The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/22/2007FILE Copy A OP'LIANNING May 22, 2007 7:00 P.M. South Coa . st Air Quality Management District' Government Center Building - Aud.itori.um-.,,.-..—.---.. 21865 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA Chairman Vice Chairman Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Steve Nelson Tony Torng Kwang Ho Lee X -a -"n -en -Nolan Osman Wei Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Planning Division of the Community Development Department, 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 11 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or accommodation (s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting must inform the Community Development Department at 1 (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 ,4,4- G;—;n 11bm Aiirfifnritim and encouracies vou to do the same City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission MEETING` RULES 5PONAM111- 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 genera . I 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 Development 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. V�LANa:_ 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. Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Commission, Cassette Tapes of.Meetings (909) 839-7030 General Agendas (909) 839-7030 email: info(@ ci. d ia mond-bar. ca. us Next Resolution No. 2007-27 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, May 22, 2007 AGENDA CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Steve Nelson, Vice Chairman Tony Torng, Kwang Ho Lee, Kathleen Nolan, Osman Wei 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is the time and place for the general public to address the members of the Planning Commission on any item that is within their jurisdiction, allowing the public an opportunity to speak on non-public hearing and non -agenda items. - Please complete a Speaker's Card for the recording Secretary (Completion of this form is voluntary.) There is a five minute maximum time limit 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 Regular Meeting: May 8, 2007. 5. OLD BUSINESS: None. 6'. NEW BUSINESS: None. 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7.1 General Plan Amendment No. 2007-01- Pre -Zoning No. 2007-01 —and Negative Declaration No. 2007-02 - The City of Diamond Bar City Council recently approved Resolution No. 2007-20 to initiate proceedings for the annexation of 106.7 acres of land into the City of Diamond Bar. In accordance to provisions of Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) and City Council Resolution, the Planning Commission will consider General Plan Amendment No. 2007-01, Pre -Zoning No. 2007-01 and Negative Declaration No. 2007-02 for the proposed annexation area. Project Address: The annexation area is located in the Crestline Drive and Diamond Canyon area, south of Brea Canyon Cutoff Road and west of State Route 57. The proposed project area includes 151 single-family residential units, 3.4 acres of commercial/industrial uses, 6.4 acres of civic uses and 71.3 acres of open space areas. MAY 22, 2007 F1 all Applicant: City of Diamond Bar Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2007-01, Pre -zoning No. 2007-01 and Negative Declaration No. 2007-02. Environmental Determination: In accordance to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15070, the City prepared an Initial Study (IS) and Negative Declaration (ND) for this project finding that there will be no significant adverse environmental impacts associated with this project. The IS/ND will be available for public review between May 2 and May 22, 2007. 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: PARKS AND RECREATION Thursday, May 24, 2007 - 7:00 p.m. COMMISSION MEETING: SCAQMD/Government Center Hearing Board Room —21865 Copley Drive MEMORIAL DAY OBSERVANCE: Monday, May 28, 2007 — City offices will be closed. City offices will re -open on Tuesday, May 29, 2007 CITY COUNCIL MEETING: Tuesday, June 5, 2007 - 6:30 p.m. SCAQMD/Government Center Auditorium 21865 Copley Drive PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMM ISS ION'M EETI NG: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 - 7:00 p.m. SCAQMD/Government Center Auditorium 21865 Copley Drive Thursday, June 14, 2007 - 7:00 p.m. SAQMD/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 Copley Dr. MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2007 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Nelson called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Lee led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Kathleen Nolan, Osman Wei, Vice Chairman Tony Torng and Chairman Steve Nelson Also present: Nancy Fong, Community Development; Ann Lungu, Associate Planner; Gregg Kovacevich, Assistant City Attorney; Dennis Tarango, Building Official; Kimberly Molina, Associate Engineer; and Stella Marquez, Senior Administration Assistant. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chair/Nelson with the approval of the Commission moved Item 7.2 to the first matter on agenda public hearings. , 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: VC/Torng moved, C/Lee seconded to approve ' the Consent Calendar as amended. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Torng, Lee, Nolan, Wei, Chair/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None 4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 24, 2007. e 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.2 VARIANCE NO. 2007-03 — In accordance with Development Code Section 22.54, the applicant requested approval to increase the light fixture MAY 8, 2007 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION height from a maximum of 20 feet to 35 feet for the parking lot within the Country Hills Towne Center. PROJECT ADDRESS: 2825 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard PROPERTY OWNER/ Country Hills DB, LLC APPLICANT: 9595 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 214 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 CDD/Fong presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Variance No. 2007-03, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. C/Nolan asked if the proposed lighting would affect the individual who emailed the Planning Department. CDD/Fong responded that the individual could not attend the meeting and .the Planning staff does not know the individual's address. The individual believes the light fixture would be similar to the light fixture at the Diamond Bar High School and that is not true. The proposed light fixture would be shielded and cast a downward light in accordance with staffs condition. There were no ex parte disclosures offered. Chair/Nelson opened the public hearing. Mike McCarthy, Country Hills DB, LLC offered a power point presentation of the proposed lighting and light poles that would replace the existing non- conforming poles and lights. The proposed lighting would eliminate dark spots in the center and assist with efforts to eliminate armed robberies at the center. In fact, Mr. McCarthy found it necessary to hire a full-time armed guard to help with security at the center. VC/Torng asked if Mr. McCarthy's presentation was an actual simulation and Mr. McCarthy responded yes. VC/Torng asked if the number of poles would be reduced and Mr. McCarthy responded that the number would be reduced because the new lighting would provide a better light source. VC/Torng again asked if the presentation was for certain based on simulation and Mr. McCarthy responded "absolutely." MAY ,8,2007 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing. C/Lee moved, C/Nolan seconded to approve Variance No. 2007-03. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nolan, Wei, VC/Torng, Chair/Nelson None None Commission Wei recused himself from deliberation of Item 7.1 and left the meeting. 7.1 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2004-16 (1) — In accordance with Development Code Sections 22.48 and 22.66, the applicant requested approval to change the Planning Commission's approved plans dated August 24, 2004.. The changes included the following: Adding approximately 865 square feet of livable area; enlarging the deck/balcony area; adding a deck; enlarging the front porch, and changing window and door configurations. PROJECT ADDRESS: 22807 Lazy Trail Drive (Tract 30091, Lot 149) Rita Medirata 22807 Lazy Trail Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 APPLICANT: Pete Volbeda 615 N. Benson Avenue, Unit D Upland, CA 91764 AssocP/Lungu presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. 2004-16 (1) with changes recommended by staff, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. C/Lee said he was concerned about the deck extension from the support column and asked why staff was not recommending approval. AssocP/Lungu responded that it would not comply with the Hillside Management Standards. Adding the roof back to the deck helps with the height requirement. C/Lee said he wanted to know the reason for this MAY 8, 2007 PAGE 4, PLANNING COMMISSION standard. CDD/Fong showed the previous approval as compared to the proposed plans. When the original plans were approved the building was terracing down and cantilevered out so that it did not meet the intent of the hillside ordinance. Therefore, staff is recommending that the revised plans not be approved and that the original design remain in effect because it meets the intent of the hillside ordinance. Additionally, the height of the building is measured from the roof and because there is no roof on the deck side staff must measure from the deck addition down and it would exceed the 35 -foot requirement. deck staff recommends that the applicant place a roof over the deck and that the deck needs to be terraced as originally designed. C/Lee said he believed that the City should always respect the rights and privilege of property ownership and at the same time property owners should comply with * h the rules and regulations. He thanked CDD/Fong for the explanation. However, he wanted to know the fundamental reason the Hillside Management Ordinance was written to oppose what the applicant has proposed. CDD/Fong responded that the question should be why does the City even have a Hillside Ordinance if the City did not believe there was an aesthetic value to the ordinance for custom homes? If there were no Hillside Management Ordinance property owners could build whatever they wanted to build and the City would be in chaos. The City desires to preserve the hillsides in accordance with one of the fundamental goals of the City's General Plan. People move to Diamond Bar for the topography and wish to maintain the hillsides. If the City allows mansionization that is insensitive to the hillside topography the City would not be meeting the goals and intent of its General Plan. The Hillside Management Ordinance allows the City to protect the aesthetic value of the hillsides, which is the uniqueness of Diamond Bar. C/Nolan visited the site and spoke with the owner this afternoon. The only thing she learned was that the owners had resided in the property for 28 years. She was allowed on the site. Chair/Nelson opened the public hearing. RECESS: Chair/Nelson recessed the meeting at 7:40 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Nelson reconvened the meeting at 7:58 p.m. MAY 8, 2007 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION Jimmy Guttierez, attorney, 12616 Central Avenue, Chino, representing the property owner, thanked the Commission for allowing him time to speak with Mr. Horcher. To the extent that Mr. HorchEir has made objections, Mr. Horcher is willing to waive his objections if the applicant complies with the following conditions: 1) that the window on the southerly elevation be removed in the basement and the property owner has agreed; 2) that the adjoining property lines be planted with tall trees such as Cypress trees to provide screening up to the end of the structure and the property owner has agreed, and that the trees be planted as soon as feasible and the property owner has agreed; 3) that they remove or screen the sump pump — however, Mr. Guttierez indicated to Mr. Horcher that there was a new condition calling for removal or screening of the sump pump and Mr. Horcher agreed. With these conditions, Mr. Horcher does not object to the decks and the roofline. Mr. Guttierez stated that Mrs. Medirata has had one extension on her construction loan and that extension will expire on June 23 with no further extensions allowed. Construction has stopped for approximately two months and Mr. Guttierez urged the Commission to direct staff to withdraw the stop order and allow construction to recommence subject to the conditions for the following reasons: I)the stop order creates a tremendous negative economic impact; 2) the City has adequate remedies to enforce the conditions and 3) the City's Code provides for changes to existing structures before, during or after construction. The Code also recognizes that to stop construction while plans are being changed and changes are being made would impose a terrible financial burden on individuals who are subject to construction loans. In this case the home has been in its location for 28 years and the owner has vacated the premises and rented another home during this construction period. He felt it was important for the Commissioner to consider the impact of the statutes and to remember that the Commission has the discretion with respect to application of the statutes. He said he was amazed at the thoroughness and excellence of staffs report. He felt the architect, contractor and staff could work together to resolve the issues. The Commission has the jurisdiction to require that this matter come back to the Commission for further review. Seni Coli, son-in-law of the property owner, said that after receiving staff's report he visited homes in "The Country Estates" and took pictures of homes that look very much like the building under construction. He showed pictures of the subject property and other properties in the area and remarked about the additional supports under the deck and how it conformed to the slope. He took exception to removal of the deck roof and the height of the house. He proposed a remedy that would shorten the deck and add a skirting roof. MAY 8, 2007 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION He asked that the Commission allow the property to continue construction because the stop work order had caused a hardship to her and the crews are finding other jobs. Pete Volbeda, architect, said it was not unusual for an owner to change plans during construction. Generally, owners have limited ability to read plans and when they observe the actual framing it leads to changes and in such cases he advises the owner to obtain approval from the City. He admitted that he had a disagreement with staff about how to measure the height of the structure. For example, if the second floor deck on the right side of the house as previously approved was not over the height requirement why would extending it to the left make it over height. He requested that the Planning Commission consider mitigation by adding landscaping or more structures below and proceed with the current approval and continue construction while considering mitigation measures for the first floor deck. The roof was constructed at a 4:12 pitch. As he understands height it is measured from the highest ridge straight down it would only go to the first level grade and not the basement level grade. In this case, the measurement for the first floor grade would be about 28 feet. Over the years he has used an average grade from the first floor level (higher on the street side) to the lower basement level at the rear of the property. His interpretation of the profile is that if it does not exceed 35 feet above grade he believes he has complied with the intent of the Hillside Management Ordinance. He asked that the Commission leave the roofline at the 4:12 pitch. Paul Horcher said he spent the past couple of days writing a brief in opposition to the project and has had time to reconsider. He was impressed to see Mr. Guttierez, an old friend and good attorney. Mr. Guttierers representations to the Commission are accurate and he agreed with the balance of staffs report. He said he was impressed with the construction of the retaining walls. With respect to decking, there is a limited amount of back yard area and he could understand the reason for the applicant's request. He commended AssocP/Lungu and CDD/Fong as being exceptional professionals and a credit to the City. Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing. C/Nolan felt there was a lack of respect and compliance with City Ordinances. She asked why the applicant allowed the contractor to get "out of control." With respect to pictures of other properties she believed that MAY 8, 2007 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION those massive homes were built prior to implementation of the City's Code regarding Hillside Management. CDD/Fong concurred that the homes photographed were prior to the City's Hillside Management Ordinance. The comparison is "apples to oranges" and the City is attempting to preserve the hillsides for future generations and what happened prior to implementation of the City's General Plan is beyond the City's control unless changes are implemented. The Commission is obliged to consider current ordinances and respect the future. She said she respected Mr. Horcher's agreement but felt the bigger issue was with the City and its requirements and whether the applicant had complied with the City's recommendations and requirements of the approval. She visited the site and stepped onto the deck. She found it was amazing that a project could go to this extreme being out of compliance with the City's requirements. VC/Torng said he agreed with C/Nolan and complimented staff on following the City's Code. Trust between the applicant and the City is very important. If the Commission approves and the applicant comes back with a different project it is not reasonable. With respect to the issues raised regarding the deck and height of the building he would trust staffs recommendation. It seems that the applicant has focused on continuing with construction in order to reduce the financial impact to the property owner. That is a reasonable request; however, the City must conform to its codes. And if the applicant had stayed with the original plan and approval, the stop work order would not have been implemented. He asked staff to comment on the issues raised by the applicant and on what process the City has to follow to allow construction to proceed. C/Lee asked the owner's representative (son-in-law) if it was a good idea for the City to allow individuals to construct homes without permits and proper attention to the City's Ordinances. C/Lee said he was trying to understand why the applicant was opposed to so many conditions of the approval and was now claiming financial difficulties. He asked the applicant if he wanted ,to continue opposing the City's Code or comply with the conditions of approval and move forward'. Chair/Nelson reminded C/Lee that the Public Hearing was closed and it was time for the Commission to deliberate. The applicant's representative said he wanted to comply with the conditions of approval and also wanted an opportunity to work with staff to understand what the applicant was proposing. The applicant's representative stated that MAY 8, 2007 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION he and the property owner would work in full compliance with the Commission and staff. Chair/Nelson said he agreed with the theme of the comments. It is difficult for this Commission to sympathize with financial difficulties of an applicant when there have been two stop orders — the first of which was ignored, and the applicant then took a set of approved plans and dramatically changed the plans. Chair/Nelson said it was very difficult for him to overcome those scenarios and move forward. The City has tried remedies and they were ineffective. The City does not want or intend to create financial hardships for anyone, let alone the residents of Diamond Bar. However, when the City cannot keep applicants from creating their own hardships the City is not to blame. He asked the .applicant if she heard correctly that she intended to comply with staff's conditions in total. She acknowledged that she did. Pete Volbeda agreed that the deck should be cut back but that the roof pitch should remain at 4:12 because the house is already framed. In his opinion, if the Commission denied the 4:12 roof pitch he would advise the property owner to appeal the decision to the City Council. Chair/Nelson asked for staffs comment and stated that he was not inclined to forgive the applicant and property owner because he felt their failure to comply was pretty aggregious. CDD/Fong stated that with respect to the three conditions, the agreement between Mr. Horcher and the applicant to remove the window in the basement is agreeable to staff. There is an additional condition with respect to the sump pump and the applicant and Mr. Horcher have agreed. The third item is planting Cypress trees along the adjoining property line, which is not a condition of approval but if the applicant wishes to agree to this condition she needs to state for the record that she agrees to the amendment to include planting of Cypress trees along the southerly property line. Staff would like to have more detail about this agreement with respect to whether the trees would be along the property line or on the property owner's property, how many and the size of the trees that would be planted. Staff would agree to a properly worded amendment. With respect to the economic impact staff understands that the property owner wishes to proceed with construction. However, the applicant does not have a building permit. The applicant would need to submit plans for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. The City cannot allow the applicant to proceed with construction until he has a building permit. MAY 8, 2007 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION CDD/Fong stated that some of the pictures shown by the applicant depict structures that were built prior to City incorporation and built under the Los Angeles County Codes. They show clear examples of why Diamond Bar needs a Hillside Management Ordinance. With respect to the deck, the City's Code is very clear and the City is well within the mandates of the Hillside Management Ordinance to require the applicant to reduce the extension of the deck. The City has a Code requirement that demands staff measure from a given point to another point. There is no leeway for staff to change the method because it is specifically called out in the City's Code. Also, the roof pitch ties to the measurement of the building's height. The difference between a 4:12 and a 3:12 pitch roof is that the 4:12 is steeper therefore rendering the height of the building even taller and staff is asking the applicant to prove that he can meet the City's height requirement by measuring from the peak of the roof to the natural contours or finished grade. The approval called fora 3:12 roof pitch in order to meet the City's maximum building height requirement and the applicant arbitrarily changed the roof pitch to a 4:12, which put the building above the maximum height requirement. Chair/Nelson stated to the applicant that this is a matter of code compliance and there is a reason the codes are in place. In some cases and for good cause, variances are granted. However, that is not what is being requested at this time. C/Lee felt there was a very important issue that the applicant di " d not want to change the roof pitch because the house was already framed out. It is simple to change it on a drawing but not in reality. C/Lee said he was concerned about the financial implications for the owner as well. He believed the applicant should understand that in order to obtain a building permit he must have conditional approval and believed the applicant must comply and move forward. CDD/Fong said that with respect to the pitch of the roof, if the applicant agreed to add back the roof on the second floor deck they could likely meet the height requirement without changing the roof pitch. ACA/ Kovacevich stated that the fact that the Commission is dealing with a "bad actor' is irrelevant to the Commission's decision tonight. The Commission's only decision is whether or not the amended proposal comports with the City's Code. MAY 8, 2007 007 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION Mr. Guttierez said when he heard the building permit had not been taken out he was surprised as well. There is no excuse for the building permit not having been taken out. His client is not involved with the technical aspects of the project. She has a contractor and architect on whom she relies and has told Mr. Guttierez that she knew nothing about the building permit issue. He does not want to beat up on anyone because the Commission and the City both want his client to act in good faith as required by the conditions under the Code and she is agreeable to doing so. To the extent that his client is ultimately, responsible she assures the Commission that she is going to supervise the architect and contractor more closely so they do what is required. CDD/Fong stated that the public hearing is closed and the applicant is at the podium to answer questions only. C/Nolan said the attorney spoke to addressing the amend ment/changes only and not to the activities that were or were not properly followed by the applicant. Mr. Guttierez requested the Commission to amend the conditions of approval to require the applicant to plant trees such as Cypress trees on the property owner's side of the southerly property line so as to fully screen Mr. Horcher's property from the property owners property. The applicant waives any requirement to demonstrate a nexus with respect to the trees in this application to avoid legal challenge. CDD/Fong stated that staff would like to include the size and number of the trees to be planted. Staff recommends 15 -gallon trees be planted at 10 feet on center. On behalf of his client, Mr. Gutierrez accepted the amendment. VC/Torng moved, C/Nolan seconded to approve Development Review No. 2004-16 (1) and Tree Permit No. 2004-08 with conditions stated in staff s report with the addition of 5 a. 10 and 5 a. 11 with the added condition to plant 15 -gallon Cypress trees 10 feet apart on center along the southerly line of the owner's property to screen her property from her neighbor's property (Paul Horcher's property); and, amend the roof pitch to 4:12 with the inclusion of the second floor deck roof. CDD/Fong explained to C/Lee that the applicant has a permit for the retaining wall, not for the house. According to what she knows at this point, MAY 8, 2007 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION R1 3 the applicant does not have a pad certification and without that certification the City cannot issue a building permit. In addition, the applicant must submit the revised plans to Building and Safety for plan check prior to issuance of a building permit. AE/Molina stated that there are two types of pad certifications required for the rough grading stage — one from the civil engineer of record and one from the geotechnical engineer of record. The. Civil engineer of record has certified the pad. The geotechnical engineer of record is working on certifying the pad. C/Lee wanted to know how the engineers could check compaction when the building was already built. AE/Molina responded that the outstanding issues with the geotechnical certification do 'not have to do with compaction but rather a clarification is needed from the geotechnical engineer between two different sets of plans that were submitted to the City. CDD/Fong summarized the motion for the edification of C/Nolan. The motion is to follow staffs recommendations with amendments. Staffs recommendation is to reduce the deck extension; to delete the basement window at the southerly elevation; allow the habitable square footage addition; require that the roof back added back to the second floor deck; maintain the 4:12 roof pitch; extend the front porch; change the front retaining wall configuration; add a fireplace and change out the windows and doors as proposed; reconfiguration of the driveway and front walkway. The additional conditions include the condition for the slump pump, one for the window and wok kitchen; as well as, the condition for planting of Cypress trees along the southerly portion of the property owner's property with 15 - gallon trees 10 feet on center. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Torng, Nolan Lee Chair/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: Wei OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: None MAY 8, 2007 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION 8. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: C/Nolan said she recently visited Sycamore Canyon Park and found it looking beautiful. She announced that she would miss the next regular Commission meeting because she would be in Ireland. Chair/Nelson thanked counsel, CDD/Fong and AssocP/Lungu for an excellent job this evening for the staff report and guidance keeping the Commission on -point. 0 STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS. 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. CDD/Fong reported that the on April 23 staff held a community pre- annexation meeting with all residents in the Diamond Canyon/Crestline area as well as, residents within 1000 feet of the project area. Only 12 residents attended and two or three of those who attended lived outside of the project area and outside of the Diamond Bar City limits. Most comments were geared toward a possible increase in property tax and residents wanted confirmation about the school district. Staff sent a special letter to all concerned parties that the general property tax would not change. There could be a change in their assessment district resulting in a savings of $10 per household. Staff confirmed that the area would be within the Walnut Unified School District and all emergency services would remain the same. During the meeting comments were made from neighboring community residents about whether the City would use this as a steppingstone toward future annexation. On May 22 the Planning Commission will consider annexation for the area and there may be public comments in accordance with the comments received during the community meeting which is not the case. 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in tonight's agenda. MAY 8, 2007 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION I ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair/Nelson adjourned the regular meeting at 8:5.7 p.m. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Nancy Fong, Community Development Director Steve Nelson, Chairman CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117 L :I ki I III. 10 :4 IT, I'Ll I I MEETING DATE: May 22, 2007 CASE/FILE NUMBER: General Plan Amendment No. 2007-01, Pre Zoning No. 2007-01, Negative Declaration No. 2007-02 PROJECT LOCATION: Project site is located in the Crestline Drive and Diamond Canyon Areas, south of Brea Canyon Cutoff Road and West of Highway CA -57, within the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County adjacent to the southwest corner of the City of Diamond Bar APPLICATION REQUEST: Annexation of the Crestline/Diamond Canyon area containing 150 single-family homes, a church and day care, an office associated with medical supplies manufacturing, and open space areas on approximately 106.7 acres. PROPERTY OWNERS- Various APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval to City Council F:13� Ihk! 113 On July 13, 2005, Los Angeles County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) approved the inclusion of the 106.7 acres of developed land in the City of Diamond Bar Sphere of Influence (SOI). This action by Los Angeles County LAFCO is the first step for the_Cityto plan the annexation of the 106.7 acres of territory. The annexation of the 106.7 acres would create a more uniform political boundary, offer a better community connection, and offer a financial benefit to the City of Diamond Bar. See Attachment 1. In 2006, the City of Diamond Bar entered into a professional service agreement with P&D Consultants (now known as EDAW) for providing consulting services to assist the City with the preparation of materials required by Los Angeles LAFCO to attain annexation of the territory. This scope of work included attending meetings with Diamond Bar and LAFCO staff, engaging community participation and meetings, initiating General Plan amendment and Prezoning, preparing CEQA documents for the General Plan, Prezoning and annexation, preparing and completing the LAFCO annexation process, and project management. ANALYSIS: A. General Plan Amendment The City's General Plan, adopted in July 1995, is a long-range planning document developed as a comprehensive growth -management and community development strategy. It defines citywide policies that will be achieved through subsequent community plans, ordinances, standards and guidelines, studies, capital improvements, economic development and other pertinent programs. The adopted policies of the General Plan guide the physical development pattern and promote the necessity of adequate public services and facilities. The preparation, adoption, implementation and maintenance of the General Plan aids in informing developers, citizens, decision -makers, and others of the rules that will guide development, and provide a basis for local government judgments. All land use decisions of the City of Diamond Bar have a direct correlation to the established goals and policies of the General Plan. The proposed General Plan land use designations for Crestline/Diamond Canyon area found in Attachment 4, hereto: 1. Existing residential development of 25.6 acres. Change from Los Angeles County General Plan Urban 2 to Diamond Bar General Plan Low -Medium Residential (RLM). 2. Existing office professional building of 9.8 acres that includes associated manufacturing use and a church. Change from Los Angeles County Page 2 General Plan Amendment No. 2007 -01 -Crestline General Plan Urban 2 to Diamond Bar General Plan Office Professional (OP). 3. Open space of 71.3 acres. Change from Los Angeles County General Plan Open Space to Diamond Bar General Plan Open Space (0). This is analogous to the land use designations applied to the project area while under the County of Los Angeles. Proposed minor amendments are made to the text of the General Plan (Attachment 4) to incorporate the new land uses into City totals where appropriate and to graphics throughout the General Plan to modify the City boundary to include the project area. Staff believes that the proposed amendment represents a logical, appropriate and rational land use designation and will be comply with LAFCO's requirements. Fundamentally, zoning is simply. the division of a city into districts and the prescription and application of different regulations in each district. These zoning regulations are generally divided into two classes: (1) those, which regulate the height or bulk of buildings within certain designated districts - in other words, those regulations, which have to do with structural and architectural design of the buildings, and (2) those which prescribe the use of buildings within certain designated districts. The purpose of zoning is the attainment of unity in the construction and development of a city, along lines of reasonable regulations, which tend to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The proposed pre -zoning for the Crestline/Diamond Canyon area is found in Attachment 5, hereto: Existing residential development of 25.6 acres. Change from Los Angeles County Zoning Residential Planned District (RPD -1 -1.3U) and (RPD -5000- 5.4U) to Diamond Bar Zoning Low -Medium Residential (RLM). 2. Existing office professional building of 9.8 acres that includes associated manufacturing use and the church. Change from Los Angeles County Zoning Manufacturing Planned District (MPD) to Diamond Bar Zoning Office Professional (OP). 3. Open space of 71.3 acres. Change from Los Angeles County Zoning Residential Planned District (RPD -1-1.3U), (RPD -5000-5.4U) and Open Space (OS) to Diamond Bar Zoning Open Space (0). Current County of Los Angeles zoning for approximately 45.3 acres is Residential Planned District. However, the acreage is an open space area and is precluded from any further development under the subdivision tract map approved by the County on December 8, 1992; therefore, an Open Space (0) zone is most appropriate. Page 3 General Plan Amendment No. 2007 -01 -Crestline Staff believes that the above -proposed zoning represents a logical, appropriate and rational will be sufficient for LAFCO's requirements. C. Annexation and LAFCO changes for the annexation area application of zoning districts and As a first step toward annexation, City Council adopted Resolution No. 2007-20 on March 6, 2007, that initiates the proceeding for annexation of land within the City's sphere of influence, as required by LAFCO. In addition to this Resolution, an application form, legal description, Mylar map, 300 -foot radius map and corresponding mailing labels, labels of registered voters within the project area, fees, environmental documents (initial study and negative declaration), pre - zoning ordinance (Ordinance No. 2007 -XX) and landowner list have been prepared for submission to LAFCO. Staff believes these documents will satisfy LAFCO's requirements to consider the annexation. The following is a summary of LAFCO annexation process: City Council passes a Resolution initiating the application (Complete — Council Resolution No. 2007-20) 2. City pre -zones property to reflect City zoning and updates the General Plan to include the property (in process) 3. City files application with Los Angeles County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) 4. City and the County determine property tax exchange 5. LAFCO reviews the application documents and the resolutions affecting the property tax exchange and, if all is in order, issues a certificate of filing within 30 days. 6. LAFCO conducts a public hearing within 90 days of City's application being deemed complete. Within 35 days of completion of hearing, LAFCO adopts a Resolution Making Determination approving, denying or modifying the annexation proposal. Within 30 days from the adoption of the Resolution, any affected person or agency may request for another hearing. 7. LAFCO conducts a protest hearing. Depending on the number of written protests received from landowners and/or registered voters, LAFCO orders the annexation, orders the annexation subject to an election, or terminates the annexation. After the protest hearing is completed and if proceedings have not been terminated, LAFCO issues a certificate of Page 4 General Plan Amendment No. 2007 -01 -Crestline completion that is recorded with the County recorder's office within 90 days. FISCAL IMPACT: The annexation of the Crestline/Diamond Canyon area will result in additional revenues to the City. There will be a minimal increase in the property tax revenue (5% for each property tax dollar) approximately $81,000, increase in Motor Vehicle License Fee collections approximately $100,000, and increase in sales tax from the existing business approximately $125,000. There will be approximately $11,000 from Property Transfer Tax, $8,000 for Gas Tax, and $7,000 for Franchise Tax. The total of all anticipated additional revenues is approximately $332,000. City will provide additional services and support to the Crestline/Diamond Canyon area including legislative, administrative, community services, community development, public works, street maintenance, and insurance are expected to cost the City approximately $214,000 annually. Therefore, the proposed annexation is expected to result in a net approximate $120,000 annually towards the City General Fund and Public Works budget. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Article 6, Section 15070, the City has determined that a Negative Declaration No. 2007-02 of environmental review is required for this project. A Notice of Availability of Initial Study and Negative Declaration No. 2007-02 and the Notice of Intent to adopt the Negative Declaration No. 2007-02 was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers and the notices were mailed to all property owners within the Crestline/Diamond Canyon area and 1,000 foot radius of the project site. The public review period began on May 2, 2007, and ended on May 22, 2007. Negative Declaration No. 2007-02 is made part of this administrative record. COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES: Public hearing notices were mailed to all legal property owners within the Crestline/Diamond Canyon area and 1,000 -foot radius of the project site. A public hearing notice was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers and a copy of the legal notice was posted at the City's designated community posting sites. To encourage public participation for the Crestline/Diamond Canyon annexation area, staff conducted three community meetings prior to this public hearing. On June 3 and June 8, 2006, two community meetings were held at the Diamond Canyon Church to provide basic information to the neighborhood about the annexation. Our consultant explained to the attendees the what, where, why, who, how and when of the annexation process. The attendances for the two workshops were low, where there were only four Page 5 General Plan Amendment No. 2007 -01 -Crestline residents for each meeting. The residents that attended all were happy that the City would be annexing their area. The only comment was about the traffic and the safety of Brea Canyon Cutoff. On April 23, 2007, a community meeting was held at the Diamond Canyon Church for the. property- owners within the annexation area and 1.000 -foot radius of the site. The purpose of the community meeting was to update the homeowners on the annexation process and the next steps. Twelve residents attended the meeting where eight were from the annexation area, one from Diamond Bar and three from Community of Rowland Heights. The attendees from the annexation area requested information on the property tax and assessment district and the verification of the School District for the area. Staff had mailed a letter with the requested information to all property owners soon thereafter. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and receive public testimony. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission should deliberate the merits of the proposed annexation. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment, Pre -zoning and the issuance of a Negative Declaration for the Crestline/Diamond Canyon annexation area. Prepared by: Nancy Fong, AICP Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Location of Annexation Area 2. Draft Initial Study and Negative Declaration No. 2007-02 3. Draft Planning Commission Resolution No. 2007-xx recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 2007 -XX, Pre -zoning No. 2007-01 4. Proposed General Plan 5. Proposed Zoning 6. City Council Resolution No. 2007-20 requesting Los Angeles LAFCO to initiate proceedings for reorganization 7. Two letters of support for annexation Page 6 General Plan Amendment No. 2007 -01 -Crestline a c --.....2�. ca 0 m CLI -0 0 C: E0 :3 0 (2) M o ca 0 V cis PO 0°0 \Y OC)— NCd U m 0) o ca cO cts E 2 co '�,� � D 0 < ty T- CO � a a � i � af`oaaa 0 U 0 Draft Negative Declaration City of Diamond Bar Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation May 1, 2007 Lead Agency: City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178 Contact: Nancy Fong, AICP Planning Manager (909) 839-7030 Consultant to the City: EDA W, Inc. 8954 Rio San Diego Dr., Suite 610 San Diego, CA 92108 (619) 291-1347 Section Table of Contents Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose of Initial Study and Negative Declaration.............................................................. 1-3 1.2 Summary of Findings.............................................................................................................1-3 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.............................................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Project Components................................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Project Purpose and Need...................................................................................................... 2-7 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING..................................................................................................... 3-1 4.0 INI' LA -L STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL .ANALYSIS Aesthetics.............................................................................................................................................. 4-3 AgricultureResources..........................................................................................................................4-4 AirQuality........................................................................................................................................... 4-4 BiologicalResources............................................................................................................................ 4-5 CulturalResources............................................................................................................................... 4-6 Geologyand Soils................................................................................................................................4-7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials....................................................................................................... 4-8 Hydrologyand Water Quality............................................................................................................ 4-9 LandUse and Planning...................................................................................................................... 4-10 MineralResources.............................................................................................................................. 4-11 Noise...............................................................................................................................................4-11 Populationand Housing..................................................................................................................... 4-12 PublicServices................................................................................................................................... 4-13 Recreation........................................................................................................................................... 4-14 Transportationand Traffic.................................................................................................................4-14 Utilities and Service Systems............................................................................................................. 4-15 Mandatory Findings of Significance................................................................................................. 4-16 5.0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE....................................................................... 5-1 6.0 NEGATIVE DECLARATION........................................................................................................ 6-1 7.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................... 7-1 Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation i City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES 1-2l and Vlc�6yD�op .—..—.—...,.--.—._---.-^~—.--_—.._—..—.~~.-..--_.—, 2'Existing Loo Angeles County General Plan Land Use Designation ................................................. 2-2 3 Proposed City o[Diamond Bar General Plan Land Use Designation .............................................. 2-3 Zi�uB�oo 4 BximbuDI�mAz�y�eoCounty _ Zoning ~ ^ ~--...—.-----.,---.--._---____~.. 3-5 5 Proposed City nfDiamond Bar Zoning Map ............................................................................... 2,6 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 3-1 �oo�u�oo � (�t�ofDh�oouUD� ----e-ri' May 2007 Environmental Documentation 1-0: Introduction 1.0 Introduction This Initial Study evaluates and identifies the potential environmental impacts which may result from the proposed annexation of 106.7 acres of land within the County of Los Angeles to the City of Diamond Bar (proposed project). The proposed project is known as the Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation (CD/DC Annexation). The City of Diamond Bar is adjacent to the proposed annexation area on its north, east and south. The San Bernardino County border is located approximately three miles east of the project area while the Orange County border is located approximately 1.2 miles south of the project area. Figure I depicts the location of the proposed project, which includes the following three main components: An amendment to the City of Diamond Bar General Plan to reflect planned development consistent with current development in the project area; A prezoning ordinance and amendment to the City of Diamond Bar Zoning Map to reflect City zoning consistent with current development in the project area; and An annexation application to the Los Angeles County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). The proposed annexation is considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the City of Diamond Bar is the Lead Agency for CEQA purposes. Section 21067 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a Lead Agency as the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project which may have a significant effect on the environment. The City of Diamond Bar has the principal responsibility for approving the proposed project; thus, the City will serve as the Lead Agency, and has the authority to oversee and complete the environmental review documentation and process for the proposed project. Lead agency name and address City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178 Contact person and phone number Nancy Fong, AICP Planning Manager (909) 839-7030 Los Angeles County LAFCO is responsible for reviewing, modifying, approving or disapproving requests for annexation (the proposed project). Crestline Drive[Diamond Canyon Annexation City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 LO: Introduction 1.1 Purpose of Initial Study and Negative Declaration As part of the environmental review process for the proposed project, the City of Diamond Bar has authorized the preparation of an Initial Study. The Initial Study provides a basis for understanding whether there are environmental impacts associated with the proposed project and, if environmental impacts are likely to occur, whether such impacts could be significant. The purposes of the Initial Study, as stated in Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines, are as follows: To provide the City of Diamond Bar with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR.) or Negative Declaration (ND) for the proposed project; ® To enable the City of Diamond Bar to modify the proposed project, by reducing or eliminating any adverse impacts before an EIR. is prepared, thereby enabling the proposed project to qualify for a negative declaration; a To assist in the preparation of an EIR, if one is required, by focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant; identifying effects determined not to be significant; and explaining reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not be significant; © To identify whether a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process can be used for the analysis of the project's environmental effects; • To facilitate the environmental review of the project early in its design; o To provide documentation for findings in a Negative Declaration that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment; a To eliminate unnecessary environmental impact reports; and o To determine whether a previously prepared EIR can be used for the project. Based on the findings of the Initial Study, the City of Diamond Bar could then determine the subsequent environmental review needed for the proposed project. If the Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, the City of Diamond Bar would prepare a Negative Declaration. 1.2 Summary of Findings The environmental analysis conducted through the Initial Study indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. As a result, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for the proposed project and is provided in Section 6.0. Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 1-3 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 2.0: Project Description 2.0 Project Description This environmental document analyzes the annexation of 106.7 acres of land within unincorporated Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. The annexation includes the following three main components described in greater detail below: 9 General Plan Amendment • Prezoning • Annexation 2.1 Project Components 1. General Plan Amendment The project area has recently been approved by Los Angeles County LAFCO for inclusion in the City of Diamond Bar sphere of influence (SOI). That action represents the first step in completing annexation of the project area to the City. The City of Diamond Bar General Plan must be updated to reflect both the addition of the project area to the City's SOI, as well as the anticipated annexation. TheCounty of Los Angeles General Plan currently designates the project area as Urban 2 and Open Space, as , illustrated in Figure 2. The Urban 2 designation allows for development of 3.3-6.0 dwellings units per acre, while the Open Space designation is intended for a variety of conservation and recreation uses as specified in the Conservation and Open Space Element of the County of Los Angeles General Plan. Appropriate City of Diamond Bar General Plan land use designations were chosen to reflect the existing land uses in the project area. Land use designations appropriate to the project area are Low -Medium Density, office Professional, and Open Space, as shown in Figure 3. The designation change proposed by the City of Diamond Bar does not include any changes in land use intensity and density, and no changes are anticipated. In addition to revising the City of Diamond Bar's General Plan. Land Use Policy Map, all map figures in the General Plan will be modified to reflect the City boundary change. Additionally, General Plan text amendments will also be included where appropriate to reflect the City boundary change. 2. Prezoning As the project area is not currently under the jurisdiction of the City of Diamond Bar, zoning districts are currently not assigned to the project area. However, determination of appropriate zoning districts through "prezoning" is required by LAFCO as part of the annexation process. The zoning districts assigned to the project area, under the jurisdiction of the County of Los Angeles, are the Residential Planned District (RPD) zoning district, RPD -1-1.3U and RPD - 5000 -54U for the residential areas. The Manufacturing Planning District (MPD) is assigned to the church and commercial/industrial land uses. The Open Space (OS) district applies to Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 2-1 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 LOSANGELES COUNTY Legend [:::] Existing City Boundary r --j Proposed City Boundary Stream 1,200 A I �� Feet N Source: Los Angcics County, GIs 2005. CITY OF Land Designation Lmg[C4i Urban 2 (U2) (3.3-6.0 du/ac) M Open Space (0) Figure 2 Existing Los Angeles County General Plan Land Use Designation 2.0: Project Description the undevelopable open spaces surrounding the developed areas. Figure 4 depicts the current County of Los Angeles zoning districts for the subject area. - Based on the current development in the project area and existing City of Diamond Bar zoning districts, the most appropriate zoning districts or prezonin.g for the project area is Low/Medium Density Residential, Office Professional, and Open Space. Figure 5 illustrates the proposed City of Diamond Bar zoning districts. 3. Annexation Procedures for annexation are generally described in Government Code Section 56650 et seq. In addition to following these procedures, the City of Diamond Bar will also comply with the written policies and procedures of the Los Angeles County LAFCO. The project area annexation process includes several steps. Key actions include the following: o Conduct a presubmittal meeting with the Los Angeles County LAFCO Executive Officer; • Compile information about the project area as required by Los Angeles County LAFCO application forms; a Complete a certified resolution; ® Provide CEQA documentation; m Provide evidence that the City has prezoned the project area; Present evidence that a satisfactory exchange of property tax has occurred (as described in Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 99 and 99.1); and m Pay the required processing fee. Figure 1 depicts the proposed annexation area of 106.7 acres of land within unincorporated Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. As part of the resolution process, a review of the provision of public services (Municipal Service Review) is required. This would include such services as police and fire protection, parks and recreation, libraries, water, wastewater, and storm drainage. The Municipal Service Review has been completed for the East San Gabriel Area which includes the project area. No changes in service providers or the provision of public services is anticipated with the proposed annexation. The proposed general plan amendment, prezoning and annexation actions are intended to reflect the existing land uses and ongoing provision of services by various jurisdictions to the project area. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Additionally, the project site is currently served by adequate infrastructure and no extension of infrastructure would occur. Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 2-4 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 LOS ANGELES COUNTY Legend CA Existing City Boundary C Proposed City Boundary Stream I1.2DG A r- I Feet N Source: Los Angeles County, GIS 2005. ---------- WE all Zoning District ggpag- Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM) Office Professional (OP) Open Space (OS) Figure 5 Proposed City of Diamond Bar Zoning Map 2.0: Project Description 2.2 Project Purpose and Need The purpose of the project is to annex 106.7 acres of unincorporated Los Angeles County into the City of Diamond Bar. A greater portion of tax receipts generated in the project area would transfer to the City of Diamond Bar benefiting the City and residents, instead of being directed to Los Angeles County; but, the City would also assume responsibility for certain services currently provided by the County of Los Angeles. Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 2-7 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 3.0: Environmental Setting 3.0 Environmental Setting The project area consists of rolling hills and valleys ranging in elevation from approximately 700 to 1,000 feet above sea level. Similar to the project area, rolling hills and valleys dominate the surrounding terrain in the vicinity of the project area. The predominate land use to the north, east and northwest is detached single-family residential areas of similar character to the project area. Intermittent open space exists between some residential neighborhoods. The area to the south and west of the project area consists primarily of land that is currently undeveloped. Table 1 illustrates the land uses in the project area. The project area is developed primarily as a residential community of 151 single-family detached units. Two residential developments of differing character exist within the project area: .1) the north central portion of the project area contains 76 residential units built along a ridgeline; 2) the center of the project area contains a gated residential area with 75 units near the base of a canyon. These residential units comprise 25.6 acres of the project area, surrounded by 52.8 acres of open space. The project area also contains 3.4 acres of commercial/industrial use that houses a medical supply company (Biosense Webster), located in the southeastern portion of the project area. A church and associated parking lot occupies 6.4 acres, also located in the southeastern portion of the project area. The southernmost portion of the project area contains 18.5 acres of open space, equating to 71.3 total acres of open space for the project area. Table 1 Land Use <Y."Use: Residential 151 25.6 _ Commercial/Industrial -- 3.4 Civic — Church -- 6.4 Open Space -- 71.3 Total 151 106.7 The current population of the project area is approximately 575 residents. Regional roadways providing access to the Diamond Bar area are State Highways 57 and 60. Major roads in the vicinity of the project area include La Brea Canyon Cutoff Road to the north and east, and State Highway 57 (the Orange Freeway) to the east and south of the project area. The majority of public services for the project area are provided by neighboring jurisdictions. Los Angeles County provides police and fire protection services and also operates the library located within. the City of Diamond Bar. Educational facilities are provided by the Pomona Unified and Walnut Valley Unified School Districts. Water and wastewater services are provided by the Walnut Valley Water District. Streets, and parks and recreation are provided by the City of Diamond Bar. Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 3-1 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis 4.0 Initial Study/Environmental Analysis The section of the document contains the Initial Study which evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project involving at least one impact that is ac"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics F] Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils- F] Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality F] Land Use/Pl g F-1 Mineral Resources ❑ Noise n Population/Housing ❑ Public Services F1 Recreation El * Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities/Service Systems F] Mandatory Findings of Significance In each issue area of the Initial Study, there are four possible responses to. each of the questions: • No Impact. The proposed project will not have any measurable environmental impact on the environment. • Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project will have the potential for impacting the environment, although this impact will be below thresholds that may be considered significant. • Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The proposed project will have potentially significant adverse impacts which may exceed established thresholds, although mitigation measures or changes to the proposed project's physical or operational characteristics will reduce these impacts to levels that'are less than significant. Measures that may reduce this impact are identified. • Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project will have impacts that are considered significant and additional analysis is required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. When an impact is determined to be potentially significant in the preliminary analysis, the, environmental issue will be subject to detailed analysis in an environmental impact report (EIR). EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources cited in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rapture zone). A "No Impact" answer is explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-1 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis 2) All answers take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Where a particular physical impact is identified, the checklist answers indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation IncorporateT applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The evaluation describes the mitigation measures, and briefly explains how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-2 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis � P,CL•AESTHETICSt•Voua titS ::; s Than`• Txs Potentially With ,' IRsB Tuan S�gmficenY Mitigation S-gnificant Noy ' " .Impact ` ti Impiie't', �: Impact' ' f IncorpiirationTI a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? C) Substantially degrade the existing visual ❑ El ® F]character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light ❑ ❑ ® o or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Discussion: a) -d) The project area contains views of natural slopes, canyons, and ridgelines. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Modifications and additions to existing homes in the project area as already allowed by the County Ordinance would not result in substantial impacts to scenic vistas, or visual character. The project area is located adjacent to State Route 57, which is eligible for designation as a scenic highway under the California Scenic Highway Program. However, the highway is not officially designated by the City of Diamond Bar or County of Los Angeles. Additionally, as the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Therefore, impacts associated with substantial damage to scenic resources within a scenic highway area would not occur. Existing sources of lighting within the project area include the residential communities, and parking lot lighting associated with the medical supply company and church. Headlights from vehicles traveling along project area roadways create glare. As no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur, no new source of substantial light or glare would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the project area. Overall, no substantial new construction or development will occur in the project area that could cause a significant aesthetics impact. Implementation of the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact to aesthetics. Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-3 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 deteirn 160:21 gric, a) b) 4.0: Initial Stady/Enviromnental Analysis Ifitra WIN' Ic Ichnf,I: ic N Drojec f- QW., °Impact: Impact ,, Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non-agricultural use? Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to a non- agricultural use? FJ 1-1 11 F] 11 ❑ Discussion: a) -c) The project area is not used as farmland or designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Because the project area is already developed, no conversion of farmland to non- agricultural uses would occur. The project area is not zoned for agricultural use, nor is it under a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, impacts to existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract would not occur. Overall- implementation of the movosed proiect will result in no impact to agricultural resources. a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation E] of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or ❑ M El contribute substantially to an existing or LLA projected air quality violation? C) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or El El M El state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-4 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Create objectionable odors affecting a El [0 El substantial number of people? Discussion: a) -e): The proposed project includes the annexation of 106.7 acres of currently developed land within unincorporated Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. The proposed annexation, general plan amendment, and prezoning actions are intended to reflect the existing land uses and ongoing provision of services by various jurisdictions to the area. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Additionally, the project site is currently served by adequate infrastructure and no extension of infrastructure would occur. Therefore, no substantial new construction or development will occur that could cause a significant air quality impact. Overall, implementation of the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact to air quality. ®r, X "W. `---..B10L0G1CAt- RESQUR ES,.,�.W6illd;'t 'e, 'kr Sq --g, with ...-;-projec 'N" ilonImpact �3 a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, F71 sensitive, or special status species in local El F] or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural r�71 community identified in local or regional El El plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? C) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water ArtF71 (including, but not limited to, marsh, El El veinal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native F71 V\J El resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological El 1:1 resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-5 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Discussion: a) -f) The project area is not located within an area designated as sensitive habitat but does contain areas of open space that support native plants and animals. However, the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations and no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Modifications and additions to existing homes in the project area as already allowed by the County Ordinance or by City Ordinance following annexation, would have a less than significant impact on biological resources. The project site is currently served by adequate infrastructure and no extension of infrastructure would occur. Any roadway and infrastructure maintenance and improvements would have a less than significant impact on biological resources. Therefore, no substantial new construction or development will occur in the project area that could cause a direct or indirect environmental impact to biological resources. Overall, implementation of the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact on biological resources. 0 .1 N, ".7 1 1 v �E& V"'b"t'i d�the:,,*.'.'�,"�',�',!!�'--,.'.*.':',',');,,.� ,�SO C 0'. 1..... r t oJec :7- iaiflii��', A` �'U?Fid alio a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the FJ F] F -I z significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the F]❑ F] F71 I/N significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? C) Directly or indirectly destroy a uniqueF71 F] FJ F] V\J paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including FJ F] ❑ those interred outside of formal V -N cemeteries? Discussion: a) -d): The proposed project includes the annexation of 106.7 acres of currently developed land within unincorporated Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. The proposed annexation, general plan amendment, and prezoning actions are intended to reflect the existing land uses and ongoing provision of services by various jurisdictions to the area. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Additionally, the project site is currently served by adequate infrastructure and no extension of infrastructure would occur. Therefore, no substantial new construction, development or additional land disturbance will occur that could cause substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource. Additionally, the proposed project would not destroy a paleontological resource or geological feature or disturb human remains. Overall, implementation of the proposed project will result in no impact to cultural resources. Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-6 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis -.V.-A'ND, SOILS Would the -project:',:. Q Significant h* 11,esg T Si in 't 'N Impact.0 P Si' Fa�. t Paz Th corp Ig ora soh. a) Expose People or Structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault. Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic around shaking?❑❑ r;71 VIIJ El iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including ❑ ®' El liquefaction? ❑El iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of El n 0 El topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a El result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building❑ El El Ordinance (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste El El El M water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-7 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis Discussion: a) ii -iv)- c): The project area is not underlain by any known active or potentially active faults that would impact the proposed project. Thus, the potential for ground rupture-due.to faulting at the site is considered low. However the project area is located in the seismically active Southern California region. Several -Potentially active faults are located near the project area (Whittier, San Jose, Sierra Madre, and San Gabriel). Additionally, within the vicinity of the project area, there are existing historical and potential unstable hillside areas. The proposed project would not increase the exposure of people and structures to seismic groundsbaldng, seismic related ground failure, landslides, or unstable soils. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Modifications and additions to existing homes in the project area as already allowed by the County or City Ordinance would have a less than significant impact on these issue areas. a) i) -d -e The project area is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone area, or an area containing expansive soils. Additionally, the project area does not use septic systems for the disposal of wastewater. The proposed project would not have an impact on these issue areas. Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-8 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 VIL"H"A'RbS.' A!A'R_DO1J8*MAT-FR1ALS-- AND R Id.t1iPp,r'6J,e,c s- Les Th"J" -oration., a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the El environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable involving El n VS1 ❑ upset and accident conditions the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or El waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant El to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a❑El result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport f7l or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety❑ El f7i El hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically F;7/1 V\J ❑ interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-8 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 4.0: initial Study/Environmental Analysis h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands7 Discussion: a) -c), g)- The proposed project includes the annexation of 106.7 acres of currently developed land within unincorporated Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. The proposed annexation, general plan amendment, and prezoning actions are intended to reflect the existing land uses and ongoing provision of services by various jurisdictions to the area. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Additionally, the project site is currently served by adequate infrastructure and no extension of infrastructure would occur. Therefore, no substantial new construction or development will I occur that could cause a significant hazards and hazardous materials impact. d) -f) The project area is not included on a list of hazardous material sites and is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or private airstrip. The proposed project would not have an impact on these issue areas. h) The project area is surrounded by vegetated slopes, ridgelines and canyons that increase the risk of wildland fires. However, no substantial new construction or development will occur with the proposed project that would increase the exposure of people or structures to wildland fires. The proposed project would have a less a) Violate any water quality standards or wasteFA discharge requirements? 0 V\1 F] b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer, volume or a lowering of the local ❑ VIJ groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the in❑VIIJ F71 ❑ FJ alteration of the course of a stream or river, a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the of the course of a stream or river, or ❑alteration FJ F] ® substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-9 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned EJ EJ M El stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? fl Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? El n M El g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard ❑El Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area El El M El structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, ❑ EJ El including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation of seicbe, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ El IeN n Discussion: a)-f):Tbe proposed project includes the annexation of 106.7 acres of currently developed land within unincorporated Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. The proposed annexation, general plan amendment, and prezoning actions are intended to reflect the existing land uses and ongoing provision of services by various jurisdictions to the area. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially alter any site drainage patterns or increase the amount of impervious surfaces contributing to increased runoff and degraded water quality. Additionally, the project does not propose additional land uses in the project area that would have an affect on water quality. g -j): The project area is not located within a flood hazard area. Portions of the project area are located adjacent to slopes, canyons and ridgelines that could be susceptible to mudflows in the event of heavy rains. However, the project does not propose an increase in density or intensity of land uses or substantial new construction or development that would substantially increase the risk of mudflows. No substantial new construction or development will occur that could cause a significant hydrology and water quality impact. Overall, implementation of the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact to hydrology and water quality 1;71 a) Physically divide an established community? El V\J b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local El coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-10 Environmental Documentation X GOORE-1 City of Diamond Bar May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community ❑ ❑ ❑ conservation plan? Discussion: a) Because the project area is already developed, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Therefore, the proposed project would not physically divide the project area and would not have an impact on this issue area. b) As the project area is currently not within the jurisdiction of the City, the City of Diamond Bar does not currently address the project area. However, the City of Diamond Bar will. update its General Plan and prezone the area to reflect current development in the project area Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any land use plan or ordinance and would have a less than significant impact on this issue area. c) No habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan exists in the project area or within the vicinity of the project area. The proposed project would not have an impact on this issue area. K i' MINE RALRESOURCES 'W6'fiId h6 pro)ect i c.� n ! t J a i ! S i 5 ? P 1 ! �- �� •� ' `.� }tiy 's lgal{Cani�. :.' •' � r -. t... rr•:,!'� . r � :� � ! � i h' :.. c. ,,ti,1 r•.`,_�. Poteohaiiy, ', [[J,tit.. __ . ` .. r� LCSsThan ; ,..r._ . $ .. �t 1. a) Result in the loss of availability of a known ❑ F1mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Discussion: ❑ ❑ ❑ a) -b): There are no known mineral resources in the vicinity of the project area. Additionally, the project area is not delineated as an important mineral resource recovery site. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Additionally, the project site is currently served by adequate infrastructure and no extension of infrastructure would occur. Therefore, no substantial new construction or development will occur that could cause a significant mineral resources impact. Overall, implementation of the proposed project would not have an impact on mineral resources. a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise ❑ levels in excess of standards established in the F] Ellocal general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation ofF1❑ ® ❑ excessive groundborne vibration or groundbome noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient ❑ ❑ ❑ noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-11 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in in ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ambient noise levels the project vicinity' above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two mules of a public airport or ❑ ❑ El public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people ❑ ❑ EZA residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Discussion: a) b) d): The proposed project includes the annexation of 106.7 acres of currently developed land within unincorporated Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. The proposed annexation, general plan amendment and prezoning actions are intended to reflect the existing land uses and ongoing provision of services by various jurisdictions to the area. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Additionally, the project site is currently served by adequate infrastructure and no extension of infrastructure would occur. Any temporary increases in ambient noise levels associated with modifications and additions to existing homes would be less than significant. Additionally, temporary increases in ambient noise levels associated with any roadway and infrastructure maintenance and improvements would be less than significant because no substantial new construction or ongoing vehicular travel increases would occur. c): The proposed project would not cause a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels and would have no impact on this issue area. e -f): The project area is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or orivate airstrip and would have no impact on this issue area. a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of El ❑ replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement ❑ ❑ ❑ housing elsewhere? Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-12 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Enviromnental Analysis Discussion: a) Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Modifications and additions.to existing homes in the project area could increase household size and/or add population to the project area. However, any population growth to the project area would not be substantial and impacts regarding population growth would be less than significant. The project site is currently served by adequate infrastructure and no extension of infrastructure would occur. The impact of routine maintenance and improvements to roadways and infrastructure in the project area on population growth would be less than significant. b) -c).- The proposed project would not displace existing housing or people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing. The proposed project would not have an impact on these issue areas. XIII:' PUBLIC SERI Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ 0 F] Police protection? L�R71 ❑❑�I F] Schools? ❑❑K-71 V\J El F71 Parks? El EJ® F] Other public facilities? El F] 'VE/I El Discussion: a): Service providers such as the County of Los Angeles and Special Districts provide public services to the project area. The County of Los Angeles provides fire and police protection, which would continue upon implementation of the proposed project. The level of service is expected to remain at the same level as provided by the County. However, service levels could vary over time, depending on the funding of those i services n the future, but would not cause service levels or response times to decrease to unacceptable levels. The proposed projects' impact to fire and police protection services would be less than significant. Because the Project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Therefore, a need to increase the capacity of schools, parks or other public facilities to serve the project area is not anticipated. No changes in the provision of public services are anticipated With the proposed annexation. Overall, implementation of the proposed project Will result in a less than significant public services impact. Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-13 Environmental Documentation t,,Ity UI IJMIIIVLLU ua May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis ION RF,C-"AT- 19M.4; Pron Pact,,' Impact PD,H. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Discussion: a) -b): The proposed project includes the annexation of 106.7 acres of currently developed land within unincorporated Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. The proposed annexation, general plan amendment, and prezoning actions are intended to reflect the existing land uses and ongoing provision of services by various jurisdictions to the area. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur that would require the construction of additional parks or recreation facilities. Overall, implementation of the proposed project would not have an impact to recreation. -0, a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard n established by the county congestion❑F1 V \J management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic F] levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or F] F1 M El dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? F] F]® F71 F] f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? F1 F]® FV -1 F] Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-14 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis g) conflict with adopted policies, plans, or program Supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? R Discussion: a) -g): The proposed project includes the annexation of 106.7 acres of currently developed land within unincorporated Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. The proposed annexation, general plan amendment, and prezoning actions are intended to reflect the existing land uses and ongoing pr6vision of services by various jurisdictions to the area. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Additionally, the project site is currently served by adequate infrastructure and no extension of infrastructure would occur. No substantial new construction or development will occur that could cause a substantial increase in vehicular trips or a significant transportation/traffic impact. Roadway improvements to existing roads may be completed in the future. However, these improvements would be expected to create safer conditions. Overall, implementation of the proposed project will result in a less than significant transportation/traffic impact. Xv U TILTTTES AND SERVLBigidirl, V rojec , r, Significant No `-Wn Ignl kqp ofa A^e'aTmpact Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional ❑ EF71l EN F] Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment ❑ facilities or expansion of existing El ® F] facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or ❑ ❑ expansion of existing facilities, the❑® construction of which could cause significant environmental effects! d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has F] ❑ F71❑ adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient ® F1 permitted capacity to accommodate the❑F1 project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local F] VN N711 ❑statutes F1 and regulations related to solid waste? Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-15 City of Diamond Bar May 2007 Environmental Documentation 4.0: Initial Study/Environmental Analysis Discussion: a) -g): The proposed project includes the annexation of 106.7 acres of currently developed land within unincorporated Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. The proposed annexation, general plan amendment, and prezoning actions are intended to reflect the existing land- uses and ongoing provision of services by various jurisdictions to the area. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Additionally, the project site is currently served by adequate infrastructure and no extension of infrastructure would occur. Routine maintenance and improvements to utilities and service systems within the project areas will need to occur with or without the proposed project. However, the impacts of maintenance and improvements to utilities and service systems would be less than significant. Other than maintenance and improvements, no changes in utilities and service systems are anticipated with the proposed annexation. Overall, implementation of the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact to utilities and service systems. .i . �. n !. 7C,•:�R'•.. •C•+:;; . _'" 1:,,. �,�,.r �,,p,��.,, G: • c...?"t `•4� ' ^s; �"� �>: ` l:fi.:ax,:. "i•i '!'�'i'-. , �, :rte,.•, i. :•.;, , :_: r,::. ... _ ,. •: WAY 4)- :^,!" :er` _•�'1':+:.;:•.. S., ;u:.::n ti� ..•ut;.<.rty, r,!6'�..,�i; .f:,`:� :..�,.i' Wil': � • 'R4' FiNDIN6S OF•:;:;�,:`=` �'•� :' ti �,.1,, .:,,, i•_• ,..i ,--.i:, ..Slg7lttiCBDX:, f ,,.:...�+ i -f 4i . ' •.;. ,..., . ... ,. ,.. .,. ,•.., ,c'. ..,• sa''y�;'�? GNMCA :, QVitFi1;;,;. •` .:�, .'•'7r•.J 1 .•,�,••..y'•,:'PJ,}. aq+.`.=l,.',+„•.It- :•d+ P.ute "'�°�•G%i:'�;�•',Ya. . ,.. ",t.., ,i;:,.. i 'ificariE'.: • t anon Sip�fca4t (,:.`:, No'`- �... r �.r.. •.• .! .. <• :;"' ` u. ; . 'orittio'n'' im 'Ylcf+:?r., • Ln act:' a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- ❑ ❑ ® ❑ sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when ❑ ❑ ® ❑ viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-16 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 Analysis 4.0: Initial Studyffinvirom-nmtal Discussion: a) As discussed above, the proposed project includes the annexation of 106.7 acres of currently developed land within unincorporated Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. The proposed annexation, general plan amendment, and prezoning actions are intended to reflect the existing land uses and ongoing provision of services by various jurisdictions to the area. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Additionally, the project site is currently served by adequate infrastructure and no extension of infrastructure would occur. Therefore, no substantial new construction or development will occur that could cause a significant environmental impact. b) The population in the East San Gabriel Valley is expected to increase by approximately 1.1 percent or 240,000 by 2025. Unincorporated areas are likely to experience the most growth, such as the undeveloped land located to the south and southwest of the project area, which could experience residential development in the future. However, the project area is fully developed and not expected to add substantial additional population. Based on the analysis in the Initi�l Study and above, the proposed project would not result in individually limited but cumulatively considerable impacts. c) The issue areas analyzed through this Initial Study have found no environmental issues that would cause substantial adverse effects. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on the environment. Ck�u�Db�000dBaz `^="~Drive/Diamond --`-- --'�� May 2007 In�oomr��Domumv�d�o 4.0: Initial Stady/Environmental Analysis DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on, the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be -prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. n I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. F-1 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, since all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, and (c) a finding and statement of overriding considerations have been adopted for unavoidable significant'acts identifiLe4 in that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are on 0mTroposed project, nothing further is required. u Sigdaturr Date WQ� Printed Name' For Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 4-19 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 5.0: Mandatory Findings of Significance 5.0 FINDINGS The environmental analysis in Section Four of this Initial Study indicates that the proposed project would not have the potential for significant adverse environmental impacts. The following findings can be made regarding the mandatory findings of significance set forth in Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines, as based on the results of this environmental assessment: • The proposed project would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment and would not reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The proposed project would not have the potential to achieve short-term goals at the expense of long- term environmental goals. The proposed project would not have environmental impacts, which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable, when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity of the site. The proposed project would not cumulatively lead to significant adverse impacts, when added to proposed, planned, or anticipated development in the area. o The proposed project would not have environmental impacts, which may have adverse effects on humans, either directly or indirectly. The City of Diamond Bar has determined that the proposed project would not have significant adverse impacts on the environment and no additional environmental analysis is warranted. The City of Diamond Bar intends to adopt a Negative Declaration for the proposed annexation of 106.7 acres within Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 5-1 city or mamona tsar Environmental Documentation May 2007 6.0: DRAFT Negative Declaration 6.0 DRAFT Negative Declaration TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) and theStateCEQA -- Guidelines, the City of Diamond Bar has made an Initial Study of possible environmentalimpacts of the following -described project: APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178 APPLICATION: The proposed project is known as the Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation (CD/DC .Annexation) and proposes an annexation of 106.7 acres within the County of Los Angeles to the City of Diamond Bar (project area). LOCATION: The project area is located in unincorporated territory in the southeastern portion of Los Angeles County adjacent to the City of Diamond Bar on the north, east and south. The San Bernardino County border is located approximately three miles east of the project area while the Orange County border is located approximately 1.2 miles south of the project area. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT: The project proposes the annexation of 106.7 acres located in unincorporated territory in the southeastern portion of Los Angeles County adjacent to the City of Diamond Bar on the north, east and south. The project area is developed with 25.6 acres of land with 151 single family residential units, 3.4 acres of commercial/industrial uses, 6.4 acres of civic uses, and 71.3 acres of open space. The project contains three main components: m An amendment to the City of Diamond Bar General Plan to reflect planned development consistent with existing development in the project area; m A prezoning ordinance and amendment to the City of Diamond Bar Zoning Map to reflect City zoning consistent with current development in the project area; and ® An annexation application though the Los Angeles County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). MITIGATION MEASURES Included in the Proposed Project to Avoid Potentially Significant Effects (if required): NONE INCLUSION OF MITIGATION MEASURES AS PART OF PROJECT: I, as applicant/authorized agent, have reviewed the mitigation measures noted above and agree to include said measures as part of this project: Signed: Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 6-1 Environmental Documentation Dated: City of Diamond Bar May 2007 6.0: DRAFT Negative Declaration FINDINGS: It has been found that this project, as described and proposed to be mitigated herein, will not have a significant effect on the environment and that an environmental impact report (EIR) is, therefore, not required. A brief statement of reasons supporting such findings is as follows: The proposed project includes the annexation of 106.7 acres of currently developed land within unincorporated Los Angeles County to the City of Diamond Bar. The proposed general plan amendment, prezoning, and annexation actions are intended to reflect the existing land uses and ongoing provision of services, by various jurisdictions to the area. Because the project area is already developed consistent with the City's proposed General Plan and Zoning designations, no increase in density or intensity of land uses would occur. Additionally, the project site is currently served by -adequate infrastructure and no extension of infrastructure would occur. Therefore, no substantial new construction or development will occur that could cause a significant environmental impact. Overall, implementation of the proposed project Will not have a significant effect on the environment. Public Inquiry: Any person may object to dispensing with such EIR or respond to the findings herein. Information relating to the proposed project is on file in the office of the Planning Department at the address shown below. Any person wishing to examine or obtain a copy of that information or this document, or seeking information as to the time and manner to so object or respond, may do so by inquiring at said office during regular business hours. A copy of the Initial Study is attached hereto. Proposed Negative Declaration Date: Negative Declaration Review Period Ends: Nancy Fong, AICP, Planning Manager Planning Department By Nancy Fong, AICP Planning Manager AGENCY CONSULTATION REQUIRED: YesNo AGENCIES CONSULTED: STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER (if required): INITIAL STUDY PREPARED BY: DATE POSTED: City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178 DATE OF NOTICE TO PUBLIC: Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 6-2 City of oiamona tsar Environmental Documentation May 2007 TO: References 7.0 References The following documents were referenced in the preparation of this Environmental Document: Burr Consulting. East San Gabriel Valley Final Municipal Service Review. July 5, 2005. City of Diamond Bar. General Plan. July 25, 1995. City of Diamond Bar. Municipal Code. Retrieved from hftp://www.municode.com/resources/gateway.asp?sid=5&pid=12790 on September 13, 2006. County of Los Angeles. General Plan. November 25, 1980. County of Los Angeles. GIS Map Data. Retrieved from 5http://regionalgis.co.1a.ca.us/iniVsites/GISNET_pub/ ssp/launch.isp> on September 14, 15, and 25, 2006. County of Los Angeles. Municipal Code. Retrieved from <http://ordlink.com/codes/lacounty/_DATA/TITLE22/index html> on September 13, 2006. Southern California Association of Governments. Growth Projections. Retrieved from 5b#p://www.seag.ca.gov/forecast/downloads/2004GF.xls> on September 20, 2006. Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon Annexation 7-1 City of Diamond Bar Environmental Documentation May 2007 Exhibit 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -XX A* RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-01 AND PRE -ZONING NO. 2007-01, AND ISSUANCE OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2007-02 FOR LOCATED COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY `106.7 ACRES GENERALY IN THE CRESTLINE DRIVE AND DIAMOND CANYON AREAS, SOUTH OF BREA CANYON CUTOFF ROAD AND WEST OF HIGHWAY CA -57 A. RECITALS 1. The City of Diamond Bar desires to annex approximately 106.7 acres of territory within its Sphere of Influence located south of Brea Canyon Cutoff Road and west of Highway CA -57, and identified as all Assessor Parcel Numbers beginning with 8269-011-, 8269-090-, 8269-091-, 8269-097-, and 8269-098-; 2. The proposal for annexation is considered a Project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and pursuant to Section 15063 et seq., an Initial Study was prepared and the Project was found to have no significant environmental effects. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070 et seq., on May 2, 2007, a notice of intent to adopt a Negative Declaration was published in the San Gabriel Vallev Tribune -_and Inland B Valley Daily Iletin newspapers and the Initial Study and the Neqative -u Declaration was circulated for review; 3. Public hearing notices for the Planning Commission meeting of May 22,2007 were mailed to all property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of and within the Project boundaries. Public hearing notice was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers and a copy of the legal notice was posted at the City's designated community posting sites; 4. On May 22, 2007, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the application, and approved Resolution No. 2007 -XX recommending the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2007-01, Pre -zoning No. 2007-01 and issuance of a Negative Declaration No. 2007-02; 5. The Planning Commission has determined that the proposed General Plan amendment represents a consistent, logical, appropriate and rational land use designation and implementing tool that furthers the goals and objectives of the City General Plan; 6. The documents and other materials constituting the administrative record of the proceedings upon which the City's decision is based are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. NOW, THEREFORE it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond THEREFORE; 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, as required by Municipal Code Section 22.70.050, as follows: (a) The amendment to the General Plan is internally consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the City and is in the public interest. General Plan Amendment No. 2007-01 will permit residential, office professional, and open space uses conforming to existing uses under the County of Los Angeles Zoning Map. The General Plan Amendment is consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, and will satisfy necessary actions for annexation of the territory into the City. The General Plan Amendment will allow for revenues to be generated for the City from property and sales sources in the area, and will allow for the preservation of open space in the canyon and hillside areas. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment is consistent with City policies and is in the public interest. (b) The amendment to the Zoning Map is internally consistent with the General Plan and the adopted goals and policies of the City. The portion of the Zoning Map covering the project area is proposed to contain 25.6 acres of Low -Medium Density Residential, 9.8 acres of Office Professional, and 71.3 acres of Open Space. These zoning descriptions are consistent with the land use/zoning designation matrix of the City's Zoning Ordinance compared to the existing land uses. 3. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2007-01, Pre -zoning No. 2007-01 and Negative Declaration No. 2007-01 as follows: 4 (a) incorporating the 106.7 -acre area south of Brea Canyon Cutoff Road and west of Highway CA — 57 and identified as all. Assessor Parcel Numbers beginning with APN - 8269-011-, 8269-090-, 8269-091-, 8269-097-, and 8269-098-) into the City of Diamond Bar General Plan; (b) Modifying the Land use map, Table 1-3 of General Plan Land Use By Category, and the Land Use Element of the General Plan to reflect the annexation of the Crestline/Diamond Canyon area as shown in Exhibit "N'; (c) Modifying the Housing Element, Resource Management Element and the Publci Heath and Safety Element to reflect the annexation of the Crestline/Diamond Canyon area as shown in Exhibit "A;" (d) Modifying the Zoning Map to reflect the annexation of the Crestline/Diamond Canyon area as shown in Exhibit "B." The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22nd DAY OF MAY 2007, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY: Steve Nelson, Chairman I 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 22nd day of May 2007, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Nancy Fong, Secretary S CITY OF DIAMOND BAR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2007-001 A comprehensive review of the City of Diamond Bar General Plan (1995) had identified a number of areas in which text and graphics would need to be modified to reflect the annexation of the Crestline Drive / Diamond Canyon Annexation Area into the City limits. These proposed changes are outlined below in strikeout/underline, and embedded into the full, document. The proposed text changes here are the minimum required to permit consistency between the Crestline Drive / Diamond Canyon Annexation Area and the City's General Plan. Graphics changes are reflected on the figures in the revised complete General Plan. I. LAND USE ELEMENT C. EXISTING CONDITIONS 1. Residential Uses Diamond Bar is comprised of rolling hills and valleys between rapidly urbanizing freeway corridors (west and north) and the largely undisturbed Sphere of influence (south). According to the California Department of Finance, the City has a total of 17,9!3-_18,196 dwelling units that presently house a population of 54,315 59,722 residents (149-3 2006). The City is primarily residential. Single family detached units represent the majority of the City's housing stock. Approximately five percent of the single family units are on large, "rural" residential lots (one acre or more). In general, development densities are greater in the flatter portions of the City (west), while larger lots predominate in the hillside areas (east). HOUSING ELEMENT 1. INTRODUCTION A. COMMUNITY CONTEXT Demographic shifts are occurring in the City. In 1990, approximately half of Diamond Bar residents were white, one-quarter of the residents were Asian, and nearly one-fifth of residents were Hispanic.:M346 lie 1aPE1;APd data is-m,ailable, euffent ea:n)ll nt4atafer-se leeateEl in Diamend Bar- pr-A_:;.4_d_Psseme insi htifita the ehan&igr-asiablethnie sempositionef th eat of the Cib4s p wer-e Asian, 31 City. h 199 g/99, appr-e imate y45-p� P. were I-Espanie a -ad 7 per -e :Mf IyP:FF:A1;4 In 2000, approximately 42 percent of the residents were Asian, 31 percent,were white,. 18 percent were Hispanic, and 5 percent were Black ti .os nano The City's population is aging; between 1980 and 4-949 2000, the median age for Diamond Bar increased from 27.5 years to 34-.9-36.5 years. During the same period, adults between the ages of 35 and 64 increased significantly as a proportion of the population, from 31 percent in 1980 to 40 50 percent in 499 2000, attracted by the many move -up housing opportunities in the City. The senior population also grew; the share of the population aged 65 years and above increased from 2 percent to 4-7.5 percent during the ten-year period. In terms of actual numbers, the senior population increased from approximately 600 persons in 1980 to near4y -2,300 4,200 persons in 4-990 2000. The City will continue to experience growth in its senior population as persons in their 50's and early 60's age in place. In contrast to the size of its population, Diamond Bar has a relatively small employment base; in 4990-2005 there were approximately 14,009-_16,400 jobs in the City. Major employers include Allstate Insurance, Travelers Insurance, South Coast Air Quality Management District, and the Walnut Valley Unified School District. While the City actually lost jobs during the early 1990's like many California communities hit by recession, SCAG projects a dramatic increase in employment between 2000-2005 and 2020. The City adopted a Redevelopment Plan in 1997 aimed at stimulating economic activity and job growth. Diamond Bar offers a variety of housing choices. Single-family homes account for 85 percent of Rear4y over 18,000 total units while multifamily units including condominiums and apartments constitute 13 percent of the housing stock- The City also contains two mobile home parks which comprise the remaining 2 percent of the housing stock. The housing stock is generally in good physical condition. However, four older single-family neighborhoods with units constructed during the 1960's and 1970's are showing early signs of aging and defer ed maintenance; these neighborhoods could be the focus for potential housing rehabilitation programs. The City has one assisted housing project, The Seasons -Diamond Bar Senior Apartments, providing nearly 150 senior housing units, 20 percent of which are reserved for lower income households. Housing prices for Diamond Bar remain relatively high with the median price single-family home at approximately $2-53,000 $659,000 and median price for condominiums at approximately $129,000 $374,000. These estimates are based primarily on resale of existing units; there was -has been very little new residential construction dufing-gmce the 1990s 1980s. ReeeRtly eBmpleted lu auy uii4s have sold fer- Baar-e than $500,000v -Although there are relatively few apartments in Diamond Bar, representative rent for a 2 -bedroom apartment was $995 to $1,27=5 $1,400 to $2,000 per month. M. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT D. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES Goal 1, Objective 1.1 Strategy 1.1.9 Work with the appropriate jurisdictions to protect remaining prominent ridges, slopes, and hilltops in and adjacent to the City and its Sphere of Influence, such City of Diamond Bar page 2 General Plan Amendment 2007-01 June 2007 as SEA 15, Tonner Canyon, the hills in the City of Industry, west of the 57 Freeway at Grand Avenue, the hills within the County of Los Angeles (Rowland Heights), west of the 57 Freeway, south of Brea Canyon Cutoff Road along Crestline Drive and above the Diamond Canyon area the portion of Tonner Canyon within the Chino Hills Specific Plan, and the portion of Tonner Canyon within the City of Brea (Orange County) IV. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY ELEMENT B. EXISTING CONDITIONS 4. , Crime and Protection Services The level of major crime in Diamond Bar is presently half of that experienced in communities of comparable size. The types of local crimes are typical of suburban communities in the Los Angeles region, including vandalism, traffic accidents, and theft. Protection services are provided under contract to the, City by the Los Angeles County Sheriff s Department out of the Elaut -San Dimas Walnut/Diamond Bar Regional Station. if emergency situations arise in which Di amond Bar units need assistance, additional units are readily available from the San Dimas and Indus Station units. The City is presently served by 219 30 deputies and 18 patrol vehicles. The County maintains an average emergency response time of 4.5 minutes within the City: Diamond Bar will - need additional protective services as it grows, although it may not need additional facilities within the City limits. The Firestone Boy Scout Ranch within the Sphere of Influence presently has private security. TABLE I-3 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE (BY CATEGORY) Land Use Designations Permitted Density / 'Gross Acres Gross Acres Total Gross Intensity In the City In Sphere Acres Residential Designations RR Rural Residential (I ac/du) 1,392 1,392 RL Low Tensity Residential (up to 3 du/ac) 3,089 3,089 RLM Low -Medium Residential (up to 5 du/ac) 996 838 905838 RM Medium Density Residential (up to 12 du/ac) 275 275 RMH Medium High Residential (up to 16 du/ac) 197 197 RH High Density Residential (up to 20 du/ac) 66 66 Subtotal 6924 5.857 644 5.857 Non -Residential Designations C General Commercial (.25 — 1 FAR) 172 172 CO Commercial / Office (.25 —1 FAR) 63 63 OP Professional Office (.25 —1 FAR) 4.68178 4-6-9178 I Light Industrial (.25 —1 FAR) 93 93 Subtotal 496 506 4-%506 Mixed Use Designations PA Planning Areas (see text) PA -1 720 720 PA -2 401 401 PA -3 55 55 PA -4 82 82 Subtotal 1,258 1,258 Other Designations(a) PF Public Facilities 27 27 W Water 19 2 21 F Fire I 1 S School 345 345 PK Park 158 158 GC Golf Course 178 178 OS Open Space &7-9 642 57-9642 PR Private Recreation 15 15 AG Agriculture 1 du / 5 ac 0 3,589 3,589 Fwy / Major Roads 684 684 Total 9-,&9-19,690 3,591 19,174 13,281 (a) No F.A.R or potential square footage has been identified for these quasi -public and recreational land use categories due to the wide range of uses permitted (e.g. civic center, schools, etc.) and because buildings are often part of large open space areas such as golf courses. City of Diamond Bar page 4 General Plan Amendment 2007-01 k4 - June 2007 ON O��runi'��i� LOS ANGELES COUNTY Legend CA Existing City Boundary f --I Proposed City Boundary Stream 1,20 Feet N Source: Los Angeles County, GIS 2005- � CITY OF Land Designation MR2,3LO Low -Medium Density (RLM) ME Office Professional (OP) rn open Space (OS) . Figure 3 Proposed City of Diamond Bar General Plan Land Use Designation ' - CITY OF DIAMOND E Legend [:::] Existing City Boundary [—~]Proposed City Boundary | ----Straarn 1,200 A I Feet N Sour= Los Amgcl� County, GlS 2005. Zoning District @,pn- Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM) 0��|Office Professional A3P\ Figure 5 Proposed City of Diamond Bar R Zoning Map WE FAIN P3161 LOS ANGELES COUNTY R— Legend C::] Existing City Boundary P —1 Proposed City Boundary Stream gun W*l01-117!11 01MUZOM Land Designation 'e- Low -Medium Density (RLM) INM Office Professional (OP) Open Space (OS) N Figure 2 A i 9nn Proposed City of Diamond Bai IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY 14 Legend Existing City Boundary f j proposed City Boundary Stream 1,2DD Feet � CITY OF Zoning District WM Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM) jM office Professional (OP) Open Space (OS) Figure 5 exhibit 5 Proposed City of Diamond Bar Zoning Map CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007- 20 A RESOLUTION -OF . THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUESTING THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE REORGANIZATION OF TERRITORY, KNOWN AS THE CRESTLINE DRIVE [DIAMOND CANYON ANNEXATION AREA; INVOLVING ANNEXATION OF 106.7 ACRES OF LAND INTO THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR A. —RE—CITALS I. The city of Diamond Bar desires to initiate proceedings pursuant to the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code, for a reorganization that Would annex territory into the City of Diamond Bar; 2. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act inition of (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378, the ' action does not meet the def a project in that the action will not result in a direct physical change or a reasonably foreseeable physical change- in the environment. 3. Public hearing 'notices were mailed to property owners of record within the Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon annexation area. Three public places within the City of Diamond Bar were posted with the public hearing notices and a display board was posted at the project site. On February 14, 2006, notification of the public hearing for this project was properly advertised in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. 4. On March 6, 2007, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed request to initiate proceedings for the reorganization of territory for annexation of the Crestline Drive/Diamond Canyon area into the City; 5.- The principal reasons for the proposed reorganization are as follows: a more appropriate division of tax revenue between the City of Diamond Bar and the County of Los Angeles; no change in service delivery for facilities, fire, police and schools; and to offer a better community connection to local government; 6. The following agencies would be affected by the proposed jurisdictional changes: Exhibit 6 Agency: Nature of Change: City of Diamond Bar Annexation County of Los Angeles 7. The territory proposed to be reorganized is inhabited, and a map and description of the boundaries of the territory are attached as Exhibits A and B and by this reference incorporated herein; S. The documents and other materials constituting the administrative record of the proceedings upon which the City's decision is based are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Department of Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. B RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Local Agency Formation Commission of Los Angeles County is hereby requested to initiate proceedings for the annexation of territory as authorized and in the manner provided by the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. The City Council shall: (1) * Certify to the adoption of this Resolution. (2) Transmit a certified GOPY of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: LAFCO for Los Angeles County 700 North Central Blvd, Suite 445 Glendale, CA 91203 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 6fTH DAY OF MARCH 2007, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY.- eve Tye, 1payor 2 I, TommYe Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the Gt� day of March 2007, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: chanc,", Everett, Herrera, MPT/Tanaka, 110L/Tye NOES: Councilmembers* None ABSENT: Councilmembers: None ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: ?done ATTEST: Tommy Cribbins, City Clerk KAREN M. JOHNSON March 8, 2007 Ms. Nancy Fong City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Re: Annexation of Crestline Drive Area Dear Ms. Fong: I am an attorney who resides in the proposed annexation area. I am a native resident of Diamond Bar. I have lived in the City for 34 years. My parents resided in the City as well. I was born and raised here. I attended junior high and high school in Diamond Bax My children are now third generation Diamond Bar residents. On March 1, 2007, I purchased my home new from Taylor Woodrow builders. At the time of purchase, I was assured that the hoarse was within the boundaries of the City of Diamond Bar and 'walnut Valley School District. I would not have purchased my home otherwise. My daughter is enrolled to attend Kindergarten at Castle Rock Elementary in the fall. It is of vital importance to me that my home remains within the boundaries of the City of Diamond Bar and that my children attend schools within the Walnut Valley School District. If my home is deemed to be outside the City of Diamond Bar and Walnut Valley School District, I will be forced to sell my home and relocate within the City. In that event, I will suffer a substantial loss in real estate value, as well as realtor fees and increased property taxes. I am in favor of the City of Diamond Bar accepting the Crestline area into the City of Diamond Bar. Please not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Karen M. Johnson 20656 OAK CREST DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 PHONE: (909) 598-8447 r 5558 Diamond Canyon Road - Diamond bar, cA 9176 . 5 • (909) 595-5599 May 2,,2007 To: The. City Council of Diamond bar Dear Friends, In.regards to the general plan to amend and include the approval of the. General Plan 207-61 and incorporate this parcel into the city of Diamond Dar, the members and staff of Diamond.Canyon Christian Church heartily encourage such an inclusion. This parcel is adjacent to Diamond Bar, identifies with Diamond Bar, and would be a beautiful addition to the city of Diamor.013ar Furthermore, in almost every way, it considers itself apart of the Diamond Dar community. We would 176 ve"ry happy to be included officially in the city of Diamond bar. We see it as providing a much more effective and efficient government of our area. We would like to applaud the plan to incorporate this area and give our endorsement of such an inclusion. May God bless ou) J a- es Price nior Pastor EXALT • EVANGELIZE - EDI fY -., EMBRACE tAXt if 11VI4 �atjeVak, �VJ4 %70-0 tk see tAa Jtj7r�'CfIqVk, 5xik, "Pik f nvt tett �vi4 John 11 :19- lyvf r 5558 Diamond Canyon Road - Diamond bar, cA 9176 . 5 • (909) 595-5599 May 2,,2007 To: The. City Council of Diamond bar Dear Friends, In.regards to the general plan to amend and include the approval of the. General Plan 207-61 and incorporate this parcel into the city of Diamond Dar, the members and staff of Diamond.Canyon Christian Church heartily encourage such an inclusion. This parcel is adjacent to Diamond Bar, identifies with Diamond Bar, and would be a beautiful addition to the city of Diamor.013ar Furthermore, in almost every way, it considers itself apart of the Diamond Dar community. We would 176 ve"ry happy to be included officially in the city of Diamond bar. We see it as providing a much more effective and efficient government of our area. We would like to applaud the plan to incorporate this area and give our endorsement of such an inclusion. May God bless ou) J a- es Price nior Pastor EXALT • EVANGELIZE - EDI fY -., EMBRACE tAXt if 11VI4 �atjeVak, �VJ4 %70-0 tk see tAa Jtj7r�'CfIqVk, 5xik, "Pik f nvt tett �vi4 John 11 :19- C14 co z w D - w z z w 05 0EL O W LL 0> w z n 0 C) z 0 w z z w Z w �V cc i 0 W IL IL W 3: LD 2- w w E U- E M cc CU 0 LL Zw LL tea) �d CD 75 00) 15.c: WAG < co3 03 1. 00 CD CD at ,4- Z co Z C,4 — N W 0 w z < Z 0 (9 z < z 0 0 z < z 0 (9 z z 0 (9 z z 0 0 z z 0 (9 z z 0 (9 z z 0 z < z 0 "0 S m0) I: 46 CD 0 W CD r 2 C: a) U) Y}= > E jrCD jr z I)f cr w (.9 W M 0 0 cr, a Z 0 0 c) 0 o w cu w o Of C7, Z > -1 z z 0 z z C ol 0 ern W a w 0 co z< uj W E of ca L.L o 22 75: E < cu 0) -j ca <� E a) z cD - m a ry j -j a) zz W W IL IL (L CL CL IL CL Q- IL < p> p c, 15 0a CD m E (D a) co 't (D 0) -j Lb z III I— (Do) 0- < CL < a. < IL < IL < 0- < 0- < IL < 0- < w 0 z w CL w w w w w w w w w M Z 0 2 0 w w w w w w Z z wC, z 1 < IL 2z (L z IL 2z IL 2z IL 2z CL 2z CL :2z 0- 2z IL Z IL 0 z 0 W 00 00j= 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 z < < tL C) U) R w U w z Ar < Z< z< Z_¢ < Z_¢ Z< < < IL x U U) LL M U - a < U- -r. Of �o of —0 13� �o n Of �o F. Cr- rn 0 F - W �o LL �o 0 LL �o LL z U- w Z 0 U- W Z LL ui Z Lli U- Z ui LL Z LLJ U- Z LL ui z w z ui z 0 LL. -<J LL -j LL -j LL -j LL -j F < Oz 0z f= -<J 0z P= Oz P < Oz P < Oz P < Oz < Oz OZ W C9 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z0 zo (D w Z U) z U) Z U) Z P Z F-5 I-- P z0 P z0 z0 z0 Z Fn < F- Z Es < Z — < to 'tet' co CO N N co co 9 to w (A U) w U) w z < < < < 0 < < C) < < 0 < o < do < 09 Y- rZ CD IZ ,- 0 r- � 0 o 0 0 < a. w (L W J¢ a_ -j w CL X :5 D- x IL D� act CL Of C� N 0 0 0 C) 0 0 0 N Cl N C) C) 0 N CL Of IL IL 0 < LL CL 0 < U- CL 0 < U- CL 0 < U- 0-0 < U- 0-0 < U- (L 0 < LL IL 0 < U - IL 0 < U- N z 0 w z z w Z w �V cc i 0 W IL IL W 3: LD 2- w w E U- E M cc CU 0 LL Zw LL tea) �d CD 75 00) 15.c: WAG < co3 03 1. 00 CD CD at ,4- Z co Z C,4 — N W 0 w "0 S m0) I: 46 CD 0 W CD r 2 C: a) U) Y}= > E jrCD jr o cr w (.9 W M 0 0 cr, a Z 0 0 c) 0 o w cu w o Of C7, Z > -1 z z 0 z z C ol 0 ern W a w 0 co z 0 W E of ca L.L o 22 75: E < cu 0) -j ca <� E a) z cD - m a ry j -j a) zz W W W a) < 2 w 0 LL 0 w M 04- 0 (D co 4 ro (o a co 75 C\j .- p> p c, 15 0a CD m E (D a) co 't (D 0) -j Lb z III I— (Do) ::) ix < w Z z z < 0 z w CL z w 0 — m w 0 LL Z 0 2 0 < z m U) w C) 0 z wC, z 1 < 0 :E w r z W z 0 W z 0 z w N 0 Z) < < tL H U) R w U w Ar U) LL < < U- z z 0 to 'tet' co CO N N co co 9 C) N Oi z P4. 9 q 9 0 09 0 rZ CD IZ ,- 0 r- � 0 6 6(o C) C) 0-. < C) CD 000 a 0 0 C) (00 cc C� N 0 0 0 C) 0 0 0 N Cl N C) C) 0 N > N N N N cq ¢:. CN N N N N ry <C) CL of > EL 0 2 F- F- < ry re < > 0 > z 0 w z z w Z w �V cc i 0 W IL IL W 3: LD 2- w w E U- E M cc CU 0 LL Zw LL tea) �d CD 75 00) 15.c: WAG < co3 03 1. 00 CD CD at ,4- Z co Z C,4 — N W 0 "0 S m0) I: 46 CD Z 5- W CD r 2 C: a) U) Y}= > E jrCD jr w cr w (.9 W M 0 0 cr, a Z 0 0 c) 0 o w cu w o Of C7, Z > -1 z z 0 z z C ol (D 0.0 " ern W a w 0 co 3: a- W E of ca L.L o 22 75: E < cu 0) -j ca <� E a) z cD - m a ry j -j a) _j LL 0 (D W W W a) < 2 F5 -j LL 0 w M 04- -j U- :5 z 0 co 4 ro (o a co 75 C\j .- p> p c, 15 0a CD m E (D a) co 't (D 0) -j Lb co C', C\l cl) Nr (Do) Lo N ce) 0 Z 7 z w CL w < m 0 z z w 0 15: IL 5: < 0 E5 , w U- 0 > w CL Z z z z z z z z z z z z < < < < < < < < Z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 F -F- < < < < C) IL CL EL EL M IL M M (L IL 0- EL < (L CL IL < a. < IL < IL < a_ < CL < IL < 0- < a. < uj w ui LU w F- LU F- ui F- w w w F- w F- w F- Y Y w w w w W w w w .,Cu, a. 2z a. M z a- M z IL :2 z IL 3; z CL :E z IL M z a- 2z 0- ME z a. :E z Q- m z a_ M z 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 P 00 0 P 00 0 P 00 P 00 (.) p Zi f", z Z¢ Z LL Z< iL m Z< L 2 Z< LL M Z< -2 LL Z < E 2 Z < u Z LL LL r-% 0 U- 0 0 LL 0 0 u - 0 0 —0 a W 0 Q W 0 Q 0 W 0 0 — 0 0 u- _ 0 C, u- 0 of 0 0 U- 0 G1 LL U- uj Z a LL w a LL w z a LL w z U- W Z U- w U- w LL w iE Lli z LU z ui z LU z 1L- M LL LL — LL QF¢ U- -j < 0 OZ -j < 0 z z z z < z < 0 z < 0 z < z P < 0 z h 0 z 0 z z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 0 z 0 Z 0 Z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z F- F- Z — F-- p Z a F- F- Z Us F- Z F- Z 25 zF- U) z p z 25 F- p z 25 F- p z cl z z F- z < W C0 W < C) < < < < C) U < O < (L as D- w a- W EL W ( 0 CL W CL Of D CL W IL Of CL ix CLW a. w w CL 0 < U- il 0 < U- a- 0 < u_ EL 0 < u- IL 0 < u- w a. CL 0 < U- CL 0 < LL m 0 < U- IL 0 < LL EL 0 < LL (L 0 < U- CL 0 < LL im w z 0 C) w 0 C) (D w 0 CL 0 w z F- w z w 5; < m U) 3: > LU W z 0 C/) -i w > < 2 3: < w z D Fo 0 0 < co W < U) CO CO) of U) C) z -j Z F- w 0 z z z w a. U) w W D se -i < < z D ry < 06 to z < 0 Q� w < 0 3: > 0 C) 0 z - < <U z 0 z < < ¢ < N 9 m C-4 C4 C4 C') N CN 0 co C) 00 — '09 O C� CD C) 00 'cr Cl) CD CO? 9 COm — CS tL r�- t (0 COO C) f�- (6 0 r C) I- Cl CD 9 C) ce) cl) C=) C) . LO 00 K (D'' �,K C:l I cli CD C) CD CD 0 C) C) 0 0 0 N b c) C) C) C14 C) CD CD Cl CD CD N 0 C:, 04 C) 04 C) CD 04 04 CD C'I C) C=) a a- N cq iL C14 N > N CL w Z) 04 w N 0- :) cq cq cq a- n, Z) of af C', 0 U) QF- 0 00 0 00 o 0 C) 0 co 0 16 (D E Co Cl) (D CD cl) a) of W (D UJ (D Z:2 0 fD ry W:2 a Z 0' > W E > W E Z 2 cn EL > z 0 cn W -j w 0_Co P E CL ca cc 0 ca LL z C) ca U- z IL U) V U) > v cr- < c :3 E ui .Cu U) 0 = U) .C-oa. w 0 Y Z— 4— Oo :) a) z '7B (D O'� z a < (D a < .2 6 U. E (D a 0 02 �o (D We q E < co U- U) � 0 < 0 a w 0 Z (D E Z y) z CO U- (D ui F/S. D r- w "U5 3: U) 0 in 25 14 CD 'O :3 I a — 3: — CD � to CD 0) C) U) U 04 3* — 04 �: C.0 .2 C-4 , �: n CD to U4 0) r- :L'4 0)— CD U) LO a) C:) " ca >i W m LU r— o i LO CO0 't z 0) CO z LO C*4 0).0 04 U) < a) CL C) (D LO Z C-4 — (D m N E CO1 (C::Ij C—'4 C'\ I Z— co CZJ 0 c — z-- 0 W Cf) CL CL r-- C14 — 04 — N 04 — CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF DIAMOND BAR On May 22, 2007, 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. 1, Stella Marquez, declare as follows: I am employed by the City of Diamond Bar. On May 18, 2007, a copy of the agenda of the Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission was posted at the following locations: South Coast Quality Management Heritage Park District Auditorium 2900 Brea Canyon Road 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on May 18, 2007, at Diamond Bar, California. Stella Marquez Community Development Department gA\affldavitposfing.doc