANTA MOMC:A MOUNTAINS
CONSERVANCY
Diet= SIMMONS
LOS A -MGM E3 C:OUNgy
50ARD OF SuPMWMRS
The Wildlife Corridor croservdon Authority MCCA) provides the
follo Mng ccmmer2ts on the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) No -
2006 -03 for Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) No. 54081. WCCA vwas
established to provide for the proper planning, conservation,
envirenaw l protection, and maintenance of the habitat and Widiife
corridor between the Whittier -Puente Hills and the Cleveland National
Forest in the Santa Ana Mountains.
Some basic information regarding the extent of impacts to biological
resources was missing or riot ciearin the WIND. WCCA recommends that
the MND be revised and recirculated for public comment with this
additional Information. At the very least, a supplement staff report should
be provided to tete Planning Commission or City Council with this
information, once the project is considered for approval. Wlthaut this
information, it is quite difficult for public reviewers and decision makers
to understand the real impacts of the project and to make meaningful
comments regarding passible alternatives or project modifications. In
addition, WCCA recommends that some mitigation measures be
2-1
2-2
For example, it is not clear how many native walnut. and Oak trees would
—i
be impacted by the project (by removal of trees and by encroa0hmenf),
including from the direct project footprint, grading, and fuel modification.
Page 2-10 of the MND states that appraxkTlat* 98 trees (including
apprmdrnately 36 oaks and 62 walnut trees) would be removed. Page 2-
8 states that 202 trees were id ed in the grading limits, and
approximately 27 trees were in the 50 -foot buffer zone and could be 2-3
affected. Page 4-10 refers to 269 trees that woukf be cut, removed,
relocated or damaged. The MMD (p. 4-10) states that the site contains
11.5 acres of mixed osommunity of Califomia walnut woodland and coast
A i,UBt[C EPFf'ITY OF7i3< STATE SSF calSFOt3NW SsrasLtslar:->3 puRsutiNT TO sr+e atiaKr rr--RC= OF VCr'PZ= AC:T
city of Diamond i3ar
MND - VTTM No. 54081, Brea Canyon %Afatershed
August 30, 2006
Page 2
live oak woodland. The MND should clearly state hoar many acreso t wires ad would
be impacted by all aspects of the plole` t. Mitigation
vised
protected tree survey. This is deferring a evaluation of environmental impacts. This
"mitigation" measure that requires an evaluation of environmental impacts does not satisfy
the intent of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
A figure should be included in the MND showing the extent of vegetation communities
overlain an the project and grading footprint and fuel modification boundaries. in addition,
the MND should expficitly state how many aces of open space would remain, including 2-4
how many acres of undisturbed open space. ,
s
WOCA concurs with several aspects of the tree mitigation plan (Mitigation Measure No. 51 -
pp- 4-'i 1 to 4-12) Such as 'seeic('rngl to estab€ish a natumi, viable plant community" and that
the 'Plan shall ... be designed to -mitigate not only the loss of individual protected trees but
also the loss or diminishment of the existing southern coast We oak and California walnut
woodland habitat bated on and adjacent to the project siie.p
However, additional specificity for the tree mitigation plan shauid be included upfront, in
tie MND. A schedule for planting should be proposed and should be enforceable.
Otherwise, it is ursclear when the restoration would be implemented (e.g., within one year,
1 o years, 5o years?)_ To maximize the benefit of the restoration for those resources or t he
impacted. the.trees (it installed off the impact area) should be installed pri
vegetat€on removal or grading, or within six months of the initiation of grading or
construction. Restoration to occur within the project impact area should occur as soon as
Possible,, but before the issuance of the certificates of occupancy..
In addition, proposed iocations for restoration should be included in the MND. At this time,
it is not: clear that there are available and suitable areas Onsite, anchor offsite, to
accomplish the proposed restoration.
WCCA concurs that grading should occur outside of the breeding bird season (p.
If tree removal occurs during grading season, a breeding bird survey should be conducted.
A buffer of 1 oo feet is not typical for construction near raptor nests. A buffer of at least 500
feet should be required for raptor nests, if construction cannot be avoided during nesting
season.
2-5
2-6
The MND (p. 2-2) states that no public dedication or conveyance of any of the four "open
space" lots is currently proposed- }However, Strategy 1.6.6 of the Land Use Element of the
City's 1995 General plan mandates the dedication of those [significant ern►€ronmesrtaq
resources to the City ar a conservancy (P. ES -4). Sometimes the management goals of 2-7
a Homeowners' Association are in conftictv*h the maximu rn protection of the open space.
CA recommends that the undisturbed open space be dedicated in fee simple to a
City of Diamond Bar
MND - VTTM No, 54081, Brea Canyon Watershed
August 30, 2006
Page 3
public.onservaation agency. Fuel mod""on areas could be dedicated to a public
cpnservatian agency, easements are gran'Od to the Homeowners',4ssrsciatior►. if a fee
tittle dedi is not possible, a conservation easement should be recorded in favor of a �
public conservation agency and the City -
The subject site is adjacent to an area proposed as open spam as part of the Aerar Mastef ----
Pianned Community. An open space dedication on the VrrM No. 54081 site would be 2-8
complementary to any adjacentoWl space preserve that may rattirr�ately!'esul# on the Aera
proper Uf
The MND (p. 2-2) states that a 20-foot-vlide "public access easement° is depicted at the
end of Street W abutting the adta►rnng property to the south, in order to provide for
emergency access. The MND should be explicit regarding whether this could be growih-
inducing, by fac lItAng access to property to the south-
Please provide us any revised CEQA documents and any notices of hearings for this
proiert. Thank you fbr the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions, please
contact Judi Tamasi sof our staff at the above address, or by phone at (310) SM -3200, ext.
Sincerely,
(ORIGINAL SIGNED BY)
John Beatrm
Chairperson
2-9
2-10
HECLIWeT10M
6P41D WASTE NAanCf MENr COUNTY S A N I TAT i O N DISTRICTS
OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY
1955 VJprkmon Will Rood, whiWw, CA 90601-1400
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 4996, Yd}+ithcr, CA 40607-II498 JAMES F. STAFlL
Ghia Engineer and Ger+eral Mor+
Telephone: 15621699-7411, FAX: [562) 699.5422 ager
www.facid.org
August 3, 2006 r
File Flo. 21-00.04-00 �f
Nis. Ann J. Lunn,�v, Associatee Planner ' r. G
Community Development Department
Plmrning Division r
City of Diamond Bar 0-'
21825 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91763
Dear Ms. Lungu:
Vesting Tentati" Tenet Mea No. 54081
The County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (Districts) receiveu a Notice of
Availability of a Mitigated -Negative Declaration for the subject project on July 27, 2006. The proposed
development is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of District No. 21. We offer the following 3"�
comments regarding sewerage service:
L The wastewater flow originating from the proposed project will discharge to a local sewer line,
which is not maintained by the DWM, for conveyance to the Distric& Diamond Bar Trr nKk ---
Sewer, located in Brea Canyon Road at Via Sorella. This i8 -inch diameter trunk sewer bas a 3-2
design capacity of 12.3 million gallons per day (ragd) and conveyed a peak flow of 4.9 mgd what
last measured in 2005...
2. The wastewater generated by the proposed project will be treated at the San Jose Creek Water
Reclamation Plant ff") mated adjacent to the City of industry, which has a design capacity of
100 rngd and currently processes an average flow of 88.4 mgd. Wastewater flows that exceed the 3-3
capacity of the San Jose Creek WRP, and all biosolids, are diverted to and treated at the Joint
Water Pollution Control Plaint located in the City of Carson.
3. The expected aysrago wastewater flow horn the pro*t site is 4,160 gallons ger day. _ — 13-4
4. The Districts are empowered by the California Health and Safety Code to charge a fee for the
privilege of connecting (directly or indirectly) to the Districts' Sewerage System or increasing the
existing strength and/or quantity of wastewater attributable to a particular parcel or operation
already connccwd. This connection fee is required to construct an incremental expansion of the -
sewerage System to accommodate the proposed project, which will mitigate the impact of this 3-5
project on the present Sewerage System. Payment of a connection fee will be required before a
permit to connect to the sewer is issued_ A copy of the Connection Fea Information Sheet is
enclosed for your conven4snce. For more specific it~formation regarding the connection fee
application procedure and fees, please contact the Cormection Fee Counter at extension 2727.
Ms. Aum J. Lungu
August 3, 2006
5. in order for the Districts to conform to the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), tine
design capacities of the Districts' wastewater treatment facilities are based on the regional growth
forecast adopted by the Southern Caiifbmia Association of Gavernmenzts (SLAG)_ Specific;
policies includad in the development of the SLAG regional growth forecast are utcorporated into
clean air plans, which are prepared by the South Coast and Antelope 'Valley_ Air Quality
Management Districts in order to improve air quality ill the South Com and tvlojave Desert'Air
Batttandated by the CAA. All axparsions of Districts' facilities must be sized and service
phased in a manner that will be cros'-stent with the SCAG regional growth forecast for the
counties of 1 es AmSeles, orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial- The
available capacity of lite Districts' treatment facilities wilts therefore, be lsmitad to levels
essoc►ated with the approved growth identified by SCAG. As such, this letter does not constitute
a guarantee of wastewater service, but is to advise you that the Districts.intend to provide this
service up to the levels- 6= are legaily permitted and to inn hrm you of the currently cxistung
capacity and a" proposed expansion of the Districts` facilities.
3-6
If you have any questions, please contact the undsrsigued at (562) 908 42$8, extension 2717.3 -%
Vert` troll' Yours,
James F. Stabi
,uth J. Frazen
Engineering Technician
Faeil'stie9 J Janninag Department
RIF_rf
Enclosure
670717.1
INFORMATION SHEET FOR APPLICANTS
PROPOSING TO CONNECT OR INCREASE THEIR DISCHARGE TO
THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY SP-WERAGE SYSTEM
THE PROGRAM
The County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County are empowered by the California Health and
Safety Code to charge zi fee for the privilege of connecting to a Sanitation District's sewerage system, Your
connection to a City or County sewer constitutes a connection to a Sanitation District's sey wap system as
these sewers flow into a Sanitation District's system. The Comity Sanitati= Districts of Los Angeles County
provide for the conveyance, treatment, and disposal of your wastewater. PAYMENT OF A CONNECTION
FEE TO TI -M COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY WILL BE
REQUIRED BEFORE A CITY OR THE COUNTY WILL ISSUE YOU A PERMIT TO CONNECT TO
THE SEWER.
I, WHO IS REQUIRED TO PAY A CONNECTION FEE?
I . Anyone connecting to the sewerage system for the first time for any structure located on a parael(a)
of land within s County Sanitation District of Los Angeles County. . -
2. Anyone increasing the quantity of wastewater discharged due to the construction of additional
dwelling units on cr a change in land usage of a parcel already connected to the sewerage system.
3. Anyone increasing the improvement square footage Of a oammereial or institutional parcel by more
than 25 percent.
4. Anyone increasing the quantity and/or strength of wastewater from an industrial parcel.
5, if you qualify for an Ad Valorem Tax or Demolition Credit, connection fes will be adjusted
accordingly.
II. HO-Vl ARE THE CONNECTION FETES tSED?
The connection fees are used to provide Additional conveyance, treatment, and disposal facilities (capital,
facilities) which are made necessary by new users connecting to a Sanitation District's sewerage system
or by existing users who sipiftcantly increase the quantity or strengtl, of their wastewater discharge.
The Connection Fee Program insures that all users pay their fair share for any necessary expansion of
the system.
11L NOW MUCH I311 y CONNECTION FEE?
your connection fee can be determined from the Connection Fee Sebedule specific to the Sanitation
District in which your parccl(s) to be' connected is located_ A Sanitation District boundary map is
attadzed to ea^.h corresponding Sanitation District Connection Fee Schedule. Your City or County
sower permitting office has copies of the Cmmectian Fee Schedules) and Sanitation District boundary
map(s) for your parcel(s). if you require verification of tate Sanitation District in which your parcel is
located, please call the Sanitation Districts' infornatiou cumber listed wider Item IX below.
IV. WHAT l" ORMS ARE REQUIRE13#2
The Connection Fee apglicat.on package consists of the following:
1. Information Sheet for Applicsmts (this form)
2. Application for Scorer Connection
(Rc1iocd.W%M6)
3. Cormrsection Fee Sc'ssedule with Sanitation District h4ap (ons schedule for each SasYitEtion
District)
;Additional •Forms are required for Industrial DischOrgers.
V. WHAT DO 1 NEED TO FIEF?
1_ Corrpfeted Application Fours
2. A complete sct of srchiteataral bitsepri;tts (not required for costr►eoting 04114P -single family Dome)
3. Fee payor t (cLnG is payable to, Cotmgty Sanitation Dissti= of Los Angeles County)
4, Industrial aFP}i mustfele additiairal forms acid follow the procedures as auttired in the
application instrrctiors
VI. WRFni DO I SUIIA' ff THE FORMS?
Residential, (,'Om m6rcral, and Institutional applicants should submit the above listed xr.aterials either by
mail or in peon to:
County Sanitation Districts of Los Armgeles County
Connection Fee Program Room 130
1955 Warltma='s nriill Road
Whitti:r',CA 90501
Industrial applicants should submit the approP ;naterisls directly to the City or County office which
will issue the sew:.r connection permit.
V11. HDR' LONG DOES IT TAM TO FROCF..85 MY APPLICATION?
Applications sub-mitted by mail are genamny processed and retailed within three working days of
receipt. Applications brought in pmson are processed on the same day provided the applicatign,
satzsfacxory. Processing of large and/or complex projects may take
supporting materials, and fey JS
longer.
VIII. HOW Ili? I OBTArN MY SEWER FF-RDrfi? TO CONNECT?
An ¢PP d p:;cation far Sewer Cveytecrion will be retuned to the applicant ay�ier all necessary
documents for processing have been submitted Present this approved -stamped copy for the sewer
01
County. office issusi_ng sewer connection permits for your area at the time you apply
hook -up -
IX. HOW CAN I GEF ADDITIONAL WFORMA.TiION?
If you require assistarscc at need additional infOlmation, please call the County Sanitation Districts of
Los Angeles County at (562) 908-4288, extension 2727.
X. WHAT Alm THE DISTRICTS, WORIc[NG HOURS.
The Districts' Offices are Open between the hours of 7:00 a uL and 4:00 p.m., Monday througl:
Thursday, and bzrv.•cen the bouts of 7:00 a.m. and 3:00 p,m. on Friday, exaept halidays_ When applying
in person, applicants must be at the Connection Fee courtier at least 30 minutes before closing time.
:.ir'3'4*MF`'�„����'�CrvzY•vrrCl;CRn°h�ia(e.hr_'
This page intentionally left blank.
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
Attachment B
Notice of Availability
City of Diamond Bar October 2006
Response to Comments
JEWEL RIDGE ESTATES
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 54081
This page intentionally left blank.
October 2006 City of Diamond Bar
Response to Comments
Notice of Availability of
Mitigated Negative
Declaration
DI LEbet
AD BAR
City of Diamond Bar
Community Development Department
Planning Division
21825 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California 91765
(909) 839-7030
TO: Agencies, Organizations, and Interested Individuals
FROM: City of Diamond Bar, Lead Agency
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Diamond Bar, the Lead Agency, has prepared an Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the proposed project -
SUBJECT: Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 for Vestinq Tentative Tract Map No.
54081
PROJECT LOCATION: The proposed project site is located at the southern terminus of Crooked
Creek Drive in the City of Diamond Bar.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed map is a 22 -lot subdivision on a site of approximately
12.9 acres. The proposed map would provide for the development of 16 single-family detached
homes on individual parcels. The parcels range in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to
10,506 square feet. The average residential lot size would be approximately 6,892 square feet.
The project would include: the construction of private streets, graded pads, manufactured slopes
and retaining walls; an easement for a public pedestrian trail in a portion of proposed open space
areas; and a portion of existing vegetation would be removed. Approximately 184,000 cubic yards
of cut and fill grading would be required and approximately 5,000 cubic yards of export. A series of
retaining wall to support the pads and slopes would be part of this project.
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) are
being circulated for public review and commentfor a period of 30 days beginning July 28, 2006 and
ending August 28, 2006. The IS/MND is available for public review at the City of Diamond Bar, City
Hall, Community Development Department, Planning Division between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and
5:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Friday, and at the Diamond Bar
Public Library located at 1061 Grand Avenue, Diamond Bar, California. The public is invited to
submit written comments regarding the environmental findings presented in the IS/MND during the
30 -day review period. All comments should be addressed to Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner, City
of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21825 Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, CA 91765. Comments must be received by the City of Diamond Bar by 5:30 p.m.
August 28, 2006 in order to be considered.
This project is tentatively scheduled for a Planning Commission public hearing on October 10, 2006
in South Coast Air Quality Management District/Govemment Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley
Drive, Diamond Bar, California at 7:00 p.m. (or as soon thereafter that the matter can be heard).
Published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on July 28, 2006
This page intentionally left blank.
INTEROFFICE ,
MEMORANDUM DIAMOND BAR
COMMUNITY & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
PLANNING DIVISION
TO: Nancy Fong, Community Development Director
FROM: Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner
DATE: From November 2002 to September 28, 2006
SUBJECT: Chronology of VTTM 54081 Singh Project
• VTTM 54081 was submitted to the City on November 6, 2002.
• The City sent applicant letter dated November 21, 2002 deeming the application
incomplete for processing and listed nineteen major concerns (i.e., fee deposit
needed for CUP and TP applications, environmental document, landform
grading, required information not submitted, map design, crib walls, street
improvements, etc.) that are required to be addressed to continue the map's
processing.
• On December 11, 2002, James DeStefano (JDS) and Ann Lungu (AJL) met with
applicant at City Hall to review the nineteen major concerns identified in the
November 21, 2002 incompleteness letter and appropriate environmental
document.
• On January 16, 2003, applicant submitted four alternatives to the original map
and said pick one. Staff responded that it is the applicant's responsibility to
design a project that meets the City codes, standards and design guidelines.
• In City letter dated February 3, 2003, Planning and Public Works/Engineering
Divisions reiterated the fundamental concerns listed in the November 21, 2002
letter. Also stated staff would not support crib walls at the proposed height of
approximately 31 feet, nor will the Planning Commission or the City Council.
Concerns of project's incompatibility with the surrounding neighborhdod were still
an issue. (These fundamental concerns have been discussed with the applicant
numerous times and in almost all future letters to the applicant.) As a result, the
project was deemed incomplete for processing.
• On February 19, 2003, JDS and AJL met with the applicant at City Hall.
Discussion at the meeting centered on the unacceptability of the four alternatives
due to their designs and wall height; and the Request for Proposal (RFP) for the
1
AT11111 411AW *8
preparation of the project's Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Additionally,
issues centering on importance of time frame for conducting required biological
spring survey were discussed.
• March 5, 2003, JDS & AJL met with applicant and his team, at City Hall to
reaffirm the nineteen items of concern. Also discussed was that the City had
contacted several environmental firms for the preparation of the EIR.
• Last week of February 2003, the City contacted 12 environmental consultants to
attend RFP meeting at City Hall on March 6, 2003. Ten firms attended. RFP's
were to be submitted to the City by 5:00 p.m. March 27, 2003. Staff received only
one bid from Michael Brandman Associates.
On March 21, 2003, applicant paid deposit to Public Works Division to have
traffic study reviewed. Comments from the City's traffic engineer were forwarded
to the applicant on April 29, 2003. Three subsequent revisions and reviews of
the traffic occurred. The traffic study was accepted by the City in June 2004.
• On March 26, 2003, staff sent applicant letter discussing the consideration of a
Planned Development (PD) overlay zoning district for the project to offer
maximum flexibility of site planning and design. In the letter, staff again
expressed concerns related to the crib walls' height, lot widths, possible size of
the residential structures and compatibility with surrounding neighborhood.
Another concern expressed was a conceptual site plan from applicant indicating
the placement of buildable pad and residential structures on each lot, which has
not been received. Applicant was given an example of an Agreement For
Payment and Processing Costs for the EIR's preparation.
Letter dated April 3, 2003 was sent to applicant informing him that only one
environmental firm responded to the RFP, Michael Brandman Associates (MBA).
The cost of the EIR's preparation and administrative fees along with a 10 percent
contingency was quoted in this letter. Also, applicant was informed that staff
would present the MBA contact to the City Council on April 15, 2003.
• Between April 3 and April 9, 2003, City had two telephone conversations
discussing the cost of the EIR, biological spring survey and the fact that applicant
may obtain a copy of MBA's bid at City Hall.
Letter dated April 10, 2003 from applicant to James DeStefano expressed that
the bid from MBA was not acceptable and that the Agreement For Payment and
Processing Costs would not be executed. The applicant refused to pay the cost
for the EIR preparation. As a result of applicant's decision, the City was not able
to present MBA's contract to the City Council on April 15, 2003 as scheduled in
order to begin the EIR preparation. The applicant's refusal to accept the cost of
the EIR preparation and held -up the project's process. Therefore, the project
could not proceed to the next processing step and the environmental document
could not be prepared.
Letter date May 9, 2003 to applicant included a chronology of the project's
processing due to the applicant's insistence that staff held -up his project.
Without addressing the technical and design issues reiterated in many letters and
conversations with the applicant, General Pian compliance and the applicant's
refusal to pay the cost for the environmental document's preparation, therefore
not complying with CEQA, the project could not move forward.
July 17, 2003 letter to the applicant gave a chronology of the environmental
process due to applicant's insistence that staff held -up the environmental
process. The chronology discussed hiring MBA to prepare a biological survey;
Applicant wanted staff to contact Blodgett/Baylosis Associates and Marc Blaine
of SAIC. Blodgett/Baylosis did not respond. SAIC did respond and would
prepare the biological survey for $5,243.00. (Applicant has submitted a biological
assessment dated 11/20/2000 on 11/22/02 and tree survey dated 10/29/2002 on
11/13/2002. The biological assessment and tree survey needed updating.)
• On July 17, 2003 staff faxed the applicant stating SAIC could be hired by the
City. However, SAIC could not provide the required insurance.
• On July 22, 2003, staff sent another RFP for conducting biological surveys and
air quality/noise analysis for this project.
• In a letter date August 4, 2003, staff informed the applicant that City had sent
RFP to six environmental firms. Only two firms responded. Attached to the letter
was the two bids from the firms.
• On September 4, 2003, Singh chose Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc.
to perform biological surveys and Marc Blodgett to perform air quality/noise
analysis for this project with City concurring.
• On September 4, 2003, staff sent a letter to applicant requiring payment in full for
the two consulting services. (Applicant paid by 9/15/03.)
• On November 13, 2003, staff sent to applicant biological assessment prepared
by Pacific Southwest Biological Services. Staff also sent copies of comments
from several agencies that reviewed map (i.e., fire, water, Edison, gas, etc.)
• On November 25, 2003, staff sent the applicant air quality/noise analysis from
Marc Blodgett.
• On December 18, 2003, staff sent the applicant a revised copy of air
quality/noise analysis to applicant due to staff comment on the report.
• On January 20, 2004, staff (AJL) met with applicant and his team to discuss
design and technical issues, retaining walls and environmental document. At
that time, the applicant agreed to address comments from the City's consultant
on traffic tree survey, geotechnical issues, and biological assessment and would
submit to the City by the end of January 2004.
• First week of February 2004, staff contacted LDM Associates and Environmental
Impact Sciences (EIS) regarding the preparation of an initial study for this project.
• On February 10, 2004, staff sent a letter to the applicant to reiterate items
discussed on January 20, 2004 and to remind the applicant that the City has not
received his comments addressing the reviewed of traffic tree survey,
geotechnical issues, and biological assessment.
• On February 11, 2004, staff received responses from LDM and EIS to prepare an
initial study for this project.
• On February 23, 2004, letter to applicant stating the City hired EIS (Peter
Lewandowski) to complete the Initial Study in order to determine the appropriate
environmental document for this project and requesting the total cost of this
service in full from the applicant. (Applicant paid total cost on March 16, 2004.)
• February 24, 2004, applicant agreed to submit comments to a geotechnical
review done by the City in May 2003 which the applicant had not yet addressed.
Applicant also agreed to address biological assessment concerns as well, which
were not yet addressed.
• March 23, 2004 letter to applicant requesting addendum to traffic study regarding
gated access; and spring surveys and geology report comments address in order
to complete Initial Study.
• April 5, 2004, letter to applicant reiterating information needed to complete the
Initial Study.
• April 16, 2004, letter to applicant reiteration information needed to complete the
Initial Study.
• April 19, 2004, City sent revised hydrology study submitted by the applicant to
EIS.
• Between May 10 — 13, 2004, staff reviewed incomplete draft of Initial Study. The
draft was incomplete because the applicant had not yet provided final information
(geotechnical) required to complete the Initial Study.
• May 11, 2004 letter to applicant reiterating that the Initial Study could not be
completed without the required information.
• On May 13, 2004, staff sent a letter to the applicant stating additional fees
needed to continue this project's processing.
• On May 18, 2004, staff sent a letter to applicant again reiterated information
required to complete the Initial Study and fee needed to continue this project's
processing.
4
• May 18, 2004, Planning staff met with EIS to discuss the required environmental
information, the revisions and other key document in order to incomplete draft of
Initial Study.
• June 2, 2004, DGA, City consultant, sent revised hydrology study to review.
• June 6, 2004 letter to the applicant reiterating again the information required to
complete Initial Study.
• On June 9, 2004, staff met with BSA, City engineering consultant reviewing the
map for Public Works Department, to discuss technical issues related to grading
and wall heights.
• July 19, 2004 letter to applicant again requesting information required to
complete Initial Study and again the same issues relating to the design, grading,
retaining walls, lot configuration, number of lots, etc.
• August 11, 2004, Public Works/Engineering and Planning team met with
applicant and his team at City Hall to discuss items required to be completed and
issues (geotechnical, lot design, wall heights, environmental etc.) required to be
resolved in order to bring this project to its first public hearing.
• August 18, 2004, letter to applicant again reiteration items required to be
completed and issues required to be resolved in order to bring this project to its
first public hearing. (This is about the 23 letter written to applicant on this
matter.)
• On September 27, 2004, staff met with applicant at City Hall to again discuss
outstanding issues (geotechnical, lot design, wall heights that are not acceptable,
environmental etc.).
• October 13, 2004, letter to applicant reiterating issues discussed at the
September 27, 2004 meeting.
• October 27, 2004 letter to applicant reiterating outstanding issues, information
required to complete Initial Study and incompatibility of map's design as
discussed in many previous letters.
• November 1, 2004, staff (Nancy Fong and AJL) met with applicant and his team
and to reiterate the same outstanding issues.
• November 3, 2004 letter to applicant confirming discussion at November 1, 2004
meeting. Issues discussed were retaining wall height and retaining wall system,
geotechnical report because the applicant has not yet addressed the comments
from the City's geotechnical consultant and design of the map and deleting Lot
11.
• November 18, 2004 letter to applicant outlining previous discussions and
concerns which have not been addressed by the applicant.
• November 22, 2004 letter to applicant requesting more funds to continue the
preparation for environmental process.
• November 29, 2004 letter to applicant discussing outstanding issues again —
technical, incompleteness, proposed walls, design of map, etc.
• December 1, 2004 letter to applicant reiterating fee required to continue process
the map.
• On February 28, 2005, the applicant submitted a "work in progress" revised map
the addressed some of the concerns for staff's review.
• March 31, 2005, staff reviewed Tree Permit submitted by the applicant so that
borings could be done for geotechnical review and analysis.
• April 26, 2005, a letter was sent to the applicant discussing geotechnical
comments related to the borings.
• On May 31, 2005, Tree Permit was approved by staff and issued to applicant.
• June 24, 2005. a Stop Work Order was issued because applicant did not follow
the approved path for the boring equipment and was not in compliance with the
Tree Permit.
• June 24, 2005 letter sent to the applicant revoking Tree Permit.
• June 24, 2005 letter to applicant giving specific direction to reinstate the Tree
Permit before boring work can continue.
• On July 5, 2005, Nancy Fong (NF) and AJL visited the project site to assess
damage done by violating Tree Permit.
• On July 20, 2005, an environmental assessment of damage by City's consultant,
Pacific South West Biological Services, occurred.
• On July 21, 2005, Nancy Fong and AJL visited the project site and met the
applicant and his surveyor to discuss property line adjacent to the homes on
Running Branch and damage done to hillside, violation of Tree Permit and
remedies.
• August 24, 2005 letter to applicant outlining what applicant is required to do to
repair damage to vegetation/slope.
• On September 7, 2005, AJL visited the project site and observed that the
applicant cut another path after stop work order was issued and has not
responded to City's required mitigation measures to remedy damage done.
6
• September 8, 2005 letter to applicant reiterating mitigation measures required to
remedy damage done and deadline to fix this situation or turn it over to City
Prosecutor.
• September 8, 2005 letter to City Prosecutor with all back-up information.
• September 9, 2005 received letter from applicant with two copies of the survey
map stamped and signed by their engineer due to confusion as to where the
project boundaries are in relationship to the house (on Running Branch) adjacent
to the project site at top of slope. It took the applicant two months to submit the
survey to the City.
• September 20, 2005, NF and AJL met with City Prosecutor to discuss course of
action and enforcement.
• Singh submitted geotechnical report on October 13, 2005. However, his
engineer responded to comments dated September 17, 2005 instead of
comments dated December 7, 2004 as required. As a result, the geotechnical
report was not accepted.
• October 27, 2005 spoke to Singh to reiterate the issues concerning repairing the
slope as discussed in the September 8, 2005.correspondes.
• October 28, 2005 returned Mr. Singh's phone call to Nancy Fong. Discussed all
issues from previous on site meeting and letters listed above. Also require the
applicant to submit plans demonstrating how the slope would be repaired and
revegetated for the Planning Division review and approval in order to rescind the
Stop Work Order.
• On October 31, 2005, received a letter from applicant's project manager, Ron
Brown, dated October 26, 2005 state how uncooperative the City is.
• November 1, 2005 sent a response letter to Mr. Singh and Mr. Brown reiterating
the required remedies for repairing damage done to the slope by deviating from
the approved Tree Permit.
• November 15, 2005, staff sent applicant's geotechnical boring report to Leighton
for review even.
• On December 27, 2005, staff received and reviewed the seeding plan for the
slope from the applicant. Staff had the plan reviewed by the City's Parks and
Recreation director for the appropriateness of the seed mix and the plan was
approved.
• On January 10, 2006, staff received a review from Leighton on the boring report
"Not approved". Applicant needed to address Leighton's comments dated
January 10, 2006
• January 17, 2006, staff called the applicant to give the go-ahead to seed the
slope.
• On January 24, 2006, applicant said he was going to seed any day if in fact it
may already be done. Required the applicant to call and let me know exactly
when the seeding is being done or is done.
• February 13, 2006, staff called applicant about the completion of seeding the
slope. Had to leave a message.
• February 15, 2006, site visit by Planning Division and Public Works Division.
• February 21, 2006, letter to applicant requiring verification of slope seeding.
• On February 21, 2006, the geotechnical report was approved subject to
conditions.
• March 22, 2006, letter to applicant discussing the following; geo-tech report
accepted; listed items that are still required to be addressed (i.e., slope seeding,
slope stability related to additional boring work, detail site plan and conceptual
grading plan with latest revisions, revegetation plan, public hearing labels, photo
sims, neighborhood meeting and finalizing environmental document).
• April 26, 2006 received revised address labels (incorrect); about a week later
received corrected labels
• On May 2, 2006, staff received revised map from the applicant. Applicant was
required to make minor changes due to the relocation of existing pedestrian trail
at the project site.
• June 21, 2006, received revised map that will be presented to PC.
• Between June 21, 2006 and July 18, 2006, City's environmental consultant
finished the environmental document.
• Mitigated Negative Declaration review period was between July 28, 2006 and
August 28, 2006.
• Received comments on MND as late as September 5, 2006
• City Environmental Consultant prepared response to comment and completed it
on October 2, 2006.
• Since January 2006, also 19 phone calls to the applicant discussing items
required to finish the environmental document and bring project to its first public
hearing.
8
OCTOBER 10, 2006
PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION
be conducted on or after 3:00 p.m., and 2) if there is a parking problem the
Conditional Use Permit could be subject to review. Motion carried by the
following Roll Call vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
Nolan, Lee, Torng, VC/Nelson
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
Wei
7.4 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 • Zone Change No 2006-02/
Planned Development; Mitigated Negative Declaration No 2006-03•
Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18; Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree
Permit No. 2002-13 — In accordance to the Subdivision Map Act, City's
Subdivision Ordinance —Title 21, Development Code — Title 22,
Sections 22.14, 22.58, 22.22, 22.54 and 22.38, the proposed project is a
22 -lot subdivision on a site of approximately 12.9 acres. It would provide for
the development of 16 single-family detached homes on individual parcels
ranging in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to 10,506 square feet.
The proposed project would include: the construction of private streets,
graded pads, manufactured slopes and retaining walls; an easement for a
public pedestrian trail in a portion of proposed open space areas; and the
removal of a portion of existing vegetation.
The current zoning of the project site is R-1-10,000. The Zone Change to
RL/Planned Development Overlay provides for compliance with the General
Plan land use designation and maximum flexibility in the site planning and
design, thereby allowing smaller lots in order to retain more open space
within the project boundaries. The Conditional Use Permit relates to grading
and development within a hillside area. The Variance relates to retaining
walls that are proposed at a height greater than six feet. The Tree Permit
relates to the removal, replacement and protection of oak and walnut trees.
PROJECT ADDRESS
PROPERTY OWNER/
APPLICANT:
Southern Terminus of
Crooked Creek Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Daniel Singh
Jewel Ridge, LLC
10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232
ATTACHMENT
OCTOBER 10, 2006
PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION
Ron Brown, RDC, Asset Manager for Jewel Ridge Estates, 159 South
Waverly Drive, Alhambra, thanked the Commission for the opportunity to
present the 16 -lot residential development proposed project. Mr. Brown
outlined the history of the proposed project. The subject property consists of
approximately 13 -acres and the maximum allowable density is 30 -units. As
previously stated, the proposed project is 16 units to be located in the
already disturbed area that is relatively flat. The existing zoning is R-1-
10,000 and the total grading quantities to develop the subject property is
98,000 cubic yards. Approximately two-thirds of the site will remain as
undeveloped Open Space. During the past four years of pursuing this
project, the City's Planning staff critiqued at least 12 different proposals. The
initial project was for 26 units, which was reduced by response to City
Planning comments. The preliminary vision for future houses is 2800 square
feet and prices ranging from the high $800,000's to the low $900,000. He
strongly noted that the zone change request was consistent with the City's
General Plan and was not being requested to allow for increased density,
rather to allow for a smaller development that preserves more Open Space
than would otherwise be allowed underthe existing zoning. In addition, the
density was less than the density of the surrounding development. The
applicant and staff held a meeting with the surrounding community to illicit
input of .the proposed project prior to staff presenting the project to the
Planning Commission this evening.
Daniel Singh, Jewel Ridge, LLC, 10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard, Culver City,
CA 90232 presented an overview of the project from its initial submittal to its
present iteration and presided over the power point presentation.
C/Lee asked if the applicant planned to build more houses in the future or if
16 units would be the maximum. Mr. Singh responded that the application
was for 16 units and that was the maximum number projected. C/Lee
expressed concern because he did not want the applicant to build more
houses. C/Lee asked if staff could lock this project into 16 units only
because the pad was designed for future houses. He also asked why the
applicant asked for a 10 -foot retaining wall. CDD/Fong explained that this
was a Vesting Tentative Tract Map meaning that the proposal for 16 -units
was legal and could not be changed to increase the number of lots.
Conversely, the applicant could reduce the number of lots but would have to
come back to the Planning Commission to seek such a reduction. The Open
Space lots will be deed restricted to Open Space_ He asked the applicant if
he was willing to reduce the height of the retaining wall to six feet and
redesign the trail. Mr. Singh said that a redesign to six feet would require two
OCTOBER 10, 2006 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION
Greg Shockley, 3711 Crooked Creek Drive, (west side of the street opposite
the development) asked the Planning Commission to look at the aerial
photograph off of the GIS on the D.B. website and ask for a transparency of
the modified graded area. The majority of the existing trees will be gone and
adjacent neighbors will be looking at modified slopes. Additionally, the
proposed 10 -foot retaining wall is a combination of three six-foot retaining
walls. The retaining walls will be an excellent surface for bouncing freeway
noise into his and his neighbor's front yards. Freeway noise is so bad in his
backyard now that it is difficult to carry on a conversation. The subdivision is
about 12.9 acres and has the capacity to accommodate 53 lots of 10,000
square feet each. He said he would rather have houses randomly
interspersed among the 12 acres. The residents of Crooked Creek will
receive absolutely no benefit from the proposed development. The
variances are proof that the applicant could not use the land without heavy
modification. He asked the Commission to take a closer look at this project
before making its decision.
Jeff Layton, 3703 Crooked Creek Drive, agreed with what Mr. Shockley
stated and said that in addition he was looking at this project as a quality of
life issue for the people who live on Crooked Creek Drive. He was
concerned about the height of the retaining wall across from his property and
the noise that would be reflected off of the wall. Also, the wall will appear
massive from eye level. How long will the new trees last and will they act as
a noise buffer? He heard there would not be a gate at the end of Crooked
Creek and wondered if it could be instituted following approval? The loss of
the natural trees will be a huge negative impact on the area. He also had
concerns about fire access and trail access and felt it would not happen if a
gate were allowed at the end of the street. He was also concerned about
traffic from 19 additional houses that would feed through what used to be a
cul-de-sac.
Eleanor Reza, 3748 Castle Rock Road, said that as a 19 -year resident she
has enjoyed the "country hillside setting" and wildlife in her backyard that
directly abuts the channel draining into Brea Canyon and where the
development is proposed. Since living in Diamond Bar she has seen quite a
bit of housing development and loss of wildlife habitat. Should the proposed
housing development occur her new backyard view would be of a six-foot
retaining wall. She asked when it might be a good idea to stop approving
OCTOBER 10, 2006 PAGE 15 PLANNING COMMISSION
Art Melendez, 3710 Crooked Creek Drive, concurred with previous speakers
about the traffic, noise and dust. There are a lot of kids that play out in the
street because it is safe. With trucks and more traffic going through the area
it will create a safety hazard and he believed the City would have to consider
installing speed humps or other traffic calming devices. He said he opposed
the project.
Joy Tweed, 21155 Running Branch Road, said she agreed with everyone
who spoke about problems of ingress and egress for the housing
development off of Brea Canyon. She was concerned that any increase in
the number of vehicles would create further problems. She moved to
Diamond Bar in 1971 and at that time the slogan was "Country Living" in
Diamond Bar With the arrangements of the high retaining walls she can no
longer consider it country living. She believed that with the intelligence of the
building staff there was a strong possibility that this project could be reviewed
to limit the size of the area. She said she would like to have the applicant
provide a park in the area for the children as a trade-off to the project.
James Eng, 20935 Running Branch Road, concurred with most of the
speakers about the traffic. During peak afternoon hours it is difficult if not
impossible to turn into his neighborhood and he believed the City should take
a closer look at the traffic pattern in the area,
Mr. Singh responded to public speakers. He stated that a noise study was
conducted that analyzed the future potential noise generated by the project
once the project was completed. The noise report concluded that there
would be no significant impact to the community. Regarding the proposal
and variances, the initial application did not include a zone change and two
of the variances. The requested changes are in fact a trade-off resulting in a
smaller development envelope and larger open space. Again, the property
has a General Plan designation and by allowing a smaller development a
trade off is a large open space that is protected in perpetuity. To the speaker
who talked about a transparency, a biological report was completed, a
transparency was done and habitats were identified and the impacts as a
result of the development were identified with the information contained in
the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Of course there are trees that will be
removed but the mitigation calls for replanting those trees. at a 3:1 ratio. In
addition, the applicant is required to ensure and guarantee the survival of the
OCTOBER 10, 2006 PAGE 17 PLANNING COMMISSION
out of them to camouflage the walls and blend them .into the existing
environment. The walls are directly opposite the current homeowners. To
many of the residents the area is already visually blocked because there is
currently a wall behind the property. The areas that residents view are the
upper elevations of the proposed site that will be maintained as open space
and generally undisturbed.
C/Nolan asked if there is an "owner's right to view?" CDD/Fong responded
that the City does not have a view protection ordinance.
To C/Torng's question about the size of the houses, Mr. Singh reiterated that
the average house would consist of 2800 square feet two-story house with
an average of 1500 square foot pad coverage. From the applicant's
standpoint the City was trying to balance the natural area. The original
project called for grading 60 to 70 percent of the natural envelope. The City
tried to limit the project to the area that was already being disturbed and that
is how the plan evolved and that is the reason for the zone change.
Conversely, the project now impacts only 30 percent of the area with 70
percent remaining undisturbed. The current Crooked Creek residences sell
for about $500,000 - $600,000 and the proposed project incorporates houses
selling in the $800,000-$900,000 range.
CDD/Fong responded to C/Torng that the applicant is building 16 homes and
is required to pay park fees that will be used to improve or expand existing
parks. There will be no new park in the area. In order to create parks there
must be land available for parks. C/Torng believed that even small traffic
impacts should be considered drastic impacts due to the volume of traffic.
Otherwise, there would be no mitigation and benefit for the community. He
supported the residents concerns about traffic impacts.
Peter Lewandowsky, Environmental Impact Services, the City's consultant,
stated that all of the comments from the community were specific and
germane to the project. Relative to traffic, there are a number of issues.
The primary focus .of the traffic analysis looked at internal circulation,
ingress/egress, street right-of-way and turnaround, etc. to make sure that
those features were sufficient to accommodate the project. The 16 vehicles
will generate about 160 trips per day. Relative to the traffic volumes in the
area it is a small number in the overall context of traffic and as a result, the
traffic analysis did not look beyond the project site. In short, the study did not
OCTOBER 10, 2006 PAGE 19 PLANNING COMMISSION
as good a project as possible in consideration of the neighbors' concerns
and the concerns of the community at large. To that end, he cannot act on
this project until he sees an actual artist's rendering of the views of the
property, the grading that will take place and what it will do or not do to the
hillside from the SR57. He said he could not agree more with Ms. Tweed
that "Country Living was the theme in the City. He is a realist and knows
where the City is heading. Nevertheless, it is a hillside that has always had
special meaning as an entry view into the City. Secondly, he did not believe
he could act on the project until he had artist's renderings of the views from
the back yards that would be affected. Further, he is not at all comfortable
with the oak tree and walnut tree and woodland mitigation. As it is currently
presented it appears to be deferred mitigation. He cannot read the
documentation as it currently exists and feel comfortable that potentially
significant impacts to oak trees and oak woodlands and walnut trees and
walnut woodlands can be mitigated to less than a significant level in terms of
the number of trees proposed to replace current trees under the ordinance
as well as the acreage of the communities those trees .provide. As an
example, in 1976 he and others prepared the 1976 Significant Ecological
Area Study for the LA County General Plan and this hillside was designated
as part of the SEA area. In 2000 his firm prepared an update and saw no
reason to remove it from that category. He believed that there was
ecological value and he wanted to feel comfortable that it could be mitigated.
He wanted to know what if anything could be done for the trees that are
claimed to be "dead and dying" because the Department of Fish and Game
says that "dead and dying" trees are in fact habitat for a whole suite of
species and he did not want those simply "written off." He also wanted the
applicant to find a similar property as a commitment to part of the plan. With
respect to the landscape plan he would like to use vegetation that was usual
to the area — local or indigenous rather than like a garden - it should look like
the surrounding hillside and function as an extension of that. He asked if the
vines were intended for the gridlock and Mr. Singh responded affirmatively.
VC/Nelson said he was not prepared to advise a good replacement but said
that most vine species are highly invasive and he would not want to create a
situation that would allow vines to creep into undisturbed woodlands and
take over. He recommendedhave anidea about how applicant
replace thet a vines. restoration
ecologist who might
OCTOBER 10, 2006 PAGE 21 PLANNING COMMISSION
9. STAFF COMMENTSIIN FORMATIONAL ITEMS.
9.1 Project Status Report Update.
9.2 Public Hearing dates for future projects
CDD/Fong stated that she hoped to schedule a workshop for today.
However, due to the absence of C/Wei the JCC Development workshop was
postponed to October 24 as recommended by the City Attorney. The
workshop will commence at 6:00 p.m. prior to the regular Commission
meeting. Dinner will be served for the Commissioners between 5:30 p.m.
and 6:00 p.m. with the location tentatively set for Room CC -2.
11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in tonight's agenda.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Vice
Chairman Nelson adjourned the meeting at 10:23 p.m_
Attest:
Respectfu)%(S
Nancy Fong
Community D1VeloV`m`ent Director
0ew; Nelson, Vice hairman --
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 28, 2006
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Nelson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality
Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar,
California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Wei led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Kathleen Nolan, Osman
Wei and Chairman Steve Nelson.
Absent: Vice Chairman Tony Torng was excused.
Also present: Nancy Fong, Community Development Director; Ann
Lungu, Associate Planner; Linda Smith, Development Services Associate; Gregg
Kovacevich, Assistant City Attorney, Sandra Campbell, Contract Senior Planner;
Peter Lewandowski, City Environmental Consultant and Stella Marquez, Senior
Administrative Assistant.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered.
3 APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chair/Nelson moved Item 7.2 to the end of the
Public Hearings.
4 CONSENT CALENDAR:
5.
4.1 Minutes of the Workshop of November 14, 2006.
C/Nolan moved, C/Lee seconded to approve the Minutes of November 14,
2006 Workshop as corrected by VC/Torng. Motion carried by the following
Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nolan, Wei, Chair/Nelson
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Torng
OLD BUSINESS: None
November 28, 2006 PAGE 2
D
7.
NEW BUSINESS: None
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
PLANNING COMMISSION
7.1 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No 54081 Zone Change No 2006-02/
Planned Development Mitigated Negative Declaration No 2006-03,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18 Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree
Permit No. 2002-13 — In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, City's
Subdivision Ordinance — Title 21, Development Code — Title 22, Sections
22.14, 22.58, 22.22, 22.54 and 22.38, the proposed project was a 22 lot
subdivision on a site of approximately 12.9 acres that would provide for the
development of 16 single-family detached homes on individual parcels
ranging in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to 10,506 square feet.
The proposed project would include the construction of private streets,
graded pads, manufactured slopes and retaining walls; an easement for a
public pedestrian trail in a portion of proposed open space areas, and the
removal of a portion of existing vegetation.
The current zoning of the project site is R-1-10,000. The Zone Change to
RL/Planned Development Overlay provides for compliance with the General
Plan land use designation and maximum flexibility in the site planning and
design, thereby allowing smaller lots in order to retain more open space
within the project boundaries. The Conditional Use Permit relates to grading
and development within a hillside area. The Variance relates to retaining
walls that are proposed at a height greater than six feet. The Tree Permit
relates to the removal, replacement and protection of oak and walnut trees.
(Continued from October 10, 2006)
PROJECT ADDRESS
PROPERTY OWNER/
APPLICANT:
At the southern terminus of
Crooked Creek Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Daniel Singh
Jewel Ridge, LLC
10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232
November 28, 2006 PAGE 3
PLANNING COMMISSION
AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of a resolution recommending City Council approval of
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03, Zone Change No. 2006-021
Panned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01, Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02
and Tree Permit No. 2002-13 as amended.
Chair/Nelson re -opened the public hearing.
Lawrence Berner, 3716 Crooked Creek Drive, a 30 -year resident said he was
concerned that construction of the three 16 -foot high brick walls behind the
homes would completely ruin the views. Additionally, he was concerned
about the mud and water coming down his drainage ditch.
Gregory Shockley, 3711 Crooked Creek Drive, said he reviewed the
documentation and found certain items to be very disappointing and could
not understand how the project got to this point. The geology report
indicates the ground is subject to liquefaction in the event of an earthquake
and he believed that with the added weight of deep watering it would lead to
problems like those that took place in Anaheim Hills, Blue Bird Canyon
(Laguna) and two years ago in Diamond Bar. He also wondered why there
was no traffic mitigation plan.
Jeff Layton, 3703 Crooked Creek Drive, spoke about the increased noise,
e from the freeway
loss country vie wall and threat of pertrucon of a wall sonal and property loss
possible
he retaining le failure of g
as a result.
Joyes Tweed, 2115 Running Branch, said she was pleased with the
applicant's efforts to meet the requested changes. However, she was not
satisfied that only one picture was taken from only one backyard because
there are number of residences that will be affected. The project will also
affect people who have property on the lower section of Diamond Bar and
she was not comfortable about how their backyards would be affected and
whether it had been properly explained during this process. She was also
concerned about the resident at the very end of the street because it was not
ng
nto
apparentnett that • She wanted to see mesident would be ore elexp expls across the street
lanation and view from
as well as next to em
all locations prior to approval.
November 28, 2006 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
June Sutherland, 20850 Gold Run Drive, said she was concerned about
drainage from the top of the hill to the lower portion because she felt the
drainage channel might be rendered inadequate by the project. She
believed that the retaining wall would be visible from the freeway and place a
negative impact on the surrounding property values. This project does not
lend itself to country living, which is the reason people live in Diamond Bar.
She said she was also concerned about the trees marked as "dead and
dying" and felt the City should hire an Arborist to meet with a committee of
residents that would ultimately be affected by the project. She also believed
that the tree replacement ratio was too little because 10 -gallon replacement
trees would not replace 100 year-old trees. She stated her belief that
heretofore it had been difficult to get projects built in the City and giving
variances of such drastic bias to the developer was unfair to the long-time
residents of Diamond Bar.
Daniel Singh, applicant, responded to speakers that he attempted to gain
access to backyards of residences that directly face the property and only a
few were willing to give his crew access to their backyards to take
photographs. He presented additional renderings to the Commission that he
said showed in 10 years how difficult it would be to see what had been built.
In spite of their being no view ordinance for the City the applicant wants to
cooperate and has sought guidance from staff to be as aesthetically pleasing
as possible. Mr. Singh said that his biologist was present and would testify
that all of the trees would be mitigated on-site and that the habitat area had
been mitigated for the oak tree woodland. The City conducted an
independent study of the project and asked for some changes that were
ultimately included in the Arborists' report. The reason for requesting a zone
change is to attempt to preserve as much of the open space as close to the
development as possible.
The applicant's biologist offered to answer questions.
Hunter J. Tannery, 3802 Castle Rock Road, said he does not want any
houses built because the animals would disappear and there would be no
place for people to hike. Every day he plays with his dog in the backyard and
they enjoy the view and do not want the City to tear down the country and
make houses.
November 28, 2006 PAGE 5
PLANNING COMMISSION
Norma Leon Enclade, 3611 Crooked Creek, said she was concerned by how
the residents would be impacted by the construction that is occurring at the
end of Crooked Creek. it seems the area will be developed and how do the
residents ensure the safety of their children as construction trucks are
coming in and out when children are playing in the street. If there were a
question of liquefaction what percentage of the existing and thoroughly
cemented vegetation would be left in place to prevent liquefaction that could
occur? She believed there were a lot of children that took pleasure in
exploring the area and felt it would be lost due to development. At what point
does Diamond Bar cease development in favor of its residents?
Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing.
CA/Vei said that although he was absent from the October 10 public hearing
for this project he familiarized himself with the details of the project and read
the minutes of the meeting. He asked the developer to respond to the
following questions: 1) Is there sufficient drainage to mitigate future mudflow
and excess water; 2) will the project infringe on the wildlife habitat and 3) is
the tree replacement ratio and size sufficient and would there be sufficient
replacement of vegetation to prevent excess mud and water flow; 4) respond
to the concerns about the safety of children during construction.
C/Lee said that last time he asked if the developer could lower the height of
the retaining wall. Also, it appears that the developer did not respond to
traffic concerns.
CDD/Fong responded that it was the Commission's direction that the
applicant was to provide additional information and one of the directions was
for the applicant to determine whether he could reduce the height of the
retaining wall. AssocP/Lungu explained that staff asked the developer to
push the five and six foot retaining walls back to make the trail connection as
required by the Trails Master Plan. As a result, the walls might have to be
higher than five or six feet each. The developer responded that he could
provide the area for the trail and retain the three five-foot high retaining walls.
Other walls throughout the project are a series of five or six foot high
retaining walls with planter areas between each wall.
EC/Lewandowski again explained that with the preparation of the
environmental documents for this project a traffic study was prepared that
November 28, 2006 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
examined the associated trip generation characteristics. The traffic study
calculated the number of dailytrips as well as, peak hourtrips and clearly the
project as with any project, would add traffic to the local roadways. However,
the added traffic does not manifest in the need for signalization or additional
traffic mitigations.
C/Lee asked if this was a proper answer to the residents' concerns.
CDD/Fong pointed out that this project consists of only 16 houses and
although the 16 trips would add some traffic to the general area it would not
be enough to warrant signals or stop signs. The City's traffic engineerwill be
looking at the issue and if the residents have concerns about the general
area they are invited to address the Traffic and Transportation Commission
and Neighborhood Traffic Management Program meetings. In general, there
may be some mitigation measures that can occur in the area. However,
based on expert analysis, this specific project does not warrant additional
mitigation measures.
C/Nolan stated that the photos showing the property from the northbound
SR57 are unclear and there is no clear understanding of how the "gateway to
the City of Diamond Bar" would appear if this project were built. It is an
important view corridor and she wanted to see how the views would be
impacted by rooftops and retaining walls from all points of entry. CDD/Fong
responded that the Commission's direction from last meeting was that the
applicant needed to do a photo simulation to show what drivers would see as
they traveled the northbound and southbound SR57. The photos did not
provide that kind of information to the Commission.
C/Nolan said she would like to see a rendition/drawing/graphic design
rendition of what would appear in view — the homes, the rooftops, and the
retaining walls as to what would be seen in the Diamond Bar gateway. She
also wanted to see a rendition of what adjacent residents would see today
and 10 years from completion of the project.
Gary Dante, Civil Engineer for the project said he took the pictures from the
ground and from the freeway. Basically, coming from the freeway there
would be no direct view into the site. The closest view would be about a
three second view from about a mile away. As one approaches the site
there is a barrier of trees that completely block the view of the site.
November 28, 2006 PAGE 7
PLANNING COMMISSION
Therefore, he does not believe there is a view corridor from the SR57. The
view corridor from the houses below shows that with the separation of the
walls and the planting between the walls the project is a considerable
distance away from the back yards and those residents would not feel
crowded because of this project. In addition, there is a 10 -foot no man's land
even before the walls start. The five-foot walls are five feet high so that they
step back and each step would have plantings that would render the walls
nearly invisible.
Mr. Dante responded to C/Nolan that the first retaining wall would be about
15 feet back from the rear of the closest resident's rear yards. Additionally,
the walls curve at the closest point and the photo was taken from the closest
back yard. In some areas the walls are fifty feet from the back yards. He felt
the mitigation was good.
C/Nolan asked if staff agreed about the view from the SR57. CDD/Fong said
that in fairness the applicant should simulate a photo without the high
landscaping at the edge of the freeway in order to provide a true picture of
what would be viewed from the SR57. The hills of Diamond Bar are very
important to its image. Additionally, the developer could provide another
photo that included the freeway landscape.
Chair/Nelson asked for clarification of the hydrology drainage changes that
would occur as a result of the project and the need to accommodate those
changes. EC/Lewandowski responded that the applicant provided hydrology
and geotechnical study evaluations, which were reviewed by the City's
Engineer and found to be acceptable relative to the City's standards and in
conformance with the County's requirements. With the introduction of
impervious surfaces and the change in the site topography, clearly the
drainage characteristics of the site would be modified. The modifications will
necessitate drainage facilities to be incorporated along the roadway with the
drainage safely conveyed to the channel. The changes in accordance with
County requirements will not result in a substantive change in the quantity or
quality of the water that is discharged from the project site.
Chair/Nelson asked what safety measures would be implemented to provide
for maximum pedestrian safety during construction. Mr. Lewandowski
responded that from a traffic engineering perspective there were no
November 28, 2006 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION
additional mitigation measures included in the Negative Declaration. As a
matter of policy the City requires a construction plan and stipulates that
construction shall occur in accordance with the City's requirements and not
adversely impact local residents. He believed there were a number of issues
relative to this particular project. This site has a single point of access along
a residential street and all construction traffic would therefore have to access
the project site via the roadway. Ultimately, if there are safety
considerations, and the City is very sensitive to those issues, those are
enforcement actions that would have to be monitored by the Los Angeles
County Sheriffs Department. Mr. Lewandowski confirmed to Chair/Nelson
that the site balanced, that there would be no offsite earth movement and all
grading would be contained within the project site's development envelope.
As with all construction activity the site would be fenced and all construction
equipment would be staged on the project site. CDD/Fong stated that the
Commission could impose a condition that required the applicant to provide a
construction traffic safety mitigation plan. Chair/Nelson felt such a
requirement would address the concerns expressed this evening.
Chair/Nelson asked if the trail went through the project and accessed the
open space. CDD/Fong explained that the trail along Crooked Creek would
lead to the regional trail at the edge of the City limits and that there would be
a trailhead further up on the project site.
Chair/Nelson asked if the grading would be visible from the SR57. Mr. Dante
responded that the site was very low and that there were two streets
between the freeway and the project site with houses on both sides of each
street. Those houses would block the view as well, even if the freeway
hedges were removed. The grading is not changing much of the site
viewscape and the hill blocks part of the site. Chair/Nelson said he had
difficulty believing there would be no view of the terraced grading. Mr. Dante
said it was downhill from the freeway. Chair/Nelson asked Mr. Dante to take
a photograph and simulate the grading and the roofs onto the photograph
and if some parts of the graded slope are in fact visible that the applicant
show what it would look like now, at a five year and 10 year interval. He
believed it would be hidden but he wanted to know what it would look like
and that was his request at the last Commission meeting. Mr. Dante said he
would do a line of site because the site cannot be seen since it is down at the
river level.
November 28, 2006 PAGE 9
PLANNING COMMISSION
Chair/Nelson asked what size trees were being used for the terraces behind
the homes. Mr. Singh responded that they were 10 -gallon on 10 -foot center
plantings Chair/Nelson recommended that the applicant consider mixing in
larger trees to provide better screening in a shorter period of time.
CDD/Fong stated that the City's Code requires that all trees must be a
minimum 15 -gallon and a certain percentage must be 24" boxed trees. Mr.
Singh said that when he reviewed the plan the tree sizes were interspersed.
C/Nolan reiterated her concern about being provided a better rendition of
what current residents would view from their back yards.
Chair/Nelson said he was more comfortable with the project at this point. He
thanked the applicant for making certain advancements such as an
increased ratio of replacement trees and having a qualified restoration
biologist on board. However, the Commission needs a little more on the
visuals.
In response to Chair/Nelson CDD/Fong confirmed that staff could review the
construction safety plan.
CDD/Fong explained that the there was no time limitation on this Zone
Change.
Chair/Nelson moved, C/Wei seconded, to reopen the public hearing and
continue the matter to December 12, 2006. Motion carried by the following
Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nolan, Wei, Chair/Nelson
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: VC/Torng
8. Conditional Use Permit No 2006-01 and Development Review
No. 2006-01 — In accordance with Development Code Sections 22.58, 22.48
and 22.42 these new applications update and replace the previous
Conditional Use Permit No. 1997-02 and Development Review No. 1997-06;
change the vendor information; modifies the lease area; adds additional
antenna on the existing park light pole behind the existing ones, and modify
the equipment area to an enclosed building to match existing park facilities.
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 12, 2006
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Nelson called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m, in the South Coast Air Quality
Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar,
California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Nolan led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Kathleen Nolan, Osman
Wei, Vice Chairman Tony Torng and Chairman Steve Nelson.
Also present: Nancy Fong, Community Development Director; Ann
Lungu, Associate Planner; Gregg Kovacevich, Assistant City Attorney and Stella
Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered.
3 APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chair/Nelson moved Item 7.2 to the end of the
Public Hearings.
4 CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes of the Workshop of November 14, 2006.
C/Lee moved, C/Wei seconded to approve the Minutes of November 28,
2006 Workshop as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
5. OLD BUSINESS: None
6. NEW BUSINESS: None
7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Lee, Nolan, Wei, Chair/Nelson
None
VC/Torng
None
7.1 Vestinq Tentative Tract Map No 54081 Zone Change No 2006
02/Planned Development, Mitigated Negative Declaration No 2006-03,
December 12, 2006 PAGE 2 F'LANNINU UUMM100wi-4
Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18 Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree
Permit No. 2002-13 — In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, City's
Subdivision Ordinance — Title 21, Development Code — Title 22, Sections
22.14, 22.58, 22.22, 22.54 and 22.38, the proposed project was a 22 lot
subdivision on a site of approximately 12.9 acres that would provide for the
development of 16 single-family detached homes on individual parcels
ranging in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to 10,506 square feet.
The proposed project would include the construction of private streets,
graded pads, manufactured slopes and retaining walls; an easement for a
public pedestrian trail in a portion of proposed open space areas, and the
removal of a portion of existing vegetation.
The current zoning of the project site is R-1-10,000. The Zone Change to
RL/Planned Development Overlay provides for compliance with the General
Plan land use designation and maximum flexibility in the site planning and
design, thereby allowing smaller lots in order to retain more open space
within the project boundaries. The Conditional Use Permit relates to grading
and development within a hillside area. The Variance relates to retaining
walls that are proposed at a height greater than six feet. The Tree Permit
relates to the removal, replacement and protection of oak and walnut trees.
(Continued from November 28, 2006)
PROJECT ADDRESS:
PROPERTY OWNER/
APPLICANT:
At the southern terminus of
Crooked Creek Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Daniel Singh
Jewel Ridge, LLC
10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232
AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of a resolution recommending City Council approval of
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03, Zone Change No. 2006-
02/Panned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01, Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No.
2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13.
AssocP/Lungu referenced a letter staff received today regarding the author's
concerns about the project and why he believed it should not be approved.
Daniel Singh stated that this was the third Planning Commission hearing on
this matter in spite of the fact that staff recommended approval. The
Commission was concerned about visual impacts even though the City's
attorney has made it clear that the City has no view ordinance.
Nevertheless, the applicant has cooperated and provided responses to
Commissioner's concerns. During the second hearing the Commission was
presented before and after views from three lots that back up to the
proposed project, five and 10 -year simulations of what the project
appearance would be and a series of photos from the northbound SR57 that
December 12, 2006 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
confirm the site would not be visible due to the vegetation along the freeway.
Also provided at the second hearing was a revised landscape plan that
utilized more indigenous vegetation and landscape plan that showed the
complete on-site mitigation for oak tree and oak woodland replacement. The
mitigation also included dead trees. Present during the November 28
meeting was the biologist that has assisted the applicant throughout the
entire process. The applicant also provided a landscape plan that illustrated
the modified areas. At the last hearing the Commission requested additional
visual simulation of the project from the second story as well as a before and
after view from the southbound SR57 and the applicant has complied. The
vegetation along the freeway is the same in the depictions of the five, 10 and
existing views. He reviewed the proposed project, well under the allowable
maximum number of units and the project now before the Commission is a
compromise based on discussions with staff and consultants. The initial
project was reduced from 26 houses to 16 houses based on staff's input.
The zone change request is consistent with the General Plan and is not
being requested to allow an increase in density; rather, to allow a small
development that preserves more open space than would not have been
made available under the existing zoning. Mr. Singh stated that the applicant
has made every effort to cooperate with staff and the Commission and has
expended more than $15,000 attempting to respond to the Commissioner's
requests. He hoped the Commission would approve the project at this time.
Chair/Nelson re -opened the Public Hearing.
Jeff Layton, 3703 Crooked Creek Drive, stated that at the last meeting he
was disappointed about the applicant's presentation and was disappointed
that he was not allowed to speak after the presentations were made because
he understood it was to be an open hearing. He also felt the engineer was
being evasive. The so-called credible biologist was not knowledgeable about
basic requirements and did not make a good presentation. He felt that in
general the presentation was far below expectations. He also believed that
the photos presented this evening were not indicative of what would occur
even within the first five years. Mr. Layton said he was concerned about the
steepness of the hillside and what the project would look like from both sides
of the street.
Gregory Shockley, 3711 Crooked Creek Drive, said he wanted to salvage the
firewood from the project. He provided photographs to the Commission that
showed a large two -foot base black walnut tagged to be removed as well as
other views. Mr. Shockley asked if all trees were supposed to be tagged.
Most of the trees in the canopy are not tagged and wondered if they had
been counted. The view from across the street shows the 18 -foot retaining
wall, the six- foot fence, the tree canopy that would be gone, etc. He said he
was not opposed to development of the property and would like to see the
applicant do a good job. He felt that a 15 to 18 foot retaining wall was not in
the best interest of the residents and D.B. He referred to his letter
addressed to the Commission.
C/Wei recommended that the applicant plant more mature boxed trees than
December 12, 2006 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
the proposed 15 -gallon at the onset of the project to provide a more mature
canopy.
CDD/Fong responded to C/Nolan that some of the oak trees could be
relocated under the direction of an Arborist. C/Nolan wanted to know if the
project could consider shelved walls rather than 18 -foot retaining walls.
CDD/Fong responded that the applicant could use a similar type of block with
landscaping cells. However, it would change the design because those
types of blocks are placed at an angle and more of the slope would be lost.
Mr. Shockley explained his statements about the failure of the retaining wall
as a result of potential earthquakes. Unless the epicenter of an earthquake
is close to the area and there is an unreasonably high water table it is
unlikely the walls will fail. However, most walls of this magnitude are on state
land or on land that is controlled by a large corporation that can afford to
inspect the walls on a regular basis and make appropriate repairs, and are
not usually installed in areas where the slope flows down to other properties.
If the retaining wall were to fail it would most likely come down onto Brea
Canyon Road. He said he spoke with three engineers and one
geotechnician and none said they would use this system. He may not agree
with the civil engineer on all points but in many aspects he did a good job.
For the most part the pads are on cut and the soil is as good as it is going to
get. In his estimation, the primary reason for the retaining wall is to increase
the usable rear yard. The retaining wall could be eliminated and the back
yards would be on a slope as they are in "The Country Estates" which, in his
opinion, would solve a lot of the problems. He said he did not agree with
changing the density. He agreed with the applicant that looking from the
elevation of the proposed dwellings residents would not be able to see the
freeway. It is possible that the rooftops would be seen from the freeway.
However, the block wall will not. He believed there were alternatives to the
design plan and was disappointed that Mr. Singh felt compelled to build a
retaining wall. If the retaining wall were six-foot high he believed no one
would object.
CDD/Fong responded to C/Lee that the distance between each of the three
six-foot high retaining walls is about five feet in accordance with the Hillside
Management Ordinance. AssocP/Lungu explained that the walls would have
a much less massive appearance with plantings between each wall.
CDD/Fong explained to C/Lee that the applicant presents his design to the
City and the City determines whether the design meets the development
standards. ACA/Kovacevich explained that the Commission's job is to apply
the code and make its recommendation to the City Council.
Peter Lewandowski stated that a Certified Arborist conducted the tree survey
in 2004 on behalf of the applicant and the City retained Mitch Beecham, a
reputable biologist to review the accuracy of the survey. Based on Mr.
Beecham's review there is no evidence to suggest that the tree survey was
not conducted in full compliance with City standards. Mr. Beecham had
recommendations that were subsequently incorporated. The tree survey was
conducted based upon the applicant's original 26 -lot subdivision and the
veGeR'luer -iz, zuub PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
grading plan has since been modified. Therefore, the tree survey should not
be necessarily indicative of a precise count but a close approximation. Prior
to grading, another tree survey will be conducted to reflect the precise
grading plan necessary to accommodate plans that Council ultimately
approves. Tree tagging protocol includes tagging trees that are in
compliance with the City's standards of diameter at a specified (breast)
height. The tree survey is an approximation and accurately reflects what was
on-site at the time of the survey. The edge of grading has been reduced and
the affected number of trees is therefore likely less than the number
represented in the environmental documentation.
C/Lee said he felt that the applicant had not made an effort to design his
project in accordance with the wishes and concerns of the residents. Mr.
Singh explained that this project had been on the drawing board for four
years and that there had been community meetings. C/Lee wanted to know
how many meetings the applicant held. Mr. Singh responded.
Mr. Singh responded to concerns about the retaining walls that a
geotechnical engineer reviewed the plan and provided recommendations that
were incorporated into the project. The City's consultant reviewed the soils
report on a number of occasions. Both consultants recommended approval
based upon the recommended mitigation. With regard to the trees the
applicant is replacing trees at a 3:1 ratio and 1:1 ratio for dead trees. He
said he would consider larger trees limited to the retaining wall area to help
screen the walls. He reminded the Commission that this was not a large
development.
Chair/Nelson closed the Public Hearing.
RECESS: Chair/Nelson recessed the meeting at 8:15 p.m.
RECONVENE: Chair/Nelson reconvened the meeting at 8:25 p.m.
C/Nolan felt the applicant did not properly respond to the Commission's
request for simulation photos. She asked for an answer regarding the
retaining walls. CDD/Fong responded that it was the applicant's decision as
to what type of wall they would use. There is a condition requiring
landscaping and irrigation. Mr. Singh stated that the system is called a "lock
and load" system with a fagade that allows for vegetation cells. The reason
this type of system is used is to accommodate the concerns regarding
massing and keep the development envelope as small as possible.
VC/Torng commended the builder for his time and effort toward a good
project. However, he believed that comments were important for the
applicant to consider. He felt that in researching all of the previous material
that the applicant had not properly responded to the request for viewpoint
simulations. He asked the applicant to tell the Commission what size trees
he intended to install, give the Commission more information about the
retaining wall and respond to the request for gateway view simulations.
December 12, 2006 PAGE 6
PLANNING COMMISSION
C/Lee agreed with VC/Torng that the applicant had not fully responded to the
Commission's requests for certain information. He asked the applicant for
his sincere cooperation based on the Commission's requests.
C/Wei echoed other Commissioner's comments regarding trees,
preservation of oak trees, increase in the size of replacement trees and how
to soften the retaining walls with more vegetation. He suggested that the
applicant come back with plans to show the Commission. It seemed to him
that the applicant had not complied with the Commission's request to have
the pictures from the northbound SR57 without the vegetation at the side of
the freeway.
Chair/Nelson suggested the applicant speak with restoration ecologist Dr.
Quinn at CalPoly to address concerns about what size trees should be
installed as replacement of the native trees and replace other trees with
larger boxed trees. He wanted a condition added to require that the slopes
being graded above residences be planted immediately and that the
applicant would use the native planting for erosion control. He believed the
project could be made to look like it appears today although it would take a
long restoration period. Chair/Nelson said he would like to move the project
up the line but he was not convinced the applicant had provided what the
Commission asked and he wants the City Council to see it as well.
C/Lee said he was not comfortable with the project and wanted the applicant
to prove that the proposed project was the best for the residents.
C/Nolan wanted to know if C/Lee was asking the applicant to provide a new
plan without a retaining wall. C/Lee said he wanted to see different plan
options to accommodate other opinions put forth by the residents because
he believed that individual views of the plan were completely opposite.
C/Nolan said it was not clear to her what C/Lee was requesting.
C/Lee said he wanted a different plan that included the resident's comments
and concerns. ACA/Kovacevich cautioned the Commission that there might
be a fundamental misunderstanding about the process. The idea was not to
get to the point of necessarily finding a project that everyone liked but to
come to agreement that the project complied with the findings of fact. The
applicant has submitted a project that has gone through several iterations
and been pared down to 16 homes and, the applicant is seeking an up or
down vote on the proposed project. if C/Lee is uncomfortable with the
project and feels he cannot make the findings he could recommend denial.
However, it is not proper for the Commission to attempt to redesign the
project.
C/Wei recommended the following: 1) revise the plan to increase the size of
trees and vegetation and a include a plan to transplant or preserve the oak
trees, 2) find a way to soften the wall and, 3) provide view photos taken from
northbound SR57 without the vegetation for photos 2, 3 & 4.
Mr. Singh stated that each of the visuals cost the applicant about $1500
91
December 12, 2006 PAGE 7
PLANNING COMMISSION
each. He wants to cooperate and has presented seven or eight views and
asked the Commission to limit their expectations as much as possible.
C/Wei believed the vegetation could be added and removed using a
computer software program.
C/Nolan stated that this request was made at the last meeting and the
request was not a new request to the applicant and it would therefore not be
unreasonable for the Commission to request compliance. If the applicant
had provided one northbound rendering as previously requested this issue
might have been resolved this evening.
Mr. Singh reiterated that the Commission was requesting views without
vegetation (photos 2, 3 & 4) along the northbound SR57 and response to
recommendations regarding tree replacement, relocation and vegetation as
called out by C/Wei. CDD/Fong said that staff would provide the requests in
writing to Mr. Singh.
CDD/Fong reiterated the Commission's requests and included
Chair/Nelson's concern about planting trees that were too large.
Mr. Singh asked the Commission to reconsider their recommendation
regarding replanting due to the low success rate of a very costly effort. He
stated that he was willing to comply with all of the other requests.
VC/Torng moved seconded to continue the Public Hearing to January 9,
2007 to allow the applicant time to comply.
Chair/Nelson agreed with Mr. Singh about native trees that 15 gallon 24 box
trees would be appropriate and asked for a friendly amendment to
VC/Torng's motion. VC/Torng amended his motion. C/Lee seconded the
amended motion.
CDD/Fong restated the motion as follows: To continue the item to January
9, 2007 and to bring back the aforementioned items: 1) revised photos #2, 3
and 4; percentage of tree species for softening the look of the retaining walls
minus relocation of native species. Motion carried by the following Roll Call
vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nolan, Wei, VC/Torng,
Chair/Nelson
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
8.1 Development Review DRQ 006-19 — In_.accordance with Chapter 22.48 of
the City of Diamond Bar ve opment Code the applicant requested
approval of plans to construct -a ew three-story 3,668 square foot single-
family residence with anttached4 0 square foot garage. The site is an
undeveloped vacant I t; the subject roperty is zoned R-1 (8,000) and
JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
7.1 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No 54081 Zone Change No 2006-02/
Planned Development Mitigated Negative Declaration No 2006-03,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18 Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree
Permit No. 2002-13 — In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, City's
Subdivision Ordinance — Title 21, Development Code — Title 22, Sections
22.14, 22.58, 22.22, 22.54 and 22.38, the proposed project was a 22 lot
subdivision on a site of approximately 12.9 acres that would provide for the
development of 16 single-family detached homes on individual parcels
ranging in size from approximately 5,705 square feet to 10,506 square feet.
The proposed project would include the construction of private streets,
graded pads, manufactured slopes and retaining walls; an easement for a
public pedestrian trail in a portion of proposed open space areas, and the
removal of a portion of existing vegetation.
The current zoning of the project site is R-1-10,000. The Zone Change to
RL/Planned Development Overlay provides for compliance with the General
Plan land use designation and maximum flexibility in the site planning and
design, thereby allowing smaller lots in order to retain more open space
within the project boundaries. The Conditional Use Permit relates to grading
and development within a hillside area. The Variance relates to retaining
walls that are proposed at a height greater than six feet. The Tree Permit
relates to the removal, replacement and protection of oak and walnut trees.
(Continued from December 12, 2006)
PROJECT ADDRESS
PROPERTY OWNER/
APPLICANT:
At the southern terminus of
Crooked Creek Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Daniel Singh
Jewel Ridge, LLC
10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232
AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report and provided the Planning
Commissioners with photographs and responses to Commissioner's
requests and concerns at the December 12, 2006, public hearing. Also in
accordance with the Commission's request, the applicant submitted a
revised landscape plan that shows a variety of tree and size planted 12 -feet
on center. Staff revised the condition to the resolution accordingly.
JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
Additionally, in accordance with the Commission's request, the applicant
provided information and structural drawings depicting the type of wall
system proposed and included renditions of types of planting materials to be
planted in the cells of the wall system.
Following the presentation AssocP/Lungu said that the Planning Commission
had the following options: 1) approve a resolution recommending City
Council approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03, Zone
Change No. 2006-02/Panned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit
No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13;
2) recommend approval to the Council with additional conditions;
3) recommend approval to the City Council with elimination of some lots;
4) direct the applicant to redesign the project, or 5) recommend City Council
denial of the project. She recited new conditions added to the resolution in
accordance with the Commission's recommendations.
AssocP/Lungu stated that Planning Commissioners were provided a copy of
a letter from Gregory Shockley, 3711 Crooked Creek Drive that discussed his
thoughts about the project.
Chair/Nelson declared the continued public hearing open and asked for
comments.
its
Daniel Singh, thael t
Ridgeain
ng explained on this project project taffdhas
history. He saidaid
recommended approval and the applicant has complied with and exceeded
elieved
every requealfor eoaa drvinthe
down the free ayto focuslt would be on the deve opm ntt
unusual for p p 9
Steve Miller, Ladera Systems, Costa Mesa, introduced the Planning
Commission to the segmental block retaining wall system that was proposed
for use on the project site and discussed its application using vegetation to
landscape its face using a power point presentation.
C/Lee asked Mr. Miller if he was a professional engineer and Mr. Miller
responded that he was a geologist. C/Lee referred to a resident's comment
that this type of wall system tends to be used for commercial projects rather
than residential projects. Mr. Miller responded that the resident must not be
very familiar with the product because there were many single-family home
JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
residential construction projects using this type of system and said found the
resident's comment to be irrelevant.
VC/Torng asked about the earthquake load and Mr. Miller said it was very
common to apply a surcharge during the analysis. His firm follows AASHTO
or NCMA design guidelines. In both cases the site static earthquake loading
is applied. The geotechnical engineers take site conditions, proximity to
most active earthquake faults, the maximum credible number (size) of an
earthquake that would occur on that particular fault and make
recommendations for peak route accelerations. Mr. Miller indicated to
VC/Torng that the most sizeable earthquake would be about 7.0 and
dynamic factors of safety are commonly 75 percent of static factors.
VC/Torng asked Mr. Miller if he was pretty sure it would be safe and
Mr. Miller responded that his firm would follow all applicable building codes
and generally accepted procedures and design methodologies for design of
retaining walls.
Gregory Shokley asked what would happen if the wall failed.
Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing.
There were no disclosures by the Commissioners.
Chair/Nelson asked Mr. Miller to respond to Mr. Shokley's question, what
would happen to the houses below if the wall failed. Mr. Miller said he was
not afraid to say that there are failures in construction. His experience with
retaining walls when they fail — especially geo-synthetic retaining walls, with
which he has a fair amount of experience, is usually in the facing element.
He has never seen a reinforced geo-grid zone fail. Therefore, the area of
failure lies within several feet of the retaining wall depending on the height.
VC/Torng said the key question was whether there was a safety issue and
could there be a large area of damage due to seismic activity. Mr. Miller
responded that certainly depending on where a house is located with respect
to the retaining wall is apropos. If the retaining wall was 12 feet high and the
house was three feet away and there were to be an issue regarding the
stability of the wall the panels could fall near the house. Engineers formulate
designs for what is understood and what is known and engineers cannot
design for what they do not know. A meteor could hit the earth near this
project site any time in the future and could impact the performance of the
JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
project. What engineers do is design things to standards of practice and
they are built and inspected to the standards of practice and when projects
do that there are no problems.
Chair/Nelson asked how far from the toe of the proposed retaining wall
assemblage the nearest residential structure was located. Mr. Singh
responded that he believed there was a 10 -foot distance between the
existing walls and the proposed wails and that most houses have a 25-40
foot rear yard; therefore the distance from the proposed retaining wall to the
actual residence would be from 35 to 60 feet before the first six-foot wall.
The planting distance between the lowest wall and the next wall up the slope
is five feet and there are five feet between each wall thereafter. Each wall is
six feet high and the total height is 18 feet. Mr. Miller said that visually, the
worst case scenario would be the entire embankment failing — the geo-grid
structure as well as the facing elements and traditionally, engineers use a 2:1
rule where the total height would fail at a slope of 2:1. Therefore, the
resulting influence of a complete failure would be about 36 feet.
C/Nolan asked Mr. Shokley to give the Commission specific failure
information. Mr. Shokley responded that he cited three examples in the letter
he addressed to the Commission and that there are more. He said he could
find a number in the Journal of Civil Engineering. Most failures are failure of
soil due to over watering. He cited failures near Cal State LA and Universal
City. His concern was whether the 16 homes would have the resources to
rebuild and or repair their homes and the homes below them in case of
failure or would the City be held responsible.
CDD/Fong stated that the City's Engineering staff has placed a condition on
this property that the applicant submit very detailed information by engineers
and geotechnical engineers to assure that the geological concerns were
addressed in the design of the wall. Staff is not saying that this is the only
material that can be approved; however, the applicant has proposed the
system and material and staff reviews the application to make certain that it
meets best practices and standards. City staff must conduct a thorough
review of the proposed materials to make sure that they are adequate for the
project and site.
CDD/Fong responded to C/Lee that Diamond Bar and southern California is
earthquake country and no one could define what would happen if a big
earthquake occurred because it would be based on pure speculation.
JANUARY 9, 2007 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
However, engineers and technical staff are experts in this area and apply
standards to all projects to make certain that the best practices and
standards are met based upon what the experts know.
ACA/Kovacevich explained that when the Commission makes its decision
this evening that the decision must be supported by "Findings of Fact" and
those findings have to be supported by substantial evidence. Substantial
findings consist of 1) facts, 2) expert opinion based on facts; and,
3) reasonable assumptions based or predicated on facts. In the record
tonight there is no substantial evidence of any risk of catastrophic failure or
any other matters of concern. On the other hand, there is substantial
evidence for success in the form of expert opinion from a geologist based on
fact as presented in the public hearing process and related materials.
C/Nolan moved, C/Wei seconded, to adopt a resolution recommending City
Council approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03, Zone
Change No. 2006-02/Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit
No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13. Motion
carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan, Wei, VC/Torng,
Chair/Nelson
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None
CDD/Fong explained that this project moves to the City Council for
consideration and residents will have an opportunity to offer further testimony
in that venue.
�(D �IOA'D BAR11PLANNING i •
REPORTAGENDA
21825 C:OPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
7.4
MEETING DATE:
October 10, 2006
CASE/FILE NUMBER:
1. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03
2. Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned
Development Overlay District No. 2006-01
3 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081
4. Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18
5. Variance No. 2002-02
6. Tree Permit No. 2002-13
PROJECT LOCATION:
Southern Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
(APN #8714-028-003)
APPLICATION REQUEST: To adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program; to subdivide a
12.9 acre site into 16 residential lots ranging in
size from 5,705 to 10,506 square feet for the
eventual development with single-family homes;
to change the zoning from R-1-10,000 to RL -PD;
to grade and develop in a hillside area; to allow
retaining walls with an exposed height of 10 feet
that exceed the allowed exposed height
adjacent to a street; and to remove, replace and
protect oak and walnut trees.
PROPERTY OWNER / Mr. Daniel Singh
APPLICANT: Jewel Ridge, LLC
10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission:
Open the public hearing; receive comments on
the project; close the public hearing and begin
deliberations on VTTM No. 5670 and its
entitlements; and recommend approval of Zone
Change No. 2006-03 and Planned Development
Overlay District 2006-01, Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 2006-03 and Mitigation
Monitoring Program, VTTM No. 54081,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance
No 2002-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-12.
ATTACHMENT *�N
BACKGROUND:
A. Project Processing:
The proposed project was submitted to the City on November 6, 2002. The
staff prepared the first letter to the applicant deeming the application
incomplete on November 21, 2002 and a follow—up second letter sent on
December 11, 2002. Both letters discussed many issues and concerns
regarding the project's design, retaining wall heights, environmental issues,
grading, acceptance of the geotechnical report, revegetation, etc.
In 2003, 20 letters were sent over the year to the applicant reiterating the many
issues and concerns referenced above. The letters also discussed updating
the biological assessment and tree survey submitted by the applicant and the
need for preparing an air quality assessment and noise analysis.
Because the applicant did not respond in a manner that resolved all the issues
and concerns completely, 18 additional letters were sent to the applicant
throughout 2004. Again these letters reiterated some of the same issues and
concerns. Also discussed in these letters was a recommendation to hire
consulting firms to prepare the air quality assessment and noise analysis and
an update of the biological assessment and tree survey. Furthermore, staff had
three meetings with the applicant and his team during 2004 to discuss these
issues.
In 2005, the applicant sent a "work in progress" revised map addressing some
of the concerns and issues discussed in the past. Six letters were sent to the
applicant reiterating project concerns and issues not addressed in the revised
map. A Tree Permit was issued for the removal of trees to do borings for
further geotechnical analysis. A Stop Work Order was subsequently issued for
non-compliance with Tree Permit conditions. Several site visits occurred
because of non-compliance with the Tree Permit and Stop Work Order.
The geotechnical report was approved subject to conditions in 2006. Also in
2006, the revised map for the project's first public hearing was submitted and
the environmental document was completed and circulated.
In total, staff has sent approximately 45 letters to the applicant between 2002
and 2005. A detailed chronology of these activities is attached to this report.
The purpose of the letters was to assist the applicant in preparing and
completing adequate plans for the Planning Commission and City Council.
B. Site Description:
The project site is located at the southern terminus of Crooked Creek Drive,
east of the SR -57 Freeway, Brea Canyon Road and Brea Canyon flood control
channel and north of the City's southern boundary. It is an irregular-shaped
hillside parcel, approximately 12.9 acres in size. The property is surrounded by
TTM 54081 Page 2
single-family homes on the north, west and east and undeveloped land to the
south outside of the City's boundary.
In general, the project site is slopes down to the south and west and slopes up
to the east. It is characterized by a moderately steep western facing slope
approximately 200 feet high and level canyon on the westerly side adjacent to
the flood control channel. Elevations on the project site range from 644 feet
above mean sea level in the western portion adjacent to the flood control
channel to 840 feet at the southeast portion. Vegetation on the site consists of
non-native grassland, oak and walnut trees and coast Live oak and walnut
woodlands. Additionally, an existing recreational trail easement traverses the
eastern portion of the project site.
C. Site and Surroundinq General Plan and Zoning and Use:
ANALYSIS:
A. Applications and Review Authority (Subdivision Ordinance Title 21; and
Development Code Sections 22.14 22 58 22 22 22 54 22.38 and 22.44)
The proposed project involves six applications as follows:
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Report and
Monitoring Program to address impacts that the propose project map
have on the environment.
2. Zone Change application to change the project site's zoning RL -PD to
coincide with the General Plan's land use designation.
3. Subdivision application for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 to
subdivide the project site into 16 residential lots, four open space lots
(Lots "A", "B", "C" and "D") and private Streets "A" and "B";
4. Conditional Use Permit application for development in hillside areas with
slopes of 10 percent or greater and to ensure the application of the
City's hillside management standards to the project; and for the
TTM 54081 Page 3
General Plan
Zone
Use
Project Site
RL/Maximum 3 DU/AC
R-1-10,000
Vacant
North
RUMaximum 3 DU/AC
R-1-9,000
Residential
South
AG/SP (Sphere of Influence)
A-2-1
Vacant
East
RUMaximum 3 DU/AC
R-1-9,000
Residential
West
RUMaximum.3 DU/AC
R-1-7,500
Residential/flood
control channel/ SR -57
ANALYSIS:
A. Applications and Review Authority (Subdivision Ordinance Title 21; and
Development Code Sections 22.14 22 58 22 22 22 54 22.38 and 22.44)
The proposed project involves six applications as follows:
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Report and
Monitoring Program to address impacts that the propose project map
have on the environment.
2. Zone Change application to change the project site's zoning RL -PD to
coincide with the General Plan's land use designation.
3. Subdivision application for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081 to
subdivide the project site into 16 residential lots, four open space lots
(Lots "A", "B", "C" and "D") and private Streets "A" and "B";
4. Conditional Use Permit application for development in hillside areas with
slopes of 10 percent or greater and to ensure the application of the
City's hillside management standards to the project; and for the
TTM 54081 Page 3
L
establishment of a Planned Development Overlay District to allow
flexibility in design, density and intensity. In this case, the PD Overlay
District allows the consideration of residential lots that are less than
10,000 square feet in exchange of more open space;
5. Variance application is for proposed retaining walls with a maximum
exposed height of 10 feet, which exceeds the allowed three feet
exposed height adjacent to a street; and
6. Tree Permit application for the preservation, removal and replacement of
oak and walnut trees with a diameter of eight inches at breast height
(DBH);
For the Zone Change and Planned Development Overlay and Vesting
Tentative Tract Map, the City Council is the review authority with the Planning
Commission giving its recommendation. For the Conditional Use Permit,
Variance and Tree Permit applications, the Planning Commission is the review
authority. According to the Development Code, when more than one
application is involved, all applications shall be processed simultaneously by
the highest review authority. In this case, the Planning Commission will review
all applications and provide a recommendation to the City Council. The City
Council will be the final decision maker for the project.
Project Components
The proposed 16 single-family residential lots will vary in size from 5,705 to
10,506 square feet, with a majority of the lot sizes between 6,229 to 7,325
square feet. Each lot will be graded with a development pad.
In addition to the 16 custom residential lots, the project will consist of four letter
lots identified as Lots "A", "B", "C" and "D". These lots will be common lots
maintained by the homeowners' association, which will be formed in the future.
Additionally, these lots, especially Lot "C", will be used for on-site mitigation
with regards to oak and walnut trees.and understory replacement.
Streets A" and `B' are proposed as private streets with sidewalk, curb and
gutter on the side of the street developed with homes. Street "A" is a
continuation of Crooked Creek Drive and Street "B" intersects Street "A" at the
project entrance.
The proposed project also consists of relocating an existing recreational trail
pursuant to the City's Trails Master Plan. Additionally, the Trails Master Plan
identifies a potential "Class A" trail head in proximity to the project site. The
proposed on-site trail head and pedestrian trail easement is identified on the
map. The applicant will be required to dedicate to the City an irrevocable
easement of 20 feet for the pedestrian trail. The easement will be located on
the east side of Street "A" and adjacent to the southern boundary of the map.
At the entrance of the tract in Lot "A", a sign/kiosk will installed identifying the
trail. Improvements for the trail are set forth as conditions of the project.
TTM 54081 Page 4
C. General Plan
The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Low Density
Residential (RL) Maximum Three Dwelling Units Per Acre (3 DU/AC). The
proposed map has a gross density of 0.81 dwelling units per acre. As such, the
proposed map is in compliance with the City's General Plan with regards to
density.
D. Zone Change and Planned Development Overlay District
The General Plan land use designation for this project is Low Density
Residential (RL)/Maximum Three Dwelling Units Per Acre (3 DU/AC). The
current zoning for the project site is R-1-10,000. A zoning change to Low
Density Residential (RL) is being processed in order to bring the zoning in
compliance with the General Plan. In addition, a Planned Development
Overlay District (PD) is being proposed to modify the required minimum lot
size. Therefore, the zoning nomenclature will be changed to RL -PD.
E. Conditional Use Permit for Hillside Development
The City's hillside management standards apply to a project having a natural
slope of 10 percent or greater. The proposed project has natural slopes ranging
from less than 10:1(8.4 %) to 4:1(24.8%) with an average natural slope if 24.35
percent. As such, a project shall be subject to the approval of a Conditional
Use Permit.
To prepare the project site for development, the following grading quantities are
estimated: 98,000 cubic yards of cut; 86,000 cubic yards of fill; and 5,000 cubic
yards of export. The applicant proposes to grade the project site in a manner
that provides sixteen residential lots, each with a development pad, four open
space lots (Lots "A", "B" "C" and "D") and two private streets to create a private,
non -gated community. Additionally, grading includes the repair of landslide
areas located on the lower portion of the descending natural slope.
Access to the project will be at the terminus of Crooked Creek Drive. Grading
will also occur within a portion of Lot "C", cutting into the easterly slope to
provide for the streets. Retaining walls will be used to support the graded pads
and cut into the easterly slope to for the streets.
F. Conditional Use Permit for Planned Development Overlay District
The purpose of a Planned Development Overlay is to promote quality design,
innovative site planning, and transfer of development rights and mixed uses
consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. The intent of the
planned development standards is to preserve a minimum 30 percent of the
project's gross acreage as open space, incorporate amenities beyond those
expected under conventional development standards and to achieve greater
flexibility in design.
TTM 54081 Page 5
Application for the Planned Development Overlay District requires approval of a
Conditional Use Permit to modify development standards (i.e., minimum lot
area, setbacks, site coverage, height, landscaping or off-site parking) normally
required in a specified zone. However, proposed development within a Planned
Development Overlay must comply with all other applicable provisions of the
Development Code.
For this project, the maximum number of dwelling units per acre is three.
Therefore, it is possible that about 30 lots plus streets could be established for
residential development. However, the Planned Development Overlay is use to
reduce the square footage of each lot in order to preserve the open space
identified as Lot "C". As such, the project has been reduced to 16 dwelling unit
or a density of 0.81 dwelling units per acre and maintains 8.9 acres or 69
percent in open space.
G. Variance
The purpose of a variance is to allow a deviation from required development
standards when special circumstances, applicable to the property (i.e., location,
size, shape, surroundings, topography, or other conditions) which inhibit the
property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity under
the same zone.
The applicant proposes retaining walls throughout the project site due to the
topography of the site and grading activities related to cut and fill that are
needed to prepare the site for 16 lots with buildable pads, streets and access
point. The walls are proposed in a series of two or three at an exposed height
of five or six feet each. They are part of each lots development and cut into
portions of Lot "C" in order to construct the streets.
Pursuant to the City's hillside management standards, the maximum allowed
exposed height of retaining walls adjacent to a street is three feet. Additionally,
no more than three terraced or stepped walls can be used. The retaining walls
adjacent to Streets "A" and "B' are proposed at an exposed heights of five and
six feet and do not exceed three terraced walls. Also to create the pedestrian
trail adjacent to Street "A" and Lot "C", the proposed retaining walls need to be
set back ten feet more then as shown on the map. Changing the location of the
walls will increase the exposed height to approximately ten feet. As a result,
Variance approval is required for the increased height of these proposed
retaining walls. A geo-grid retaining wall system with cells for plant material will
be used for the retaining walls adjacent to the street. For all other walls, split
face block in earth tone will be required.
H. Tree Permit
According to the biological assessment, the proposed project will impact 11.5
acres of mixed coast live oak and California walnut woodland with understory
dominated by poison oak. This woodland acreage is identified by the California
TTM 54081 Page 6
Department of Fish and Game as a sensitive resource and has a minimum
replacement ratio of 1:1.
A survey indicates that a total of 468 oak and walnut trees exist on the project
site. A total of 269 of these trees will be removed due to the proposed grading.
However, 197 oak and walnut trees are deteriorated to the point of where they
are either dying or dead. The remaining 72 trees (43 oaks and 29 walnuts) are
considered healthy and are recommended for replacement at a 3:1 ratio per the
City's Tree Permit requirements. Mitigation will include a combination of on-site
and/or off-site preservation, enhancement and/or restoration. The applicant will
implement the mitigation plan, as approved by the City and according to the
guidelines and performance standards of the plan.
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
the City has prepared an Initial Study and determined that a Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) is required for this project. Mitigated Negative Declaration
No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129) was prepared by the City's environmental
consultant, Environmental Impact Sciences.
Purpose of a MND:
a. A MND is an informational document that evaluates whether or not
there is substantial evidence that a project will have the potential to
significantly effect the environment. It is used to guide and assist the
City staff, Planning Commission, City Council, and public in the
consideration and evaluation of potential environmental implications
that may result from the proposed project's development.
A MND may be prepared if the Initial Study identifies a potentially
significant effect for which the applicant has made or agrees to make
project revisions that clearly mitigate the effects. For a MND, specific
mitigation measures are developed and agreed to before project
approval. The mitigation measures are incorporated into a mitigation
reporting and monitoring program which becomes part of the MND.
2. MND Process:
a. Initial Study
An Initial Study is the first step in determining the appropriate
environmental document for a project. It is a preliminary analysis
to determine whether or not an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) or a Negative Declaration is need for a project. If the Initial
Study concludes that the project will not significantly effect the
environment or may have the potential to effect the environment
but can be mitigated to a level of less than significant, a Negative
Declaration or a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared
TTM 54081 Page 7
17
C.
no
respectively. Staff and the City's environmental consultant
completed the Initial Study questionnaire for the proposed project
and identified several areas, namely aesthetics, air quality,
hazards and hazardous materials, biological resources and
transportation and traffic that have the potential to effect the
environment but will be mitigated to a level of less than
significant.
Notice of Availability (NOA)
Once the MND is prepared, a NOA is prepared and distributed to
agencies that have or may have the responsibility for providing
service to the project or may be impacted by the project for review
and response. The response period is typically 20 days.
However, for this project the response period is 30 days because
it was submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by state
agencies. As a result, the NOA for this project was circulated on
July 28, 2006 with the review period ending on August 28, 2006.
Notice of Intent to Adopt
A Notice of Intent to Adopt and Public Hearing is sent to the
County Clerk, the public and responsible agencies. The Notice of
Intent to Adopt is a minimum 20 day notice. At the public hearing,
the Planning Commission shall consider the proposed MND with
the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program, and then make
a recommendation to the City Council.
Environmental Factors and Effects Analyzed In the MND
The Initial Study process for this project determined that the
following environmental issues will have "no impact" or "less than
significant impact and are not addressed in the MND:
Agricultural Resources
Land Use and Planning
Mineral Resources
Hydrology and Water Quality
Public Services
Population/Housing
Recreation
Cultural Resources
Noise
Utilities and Service Systems
The following environmental issues could have a potentially
significant effect on the environment unless mitigated to less than
significant. But with the incorporation of the project's mitigation
program, impacts associated with the implementation of this
project will be reduced to a level "less than significant".
Aesthetics Hazards/Hazardous Materials
Air Quality Biological Resources
Transportation/Traffic
TTM 54081 Page 8
(1.) Aesthetics.
According to the MND, the environmental issue related to
aesthetics has the potential to be significant unless
mitigated to a level of less than significant. The proposed
series of retaining walls located along or near rear property
lines may partially impede existing views. In order to
mitigate the view of the retaining walls, landscaping with
irrigation will be used within the wall cells and planter areas
between and in front of all retaining walls.
(2.) Air Quality.
Environmental issues related to Air Quality affected by dust
and particulate matter may be potentially significant during
grading and construction. The applicant is required to:
water all exposed surfaces three times daily; limit off-road
trucks to no more than 15 mph; use soil stabilizers; replace
ground cover in disturbed area as quickly as feasible; and
cover all stockpiles. Additionally, all exterior points for on-
site residential units will conform to specifications that will
reduce volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
(3.) Transportation/Traffic.
The project entry will be a "traffic roundabout". Although
the streets of the proposed project are private, staff
believes this project should not be gated due to the
awkwardness of the proposed gates location in the traffic
roundabout. According to the MND, roundabouts are a
traffic calming device that reduces speed. However due to
the intersecting of Streets "A" and "B" at the roundabout, a
conflict point for vehicles, bicycles, or pedestrians may
occur. As a result, the final design, development plans,
and geometrics of all on-site streets shall be approved by
the City Engineer and comply with the City's street
standards.
(4.) Hazards/Hazardous Materials.
The project site is located directly adjacent to a "Very High
Fire Hazard Zone". As a result, the applicant is required to
prepare and submit a fuel modification plan to the City and
Fire Department for approval and comply with all fire
codes. Additionally, the applicant is required to prepare
construction fire prevention and control plan outlining all
activities that will occur during construction, access
TTM 54081 Page 9
through the project site and fire safety and suppression for
approval by the Fire Department and City.
(5.) Biological Resources.
A biological assessment acknowledges that walnut and
oak woodlands and California black walnut and oak trees
exist at the project site. In recognition of a potentially
significant impact to biological resources, mitigation
measures that will reduce the impacts to significantly less
are as follows: replacement of oak and walnut trees at a
3:1 ratio on-site and off-site locations and oak and walnut
woodlands with a five year monitoring plan funded by the
applicant; on-site grading activities must occur prior to April
2007, or a new biological survey must be conducted to
reassess the presence or absence of protected biological
resources; information regarding biological resource must
be in the covenant, conditions and restrictions (CC&R's);
landscape plans for all common areas shall incorporate
replacement species, native drought -tolerant, non-invasive
plant species and weed prevention and control; and all
construction and material staging activities must be
confined within the project boundaries
e. Public Review Period/Response to Comments
At the conclusion of the public review period, comments received
are responded to and included as part of the MND that is
reviewed by the decision makers.
Revision to the Project Design
After the close of the MND review period and based on the
environmental analysis and comments received, the applicant
may need to restudy and redesign the subdivision and its grading
concept.
g. Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP)
CEQA requires public agencies to set up a Monitoring Program
as part of the MND. The purpose of the MMP is to insure
compliance with the mitigation measures. At the time of the
MND's adoption, the MMP is adopted. This project's MMP has
been prepared for consideration.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel
Valley Tribune on September 28, 2006. Public hearing notices were mailed to
TTM 54081 Page 10
approximately 219 property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site on
September 25, 2006. Furthermore, the project site was posted with a display board
and the public notice was posted in three public places by September 27, 2006.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the following to the City
Council: approval of Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned Development Overlay
District No. 2006-01, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH
#2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program and Vesting Tentative Map No.
54081, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02, Tree Permit No.
2002-13, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached
resolutions to City Council.
Prepared by:
A n J. L gu,
Associate Planner
Attachments:
Reviewed by:
Nancy Fong, AICP,
Community Development Director
1. Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Zone Change No.
2002-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01;
2. Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of VTTM No.53430
and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH
#2006071129) and Mitigation Monitoring Program;
3 Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Conditional Use
Permit No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13 and
adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
and Mitigation Monitoring Program;
4. Exhibit "A" —Tentative Map No. 54081 dated October 10, 2006;
5. Exhibit "B" Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program; and
6. Exhibit "C" Response to Comments;
7. Chronology of VTTM 54081; and
8. Photo simulations of project after development.
TTM 54081 Page 11
(II DIAPIOND BAR�� PLANNING • O
AGENDA R •
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER-
7.1— Public hearing continued from October 10, 2006
MEETING DATE:
November 28, 2006
CASEIFILE NUMBER:
1. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 2.
2. Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned
Development Overlay District No. 2006-01
3 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081
4. Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18
5. Variance No. 2002-02
6. Tree Permit No. 2002-13
PROJECT LOCATION:
Southern Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
(APN #8714-028-003)
APPLICATION REQUEST: To adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program; to subdivide a 12.9
acre site into 16 residential lots ranging in size from
5,705 to 10,506 square feet for the eventual
development with single-family homes; to change
the zoning from R-1-10,000 to RL -PD; to grade and
develop in a hillside area; to allow retaining walls
with an exposed height of 10 feet that exceed the
allowed exposed height adjacent to a street; and to
remove, replace and protect oak and walnut trees.
PROPERTY OWNER I Mr. Daniel Singh
APPLICANT: Jewel Ridge, LLC
10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission: Open
the continued public hearing; receive comments on
the project; close the public hearing and begin
deliberations on VTTM No. 54081 and its
entitlements; and recommend approval of Zone
Change No. 2006-03 and Planned Development
Overlay District 2006-01, Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 2006-03 and Mitigation Monitoring
Program, VTTM No. 54081, Conditional Use Permit
No. 2002-18, Variance No 2002-02 and Tree Permit
No. 2002-12.
VTTM 54081
BACKGROUND:
VTTM No. 54081 was presented to the Planning Commission at a public hearing on
October 10, 2006. The Commission continued the public hearing to ,November 28,
2006 to give the applicant time to address the Commission's concern.
ANALYSIS:
At the October 10, 2006 public hearing for this project, the Planning Commission
directed the applicant to address the following concerns.
The height of three 10 foot high retaining walls adjacent to the proposed
pedestrian trail easement located on the east side of Street "A".
According to the applicant's preliminary landscape plan, the three retaining walls
have been reduced in height and are proposed at an exposed height of five feet
each.
2. Provide an artist's renderings before and after the project's construction from the
SR 57 freeway.
Artist's renderings were not provided. The applicant provided photographic views
;From 13 locations along the SR 57 freeway to the project site. The views show
that the project site can not be seen from the SR 57 freeway. Staff believes that
photographs taken from a different lane of the freeway, with the development of
the site started and/or completed, the disturbance of the hillside and portions of
the homes would be visible. As a result, staff believes that the Commission's
concern regarding the view from the freeway is not adequately addressed.
3. Provide artist's renderings from the backyards of residents affected by the
project_ Show progression at five and ten year intervals.
The applicant provided a photograph of the existing backyard view at ground
level from Lot 82 located on Crooked Creek Drive to the project site. Artist's
renderings have also been provided of this view at five and 10 year intervals and
,section renderings showing the views from Lots 80 and 82. The renderings
indicate that the view from the backyards of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive
will change substantially. However, with the maturity of the plant materials used
to buffer the retaining walls, the walls could effectively be screened and the view
softened. But, the applicant did not consider the view from the sQcond floor of
the existing homes which would certainly be different from the view at ground
level- The retaining walls and new home viewed from the second floor would be
more obtrusive. Staff believes that the view concern is not adequately addressed.
4. Provide documentation that the oak and walnut trees removed by this project's
development will be mitigated to less than significant.
2
VTTM 54081
The applicant provided a preliminary landscape plan that shows on-site
mitigation as follows:
a. The removal of 43 oak trees and their replacement at a 3:1 ratio for a total
of 129 replacement oak trees:
b. The removal of 29 walnut trees and their replacement at a 3:1 ratio for a
total of 87 replacement walnut trees: and
c. One -hundred and ninety-seven (197) dead or drying oak and walnut trees
that will be replaced at a 1:1 ratio for a total of 197 replacement trees.
The total tree replacement is 413 trees.
A fuel modification plans was also submitted by the applicant. This plan will be
provided to the Fire Department for review prior to final map approval.
5. Provide a landscape plan that uses vegetation that is indigenous to the area,
looks like the surrounding area and functions as an extension of the hillside.
The preliminary landscape plan uses planting patterns that occur in nature.
Several of plant species are native to southern California. Additionally, proposed
vines are located between proposed lots and existing homes on Crooked Creek
Drive or on lots adjacent to the flood control channel. Vines are also located next
to the project site's south property line and natural open space area. These vines
need to be deleted from the plan and replaced with a species that is appropriate
next to a natural open space area.
The City's environmental consultant, Environmental Impact Sciences who prepared the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, has reviewed the plans and finds that from a CEQA
perspective, the plans do not introduce substantially new information that would change
the project. Therefore, the
CEQAMitigated
compliancNegative
e� Additionally, thethis
lanpsroaret asis fullstill
and
an
appropriate document for
adequate solution to vegetation related impacts.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
As directed by the Planning Commission, staff mailed continued public hearing notices
to approximately 219 property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site at
least 10 days prior to the continued public hearing date of November 28, 2006.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
has prepared an Initial Study and determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND) is required for this project. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH
#2006071129) was prepared by the City's environmental consultant,
Environmental
Impact Sciences. The 30 day review period began on July 28, 2006 and ended on
August 28, 2006. The additional information provided and attachment to this staff report
does not substantially change this project. Therefore, it is not required that the Negative
Declaration be recirculated.
VTTM 54081
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the following to the City
Council: approval of Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned Development Overlay
District No. 2006-01, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
and Mitigation Monitoring Program and Vesting Tentative Map No. 54081, Conditional
Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02, Tree Permit No. 2002-13, Findings of
Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolutions to City Council.
,.
a��,
4 �1� - 1491W
repay b Reviewed by:
nn J. Lungu, Nancy Fong, Al ,
Associate Planner Community Develo maRtJirector
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Zone Change No.
2002-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01;
2. Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of VTTM No.53430 and
adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
and Mitigation Monitoring Program;
3 Draft Resolution recommendingkto City Council approval of Conditional Use
Permit No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13 and
adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
and Mitigation Monitoring Program;
4. Planning Commission Minutes dated October 10, 2006;
5. Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 10, 2006;
6. 57 Freeway View of VTTM 54081;
7. Artist's Renderings of views from the back yards of Lots 80 and 82 located on
Crooked Creek Drive; and
8. Conceptual Landscape Plan and Fuel Modification Plan.
Y
4
VTTM 54081
w
COMMISSION •
AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER' 7.1— Public hearing continued from November 28, 2006
MEETING DATE: December 12, 2006
CASE/FILE NUMBER: 1
2.
3
4.
5.
6.
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03
Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned
Development Overlay District No. 2006-01
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081
Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18
Variance No. 2002-02
Tree Permit No. 2002-13
PROJECT LOCATION' Southern Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
(APN #8714-028-003)
APPLICATION REQUEST: To adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program; to subdivide a 12.9 acre
site into 16 residential lots ranging in size from 5,705 to
10,506 square feet for the eventual development with
single-family homes; to change the zoning from R-1-
10,000 to RL -PD; to grade and develop in a hillside area;
to allow retaining walls with an exposed height of 10 feet
which exceed the allowed exposed height adjacent to a
street; and to remove, replace and protect oak and
walnut trees.
PROPERTY OWNER / Mr. Daniel Singh
APPLICANT: Jewel Ridge, LLC
10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission: Open the
continued public hearing; receive comments on the
project; close the public hearing and begin deliberations
on VTTM No. 54081 and its entitlements; and
recommend approval of Zone Change No. 2006-03 and
Planned Development Overlay District 2006-01,
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 and
Mitigation Monitoring Program, VTTM No. 54081,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No 2002-
02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-12.
VTTM 54081
BACKGROUND:
VTTM No. 54081 was presented to the Planning Commission at a public hearing on
October 10, 2006. The Commission continued the public hearing to November 28,
2006 to give the applicant time to address the Commission's concerns related to
retaining wall heights, vegetation replacement and views after the project's
development.
At the November 28, 2006 meeting, the applicant provided a revised preliminary
landscape plan showing the three -10 foot high retaining walls reduced to a height of five
feet each; the use of vegetation indigenous to the area that functions as an extension of
the existing hillside; and replacement walnut and oak trees. The Commission found the
revised preliminary landscape plan acceptable. The applicant also provided
photographic views from 13 locations along the SR 57 freeway to the project site and
artist's renderings of views from the backyards of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive at
five and ten year intervals with section renderings. The Commission felt that the
photographic views did not accurately reflect the current view or show the results from
grading the project site and constructing homes. Additionally, the renderings did not
show the view from the second story of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive at five and
ten year intervals. As a result, the Commission continued the public hearing to
December 12, 2006 to allow the applicant additional time to provide the photo
simulations and renderings.
ANALYSIS:
At the November 28, 2006 continued public hearing for this project, the Planning
Commission directed the applicant to re -address the following concerns.
Provide photographic simulations of the project site as viewed from the SR 57
freeway. Simulate the grading and roof tops on to the photograph and show the
graded slope at the project site.
At the November 28, 2006, the applicant presented the Commission with
photographic views from the SR 57 freeway north bound. The view showed that
the project was not visible from the freeway.
The applicant has submitted a photographic view and photo simulation from the
SR 57 freeway southbound. The photographic view shows the project site as it is
today. The photo simulation shows the project site in ten years with a view of the
second story and roof top of six homes and open space hillside. It also shows
that existing vegetation along with trees planted as part of the proposed project's
mitigation will prevent seeing a majority of the proposed homes from the SR 57
freeway south bound. However, the applicant did not provide a photographic
view and photo simulation from the SR 57 freeway north bound.
2
VTTM 54081
3. Provide an artist's renderings before and after the project's construction from the
backyards of the second story of existing homes located on Crooked Creek
Drive.. The renderings after the project's construction should be at five and ten
year intervals.
The artist's renderings submitted by the applicant show the view from the second
story basically the same as the view from the first story presented to the
Commission on November 28, 2006. Due to the elevation difference between
the pads of homes on Crooked Creek Drive and e proposed homes, the series of
retaining walls are necessary. According to the applicant's plans, Lot 80 on
Crooked Creek Drive has a pad elevation of approximately 665. Lot 13 of VTTM
54081 directly behind Lot 80 has a pad elevation of 690. Due to the topography,
there is an elevation difference of 25 feet. Therefore, the view of the walls can
not be avoided unless Lots 10 through 16 were not graded. The first wall of the
series of three walls will be located approximately 12 feet at the narrowest point
to 30 feet at the widest point from the property line of the homes on Crooked
Creek Drive. The proposed landscaping will assist in mitigating the view, but the
walls will still be seen.
3. Provide a construction safety mitigation plan to address the safety concerns on
local residential streets.
A condition has been added to the resolutions as follows: Conditional Use
Permit, Variance and Tree Permit Resolution, page 11, 5. b. 12; and VTTM
54081 and Mitigated Negative Declaration Resolution, page 9, 7.b.12. The
condition states: "Prior to issuance of any permits or grubbing of the site,
whichever comes first, the applicant shall submit a construction traffic safety
mitigation plan that addresses such items as, but not limited to, lane closures,
truck routes, traffic control measures for the construction area, street cleaning,
etc. for the City's review and approval."
4. On November 28, 2006, public comments expressed concerns related to traffic,
retaining walls behind the homes on Crooked Creek Drive and their view, dead
and dying trees, safety of children and drainage.
A traffic study was prepared for this project and reviewed and accepted by the
City. The study examines trips, daily and peak hours, generated by this project.
The study shows the project would add trips to the local roadways. However, the
added trips did not manifest the need for signalization or additional traffic
mitigation.
As discussed above, retaining walls are needed due to the elevation differences
between the pad for existing homes and proposed homes. The view of the walls
can be mitigated to some extent with landscaping.
The dead and dying trees, to be replaced at a 3:1 and 1:1 ratio respectively, were
addressed to the Commission's satisfaction in the revised landscape plans.
VTTM 54081
The safety of children is addressed by adding a condition to the project requiring
the applicant to provide a construction safety mitigation plan for the City's review
and approval.
The drainage was addressed in a drainage study prepared by the applicant and
reviewed and accepted by the City.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
As directed by the Planning Commission, staff mailed continued public hearing notices
to approximately 219 property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site at
least 10 days prior to the continued public hearing date of November 28, 2006.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
has prepared an Initial Study and determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND) its required for this project. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH
#2006071129) was prepared by the City's environmental consultant, Environmental
Impact Sciences. The 30 day review period began on July 28, 2006 and ended on
August 28, 2006. The additional information provided and attachment to this staff report
does not substantially change this project. Therefore, it is not required that the Negative
Declaration be recirculated.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the following to the City
Council: approval of Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned Development Overlay
District No. 2006-01, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
and Mitigation Monitoring Program and Vesting Tentative Map No. 54081, Conditional
Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02, Tree Permit No. 2002-13, Findings of
Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolutions to City Council.
Pre ared by.
Ann J. Lungu,
Associate Planner
Reviewed by:
Nancy Fong, AICP,
Community Development Director
4
VTTM 54081
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Zone Change No.
2002-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01;
2. Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of VTTM No.53430 and
adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
and Mitigation Monitoring Program;
3 Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Conditional Use
Permit No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13 and
adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
and Mitigation Monitoring Program;
4. Planning Commission Minutes dated November 28, 2006;
5. Planning Commission Staff Reports dated October 10, 2006 and November 28,
2006;
6. 20 57 Freeway Southbound View of VTTM 54081; and
7. Artist's Renderings of views from the back yards at five and 10 year intervals.
VTTM 54081
1110I liIO2VD BART
L - S1,1�
\'� fPLANNING COMMISSIONAGENDA REPORT
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE -- DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 -- TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
7. 1 — Public hearing continued from December 12,
2006
MEETING DATE:
January 9, 2007
CASE/FILE NUMBER:
1. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03
2. Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned
Development Overlay District No. 2006-01
3 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54081
4. Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18
5. Variance No. 2002-02
6. Tree Permit No. 2002-13
PROJECT LOCATION•
Southern Terminus of Crooked Creek Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
(APN #8714-028-003)
APPLICATION REQUEST: To adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program; to subdivide a 12.9 acre
site into 16 residential lots ranging in size from 5,705 to
10,506 square feet for the eventual development of
single-family homes; to change the zoning from R-1-
10,000 to RL -PD; to grade and develop in a hillside area;
to allow retaining walls with an exposed height of 10 feet
which exceed the allowed exposed height adjacent to a
street; and to remove, replace and protect oak and
walnut trees.
PROPERTY OWNER / Mr. Daniel Singh
APPLICANT: Jewel Ridge, LLC
10365 W. Jefferson Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232
STAFFRECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission: Open the
continued public hearing; receive comments on the
project; close the public hearing and begin deliberations
on VTTM No. 54081 and its entitlements; and
recommend approval of Zone Change No. 2006-03 and
Planned Development Overlay District 2006-01,
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 and
Mitigation Monitoring Program, VTTM No. 54081,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No 2002-
02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-12.
VTTM 54081
BACKGROUND:
VTTM No. 54081 was presented to the Planning Commission at a public hearing on
October 10, 2006. The Commission continued the public hearing to November 28,
2006 and to December 12, 2006 to allow the applicant time to address the
Commission's concerns related to retaining wall heights, vegetation replacement and
views after the project's development.
At each continued public hearing the applicant provided views from the SR 57 freeway
of the project site before and after construction of the project at five and 10 year
intervals. The applicant also provided a preliminary landscape plan and photographic
simulation views from the backyards of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive at five and
ten year intervals with section renderings. The Commission felt that the photographic
views and simulations did not accurately reflect the current view or the results from
grading the project site and constructing homes. Therefore, the Commission continued
the public hearing to January 9, 2007 to allow the applicant additional time to provide
the photographic views and accurate simulations.
ANALYSIS:
At the December 12, 2006 continued public hearing, the Planning Commission directed
the applicant to re -address the following concerns.
1. Photographic simulations from the SR 57 freeway north bound without the
existing vegetation located adjacent to the freeway. Provide views from freeway
locations 2, 3 and 4 as shown on photographs presented to the Commission
November 28, 2006. Photographic simulations must show the project site
immediately after construction — zero year and five and ten year intervals.
Additionally, the photographic simulations must include the slopes above the
houses.
The applicant has provided additional photographic views and simulation from
the north bound SR 57 freeway at locations 2, 3, and 4 to the project site. The
current photographic views at zero year and simulations after grading, and at five
and ten year intervals show that the views from locations 3 and 4, which are
closer to the project site, reveal more of the graded slopes, proposed retaining
walls and future homes. Additionally, the photo simulations show that the more
mature the vegetation is on the slopes and planter areas adjacent to the retaining
walls, the more effectively the proposed project is screened from the SR 57
freeway. However, the project will still be seen from the freeway. The applicant
has also provided photo simulations at the 10 year interval showing the existing
vegetation located adjacent to the freeway right-of-way. This vegetation also
assists in screening the proposed project more effectively.
2 VTTM 54081
2. A revised landscape plan showing trees, shrubs and vines in the planter areas
between the retaining walls which are adjacent to the property lines of the homes
on Crooked Creek Drive and Brea Canyon Flood Control Channel. The
landscape plan must show the following: ornamental evergreen trees at 24, 36
and 48 inch box sizes, planted 12 feet on center with 50 percent at 24 inch box,
25 percent at 36 inch box and 25 percent at 48 inch box; shrubs in 5 and 10
gallon sizes, planted 3 feet on center with 75 percent at 5 gallon size and 25
percent at 10 gallon size; and vines in 5 gallon size planted 5 feet on center.
The revised landscape plan reflects the above referenced plant sizes and
percentages for planter areas between the retaining walls which are adjacent to
the property lines of the homes on Crooked Creek Drive and Brea Canyon Flood
Control Channel. Additionally, a condition has been added to the resolution
reflecting these plant sizes, percentages and location.
3. Provide photographic and informational material on the geo-grid retaining wall
system. Explain the construction of the wall and how plant materials and
irrigation are integrated into a wall.
The applicant has provided structural details and information for a geo-grid lock
and load retaining wall for another project in the City of Thousand Oaks,
California and a typical section of this type of wall for the City of Diamond Bar.
Also provided are photographs of this type of wall with landscape areas between
a series of retaining walls.
Options:
The Planning Commission has the following options when considering this project. The
options are as follows:
1. Recommend approval to City Council of this project as presented to the
Planning Commission;
2. Recommend approval to City Council with additional conditions;
3. Recommend approval to City Council with the elimination of lots;
4. Direct the applicant to redesign the project; or
5. Recommend denial of the project to City Council.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the following to the City
Council: approval of Zone Change No. 2006-02 and Planned Development Overlay
District No. 2006-01, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
and Mitigation Monitoring Program and Vesting Tentative Map No. 54081, Conditional
VTTM 54081
Use Permit No. 2002-18, Variance No. 2006-02, Tree Permit No. 2002-13, Findings of
Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolutions to City Council.
4. ?A", �
Pr pared by.
Ann J. Lungu,
Associate Planner
Reviewed by:
Nancy Fong, AICP,
Community Development Director
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Zone Change No.
2002-02 and Planned Development Overlay District No. 2006-01;
2. Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of VTTM No.53430 and
adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
and Mitigation Monitoring Program;
3 Draft Resolution recommending to City Council approval of Conditional Use
Permit No. 2002-13, Variance No. 2006-02 and Tree Permit No. 2002-13 and
adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2006-03 (SCH #2006071129)
and Mitigation Monitoring Program;
4. Planning Commission Minutes dated December 12, 2006;
5. Planning Commission Staff Reports dated October 10, 2006 and November 28,
2006 and December 12, 2006;
6. SR 57 Freeway northbound view of VTTM 54081 from locations #2, #3 and #4
with present view, view after grading and after construction at 5 and 10 years;
7. Photos of geo-grid walls;
8. Structural details for geo-grid wall; and
9. Preliminary landscape plans with larger size plant materials.
4 VTTM 54081
RL ce
57,
N.
1:y
t
o
20
"�• wM � .t�se
7 •�� T'i�li ��
►Y VIEW OF TT 54081'' '
D LOCATION MAP r `'
ATTACHMENT */Z
I
F -mu Freeway 5-i'l at Locatio" No.2
l'Subiect property not visible)
1.�
1t
�°
��J
` leii from Freeway *57 at Location No.6
(Subject property not visible)
View from Freeway 57 at Location No.8 - - --
View from Freeway 57 at Location iv o.y - — -_
(Subject property not visible)
II
.... ... 3.4" ......
. . ........ 7,-.,'
ell
14,
Y,VIEW OFTT 540 •1\
O ON MAP
F View from Fwy 57 north bound from Location 2 after construction at 5 years
View from Ywy 57 north bound from Location 2 after construction at 10 years
View from Fwy 57 north bound from Location 3 at present view
view trom P wv 57 north bound from Location 3 after grading at 0 year
V
View from Fwy 57 north bound from Location 3 after construction at 5 years
View from Fwy 57 north bound from Location 3 after construction at 10 years'
View from Fwy 57 north bound from Location 4 after construction at 5 years
s + t OF R. Irw�
View from Fwy 57 north bound from Location 4 after construction at 10 years
'OVE
GaT�� CONC. CURB & GUTTER
18.86' - -- — - -- — v CROOKED O
CREEK
(67�L-— - ---- ---_ _ __. -- -- -
--- A TCH B A S I N o - -- -- -- ----- - -
JOIN EX /Ys TOR=662.26
FT - F/L =661.65 (F'UF3LIC P\/W) U
C6 N C. I -
rn SIDEWALK DRAINI-IN 7-
j
I
�; 2'989
I li i i
U
gq. 83 i I I
82 I
+ 80 79
I� o
CD
VIEW co
i
I.
i
- (LL
IrlCD
`` L
_V -
67a, o
�\ t tail --CUT
±35' HIGH ELEC.
/
PSG/
VAR.
LOT 80 i
TRACT 25989
X.
WALL
n LOT -80
SECTION VIEW 1/8' -V -o"
OT LINE SOUSE STRUCTURE
/ NOT VISIBLE LOT LINE
11
0 LU "1' - ti U
ELEVATION VIE1Y �/e'=t'—o^
VIEW FROM TRACT 25989
LOT -80
N N
'TATIVE
540$1
Lor 82
TfRACT 25,989
r--,,LOT-82
SECTION VIEW17. - -o'
_
/ `-EX. GRADE
GEO-GRID FABRIC SUPPORTED
RETAINING WALL
I,-LOT LINE
OUSE STRUCTURE
LOT LINE
i
n LOT -82
ELEVATION VMW
VIEW FROM TRACT 25989
LOT -82
B & GUTTER
CROOKED
(PUBLIC R/W)
w
cli
CREEK
0
O
Un Z
DR.
CHAIP
FEI
147 Z7,
p.,.,
J
�
�4 fi 1c f.
�\'�
�,��'�y•I,k x iF. +iN +�'. ry � ,
-06 .,
,'�! •. J. ,..
Y`. .. ..r .!'6%'`
�.
lk - V ..l ., i'Glt.4. w i ,.:: .., .1 r AR . :. i "..
�. ., w ..
i'�"
or t ► r�
44
V
ME
;arm CONC. CURB & GUTTER
CROOKED CREEK
(662, 0) & T C N BAS 1 N OCA
JOIN EY,. - 7, TOP=662.26 � C3
F/L=661.65 (PUBLIC R/W)
CON C.-------
`� SIDEWALK DRAIN
N
o
64 83 so 79
o wLTI
'i o
!nP
1
r
n 676.50 5P7�•
yn / oo
F
C• a tQ,J / I\ N 0 N
FILL
r \ 6 N 'AUT
_ PROPO.. FD CUktiC�1
`° �'�'�� 4.G8' �) �Z6,2Q 70;0.-- 700
�_
Current view at the rear of Lot 82
Artistic rendering from Lot 82 at five years
vr
B & GUTTER
CROOKED
(PUBLIC R/W)
CA
CREEK
' O
(J� Z
DR,
GHAII
FE
Artistic rendering from lot 79 2nd floor at 5 years
rxisting wail
Artistic rendering from lot 79 2nd floor at 10 years
Artistic rendering from lot 82 2
nd floor at 5 years
Artistic rendering from lot 82 2nd floor at 10 years
C.l•�� � '�.r}'1
I t -j
Agenda # g ,1
Meeting Date: February 20, 2007
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
tfilling
FROM: James DeStefano, City Mana
TITLE: Procedure and discussion fory ouncil vacancy.
RECOMMENDATION:
Discuss options and take action and /or direct staff accordingly.
BACKGROUND:
While the City Council and community mourn the loss of Council member Bob Zirbes, the City
Council is required by law to fill the vacancy created by his passing. This report briefly sets forth the
procedures contained in the California Government Code governing the filling of a midterm vacancy
on the City Council and the available options for the Council to consider.
The Council may chose to appoint or call for an election. The Council has thirty days from the date of
the vacancy in which to take one of three available actions. The City Council must fill the vacancy or
call for an election by March 10, 2007 or, by law, the vacancy shall be filled by special election at the
next regularly established election date (November 6, 2007).
Council options are as follows:
1. The Council may appoint someone to fill the remainder of the term (i.e. to November 2009).
2. The Council may appoint someone to serve only until a special election is held. The
regulations to conduct a special election indicate that the next opportunity to conduct an
election is November 6, 2007. The appointed person would be eligible to run in the election.
The person elected in November 2007 would serve out the remainder of the term (i.e. two
years, until November 2009).
3. The Council may, in lieu of an appointment as per #2 above, call a special election to fill the
vacancy. Council may call the special election, which must be held in November 2007, and the
person elected would fill the remainder of the term (i.e. until November 2009).
Appointment
1. The Council has thirty (30) days from the date of the vacancy (February 8, 2007) to complete
the selection process. The last regular Council meeting prior to the deadline is March 6, 2007.
A decision must be reached by March 10, 2007. The City Council may conduct public
meetings as often as necessary to discuss the options and determine an appropriate course of
action.
2. As stated above, the Council may appoint someone to fill the remainder of the term (November
2009) or only until the election date in November 2007.
3. Councilmember Huff's election to the Assembly in November 2004 resulted in the need to
consider available options to fill the remainder of his term. With sufficient time to prepare, the
Council solicited interest from citizens, conducted interviews, discussed options and ultimately
determined to call for a June 2005 special election. There is no requirement for the City
Council to advertise the current vacancy, receive interest/applications from citizens and
conduct a similar selection process as used previously for the appointment. The City Council
may simply select a citizen and appoint by majority vote.
Election
If the City Council prefers to conduct a special election the Council may also simply call for the
November 6, 2007 election during the remaining time period (through March 10, 2007) without
engaging in an appointment/selection process.
The Council should review and discuss the available options and commence a process to fill the
vacancy. The Council may take action tonight or continue the discussion to an adjourned meeting or
the next regular meeting of March 6, 2007.
Jas
2