Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/24/1999wnm�' j A - AM WIN IN, IEJ� VUGUST 24, - 1991 Chairman Steve Tye Vice Chairman Steve Nels,-n Commissioner George Kuo Commissioner Joe McManus Commissioner Joe Ruzicka Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Planning Division of the Dept. of Community & Development Services, located at 21660E Copley Drive, Suite 190, and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please call (909) 396-5676 during regular business hours. In an effort to comply with the reqLdrements of Title 11 of the Americans with. Disabilities Act of 1.990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or accommodarion(s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting must inform the Dept. of Community & Development Services at (909) 396-5676 a minimum of 72 hours -prior to the scheduled meeting. Plea -se ref rain f rom stnoking, eating or drinking in the Auditorium Tfit City of Minond Bar uses Tecycid pa and encourages you to d 3 the s I City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission The meetings of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission are open to the public. A member of the public ma%, addres:b th jurisdiction of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission. A request to address Commission should be subr ttedi, ni in writing at the public hearing, to the Secretary of the Commission. IM, -19 "UMIU-1i VII a' 611,11,111, V1.11011=' OWN &P A Atf MM JT&J, LCI LO 41VC XICIr PrIsenEtation Mat F time the item is called on the calen Chair t individual public input to five minutes on any item; or the Chair may limit the total amount of e alloca for public testimony based on the number of people requesting to speak- and the business of the Co Individuals are requested to conduct themselves in a professional and buisinesslike . manner. Comments and questions are welcome so that all points of view are considered prior to the Commissiox, rtt &krig, twnn-o7or --, In accordance %kith Government Code Section 54954.3 a) the Chair - I-roact, t4neis-o AK WOUTMEO - - - -- a , - I - - 1,1,76-cuzrwission meetings are prepared by the Planning Division of the Community mrid Development Sen,ices Department. Agendas are available 72 hours prior to the meeting at City Hall and the pu,blic 11bran-, and may be accessed by personal computer at the number below. E% ern meeting of the Planning Commission is recorded on cassette tapes and duplicate tapes are available for a nominal charee ADA — QUIREMENTS A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot access the public speaking area- The service of the cordless microphone and sign language interpreter services are available by giving notice at least three business days in advance of the meeting. Please telephone (909)396-5676 between 8:00a.m. and 5:00p.m. Monday through Friday. MR -M 0 Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Cominission, Cassette Tapes of Meetings (909) 396-5676 Computer Access to Agendas (909) 860-LWE General Agendas (909) 396-5676 email: infO&I.diamond-bar.ca.us CITY DIAMOND FM13 BAR Tuesday August 24, 1999 ITIMA, 11,12 C�7.tf�1�Ti r�Z� ,r .► �t�A�l� Next Resolution No. 99-20 PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE: I ROLL CALL,: COMMISSIONERS: Chai Steve Tye, Vice Chairman Steve Nelson, George Kuo, Joe McManus and Joe Ruzicka. 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. The following items listed on the consent calendar are considered routine and are approved by a single motion. Consent calendar items may be removed fro -the agenda by request of the Commission only: 4.1 Minutes: August 10, 1999 5. ®LD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: None 8.1 Development Review No. 99-5, Variance No. 99-7, Tree Permit No. 99-1. and Negative Declaration No. 99-7 (pursuant to Code Sections 22.54, 22.48, and 22.38) is a request to construct a 11,429 square foot two-story and basement single-family residence with 2,572 square foot four -car garage and storage space, motor court, pool/spa, tennis court and gazebo. The Variance is requested to allow a 10% variance in height from 35 feet to approximately 38.3 feet. The Tree Permit is requested to allow replacement trees as mitigation measure for the removal of nine native California Walnut trees currently on site. = �M' 07M 2856 Wagon Train Lane (Tract No. 30578, Lot - • .. r r. Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Peichin Cheng 17800 Castleton Street, 4106, City of Industry, CA 91765 Anchi Lee 1 3740 Campus Drive, #B, Newport Beach, CA 92664 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15070, the City has determined that this project requires a Negative Declanxtion. Negative Declaration No. 99-7 has been prepared. The Negative Declaration review period began August 4, 1999, and ended August 24, 1999. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. 99-5, Tree Permit No. 99-1 and Negative Declaration No. 99-7, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within the resolution. 10. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 10.1 Video tape of Four Comers Report presented to City Council on August 17, 1999. 10.2 Public Hearing dates for future projects. CONJUNCTION WITH THE DIAMOND BAR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: NIGHT AT THE QUAKES: NFIVITMIFTYIVLIJM—��f � COMMITTEE: IX "OYMMA."A'9111 oil 17,11VA Fourth Tuesday of each month through November 1999 7:00 P.M. — 9:00 P.M. AQMD, CC6, 21865 E. Copley Drive Wednesday, August 25, 1999 - Bus leaves City Hall at 5:30 P.M., Game Time 7:00 P.M. Thursday, August 26, 1999 — 7:00 P.M. AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive Monday, September 6, 1999 - City Offices closed City Offices will re -open Tuesday, Septembei-7, 1999 Tuesday, September 7, 1999 — 6:30 P.M. AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive d:\\agenda\p1anning\august 24, 1999 August 24, 1999, PC Agenda In Om Thursday, September 9, 1999 — 7:00 P.M. Alf,MD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive X I' " V IT rt ff rin M w w U, 10 d I d:\\agenda\planning\au gust 24, 1999 August 24, 1999, PC Agenda MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 10, 1999 Chairman Tye called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond iii_.: ffe", Uff1=0 a Present: Chairman Steve Tye, and Commissioners George Kuo, Joe McManus and Joe Ruzicka. Vice Chairman Steve Nelson was excused. Also Present: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager, Linda Smith, Development Services Assistant, Sonya Joe, Development Services Assistant and Stella Marquez, Administrative Secretary. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. 1. Minutes of July 27, 1999. C/Ruzicka moved, C/Kuo'seconded, to approve the minutes of July 27, 1999, as presented. Motion carried 4-0 with VC/Nelson being absent. *'LD BUSINESS: Nou— NEW BUSINESS: None Ewe Me - 1. Conditional use Permit No. 99-4 and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 99-9 (pursuant to Code Sections 22.58, 22.56, 22.10.030 and Table 2-6) is a request to provide entertainment, outdoor dining and the sale and on-site consumption of alcoholic beverages within an existing restaurant structure. PROPERTY ADDRESS: 245 Gentle Spring Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY SX Diamond Bar 259 Gentle Spring Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PLIC Chris Pierce, Platinum Restaurant 245 Gentle Spring Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 DCM/DeStefano presented staff s report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approv* ConditionalUse Permit N.• 99-4 and Minor• d.•, Use Permit No. 99-9, Findingsof • conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Chris Pierce, 23527 Prospect `Talley Drive, indicated to Chair/Tye that dancing will take place after dinner has been served, 10:00 p.m. The request for early serving of alcoholic beverages was to accommodate Sunday Brunch. 11:00 a.m. would be perfectly acceptable. Jill Pierce, 17451 Brooklyn Avenue, Yorba Linda 92886, stated that the applicant was very surprised to learn that Gentle Spring Lane is a private street. The applicant leases the building from the property owner and during the lease negotiations, they had no idea that they would incur additional expense to fix the street in front of the restaurant. She believes that the primary damage to the street is from semi -tracks pulling into the Kmart Shopping Center which are pulled into the lot by owners who sleep and then get back on the freeway. She believes that it is an unfair burden to the applicant to require, as a condition of approval, that 150 feet of the street in front of the restaurant be slurry sealed. She believe- it will look out of place and will not solve the ultimate problem. She requested that the condition be eliminated from the approval. DCM/DeStefano stated that the street is in disrepair. Before the Commission is a discretionary permit with a clear nexus between the need to repair the street and the type of operation that is occurring in the location. Staff 'is recommending that the improvement take place. It is within the Commission's discretion to take an alternative course. C/McManus asked if it is feasible to have the property owner complete the slurry seal from in front of the restaurant to the end of the street. DCM/DeStefano responded that it would make more sense to do it that way. however, the property owner has not, in many years, improved the street. DCM/DeStefano indicated to Chair/Tye that it is in the City's best interest to see that the slurry seal gets done. This application request presents that opportunity and it is not the City's concern who does the slurry seal. Chair/Tye asked the applicants why they believes their proposed restaurant will work at this location when there have been others before them that have failed. t•3_�ei�� Jill Pierce believes businesses fail be__:w bedon't know area.their costs as related to their prices. This building is a unique facility. There are banquet facilities for weddings and holiday parties. There is a wine cellar which will accommodate parties of 30-40 people which is.conducive to certain kinds of private parties. The facility has a -dining room, a bar, etc. Many residents have expressed excitement about the proposed restaurant. There is nothing quite like it in Diamond Bar and people are anxious to have a fine dining and entertainment facility which is conducive to the demographics of Diamond Bar. As applicants, we spent a lot of time looking at the demographics before deciding to operate in the community. Several of the applicants'family members live in Diamond Bar and we feel very strongly about this community. This is a family-owned business and we intend to be hands-on managers. We have owned other successful businesses that have worked over the pears and we believes this ce�ro�ect will work in this C/Ruzicka said that in view of what the applicant has just stated, would it not be to your advantage, although there is a cost involved, to have your particular section of street repaired to show not only the pride that you have in your facility, but to point out how bad the rest of the street looks in comparison, and perhaps enjoin those other property owners to make their portion of the street look as good as the applicants. Jill Pierce stated that when they leased the facility, they did not believe the parking lot needed to be resurfaced because it looked just like all of the other parking lots at all of the other restaurants and Kmart, MacDonalds, etc. Contractors have told them that the parking, lot is not that bad and they never expected to be conditioned to resurface the parking lot. When staff recommended the resurfacing it, although we prefer not to have to spend thousands of dollars more than anticipated we'll do it anyhow because the kind of high class restaurant we anticipate should show shiny new white lines and a new blacktop parking lot in spite of the fact that it would be the only one that would look like that in the neighborhood. In response to that, I agree with you, Commissioner Ruzicka. Candidly, I'm trying to pico:re what 150 feet of resurfacing halfway through to the centerline will look like and I don't believe it will look classy. I personally believe it would look like a patchwork quilt. And I don't know how long it would take for that stretch of the street to look like everything else since the majority of the time there are semi -trucks on the street. In response to C/Ruzicka, DCM/DeStefano stated that the street has been in its present condition for many years and is the result of combined neglect of all of the property owners. No one is maintaining the street. He is not aware of complaints regarding semi -trucks parked on the street. Most commercial areas do not permit on -street parking. This area does permit on -street parking because it is a private street. He said he suspects more people are parking in the lots rather than on the street. Responding to C/McManus, DC eStefano stated that the City has a right to require the property owner to repair the street. It begs the larger question of whether that portion of the street is repaired or whether the entire street is repaired and therefore, bringing all of the other property owners together into one joint effort. He suggested that staff work with the applicants to re-examine the condition regarding slurry seal of the parking lot and focus on the appropriate areas of restriping in the parking lot and thereby transfer the slurry effort to the street in order to get that portion of the street repaired. The condition suggests that slurry sealing and appropriate modifications take place within three months after opening. He recommended that the Commission grant an additional length of time - 3 months, 6 months, in order to provide an opportunity for staff to coordinate with other property owners, if they are willing to cooperate, and provide the owner of this facility an appropriate opportunity to develop reserves to proceed with the work during that period of time. DCM/DeStefano indicated to Chair/Tye that the parking lot is in generally good shape. It needs spot slurry and restriping in certain areas. The handicap accessibility aisle needs restriping. The street needs an overlay. It is much more complicated to patchwork the overlay and therefore, all of the other property owners need to be involved. The street is more likely to be crack -sealed and slurried than it is to be truly overlaid in just this small patch. Jill Pierce said that the applicant did bud not get to slurry the parg kinlot bica ecause it looks good. She indted that they had intended to restripe where applicable, paint the red curb and upgrade the handicap area. If they are required to. expend funds, they would rather redo the parking lot because it involves the image of the restaurant whereas, the street does not speak so much to that image. She believes that because the street is a private street, it is the responsibility i'_ property owners and she would like to see the'street area as a separate project. 10196,1117-01, 111011,111,11, 1 1 BMW what progress has been made or the Commission could have the matter brought back to deal with the street issue after an appropriate amount of time such as six months, to determine whether this applicant will be required to slurry seal their portion of the street. Responding to C/Ruzicka, DCM/DeStefano stated that there is a reasonable expectation that the property owners will cooperate. Jill Pierce stated that in lieu of her property owner's participation, she will willingly participate in a joint effort to rehabilitate the street. C/Kuo said he does not see how repair of the street is related to the applicant. Be believes the applicant is innocent in this matter and that the condition should be stricken. He recommended that DCM/DeStefano ask the City Attorney if the City has any power to compel the owners to fix the street. Be does not believe that this matter needs to be brought back before the Commission for purposes of placing this burden back on the applicant. There being no further testimony offered, Chair/Tye closed the Public Hearing. C/McManus moved, Chair/Tye seconded, to approve Conditional use Permit No. 994 and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 99-9. Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution subject to the following amendments by C/Ruzicka and Chair/Tye: Delete Condition 5. (c) (5) on Page 5; add a condition that no alcoholic beverage be served on premises prior to 10:00 a.m. Further, staff is directed to see to the complete restoration of Gentle Spring Lane. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: August 24 Planning Commission meeting. Kuo, McManus, Ruzicka, Chair/Tye None VC/Nelson Chair/Tye stated he will not be present at the Tuesday, WCAURIAN INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: DCM/DeStefano stated that at its next meeting, the Planning Commission will consider a proposed 18,000 square foot office building on a one acre lot for Automobile Club's auto emission testing facility to be located between Kelly -Clarke and SEMA in the Gateway Corporate Center. The Commission may also be considering a height variance for a single family residence. The Commission will be considering amendments to the General Plan's Housing Element as well as, beginAhe zone change process toward the end of this year. Hes'poke year. t>> that Conunissioners who are interested in attending the Three Valleys Municipal Wafer District State Water District facilities tour the weekend of September 23 to advise AS/Marquez. He talked about the ongoing process toward construction of a skateboard park facility. The City Council approved a contract,%Nith Economic Research Associatesto look at the costs associated with four potential sites under consideration for a civic/community center complex. d" u�,l�p4mminf�lpirlilll� As listed in the agenda. C/McManus moved, C/Ruzicka seconded, to adjourn the meeting. There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair/Tye adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, James DeStefano Deputy City Manager Attest Steve Tye Chairman �.ITEM NUMBER: PORT DATE: August 19, 1999 MEETING , ,,,_ August J 1999 CASE/FILE ER: Variance No. 99-7, Development Review No. 99-5, Tree Permit No. 99-1 and Negative Declaration No. 99-7 APPLICATION REQUEST: A request to construct a 11,429 square foot two-story and basement, single-family residence with 2,572 square foot six -car garage and storage space, motor court, pool/spa, barbecue, tennis court and gazebo. The Tree Permit is for the removal/replacement of nine native California Walnut trees currently on site. PROPERTY LOCATION: 2856 Wagon Tr -in Lane (Lot 71 of Tract No. 30578) PROPERTY OWNER: Peichin Cheng 17800 Castleton St., #106 City of Industry, CA 91748 APPLICANT: Anchi Lee 3740 Campus Drive, #B, Newport Beach, CA 92660 The property owner, Peichin Cheng, and applicant, Anchi Lee, requests a Development Review and Tree Permit approval (pursuant to Code Sections 22.48 and 22.38) in order to construct a 11,429 square foot two-story and basement, single-family residence with 2,572 square foot six -car garage and storage space, motor court, pool/spa, barbecue, tennis court and gazebo. The Tree Permit is requested to allow replacement trees for 1 the removal of nine existing native California Walnut trees on-site. The project site is located at i • Wagoni of No. y the gated community identified as "The Country Estates." It is a vacant parcel approximately 1.38 gross acres 4 1. 31 net acres. It is _• • irregularly, widening and 'parcelsloping downward toward the rear, southeasterly exposure. The rear of the area for Tract abuts the mitigation• •.. •. 47851. Grading, drainage and retaining wall improvements are necessary to facilitate • _ • on • _. The project site is zoned Rural Residential . (RR) for single-family residence with a minimum lot_ of • _ acre. Its General Plan Land Use designation is Rural Residential (RR) . Generally, the following zones surround the subject site: to the north, south, east and west is the Rural • Zone. VAR T AMrF. The application was originally proposed and advertised as a Variance due to the residence's proposed height of 38.3 feet. Per Development Code Sections 22.16.060 and 22.22.120, heights for structures are measured from the natural or finished grade adjacent to any point at each exterior wall of the structure to the highest point of the roofline, above and parallel to the natural or finished grade to a maximum of 35 feet. In hillside areas such as this application, the architecture must follow the natural slope with the roofline cascading to avoid a rigid vertical element. The applicant and staff have actively pursued solutions to avoid the 38.3 feet height. Exhibit "A", page A-8, is consistent with the 35 -foot height requirement. With the use of retaining walls under 6 feet and excavated underground rooms, the submitted application follows architectural -guidelines of the Development Code. REVIEW AUTHORITY This application requires development review per the City's Development Code. Section 22.48.020.A(1) states that Development Review is required for projects involving a Building Permit for new construction on a vacant parcel greater than 10,000 square feet. The proposed project is residential construction greater than 10,000 square feet; therefore, Development Review is required with the Planning Commission as the review authority. A Tree Permit is required per Section 22.38 to allow the removal and replacement of nine existing native California Walnut trees. The review authority for the Tree Permit is the Director. Pursuant to Development is Code Section 0.0 thr- highest authoritydetermination. In this case, t Pla - .- • Commission is -the highest authority. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW The following is a comparison of the City's approved development standards and the project's proposed development standards: The above analysis indicates that the proposed residence complies with the City's development standards. The proposed project's architectural style is Mediterranean. The proposed style and palette are compatible with the eclectic architectural style of other homes within Tract No. 30578 and "The Country Estates." The applicant has received the approval of "The Country Estates" Homeowners' Association architectural committee. The following materials and colors will be utilized: ® Exterior stucco - La Habra X-53, Pure Ivory, Sand Finish - La Habra X-23, Aspen, Sand Finish ® Exterior trims: Eaves Pre -cast items Sheet metal items Steel railing Wood entry/garage - To match X-23 Aspen - To match X-23 Aspen - To match X-23 Aspen - Copper - Stain - light 3 City's Development Standards Project's Development Standards 1. Setbacks: 1. Setbacks: ® Front yard -30' from property ® Front yard-. 40' from property line line ® Side yards -10' & 15' minimum • Side yards- 10' and 18' from from property line property line ® Rear yard -20' minimum from • Rear yard- 36' from property property line; line; 2. Building Height: 2. Building Height: ® Maximum 35'; ® Maximum 35'; 3. Parking: 3, Parking: • Minimum two -car garage. • Six -car garage and motorcourt. 4. ccessory s ruc urea: . ccessory structures: • Tennis,cqurt4me as main five • Tennis court - sides 18'/24' • Ppol Tlnlmum feet line • Pool - closest side 28' • sides/rear,pvopertyy B,�rbeGGue minimum three feet • Barbecue - 12' closest side sideMear property ine • Gazebo same as main • Gazebo - closest side 41", rear 156' The above analysis indicates that the proposed residence complies with the City's development standards. The proposed project's architectural style is Mediterranean. The proposed style and palette are compatible with the eclectic architectural style of other homes within Tract No. 30578 and "The Country Estates." The applicant has received the approval of "The Country Estates" Homeowners' Association architectural committee. The following materials and colors will be utilized: ® Exterior stucco - La Habra X-53, Pure Ivory, Sand Finish - La Habra X-23, Aspen, Sand Finish ® Exterior trims: Eaves Pre -cast items Sheet metal items Steel railing Wood entry/garage - To match X-23 Aspen - To match X-23 Aspen - To match X-23 Aspen - Copper - Stain - light 3 ® Roof tile - Monier Life Tile, Autumn Blend ® Vinyl windows/doors - Sinclair White ® Stone veneer - Cultured Stone, Mojave Pro -fit Ledgestone ® Driveway concrete - Color to be submitted The • .• , r consistsof two -stories ant basement. The basement includes the underground six -car garaqe; laundry; exercise/dancing area; two bedroom -one with bath; seven storage areas; furnace, mechanical, and utility closets; sauna and bath. The first -story includes the Portico with cascading fountain and rock facade, foyer; living room with veranda; music room; dining room; kitchen with pantry & butler closet; nook; wok room; storage closet; coat closet; powder room; library; elevator; hall bath; family room with wet bar and wine cellar; In-law suite with walk -in -closet, bath and balcony; and veranda. ' The second -story includes the elevator landing, master bedroom suite with walk -in -wardrobe, and bath; wet bar; and three bedrooms adjoining bathrooms and walk -in -closets. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES The accessory structures include a pool and spa, tennis court, barbecue, and gazebo. All meet the setback requirements. The colors and materials for the gazebo will match the main structure. Court lighting will be a conditioned to comply with Development Code Standards addressed in Section 22.16.050. These standards include maximum pole height, illumination, placement, hours of operation, and court surfaces. SITE WORK The applicant proposes to do site grading, on-site drainage, and retaining walls. Export is necessary with estimated cut/fill of approximately 3,400 cubic yards. Per Development Code Section 22.16.030 and 22.28, grading permits are issued with conditions related to air emissions and .noise, thereby minimizing impacts to surrounding properties. The retaining walls will be designed to maintain a minimum exposed height. The Development Code allows 6 feet maximum, but the plans indicate walls at approximately 3;-� feet. The proposed design and use of on-site drains disperse runoff to the street and rear of the lot. The grading, drainage, and retaining walls necessary for the improvements will be reviewed and permitted by the Public Works Division. VIEW IMPACT The terrain in the vicinity of Steeplechase Lane and Wagon Train Lane is hilly. The subject site slopes to lower elevations than the northerly neighbors following the southerly -declining slope of Wagon Train Lane. The project site slopes to the lowest point at the southeast corner of 0 maintainingthe lot. The adjoining properties on both sides of the project site aill; single-family two-story residences. By the allowed requirement overall an• with the north elevation of - structure at height of approximately 30 feet, the proposed residential structu allows view corridors to the northerly neighbor; the easterly a neighbors are at a lowerelevations than the subj Currently, the southerly neighbor's northerly view is a slope a retaining -with the structure atapproximately Z5 feet lowe elevation than the subject site. Therefore, the proposed residence wil not .. a significant detrimental .. r. • • Y impact. 1 it A landscape/irrigation plan was submitted for review and approval with this project's application delineating the type of planting materials, color, size; quantity.and location. It will be required that the front yard landscaping/irrigation be installed prior to the Planning Division's final inspection or the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. Any walls, gates, fountains, etc. that may be proposed within the front setback shall not be in the street's dedicated easement. Any such structure or plant material proposed within this front setback shall not exceed a height of 42 inches. A site visit indicates that the arborist's report does not identify vegetation at the rear of the property as incidental, or preserved and protected species. The rear portion of the project site abuts Tract 47851's Mitigation Monitoring area. As a result, plant materials within this portion of the project site are required to be compatible with the mitigation monitoring area as reviewed and approved by the City's environmental consultant. Before the issuance of an,. City permits, the applicant will be required to submit an updated arborist's report (for the City's review and approval) identifying species in the area of the proposed tennis court. If protected species are within this area, Tree Protection will be required per Section 22.38.140. All changes to the project as reflected on the revised site plan, the new planting materials at the rear of the parcel, and the replacement trees as discussed below, will be submitted with a revised set of landscaping plans for the Planning Division's review and approval. The applicant desires to remove the nine native walnut trees on-site because of the owner's high level of allergy to walnut trees (see application). Therefore, preservation of these trees would compromise the property owner's reasonable use and enjoyment of his property. Pursuant to Code, replacement for these trees is at a 3:1 ratio or a total of 27 trees. Per the landscape plan, 16 of the new trees proposed on the site at the front are California Sycamore, 36" box, species 19 determined per the Development Code as protected. All replacement trees will be of the native variety from preserved species: Sycamore, Arroyo Willow, or Oak. Five California Pepper trees are proposed in pots ant California Pepper trees will not be considered as replacement trees. This item has been advertised in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and th4 Inl.. Valley Daily Bulletin- lr•- - on August •. _..I ••RFifty-two property owners within a 500 -feet radius of the project site were notified by mail on August 3, 1999. A notice of public hearing on a display board was posted at the site on August 3, 1999 and displayed for at least 20 days before the public hearing. Three other sites were postedwithin.. vicinity • .._ r application. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that a Negative Declaration is required for this project. 'According to CEQA Section 15070, Negative Declaration No. 99-7 has been prepared. The Negative Declaration's review period begins August 4, 1999 and ends August 24, 1999. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. 99-5, Tree Permit No. 99-1 and Negative Declaration No. 99-7, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within the attached resolution. 1. The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, development standards of the applicable district, design guidelines, and architectural criteria for specialized area (e.g., theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards, or planned developments); 2. The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards; 3. The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain and enhance the harmonious orderly and attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.48, the General Plan, City Design Guidelines, or any applicable specific plan; 0 remain4. The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public; as well as, its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will aesthetically •• • 5. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative affect on property values or resale(s) of property) to the properties or improvements in the vicinity; and 6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In order to approve an application for a Tree Permit or Tree Pruning Permit, it shall be necessary that one or more of the following findings be made, otherwise the application shall be denied: 1. The tree is so poorly formed due to stunted growth that its preservation would not result in any substantial benefits to the community. 2. The tree interferes with utility services, or streets and highways, either within or outside of the subject property, and no reasonable alternative exists other than removal or pruning of the tree(s). 3. The tree is a potential public health and safety hazard due to the risk of it falling and its structural instability cannot be remediated. 4. The tree is a public nuisance by causing damage to improvements, (e.g. building foundations, retaining walls, roadways/driveways, patios, and decks) . S. The tree is host to an organism, which is parasitic to another species of tree, which is in danger of being exterminated by the parasite. 6. The tree belongs to a species which is known to be a pyrophitic or highly flammable and has been identified as a public safety hazard.' 7. Preservation of the tree is not feasible and would compromise the property owner's reasonable use and enjoyment of property or surrounding land and appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented in compliance with Section 22.38.130 (Tree Replacement/Relocation Standards). FA Prepared by: Linda Kay Smitli Development Services Assistant 1. Applications; 2. Oak Free Statement dated May 28, 1999; 3. Draft Resolution of Approval; 4. Exhibit "A" - site plan, floor plan, elevations, landscape plan, grading plan, renderings, site photos, and materials/color's board, dated August 24, 1999; 5. Negative Declaration 99-07. D:WORD-LINDA\PLANCOMM\PROJECTS\DR99-5 TREE99-1 2856\DR99-05REP 2856 n CITY OF DIAP—IND BAR s0Copley ! (909)396-5676 Fax (9D9)861-3117 DEVELOPMENT `C APPLICATION Record Owner Marne C h`en .. �t®C�✓1}� . (Last /e first) Address city J Zip Phone >/- Applicant Le -e, /)p c ,1� . (ULst name t) Applicant's Agent (Last name first) Phone( ) NOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Community Developffient Director in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this case. (Attach a separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors of corporations.) Consent: I rtify that I stn the owner of th erein describe arty and permit the applicant to file this request. Signed f' Date (All record own ) � Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. II Print Name (Applicant or Agent) Signed Date L (Applicant or Agent) Location (Street address or tract and lot number) zoning Q f` Previous Cases Present Use of Site Ve ' C el HNM L,2-" 37 7 Use applied for �� �l" pr I1� � /1 (� �i � C�M�r) Legal description (all ow- - -,qbip comprising the proposed lot(s)/pamel(s)) ),, 4 7 / -, r -,i Cf- � r— 0 d" GradingL....... If yes, Quantity cut FW Import Quantity Export If yes, Quantity Applicant's Agent (Last name first) Phone( 3 ® 1 3 / Phone(% ®® phone( ) NOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Community Development Director in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this case. (Attach separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors of corporations.) Consent: I certify that I am the owner of the herein described property and permit the applicant to ,file this request. (All record owners) Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the infr-nation herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. Print Name _ (A plicant or Agent) Signed Date -,1t6/R 9 (App cant or Agent) Location (i.e. address or general description of location) and legal description of property in question: (use additional sheets as necessary) L- ®i 71 ) i CT 30-570) ®N TW40 How many oak trees will be cut, removed, relocated or damaged? &M �l136 P4FMC)VSP How many oak trees will remain? QA u i Will trees to be removed be replaced? If yes, indicate the proposed size, type, location (indicated on site plan) and schedule for planting. ff-Mm"_ry a . —' 1. That the removal or relocation of 'the oak fi*s) proposed is necessary as continued existence at present location(s) frustrates the planned improvement or propose& use of the subject property to �,ijch an extent that: a. Alternative development plans cannot achieve the same permitted density or that the of such alternative would be prohibitive, or b. Placement of such tree(s) precludes the reasonable and efficient use of such property a use otherwise authorized, or I XKM 51 -1 MM K 1 7 MY 4ighways either within or outside of the subject property and no reasonable alternative to such interfere exists other than removal of the tree(s), or 3. That the condition of the oak tree(s) proposed for removal with reference to seriously debilitating disease or danger of falling is such that it cannot be remedied through reasonable preservation procedures and practices. Date: 7/ Applicant's Signature Two (2) oak tree reports certified by the applicant to be true and correct and acceptable to the Community Development Director is rcQuired for each tree shown on the site Dlan. Each re'SWK;AT IAGA•M--, PO -requirnitk--4 � sball contain the following information: 1 0 -, J 0 0 , - f - - 'I I i- I i,' . - 1. - 2. Evaluation of the physical structure of each tree as follows: & ARCHITECTS 714 660-6688 FAX 660-7255 3740 CAMPUS DR. SUITE B. NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 There are nine California walnut trees in the project site. Eight of them are located in the middle of the lot. Since the lot is 25' elevated from the street level with a 2:1 slope across the entire frontage of the property, it will require a 160' long driveway with a 16% slope to climb up to the less steep area (i.e. 20% average slope). This approach will not only require to remove all trees, but -also create a undesirable huge filled slope and some retaining walls next to south side neighbor's property. It seems reasonable to design a basement level at •. than the street for garage and motor court with a shorter driveway (100' long). Although it will still require to remove all the trees in the middle of the lot, the split level type of grading will be in consist of the existing land for -in and bridge the topography of neighbor's properties on both side nicely. Since there is not a single leveled area in this lot, even the minimum grading required to build a house will mean to remove these eight trees completely. Without removing the trees, this lot is just not build -able at all. A certificate from the doctor is also attached to show that the owner is allergic to California walnut trees. It is impossible to leave any of these trees near the proposed house. Since there will be grading required in where the trees are removed, all cuts and fills will be certified and approved by City and consulting engineers. It will not result h. my soil erosion. Date: July 16. 1999 Applicant: An -Chi Lee DR ABN SU PATIENT: MR KEN .CHENG 1850 SOUTH AZUSA SUITE 205 HACIENDA HEIGHTS CA 91745 690000 9971 VOLTS COMMENTS IgE -SPECIFIC MAST PANEL 61036 -ON PROCEDURAL CONTROL 3.23 OK BLANKING THREAD 0.14 OK WESTERN COMPREHENSIVE INHALANT THREAD ALLERGEN VOLTS NAST TEST NUMBER CLASS .•_ , RESPONSE 1 ACACIA 0.00 0 negative 2 ASH (UNITE) 0.00 0 negative 3 BIRCH/ALDER MIX 0.00 0 negative 4 BOX ELDER (MAPLE) 0.00 4 negative 5 CEDAR 0.00 0 negative b COTTDNWODD/WILLDW/ASPEN NIX 0.00 0 negative 7 ELM NIX 0.00 0 negative 8 EUCALYPTUS 0.00 0 negative 9 MESQUITE 0.00 0 negative 10 MULBERRY NIX 0.00 0 negative 11 OAA MIX 0.00 0 negative 12 OLIVE 0.00 0 negative 13 PINE NIX 0.02 0 negative 14 PRIVET 0.00 0 negative 15 SYCAMORE (AMERICAN) 0.02 0 negative fft 16 WALNUT MIX 3.4b 3 HIGH POSITIVE 17 BERMUDA GRASS 0.02 0 negative IB GRASS NIX 0.00 C negative 19 ATRIPLEX 0.00 0 negative 20 BURNING BUSH 0.02 0 negative 21 COCKLEBUR 0.00 0 negative 22 ENGLISH PLANTAIN 0.02 0 negative 23 LAMB'S QUARTERS 0.00 0 negative 24. PIGWEED MIX 0.00 0 negative 25 RAGWEED MIX II 0.00 0 negative 16 RUMEX MIX 0.00 0 negative 27 RUSSIAN THISTLE 0.00 0 negative 28 SAGE NIX 0.00 0 negative 29 CAT 0.00 0 negative 30 DOG 0.00 0 negative 31 HOUSEDUST 0.00 0 negative l 32 MITE (FARINAE) 0.00 0 negative 33 ALTERNARIA 0.00 0 negative 34 ASPERGILLUS 0.00 0 negative 35 CANDIDA 0.02 0 negative 3b CLADOSPORIUM 0.02 0 negative Voltap Range: NAST Class: G.GO - 0,06 0 0.07 - 0.16 0.5 TEST PERFORMED BY: NAST AIlergy Testing Service 0.19 - 0.67 1 630 Clyde Court 0.68 - 1.90 1 Mountain View, California 94043 _ 3.50 3 Vincent A Marinkovich, MD, Director i v.50 4 TEST DATE: 03/30/93 0 2. Name, Address and Phone Number of Key Contact Person(s): I — -,AJ / I —, M 4. Project Assessor's Block and Parcel Number(s): 5. Other Identification (other recorded/map location information): 6-A. Does the project require any of the following actions by the City: YES NO Administrative Development Review Development Review Conditional Use Permit: General Plan Amendment: Plot Plan Review: Subdivision: Variance: Zone Change: dMi 6-B. List and describe any other related standards, permits and other public approvals relevant to thL,, project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: !3WZ-P1A1*- - - rtM 1-1-5, 0 PAPfP4 6p" /T I 07ke 7AP& P&ftm rr Genend Plan Designation: Zoning: / TH I 9-13. - Legal Description of the Project: (anach copy to 1hisform ifnecessary) Wig 10. Describe public or private utility easements, utility lines, structures or other facilities which exist on the surface or below the surface of the project site. 11. Associated Projects: Projects . or potential projects which are directly related to this project ( i.e. potential developments which require completion of this project): 13. Attach one copy of each of the following: a. Preliminary Soils Report b. Preliminary Geologic Investigation. C. Drainage Study. d. Topographic Map highlighting any existing slopes of 25 % or more. C. Tmet Map, Pai—I Map, or Plot Plan clearly showing each am- f cut and each am of fill: all residential unit A (if known), and any arm with slo25 t, a more. pes J. f. Photographs showing the site from different (ie: -north, south, east, west) vantage points and photographs showing vistas (ie: north, south, east, west) from the site. Are the following items applicable to the proposed project or its effects? (Discuss below all items which apply to this project: attach additional sheets as necessary) 5 16. Describe how the proposed project will fit into its surroundings (i.e. will the proposed project blend into and existing neighborhood? How will it relate to the size, scale, style, and character of the existing surrounding 2001S='� 17. Describe any alteration of the existing drainage patterns, or potential for changes in surface or ground water quality or quantity. (Le. will the flow of any permanent or intermittent surface/subsurface water change as a result .1 of this project? How? Will there be any injection wells, septic systems, or other facilities which may affect surface or subsurface water quality?) 18. Describe any long-term noise and/or vibration which may occur as a result of this project: (after construction will this project directly or indirectly cause the generation of noise and or vibration greater than any that exists now?) MM W9 19. Describe any residential construction proposed on filled land (i.e. identify the lot number of each structu proposed to be built of filled land). 1W v'r— rtp-�5&v 20. Do any significant trees exist on the project site now? Describe the effect this project will have on them (i.e. Oak and Walnut trees are considered significant). Describe whether the proposed project will disturb or cause removal of any of these trees. 21. Is the project site located in a national, state, regional or locally designated am of historical, environn=tal or other significance? If so describe. (i.,e. is the site an am designated as a hillside gement am, significant ecological arm, significant mineral resource am, etc.) Environmental Setting: JAoT 4 'W'V4163 t a -01 11111 '00 V F W ga�'�-wg g -0-- R'7 R "M Certification: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attacbed exhibits present the data and information required for initial environmental evaluation of the proposed project. All information is to the best of my knowledge, belief and ability to determine factual, true, correct Rd complete. /9 Date: 1(b /I . I Signature: —OAd—L- For Completion of this form is required to begin review of a project. Information within this form and the required attached materials will assist the City in determining whether a Negative Declaration may be granted, whether a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be granted, or whether Environmental Impact Report shall be required. Lot 71, 2856 Wagon Train Lanz - Diamond Bar, CA 91766 Total nine existing Callforrila Walnut on site. One of them to remain, eight of them to be r8moved & replaced with total 224 trees summarized as following - 1. 15 Gallon Size Trees (Total Quantity 171): Quantity Botanical Name Common Name Remarks 3 A4dtas oTT0VT,=3rnp4Rc5A- Strawberry 1 ree -Remarks 4 Bougainvilleas Assortment Patio Tree L -E- (Per Pot) 10 Chorisia Speciosa Floss Silk Tree L E. /D 58 Citrus Species Lemon, Orange, Tangerines M, E. 18 Cupressus Sempervirens Italian Cypress L. E, 20 Liquidambar S. 'Palo Alto" American Sweet Gum M. D. 9 Melaleuca Quinquenervia Melaleuca M.®. 6 Schinus Molle California Pepper 5 Strelitzia Nicolai (Per Pat) Giant Bird of Paradise 38 Prunus Specis Flower Cherry, Peach Pear If. 24" Box Size Trees (Total Quantity 51): Quantity Botinacial Name Common Name Remarks 4 Betula Pendula European White Birch- H. D. 15 Ginkgo Biloba Maidenhair Tree M, D. 6 Lagerstroemia Indica 'Pink' Crape Myrtle L. D. 5 ®lea Europaea Olive L. E. I Pinus Thunbergiana Japanese Black Pine 16 Pyrus C. 'Cleveland Select' Ornamental Pear M. 4 Tabobuia Rosea Pink Trumpet Tree M.®. Ill. 36" Box Size Trees (Total Quantity 2): Ouant Botinacial Name Common Name Remarks 2 Platanus Racemose California Sycamore Note- H - High Water Use E - Evergreen M - Moderate Water Use D - Deciduous L - Low Water use a� AL The subject property contains no oak, walnut; sycamore, willow, or naturalizef California Pepper trees. The subject property contains one or more oak, walnut sycamore, willow, or naturalized California Pepper trees. The applicant anticipates that'no activity (grading and/or, construction). will take place within rive (5) feet of the outer dripline of any oak, walnut', sycamore, willow, or naturalized California Pepper tree. (Applicant's Fignature) 1. The property owner, Peichin Cheng, and applicant, Anchi Lee, have filed an application to approve Development Review No. 99-5, Tree Permit No. 99-1 and Negative Declaration No. 99-7, for a property located at 2856 Wagon Train Lane, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California and part of the gated development identified as "The Country Estates", as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review, Tree Permit, and Negative Declaration shall be referred to as the "Application". 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, on August 24, 1999, conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. 3. Notification of the public hearing for this project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on August 4, 1999. Fifty-two property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the project site were notified by mail on August 3, 1999. A notice of public hearing on a display board was posted at the site on August 3, 1999 and displayed for at least 20 days before the public hearing. Three other sites were posted within the vicinity of the application. PlantingNOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by tht Commission of of 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. 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Initial Study review and Negative Declaration prepared by - City of a • • Bar in compliance the requirement of the California Environmental Quality Act Q' .. • guideline to Section 15070. Furthermore, Negative Declaration No. 99-7 reflects the independent judgement of the City of Diamond . 3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds ani determines that, having considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which habeen • • • . ' • into . • rebutsconditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence before -this Planning commission that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this Planning commission hereby presumption • adverse effects • r -i in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning Commission, hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to an undeveloped parcel at 2856 Wagon Train Lane (Lot 71 of Tract No. 30578), Diamond Bar, CA, within the gated community identified as "The Country Estate ." The project site is approximately 1.38 gross acres and 1.31 net acres. It is shaped irregularly, widening and sloping downward toward the rear, southeasterly exposure. The rear of the parcel abuts a mitigation monitoring area designed with the improvement of Tract 47851. Grading, drainage and retaining wall improvements are necessary to facilitate construction on the site. (b) The project site is zoned Single -Family Residence - Minimum Lot Size One Acre Rural Residential (RR) Zone. Its General Plan Land Use designation is Rural Residential (RR). (c) Generally, the following zones surround the subject site: to the north, south, east and west is the Rural Residential (RR) Zone. (d) The application is a request to construct a 11,429 square foot two-story and basement, single-family residence with 2,572 square foot six -car garage and F storage space, motor court, pool/spa, barbecue, tennis court and gazebo. A Tree Permit is requested to allow the removal and replacement of nine native California Walnut trees currently on- site. INIM/ M011Qui�i Y1�:i +Iiw1 1 (e) The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, development standards of the applicable district, design guidelines, and architectural criteria- for specialized area (e.g., theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards, or planned developments). The project site and the proposed use is zoned for single-family residence at 1 du/acre. The adopted General Plan of July 25, 1995 has a land use designation of Rural Residential (1 du/acre). The proposed structure and accessory structures comply with the City's General Plan objectives and strategies related to maintaining the integrity of residential neighborhoods and open space. The structures and placement on the parcel conform to the site coverage criteria of the Diamond Har Development Code. Furthermore, the applicant has obtained the approval of "The Country Estates" Homeowners' Association architectural committee. (f) The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. The project site is currently an undeveloped parcel within an existing tract designed for single-family homes. The proposed new construction and accessory structures do not change the use of a single-family residence. The developed property is not expected to unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. The project site is adequately served by Wagon Train Lane. This private street is designed to handle minimum traffic created by this type of development. 0 (g) The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with the characteristics of the surrounding - ••' •i • will maintainthe harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated City Design Guidelines, or any applicable specific plan. The' proposed • •-_. architectural design compatible - eclectic _ - .. .. - of stylingother homes. within "The Country Estates," and is. consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and Development Code. The project uses architectural with the street sideportico r i i fountain and rock fagade, balconies, cascading roof lines down slope,ornamental st- ^ i columns, as well as the layering of materials and finishes via the scoring of i the stone veneer• wood trims, to present design. •.• •n . the colors and materials Countryutilized are compatible with the homes within the surrounding area. The applicant has obtained the approval of the architectural committee of "The r - (h) The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public, as well as its neighbors, through good aes"-hetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically apl, aling. A project colors/materials board is provided as Exhibit "A". The colors, materials, and textures proposed are complimentary to the existing homes within the area while offering variety and low levels of maintenance. (i) The proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative affect on property values or resale(s) of property) to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. City permits, inspections and soils reports are required for construction and will ensure that the finished project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. Lk (j) The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, the City has determined that a Negative Declaration is required for this project. According to CEQA Section 15-070, Negative Declaration No. 99-7 has been prepared. The Negative Declaration's review period began August •.._. •••. • ends August 1999. (k) Preservation of the tree is not feasible and would compromise • property owner's use w • enjoyment of property or _• • • land an appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented in compliance with Section Repl acement/Re location Standards)below. The applicant has submitted that nine native walnut trees are on the site in a grove and scattered, and requests removal of these trees and replacement on- site. Because of the owner's high level of allergy to walnut trees, preservation of these trees would compromise the property owner's reasonable use and enjoyment of his property. Replacement for these trees is at a 3:1 ratio or a total of 27 trees. Sixteen of these trees are already planned as Sycamore, 36" box, and the additiu�ial eleven trees, are a condition of approval. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby approves this Application subject to the following conditions: (a) The project shall substantially conform to site plan, floor plans, elevations and materials/colors board collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" dated August 24, 1999, as submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission. (b) The subject site shall be maintained in a condition that is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction, shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and 0 disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, •nstruction, and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's •,, ._ , insure r.. the waste contractor utilized has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. Befo,re construction begins, the applicant shall install temporary construction fencing pursuant to the Building and Safety Division's requirements • i the •.: • - - perimeter. • shall remain until the Building Official approves its - • (d) The landscape/irrigation plan has been submitted with this application delineating the type of planting materials, color, size, quantity and location. A subsequent plan with native planting materials shall be submitted for all new planting materials at the rear of the parcel, including 27 replacement trees from the protected species list of Sycamore, Arroyo Willow or Oak, and the transitional plants as recommended by the City's environmental consultant. (e) A revised arborist's report shall be submitted to the City for review and approval tagging all trees at the rear of the property abutting the mitigation monitoring slope area of Tract 47851 before any grading or building permits are issued.' Tree Protection Requirements per Section 22.38.140 shall be required for any California Pepper, Arroyo Willow, Sycamore, or Oak. (f) The front landscaping, as well as replacement trees and transition planting at the rear of the project site, shall be installed prior to the Planning Division's final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy issuance. Additionally, any walls, gates, fountains, etc. that may be proposed within the front setback shall not exceed 42 inches in height or be. constructed within the street's dedicated easement. Driveway color shall be provided for Planning Division approval prior to installation and Planning Division's final inspection. • 1 grading r • retainingwallplan review.-- • approval is required for quantities .greater than 50 cubicyards. accordance the City's grading --• _ - ^ - grading • - shall • --reviewed r • approved by - -. before 2 the issuance of a grading permit. on a grading plaMs IN the following shall be delineated: 0 (1) Cut and fill quantities and earthwork calculations; (2) All flow lines, finished surfaces, and finished grades; (3) Proper drainage with detailed sketches; (4) Proposed and existing grades; (5) Sign/stamped by a civil engineer, geotechnical engineer and geologist; (6) Clearly delineate all easements; (7) Indicate retaining wall locations on grading plan and delineate: (a) Top of wall; (b) Top of footing; (c) Finish Surface; (d) Structural calculations; and (e) Retaining wall shall not exceed a height of six feet. (8) A].1 grading is subject to Development Code Sections 22.16.030 (Air Emissions) and Section 22028 (Noise). (h) Applicant shall submit a soils report for the proposed improvements to be reviewed and approved by the City. The soils report shall also reference the suitability of the retaining walls to withstand pressure of the retained soil. and proposed development. (i) Applicant shall verify that the project site is currently connected to the public sewer system and impacts on the sewage capacity as a result of the proposed addition shall be approved. (j) The single-family structure shall meet the 1998 California Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and California Electrical Code requirements. (k) The minimum design wind pressure shall be 80 miles per hour and "C" exposure. (1) The single-family structure is located in "Fire Zone 4" and shall meet the following requirements of that fire zone: (1) All roof covering shall be "Fire Retardant, Class A"; tile roofs shall be fire stopped at 0 DIM.r i the eaves to preclude entry of the flame or members under the fire; (2) All enclosed under -floor areas shall be constructed as exterior walls; (3) All openings into the attic, floor, and/or other enclosed areas shall be covered with corrosion -resistant wire mesh not less than 1-4 inch nor more than Ii inch in any dimension except where such openings are equipped with sash or door; (4) Chimneys shall have spark arresters of maximum 1,� inch screen. This single-family structure shal__ _ State Energy• rStandards. (n) Drainage pattern shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Division; surface water shall drain away from the building at a 2% minimum slope. w Site, driveway grade, and design shall be approved by e Fire Department. The maximum slope is 15% per - Public Works Division. (p) Maximum height of the structure shall measure 35 feet at exterior walls to the highest roofline from the finish grade. (q) Due to the site's topography, appli'�ant shall comply with special design requirements as specified in the U.B.C., Section 18.4.3, building setback, top and toe of slopes. (r) The Applicant shall comply with Planning and Zoning; Building and Safety; and, Public Works and Fire Department requirements. (s) This grant is valid for two (2) years and shall be exercised (i.e. construction) within that period or this grant shall expire. A one -(1) year extension may be approved when submitted to the City in writing at least 60 days prior to the expiration date. The Planning Commission will consider the extension request at a duly noticed public hearing in accordance with Chapter 22.72 of the city of Diamond Bar Development Code. (t) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed, ranw L within fifteen (15) days of approval of this grant, at the City of -• • Bar Community ant Development Services Depa conditionsstating that they are aware and agree to accept all the _ this grant.grant shall not be effective - permittee pays remaining City p• • (u) If the Department of Fish and Game determines that Fish and Game. Code Section 711.4 applies to the approval of.this project, then the applicant shall remit to the City, within five days of this grant's approval, a cashier's check of $25.00 for a documentary handling fee in connection with Fish and Game Code requirements. Furthermore, if this project is not exempt from a filing fee imposed because the project has more than a deminimis impact on fish and wildlife, the applicant shall also pay to the Department of Fish and Game any such fee and any fine which the Department determines to be owed. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this ResolutiDn, by certified mail to Peichin Cheng, 2856 Wagon Train Lane, Diamond Ba-, CA 91765 and Anchi Lee, 3740 Campus Drive, B, Newport Beach, CA 92660. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF AUGUST 1999, BY THE &LANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. IM Steve Tye, Chairman I, James DeStefano, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of August, 1999, by the following vote: N f LJ AYES: NOES ABSENT: STAIN: ATTEST: D:WORD-LINDA\PLANCOMM\PROJECTS\DR99-5 TREE99-1 2856\RESODR99-05 00000a0000aoaoa 14 ass =m 11 '-1 mai= �sr� g�zq DJ2 � mQ 0000a0000 HUMOR IIIaWlsbc ull'I'em 80 s a UP31_111 1{.i 10101 ; w 4 >RoR� �=mac y Egan _ t raaaaaaaa e�e-yy y ryM tom" [p�q" O IT) r`i y rte. �d Oy_C.G �O•t0 ��� va M z®o�N � b z A TUNA'sulu dve GHOWVIG J0 AW 03A13338 Im UP Ogg�= of at o TUNA'sulu dve GHOWVIG J0 AW 03A13338 Im UP IMIIIN� MUNIMUND 0 _ ®soon CMG 4r PLAN zeas aecor+� E T I 1 T T ' 1 bEa I O ca rqo i 4,a z= T i N I 1 I � I I I I � I � I I 1 I ' i 1_- I 1 1 w I _-®_____-_____I i T 1 I � I , i i I r j � 1 1 i I I I / z p I i I I I / i o0000000a A93 p 2.1 � mss— i' g m ffi r � 0 _ ®soon CMG 4r PLAN zeas aecor+� E milli _.m _'. mmm 0 -NONE lal I I i i k P ' rn a ' m z rn ' IZ I 0 I 1 i I 1 �N Ia - �o�a00000000000� _ _ yy vv gq qq m S e JA n P milli _.m _'. mmm 0 -NONE lal I U) 0 C: V) 0 m m r m 0 z 0 z 0 X U) 0 m m r m b 0 z 'I GO G g S eP SHIM =a -m -N, "no 0 Naomi C9 %1111� W-Imm -���0111111091 t P i •��e�s q IN s - i I a p p g P A Y a a a P a r a a P N P it PIN I lip, HU "ll RI, jj 1 OR - Si rga In NA ip r1 E c `il {`t:r# r [r Dr ` �P ip, if ®�#,d �.® + A td �s aPegf tt® �jB too IL ILIF ° E r'. I I I *� 11,,,.lAY C1H1FNC RESIDLANH ENCE ,,j ONB R. .. =DEN E m PR FAMOUSGAR DEN PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN ffiwj�� p I�i,roject Description and Location 111111,1111g -113FIGIM30, , 2 I 'i V I Pursuant to Guidelines for California Environmental Quality Act § 15603 (f), this form, along with the Environmental Information Form completed by the applicant, meets the requirements for an Initial Study. ED =6 Part I Background Part H Summary of Environmental Factors Potentially Affected Part III Determination Part I-V Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Part V Discussion of Environmental Impacts 1. City Project Numbers: Variance No. 99-7, Development Review No. 99-5, Tree Permit No. 99-1 and Negative Declaration No. 99-7 2. Project Address/Location: 2856 Wagon Train Lane, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles Countv, California, 91765 3. Date of Environmental Information Form submittal: June 2, 1999 4. Applicant: Anchi Lee, 3740 Campus Drive, #B, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Property Owner: Peichin Cheng, 17800 Castleton Street, #106, City of Industry, CA 91748 5. Lead Agency: City of Diamond Bar Contact: Linda Kay Smith, Development Services Assistant I Address: 21660 E. Cor)lev Drive, Suite 190 1 A F% City/State/Zip: Diamond Bar. CA 9M., Phone: (909) 396-5676 Fax: (909) 861-3117 .10 001 1 MIT Maximum I DU/A II Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary). p 'NIJ I- NJ op lor al M of 35 feet and the apj2lication was withdrawn. 111111 11 � !IJI III ��Rwnvrgljjr% The proposed project lies within "The Country Estates," a gated community 'of custom homes. The topography of the area isgenerally that of steeply rolling hillsides. Residential development has occurred on all contiguous lots to the north, south, %I and west. The area to the south is a newer tract of homes that abuts the site with mitip-ation monitorinia slopes and controlled drainage devices. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.): 11. List City of Diamond Bar related applications for this project that must be processed simultaneously: 11!111101 11 1 11 In a TIM JIM IMMOMM im'M�fl pmrmr,"' M- In- native Califomia Walnut trees and to allow reolacement trees on-site at a 3:1 ratio. December 18, 1968. + ti �d) si zpNO � 9$ � �a0�/ �� ♦�9 . `''f'-' n-�; 8'Eg_.__iA'�J::_ S8„ L86 OHO SIO 0 Ile 17 16 15 D� --------- - - - - -Z Z--------- >: eo 2 3 Z- `f SVNl44 02 I m �� 4p° \ N 6' H� O 10 1 L1® ,.^app♦ ..: 2 ti \ 26°a/ems 6/ i 70 72 7�RACT 4785, F j, ,3s, 6 ' ® / JS v � � el 8p cp pa° 2 ® g3wf •, ® \A 1 RECE- 'IVED CITY OF DIAMOND BAR i Nn . Ri nG., FNGR. z INNER :g s u a ga° a e J ! b b a PTs d� � 93� `� �• 6 b� i 9 g g 's g i v a F �,00�00000�ooa000 rrc ae :g s u a ga° a e J ! b b a PTs d� � 93� `� �• 6 b� i 9 g g 's g i v a F �,00�00000�ooa000 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NEGATIVE DECLARATION 99-7 Initial Study (Environmental Information amo-.1 Environmental Checklist) The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning Population and Housing Geologic Problems Water Air Quality Transportation/Circulation Biological Resources Energy & Mineral Resources Noise Public Services Utilities & Service Systems Aesthetics Cultural Resources Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance PART —DETERMINATION Project Numbers: VAR 99®7, DR 99-5 to be completed by Lead Agency E99®1 On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE EC TI N will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant. effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the MITIGATION MEASURES described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact' OR "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Si nat re Linda Kav Smith Printed Name Date A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported "yinformation i er agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that 1, _:' simply es not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should �. �"! v` "i '. ��I'_. a "i as well as general standards projecto. ',,pos'" sensitive receptors to pollutants, based 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on- cumulative as well as project -level, indirect ;s well as direct, _ construction as operational impi. ` V "Potentially P... Significant .Impact"appropriate if -substantial :i _ .. evidence that an effect significant. .., one or _ore "Potentially Significant entries when the determination made, _1, an EIR is required. 4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an affect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XIII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section SVai at the end of the checklist: 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impact (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. ENVERONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact i'NDITS A J ®u1' tej to _ a. Conflict with General Plan designation or 11 El zoning? Sources #s: General Plan, p. I-27; City of Diamond Bar Development Code, Title 22, p.114,11-7 b. Conflict with applicable environmental El F1 plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? Source #s: General Plan III -10 et seg. c. Be incompatible with existing land uses in the vicinity? Source #s: General Plan, 1-6, I-27; City of Diamond Ear Development Code, II -7, RR. d. Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? Source s: Project site plan,; Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) p. H -E- 1. e. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? Source #s: Project site plan; City of Diamond Ear Development Code, p. II -8- 11, General Plan, I-1 et seq., II -1 et seq.; Tract Map 30578; Tract Map 47851. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a. Displace substantial numbers of people, El 11 0 necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Source s: 1990 Census of Population; Housing, A, p.11-1-4,11-1-19 b. Induce substantial growth in an area either El El directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? Source #s: 1990 Census of Population and Housing; NMA, p. II -I-19; 500' Land Use Radius Map, DR 99-05 c. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Source s: 1990 Census of Population; Dousing; NMA, p. 11-I-19; General Plan, p. I-1 et seq., p. II -1 et seq.; project site plan; Land Use Radius Map, DR 99-5. 3. GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a. Fault rupture? El 11 El 11 Source s: General Plan, p. IV -2, 3, Fig. IV -1; MEA, p. II 13-7 et seq. b. Seismic ground shaking? Source s: MEA, p. II -13-14, p. II -13-10, Fig. II -13-5; project's preliminary soils report prepared by Hu Associates, Inc., dated July 8, 1999. c. Seiche (water tanks, reservoirs)? El El 11 0 Source #s: Walnut Valley Water District Map 1996. d. Landslides or mudflows? El El 0 El Source s: General Plan, p. IV -3, Fig. IV - l; MEA, p. 11-B-3, Fig. II -I3-2; II -B-15 State of California Seismic Hazard zones Map, dated April 15, 1998; project's preliminary soils report prepared by Hu Associates, Inc., dated July 8, 1999. e. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable El 11 El 0 soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? Source #s: General Plan, p.IV-3, Fig. IV - 1; project's preliminary soils report prepared by Hu Associates, Inc., dated July 8, 1999. f Subsidence of the land? Source #s: MEA, p. II- -16; project's preliminary soils report prepared by Hu Associates, Inc., dated Jul 8, 1999. g. Expansive soils? Source #s: MEA, p. II- B- 16, Final As - Graded Geologic Report, Tract 30578 dated November 5, 1970 by Robert Stone & Associates, 'Inc.; project's preliminary soils report prepared by Hu Associates, Inc., dated Jul 8, 1999, h. Unique geologic or physical features? [Ell El 0 Source #s: NIEA, Fig. II -A-1; project's preliminary soils report prepared by Hu Associates, Inc., dated July 8, 1999. 4. WATER. Would the project result in - a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage El El -ffx f El patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? Source #s: City of Diamond Bar Public Works/Engineering Division; project site plan; project's preliminary soils report prepared by Hu Associates, Inc., dated July 8, 1999. b. Exposure of people or property to water El El related hazards such as flooding? Source #s: General Plan, p. IV -4, Fig. IV - 2; Fema Flood Panel No. 065043098013, Zone C, 12/2/80 c. Discharge into surface water or other El El ff] alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? Source #s: MEA, p. II -C-3, 4, Fig. II -C-1 d. Changes in the amount of surface water in El any water body? Source #s: MEA, p. 11-C-3, 4, Fig. 11-C-1 e. Changes in currents, or the course or El El El 0 direction of water movements? Source #s: MEAi, p. II -C-3, 4, Fig. 11-C-1; City of Diamond Bar Public Works Division; project site plan; project's preliminary soils report prepared by Hu Associates, Inc., dated July 8, 1999. f Changes in the quantity of ground waters either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? Source #s: MEA, p. II -C-3, 4, Fig. II -C-1; project's site/grading plans g. Altered direction or rate of flow of El El 0 groundwater? Source #s: City of Diamond Bar Public Works Division; project site plan; project's preliminary soils report by Hu Associates, Inc., dated July 8, 1999. h. Impacts to groundwater quality? Source #s: MEA, p. II -P-3-8. i. Substantial reduction in the amount of El El 11 0 groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? Source #s: MEA, p. 11-P-3-8. j. Place housing within 100 -year flood El El hazard area as mapped on the Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map or place with 100 -year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? Source #s: General Plan, p. IV -4, Fig. IV - 2; MEA, p. II -C-1 et seg. 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct the El El implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Source #s: SCAQMD Air Quality Handbook b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? El El Source #s: M[EA, p. II -F-8- 10, Fig. 11-F-3. c. Result in cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Source #s: SCAQMD Air Quality . Handbook d. Create objectionable odors? EY El El Source s: SCAQMD Quality Handbook 6. T"NSPORTATION/CEP.CULATION. Would the project result in. a. An increase in vehicle trips which is El El substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections) Source s: 'Trip Generation, 5t' Edition, Institute of Traffic Engineers b. Substantially increase hazards due to design feature (e.g. sharp curves or 1:1 El dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? Source s: City's Public Works Division c. Inadequate emergency access? El El M Source s: Multihazard Functional Plan, City of Diamond Ear; City's Public Works Division. d. Inadequate parking capacity on-site? El El Source s: City of Diamond Ear Development Code, III -97. e. Exceeding, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads and highways? Source #s: City's Public Works Division; Ordinance No. O1 1993 f Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnabouts, bicycle racks)? Source #s: General Plan, p. V-22; Ordinance No. 01 (1993) Congestion Management Plan g. Change in rail, water, or air traffic patterns, El El including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risk? Source #s: MEA, p. 11-T-36; project application 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project result in: a. Substantial adverse effect, either directly or El El El El through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plan, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services? Source #s: MEA, p. 11-D-1-8; General Plan, p. III -11; project site plan. b. Substantial adverse effect on and riparian El 1:1 FNI El habitat, federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 Clean Water Act, or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services? Source #s: MEA, p. II- D-1-8; General Plan, p. 111-11; City of Diamond Bar Development Code, p. IH -149 et seg. c. A conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Source #s: MEA, p. II- -1-8; General Plan, p. III- 11, City of Diamond Bar Development CoqS_E -149 et. Seq. d. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted El 0' Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? Source #s: General Plan, p. 1-15-16, p. Ill - 11; NffiA, p. II --1-8; City of Diamond Bar Development Code, p. HI -149-150 e. Substantial interference with the movement El of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Source #s: MEA, p. II -D-1-8 & 18. 8 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:: a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation El plans? Source #s: General Plan, p. 111-14, Uniform Building Code, 1998 b. Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful 0 El and inefficient manner? Source #s: MEA, p. 11-S-1; Uniform Building Code, 1998. c. Result in the loss of availability of a known El El 0 mineral resource that would be the future value to the region and the residents of the State? Source #s: MEA, p. III -13-17 a ,WOWd 6eproject: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; or create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Source s: MEA, p. II -M-1; project application, General Plan, p. IV -1 et seq., Uniform Building Code, 1998, Section 307. b. Impair the implementation of or physically El 0 interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Source #s: Multihazard Functional Plan, City of Diamond Ear, 1992. c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle El El El hazardous or actively hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Source #s: Walnut Valley Unified School District; Pomona Unified School District; City of Diamond Ear House Lumbering Map. d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Source s: ME& p. II -M-1 et seg. e. Expose people or structures to a significant 11 El risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Source s: MEA, p. II -IC -1 1, 1S s ;; Quid the protect r ult in: a. ...__ . ... Exposure of persons to or generation of El noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance; or applicable standards of other agencies; or exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Source s: Project application; General Plan, p. IV®15; A, p. II -G-1 et seq.; City of Diamond Bar Development Code, p. HI -81-90. b. A substantial permanent increase or x11 El temporary or periodic in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project; Source s: Project application; General Plan, p. IV -15; MEA, p. II -G-1 et seq.; City of Diamond Bar Development Code, p. HI -81-90, 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project have an effect upon, or°'result in: a need for new or altered government services, in any of the following areas: a. Fire Protection? El El, El El Source s: General Plan, p. VI -3 b. Police Protections? El El El 0 Source #s: General Plan, p. VI -3 c. Schools? El El El Source #s: MEA, . II -0-1 d. Maintenance of public facilities, including 11 El 11 El roads? Source s: General Plan, p. VI -2 e. Other governmental services? El 11 El El Source s: General Plan, p. VI -1 et seg. 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICESYSTEMS. Would the project result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities a. Power or natural gas? El El 11 0 Source s: General Plan, . I-18, VI -2 b. Communication systems? El 11 11 El Source s: General Plan, p. I-18, VI -2 c. Local or regional water treatment or El El 11 El distribution facilities? Source s: General Plan, . I-18, VI -2 d. Sewer or septic tanks? Source s: General Plan, p. I-18, VI -2 e. Storm water drainage? Source s: General Plan, . I-18, VI -2 f. Solid waste disposal? Source #s: General Plan, . I-18, VI -2 g. Local or regional water supplies? x Source #s: General Plan, . I-18, VI -2 13. A S.T CS: ul the ject® a. Have a substantial adverse affect on a scenic vista or damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock out croppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Source s: General Plan, p. III -10 b. Substantially degrade the existing visual 11 El El El character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Source s: General Plan, p. III -10; City of Diamond Bar's Development Code c. Create a new source of substantial light or El glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Source s: City of Diamond Bar's Development Code, p. IV -11-16 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique El 11 11 El paleontological resource or site or unique geologic features? Source #s: WA, p. II -H-1 et seg. b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the El El significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5 Source s: MEA, p. II -H-1 et seg. c. Cause a substantial adverse change in the El El significance of historical resources as defined in §15064.5? Source s: MEA, p. II -H-1 et seg. d. Have the potential to cause a physical El El change, which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? Source s: MEA, p. II -H-1 et seg. e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Source s: MEAy. II- -1 et seg. I .TI W.. uld the r®jest a. Increase the demand use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Source s: General Plan, p. II -1 et seq. b. Include recreational facilities or require theEl M El construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Source s: General Plan, p. II -1 et seq. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. Does the project have the potential to El El degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California histoa or pre -history? b. Does the project have the potential to El El El El achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmentalgoals? c. Does the project have impacts that are El El El M individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the affects of probable future projects) d. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? �5-oy 011 2111 Enviroranental Finding PART 7 m4 .". DISCUSSION O ,'».'`m,. ;,!OENVIRONMENTAL ,' Ja C i Discussions within each section r y be grouped. a) The project site is located within the General Plan Land Use designation area of Rural Residential (maximum 1 dwelling unit per acre), and is within the zoning district of Rural Residential ). The project proposes one dwelling unit on 1.38 acres. Therefore, it does not conflict with the General Plan. aim c) Existing land uses in the general vicinity of the project are limited to residential or are vacant land, zoned residential. Therefore, the proposal is not incompatible with existing land uses in the vicinity. d) There are no agricultural resources or operations in the vicinity of the project area. Therefore, agricultural resources or operations will not be effected. e) Existing land uses in the vicinity of the proposed project are residential, or vacant land and zoned for residential. The proposed project is also residential and is consistent with the character of the surrounding development; therefore, will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community including a low-income or minority community. Additionally, pursuant to the General Plan this area is not designated as a low-income or minority community. a) The project is a single-family residence. The results of the 1990 Census indicate the Persons per Occupied Housing Unit are 3.18. It is assumed this development will be generally consistent with this average, and will therefore not cause any regional or local population projection to be exceeded. b) This project consists of one single-family residence, the use of which is not expected to induce substantial growth, either directly or indirectly. The site was previously approved for a single-family residence with subdivision approval of Tract 30578 April 23, 1969. c) The existing site is vacant, therefore, the project will not displace existing housing. a) No portion of the City has been identified as in an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. The closest fault is the Diamond Ear Fault, which is described as a "small inactive local fault". The Whittier-Elsinor fault lies approximately four miles from the project site and has been active in historic times. Three faults with the greatest potential for activity are located in limited.excess of 20 miles from the proposed project. Therefore, the likelihood of fault rupture b) The proposed project site lies within an area identified as Seismic Zone 1, or Relativ(', Ground Response Low (RGRI). Using current building codes that account for ground shaking, any impacts from seismic ground shaking may be considered less than significant. c) The closest reservoir is the Ambushers Reservoir, approximately one half mile to the west of the project, in a different drainage basin. If seiche occurs, it will not affect the project site. Additionally, the project is not located near any volcanic mountain regions. There are no large bodies of water in close proximity to the project site. d) According to the State of California Seismic Hazard Zone Map, the project does not appear to be in a potential liquefaction zone. The applicant submitted the preliminary soils report and before issuance of City permits the approval by the City's soils' and geotechnical engineers shall be required. Soils and geotechnical engineers evaluate areas where historic occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological, geotechnical and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements and where required mitigation as defined in Public Resources Code Section 2693 (c) would be required as necessary. The preliminary report does not indicate any of these areas. Additionally, the nature of the underlying material on the project site, the lack of ground water and the existing and proposed drainage conveyance devices within the lot further diminish occurrences of liquefaction. e) Pursuant to the project's preliminary soils report, the subject site and soil conditions appear to be conducive to the development of the project. Moreover, the project site will undergo further review to verify the structural integrity of the fill material and the site grading will be performed under engineering supervision of the geotechnical engineers. f) There is no evidence that subsidence -producing activities have occurred at or near the site. Oil drilling occurred in lower Tonner Canyon, but any potential subsidence is not expected to affect this project site. The proposed use, including basement, does not propose any operation that may cause subsidence. Test pit locations were checked for the presence of groundwater above the bedrock during the excavation operations. Free groundwater was not encountered. This infers subsidence of the land is very unlikely, and thus has no impact on the site. g) Almost all soils in Diamond Bar have the capacity to be expansive, and should be reviewed on a project®specific basis. Pursuant to the project's soils report, siltstone and sandstone conditions were encountered throughout the site. Subsurface soil conditions were explored by excavating five pits to depths ranging from approximately 7 to 9 feet below existing site grade. Overall, field and laboratory tests suggest that the soils are moderately strong and slightly compressible. Therefore, it is not anticipated that expansive soils will adversely affect the project. h) It is not anticipated that any unique geologic or physical features exist on the project site. MEMEMI MM ,, project be cubicincrease the amount of impervious surface, and thus the amount of surface runoff. Runoff will be directed from on-site drainage devices into off-site drainage devices designed to accommodate run-off from the project site. Additionally, the project proposes export of 3,370 i, the site profile be changed. drainage • been rerouted to the street for the house portion of the lot and to be dispersed into riprap drainage at the rear of the lot. The increases or decreases of runoff are expected to be less than b) The project site is not located within a flood hazard area and adequate drainage devices will be incorporated into the project's required drainage plan and installed. c., d., e.) There is no body of surface water on the project site or in the vicinity of the project. The closest surface water is Carbon Canyon Dam, approximately 2 '/2 miles from the project site. Therefore, no impacts related to surface water features, quality or flow will affect the project site. f) The project will add to the amount of groundwater to the extent impermeable surfaces are added and the rate of absorption is affected by the new grading. This amount is unknown, but for a project of this small size, may be considered to be insignificant. g., h) The proposed project will not effect the direction or rate of flow of groundwater due to conditions described above (a through f.). With respect to groundwater quality, its extent is likely to be small given the small size of the site and its ultimate residential usage. i) The development or use of one single-family residence is not considered to cause a substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater for public water supply. Additionally, groundwater is not utilized for domestic supply, but for the reclaimed water supply. j) The project site is not located within a flood hazard area. a) Air quality will be expected to be affected during grading operations, given the quantity and method of grading transport, however, it is not expected to be significant with procedures that will be implemented to reduce air emissions. Project conditions, including watering of site, will lessen any impacts. The use of the residence is not expected to significantly contribute to the violation of any air quality standards. Additionally, such emissions are not expected to exceed those listed within the SCAQ Quality Handbook as calculated via Table -9-1. b) There are no known sensitive receptors within the vicinity of the site. Therefore, any impacts to sensitive receptors will be insignificant. c) The proposed project's affect on air quality will mostly be during grading operations only. The affect will be temporary and will not result in a considerable, cumulative net increase of any pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. d) During the grading phase of the proposed project, diesel fuel odor may be emitted, however, based on the scope of the proposed grading operation, the impact is not expected to be significant. Therefore, there will be no significant air quality impacts from the proposed uses on this site. a) Vehicle trips will increase temporarily during construction, but not to an extent to significantly exacerbate any existing traffic congestion. A permanent increase in vehicle trips will occur from the use of the single-family residence, but at an average of 9.55 trips per weekday, is considered insignificant. b) The on-site to off-site circulation has been reviewed and has been found not to result in hazards to safety from design features or incompatible uses. Though the slope of the driveway is 16% and preferred is 15%, the house will use a fire -sprinkler system as required. c) Two private roads, Wagon Train Lane and Steeplechase Lane, which deposit into the public streets of Grand Avenue and Diamond Bar Boulevard, respectively, provide vehicular access. These access routes are considered adequate. d) The development proposes a six -car garage with additional areas for uncovered parking. As the City of Diamond Bar's Development Code requires two covered parking spaces, parking is considered adequate for the project. Therefore, the proposal will not result in insufficient parking. e) The approved vacant parcel approved for single-family residences of Tract 30578 in 1969, would allow for future levels of service with final map approval. Therefore, levels of service have been established. f) The proposed project must be consistent with the General Plan's Vision Statement and maintain an adequate level of service on area roadways. The development of one single- family residence, as such, does not conflict with any of the City's goals, objectives. Or strategies supporting transportation. g) No rail, waterborne, or air traffic facilities or operations are in the vicinity of the proposed project. Therefore, the project will not impact these facilities or operations. a) Presently, the site does not contain locally designated natural communities or wetlands. In the absence of these conditions, a determination has been made that the site is incapable of supporting endangered, threatened or rare species. The p..•p•sst. is notexpected to have impacts to endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats because none are know to b.,c.,d.)The project proposes to remove 9 native walnut trees, which occur individually and within l community. Native walnuttrees ar protected and preserved per the City of Diamond Bar Development Code. Preservation of the trees is not feasible and would compromise the property owner's. reasonable use and enjoyment of the property. Appropriate tree replacement . from the preserved/protected species list will be implemented in compliance with Section 22.38.130 (Tree Replacement/Relocation Standards) at r.ratio. project's •sri' plan will also be reviewedb. to ensure complies Development ••" Water standards. 1t result in impact to wetland habitat because no wetland exists on Therefore, the proposed. project significanthave a less than f. on biological res C. The proposal will not result in an impact to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors because none exist on site. a.) The proposed project will be required to comply with the LJBC design and construction standards and City's Energy Conservation Standards. b.) The development of the project will require the use of non -renewal resources, specifically fossil fuels for transport and grading. However, the extensive grading is required to create a buildable pad for the development. Fossil fuel use will be minimized by utilizing grading export to an adjacent tract. Additionally, the fossil fuel use for this development may be considered less than significant in context of like developments in the vicinity of the project. c.) The proposed site is not within an area identified as possessing mineral resources of regional value. Therefore, it is not anticipated the proposed project will result in the loss of availability of mineral resources that would be of future value to the region and residents of the State. a, c) The project will likely use hazardous materials, such as oil, chemical, etc. during its construction phase. Relatively small amounts of household hazardous materials will also likely be used by the project's residents. Their relative minor use results in a less than significant impact. b) The proposed project will not interfere with the City's emergency response plan or evacuation plan. V d) No current icant hazard to the public or the environment exist on the site, therefore people will not be exposed to existing of potential health e) The development of the site or its use will not result in an increased fire hazard in the areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees. Because the site will be fully landscaped and irrigated its development will likely result in a decrease in fire hazard from brush, grass, or trees. a,b)The use of the single family residence will increase existing noise, but not to an extent considered significant in a neighborhood of existing single-family residences. however, given the proximity of other residences, during construction extensive grading is likely to reach noise levels that are Formally Unacceptable, as indicated in the General flan. With permit conditions to protect neighbors during construction, noise levels can be reduced to an acceptable level. The grading permit conditions include the following items: transportation of equipment and materials, and operation of heavy grading equipment shall be limited to hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; all construction equipment shall be properly muffled to reduce noise levels; exterior construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. a, b) The proposed project will receive fire protection and police protection services from the Los Angeles County Fire and Sheriff Departments. Currently, these agencies provide services to the City of Diamond Bar. It is anticipated that the proposed project will not require the development of new or expanded facilities or services. "The Country Estates" also has their own private security patrol. c) The proposed project is located within the Walnut Valley School District. It is not anticipated that the proposed residential project will create a 'significant demand to the District. however, the project is required to pay school fees as part of the development fees paid to the City. d) The project site is in a private community identified as "The Country Estates" and part of a previously approved residential tract for single®family residence's. As such the maintenance of the immediate roads/streets, storm drain, sewage systems are the responsibility of the private association. The maintenance of public facilities includes roads, streets, and public right of way. The project will likely create negligible impacts to the City's streets and sewage systems as the approval for the tract allowed for impact at that time. e) No other specific governmental services have been identified that may be impacted by the proposed project. a -g) The project site currently contains a rough graded parcel in an existing tract of single- family residence homes. The newly proposed development will continue to be a single-family residence. It is anticipated the new development will use existing utility lines and pipe systems. Therefore, the development of the proposed single-family residence will not result in the need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following: electrical power or natural gas; communication systems; local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities; sewer systems; storm drainage systems, solid waste disposal systems. a,c) The proposed project site is located in "The Country Estates" and the site currently contains a rough graded parcel in an existing tract of single-family residence homes at 2856 Wagon Train Lane. Aesthetic impact has been considered for the proposed project. The proposed residence will not have significant detrimental view blockage impact. The trees and landscaping has been reviewed to ensure an aesthetically pleasing project site. The applicant shall conform to the landscape plan, which complies with the City's Development Code and is approved by the City. The proposed project will be developed in compliance with the City's Development Review and Design Guideline standards. As a result, the proposed project will be consistent with the existing development within the surrounding area by utilizing good architectural design and features, as well as compatible and pleasing colors and materials. Exterior, on-site lighting for the pool/spa and tennis court will be shielded and installed in a manner that will not reflect light or glare onto neighboring properties per the City of Diamond Bar Development Code. a) There are no paleontological sites identified within the City and the site currently contains a rough graded parcel in an existing tract of single-family residence homes. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the site's development will disturb paleontological resources. b) There are no archaeological sites identified with the City and the site currently contains a rough graded parcel in an existing tract of single-family residence homes. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the site's development will disturb archaeological resources. c) No historical sites have been identified within the vicinity of the project site and none are expected. Therefore, development of the proposed project will not affect historical resources. d,e) No unique ethnic cultural values, religious or sacred uses are located within a quarter mile of the project site. Therefore, the proposed project will not have the potential to create adverse impacts on said resources. a,b) Single-family residence projects of this type are not generally associated with creating adverse impacts on parks or other recreation opportunities. The site itself lends to its own recreation with tennis court, gazebo, barbecue, and pool/spa. Also, the private community, "The Country Estat&', has their own private recreation facilities. !IJ CO _ f w,. r e N r � r 7 e RMA o-� 3=w ► > w , N fiC a x a d � _ u 2p z „ -' v� 4 (( s li o w �� 4 C.G.M. 17800 Castleton ,St, ,Suite106, City qf Ii dusti:); CA 91 -48 , ® Tel: (6 6.) 913-8939 - t'(tx: (626) 9/ )-111 1 29s/, GJa n, Kai ' L awe. a jo 17800 Castleton St., Suite106, Cit o Industry, C�4 917- 8 ® Tel: (6 6 Jl S�.>) Far (6_6j 91_> 1>11 �' y � ��� c�c � � � I 2M w MM '' • REAR OF PARCEL 71 SOUTH VIEW FROM WAGON TRAIN LANE r I I � REAR OF PARCEL 71 NORTH VIEW FROM OAK KNOLL DRIVE Lame- 3 0 OWNER: CGM DEVELOPMENT, INC. ADDRESS: LOT 71, 2856 WAGON TRAIN LANE DIAMOND BAR, CA DATE: 5/18/99 ROOF 0-3 MATERIAL: CONC ROT TILE4 (D cn T_ COLOR. "ESPANA COUOR ' BLIND _ W �mb"AV1VMN 0 0 MFGR: MONIERLIFETIE �ci0�.� ®_ STUCCO r n ®E COLOR: X®53 PURE IVRY' ; ®® "'���®°' iL m FINISH: SAND �� _ E MFGR: LA HABRA 5 ui ® m �. cn ,..v Ln .\ -® ac"a � 1 x r_C �, m ACCENT STUCCO ,, =)0,31)Q o COLOR: X®23 ASPEN 6 � ®® 3 `u � `� FINISH: SAND < � 0 � � ui Cl MFGR: LA HABRA H �r0r����� Lu 0 J - " Q B9 (� Tv _ eo iL ''Ew0 EXTERIOR PAINT FOR - L15 G,(—D 0® X k13 GUTTER, SAVE, ETC. COLOR: MATCH ACCENT STUCCO y f WINDOW/DOOR MATERIAL: VINYL COLOR: MATCH SINCLAIR "WHITE" RAILING MATERIAL: STEEL COLOR: COPPER MATERIAL:ENTRY DOOR, GARAGE DOOR WOOD COLOR: STAIN WALL STONE MATERIAL: CULTURED STONE COLOR: MOJAVE PRO -FIT LEDGESTONE MFGR: CULTURED STONE DIAMOND BAR COUMMY ESTATES ASSOCIATM 22815 Lazy Meadow D&O Diamond Bar, CA 91765 The Diamond Bar Country Estates Association Archi- tectural Committee takes no exceptions to thq covenants, Conditions Fnd Restftlons unless oth- erwi3G stated In writing nor does Me Architectural Committee take any exceptions to the County of Los Angeles Bung Department or Building - oother County or State Regulatory Agencies. Pg�APPROVED 0 APPROVED AS NOTED D DISAPPROVED RESUBMIT CHECKED BY DATE .DING SUMMARY n� I 'See 2856 WAGON TRAIN LANE -..DIAMOND BAR, CA 91016 ® LOT 71, TRACT NO. 30578 &0 of G FOOTPRINTO- 6,860 SQ.FT. 3:0 0 DOR 5,726 SOFT. FLOOR 2,993 SQ.FT. mq T 2,578 SOFT. 00-0 n� I 'See 2856 WAGON TRAIN LANE -..DIAMOND BAR, CA 91016 ® LOT 71, TRACT NO. 30578 A 579 102 SQ.FT G FOOTPRINTO- 6,860 SQ.FT. RED HOUSE. - DOR 5,726 SOFT. FLOOR 2,993 SQ.FT. T 2,578 SOFT. rn k ti CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Ift4y, Chairman Steven Tye Vice Chairman Steve Nelson Commissioner George Kuo Commissioner Joe McManus Commissioner Joseph T. Ruzicka FROM: James DeStefano, Deputy City an SUBJECT: Four Comers Study — August 17, 1999, City Council Study Session DATE® August 18, 1999 On August 17, 1999, J.D. Douglas of Parsons Brinckerhoff conducted a presentation on the Four Comers Study before the City Council at its scheduled Study Session. Attached please find a copy of the presentation. City Staff will provide a 45 minute video of Mr. Douglas's presentation to the Planning - Commission at its regular meeting scheduled on August 24, 1999. Attachment DA\memos\pc.doc S. NEW a -74-44- M!r� 9 m U) VW� 4-J C: C: fu 4-J MO -0 u u E E o (3) u o E u 0 CL [ 0 020 N fu Ln 0 1 U) 0 0 C: fu u C: C: fu 0 > '0 U) C: fu fu 0- 1 E 000 � s r� \� � � , /\ \ AMC 7 AIM m 011 i a I `�: � � � � � / q�2 �� � ; �� � � , � � / � - � \ \, � § ° � :� � � a 7 � � : �� � 2 � 4 � :� . � � :� � .. � . � � � � 2 � � � . � \ � � a z q�2 �� INAU"I ��� ���g . y� � � � a � » � , � � :a �� /� � � . � _ � . 2� , \ - . < > ��® � � � � � \ \ : : , � � � \ �� � . w\ % � . . z. � ® \� © d � \ � \ � � \ ��� ���g . y� � � � a � » � ��` \�. � , � ��� 2/ � Q) LL CL MOWN• E 0 LL w Z � m V w C: ca 0 0 0 CC 0 Q) LL CL E 0 LL w Z � m V w C: ca 0 0 0 CC 0 > 0 0 Z 4 :0Z OE] 10 ".1, co ue Sol e411130 Ib G 03 IL 77 77 71 I 'Liff 7 a MM 2 pt aCD i c,00 �a �a ®yd u ®1< u 114 z zw-y H ® U E U C O > If) N O y to cz O 00 kr) tn00 ry� h� N c m aj u 00 00 � oj M CN � N (ONCN N M � �• k � U � U V U U Ep U 0 114 -: v am 2 pt i �a �a ®yd u u 114 z zw-y H C O 0 If) N N N O c aj u 00 00 00 00 oj 0 N N N M � �• k 2 pt i ®yd 114 z zw-y H C O c u 00 00 00 00 N 0 N N N M � �• k U U U 0 114 v 2 pt j § \ FE : . . ■ w % z 2 ■ � ■� � j § \ FE NOTICE OF „1, MEETING vd AND AFFIDAVIT OVPP804di The Diamond Bar Planning Commission will hold a regular meeting at the South Coast Quality Management District Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, at 7:00 P.M. on August 24, 1999. Items for consideration are listed on the attached agenda. 1, John Ilasin, declare as follows: I work for the City of Diamond Bar in the Community and Development Services Department; that copies of the Notice for the Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission, to be held on August 24, 1999, was posted at the following locations: City Hall South Coast Quality Management District Auditorium 21660 E. Copley Drive 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on August 20, 1999, at Diamond Bar, California. Vh2n—I a & n Community and Development Services Dept. DA\s\affidavitposfing.doc 70 , ,