HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/26/2011NP-LANNING FILE copy
I
COMMISSIOL
April 26, 201
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
Jack Shah
Kwang Ho Lee
Jimmy Lin
Steve Nelson
Tony Torng
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 I/ of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person J . n need of any
type of special equipment, assistance or accommodation(s) in order to communicate at a
City public meeting must inform the Community Development Department at
(909) 839-7030 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting.
Please refrain from smoking, eating or The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper
drinking in the Auditorium and encourages you to do the same
City nfDiamond Bar
Commissionp|@OO'DCommission- -
MEETING RULES
�--�--��-- ------�----------�'---'----- -------- —'--�--- �
The Ol8etnQ8 of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission are open to the public. /\ DleDlbS[ of the
public may address the Commission oOthe subject Ofone V[more agenda items and/or other items of
which are within the sVhiBCt matter jurisdiction of the OiaOlOOd Ba[ Planning COOODliSSiOD. A request
tUaddress the Commission should be submitted inwriting 8tthe public hearing, tOthe Secretary ofthe
CO[DDlisaiUD.
AS 8 general rule, the opportunity for public COmDDeDtS will take D|aC8 at the discretion of the Chair.
HOVVeVe[. in O[dB[ to facilitate the meeting, persons who are interested parties for an item may be
requested togive their presentation 8tthe time the item iscalled oDthe calendar. The Chair may limit
individual public input to five [OiOUbas On any item; Or the Chair may limit the total 3nlOUnt of time
allocated for public testimony based on the number of people requesting to speak and the business of
the Commission.
Individuals are requested to conduct themselves in a professional and businesslike Dl8ODe[
Comments and qUeSUODg are VVelcOnn8 s0 that all points Of View are CoOSidBnsd prior to the
Commission making recommendations to the staff and City Council.
In accordance with State Law (Brown Act' all matters to be acted OO by the Co[OOli83|oD must be
posted at least 72 hours prior to the CVDl[DiSGiOO meeting. In case Of emergency or when subject
matter arises SUbg8qUeOt to the posting of the 8geDd8, upon making CBd8iO findings, the CO[0DliGSinO
may act OOitem that i8not OOthe posted agenda.
INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COMMISSION
Agendas for [}iaDlOOd B8[ P|8DOiDg CoDlr0iSSioD meetings are prepared by the Planning Division Of
the Community DevelopmentDepartDlB[d. Agendas are available 72hours prior b]the meeting EtCity
Hall and the public library, and may beaccessed bypersonal computer 8tthe number below.
Every meeting of the P|8OOiOg Commission is recorded On C8SSBtte tapes and duplicate tapes are
available for a nominal charge.
A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot access the
public speaking area. The service of the cordless microphone and sign |8OgUoge iOtRqpF8tB[ SerV|C8S
are 8V3i\8blB by giving notice at i88St three buSiO8S5 days in 8dV8OCe Of the meeting. Please
telephone /909\ 839-7030 between 7:30 8.0. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through ThU[Sdoy, and 7:30 a.m.
HELPFUL PHONE NUMBERS
Copies of Agenda, Rules of the CoOOnliSSiOD.
General Agendas (908) 839-7030
email: info(cD-ci.diamond-bar.ca.us
Cassette Tapes of Meetings (909) 839-7030
Next Resolution No. 2011-09
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Jack Shah, Vice Chairman
Kwang Ho Lee, Jimmy Lin; Steve Nelson, Tony Torng
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS:
This is the time and place for the general public to address the members of the
Planning Commission on any item that is within their jurisdiction, allowing the' public an
opportunity to speak on non-public hearing and non -agenda items. Please complete
a Speaker's Card for the recording Secretary (completion of this form is
voluntary). There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressing the
Planning Commission.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
The following items listed on the c ' onsent 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: March 22, 2011.
4.2. Minutes of Regular Meeting: April 12, 2011.
5. OLD BUSINESS: None.
6. NEW BUSINESS: None.
7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING(S):
7.1 Conditional Use Permit No. PL 2010-355 — Under the authority of Diamond
Bar Municipal Code Section 22.58, the applicant is requesting approval to
remove an existing Edison street light pole located on Diamond Bar Blvd.,
public rights-of-way, north of Tin Dr., and replace it with a similar light pole
equipped with cellular telecommunications antennas and associated ground -
mounted equipment. (Continued from April 12, 2011)
APRIL 26, 2011
PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Project Address: Public Rights -Of -Way on Diamond Bar Boulevard and
760 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard
Property Owner: City of Diamond Bar
21825 Copley Dr.
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Applicant: Sequoia Deployment Services on Behalf of T -Mobile
Monica Moretta
One Venture, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92618
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
Section 15303 (New Construction of Small. Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines.
No further environmental review is required.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue
this matter to May 10, 2011.
8.1 Development Review No. PL 2010-438 — Under the authority of Development
Code Section 22.48, the applicant, Manolo M. Manalo, and property owners,
Ming Kuo and Li Hua Chen, are requesting approval for a 1,643 square -foot
addition to an existing 2,768 square -foot single-family residence and a 421
square -foot pool house on a 0.69 gross acre (30,057 square -foot) lot. The lot is
zoned Rural Residential (RR) with a consistent underlying General Plan land
use designation of Rural Residential.
Project Address: 2435 Alamo Heights
Property Owner: Ming Kuo and Li Hua Chen
2435 Alamo Heights
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Applicant: Manolo M. Manalo
23824 Audrey Ave., #C
Torrance, CA 90505
Environmental Determination: The 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 Article 19 under Section 15301(e)
APRIL 26, 2011
a
PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
(addition to an existing structure of less than 10,000 square feet) of the CEQA
guidelines.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Development Review No. PL 2010-438, based on the Findings of Fact, and
subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution.
8.2 Conditional Use -Permit No. PL 2011-058 — Under the authority of
Development Code Section 22.58, the applicant, Mannikku Mairaj, and property
owner, Ronald E. Albrecht, are requesting approval to operate a 3,835 square -
foot tutoring center. The proposed hours of operation are from 8:00 a.m. to
6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. The lot is' zoned Light Industrial (1) with a
consistent underlying General Plan land use designation of Light Industrial.
Project Address: 782-784 Pinefalls Ave.
Property Owner: Ronald E. Albrecht
Sterling Capital Inc..
8502 E. Chapman, #184
Orange, CA 92369
Applicant: Manikku Mairaj
Ranmal Educational Services
801 Brea Canyon Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91789
Environmental Determination: The 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 Article 19 under Section 15301
(existing facility) of the CEQA Guidelines.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Conditional Use Permit No. PL 2011-058, 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:
10. STAFF COMMENTS/ INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
10.1 Public Hearing dates for future proiects:
APRIL 26, 2011 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
PARKS AND RECREATION
COMMISSION MEETING:
CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING:
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION MEETING:
12. ADJOURNMENT:
Thursday, April 28, 2010-7:00 p.m.
Government Center/SCAQMD
Hearing Board Room, 21865 Copley Drive
Tuesday, May 3, 2011 - 6:30 p.m.
Government Center/SCAQMD Auditorium
21865 Copley Drive
Tuesday, May 10, 2011 — 7:00 p.m.
Government Center/SCAQMD Auditorium
21865 Copley Drive
Thursday, May 12, 2011 - 7:00 p.m.
Government Center/SCAQMD
Hearing Board Room, 21865 Copley Drive
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
aD AFT
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 22, 2011
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: Commissioner Lee led the Pledge.of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALF:
Present: Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Jimmy Lin, Steve
Nelson, Vice Chairman Jack Shah, and Chairman Tony Torng.
Also present: Greg Gubman,,Community Development Director; Brad
Wohlenberg, Assistant City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Natalie Tobon,
Planning Technician; and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant..
Also Present: John Douglas; Housing Element Consultant
2. REORGANIZATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
q
a) Selection of Chairman:
C/Torng nominated Commissioner :Shah to serve as Chairman of the
Planning Commission. C/Lee seconded the nomination. There were no
other nominations offered. Commissioner Shah was unanimously elected to
serve as Chairman of the Planning Commission by the following Roll Call
vote:
C/Lee Yes
C/Linn Yes .
C/Nelson Yes
C/Shah Yes`
C/Torng Yes
b) Selection of Vice Chairman:
C/Torng nominated C/Leeto serve as Vice' Chairman of the Planning
Commission. C/Nelson seconded the nomination. There were no other
nominations offered.' Commissioner Lee was elected, to. serve as Vice
Chairman of the Planning Commission by the fo.Ilowing Roll Call vote:
L DRAFT�`.
MARCH 22, 2011 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
C/Lee abstain
C/Linn Yes
C/Nelson Yes
C/Torng Yes
Chair/Shah Yes
3. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: C/Torng moved, C/Nelson seconded, to move
Agenda Item 8.2 prior to Agenda Item 8.1. Motion carried by the following Roll Call
vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee, Chair/Shah
NOES COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
5. CONSENT CALENDAR:
5.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 8, 2011.
C/Nelson moved, VC/Lee seconded, to approve the February 8, 2011,
minutes as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee,
Chair/Shah
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
6. OLD.BUSINESS None
7. NEW BUSINESS: None
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
8.2 General Plan Amendment No PL 2011-43 (2008-2014 Housing Element.,
Update Pursuant to state law, the proposed project is the update to the
City's General Plan Housing Element for the 2008-2014 planning period.
PROPERTY ADDRESS: Citywide
PROPERTY OWNER: Citywide
APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar
MARCH 22, 2011 PAGE 3
PANNING COMMISSION
CDD/Gubman introduced John Douglas, JHD Consulting, who presented
staff's report. Mr. Douglas stated that in January 2011, the City received a
letter from the State of California indicating that if the City adopts the
Housing Element in the form before the Planning Commission this evening, it
will meet all of the requirements of state law and will be certified. He
elaborated on the certification process and CDD/Gubman presented
information regarding the proposed and potential rezone sites contained
within the Housing Element. Mr. Douglas talked about special needs
housing consisting of "Emergency Shelters," "Transitional and Supportive
Housing," and "Reasonable Accommodation for Persons with. Disabilities."
On April 19 staff expects the City Council to review this item and following
Council adoption of the Housing Element, staff will move into the
implementation phase which will include the zone changes and code
amendments.
.'CDD/Gub.man recommended that the. Planning Commission recommend City
Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. PL 201.1-43 (2008-2014
Housing Element update).
C/Nelson asked for an explanation of "transitional and supportive housing"
and Mr. Douglas responded that it refers to housing that is designated for
persons that are "at -risk" of homelessness. C/Nelson asked if it had anything
to do with people with criminal records. or substance. abuse issues and
Mr. Douglas said he believed those kinds of programs could have persons
with these sorts of problems that are often considered a disability. C/Nelson
said he recalled that there was some discussion about the number and
distance apart of some of these facilities and asked if that was included in
the Housing Element. CDD/Gubman explained that there was a Code
Amendment done for "Group Homes last year which established distance
criteria for sober living facilities and boarding facilities and similar types of
uses the City would need to provide for minimally. Emergency shelters are
not part of the criteria for group homes, substance abuse and parolee
probationary housing which are different from the items being discussed
within the Housing Element, and are, in addition, subject to discretionary
review. The emergency shelters would be for persons who are destitute and
what would be envisioned for these emergency shelters would be churches
such as Calvary Chapel, for example.- While not limited to churches, staff
`believes those institutions in Diamond Bar have facilities that would be the
most logical locations to accommodate 'emergency housing needs.
VC/Lee asked what kind of housing was contemplated for multi -family units.
Mr. Douglas responded that the law does not specify whether it needs to be
DDRAFT
MARCH 22, 2011 ' PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
apartments or condos but the law does say that cities cannot specify that it
only be condos. The law has to allow multi -family rental housing. What is
presented in the Housing Element is exclusively residential and does not
include commercial.
C/Lin asked if "target quota" meant the City did not have to comply, and,
Mr. Douglas said he believed the best answer was that the state legislature
understands that cities do not have total control over the development
process. There are certain regulatory requirements that have to be in place
in order for housing to be built, including affordable housing. State law holds .
cities responsible for the things over which they have control. Cities can
adopt regulations but if there is nota developer that wishes to build under
those regulations it will not happen except in situations such as a
Redevelopment Agency wherein the City could act as a developer.
C/Lin said he was curious about whether the demographics for 2007 were
substantially different from the 2010 census data. Mr. Douglas said staff
does not know yet because the 2010 census information that has been
released is the most basic of information and there is a lot of other data that
will come out over the next couple of years. When talking about the City's
"fair -share" needs that drives this process, it is good to.remember that those
needs were established in 2007 by SCAG based on the growth forecast and
the demographics they knew at that time. When compiling information, the
cities cannot go back and revisit or change those numbers. Those were the
numbers that were set in concrete and that is what the cities have to live with
until the next set of numbers become available.
C/Lin asked if Diamond Bar currently has high-rise units and CDD/Gubman:
said that at present, the City has two-story units and has nothing that would
be considered mid or high rise. He believed that to achieve 30 -units per acre
(a 50 percent increase over the current maximum density) would necessitate
minimum three-story developments. Mr. Douglas said he has seen many
projects that are three-story projects that are about 30 -units per acre.
C/Lin asked if affordable housing means subsidized housing and Mr.
yes." C/Lin asked how such units would be
Douglas responded "generally;
subsidized and Mr. Douglas said that it comes back to .what was. being
discussed earlier, that cities do not have total control over the development
process. Cities such as Diamond Bar certainly, do not have lots of excess
General Fund money to subsidize housing which is. one of the reasons this
Housing Element is referred to as a "planning" target and not a "quota.
Cities that do not have funds that they can devote to housing means that the
only way affordable housing can .be built is through a subsidy from some
MARCH 22, 2011 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
other source such. as the federal government, state government,
redevelopment agencies, etc. The legal framework .that cities work in
understands that a lot of. things have to line up in order for subsidized
affordable housing to be built and cities being held responsible for those
portions of it that they have control over which is primarily zoning and
development standards. Mr. Douglas further explained that typically, the way.
affordable housing is built is most .often by non-profit developers. If, for
example, a non-profit developer was interested and could assemble the
sources of subsidy funds necessary to provide such a product, they would
come to the City, submit an application, go through the development review
process, etc., and under those circumstances the City would not be required
to contribute any money to the project.
C/Torng asked if the City had to notify the City of Industry and the Water
District as property owners before proposing those properties within the
Housing Element. Mr. Douglas responded that the City of Industry was
notified through the Housing Element process as an adjacent jurisdiction. All
surrounding communities are notified of the proposed General Plan
Amendment. When the City moves forward to the zone change stage of the
process, certainly the property owner would be notified through the typical
notification process. Certainly the City of Industry would be notified and have
an opportunity to come and comment and as the property owner, the City of
Industry would make the final decision about what development to pursue on
those properties. If the City of Industry were to decide not to pursue any
development at this time, .there is nothing in the Housing Element or the
zoning that would require or override the City of Industry's desire.
C/Torng felt that potentially there would be a major. population increase,
additional traffic, etc., if 400 plus units were built in. Tres Hermanos, for
example and most likely no one. would complain because there are no
residents in, the area so these sites are likely rendered redundant in the
future. Mr. Douglas said the zone changes that are referenced in the
Housing Element will not happen with adoption of this element because that
is a separate process that would come at a later time and will come back to
the Planning Commission and City Council for further consideration at which
time there would be a thorough environmental review of traffic, noise, air-
quality, and all other issues investigated through the environmental review
process.C/Torng asked if a Specific Plan would be developed for this type
of development. ACA/Wohlenberg stated that his office looked at the issue
of the environmental review as well and at this point in .the process it is too
speculative to come up with the information the Cityi would need to make
environmental determinations because at this point no one knows how many
units there will be and how many trips per day those units will generate so
MARCH 22, 2011 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
those decisions, by necessity, have to be put off to a later stage where things
get more specific. C/Torng- again- asked- if a Specific Plan would be
developed forthis kind of a location when the site is rezoned. CDD/Gubman
said that was a possibility. The portion of Tres Hermanos that lies within
Diamond Bar is about 700 acres so one scenario would be to do a Specific
Plan for all of Tres Hermanos that would include the parcels that are
specifically being considered for a zone change. In fact, the City approached
HCD with the idea that there would be an overlay over the entirety of Tres
Hermanos that would state that the planning for Tres Hermanos shall be in
the form of a Specific Plan and that Specific. Plan shall include program
elements to have an affordable housing component among the entire palette
of uses that the 700 acres could be planned for. The HCD carne back to the
City and said they would expect the City to complete a Specific Plan in an
unreasonably short period of time so although he believes a Specific Plan is.
the best strategy for Tres Hermanos, the only approach that HCD would
accept in the Housing Element was for the City to look at rezoning specific
properties within Tres Hermanos. Staff can comply with that and follow
through with the rezoning. The City of Industry can say thank you very much
for rezoning our property, but we have no interest in developing it and we
have a big plan that we will look into in the future. CDD/Gubman said that
C/Torng made a good observation and felt it was likely that all of Tres
Hermanos would be master planned and this would become one component
of that master plan. But if that does not happen Diamond Bar has satisfied
its obligation by rezoning at least 15 1/2acres.
C/Lin asked for confirmation that adoption of the Housing Element as part of
the General Plan update would provide that the land use map for the City of
Diamond Bar would identify this area, as a high-density 30 -unit per acre land
use and ACA/Wohlenberg responded that Chair was correct. Chair further
commented that this adoption would not provide legal right for development.
ACA/Wohlenberg said that an applicant would still have to do a zone change
and bring a project forward for consideration and other steps would have to
take place before anything could be built,
Fr,
Chair/Shah asked if the City would have to go back to the drawing board if
the City of Industry said* thanks but no thanks to this amendment.
CDD/Gubman'said that the City of Industry would not have any veto
authority. The City Council is the lawmaker in Diamond Bar and the City of
Industry could object to the rezoning but it is the City Council that makes the
decision on land -use matters in the City. The City of Industry could have the
ultimate veto power by electing not.to develop the property at all or as the
property owner, they could elect to develop it at a lower density than what
would be allowed. For example, if the City of Industry develops housing but.
R DRAM
MARCH 22, 2011 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
it is not at 30 -units per acre, then that puts Diamond Bar in the position to
have to locate other land to compensate for that shortfall that can no longer
be accommodated on the site.
;Chair/Shah` asked if when submitting a plan does. the City have to have an
alternative site or is one site okay? Mr. Douglas reiterated that the way the
law works is that the City is required to identify enough sites in the Housing
Elements that can accommodate the City's need. So the sites that staff has
shown the Commission tonight would accomplish that goal. When this gets
to the City Council, the Council could decide those were not good sites and
ask staff to find or consider other sites. But for purposes of satisfying the
requirements, staff believes that what, is in the proposed amendment
satisfies the requirements. There is another related portion of state law that
CDD/Gubman alluded to and that is if these sites were to be developed for
something other than housing or for low density housing, the housing would
then be required to amend the Housing Element to identify other sites that
would satisfy the City's needs.
Chatr5ha`h4 asked if the emergency shelter was required to accommodate so
many people a, certain number of square feet per acre. Mr. Douglas
explained that when staff comes back with the ordinance to implement the
emergency shelter zone, the City has the authority to establish a variety of
standards and regulations that would cover those emergency shelters and it
includes things like the maximum number of beds, parking, landscaping,
lighting, management plan, etc."
ChairlSfah asked if transitional housing meant that no one lived there on a
permanent basis. Mr. Douglas said RC,1hair/Shah` was correct. Transitional
Housing is typically a limited term. The difference between Emergency
Shelter and Transitional Housing is usually about six months. Typically, an
Emergency Shelter, would not allow anyone to stay there longer than six
months; Transitional or Supportive Housing often times could be a year or
two and it is intended for families as opposed to a group home situation.
Transitional Housing is typically for families in a single family home, condo or
apartment unit and it is typically run through non-profit agencies that have
standards such as clean and sober; zero tolerance for drug and alcohol
abuse to be a participant in the programand it is a very different situation
than some of the group homes the Commission discussed about six months
ago.
hl
R AFT.
MARCH 22, 2011 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION
asked if the distance criteria applied. Mr. Douglas reiterated that
cities , , .cannot establish any regulations on transitionaland. supportive housing
units that
t do not apply to the entire City for a regular single family home. So
unless a City had separation requirements for single family homes which
they do not, then cities cannot establish any kind of separation requirements
for transitional and supportive units either.
ChalrlShah asked if when this is identified, the City has to address the
improvements to infrastructure to those areas. Mr. Douglas reiterated that
those issues would be part of the process to review the zone changes during
the environmental review process that looks at the site-specific details
because as ACA[Wohlenberg mentioned, that level of detail is not yet
available. Staff has identified a relatively large area that contains quite a bit
more land than needed to meet the requirements for rezoning so as the City
goes through the process to- identify exactly which areas are appropriate to
be rezoned that review of infrastructure, traffic and so forth will take place.
Chair/Shah opened the public hearing.
With no on I e present who wished to speak on this matter, Chair/Shah closed
the public hearing.
C/Torng moved, VC/Lee seconded, to recommend City Council approval of
General Plan Amendment No. PL 2011-43 (2008-2014, Housing Element
update). Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee,
Chair/Shah
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
C/Lin said he voted "no" because this is a, target and not a quota which
means to him that the City does not have to follow the state's instructions or
requirements and when he was in another. area. of politics he had an
unsatisfactory experience with affordable housing. It can cause a lot of fiscal
problems for the City because the tax it receives is not close to paying forthe
services provided to high-density housing.
8.1. Variance No: PL 2010-422. — Under the authority of.,Development Code
Section 22.54, the applicant, Gordon T..Myers and property, owner, Steven
Chu requested approval of variances to allow a swimming pool and a six-foot
highlence within the front setback of a single family residence. The lot is
'__'DR A i
MARCH 22, 2011 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION
zoned Rural Residential (RR) with an underlying General Plan land use
designation of Rural Residential.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2615 Braided Mane Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Steven Chu
2615 Braided Mane Drive
Diamond Barg CA 91765
APPLICANT: Gordon T. Myers
Elegant Pools
31200 Landau Boulevard
Cathedral City, CA 92234
C/Lin recused himself from consideration of this project because he owns
property within the .radius notification requirement and left the meeting:
PT/Tobon presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission
denial of Variance No. PL 2010-422, based on the Findings of Fact. Staff
has concluded that three of the five findings required to grant the variances
cannot be made.
VC/Lee asked why. staff brought a request to the Planning Commission to
deny a Variance. ACA/Wohlenberg responded that if an application is
received for a variance there needs to be a decision made and that decision
has to be made by the Planning Commission. Staff conducts its analysis and
brings forth a recommendation to the Planning Commission but the Planning
Commission has to ultimately make a yes or no decision on the Variance
application.
VC/Lee said in his experience' with several other cities, the Variance was not
processed before the Planning Commission. Are those cities wrong or is
Diamond Bar too accommodating? ACA/Wohlenberg said he was not sure
what those cities' processes would be but in all of the jurisdictions in which
he works, an application may go forward with a recommendation of denial
and generally, applicants like to avoid -that because it tends to be a
recommendation _ that carries. significant 'weight With.. the Planning
Commission. He has .seen agencies encourage applicants to make changes
so that staff does. not have to put a denial recommendation on the project but
ultimately, `if the applicant wants it to move forward .with the denial
application, that is what staff will do,
RAFT
MARCH.22, 2011 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION
C/Torng said he knows "The Country Estates" decision is irrelevant to the
City's decision but he asked if the The Country Estates denied this project.
PT/Tobon responded that "The Country Estates" approved the project.
Chair/Shah opened the public hearing.
Ron Stubna, Landscape Architect for the proposed project, stated that about
eight months ago his firm was approached by the owner, Steven Chu who
purchased the home six or seven years ago. Mr. Chu was not the person
who rebuilt the home. As Mr. Chu has, remodeled the home they have
decided to add other amenities. The patio has shifted and is severely
cracked so Mr. Chu asked his firm to design a new patio, pool, spa,
barbecue, etc. At that point, Mr. Chu was not aware of the front yard issue
because the pool is set to the side and toward the rear of the house. As this
progressed through the association approval and approached the City, he
and Mr. Chu learned that they would have to ,go through this Variance
process. There are hedges along the front of the property which have been
in existence long before Mr. Chu bought the property and those hedges do a
very good job of screening where the pool would be. Even without those
hedges, there is about eight feet of landscaping that can be used to screen
the pool from the street. Braided Mane is a cul-de-sac so there are only six
residents to the south of this property. Mr. Chu's house is set at a 45 degree
angle at the intersection and he believes that is why there is a problem that
warrants approval of a Variance. The other design issue of concern was the
topography which is a 11 slope at the rear of the house and his firm wanted
to make certain that that rear area remained in a natural condition. In fact,
as part of the reconstruction process, the slope overlooks the canyon and the
project will bring a lot of the native plant, material back onto that slope.to
stabilize the slope and blend into the magnificent canyon view. In addition,
he has learned that a six-foot high wrought iron fence is not required and
they could reduce that to a five-foot high wrought iron fence as required by
the building code. "The Country Estates" said that if there was an issue with
a view of the pool that they would approve a block wall to completely mask
the pool. Between the existing hedge and vegetation planned, there should
be sufficient imasking:
ad view of the. landscape plan, Gordon Myers,. owner,
Using an overhe
Elegant' Pools, pointed out the front entrance to the house. and the garage
door entrance: Because ofthe way the house is situated, the entrance is
actually on the,side of the house. Mr. Stubna pointed out that it is quite
common to have unique situations with a combination of the topography and
positioning of the homes in "The Country Estates" and for whatever reason,
theconstruction of the home allowed fora flat place where the .pool is
R°
MARCH 22, 2011 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION
planned. He felt it would be an environmental negative to have to put in
huge walls which require increased maintenance with natural earth
movement, therefore, believes the proposed site is the safest and most
convenient place to build the pool. Mr. Myers said this pool is proposed to
be 3 �/2 feet maximum depth and found the proposed site to be the best and
safest location. The pool could be brought within the limits of the side yard
setbacks and he believed the concern was whether this was a front yard or a
side yard and when facing the property it appears to be on the side yard.
Chair/Shah closed the public hearing.
VC/Lee asked if staff had any other suggestions for compromise.
CDD/Gubman said he believed there was a fundamental policy question that
staff asked the Commission to consider and that is whether the applicant
should be entitled to a pool, and on this property the only way to achieve that
would be to encroach into the setbacks and of course, that leads to the
variance request. It is true, given that there is very little flat pad, this area
where the pool is proposed being the one viable location, there is no other
option for them. So the fundamental question becomes that given this is the
only available location for the pool without going through an extraordinary
expense to build up .a pad area in the rear, is that sufficient to warrant the
granting of this variance or, should a pool simply be considered a. luxury
rather than a right. Either the applicant chooses to make. a bigger footprint,
or take into account that this is a difficult property and planning needs to take
place before any development occurs for the types of the amenities the
applicant would like to have within the constraints of the code. Staff would
agree that there is no other place on the site to put a pool. But on the other
hand., staff does not believe it can make the necessary findings to
recommend that the Commission approve this variance.
C/Nelson said that several weeks ago he was.very concerned about some
retaining walls that were not just a little bit above the City's Development
Code but a lot above the City's Development Code, He continues to hold the
belief that if the City gives variances that are extreme, even though the
existing pools in the area that were developed under the County Code, then
the City is simply diluting its Development Code. So he will support the
denial and not support the approval of the pool because he.does not want
this City to be a blank check to develop whatever.an applicant wants.
Chair/Shah said that staff has studied the issues and brought up several
concerns; none of .'which were.addressed by.. the. applicant despite the
applicant being aware of,those concerns: Second; he.agrees with C/Nelson
that if the City is going to dilute the regulations in place, there is no purpose
r�'
� BRA -
MARCH
22, 2011 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION,
to having regulations. As an architect, he cannot necessarily agree with all of
the arguments made by the applicant not having been offered an alternative.
He understands that it is a matter of cost. On the other hand, it is a matter of
choice. He respects the desire of the applicant and their effort in designing
the site. However, he sees that several of the items identified in staff's report
indicates that this variance should be denied.
VC/Lee moved, C/Nelson seconded, to adopt staffs recommendation that
the. Planning Commission deny Variance No. PL 2010-422, based on the
Findings of Fact. Motion carried by the following Roll Call.vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee,
Chair/Shah
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Lin
CDD/Gubman stated that all Planning Commission decisions may be
appealed to the City. Council. An appeal of the Planning Commission
decision must be filed with the City Clerk within 10 calendar days of the
Planning Commission's decision. Should anyone wish to file an appeal they
are instructed to contact the City Clerk for information about filing an appeal
and/or obtaining an appeal petition.
9. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
VC/Lee thanked his colleagues for supporting him as. the Vice Chairman and
offered his support to Chair/Shah, the Commission and residents.
C/Torng congratulated Chair/Shah and VC/Lee on their appointments and wished
them the best. He thanked staff for their good job this evening.
Chair/Shah thanked his colleagues for the opportunity to serve the City as the
Planning Commission Chairman. He thanked staff for their support during his
tenure with City Commissions.
:10. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
10.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects.
CDD/Gubman congratulated Chair/Shah and VC/Lee on.their appointments'
to their current positions on the Planning Commission. He. said to call or
email if there' are any questions about future agenda items. He has enjoyed
R
MARCH 22, 2011 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION
working with all of the Commissioners and looks forward to working with the
new Chair and Vice Chair for the coming year.
CDD/Gubman stated that the Planners Institute was held in Pasadena last
week. He attended two of the three days and felt the overall program was
less interesting and included more retreads of previous sessions. There
was a good session on medical marijuana by a colleague of CA/Jenkins who
jointly wrote an article with him on the matter. It was interesting to hear other
cities' challenges in dealing with this kind of business growth throughout the
state. The budget issues that took a lot of previous year's session time has
been somewhat supplanted by the current controversy about eliminating
redevelopment agencies. As far as new planning concepts and trends, there
was not really a whole lotof interesting new stories for folks to tell which is
probably a symptom of the economic downturn where there just has not
been enough development activity to see new interesting things occur in the
last few years: With that said, he wanted to reassure the Commissioners
that they did not miss a whole lot.
CDD/Gubman stated that the next Planning Commission is scheduled for
April 12 and the Commissioners will hear requests for a cell site on a
wireless telecomunitations facility - a streetlight on Diamond Bar Boulevard
as well as, a new single family residence bn Wagon Train.
11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in tonight's agenda.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission,
Chairman Torng adjourned the regular meeting at 8:50 p.m.
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 12th day of April, 2011.
Attest:
Respectfully Submitted,
i
GregGubman
it
Community Development Director
Jack Shah, Chairman.
�" B F T
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 12, 2011
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Shah 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: Commissioner Lee led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Jimmy Lin, Steve Nelson, Tony
Torng, Vice Chairman Kwang Ho Lee and Chairman Jack Shah.
Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director;
Grace Lee, Senior Planner; David Alvarez, Assistant Planner; Natalie Tobon,
Planning Technician; and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 22, 2011.
C/Torng moved, VC/Lee seconded, to continue the Minutes of March 22,
2011, for corrections. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, Torng; VC/Lee,
Chair/Shah
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None'
5. OLD BUSINESS: None
6. NEW BUSINESS: None
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
7.1 Development Review No. 200.7-25 and Tree Permit No. 2007-06
Request for a one-year time extension 'of the Planning Commission's
approval for a new 9,513 square foot, new single.family residential project
on a 51,401 gross square foot (1.,18 acre) lot. The project site is zoned
- Rural Residential (RR) with a consistent underlying, GeneralPlan land use
designation. The project was approved on February 10 2009, with a two
2M, AFT
.APRIL 12, 2011 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
year timeframe to. obtain building permits and begin construction;
however, Diamond Bar Municipal -Code Section 22.60.050 authorizes the
Planning Commission to grant a one-year time extension.
PROPERTY ADDRES: 2706 Indian Creek Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Basant Bhatia
17753 Via San Jose
Rowland Heights, CA 91748
APPLICANT: Pete Volbeda
180 N. Benson Avenue, Suite. D
Upland, CA 91786
PT/Tobon presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of a one-year time extension for Development
Review No. 2007-25 and Tree Permit No. 2007-06, based on the Findings
of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed. within the
Resolution.
Chair/Shah opened the public hearing.
Pete Volbeda, applicant, requested the one-year time extension and said
if the extension was approved that all approvals for the development
would be received within that timeframe.
Chair/Shah closed the public hearing.
VC/Lee moved, C/Nelson seconded to support staff's recommendation .
and approve a one-year time extension for Development Review. No.
2007-25 and Tree Permit No. 2007=06; 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: Lin, Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee,
Chair/Shah
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS None
7.2 Development Review PL 2010-289 - Under the authority of Development
Code Section 22.48, the applicant, Stuart Beck, and they property owner,
e and
Hai Nguyen requested approval to demolish an existing residenc
RAFT
APRIL 12, 2011 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
construct.a new 7,432 square foot single family residence on a 1.88 gross
acre (82,015 square foot) lot. The subject property is zoned Rural
Residential (RR) with a consistent underlying General Plan land use
designation.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 3010 Wagon Train Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Hai Nguyen
3057 Windmill Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
APPLICANT: Stuart Beck
2915 Redhill Avenue, Suite G102
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
PT/Tobon presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Development Review No. PL 2010-289; based on
the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed
within the Resolution:
C/Lee asked if the City needed any specialor specific, requirements for
plumbing for indoor pools. CDD/Gubman said there would be specific
requirements for indoor pools in enclosures that would deal with moisture
retention on the inner surfaces as well as, drainage and maintenance, all
of. which would be part of the plan check review process to ensure; that all
of the appropriate materials, membranes, protective coatings needed to
facilitate the installation are up to code. The plumbing requirements are
under the umbrella of the condition requiring that the applicant shall
comply with the building codes including the 2010 California Building Code
that was recently adopted by the City.
C/Lin said he assumed that this system would be connected to a sewer
system rather than a septic systen. '' PT/Tobon responded that according
to the standard conditions, one of the public works conditions is that at the
applicant's full `cost and expense shall. construct . the sewer, system, in
accordance with the City, and sewer plans' must be submitted for review
and approval by the City's Building and Safety Department. C/Lin asked if,
the site plan typically includes a septic tank system as _part of the process
or is this purely an. engineering review.. process. CDD/Gubman explained
that there is an available sewer and by City Code, the applicant would
need to connect to the City's sewer system.
0DR, F
APRIL 12, 2011 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
C/Torng asked if there was any protected tree that would be removed from
- the landscape and PT/Tobon- responded -that there are no protected trees
on the property.
Chair/Shah asked about the cut and fill. PT/Tobon explained that the
applicant will be exporting 350 cubic yards for the footing and pool.
Chair/Shah opened the public hearing.
Stuart Beck, applicant, said he was present to answer questions.
Jen and Ting Huang, 3000 Windmill Drive, Diamond Bar, "CA, asked for
the Commission to consider the fact that this building would be located in
front of their home because their entire 240 foot front view would be
impacted by this two-story building. She asked if the building could be set
back further to prevent the building from them so it would not be so close
to their property.
Ting Huang said that he lived in "The Country Estates" for the country
view and he would not expect to have a big "apartment" in front of him.
The original house was 2400 square feet and now it will be three times the
size and there will be a 240 foot wide two-story building in front of him.
Because the hill slopes up,. the building will appear to be much taller than
if he built on the other side of the property. There will be a severe impact
to his family life and he does, not think it is compatible with the
neighborhood. The land on the other side of this is empty. He has lived
for 10 years with the previous owner. Their home is a single. story. They
never expected to have such a big "apartment next to them.
Stuart Beck responded . to the speakers that with respect to the height
issues, one of the early design features presented by the homeowner was
to not maximize his two-story design element and wanted to spread his
square footage out to soften the massing. The majority of the houses
along the street are one-story homes. The applicant's home has 360 feet
of curb along Windmill and only 86 feet along the curb is two-story with the
remaining 122 feet of the house being one-story. Said another way, 64
percent of the house frontage is one story and 36 percent is two story.
Many houses within "The Country Estates" are two-story from side yard
setback to side yard setback.: With respect to the comment about pushing
the structure back farther on the site, the applicant is keeping some of the
dirt and expanding thesite; back to. the rear yard .and the house was
pushed back as far as possible without causing problems with the code`
issues pertaining to location of the house to the top of slope. So the
OR A
APRIL12, 2011 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
do everything possible to minimize the two-story massing: Mr. Beck said
he believed that this was not the neighbor's primary view because the
back of the house looks out over unimpeded natural topography. The
view they are. concerned about is the street view that this building is
impeding.
Chair/Shah closed the public hearing.
There were no ex parte disclosures.
C/Lin agreed that the structure appeared. somewhat massive across the
front but not in height. The design is in compliance with the City's Codes
and regulations. And while he believes it is fairly gigantic in terms of width
he saw no reason to deny the application on that basis.
C/Nelson said he agreed with C/Lin. He said he was not indifferent to the
neighbor's concern but in terms of neighborhood compatibility, while he
has served on the Commission it has approved up to a 23,000 square foot
home in "The Country Estates" and standards typically range from 8,000
to 12,000 square feet. This particular project meets all of the
Development Code requirements and said he felt it would be well beyond
this Commission to deny this request when it is within the Code. In
addition, he places a lot of faith in staff's report and analysis which states
that the proposed structure is compatible.
Chair/Shah said he shares the opinions of his colleagues. He
understands the neighbors' concerns and he is sensitive to those
concerns. He is in a similar business and can visualize that the building is
massive and will be somewhat imposing but because the greater portion
of the building is only a single story and since it complies with all codes
and regulations the Commission has a responsibility to act within its
powers while remaining sensitive.
C/Lin moved, C/Nelson seconded, to approve Development Review
No. 2007-25 and Tree Permit No. 2007-06, 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: Lin, Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee,
Chair/Shah
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
'DRA"T
APRIL 12, 2011 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION.
CDD/Gubman stated that all Planning Commission decisions may be
appealed -to the City Council. Anappealof the - Planning Commission
decision must be filed with the City Clerk within 10 -calendar days of the
Planning Commission's decisions this evening. If anyone wishes to file an
appeal they are instructed to please contact the City Clerk for information
about filing an appeal and obtaining an appeal application.
7.3 Conditional Use Permit No. PL 2010-355 - Under the authority of
Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.58, the applicant requested
approval to remove an existing Edison streetlight pole located on the
Diamond Bar Boulevard public right-of-way north of Tin Drive and replace
it with a similar light pole equipped with cellular telecommunications
antennas and associated ground mounted equipment. .
PROJECT ADDRESS: Public. Rights of Way on
Diamond Bar Boulevard and
760 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard
PROPERTY OWNER: City of Diamond Bar
21825 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
APPLICANT: Sequoia Deployment Services
On behalf of T -Mobile
Monica Moretta
One Venture, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92616
AP/Alvarez presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit. No. PL 2010-255, based
on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed
within the Resolution.
C/Nelson asked what happened to the antennas that had the big arms that
stuck out with the big plates that look like satellites. He asked ,if he was
correct that these antennas are completely different than what the
Commission had previously considered. AP/Alvarez explained that these
are antennas within the right-of-way and stated there would continue to be
the typeof antennas C/Nelson described in parks. C/Nelson asked for
confirmation that these antennae would not affect the banners honoring
service people and AP/Alvarez-responded that C/Nelson was correct.
C/Nelson asked if landscaping was planned around the box at the bottom
of the pole and AP/Alvarez responded no, but staff conditioned the
APRIL 12, 2011 1 PAGE 7
A@ DRAFT
approval to.paint the equipment dark green to blend in with the vegetation.
C/Nelson asked if there was enough room between the equipment and the
sidewalk to plant shield material. CDD/Gubman responded that staff
initially pursued the desire to landscape and screen the above -ground
equipment. The problem is that there is no irrigation equipment in the
area. It is all non -irrigated established landscaping so after consulting with
the Director of Community Services it did not appear to be a viable option
to install plant material and bring irrigation equipment from as far away as
Tin Drive to sustain the material. C/Nelson asked if it was a four -foot box.
AP/Alvarez responded that the vents are on the side and there are two
vents on the back which are approximately seven feet back from the right-
of-way and the boxes are 34 inches in height. There is one 36 inch box
and one 50 inch above -ground pedestals.. He showed a current location
with similar boxes and pedestals on North Golden Springs south of High
Knob. C/Nelson asked what it would entail if the Commission were to
include a condition for vegetative screening. CDD/Gubman said it would
be necessary to connect to a water line and provide a meter for this
particular location. It would not be something that would. be legal to tie
into the homeowner's association for the Pulte Homes off of Tin Drive and
but, it would, require pulling irrigation from an existing line either from Tin
Drive or under Diamond Bar Boulevard or from Gold Rush. C/Nelson
recalled that the Commission required screening for boxes on Diamond
Bar Boulevard at the Pulte Homes development and wanted to make sure
the City did as much as possible to screen these structures. If the City.
required screening for the Pulte Homes development, why wouldn't the
City require the same thing for this project and CDD/Gubman said that the
Commission has the authority to require that as long as it believes it is
necessary to make this installation compatible with the surroundings, and
in order to do that it would require that the irrigation be extended to that
point. During review of this project, staff felt that the benefit of reaching
the site with irrigation to serve a rather small project area wasn't really
warranted so staff looked at the alternative of painting the sheet metal a
color that is less objectionable. However, it is within the Commission's,
discretion to require additional screening or continue this matter and ask
staff to look into it further.
C/Lin asked if it was possible to put the pedestals underground and
AP/Alvarez referred C/Lin to the applicant. C/Lin said he lives in the
neighborhood, and was told that the light bills for the three poles are
currently, paid by the Diamond Hills Homeowners Association and they
may have ownership of those.three poles. CDD/Gubman responded that
they are Edison lights. Chair/Shah asked what would happen if someone
C
APRIL 12, 2011 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION
lost control of their vehicle and hit the box, would it impact the service?
AP/Alvarez referred-Chair/Shah to the applicant._
CDD/Gubman asked AP/Alvarez to put up the view of the street view that
highlights the location of the proposed antenna so the Commissioners can
see how many light poles the project is away from Crestview.
CDD/Gubman said that in addition to the signal mast, it appears the
project would. be on the fourth pole from the corner. AP/Alvarez said he
would need to make a correction on the fourth line of the summary to
indicate it would be the "third" pole rather than the second pole from Tin
Drive. CDD/Gubman said it appeared that the site plan also did not
include all of the streetlight locations based on the photo of the field
conditions so it would necessitate an additional correction to what is in the
staff report.
Monica Moretta, Sequoia Deployment Services, stated that T -Mobile
reviewed staffs report and the conditions of approval and T -Mobile agreed
with and intends to comply with the conditions as represented without
change. Regarding landscaping for the vent and boxes, T -Mobile could
propose to have dry vegetation to be placed to hide the visibility from the
street. Dry vegetation usually requires minimal irrigation and will basically
survive with the rain once it is established without having irrigation
transferred from Tin Drive to the specific location. With respect to placing
these elements underground, the meter must be available for SCE to read
and the vents are utilized for venting the equipment and must be placed
above -grade. All of the other elements which are considered to be more
massive and intrusive are placed underground.
C/Nelson said that in the past when the Commission has approved these
sites, they have approved them to be fake trees. Ms. Moretta said that
depended on the location. C/Nelson asked if the applicant could design a
box at the bottom of the pole that would include the fake foliage no
irrigation required. Ms. Moretta said that has been done. In an Orange
County project, that was recently completed, there was an. issue with the
vines around the wall and there was a proposal to include fake vines
around the wall. It can be done to mitigate the visibility of the vents and
the telecom box. C/Nelson asked if the applicant could work with staff to
accomplish that and asked if CDD/Gubman felt his recommendation was
reasonable. CDD/Gubman responded sure, that the_Commission could
either condition this or the applicant could be directed to work out the
details with staff, or the ,Commission could continue the matter to allow
staff to come back with samples. C/Nelson said he was not sure he liked
APRIL 12, 2011 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION
the dry vegetation because that typically meant something that is non-
native. Ms. Moretta said that C/Nelson was correct.
Chair/Shah again asked if the service would be interrupted if someone
damaged the box and Ms. Moretta said Chair/Shah was correct. The
vents would not affect the service of the facility but the RLH box houses
the telecom wiring, and if that source is damaged, the facility will go off-
line. Typically, facility designs incorporate a microwave dish that is usually
there to provide telephone services in such emergencies but in this case a
microwave dish cannot be incorporated because it would be very
noticeable and could not be screened within the pole.
Ms. Moretta said that T -Mobile would welcome a condition to screen the
equipment so that the applicant can provide additional alternatives for,
landscaping and screening for the above -ground equipment.
C/Nelson moved, C/Torng seconded, to continue the Public Hearing for
Development Review PL. 2010-289 to allow T -Mobile to return with
samples of landscaping and screening of the above -ground equipment,
either a fake vine or oaktree.
C/Lin said he was not a fari of the fake trees but felt C/Nelson S
recommendation to look at options is a good decision. CDD/Gubman
asked C/Nelson to amend his motion to a date certain such as April 26.
C/Nelson amended his motion and C/Torng seconded the. amended
motion to continue PL 2010-289 to April 26, 2011.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee,
Chair/Shah
-NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
.8. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
C/Nelson thanked AP/Alvarez for providing the existing and anticipated views of
__11:.6— _U- , 14. "_ .1.,. .1 -4 -4; - -,.-4-
APRIL 12, 2011 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION
C/Torng announced that during the recent Friends of the Library Wine Soiree,
Supervisor Don Knabe. announced _the .fundngand _investing in Diamond Bar's
new library.
.9. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
10.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects.
CDD/Gubman said that because the Library project consists of interior
remodel/tenant improvements, it would not. be subject to Planning
Commission review.
CDD/Gubman .announced that the Housing Element will be heard by the
City Council on April 19 with the Planning Commission's recommendation
for adoption. On Thursday, April 28, the Parks and Recreation
Commission will review the Citywide Parks Master Plan and if the
Commission recommends City Council approval, on May 10 the Planning
Commission will be asked to make a finding of. General* Plan
Consistency/adopt a Resolution with affirmation that the Parks Master
Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan
and to assist in that decision, staff will forward to the Commissioners, CD
copies of the Parks Master Plan along with hard copies of the Executive
Summary as soon as they, become available to give the Commissioners
sufficient time to review the documents prior to. the May 10 meeting.
CDD/Gubman reported on some of the Code Enforcement activities taking
place in the City. During closed session, the City Council authorized staff
to seek a court order to assign a receiver to deal with a severe hoarding
situation on Decorah Lane. This situation was brought to the attention of
the City through neighborhood complaints and further investigation
resulted in City staff obtaining two inspection warrants and upon serving
those warrants, discovered very severe hoarding conditions that . will _
require a judge to issue a court order to enable the City to eliminate these
conditions. The house has been red tagged. and the occupant of the
house is in danger because if emergency., service personnel needed to
come to the home they would not be allowed to enter the :premises to
extract persons or provide emergency care. This is also an imminent
threat to surrounding residents due to the amount of combustible. storage
on the property: Staff is proceeding with the receivership option as the
most effective tool to eliminate these dangers.
CDD/Gubman stated that the Commissioners may have heard about the
shooting incident in the 1100 block of Del Sol in which an individual was
.']DRAFT
APRIL 12, 2011 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION
shot and killed. With the property owner's consent, staff searched the
premises and discovered that an auto and motorcycle repair business was
being conducted inside the house which presents a number of building
code and zoning violations as well as, hoarding conditions and hazmat
issues with the storage of combustible and hazardous chemicals onsite.
Based on that discovery, staff is moving forward to protect the
neighborhood from the health and safety threat that exists at the property.
CDD/Gubman reported that in addition to the continuance of the T -Mobile
project on April 26, there is a room addition request on Alamo Heights in
"The Country Estates" and a Conditional Use Permit for a tutoring facility.
(Montessori School satellite) located on Pinefalls in the industrial area.
10.. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in tonight's agenda.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before. the Planning Commission,
Chairman Torng adjourned the regular meeting at 8:10 p.m:
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 26th day of April, 2011.
Attest:
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Gubman
Community Development Director
Jack Shah, Chairman
j
PJA 901 ION I
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.1
MEETING DATE: April 26, 2011
CASE/FILE NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No. PL 2010-355
PROJECT LOCATION: Public Right -of -Way on Diamond Bar Blvd. and
760 S. Diamond Bar Blvd (Los Angeles County
Assessor's Parcel Number 8701-006-905)
City of Diamond Bar
21825 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Monica Moretta on behalf of T -Mobile
Sequoia Deployment Services
One Venture, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92618
At the April 12, 2011, Planning Commission meeting, the Commission directed the
applicant to provide screening around the ground -mounted equipment associated with
the wireless telecommunications antenna mounted on a streetlight pole, and continued
the matter to April 26, 2011. Specifically, the Commission asked the applicant to
provide samples of artificial vegetation that could be used to screen the equipment.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue this matter to May 10, 2011,
to allow the applicant further time to submit a proposal that addresses the Commission's
concern.
Prepared by:
David Alvarez
Assistant Pla Kner
Reviewed by:
Grace S. Lee
Senior Planner
PLANNING COIVIIVIISSIO�l
AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
CASE/FILE NUMBER:
PROJECT LOCATION:
M1
April 26, 2011
Development Review No. PL 2010-438
2435 Alamo Heights, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
(APN 8713-009-002)
Ming Kuo and Li Hua Chen
2435 Alamo Heights
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Manolo M. Manalo
23824 Audrey Ave #C
Torrance, CA 90505
Property owners, Ming Kuo and Li Hua Chen, and applicant, Manolo M. Manalo, are
requesting approval of Development Review application to add 1,643 square feet. to an
existing 2,768 square -foot, single-family residence. The applicant also proposes to
convert an existing 792 square -foot horse barn into a 421 square -foot pool house with
an attached 371 square -foot patio cover.
The existing architectural style of the structure is a 1970s ranch design with a gable
roof, wood siding, stucco walls, and steel frame doors and windows. The proposed
architectural style is a contemporary eclectic design with hipped roofs, cultured stone
veneer, stucco walls, a cupola, vinyl doors and windows, and prefabricated columns.
After evaluating the application, staff finds that the proposed Development Review
proposal complies with the City's development standards and meets the findings
required of the project. Therefore, staff recornmends that the Planning Commission
approve Development Review No. PL 2010-438, subject to the conditions of approval
contained in the attached Resolution.
BACKGROUND:
Site Description:
The site is located in The Diamond Bar Country Estates (The Country) and is located on
Alamo Heights between Lazy Meadow and Steeplechase Lane. In 1976, the property
was developed under Los Angeles County standards with a single -story, 2,768 square -
foot, single-family residence on a 0.81 gross acre (35,284 square -foot) lot. There are
no protected trees onsite.
The site is legally described as Lot 163 of Tract No. 30578, and the Assessor's Parcel
Number (APN) is 8713-009-002.
The proposed addition will maintain a single -story design, and the 1,643 square -foot
addition will consist of the following components:
New master bedroom, study room, second kitchen (also known as a wok) and a
half bathroom;
0 Removal of one existing bedroom;
® Relocation and expansion of the foyer;
® Relocation and expansion of the laundry room;
a Expansion of two bedrooms, living room, dining room, kitchen, and family room;
"Hacienda" floor plan that includes a courtyard towards -the rear of the building;
and
"Cupola" that extends above the roofline measuring an additional seven feet to
the highest point.
The applicant also proposes to convert an existing 792 square -foot horse barn into a
421 square -foot pool house with an attached 371 square -foot patio cover.
The existing building height of the dwelling is 16-4." The proposed height of the
building is 23-4", measured from the finished grade to the highest point of the roofline.
The height of the pool house will remain at 12'-4", measured from finished grade to the
highest point of the roofline.
The applicant has obtained approval from The Diamond Bar Country Estates
Association.
Development Review No. PL 2010-438 Page 2 of 7
Site Rural Residential
North 17��al Residential
RR
RR
Single -Family Residential
Family Resi
South Rural Residential
RR
Single -Family Resid
East Rural Residential
West Rural Residential
R
RR
Single -Family Resid
Single -Family Residential
Development Review No. PL2O1O~438 Page 3of7
Review Authority (Diamond Bar Municipal Code (QBMQ Section 22.48)
Additions to structures and reconstruction projects which are equal to 50 percent of the
existing habitable floor area of all existing structures on-site or greater require Planning
Commission approval of a Development Review application.
Approval of a Development Review 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.
Development Review
The following table compares the proposed project with the City's development
standards for residential development in the RR zone:
�I , &MV UZOILOM M I I re 14TOI a
The site is level with the street and no grading is required.
Elevations
The existing architectural style of the structure is a 1970s ranch design with a gable
roof, wood siding, stucco walls, and steel frame doors and windows. The proposed
Development Review No. PL 2010-438 Page 4 of 7
n
FIII WIN OW
-11,
r�iSemdrgs-
ILION
30'
30'-10"
30'-10"
Yes
4
151-01, on one side
&
17'-9" north side
17'-9" north side
Yes
10'-0" on the other
side.
28'-6" — south side
19'-3" — south side
U K&.
39W" — north side
36-5" — north side
Beier enA"djoining'`
25'Yes
34'-2" — south side
25-9" — south side
25'
501-3$'
50'-3"
Yes
R "Wg gwg
a galip
MINE
�G TA M7910115 � MO. MM IMI
O
ara?Og p "�q
Maximum of 30%
16.8%
22.3%
Yes
P
G"
35'-0"
18'-8".
231-4"
Yes
k-M41E '400-
M
RnUV,
2 -car garage
3 -car garage
3 -car garage
Yes
I Mil ®R
I
�I , &MV UZOILOM M I I re 14TOI a
The site is level with the street and no grading is required.
Elevations
The existing architectural style of the structure is a 1970s ranch design with a gable
roof, wood siding, stucco walls, and steel frame doors and windows. The proposed
Development Review No. PL 2010-438 Page 4 of 7
fagade remodel and addition is a- contemporary eclectic design with hipped roofs,
cultured stone veneer, stucco walls, a cupola, vinyl doors and windows, and Tuscan
style columns..
The applicant provided color samples which call for earth tone colors for the.exterior
finishes to soften the building's visual impact.
Proposed Front Elevation
r• 0 • :a • - -
The site was developed with a 792 square -foot horse barn in the rear of the property.
The applicant proposes to maintain the footprint of the. horse barn to convert into a 421
square -foot pool house with an attached 371 square -foot patio cover. The floor plan of
the pool house will consist of an entertainment/game room, bathroom, and two storage
rooms. An outside bar is also proposed in the patio area.
The height of the existing horse barn and roof* pitch will remain. The floor area of the
proposed pool house does not exceed 30 percent of the required rear yard, as required
pursuant to Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.42.110 (1.c.1). In
addition, the existing side and rear setbacks are in compliance with the development
code. This structure will be architecturally compatible with the main residence. The
exterior building will be renovated utilizing similar building materials and colors as the
main residence, such as lightweight tile roof, stucco walls, vinyl doors and windows, and
Tuscan style columns.
Landscaping
Landscape plans are not required because the site is already developed, and because
the project is exempt from the City's Water Conservation Landscaping Ordinance. The
ordinance would only apply if 5,000 square feet or more of the existing landscaped area
was being altered. Nevertheless, the applicant submitted a preliminary landscape plan.
The front yard will be 53% landscaped with trees, turf and other plant materials to soften
the look of the paved surfaces, enhance the architecture, and create an overall site
design that blends in with neighboring hornes and the natural environment of the site.
The overall design incorporates crape myrtle, sweet shade, sweet olive, New Zealand
flax, crannesbill, lily of the nile, tobira, rose, and Indian Hawthorn. All plant types will be
drought tolerant and non-invasive.
Development Review No. PL 2010-438 Page 5 of 7
The subject property is located within the Los Angeles County Fire Department "Very
High Fire Hazard Severity Zone." Therefore, the proposed landscaping must comply
with the Fire Department's Fuel Modification Plan requirements. The proposed plans
will be submitted for review and approval by the Fire Department during building plan
check.
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:
The proposed addition will conform to all development standards, including
building height and setbacks, which is consistent with other homes in the
neighborhood;
® The proposed addition will maintain a single -story design, appropriate in mass
and scale to the site;
The project is designed to minimize the negative impacts on surrounding homes.
A transition between the project and adjacent properties is achieved through
appropriate setbacks and landscaping; and
Placement and relationship of windows, doors, and other window openings are
carefully integrated with the building's overall design.
Adjacent Home to West Project Site Adjacent Home to East
Ijmm
The Public Works Department and Building and Safety Division reviewed this project,
and their comments are included in the attached resolution as conditions of approval.
On April 15, 2011, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a
1,000 -foot radius of the project site and the notice was published in the San Gabriel
Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. A notice display board was
Development Review No. PL 2010-438 Page 6 of 7
posted at thp site, and a copy of the notice was posted at the City's three designated
community posting sites.
Public.Comments Received
At the time the staff report was published, staff had not received any comments from the
public.
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(e) (additions to an existing structure of less than 10,000
square feet) of the CEQA Guidelines.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution
(Attachment 1) approving Development Review No. PL 2010-438, to construct an
addition of 1,643 square feet to an existing 2,768 square -foot single-family residence
and a 421 square -foot pool house, based on the findings of DBIVIC Section 22.48,
subject to conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution.
Prepared by:
Mv V a, rF6 z
Assistant •
Attachments:
Reviewed by:
00
Gra`c. Lee
Senior Planner
1. Draft Resolution Approving DR No. PL 2010-438
2. Site Plan, Floor Plans, Elevations, and Landscape Plans
I. Photographs of Existing House
Development Review No. PL 2010-438 Page 7 of 7
Attachment 1
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO.2011-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
NO. PL 2010-438 TO ADD 1,643 SQUARE FEET TO 'AN EXISTING 2,768
SQUARE -FOOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND CONVERT AN
EXISTING 792 SQUARE -FOOT HORSE BARN INTO A 421 SQUARE -FOOT
POOL HOUSE WITH AN ATTACHED 371 SQUARE -FOOT PATIO COVER
ON A 0.81. GROSS ACRE (35,284 SQUARE -FOOT) .LOT LOCATED AT 2435
ALAMO HEIGHTS, DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 (APN 8713-009-002).
A. RECITALS
1. The property owners, Ming Kuo and Li Hua Chen, and applicant, Manolo M.
Manalo, have filed an application for Development Review No. PL 2010-438 to
add 1,643 square feet to an existing 2,768 square -foot single family residence.
The applicant also proposes to convert an existing 792 square -foot horse barn
into a 421 square -foot pool house with an attached 371 square -foot patio cover
located at 2435 Alamo Heights; City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles,
California. Hereinafter in this resolution, the subject Development Review shall
collectively be referred to as the "Project.
2: The subject property is made up of one parcel totaling 35,284 square feet (0.81
gross acres). It is located in the Rural Residential (RR) zone with an underlying
General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential.
3. The legal description of the subject property is Tract 30578 Lot 163. The
Assessor's Parcel Number is 8713-009-002.
4. On April 15, 2011, 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
1,000 -foot radius of the Project site and public notices were posted at the City's
designated community postingr sites on April, ` 15, 2011 In addition to the
published and mailed notices, the project site.was posted with a display board
and the notice was postpd at three other locations within the project vicinity.
5. On April 26, 2011, 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 ,
I ,
NOW, .THEREFORE, . it Js found, determined . and .. resolved by the. Planning
Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. 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; and
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 15301 (e) (additions to. an
existing structure of less than 10,000 square feet). of the. CEQA guidelines.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required.
C. FINDINGS OF FACT
Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein and as prescribed under
Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.48; this Planning Commission
hereby finds as follows:
Development Review Findings (DBMC Section 22.48.040)
1. The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the
applicable elements of the City's General Plan, City Design Guidelines, and
development standards of the applicable, district, - design guidelines, and
architectural criteria for special areas (e.g., theme, areas, specific plans,
community plans, boulevards or planned developments);
The addition of 1,643 square feet to an existing 2,768 square -foot single. family
residence and the proposed conversion of an existing 792 square -foot horse
barn into a 421 square -foot pool house with an attached 371 square -foot patio
cover are consistent with the City's General Plan, City Design Guidelines and
development standards by meeting all of the setbacks and requirements of the
City's development code:
The project site is not part of any theme area, specific plan, community plan,
boulevard or planned development.
2. The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the
use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments, and will not
create traffic or pedestrian hazards;
The proposed addition will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of
neighboring existing or future developments because the use of the project site
has an existing single-family home and the surrounding uses are also single-
family homes.
The proposed addition will not interfere with vehicular or pedestrian
movements, such as access or other functional requirements of a single-family
residence because it complies with the requirements for driveway widths.
3. The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with. the
character of the surrounding neighborhood and, will maintain and enhance the
harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated. by
Chapter 22.48: Development Review Standards, the City's Design Guidelines,
the City's General Plan, or any applicable specific plan;
DR No. FL 2010-289
The proposed addition is designed to be compatible with the character of the
eclectic neighborhoods in The Country Estates. The proposed design of the
structure is a contemporary eclectic style of architecture with earth -tone shades
for the exterior finish to soften the building's visual impact.
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, color, and will remain aesthetically.
appealing;
The design of the single-family residence is a contemporary eclectic style of
architecture. Variation in the building elements has been achieved through the
utilization of varying architectural features and building materials, such as, tiled
roof, cultured stone veneer and stucco walls, cupola, vinyl doors and windows,
and prefabricated columns.
5. The proposed development will not be detrimental to 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 Los Angeles County Fire
Department requirements. Through the permit and inspection process, the
referenced agencies 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 15301 (6) (additions to an existing structure of less than 10,000 square
feet) of the CEQA guidelines.
- Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby
approves this Application` subject to the following conditions:
- 1. Development shall substantially comply with the plans and documents
presented to the Planning Commission at the public hearing;
2. Prior to building permit issuance, the required plans shall be designed to meet
the requirements of the Los Angeles County Fire Department's Fuel
Modification PlanGuidelines in terms of plant selection, placement and
maintenance. The final landscape and fuel modification .plans shall be
submitted to the Los Angeles Fire Department for review and approval; and
3. Standard Conditions. The applicant shall comply with the standard development
conditions attached hereto.
_ 3
DR No. PL 2010-289
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
-STANDARD CONDITIONS
USE PERMITS, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL NEW AND
REMODELED STRUCTURES
PROJECT #: Development Review No. PL 2010-438
SUBJECT: Addition of 1,643 square -foot, single -story, addition to an existing
2,768 square -foot, single -story, single-family residence. The
applicant also proposes to convertan existing 792 square -foot
horse barn into a 421 square -foot pool house with an attached 371
square -foot patio cover.
PROPERTY Ming Kuo and Li Hua Chen
OWNER(S): 2435 Alamo Heights
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
APPLICANT: Manolo M. Manalo
23824 Audrey Ave #C
Torrance, CA 90505
LOCATION: 2435 Alamo Heights, 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 pp p Review No. PL 2010-438, brought within the
time period provided by Government Code Section 66499:37. In the event the
city and/or its officers, agents and employees are, made a party of ;any such
action:
5
OR No. PL 2010-438
(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. PL 2010-438, 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 a zoning approval for those
businesses located in Diamond Bar.
4. Signed copies of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011 -XX, Standard
Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full
size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the
construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped
by a licensed Engineer/Architect.
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.
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 and roof plans, and elevation plans shall
be coordinated for consistency. prior to issuance of City permits (such as
grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.,) or approved use has
commenced, whichever comes first.
10. The property owner/applicant shall remove the public hearing notice board
within three days of this project's approval.
6
DR No. PL 2010-438
11. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of City Planning, Building and
Safety Divisions, Public Works Department, and the Fire Department.
B: FEES/DEPOSITS
1. Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to Planning,
Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works Department and Mitigation
Monitoring) at the established rates, prior to issuance of building or grading
permit (whichever comes first), 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 depositaccounts for the processing of this project
shall have no deficits.
C. TIME LIMITS
1. The approval of Development Review No. PL 2010-438 expires within two
years from the date of approval if the use has not been exercised as defined
per Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section (DBMC) 22.66.050 (b)(1). The
applicant may request in writing a one year time extension subject to
DBMC 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 attached hereto as Attachment 2 including:
site plans, floor plans; architectural elevations, and landscape plans on file with
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
owners/occupant.
5. All ' landscaping, .structures, architectural features :and public improvements
damaged during construction shall be repaired or replaced upon project
completion.
7
DR No. PL 2010-438
E. SOLID WASTE
1. The site shall be maintained in a condition, which is free of debris both during
and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlement
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
1. 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.
2. 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. DRAINAGE
1. - Detailed drainage system information of the lot with careful attention to any
flood hazard area shall be submitted. All drainage/runoff from the development
shall be conveyed from the site to the natural drainage course. No on-site
drainage shall be conveyed to adjacent parcels, unless that is the natural
drainage course.
8
DR No. PL 2010-438
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 839-70201
FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: -
1.
Plans shall conform to State and Local Building Code (i.e.., `2010 California
Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and the
California Electrical Code requirements and all other applicable construction
codes, ordinances and regulations, in effect at the time of plan check submittal -
2:
Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all California
Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been met. The
buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy.
3.
Solid waste management of construction material shall incorporate recycling
material collection per Diamond Bar Municipal Code'8:16 of Title 8:
4.
The minimum design load for wind in this area is 95 M.P.H. exposures "C and
the site is within seismic zone D or E. The applicant shall submit drawings and
calculations prepared by a California State licensed Architect/Engineer with wet
stamp and signature:
5.
This project shall comply with the energy conservation requirements of the
State . of California Energy Commission. All lighting shall be high efficacy or
equivalent per the current California Energy Code.
6.
"Separate permits are required for site work" and shall be noted on plans.
7.
Indicate all easements on the site plan.
8.
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 and/or other enclosed ureas 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.
9.
All retaining walls shall be submitted to the Building & Safety and Public Work.
Departments for review and approval.
10.
Check drainage patterns with Engineering Department. Surface water shall
drain away,from building at a 2% minimum slope.
1 l .-
Specify location of tempered glass as required by code.
12.
Bodies of water that. are greater than 18" in :depth shall have the required
barriers to prevent unintentional access per CBC 3904.4. All pool barriers shall
be maintained:
9
DR No. PL 2010-438
@9p
G a a G 9 8 (2)
i I 1 9 fl, lifir:nIsare
5
6 q
cn r—
>
I
0 1-1 z >
Wall
10
0
G) a 8
M 0
z
C)
Z z
q
0 x
'ma rn
I
cn
--i M10
I
I
R -H
co
M
1.2
IRIFE,
T
@9p
1.MO
ADDITION/ RENOVATION POR:
Wall
M 0
z
C)
Z z
z
0
I
cn
--i M10
I
I
co
M
m
I
<
m
m
I
0 1
1
M T
z
-4 R
>
@9p
K)
GO
0`1
> 0
3: 2:
0
:r M
m Z
1:
(D
>
0
z. CD
03 =
>
0
CD
(D
En
>
0 ITT
I Tog g!
0
I . > m
ITT 1 9 1 u m
69
m z
W
z A a - , tt
> 0
0
N:0Z 0s 6 R
z a I
V1
1.MO
ADDITION/ RENOVATION POR:
Wall
M 0
z
C)
Z z
z
0
I
K)
GO
0`1
> 0
3: 2:
0
:r M
m Z
1:
(D
>
0
z. CD
03 =
>
0
CD
(D
En
>
0 ITT
I Tog g!
0
I . > m
ITT 1 9 1 u m
69
m z
W
z A a - , tt
> 0
0
N:0Z 0s 6 R
z a I
V1
1.MO
ADDITION/ RENOVATION POR:
M 0
z
C)
Z z
z
0
I
q,
_A 24q..-
................
e
cn
>
L
co C() P
>
In
FIG
F M.
M
mi
.. .. ..
4
r
C/)
T—
M.
ti
119
z
O
O a G) G 8 E)
m
Na
a>
il i!j 188'.2 al
y
R R moz
M H
Z
0
m
m
Cn
2
G-
z
US
Cl)
> M 9
F,
> m
>
Bil
Fn 0
z
rn
0 1
L
Cl)m
—7
m
<
17,
z
z
z
8-
....... ....
E�L
M-
n.
g
41'
A
2
2
m -n co m
r- r-
0 m
ADDITION/ RENOVATION FOR:
0
0
0
Z
I
CHEN Residence
u
O
z
Z
2435AI,AMOHEIGHTS.DMfAONDW.CA9I7U
Ei
C)
Np
Z
design
meg�g
SEtDACK UNE
_ _PROPERTYUNE__ _ _
i.
— .3 fn,..mx
c€ =ESS
PRD_PERTYUNE__ _ -- _ _ -- _ _ -- _ _
_ _ PflpPERt1'UNE _ _
_ — _ GIpE YARp
SETBACK LINE
BIDEYARD -
�p - SEtHACK LF _
Y �
s X90
PROPERIYGNE
D it
mm G
it
Q o o Q m.
z
r o .
Z _ ..
-u G) 2 ADDITIOW RENOVATION FOR:
1 m . A 4 i i
z O n 32
C O o g¢iF ¢
z d
mm CHENResidence !i€L:9�
-n y O 2495 AIAMO HEIGHTS. DIAMOND BAR. GA 94765
O, _ FE Fie o
k• design
e•
mttuiR
�• rnou lu
PROPERTY IJNE
xs c us {-Io'o
6 0' is
s.
l4 G
o a
----------------
®
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
i
I
1
i
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
cn
i
Siy
M$ I—,
— —
I
is
Z o
m �—
1$
ja
i
mo
❑ - ;R
O O
Z
I
1
1
1
,
,
i
i
i
1
1
1
1
1
a
1
1
I
,
1
1
,
,
�
1
'u.
i
i
n
xs 9
J�15'
Nn�
C
a_
tl
n a
O O O O O O O O O
In
"n $ a
a ya
rtl
� § a £s
22 i S
�� 9 aF uNl ?sS �•`�- t S 1 ¢� i HE
r
D
7ioip
B 3 Y� o
I—
U)
w,R
S
f
3i
;V,
..
o
¢
ifl s
fil
9
ADDMOW RENOVATION FOR:;
ifl 1°
g i
ea79
2
H
e
�.-Di z
U' p�z
y
°
�CHEN Residence
2435 AIAIAO REIGMS, OWAONO RAR, C"170
I�IkF
�k
MIN
N
6 y2
P� iii
,T
' �� a d—
°y
5 N
�
design
rnourr
x'
]mss•
wv.oE
,o,
P
rwummraw.x
i
i
I
I
-
i
I
I
I
1
1
i
i
'
I
I
1
,
,
,
,
'
r
r
r
r
,
1
q
I
N
FR.-
,
1
j
r
,
i°
CD
0
r2
e
;R
ms
r-8
8
M;
m
'x
A
I
r
�
r
�
I
I
,
i
1
i
F
�
�
I
1
,
i
1
�
1
pg
,
pp
3
lu
]s•
P
q
S
rnwnrnmvance
,
i
a 'r g
yr
p O
O
O O
O
O O 0 O
p
a Y
181
��°
ji< lip.
aeg
o
�p
h � I bs s RH
gRa R RR i q�n
sm
r
an
8
�� Sp�2
io�
5 8
§� §
z 8
—Di
m
70
r
b
�5
8
A
W
e
umw�e.�o�.my
0 mm
D 0
AOORIOM RENOVATION FOR:
a$
s
e 5
3
e
r °
m p
z
N
.z
'
°
o
CHEN Residence
xaaS ALAMO HEIGFRS,OW.tONO BAR, OA BilGS
o.�
^
c 5
$
G
'
Ck3fi
G .design
I3•_r
Io
ss-{
A
A555A
i
-,T
�..o
s
C-)
5
s
m
(mj
n
C7
a r
m
�
v
Q
Qg.
Cncn
O
s
�
co
m
T��
D
c2
0
m
z
a'
gg
z
5
F�
-
az
�I.
P
A '
P
b'
G
0
Q
Q
Q
Q Q
a Q
_oaf
g0
£m�
!Zj.
89�g
2212
��^ 2.
Qii^m
3
g
3mA SR
E6 S
r
my
$
Y
n m
O
ADDITION/ RENOVATION
FOP -'4
R5¢f
a
§
e 5
5
D .� c0
p
°
CHEN Residence
-
3 E°yc
isYi�i
6� 0
2
'
e a
OZ cn
Z m
CA 9170
n a
S
y
_{
�
M4 AWAO
HEIGHTS. OWAOND OAR,
6CliSY{•
��
.o
:design
1x
.
W
C"g
17-
CI
5
N�
>
w
8 O
D
z i
O-
o
I 1
j
II
I
VIII)Fa
6I
s_
t
s
II z
zrd
••L
i
u
xx'
'
Pg£ .m o �gz
9
��"°. � � Y of �z tRn
8�
> mg
Vis.
-
CO
In
5�
��
m
>! Ms
m3
$��g
6 g' g'go�g 8g
O
o
m e
e
�B � m8 HIM
r
m808D
m 0
rn
f ��
5P P 8 € W ` 9
0
I' z
11 0
Z
;98HE �
sm
o
O
m
RE
cn
1 to
O
B k
Bpk
l
I—Q 1x'-,-
D mg
rn In
,x•-,•
1
a - - - - - - -
cog
ggLD
cn
C I I I II m.
go
m
k£
O; i
v°sP
�$
m O
II z
I. Sj e2 -{
i .- it OJoe
I 'IIIc I I i
°a
it
�ry
BRI �
�� °R
s� 10•-1---i
°�,R
BR
°
m�
.mWWrn.wNO
a i
i
II77jj
JC Q z m
O
- ADDM1111 RENOVATION FOR:
1F43.
o
czi o z
0
CHEN Resid...=6
t
LEt`
4
D� y
Z z
2435AWAOHEIGRT5.01AMONDRAR.DA91705
6 (t9
E i.
g
°.design
e
zz
(n cn
fo
m
,.
o.I;F
IM1.
IN
�loll
11
1
loll
0101010
11
loll
1111
111
111111111
1
1
loll
I
III MN
ME
I
I
1
11
1
1111
I
I
I
111
11
111
IN
IIIIIII
I
I
Hill
11
1
111
1111111
UNION
11111
1
111111111
HIM
I
I
111
11
IN
1111113
I UNION
III
HIM
1
MINE
11
IN
I
HIM
I III
gill 1 11111
MEN
11111111
IiIii
I
MEN
1
11�
.
ii
Ill 1111
111111
.11111
1
111
IN
-1IGS1
111 1111111
HIM
ill
Ill
I
I
I
I
I
IN I 1111111
11
IN
11
IN
ME
11 1 1
MEN
IIII
I
0
Mail
m m X A 9 A Z
_ V _ O p 2 Z 2
I p N y y p -
1�
p0V O x
m
A N =
a a
o j
� I z
I m L—
az
r"�• i l �4
QA.r'a3n
as
�--- o-
i
,00 o ®u01(-�I�
�Pg F a Go $ ? D. A 0e33a �..m S z
Z
i mCmRP �'t 4,m-zn m >• g� G. oo �> y $ - ro -f
o n ge oaa t 3
gmc ' wpm x �A ' oo m�r So �`. o y A F 5 3 ^ I Z
wAo 15 c p
��roQy 5 v��� _ •��m "z _ ^'
Ata gm' -'off �N 'c m� oa o z�r Ol i1 A:
oum ,�pN6 Az on o �. �. R ,,, N 0
z z-gpo mmi m6�s �= �^ D.vo
A- gg _ s A o 2 o z my �� 0N '0
0 N..
0
2m
oaf
Zzoo
� .•�.�io•u
it
mop
NnK
g
i
F zo
m
1 w
I
I�
I
I I
�
rn > >. �
ET
x'=
F
>'�
3
r I� �I�nlll �.�
192-
3
P
SFS
A
I
N'x
2
CO N@
3
O D ~O
4 it j
�p H O �
- _a- I�
_.�
�
I I
�
'9
gc
O v•0 �
�
..per=
4m3on� '(�.
gmN � m
3
5
J
_
N
O
0
� .•�.�io•u
it
ng u
" I .mai
I
I�
I
I I
�
rn > >. �
ET
Ha62
� �' �
3
r I� �I�nlll �.�
192-
3
P
SFS
I
N'x
2
CO N@
3
O D ~O
4 it j
�p H O �
- _a- I�
_.�
�
I I
�
'9
gc
O v•0 �
�
..per=
4m3on� '(�.
gmN � m
3
5
_
� .•�.�io•u
it
ng u
" I .mai
I
I
I I
�
rn > >. �
$
� �' �
3
r I� �I�nlll �.�
r'
I
�
P
SFS
I
2
CO N@
3
O D ~O
4 it j
�p H O �
- _a- I�
_.�
�
I I
�
I
� �
O v•0 �
�
..per=
4m3on� '(�.
gmN � m
00
61
.
�
NIP
F
(§ �
| \
pill °.
`'
�§§
�
[:i
1 `
. .
--
)
/
.«
a
\
\
(
1j, \
§ {�` -; 1\-.\
\
(�) ..
FU-
;' . . ;
°r .. .
/_/ ec j \CAL A D ENGINEERING,
§ (2 . , . ;
!§ 'za»wHeights, " p§7ap�t§/«®��®
mm,e#a . 2\. � .0
� . aQ
(N
NIP
F
(§ �
| \
pill °.
; �
[:i
1 `
. .
--
)
1j, \
§ {�` -; 1\-.\
\
(�) ..
FU-
;' . . ;
°r .. .
/_/ ec j \CAL A D ENGINEERING,
§ (2 . , . ;
!§ 'za»wHeights, " p§7ap�t§/«®��®
mm,e#a . 2\. � .0
1
I
..-i% --4t.' 1�--- e -RECEIVED BY THE
r Cl OF DIAMOND BAR
i
r
1 i I I i
ry r` EXISTING 'r t [
1 iCORRALRUT ZDf 4 C PM 1• S
t I
i 1 1
i rl rY r* rY
i
i
I r� 11
I I 11
1 It
n
1 s
EX.
7 SPA
EXISTING
SWIMMING POOL
r---------- r ----i
1
t
1 ul u r
CONCRETE II i ii r
i PAVEMENT/
1 WALK
1 1
D
a A 1, �, r
r.
12.09.2010
online. (424)2U1.U/8
m3architect@hotmail.com
ff 4 VIEW
CHEN RESIDENCE
2435 ALAMO HEIGHTS, DIAMOND BAR 91765
12.09.2010
0)
[M31-0
0
mobile.(310)817.9493
online. (424)201.0788
m3architect@hotmaii.com
7■t • ...e. . PHOTOS
6 VIEW
(DVIEW
MINIM p 5NItie
VJL
�� ��i.•
ipjrll• 1
r-
0)
MUMMN
[M3]a)
mobile. (310) 817.9493
online. (424)201.0788
m3arch itect@hotmail.cam
PROJECT PHOTOS
(9 VIEW
(DVIEW
FZA NNTA K -Al ITI LOm 11,111111 lip
12.09.2010
&IEW
c
[M 3].2.' ommmm
mobile.(310)817.949
online. (424)201.0788
m3architect@hotmaii.com
-- r PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR -21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117
AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.2
-
MEETING DATE: April. 26, 2011
CASE/FILE NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No. PL 2011-058
PROJECT LOCATION: 782-784 Pinefalls Avenue. (Los Angeles County
Assessor's Parcel Number 8760-027-003)
PROPERTY OWNER: Ronald E. Albrecht
Sterling Capital
8502 E. Chapman, #184,
Orange; CA 92369
APPLICANT: Manikku Malraj
Ranmal Educational Services
801 Brea Canyon Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91789
Summary
The applicant, Manikku Malraj, is requesting approval of aConditional Use Permit
(CUP) to operate a 3,835 square -foot, tutoring center at 782-784 Pinefalls Avenue. The
proposed tutoring center -will serve children in; grade levels between kindergarten and
sixth grade.
After evaluating the application, staff finds that the Conditional Use Permit complies with
the City's development standards and meets the findings required of the project.
Therefore, staff ` recommends that the Planning Commission approve CUP
No. PL 2011-058, subject to the conditions of approval contained in, the attached
resolution.
Background
The project site is located. at 782-784` Pinefalls Avenue, in an industrial park at the
corner of Pinefalls Ave and Lycoming Drive. The industrial park is comprised of 15
buildings and 18, parcels, and each building occupies its own lot.
On October 7, 2010, staff was contacted by the Los Angeles_ County Fire Department
regarding the operation of a school at the subject site. Staff conducted a site: visit on
October 18; 2010, and observed a business operating at 782 Pinefalls` Avenue. Staff
informed the business owner to close the business until a CUP approval was obtained,
and the business ceased operation on October 25, 2010.
Project Description
The proposed tutoring center will provide instruction in math, reading, writing,
communication, and test preparation for children between the kindergarten and sixth
grade levels. Six subjects will be available each day, as described in the attached
business description (Attachment 3).
The proposed hours of operation are Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to
6:00 p.m. Sessions for each category are 90 -minutes in length and offered for groups
of three to nine students, and one -on -ane tutoring. There will be three instructors in the
morning and three in the afternoon, totaling six. The tutoring center expects to have a
maximum of ten students and three instructors during any subject slot.
The proposed floor plan includes three individual tutoring rooms, three offices, two
restrooms, and a lobby.. The proposed space is 3,835 square feet.
Site and Surrounding General Plan, Zoning and Land Uses
Site Light Industrial I
Warehouse
North
South
Light Industrial I�
Low -Medium Density
Residential RLM
Warehouse
Single -Family
Residences
East
Light Industrial L
Music School
We
Light Industrial I
Warehouse
ANALYSIS:
Review Authoritv (Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.58
Planning Commission approval of a Conditional Use Permit is required for the
establishment of a new tutoring center.
C6 inditionall .Use Permit:
A,Conditional 'Use,Per.mit (CUP) is required for uses whose effect on the surrounding
area cannot be.determined before being analyzed for suitability at a particular location.
The -1,(Ught Industrial) zone requires, approval of a CUP for schools offering. specialized
education and training.
When reviewing a CUP, -consideration is given to the location, design, configuration,
operational.. characteristics and potential impacts to determine whether or, not the.
proposed use will pose a detriment to the public health, safety and welfare. If i I t can be
found that the proposed use is likely to be compatible with its surroundings, Jhe
Commission may approve the proposed use subject to conditions stipulating the
manner: in which the use. must be conducted. If the Commission finds that the proposed
use, is likely. to be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare, then it
must deny there.quest.
When a CUP, is approved, it runs with the land and all conditions placed on the CUP'are
binding on all, successors in interest. In other words, if the owners of the proposed.
Conditional Use. Permit No. PL 2011-058
tutoring center were to close after it has begun operating, a new tenant could locate in
the space and operate the same type of tutoring center. ` The new tenant would be
required to comply with the same conditions as:the previous tenant and would not be
permitted to ` expand the tutoringbusiness without full review and approval by the
Planning Commission.
Cornpatibility with Neiahborhood
The proposed project complies with the goals and objectives as set forth in the adopted
General Plan in terms of land use. The project will not negatively affect the existing
surrounding land uses, .and the proposed business is compatible with various .types of
businesses in the area, such as The Music Stare and Dello's Dance Studio located in
the industrial park, and Discovery. World Montessori elementary school located at the
southwest corner of.Brea Canyon Road and Lycoming Drive:
The operational characteristics of the proposed tutoring center will not be incompatible
with Wayne's Automotive located next door. Wayne's Automotive is a warehouse that.
stores antique vehicles for recreational use by the tenant. There is no retail, car repair,
or services provided to the public that would impact any existing businesses on the
property. Wayne's-Auto motive and North Point Printing Shop are not incompatible uses
with the proposed tutoring center because the children will be situated indoors within the
building. Children will not be allowed to leave the premises until a parent or guardian
arrives to pick them up from their class.
Given the proposed hours of operation, the availability of parking, and the types of
adjoining uses, it is expected that the tutoring center would, be a compatible use at this
location.
required for the proposed tutoring business. The total number of spaces required has a
mathematical deficiency of 4 spaces.
Number of Spaces Required
Shop
Total 34
The,.proposed business hours are 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and
closed Saturdays and Sundays. The business hours for the other twobusinesses are
from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Sunday. The business hours of the
tutoring center and the other businesses overlap on Monday through Friday between
8`:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
One of the. purposes of the Conditional Use Permit process is to consider potential
impacts the proposed use may have on parking on the property. When reviewing
parking impacts on properties with shared uses, the various uses and business hours
for those uses are taken into consideration. Diamond Bar Municipal Code
Section 22.30.050, states that when "two or more nonresidential uses are developed as
a recognized shopping or professional center and two or more uses have distinct and
different peak parking usage periods, (e.g. a theater and a bank), parking spaces may
be allowed through the approval of a parking permit, provided that the most remote
spaces is located within 300 feet of the use it is intended to serve... A shared parking
analysis may be required by the director to support a request for a parking reduction."
Staff surveyed the site during various hours of the day that the proposed tutoring center
and :the other two tenants would be in use. Thisis a conservative approach to
analyzing the parking impacts because it is not clear whether there is reciprocal parking
among the parcels in the industrial park. Staff has not been able to verify this because
the industrial park was developed prior to the incorporation of the City, under Los
Angeles County standards.
Conditional Use Permit No. PL 2011-058
Number of Spaces Utilized (Out of 30 Available)
The. parking study revealed that there is a substantial number of unused parking spaces
throughout the day, so staff does not foresee any parking issues resulting from the
proposed use. The existing parking supply is adequate and can accommodate the
proposed tutoring center. The proposed tutoring center would offer a maximum of one
session with up to nine students, one-on-one tutoring, and three instructors during any
single time slot, thus it is not likely that more than 13 parking spaces would be occupied
at any one time to accommodate 10 students and three instructors. All students are
minors and would be dropped off by a parent, so parking demand for drop-off and pick-
up activities would be for very short durations.
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.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
On April 15, 2011, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 500 -
foot radius of the project site and the notice was published in the Inland Valley Daily
Tribune. and San Gabriel Valley Tribune newspapers. A notice display board was
posted at the site, and a copy of the notice was posted .at the City's three designated
community posting sites.
Public Comments Received
At the time the staff ,report was published, staff had not received any comments from the
public.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Thisproject has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be
Conditional Use Permit No. PL 2011-058
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
Conditional Use Permit No. PL 2011-058
Attachment 1
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. PL 2011-058, A REQUEST TO OPERATE A 3,835 SQUARE -FOOT
TUTORING CENTER, LOCATED AT 782-784 PINEFALLS AVENUE,
DIAMOND BAR, CA (ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 8760-027-003).
A. RECITALS
1. Property owner, Ronald E. Albrecht, Sterling Capital, and applicant, Manikku
Malraj, Ranmal Educational Services, have filed an application for Conditional
Use Permit No. PL 2011-058 to operate a tutoring center located at 782-784
Pinefalls Avenue, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California ("Project Site").
Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit shall be
referred to as the "Proposed Use."
2. The subject site is located in the Light Industrial (1) zone and is consistent with
the General Commercial land use category of the General Plan.
3. The legal description of the subject property is identified as Assessors Parcel
Number is 8760-027-003.
4. On April 15, 2011, 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 April 26, 2011, 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:,
1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth
in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct;
I
C.
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 15301 (existing facility) of the
CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, no further environmental review is required.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein and as prescribed under
Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.58, this Planning Commission
hereby finds as follows:
Conditional Use Permit Review Findings (DBMC Section 22.58)
1. The proposed use is allowed within the subject zoning district with the approval
of a conditional use permit and complies with all other applicable provisions of
this Development Code and the Municipal Code;
Pursuant to DBMC Section 22.10.030, Table 2-6, a specialized education and
training school is permitted in the I zoning district with approval of a conditional
use permit.
2. The proposed use is consistent with the general plan and any applicable
specific plan;
The proposed use is consistent with General Plan Strategy 1.3.3: ("Encourage
neighborhood serving retail and service commercial uses') in that the proposed
tutoring center meets strategy 1.3.3 because the proposed tutoring center
provides services to Diamond Bar residents.
The site is not subject to the provisions of any specific plan.
3. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed use are
compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity;
The proposed use is located within a multi -tenant industrial park occupied by
various 'warehouses and service uses including a reproduction/copy center.
The proposed tutoring center will 'be compatible with uses in close proximity
such as the music school and the dance school located within the same
industrial park across the street of the proposed site. Discovery World
Montessori preschool/elementary school is also located in close proximity to the
proposed tutoring center. As such, the operational characteristics of the
proposed tutoring center are compatible with the existing land uses in the
vicinity. Through compliance with the conditions of approval stipulating the
manner in which the use must be conducted, the proposed use will be
compatible with neighboring uses in the industrial park.
K
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011 -XX
4. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use
being proposed, including access, provision of utilities, compatibility with
adjoining land uses, and the absence of physical constraints;
The project site is located within an existing industrial park that has other
educational uses. The proposed use is compatible with other uses in the
surrounding areas such as a music and dance school to the west and a
preschool and elementary school to the southeast. A parking utilization study
was conducted to show that the number of parking spaces available is
adequate to accommodate the proposed tutoring center.
5. Granting the conditional use permit will not be detrimental to the public interest,
health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or injurious to persons, property, or
improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located;
and
Prior to the issuance of any city permits, the proposed project is required to
comply with all conditions of approval within the attached resolution, and the
Building and Safety Division.
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 15301(existing facility) of the CEQA Guidelines.
SEEKOW 11-010 15031 &ROMMAN
Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth above, the Planning Commission
hereby approves this application subject to the following conditions:
1 The establishment is approved as a tutoring center as described in the
application on file with the Planning Division, the Planning Commission staff
report for Conditional Use Permit PL 2011-058 dated April 26, 2011, and the
Planning Commission minutes pertaining thereto, hereafter referred to as the
"Use". The use shall be limited to a tutoring center.
2. The Use shall substantially conform to the approved plans as submitted and
approved by the Planning Commission and on file with the Community
Development Department.
3. This Conditional Use Permit shall be valid only for 782-784 Pinefalls Avenue, as
depicted on the approved plans on file with the Planning Division. If the
proposed use moves to a different location or expands into additional tenant
spaces, the approved Conditional Use Permit shall terminate and a new
Conditional Use Permit, subject to Planning Commission and/or City Council
approval shall be required for the new location. If the Use ceases to operate,
3
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011 -XX
the approved Conditional Use Permit shall expire without further action by the
City.
4. This approval does not specify limitations on class sizes or business hours
based on the presumption that the proposed use will operate in a manner that
does not deviate significantly from the operating characteristics described in the
Conditional Use Permit application, as summarized below:
a. Business hours — Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.;
and
b. Ten or fewer students and three instructors. at any one time.
If, at any time, the City finds that the proposed use is the cause of a parking
deficiency of other land use impact, the Community Development Director may
refer the matter back to the Planning Commission to consider amending this
Conditional Use Permit to the address such impacts.
5. No changes to the approved scope of services comprising the use shall be
permitted unless the applicant first applies for an amendment to this CUP, pays
all application processing fees and receives approval from the Planning
Commission and/or City Council.
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:
Ronald E. Albrecht, Sterling Capital, 8502 E. Chapman # 184, Orange,
CA 92369; and Manikku Malraj, Ranmal Educational Services, 801 Brea
Canyon Road, Diamond Bar, CA 91789.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26th DAY OF APRIL 2011, BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
M
Jack Shah, Chairman
1, 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 26th day
of April, 2011, by the following vote:
N
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011 -)CK
AYES:
Commissioners:
NOES:
Commissioners:
ABSENT:
Commissioners:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners:
ATTEST:
Greg Gubman, Secretary
-n
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011 -XX
P ROJConditional Use Permit No. PL 2011-058
SUBJECT: Tutoring Center
APPLICANT: Manikku Malram
LOCATION: 782-794 Pinefalls Avenue, Diamond Bar, CA 91789
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION AT (909) 839-7030, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
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 Conditional Use Permit
No. PL 2011-058 brought within the time period provided by Government
Code Section 66499.37. In the event the city and/or its officers, agents
and employees are made a party of any such action:
(a) Applicant shall provide a defense to the City defendants or at the
City's option reimburse the City its costs of defense, including
reasonable attorneys fees, incurred in defense of such claims.
(b) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against
the City 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 Conditional Use Permit No. PL 2011-058 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
6
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011 -XX
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. The business owners and 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. Prior to any. use of the project site or business activity being commenced
thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed.
5. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance with
the conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable regulations.
6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the
Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and any
applicable Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
7. To ensure compliance with all conditions of approval and applicable
codes, the Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to periodic review. If
non-compliance with conditions of approval occurs, the Planning
Commission may review the Conditional Use Permit. The Commission
may revoke or modify the Conditional Use Permit.
8. Property owner/applicant shall remove the public hearing notice board
within three (3) days of this project's approval.
9. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of City Planning,
Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works Department, and the Fire
Department.
B. FEES/DEPOSITS
1 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.
C. . TIME LIMITS
1 The approval of Conditional Use Permit shall expire within two (2) years
from the date of approval if the use has not been exercised as defined per
7
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011 -XX
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.
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 the California Electrical Code unless submitted after January 1, 2010
which will be covered under the 2010 code series) requirements and all
other applicable construction codes, ordinances and regulations in effect
at the time of plan check submittal.
2. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all
California Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been
met. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy.
3. This project shall comply with the energy conservation requirements of the
State of California Energy Commission. All lighting shall be high efficacy
or equivalent per the current California Energy Code.
4. This project shall upgrade items that are "readily achievable" with all
Accessibility Code requirements including accessible parking, path of
travel, elevators, restrooms, drinking fountains, etc. Provide compliance
with van accessible parking, path of travel, etc. Reception counter shall
comply with the Title 24 accessibility requirements.
5. "Separate permit shall be required for all wall and monument signs" and
shall be noted on plans.
6. Provide exit analysis showing occupant load for, each space, exit width,
exit signs, etc. The exiting design shall include clarification of exiting
through adjoining rooms per CBC 1014.2, exit signage per CBC 1011, and
doors meeting CBC 1008.1.2 & 1008.1.9.
7. Indicate the proposed addition and existing building on the plans. Submit
code analysis and justification showing the following:
a. Each building square foot
b. Type of construction
C. Sprinkler system
d. Each group occupancy
e. Occupancy separation per CBC 508.3.3.
f. Exit analysis for each building (occupant load/corridor rating/exit
width/exit signs, etc.)
g. Accessibility analysis for the entire site and for each building for
8
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011 -XX
"readily achievable" items.
ME
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011 -XX
`
Attachment
PROPERTY OWNER: STERLING CAPITAL INC.
ADDRESS: 780-788 PINEFALLS AVE' DIAMOND BAR, CA 91789
ZONING: INDUSTRIAL )
APN: 8760-027-003TRACT 32554, LOT 2
LOT SIZE: 21.466 S.F.
BUILDING SQUARE FEET 9.586 S.F.
BUSINESS OWNERS): RANMAL EDUCATIONAL SERVICES INC.
BUSINESS OWNER'S ADDRESS: 801 BREA CANYON ROAQ, DIAMOND BAR' OA 91783 |
BUSINESS AREA: 3.835 ss
(E) PARKING
PROPOSED TUTORING
AREA:3,835 S.F.
SITE PLAN
Lli
(E) WAYNE'S AUTO
VACANT
(E) PRINT SHOP
(WAREHOUSE)
(WAREHOUSE)
(WAREHOUSE/
MANUFACTURING)
CD
Z
u
Co
OFFICE
r7801
782
784
786
F788]
OFFICE
F13
3
14
2
(E) PARKING
15
16
(E) DRIVEWAY
|
'
�
P|NEFxLLS AVENUE
|
SITE PLAN
;OPERTY OWNER: STERLING CAPITAL INC.
)DRESS: 780-788 PINEFALLS AVE., DIAMOND BAR, CA 91789
)NTNG: INDUSTRIAL (I)
'N: 8760-027-003, TRACT 32554, LOT 2
T SIZE: 21,466 S.F.
IILDING SQUARE FEET: 9,586 S.F.
(SINESS OWNER(S): RANMAL EDUCATIONAL SERVICES INC.
SINESS OWNER'S ADDRESS: 801 BREA CANYON ROAD, DIAMOND BAR, CA 91789
SINESS AREA: 3,835 S.F.
-------------- FE -126.33' __--__---
^ (E) PARKING
I
AREA:3,835 S.F.
14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
SITE PLAN
Attachment 3
Tutoring Business
Description
Our business is to tutor the minds of tomorrow's future. Statistics show that test scores and grades have
been at an all time low. Our business is to tutor children between kindergarten and sixth grade to excelin
math skills, algebra, geometry, communication ' skills, reading comprehension,writingskills, creativewriting, and test preparatory skills. Our tutors use specialized equipment and methods to improve
academic performance and STAR scores and develop better studying and test taking skills. Specialized
teaching methods include "sentence analysis technique", "grammar symbols", and "dynamic link method"
to teach language. Specialized equipment includes the "geometric cabinet" used in math and geometry.
Our business focuses on tutoring five major components, which, include Test pneporoDon.Math
'
Communication, Reading, and Writing. VVooffer these subjects Monday through Friday atdifferent slot
times to accommodate our clients' busy schedules. Our sessions are QO minutes in length for each
category. Clients can enroll in as.many subjects as they wish during any time slot throughout the week.
For instance, our clients can enroll their children for the Math Tutoring on Monday and for Reading '
Tutoring for Friday. Our sessions are offered in groups, between 3-9 students, and one-on-one. There will
be a total of tutors, 3i the morning session and 3i the afternoon session. One will serve as -the group
tutor, the second will serve as a private tutor, and the third will serve as receptionist. Since each tutor
specializes in o specialized aubioot' the tutors will rotate during each session enthat each one serves as
o group tutor, private tutor and areoeption\sL
Our business anticipates nomore than 10 students during each tutoring block C] -Qin each group and i
private)ondnomore than ab�a of students d and most students take more than one subject.
Below is a chart of the subjects available throughout the week to get a better understanding of how our.
program offers different subject at different brnoa Monday through Friday. We will not be opened on the
�m�
similar businesses that cater to children in this same � group, «/,_" / which are The
Music Store ' (teach music to d�\dren).and De|km Dance (teaches dance to children). Both are in the same
business park
located across the street. Our business will nottuooh, but tutor children to excel in school.
Time
Monday
Tue sday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
8:00 am
Test Preparation
Writing
Reading
Test Preparation
Communication
8:30 am
9:00 am
9:30 am
Math
Test Preparation
Writing
Reading
Math
10:00 am
10:30 am
11:00 am
Communication
Math
Test Preparation
Writing
Test Preparation
11:30 am
12:00 prn
12:30 pm
1:00 Pm
CLOSED FOR LUNCHrTRANSITION
PERIOD
1:30 pm
Test Preparation
Communication
Math
Test Preparation
Writing
2:00 pm
2:30 pm
3:00 pm
Reading
Test Preparation
Communication
Math
Reading
3:30 pm
4:00 pm
4:30 prn
Writing
Reading
Test Preparation
Communication
Test Preparation
5:00. Prn
pm
ME
=IME
a IMSE
ql - ". -
<
0
<
C)
<
0
<
0
z
CD
z
CU
cu
U-)00
CU')
IIII
OD
L?
a)
LO
76
co
Ets
0
E
0
_030
a)
0
>
?
Oi,.�
0
--)
0
0-
a IMSE
ql - ". -
<
0
<
C)
<
0
<
0
z
CD
z
CU
cu
U-)00
CU')
IIII
OD
L?
a)
LO
76
m co
-a
--A
?
Oi,.�
CL
3:
.9 E
E
E
0
E
V3
C,
0
0
CD
NN
0
E
<
CD
N
U)
it
-.1
n
-j
IL
CL
n
4-
n
n
LU
0
CL
a
n
n
cr-
ry,
(D
a)
a)
uj
cu
cu
tr-
a IMSE
0-
a
a
a
C-
0-
0-
m
CU
cu
CL
IIII
c .2
a)
a)
76
m co
-a
'a
'a
CL
3:
.9 E
E
E
E
E
0
0
0
0
0
LLI
0
0
r-
C:
1:
C:
6.2
a)
0
(D C:
6.0
4-
0
0
0
0
a
'0
_0
_0
0)
a)
a)
uj
cu
cu
tr-
0-) E
E
UE
10�
CD
— -0
— 0
CO
Lo 0
CO 0
F-- 0
— 0
4
<
N
q
co
Z
0o
N
cli
C\l
L)
0
Fn
'o
1�
L)
(n
C:
111
0
.2
(L)
U) C:
o
(1) (D
U)
0
E
w
>
E5
(D
C) (D
M
Q)
ID �W
cp
Z
0—
E_0
n
—
m
m
In
m
r– (D
- '&I
"
<
w
E
<
!Z5
C) m
ash
�5 . S
i --
(n
Z
T aw)
C)
C
-0
co
ti
c:
—c OE
L'o E
- (n
0 -114
L -J w
z
<
CD
co o
-
C\l
co
(D a)
o
m 0
Co ry
rz
(D
(D
z
fD
CL
N —
N
r--
N
C', �11
<
a IMSE
cu cu
0
C: c 0 0 C: 0
U( m I L) cu I m
L) u
0-
0-
a
a
a
C-
0-
0-
m
CU
cu
m
IIII
c .2
a)
a)
76
m co
-a
'a
'a
CL
E
.9 E
E
E
E
E
cu cu
0
C: c 0 0 C: 0
U( m I L) cu I m
L) u
0-
0-
a
a
a
C-
0-
0-
m
CU
cu
m
*
c .2
a)
a)
76
m co
-a
'a
'a
CL
E
.9 E
E
E
E
E
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
r-
C:
1:
C:
6.2
a)
0
(D C:
6.0
4-
0
0
0
0
a
'0
_0
_0
0)
a)
a)
0
cu
cu
tr-
0
0
0
0
C:
C: c
r- C:
c c
0
-
0
04
0
*
c .2
.0
76
m co
t6
0
E
-L)E
E
.9 E
I
a �
-
a°
< F=
o- 40-
< r-
o-,2
< •S;
oa 'o
< S;
0
0
0
co
-a
-0
a)
D
'0
co
F:
Or
a)
a)
IL
(D
co
IU' DJ I Iz- Io
(3)
CD 't
c Nr
0
0
n o:)
Or
O
O
0
0
C)
N
0
04
n
-j
-j
n
(L
0
( z.ff
cr
ry
❑n
I
cc
co
IL
C)
LLJ
. W
—
0
c
0
Id
L)
C:
0
-0 =
=3
cr
Cn
cc
co
C)
LLJ
. W
—
0
0 0)
:�, ()
>
-N&
W
Q) —
0
n
C: �F-
m o
C:
6.2
a)
0
(D C:
6.0
ry
�:, =
0
Ic\l
_0
-0
-0
-0
--a
CU -0
(D
cu
cu
, m
—
0-) E
E
UE
z
CD
— -0
— 0
CO
Lo 0
CO 0
F-- 0
— 0
4
<
N
q
co
"t rr
N
cli
C\l
7
m
a.
m
cu
M
cu
cu
m
m
m
cu
m
m
M
m
cu
cu
M
C:
a
C
c
a:
C)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
P
0
0
0
0
0
-0
_0
'0
_0
-a
_0
-0
'0
_0
_0
_0
'0
cu
cu
m
m
co
cu
m
cu
cu
cu
cc
(o
M
cu
cu
10
IC
10
10
10.
10
10
40-
40-
10
10
10
10
4O -
O)
0)
0)
0)
CY)
0)
0)
0)
0)
CA
0)
0)
0)
0)
CY)
C
C:
c
rz
c
cu
m
cu
cu
M
cu
cu
M
cu
cu
m
cu
cz
m
co
r_
c
c
C
C:
O
.0
.0
.2
.0
.2
O
O
O
O
.0
.0
.2
.2
.0
m
m
cu
cu
m
m
m
m
m
m
cu
m
m
m
0L)
L)
0
0
0
0
0.
CL
c-
CL
0-
CL
CL
c-
CL
CL
c-
0-
CL
0-
CL
CL
C).
0-
CL
a
CL
CL
CL
C).
CL
0-
CL
0�
0-
L.L
co
m
m
m
cu
(z
m
m
cu
w
ca
m
m
m
m
a)
(D
(D
(D
a)
a)
(Da)
a)
Q)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
(D
1)
A
'a
'a
'a
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
O
c
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
U
L)
0
0
L)
0
0
0
L)
0
L)
0
0
L)
C:
r
C:
0
0
0
0
4-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
'0'0
'0
'0
_0
a)
Q)
Q)
(D
W
(D
Q)
(1)
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
O
0
Q—)
0
0
0
0
0
C:
0
c c
— 0
c c
— 0
C: C:
— 0
c
—C 0
a r_
0
c
0
cc
c C
— 0
a c
— 0
.
>
a a
0
c c
— 0
c rz
— 0
a a
— 0
c a
— 0
C' r_-
c =
a =
C'
c
c =
C: Lp
(1)
c'
C: r_-
r_ *;_-
c
m m
m m
m m
m m
m m
m m
m m
m m
m m
m m
-
m
m m
m m
m m
m m
c-) E
2 E
.2 E
.0 E
.2 E
.2 E
c-) E
.0 E
E
.0 E
a)
E
E
.9 E
.0 E
E
•
0
0
'Ro
L6
-CR
-a-
C)
'a
'a,2
a-
-a-
CL
CL
0-10
0-10
< C:
C)
CL I-
CL 10
CL
C:
CL
0 -
< C:
CL 10
<.0
CL 12
< l:
cr
CA
U)
a)
Cl) 0
—1 =3
m
0
0)
0
m
m
CL.
cm
c
N
a)
cn 0
m
cu
0
r-)
(v
cn
E
0
m
cu
cn
:3
=3
0
-2
m
0
n
a)
a)
m
co
0
m
0
m
0
cn
m
U-
0
ry
L)
rt,
cu
cu
ry
0
m
m
M
z
z
(D
(D
C)
z
z
r)
0
o
z
z
r)
00
co
CD
0
CO
m
co
CN
r--
co
CO
CO
LO
lq-
M
N
C?
C?
I?
0
C
CD
—
—
0
0
0
0
CN
C)
N
CN
0
CN
0
0
C:)
cli
0
cli
0
C14
C14
-j
-j
-i
n
IL
-j
o-
Cj
-J
IL
0-
n
n
-i
CL
n
DL
_j
0-
rr
0�
n
Z)
Of
ll�
ry
DI—C)
D
C)
C
_0 (D
L)
a)
-0
E
E
0
cn
>
n
F
a)
F
n
=3
a)
U)
>>
CO:2
co
(D
'0
(D
-0
'in-
-3,
L)
ui
E
in
a)
E
cn
0)•Fn
U)
E
42
n
F
a)
a)
co
0
>
E
2
u)
-1 5;
o
a)
C -L
>
a)
a)
0)
C:
p
cl)
— =
— =
0
0
E
cu
E
o-,
U)
Q) E
a) cr
(D
E
E
15
CL
0
U) (n
(D u-
0)
a)
0)
cn
a)U@
U
E
0
a)
(D
0
cn
0
C a)
C: a)
C:
U)
a)
0) 0
0
o—
-0 C:
0
C:
cu Ex
M 0
3:
0
a)
c
m cr
a)
rz -a.
m
- .-
(n
0-
0) ry
Z
-i
-0 cu
0
CD a)
_0 C_-
C *U5
0-J
*v— CO
-1 2
r-
—
-J C:
Fn
Q)
LL
En
C)
E
.2
0 U)
0 Co
0 -01
—0
U- .—
—,
C
.;--
Lo 0
o a)
—
u u)
C.)
c —
4-- :3
z
(D
o
0) IE5
-,4-
Lo 3:
r- 0
Ln 0
U-) =—
't �:
0-0
co :3
C) Q)
U
U
Lo 3:
WLO
0
Q�
M -0
N
Z
N a)
MZ
CN 3:
—
r a)
Z
--0
p0¢
CD :3
—5
It a)
C\j Z
CO -0
LO <
0) -r-
O()
Cl)
0)
Co
n
Q)
Co 7,
n
Q)
�2
OZ
o
CL
CL
.0
—
— :tl
— —
Nt
—
N—
N —
N—
— —
N—
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR bC1Ww,'J9-1 90
1, Stella Marquez, declare as follows:
On April 26, 2011, the Diamond Bar Planning Commission will hold a regular
session at 7:00 p.m., at the South Coast Quality Management District/Government Center
Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
Items for consideration are listed on the attached agenda.
1, Stella Marquez, declare as follows:
I am employed by the City of Diamond Bar. On April 22, 2011, a copy of the agenda
of the Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission was posted at the
following locations:
South Coast Quality Management
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
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on April 22, 2011, at Diamond Bar, California.
2 -
- (U 11 a
-
Stella Marquez
Community Development Department
p
CD/zstcll,,i\atlid,ivitposting.doc