Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/25/2010FILE COPY PLANNING L #11111 May 25, 2010 7:00 P.M. South Coast Air Quality !Management District Government Center Building — Auditorium 21865 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Chairman Vice Chairman Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Tony Torng Kathleen Nolan Kwang Mo Lee Steve Nelson Jack Shah Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Planning Division of the Community Development Department, located at 21825 Copley Drive, and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please call (909) 839-7030 during regular business hours. Written materials distributed to the Planning Commission within 72 hours of the Planning Commission meeting are available for public inspection immediately upon distribution in the City Clerk's office at 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California, during normal business hours. In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title ti of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or accommodations) in order to communicate at a City public meeting must inform the Community Development Department at (909) 839-7030 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. 113kri(1)1.3 F,1 l Please refrain from smoking, eating or The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper -- and encourages you to do the same CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, May 25, 2010 AGENDA CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. Next Resolution No. 2010-16 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Tony Torng, Vice -Chairman Kathleen Nolan, Kwang Ho Lee, Steve Nelson, Jack Shah 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCEIPUBLIC COMMENTS: This is the time and place for the general public to address the members of the Planning Commission on any item that is within their jurisdiction, allowing the public an opportunity to speak on non-public hearing and non -agenda items. Please complete a Sneaker's Card for the recordina Secretary (completion of this form is voluntarv). There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressing the Planning Commission. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chairman 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following items listed on the consent calendar are considered routine and are approved by a single motion. Consent calendar items may be removed from the agenda by request of the Commission only: 4.1 Minutes of Regular Meeting: May 11, 2010. 5. OLD BUSINESS: None, 6. NEW BUSINESS: None, 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7.1 Development Review No. PL 2010-11 - Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48, the applicant is requesting approval to construct a new single-family residence of 8,870 square -feet on a 58,806 square -foot, Rural Residential (RR) zoned parcel with a consistent underlying General Plan Land Use designation of RR. Project Address: Derringer Lane Lot 55 (Tract 23483, Lot 55, APN 8713-034-029) MAY 25, 2010 91 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. PL 2009-01 and Comprehensive Sign Program No. 2009-02, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. 7.3 One -Year Time Extension for Development Review 2007-06 - Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.66.050, the applicant submitted a request for a one year extension of time to begin construction. The project was approved on May 13, 2008 with a two (2) year time frame to obtain building permits and begin construction. Project Address: Property Owner: 2502 Razzak Circle Wasif Siddique 11076 Venture Drive Mira Loma, CA 91752 Applicant: Robert Larivee, Award Winning Design 3109 Center Drive Santa Ana, CA 92704 Environmental Determination: This project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to the provisions of Article 19 under Section 15303(a) (New Construction of One Single -Family Residence) and Section 15332 (Infill Development Projects) of the CEQA Guidelines. No further environmental review is required to extend the time limit for the approved project. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve One -Year Time Extension for Development Review 2007-06, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS I INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 9. STAFF COMMENTS / INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects: MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 11, 2010 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Torng called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C/Nelson led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Steve Nelson, Jack Shah, Vice Chairman Kathy Nolan, and Chairman Tony Torng. Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Brad Wohlenberg, Assistant City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Natalie Tobon, Planning Technician; David Alvarez, Assistant Planner; and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant. Consultants: Mark Rogers, TRG Land; and Peter Lewandowski, Environmental Impact Sciences. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCEIPUBLIC COMMENTS: None. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 27, 2010. C/Shah moved, VC/Nolan seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 13, 2010, as corrected. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Lee, Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng None Nelson None 7.1 Comprehensive Sign Program No. PL 2010-30 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.36.060, the applicant requested approval for a Comprehensive Sign Program for Firestone. The lot is zoned Regional MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION General Commercial. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit is required to operate a music school. PROJECT ADDRESS: 2751 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard, Suite A Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Country Hills Holdings LLC 8115 Preston Road #400 Dallas, TK 75225 APPLICANT: James Kim 21700 Copley Drive, Suite 290 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 SP/Lee presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit No. PL2010-89, based on the Findings of Fact and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. C/Shah asked if the applicant intended to rent the hall for other uses or was it intended strictly for their own use and SP/Lee said she believed it was intended strictly for use by the music and art school but she would ask the applicant to clarify that point. C/Shah said if the hall was rented out he would be concerned about the time and the one door ingress/egress at the side of the hall. C/Nelson asked why the school was restricted to 65 students. SP/Lee responded that there are 29 individual classrooms and the number of students is related to the parking, traffic impacts and capacity. She confirmed to C/Nelson that there is surplus parking. C/Nelson asked why the City would restrict a business that is coming into an area that has been vacant for years. SP/Lee stated that part of the analysis includes a new office building at the north end of the shopping center which was submitted to the Planning Department today for consideration, all of which has to do with the parking and traffic impacts of the shopping center. CDD/Gubman further stated that the applicant proposed that a maximum of 60 students was anticipated at any one time. Staff normally places restrictions on the maximum enrollment, hours of operation, days of the week, etc. Staff also wanted to provide some flexibility should there be an increase in enrollment because staff did not feel it should limit enrollment so tightly that if there might be 61 students for example, they would have to come back and request an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit. In this instance, staff's intent was to create a bit of a cushion for the business to exceed their 60 student peak enrollment at any one time without having to seek a modified approval. Certainly, if the Planning Commission feels the cushion is insufficient the parking analysis would allow for more of a cushion. However, he believes that there should be some sort of a cap set during this process. The 65 number was arrived at by adding a 10 percent MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION effective height when viewed from Steeplechase which is at a fixed grade, would be mitigated by that feature of the development. C/Nelson said he would suggest the Commission keep that in mind for the future. VC/Nolan asked when the Hillside Management Ordinance was put in place and whether it was put in place because of the conditions where people are building more on the hillsides because of less area. And was the 35 foot limit in place prior to that ordinance. CDD/Gubman responded that the Hillside Ordinance was developed out of consideration for Diamond Bar and its topography and there is a need wherever a jurisdiction is in a hillside situation or with this type of topography to avoid some of the mass grading for steep roadway design that occurred in hillside developments in the 60s and 70s where development occurred directly on ridgelines and was destroying the natural features. The Hillside Development Standards are an effort to require homes and development overall to be designed to fit the overall topography rather than altering the topography to fit the development. SP/Lee stated the Hillside Management Development Standards were adopted in 1998. CDD/Gubman responded to VC/Nolan that the 35 foot height limitation is in all of the residential zones so the height limit for the hillside district is overlayed on this additional concept of the building height envelope that is determined by some diagrams in the Hillside Development Standards where one creates height envelopes from site property lines and from the grade from the front to the back of the property. SP/Lee said the 35 foot height limit requirement was also included in the Hillside Standards. C/Shah asked how many truckloads of dirt would be required to export the 600 cubic yards of export and Mr. Mitchell responded that due to the site he would have to bring in smaller trucks to accommodate the shared driveway for about 100 trips of six to seven yards per truck. The dirt will be hauled to the landfill just off the SR60. He plans to remove the dirt in a slow and methodical manner so as to present as little interruption as possible to the neighborhood. When he first looked at the site dirt export was his initial concern. As a result, he designed retaining walls for an earth retention system that uses modular blocks and uses the onsite materials that are reprocessed and re -compacted onsite. Mr. Danielian responded to Chair/Torng that he read staff's report and concurs with the conditions of approval. Chair/Torng opened the public hearing. Victor Natividad, 2730 Steeplechase Lane, said he was not present to object but was, in fact, pleased to welcome a new neighbor. He had concerns about the shared access road that is sitting on a steep slope and over 100 truckloads of dirt will be moved across the shared access road that proceeds through six lots. This access road is owned by the land owners and it is not maintained by "The Country Estates" which is unfortunate because the road is in very, very bad condition. With MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION CDD/Gubman explained that the access from Steeplechase to these properties has to be traversable and for this project to get through the fire department plan check process the applicants will have to demonstrate that the roadway is going to be surfaced to accommodate emergency vehicles. With respect to damage to the private drive and potential damage to water lines, this is a private property and reciprocally used, owned and accessed between private property owners so the City would not impose any requirements in this regard. This is a civil matter that would need to be dealt with in that venue should there be any claims or damage caused by this construction project. VC/Nolan asked the length of the access road and Mr. Mitchell responded he believed it was 500 to 600 feet traversing five or six lots. There are sections that are in very poor repair. For his fire department requirements he has to maintain emergency access at all times during combustible construction. There are rules and responsibilities that other agencies have that are standards and if one causes damage it has to be repaired. C/Shah said he believed the architect could design the lot by balancing the dirt onsite rather than having dirt exported. C/Lee was confident that the applicant knew what he was doing and the City has full enforcement authority to take care of those concerns. C/Lee moved, VC/Nolan seconded, to approve Development Review and Variance No. PL2010-17, based on the Findings of Fact and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nelson, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Shah ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 8. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 3.1 Site "D" Specific Plan — Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act; Title 21 — City's Subdivision Ordinance; and Title 22 — Development Code Sections 22.60 and 22.70, the proposed project is to recommend approval of the following to the City Council. General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 — A request to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan (SP). MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION Environmental Impact Report and adoption of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. There was general support for the Specific Plan, but there was a lack of consensus about how to craft the recommendation pertaining to the incorporation of a park element on this site. The three supporting Commissioners expressed a desire to have some requirement for a park or public space as part of this project but continued the matter to allow staff to conduct further research and to come back to the Commission with its recommendation. Staff is ready to present information to help the Commission make its decision this evening. CDD/Gubman further stated that what staff heard from the Commission were two different concepts discussed. One was a dedication of a traditional public park as a standalone feature on this site. The second concept staff heard was the integration of one or more public spaces into the future commercial development comprised of some minimum acreage that would incorporate amenities such as tot lot, shade structure, picnic table, features that would be found in a traditional park but more integrated into the commercial development. Tonight's presentation is in two parts, the first of which he will present to the Commission using a PowerPoint presentation that depicts an overview of parks in the City of different sizes to help the Commissioners visualize what one and two acres and different sizes and palettes of amenities that parks of different sizes could accommodate. This presentation will be followed by a discussion of the public space option for the commercial development by Mark Rogers who will present an interactive design exercise to help the Commission consider that option as well. CDD/Gubman first presented an overview of seven City parks that are within the size range discussed at the last meeting_ These parks range in size from .3 acres (16,000 square feet) to about 3.4 acres. Staff will then show graphics of polygons that will give the Commissioners an idea of how those different sized parks would compare to the footprint of Site D. The staff report calls out acreages in the table and when staff went through the actual graphic verification of park sizes more exact acreages were determined. CDD/Gubman first presented the approved construction plan for the new Washington Street Park at the intersection of Washington and Lincoln Streets. This .3 acre site has a tot lot, open green space, gazebo, five picnic tables, three benches and a walkway. This park is a neighborhood park and does not accommodate off-street parking. This park is intended to serve the neighborhood and visitors would have to park on the street. The next larger park is Longview Park South which was about .83 developed acres and has planned for it a basketball court, turf volleyball court, tot lot, two picnic tables and a barbecue. Stardust Park is .98 acres and features a tot lot, open green space, two benches and a paved walking trail. Longview Park North is .99 acres with .8 acres improved. There is a grove/grouping of vegetation at the rear portion of the site that reduces the usable acreage. This park includes a tot lot, open green, two benches and a paved walking trail. Summitridge Mini Park (down slope from the Diamond Bar Center) is about 1.27 acres and is entirely passive green space. Starshine Park is 1.66 acres and includes tot lot, open green space, two picnic tables, two benches, a barbecue and a l�: T MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 15 PLANNING COMMISSION park be before it needs its own dedicated parking or parking that would be inclusive of the commercial lot. CDD/Gubman said it would depend on context. A neighborhood park is going to use neighborhood streets for parking or it is going to be accessed by pedestrians in the immediate vicinity. This park given its adjacency to an arterial and potentially not being within a neighborhood, it is going to need to rely on the off street parking provided by the shopping center. Mark Rodgers took the podium and explained to the Commission that he would lead them through an interactive sketch exercise to illustrate concepts of how usable public spaces could be integrated into a commercial shopping center environment. He then proceeded, using the auditorium's overhead projection system, to sketch diagrams onto Site D base maps to show different ways buildings and public plazas could be configured on the commercial portion of the site. VC/Nolan said she appreciated all of the presentations. It really puts a name to the face. VC/Nolan said that she visited a number of parks in the area. She visited both Longview Parks, Stardust Park, Starshine Park, Washington Park and other parks outside of the area. The smaller parks in residential areas did not fit what she envisions. The parks that she visited today were basically used by residents within those few blocks. Of all of those parks she visited there wasn't one person at any of them and it was during after school hours. She envisions something that is for the community. Something that can be used by everyone. She said they talked about this being the gateway to Diamond Bar and she would like to see something that is visual. V/C Nolan said that she liked how it is incorporated with residential. She said that a park area less than an acre and a half would not be worth the effort to include in the project. She envisions more than a pocket park, although, pocket parks serve a great purpose — no discredit to them, however, they look like two lots that were planted with grass to make it look like a playground — they do serve a purpose for that immediate neighborhood, however, she does not see a pocket park being right for this kind of environment. Before the April meeting she visited a number of parks that she shared with Mr. Gubman and a number of them even had dog parks. When we talk about the social aspect of these park like areas, they were hugely populated, they were very nice environments that did bring those communities, e.g., elderly and young, together throughout the day. V/C Nolan said that she did not care for the park area being in the residential area. She wants to see this as something that can be used by the community at large. C/Shah said he thought it was a good presentation. If there is a park in one area it's a question of maintaining it and who is going to maintain it. If it becomes part of the public, then the property owner is going to say why am I paying for it. He always believes in rewarding designs. Frank Gehry is a famous architect known throughout the world. He has created these kind of spaces. He said that he has created at mass transit stations where it becomes a living and breathing space for the towns. He said that he sees that vision here that instead of identifying one area, the space should flow — there should be green, there should be areas where people can go and sit and in the commercial area that is best utilized for the people who are coming for shopping, who are visiting, going to MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 17 PLANNING COMMISSION Downtown Brea Birch Street. But she does think this does serve the purpose for the neighborhood. Making the commercial area smaller, and incorporating a park into this area can tie in very well with the commercial use - building a path — making it a trail where it is marked off for size, for distance, for walking, for exercise, and incorporating that with the residential, with the commercial and with the park. Chair/Torng, in response to C/Lee's comments that we do not reflect the community's comments stated the Commission has gone through this process based on a legal process that staff explained during the last meeting with respect to working through the entire process overtime with public meetings, and public hearings. On April 27 staff responded to all of the questions, from residents. After the Commissioners heard all of the input and staff's responses the Commission decided at the last meeting that it wanted more information regarding a park in the proposed project. All proper protocol has been followed and the Commission has considered the project on its merits in a legal manner. Chair/Torng thanked staff for their presentation that helped the Commission to better understand how a park of different sizes would impact the commercial and residential areas. He understands that parks are maintained by the City and that would mean additional costs to the City. He concurred with C/Shah that the "park" space be more integrated public space. He also liked Mr. Roger's suggestion of a trail from the residential area through the center of the commercial site to the corner of the Diamond Bar entrance and also at the corner of Cherrydale, if the Commission were decide to add one third of an acre, and take one third of an acre on to that corner. He said that he discussed with CDD/Gubman a third option. We may want o keep the options open for the B level plan by allowing that future developments must choose between the two options instead of force choosing one option at this time. At the plan level B the builder would have to come back to the Commission with a more detailed plan. At this time, the Planning Commission could consider the minimum acreage it would want to put into either a park or integrated space. That's something we might want to consider now. And if we cannot make a decision regarding a park or integrated space — option one and two, the Commission could consider the third option. He asked CDD/Gubman to confirm the third option. CDD/Gubman explained that staff provided two options in its report and the Commission could come up with a third option that is a synthesis of those two to be proposed at the B level. C/Shah said he felt Chair/Torng was on the right track. He wanted to make the point that the Commission may want to identify the commercial portion be designated as one third of an acre of a park and one-quarter of an acre for each residential loft based on level B so that in the future the builder can propose to develop the property in a certain way and come back for the Commission's final determination and approval. At least if we give them the guidelines, they can interpret how to incorporate the space depending on how the design develops for both the commercial and residential. Chair/Torng said he was concerned about the residential because in the commercial area the public can use the area but in a residential area that may be restricted to the MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 19 PLANNING COMMISSION VC/Nolan asked if the Commission will re -vote on the resolutions voted on at the last meeting. ACAM/ohlenberg said that there are three resolutions, two of which have been approved by a vote of 3-1 and the Commission reconsidered those and tabled those until this time for a revote and the reconsideration essentially removed the previous vote and now they are up for a vote again. The third resolution the Commission never reached consensus and so that will be up for a vote at this meeting. CDD/Gubman recommended that the Commission complete the discussion on Item 3 and see what, if any consensus can be reached. C/Shah recommended thatthe Commission reconsiderthe previous approved resolutions and consider Option 2 for a maximum of one acre. C/Shah said that VC/Nolan convinced him that the residential should manage their own common space. CDD/Gubman said that in Option 1 the residential development as envisioned would still have its community, its HOA amenities. To do Option 1 in the residential area would be to reduce the size of the residential area to put a park in that area. The idea of the park is undetermined at this time where on the 30 acres it would finally reside but if the Commission is going to recommend the park option itwill reduce the acreage of eitherthe residential or commercial side of the project. VC/Nolan asked how they should proceed. ACA/Wohlenberg said that all three actions are essentially taking place simultaneously so if the Commission wants to discuss 3 and vote on that item first because he believes it will be most difficult, that would be fine and then the Commission can move to Items 1 and 2. VC/Nolan moved to recommend that the City Council approve Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to establish land use and development standards to facilitate and govern the development of up to 202 residential dwelling units, up to 153,985 gross square feet of commercial floor area; and approximately 10. 15 acres of open space areas, easements and right-of-way, and Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes with the amendment to include 1.5 acres of dedicated park space within the commercial parcel. Mr. Rogers clarified that the water quality features are not a functioning part of a park. When he says "ambient" they may be adjacent and provide area for green space and planting, etc., but you do not recreate in them. We have calculated, for purposes of water quality, the area necessary to clean the water under the current standards and it is approximately about one third of an acre and two shallow basins less than three feet in depth. These areas collectively can be of benefit to, by virtue of their adjacency, creating a park environment and yet not have functioning uses within them. And it might result, if MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 21 PLANNING COMMISSION understands that the park should not take so much away from the commercial that it hurts that portion of it but she thinks 1.3 acres is an appropriate minimum. C/Shah said that within the last year and a half he had been involved with the design of about one and one-quarter acres and he agreed with VC/Nolan. He said that he could visualize it and could see it being used. CDD/Gubman said the more exact size of Starshine Park is one and two-thirds acres. VC/Nolan said it was a very comfortable setting, the design of it and the open space. She said she visualized an area where people can actually use it, not just open land for the sake of open land but park settings. An acre and two-thirds of space was doable for her. C/Shah said he was comfortable with moving forward with the motion for 1.3 acres and Option 2. But the word "usable" space for the park should be included. VC/Nolan asked C/Shah to confirm that it would be one space and not broken up. C/Shah concurred. ACAANohlenberg proposed the recommended resolution language for either option to be included within the staff report. He read the proposed language to the Commission, the original of which would be found on Page 4 of 15 in the staff report. This would be to add to the resolution Section B.5.a.4 to read; "At the time the development is formally submitted to the Planning Commission for consideration, the subsequent plan shall incorporate within its boundaries a neighborhood park of at least 1.3 acres usable area dedicated to the City within the commercial development adjacent to slope areas or waste water management areas and shall incorporate features such as but not limited to, a tot lot, picnic tables, seating areas, shade structures," And he would also include Section B.5.b.8 as originally stated on Page 5 of 15 of staff's report. C/Shah asked if the amended language could include that "the park be designed to the City's standards and when completed should be dedicated to the City if the City is willing to accept it." ACA/Wohlenberg responded that after where in his previous language he said "dedicated to the City" they could add "and designed and constructed to City standards." And, not waste water management areas but "water quality management areas." He was reminded those are two different things. Chair/Torng asked if there was any motion. C/Shah moved to General Plan amendment No. 2007-03, Zone Change No. 2007-04, Specific Plan No. 2007-01, Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 and Environmental Impact Report No. 2007-02, reconsider the previous passage of the two previous considerations and the third one to be added to that one with the language provided by the counsel. ACA/Wohlenberg clarified for the record that the CEQA action is taking place first and that staff's opinion and recommendation that this alteration is within the existing scope of the EIR. C/Shah concurred. VC/Nolan received confirmation that the acreage was 1.3. V/C Nolan Seconded the motion. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: La I - Gig 4 MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 23 PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairman Torng adjourned the regular meeting at 9:47 p.m. to the Special Meeting of May 13, 2010 at 6:30 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 25th day of May, 2010. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman Community Development Director Tony Torng, Chairman CITY OF DIAMOND BAR -- 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 -- TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 7.1 MEETING DATE: May 25, 2010 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Development Review No. PL 2010-11 PROJECT LOCATION: Derringer Lane, Lot 55, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (APN 8713-034-029) APPLICATION REQUEST: To construct a new 8,870 square -foot single- family residence on a 54,860 net square -foot (1.25 net acres), Rural Residential (RR) zoned parcel with a consistent underlying General Plan Land Use designation of RR. PROPERTY OWNERS: Sumermai Vardhan 320 Woodruff Walnut, CA 91789 APPLICANT: Pete Volbeda 180 N, Benson Ave, Suite D Upland, CA 01786 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to conditions DR # PL 2010-11 Page 1 of 6 Construction of a new single-family residence requires Planning Commission approval of a (development Review (QR) application. Approval of a DR is required to ensure compliance with the City's general plan policies, development standards and design guidelines, and to minimize adverse effects of the proposed project upon the surrounding properties and the City in general. DGV%Lo -i l -ie following table compares the proposed project with the City's development standards for residential development in the RR Zone: DR # PL 2010-11 Page 3 of 6 Section 22.22.120(a)(1) establishes a height limit of 35 feet as measured from the finished grade to the highest point of the roofline. The submitted plans demonstrate that the proposed structure will be 34 feet, 5 inches at its highest point. The proposed residence is terraced on two pad levels. From street view, the building has the appearance of a two-story structure but the rear of the building steps down to the lower pad level, which contains the basement and tuck -under garage. Corr paftifity with Naighborhood The proposed project complies with the goals and objectives as set forth in the adopted General Flan in terms of land use and density. The project will not negatively affect the 6Xisting surrounding land uses, and the design and appearance of the proposed addition is compatible with the existing residence and surrounding community. The project is designed to be compatible and complementary to the neighborhood, and incorporates the principles of the City's Residential Design Guidelines as follows: m The project is designed to minimize the negative impacts on surrounding homes. A transition between the project and adjacent uses is achieved through appropriate setbacks and landscaping; The project is designed to be appropriate in mass and scale to the site and surrounding homes; ® The project provides open space and landscaping to serve as a buffer between neighboring properties and blend into the terrain, so as not to dominate the landform as seen from lower elevations; and ® The project is terraced on two pad levels. From street view, the building looks like a two-story structure but the rear of the building steps down to the lower pad level, which contains the basement floor and garage. Adjacent Horne to the Left Project Site Adjacent Property to the Right OR V, PL 2010.11 Page 5 of 6 Attachment I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -XX RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND EAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. PL 201011, A REQUEST TO CONTSRUCT A NEW 8,870 SQUARE -FOOT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT DERRINGER LANE, LOT 55 (ASSESORS PARCEL NO. 8713-034-029). A. RECITALS Property owner, Sumermal Vardhan, and applicant, Pete Volbeda, have filed an application for Development Review No. PL 2010-11 to construct a 8,870 square -foot new single family residence located at Derringer Lane, Lot 55, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California ("Project Site"). Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review shall be referred to as the "Proposed Project." 2. The subject property is comprised of one parcel totaling 1.25 net acres. It is located in the Rural Residential (RR) zone and is consistent with the General Commercial land use category of the general plan. 3. The legal description of the subject property is Parcel Map 23483 Lot 55. The Assessor's Parcel Number is 8713-034-029. 4. On May 14, 2010, notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the Project site and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board. 5. On May 25, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; 2. The Planning Commission hereby determines the Project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the provisions of Article 19, Section 15303 (a) (New Construction of One Single -Family Residence) of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, no further environmental review is required. building looks like a two-story structure but the rear of the building steps down to the lower pad level, which contains the basement floor and garage. 5. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative effect on property values or resale(s) of property) to the properties or improvements in the vicinity; and Before the issuance of any City permits, the proposed Project is required to comply with all conditions within the approved resolution, and the Building and Safety Division and Public Works Departments, and L.A. County Fire Department requirements. The referenced agencies through the permit and inspection process will ensure that the proposed project is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. S. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as set forth under Article 19 Section 15303(a) (iVew Construction of One Single -Family Residence) of the CEQA Guidelines. 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: Sumermal Vardhan, 320 Woodruff, Walnut, CA 91789; and Pete Volbeda, 180 N. Benson Ave, Suite D, Upland, CA 91786 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THiS 25T" DAY OF MAY 2010, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. NO Tony Torng, Chairman i, Greg Gubman, 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 25`x' day of May 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ATTEST: Greg Gubman, Secretary 3 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2010 -XX Q approval shall not be effective until the applicants pay remaining City processing fees, school fees and fees for the review of submitted reports. 3. All designers, architects, engineers, and contractors associated with this project shall obtain a Diamond Bar Business License, and zoning approval for those businesses located in Diamond Bar, 4. Signed copies of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2010 -XX, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all partied involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect, 5. Prior to the plan check, revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval. 6. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed. 7. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance with the conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable regulations. S. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and any applicable Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 9. All site, grading, landscape/irrigation, roof, and elevation plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of City permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment permit, etc.,) or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 10. Property owner/applicant shall remove the public hearing notice board within three (3) days of this project's approval. 11. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of City Planning, Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works Department, and the Fire Department. FEESIDEPOSITS Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to Planning, Building and Safety Divisions, and Public Works Department) at the established rates, prior to issuance of building permits, as required by the City. School fees as required shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permit. In addition, the applicant shall pay all remaining prorated City project review and processing fees prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever comes first. 2. Prior to any plan check, all deposit accounts for the processing of this project shall have no deficits. 5 Planning Commission Resolution No 2010 -XX APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, (909) 839-7040, FOR COMPLIANCE iRyiTH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL An Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted concurrently with the grading plan clearly detailing erosion control measures. These measures shall be implemented during construction. The erosion control plan shall conform to national Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards and incorporate the appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's) as specified in the Storm Water BMP Certification. For construction activity which disturbs one acre or greater soil a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be needed. Please refer to City handouts. 2. The applicant shall comply with Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) requirements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Please refer to City handouts. . 3. Grading and construction activities and the transportation of equipment and materials and operation of heavy grading equipment shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Dust generated by grading and construction activities shall be reduced by watering the soil prior to and during the activities and in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 402 and Rule 403. Reclaimed water shall be used whenever possible. Additionally, ail construction equipment shall be properly muffled to reduce noise levels. 13, SOILS REP®RTIGRA®INGIRETAINING WALLS Prior to grading plan submittal, a geotechnical report prepared by a Geotechnical Engineer, licensed by the State of California, shall be submitted by the applicant for approval by the City. 2. Upon approval of the geotechnical report, the applicant shall submit drainage and grading plans prepared by a Civil Engineer, licensed by the State of California, prepared in accordance with the City's requirements for the City's review and approval. A list of requirements for grading plan check is available from the Public Works Department. All grading (cut and fill) calculations shall be submitted to the City concurrently with the grading plan. 3. Finished slopes shall conform to City Code Section 22.22.080 -Grading. 4. All easements and flood hazard areas shall be clearly identified on the grading plan. 5. The grading plan shall show the location of any retaining wails and the elevations of the top of wall/footing/retaining and the finished grade on both sides of the retaining wall. Construction details for retaining wails shall be shown on the grading plan. Calculations and details of retaining wails shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for review and approval. 7 Planning commission Resolution I4o. 2010-),'K E. UTILITIES Underground utilities shall not be constructed within the drip line of any mature tree except as approved by a registered arborist. F. SEWERS/SEPTIC TANK Applicant shall obtain connection permit(s) from the City and County Sanitation District prior to issuance of building permits. 2. Applicant, at applicant's sole cost and expense, shall construct the seeder system in accordance with the City, Los Angeles County Public Works Division. Sewer plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the City. G. TRAFFIC MITIGATIONS (Not required) APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Plans shall conform to State and Local Building Code (i.e., 2007 California Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and California Electrical Cade) requirements and all other applicable construction codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of plan check submittal. 2. Application for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data submitted for review may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the Building Department. 3. Every permit issued by the Building Department shall expire if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit. 4. Construction activities causing the operation of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, or demolition work shall be conducted Mon. -Sat. between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. 5. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been met. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 6. The minimum design load for wind in this area is 85 M.P.H. exposures "C" and the site is within seismic category (D). The applicant shad submit drawings and calculations prepared by a California State licensed Architect/Engineer with wet stamp and signature. 7. This project shall comply with the 2008 Energy Code requirements of the State of California Energy Commission. Kitchen and ba[hroon-1 lights shall be fluorescent. 0 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2010 -XX 20. Specify location of tempered glass as required by code. 21. Specify 1/4"/ft slope for all flat surfaces/ decks with approved treater proofing material. Also, provide guardrail connection detail (height, spacing, etc.). 21 Private property seeder/septic system shall be approved by the Los Angeles County Health Department and the California Water Control Board. APPLICANT SHALL. CONTACT THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE FI,EVENTION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Emergency access shall be provided, maintaining free and clear, a minimum 28 foot at all times during construction in accordance with Fire Department requirements, 2. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire Department that temporary hater supply for fire protection is available pending completion of the required fire protection system. 3. All required fire hydrants shall be installed and tested and accepted prior to construction. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction. AMS 11 Planning Commission resolution No 2010.1:): IM I � • \� % y� ) m. � ay. 0911 £L£ 606 '131 uuNnpp u NY8ON01YY�O UMWJi aao 96 101 EE!! pp9�9pL{1qq6 pYp3 qq'Q{Y4'lppdfgg7'Q3pJ�1�M 3HAntlq� NOS9N38RN ,.,0029 L 11° lVM W )S 'NVHMIYA SNW ONY an 2103 33U3OLS3N *=.- L b0.g4k1+'•U ® tl 1 tl ti V-�� 1�! I d��tl ��,1,?m twos OZ NYld us cCJ1 +e,pd o Q IL W U) C� "9 p4 OD L � 4 Q IL W U) M M 606 BLAMW100 MU dYBONOwvla 8 30Nldd3a ss 101 99a6 V3 'C"'d 3llG 3Atl NOM Cil FM i r� NVHAYMS NHVadVA SM ONV NW Nod 30NMIS38 C\t Id Uafla loh HAW —'OS OL NVId 3115 � 00'00=a N 02 32'12" W (131dis 31dP O 3N d7 55 j 0 Z cV M 117.00' N a M N 117.00' 9 3 ' r o o ?� n n a� s Z \ llll� ........... z m 101 0511 £L£ 606 l31 m� �a 'iVwa3wnS 'NVHCIHVA saw ONV 8A HOA DNKIS3a I d 98L16 VO 'ONVldn '0 311AS 3AV NOSgN38g1 0B1 �p a 59 SIO -1 HO.1 NV -1d ONICV�j`J lVnid33NOD we] V 0 LL Q nD LL U 0 0 -- - - 09H VIT 606 -Sl 9946 NO ZWO 143 MY Nom N OGI fiyluynld ld"I'll-91dd dMainh AlAd A&MI-103 » 8YSCINOYiVICI 83DNI8'd3O GS.101 NVH_MS MHVCWA � ONV IM 80A 33143GIS3a � ; � � � �\ ;; A&MI-103 » 8YSCINOYiVICI 83DNI8'd3O GS.101 NVH_MS MHVCWA � ONV IM 80A 33143GIS3a 9 GNV V MOIJOAS ---- aucsi aE '�.�� NHF/42Jb/� 44IIFi YJ uh-w a Sus -=RV N09Ee N ca M M U Z: 0 U w U) w cn u yr m — 091 L £L£ 606 -M 99416 VO 'ONVIdn '0 31inS 30 NOSN38 N 081 5mutliF1 @,AHjfl@j!LptAtj x®2910A Abid ALLLWWO 3H1 UV90NONVIO fl30NI2 M SS 101 1V✓1il YMS •NVHOUVA S8A (INV aW H03 3ON3OIS32 r m laji�zm 40 3.1L,ec � H L 6 �zz URI ti A -*- assaaaa zug" O 094 sts 606 -a.l. 98"6 Vo CNVI& 0 31r)s , H }..� y{ q gKQCp �' NVHdiPN 5; Nwo8V-A SaW ONY 2iW YbOJ 3�N305321 Lima 10 1 mad � Oco@ O O O p 0 ,6 Q U m a 10' x � N 02 32'12" W 117.00' (133�A1S 31dnlHd 3NV7 N z x x N 02 32'12° 117.00' 0 x Y ---------------- --- ._- 0 x L z z Q rn J ' Li. IFJ i•i q 4_ t—J 0 E3 0 s ri cli z LLJ w Q < in �sscosxa� 0511 £L£ 606 -M A2LLNnoo 3HU aveallowvia 2GDNIaa3o 9846 VO QdH 1dl 0 31lf�S'3Ad PlOSTHB N 051 �.r NVHa3wns Ni vaaen saw aNv aw ao3 3nN3ais3a U11J ������l�d ���®�®A 2121 '°"• Nb 1 d �J00�� 1 S G _I&MIX Lip . mca� dos xvi 09a EU£ 606 -at 98L16 VoQq' jl 4 3LM ' ,y NMS N Oa NYHa3rvns N GNa^o aM oNe aw WA 3JN301S 8 a° Ndld NOOIJ UNZ Cfiu TLE 606 a� a air$ 'SAV 40GKN s 0Q Qeae I 'd4 011-11"la3�NlUU34 },271N�00 5�W aNV UW 803 30N30153t3 f N�1Na3WN5 NHtl62?A P Q - - ®c ASINnOO 3H1 8V80NOWVIO 830N16;30 m to 0 ELM CII £L£ B9 'i31. NVM3NnS NHVObVA SaN 0NV HVi 2JO3 30N30GS N 98x6 `dJ CPMIdt 4316'15 '9Atl N05N39 N 08l ""� � ®• MIA�,.-r-r R 9 a a € �a y m¢ R has �m s 000 ® oo a aoFql 9 a a -- -- -- I I ),aNAGO 3H1 ']VgQNOPVIO m as to6 xws 09ft M 606 -BI I NVHKIMS NHV08VA SHN (INV Sh NO3 KNKS38 9946 VO (JWlcn G an'MY NOM N 091 In 3NOUVA3l2 230!43!X3MW s si a ni n: o g. g - - - - - - Ll FE O & F--] L LLJ: LL� 'SS Ila a'! g� aaam099V 606 -21 AaLNrIOa ]Hi __ee�wI8�0,± 6� ��O3m'¥N a_.s,�� s o as _ L �d ©®99® 7� dUaO OA ]i]d g2v+@o 2van� esav §. ¥ ) ) , E w m w \\\ / /§ � - / 3 ; / a / / \ 2 a = /) a - E §]2 . ~ q LU... k LL- | C 41 ^` y y G m � N | ° JL \ ;§ \\ k � I`DILO.��D�AP PLANNING COMMISSIONAGENDA REPORT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE -- DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117 CASE/FILE NUMBER: APPLICATION REQUEST - 7.2 May 25, 2010 Development Review No. 2009-01 and Comprehensive Sign Program No. 2009-02 1241 Grand Avenue (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Number 8702-001-192). Approval of a Development Review for a fagade remodel and Comprehensive Sign Program for a new unified signage for a 30,602 square -foot existing commercial building on an 113,683 square -foot (2.6 acres), Regional Commercial (C-3) zoned parcel with a consistent underlying General Plan Land Use designation of General Commercial (C). A&J Sunset Village, LLC 10508 Wyton Drive Los Angeles, CA 90024 APPLICANT: Jeda Designs 140 East Santa Clarita, Unit #13 Arcadia, CA 91006 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to conditions. Review Authority (Diamond Bar Municipal Code Sections 22.46 and 22.36.060) Modifying the exterior fagade of a commercial building requires Planning Commission approval of a Development Review application (DBMC Section 22.48). Installing new unified signage for the entire building whenever five or more signs are proposed for an existing development also requires approval of a Comprehensive Sign Program (DBMC Section 22.36.060) from the Planning Commission. Approval of a Development Review and Comprehensive Sign Program are required to ensure compliance with the City's general plan policies, development standards, and design guidelines, and to minimize adverse effects of the proposed project upon the surrounding properties and the City in general. Development Review The purpose of Development Review is to establish consistency with the General Plan through the promotion of high aesthetic and functional standards to complement and add to the economic, physical, and social character of the City. The process ensures that new development and intensification of existing development yields a pleasant living environment, and attracts the interest of residents and visitors as the result of consistent exemplary design. Development Standards: The proposed project does not add square footage to the existing building so the building setbacks remain the same. However, the addition of new towers and parapet will change the building height from 25 feet to 35 feet. The proposed improvements meet the development standards of the Regional Commercial (C-3) zoning district. Architectural Features, Colors, and Material: The City's Design Guidelines have been established to encourage a better compatible building and site design that improves the visual quality of the surrounding area through aesthetically pleasing site planning, building design, and architecture. Additionally, a primary objective is to promote compatibility with adjacent uses to minimize any potential negative impacts. dWLRW-� l I Il . . The architectural style is a more contemporary design than the existing design. The building is updated with new towers and parapets, and smooth stucco walls painted in shades of green and ivory with a stone veneer at the bottom base of the building (see color and material board in Attachment 2). The proposed paint colors and stone veneer accent is compatible with the types of materials used in recently remodeled commercial buildings in the City. Page 3 of 7 CD: Staff Reports-PC/Grand Ave 1241, PC Staff Report 05/25/2010 docx 7. 5C7U` H ELEVATION The architectural style is a more contemporary design than the existing design. The building is updated with new towers and parapets, and smooth stucco walls painted in shades of green and ivory with a stone veneer at the bottom base of the building (see color and material board in Attachment 2). The proposed paint colors and stone veneer accent is compatible with the types of materials used in recently remodeled commercial buildings in the City. Page 3 of 7 CD: Staff Reports-PC/Grand Ave 1241, PC Staff Report 05/25/2010 docx Property to the West Compatibility with Neighborhood Property to the Southwest The proposed project complies with the goals and objectives as set forth in the adopted General Plan in terms of compatibility and integrated signage. The proposed project will not negatively affect the existing surrounding land uses, and the design and appearance of the proposed renovation is compatible with the existing commercial buildings. In addition, the Comprehensive Sign Program complies with the standards of Chapter 22.36.060 by integrating the signage with the design of the new remodel and having specific requirements for signs proposed in the development. The proposed project is designed to be compatible and complementary to the neighborhood, and incorporates the principles of the City's Commercial Design Guidelines as follows: ® Parapet walls are integral parts of the building design and relate to the tower element, ® Stone veneers are added to the bottom base of the building, providing architectural elements at the pedestrian level; ® The sign color contrast with the color of the building and is easily visible from a distance; ® The monument sign incorporates colors and materials of the building. The consistency of colors and materials will unite the look of the building, wall signs, and monument sign; ® The proposed wall signs are sized such that they are appropriately scaled for the wall surfaces on which they are to be placed, and are located in such a manner that they are properly centered and balanced with the architectural features of the building; The signs are compatible with surrounding buildings in nearby commercial shopping centers. The signs are in harmony with and visually related to the signs in surrounding developments through the use of similar materials such as acrylic and vinyl facing, colored trim caps and returns, and internal lighting; and o Additional trees, shrubs, and ground cover are added to the parking area to reduce the visual impact of the parking lot. Page 5 of 7 CD. Staff Reports-PC/Grand Ave. 1241, PC Staff Report 05/25/2010 docx Additional Review The Public Works Department and Building and Safety Division reviewed this project and included their comments in the attached resolution as conditions of approval. On May 10, 2010, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 500 - foot radius of the project site, and on May 14, 2010, the notice was published in the Inland Valley Daily Tribune and San Gabriel Valley Tribune newspapers. The project site was posted with a notice display board, and a copy of the public notice was posted at the City's three designated community posting sites. This project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to the provisions of Article 19 Section 15301(a and e(2)) (interior and exterior alterations, and additions to existing structures that do not increase the floor area by more than 10,000 square feet in fully urbanized areas) and Section 15311 (a) (on -premise signs) of the CEQA Guidelines. No further environmental review is required. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment 1) approving Development Review No. 2009-01 and Comprehensive Sign Program No. 2009-02, based on the findings of DBMC Section 22.48 and 22.36.060 of the Development Code, subject to conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. Prepared by: Grace S Senior Planner Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX 2. Site Plan, Floor Plan, and Elevations 3. Comprehensive Sign Program Reviewed b : Greg Gubman, AICP Community Development Director Page 6 of 7 CD: Staff Reports-PCIGrand Ave 1241, PC Staff Report 05125/2010 doc x Attachment 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2009-01 AND COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PROGRAM NO. 2009-02, A REQUEST TO RENOVATE THE EXTERIOR OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND PROVIDE NEW UNIFIED SIGNAGE, LOCATED AT 1241 GRAND AVENUE (ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO, 8702- 001-192). A. RECITALS Property owner, A&J Sunset Village, LLC, and applicant, Jeda Designs, have filed an application for Development Review No. 2009-01 and Comprehensive Sign Program No. 2009-02 to renovate the exterior of an existing commercial building and provide new unified signage located at 1241 Grand Avenue, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California ("Project Site"). Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review and Comprehensive Sign Program shall be referred to as the "Proposed Project." 2. The subject property is comprised of one parcel totaling 2.6 acres. It is located in the Regional Commercial (C-3) zone and.is consistent with the General Commercial land use category of the general pian. 3. On May 14, 2010, notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Dail Bulletin newspapers. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the Project site and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board. 4. On May 25, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; 2. The Planning Commission hereby determines the Project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental The facade remodel is designed to be compatible with the character of the neighborhood, using similar materials in recently remodeled commercial buildings in the City. There is no specific plan for the project area. 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; The design of the fagade remodel 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. Variation in the building elements has been achieved through the utilization of varying architectural features, building colors and materials, and landscaping, 5. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative effect on property values or resale(s) of property) to the properties or improvements in the vicinity; and Before the issuance of any City permits, the proposed project is required to comply with all conditions within the approved resolution, and the Building and Safety Division and Public Works Departments requirements. The referenced agencies through the permit and inspection process will ensure that the proposed project is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. 6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as set forth under Article 19 Section 1.5303(a and e) (interior and exterior alterations, and additions to existing structures that do not increase the floor area by more than 50 percent, or more than 2,500 square feet, whichever is less) of the CEQA Guidelines. Comprehensive Sign Program Findings (DBMC Section 22.36.060) 1. The comprehensive sign program satisfies the purpose of this chapter and the intent of this section; The comprehensive sign program satisfies the purpose and intent of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 2.2.36.060 by integrating the signage with the design of the building and having specific requirements for signs proposed for the building. 3 Planning Commission Resolution No: 2010 -XX 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: A&J Sunset Village, LLC, 10508 Wyton Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90024; and Jeda Designs, 140 East Santa Clarita, Unit #13, Arcadia, CA 91006. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF MAY 2010, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. Tony Torng, Chairman I, Greg Gubman, 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 25th day of May 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ATTEST: Greg Gubman, Secretary 5 Planning Commission Resolution No 2010 -XX (a) Applicant shall provide a defense to the City defendants or at the City's option reimburse the City its costs of defense, including reasonable attorneys fees, incurred in defense of such claims. (b) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City defendants. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action of proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense thereof. 2. This approval shall not be effective for any purpose until the applicant and owner of the property involved have filed, within twenty-one (21) days of approval of this Development Review No. 2009-01 and Comprehensive Sign Program No. 2009-02 at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department, their affidavit stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all the conditions of this approval. Further, this approval shall not be effective until the applicants pay remaining City processing fees, school fees and fees for the review of submitted reports. 3. All designers, architects, engineers, and contractors associated with this project shall obtain a Diamond Bar Business License, and zoning approval for those businesses located in Diamond Bar. 4. Signed copies of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2010 -XX, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all partied involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 5. Prior to the plan check, revised site pians and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval. 6. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed. 7. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance with the conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable regulations. 8. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and any applicable Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 9. All site, grading, landscape/irrigation, roof, and elevation plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of City permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment permit, etc.,) or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 7 Planning Commission Resolution No 2010 -XX 4. All structures, including walls, trash enclosures, canopies, etc., shall be maintained in a structurally sound, safe manner with a clean, orderly appearance. All graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours by the property owners/occupant. E. SOLID WASTE The site shall be maintained in a condition, which is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlement approved herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste contractor used has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. 2, Mandatory solid waste disposal services shall be provided by the City franchised waste hauler to all parcels/lots or uses affected by approval of this project. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, (909) 839- 7040, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL The driveway approach along Grand Avenue shall be upgraded to current APWA Standard 110-2 Type C. An encroachment permit is required from the Public Works/Engineering Department. This work shall be completed and signed off prior to any final inspection by the Building and Safety Division. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Plans shall conform to State and Local Building Code (i.e., 2007 California Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and California Electrical Code) requirements and all other applicable construction codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of plan check submittal. 2. Application for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data 9 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2010-M ( W 1 31 �~ l PLANNING COMMISSION c�nroxat%°> AGENDA REPORT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117 AGENDA ITEM NO. MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: PROJECT LOCATION: APPLICATION REQUEST PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: 7.3 May 25, 2010 Development Review PL2007-06 2502 Razzak Circle (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Number 8713-009-066). Extension of time for construction of a new a three-story single-family residence on a 19,980 net square -foot (0.46 net acre), Rural Residential (RR) zoned parcel with a consistent underlying General Plan Land Use designation. Wasif Siddique 11076 Venture Drive Mira Loma, CA 91752 Robert Larivee Award Winning Design 3109 Center Drive Santa Ana, CA 92704 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve. Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to the provisions of Article 19 Section 15303(a) (New Construction of One Single -Family Residence) and Section 15332 (Infill Development Projects) of the CEQA Guidelines. No further environmental review is required to extend the time limit for the approved project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment 1) approving a one year extension of time for Development Review PL 2007-06, based on the findings of DBMC Section 22.66.050 of the Development Code, subject to conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. Prepared by: Grace S. Lee Senior Planner Attachments: 7Reviewed b Greg Gubman, AICP Community Development Director 1. Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX 2. PC Staff Report and Resolution No. 2008-17 dated May 13, 2008 Page 3 of 3 CD: Staff Reports-PClRazzak Circle, 2502/Time Extension/PC Staff Report 05/25/2010 docx Attachment 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. PL 2007-06 TO CONSTRUCT A NEW THREE-STORY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ON LOT NO. 181 OF TRACT 30578, LOCATED AT 2502 RAZZAK CIRCLE, DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 (APN 8713-009-066) A. RECITALS 1. On May 13, 2008, the Planning Commission approved Development Review No. 2007-06 to construct a new three-story 7,888 sq. ft. single-family residence with an attached 1,440 sq. ft. garage located at 2502 Razzak Circle, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California ("Project Site"). Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review shall be referred to as the "Proposed Project." This approval included an initial two-year expiration date for the applicant to commence construction. 2. The subject property is made up of one parcel totaling 1.67 acres. It is located in the Rural Residential (RR) zone and is consistent with the rural residential land use category of the general plan. 3. The legal description of the subject property is Tract 30578, Lot 81. The Assessor's Parcel Number is 8713-009-066. 4. Section 22.66.050 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code authorizes the Planning Commission to grant time extension for approved projects, provided that certain findings can be made to establish good cause for such time extensions. 5. Applicant, Robert Larivee, on behalf of Wasif Siddique, has filed a request for a one-year extension of time for the Project. 6. On May 14, 2010, notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the Project site and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board. 7. On May 25, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above and as prescribed under Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.66.050, this Planning Commission hereby approved the Application subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall substantially conform to the approved plans as submitted and approved by the Planning Commission and on file with the Community Development Department. 2. All conditions of approval for Development Review No. 2007-06 approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2008-17 shall remain in full force and effect except as amended herein. 3. This approval shall extend the expiration date of Development Review No. 2007-06 to May 13, 2011. 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 the applicant, Mr. Robert Larivee, Award Winning Designs, 3109 Center Drive, Santa Ana, CA 92704, and the property owner, Mr. Wasif Siddique, 11076 Venture Drive, Mira Loma, CA 91752. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25" DAY OF MAY 2010, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. No Tony Torng, Chairman I, Greg Gubman, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of May, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Greg Gubman, Secretary 3 Attachment 2 PLANKING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT 21825 COPLEY DRIVE -DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 -TEL (909) 839-7030—FAX (909) 861-31 l7—www.Cityofdiamondbar.com AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 7.1 MEETING DATE: May 13, 2008 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Development Review No. DR 2007-06 PROJECT LOCATION: 2502 Razzak Circle Diamond Bar, CA 91765 APPLICATION REQUEST: Approval of development plans to construct a new three-story single-family dwelling of approximately 7,888 square feet with an attached 1,440 sq. ft. garage. PROPERTY OWNERS: Mr. Wasif Siddique 11076 Venture Dr. Mira Loma, CA 91752 APPLICANTS: Mr. Bob Larivee, Award Winning Designs 17 Rue Du Chateau Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conditional Approval The applicant submitted an arborist's report that indicated the existence of 50 mature Black Walnut trees on the subject property. The file does not contain a map locating the trees. The arborist indicates that if any of the 22 protected trees identified in the report have to be removed they should be replaced at a ratio of 3:1. The replacement trees should be 15 gallon native trees (walnuts, oaks, sycamores or willows). The arborist indicated that the majority of these trees are in poor condition. Chapter 22.38 of the Diamond Bar Development Code (DBDC) requires that a tree removal permit must be first obtained from the director before a protected tree is removed. Section 22.38.070 allows the director to waive the requirement of a separate tree removal permit and require necessary information to be submitted as part of a discretionary permit application. Section 22.38.130 requires that the removed protected trees shall be replaced at a ratio of 3:1 and that at least six (6) of the replacement trees shall be 24 -inch box. An arborist hired by the applicant shall provide information regarding the best method for planting the replacement trees. The applicant proposes to construct the dwelling unit in a Restricted Use Area (RUA). The applicant's geotechnical consultant has been working with the City Engineer's office to provide adequate information and mitigation in order to relocated or eliminate the recorded boundary of the RUA on the subject property. Staff is of the opinion that sufficient mitigation measures can be implemented to support the relocation or elimination of the RUA and the required documents can be properly recorded in the Office of the County Recorder. B. Site Description: The site is located in the Diamond Bar "Country Estates." The site fronts on Razzak Circle, which is a fully improved private street. The Los Angeles County Tax Assessor Map indicates that the site contains a 50 -foot wide easement for the extension of Pathfinder Road. The project site is an irregular triangular shaped vacant lot containing 1.67 gross acres of land area (73,120 sq. ft.) The site is legally described as Lot 181, Tract No. 30578, Map Book 785, Pages 1 through 25. The Assessor Parcel Number is 8713-009-066. The site contains a number of easements identified in the Title Report to include a significant "Restricted Use" easement. The restrictions set forth in this easement are such that the easement prohibits the construction of buildings within these areas. The site and grading plans show a portion of the proposed building located within the restricted use easement. Staff's recommendation is that the applicant be required to submit a written request to the City to have the designated restricted use area be remove/lifted. A condition of approval has been incorporated into the attached Resolution addressing this issue_ C. Project Background: The applicant submitted a development application on October 3, 2005, (Development Review No. 2005-31). After conducting public hearings on February 14, 2006, March 14, 2006, and May 23,'2006, the Planning Page 3 DR 2007-06 C. Development Review (22.43) 1. Residential District General Development Standards: The following Table compares the proposed project with the City's Development Standards for Residential Development in the RR (20,000) Zone: Development RR (20,000) Meets Feature Development Proposed Requirements Standards Minimum lot area 20,D00 sf. 73,120 sf. Yes Residential density 1 Single -Family Unit; 1 DU per lot plus 1 second 1 Single Family Unit Yes dwelling 1 Second Dwelling Front setback 30 feet 32 feet Yes 15 ft on one side & 27 feet (west side yard) Side setbacks 10 ft, on the other & 10 feet(east side yard) Yes Side yard minimum between adjoining 25 feet 25 feet plus Yes structures Rear setback 20 feet Appx. 180 feet Yes Lot coverage 30% Approximately 5% Yes Retaining Wall Height Maximum Height 6 feet 6 feet maximum Yes Building height limit 35 feet maximum 35 feet Yes Landscaping 50% of front yard 54% Yes Driveway Maximum 14 feet @ PL 16 feet @ PL NO* Parking 2 in fully enclosed garage 6 -car garage + 3 Yes Chapter 22.30 uncovered spaces `A condition of approval is included to show reduced within the construction documents. 2. Site and Grading: The site steeply slopes in a northerly direction. The proposed building pad is located at the top of the slope and it has a commanding view of the surrounding area. The average slope of the site is 22.5%. The applicant indicates that the proposed project will require 1,150 cubic yards of cut, 400 cubic yards of fill, resulting in 750 cubic yards of material to be exported from the site. 3. Elevations: The architectural style is a "California" eclectic design with concrete tile roof treatment, smooth stucco walls, concrete appearing window Page 5 DR 2007-06 E. F. Additional Review The Public Works Division and the Building and Safety Division reviewed this project. Their comments are included in both the report and the recommended conditions of approval. General Plan, Design Guidelines and Compatibility with Neighborhood The proposed project complies with the goals and objectives as set forth in the adopted General Plan in terms of land use and density. The proposed project will not negatively affect the existing surrounding land uses and the design and appearance of the proposed dwelling unit is compatible with the existing neighborhood. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the project site and the notice was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. A notice display board was posted at the site, and a copy of the legal notice was posted at the City's designated community posting sites. ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT: The City has determined that this project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15303 (new construction of a single-family dwelling) and 15332 (infill construction) of the CEQA Guidelines. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution approving Development Review No. 2007-06 based on the findings set forth under Section 22.48.040 of the Development Code, subject to conditions. Prepared by: David D. Meyer LDM Associates, Inc. Planning Consultant Attachments: Reviewed by Greg Gubman, AICP Planning Manager 1. Aerial 2. Draft Resolution of Approval 3. Exhibit "A" — site plan, floor plan, elevation sections, landscape plan and conceptual grading pian dated April 3, 2008 Page 7 DR 2007-06 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2008-17 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND . BAR, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2007-06 FOR THE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A THREE-STORY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ON LOT NO.181 OF TRACT 30578, LOCATED AT 2502 RAZZAK CIRCLE, (APN: 8713-009-066) A. RECITALS The Planning Commission considered an application filed by Mr. Robert Larivee of Award Winning Designs, on behalf of the property owner, Mr. Wasif Siddique, requesting approval of plans to construct a new three-story, 7,888 square foot single-family residence with an attached 6 -car 1,440 square foot garage. The location of the proposed project is 2502 Razzak Circle. The subject property is zoned R-1(20,000) and it contains 73, 120 square feet (1.67 acres) of gross land area. The property in question is subject to the Rural Residential (RR) Development Code Standards. 3. The subject property is legally described as Lot 181, Tract 30578 and the Assessor's Parcel Number is (APN) 8713-009-066. 4. Public Hearing notification was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers and property owners within a 500 - foot radius of the project site were notified of the proposed project by mail. Further, a public hearing notice display board was posted at the site, and the notice was posted at three other locations within the project vicinity. 5. On May 13, 2008, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date_ B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Planning Commission hereby determines that the proposed project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) in accordance with Sections 15303 and 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines. e. 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. The proposed single-family residence is consistent with the anticipated development pattern for the neighborhood and it will not negatively impact the public health, safety or general welfare. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby approves this Application subject to the following conditions; a. Planning Division (1) Development shall substantially comply with the plans and documents presented to the Planning Commission at the public hearing regarding this proposed project. (2) The applicant shall provide the Director with adequate detailed information to support the issuance of a Tree Removal Permit. (3) The applicant shall obtain the services of a licensed landscape architect to prepare the final landscape plans for the proposed project. The landscape plans shall include the design and selection of material for all hardscape, walls and fencing. The detailed landscape plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Director for review and approval, prior to issuance of building permits. (4) The required landscape plan shall be designed to meet the requirements of the Los Angeles County Fire Department's Fuel Modification Plan in terms of plant selection, placement and maintenance. The final laindscape plan shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval_ (5) The landscape pian shall include the in-kind replacement of all protected trees that are removed from the site in order to accommodate the proposed development. The ratio of the replacement trees shall be 3:1. The minimum size of the replacement trees shall be 15 gallon and at least six (6) of the replacement trees shall be 24 -inch box. The plan shall delineate the location of all trees that will be removed and the location of all new plant material to include the location of the replacement trees. (6) A certified arborist shall provide mitigation measures that will be used during grading and construction to ensure that the remaining protected trees shall not be negatively impacted by the construction activity. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF MAY 2008, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. By: A��— teve Nelson, Chairman I, Nancy Fong, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of May 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: Nolan, Shah, AC/Torng, Chair/Nelson NOES: Commissioners: Lee ABSENT: Commissioners: None ABSTAIN: Commissioners: None ATTEST: D'�IO1VD_ SA_RCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENL USE PERMITS, " i RESIDENTIAL --— - 1. REMODELED STRUCTURES No: Development Review No. 2007-06 SUBJECT- Construction of a new 3 -story Single -Family Dwelling PROPERTY Mr. Wasif Siddigue OWNER: 11076 Venture Drive Mira Loma, CA 91752 APPLICANT: Award Winning Designs 17 Rue De Chateau Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 LOCATION: 2502 Razzak Circle Diamond Bar CA 91765 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION AT (909) 839-7030, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1. In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9(b)(1), the applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and its officers, agents and employees, from any claim, action, or proceeding to attack, set-aside, void or annul, the approval of Development Review No. 2007-06 brought within the time period provided by Government Code Section 66499.37. In the event the city andlor its officers, agents and employees are made a party of any such action: (a) Applicant shall provide a defense to the City defendants or at the City's option reimburse the City its costs of defense, including reasonable attorneys fees, incurred in defense of such claims. (b) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City descendents. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, acfion of proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense thereof. shall pay all remaining prorated City project review and processing fees prior to issuance of grading or building permit, whichever comes first. 2. Prior to any plan check, all deposit accounts for the processing of this project shall have no deficits. 3. Prior to issuance of a grading, the applicant shall submit fees and receive review approval for Tree Removal Permit. C. TIME LIMITS 1. The approval of Development Review No. 2007-06 shall expire within two years from the date of approval if the use has not been exercised as defined per Municipal Code Section 22.66.050(b)(1). The applicant may request in writing a one year time extension subject to Municipal Code Section 22.60.050(c) for Planning Commission approval. D. SITE DEVELOPMENT 1. The project site shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the approved plans submitted to, approved, and amended herein by the Planning Commission, collectively referenced herein as Exhibit "A" including: site plans, floor plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 2. All ground -mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, air conditioning condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berms, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. 3. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened from public view. 4. All structures, including walls, trash enclosures, canopies, etc., shall be maintained in a structurally sound, safe manner with a clean, orderly appearance. All graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours by the property owner/occupant. 5_ Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall revise the design of the driveway such that it does not have a width greater than 14 feet at the property line per Section 22.30.080E (1) (b) & (e) and a. The revised plan shall be subject to review and approval of City staff. E. LANDSCAPE, PRESERVED AND PROTECTED TREES 1. Prior to issuance of any permits, detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval. 3. Grading and construction activities and the transportation of equipment and materials and operation of heavy grading equipment shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p,m., Monday through Saturday. Dust generated by grading and construction activities shall be reduced by watering the soil prior to and during the activities and in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 402 and Rule 403. Reclaimed water shall be used whenever possible. Additionally, all construction equipment shall be properly muffled to reduce noise levels. B. SOILS REPORT/GRADING/RETAINING WALLS Prior to grading plan submittal, a Geotechnical Engineer, licensed by the by the applicant for approval by the City. geotechnical report prepared by a State of California, shall be submitted 2. Upon approval of the geotechnical report, the applicant shall submit drainage and grading plans prepared by a Civil Engineer, licensed by the State of California, prepared in accordance with the City's requirements for the City's review and approval. A list of requirements for grading plan check is available from the Public Works Department. All grading (cut and fill) calculations shall be submitted to the City concurrently with the grading plan. 3. Finished slopes shall conform to City Code Section 22.22.080 -Grading. 4. All easements and flood hazard areas shall be clearly identified on the grading plan. 5. Prior to plan check approval, the applicant shall submit a written request to the City for review and approval to remove/lift the designated Restricted Use Area (RUA) easement, which prohibits the construction of buildings within these areas. 6. The grading plan shall show the location of any retaining walls and the elevations of the top of wail/footing/retaining and the finished grade on both sides of the retaining wall. Construction details for retaining walls shall be shown on the grading plan. Calculations and details of retaining walls shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for review and approval. 7_ All equipment staging areas shall be located on the project site. Staging area, including material stockpile and equipment storage area, shall be enclosed within a six (6) foot -high chain link fence. All access points in the defense shall be locked whenever the construction site is not supervised. 8. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California Building Code, City Grading Ordinance, Hillside Management Ordinance and acceptable grading practices_ F. SEWERSISEPTiC TANK 1. Applicant shall obtain sewer connection permit(s) from the City and County Sanitation District prior to issuance of building permits. 2. Applicant, at applicant's sole cost and expense, shall construct the sewer system in accordance with the requirements of the City and the Los Angeles County Public Works Division. G. TRAFFIC MITIGATIONS (Not required) APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Plans shall conform to State and Local Building Code (i.e., 2007 California Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and the 2004 California Electrical Code) requirements and all other applicable construction codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of plan check submittal. 2_ Application for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitation, and plans and' other data submitted for review may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the Building Department. 3. Every permit issued by the Building Department shall expire if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit. 4. The minimum design load for wind in this area is 80 M.P.H. exposures "C" and the site is within seismic zone four (4). The applicant shall submit drawings and calculations prepared by a California State licensed Architcct/Engineer with wet stamp and signature. 5. This project shall comply with the energy conservation requirements of the State of California Energy Commission. Kitchen and bathroom lights shall be fluorescent or controlled by a manual-on/auto off, occupant sensor. 6. Specify 5/8" type X drywall between the garage and the house. 1-3/8" solid core self closing door between the house and garage. 7. Submit Public Works Department approved grading plans showing clearly all finish elevations, drainage, and retaining walls locations. 8. "Separate permits are required for pool, spa, pond and tennis courts" and shall be noted on plans if applicable. 0_ A height survey may be required at completion of framing 21. The project shall be protected by a construction fence and shall comply with the NPDES & BMP requirements (sand bags, etc.) 22. Check drainage patterns with Engineering Department_ Surface water shall drain away from building at a 2% minimum slope. 23. Specify location of tempered glass as required by code. 24. Specify 114"M slope for all flat surfaces/ decks with approved water proofing material. Also, provide guardrail connection detail (height, spacing, etc.) 25. The Los Angeles County Health Department and the California Water Control Board shall approve private property sewer/septic system. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE LOS /ANGELES COUNTY FIFE PREVENTION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:' Fire Department approval shall be required. Contact the Fire Department to check the fire zone for the location of your property. If this project is located in High Hazard Fire Zone it shall meet of requirements of the fire zone. a. All unenclosed under -floor areas shall be constructed as exterior wall. b. All openings into the attic, floor andior other enclosed areas shall be covered with corrosion -resistant wire mesh not less than 1/4 inch or more than 1/2 inch in any dimension except where such openings are equipped with sash or door. 2. Emergency access shall be provided, maintaining free and clear, a minimum 28 foot at all times during construction in accordance with Fire Department requirements. 3, Prior to the issuance of any building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire Department that temporary water supply for fire protection is available pending completion of the required fire protection system. 4. All required fire hydrants shall be installed and tested and accepted prior to construction. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction. End Z w 2 F - Q �a m� f� z Z w 02 D- 0 ow w Ow F- } z O C) , I II I i li .I it I I I ! i jl �I it ! li I It IU fa:�l I i I+ U I z wll '1 ! 11 ! I l II I O O O O O Ali U I U U i II LO IC1 1 NAII L i1 .L l CL ii 1 , i l ii ! if Q I II it U I I 1 a , II "v [s 1 1) !I w w LU `> > 0- D- II j I nz �z � 00 00 00 00 I II I UF- fl 'I I it U� ! I I! Ij i ; I U ! •-- ( U I I cl I (o�I .4 I N (V o� o� a0 oO u1 0 a_ O O p00C) w w z w z w z In z !- LL- J u- _ t u _ IL O I OZ Oz Oz Oz w z0 z0 z0 > z0 z I-- {= F- —{- j- F-- F- I-- — L Z� Zt ZQ Z C ZQ F - O g ' °LnIr U <Q (n U U Q O J ! N Lo a) 4 W V C Lo L a.. a O q o a y o _ J E U o () Qo 4 QIP C1 C3 N QI.l. a `ate -A °)C Z 0 m'� aW z t T C Q (1)O �I •I I !i 1! l+ I II z i O 1 I . I f_) it it �I ! rnll -j I 'CI 'I SLLI 0 cr 01 i, wl II II w �I I F-:i�I z nl 2 t n <I I I J i a. t:_ 11 CL Oi yll It ! I 1 I i I I I 'I li I cl [qII I, mi� i a,l dll If I �I , I CLI ,! I If in;I� 11 "J O I Cf" l I II ii li I' if I ! ! i ( -I c i :it !I o? LIJ r'�i ,i VI `SII :il �i fy. rn� !I c7• ..� z z z 0 z F- z z z z z O O O O O U U U U 2 a 0- CL ii Q Q d Q d I-- w w w w LU `> a_ 0- D- o- �z nz �z � 00 00 00 00 00 Z Up UF- Ur (-)— U� zQ zQ zQ z za cl o orj� o� o� a0 oO Q 0 a_ O O p00C) w w z w z w z In z !- LL- J u- _ t u _ IL O 0z OZ Oz Oz Oz z0 z0 z0 zp z0 z I-- {= F- —{- j- F-- F- I-- — O_ Z� Zt ZQ Z6 ZQ F - <0 <0 UQ U< <Q U U Q 4 W 2 IY a X 4C_ 0-1 a.. a 4 0-0 a.0 0-0 0-0 a 0 4 QIP QIJ_ eLL, alp QI.l. a c U Q w C11(U a o m Q Q) .n y Q x j � ?-, N C� a> N 0- C F 4 U <n z CC] 0 c^'7 0 rn 0 CID co co o o � Lr) O O N O N O O O CA J (Y -1 O N N O N CA i C- z z J(1 CL J Z Of o U CD ! .c U) 0 (II � O � C --> C �U) m m fc v _ C7 j fn > -a o C co -D U> c6 .� C p .2 N C U ,-a b -c N .Q z Ib COL C c0 '13 "d c6 -p C 3 .0 4� O ,-. E U) Cl) E U [, Q�aJ o 00 Em t� O C —o co o mo CD O t`o N 3 o� O a) Lo r CJ Cl) co r;(� N4— N() NZ z� oLLJ C7tr(oIII z w �L) Q� z<< > = Q— LLI C) � U m W z Co 0 e �Z� iO= a O d 2 Q U It Z II it 11 II aXa.dQU 0 z w C7 w J CITY ,O.F C3tA'111�OND BAR NOTICE OF -PUBLIC MEETING AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF DIAMOND BAR On May 25, 2010, the Diamond Bar Planning Commission will hold a Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m., at the South Coast Quality Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. Items for consideration are listed on the attached agenda. I, Stella Marquez, declare as follows: am employed by the City of Diamond Bar. On May 21, 2010, a copy of the agenda of the Special Meeting of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission was posted at the following locations: South Coast Quality Management District Auditorium 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar Library 1061 Grand Avenue Diamond Bar, CA Heritage Park 2900 Brea Canyon Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on May 21, 2010, at Diamond Bar, California. l.= Stella Marquez Community Development Department g \\affidavitpostmg doc