The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01/10/2006PLANNING "`E`°`° COMMISSION AGENDA January 10, 2006 7:00 P.M. South Coast Air Quality Management District Government Center Building - Auditorium 21865 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA Chairman Vice Chairman Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Joe McManus Ruth M. Low Kwang Ho Lee Dan Nolan Tony Torng Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Planning Division of the Dept. of Community & Development Services, located at 21825 Copley Drive, and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please call (909) 839-7030 during regular business hours. In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title I/ 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 Department of Community & Development Services at (909) 839-7030 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Please refrain from smoking, eating or The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper drinking in the Auditorium and encourages you to do the same City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission MEETING RULES PUBLIC INPUT The meetings of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission are open to the public. A member of the public may address the Commission on the subject of one or more agenda items and/or other items of which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission. A request to address the Commission should be submitted in writing at the public hearing, to the Secretary of the Commission. As a general rule, the opportunity for public comments will take place at the discretion of the Chair. However, in order to facilitate the meeting, persons who are interested parties for an item may be requested to give their presentation at the time the item is called on the calendar. The Chair may limit individual public input to five minutes on any item; or the Chair may limit the total amount of time allocated for public testimony based on the number of people requesting to speak and the business of the Commission. Individuals are requested to conduct themselves in a professional and businesslike manner. Comments and questions are welcome so that all points of view are considered prior to the Commission making recommendations to the staff and City Council. In accordance with State Law (Brown Act), all matters to be acted on by the Commission must be posted at least 72 hours prior to the Commission meeting. In case of emergency or when a subject matter arises subsequent to the posting of the agenda, upon making certain findings, the Commission may act on item that is not on the posted agenda. INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COMMISSION Agendas for Diamond Bar Planning Commission meetings are prepared by the Planning Division of the Community and Development Services Department. Agendas are available 72 hours prior to the meeting at City Hall and the public library, and may be accessed by personal computer at the number below. Every meeting of the Planning Commission is recorded on cassette tapes and duplicate tapes are available for a nominal charge. ADA REQUIREMENTS A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot access the public speaking area. The service of the cordless microphone and sign language interpreter services are available by giving notice at least three business days in advance of the meeting. Please telephone (909) 839-7030 between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday, and 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Friday. HELPFUL PHONE NUMBERS Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Commission, Cassette Tapes of Meetings (909) 839-7030 General Agendas (909) 839-7030 email: info@ci.diamond-bar.ca.us CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 10, 2006 AGENDA CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. Next Resolution No. 2006-01 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Joe McManus, Vice - Chairman Ruth M. Low, Dan Nolan, Kwang Ho Lee, Tony Torng 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is the time and place for the general public to address the members of the Planning Commission on any item that is within their jurisdiction, allowing the public an opportunity to speak on non-public hearing and non -agenda items. Please complete a SDeaker's Card for the recording Secretary (Completion of this form is voluntary.) There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressing the Planning Commission. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chairman 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following items listed on the consent calendar are considered routine and are approved by a single motion. Consent calendar items may be removed from the agenda by request of the Commission only. 4.1 Minutes of Study Session: December 13, 2005. 4.2 Minutes of Regular Meeting: December 13, 2005. 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None 7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7.1 Tentative Tract Map No. 53430/Zone Change No. 2005-03/Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01 [Variance 2005-03/Tree Permit No. 2005-10 — In accordance to the Subdivision Map Act, City's Subdivision Ordinance—Title 21 and Development Code—Title 22, Sections 22.70, 22.58, 22.22, 22.54 and 22.38) is a request to subdivide approximately 80 acres into 48 single-family JANUARY 10, 2006 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION residential lots for the eventual development of single-family custom homes. The Zone Change is related to changing the existing zoning from R-1-20,000 to Rural Residential (RR). The Conditional Use Permit is related to grading and development within a hillside area. The Variance is related to retaining walls that are proposed at a height greater than six feet. The Tree Permit is related to the removal/ replacement/ protection of oak and walnut trees. (Continued from December 13, 2005) Project Address: Directly south of Rocky Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive and west of Horizon Lane, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Property Owner/ Millennium Enterprises, Mr. John Bostick, 3731 Wilshire Applicant: Blvd., Suite 850, Los Angeles CA 90010 Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required for this project. An EIR (SCH #2003052202) was prepared and was available for public review from August 20, 2004, through October 4, 2004. The Planning Commission will also consider the certification of the final EIR on December 13, 2005. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the following to the City Council: Certification of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH#2003052202) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 53430, Zone Change No. 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03, Tree Permit No. 2005-10, Statement of overriding Consideration, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval listed within the attached Resolutions. 8. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 8.1 Conditional Use Permit 2005-04/Development Review No. 2005-23 — In accordance to Code Sections 22.42, 22.58, and 22.48 - this is a request to install a wireless telecommunications facility with antennas mounted on the roof -top concealed by the fagade and mansard roof and equipment cabinets in retail suite. The Development Review relates to architectural/design review for the replacement of faux stucco and roofing materials. Project Address: 1155 Diamond Bar Boulevard Property Owner/ Diamond Bar Town Center, LLC, Pacific West Asset Mgmt. Applicant: 3191-D Airport Loop Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 JANUARY 10, 2006 4 10 11. PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15301(b), the City has determined that this project is Categorically Exempt. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 2005-04/Development Review No. 2005-23, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS / INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: STAFF COMMENTS I INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 10.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. 10.2 Status of approved projects. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: HOLIDAY TREE CURBSIDE December 26, 2005 through January 13, COLLECTION PROGRAM: 2006. Trees free of decorations may be left at the curb for free pickup during this period. NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC Tuesday, January 10, 2006 — 7:00 p.m. MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (for neighborhoods of Cameron Crest Dr./ MEETING: Maple Spring. Dr., and Golden Prados Dr./ Sabana Dr. along north side of Golden Springs. Dr) Diamond Bar Community Center Pine Room, 1600 Grand Ave. CITY COUNCIL MEETING: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 - 6:30 p.m. SCAQMD/Government Center Auditorium 21865 Copley Drive PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, - January 24, 2006 MEETING: SCAQMD/Government Center Auditorium 21865 Copley Drive PUBLIC WORKS Thursday, January 12, 2006 COMMISSION MEETING: SCAQMD/Government Center Hearing Board Room — 21865 Copley Drive STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS: January 12,2006-6:00 p.m., Diamond Bar Center, 1600 Grand Ave. JANUARY 10, 2006 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM MEETING: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING: 12. ADJOURNMENT: PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION Thursday, January 19, 2006 — 7:00 p.m. (for neighborhoods of Armitos PI., between Pantera Dr. and Top Ct. and Pantera Dr. between Armitos PI. and Bowcreek Dr.), Diamond Bar Community Center Pine Room, 1600 Grand Ave Thursday, January 26, 2006 SCAQMD/Government Center Hearing Board Room — 21865 Copley Drive MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION DECEMBER 13, 2005 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman McManus called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m. Room CC -2 of the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center Building, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765. Information regarding TTM 53430 (Stanley Cheung Project) 1. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Joe McManus, Vice Chairperson Ruth Low, and Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee and Tony Torng. Commissioner Dan Nolan was excused. Also present: Nancy Fong, Interim Community Development Director; Gregg Kovacevich, Assistant City Attorney; Ann Lungu, Associate Planner and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant. A. Information Regarding TTM 53430 (Stanley Cheung Project) ICDD/Fong gave a brief overview of the proposed project and introduced John Bostick, Millennium Enterprises who introduced his team and gave a slide presentation depicting the layout of the project located directly south of Rocky Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive and west of Horizon Lane. Mr. Bostick responded to Chair/McManus that in general the lots are one -acre 20,000 square foot flat pads, well above or more than the minimum density requirement. Mr. Bostick explained that the lift station for servicing the sewer system would be funded by the homeowners' association. The majority of the retaining walls were eliminated by improved grading techniques. However, there are a couple of areas of concern that may have to be addressed if the applicant were unable to negotiate the easement for grading. Mr. Bostick stated that Millennium Enterprises held one meeting with the residents along Alamo Heights, one meeting with "The Country Estates " Homeowners' Association and one meeting with the City. Three to four homeowners attended each of the meetings and Dr. Wu, Professor of Architecture asked to provide his expertise to the project regarding grading and other architectural features. Mr. Bostick said he believed that the architectural features agreed upon between the applicant and staff would serve to mitigate the view of the walls. He showed examples of walls that Millennium intends to use. The walls include features such as composite rock that is natural to the area, planters and DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION irrigation lines. He explained how the cut and fill would be done to accommodate the correct ratio roadways. ICDD/Fong responded to comments made by Dr. Wu. Regarding the sensitive nature of the area as a habitat for wildlife, while true of hillside areas the EIR addressed that concern and recommended on-site and off-site mitigation. With respect to traffic, the project has a completed traffic study and the EIR indicated no impact because the number of trips generated by one -acre lots would be insignificant. The third comment was regarding slope stability and most certainly this was a major concern for the City of Diamond Bar. The soils experts indicated that slope stability mitigation be accepted as indicated in the EIR. Additionally, the Los Angeles Fire Department reviewed the EIR and recommended a few modifications including a recommendation that all houses would require sprinklers and that the access meet the requirements. Drainage, sewer and other like issues have also been addressed and installation and ongoing maintenance will be paid through homeowner association dues assessment along with other required fees. VC/Low asked for a status of the negotiations with the Alamo Heights property owners with regard to the grading. ICDD/Fong said that a few property owners were present for the neighborhood meeting to review the easement proposal. Staff believes that the proposal offers a win-win for the residents because it would result in re -grading and landscaping the rear slopes. VC/Low asked if the proposed 26 foot high retaining wall along Alamo Heights was accurate and ICDD/Fong and AssocP/Lungu responded that only certain sections of the retaining wall might reach a maximum height of 26 feet. Mr. Bostick pointed out a very small section at the low point that would reach 26 feet in height and the existing residences would remain above the 26 -foot wall. Mr. Bostick assured VC/Low that even with Planning Commission approval he was very financially motivated to pursue the easement with the landowners. If the landowners approved the easement there would be no need for a variance from the Planning Commission. Tom Smith of BonTerra Consulting, the City's Environmental Consultant, explained to VC/Low that levels of service calculations for traffic flow do not apply to private driveways. Traffic engineering reports are related to public streets only. Mr. Bostick said he believed the homeowner was more concerned about construction traffic. VC/Low explained her concern that residents in "The Country Estates" had increased to the point of reconsideration and wondered if there was anything that could be done to mitigate the traffic inside "The Country Estates." Mr. Bostick explained that it was an association problem that could be addressed through the annexation process. ICDD/Fong explained that the primary reason fortraffic backup DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION during peak hours was a result of the security checking process and felt that the association should work with the City's traffic engineer to provide an improved access. C/Lee spoke about traffic and noise pollution problems in the City as a result of additional building. He disagreed with the EIR finding in Item 212.5 on page 16 entitled "Population Housing Description." Many residents believe that building more houses brings a significant impact to the City's traffic. How was it that the General Plan anticipated a population increase and by what standard did the engineer determine there would not be a significant impact on the City's traffic movements. Mr. Smith explained that in CEQA when impact determinations are made a "significant stretch threshold" is used as a basis for whether an impact is or is not significant. The way these analyses are done is by using the General Plan as a trigger for whether or not new projects "trigger" significant impacts on the current conditions. If the project requires an amendment to the General Plan it means that the project was not fully anticipated in the General Plan and it would therefore cause an impact that the General Plan did not anticipate. The City's General Plan allows this project; there is no proposed General Plan Amendment. Therefore, the property can be built as anticipated under the City's existing General Plan. Mr. Lee explained that every developer has indicated that there are no significant impacts to traffic. However, he has observed what he believes to be significant impacts to traffic since he moved to Diamond Bar 14 years ago. Chair/McManus explained that he was involved in the writing of the General Plan and learned that most of the City's traffic problems were caused by cut -through traffic. Mr. Smith stated that when the City approved the General Plan additional projects were included in the consideration and to date, the City has not exceeded the projects that were included and contemplated in the approved General Plan. What the Planning Commission needs to address are infrastructure changes that would help mitigate unrelated traffic issues. Mr. Bostick explained that as a matter of due diligence, applicants such as Millennium Enterprises discuss the General Plan with staff and its planners. In this case, the applicant has done everything possible to remain within the boundaries of the General Plan. C/Lee said he understood the General Plan but was concerned about the impact to the residents. ICDD/Fong explained that the project was well within the density called out in the General Plan. The benefit to the City is thatthis development would increase property value and the improvements would result in additional property tax to the City. Chair/McManus reiterated that the project was within the guidelines DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 4 TA PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION of the City's General Plan and the Planning Commission was charged with land use issues only. "The Country Estates" needs to address their ingress/egress issues. Mr. Bostick further explained that the project is actually at 60 percent of the density called out in the City's General Plan. Mr. Bostick responded to VC/Low that there were several small faults in the area that were not considered to be active faults. C/Torng asked how long the project would take and Mr. Bostick responded that the grading would take six to nine months. Mr. Smith explained to VC/Low that if the Commission approved the project a landscape plan would be done to determine where trees should be placed to allow for maturity. Some of the manufactured slopes may not be appropriate for a large number of trees. In addition, there would be a number of off-site tree replacements. Some of the oaks are within jurisdictions where the replacement is as high as 10:1 or higherfor example. The actual numberwill not be known until the permit process is completed. In short, it was acknowledged from the beginning of the discussions that there would be many more trees called out for mitigation than this site could accommodate. Fish and Game supersedes the City's requirement. VC/Low asked why Lot A was reduced from 11 to under eight acres. Mr. Smith explained that the original tract map design included a park -like setting and a recreated riparian system protected by retaining walls. The current design put that area in a pipe and on the surface there are other water quality features but it is not intended to be habitat. The present design achieves all of the storm water goals of the previous design but no agency would have accepted the riparian area as mitigation because it was totally recreated and would have been a huge expense for the homeowners to maintain with very little real benefit. The current project offers real environmental values. Mr. Smith explained to VC/Low that the biologists walked every inch of the property and mapped it. The report contains a detailed report in GIS mapping with detailed maps that were prepared on-site and entered into the computer. The maps included all of the various habitats. Also, every tree on the site met the City's standards for its Tree Ordinance (8" in cumulative diameter). All trees were tagged with metal tags that contain GPS coordinates, the type of tree, height, width, quality, etc. In addition, the drainage was mapped and no Fish and Game riparian jurisdiction was established outside of the drainage corridor. Very little actual wildlife usage was determined to be on the property. Wildlife traverses Tonner Canyon. Even though the property is owned by the City of Industry the property outside the City boundary is owned by Los Angeles and Tonner Canyon was designated as a significant ecological area. DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair/McManus adjourned the study session at 6:59 p.m. to the regular meeting. Respectfully Submitted, Nancy Fong Interim Community Development Director Attest: Joe McManus, Chairman MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 13, 2005 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman McManus called the meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Lee led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Joe McManus, Vice Chairperson Ruth Low and Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee and Tony Torng. Commissioner Dan Nolan was excused. Also present: Nancy Fong, Interim Community Development Director; Gregg Kovacevich, Assistant City Attorney; Ann Lungu, Associate Planner, Linda K. Smith, Development Services Associate and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of the Study Session of November 8, 2005, VC/Low moved, C/Torng seconded to approve the Minutes of the November 8, 2005, Study Session as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Low, Torng, Lee NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/McManus ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 4.2 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 8, 2005. C/Torng moved, VC/Low seconded to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 8, 2005, as changed by C/Torng. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Torn, VC/Low, Lee NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/McManus ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7.1 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2005-07 - In accordance with Code Section 22.48, this was a request to construct an approximate 10,650 gross square foot three-story single-family residence with balconies, six car garage and site retaining walls to a maximum six-foot height. PROJECT ADDRESS: PROPERTY OWNER: 2729 Steeplechase Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Alfred and Kuolin Yui 1330 Red Bluff Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 APPLICANT: Andy Wang 14658 E. Valley Boulevard Industry, CA 91746 DSA/Smith presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. 2005-07, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. Andy Wang said he and the applicant read staff's report and concurred with the conditions of approval. DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION Chair/McManus opened the public hearing. With no one present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/McManus closed the public hearing. VC/Low moved, C/Lee seconded to approve Development Review No. 2005-07, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Low, Lee, Torng, Chair/McManus NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan 7.2 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2004-11(1) - In accordance with Code Section 22.66.060(2), this was a request to modify the architectural style of an approved structure that would house an indoor swimming pool. The Planning Commission approved the single-family residence and swimming pool structure on July 13, 2004. PROJECT ADDRESS: PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT: 2601 Wagon Train Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Li Zhao 1066 Iron Shoe Court Walnut, CA 91789 AssocP/Lungu presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. 2004-11(1), Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. AssocP/Lungu responded to C/Torng that the neighbor might be able to see a small portion of the structure because it was higher than the tennis court fencing by about five feet. Neighbors on either side may be able to see the structure and that is why staff asked for additional landscaping to mitigate the view. Such enclosures are common to `The Country Estates" as well as other areas of Diamond Bar. Ed Wilbur, California Custom Sunrooms, explained that the patio was a full glass enclosure with fully insulated low E "Smart Glass 90" dual pane vinyl windows and wall panels. DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION Mr. Wilbur confirmed to Chair/McManus that the roof skylights open to eliminate fogging and the front contains operable windows. Chair/McManus opened the public hearing. With no one present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/McManus closed the public hearing. C/Torng moved, C/Lee seconded, to approve Development Review No. 2004-11(1), Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Torng, Lee, VC/Low, Chair/McManus NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan 7.3 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2005-39, MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005-15 AND TREE PERMIT NO. 2005-11 - In accordance with Code Section 22.48, 22.68, 22.56 and 22.38, this was a request to remodel and construct approximately 6,446 gross square feet to an existing 3,392 square foot single family residence with a five car garage, site retaining walls with a maximum exposed height of seven (7) feet, and swimming pool. Additionally, the applicant requested Minor Conditional Use Permit approval to allow the continuation of a legal non -conforming 22-footfront yard setback and Tree Permit for the removal and replacement of preserved/protected trees. PROJECT ADDRES: PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: 2601 Wagon Train Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Karambir S. Bhullar 2601 Wagon Train Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Ron Whittier 2512 Cedar Ridge Lane Corona, CA 92881 DSA/Smith presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. 2005-39, Minor Conditional Use Permit DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION No. 2005-15 and Tree Permit No. 2005-11, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. VC/Low asked if DSA/Smith was comfortable with the Arborists' report since it was dated December 2, 2002, and DSA/Smith responded affirmatively because nothing had changed at the site. C/Torng asked why the applicant had landscaped to the street and DSA/Smith explained that "The Country Estates" homeowner's property line runs to the centerline of the existing street. Ronald Whittier, applicant, stated that he and Dr. Bhullar read staff's report and concurred with the conditions of approval and Dr. Bhullar would like to move forward with the project. Chair/McManus opened the public hearing. Ron Everett, Rocky Trail, said he had safety concerns during construction about the setback because the easterly garage was close to a turn. He felt that all construction vehicles and equipment should be kept off the street. He asked that the new garage be set back as far as possible from Wagon Train. He said he supports the project. He would like to see low landscape in the front yard area so that it would not impede visibility for vehicle travel on Wagon Train. He said he was also concerned about view protection because his view would be invaded by the project. He also requested that no second stories be allowed on the garages. ICDD/Fong responded that the traffic engineer reviewed the plans and made no comment that there was a safety issue. The new garage sits back further than the existing building and is short only by a foot and three-quarters from the 30 -foot setback. Regarding the landscaping, a condition could be placed upon the project requiring that landscaping within the front yard should be low level shrubs and that trees should be moved back closer to the building. She again stated that the City does not have a view preservation ordinance that would require applicants to conduct a study on view sheds. C/Lee moved, C/Torng seconded, to approve Development Review No. 2005-39, Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-15 and Tree Permit No. 2005-11, Findings of Fact, and Conditions of Approval as listed in the resolution subject to the addition of a condition requiring shrubbery in the DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION front yard setback to be low-level. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Torng, VC/Low, Chair/McManus NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan 7.4 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 53430, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2005-03, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-01, VARIANCE 2005-03 AND TREE PERMIT NO. 2005-10 - In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, City's Subdivision Ordinance — Title 21 and Development Code — Title 22, Sections 22.70, 22.58, 22.22, 22.54 and 22.38, this was a request to subdivide approximately 80 acres into 48 single-family residential lots for the eventual development of single-family custom homes. The Zone Change is related to changing the existing zoning from R-1-20,000 to Rural Residential (RR). The Conditional Use Permit was related to grading and development within a hillside area. The Variance was related to retaining walls that were proposed at a height greater than six feet. The Tree Permit was related to the removal/re placement/protection of oak and walnut trees. PROJECT ADDRESS: Directly south of Rocky Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive, and west of Horizon Lane, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER/ John Bostick APPLICANT: Millennium Enterprises 3731 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 850 Los Angeles, CA 90010 AssocP/Lungu presented staff s report and recommended that the Planning Commission recommend the following to the City Council: Certification of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH#2003052202) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 53430, Zone Change No. 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03, Tree Permit No. 2005-10, Statement of Overriding Consideration, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the Resolutions. DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION VC/Low asked when the amount of contributions toward a park would be determined and ICDD/Fong responded that typically, the amount is handled prior to issuance of permits based on the appraised value of the proposed project. TCDD/Fong explained that the pad sizes are about an acre and in this particular zone the lot coverage is 30 percent so that there is less infringement into the natural slope (restricted) areas. This project as in the case of all projects within "The Country Estates" requires homeowners' association approval. John Bostick, Millennium Diamond Road Partners, showed a copy of the Tentative Tract Map provided by property owner Jerry Yeh, showed a photo of the proposed site and 3-D depictions of the completed project. He explained the proposal in detail and showed the location of the streets and proposed lots on the other side of Horizon Lane. He stated that the applicant is working with the Alamo Heights residents to obtain a slope easement in order to eliminate the retaining wall required by the construction of Alamo Heights Drive. VC/Low asked for further comment on the EIR with respect to wildlife. Tom Smith, BonTerra Consulting, explained to VC/Low how the project does not impede habitat and wildlife corridors. The finger canyons off of the ridgeline of "The Country Estates" provide some opportunity for wildlife to move back and forth from Tonner Canyon into the side canyons a bit. However, there are no actual connections for wildlife movement in the area - He said that his staff spent several days mapping the entire site and surveyed every tree on the site that met the City's Tree Ordinance standards. The conclusion was that the loss of the trees and the habitat could be mitigated was based on compliance for the City's Tree Ordinance and requirements for recreating the habitat and replacing the appropriate number of trees onsite and offsite. In addition, the biological surveys determined that the Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Fish and Game as well as the Regional Water Quality Control Board have jurisdiction on this property relating to the drainage. Permits will be obtained from those agencies and all mitigation required by those agencies will be satisfied as required before the City's issuance of a grading permit for development of the site. As with any project in the City and as required by CEQA, there is a five-year mitigation monitoring system in place during implementation of the project. DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION In response to VC/Low, Mr. Bostick stated that staff met with "The Country" Homeowners' Association regarding approval and future construction of the project and agreed to work with the association regarding hours of operation. He said he speaks with Steve Solis, President of the association at least twice a week about the project. The access to the construction site is through Alamo Heights. The current anticipated value of the project upon completion is $1.1 million per lot. Mr. Smith explained to C/Lee that the animals would move out of the area once the grading began. As previously mentioned, the 70 acres of development is a very small area in comparison to the over 1000 acres in the Tonner Canyon significant ecological area and biological resources area. Any animals on the site will move on their own out into other areas and most especially Tonner Canyon. For small animals with low mobility, the mitigation monitoring program requires biological monitors to be placed on-site before the first piece of equipment starts to move. This process has taken place in Diamond Bar and other cities for many years. The biologists move rattlesnakes, small lizards and other animals that are unable to get out of the way of the equipment. The most valuable place for animals is in Tonner Canyon and not on this project site because the site is surrounded on three sides by other development. The mitigation program requires that the acres of habitat be recreated offsite under the watchful eye of a five-year monitoring program. At the request of C/Torng Mr. Bostick explained that the park fees are determined after approval and engineering. The appraisal is based upon the finished product and Millennium is prepared to pay the park fees for the 8.9 - acres. James Claude, Neblitt Associates, engineering consultant for the project, stated that his firm follows state, county and city guidelines as well as industry standards for slope stability calculations, seismic hazards analysis and other geotechnical analyses. Mr. Smith confirmed to Chair/McManus that a wildlife habitat is open at both ends and one that is not is often referred to as a mortality sink for the animals. VC/Low asked if Mr. Bostick was comfortable with the City's fees and Mr. Bostick confirmed that he was. DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION Chair/McManus opened the public hearing. Bill Liu, 2855 Bentley Way, said that if this procedure requires Crystal Ridge HOA to be involved it should have input into the project. He asked whether the City required approval from the Crystal Ridge HOA. ICDD/Fong responded that this project asked to annex into "The Country Estates." The Crystal Ridge HOA is a separate association and cannot ask the City to require that this project be annexed into `The Country Estates" Homeowners Association because the City merely grants the entitlement and does not regulate whether an association annexes into "The Country Estates." Therefore, this is a private matter between Crystal Ridge and "The Country Estates." Mr. Liu responded to C/Torng that the Crystal Ridge homeowners are confined to using the Steeplechase entry only. Ron Everett, Rocky Trail Road, stated that this was a complex and very good project and that the community engineering was a major problem. He appealed to the Commissioners to devise a way to make sure that the matter of homeowner association relationships were established prior to completion of this project. The developer and "The Country Estates" are in continuing discussions but there are other issues that need to be resolved. He said he was concerned about three or four associations involved in sharing roads that would create "human- interest" concerns. ICDD/Fong said that for tonight's meeting the advertisement was for entitlement of this project and not to discuss the association concerns. David Leong, Kicking Horse Drive (adjacent to the proposed Alamo Heights) asked the applicant to reiterate the height and length of the wall along Alamo Heights. He wanted to know if it was true that the homeowners on Kicking Horse Drive were legally obliged to grant easement for half of the width of Alamo Heights. The creek running along Alamo Heights that accommodates animals is not referred to in the EIR. TCDD/Fong responded that the property has a 40 -foot easement, a drainage easement and a maintenance easement. If the applicant stays within the 40 -foot easement they would have to construct a retaining wall in order to build Alamo Heights, If built, the wall would extend the length of eight homes and the wall could range from 0 to 26 feet at its highest point. The applicant showed plans that depicted how the retaining wall and landscaping would appear. If the eight property owners DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION granted a grading easement of about 50 feet in width the applicant could use the entire 90 feet for grading a 2:1 gradual slope to meet the height of the street and avoid building the retaining wall. If the additional 50 -foot easement were granted it would provide more of a natural landscape. The applicant has proposed an underground box for the water flow with catch basins and drains. Tom Smith referred the speaker to pages 3.3-11 and subsequent pages as well as Figure 3.3-1 that showed the location of the drainages and talked about the wildlife and habitat values in the area. It is true that there is runoff in the creek now and it is his belief that a lot of the runoff is "nuisance" water from irrigation on the surrounding development. As indicated, the water will continue to pass beneath the surface of the site and ultimately discharge into Tonner Canyon at approximately the same location that it discharges today as required by the City and by the regulatory agencies. ICDD/Fong responded to Mr. Leon that Alamo Heights has a certain grade. The approval of the Jerry Yeh subdivision extended Alamo Heights and established certain grades requiring gradual grade reduction of the extension. The retaining wall concept is to hold up the street because of the significant drop in the elevations in a short span of roadway. Staff would prefer to have the applicant grade the slopes at the back of the homes to create a gentle slope that rises to meet the street and not require the high retaining wall. Dr. Hofu Wu, licensed architect and Fellow of the American Institute of Architects, 22368 Kicking Horse, felt that with all of the requirements placed on the project it was not an insignificant impact to the EIR, that there would be a vast amount of cut and fill and that the pads would actually be at 50 percent lot coverage and not 30 percent. He offered what he felt was a better solution to the proposed retaining wall that he believed would be 600 feet long rather than the 100 feet previously indicated. Fred Guido, 7530 Rocky Trail Road, said he did not have an opportunity to look at the EIR. He asked what size, types of motors and sound suppression would be implemented for the sewage pump station located at the cul-de-sac joining Rocky Trail Road; asked for a definition of a Statement of Overriding Consideration as it related to grading; and whether grading would be confined to the City of Diamond Bar or infringe on L.A. County property and whether that possibility was taken into consideration during the preparation of the EIR. He asked if Rocky Trail Road would be used as an access road during the course of construction and what requirements/mitigation measures/conditions were placed on the project to keep access streets clean DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION and free of muddy debris. He said that in his opinion, the City should be developing this project in accordance with the contours of the land because Crystal Ridge turned into a cookie cutter box -style housing tract and the houses are out of character with the general setting of "The Country Estates." ICDD/Fong responded that staff was unaware of the size of the pump and that it would be reviewed by LA County. The pump will be housed in a structure to minimize noise pollution and should not impact the residents. Additionally, the pump was located close to the southern boundary of the project site and not any where near the cul-de-sac of Rocky Trail. Through CEQA and the EIR process if all impacts have been identified and can be mitigated to a point of "less than significant" the project can move forward. However, if one impact exceeds that standard a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted in order for the EIR to be certified and for the project to be approved. In this case the only impact at issue is PM10 that deals with the inability to meet the air quality standards during construction. Once the project is completed there are no long-term impacts at issue. ICDD/Fong said she was unable to discuss regional air quality matters because they were not City of Diamond Bar issues. With respect to grading, the EIR reviewed the project within the project boundary only. The city, county, state and Water Quality Board have regulations regarding dust, mud and debris (NPDS) and the developer must make certain that no mud and debris washes into the drainage system. During grading water trucks are set in operation to mitigate dust impact to surrounding residences. The variance is for the height of several retaining walls. Staff has been working with the applicant to reduce the number and height of the retaining walls. Staffs preference is for the applicant to work with the adjacent neighbors so that there would be no retaining wall along Alamo Heights. VC/Low said she visited the project site today and found it to be ambitious and the views breathtaking. She felt that Mr. Wu's recommendations while not necessarily better than those of the applicant were worthy of consideration. She said she was concerned that if the Variance were granted today there would be no incentive for the applicant to continue negotiating with the landowners for the easement. VC/Low moved that the hearing be continued to January 10, 2006, to allow the applicant time to obtain permission from the remaining landowners for the easement. C/Torng seconded the motion. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Low, Torng, Lee, Chair/McManus NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan 8. PLANNING COMMSSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: VC/Low wished staff and residents Happy Holidays and a Merry Christmas. C/Lee said that Mr. Smith did a very good job explaining the project and answering his questions but he was still concerned that although the City's population had doubled since 1980 the streets had not been widened. The Millennium project is only for 48 houses but it does increase the population which in turn increases pollution, traffic and adverse conditions. He would prefer to see the project discussed as a private matter with a more detailed discussion at the next meeting. C/Torng thanked the developer, staff and the consultant for their presentations. He said Happy Holidays to everyone including his fellow Commissioners. Chair/McManus wished everyone a Merry Christmas. 9. STAFF COMMENTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. ICDD/Fong reminded the Commissioners that the December 27, 2005, meeting was canceled due to lack of quorum. TCDD/Fong reported that at its December 6, 2005, meeting the City Council approved the Country Hills Towne Center project with additional conditions. CM/Lowry and the City Council are considering economic development for the City and are looking at several sites. The Mayor may request an Economic Development Task Force and may ask two members of the Planning Commission to participate. ICDD/Fong responded to VC/Low that at the December 6, 2005, Council meeting Mr. McCarthy expressed that he would most likely be signing an agreement to bring a market to his shopping center within 10 days. 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in tonight's agenda. DECEMBER 13, 2005 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, VC/Low adjourned the meeting at 10:06 p.m. to January 10, 2006. Respectfully Submitted, Nancy Fong Interim Community Development Director Attest: Joe McManus, Chairman PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT 21825 COPLEY DRIVE—DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 --TEL (909) 839 -7030 -FAX (909) 861-3117—www.Cityofdiamondbar.com AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 1�- l MEETING DATE: January 10, 2006 REPORT DATE: January 3, 2006 CASEXILE NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-04/Development Review No. 2005-23 PROJECT LOCATION: 1155 Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (APN: 8713-031-010) APPLICATION REQUEST: A request to install a wireless telecommunications facility with antenna mounted on the rooftop concealed by the facade and mansard roof and equipment cabinets in a second story retail suite. The Development Review relates to architectural/design review for the replacement of faux stucco and roofing materials. PROPERTY OWNER: Diamond Bar Town Center, LLC, via Pacific West Asset Management, 3191-D Airport Loop Drive, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 APPLICANT: Cingular Wireless, MMI Titan, Danielle Brandenburg, 12900 5th Floor- Park Plaza Drive, Cerritos, CA 90703 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve CUP 05-04/DR 05-23 PAGE 1 BACKGROUND: The property owner, Diamond Bar Town Center, LLC, via Pacific West Asset Management, and applicant, Cingular Wireless, MMI Titan, Danielle Brandenburg, request Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-04 and Development Review No. 2005-23 to install a wireless telecommunications facility with antenna mounted on the rooftop concealed by the facade and mansard roof with the equipment cabinets in a second story retail suite. The Development Review relates to architectural/design review for the replacement of faux stucco and roofing materials. The commercial project site is near the corner of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Grand Avenue behind the Jack in the Box. The commercial lot is approximately 53,900 square feet in size and is irregularly shaped with an existing two-story commercial building completed in 1986. This building and the five adjacent businesses have reciprocal access and parking agreements. The Cingular wireless communication equipment installation will provide voice, e-mail and Internet access capabilities for Cingular Wireless customers. Cingular Wireless, formally know as Pacific Bell Mobile Services and Pacific Bell Wireless, was established in 1994 as the wireless subsidiary of Pacific Bell, now currently SBC. The new Cingular Wireless includes ATT Wireless and is currently expanding its network for needed coverage since the previous Cingular network was transferred to T -Mobile. ANALYSIS: A. Applications and Review Authority Rooftop telecommunication installations require Planning Commission Conditional Use Permit approval per Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Sections 22.42.130 and 22.58. The Development Review approval also requires Planning Commission approval for the architectural/design review of the faux stucco and roofing material replacement per DBMC 22.48. The City's development standards for wireless telecommunication antenna facilities were adopted in 1999. The purpose is to insure that the design and location of telecommunications antenna and its related facilities are consistent with the adopted policies, which require the aesthetic appearance of the wireless facilities be unobtrusive and not unsightly to protect property values. These processes establish consistency with the General Plan through the promotion of high aesthetic and functional standards to complement the City's economic, physical, and social character. The process ensures that the proposed project's development yields a pleasant living environment for the residents and visitors as the result of consistent exemplary design. CUP 05-04/DR 05-23 PAGE 2 B. Site and Surrounding Uses General Plan designation - General Commercial (C) Zoning - Unlimited Commercial -Billboard Exclusion (C -3 -BE) Surrounding Zones and Uses — to the north and west is the Unlimited Multiple Residence -Minimum Lot Size -8,000 square feet -25 units per acre (R -3-8000-25U) Zone; and to the south and east is the C -3 -BE Zone C. Conditional Use Permit(Development Review While general land use categories can be geographically designated through the General Plan and other applicable land use plans, telecommunication facilities are location dependent. The location is based on technical requirements such as terrain and line -of -sight interaction with surrounding existing public utilities. As a mobile unit moves from one area to another with a call in progress, the call is automatically "handed off' to the next repeater station without interruption. According to the applicant, the chosen site provides the maximum coverage and efficient operation of the system based on their grid and the surrounding land uses. The applicant proposes to locate all unmanned telecommunications antennae at 26.5 feet height in the 30 feet 8 inch high existing building's fagade and mansard roof while maintaining the appearance of the existing structure by using the installation of faux RF transparent roofing and stucco materials in the noted locations. The applicant's proposed unmanned development and use will be in operation twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days a week, with routine maintenance scheduled once a month. The proposed facility utilizes twelve (12) antennae divided into three (3) sectors located within the existing fagade and mansard roof. Each antenna is 72 inches high by 10 inches wide and 4 feet deep. Also, antennae for 911 upgrade use will be added on the southwest side of the building. This antenna is exposed and is 13 inches high by 2" wide. Two air conditioning units are added to the roof and the telecommunication equipment is located inside an existing second story retail suite. Aesthetics are a major issue of locating the facilities within our municipality. The owner and applicant worked to mitigate unsightly visual impacts with this wireless facility by screening methods that would not undermine the intent of the General Plan and the implementing ordinances. The applicant has agreed to mitigate staffs concern that the faux materials age differently from the surrounding materials with the applicant maintaining the RF transparent materials for a consistent appearance with the surrounding materials. The roof and fagade shall be reviewed by the applicant every five years or as requested in writing to match the existing building to avoid any property maintenance deterioration. CUP 05-04/DR 05-23 PAGE 3 1. Architectural Features and Colors: The proposed project's faux roof the and stucco fagade are compatible with the eclectic architectural style of the surrounding area, consistent with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, and Design Guidelines. 2. Site Work: No site work is required. 3. Co -location: The building is available for co -location. 4. FCC Guidelines: The FCC documentation indicates this project is categorically excluded and highly unlikely to cause exposure in excess of the FCC's guidelines or detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare of the community. D. View Impact The views are consistent with the existing development. E. Additional Review The Public Works Division and the Building and Safety Division reviewed this project. Their comments are included in both the report and the approval conditions. F. General Plan/Design Guidelines/Compatibility with Neighborhood 1. Strategy 2.2.1, New developments shall be compatible with surrounding land uses. Staff's review finds the application is consistent with the General Plan, Municipal Code Standards, the City's Design Guidelines and the project is compatible with the neighborhood. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: On December 27, 2005, 27 property owners and interested parties within the project's 500 - foot radius were mailed a public hearing notice and three other locations within the application's vicinity were posted. On December 30, 2005, the project's public hearing notification was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers and on December 31, 2005 a public hearing notice display board was posted at the site. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The City has determined that the Application is categorically exempt per the 1970 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15301(b). CUP 05-04/DR 05-23 PAGE 4 RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-04/ Development Review No. 2005-23, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolution. Prepared by: Linda Kay Smith, Development Services Associate ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution of Approval; 2. Exhibit "A" - Title Sheet, Site and Roof Plan, Antenna and Equipment Layout Plan, Elevations, Details, and Survey dated January 10, 2006. CUP 05-04/DR 05-23 PAGE 5 A. A DRAFT ATTACHMENT "1" PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-xx A RESOLUTION OF THE DIAMOND BAR PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005-04, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2005-23 AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION 15301(b), A REQUEST TO INSTALL A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY WITH ANTENNA MOUNTED WITHIN THE ROOFTOP CONCEALED BY THE FACADE AND MANSARD ROOF AND EQUIPMENT CABINETS IN A SECOND FLOOR RETAIL SUITE. THE PROJECT SITE IS 1155 DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD (APN: 8713-031-010), DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. RECITALS The property owner, Diamond Bar Town Center, LLC, via Pacific West Asset Management, and applicant, Cingular Wireless, via MMI Titan, Danielle Brandenburg, filed Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-04 and Development Review No. 2005-23 applications for a property at 1155 Diamond Bar Boulevard (APN: 8713-031-010), Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit, Development Review, and Categorical Exemption shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. On December 27, 2005, 27 property owners and interested parties within the project's 500 -foot radius were mailed a public hearing notice and three other locations within the application's vicinity were posted. On December 30, 2005, the project's public hearing notification was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers and a public hearing notice display board was posted at the site. 3. On January 10, 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Planning Commission categorically exempt per the (CEQA), Section 15301(b). hereby determines that the Application is 1970 California Environmental Quality Act DRAFT ATTACHMENT "1" 3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the Application, there is no evidence before this Planning Commission that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this Planning Commission hereby rebutsthe presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: (a) The project site is addressed 1155 Diamond Bar Boulevard (Assessor Parcel Number 8713-031-010), Diamond Bar, California. The parcel is approximately 1.24 gross acres: 53,900 usable square feet. The lot is irregularly shaped with an existing two-story commercial building completed in 1986. Six parcels have reciprocal access and parking agreements. (b) The General Plan Land Use designation is General Commercial (C). The project site is zoned Unlimited Commercial Billboard Exclusion (C -3 -BE). (c) To the north and west is the Unlimited Multiple Residence -Minimum Lot Size -8,000 Square Feet -25 Units Per Acre (R -3-8,000-25U) Zone and to the south and east is the Unlimited Commercial (C-3) Zone. (d) The Application requests installation of a wireless telecommunications facility with antenna mounted on the rooftop concealed by the facade and mansard roof and equipment cabinets in a second floor retail suite. The Development Review relates to arch itecturalidesign review for the replacement of faux stucco and roofing materials. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (e) The proposed use is allowed within the subject -zoning district with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit and complies with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Municipal Code. The proposed telecommunication project is permitted on the subject property as set forth in the Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.42.130. The existing building was approved in 1986. The proposed unmanned telecommunications facilities are mounted within the 2 DRAFT ATTACHMENT "1" existing building's facade and mansard roof The RF transparent replacement materials match the existing building so no exterior changes are apparent. As an architecturally concealed antenna, it complies with applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. (f) The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. On July 25, 1995, the City adopted its General Plan. The proposed project complies with the General Plan land use goals, objectives and strategies. The project site is an existing fully developed building and the proposed unmanned telecommunications facilities are mounted within the existing building's fagade and mansard roof. The RF transparent replacement materials match the existing building so no exterior changes are apparent. This application is considered an architecturally concealed antenna and therefore continues to be consistent with the General Plan, City's Municipal Code, and Design Guidelines and there is no specific plan. (g) Design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity. The existing building was approved in 1986. The proposed unmanned telecommunications facilities are mounted within the existing building's facade and mansard roof. The RF transparent replacement materials match the existing building so no exterior changes are apparent. This application is considered an architecturally concealed antenna facility and therefore is compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity. (h) The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed including access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and the absence of physical constraints. The project site is an existing fully developed building and the existing building was approved in 1986. The proposed unmanned telecommunications facilities are mounted within the existing building's fagade and mansard roof. The RF transparent replacement materials match the existing building so no exterior changes are apparent. This application is considered an architecturally concealed antenna facility and therefore will continue to be physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed including access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and the absence of physical constraints. 3 DRAFT ATTACHMENT 1" (i) 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. Before the issuance of any City permits, the proposed project is required to comply. with all conditions set forth in the approving resolution; and the Building and Safety Division; Public Works Division; Fire Department requirements; and FCC approval. The referenced agencies through the permit and inspection process will ensure that the proposed project is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. Q) The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The City has determined that the Application is categorically exempt per the 1970 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15301(b). DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (k) The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the applicable elements of the City's General Plan, City Design Guidelines, and development standards of the applicable district, design guidelines, and architectural criteria for special areas (e.g., theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards or planned developments). On July 25, 1995, the City adopted its General Plan. The proposed project complies with the General Plan land use goals, objectives and strategies. The project site is an existing fully developed building and the proposed unmanned telecommunications facilities are mounted within the existing building's fagade and mansard roof. The RF transparent replacement materials match the existing building so no exterior changes are apparent. This application is considered an architecturally concealed antenna and therefore continues to be consistent with the General Plan, City's Municipal Code, and Design Guidelines and there are no architectural criteria for special areas. (1) The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. El DRAFT ATTACHMENT "1" The project site is an existing fully developed building and the proposed unmanned telecommunications facilities are mounted within the existing building's facade and mansard roof. The RF transparent replacement materials match the existing building so no exterior changes are apparent. This application is considered an architecturally concealed antenna and therefore will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. (m) The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain and enhance the harmonious orderly and attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.48, the General Plan, City Design Guidelines, or any applicable specific plan. The project site is an existing fully developed building and the proposed unmanned telecommunications facilities are mounted within the existing building's fagade and mansard roof. The RF transparent replacement materials match the existing building so no exterior changes are apparent. This application is considered an architecturally concealed antenna and therefore will continue to be compatible with the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood and continue to maintain and enhance the harmonious orderly and attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.48, the General Plan, City Design Guidelines, or any applicable specific plan. (n) The architectural design of the proposed development will provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public; as well as, its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing. The project site is an existing fully developed building and the proposed unmanned telecommunications facilities are mounted within the existing building's fagade and mansard roof. The RF transparent replacement materials match the existing building so no exterior changes are apparent. This application is considered an architecturally concealed antenna and therefore will continue to provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public; as well as, its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing. (o) The proposed development will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative affect on property values or resale(s) of property) to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. 5 DRAFT ATTACHMENT "V Before the issuance of any City permits, the proposed project is required to comply.* with all conditions set forth in the approving resolution; and the Building and Safety Division; Public Works Division; Fire Department requirements; and FCC approval. The referenced agencies through the permit and inspection process will ensure that the proposed project is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. (p) The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The City has determined that the Application is categorically exempt per the 1970 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15301(b). 5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Application subject to the following conditions: GENERAL (a) The project shall substantially conform to Title Sheet, Site and Roof Plan, Antenna and Equipment Layout Plan, Elevations, Details, and Survey collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" dated January 10, 2006, as submitted to, amended herein, and approved by the Planning Commission. (b) The site shall be maintained in a condition that 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 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. BUILDING AND SAFETY (d) Construction Plans shall conform to State and Local Building Codes. (c) A permit for demolition shall be obtained from the South Coast Air Quality Management District. le PLANNING DRAFT ATTACHMENT "1" (d) This structure shall meet the State Energy Conservation Standards. (e) The minimum design wind pressure shall be 80 miles per hour and "C" exposure. The City is in seismic zone four (4). Applicant shall submit drawings and calculations prepared by a licensed architect/engineer with wet stamp and signature. (f) The applicant shall maintain the RF transparent materials such that the materials maintain a consistent appearance with the surrounding materials. The roof and fagade shall be reviewed by the applicant every five years or as requested in writing to match the existing building to avoid any property maintenance deterioration. (g) This approval is valid for two (2) years and shall be exercised (i.e. construction) within that period or this approval shall expire. A one- (1) year extension may be approved when submitted to the City in writing at least 60 days prior to the expiration date. The Planning Commission will consider the extension request at a duly noticed public hearing in accordance with Chapter 22.72 of the City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code. (h) This approval shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed, within fifteen (15) days of approval, at the City of Diamond Bar Community and Development Services Department, their affidavit stating that they are aware and agree to accept all the conditions of this approval. Further, this approval shall not be effective until the permittee pays remaining City processing fees. (i) If the Department of Fish and Game determines that Fish and Game Code Section 711.4 applies to the approval of this project, then the applicant shall remit to the City, within five days of this approval, a cashier's check of $25.00 for a documentary handling fee in connection with Fish and Game Code requirements. Furthermore, if this project is not exempt from a filing fee imposed because the project has more than a deminimis impact on fish and wildlife, the applicant shall also pay to the Department of Fish and Game any such fee and any fine which the Department determines to be owed. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail to Diamond Bar Town Center, LLC, via Pacific West Asset 7 DRAFT ATTACHMENT "1" Management, 3191-D Airport Loop Drive, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 and Applicant, Cingular Wireless, MMI Titan, Danielle Brandenburg, 12900 5th Floor- Park Plaza Drive, Cerritos, CA 90703. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10th DAY OF JANUARY 2006, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. 0 Joe McManus, Chairman I, Nancy Fong, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of January 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioner: ABSENT: Commissioner: ABSTAIN: Commissioner: ATTEST: Nancy Fong, Interim Community Development Director Word: comde0inda smith/plancomm/projects/DR 2005/DR 2005-23 ... /Reso... 0 •'f mma L'0 SNV AD NOISSIWN3d NUMM 3N1 NUM 1dIMM NNW ANI 03Sn NO 02WOONd3N 3S AM2aRnO00 SIWL !O lWd ON 'SMV um 1N3W33NOV NY WOW NOLMUMOO 331N033 801 (31V3ND SVM IWW000O SIWL '(SMV) 'DNI 'S3OVMS SS313NIM 1221V SOOZO < 99 3 ❑❑❑❑❑ > &s a �" g � m �v � •w;� a a 4m o � o p a * y u 0 s 3 a E o epi ? Z ❑❑❑❑❑R=s-gz3mg LU O❑ m o o Ix �� s� o � XCD' 8 0 � Y $ a y -191M o $ w a 8 p a o z o �s 21 4 0 EMW7 N LU N P -UJ Z E a J Q Q o ao LL z o a �� ao Q b t0 ^ I.L W > y�o CO O . _ 2 a y� X SOP U z z uj W F- U Rm cc o Ix�w aCc, < O V m N N W Z J O Lu❑ a 7 S J W w N O m Z J U W W GO 5 N o J z _8 am" N Q Z y aLL W LL N Q a °� ❑ �, O ❑ J VZ N Z Z V W 5 �S W Z F- N H a a❑ w¢ wgm 0,<.z V O �L U Q J W vi O 5 W¢ P rc 0 a° a a a s a❑ rw w Z otl N ¢ U J W Q Q y a Z z 2 Z J a V V a Ja g Z 0 O Z N N 6 Z 0 2 J Z Z Z 2 J J a Q Z a a z !-• J Z O W! H W F Y J J W W 1- O= J?= w W a a 4 v F C9 0 a w w 0 0 7 (7 w N a P D u J N H vl W � o o{ o 0 o T e o 0 0 0 0 0 o p !- F- f51 Cr U U❑❑ W W W W W� '� N N uWi O � J O Z O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N n n N N N N N n n N N N N N r o Z a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a U Z Z Z Z Z Z Z V U V U V V U V Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z a a a a a a a a a a a a a ^ �i.� N N N N N N N N N N N N N O a a a a a a a a< a a< a a a a •'f mma L'0 SNV AD NOISSIWN3d NUMM 3N1 NUM 1dIMM NNW ANI 03Sn NO 02WOONd3N 3S AM2aRnO00 SIWL !O lWd ON 'SMV um 1N3W33NOV NY WOW NOLMUMOO 331N033 801 (31V3ND SVM IWW000O SIWL '(SMV) 'DNI 'S3OVMS SS313NIM 1221V SOOZO ?��rN R W 5z�99 F�U z ? bozo a wq o -t2 o A13�.i ,nF 3 Virii C,oz u 2@z 3 �c�z am < =ea ,00oo ZZ0 qo- e�_ S. a� �oax m�� 3¢��3 we`d `Y o w ;n o�o Z W 0 z w CD 1. " w�a 131HO3B 80 SMV dO NOISSIINM3d N3WMM 3HL NUM 1d3OX3 YIM03 ANV NI 035N MO 030N008d3M 3H AYM 1N31Vf1000 SIHl j0 1NVd ON 'SAV NLA LN3Y63MOV NV M30N7 NOLLVMOddOO 13U103M MOd 0M MO S!M 1N3FVO00 SINL '(SMV) "0N1 'S301AWS SS313NIM IVIV SOOZa ?��rN R 5z�99 m z ? bozo a o o A13�.i wwS w w w u G ¢ Cox y wU YFg�Ziww�C oowa- <rid.awz C,oz u O v o 3 3 �c�z "x =ea w 3�LL�o�w� ¢=o oe ggam ay w `Y o w ;n o�o m<•__mZ �eSW W 3j o- §o�SZ �_Nd o gMi. - �� Z" 0. p �x 4a QKt o, y wren �oN wm x a NU H w J uo � �� ¢mai rw mo LLI N �o Z %N p N Z w Y o zi o � � - Z° Z o w o 3 a Z 0 G WW i W ,� =moo a� <mvim Ui?OowW oo w 3 i 2 GV �� ?S UUI w cl,n o " mrU U n Uw m 0 p� qO z iF C a 3 U Z a a ¢ ¢ ZZZZ oo vwi vxi v�-iy�>� O S GU 131HO3B 80 SMV dO NOISSIINM3d N3WMM 3HL NUM 1d3OX3 YIM03 ANV NI 035N MO 030N008d3M 3H AYM 1N31Vf1000 SIHl j0 1NVd ON 'SAV NLA LN3Y63MOV NV M30N7 NOLLVMOddOO 13U103M MOd 0M MO S!M 1N3FVO00 SINL '(SMV) "0N1 'S301AWS SS313NIM IVIV SOOZa m z ? bozo o o A13�.i wwS w w w u G ¢ Cox y wU o �x " Z C w O v o 3 x ° ? w ¢ Z o s W 1 s w o�w ; �z Q a z a o 0 i F rc Z 3 ggam ay w o�o m al �m0 L� ® ■ . ■ o gMi. y l III o p ,w� o= Oz ° N �o Z %N p N Z w Y o zi o � � - Z° Z o w o 3 a Z 0 w - Z. G w w w a ,a�a_ z� ��_ 3. ->W>Wa �a du 10 rc < S __� a�4 U 3 rc w w amt =moo W au <mvim Ui?OowW w v�=z - 25 Z0 z - z U¢ a ww o chi 3� h"i5�¢�� ¢ w w Z Z U awo i csa�3i2i o0 �vxi in u�i¢»iiawaZ <cc ¢ m Z o U Q. °Z a. v O08ow oe--6 wwwwc� vowcW 3 U Z a a ¢ ¢ ZZZZ oo vwi vxi v�-iy�>� 131HO3B 80 SMV dO NOISSIINM3d N3WMM 3HL NUM 1d3OX3 YIM03 ANV NI 035N MO 030N008d3M 3H AYM 1N31Vf1000 SIHl j0 1NVd ON 'SAV NLA LN3Y63MOV NV M30N7 NOLLVMOddOO 13U103M MOd 0M MO S!M 1N3FVO00 SINL '(SMV) "0N1 'S301AWS SS313NIM IVIV SOOZa 0 m D RN ,8-,141 Fn E:l li �I i i iI I� ,III i Q� acs ma ?gQ � 1 -- • �� yy Fi Q�gg JrJyL gg GH �� iy O V m v I I I a ❑ .�GUtARSECfCR 0 4 i U) -Fr/ p11NOTH �zou lL Is, I, Vf IF _goF -- g O O i � g , 1 UVA9100q xvg ONOWVICI 0 m D RN T3,HO38 110 SM 30 NOISSIY033d N31bbM 3H1 HM id3OX3 MW ANY NI 0351 bO 03Of100bd3b 38 AYN 1N3NH000 SIH1 30 M Vd ON T3, -SMY HUM 03N33NOY NY b30N0 NOLMOdMOO H039 b03 0unw SYM imrmo0 SINL '(SMV) 'ONI 'S30W73S SS3l3HVA 131V 5003 Fn E:l li �I i i iI I� ,III i Q� ❑ ❑ o 1 -- ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ GH O V m v a ❑ .�GUtARSECfCR 0 4 i U) p11NOTH �zou lL Is, I, Vf _goF UVA9100q xvg ONOWVICI — — — — — — — — r`8 T3,HO38 110 SM 30 NOISSIY033d N31bbM 3H1 HM id3OX3 MW ANY NI 0351 bO 03Of100bd3b 38 AYN 1N3NH000 SIH1 30 M Vd ON T3, -SMY HUM 03N33NOY NY b30N0 NOLMOdMOO H039 b03 0unw SYM imrmo0 SINL '(SMV) 'ONI 'S30W73S SS3l3HVA 131V 5003 li �I i i iI I� ,III i Q� O V m v a ❑ J U) — SM, r`8 ,0 — —304 SOSZN d i¢ 2 ,00 6L 3 06,50.5E N — — — ---- —a < N OL 8 I- 8 SF.O�OS .O ❑ m w Z y�, ,00 SLZ 3,O�,SO.SZ N L�QC� • SECiOR .g � T3,HO38 110 SM 30 NOISSIY033d N31bbM 3H1 HM id3OX3 MW ANY NI 0351 bO 03Of100bd3b 38 AYN 1N3NH000 SIH1 30 M Vd ON T3, -SMY HUM 03N33NOY NY b30N0 NOLMOdMOO H039 b03 0unw SYM imrmo0 SINL '(SMV) 'ONI 'S30W73S SS3l3HVA 131V 5003 G < •h � g v a 3 o m a 0 0 0 0 0 "s a 3N W a za�gr .0—,Is p �I k x`�ic1 1 WI []EI P a 8E - r _GM338 NO SMV d0 NOISSINN3d N311INM 3HL HiIM 1d3OX3 NNOA ;,WNI 035D NO 03OOOONd3a 38 AVN 1N3NOOD0 SIM d0 "Yd ON 'SMV HUM LN3N33aOV NV N30NN NOMYUOdUOO 13W038 NOd a3LV3u3 S1M 1N3NN000 SIHL '(SW) •0NI 'S3OMS SS313ULM 1L1V SOOZ® I i I , Hit I 1 i ra � — L____.I Ci mA� zzi g6 R. C3 Li yd sEy, i I k I i I , Hit I 1 i ra � — L____.I Ci mA� zzi g6 R. C3 -�s w _JdY to NOIss—I N3WhA — HliAt —M Wao! o3:NmwW ', 3 AYry stm JO IWI ON 4 N urf"3 W W YKMR NMY40XSM nLHM a03 OX. *SPM 1N3WraW SHL '(.1)'oi+'1'SIJ a$ ss 90 iA!Y 5MZ- LU > -�s w _JdY to NOIss—I N3WhA — HliAt —M Wao! o3:NmwW ', 3 AYry stm JO IWI ON 4 N urf"3 W W YKMR NMY40XSM nLHM a03 OX. *SPM 1N3WraW SHL '(.1)'oi+'1'SIJ a$ ss 90 iA!Y 5MZ- .Smy am 2 7 2m �3&�� «" &G ° 7� eft 2 \ \ }/ - q / w'§, Hol #\ #% � \}! \17;! § }!!` | m\ §� � | Is |( ! w % �[~ E5.0 | - / . � « ■� - ��|f& / yy . - | 2 �(� \N )) 000 " \ r7.1 j§� gyNt » 12 !!( ��- _ q \» � � § |® 2 % w, 4 ?, .Smy am 2 7 2m �3&�� «" &G ° 7� eft 2 �a S ❑oma Oc¢i� gzao _¢ayo woe, moo@ �'b ILLM43J�rv� r �O NOISSIflL3 d LQl� ry ANY NI 431Y3N� 5yM Ly3J00 gHL O(t (may Ne Am, 1N3Nli�pa S1H( !0 ooz® � u� a VIN 11 � R2. ° S r$@2� z a/1 � 1 f ❑oma Oc¢i� gzao _¢ayo woe, moo@ �'b ILLM43J�rv� r �O NOISSIflL3 d LQl� ry ANY NI 431Y3N� 5yM Ly3J00 gHL O(t (may Ne Am, 1N3Nli�pa S1H( !0 ooz® � m 11 � ❑oma Oc¢i� gzao _¢ayo woe, moo@ �'b ILLM43J�rv� r �O NOISSIflL3 d LQl� ry ANY NI 431Y3N� 5yM Ly3J00 gHL O(t (may Ne Am, 1N3Nli�pa S1H( !0 ooz® "131H03B NO SMY i0 WSSIW83d N31LNM 3H1 NAM 1d3DK3 WN03 AW NI 03sn NO 03Df100Nd3N 36 AYVJ 1NW000 SM JO 1Nyd ON 'SMY HNM iN3W33NOY NY oaNn NOLLYNOdNOD T31H33B Nw O3LV383 SVM 1NIPMODO SIHL '(SM `A DNI S3DM3S SS3138IM 141Y SOOZO �a � I €Sy. my �fts��W"eS Q J� H AF�r k_ 7mry{m iai a Pg a F uj ss a ME n ea Z �a \ U Fo }t aland a 2 a o c5 4 E Qcc W g g IaF Z Q � FtlOtllmtl O g - ci„ � .S-lll�u i z g Ow k� "131H03B NO SMY i0 WSSIW83d N31LNM 3H1 NAM 1d3DK3 WN03 AW NI 03sn NO 03Df100Nd3N 36 AYVJ 1NW000 SM JO 1Nyd ON 'SMY HNM iN3W33NOY NY oaNn NOLLYNOdNOD T31H33B Nw O3LV383 SVM 1NIPMODO SIHL '(SM `A DNI S3DM3S SS3138IM 141Y SOOZO '131H039 NO SMV d0 NOISS1WN3d N31MNM 3H1 HNM 1430X3 WHOA ANV NI m50 NO O3o000Nd3N 3B ),VA 1N3Y(No0O SIM d0 1Ntld ON 'SMV HIM 1N3YG3WV NV N30N0 NOLLVNOdN00 '131HO38 NO! OAV380 SVM immo0O SIHL '(SMtl) 'oNI '930UN3S S=MIM 1�71V SOOZ L 60 o Q W C_3 � !r o Z Q O N J p �yyyy�� U ; SS Wuj n ZZ ooa� o� >ow asw aww zo,y uw �N � w a �Jo O�Wz d� ttC aoW OZZQ OU� _ " � N w�U �pOo w¢ a� �U OZU .wY _Fti ZF- t �ma pw C12 } t N how Nz� S2p¢woFaa �Nzo Z� w z>N o�o�o iow wz"f- as Q .Jm z wa J J 3rc gvioNicp o d�ap Sr r 0 N U U w N¢ UU w 2 tzUpZU� V p F U o-"-i� (Fw U ��w �WO OU Z wOw OUB �nF�a N [V3WU w U O 8 I� y Joy Q wU ZUr 02-b5 wN UWJ Q Ja�O w� Jim UX Z- pVFW �V_U o'; Few FU a FO Q?a �� t -w Vi Oa FYZ`'I OJ J Jd >O�Q wp UN i— W w U p ¢'¢¢ w O Z N w rnu�o ao �¢v' O Z. ¢ f N u�W O ZO - zO 2 J ac»c Uinw Ko N� s W7 ss p S - 4 g w -q .0 bow a¢ Z_Z w SPR rn ap :I :I aam" :I :I zaom daao y ppppo a � � a :I H L%33 3v, g 5m ---- a-- N CW ao � Z �� as o0 b3 Z. J H1ilON '131H039 NO SMV d0 NOISS1WN3d N31MNM 3H1 HNM 1430X3 WHOA ANV NI m50 NO O3o000Nd3N 3B ),VA 1N3Y(No0O SIM d0 1Ntld ON 'SMV HIM 1N3YG3WV NV N30N0 NOLLVNOdN00 '131HO38 NO! OAV380 SVM immo0O SIHL '(SMtl) 'oNI '930UN3S S=MIM 1�71V SOOZ - ( \ /} \: / / j m j\ \(§ \ \ 5'\ )__ (§ &-/ \\ }| } ) ( -; �§j} \ / § \ [ ! K ! « (§ §_<» / \\-\ \\ \\ )}») }\( |\ �� ! 2 \ \ \ j \\ $ // \ : // / a: 2; :w° !! !m ;�_� !w # G 2 u!� 0— :e !: k � 2 44 e @6/6/9/9 - ( \ /} \: / / j m j\ \(§ \ \ 5'\ )__ (§ &-/ \\ }| } ) ( -; �§j} \ / § \ [ ! K ! « (§ §_<» / \\-\ \\ \\ )}») }\( |\ �� ! 2 \ \ \ j \\ $ // \ : // / a: 2; :w° !! !m ;�_� !w # G 2 u!� 0— :e !: k � MUM 80 SMV AD NOISSIYM3d N31N21M 3N1 RM 1d3OM INVOd kW NI o35D NO 030DooNd3N 39 AVN LN3N(1300 SIHL d0 WVd ON •SMV H11M LN3A33MV NV MOM NOLLVNOdNOO 131NOM NO! 0 MUO SVM AN314OOOO SIHI •(SMV) 041 'S30VOS SS3l3NIM LVIV 900ZO �o zomi � a - os ¢ ;occ � C d3m� Z m r I 0 3o J U a 3=a z . e YU a N z J w o e®= � -S �o Yo tz. a mo80 30 s LLI cc inU 3u Z� 62 c ,o` 1 vii �Uz z eU �z z I I z 3 Z U N a Y 0 Q 3 Q q MOT a m ¢ y� � R i N Boz m U i{ Q W � _ U W wo=z a z m� a J am¢ I- Iz¢ m O mj 0 w zog� < w Wim"' � J 0 0p w 3 O a z Z Q - 1 _ ?gm G�- a MUM 80 SMV AD NOISSIYM3d N31N21M 3N1 RM 1d3OM INVOd kW NI o35D NO 030DooNd3N 39 AVN LN3N(1300 SIHL d0 WVd ON •SMV H11M LN3A33MV NV MOM NOLLVNOdNOO 131NOM NO! 0 MUO SVM AN314OOOO SIHI •(SMV) 041 'S30VOS SS3l3NIM LVIV 900ZO �o €3 3z _ mid a 07 t3 bq obq obT- �F mz a3a<�$�ow '=OFV¢za JNrc -{32 ie H '131HO39 NO SMV d0 NOISSIN113d NaWHM 3H1 NUM 140X3 NNOd AW NI 0351 NO 03of100ad3N39 AVN 1N3N1000 SIM dO 11Md ON 'SMV NUM 1NWOMOV NV N30N1 NOUVNOdNOO 131/1038 NOd 031MO SVM INMA000 SIHI '(SMV) 'ONI 'S331m3S SS313NIM 11PlV SOOZ® i - �V '„i !I }I I I „ItYII�i I I it I f ,I W - I I - I ! z= �o €3 3z _ mid a 07 t3 bq obq obT- �F mz a3a<�$�ow '=OFV¢za JNrc -{32 ie H '131HO39 NO SMV d0 NOISSIN113d NaWHM 3H1 NUM 140X3 NNOd AW NI 0351 NO 03of100ad3N39 AVN 1N3N1000 SIM dO 11Md ON 'SMV NUM 1NWOMOV NV N30N1 NOUVNOdNOO 131/1038 NOd 031MO SVM INMA000 SIHI '(SMV) 'ONI 'S331m3S SS313NIM 11PlV SOOZ® V7UM HU �p 7" &&�� 2m 7n2v #W M O 74 §\ , LLj q, Ld §z , k } } ! ) e) �(\ - § r,! ]E E§!/!§!7 ; §, / K`§ \ \ \- m§ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 2 {} §i\ - > \ a a « a « a a )k \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ^�`�`� !\ / / ..'2. 9695 �\�\ § § \ � \ / j4m(§/ , � S LU \j ^° ZZ� �z Lt. !( 9 § 2§E z)(\ §2#; £a:; o �!! f� \ � -- & o co })" �§ / ) (\\ ; Eja �■ - `° w m V7UM HU �p 7" &&�� 2m 7n2v #W M O 74 §\ , ! ) e) �(\ ]E E§!/!§!7 ; §, \ \- m§ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 2 - > \ a a « a « a a )k \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ^�`�`� !\ / / ..'2. 9695 § § \ � \ / 72 '13L1J38 40 SMV J0 NOISSII0183d N31LlfM 3H1 NlLN 1d3JX3 WtlOJ AW NI 035f1 NO 03Jf140iid3il 39 AVW 1N3Wf1J00 SIH1 d0 lbtld ON SMVHLM 1N3Yi13N9tl NV Ef34Nf1 NOLLtlNOdtlOQ 131HJ38 i10! 031tl3No S/M lH3VINo00 SIHL '(SW) 'SNI 'S3JWf35 $5313NIM 1q1 � 8s iso �$ o �o o Z =o a a Z - U Q Z S o CL = n U J W Q � � Z ------------------ ` I� I(�� zz wo- o "s fi II li ¢wm oma 5 5 1. _ d ° 12 _ - V J3 a v so U X w 0 1n ��"€ m��" § � w I IN— y o s€�� n�m h Z o z� �� W r 9%:saa g >- Z cai °m �`y avm"'�" god y g z az gso cc�a "s;Y aes aaa s Z"ee g�'¢ _a y °O Cd ow �`a$ �_o �Y p 34 W �� gi a gm: J o _3 n£ s "� " �" Z a Y a Sy W es Zia e g es 7 os 3 zj ��._ c 3 SO m "� U z a as IN Jag Pga y �8 3g�_�o�'r_ 16 $s5 pz � � e£ e€ �� gam �= So= r 55�W m� mW �Y£=3 !HT yea=a sah n"a�a w LL m s=3 w eF sig3 m e"x€ �a �4 W �g Gs ti „s-,�wy O¢ waw HS X40 502 §e= �1 �G z €�� s w 0 4 �� a €�€ a� gga =so N� 3€� W 3� seo � s �r�o 31� ��p I �rx�� LU a. sa£ a sao sa Wm =saE�e Nn �Yse �z Asa a" F =Hae ws�� og g� z Wsa Z foo s r Ncl -ge s� z< s m as `3€ € m § U W J W -EW33e s0 SMV 30 NOIS61Ws3d MILUUM 3HL HMM 1d3OX3 VISO3 INV NI 03sn s0 030n0osd3s 3e AYN LNmnao0 SIHL 40 IWJ ON '$MY HUM iN3rG36OV NY UONn NOLLYSOdHOO 13LH036 SOd 031Y3s0 sVM imrinoo0 sIHL '(SMY) 'ONI 'S3 M3S SSTOMIM My 50020 PP Sn N Bt Btf iL e= d «mmoaseee��3��saa�a�� oau u Amog u t'�au 7 i� m C -mv�m mn `y4. �Wzz pk2 80 p3 iiagra€ 0 3 '0A'l9 UVO 4N0NVIO o� - - - - - - - - - - - 9 mom« �1 m z¢og OU�m a ul ❑ -J n r '13LW38 80 SMV d0 NOISSIN83d N31UHM 3HL KM 1d3OX3 W803 AW NI 035!1 80 03Of1008d38 38 AVA 1N3Nl1000 SIN! d0 1HVd ON 'SMV NLM 1N3N3380V KV 830N0 NOUV80d80O MM338 BOJ 03LV38J SVM 1N3NNO00 SIH! '(SMV) 'ONI S30M3S SS31381M MV SOOZ® N Bt Btf iL e= d «mmoaseee��3��saa�a�� 1oa - - - - - - - - - - - 9 mom« �1 m z¢og OU�m a ul ❑ -J n r '13LW38 80 SMV d0 NOISSIN83d N31UHM 3HL KM 1d3OX3 W803 AW NI 035!1 80 03Of1008d38 38 AVA 1N3Nl1000 SIN! d0 1HVd ON 'SMV NLM 1N3N3380V KV 830N0 NOUV80d80O MM338 BOJ 03LV38J SVM 1N3NNO00 SIH! '(SMV) 'ONI S30M3S SS31381M MV SOOZ® PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT S�J89� 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117 AGENDA ITEM: 7.1 MEETING DATE: January 10, 2006 BACKGROUND: The above referenced project was presented to the Planning Commission at a study session and public hearing on December 13, 2005. The Commission continued the public hearing to January 10, 2005 to give the applicant additional time to address the Commission's concern regarding a proposed retaining wall adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive. ANALYSIS/DISCUSSION- The extension of Alamo Heights Drive uses a retaining wall varying in height from zero to 26 feet. The retaining wall is necessary to support Alamo Heights Drive because the street's existing elevation is much higher than the rear portion of the Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of Tract 32482 and Lot 96 of Tract 30578 and to align with the extension of Alamo Heights Drive that will serve VTTM 53670 (Yeh/five lot subdivision). However, if the applicant can obtain an additional 50 foot grading easement from the referenced lots, the retaining wall would be eliminated. At the public hearing, several residents expressed concerns related to the on-site pump station, drainage, grading, wildlife and proposed retaining wall adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive. The concerns related to on-site pump station, drainage, grading and wildlife which are addressed in the Draft EIR. One resident, Dr. Hofu Wu, affected by the additional 50 foot grading easement or proposed retaining wall suggested an alternative design concept. Staff does not know the origin of this concept and was not given a copy of Dr. Wu's presentation. Staff believes this concept is from an old tract map designed before the City incorporated. Its density is higher than one dwelling unit per acre and is not consistent with the City's General Plan. Additionally, it does not comply with the City's Hillside Management Standards. Furthermore, there is no technical information and analysis of any kind to support this concept. After public comments and discussion, the Planning Commission directed the applicant to continue working on obtaining the additional 50 foot grading easement from the property owners of the referenced lots of Tract 32482 and 30578. The applicant continues to work with these property owners and has submitted a chronology of all discussions. The chronology is attached to this report. The applicant has submitted an alternative design for the improvement of Alamo Heights Drive. The alternative design gradually lowers the grade of Alamo Heights Drive approximately 10 feet within a 300 foot span beginning at the access point for VTTM 53670 to the rear of Lot 5 of VTTM 53670. The grade then begins to rise at the end of Lot 16 of proposed TTM 53430. By lowering the grade, the height of the retaining wall located on the west side of Alamo Heights Drive changes to a maximum height of 10 feet. A second retaining wall, varying in height with a maximum height of 10 feet, is added adjacent to the rear property lines of Lots 5, 8, 9 and 10 and adjacent to a portion of the rear property line of Lots 4 and 7 of Tract 32482. Lot 8 of Tract 32482 will not have the second retaining wall. Lot 96 of Tract 30578 will have the second retaining wall adjacent to the rear property line. Also, a third retaining wall is proposed on the east side of Alamo Heights Drive adjacent to the side property line of Lot 5 of VTTM 53670 (Yeh subdivision). It varies in height from zero to nine feet. The staff has added additional language to condition 5. b. (7) of the Subdivision Resolution and Hillside Management/Conditional Use Permit/Variance/Tree Permit Resolution as follows: Prior to final map approval, applicant shall make a "good -faith" effort to obtain an additional 50 foot wide off-site grading easement across Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of Tract 32482 and Lot 96 of Tract 30578 which have rear properties adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive. The applicant shall provide written permission to the satisfaction of the City Engineer from the property owners of said lots affected by the off-site grading. If the 50 foot wide easement is obtained, applicant shall provide irrigation and landscaping for the 50 wide foot easement on said lots and existing 40 foot wide easement adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive for a total of approximately 90 feet wide. Applicant shall maintain this 90 foot easement until the responsibility becomes part of the homeowners association. If the applicant is unable to get the additional off-site grading easement from any one of the above mentioned lots of Tracts 32482 and 30578, the applicant shall submit plans with alternative design delineating retaining walls not to exceed a maximum exposed height of 15 feet subject to the Community Development Director's review and approval prior to final map. The retaining walls adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive will be constructed from architectural shotcrete with dense landscaping in front of the walls and in planter areas within the walls. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the following to the City Council: certification of the Draft Environmental Report (SCH #2003052202) and approval of the Mitigation Monitoring Program; approval of Tentative Map No. 53430, Zone Change 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03, TTM 53430 Page 2 Tree Permit No. 2005-10, Statement of Overriding Consideration, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolutions to City Council. Prepared by: Ann 4. Lungu, Q'ssoeate Pinner Attachments: 1. Alternative Plan for Alamo Heights Drive/Improvement; 2. Correspondence to Planning Commission dated December 19, 2005; 3. Chronology of meetings/phone discussions with owners of properties adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive from John Bostick of Millennium Diamond Road Partners, LLC; and 4. Staff Report dated December 13, 2005. TTM 53430 Page 3 A. B. PLANNING COMMISSION 44P RESOLUTION NO. 2006 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 2005-03 WHICH CHANGES THE EXISTING ZONING FROM R-1-20,000 TO RURAL RESIDENTIAL (RR) FOR PROPERTIESLOCATED DIRECTLY SOUTH OF ROCKY TRAIL ROAD AND ALAMO HEIGHTS DRIVE AND WEST OF HORIZON LANE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (APN NOS. 8713-023-002, 8713-023-004, 8713-023-005, 8713- 024-001 AND 8713-024-002). RECITALS The property owner/applicant, Millennium Diamond Road Partners, LLC has filed an application for Zone Change No. 2005-03 for a property identified as APN Nos.8713-023-002, 8713-023-004, 8713-023-005, 8713-024-001 and 8713-024-002 located directly south of Rock Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive and west of Horizon Lane, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Zone Change shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. On November 23, 2005, public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 180 property owners of record within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site. On December 1, 2005, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. 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 prior to November 30, 2005. 3. On December 13, 2005, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application and continued the public hearing to January 10, 2006. 4. On January 10, 2006, the Planning Commission opened the continued public hearing and concluded the public hearing on the application. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the zone change identified above in the resolution was addressed in the Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2003051102) prepared for Tentative Tract Map No. 53430 according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated there under and determined not to have a significant effect on the environment. 3. The Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: (a) The proposed Zone Change relates to a vacant property located directly south of Rock Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive and west of Horizon Lane within a gated community identified as "The Country Estates" which consists of large single-family homes. The project site is directly south of Alamo Heights Drive which would be extended to provide access to the project site with Rocky Trail Road as a secondary emergency access. (b) Generally to the north, south, east and west, the Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 square feet (R-1-20,000) and R-1-40,000 zoning districts surround the project site. (c) The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential (RR) Maximum 1 DU/AC and a current zoning designation of Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 square feet (R-1-20,000). (d) The Application request is for approval to change the existing zoning designation to Rural Residential (RR), which is in compliance with the General Plan land use designation for the project site. (e) The Planning Commission, after due consideration of public testimony, staff analysis and deliberations recommends that the existing zoning be changed from Single Family Residence - Minimum Lot Size 20,000 square feet (R-1-20,000) to Rural Residential (RR). Pursuant to the General Plan, the maximum gross density for the RR land use designation is 1.0 dwelling units per acre or less. The Commission has determined that the Rural Residential (RR) zone implements the Strategies of the General Plan. Furthermore, the RR zoning district is used to identify hillside areas intended for rural living, including the keeping of animals, with supporting accessory structures. The 2 Planning commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX property that the zone change will affect is compatible with the General Plan land use designation description and will be able to adhere to the development standards for the RR zoning district as prescribed in the City's Development Code. Therefore, approval of the Zone Change for the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution by certified mail: to Millennium Diamond Road Partners, LLC, 3731 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 850, Los Angeles, CA 90010 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2006, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. Joe McManus, Chairman I, Nancy Fong, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of January 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner: NOES: Commissioner: ABSENT: Commissioner: ABSTAIN: Commissioner: ATTEST: Nancy Fong, Secretary 3 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX A. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 2003051102) AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 53430 AS SET FORTH THEREIN FOR A FORTY- EIGHT LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED DIRECTLY SOUTH OF ROCKY TRAIL ROAD AND ALAMO HEIGHTS DRIVE AND WEST OF HORIZON LANE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA RECITALS. The property owner/applicant, Millennium Diamond Road Partners, LLC has filed an application for certification of Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH # 2003051102) and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Tentative Tract Map No. 53430 (TTM 53430), as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. On November 23, 2005, public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 180 property owners of record within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site. On December 1, 2005, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. 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 by November 30, 2005. Additionally and pursuant to Public Resource Code, Section 21092.5, agencies commenting on the project's Environmental Impact report were notified in writing of the December 13, 2005 Planning Commission public hearing on November 23, 2005. 3. On December 13, 2005, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application and continued the public hearing to January 10, 2006. 4. On January 10, 2006, the Planning Commission opened the continued public hearing and concluded the public hearing on the application. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the project identified above in this Resolution required an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). EIR (SCH # 2003051102) has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated there under. The 45 day public review period for the EIR began August 20, 2004 and ended October 4, 2004. Furthermore, the Planning Commission has reviewed the EIR and related documents in reference to the Application. 3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole, including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence before this Planning Commission that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. The Planning Commission based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, 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 Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2003051102) except as to those effects which are identified and made the subject of a Statement of Overriding Considerations which this Planning Commission recommends to City Council and finds are clearly outweighed by the economic, social and other benefits or the proposed project, as more fully set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 5. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the Findings of Facts, Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program attached herein as Exhibits "C" and hereby incorporated by reference. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and 2 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: Millennium Diamond Road Partners, LLC, 3731 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 850, Los Angeles, CA 90010 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2006, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION- OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. Joe McManus, Chairman I, Nancy Fong, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of January 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner: NOES: Commissioner: ABSENT: Commissioner: ABSTAIN: Commissioner: ATTEST: Nancy Fong, Secretary 3 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX Q 44) 40P PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 53430 FOR A 48 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED DIRECTLY SOUTH OF ROCKY TRAIL ROAD AND ALAMO HEIGHTS DRIVE AND WEST OF HORIZON LANE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. (APN NOS. 8713-023-002, 8713-023, 8713-023-005, 8713-024-001 AND 8713-024-002) RECITALS 1. The property owner/applicant, Millennium Diamond Road Partners, LLC has filed an application for Tentative Tract Map No. 53430 (TTM 53430), certification of Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH # 2003051102) and Mitigation Monitoring Program as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map, Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. On November 23, 2005, public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 180 property owners of record within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site. On December 1, 2005, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. 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 by November 30, 2005. Additionally and pursuant to Public Resource Code, Section 21092.5, agencies commenting on the project's Environmental Impact report were notified in writing of the December 13, 2005 Planning Commission public hearing on November 23, 2005. 3. On December 13, 2005, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application and continued the public hearing to January 10, 2006. 4. On January 10, 2006, the Planning Commission opened the continued public hearing and concluded the public hearing on the application. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the project identified above in this Resolution required an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). EIR (SCH # 2003051102) has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 45 day public review period for the EIR began August 20, 2004 and ended October 4, 2004. Furthermore, the Planning Commission has reviewed the EIR and related documents in reference to the Application. 3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole, including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence before this Planning Commission that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to vacant land located directly south of Rocky Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive and west of Horizon Lane within a gated community identified as "The Country Estates" which consists of large single-family homes. The project site is directly south of Alamo Heights Drive which would be extended to provide access to the project site with Rocky Trail Road as a secondary emergency access. (b) The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential (RR) Maximum 1 DU/AC. (c) The project site is within the Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 Square Feet (R-1-20,000) Zone. However, Zone Change No.2005-03 within Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005—XX recommends that the City Council approve the zone change from R-1-20,000 to Rural Residential (RR) for General Plan compliance. (d) Generally to the north, south, east and west, the Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 square feet (R-1-20,000) and R-1-40,000 zoning districts surround the project site. 2 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX (e) The Application request is to certify the Environmental Impact Report; to subdivide a 80 acres site into 48 parcels with a minimum lot size of one acre for the eventual development of 48 single-family custom homes; to change the existing zoning from R-1-20,000 to Rural Residential (RR); to grade and develop in a hillside area; to allow retaining walls with an exposed height of more than six feet; and to remove and replace oak and walnut trees. Tentative Map Findings (f) The proposed subdivision including design and improvements is consistent with the General Plan or any applicable specific plan; The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Rural Residential (RR). The General Plan describes this designation as a residential land use category for detached single-family residences with a maximum density allowed fornew subdivisions as one dwelling unit per acre or less. The proposed map is a 48 lot subdivision with a gross density of 0.6 dwelling units per acre. The 48 lots will vary in size from 1.02 gross aces to 4.17 gross acres, with a majority of the lot sizes falling between 1.0 to 2.0 acres. The proposed map as designed with the incorporation of landform grading, the extension of Alamo Heights Drive in a manner that is consistent with existing development and proposed development north of the proposed map, the secondary emergency access at Rocky Trail Road, revegetation of slopes, installation of sewers and drainage facilities is in accordance with the Objectives and Strategies of the General Plan. As a result, TTM 53430 is consistent with the General Plan. (g) Site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of the development; The project site is approximately 80 gross acres. The TTM 53430 proposes to subdivide 80 gross acres into 48 lots with streets and an open space lot for revegetation for the future development of 48 single-family custom homes. As referenced above in Finding (0, the type and proposed density is in compliance with the General Plan and existing development within the gated community identified as `The Country Estates" Additionally, the EIR prepared for TTM 53430 reviewed the map's suitability for the project site, access, circulation, grading, aesthetics, land use, etc. The reviewed concluded that the proposed map would not have a significant effect on the environment and/or with the incorporation of mitigation measures environmental impacts would be reduced to a level of less than significant. 3 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX However, the environmental issue related to Air Quality impacts may have a significant effect on the environment. The operational characteristics of the project (after homes are built and occupied) will not have a significant effect on the environment. The fugitive dust impacts (PMio) during grading activities could be worsened at the local level and be cumulatively considerable in the short-term if there are project under construction simultaneously in the immediate vicinity. VTTM 53670 (Yeh project) is located to the north of this project and will involve approximately 102,000 cubic yards of grading over 7.5 acres. According to the preliminary air quality report prepared by JHA Environmental Consultant for VTTM 53670, construction emissions from grading on that site will not result in a significant impact. However, if the project site (TTM 53430) and VTTM 53670 are graded simultaneously, short-term air quality impacts from fugitive dust would be considered cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures will be incorporated into TTM 53430's design as follows: • Water exposed surfaces three times a day; • Apply soil stabilizers in inactive areas; • Replace vegetative ground cover in inactive areas quickly, using perennial where possible; • Coverall stockpiles with tarps; • Install particulate filters on all diesel haul trucks; • Use particulate filters on all diesel equipment; • Pre -water prior to earth -moving to maintain soil moisture content at a minimum 12 percent so as to prevent dust plumes; • Maintain stockpiles to avoid steep sides or faces; and • Turn off equipment when not in use for longer than five minutes. After incorporation of the above mitigation measures, emissions of PM10 will be substantially reduced, but will remain significant on both the peak day and in the peak quarter. After mitigation, all other emissions will be less than significant on both the peak day and in the peak quarter. As a result, a Statement of Overriding Consideration is required to certify the EIR. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX for the certification of the EIR will be considered concurrently and approved with the project. (h) 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; The EiR analyzed whether or not the proposed map would cause 4 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The EIR concluded that with the implementation of mitigation measures as prescribed in the Mitigation Monitoring Program summarized as follows, it is anticipated that the proposed map and cumulative biological resources impacts would be reduced to a level less than significant. ■ A combination of on-site or off-site preservation, enhancement, and/or restoration at no less than a 1:1 acreage ratio; ■ Native tree protection at a 3:1 ratio to replace 348 coast live oak trees, 250 scrub oak and 279 California black walnuts; ■ Biological monitoring; • Obtain appropriate permits from California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State Water Resources Control Board; and ■ Lighting plan reviewed and approved by the City demonstrating that lighting from the project will be directed away from natural open space areas. (i) The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health or safety problems; The EIR analyzed impacts related to the design of the subdivision and improvements related to the project. Mitigation measures that related to air quality, geology/soils/grading, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, traffic, and public services have been incorporated into the proposed map. Mitigation measures are summarized as follows: o Manufactured slopes would be designed at a slope ratio of no steeper 2:1 and keyed into approved natural ground, o Standard conditions of approval related to compliance with Uniform Building Code; o All grading be performed under the observation of a registered geotechnical engineer, o Recommendations contains in the geotechnical and engineering geological investigation is to be implemented during grading/construction activities; o Comply with all Los Angeles County Fire Department code requirements; o All property owners be provided with a disclosure statement that identify the responsibility of maintaining the fuel modification zones within their property as defined in the approved Fuel Modification Plan; o Compliance with Federal Clean Water Act and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program; 5 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX o Implementing construction -related Best Management Practices (BMP's) and Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) criteria; and o Provide storm drain system, energy dissipaters and standard conditions. Furthermore, no active or potentially active faults were found and the project site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Fault Rupture Hazard Zone. Therefore, with the incorporation of the mitigation measures, impacts associated with causing serious public health or safety problems would be less than significant. 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. This finding may not be made if the review authority finds that alternate easements for access or use will be provided, and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously required by the public. The proposed map is located within a private gated community. Access easements within this gated community are private property. Access to the gated community is from public streets at Diamond Bar Boulevard and Grand Avenue. The proposed map will not affect these public streets. (k) The discharges sewerage from the proposed subdivision into the community source system would not result in violation of existing requirements prescribed by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board; An EIR prepared for TTM 53430 reviewed the environmental issue of water quality. To reduce water quality impacts to a level of less than significant, the proposed map is required to comply mitigation measures within the Mitigation Program that include compliance with Regional Water Quality Control Board, Federal Clean WaterAct and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program, implementing construction -related Best Management Practices (BMP's) and Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) criteria. With project design features related to the storm drain system, energy dissipaters, standard conditions of approval, mitigation measures, potentially significant wafer quality impacts would be reduced to levels less than significant. (1) A preliminary soils report or geological hazard report does not indicate adverse soils or geological conditions and the subdivider has provided sufficient information to the satisfaction of the City Engineer or 6 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX Council that the conditions can be corrected in the plan for the development; or An EIR prepared for TTM 53430 reviewed the environmental issue of soils and geological hazard. As referenced in Finding (i), the mitigation measures prescribed in the Mitigation Monitoring Program will reduce potential geologic and soil impacts to a level less than significant. (m) The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable provisions of this Title, the Development Code, any other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, and the Subdivision Map Act. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential (RR). It will be graded in compliance with the City's applicable hillside management standards. The physical size and design of the proposed subdivision will allow for compliance with the City's Development Code standards for the RR zoning district. Furthermore, the proposed map is consistent with Title 21, the City's subdivision ordinance and the Subdivision Map Act requirements as processed herein. 5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2003051102) and recommends that the City Council approve TTM 53430 and the Mitigation Monitoring Program subject to the following conditions and Standard Conditions attached here to and referenced here in: a. GENERAL (1) This approval shall be null and void and of no affect unless the Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2003052202) is certified and Tentative Tract Map No. 53430, the Mitigation Monitoring Program and Zone Change No. 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03 and Tree Permit No. 2005-10 are approved. b. SITE DEVELOPMENT (1) Walls/retaining walls located on Lots 25 and 26, Lot 31 (secondary access/Rocky Trail Road), Lot "A" trail and maintenance easement and on the west side of Alamo Heights shall be constructed from Architectural Shotcrete with irrigated pockets in the wall for plant material. Plant material shall be the kind that cascades down the wall. Prior to final map 7 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX approval, applicant shall provide retaining wall plan delineating the irrigation and species, quantity and size of the plant material. Trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size and planted eight feet on center. Shrubs shall be a minimum 5 gallon size and planted three feet on center. All landscaping/irrigation plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. (2) All other walls shall be constructed from decorative material such as split face block, etc. to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. (3) The retaining walls on Lots 25 and 26 adjacent to Street "B" shall be designed as two retaining walls, thereby reducing the height of each wall, with a planter area between the walls. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall provide a plan delineating two retaining walls with planter, irrigation, species, quantity and size of the plant material. Trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size and planted eight feet on center. Shrubs shall be a minimum 5 gallon size and planted three feet on center. All landscaping/irrigation plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. (4) The two ten -foot high retaining walls for Lot 31: Provide a five foot wide planter area adjacent to the pad and the first retaining wall, and heavily landscape the five foot planter area as well as the planting areas between the walls to reduce the visual and aesthetic impact from Street "A" and Lot 31. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall provide a plan delineating the two retaining walls with planter areas, irrigation, species, quantity and size of the plant material for Planning Division review and approval. (5) Retaining walls on the following Lots shall not exceed the exposed height as delineated in Exhibit "A" as follows: Lots 13, 14, 15, and 16 Lots 27, 28, 29, 42 and 43 Lot A Maximum exposed height — 10 feet Maximum exposed height — 5 feet Maximum exposed height — 0 feet (6) A trail is located within the project site. Prior to final map, the applicant shall submit a detailed plan indicating trail width, Fn Planning Commission Resolution No, 2005 -XX maximum slopes, physical conditions, drainage, weed control and trail surface constructed from decomposed "granite in accordance with City Master Trail Plan for the Parks and Recreation Director's review and approval. (7) Prior to final map approval, applicant shall make a "good -faith" effort to obtain an additional 50 foot wide off-site grading easement across Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of Tract 32482 and Lot 96 of Tract 30578 which have rear properties adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive. The applicant shall provide written permission to the satisfaction of the City Engineer from the property owners of said lots affected by the off-site grading. If the 50 foot wide easement is obtained, applicant shall provide irrigation and landscaping for the 50 wide foot easement on said lots and existing 40 foot wide easement adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive for a total of approximately 90 feet wide. Applicant shall maintain this 90 foot easement until the responsibility becomes part of the homeowners association. If the applicant is unable to get the additional off-site grading easement from any one of the above mentioned lots of Tracts 32482 and 30578, the applicant shall submit plans with alternative design delineating retaining walls not to exceed a maximum exposed height of 15 feet subject to the Community Development Director's review and approval prior to the issuance of any permits. (8) Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit a landscape/irrigation plan for the grading easement(s) adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive for the Community Development Director's review and approval. Trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size and planted eight feet on center. Shrubs shall be a minimum 5 gallon size and planted three feet on center. C. STREET IMPROVEMENT (1) Prior to final map recordation, the applicant shall submit plans delineating the improvement and extension of Alamo Heights Drive for the Public Works/Engineering Department review and approval. The improvement and extension shall align with and be compatible with Vesting Tract Parcel Map No.53670. The improvement and extension of Alamo Heights Drive shall be completed prior to final inspection of grading activities. (2) Emergency secondary access from Rocky Trail Road into the project area and the access road to the sanitary lift station 9 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX shall be constructed in accordance with the Fire Department requirements and to the satisfaction of the Public Works/Engineering Department. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall submit plans delineating the design of the secondary access and roads to the sanitary lift station to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review and approval. Said plans shall include landscapinglirrigation at the terminus of Rocky Trail Road for the secondary access. (3) Cul-de-sac in accordance with all applicable City standards shall be constructed at the terminus of Rock Trail Road. d. GRADING (1) As noted in the reports by Neblett and Associates, significant additional investigation and analysis of the development shall be required as the project proceeds. The findings of that investigation could result in changes to the recommended remedial grading, the establishment of building setback zones not currently recommended, and changes to other recommendations within the existing reports. That future investigation shall include a detailed subsurface investigation to more accurately evaluate the geotechnical conditions for each slope onsite and shall particularly focus on the edge conditions of the tract as noted in the response report by Neblett and Associates. In addition, the investigation shall include additional laboratory testing of soil samples collected to further evaluate site conditions and engineering properties of the earth materials, including the strength parameters used in the slope stability analysis and deep fill settlement calculations. (2) All buttress back -cuts and remedial grading shall be final designed to be contained within the tract boundaries unless an offsite easement is executed by an adjacent landowner. Remedial grading limits, buttress keys and back -cuts, etc. shall be placed on the final 40 -scale grading plan to indicate final soil disturbance limits prior to approval of grading plan submittal of final tract map approval, whichever comes first. (3) Any identified geologic 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 "Restricted Use Area." The owner 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. 10 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX (4) Concurrently with the precise grading plan check, the debris basin access road surfaces shall be approved by both the Los Angeles County Fire Department and Los Angeles County Public Works (5) The applicant shall provide gates at the debris access roads to prevent access to non -maintenance personnel. e. FIRE DEPARTMENT (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 interior 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 installed, tested and extended over 150 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. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior to construction. (5) This property is located within the area described by the Fire Department a "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone" (formerly Fire Zone 4). A Fuel Modification Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to final map approval. (Contact Fuel Modification Unit, Fire Station #32, 605 North Angeleno Avenue, Azusa, CA 91702-2904, phone # 626-969-5205). (6) 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 required. (7) Applicant shall provide fire flow for public fire hydrants at this location at 1250 gallons per minute at 20 psi for duration of 2 hours, over and above maximum daily domestic demand. 11 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX Provide one hydrant flowing simultaneously, one of which shall be the furthest from the public water source. (8) Twelve fire hydrants shall be Installed by the applicant as required by the Fire Department. (9) All hydrants shall measure 6" x 4" x 2 '/2" brass or bronze, conforming to current AWWA standard C503 or approval equal. All on-site hydrants The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: Millennium Diamond Road Partners, LLC, 3731 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 850, Los Angeles, CA 90010 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2006, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. AIN Joe McManus, Chairman I, Nancy Fong, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of January 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner: NOES: Commissioner: ABSENT: Commissioner: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Nancy Fong, Secretary 12 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS (DEVELOPMENT) Project #: TTM NO. 53430, Zone Change No. 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03 and Tree Permit No. 2005-10 Subject: 48 Lot Residential Subdivision Applicant: Millenium Diamond Road Partners, LLC Location: Directly south of Rocky Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive west of Horizon Lane ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 839-7032, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1. 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 Tentative Map No. 53430 (TTM 53430) 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. 13 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -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 Resolutions of Approval Nos. 2005 -XX, 2005 -XX and 2005 -XX Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations 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 are not limited to site plan, landscape/irrigation plans, grading plans, etc., incorporating all conditions of approval shall be submitted by the applicant for Planning Division review and approval prior to plan check submittal. 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 project 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 and Public Works/Engineering Department and Mitigation Monitoring, etc.) 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 14 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 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 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 with in 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 and Development Services Department/Planning Division an Affidavit of Acceptance stating that they are aware of it agreed to accept all the conditions of this approval. Further, this approval shall not be effective until the applicant pays all remaining Planning Division fees. 2. Pursuant to Subdivision Map Act Section 66463.5, TTM 53430 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 approval's expiration date. Final map approval will not be granted unless the map is in substantial compliance with TTM 53430 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 TTM 53430, except as conditions herein, and as conditioned in Zone Change No. 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005 -03 and Tree Permit No.2005-10 submitted to and approval by the Planning Commission collectively attached hereto as Exhibit "A" -the subdivision map, Exhibit "B" - Mitigation Monitoring Program dated November XX, 2005, and Exhibit "C" - Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2003051102) dated August 17, 2005 and Update information for VTTM 53430 Environmental Impact Report dated October 13, 2005 as modified herein. 2. The project site shall be developed in substantial conformance with TTM 53430, except as conditions herein, and as conditioned in Zone Change No. 15 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03 and Tree Permit No. 2005-10 submitted to and recommended approval by the Planning Commission to the City Council collectively attached hereto as Exhibit "A" -the subdivision map, Exhibit "D" - Mitigation Monitoring Program dated November XX, 2005, and Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2003051102) dated August 17, 2005 and Update information for VTTM 53430 Environmental Impact Report dated October 13, 2005 as modified herein. 3. The Mitigation Monitoring Program outlined in Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2003051102) 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 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. 4. Proposed future custom single-family residential units shall comply with the City's Development Review process. 5. Prior to final map recordation or priorto grading permit issuance (which ever occurs first), the applicant shall negotiate to annex into "The Country Estates" Homeowners Association. If annexation occurs, each lot of TTM 53430 shall be subject to "The Country Estates" Covenant, the Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's). 6. A Home Owner's Association (HOA) shall be formed. The HOA shall have Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) that are compatible with the "The Country Estates" Homeowners Association CC&R's. The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the homeowners association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Public Works/Engineering Department and the City Attorney. The CC&Rs shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of any City permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The homeowners association shall submit to the Planning Division a list of the name and address of the officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. 7. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Division a list of the name and address of their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and when ever said information changes. 16 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 8. 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 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. 9. 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. 10. 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 30 feet from front property line; (b) Side yard setbacks minimum 10 and 15 feet 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 of 40 feet; (d) Rear yard setback minimum 25 feet from the edge of the buildable pad or rear property line, whichever is applicable; and (e) Buildable pad coverage with structures shall not exceed 30 percent; (f) Accessory structures shall utilize setback distances from the edge of pad or property line whichever is applicable and be consistent with the Rural Residential zoning district at the time of permit issuance. 11. 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. 12. 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. 17 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 13. 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. 14. All lighting fixtures adjacent to interior property lines shall be approved by the Planning Division as to type, orientation and height. E. LANDSCAPE, PRESERVED AND PROTECTED TREES Prior to final map approval, a detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval. 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. 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 EIR's Mitigation Program and submit the plan to the Planning Division for review and approval. Mitigation shall include on site and/or offsite preservation and or restoration at no less than 1:1 acreage ratio. The native trees protected under the City's tree preservation and protection standards require a minimum replacement ratio of 3:1. It is estimated that 348 coast live oak, 250 scrub oak and 270 southern California black walnuts will be removed by the project's development, totaling to 868 trees. However, mitigation offsite shall be in accordance with the requirements and approval of the California Department of Fish and Game. If in -lieu fees are utilized 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 City permits, the applicant shall submit a revegetation landscape plan and irrigation plan for slopes within the project site for the City's review and approval. Said slope shall be landscaped at the completion of grading activities. All slope planting and irrigation and revegetation areas shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for the units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that the vegetation is in satisfactory condition. 18 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 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. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS 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. The applicant shall obtain a permit from the Los Angeles County Public Works Department for work within its right-of-way or connection to its facilities. 3. 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. 4. Prior to final map approval and when final map is submitted for plan check, a title report/guarantee showing all fee owners, interest holders, and nature of interest shall be submitted. An updated title report/guarantee and subdivision guarantee shall be submitted ten (10) business days prior to final map approval. 19 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 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. Priorto 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. 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 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. 20 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 14 Applicant shall label and delineate on the final map any private drives or fire lanes to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 15. 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. 16. After the final map records; applicant shall submit to the Public Works/Engineering Department, at no costto 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 Engineering Division. 17. 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. 18. All improvements for the subject tract shall be coordinated with any existing or proposed maps including Tract Map 53670. 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 an Auto CADD format defined by the City for all related plans, at no cost to the City. 21. All activities/improvements proposed for this map shall be wholly contained within the boundaries of the map. Should any off-site activities/improvements be required, approval shall be obtained by the applicant from the affected property owner and the City as required by the City Engineer. 22. Applicant shall submit document(s) from Diamond Bar Country Estates Association indicating the project will have proper/adequate right -of -entry to the subject site. 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. 21 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 2. Retaining wall design and calculations shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Division 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 and shall be approved by the Public Works/Engineering Department. 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 and Development Services 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. The maximum grade of driveways serving building pad areas shall be 15 percent. 7. 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 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. 22 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 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. 8. Prior to issuance of grading permits, storm drain improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer and Los Angeles County and surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all drainage facilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit an erosion control plan which shall be approved by the City Engineer. The erosion control plan shall be made in accordance to the City's NPDES requirements. 23 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 13. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit a stockpile plan showing the proposed location for stockpile for grading export materials, and the route of transport for the City Engineer's review and approval 14. Applicant shall prepare a horizontal control plan and submit concurrently with the grading plan for review and approval. 15. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a pre -construction meeting shall be held at the project site with the grading contractor, applicant, and city grading inspector at least 48 hours prior to commencing grading operations. 16. Applicant shall submit rough Grade certifications by project soils engineer prior to issuance of building permits for the foundations of structures. Retaining wall permits may be issued without a rough grade certificate. 17. Applicant shall submit final grade certifications by project soils and civil engineers to the Public Works/Engineering Department prior to the issuance of any project final ins pectionslcertificate of occupancy. C. DRAINAGE 1. All terrace drains and drainage channels shall be constructed in muted earth tones, native rock or as required by the Director so as not to impart adverse visual impacts. Terrace drains shall follow 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. Prior to placement of any dredged or fill material into any U.S.G.S. blue line stream bed, a 404 permit shall be obtained from the Army Corps of Engineers and an agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game shall be obtained and submitted to the City Engineer. 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 County of Los Angeles and all fees required shall be paid by the applicant. 24 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 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, the applicant shall submit a complete hydrology and hydraulic study which 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. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a final drainage study and final drainage/storm drain plan in a 24" x 36" sheet format to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and Los Angeles Public Works Department. 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. 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a comprehensive maintenance plan/program shall be submitted by the applicant concurrently with the storm drain plans to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. 9. 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." 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. 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. 25 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 4. New street centerline monuments shall be set at the 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 building occupancy, applicant shall construct base and pavement for all streets in accordance with soils report prepared by a California registered soils engineer and approved by the City Engineer or as otherwise directed by the City Engineer. 7. Prior the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall install street signs at all intersections within the tract per Public Works/Engineering Department requirement. 8. Prior to issuance of building permits, a house numbering plans shall be submitted to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review and approved and each lot shall be identified by the approved address. 9. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. E. UTILITIES Prior to final map recordation, 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 26 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX domestic and fire flows as may be required by the City Engineer, WVW D and Fire Department. 4. Prior to final map, the applicant shall submit to the City written certification from all utility companies (i.e. water, phone electric, gas and cable TV, etc.) and any other service related to the site shall be available to serve the proposed project. Such letters shall be submitted 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, the 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 City and 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 Department 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 Department and County Sanitation District Standards prior to occupancy. 27 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX G. TRAFFIC MITIGATIONS All traffic mitigations shall be implemented and constructed in accordance with the Traffic Report dated December 2003 prepared by TranSolutions and conditions of project approval for the TTM 53430 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: Retaining wall design and calculations shall be submitted to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review and approval concurrently with the grading plan check. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE PREVENTION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 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. All required fire hydrants shall be installed and tested and accepted prior to construction. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction. 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a fuel modification plan, landscape/irrigation plan prepared by a registered landscape architect to the Fire Department for review and approval. 5. Prior to recordation, the final map shall comply with all Fire Department requirements. 28 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 44P PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-01, VARIANCE NO. 2005-03 AND TREE PERMIT NO. 2005-10 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 53430, A 48 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION FOR THE EVENTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF 48 SINGLE-FAMILY CUSTOM HOMES, THE CONSTRUCTION OR RETAINING WALLS THAT EXCEED SIX FEET IN EXPOSED HEIGHT AND THE REMOVAL/REPLACEMENT OF OAK AND WALNUT TREES. THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED DIRECTLY SOUTH OF ROCKY TRAIL ROAD AND ALAMO HEIGHTS DRIVE AND WEST OF HORIZON LANE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. (APN NOS. 8713-023-002, 8713-023, 8713-023-005, 8713-024-001 AND 8713-024-002) RECITALS The property owner/applicant, Millennium Diamond Road Partners, LLC, has filed an application for Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03 and Tree Permit No. 2005-10 related to Tentative Tract Map No. 53430 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit, Variance and Tree Permit shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. On November 23, 2005, public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 180 property owners of record within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site. On December 1, 2005, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. 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 by November 30, 2005. Additionally and pursuant to Public Resource Code, Section 21092.5, agencies commenting on the project's Environmental Impact report were notified in writing of the December 13, 2005, Planning Commission public hearing on November 23, 2005. 3. On December 13, 2005, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application and continued the public hearing to January 10, 2006. 4. On January 10, 2006, the Planning Commission opened the continued public hearing and concluded the public hearing on the application. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX B. RESOLUTION. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the project identified above in this Resolution required and Environmental Impact Report (EIR). EIR No. 2004-01 (SCH # 200305102) has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 45 day public review period for the EIR began August 20, 2004, and ended October 4, 2004. Furthermore, the Planning Commission has reviewed the EIR and related documents in reference to the Application. 3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence before this Planning Commission that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to vacant land located directly south of RockyTrail Road and Alamo Heights Drive and west of Horizon Lane within a gated community identified as "The Country Estates" which consists of large single-family homes. The project site is directly south of Alamo Heights Drive which would be extended to provide access to the project site with Rocky Trail Road as a secondary emergency access. (b) The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential (RR) Maximum 1 DU/AC. (c) The project site is within the Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 Square Feet (R-1-20,000) Zone. However, Zone Change No.2005-03 within Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005—XX 2 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX recommends that the City Council approve the zone change from R- 1-20,000 to Rural Residential (RR) for General Plan compliance. (d) Generally to the north, south, east and west, the Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 square feet (R-1-20,000) and R- 1-40,000 zoning districts surround the project site. (e) The Application request is to certify the Environmental Impact Report; to subdivide a 80 acres site into 48 parcels with a minimum lot size of one acre for the eventual development of 48 single-family custom homes; to change the existing zoning from R-1-20,000 to Rural Residential (RR); to grade and develop in a hillside area; to allow retaining walls with an exposed height of more than six feet; and to remove and replace oak and walnut trees. Conditional Use Permit/Hillside Management The Planning Commission shall evaluate a Conditional Use Permit for hillside development based on the following objectives and required findings: (f) 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; The proposed map is a 48 lot residential subdivision for the eventual development of 48 single-family custom homes. The map approval includes grading the project site in a manner that will create buildable pads for each lot, Streets "A" and Street `B" within the map boundaries and the extension of Alamo Height Drive and Lot A for open space revegetation and Lot B for sewer lift station.. 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 slope 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. 3 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX (g) The preservation of natural features and appearances through restrictions on successive padding and terracing of building sites; The proposed map is not the type of project that would tend to utilize successive padding and terracing of building sites. The project is located within a gated community that has a General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential which prescribes minimum lot sizes at one acre and with a maximum of one dwelling unit per acre. The zoning designation as prescribe in Zone Change 2005-03 for this project also requires minimum lot sizes of one acre with a maximum of one dwelling unit per acre. As such, the proposed map is in compliance with the General Plan and will be able to accommodate the applicable development standards of the RR zoning district as well as development standards set forth in the conditions of approval. (h) The retention of major natural topographic features, drainage courses, steep slopes, watershed areas, vernal pools, view corridors, and scenic vistas; The EIR (SCH #2003051102) has been prepared for the proposed project and has analyzed visual impacts, scenic resources, drainage courses, watershed areas, steep slopes and vernal pools. Although the project site is currently undeveloped vacant land, it does not contain any unique aesthetic features or scenic resources. Topographic features and slopes have been addressed above in Finding (1] and with mitigation measures from the Mitigation Monitoring Program that will be incorporated into the proposed project, it is anticipated that the environmental impacts related to topographic features and slopes will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. Pursuant to the EIR, the proposed project site lies within the "Los Angeles -San Gabriel' Hydrology Unit and is in the San Gabriel River watershed boundaries. The watershed originates in the San Gabriel Mountains and eventually water discharges into the Pacific Ocean. For the project site, a drainage plan was prepared. The project site, as undeveloped land, does not contain any existing drainage facilities. Storm water currently drains into an un -named tributary of Tonner Canyon Creek. Off-site areas and manufactured slopes within the footprint of the project site would be routed via brow ditches to the southern project boundary. After construction of the project, storm water runoff from the site would continue to drain into Tonner Canyon Creek. Therefore, the existing drainage pattern would not be substantially altered. Additionally, vernal pools are not related to the proposed project. 4 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX According to the EIR, prominent visual characteristics of the project site are the natural landscape features, including the undeveloped hillside and the natural vegetation within the project boundaries. There are no exceptional or unique aesthetic features or scenic vistas present within the project boundaries. Only existing homes adjacent to the project site or on adjacent ridgelines have views of the project site. With the incorporation of mitigation measure such as: using landform grading techniques in order to minimize the visual impacts to the natural topography and maintain the look of natural slopes to the maximum extent, revegetation of manufacture slopes on the project site with natural and drought tolerant plant material, and the planting of vegetation associated with the future new homes will contribute to the visual continuity of the project site with the surrounding environment. As a result, aesthetic and visual impacts associated with the proposed project will be less than significant. (i) The preservation and enhancement of prominent landmark features, significant ridgeline, natural rock outcropping, protected trees and woodlands (Chapter 22.28, Tree Preservation and Protection), and other areas of special natural beauty; The preservation and enhancement of prominent landmark features and significant ridgeline is addressed in the above referenced Findings (0 and (h). According to the EIR, natural rock outcroppings do not exist at the project site. According to the EIR, focused surveys were prepared for native trees and special status plants/vegetation. The potential significance of environmental impacts on biological resources has been assessed. The proposed project will impact 7.94 acres of oak woodland and 5.20 acres of walnut woodland. It is estimated that approximately 348 coast live oak and 250 scrub oak and 279 southern California black walnut trees will be impacted by this project. The EIR concluded that with the implementation of mitigation measures as prescribed in the Mitigation Monitoring Program summarized as follows, it is anticipated that the proposed map and cumulative biological resources impacts would be reduced to a level less than significant. The applicant will implement the mitigation plan, as approved by the City and according to the guidelines and performance standards of the plan. The mitigation measures are as follows: A combination of on-site or off-site preservation, enhancement, and/or restoration at no less than a 1:1 acreage ratio; 5 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX ■ Native tree protection at a 3:1 ratio to replace 348 coast live oak trees, 250 scrub oak and 279 California black walnuts; ■ Biological monitoring; ■ Obtain appropriate permits from California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State Water Resources Control Board; ■ Lighting plan reviewed and approved by the City demonstrating that lighting from the project will be directed away from natural open space areas. ■ Develop a planting schedule which requires planting to occur in late fall early winter between October 30, to January 30; and ■ Lighting plan reviewed and approved by the City demonstrating that lighting from the project will be directed away from natural open space areas. (j) The utilization of varying setbacks, building heights, foundation design and compatible building forms, materials, and colors which serve to blend buildings into the terrain; The proposed map will cause the eventual development of 48 custom 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 utilization of clustered sites and buildings on more gently sloping terrain so as to reduce grading alterations on steeper slopes; As referenced above in Finding (g), the proposed map is not the type of project that would tend to utilize clustering of sites and building due to the General Plan land use designation and proposed zoning district which is compliance with the General Plan. The project is located within a gated community that has a General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential which prescribes minimum lot sizes at one acre and with a maximum of one dwelling unit per acre. The zoning designation as prescribe in Zone Change 2005-03 for this project also requires minimum lot sizes of one acre with a maximum of one dwelling unit per acre. As such, the proposed map is in compliance with the General Plan and will be able to accommodate the applicable development standards of the RR zoning district as well 6 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005•XX as development standards set forth in the conditions of approval. Furthermore Finding (0 referenced above, discusses grading alterations on slopes. (I) The utilization of building designs, locations, and arrangements, which serve to avoid a continuous intrusive Skyline effect and which afford a few privacy and protection; 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 Revlew 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) The preservation and introduction of plant materials are to protect slopes from soil erosion and slippage and minimize the visual effect of grading and construction and hillside area; and Grading will create manufactured slopes ata 2: 9(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, 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. (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 south of Rocky Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive and west of Horizon Lane. The project proposes two streets, identified as Streets 'A" and `B" and the extension ofAlamo Heights that will be the main access to the project site. However, the applicant will be required to improve and extend Alamo Heights Drive to align with and be compatible with approved Vesting Tract Parcel Map No.53670. All improvements and the extension of Alamo Heights Drive will be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 7 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX Variance (o) There are special circumstances applicable to the property (e.g., location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other conditions), so that the strict application of the City's 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; In accordance to Development Code Section 22.52.020, 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. The applicant proposes retaining walls throughout the project site due to the topography of the site and grading activities related to cut and fills that are needed to prepare the site for 48 lots with buildable pads, streets and access points. Several of the proposed grading walls are in excess of the maximum allowed exposed height of six feet. The retaining walls in excess of the allowed six foot height are as follows: Lot 31 The applicant is required to provide a five foot wide planter area located adjacent to the pad and the first retaining wall and landscape the planting areas to reduce the visual and aesthetic impact from Street "A" and Lot 31. Lots 25 and 26 The wall shall be designed as two walls, thereby reducing the height of each wall with planting areas between the walls to reduce the visual impact. Lot A The retaining walls proposed for the trail easement/maintenance road will remain at the ten foot height. These walls vary in their linear design and will not create a tunnel effect (i.e. walls on both sides of the trail) and their impact can be reduced by the plant material. The retaining wall proposed along Alamo Heights for the purpose of constructing the road is needed due to elevations of existing lots that have rear property lines at Alamo Heights and to align with and be compatible with the extension of Alamo Heights that will serve approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 53670 (Yeh/five lot 8 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX subdivision). The applicant has a 40 foot easement to grade and construct this retaining wall. However, the applicant is working with the owners of Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of Tract 32482 and Lot 96 of Tract 30578 in order to gain an additional 50 foot easement. The additional 50 feet will eliminate the proposed retaining wall and in its place will be a landscaped 2:1 slope adjacent to Alamo Heights. The slope will be planted and maintained by the applicant and eventually by the homeowners association of the proposed map. In the event, that the applicant does not gain the additional 50 foot easement, this retaining wall will be designed and constructed as two walls with landscape area between the walls. All retaining walls proposed on Lots 25 and 26, Lot "A" and on the west side of Alamo Heights will be constructed from Architectural Shotcrete with pockets that will contain plant material and irrigation. The Shotcrete has a natural rock appearance and the pockets of plant material will enhance that natural appearance. All other retaining walls will be constructed from decorative material such as split face block. (p) 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 Item (I), 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 due to the constraint of the project site cause by topography as described in Finding (1) above. (q) Granting the Variance is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; 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, service road/trail easement and the extension of Alamo Heights which is the main access to the project site. Therefore, granting the Variance will be consistent with the General Plan. The project area does not have a specific plan. (r) The proposed entitlement would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; and 9 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 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 Architectural Shotcrete for wall construction 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 is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. (s) The proposed entitlement has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Planning Commission hereby finds that the project identified above in this Resolution required and Environmental Impact Report (EIR). EIR No. 2004-01 (SCH # 200305102) has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 45 day public review period for the EIR began August 20, 2004, and ended October 4, 2004. Furthermore, the Planning Commission has reviewed the EIR and related documents in reference to the Application. Tree Permit (t) Preservation of the tree is not feasible and would compromise the property owner's reasonable use and enjoyment of property or surrounding land and appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented in compliance with Section 22.38.130 (Tree Replacement/Relocation Standards According to the EIR prepared for the project site, focused surveys were prepared for native trees and special status plants/vegetation. The potential significance of environmental impacts on biological resources has been assessed. The proposed project will impact 7.94 acres of oak woodland and 5.20 acres of walnut woodland. It is estimated that approximately 348 coast live oak and 250 scrub oak and 279 southern Califomia black walnut trees will be impacted by this project. The EIR concluded that with the implementation of mitigation measures as prescribed in the Mitigation Monitoring Program summarized as follows, it is anticipated that the proposed map and cumulative biological resources impacts would be reduced to a level less than significant. 10 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX • The site for off-site mitigation will be determined in coordination with the project applicant, the City and resource agencies; • A combination of on-site or off-site preservation, enhancement, and/or restoration at no less than a 1:1 acreage ratio; ■ Native tree protection at a 3:1 ratio to replace 348 coast live oak trees, 250 scrub oak and 279 California black walnuts; ■ Biological monitoring; ■ Obtain appropriate permits from California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State Water Resources Control Board; ■ Lighting plan reviewed and approved by the City demonstrating that lighting from the project will be directed away from natural open space areas; and ■ Develop a planting schedule which requires planting to occur in late fall early winter between October 30, to January 30; 5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2003051102) and recommends that the City Council approve TTM 53430 and the Mitigation Monitoring Program subject to the following the following conditions and Standard conditions attached and referenced herein: a. GENERAL (1) This approval shall be null and void and of no affect unless the EIR (SCH #2003052202) is certified, and Tentative Tract Map No. 53430, the Mitigation Monitoring Program and Zone Change No. 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03 and Tree Permit No. 2005-10 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 (1) Walls/retaining walls located on Lots 25 and 26, Lot 31 (secondary access/Rocky Trail Road), Lot "A" trail and maintenance easement and on the west side of Alamo Heights shall be constructed from Architectural Shotcrete with irrigated pockets in the wall for plant material. Plant material shall be the kind that cascades down the wall. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall provide retaining wall plan delineating the irrigation and species, quantity and size of the plant material. Trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size and 11 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX planted eight feet on center. Shrubs shall be a minimum 5 gallon size and planted three feet on center. All landscaping/irrigation plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. (2) All other walls shall be constructed from decorative material such as split face block, etc. to the satisfaction of the Director. (3) The retaining walls on Lots 25 and 26 adjacent to Street "B" shall be designed as two retaining walls, thereby reducing the height of each wall, with a planter area between the walls. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall provide a plan delineating two retaining walls with planter, irrigation, species, quantity and size of the plant material. Trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size and planted eight feet on center. Shrubs shall be a minimum 5 gallon size and planted three feet on center. All landscaping/irrigation plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. (4) Two retaining walls 10 feet high for Lot 31: Provide a five foot wide planter area adjacent to the pad and the first retaining wall, and heavily landscape the five foot planter area adjacent to the pad and the planting areas between the walls to reduce the visual and aesthetic impact from Street "A" and Lot 31. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall provide a plan delineating the two retaining walls with planter areas, irrigation, species, quantity and size of the plant material.. Trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size and planted eight feet on center. Shrubs shall be a minimum 5 gallon size and planted three feet on center. All landscaping/irrigation plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. (5) Retaining walls on the following Lots shall not exceed the exposed height as delineated in Exhibit "A" as follows: Lots 13, 14, 15, and 16 Lots 27, 28, 29, 42 and 43 Lot A Maximum exposed height — 10 feet Maximum exposed height — 5 feet Maximum exposed height — 10 feet (6) A trail is located within the project site. Prior to final map, the applicant shall submit a detailed plan indicating trail width, maximum slopes, physical conditions, drainage, weed control 12 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX and trail surface constructed from decomposed granite in accordance with City Master Trail Plan for the Parks and Recreation Directors review and approval. (7) Prior to final map approval, applicant shall make a "good -faith" effort to obtain an additional 50 foot wide off-site grading easement across Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of Tract 32482 and Lot 96 of Tract 30578 which have rear properties adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive. The applicant shall provide written permission to the satisfaction of the City Engineer from the property owners of said lots affected by the off-site grading. If the 50 foot wide easement is obtained, applicant shall provide irrigation and landscaping for the 50 wide foot easement on said lots and existing 40 foot wide easement adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive for a total of approximately 90 feet wide. Applicant shall maintain this 90 foot easement until the responsibility becomes part of the homeowners association. If the applicant is unable to get the additional off-site grading easement from any one of the above mentioned lots of Tracts 32482 and 30578, the applicant shall submit plans with alternative design delineating retaining walls not to exceed a maximum exposed height of 15 feet subject to the Community Development Director's review and approval prior to final map. (8) Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit a landscape/irrigation plan for the grading easement (s) adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive for the Community Development Director's review and approval. Trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size and planted eight feet on center. Shrubs shall be a minimum 5 gallon size and planted three feet on center. C. STREET IMPROVEMENT (1) Prior to final map recordation, the applicant shall submit plans delineating the improvement and extension of Alamo Heights Drive for the Public Works/Engineering Department review and approval. The improvement and extension shall align with and be compatible with Vesting Tract Parcel Map No.53670. The improvement and extension of Alamo Heights Drive shall be completed prior to final inspection of grading activities. (2) Emergency secondary access from Rocky Trail Road into the project area and the access road to the sanitary lift station shall be constructed in accordance with the Fire Department 13 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005-Xx requirements and to the satisfaction of the Public Works/Engineering Department. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall submit plans delineating the design of the secondary access and roads to the sanitary lift station to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review and approval. Said plans shall include landscaping/irrigation at the terminus of Rocky Trail Road for the secondary access. (3) Cul-de-sac in accordance with all applicable City standards shall be constructed at the terminus of Rock Trail Road. d. GRADING (1) As noted in the reports by Neblett and Associates, significant additional investigation and analysis of the development shall be required as the project proceeds. The findings of that investigation could result in changes to the recommended remedial grading, the establishment of building setback zones not currently recommended, and changes to other recommendations within the existing reports. The investigation shall include a detailed subsurface investigation to more accurately evaluate the geotechnical conditions for each slope onsite and shall particularly focus on the edge conditions of the tract as noted in the response report by Neblett and Associates. In addition, the investigation shall include additional laboratory testing of soil samples collected to further evaluate site conditions and engineering properties of the earth materials, including the strength parameters used in the slope stability analysis and deep fill settlement calculations. (2) All buttress back -cuts and remedial grading shall be final designed to be contained within the tract boundaries unless an offsite easement is executed by an adjacent landowner. Remedial grading limits, buttress keys and back -cuts, etc., shall be placed on the final 40 -scale grading plan to indicate final soil disturbance limits prior to approval of grading plan submittal of final tract map approval, whichever comes first. (3) Any identified geologic 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 "Restricted Use Area." The owner 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. 14 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX (4) Concurrently with the precise grading plan check, the debris basin access road surfaces shall be approved by both the Los Angeles County Fire Department and Los Angeles County Public Works. (5) The applicant shall provide gates at the debris access roads to prevent access to non -maintenance personnel. e. FIRE DEPARTMENT (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 b e extended to within 150 feet distance of any interior 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 installed, tested and extended over 150 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. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior to construction. (5) This property is located within the area described by the Fire Department a "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone" (formerly Fire Zone 4). A Fuel Modification Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to final map approval. (Contact Fuel Modification Unit, Fire Station #32, 605 North Angeleno Avenue, Azusa, CA 91702-2904, phone # 626-969-5205). (6) 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 required. (7) , Applicant shall provide fire flow for public fire hydrants at this location at 1250 gallons per minute at 20 psi for duration of 2 hours, over and above maximum daily domestic demand. Provide one hydrant flowing simultaneously, one of which shall 15 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX be the furthest from the public water source. (8) Twelve fire hydrants shall be Installed by the applicant as required by the Fire Department. (9) All hydrants shall measure 6" x 4" x 2 '/2' brass or bronze, conforming to current AWWA standard C503 or approval equal. All on-site hydrants The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: Millennium Diamond Road Partners, LLC, 3731 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 850, Los Angeles, CA 90010 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2006, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. Joe McManus, Chairman I, Nancy Fong, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted bythe Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of January 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner: NOES: Commissioner: ABSENT: Commissioner: ABSTAIN: Commissioner: ATTEST: Nancy Fong, Secretary 16 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX I I l l COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPMENT v'SERVICES DEPARTMENT 'knxivm^'i STANDARD CONDITIONS (DEVELOPMENT) Project #: TTM NO. 53430, Zone Change No. 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03 and Tree Permit No. 2005-10 Subject: 48 Lot Residential Subdivision Applicant: Millenium Diamond Road Partners, LLC Location: Directly south of Rocky Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive west of Horizon Lane ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (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 Tentative Map No. 53430 (TTM 53430) 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. (b) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City descendents. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any 17 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX claim, action of proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense thereof. 2. Applicant shall include signed copies of the Planning Commission Resolutions of Approval Nos. 2005 -XX, 2005 -XX and 2005 -XX Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations 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 site (such as but not limited to site plan, elevations landscape/irrigation plans, grading plans, etc.) incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted by the applicant for Planning Division review and approval prior to final map, grading permit issuance and plan check submittal. 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 project 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 and Public Works/Engineering Department and Mitigation Monitoring, etc.) 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 18 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 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 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 with in five days of this grant's approval. �i41-, I2111141if,]k&I 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 and Development Services Department/Planning Division an Affidavit of Acceptance stating that they are aware of it agreed to accept all the conditions of this approval. Further, this approval shall not be effective until the applicant pays all remaining Planning Division fees. 2. This approval is valid for three years. An extension of time may be requested in writing and shall only be considered if submittal to the City no less than 60 days prior to approval expiration's date. D. SITE DEVELOPMENT The project site shall be developed in substantial conformance with TTM 53430, except as conditions herein, and as conditioned in Zone Change No. 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005 -03 and Tree Permit No.2005-10 submitted to and approval by the Planning Commission collectively attached hereto as Exhibit "A" -the subdivision map, Exhibit "B" - Mitigation Monitoring Program dated December 6, 2005, and Exhibit "C" - Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2003051102) dated August 17, 2005, and Update information for VTTM 53430 Environmental Impact Report dated October 13, 2005, as modified herein. 2. The project site shall be developed in substantial conformance with TTM 53430, except as conditions herein, and as conditioned in Zone Change No. 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03 and Tree Permit No. 2005-10 submitted to and recommended approval by the Planning Commission to the City Council collectively attached hereto as Exhibit "A" -the subdivision map, Exhibit "D" - Mitigation Monitoring Program 19 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX dated November XX, 2005, and Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2003051102) dated August 17, 2005, and Update information for VTTM 53430 Environmental Impact Report dated October 13, 2005, as modified herein. 3. The Mitigation Monitoring Program outlined in Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2003051102) (EIR) and approved by the City shall be implemented, complied with and completed within five year. The mitigation monitoring fees shall be deposited with the City, 90 days prior to the issuance of a grading 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. 4. Proposed future custom single-family residential units shall comply with the City's Development Review process. 5. Prior to final map recordation or prior to grading permit issuance (which ever occurs first), the applicant shall negotiate to annex into "The Country Estates" Homeowners Association. If annexation occurs, each lot of TTM 53430 shall be subject to "The Country Estates" Covenant, the Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's). 6. A Home Owner's Association (HOA) shall be formed. The HOA shall have Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) that are compatible with the "The Country Estates" Homeowners Association CC&R's. The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the homeowners association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Public Works/Engineering Department and the City Attorney. The CC&Rs shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of any City permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The homeowners association shall submit to the Planning Division a list of the name and address of the officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. 7. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the Applicant shall complete and record a "Covenant and Agreement to Maintain a Single -Family Residence" on a form to be provided by the City. The covenant shall be completed and recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorders Office. 8. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Division a list of the name and address of their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and when ever said information changes. 20 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 9 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 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. 10. 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. 11. 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 30 feet from front property line; (b) Side yard setbacks minimum 10 and 15 feet 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 of 40 feet; (d) Rear yard setback minimum 25 feet from the edge of the buildable pad or rear property line, whichever is applicable; and (e) Buildable pad coverage with structures shall not exceed 30 percent; (f) Accessory structures shall utilize setback distances from the edge of pad or property line whichever is applicable and be consistent with the Rural Residential zoning district at the time of permit issuance. 12. 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. 13. 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. 21 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 14 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. 15. All lighting fixtures adjacent to interior property lines shall be approved by the Planning Division as to type, orientation and height. E. LANDSCAPE, PRESERVED AND PROTECTED TREES Prior to final map approval, a detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval. 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. 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 EIR's Mitigation Program and submit the plan to the Planning Division for review and approval. Mitigation shall include on site and/or offsite preservation and or restoration at no less than 1:1 acreage ratio. The native trees protected under the City's tree preservation and protection standards require a minimum replacement ratio of 3:1. It is estimated that 348 coast live oak, 250 scrub oak and 270 southern California black walnuts will be removed by the project's development, totaling to 868 trees. However, mitigation offsite shall be in accordance with the requirements and approval of the California Department of Fish and Game. If in -lieu fees are utilized 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 City permits, the applicant shall submit a revegetation landscape plan and irrigation plan for slopes within the project site for the City's review and approval. Said slope shall be landscaped at the completion of grading activities. All slope planting and irrigation and revegetation areas shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for the units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that the vegetation is in satisfactory condition. 22 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX F. SOLID WASTE 1. 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. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS 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. The applicant shall obtain a permit from the Los Angeles County Public Works Department for work within its right-of-way or connection to its facilities. 3. 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. 4. Prior to final map approval and when final map is submitted for plan check, a title report/guarantee showing all fee owners, interest holders, and nature of interest shall be submitted. An updated title report/guarantee and subdivision guarantee shall be submitted ten (10) business days prior to final map approval. 23 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 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. Priorto 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. 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 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. 24 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 14. Applicant shall label and delineate on the final map any private drives or fire lanes to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 15. 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. 16. 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 Engineering Division. 17. 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. 18. All improvements for the subject tract shall be coordinated with any existing or proposed maps including Tract Map 53670. 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 an Auto CADD format defined by the City for all related plans, at no cost to the City. 21. All activitieslim prove ments proposed for this map shall be wholly contained within the boundaries of the map. Should any off-site activities/improvements be required, approval shall be obtained by the applicant from the affected property owner and the City as required by the City Engineer. 22. Applicant shall submit document(s) from Diamond Bar Country Estates Association indicating the project will have proper/adequate right -of -entry to the subject site. 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. 25 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 2. Retaining wall design and calculations shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Division 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 and shall be approved by the Public Works/Engineering Department. 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 and Development Services 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. The maximum grade of driveways serving building pad areas shall be 15 percent. 7. 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 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. 26 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 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. 8. Prior to issuance of grading permits, storm drain improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer and Los Angeles County and surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all drainage facilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit an erosion control plan which shall be approved by the City Engineer. The erosion control plan shall be made in accordance to the City's NPDES requirements. 27 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 13. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit a stockpile plan showing the proposed location for stockpile for grading export materials, and the route of transport for the City Engineer's review and approval 14. Applicant shall prepare a horizontal control plan and submit concurrently with the grading plan for review and approval. 15. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a pre -construction meeting shall be held at the project site with the grading contractor, applicant, and city grading inspector at least 48 hours prior to commencing grading operations. 16. Applicant shall submit rough Grade certifications by project soils engineer prior to issuance of building permits for the foundations of structures. Retaining wall permits may be issued without a rough grade certificate. 17. Applicant shall submit final grade certifications by project soils and civil engineers to the Public Works/Engineering Department priorto the issuance of any project final inspections/certificate of occupancy. C. DRAINAGE All terrace drains and drainage channels shall be constructed in muted earth tones, native rock or as required by the Director so as not to impart adverse visual impacts. Terrace drains shall follow 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. Prior to placement of any dredged or fill material into any U.S.G.S. blue line stream bed, a 404 permit shall be obtained from the Army Corps of Engineers and an agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game shall be obtained and submitted to the City Engineer. 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 County of Los Angeles and all fees required shall be paid by the applicant. 28 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 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, the applicant shall submit a complete hydrology and hydraulic study which 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. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a final drainage study and final drainage/storm drain plan in a 24" x 36" sheet format to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and Los Angeles Public Works Department. 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. 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a comprehensive maintenance plan/program shall be submitted by the applicant concurrently with the storm drain plans to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. 9. 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." D. STREET IMPROVEMENT 1. 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. 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. 29 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX 4. New street centerline monuments shall be set at the 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 building occupancy, applicant shall construct base and pavementfor all streets in accordance with soils report prepared by a California registered soils engineer and approved by the City Engineer or as otherwise directed by the City Engineer. 7. Prior the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall install street signs at all intersections within the tract per Public Works/Engineering Department requirement. 8. Prior to issuance of building permits, a house numbering plans shall be submitted to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review and approved and each lot shall be identified by the approved address. 9. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. E. UTILITIES Prior to final map recordation, 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 30 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX domestic and fire flows as may be required by the City Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department, 4. Prior to final map, the applicant shall submit to the City written certification from all utility companies (i.e. water, phone electric, gas and cable TV, etc.) and any other service related to the site shall be available to serve the proposed project. Such letters shall be submitted 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, the 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 City and 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 Department 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 Department and County Sanitation District Standards prior to occupancy. 31 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX G. TRAFFIC MITIGATIONS All traffic mitigations shall be implemented and constructed in accordance with the Traffic Report dated December 2003 prepared by TranSolutions and conditions of project approval for the TTM 53430 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: Retaining wall design and calculations shall be submitted to the Building and Safety division for review and approval concurrently with the grading plan check. 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. All required fire hydrants shall be installed and tested and accepted prior to construction. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction. 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a fuel modification plan, land scapelirrigation plan prepared by a registered landscape architect to the Fire Department for review and approval. 5. Prior to recordation, the final map shall comply with all Fire Department requirements. 32 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005 -XX Letter to the Planning Commission Page 1 December 19, 2005 To: Chair Joe McManus `f Vice Chair Ruth M. Low ` ` Commissioner Dan Nolan Commissioner Kwang Ho Lee z Commissioner Tony Tomg Ms. Nancy Fong, Manager, Planning Division RE.: Millennium Development of Tentative Tract 53430 Dear Members of the Planning Commission and Manager of the Planning Division: We, the undersigned, are property owners on Kicking Horse Drive. Our properties are adjacent and contiguous to the proposed Tentative Tract Map 53430 of the Millennium Development. First, we would like to thank the committee for the action it took last Tuesday on December 13th. This letter is to further clarify and express our concerns and objection to the development at its current design stands. None of us have reached any type of agreement with the Millennium Development on any of their proposals, which encroach on our property and rights. There are three major issues that are summarized below: (1) The overall 45 feet deep additional landfill to raise the elevation of proposed Alamo Heights Drive from its current topography is absolutely unacceptable. The pad elevation of lots 13 to 16 should be lowered to the existing elevation with minor cut and fill for these lots. (2) The new Alamo Heights Drive should not be extended and filled beyond the existing map with an excessive landfill that eliminates the entire valley of waterway and wildlife. It would be best if the proposed properties are only accessible through Horizon Lane and Rocky Trail Road as shown in the existing maps. Should the Alamo Heights Drive be constructed, the road easement should be mutually agreed among all property owners and be subjected to the standards of roadway construction. The new roadway should be designed according to the rules of the Diamond Bar Country Estate and constructed equally on both sides of the road to preserve the existing waterway and wildlife. (3) The proposed retaining walls, if there are any, should not exceed the maximum height allowed (6 feet high from the existing ground surface) as specified by the city of Diamond Bar's zoning ordinance. All wildlife habitats inside our property should be protected. The developer should be responsible for any negative impact or destruction of wildlife on our property and shall restore and restitute the wildlife in addition to penalty compensation payable to the property owners. There has been no communication among us, the city staff, and the developer after the public hearing on Dec. 13th. This proposed Tentative Tract Map 53430 should not be approved and should be tabled until the developer has obtained agreements from the contiguous properly owners on their easement rights and the site design. Letter to the Planning Commission Sincerely Yours, 1. J SignaWFe Yuan Liu 22354 Kicking Hose Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 ZI 2. _j Signature Page 2 Date �'es — V Date Tim Chu 22360 Kicking Horse Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 3.::- S�L Signa tur Date Hofu 22368 Kicking Horse Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 4. t Signature David Leong 22372 Kicking Horse Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Date 5. -� IZ—( cj—O "Signature Date J---1 vn I'e'r I �j��o �( i 22376 Kicking Ho Drive, Di oma, Di oma nd Bar, CA 91765 Signatur Date '�/� / 3 GH/a'<1 22380 Kicking Horse Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Page 1 of 1 Ann Lungu From: John Bostick Obostick@millenter.com] Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 10:31 AM To: Ann Lungu; Nancy Fong Cc: charles yi Subject: Map 53430 Adjacent Land Owners Call Log Ann, Attached is the updated call log for the adjacent land owners. We have also attached the cover letters and FedEx receipts for plans we sent to Dr. Wu. It is important for the Planning Commissioners to note that we were in communication with Dr. Wu prior to the first Planning Commission Meeting. This is evidenced by the calls log and the fact that we sent him the plans via FedEx to his house prior to the first meeting. Therefore, his assertions that we are not communicating or working with him are patently false. We will give you another update after our meeting tonight. Sincerely, Millennium -Diamond Road Partners, LLC John Bostick, Project Manager Alamo Heights Grading Easement Adjacent Land Owners Mei C. Tien & Paul Chun 909 860-8258 2742 Rocky Trail Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Map # 111 NOTES: Not present at meeting on 5/18. 7/19 LM; 7/20 LM; 7/26 LM; 8/2 LM; 9/12 mailed invitation to meeting at City for 9/21; Not present at meeting 9/21 12130 LM said we could have someone translate if needed. Yuan -Lung Liu & Martha Lee 909 860-3737 22354 Kicking Horse Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Map # 166 NOTES: Present at meeting on 5/18 Signed support of easement letter on 9/16 did not attend meeting on 9/21 12/27 LM with cell phone number 12/28 Mr. Liu returned our call. He wants to wait to meet until his wife gets back from China in 3 weeks. We explained our hearing date is the 10th and we should try to meet before then but he reiterated he would prefer to wait until his wife returns. 12/30 LM asked to call us back at office or on cell phone 1/3 LM with the time and place of meeting on 1/5, requested their attendance at the meeting to discuss the options. Tim Zhu & Jian Rong Shen 909 860-9186 or mobile 626 890-1852 22360 Kicking Horse Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Map # 167 NOTES: Not present at meeting on 5/18; Charlie spoke with multiple times trying to arrange a meeting; Attended meeting on 9121; supportive of easement but did not sign anything, met and spoke with Charlie Liu and Nancy Fong at meeting. 12/27 LM with cell phone number at both numbers above 12/30 LM asked to call us back at office or on cell phone 113 Mr. Zhu returned our call and said he will be at the meeting on 1/5 Lo V & Alba Moesser 909 861-8845 22364 Kicking Horse Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Map # 168 NOTES: Present at meeting on 5/18. They are very supportive of our proposal. 9/19 Spoke with Mr. Moesser, he could not find the letter we sent but maintained his support of the easement idea. He did not attend the meeting on 9/21. 12/19 LM asking him to call us back 12/27 LM with cell number 12/30 Spoke to Mr. Moesser and he reiterated his belief the grading and landscaping would be a benefit to his property. He will try to make the meeting on Jan 5`n and the hearing on Jan 10`n Hofu & Meina L Wu 909 396-1218 or 909 869-4527 (work) 22368 Kicking Horse Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Map # 169 NOTES: Not present at meeting on 5/18. According to others he is a college professor of architecture who seems upset with the HOA and anything going on in The Country. Note that his neighbor is our biggest supporter. Not present at meeting on 9/21 1211 Spoke with Mr. Wu for about 30 minutes. He is not happy about either option, seems to understand we do have the existing easement. Wants us to lower Alamo Heights, we explained we are tied into the Yeh parcel approval. Agreed we would continue to work together after our tentative map approvals. 12/5 LM for him saying we had sent him the set of plans he requested from Ann Lungu 12112 LM to ensure he had received the plans 12/13 LM to verify he had the plans and give him the time of the meeting. 12/27 LM at home and at work with cell phone number to call us back to meet and discuss the project 12/30 Dr. Wu returned our calls. We are trying to arrange a meeting at the HOA office for January 5th at 6:30 pm at the HOA office. We will contact others to see if they can make this time and get back to Dr. Wu. 12/30 LM at home and at work stating we have arranged with Steve Sohus of The Country to use the conference room at the HOA on January 5th at 6:30. Asked him to call back to verify he received our message. 12/30 Dr Wu returned our call at 4:00 pm. He said he may not want to meet with us at all depending on if we have made enough changes to the plan. He wants to review the revisions to the plan and then decide if he wants to meet with us. We said we have made other calls and have the meeting set up. We said we will send him the plans and hope that he will be willing to meet with us and discuss our proposed changes to the plans. 1/3 Dr. Wu said he will review the plans we send to him. David S & Evelyn C Leong 909 861-9130 22372 Kicking Horse Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Map # 170 NOTES: Present at meeting on 5/18. She was very cautious and concerned specifically about the storm sewer access road. Contacted multiple times by Charlie and then Charles Yl. She wants to meet but does not yet have time. Present at meeting on 9/21; they want to meet on their property to better understand the request, there initial reactions seems to be the less we grade the better and therefore prefer the wall. 10/10 No answering machine 12/27 Spoke with David Leong, he initially said there was no need to meet because he opposed both the wall and the easement concept. We explained the concept of the elevation being difficult to change due to the Yeh parcel grading. He agreed to meet with us and discuss before January 10th. He would like us to include Dr. Wu in the meeting. We said we will continue to try to contact Dr. Wu. He agreed to meet us if we are unable to get a return call from Dr. Wu. We will give Dr. Wu unitl the 29th and then call Mr. Leong to confirm a date to meet. 12/30 LM that we had a meeting arranged with Dr Wu for January 5th at 6:30 pm at the HOA office 12/30 LM that we had spoken to Dr. Wu again and needed to talk to him after our conversation with Dr. Wu because Dr. Wu may not attend the meeting if the changes are not to his satisfaction. In any event we would still like to meet to discuss the project. 12/30 Mr. Leong returned our call and said he will be at the meeting on the Stn Jae Woo Yi & Kyoung MI Yi 909 861-7494 22376 Kicking Horse Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Map # 171 NOTES: Not present at meeting on 5/18. Charlie spoke with her, she is Korean and would like to speak to Charles Yi, her number is 909 455-4604. Charles spoke with her about the issue, she seems open to the idea of an easement. She will be at the meeting on 9/21 Attended meeting on 9/21, she signed the support of the easement letter at the meeting. 12/27 LM with children 12/30 LM with children 1/3 She says she does not care if the wall goes in or not. We should do what the City tells us and she will go along with whatever Dr. Wu agrees with because he is the expert. She did say she will be at the meeting on the 5m Wan Lin -Chen 2361 Joel Drive Rowland Heights, CA 91748 Or HOA has: Wilson Y.S. Chang & Su Chen Chen 909 636-3258 20562 Crestline Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Map #172 NOTES: Not present at meeting on 5/18. 6/7 Steve Solus was notified the property is in the process of sale. Steve will try to get them on board 6/14 Choel Chung is purchasing the property and is a 17 year resident of The Country. Phone number is 909 861-5095. 7/27 No answer. 8/2 Choel Chung speaks Korean and will follow up with Charles to arrange a meeting. 9/19 left a message Not present at meeting on 9/21 12/27 LM for Mr. Chung. His son returned the call. Mr. Chung prefers to speak Korean. We gave his son the cell and office phone for Charles Yi and stated Charles will be back in the office on January 2nd. We also asked the son to call us back if Mr. Cheung in not able to reach Charles on January 2"d 12/30 Per previous call we will wait until the 2nd to call back 1/3 LM in Korean about the time and place of the meeting and respectfully requested they attend. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT jA89 21825 COPLEY DRIVE DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: MEETING DATE: REPORT DATE: CASEIFILE NUMBER: PROJECT LOCATION: APPLICATION REQUEST: -). L4 December 13, 2005 November 21, 2005 Tentative Tract Map No. 53430, Zone Change No. 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03 and Tree Permit No. 2005-10 Directly south of Rocky Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive and west of Horizon Lane, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 To certify the Environmental Impact Report and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program; to subdivide a 80 acres site into 48 parcels with a minimum lot size of one acre for the eventual development single-family custom homes; to change the zoning from R-1-20,000 to Rural Residential (RR); to grade and develop in a hillside area; to allow retaining walls that exceed an exposed height of six feet; and to remove/replace/ protect oak and walnut trees. PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT: Millennium Enterprises Mr. John Bostick 3731 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 850 Los Angeles, CA 90010 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing; receive comments on the project; close the public hearing and begin deliberations on TTM No. 53430 and its entitlements. Recommend to City Council the following: certify the Draft Environmental Report (SCH #2003052202) and approve the Mitigation Monitoring Program; approval of TTM No. 53430 and its entitlements. BACKGROUND: The project site, approximately 80 acres, is located within a private gated community identified as `The Country Estates". It is directly south of Rocky Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive and west of Horizon Lane. Generally to the north, south, east and west, the Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 square feet (R-1-20,000) zoning district surrounds the project site. The southern boundary of the project site is the boundary between the City of Diamond Bar and the County of Los Angeles. North and adjacent to the project site is Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 53670. This is a 7.5 acre site approved for the developed of five custom residential lots. This map was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission and approved by City Council on January 4, 2005. ANALYSIS: A. Applications/Review Authority The proposed project involves five applications as follows: Subdivision application to subdivide the project site into 48 residential lots, Lots "A" and "B" and private streets; 2. Zone Change application to change the existing zoning of R-1-20,000 to Rural Residential (RR) for compliance with the General Plan land use designation for the project site. 3. Conditional Use Permit application for development in hillside area's having slopes of 10 percent or greater and to ensure the application of the City's hillside management standards to the project. The project site has natural slopes from 1.5:1 (67%) to 2.5:1 (40%). 4. Variance application is for proposed retaining walls that exceed an exposed height of six feet; and 5. Tree Permit application for the preservation, removal and replacement of oak and walnut trees which have a diameter of eight inches at breast height (DBH); For the Subdivision and Zone Change applications, 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. Pursuant to the Development Code, when more than one application is involved, all applications shall be process simultaneously by the highest review authority. In this case, the TTM 53430 Page 2 Planning Commission will review all applications and provide a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will be the final decision maker. B, Existing Proiect Site Conditions The project site consists of approximately 80 acres of naturally vegetated and undeveloped land. Elevations on the project site range from 1,115 feet above mean sea level in the northeast corner of the site near proposed Lot 2 to 795 feet at the southern boundary of the project site. In general, the project site is characterized by slopes and ridges and contains various steep hillsides that lead towards the central drainage feature which transects the project site from north to south. This drainage area is heavily vegetated in the northern portion with oak trees and thick underbrush. The prominent upper ridgeline is wide and gently sloping from the north to south towards Tonner Canyon and is covered with grasses and sparse stands of walnut woodlands. The eastern boundary of the project site along Horizon Lane consists of steeply sloped hillsides that incline towards the central drainage feature and are vegetated with coastal sage scrub and walnut woodlands. The project site is located within the Tonner Canyon Significant Ecological Area No. 15 (SEA 15) as designated by the City's General Plan. However, since the SEA 15 is a County of Los Angeles designation and only applies to land in the unincorporated County, it is not applicable to land within the City limits. Therefore, the proposed project is not subject to the development review requirement of the County's SEA Technical Advisory Committee. C. Proiect Components The proposed 48 single-family custom residential lots will vary in size from 1.02 gross aces to 4.17 gross acres, with a majority of the lot sizes falling between 1.0 to 2.0 acres. Each lot will be graded with a development pad varying from 0.46 acres to 0.88 acres. In addition to the 48 custom residential lots, the project will consist of Lots "A" and "B" and private streets. Lot "A" transects the project site from north to south and will be adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive. It is a total of 7.82 acres. It will be developed as a mitigation area for impacts to the vegetation types on the project site. Lot "B" is located at the southern boundary of the project site. It will contain the sewerage pump station for the proposed project. D. General Plan The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential (RR) Maximum 1 DU/AC. The maximum gross density for the RR land use designation is 1.0 dwelling units per acre or less. The proposed map has a TTM 53430 Page 3 gross density of 0.6 dwelling units per acre. As such, the proposed map is in compliance with the City's General Plan with regard to density. E. Zone Change No. 2002-03 The current zoning for the project site is R-1-20,000 which allows more dense residential development. To be consistent with the General Plan land use designation of RR, a zone change is required for the project site. The RR zoning allows a maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre or lower density and is consistent with the land use designation. F. Variance No.2005-03 The purpose of a Variance is to allow a deviation from required development standards due to special circumstances, not self -create, applicable to the property (i.e., location, size, shape, surroundings, topography, or other conditions) which inhibits a strict application of the Development Code. The applicant proposes retaining walls throughout the project site due to the topography of the site and grading activities related to cut and fills_ that are needed to prepare the site for 48 lots with buildable pads, streets and access points. Several of the proposed walls are in excess of the maximum allowed exposed height of six feet. Therefore, a Variance approval is required. The retaining walls in excess of the allowed six foot height are as follows and as shown in Exhibit "B". 1. Lot 31 is located adjacent to the secondary/emergency access at the terminus of Rocky Trail Road. Two retaining walls, each ten feet high, are proposed due to elevations difference between the buildable pad on Lot 31 and the adjacent slope the leads up to Rocky Trail Road. Staff recommends the applicant provide a five foot wide planter area located adjacent to the pad and the first retaining wall. The five foot wide planter area and the planting areas between the walls shall be heavily landscaped to reduce the visual and aesthetic impact from Street "A" and Lot 31. 2. Lots 25 and 26 are located adjacent to Street "B". A 16 foot high retaining wall is proposed at the property line adjacent to the street for the two lots because of the grade difference from the street. Staff believes that the 16 foot high retaining wall will create a negative visual and aesthetic impact contrary to the Hillside Management Ordinance. Staff recommends the applicant terrace the retaining wall (i.e. two -eight foot high retaining walls with a planter area separating the walls). Again, the landscape area between the two walls shall be heavily landscaped. TTM 53430 Page 4 3. Lot A is located in the southern portion of the project site and contains a trail easement and maintenance road. A 10 foot high retaining wall is proposed along various sections of the easement/road. The retaining wall is needed to support the easement/road because of the steep topography of this portion of the site. These walls vary in their linear design and will not create a tunnel effect (i.e. walls on both sides of the trail) and their impact can be reduced by plant material. 4. Lots 13, 14, 15, and 16 have a 10 foot high retaining wall located in the rear of the lot at the edge of each buildable pad. The retaining wall is needed to hold the upward rear slope at the pad's edge. 5. A retaining wall varying in height up to 26 feet is proposed along Alamo Heights Drive. The retaining wall will be located at the rear property lines of Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of Tract 32482 and Lot 96 of Tract 30578. These lots take access from Rocky Trai Road and have re r property line adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive. 1 Alamo Heights Drive is the main access to TTM 53430. Currently, Alamo Heights is at a higher grade than the above referenced lots and TTM 53430. The retaining wall is needed to construct the improvements for Alamo Heights in order to access the project site at an acceptable and gradual down slope. The retaining wall is also needed to align with the extension of Alamo Height that will serve approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 53670 (Yeh/five lot subdivision). Staff has determined that this retaining wall will create a negative visual and aesthetic impact contrary to the Hillside Management Ordinance. Furthermore, a wall of this height adjacent to a street has never been approved since the adoption of the Hillside Management Ordinance and staff believes that doing so would set a precedence. The applicant has a 40 foot grading easement at Alamo Heights Drive. To improve Alamo Height Drive without the retaining wall, the applicant needs to obtain a 50 foot grading easement from the property owners of the lots referenced above. If the additional easement is obtained, a landscaped 2:1 slope could be constructed adjacent to Alamo Heights. The slope would be planted and maintained by the applicant and eventually by the homeowners association of the proposed map. As a result, staff recommended the applicant meet with the property owners of the lots referenced above. On September 21, 2005, the applicant held a meeting with the property owners and staff to discuss the alignment of Alamo Heights and the additional 50 foot grading easement. At the meeting, several property owners agreed in concept with 50 foot grading easement. The applicant is still working with the property owners to obtain this easement. In the event the applicant TTM 53430 Page 5 G. H does not gain the additional easement, staff is recommending that the retaining wall be designed and constructed as two retaining walls (thereby splitting the height of the one retaining wall) with a landscape area between the walls. In this case, portions of the wall will be taller than six feet. Therefore, a Variance is required. All retaining walls on Lots 25 and 26, Lot 31, Lot "A" and on the west side of Alamo Heights Drive will be constructed from architectural shotcrete with pockets containing plant material and irrigation. The shotcrete has a natural rock appearance. The pockets of plant material will enhance that natural appearance. All other retaining walls will be constructed from decorative material such as split face block. Tree Permit The proposed project will impact 7.94 acres of oak woodland and 5.20 acres of walnut woodland. It is estimated 348 coast live oak and 250 scrub oak and 279 southern California black walnut trees will be removed by this project. Mitigation and monitoring plan is part of this project to ensure the replacement of these trees. Mitigation will include_ a combination of on-site and/or off-site preservation, enhancement, and/or. restoration of no less than a 1:1 acreage ratio to ensure no net loss of habitat values as a result of the project's implementation. The native trees will be replaced at a 3:1 ratio per the City's Tree Permit requirements. The applicant will implement the mitigation plan, as approved by the City and according to the guidelines and performance standards of the plan. Environmental Impact Report: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required for this project. An Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2003051102) was prepared by the City's environmental consultant, BonTerra Consulting 1. Purpose of an EIR: a. The EIR is an informational document. It evaluated potential project - specific and cumulative environmental impacts that could result from the development of the proposed project, identify possible ways that will minimize the significant effects and describe reasonable alternatives to the proposed project which will reduce or avoid potentially significant impacts. The information is used to guide and assist the City staff, Planning Commission, City Council, and the public in the consideration and evaluation of the potential environmental implications that may result from the proposed project's development. TTM 53430 Page 6 2. EIR Process: I C. 111 Initial Study Initial Study is the first step in determining whether an EIR needs to be prepared for a project. Staff completed the Initial Study questionnaire for the proposed project and identified several areas, namely air quality, geology and soils, biology, hydrology, water quality and cultural resources that have significant impacts on the environment. Therefore, an EIR was required for TTM 53430. Notice of Preparation (NOP) Once the determination to prepare an EIR is made, an NOP and the scope of the EIR is required to be 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 30 days. For this project, the NOP was circulated on May 16, 2004 with the review period ending on June 6, 2004. Notice of Completion (NOC) As soon as the "Draft" EIR (DEIR) is completed, a Notice of Completion and Availability is filed with the Office of Planning and Research' and the DEIR is circulated for public review. The review period is 45 days. For this project, the DEIR/NOC was completed and circulated on August 20, 2004. The review period ended October 4, 2004. Environmental Factors/Effects Analyzed In the DEIR 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 DEIR: Agricultural Resources Population/Housing Land Use and Planning Recreation Mineral Resources The following environmental issues will have an impact 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". TTM 53430 Page 7 e. [a AestheticsNisual Resources Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Noise Public Services Transportation/Traffic Utilities According to the DEIR, the environmental issue related to Air Quality impacts may have a significant effect on the environment. The operational characteristics of the project (after homes are built and occupied) will not have a significant effect on the environment. However, the fugitive dust impacts (PM1o) during grading activities could be worsened at the local level and be cumulatively considerable in the short-term if there are project under construction simultaneously in the immediate vicinity. VTTM 53670 (Yeh project) is located to the north of this project and will involve approximately 102,000 cubic yards of grading over 7.5 acres. According to the preliminary air quality report prepared by JHA Environmental Consultant for VTTM 53670, construction emissions from grading on that site will not result in a significant impact. However, if the project site (TTM 53430) and VTTM 53670 are graded simultaneously, short-term air quality impacts from fugitive dust would be considered cumulatively considerable. Even with the implem tion of the mitigation measures, the air quality impact couldendered to a less than significant impact. Therefore, the approval of the project will require a Statement of Overriding Considerations (see Section h.) 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 DEIR that is reviewed by the decision makers. Revision to the Project Design After the close of the DEIR review period and based on the environmental analysis and comments received, the applicant has to restudy and redesign the subdivision and its grading concept. The project was inactive for approximately seven months. In the month of May 2005, the applicant submitted the redesigned subdivision for staff review. The City's environmental consultant prepared and updated document to the DEIR addressing the redesign. The consultant determined the redesign did not significantly change the project and the DEIR did not require recirculation. TTM 53430 Page 8 g. Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) CEQA requires public agencies to set up a Monitoring Program as part of the "Final" EIR. The purpose of the MMP is to insure compliance with the mitigation measures. At the time of the EIR's certification, the MMP is adopted as conditions of approval to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. This project's MMP has been prepared for consideration. After incorporation of this project's mitigation measures, emissions of PM10 related to grading will be substantially reduced, but will remain significant on both the peak day and in the peak quarter. As a result, a Statement of Overriding Consideration (SOC) is required. h. Certification of the Final EIR and Statement of Overriding Considerations For substantial or potentially substantial environmental effects - which cannot be mitigated to level of less than significance, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required. CEQA requires the decision makers to balance the proposed project's benefits against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the proposed project's benefits outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered acceptable. For this project, a Statement of Overriding Consideration has been prepared because of the PM,o. The Findings of Fact to support the SOC is incorporated into the Planning Commission resolution that recommends the City Council certify the DER and adopt the MMP. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on December 1, 2005. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 180 property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site on November 28. 2005. Furthermore, the project site was posted with a display board and the public notice was posted in three public places by November 30, 2005. TTM 53430 Page 9 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the following to the City Council: certification of the Draft Environmental Report (SCH #2003052202) and Mitigation Monitoring Program; approval of Tentative Map No. 53430, Zone Change 2005-03, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03, Tree Permit No. 2005-10, Statement of Overriding Consideration, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolutions to City Council. Prepared by: J. LunAu, AsOelciate Wanner Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution recommending certification of the DEIR and adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring Program to City Council of TTM No.53430; 2. Exhibit "C — Statement of Overriding Considerations dated December 6, 2005 (attached to DEIR resolution); 3. Exhibit "D" — Mitigation Monitoring Program dated December 6, 2005 (attached to DEIR resolution); 4. Draft Resolution recommending approval to City Council of Zone Change No. 2005-03; 5. Draft Resolution recommending approval to City Council of Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-17, Variance No. 2005-03 and Tree Permit No. 2005-10; 6. Exhibit "A"—Tentative Map No. 53430 dated December 13, 2005; 7. Exhibit "B" — Location of Retaining Walls; 8. Draft Environmental Impact Report (Volume 1); 9. Technical Appendices (Volume 11) dated August 17, 2005, 10. Updated Information for TTM 53430 Environmental Impact Report dated October 13, 2005; and 11. Volume III/Response to Comments dated November 16, 2005. TTM 53430 Page 10 ��ef4i", g4vaaa i",g4va7a �A z w Q a LU ❑ U) LU U mW ❑ U) z� o Q w 0 I O_j w i}- W U❑ a o� I I I I 0 U N I I I I z I N 0 Q 0 a 0a Qa 0 Q fD I a. I I I I l a d Z N it i QOCL a0 d0 (o WO F- wQ W - wQ W - wQ W - wQ UN m a CL CL J 0 20 a� M 0 d� 20 :3 B O z O LL z O z � O LL Z o I� COm I z� z_0 Z: ciN r I a LLa I 00 f LLa 0Z0 U - <W Oz0> ,L¢ 0z0 I I ❑t ❑t of i LLQ ujt _ LLQ w _ LL 0m w u—"0 o I _ I o ¢ m0 a a d z0 z U zw zOuj z0 Z zLL aca cn 0 z LL dca z LL dca ~ LL zdca cn I to 0 I Uz w IL Uz 0zm Uz W IL 00 va aI I CL¢ aQ CL U) ad � d� 0- w Q� <Sm Q's a oa O O, O` U J LU J ❑ d O o T, p W U W {- D Y _Z O m Q W ❑ J I ^.O z W z 0 ❑ Q z Q W r Y D Q C7 � Y O�Q I W�' r N O r U J c- N N N m ¢ d d a d d z M099 ON Orn p co , O G N M �O M O � M M C? �# N to ' L p 0 C p U> ' p 0 ' ' 0 0 0 ' p k -' a) r *k Lo 00 co O ' to O , , U') O p ' O ' O V) �ONNO N N NO N �y00 N N O N N N" N N Cl N O N 00 NCV O N O N U d Q' U a �NU> w w �> U U,. : U LL ¢ O ❑ �a � ❑ U❑ U❑� N U W ❑I- D W C J to Z fn _ ❑ .. g V LL to W ` N F- V LL LU ❑ OU w N c o m N ~ �w _ CD V V aQ 0 in -' W > -0 V LU Kaci I— z a' -J U 0� E OUD W 0p .. V a`gi W o' wl- =ti y 0 L) W - m� pLL a zn. m> 2= o c ca zLL m w1 z ¢'v _2 H v o, V` m ca LX co g z dw I— w EE :20 O � D 4) J m a) _y Z > 0- z N LL' Q� H to 2 dto J N U O E co Z L V Ul Z ' �to-O N C 2 �❑ O C � f0 WLL 0 y ao co � we W ._ � W W O_ 7 f. D? W z C Z � c W Z > W (fj U N W Z JW z -O �w=� �._ �� z._ U O D o. W z._ �p U�o W� ❑Q Up �� N �z arY U NU Q z a Y.. c� z z_W �M WU = J Up J m °- a0 , Z ma ❑ w z ") 0z Q W ❑ n. LL O ow w U ❑ CL 0 0 �Z �Z O< O O -j O O O O O a a U U U U U U U U W W w J Z J O J Za. J J J J J QO QW QO QO QO QO QO QO W— F- F' Q W> F- w W— F- F- Q W— F- �' Q W— F- W— F- F' Q W— F- F- w— FF- W aof W❑ am w n w W< aG� W awaW w Q LTJ Q Jg of a- of MOa m0� 2 O 2O 2O 2O 20 0LLW O© Oaw Ou. Oa 0 L OLL Oa 0Zm Z J O U Z Uza Z J O Uz Z J Uz Z J Uz Z J Uz Z J 0 Z J LLQLU 0Z> LL Om LL LU 0Z> LLQ Oz LLQ Oz LLQ OZ LLQ OZ LLQ 0Z ❑Ow 0Z) 02W ❑L) ❑L ❑0 0 W ❑ LU CO W �❑ w� W F=' Wt ED t= WO w❑ m HQ LL Co a❑ m F -Q a❑ a❑ HQ a❑ FQ w❑ HQ _ a❑ HQ o0 0< ZWw Off- ZF- cn ZaW O� C9 za O Z� O Zof O zW O C9 z_ C9 z za O ZU-~ < 2 ZZ Qg zU- QC92 _z (A to zLL Q0 zLL Q0 zLL QC9 zLL Q0 V5 cn cn co zU- Q0 Uzm v(L J 2 C w U c)z JF Uz JF- 0 J� Uz J� w U w U Uz J[-- -J F- a- a� -J F- a- O a- a- a- a- O O a- a�m az aim a Q a� Q< a 0- a a< O ❑ w c Q U = Q w Q Q = Lt1 m o W Q W Y W w W A Z LL m ❑ U F- ❑ J ❑ _ a 0 '. J J w U w2 wZ c~n J w O z g a w o z UO � H d Q ZY Q U) 2 U) (n d W ❑ N CA M O Q — J F- w - - ❑ co ti M U U cD co Mce) N N LU 0 Y Q_j � C14 I- N Op M M04 CON O O M pto O m M coMM 00 h NN Lo LO OOO LO n o Ln OO LO d O InLh 6 0 O � MOO 6 L6 Ln OOOO UN> 00 N NN 2 O N OO N N N Cl 0 N N N O O N N O N O N ❑F- V❑ �F- ❑ ❑ ❑ Ua�� NU❑(n a> ❑� ❑ a ❑ > z Q C N W tC N c = C O U O m J C OLu U L S H � cn W O J F- O z ofQ a� p � _ O N Of U W Co a 6 � O >, J Q Q -, W 2— � -O Q -rE :. U N N U- — O' a' 0LL >- w Q co -0 �m QLL �$ �w aE OLL ��' CO ca C 3 Jc Z� o y IW -E Co WALL a D as Oc Z m Y� O� = 3 W� o eco Qh ❑ FO- J a) cn Of Z C = = V Q C_ W C Z N y a' N Q c C9 W p V Q f!J 02 y ¢ O F- O �o ~ C y Q m =� U Z `' 0-2 J N O>z Q CL J.N,i ZU� 0� tnZ coo Cn� U) Z, H� X O a W w Q V i O w a 0 a y O a3 O > a) c E c , 0) ° aci UOi E� 00 -am � a3 >, ��-- p Q 0� L 06 a) c tm c O .0 DONS=O c n0� c E O nQ 3 y a)C) j L N w Q 0 N O p � c O ,N U) O O= C L > .r U) .a tC E U C L (�) L) Q U m > O U E Y > c Q c�nE m0a)cc c0� CD moo Q C6 c p O p a) U) + ..O .%C 0 U 0 ai C Q. O Y w U(n O L O O O r+ 0 fA > � c O 0 � •N .. N O a) U5 E U L O w 0 c+ Y L c Ln {� a) O L O -'S c 4-- O C .0 U x O c O 0 V 'O O J Z Q �- O a) N O "- N O O U) +� a) L U) to ns ° c O O O p "'' 3 O E U a) (0 ' _O (Q aC+ U) � 0 � a) O •T c _ � M CO QN a) °) n.Y2= Q N L).V0 W 0 0 0 c L Q 47 O ">O OL O/ Q O 0-QC,L�/� ' tea�j) 7p- m O .N •� i 2 U CO (� .0 L �O LL (� L U U Q m m U) 0 0 0 c O « O m U O A ca E cn D co O m J 3 0) c A Q O CL a) co = 0-E cn ca a r' a) C -o c c - �E =0) a) -" > Cl r- N L a) :3 _ a J J J J CO Cf) o N O U') ti LO U.) Q) Ncn,O NO co 00 � O 4 Oi O lf) U 2 CL0 Q 2 a Z) of ch D N > Q c > ` °? pcn c a a) x o U) co L m V` W c6 E CIO LO rn � 0 c 2 N N v) a C a C p o m > > > O IL W 1— W O w a m 0 0 0 .E E U 0 c 'c m Fl Lo LO co ,_, C) o N 0 E Q N w L Ln L d CD Q (a U m 4- —�CQO O a 0 C Q c Q 0 � •c •� C _O O O U r N N CO U O7 C -� m��•.�-a O C U C Y� L yam+ L w! C — L O C71 - C CU CCfl C U O � O C CL w 0)2 m•� Q N -� CCM O O_ :3 N E N 2 ;=•'a 'a cB. �EE EO ND. -0 co C�-0m 2.y U.� M U mm L y J Q L Q Cy. 0 C C .0 CB U c� a U- Li U- k LO �p MMrD Q N N It Tl - ,L6 Q V' N Q O N p L6 a N rOf U❑ O W C O w IL Q N E m H = o U � ❑ LU ,C D O N O Q 0) L L Li a mL m CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF DIAMOND BAR On January 10, 2006, the Diamond Bar Planning Commission will hold a regular session at 7:00 p.m., at the South Coast Quality Management District/Government Center - Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. Items for consideration are listed on the attached agenda. I, Stella Marquez, declare as follows: I am employed by the City of Diamond Bar. On November 6, 2006, a copy of the Notice for the Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission, to be held on January 10, 2006, was posted at the following locations: South Coast Quality Management District Auditorium 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar Center 1600 Grand Avenue Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Heritage Park 2900 Brea Canyon Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on January 6, 2006, at Diamond Bar, California. 1 Stella Marquez Community and Development rvices Department g •\\affidavitposting. doe January 10, 2006 TTM 53430 Additional conditions to be added to the Subdivision Resolution and the Conditional Use Permit/Variance/Tree Permit/Resolution. Applicant of TTM 53430 and owner of VTTM 53670 shall enter into a shared cost/reimbursement agreement to the center line of the street for the future extension of Alamo Heights Drive and utilities which will serve both tracts. This agreement may include the maintenance of retaining walls with planter areas and landscaping located on the east side of Alamo Heights Drive. Prior to final map approval, said agreement shall be submitted to the City Public Works/Engineering Department and City Attorney for review and approval. 2. If the extension of Alamo Heights Drive necessitates a retaining wall on the east side of the street, the applicant shall bear full cost of the retaining wall and may be required to obtain permission from the owner of VTTM 53670. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall submit written permission to the Public Works/Engineering Department. Any retaining walls along the east side of Alamo Heights Drive shall not be taller than six feet. Prior to final map approval, design/construction plans for the walls and landscape/irrigation plans for the planter areas shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works/Engineering Department, Building and Safety Division and Planning Division. 3. The applicant/owner of TTM 53430 and VTTM 53670 shall work in "good faith" together to balance the grading on-site for the extension of Alamo Heights Drive and grading for development. 4. Applicant shall install wrought iron fencing/gate at the access point of the Los Angeles County's maintenance road located adjacent to Alamo Heights Drive. Change to existing condition. Pg. 17 condition (10) of Subdivision Resolution and Pg. 21 condition (11) of the Conditional Use Permit/Variance/Tree Permit Resolution 10. 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 30 feet from front property line; (b) Side yard setbacks minimum 10 and 15 feet 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 of 40 feet; (d) Rear yard setback minimum 25 feet from the edge of the buildable pad or rear property line, whichever is applicable; and (e) Buildable pad coverage with structures shall not exceed 30 percent; (f) Accessory structures shall utilize setback distances from the edge of pad or property line whichever is applicable and be consistent with the Rural Residential zoning district at the time of permit issuance; and (g) Each custom home shall have a unique and individualistic architectural style that truly reflects a custom designed home. The design elements shall stay true to the architectural style. N"05day, JdlivaPy 0S, :0063 1 30 Flip .ior y $mac $vb i3212! P 632 gent By Facsimile and Regular Q, S. Ma 1 January 8"11, 2006 iVls. Nancy Fong ur4ev! COiTIliIUIUL.y+ GYi'Zi_ �ii ci{L DUGGtt±a 0/6 Pial Commissioners City of Diamond Bar 21825 Conley give Dian, and Bar, CA 91 '1165 Re. Teri adve Traci y cep 53430 Dear Ms. Fong: I an± the owner of Tract 53670, an approved five (5) lot subdi"visior, i,Lu ,ediaieiy to the north of Tract 53430. T am writing thin letter because of the recent developments involvhW Tract 53430 and the possible ?mn-act those developments have upon rely property. Due to a change of address, I did not receive your piii•i c head..g nGt ve until :.c--ri11%)Cr 14, 2005, and therefore did not attend the hearing regarding Tract 53430. 1 appreciate your thought-alness in asking the owner/developer of Tract 53430 to contact me to discuss their project, especially• Ae pLans regardinng Alar-na heights Road, On january 6, 2006, Mr. Charles Yi and Mr. John Bostick of the Millennium Enterprises Co. were vary kind to rY?bPt with me n pf'rson. In my brief review of the Tract 5343rD map in relationship to =cs- aP:g- e 1 t tt' .3a nen o f n _�y ;�rorY..y �:. ,: 'i_ devF,oper .a rr'.posing or contemplating to: (1) Lower the strut elevation on a portion of the A'.a.:o Heights -Road located on, my property; (2) install a 9' high retaining wall in the street easement area, but within my property; (3) Change the already approved lot design of my property and alter the grade on the northwest portion of trey property; 4) Fs6all a Coti my =tom+±=^i itza7terzance road on the adjacent properties, running parallel to the Alanio Fleie.AN Rowdy' and within :..=d°__e ° zw Gin y ;Vura street `.A" My co;werns on f:op;sals (1) and (2) are: Lowcring the street elevation of a portion of the Aiturno i-ieiets Road will generate additional dirt dwa mg grading. My Tract was deaiSned to have dirt works balanced on site. In the event that 1 proceed with site improvement prior to the owner/developer of Tract 53430, the additional dirt resulting from the lowered elevation will require exporting_ l understated that at this point in time the City 'has aiot .cyuiied, as a condition of fnal p'.an approval, a requirement that the Page n of 3 Ja�,..darY OZ, 200$ Z15- PM JY go SGS 5251 p.03 c') 414A '!f___vS Ae'A he. : vG±dud l{ostst-- --le.iW1bo?impjpi1 .==_s:s� y�5 q ;� p� p .} Fe m..� L zr ++�� 4qFtR� try 3 a d -lop of my property. 1 would 1\,1.�-"-- ' that ....... a cVr�tion'be added. vFlah respect to ,he irstallat).on Oi u 9" higi'1 retainirig wall on my property, 1 fin] Concerned about tete issue of falure liability. Who will this wall belong to? INTio w'i l niairitain the wall's -oho is Hft` � = t f�a Hae _ - t r:: :;ALM; ;or ply ad erre condf ons LH4Lhat fight .;.i - on nfy property, or the impact upon the fLture owners when my property is developed f And, as an initial (natter, who will pay trr the � eonStr�iettorr o1 tite �vu11. 1 believe ilat these issues must be addressed as a part of the City's ideal approval process. Ndy concerns Gil proposal {3) are: The owner/developer of Tract 53430 is proposing to change my lot design and alter tete grade orb the northwest portion of my property (lot 5 of Tract 53670) to accommodate the desiga.of their development. Although I ash friendly to the idea, there are costs assooieted with suoh alteratiorna* to my Tract. Vv'ho is gig to pray for ares additional grading? I an, willing to work with the e3rtiri(ri'Cievelopor o7 Trac} .{i�t*3i� rc"a'ar{fil"I�T tjt'.tS issue, i3Ut � 17eirwYc u,wi else issues related to the changed Uading of lily property :[lust be resolved as a condition to the approval of a firia map for Tract 53430. Nay concerns on proposal {�+) are: The installation of a County maintenance access road on the adjacent properties, parallel to the Alamo Hei-ahts Road and within immediate view of our future street' A," may adversely affect the property value of our Trart. I assume that the success road will be chain link fenced and gated, It is unsightly to have dais type of structtuc right across from street "A", which VU serve as the main read iflto our lots. Is it possible to relocate this access road further south or north of the Alamo HeWhts Road, so that ,t would be out of Immediate view Urn our lots r if that is •110tk possible, can an alternative design be, incorporated, so that,the fence and gate are not mi mediately= visible from street "A"? Again, I believe tris issue should be addressed as a part of the City's final approval process of Tract 53430. In addition to my concerns about the above four proposals, I am also concerned about the fact that Tract 53430 will utilize the future extension of the Alamo Heights Road as its :ruin access and s1we the usage cif fine undergrou lu tuners improvetrlems. Therefore, if i develop my tract first, tete owner/developer of Tract 53430 will receive the benefit of the improvements I make, without having to share in the cost of those improvements. The same would bold tare if the owner/developer of Tract 53430 proceeded with their development first - I would receive the benefit of the road improvement on arty land without having to share in that cost. Thus, I believe that it would be prudent and necessary to have, as a condition for the final approval of Tract 53430, a reuttiretuent that there be a Joint agreement with Tract 53674 on the sharing and aLfl.1V`UrSO Kier vi ilio ovals uaSv4'ifltc6i With the road irtfprovetrteriis orf my E+roperty r.�u�d, if tie2iiid, the granting of tliz right to grade prior to recordation of a final map. Page 2 of 3 Monaay, January u9, 2006 12.15 r P l ferry �U 3F,0 5281 p.04 T want to thank you 41 advance for reading my letter and understanding my conce:::s. i ��ope you will find my requests to -be reasonable and legitimate. i intend to cooperate and work with 'both the City and the owmerldeveloper of Tract 53436 to hopefully reach a resolution on all of these � 4esues that a satigfiiictory to all rosz�-rnpd Thrnnk V'w Qossi„. for your attention. l remnip, Truly. �-� .terry K. 'Yeh Managing Director CC: Mr_ john Bostick / Millennium Ent. /'via email Mr. David Reynolds / Lewis, Smith, Brisbois & Bisgaard / via email 20770 Greet,ciwe DTivf-/ WaInitl / California 71789 1 i;1. k,;Fv ) OUy U 171 J rax:k-7v ) 0 3 — u291 E-mail_ JYEH ,horizon-paciiic.net /Cage 3 of 3 20770 Greenside Drive Walnut, CA 91789 USA T (909) 869 6191 / F (909) 869 6291 Email: HPC@horizon- pacific. net LM To: Mr. John Bostick From: Jerry Yeh Fax: Pages: 2 Phone. Date: 1/10/2006 Re: TTM 53430 CC: City of Diamond Bar a Urgent es For Review !s Please Comment g Please Reply es Please Recycle Mr. Bostick: In follow up to our telephone conversation and my review of your draft language related to condition 2 and your request that I not object to the deletion of condition 3, the following are my comments. Pertaining to condition 3: 1 do not object to the removal of this condition, but with the understanding that any of the increased improvement works affecting VTTM 53670 that result from your design of TTM 53430 are addressed as a part of the agreement condition set forth in paragraph 1. Pertaining to condition 2: 1 am still unclear about the validity and mechanism of your proposal to have your future HOA be responsible for maintaining and being liable for structures that are in the jurisdiction of another HOA or on other people's property. I do not have the expertise on HOA laws or on cases associated with this type of scenario. I would prefer to not have the wall on my property given the increased grading issues and potential future costs and liabilities! Nevertheless, if the wall is absolutely necessary for your needs, I am willing to discuss these matters (i.e., increased costs, future liabilities, etc.) as a part of the agreement required by condition 1. At this point, however, I believe that the condition, as proposed by the City, is appropriate and reasonable. January 10, 2006 It is my understanding that you agree to conditions 1 and 4. 1 will therefore not comment upon those conditions. Once again, I believe that I have been reasonable and have tangible and legitimate concerns. You are a land owner — what would you do differently? I am sending a copy of this fax to the City so that they are made aware of our discussion and my position with respect to the proposed conditions. Thank you. Sincerely, Jerry Yeh Am� Page 2 Alamo Heights Grading Easement Adjacent Land Owners Mei C. Tien & Paul Chun 909 860-8258 2742 Rocky Trail Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Map # 111 NOTES: Not present at meeting on 5/18. 7/19 LM; 7/20 LM; 7126 LM; 8/2 LM; 9/12 mailed invitation to meeting at City for 9/21; Not present at meeting 9/21 12/30 LM said we could have someone translate if needed. Yuan -Lung Liu & Martha Lee 909 860-3737 22354 Kicking Horse Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Map # 166 NOTES: Present at meeting on 5/18 Signed support of easement letter on 9/16 did not attend meeting on 9/21 12/27 LM with cell phone number 12/28 Mr. Liu returned our call. He wants to wait to meet until his wife gets back from China in 3 weeks. We explained our hearing date is the 10`h and we should try to meet before then but he reiterated he would prefer to wait until his wife returns. 12/30 LM asked to call us back at office or on cell phone 1/3 LM with the time and place of meeting on 1/5, requested their attendance at the meeting to discuss the options. 1/5 Not present at meeting 1/7 Not present at meeting on-site. 1/9 LM the person who answered said they did not need our number as we had left more than enough messages. Tim Zhu & Jian Rong Shen 909 860-9186 or mobile 626 890-1852 22360 Kicking Horse Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765