HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/12/2000ber
_.,.2 2000
P.M.7-000
South Coast Air Quality Management
Auditorium
�y
21865 East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, •z
Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Planning
Division of the Dept. of Community & Development Services, located at 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190,
and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please call
(909) 396-5676 during regular business hours.
In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 9990, the City of
Diamond Dar 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 Dept. of Community &
Development Services at (909) 396-5676 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting.
Please refrain from smoking, eating or The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper
drinking in the Auditorium and encourages you to do the same
City of Diamond Bar
Planning Comtnission
MEETING RULES
PUBLIC INPUT
The meetings of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission are open to the public. A member of the public may
address the Commission on the subject of one or more agenda items and/or other items of which are within the
subject matter jurisdiction of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission. A request to address the Commission
should be submitted in writing at the public hearing; to the Secretary of the Commission.
As a general rule, the opportunity for public comments will take place at the discretion of the Chair. However,
in order to facilitate the meeting, persons who are interested parties for an item may be requested to give their
presentation at the time the item is called on the calendar. The Chair may limit individual public input to five
minutes on any item; or the Chair may limit the total amount of time allocated for public testimony based on the
number of people requesting to speak and the business of the Commission.
Individuals are requested to conduct themselves in a professional and businesslike manner. Comments and
questions are welcome so that all points of view are considered prior to the Commission making
recommendations to the staff and City Council.
In accordance with State Law (Brown Act), all matters to be acted on by the Commission must be posted at least
72 hours prior to the Commission meeting. In case of emergency or when a subject matter arises subsequent to
the posting of the agenda, upon making certain findings, the Commission may act on item that is not on the
posted agenda.
INFORMATION L.ATING TO AGENDAS AACTI®NS OF THE COMMISSION
Agendas for Diamond Bar Planning Commission meetings are prepared by the Planning Division of the
Community and Development Services Department. Agendas are available 72 hours prior to the meeting at City
Hall and the public library, and may be accessed by personal computer at the number below.
Every meeting of the Planning Commission is recorded on cassette tapes and duplicate tapes are available for a
nominal charge.
ADA REQLTI MENTS
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) 396-5676 between
8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
HELPFUL PHONE NUMBERS
Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Commission, Cassette Tapes of Meetings (909) 396-5676
Computer Access to Agendas (909) 860 -LINE
General Agendas (909) 396-5676
email: info@ci.diamond-bar.ca.us
Next Resolution No. 2000-16
1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Steve Nelson, Vice Chairman
Bob Zirbes, George Kuo, Joe Ruzicka, and Steve Tye.
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 Sneaker's Card for the
recording Secretary (Completion of this form is voluntary_) There is a five-minute maximum
time limit when addressing the Planning Commission.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chairman
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:
.1 Minutes: August 8, 2000.
6. NEW BUSINESS: Review topics of discussion conducted at Joint Study Session of City
Council and Planning Commission on August 15, 2000.
a
September 12, 2000
801 Development Review No. 2000-14 (pursuant to Code Section 22.48.020) is a request
to construct a two story, single family residence of approximately 10,349 square feet
with a four -car garage. The request also includes a five-foot high retaining wall.
Project Address: 2813 Watercourse Drive (Lot 48 of Tract 47850)
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Property Owner Diamond Bar West, LLC
3480 Torrance Boulevard, Suite 300
Torrance, CA 90503
Applicant: Richard Gould
3480 Torrance Boulevard, Suite 300
Torrance, CA 90503
Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that this project is consistent with the previously
certified Environmental Impact Report No. 91-2 for Tract Map No. 47850. No further
environmental review is required.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development
Review No. 2000-14, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within the
resolution.
802 Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04 and Development Review No. 2000-10
(pursuant to Code Sections 22.58 and 22.48) is a request to install two (2) additional
25 foot high camouflaged monopoles with a total of six (6) antennas, equipment
cabinets, and block equipment enclosure on an approximately seven acre site that
currently contains co -located, unmanned, wireless telecommunication facilities.
Project Address: 24401 Darrin Drive (Lot 51 of Tract No. 42584)
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Property Owner . Eric Stone
24401 Darrin Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Applicant: Nextel Communications
310 Commerce
Irvine, CA 92602
September 12, 2000
Page 3
Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15303(e), the City has determined that this project is
Categorically Exempt.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use
Permit No. 2000-04 and Development Review No. 2000-10, Findings of Fact, and conditions
of approval, as listed within the resolution.
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION MEETING:
DIAMOND BAR DAY AT
LOS ANGELES COUNTY FAIR
Thursday, September 14, 2000
AQMD Board Hearing Room
21865 E. Copley Drive
Monday, September 18, 2000
Fairplex, Pomona
JOINT STUDY SESSION Tuesday, September 19, 2000
CITY COUNCIL AND TRAFFIC AND 5:00 p.m. — AQMD Room CC -8
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION" 21865 E. Copley Drive
CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
MEETING:
Tuesday, September 19, 2000 — 6:30 p.m.
AQMD Auditorium
21865 E. Copley Drive
Tuesday, September 26, 2000 — 6:00 p.m.
AQMD Auditorium
21865 E. Copley Drive
September 12, 2000
MEETING:
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII•I - Be
LYAVJFAI%*
MEM
Tuesday, September 26, 2000 —7:00 p.m.
AQMD Auditorium
21865 E. Copley Drive
Thursday, September 28, 2000 — 7:00 p.m.
AQMD Hearing Board Room
21865 E. Copley Drive
Saturday, October 7, 2000
9:00 a.m. — 3:00 p.m.
Mt. Sac Parking Lot B -
11101. Grand Ave, Walnut
MINUTES
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULARMEETING OF THE, PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST :. hI,I
Chairman Nelson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management
Headquarters Building Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Kuo.
11
OA
�1
Present: Chairman Nelson, Vice Chairman Bob Zirbes, and Commissioners
George Kuo, Joe Ruzicka, and Steve Tye.
Also Present: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager; Sonya Joe, Development Services
Assistant; Linda Smith, Development ,Services Assistant, and
Stella Marquez, Administrative Secretary.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: . As presented.
4.1 Minutes of the July 25, 2000, meeting.
C/Ruzicka moved, C/Kuo seconded, to approve the minutes of the meeting of July 25,
2000, as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kuo, Ruzicka, Tye, VC/Zirbes, Chair/Nelson
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
5.1 Development Review No. 2000-09 (pursuant to Code Sections 22.48.020) is a request to
construct a three story (two stories and a basement) single family residence with a three car
garage and balconies totaling to approximately 11,560 square feet. The request also
includes a swimming pool/spa, gazebo and retaining walls with a maximum six-foot
exposed height. (Public Hearing closed and continued from July 11, 2000.)
August 8, 2000 Page 2 Planning Commission
GI��CN�h�A
2718 Steeplechase Lane
(Lot 54, Tract No. 30289)
Diamond Far, CA 91765
P# •
P.O.
Diamondc 91765
An -Chi Lee
3740 Campus Drive #B
Newport Beach, CA 92660
DCM/DeStefano reported that this matter was continued in order for staff to look into concerns
expressed by the Commission: 1) The accessibility of the easement road and driveway situation,
and 2) verify the amount of earth work proposed for the project. The Commission closed the
public hearing on July 11, 2000. The Commission has the opportunity to deliberate on the matter
and to question the applicant and receive answers from the applicant regarding questions or
concerns. With respect to access rights over the shared driveway, staff has received documentation
from the applicant and has requested the City Attorney to look at the situation. The City Attorney
has concluded in a letter dated August 1, 2000, that the applicant does have rights over the access
drive and that the objection presented by the adjacent property owner should not serve as a basis
for denial of the application by the Planning Commission. With respect to the quantity of earth
work necessary for the project, the quantities have been verified as being 2700 cubic yards of earth
work for the project - 25 cubic yards of cut and 200 cubic yards of fill with about 2300 cubic yards
of earth work requiring exportation from the site. Assuming a truckload of about 12 cubic yards,
it would equate to 192 full truckloads leaving the site. The precise quantities of earth work will
likely vary as a result of final engineering, grading and field conditions found once the project is
underway. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review
No. 2000-09, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
C/Tye asked what recourse is available to the Roberts in the event that Condition 5 (i) is not
completed to their satisfaction.
DCM/DeStefano stated that staff would recommend that Condition 5 (i) be modified to include
such things as determination of an access route by the Applicant, an assessment of the roadway
condition for that route to be provide by the Applicant to the City's Engineer, a reassessment of the
roadway by the City prior to the approval of final occupancy, and that the Applicant be responsible
for repairing any damage that has been caused by the construction activities. It is staff's
understanding that the roadway section is minimal and that it is about 35-40 years old. This
Applicant has access rights over the roadway but has absolutely no control over the condition of
that roadway, has no ability to repair it - has no obligation to repair it, and unless and until the six
August g, 2000 Page 3 Planning Commission
or seven involved property owners get together and determine the method and responsibility of
maintenance and upkeep the roadway will likely remain in its current condition. The property
owners at either end of the driveway have tended to take care of their portions. It is the property
owners in the middle that have not maintained their portion.
VC/Zirbes said that he drove to the site yesterday. He came in on the access road to the south and
he noted that all of the roadway leading to the site as well as, the frontage on the Applicant's
property was in dire need of repair. The property owners to the north of the project site have
improved their portion and the Roberts' have improved their portion with a concrete material
instead of a blacktop material.
Jim Stroffe, Attorney at Law, Friedman, Peterson and Stroffe, representing the Applicant, stated
that the Applicant does not have a problem with the concept of a baseline assessment of the
roadway and a determination as to what damage, if any, has been caused by the construction
activity and an obligation on his part to repair that damage.
C/Tye asked if the repair included re -paving in spite of its current condition would they do so.
Jim Stroffe responded that what he is saying is that if there is damage caused to the roadway by the
construction activity that does not pre-exist the construction activity, the Applicant will repair that
damage to the pre-existing state.
C/Tye questioned how asphalt could be restored to its pre-existing condition.
Jim Stroffe admitted that this is a dilemma. Staff's suggestion to reconstruct the roadway in front
of the Applicant's property is most likely where most of the construction activity will take place.
It. is likely the trucks will come empty across the Roberts' property causing the least amount of
damage and'exit the property at the other end where the lots are unimproved. The loading activity
will take place on the Applicant's property. If there is damage occurring from the construction
activity in other areas it will be repaired to the satisfaction of the City's Engineer. He indicated he
was referring to Condition (h), which requires that the Applicant reconstruct which is different
from repair.
DCM/DeStefano explained that staff's intent was twofold: 1) to cause the eventual reconstruction
of the entire roadway starting with this Applicant who will be responsible for their portion directly
in front of their property. Any subsequent projects will have the identical condition unless and
until the property owners get together and resolve the issue, and 2) to cause the Applicant to repair
any damage that the construction causes to the balance of the roadway but only to bring it to the
level existing prior to the construction activity taking place. Staff is not asking that the Applicant
reconstruct the roadway fronting neighboring lots.
Chair/Nelson.re-opened the public hearing.
August 8, 2000 Page 4 Planning Commission
Victor Natividad, Lot 55 (adjacent to the proposed project) said he is concerned about 192
truckloads traveling over the access road. Construction will continue for about one year and with
heavy loads the asphalt will give way. If the Applicant is going to fix the roadway they cannot wait
until the rain stops because it will be extremely muddy. He does not want to pass the cost over to
the builder but at the same time it has to be passable because he has witnessed even pickups
moving in and out of the area causing severe problems. He asked that the roadway be repaired as
soon as possible, especially during the heavy rains.
Mr. Natividad explained to C/Ruzicka that repair would not be an issue at this time. When the
rains come, potholes will be created by heavy loads passing over the roadway. Left unattended,
the damage will be extreme and it may render his access impassable.
Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing.
C/Ruzicka said he understands the conditions of approval as written. However, Mr. Natividad may
have a point that there ought to be some kind of condition that the builder maintain the road in
passable condition during the time of the project.
VC/Zirbes suggested that Condition (i) be modified to read: "The Applicant shall repair damage
that may occur to the shared access driveway during construction, on an ongoinglas needed basis,
pursuant to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." C/Ruzicka concurred.
Chair/Nelson said he shares the same concerns about the roadway. If the roadway is in very poor
condition and portions are repaired back to its existing condition, he doesn't understand how this
will take care of the situation.
DCM/DeStefano responded that staff has discussed this matter at length. The issue is that there
is no Homeowners Association and no shared ownership of this long access driveway. Requiring
this Applicant to repair or improve the entire access drive puts this Applicant at the mercy of the
other property owners. While staff agrees that repairing a bad road with a "new coat of paint"
which will still have a bad structural condition, may not be the best way to deal with this matter.
Staff is not sure that there is necessarily a nexus between this Applicant's project and a
responsibility to repair the entire roadway. While it is not the ideal situation, it is staff's opinion
that it is the appropriate solution at this point. It is staff's hope that some of the property owners
will capture the opportunity to rebuild their portion of the driveway. 'There may be an opportunity
for a volume discount with the pavement contractor and hopefully, as a result of this project, some
of the other homeowners will pitch in their share and more of the driveway will be properly
repaired. Construction activities will be monitored on a regular basis.
DCM/DeStefano responded to C/Ruzicka that the proposed wording change to Condition (i) would
be redundant but it would not be onerous.
August R, 2000 Page 5 Planning Commission
VC/Zirbes asked if the cut under the roadway is strong enough to support the types of weight loads
proposed for exporting earth and does Condition (i) cover the understructure.
DCM/DeStefano responded that the Applicant is required to provide soils reports (Condition (g))
that will prove that the property can withstand the additional loads for the house and for the use of
the roadway for construction activity.
VC/Zirbes moved, C/Tye seconded, to approve Development Review No. 2000-09, Findings of
Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution subject to the following
modification to Condition 5. (i): Add "on an ongoing/as needed basis" so that the condition reads:
"The Applicant shall repair damage that may occur to the shared access driveway during
construction, on an ongoindas needed basis, pursuant to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." as
well as, the inclusion of wording in Condition 5. (i) an assessment prior.to construction regarding
the selection of a route, a reassessment of the route and appropriate repair to any damage caused.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kuo, Ruzicka, Tye, VC/Zirbes, Chair/Nelson
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
6. NEW -BUSINESS:
601 Discussion on Joint Study Session of City Council and Planning Commission on August
15, 2000, Review of proposed topics for .discussion.
Commissioners requested inclusion of the following topics for discussion:
C/Ruzicka:
1) Status of Shopping Malls/redevelopment
2) Redevelopment Agency
3) Kmart Shopping Center plans
4) Top Value (Brea Canyon Road and Golden Springs Drive
5) Ralphs Market (Country Hills Towne Center) .
VC/Zirbes:
1) Status of approved CUP's
2) Redevelopment Agency
3) Industry East Project and its effect on D.B. business
C/Tye:
1) (In Force) Conditional Use Permit Review Process
August 8, 2000 Page 6 Planning Commission
M
0
2) Use of Code Enforcement Officers to clean up the city
3) Update re: Larkstone Park
1) Approval of Variances
2) D.B. Traffic and status of the Four Corners Freeway Study
3) Industry East Project
4) State Approval of the City's Housing Element
Chair/Nelson: (Unable to attend the joint meeting)
1) Better Understanding of the Council's Vision for Open Space within the
City as well as, at its borders.
2) Update on Council's Discussion Regarding Annexation of Lands to the
Southwest.
3) Status of Tonner Canyon
4) Parks/Trails baster Plan
8,1 Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-03 (pursuant to Code Section 22.42.040 and 22.58) is
a request to operate a Child Day Care Center in conjunction with a Montessori School.
23555 Palomino Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Abbey Company
12383 Lewis Street,. Suite 200
Garden Grove, CA 92840
APPLICANT: Diamond Bar Montessori Academy
1861 Paseo La Paz
Pomona, CA 91768
DSA/Smith presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
approve Development Review No. 2000-03, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval
as listed within the resolution.
DSA/Smith responded to C/Ruzicka that children may range in age from 2 to 11 years. The
applicant is not concerned about the close proximity of the school to a bar. .
August 8, 2000 Page 7 Planning Commission
DSA/Smith indicated to Chair/Nelson that KinderCare operated at this location from 1979
to September, 1999. Parking is available on both sides of Derringer Lane in front of the
school.
Tige Licato reiterated the project plan. No structural changes are proposed. The Applicant
intends to provide the same type of care previously offered by KinderCare. Speaking on
behalf of himself and his partners, Mr. Licato stated he does not foresee any problem with
conditions set forth by the City's Planning Department. however, the Applicant has a
timeliness issue since school commences at the end of August. There is a great deal of
interest in the school. Thirty-five parents have indicated that they wish to enroll their
children in the school and fully understand that there is not a specific date of opening due
to the fact that Los Angeles County has not yet process their business license application
which was submitted two months ago. The City's Planning Department has conditioned
the project that the business license must be in hand prior to issuance of the CUP. The
Applicant has requested permission from the Planning Department to open prior to receipt
of the business license. he reported that he spoke with Ms. Everett (L.A. County Business
License Department) who indicated they cannot do a site inspection until the CUP is
completed and the business is up and running. The business license is the only outstanding
matter.
Attorney Gene Shield stated that this project is within the economic revitalization of the
City of Diamond Bar. Due to the fact that there was a 20 year existing school in that
location the Applicant is merely implementing the same program with a variance in terms
of the education quality being at a higher level as well as, providing a day care facility for
the residents of Diamond Bar within that economic revitalization plan. The CUP issue
arose because the previous business had been closed longer than the required 180 days.
DCM/DeStefano indicated to C/Ruzicka that business licenses are required in Diamond Bar
for certain activities, of which this is one. Diamond Bar contracts with the County of Los
Angeles to provide the service. A business license is required. The applicant is asking you
to waive or extend that requirement such that they can open their business without the
County business license which 'is a major policy issue that may be outside of the Planning
Commission's scope of authority. The issue is how do you effectively do so and how do
you receive assurances that the.Applicant is going to process the business license. What
if there are issues that the County discovers in the Applicant's background that cause them
to not issue the license and you have a school that is now open. When and how would you
seek revocation of the recently granted CUP. It creates a number of issues. For as many
times as the City hears the County permits the processing of a the operation of a business
without a license, they come back and say that they do not allow anything to open up
without the license first being in hand. It is a difficult situation. As a City, the Planning
Commission has no control over the County's process.
August 8, 2000 Page 8 Planning Commission
C/Tye asked if it would be unprecedented to permit this Applicant to open his school
without physically having a business license?
DCM/DeStefano said "No„ because he can think of one other example in that immediate
area where a business operated without a County business license which is still a point of
contention almost one year to the day later. If the 180 days had not expired, a business
license would still be required, a CUP would not be required because they would not have
lost their previous status.
Mr. Licato responded to VC/Zirbes that the purchase of the property was consummated the
end of June.
VC/Zirbes said as a parent he is concerned about the proximity of the school to the bar.
What types of requirements or conditions does the State Licensing Bureau impose with
respect to the school's proximity to an establishment that sells alcohol.
Mr. Licato responded that it was not an issue as far as the State is concerned. Children will
not be waiting outside of the school for their parents. There is a strict state requirement that
all children be signed in and out of the school with the time noted.
VC/Zirbes asked if Mr. Licato has considered the peak hour traffic at that intersection and
how it will effect his student population. How many children will be picked up between
the hours of 4:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m.
Mr. Licato said he anticipates that because of the school's scheduling about one-third of the
students will be dropped off and picked up at any given time. During those specific hours,
about 25 to 30 students will be picked up. The school does not anticipate a traffic problem.
C/Ruzicka asked if the Planning Commission can do what the Applicant is asking it to do.
DCM/DeStefano responded that he does not believe it can. The Commission has a
Municipal Code Provision that requires a business license prior to the operation of a
business and he believes that the Planning Commission cannot waive that requirement.
The license is presumed to be 90 days after the application has been filed which will not
help this applicant.
Chair/Nelson opened the public hearing.
August 8, 2000 Page 9 Planning Commission
There being no one who wished to speak on this matter, Chair/Nelson closed the public
hearing.
DCM/DeStefano suggested that the Planning Commission could approve the project with
the provision that evidence of the filing for a business license to be provided to staff within
15 days of approval or the approval does not become effective. The second provision could
be that this Conditional Use Permit expires at a certain time unless they have their business
license in hand. The only remedy to that would be to seek an extension to the CUP from
the Planning Commission. Assuming Planning Commission approval, staff would work
with the Los Angeles County Business License Division in order to try to assure the timely
conclusion of this application and other applications.
C/Ruzicka emphasized his concern about the City's potential liability where small children
are involved in the event that this school opens and problems ensue.
VC/Zirbes concurred. There are children involved and he believes that all of the
appropriate licensing should be in place before the facility opens.
Mr. Licato indicated to Chair/Nelson that the business license matter is being disclosed to
all applicants that they had intended to .open at the end of August but because of the
situation with the business license the opening may be pushed back. Parents are awaiting
the Planning Commissions' decision.
Attorney Shield stated that the proposed business is the same type of business that
previously occupied the site. These Applicants have completed the rigorous background
search with the Department of Social Services, Department of Education, etc.
Chair/Nelson stated that there is no problem with the type of use. No one on this
Commission is questioning the validity of the operation or, its benefits to the community
- we are discussing a major change in policy about which this body must be very cognizant.
C/Tye moved, VC/Zirbes seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-03,
Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
AYES: Kuo, Ruzicka, Tye, VC/Zirbes, Chair/Nelson
None
None
CO SSIONERS:
NOES:
CO SSIONERS:
ABSENT:
CO SSIONERS:
August 8, 2000 Page 10 Planning Commission
8.2 Variance 2000-05, Administrative Development Review No. 2000-07 (pursuant to Code
Section 22.52 and 22.48) is a request to construct a two story single family residence of
approximately 9,692 square feet, which includes two (2) two -car garages and second story
decks. The request also includes a lap pool with spa, pond with waterfall, and pavilion.
The Variance is requested for proposed crib walls that reach a maximum height of
approximately 25 feet.
2001 Derringer Lane
(Lot 73, Tract 3009 1)
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Gene Pascual
14326 Spring Crest Drive
Chino Hills, CA 91709
APPLICANT: Ron Wilson
2658 Del Mar Heights Road #149
Del Mar, CA 92014
DSA/Joe presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
approve Variance No. 2000-05 and Administrative Development Review No. 2000-07,
Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
DSA/Joe explained the proposed project and the crib wall requirement and variance request
in relationship to the topography of the site.. Staff believes that the installation of the crib
wall is preferable to excessive grading of the site in order to create a flat buildable pad.
Ron Wilson explained the project using photographs of the lot. He was very concerned
about the mass of the house as seen from the street and screening the house from view to
offer the property owner some privacy. Most of the rooms of the house are oriented to the
canyon view. The civil engineer determined that a crib wall would be the most prudent way
to create a building pad and not have a series of walls on this site.
Mr. Wilson responded to VC/Zirbes that the entire crib wall will be covered with
landscaping.
Ron Tashima, Landscape Architect, indicated to VC/Zirbes that a lot of the vines that will
be used for landscaping currently exist in that location. A drip irrigation will be installed
using fertilizer injection. He presented examples of commercial structures that are
supported by crib walls which are about one year old. In about three years of three good
growing seasons the walls will be completely covered.
August g, 2000 Page 11 Planning Commission
Mr. Wilson explained to C/Ruzicka that the house will be built behind the house in order
to preserve the natural terrain.
Dan Pierce, GVW Engineering, explained to C/Ruzicka that when the pad is graded down
the second story floor would be near street level. With respect to the rear crib wall along
the pool, if the Applicant went with a series of six foot walls in that area there would be
about 3 -six foot walls with 3:1 slopes in between them. It is likely that there would be a
series of four to five walls in the front area where the 25 foot crib wall is proposed and
those walls would come out to the street right of way and step down to the house.
Mr. Milson indicated to C/Kuo that he does not know specifically how many crib walls in
"The Country Estates" exceed 25 feet. He referred to the picture of the home on Derringer
Dane that has a series of walls that are 15 to 16 feet. Although the proposed crib wall
extends to 24 feet at one point and decreases in height dramatically because the grade falls
very rapidly. He believes that this is the best design solution for this particular lot which
offers unique design options.
Mr. Tahema explained to Chair/Nelson that the landscape plan includes plantings of
varying height at the base of the back wall to soften the impact.
Chair/Nelson cautioned the landscape architect to avoid invasive species.
Chair/Nelson opened the publicpearing.
There being no one present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/Nelson closed the
public hearing.
C/Ruzicka moved to approve Administrative Development Review No. 200-07, Variance
No. 2000-05, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within the resolution.
VC/Zirbes seconded the motion and ask for consideration of the following: That Ron
Wilson be removed as an applicant from Page 1 of the Recitals and that Condition 5. (d)
on Page g include the following language at the end of the sentence: ", including all crib
wall landscaping and irrigation prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy."
C/Ruzicka concurred with the amendments. Motion carried by the following Roll Call
vote:
AYES: Kuo, Ruzicka, Tye, VC/Zirbes, Chair/Nelson
None
None
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIO S:
August 8, 2000 Page 12 Planning Commission
9. COMMISSION COMMENTS: C/Tye asked if the matter of reciprocal parking for Togo's
has been addressed and how is it that they will be opening shortly.
DSA/Joe responded that yesterday Togo's submitted an application to amend their existing CUP
application due to the increased occupancy to change from a takeout Deli to an indoor- dining
facility. They also submitted a Minor Conditional Use application to request outdoor dining which
would consist of possible two to three tables with three chairs to each table. This will require
increased parking. Part of the application will be to again review the purpose of the Conditional
Use Permit that was triggered due to the increase in seating.
C/Ruzicka thanked DCM/DeStefano for his heroic attempt to accommodate the Planning
Commission with regard to the Montessori Academy. He read in today's paper that the Utilities
Commission is conducting open hearings entitled "help write the rules." He asked if the City has
any input into something along these lines.
VC/Zirbes commented that colorized architectural drawings provided a much clearer picture of
proposed projects.
10.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects.
As indicated in the agenda matrix.
DCM/DeStefano pointed out that the Planning Commission presently has no items
scheduled for its August 22, 2000 meeting. No items are scheduled or anticipated. Staff
recommends that the Planning Commission go dark on that evening and meet again on the
regular meeting date of September 12, 2000. The Commission concurred to go dark on
August 22, 2000.
DCM/DeStefano explained that a notice will be posted re: anticipated lack of quorum for
August 22, 2000.
DCM/DeStefano, reported that AssocP/Lungu is doing well following surgery on her left
wrist last week.
y r.
As listed in the agenda.
August g, 2000 Page 13 Planning Commission
There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chairman Nelson adjourned
the meeting at 10:15 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
James DeStefano
Deputy City Manager
Attest:
Chairman Steve Nelson
CASE/FILE ER:
City of Diaxaond
PLANNING COMMISSION
Report
RIM
September 12, 2000
Development Review No.
2000-14.
A request to construct a two
story single family
residence of approximately
10,349 square foot with a
four car garage. The
request also includes a
three foot high retaining
wall.
2813 Water Course Drive (Lot
48, Tract 47850)
Diamond Bar West, LLC
3480 Torrance Boulevard,
Suite #300
Torrance, CA 90503
The property owner/ applicant, Diamond Bar West, LLC is requesting a
Development Review approval (pursuant to Code Section 22.48.020 and
22.48.040) in order to construct a two story single family residence
of approximately 10,349 square feet with a four car garage. The
project site is located at 2813 Water Course Drive adjacent to "The
Country Estates".
The project site is Lot 48 of Tract 47850, a 50 lot subdivision with
graded buildable pads, approved by City Council on June 6, 1995.
The project site is a vacant, rectangular shaped lot approximately
29,031 gross square feet. The front yard contains a downward slope
that tapers off toward the driveway. The rear yard contains a small
downward slope. The north side yard contains an upward slope. The
south side yard contains a small berm. According to the Tract Map,
1
the project site does not contain any easements and/or restricted
use areas. Additionally, the subject property does not contain any
of the trees listed within the Development Code that may require
protection and/or preservation.
The project site is zoned Single Family Residential- Minimum Lot
Size 20,000 Square Feet (R-1-20,000). Its General Plan Land Use
designation is Rural Residential (RR). Generally, the following
zones surround the subject site: to the north, south, east, and
west is the R-1-20,000 Zone.
The City's Development Code sets forth a Development Review process.
The purpose of this process is to establish consistency with the
General Plan through the promotion of high aesthetic and functional
standards to compliment and add to the economic, physical, and
social character of the City. The process will also ensure that new
development and intensification of existing development yields a
pleasant living, working, or shopping environment and attracts the
interest of residents, workers, shoppers and visitorstas the result
of consistent exemplary design.
Section 22.48.020 states that an application for Development Review
is required for residential projects, which involve construction on
a vacant parcel and new structures, additions to structures, and
reconstruction projects which are equal to 50 percent or greater of
the floor area of existing structures on site, or have a minimum
10,000 square feet of combined gross floor area. The proposed
project is residential construction on a vacant lot for a 10,349
square foot home. Therefore, Development Review is required and the
Planning Commission is the review authority.
Additionally, a condition of approval for Tract No. 47850 requires
that the proposed project comply with the conditions of approval for
Vesting Tract Map No. 47850. A condition of approval for the tract
map requires that residential dwelling units be submitted for the
City's review pursuant to the requirements of the Development Review
Ordinance. The Development Review Ordinance is incorporated into
the City's Development Code.
The following is a comparison of the City and Tract Map No. 47850
development standard requirements and the project's proposed
development standards:
Theproposed single family residence complies with the City's and
Tract Map No. 47850's development standards for Lot 48. However,
this report includes added discussion on the minimum dimensions for
the proposed garage.
3
City/Tract Hap No. 47550
Project's Development Standards
Development Standard Requirements
1.
Setbacks:
1.
Setbacks:
Front yard - minimum of 25'
Front yard - 35' from property
from property line
line.
Side yard setbacks - 10' and
Side yards - 16' 6" and 10'
15' from buildable pad's
from buildable pad's edge.
edge.
Rear yard - minimum of 25' from
Rear yard - 51' from the
buildable pad's edge.
buildable pad's edge.
Minimum distance between
Minimum distance of 40' between
dwelling units - 40'. Pads
dwelling units.
of .25 or less may vary from
the established setbacks
.subject to Development
Review.
2.
Building Height:
2.
Building Height:
Two stories - maximum - 35'.
Two stories - 30' 6".
3.
Parking:
3.
Parking:
Minimum 2 car garage.
4 car garage.
Minimum 20' depth and 10 foot'
2 -bays 20' x 20' 6"
width for each vehicle bay.
1 -bay 8 x 20'6"
1 -bay 8.5 x 20'
4.
Retaining wall:
4.
Retaining Wall:
Maximum of 6' exposed height.
3' exposed height.
5.
Site Coverage:
5.
Site Coverage:
Maximum 30 percent.
18 percent
Theproposed single family residence complies with the City's and
Tract Map No. 47850's development standards for Lot 48. However,
this report includes added discussion on the minimum dimensions for
the proposed garage.
3
Tract No. 47850 is not annexed to "The Country Estates". As a
result, on January 15, 1997, Jim Gardner, manager for "The Country
Estates" stated that "The Country Estate's" homeowners' association
architectural committee would not be reviewing the proposed homes
for Tract No. 47850.
The proposed project's architectural style is Mediterranean. It is
compatible with the eclectic architectural style of other homes
within adjacent Tract No. 47851 and "The Country Estates". The
following materials and colors were proposed with this application:
® stucco - P-941 Vanilla Rose;
roof - 3532 Terraccotta/Gold Streaks
® fascia and trims - SP 164 French White
® columns and exterior doors - SP 1 White
® trims and bellybands - SP 152 Cashmere.
The proposed materials/color board was compared to boards previously
approved for homes adjacent or near the project site =(Lots 46, 47,
50). The comparison indicates the proposed application will
incorporate matching colors that will further compliment the tract
development, but also remain distinctive enough to encourage a more
customized feel.
This single family residence contains simple, elegant architectural
features. Unlike nearby single family developments, the faoade will
not contain a stone face or stone accents. Instead, this proposal
includes roof and window treatments to accentuate the homes
fenestration. The applicant has also proposed a bellyband, which
helps prevent the appearance of a smooth box and provide distinction
between the first and second floor.
The proposed single family structure consists of two stories as
shown on Exhibit "A". The first story contains an entry foyer,
living room, two bedrooms (each with adjacent bathrooms), theater,
family room, wet bar, dining room, powder room, kitchen, nook, dirty
kitchen,- pantries, service room and four car garage. The second
story contains a master bedroom with sitting room, wardrobe rooms
and master bathroom, library, four bedrooms (each with an adjacent
bathroom), storage room, mezzanine, and two balconies.
0
Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.30 Table 3-10, a minimum of
two spaces in a fully enclosed garage is required. Furthermore,
pursuant to Development Code Section 22.30 Table 3-11, the minimum
interior parking stall dimension for residential uses is 10 feet in
width and 20 feet in length.
Staff researched projects within Tract No. 47850 that were approved
by the Planning Commission between January 1999 to the present date.
The following table contains past project approval information:
ADDRESS
GARAGE
STALL
DIMENSIONS
OVERALL
APPROVAL
SIZE
GARAGE WIDTH
DATE
2808
Crystal Ridge
1- four car
2 -bays
10'
x 22'
38'
10/26/99
(Lot
30)
garage
2 -bays
9'
x 22'
2859
Crystal Ridge
2- four car
2 -bays
10'
x 2116"
37' for first
10/26/99
(Parcel F)
garages
2 -bays
8.16"
x 2116"
garage
2 -bays
10'
x 2116"
2 -bays
819"
x 2116"
37'6" for
second garage
2800
Crystal Ridge
1- four car
2 -bays
10'
x 20'
37
6/27/00
Road
(Lot 29)
garage
2 -bays
816"
x 20'
2819
Water Course
1- five car
3 -bays
10'
x 20'
4616"
5/23/00
(Lot
46)
garage
1 -bay
8' x
20'
1 -bay
8'6"
x 20'
As indicated above, past projects for Tract No. 47850, which
provided a minimum of two, fully enclosed parking spaces with a 10'
width and 20' length for each vehicle bay have been approved by the
Planning Commission. However, the smallest overall garage width
that has been approved is 37'. Whereas, this application proposes a
four car garage.with a 36'6" overall width. In an effort to ensure
no precedence is set for a further reduced size garage, staff
recommends, the overall width be a minimum of 37'. As a part of this
project's conditions of approval, the Applicant shall submit a plan,
which delineates a minimum garage width of 37' for a four car garage
for the City's review and approval prior to the issuance of any City
permits.
A landscape/ irrigation plan was not submitted with this project's
application. However, the applicant will be required to submit
landscape/irrigation plans at a later date, reflecting the
landscaping guidelines and restrictions set forth by Tract Map No.
47850 for the City's review and approval. In recently approved
projects (i.e. Tract No. 47851), the applicant was required to
5
submit a landscape/ irrigation plan delineating the type of planting
materials, color, size, quantity and location, for review and
approval by the City within 60 days of the project's final
inspection or occupancy issuance. Additionally, the
landscaping/irrigation was required to be installed within six
months of the Planning Division's final inspection or Certificate of
Occupancy's issuance. This requirement will be a condition of
approval for this proposed project.
A condition of approval for Tract No. 47850 requires the preparation
of a "Buyers' Awareness Package" which includes but is not limited
to information pertaining to geologic issues regarding the
properties, wildlife corridors, oak and walnut tree preservation
issues, the existence and constraints pertaining to Significant
Ecological Area No. 15 and Tonner Canyon, explanatory information
pertaining to restrictions on use of the properties as necessary and
similar related matters. A program was instituted to included
delivery of a copy of the "Buyers' Awareness Package" to each
prospective purchaser. This program incorporated a signed receipt
by the prospective purchaser verifying receipt of the Package and
that the information within the Package was read by the prospective
purchaser. This program also required that a copy of this receipt
be forwarded to the City. To ensure the effectiveness of this
program, a condition of approval for this project will be that
before final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy of the proposed
home, the applicant shall submit to the City a copy of this receipt
signed by the prospective buyer.
The Public Works Division and the. Building and Safety Division
reviewed this project. Their recommendations are a component of the
draft resolution.
This item has been advertised in the San Gabriel Valle
the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on September 1, 2000.
mailed'to twenty-two property owners within a 500 foot
project site on September 1, 2000. A notice of public
display board measuring at least 4 foot by,6 foot was
project site on September 1, 2000 and displayed for at
before the public hearing. Also, a notice of public
posted at.three public places on September 1, 2000.
0
y Tribune and
Notices were
radius of the
hearing on a
posted at the
least 10 days
hearing was
The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project is
consistent with the previously certified Master Environmental Impact
Report No. 91-2 for Tract Map Nos. 47850, 47851, and 48487 according
to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) and
guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15162 (a) of
Article 11 of the. California Code of Regulations. No further
environmental review is required.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development
Review No. 2000-14 Findings of Fact, and conditions as listed within
the attached resolution.
Prepared by:
Sonya J e
Development Services Assistant
1. The design and layout of the proposed development are consistent
with the General Plan, development standards of the applicable
district, design guidelines, and architectural criteria for
special areas (e.g. theme areas, specific plans, community plans,
boulevards or planned developments);
2. The design and layout of the proposed development will not
interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or
future developments, and will not create traffic or, pedestrian
hazards;
3. The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible
with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will
maintain and enhance the harmonious, orderly and attractive
development contemplated by the Development Code, the General
Plan, or any applicable specific plan;
4. The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable
environment for. its occupants and visiting public as well as its
neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture and
color, and will remain aesthetically appealing;
5. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative
0
affect on property values or resale(s) of property) to the
properties or improvements in the vicinity; and
6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
1. Draft Resolution of Approval;
2. Exhibit "A" - site plan, floor plan, elevations, and
materials/colors board, dated September 12, 2000;
3. Application; and
4. Oak Tree Statement dated August 23, 2000.
8
A. Recitals
The property owner/applicant, Diamond Bar West, LLC has
filed an application for Development Review No. 2000-14.
The project site is located at 2813 Water Course Drive,
Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, as described in
the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this
Resolution, the subject Development Review is referred to as
the "Application".
The Deputy City Manager of the City of Diamond Bar, on
September 12, 2000 conducted a duly noticed public hearing
on the Application. .
Notification of the public hearing for this project has been
made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley
Daily Bulletin newspapers on September 1, 2000. Twenty-two
property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project site
was notified by mail on September 1, 2000. A notice of
public hearing on a display board measuring at least 4 foot
by 6 foot was posted at the project site on September 1,
2000 and displayed for at least 10 days before the public
hearing.
B. Resolution
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the
Planning Commissioner of the City of Diamond Bar as.follows:
1. The Planning Commissioner hereby specifically finds that
all of the facts set forth I the Recitals, Part A, of this
Resolution are true and correct.
1
tom.
r,
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the project
identified above in this Resolution is consistent with the
previously certified Master Environmental Impact Report
No. 91-2 for Tract Nos. 47850, 47851, and 48487 according
to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA)
and guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section
15162 (a) of Article 11 of the California Code of
Regulations.
3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and
determines that, having considered the record as a whole
including the findings set forth below, and changes and
alterations which have been incorporated into and
conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the
application, there is no evidence before the Planning
Commission that the project proposed herein will have the
potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or
the habitat upon which the wild life depends. Based upon
substantial evidence, this Planning Commission hereby -
rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in
Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth herein,
the Planning Commission, hereby finds as follows:
(a) The project relates to a 50 lot subdivision with
graded buildable pads, approved by City Council on
June 6, 1995. The project site is a vacant.
,rectangular shaped lot approximately 29,031 gross
square feet. The front yard contains a downward slope
that tapers off toward the driveway. The rear yard
contains a small downward slope. The north side yard
contains an upward slope. The south side yard
contains a small berm. According to the Tract. Map,
the project site does not contain any easements
and/or restricted use areas. Additionally, the
subject property does not .contain any of the trees
listed within the Development Code that may require
protection and/or preservation.
(b) The project site is zoned Single Family Residential -
Minimum Lot Size 20,000 Square Feet (R-1-20,000).
Its General Plan designation is Rural Residential (RR
max. 1 du/acre).
F-1
(d) The project involves the construction of a two story,
single family residence of approximately 10,349
square feet with a four car garage. The request also
includes a three foot high retaining wall.
(e) The design and layout of the proposed development is
consistent with the General Plan, development
standards of the applicable district, design
guidelines, and architectural criteria for
specialized area (e.g. theme areas, specific plans,
community plans, boulevards, or planned
developments).
Originally, Tract Map No. 47850 was submitted as a
vesting tentative tract map. At that time, the City
was operating under a draft General Plan. The
General Plan was adopted on July 25, 1995, Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 was approved on June 5,
1995. However, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850
was designed at 25 percent below the maximum
allowable density and has an overall average density
of 1.49 dwelling units per acre unit which complies
with the land use designation of Rural Residential
(max. 1 du/acrea) identified in the adopted General
Plan. Additionally, the proposed project complies
with the City's General Plan objectives and
strategies related to maintaining the integrity of
residential neighborhoods and open space.
Furthermore, the proposed project is compatible with
the eclectic architectural style and design,
materials, and colors of existing homes within the
surrounding area.
(f) The design and layout of the proposed development
will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of
neighboring existing or future development, and will
not create traffic or pedestrian hazards.
Tract Map No. 47850's Master Environmental Impact
Report No. 91-2, certified by the City, addresses the
design and layout of the neighborhood as well as the
flow of pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Water
Course Drive adequately serve the project site as
9
presented in the Environmental Impact Report. This
street was designed to handle minimum traffic created
by this planned residential development. Therefore,
the use will not interfere with
(g) The architectural design of the proposed development
is compatible with the characteristics of the
surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the
harmonious, orderly and attractive development
contemplated by the Development Code, the General
Plan, City Design Guidelines, or any applicable
specific plan.
The proposed project's architectural style is
Mediterranean. This single family residence contains
simple, elegant architectural features. Unlike
nearby single family developments, the fagade will
not contain a stone face or stone accents. Instead,
this proposal includes roof and window treatments to
accentuate the homes fenestration. The applicant has
also proposed a bellyband, which helps prevent the
appearance of a smooth box and provide distinction
between the first and second floor. As a result, the
architectural design is compatible with the character
of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the
harmonious, orderly and attractive development
contemplated by Chapter 22.48.020 Development Review
Standards, City Design Guidelines, and the City's
General Plan. Additionally, as approved the proposed
project will be compatible with Vesting Tract Map No.
47850's development standards.
(h) The design of the proposed development will provide a
desirable environment for its occupants and visiting
public, as well as its neighbors, through good
aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that
will remain aesthetically appealing.
A project colors/materials board is provided as
Exhibit "A". The colors, materials, and textures
proposed are complimentary to the existing homes
within the area while offering variety and low level
of maintenance. The proposed colors and materials
will provide a desirable environment for its
occupants and visiting public by accentuating the
simple, elegant architectural features of the single
family residence.
x
(i.) The proposed project will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare or materially
injurious (e.g. negative affect on property values or
resale(s) of property) to the properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
City permits, inspections, and soils reports are
required for construction and will ensure that the
finished project will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare, or materially
injurious to the properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
(j) The. proposed project has been reviewed in compliance
with the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
Pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has
determined that this project is consistent with the
previously certified Environmental Impact Report No.
91-2 for Tract Map No. 47850..
5. Eased upon the findings and conclusion set forth above,
the Planning Commission hereby approves this Application
subject to the following conditions:
(a) The project shall substantially conform to site plan,
floor plan, elevations, and materials/colors board
collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" dated September 12,
2000, as submitted to and approved by the Planning
Commission, and as amended herein.
(b) The subject site shall be maintained in a condition
which is free of debris both during and after the
construction, addition, or implementation of the
entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash,
debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to
construction shall be done only by the property owner,
applicant, or by duly permitted waste contractor, who
has been authorized by the City to provide collection,
transportation, and disposal of solid waste from
residential, commercial, construction, and industrial
areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's
obligation to insure that the waste contractor utilized
0
LA, j
has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to
provide such services.
(c) Before construction begins, the applicant shall install
temporary construction fencing pursuant to the Building
and Safety Division's requirements along the project
site's perimeter. This fencing shall remain until the
Building Official approves its removal.
(d) Within 60 days of this project's final inspection or
occupancy issuance, the applicant shall submit a
landscape/ irrigation plan delineating the type planting
materials, color, size, quantity and location, for
review and approval by the City. The
landscaping/ irrigation shall be installed within six
months of the Planning Division's final inspection or
Certificate of Occupancy's issuance.
(e) Before final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy
issuance, the applicant shall submit to the City
written evidence indicating the buyer's receipt of the
"Buyer's Awareness Package" within 30 days of
occupancy.
(f) Grading plan, review and approval shall be required if
cut/fill quantities are greater than 50 cubic yards
otherwise a fine grading/drainage plan with a soils
letter update shall be filed with the Public Works
Division. On a grading plan, the following shall be
delineated for the City's review and approval:
(1) Cut and fill quantities and calculations.
(2) All flow lines, finished surfaces, and finished
grades.
(3) Proper drainage with detailed sections.
(4) Existing and proposed grades.
(5) Retaining Walls (including top of wall, top of
footing and finished surfaces).
(g) Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the
applicant shall submit retaining wall calculations for
the City's review and approval.
(h) Fine Grade Certification shall be required before
building final.
(i) Driveway slope shall not exceed 15 percent.
R
(j) Applicant shall obtain Fire Department approval.
(k) Applicant shall obtain separate permits for pool, spa,
and accessory structures.
(1) The single family structure shall meet the 1998 Uniform
Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform
Mechanical Code and the 1996 National Electric code
requirements.
(m) Building setback from any slopes (toe or top) shall
.neet Section 18 of •• Code.
(n) The minimum design wind pressure shall be 80 miles per
hour and "C" exposure.
(o) This single family home is located in "Fire Zone 4" and
shall meet all requirements of the fire, zone.
(1) All roof covering shall be "Fire Retardant". Tile
roofs shall be fire stopped at the eaves to
preclude entry of the flame or members under the
fire.
(2) All unenclosed under -floor areas shall be
constructed as exterior wall.
(3) All openings into the attic, floor and/or other
enclosed areas shall be covered.with corrosion -
resistant wire mesh not less than 1/ inch nor more
than 1/a in any dimension except where such openings
are equipped with sash.or door.
(4) Chimneys shall have spark arrestors of maximum 1/%
inch screen.
(p) This single family structure shall meet the State
Energy Conservation Standards.
(q) Drainage pattern shall be reviewed and approved by the
Public Works Division; surface water shall drain away
from the building at a 2% minimum slope.
(r) Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the
Applicant shall submit a plan, which .delineates a
minimum garage width of 37' for a four car garage for
the City's review and approval.
7
(s) The Applicant shall comply with the Planning Division,
Building and Safety Division, Public Works Division,
and Fire Department requirements.
(t) This grant is valid for two (2) years 'and shall be
exercised (i.e. construction) within that period or
this grant shall expire. A one (1) year extension may
be requested in writing and submitted to the City 30
days prior to this grant's expiration date.
(u) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until
the permittee and owner of the property involved (if
other than the permittee) have filed, within fifteen
(15) days of approval of this grant, at the City of
Diamond Bar Community Development Services Department,
their affidavit stating that they are aware of and
agree to accept all the conditions of this grant.
Further, this grant shall not be effective until the
permittee pays remaining City processing fees.
(v) If the Department of Fish and Game determines that Fish
and Game Code Section 711.2 applies to the approval of
this project, then the applicant shall remit to the
City a cashier's check, payable to the County Clerk, in
the amount of $25.00 for a documentary handling fee in
connection with Fish and Game Code requirements.
Furthermore, if this project is not exempt from a
filing fee imposed pursuant to Fish and Game Code
Section 711.4 because the project has more than a
deminimus impact on fish and wildlife then the
applicant shall also pay to the Department of Fish and
Game. any such fee and any .fine which the Department
determines to be owed.
8
The Planning Commission shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this
Resolution, by certified mail to Diamond Bar
West, LLC, 3450 Torrance Boulevard, Suite #300,
Torrance, CA 90503.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 200#
BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
Steve Nelson, Chairman
I, James DeStefano, Secretary, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed and adopted
by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a
regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 12th
day of September 2000, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
BY:
James DeStefano, Secretary
E
21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190
(909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117
ADAMISTRATM- DEVELOPAW.NT RF-V'E"�,ECEIVE.
Name Diamond Bar West, LLC
(Last name first)
Applicant
I ... ...
Richard Gould
(Last name first)
Addrcss_aAa9_Joxxanaa-3J— Ste. 300 same as—CINACoex- —
Zip �90503
O'hone( ) 310-540-3990 Phone( )-a1Q--'iA0-3990 Phone(
Deposit$ -AEO —IP. 0 4)
BY
Date Rec'd
Applicant's Agent
(Last name first)
INIOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Community Development Director in writing of any change of the
principals involved during the processing of this case.
(Attach a separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors
of corporations.)
Consent: I ceM)37 that
of the herein described property and permit the applicant to file this request.
Date �/73/oo
GREG DELGADO, President
Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty ofpeijury that the information herein provided is correct
to the best of my knowledge.
Print Name RICHARD GOULD
)ApPlicant or Agent)
Date gL�^Ico
Signed
(Applicant r Agent)
Location 2813 WATER COURSE DRIVE - Tract 47850 Lot 48
(Street address or tract and lot number)
Zoning R-1-20 000 -- HNM
Previous Cases
Present Use of Site — V
Use applied for — New
0
(
/plr�icante'sSigfniature)
a
=«lJa OEJll\I f TbAl
2-% j/ WATER COURSE DR.
DIAMOND BAR, C
TRACT 75 0
/
LOT 48
h E ?-o - Ig
PLOT PLAN
R
a
WPM
�
�
I
( 2\
r7 ��
e.2\
2 z cl.
OZ D,
\Z.C.
000-�
± On
LUNV CH Mum I hm,
SCALE:
FLOOR AREA SQ. FT.
TOTAL LNMLL ... ei30.aO m}.
W!'81910G9
u�
m�
4
z tl1
O
A
w<F
®.d
Zm2p
Wyw�r
�ZQwvm-
UlLLI
w �x v
Irk wpZ
DZ OAU
Lu K f�
LOU J
df�im
00 m
�a tz-ure®
I - I
I
- ,�• j
I i i
i
i
i
—
�\
1
b
�
a�
0
BATH
el oo
m< �
I B BDROOM
THEATER
_ _
;p }111'''
}*s
u.
VVVj
li] •a
—
i
c/
S
BEDROOM
a
POWDER
m
BATT
CLOSET I
_
i
m
00
CAR GARAGE
..ENTRY
'
voWX '%imx
31DINING
o
LNING ROOM
4bmSLIR.17-nA
NG M V
O
— �-
-
9" 13
9 9 � •�� t �4-m—n�
3Q
Artexni.ovv.
S
Q O PORCH
O
—
Aac� �v. w
yy
wwcHni.nv. wi
] s
LUNV CH Mum I hm,
SCALE:
FLOOR AREA SQ. FT.
TOTAL LNMLL ... ei30.aO m}.
W!'81910G9
u�
m�
4
z tl1
O
A
w<F
®.d
Zm2p
Wyw�r
�ZQwvm-
UlLLI
w �x v
Irk wpZ
DZ OAU
Lu K f�
LOU J
df�im
00 m
�a tz-ure®
REAR ELEWAMON
SCALP: 1/4" -t' -O"
FRONT ELEVAMON
SCALP: 1 /4"• 1'-O"
lam
LER ME ELEVATOM
®GALE: 1/4' -l* -O'
MGM MDE ELEISMON
5CAL-F: 1/4"-1'-O"
w�ae�loeu�
a�
.S
cs
6.5 =
Z _
a
a
® J
185
4"-1 -0-
0
REPORT DATE:111
-
CASE/FILENUMBER: ,..: . Permitr 2000-04 and
Development Review r 2000-10
APPLICATI®N ST: A. request, pursuant to Code Sections 22.58 and
22.48, to install two 25 foot high camouflaged
monopoles with six antennas, equipment cabinets
and a block wall equipment enclosure,, to be located
adjacent to an existing unmanned co -located
wireless telecommunication facility on a portion of
a 10.05 acre site.
PROJECT LCATI®N: 24401 Darrin Drive, (Tract No. 42584, Lot 51)
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY O . Robin
4,1 Darrin Drive
Diamond :. .63
APPLICANT® Nextel Coinmunications
310 Commerce
Irvine, CA 92602
Nextel Communications has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to construct an
unmanned wireless telecommunication facility to be placed below the street level within
the sloped area of a residentially zoned site. Facing toward the Pomona (60) Freeway the
facility will consist of two, 25 foot high monopoles incorporating six antennas,
equipment cabinet, and block wall enclosure. The facility is designed to blend into the
hillside site similar to the adjacent existing telecommunications facility constructed for
Pac Bell and Cox Communications in 1998. The proposal is permitted subject .to the
approval of a Development Review and Conditional Use Permit by the Planning
Commission.
Site Characteristics
The project is proposed to be located at 24401 Darrin Drive (Tract 42584, Lot 51). The
property consists of a single 10.05 acre site. The property has been assigned two
Los Angeles County Assessor Parcel Numbers (APN). APN 8281-29-24 consists of
6.87 acres and contains the existing 1400 square foot residence constructed in 1985 and
located at the northwest comer of Darrin Drive at Armitos Place. The site also contains
a co -located wireless telecommunications facility cell site approved by City Council
action in 1997, located adjacent to Armitos Place near the Los Angeles County Fire
Station. APN 8281-29-23 contains 3.18 acres and is fully encumbered by a storm drain
easement.. A map restriction exists on the property restricting vehicular ingress and
egress to Armitos Place.
The subject property is an irregularly shaped lot located at the northwest comer of
Armitos Place and Darrin Drive, south of the 60 Freeway. The site is approximately
10.05 gross acres, surrounding a 25,270 square foot parcel owned by the Los Angeles
County and occupied by a fire station.
The development site is adjacent to the flat portion of the property along Armitos Place.
The site trends downward at an approximately 2:1 slope northerly property boundary
adjacent to the freeway. There is the existing 1,400 square foot single family residence
on the site with frontage and access on Darrin Drive and telecommunications facility.
With the exception of the residence and cell site, the property is undeveloped. Vegetation
consists primarily of sage scrub plants typically found on the lower slopes of the City.
The site contains scattered trees believed to be oak and walnut. All trees will be retained.
The site's General Plan designation is Low Density Residential (RL) and it is zoned
Single Family Residential (R-1-10,000.) The proposed use is conditionally permitted
within this zone pursuant to the provisions of Development Code Section 22.58, and
22.48. The land uses surrounding the subject site include the Pomona Freeway (SR 60)
to the north, and single family residential development to the south, east and west.
Since the City's incorporation in 1989, twenty-four (24) cell sites have been constructed
within the City. Generally, these sites are located adjacent to or near the freeways or
heavily roadways in order to capture the maximum number of users. This cell site is
located within a residential neighborhood, although there are facilities located at
Diamond Bar High School, which has a residential zoning designation.
F
Existing Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Entitlement
On April 22, 1997, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 97-6 approving an
application (Conditional Use Permit No. 96-10 and Development Review No. 96-9) for
the construction of a co -located wireless telecommunication facilities cell site (Pac Pell
Mobile Services and Cox Communications) project on a portion of the 10.05 acre site
located adjacent to Armitos Drive. The Planning Commission's decision was
subsequently "called for review" by the City Council.
In August 1997, the City Council concluded its public hearing review and adopted
Resolution No. 97-58 approving the proposed project for a one-year period. The adopted
Resolution set forth an opportunity to extend the grant subject to the review and approval
by the Planning Commission at the conclusion of a duly noticed public hearing.
In June 1998, Pac Pell Mobile Services and Cox Communications, the applicants, applied
for said extension. On August 25, 1998, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution
No. 98-18 extending the grant to August 5, 2001. No further extension of the permit
shall be granted unless the applicants submit an application and receive approval from the
Planning Commission following a duly noticed public hearing.
Conditional Use Permit No. 96-10 and Development Review No. 96-9 contain specific
conditions as approved by the City Council and as contained within the extension
approved by the Planning Commission. The project was conditioned to conform to the
approved development plans. The approval is specific to the development plans
proposed by the two carriers, Cox and Pac Pell.
Nextel has applied for an additional telecommunications facility on the Stone property.
As such the proposed application would add a third facility (antennas, structures and
equipment building) to a site approved for a total of two carriers).
As the Development Code states in Section 22.66.060, an expansion of the existing use,
will require a new Conditional Use Permit and Development Review or a Modification to
the existing Conditional Use Permit and Development Review. Ordinance No. 4 (1999),
the Radio and Television Antennas and Wireless Telecommunications Facilities
Ordinance adopted on March 2, 1999, establishes procedures for the placement of
wireless telecommunications facilities and modifications to existing facilities.
Section 22.42.130.J.l.of the Ordinance states that certain modifications to wireless
telecommunications antenna facilities may be authorized by an amendment to a
Conditional Use Permit. The application process for a new or amended permit requires a
noticed public hearing before the Planning Commission.
The applicant is proposing that a third . carrier, antenna and equipment enclosure be
located upon the site. Staff has concluded that the proposed additional
telecommunication facility for Nextel incorporating two additional monopoles, six
directional antennas and. an equipment enclosure will require a new discretionary
ki
conditional use permit and development review incorporating a public hearing before the
Planning Commission.
I: ffL�- 01 Le MIS
The current proposal consists of two (2) antennas, 25 foot high camouflaged monopoles
with six antennas, equipment cabinets and a block wall equipment enclosure. The facility
is proposed on the subject site's northerly slope, facing the freeway below the
undeveloped area between the fire station and the dwelling unit.
Each antenna sector consists of three (3) panel antennas measuring four feet high, six
inches wide and the overall width of the antenna array is eight feet. The antennas will be
mounted on two separate vertical poles placed in the slope. Both monopoles will be
placed on the slope. Both monopoles will be placed approximately 100 feet from the
southerly property line adjacent to Annitos Place. The highest point of all the antennas
will be approximately located at or below the flat, street level portion of the site.
As proposed, the antennas will be approximately 120 feet from the nearest residence and
will not be visible from the street level along Armitos Place. The antennasiwill be visible
(although screened) from the Pomona (60) Freeway.
The facility will also involve the placement of an equipment cabinet on a 230 square foot
concrete slab located south and perpendicular to the antennas. The slab will be placed
into an area cut into the side of the hill immediately adjacent to the existing cell site and
oriented parallel to the existing contours. Retaining walls not to exceed 6 feet in height
will be used to accommodate the necessary cut.
The equipment cabinets will be enclosed with a six foot block wall with chain link top.
The antennas, equipment cabinets and other support hardware will be painted in
camouflage colors to match the existing vegetation. The antennas and equipment cabinet
will not be lighted nor generate any discernable noise to residents.
The applicant is proposing access to the site via a 15 foot wide easement extending from
Armitos Place. No vehicular ingress or egress is proposed nor will be permitted from
Armitos Place.
Radio Frequency Emissions/I%ealth Impacts
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requires that all cellular and PCS
providers comply with safety standards for radio frequency electromagnetic fields. The
American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and Institute of Electrical and Electronic
Engineers (IEEE) have established standards for safe human exposure to radio frequency
electromagnetic fields.
E!
The Telecommunication Reform Act of 1996 prohibits local governments from
regulating facilities because of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions as
long as facilities comply with FCC regulations.
However, that does not preclude cities from requiring that telecommunication providers
submit documentation showing safety standard compliance. The City has previously
required that an applicant submit radio frequency radiation ( ) field measurement
study to the Planning Division to verify compliance with FCC emission standards.
Location Criteria
The design and location of telecommunication facility sites is determined by several
factors. Sites must be close enough to the caller to receive the signal generated. Sites
must be far enough from one another to eliminate cross -talk and sites must be located
away from sources of interference, which will cause signal distortion and poor
communication quality.
Height is one of the most important considerations when locating a site because
telecommunications facilities function on a line -of -sight transmission. Antennas must be
placed at precise heights in relation to one another in order to transmit and receive
signals. Therefore, topography plays a major role when determining antenna heights.
Other considerations include availability of road access, electric power, land based
telephone lines and/or microwave link capability, structural capacity for equipment and
maximum coverage in the desired area with minimal sites.
According to Nextel, the proposed project fills a gap in coverage along the Pomona (60)
Freeway.
Land Use Compatibility
Telecommunications facilities, including antennas are conditionally permitted within the
Single Family residential zone.
According to Development Code Section 22.58, a conditionally permitted use is a use
which, because of specific characteristics such as size, technological processes, or
location, requires "special consideration" to "ensure proper integration with other existing
or permitted uses in the same zone ...." Conditional uses are generally approved with
conditions ensuring that this integration is achieved.
Vehicular access to the project site would be utilized a few times a year for maintenance
of the telecommunication facility. Since the equipment cabinets and antennas are located
on the slope, access by foot would be necessary. On -street parking is not restricted in this
area, therefore, the maintenance crews could park their trucks on the street for the limited
time that service visits require.
W
Environmental Assessment
In accordance with the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
City has determined that this project will not have a significant impact on the
environment and has been determined to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of
CEQA, pursuant to Section 15303(e).
On August 24, 2000, public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 164 property
owners of record within a 700 -foot radius of the project site. On August 25, 2000,
notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Vallev
Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, and the project site was posted with a display
board for at least 10 days. Further, the public notice was posted at three public places.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit
No. 2000-04 and Development Review No. 2000-10, Findings of Fact, and conditions of
approval, as listed within the resolution. y
In the alternative, the Planning Commission may direct staff to prepare a resolution of
denial or continue the project to a date certain for further information and discussion.
1. The proposed use is allowed within the subject zoning district with the approval
of a Conditional Use Permit and complies with all other applicable provisions of
this Development Code and the Municipal Code.
2. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific
plan.
3. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed use are
compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity.
4. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use
being proposed including access, provisions of utilities, compatibility with
adjoining land uses, and the absence of physical constraints.
5. Granting the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public interest,
health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or materially injurious to person, property
or improvements in the vicinity and zoning districts in which the property is
located.
6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
6
1. The design and layout of the proposed development are consistent with the
General Plan, development standards of the applicable district, design guidelines,
and architectural criteria . for special areas (e.g., theme areas, specific plans,
community plans, boulevards or planned developments);
2. The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the use
and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments, and will not create
traffic or pedestrian hazards;
3. The architectural design of the proposed development is, compatible with the
character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain and enhance the
harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this Chapter, the
- General Plan, or any applicable specific plan;
4. The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable environment for
its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good aesthetic
use of materials, texture and color, and will remain aesthetically appealing;
5. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative affect on property values or
resale(s) of property) to the properties or improvements in the vicinity; and
6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). i
Prepared by:
James DeStefano, Deput City Manager
Attachments:
1. Draft Planning Commission Resolution
2. Project Site Map
3. Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04, and Development Review No. 2000-10
4. Conditional Use Permit Narrative
5. Facilities Master Plan
6. Photographic Simulation
7. Public Hearing Notice
g. Proposed Development Plan
0
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION N61, 2000-X
1. The property owners, Eric and Robin Stone and the applicant, Nextel
Communications, have filed an application for Conditional Use Permit
No. 2000-04, and Development Review No. 2000-10, as described above in the
title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional
Use Permit and Development Review shall be referred to as the `Application."
2. On August 24, 2000, public hearing notices ,were mailed to approximately
164 property owners of record within a 700 -foot radius of the project site. On
August 25, 2000, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided
in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, and the
project site was posted with a display board for at least 10 days. Further, the
public notice was posted at three public places.
3. On September 12, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar
conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission
of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in
the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The Planning Commission hereby determines that the project identified above in
this Resolution Categorically Exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the guidelines promulgated
thereunder, pursuant to Section 15303 of Article 19 of Chapter 3 of Division 13 of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that, having
considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and
changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon
the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence before this
Planning Commission that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an
adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends.
Based upon substantial evidence, this Planning Commission hereby rebuts the
presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the
California Code of Regulations.
4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the Planning Commission
hereby finds as follows:
(a) The project relates to a developed parcel containing a 1400 square foot
residence, approximately 10.05 acres in size located at 24401 Darrin
Drive.
b) The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Low Density
Residential (RL). It is within the Single Family Residential (R-1-10,000)
Zone.
(c) Generally, the following uses surround the project site: To the north is the
Pomona Freeway, to the south, east and west is single family residential
development. In approximately the center of the project is a separate
parcel occupied by a fire station.
(d) The proposed project is a request by Nextel Communications for the
location of an additional telecommunications facility.
(e) The proposed Conditional Use Permit will not be in substantial conflict
with the adopted General Plan. The General Plan provides for a variety
and mix of land uses and accessory uses necessary for the health, safety,
comfort and convenience of the community. The facility's operation
offers a service to the community. The proposed facility is consistent with
the General Plan and is further authorized as a conditionally permitted use
within the R-1®10,000 zone pursuant to the Development Code Section,
Section 22.22.48 and 22.58.
(f) The proposed project will not:
(1) Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons
residing in the surrounding area; or
(2) Be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of
property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site; or
(3) Jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to public
health, safety or general welfare for the following reasons;
N
The Conditional Use Permit's approval allows for the proposed
telecommunications facility's construction. The facility, as conditioned
complies with all City Codes, therefore does not jeopardize, endanger or
otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general
welfare. Currently, the consensus of the scientific community maintains
that the radio frequency radiation emitted and the lower frequency
electromagnetic fields associated with this type of facility generally do not
produce adverse health effects in humans because they are non -ionizing in
nature and normal exposures are controlled so as not to result in thermal
effects. As such, the facility will not be detrimental to the use, enjoyment
or valuation of property or persons located in the vicinity of the site.
(g) The proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate develop-
ment features prescribed in this approval to integrate the use in the
surrounding area.
(h) The project site is adequately served:
(1) By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as
necessary to carry the kind and quantity of traffic such use would
generate; and
(2) By other public or private service facilities as are required.
The project site is served by Armitos Place. The project site, Lot 51 of
Tract Map 42584, contains a map restriction which gives the City the
authority to restrict ingress and .egress to Armitos Place. It has been
determined that vehicular access to the site is not necessary and that
maintenance trucks can utilize on -street parking. The facility does not
significantly increase vehicular traffic to and from the site. It requires only
a few routine maintenance checks with one vehicle during a one-year
period. Additionally, electrical and telephone service to be utilized by the
facility already exists at the site.
(i) The proposed project is found to be in compliance with Development
Code.
(j) The architectural design of this project is compatible with the character of
.the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the harmonious, orderly
and attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.48 of the
Development Code. At their highest elevation, the antennas will be below
the elevation of the top of the slope adjacent to the level pad area as shown
on the approved site plans and will not be visible when viewed from the
street. Additionally, landscaping will further screen and enhance the
appearance of the project site so that it will be compatible with the
neighborhood. The facility will be painted to match the existing
landscaping and topography and additional landscaping if necessary to
create a naturalized grove on the slope. The equipment cabinets will be
K
}
screened with a block wall painted to match the surroundings and screened
with landscaping as required.
(k) The design of this project provides a desirable environment for its
occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good
aesthetic use of materials, textures and color that will remain aesthetically
appealing and will retain a reasonably adequate level of maintenance.
5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Application subject to the following conditions:
(a) The project shall substantially conform to development plans dated
September 12, 2000, collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" as submitted to
and approved by the Planning Commission, and amended herein.
(b) The site shall be maintained permanently in a condition, which is free of
debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation
of the entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and
refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be done only by
the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor, who
has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and
disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, =construction, and
industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to
ensure that the waste contractor utilized has obtained permits from the
City of Diamond Bar to provide such services.
(c) The applicant shall comply with all Federal, State and City regulations.
(d) This grant is valid for a period of two years and shall be exercised (i.e.,
construction commenced) within that period or the grant shall expire. No
extension shall be granted unless the applicant submit an application for
an extension no less than 60 days prior to the expiration and the extension
is approved by the Planning Commission following a duly noticed public
hearing.
(e) To ensure continuing compliance with all conditions of approval and
applicable codes, the Conditional Use Permit and Development Review
shall be subject to periodic review by the Planning Commission. Should
non-compliance occur, the Planning Commission may modify conditions
or revoke the Conditional Use Permit and Development Review.
(f) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the applicant have
posted, at the office of Development Services, a bond, letter of credit or
other security in a form approved by the City Attorney, in the amount of
$10,000, to guarantee the removal of the facility and the restoration of the
site to a condition acceptable to the Deputy City Manager.
11
Said bond or letter of credit or other security shall be released to the
applicant upon removal of the facility and restoration of the site to a
condition acceptable to the Planning Division.
(g) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the property owners
and applicant have filed, within fifteen (15) days of approval of this grant,
at the office of City Clerk, their Affidavit of Acceptance stating that they
are aware of and agree to all conditions of this grant. Further, this grant
shall not be effective until the applicant pay any remaining City
processing fees.
(h) If the Department of Fish and Game determines that Fish and Game Code
Section 711.4 applies to the approval of this project, then the applicant
shall remit to the City, within five days of this grant's approval, a cashier's
check, payable to the County of Los Angeles, of $25.00 for a documentary
handling fee in connection with Fish and Game Code requirements.
Furthermore, if this project is not exempt from a filing fee imposed
because the project has more than a de minimis impact on fish and
wildlife, the applicant shall also pay to the Department of Fish and Game
any such fee and any fine which the Department determines to be owed.
(i) Prior to final inspection of the telecommunications facility, the applicant
shall submit a radio frequency radiation (RFR) field measurement study to
the Planning Division for review and approval which verifies compliance
with FCC emission standards. The study shall be accompanied by a report
describing compliance with these standards in language that can be
understood by a lay person. Any costs associated with the City's review
of the study shall be borne by the applicant.
(j) The applicant shall submit a certification attested to by a licensed engineer
expert in the field of RFR emissions, that the facilities will be operated
within the then current applicable FCC standards for RFR emissions. Any
costs resulting from the city's review of this certification shall be borne by
the applicant.
(k) If the wireless telecommunications facility approved by this resolution is
operated or maintained in violation of FCC standards, said facility shall be
subject to permit revocation by the Planning Commission.
(1) In the event of any future maintenance problems, abandonment of use,
expiration of permit ,approval or changes in technology which render the
above mentioned facility and screening structure obsolete, the applicant
shall, upon notification by the City of Diamond Bar, repair, replace or
remove the screening structure and/or facility within 30 days.
(m) Prior to permit issuance, the applicant shall submit final
landscaping/fencing and irrigation plans to the Planning Division for
review and approval. Landscaping, incorporating the earth removed from
M
the equipment cabinet/pad area, shall be provided on the flat pad area, as
necessary, in quantities sufficient to enhance the appearance of the project
site when viewed from the street, creating a neighborhood amenity as
determined by the Planning Division.
The equipment cabinets shall be completely enclosed by a block wall or
other opaque fencing materials as approved by the Planning Division, and
then painted to blend with the surrounding terrain and landscaping.
Landscaping shall be provided adjacent to the walls, in quantities and
heights sufficient to soften the appearance of the walls and provide
additional screening. Trees, shall also be provided, as necessary, between
and surrounding the antennas and shall be planted in an arrangement
representing a naturalized grove of trees.
New plant materials utilized shall emphasize drought tolerant materials
and/or native species in the following sizes and types: Trees; 24 inch box,
20%, 15 gallon, .80%: shrubs; 5 gallon 70%, 1 gallon (herbaceous only)
30%. All landscaping shall be installed prior to final project inspection.
Upon removal of said facility, the property owners shall maintain the
landscaping on the project site in perpetuity.
(n) Plans shall conform to State and Local Building Codes (i.e., 1998 editions
of the Uniform Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, and
1997 edition of the National Electrical Code) as well as the State Energy
Code.
(o) Proposed antennas shall be engineered to meet wind loads of 80 m.p.h.
with an exposure of "C."
(p) All cables or electrical conduits from the cabinet or any vault, shall be
installed underground. Any new or additional electrical service associated
with this project shall be installed underground.
(q) Prior to permit issuance, grading plans showing all cut and fill quantities
and drainage plans, shall be submitted to the Public Works Division for
review and approval.
The Planning Commission shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this resolution; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this resolution, by certified mail to Eric
and robin Stone, 24401 Darrin Avenue, Diamond Bar, CA 91765, and Nextel
Communications, 310 Commerce, Irvine, CA 92602.
0
APPROVED AND ADOPTED TEAS 12TH OF SEPTEMBER 2000, BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
Steve Nelson, Chairman
I, James DeStefano, 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 12th day of
September 2000, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
James DeStefano, Secretary
I
gWesolutions pc\cup200O-O4danin.doc 7
Im
z '
N
Zfl
Re
4
10 .9 _1-6_..1- •66 s O OI
4
EVA
CONDITIDNAL. USE PERMIT APPLICATION
phoo4q
Fax -20 3 54
C ---
Case 4'
FPL # -1 LLLL-L��
Deposit s_ 2.,
Rc=pt
Date Rec'd
FOR CM* USE
k/ Applicanes Agent
,e)
to est)
C2L-;)Y �22-
z4le4�-- mac 5%
Phon
Fax / �3s;,
NOTE: "is the &PPlicant's responsibility to notify the City in writing oranychug
Processing of this aue. e
of PriuciP&ls involved during the
(Attach SeParate sheet, if ncccs_wy
corporti6ons.) ,inclAng DMCS, Bd&esm, md signatma of mewbco of paft"sWpz, joint Venttwes, and &ccton of
the applicant to Rale this requeS4
Date
.rPffeYan,,,.fion herein provid
p
LocafionX'7/(/,,l 4
is address or
zoning R- /- /® "')
House Numbering Map
Previous C&n* —LZE��
s
Date
Present Use of Site ifs
F4 A
.4 i/®
0
City orDimmond Bar -
IcAll, 'Ok"I'll'All-au JI N V- -p F I "-Ilr
Project Size (gross acres) Project Density
® Cas"
Presmi Use of Site
wl,
u
CONDITIONAL.USE PE TT BURDEN OF PROOF',--*
In add . ition to the information required in the application, the applicant shall substantiate to tisfaction of tlie'P
Commission, the following facts: (answers must be full & complete) '4 <J
A. That the requested use at the location proposed will not:
1. Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding
area, or
B. That the proposed site is adequate" in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading
facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this Title 22, or as is otherwise required in
order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area.
C. That the proposed site is adequately served:
By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of
traffic such use would generate, and
2. By other public or private service facilities as are required.
Residential:
Total Units Bachelor I Bedroom 2 Bdrm. & larger
Tot dl Pkg. Cov. Pkg. Uncov. Pkg.
Project Size: Lot Coverage:
Density: Maximum Height: No. of floors:
Non-residential:
Sq. ft. area No. of Bldgs. OccupantLoad*
Sq. Footage
Parking:
Total Standard Compact Handicap
Landscaping:
Sq. feet
Grading: Y _ N If yes, Quantity:
Cut:
Fill:
Import: Y N If yes, Quantity:
Export: Y P1® If yes, Quantity:
Occupant Load as calculated by the Building & Safety Di`V':1-S'ion is requiredfor all dining, take-out or assembly use, churches,
health clubs, theaters, etc.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (all ownership comprising the proposed lot(s)/pareel(s)
0
Area devoted to structures Landscaping/Open spacee
Residential Prqject:.__�_ and
(gross area) (No. of lots)
Proposed density
(UnitsJA,cres)
Parking Required Provided
Standard
Compact
Handicapped
Total
I
FPL #
Deposit$
L Receipt#
By
Date It 'd
(Lut name fin)
M
I dywst7A,d�. vi. I mr�wnt-,
k am the o f the herein described property and pennif the applicant to-fl-e—dd"eqv
OF
F4
D..
owners)
5rtification: 1, the undersigned, hereby cerfify underpenalty ofpejjuiy that the information herein provided is correci
to the best of my knowledge.
0
4
(Applicant's Signature',
I
(Date)
V.
Nil E TM
R i
R
At the direction of the Planning Department for the City of Diamond Bar, Nextel is filing
for a Conditional Use Permit for a telecommunication facility. The property is located at
24401 Darrin Drive, Diamond Bar. The application is for co -location on an existing
telecommunication site. Nextel's representatives have been informed by city staff that
the location does not qualify for administrative approval.
The site is located in a residential zone, with single-family homes in close proximity to
the proposed facility.
Lynn Van Aken
Project Manager
20472 CRESCENT BAY DRIVE, SUITE 104, LAKE FOREST, CA 92630, U.S.A.
TELEPHONE: (949) 470-7990 f FAX: (949) 470-7989
Introduction
Nextel Communications is the world's leading provider of fully integrated, all digital
wireless services. Nextel's goal is to provide the highest quality wireless services
available throughout its coverage area.
Coveraze
Nextel's wireless network is defined by three basic characteristics: coverage, quality and
capacity. Effective radio frequency (RF,) coverage is realized by transmitting RF energy
over existing terrain, including foliage and man-made structures to provide enough
downlink (from the cell site to the mobile,) to allow uninterrupted two-way
communication. A correctly designed and balanced system will never be uplink limited;
that is, limited by the transmission power of the mobile unit to the cell site antenna.
Nextel's philosophy is to design the RF network so if sufficient downlink signal is
present, the mobile subscriber will always be able to establish communication. Therefore,
when discussing coverage, we will be referring to the downlink signal.
Within the category of RF coverage, Nextel applies two additional standards to qualify
coverage: In Car Portable (ICP) coverage, and In Building Portable (IBP) coverage.
A Portable is a typical handheld, one half watt capable phone. ICP coverage requires that
sufficient downlink signal be present inside the passenger cabin of a motor vehicle to
enable communication. Extensive testing by Motorola has shown that effective ICP
coverage requires in general, an increase in signal available versus an unobstructed line
of sight to compensate for vehicle penetration losses. IBP coverage has been shown to
require even greater signal levels be present than that required for ICP coverage,
depending on building size, construction materials and location inside the building.
Nextel's goal in proposing to construct the site at 15627 Arrow Highway is to provide
ICP coverage east and west along Arrow Highway, and to the areas immediately north
and south of that roadway. This includes the Trammell Crowe Business Park in
Irwindale, located immediately to the.south of the proposed Nextel facility, and the
Irwindale Civic Center area, located to the southeast. Because today's wireless
customers are modifying their usage, especially with the introduction of wireless data
services, Nextel's goal is to provide IBP coverage in these major commercial sectors of
Irwindale. The proposed 65 -foot -high facility at 15627 Arrow Highway will allow
Nextel to meet this service level goal.
uall
The quality of the RF network is defined by having sufficient signal quality to provide
voice and data traffic free of unwanted degradations, warbling, noise or other interference
to enable uninterrupted communications and seamless handovers at cell site RF
boundaries. The minimum signal-to-noise ratio (SNR,) for an iDEN technology,
interconnect call has been established to be 20 dB; that is, the downlink (limiting) signal
needs to be 100 times greater than the sum of all other signals present. The presence of
various extraneous in and near band RF sources, and the relatively increased noise floor
of the 800 — 900 MHz band makes it increasingly difficult to ensure a 20 dB SNR is
attainable. The FCC limitation for a Metropolitan Service Area of 100 Watts Effective
Radiated Power (ERP) per transmit channel then means that to attain the required SNR,
Nextel's cell sites need to be more closely spaced together. If this is done, a sufficient
quality signal is made available for establishing, sustaining and handing over wireless
phone calls.
Ca aci
The final method by which Nextel's RF network is characterized is capacity. Network
capacity is a measure of how much traffic an individual cell site can carry. Capacity is
limited by three separate constraints:
Landline infrastructure
Antenna -air interface
Motorola's Fixed Network Equipment design limitations.
Landline infrastructure refers to the local telephone service provider's network
connecting a cell site back to its controlling switch. A fixed bandwidth pipeline is
provided to carry the voice and data traffic between the two facilities. The finite nature of
this pipeline effectively limits the number of subscriber calls an individual cell site can
process through the switch.
The antenna -air interface is a limit to how much power a single antenna can transmit
without adversely raising the RF noise floor at the site or creating intermodulation
products that could interfere with that cell site's operation or, in violation of FCC
requirements, another carrier's operation. A single sector of a cell can only have a finite
number of antennas due to RF spacing requirements for optimum receiver operation.
Since the forward power per antenna or sector is limited, then the number of transmitting
carriers and therefore sector capacity will also be limited.
Motorola design limitations are related to the physical equipment racks themselves.
Transmitter size, RF combining requirements, heat dissipation and other requirements
limit the number of transmitting. carriers available per antenna, sector and the entire site.
Once any of these limits is reached, depending on individual site configuration, a
subscriber attempting to establish communication will be "blocked" from doing so unless
there is sufficient RF signal available from a neighboring site or sector to enable call
setup to occur and a high quality call to ensue. Therein lies the solution to capacity
issues: Build cells in close proximity such that neighboring sites or sectors can offload
heavily trafficked sites.
ProMosed Solutions
The three RF network characteristics all require that as subscriber numbers increase and
methods of cell phone usage change, in order to maintain adequate coverage with a high
quality signal to ensure acceptable calls and smooth handovers, and to ensure minimal
blocking to satisfy subscriber demand, Nextel will engage in an aggressive buildout .
program where subscriber use mandates. Figure 1 shows the Total Minutes of Use per
week, from February to July 2000, for an area which includes the Eastern San Gabriel
Valley and the city of Diamond Bar.
25000
20000
15000
D
10000
5000
0
Figure 1
120
100
80
m
0
0
e
60 0
m
u
E
e
40
20
0
As shown, subscriber use is on a sustained increase. Future projections using this trend
indicate local network saturation sometime late in 2000 or early in 2001 if no new sites
are built in the area. The Los Angeles Market as a whole is experiencing similar growth,
so construction dollars to this area are limited. To determine the most effective use of
available capital in this cluster, RF Engineering has studied the existing coverage and
traffic statistics per site.
One particular coverage problem we have is in the Diamond Bar area on the 60 Freeway
between Diamond Bar Blvd. and Phillips Ranch Rd. in Pomona. This area is difficult due
to the terrain around the freeway and the turns in the road. The best solution for this area
is a site located around the freeway in the vicinity of the currently proposed site 6710®
Phillips Ranch. This site has been tested and verified to provide sufficient coverage
levels to connect the currently existing sites in Diamond Bar with sites in Pomona and
Chino.
! �r
Llr—
E) Umm
.00 f,UG 23 ; 1 :32
August 16, 2000
Jim DeStefano
Deputy City Manager
Diamond Bar, CA
Dear Mr. DeStefano,
Nextel Communications
310 Commerce
Irvine, California 92602-1300
(714) 368-3500 Fax: (714) 368-3501
I am the RF Engineer for the current and proposed sites in the Diamond Bar and eastern
San Gabriel Valley area. As is required by federal law, all sites in this area comply with
all FCC rules and regulations.
I can also ensure you that the proposed site, CA6710 — Phillips Ranch, will be in
compliance with all regulations regarding RF emissions.
If you have any questions regarding current FCC regulations please feel free to contact
me at 760-250-4465.
Sincerely,
Steven A. McDougall
RF Engineer
sc
N P9d ct I I
�' p °\ a
Er
Dorsa ;
q4 al
.�
\,� 1
�, IIS•
act
tO OILt
M'ca
Roa
t�td
oY
��'
.. lint
� •
ROav
a t
tt Lea g t b Park
® e
�a
l h �'
We
rook f DC m�
s ridle rai L
r
son rk
�
Eagl
_ •eytR
°ad
N
L
o
\
Scenic R,
n
- N
Se
s 't
Oa
o- -. E S
n
Gr o
v c
Dia nd
Golf
_
a "= s s as
3 o Ave
S
ark m
�a
a
r
SO
.Dr
�C�
��o
\-Odg
eat d\o
r:
'
P Ct-
�+
r°d
p
<o
2
J
A9apl
k:- .: .• . Su _
Wain
o
ACnOIdSBNOIi
A ista I( Dorsa
®°G' ®._.. ��®�\c
- _ ' ®'
o Q\�
Stars
RidgeCher
'..
k oad
:'
Re r.
`
ou P
pc
��
n d
�� 31 •'
@Stspn7 0�.
Ste' ear vp
®.
IY Ann Ln M a
d
V
woad
.
f
' State Rd
( Western Hills Country CI
U5/
�s9`1.
N r
9\
9411.
�Q
Fid
°+
Irl
illiIIiiiiiijillill 111 1,1111! I'll! 111 Illy Ill Ii1:1!1�ilill-lillillilill,,,I, 11111111111111 Jill III I III I
TO: Property Owners within a 700 foot radius of subject site
FROM: City of Diamond Bar, Deputy City Manager
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to State law, that a public hearing will be held by the Planning Commission to determine
whether or not the subject request shall be approved under the provisions of State law and the City of Diamond Bar Development
Code as follows:
DATE AND TIME OF BEARING: Tuesday, September 12, 2000, 7:00 P.M. (or as soon thereafter that the matter can be heard)
PLACE OF HEARING: South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium
21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04 and Development Review No. 2000-10
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit No. 200004 and Development Review No. 2000-10 (pursuant to Code Sections
22.58 and 22.48) is a request to install (2) two additional 25 foot high camouflaged monopoles with a total of (6) six antennas,
equipment cabinets, and block equipment enclosure on an approximately seven acre site that currently contains co -located,
unmanned, wireless telecommunication facilities.
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 24401 Darrin Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (Lot 51, Tract No. 42584)
PROPERTY OWNER: Eric Stone, 24401 Darr -in Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
APPLICANT: Nextel Communications, 310 Commerce, Irvine, CA 92602
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
Section 15303 (e), the City has determined that this project is Categorically Exempt.
Published in:
San Gabriel Valley Tribune: Friday, August 25,'2000
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin: Friday, August 25, 2000
If you are unable to attend the public hearing, but wish to send
written comments, please write to the City of Diamond Bar
Community and Development Services Department/Planning
Division at the address given below. To preview case materials
or for further information on this subject please contact the
Community and Development Services Department/Planning
Division at (909) 396-5676.
If you challenge this application and project in court, you may
be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else
raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or
prior to, the public hearing.
CASE MATERLkLS are available for review between the hours
of 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., at the Community and Development
Services Department/Planning Division, 21660 E. Copley Dr.,
#190, Diamond Bar, CA 91765.
AREA MAP:
North Subject (ttoscale)
1t t
t&
xi K
,+ae �,'llll ai' ¢i '4 �`.e...:�sst� ' fiC Ne
119 �01 �
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
VICINITY MAP
SHEET INDEX
REVISIONS
APN NUMBER: 8281-029-024
LOT 51 OF TRACT NO 42584, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 1024, PAGES 6
-
O7 COVER SHEET
INNER—OFFICE
NO. DATE ISSUED BY: DESCRIPTION
TO 14 INCLUSIVE OF MMS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID
COUNTY.
NOWEXCEPTINGA THEREFROM ALL OIL, GAS AND OTHER INHYDROCARBONS DE MINERALS,
AND THEREUNDER, TOGETHER
NOW OR AT ANY REE RIGHT
WITH THE AW DMET TER STRIATE. PRODUCT,
RIGHT i0 DRILL FOR, PRODUCT, EXTRACT, TAKE AND MINE
THEREFROM, SUCH OIL, ANDOTHER AND MINERALS AND TO
�'A pTjT('1T
as R JEC
PROJECT
- SITE
O2 OVERALL SITE PLAN
SITE PLAN & NORTH ELEVATION
C1 SITE SURVEY
Ol 4/11/00 HE -EL PRELIMINARY REVIEW
02 6/19/00 NE%TEL DIMEIJSIONS ADDED
03 6/30/00 NEMEL DIMENSIONS ADDED
THE SAID LAND, O
SAID THE SAGE UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, OR BELOW THE SURFACE OF
PROJECT TEAM
04 8/15/00 NE%TEL Cltt COMMENTS
SAID LAND, AS AND T1 THE RIGHT TO STORE UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID
LAND, OIL, CAS AND OTHER AND MINERALS WHICH MAY BE
II, WITH ENTRY THEREON FOR SAID
PRODUCED FROM OTHER IRIGHT WRC THE RICHT
PROPERTY ADDRESS: APPLICANT:
24401 DARRIN DRIVE NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 INV COMMERCE
IRVINE, CA 92602
JAMES MCBRYDE-CONST. MGR.
PURPOSE AND WITH THE RIGHT' TO CONSTRUCT. USE, MPIPE N, ERECT, REPAIR,
USE,
REPLACE AND REMOVE THEREON AND THEREFROM, ALL PIPE LINES, TELEPHONE AND
TELEGRAPH LINES, TANKS, EGU E BUILDINGS AND DRIER STRUCTURES, WHICH
MAY BE NECESSARY ANDREOtIESRE T TO CARRY ON OPERATIONS ON SAID LANDS, -
WITH THE FURTHER RIGHT TO ERECT, MAINTAIN, OPERATE AND REMOVE A PIANT,
WITH ALL NECESSARY APPURTENANCE FOR THE ET"MION OF GASOLINE FROM GAS,
ED
C, o
Yo g
�� d oS�
COMMENTS
INCLUDING ALL RIGHTS NECESSARY OR CONVENIENT THERETO, AS EXCEPTED AND
(949)-279-0901
RESERVED IN THE DEED FROM TRANSAMERICA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A CAUFORNLA
CORPORATION, RECORDED MARCH 29, 19681 IN BOOK D-3955, PAGE 185,
INSTRUMENT NO. 2456, OFFlCW. RECORDS, AND RE-RECORDED JUNE 19, 1969, IN
'�
�'' �' o
LYNN VAN AKEN-ZONING MGR.
(949)-279-2575
PROPERTY OWNER
BOOK 0-4407, PACE 591, INSTRUMENT NO. 1776, OFFICIAL RECORDS, AND ASH
MODIFIED BY A QUITCLAIM DEED, WHICH REUNQUISHED ALL RIGHTS TO THE USE OF
THE SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE TO A DEPTH OF FIVE HUNDRED (500) FEET FROM
THE SURFACE OF SAID lAN0. RECORDED DECEMBER 23, 1981, AS INSTRUMENT No,
4p
ERIC & ROBYN STONE
24401 DARRIN DRIVE MUNICIPALITY:
DIAMOND BAR. CA 91765 CIN OF DIAMOND BAR
(909)- 860-2474
81-1263075, OFFICIAL RECORDS,
PARCEL
PROJECT DATA
THIS DEED IS EASE ANO ACCEPTED UPON THE COVENANTS,
LATITUDE
34' 01' 32"
LONGITUDE
117' 47 30"
THIS I5 AN UNMANNED TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACIUTr FOR NEXTEL.
THIS SITE CONSISTS OF AN EQUIPMENT CABINET AND SIX (6)
DIRECTIONAL ANTENNAS ON 25 FOOT MONOPOLES.
APPROVAL AGENCY
IN THAONS,
FORTH IN THAT CERTAIN
RECLARA ONS, F EASEMENTS AND OTHER ED FEBRSETUARY
NO. 84-233 OF RESTRICTIONS, RECORDED FEBRUARY 24, 1984, AS WHICH
WHICH
N0. 84-233763, INCORPORATED
RECORDS, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, ALL WITH
PROVISIONS ARE INCORPORATED HERRN BY REFERENCE THERETO WITH 7HE SAME
FORCE AND EFFECT AS THOUGH FllLLY SET FORTH HEREIN AT LENGTH, AND
GRANTEES, BYACCEPTANCE OF THIS DEED APPROVE, ADOPT, RATIFY AND AGREE TO
BE BOUND BY THE PROVISIONS OF SAID DECLARATION, AND AGREE TO PAY
PROMPTLY, WHEN DUE, ANY AND ALL LWMENANCE ASSESSMENTS AS REQUIRED
UNDER SAID DECLARATION.
NO. DATE ISSUED BY: DESCRIPTION
CURRENT ZONING: R-1-10.000
EXISTING USE: 0100
TEL ECOMMUNICAtHONS SITE
EXISTING/PROPOSED USE: 0100
TELECOMIAUNICARONS SITE
NET LEASE AREA 23'X23' (529 S.F
COMMENTS
G
rohinson hill architecture, inc.
A California Corporation
1 9 7 6 2 MacArthL,
Boulevard, Suite 120
Irvine, California 92612
tel. 949-399-0880
fax 949-399-0881
SITE NAME
PHILLIPS RANCH
PROJECT NUMBER DRAVIN BY:
ONTC081.C1 S.C.M.
CHECKED BY: DATE
04/11/00
SITE NUMBER
CA671OB
8/15/00
ISSUED FOR:
LAND USE
DRAWINGS
AISNEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
310 COMMERCE
IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92602-1300
PH 711 368 3500
FAX 714 368 3501
CA6710B
SITE ADDRESS
24401 DARRIN DRIVE
DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765-1849
APAI : 8281-029-024
SHEET 14UMBER
PROPOSED NEXTEL DIRECTIONAL ANTENNAS
ON CALIOUFLAGED PAINTED POLES TO
EXISTING TELECOMMUNICATION CARRIERS
TENNAS ON CAMOUFLAGED PAINTED POLES.
MATCH EXISTING TELECOMMUNICATION PROPOSED"NL EL DIRECTIONAL ANTENNAS
-tXRRIERS-ANO-SURROUNDINGS ON CAMOUFLAGE D�PAIet'[ED POLES TO
PROPOSED NEXTEL WOOD MATCH EXISTING 'IELECOhIAIUNICATION
STEPS TO MATCH EXISTING. CARRIERS MID SURROUNDINGS.
IST NG TREES AND SHRUBS
NEW NEXTEL CMU WALL ,M$;
TO ABUT EXISTING WALL bF R 'X ' �I�-)
_ •.
CMU BLOCK RETAINING EXISTING TREES AND SHRUBS
ENEXTELQUIPMENT
PROPOSED NEXTEL DIRECTIONAL ANTENNAS PROPWALL FOR
ON CAIdOUFlAGE PAINTED POLES TO WALL FOR EOUNMENL GBINEE ENCLOSURE TO REMAIN. (TYPICAL)
MATCH EXISTING TELECOMMUNICATION WITH CHAIN LINK TOP. PAINTED CAMOUFLAGE
CARRIERS AND SURROUNDINGS. TO MATCH EXISTING SURROUNDINGS.
rO�In90n hill architecture, inc,
A C.Efomin Corporation
PROPOSED EXISTING TREES
TO BE RELOCATED AS REQUIRED. _
RELOCATION TO BE MINIMIZED
J� _ -
4i -
�+•rc�`
EXISTING TELECOMMUNICATIONS BLOCK PROPOSED NEXTEL DIRECTIONAL ANTENNAS
EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE WITH CAMOUFLAGE ON CAMOUFLAGE PAINTED POLES TO
PAINT TO MATCH EXISTING SURROUNDINGS. MATCH EXISTING TELECOMAIUNICATION
CARRIERS AND SURROUNDINGS.
1 9 7 6 2 M,aknur
BOulewrd, $Nile 120
hm, CdComio 92612
(al. 949-399-0880
fox 949-399-0661
41
'•✓' •� �.d )�••-d ' ='P �"'t •� 'l "d EXISTING WOOD STEPS.
23 9 ` t'
�—
K2 �
np
—CONSULTANT
SITE NAME
PHILLIPS RANCH
PROJECT NUMBER
DRAWN BY:
a
0NTC081.C1
S.C.M.
EXISTING TREES AND SHRUBS
TO REMAIN. (TYPICAL)
ANY TREES AND LANDSCAPING TO BE
RELOCATED IS DEPENDANT UPON THE
JNING DEPARTMENT.
APPROVAL OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
TRIMMING OF EXISTING LANDSCAPING
FOR RF ANTENNAS TO HE KEPT
u" -d
PROPOSED (4) FOUR NEXTEL RADIO
EQUIPMENT CABINETS (40 -XII -X60" EACH) •-c
WI TH (1) ONE N/0 TON A/C UNIT
AT EACH END. -
PROPOSED NEXTEL BLOCK EQUIPMENT•.„f ,
CABINCT ENCLOSURE WITH CHAIN
ANTE NG TELECOMMUNICATION CARRIERS EXISTING TREE
ANTE(TYPICAL-3) NNAS ON CAMOUFLAGE PAINTED POLES. 10 REMAIN.
CHECKED BY:
GATE
04/11/00
SITE NUMBER
CA671OB
STAMP
TO A MINIMUM. UNK TOP. PAINTED CAMOUFLAGE
ALL CABLES AND UTILITIES TO 10 MATCH EXISTING SURROUNDINGS.
BE TRENCHED UNDERGROUND.
EXISTING TELECOMMUNICATIONS BLOCK I
EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE WRIT CAMOUFLAGE EXISTING TREES AND SHRUBS
PAINT TO MATCH SURROUNDINGS. TO REMAIN. (TYPICAL)
ENLARGED SITE PLAN K' V -o'
NORTH ELEVATION a/u' • r -o'
CURREI•I'T ISSUE DATE
l
8/15/00
ISSUED FOR:
LAND USE
DRAWINGS
i PROPOSED NEXTEL ANTENNAS
EXISTING FIRE STATION. ON CAMOUFLAGE PAINTED POLE.
:_.------'_-
_® ®tea.
m
'\
`
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
310IONS
IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92602-1300
PIP 714 368 3500
FAX 714 368 3501
APPROVALS
LANDLORD INITIALS DATE
LEASING
ZONING
If
RF
E P
C.P.M.
1 \.
j \
PROPOSED NEXTEL BLOCK
/ EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE. •�
'SRRI/T03
SITE NUMBER
CA6710B
PZ4CF .\
SITE ADDRESS
EXISTING TELECOMMUNICATIONS
BLOCK EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE. \
'`
24401 DARRIN DRIVE
DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765-1849
APN : 82B1-029-024
\
SHEET NUMBER
02
OVERALL SITE PLAN RO
PROJECT SITE
D1Ba°NY: nN"n,TGBATBDe2E�Tg6GITe Bao
4 �D.D6 a FAx 66 D,,6
(PROVIDED BY CLIENT)
N
L_
60
robinson
bill architecture, ine.
N.T.S.
TO THE NEAREST 2 ONE FOOT.
PHILLIPS RANCH
A.P. NUMBER:
PROJECT NUMBER
3
8201-029-024
LAT./LONG. OF PROPOSED MONOPOLE:
A CalifomiD Corporation
DAB
—
39T1'33'
LON
1 9 112 MacArthur
Boulevard, Suite 120
DATE
TUE
LONGHTuOE; -11]'4]'33'
ELa 938'
Irvine, CDlifomia 92612
07/06/00
tel. 949-399-0880
SITE ADDRESS:
24401 DARRIN DRIVE
CA6710B
fax 949-399-0881
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR A.P.N. 8281-029-024
—
D1Ba°NY: nN"n,TGBATBDe2E�Tg6GITe Bao
4 �D.D6 a FAx 66 D,,6
(PROVIDED BY CLIENT)
LOT 51 OF TRACT NO. 42504, IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
800FOK 6 TO 14 OF MAPS IN TIE OFFICE OF THE
L_
CPER
OUNttPRECWNERUED IN
SND2COUNttS
BENCH MARK:
SITE NAME
EL£7ATON BASED ON NORTH AMERICA VERTICAL BB ORTHGMETRIC DATA. ACCURACY IS
TO THE NEAREST 2 ONE FOOT.
PHILLIPS RANCH
A.P. NUMBER:
PROJECT NUMBER
DRAWN BY:
8201-029-024
LAT./LONG. OF PROPOSED MONOPOLE:
DO -664
DAB
—
39T1'33'
LON
CHECKED BY:
DATE
TUE
LONGHTuOE; -11]'4]'33'
ELa 938'
LMO
07/06/00
SITE NUMBER
SITE ADDRESS:
24401 DARRIN DRIVE
CA6710B
DIAMOND BAR, CA OT7GS-1849
STAMP
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF LEASE PARCEL:
THAT PORTON OF LOT 51 OF TRACT NO. 42584. IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES.IFSH
STATE OF CALIFORNIA PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 1024, PAGES 6 TO 14 OF MAPS IN
TR OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY
_
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
— O
GO MENDED AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 66 OF SAID TRACT NO. 42581
SAID POINT BEING ON THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF ARMITDS PLACE,
-
60 FEEr WIDE, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY UNE OF
SAID LOT 51 AND SAID NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE —TH >]'40'40' EAST.
26.07 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE, CGNCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY. HAVING p
SNa SWTHWESTERLY UNE
CURRENT ISSUE DATE
RAG US OF 378.00 FEET: THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG
OF LOT 51 AND SAID NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE AND SAID CURVE THROUGH
A CENTRAL AN OF 11'09'10" AN ARC LENGTH OF 7150 FEET. A RADIAL LINE
THROUGH SAD POINT BEARS NORTH 2320'30' EAST: THENCE —NG SAID
SGUTHYIESIERLY LINE OF LOT 51 AND SAID NORIHEASIERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE
NORTH M '30' EAST, 9].30 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE NORTH
44'OD'15" EAST. 10.00 FEET—SOUTH 45'59'45" EAST; 23.00 FEET: THENCE
SOUTH 9V00'15 WEST. 10.00 FEET TO A UNE THAT BEARS SOUTH 45'59'45' EAST
FROM TIE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE ALONG SAID LINE NaRTH 45'59'45"
WEST, 23.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF ACCESS EASEMENT:
ISSUED FOR:
THAT PORTON OF LOT 51 OF TRACT NO. 42584. IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,
SFAIE OF CALIFORNIA PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 1024, PAGES S TO 14 OF MAPS. IN
THE OFFICE OF RHE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
ARM
A STRIP OF LAND. 120D FEET WIDE LYING NORTHWESTERLY AND NORTHEASTERLY OF
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
THE FOLLOWDG DESCRIBED UNE
17275 DERIAN AVENUE
COMSADMPOINTGAT INE BEINON LTHET NORTH EE 11 CORNERRGHTT-OFOWAY HE OT 66 OF F ARM TOS PLACE, TRACT NO. 4,
L�P4i 949 FORNA 2300614
BO FEET WIDE, AS SHOWN ON -a MAP. THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHW£51ERLY UNE OF
RHGNT-OF-WAY UNE SOUTH 77'40'40" EAST,
FAX 949 882 2313
SAID LOT 51 ANO SAID NORTHEASTERLY
26.07 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE. CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A
NAGNS OF 3]8.00 FEET. THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY HANG SAID SDUTHWESTERLY UNE
OF LOT 51 ANIT SAID NORTHEASTERLY RIGNT-OF-WAY UNE AND SAID CURVE THROUGH
APPROVALS
APPROVALS INITIALS DATE
A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11'00'10' AN ARC LENGTH OF 73.58 FEET TO TIE TRUE POINT
OF BEGINNING, A RADIAL UNE THROUGH SAID POINT EEARS NORTH 232870' EAST.
THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHWESTERLY UNE OF LOT 51 AND SAID NORIHEASTERLY
LANDLORD
RICHT-OF-WAY UNE NORTH 212B'30' EAST, 97.30 FEET; THENCE NORTH -GD 15
EAST. 1000 FEET. THENCE SOUTH 4559'45' EAST. 2100 FEET.
LEASING
ZONING
SIDELINES OF BND STRIP SHALL BE LEHGIHENED OR au RIENED TO TERMINATE
SOUTHYNSTERLY ON SND SOUTHWESTERLY UNE OF LOT 51.
RF
E P
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF UTILITY EASEMENT:
C.P.M.
THAT PORTON OF LOT 51 OF TRACT NO. 42584, IN THE COONTY OF LOS ANGELES.
S(TE NUMBER
STATE OF CAUFORNIA PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 1024, PACES 5 TO 14 OF MAPS, IN
THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. BEING MORE PARTCULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FO—
A STRIP OF LAND, 3.00 FEET —E. LYING NORTHWESTERLY ANO NORTHEASTERLY OF
CA6710B
THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED UNE:
SITE ADDRESS
COMMENCING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF LOT O6 OF SAID )RACY ND. 42584,
SND POINT BEING ON THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT -CF -WAY LINE OF ARM -S PLACE,
60 FEET WIDE, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE ALDNG THE SOUTHVHESTERLY UNE OF
24401 DARRIN DRIVE
SND LOT 51 AND SAID NORTHEASTERLY RICHT-OF-WAY LINE SOUTH 7T40'40" EAST,
26.07 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE. CONCAVE SOUTHWESIERLY, HAVING A
RADIUS OF 370.00 FEET: THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUIHWESTTRLY UNE
DIAMOND BAR, CA 91755-1849
8281-029-024
OF LOT 51 AND SAID NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE AND SAID CURVE THROUGH
A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11109'10' AN ARC LENGTH OF 7358 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT
SHEET NUMBER
OF BEGINNING, A NADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS ROR1H 232070" EAST:
THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHWESTERLY UNE OF LOT 51 AND SAID NORTHEASTERLY
RICHT-OF-VIAT UNE NORTH 2328'30' EAST, 97.30 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44'00'15'
AA
A
EAST, IOOO FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45'S9'tr5' EAST, 23.00 FEET.
SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP SHALL BE LENGTHENED OR SHORTENED TO TERMINA
SOUTHWESTERLY ON SAID SOUTHWESTERLY UNE OF LOT 51.
Project MEETINGS
August 8, 2000
PLANNING COMMISSION PROJECTS
Case #
PM
Location
PC
cc
PC
cc
PC
cc
PC
9/12
9/19
9/26
10/3
10/10
10/17
10/24
GOULD, RICHARD
DR 2000-13
AJL
2818 WATER COURSE
MV 2000-6
PH
TP 2000-3
(Single Family Residence)
BOURNE, JOHN
(TRACT 47850)
LKS
2102 ROCKY VIEW ROAD
ON HOLD - PER APPLICANT
(Converting Storage into Game Room)
GOULD, RICHARD
DR 2000-14
si
2813 WATER COURSE DR.
PH
ON HOLD - PER APPLICANT
ALEXANDER DEVELOPMENT
(Single Family Residence)
LIPPICH, LESLIE
DR 2000-08
AJL
1626 DERRINGER LANE
PROCESSING
(Single Family Residence)
HOUSING ELEMENT
JDS
CITYWIDE
X
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS —
CUP 2000-04
JDS
24401 DARRIN DRIVE
PH
(Wireless Telecommunications)
DR 2000-10
PARKS/TRAILS MASTER PLAN
JDS
CITYWIDE
X
PLATINUM RESTAURANT
CUP 99-4
JDS
245 GENTLE SPRINGS
PH
(Review Conditional Use Permit)
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS Case # PM Location ®CM ®CM DCVI
GOULD, RICHARD ADR 2000-19 LKS 2883 WATER COURSE DR. PH
(Single Family Residence)
PENDING
Case #
PM
Location
ASHAI & ASSOC./ SUNIL KOHLI
ADR 2000-17
si
23634 RIDGE LINE ROAD
PROCESSING
(Room Additions)
BHOGAL, SURINDER
DR 2000-11
AJL
23415 PLEASANT MEADOW
PROCESSING
(Single Family Residence)
MCUP 2000-6
MV 2000-6
TP 2000-3
BOURNE, JOHN
MC UP 2000-09
LKS
2102 ROCKY VIEW ROAD
ON HOLD - PER APPLICANT
(Converting Storage into Game Room)
DIAMOND BAR HONDA/
VAR 2000-02
AJL
515 S. GRAND AVENUE
ON HOLD - PER APPLICANT
ALEXANDER DEVELOPMENT
(Freeway Sign)
LIPPICH, LESLIE
DR 2000-08
AJL
1626 DERRINGER LANE
PROCESSING
(Single Family Residence)
g:\\project meetingWoc: PH = PUBLIC HEARING X = NOTA PUBLIC HEARING
PROJE('r MEETINGS
Ativieo R WM
CITY • •:••.
:PEEN D I N G"
Case #
PM
Location
]CC DEVELOPMENT
ZC 2000-01
AJL
DIAMOND BAR BLVD
PROCESSING
(Zone Change to Commercial)
PM 10208, PARCEL 2
METRICOM — WVUSD
CUP 2000-02
AJL
21400 PATHFINDER
PROCESSING
(Wireless Telecommunications)
MOON, SEONG YEO
CUP 2000-06
AJL
20627 GOLDEN SPRINGS DR.
PROCESSING
(Entertainment — Karoke)
TOGO'S — ROBERT PARKER
CUP 2000-05
LKS
1193 S. DIAMOND BAR EI.
PROCESSING
(Dine In)
MCUP 2000-10
TRENTON GROUP
DR 2000-12
si
1440 BRIDGEGATE (LOT 16,
PROCESSING
(Three -Story Office Building)
TRACT 39679)
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
JDS
CITYWIDE
PROCESSING
g:\\project meeting\\doc PH = PUBLIC HEARING X = NOT A PUBLIC HEARING
Date: September 8, 2000
To: Community and Development Services Department
Planning Commission
From: Diamond Bar Resident
Subject: Opposing of Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04 and Development
Review No. 2000-10
To Whom It May Concern:
We are opposing the project, which was requested by Nextel Communications to
install (2) two additional 25 -foot high camouflaged monopoles with a total of six
antennas, equipment cabinets, and block equipment in our neighborhood.
However, we are not able to attend the Public Hearing on Tuesday, September 12,
2000. Please take our opinion into your consideration. Thank you for your
attention and time.
Diamond Bar Resident G
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING,
AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR )
r
On September , 2000, at 7:00 P.M., the Diamond Bar Planning Commission will hold a
regular meeting at the South Coast Quality Management District Auditorium, 21865 East Copley
Drive, Diamond Bar,.Califp�n a.
Items for consideration are listed on the attached agenda.
I, John Ilasin, declare as follows:
I am employed by the City of Diamond Bar, Community and Development Services
Department. On September 8, 2000, I posted copies of the Notice for the Regular Meeting of the
Diamond Bar Planning Commission, to be held on September 12, 2000, at the following locations:
City Hall South Coast Quality Management District Auditorium
21660 E. Copley Drive 21865 East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91.765
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on September 11, 2000, at Diamond Bar, California.
J n Ilasin
Community and Development Services Dept.
g:\\affidavitposting.doc
VI
and is rea y for
ning
He fev' we b