Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/10/2001July 10,'2001 7:00 P.M South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA Chairman Bob Zirbes Vice -Chairman Joe Ruzicka Commissioner George Kuo Commissioner Steve Nelson Commissioner Steve Tye 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 21825 E Copley Drive, and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please call (909) 396-5676 during regular business hours. In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title // of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that anyperson in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or accommodation(s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting must inform the Dept. of Community & Development Services at (909) 396-5676 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Please refrain from smoking, eating or The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper . . drinking in the Auditorium and encourages you to do the same i City of Diamond Bar -_— Planning Commission MEETING RULES -PUBLIC INPUT The meetings of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission are open to the public. A member of the public may address the Commission on the subject of one or more agenda items and/or other items of which are within the .subject matter jurisdiction of. the Diamond Bar Planning Commission. A request to address the Commission should be submitted in writing at the public hearing, to the Secretary of the Commission. As a general rule, the opportunity for public comments will take place at the discretion of the Chair. However, in order to facilitate the meeting, persons who are interested parties for an item may be requested to give their presentation at the time the item is called on the calendar. The Chair may limit individual public input to five minutes on any item; or the Chair may limit the total amount of time allocated for public testimony based on the number of people requesting to speak and the business of the Commission. Individuals are requested to conduct themselves in a professional and businesslike manner. Comments and questions are welcome so that all points of view are considered prior to -the Commission making recommendations to the staff and City Council. In accordance with State Law (Brown Act), all matters to be acted on by the Commission must be posted at least 72 hours prior to the Commission meeting. In case of emergency or when a subject matter arises subsequent to the posting of the agenda, upon making certain findings, the Commission may act on item that is not on the posted agenda. INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COMMISSION Agendas for Diamond Bar Planning Commission meetings are prepared by the Planning Division of the, Community and Development Services Department. Agendas are available 72 hours prior to the meeting at City Hall and the public library, and may be accessed by personal computer at the number below. Every meeting of the Planning Commission is recorded on cassette tapes and duplicate tapes are available for a nominal charge. ADA REQUIREMENTS 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 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday, and 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Friday. HELPFUL PHONE NUMBERS Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Commission, Cassette Tapes of Meetings (909) 396-5676 Computer Access to Agendas (909) 860-LINE General Agendas (909) 396-5676 email: info@ci.diamond-bar.ca.us PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Tuesday, July 10, 2001 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. Next Resolution No. 2001-24 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 1 ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Bob Zirbes, Vice Chairman Joe Ruzicka, George Kuo, Steve Nelson, and Steve Tye. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUD:iENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is the time and place for the general public to address the members of the Planning Commission on any item that is within their jurisdiction, allowing the public an opportunity to speak on non-public hearing and non -agenda, items. Please complete a Speaker's Card for the recording Secretary (Completion of this form is voluntary There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressing the Planning Commission. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chairman. The The following items listed on the consent calendar are considered routine and are approved by a single motil,,m. Consent calendar items may be removed from the agenda by request of the Commission only: 4.1 . Minutes of Regular Meeting: June 26, 2001. 5. OLD BUSINESS: None. 6. NEW BUSINESS: None. 6.1 General Plan Annual Report. Government Code Section 65400(b) requires that an annual report be presented to the local legislative body, the -Governor's Office of Planning and Research, and the Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION Department of Housing & Community Development, on the- status & progress of the implementation of the General Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive the General Plan Annual report and direct staff to forward a copy to the City Council for review. 7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: None. 8. PUBLIC HEARING: 8.1 Development Review No. 2001-040) and Minor Variance No. 2001-090) (pursuant to Code Section 22.66.060(A)(3)) is a request for a revision of hours of operation for the public from 11:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. Current hours of operation are 5:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily. Additionally, the applicant requests to use the premises from 10:00-a.m. to 5:30 p.m. for food preparation and the taking of reservations and catering orders. PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2020 Brea Canyon Road, Suite A-7 (Lot 180, Tract 30578) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Nathaniel Williams 3029 Wilshire Blvd. #202 Santa Monica, CA 90403 APPLICANT: Akbar Ali 8481 Holder Street Buena Park, CA 90620 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15301(a), the City has determined that this project is Categorically Exempt. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. 2001-04(1) and Minor Variance No. 2001- 09(1), 001-09(l), Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolution. Page 3 PLANNING COMMISSION 8.2 Development Review No. 2000-010), Variance No. 2000-01(1) and Minor Variance No. 2000-01(1) (pursuant to Code Sections 22.60.050.C.) is a request for an extension of time for a project approved by the Planning Commission on February 8, 2000. The Planning Commission approval allows the construction of a two-story single family residence of approximately 15,602 square feet with a basement, balconies, six -car garage and indoor and outdoor swimming pool/spa, pool equipment/restroom structure, and tennis court. The Variance allows a reduction in setbacks for the residence, pool equipment, restroom structure and tennis court. It also allows tennis court fencing in excess of 6 feet. in height and retaining wall in excess of 42 iiiches-in_ height within the front yard setback. The Minor Variance -allows the construction of two cupolas that extend 2.5 feet above the maximum 35 -foot height permitted for a residence. The extension of time, if approved, will allow the continuation of this entitlement until February 8, 2003. PROJECT ADDRESS: 22840 Ridgeline Road (Tract No. 30091, Lot 156) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Mr. and Mrs. Wen Chang 1011 Summitridge Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765' APPLICANT: Ku and Associates, Inc., Habitant Development-, Corporation 18725 E. Gale Avenue, #217 City of Industry, CA 91748 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15303(a), the City has determined that this project isIcategorically exempt. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the one year extension of time for Development Review. No. 2000-01 (1), Variance No. 2000-01 (1), and Minor Variance No. 2000-01 (1) 9. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: JUNE 26, 2001 Page 4 1111 to] ;- I TIT-" % 11 10.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. 11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: CONCERTS IN THE PARK: TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING: CITY COUNCIL MEETING: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: PARKS AND RECREA'FiON COMMISSION MEET!. -,AG: • 10 'a A ;jWfjwyAj PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesdays 6:30 p.m. — 8:00 p.m. July 11, Crazy Rhythm July 18, Orange Colored Sky July 25, The Ravelers Thursday, July 12, 2001 — 7:00 p.m. AQMD Board Hearing Room 21865 E. Copley Drive Tuesday, July 17, 2001 — 6:30 p.m. AQMD Auditorium 21865 E. Copley Drive Tuesday, July 24, 2001 — 6:00 p.m. AQMD Auditorium - 21865 E. Copley Drive Tuesday, July 24, 2001 — 7:00 p.m. AQMD Auditorium 21865 E. Copley Drive Thursday, July 26, 2001 — 7:00 p.m. AQMD Board Hearing Room 21865 E. Copley Drive Saturday, August 25, 2001 — 5:00 p.m. Quakes Stadium MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 26, 2001 A 3 R I I " I MIX# Iff 110 1 Chairman Zirbes called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: ThePledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Nelson. C) 1. 2. 3. 9 ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Bob Zirbes, Vice Chairman Joe Ruzicka, and Commissioners George Kuo, Steve Nelson and Steve Tye. Also Present: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager; Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner; Linda K. Smith, Development Services Assistant, and Stella Marquez, Administrative Secretary. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None offered. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 12, 2001. C/Kuo pointed out that Chair/Zirbes abstained from voting on Item 8.2, Page 5. VC[Ruzicka moved, C/Kuo seconded, to approve the minutes for the regular June 12 2001 meeting as corrected. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: 5. OLD BUSINESS: None Kuo, Nelson, VC/Ruzicka, Chair/Zirbes None Tye None JUNE 26, 2001 6. NEW BUSINESS: PAGE 2 PLANNING CO 6.1 General Plan Conformity Report for Vacation of a portion of Right -of -Way for Hawkwood Road pursuant to Section 65402 of the Government Code. This matter is before the Planning Commission because of a request by JCC Homes to vacate a portion of the right-of-way for Hawkwood Road within Lot 28 of Tract 47850 of the private community of the Crystal Ridge Estates. This request is made to facilitate the installation of a security gate for emergency services access at this entrance to the Crystal Ridge Estates. APPLICANT: Eastern End of Street Of Hawkwood Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 City of Diamond Bar. DCM/DeStefano presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution finding and reporting that the location, purpose and extent of the vacated portion of right-of-way for Hawkwood Road is in general conformance with the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar. VC/Ruzicka moved, C/Nelson seconded, to approve Resolution finding and reporting that the location, purpose and extent of the vacated portion of right-of-way for Hawkwood Road is in general conformance with the General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kuo, Nelson, Tye, VC/Ruzicka, Chair/Zirbes NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: None 8. PUBLIC HEARING: 8.1 Conditional Use Permit No. 98-7(1), Development Review No. 98-12(1),_ Variance No. 99-2(1) (pursuant to Code Sections 22.66.050 -extension of time and 22.76.020 -modification) is a request to revise a project approved by the Planning Commission on June 22, 1999. The revision includes a reduction in total square footage of the approved project. The approved project allows the construction of an automated car wash with retail sales boutique, lube center, detail center with office, auto service center and fuel dispensers, and retaining wail with a maximum height of 18 feet r JUNE 26, 2001 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION which is deleted in the revision request. Additionally, the applicant is requesting a time extension of the Planning Commission's approval. PROPERTY ADDRESS: PROPERTY 515 S. Grand Avenue (Parcels 3 and 4 of Parcel Map No. 15625) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Mathew Tachdjian P.O. Box 4655 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 98-7(1) and Development Review No. 98-12(1), Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within the resolution. James Cook, project architect, responded to Chair/Zirbes that because the area will be paved there will be no dusty cars as currently exist. Chair/Zirbes opened the public hearing. There being no one present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/Zirbes closed the public hearing. C/Nelson moved, C/Tye seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 98-7(1) and Development Review No. 98-12(1), Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kuo, Nelson, Tye, VC/Ruzicka, Chair/Zirbes NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 8.2 Variance No. 2001-03/Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-03 (pursuant to Code Sections 22.54, 22.5y6.020(B), and 22.68.030(B)) is a request to permit a 243 square foot room addition. A variance is required due to the room addition's encroachment into the rear setback and site coverage of approximately 39 percent. A Minor Conditional Use Permit is required for the expansion of a legal nonconforming structure. PROJECT ADDRESS: 1008 Jason Place (Tract No. 42569, Lot 24) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 r V � JUNE 26, 2001 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMI�§ION Connie Wong 1008 Jason Place Diamond Bar, CA 91765 James Ables 19953 Valley Boulevard Walnut, CA 91789 DSA/Smith presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Variance No. 2001-03 and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-03, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within the resolution. James Ables, applicant's representative, agreed with recommendations. Chair/Zirbes opened the public hearing. Alice Penn, (rental property at 1025 Marc Court), expressed her concern that the addition might compromise the soil above her house resulting in a mudslide which would damage her property and reduce its value. Mr. Ables explained that there are a series of 4 or 5 area drains currently built into the property to insure proper drainage. A 15 foot setback will be maintained. The area is well-maintained and the hardscapes make certain that the water flows toward the drains. Chair/Zirbes closed the public hearing. Following discussion, C/Tye moved, VC/Ruzicka seconded, to approve Variance No. 2001-03 and Minor Conditional use permit No. 2001-03, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 9. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: Kuo, Nelson, Tye, VC/Ruzicka, Chair/Zirbes None None C/Tye asked why the Verizon public hearing signs are still present on the site during construction. DCM/DeStefano reiterated that removal of the public hearing signs has been an issue for the City since the requirement was place in the City's Development Code. The City contacts the property owner requesting removal of the sign. If the signs remain on-site, it becomes a code enforcement issue. Staff will contact JUNE 26,2001 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION Verizon and request removal of the sign. State law requires that property owners be notified of impending projects. 10. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 10.1 Status Report for Development Review No. 2000-12, Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-07, and Variance No. 2000-06 located at 1440 Bridge Gate'(Lot 16, Tract No. 39679) within Gateway Corporate Center DCM/DeStefano presented staff's report. Chair/Zirbes felt that proposed changes to a project of this magnitude might be referred back to the Commission for consideration of landscaping and other issues that might effect the community. 10.2 Public Hearing dates for future projects. DCM/DeStefano reported that staff has asked Pulte to 1) create a low -scale wall, 2) create a low - scale fence, or 3) create a full-grown hedge row to hide the mechanical equipment on Diamond Bar Boulevard near the project's entrance. DCM/DeStefano stated that the City and the Chamber of Commerce has entered into a partnership that will result in economic development efforts over the next two years. The plan is to meet with tenants of different shopping centers and learn about their concerns and questions about matters of interest in the City as well as, how the Chamber can help provide them with business assistance. Initially, a test will take place this Friday at the Albertson's Shopping Center at Grand and Diamond Bar Boulevard from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. If the test is successful, the pattern will continue over the next six months, once a week at each of the 25 different commercial and industrial centers. At its last meeting, City Council approved the FY 2001/02 budget and capital improvement projects recommended by the Planning Commission. Included in the budget is allocation for an additional 20 hours per week for code enforcement. Recruitment is underway to fill the second Development Services Assistant position previously held by Sonya Joe. Council will likely adopt its list of goals and objectives at the next City Council meeting. At its June 19 meeting Council approved for second reading the JCC zone change, which will become effective about July 19. At some point in the near future a project will be submitted for the Planning Commission's consideration. DCM/DeStefano provided updates on current pending projects: Community/Senior Center and Library project, City of Industry's Industry East Project, Lanterman Developmental Center Expansion project, Census 2000 figures and related revenue issues, and the Alameda Corridor East project. DCM/DeStefano encouraged Commissioners to attend the major July 17 presentation on the JUNE 26, 2001 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ti Community/Senior Center and Library project. 11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in the Agenda. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chairman Zirbes adjourned the meeting 41) at 9:15 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, James DeStefano Deputy City Manager Attest: Chairman Bob Zirbes INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Chairman and Planning Commissioners FROM: Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner ��t j SUBJECT: Item 6.1 - General Plan Annual Report DATE: June 27, 2001 BACKGROUND: Government Code Section 65400 (b) requires that an annual report be presented to the local legislative body, the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, and the Department of Housing and Community Development on the status of the General Pian. The annual report shall include the progress in the General Plan's implementation, and in meeting its share of regional housing needs pursuant to Government Code Section 65584 and local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement and development of housing pursuant to.paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583. The General Plan Annual Report will be presented to the Planning Commission on July 10, 2001 and will be forwarded to the City Council for review pursuant to the requirements of the Government Code. The City adopted its General Plan on July 25, 1995. Last year, the Planning Commission was presented with the first General Plan Annual Report. The report included the General Plan's progress from July 25, 1995 to December 31, 1999. This report includes the General Plan's progress from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2000. RECOMMENDATION., Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive and file this report and direct staff to forward a copy to the City Council for review. GMNERAL PLAN ANNUAL REPORT Period beginning January 1, 2000 and ending December 31, 2000 INTRODUCTION On July 25, 1995, the City Council adopted the City of Diamond Bar's General Plan. A General Plan is a State mandated document that a city uses to plan the framework for its future physical, social and economic development. A General Plan is considered a long-term document that steers development within a community for 15 to 20 years. By projecting conditions and needs into the future, the General Plan establishes a basis for evaluating current policy and providing insight on future policy. The City of Diamond Bar General Plan consists of six elements as identified below: Land Use Public Health and Safety Housing Circulation Resource Management Public Services and Facilities The following information provides the implementation status of each General Plan element. T.AT\TT) TT.qF. Since the adoption of the Land Use Element, development in Diamond Bar has occurred pursuant to the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan.. Diamond Bar is primarily a residential community. Single family detached units represent a majority of the City's housing stock; however multi -family housing exists along Diamond Bar Boulevard,.south of Grand Avenue and on Golden Springs Drive, north of Diamond Bar Boulevard. No single-family residential or multi -family subdivisions have been approved in the year 2000. However, 20 new single family residences were constructed this year. At the adoption of the General Plan, the existing commercial/ industrial square footage was estimated at 5,865,000 square feet. Since the General Plan's adoption, approximately, 523,000 square feet of commercial development has been constructed. The majority of this new commercial development relates to multi- story office buildings constructed within Gateway Corporate Center. A three-story, 129,000 square foot office building was approved in November 2000 by the Planning Commission. Also, 01 approved was a 2,776 square foot restaurant with drive-through in June 2000 identified as Farmer Boys at the corner of Lycoming Street and Brea Canyon Road. These two projects advance General Plan Objective 1.3 that states "Designate adequate land for retail and service commercial, professional services, and other revenue generating uses insufficient quantity to meet the City's needs" and related strategies. HOUSING The purpose of the Housing Element is to identify and make provisions for existing and projected housing needs. Based on the Strategies within the Housing Element several programs have been implemented. In partnership with Los Angeles County, Diamond Bar offers a first time homebuyers program and Mortgage Credit Certificates. Diamond Bar continues to distribute information regarding the activities of the City to assist the Long Beach Fair Housing Council in the resolution of housing discrimination cases. Assistance in the rehabilitation of homes occurs in conjunction with the Diamond Bar Improvement Association (DBIA) and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. This year the City has been working on updating its Housing Element. The updated Housing Element was reviewed by the Planning Commission, which recommended approval to City Council on November 28, 2000. The updated Housing Element is scheduled for adoption by the City Council in January 2001. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Issues related to open space and conservation overlap in Diamond Bar. As a.res.i.tlt, the City combined its Open Space Element and Conservation V.-ement into one Resource Management Element. The Resource Management Element addresses open space and visual resources, biological resources, and parks and recreation. Additionally, this element establishes strategies for effectively managing local and natural resources to prevent waste, destruction, or neglect. To further objectives 1.3 of this element and related strategies, the City is pursuing the development of an integrated trail system within the community. The Recreational Trails and Bicycle Master Plan is scheduled for adoption in 2001. Additionally, the City has selected Summitridge Park as the preferred site for the development of a community/senior center/library project, which also implements Objective 1.3 and related strategies. In 2 continuing to implement this Objective and Strategy that encourages improving and enhancing existing recreational areas, the City has added a skate park facility to Peterson Park that opened July 2000 and completed ADA retrofit for Sycamore Canyon Park. The City added sports field lighting to Pantera Park. According to the General Plan in pursuing joint public/private development of recreational facilities, the City install sports field lighting at Lorbeer Middle School. Wherever feasible the City encourages new development to utilize reclaimed water and the City established Water Efficiency Landscape Standards. The Gateway Corporate Center, a new housing development (Diamond Ridge Estates) and City medians utilize reclaimed water, thereby implementing Objective 2.1. Energy conservation is continually encouraged through the City's Subdivision -Ordinance and Building and Safety Division requirement. To implement Objective 2.5 and related strategies, Diamond Bar continues to implement its mandatory Source Reduction and Recycling Element with programs that exceed industry standards for residential, commercial and industrial generator of waste and Household Hazardous Waste Element. In November 2000, the. City implemented a residential curbside waste program for recycling materials and green waste as well as continuing curbside pickup of used oil. In partnership with Los Angeles County, the City participates in a round -up and disposal program for hazardous waste. In August 2000, the City implemented a commercial recycling program. This year the City is studying the most feasible way to implement a beverage container recycling program. Such a program is expected to be implemented by the end of 2001. The City continues to implement Objective 2.5 and related strategies by offering compost seminars. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY The Public Health and Safety Element contains provisions that relate to the protection of life, health, and property from natural hazards and man-made hazards. It identifies areas where public and private decisions on land use need to be sensitive to hazardous conditions caused by slope instability, seismic activity, flood, fire, and wind. As required by the Uniform Building Code, site-specific geotechnical investigations are mandatory to determine appropriate design parameters for the construction of public and private facilities in order to minimize the effects*of geologic and seismic hazard on development. Drainage studies.are required 3 to ensure that proposed development will be adequately protected, and the development proposal will not create new downstream flood hazards. To implement Objective 1.2 and related strategies, the City completed a -drainage improvement project for the northeast section of the City. To implement Objective 1.5 and related strategies which deal with minimizing the risk and fear of crime and create a'level of public awareness and support for crime prevention, the City and the Los Angeles County Sheriff Department have developed or intensified existing programs in the year 2000. In March 2000, the City opened a service center/outpost within a commercial center for the Sheriff Department with operating hours of Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., thereby having the Sheriff Department more readily available to the citizens of Diamond Bar and to administer services and spec.'.al programs to our community more efficiently. The City in conjunction with the Sheriff Department implemented an emergency business information program, which is a database of all the businesses in town, type of business, owners, managers, and hazardous materials (if any) utilized in the course of business, thereby making contact easier in an emergency. In May 2000, the Critical Facilities Response Plan Program for school violence was implemented. This program provides the Sheriff Department with photos, plans and a map layout of all schools in Diamond Bar along with mock drills for violent situations. The City continues to implement General Plan Objective 1.7 and related strategies and the Standard Emergency Management System Multi -Hazard Functional Plan this year by conducting mock emergency preparedness procedures drills for City employees and has designated the role of each City staff person in an emergency. Additionally, all schools within D-.amond Bar now have EOC (Emergency Operation Centers) containers to. store emergency supplies. Furthermore, the City participates in the Area "D" Board that devises and implements emergency preparedness in the Pomona and San Gabriel Valleys area. CIRCULATION The Circulation Element defines the transportation needs of the City and presents a comprehensive transportation plan to accom- modate those needs. The focus of this element is the identifi- cation and evaluation of local circulation needs, balancing those needs with regional demands and mandates. 21 Diamond Bar implements Objective 1.1 and related strategies by participating in local and regional transportation planning and decision making by implementing the guidelines of the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Plan and participation in the Four Corners Transportation Study and Alameda Corridor -East (ACE) Construction of Authority Project. The Four Corners Transportation Study focuses on potential transportation improvements in the area bounded by State Routes 57, 91 and 60 and Interstate 15, assists in the evaluation of alternate tfavel corridors through the easterly portion of the City's Sphere of Influence and initiates regional transportation town hall meetings in Diamond Bar. The City continues to support modifications and construction of regional freeway interchanges. The City has executed a Cooperative Agreement with ACE, thereby supporting -safety upgrade improvements to the Union Pacific crossing at Lemon Avenue and on the Union Pacific Railroad line at Brea Canyon Road' -near Washington Street. The safety upgrade improvements are designed to minimize traffic, noise, and air quality impacts to the community as a result of anticipated increased Alameda Corridor train traffic. Through the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the City continues to make improvements to its system of streets, thereby implementing Objectives 1.2, 1.3 and 3.1 and related strategies. Street rehabilitation/upgrading occurred on portions of Brea Canyon Road between Golden Springs Drive and Pathfinder Road and the westerly section of Golden Springs Drive was reconstructed and median added with the landscaping. New traffic signals were installed at Lemon Avenue/Lycoming Street, Glenbrook Drive /Brea Canyon Road, Rapid View Drive/Golden Springs Drive, Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Crest Lane and Brea Canyon Road/Silver Bullet Drive. The existing traffic signal at Golden Springs Drive/Brea Canyon Road was upgraded. Additionally, stop signs were added to the Summitridge Drive/Thunder Trail, Presado Drive/Chestnut Creek Road, Chestnut 'Creek :-Road/Tierra Loma Drive and Bella Pine Drive/Cliff Branch Dxive. Slurry sealing for residential neighborhoods was completed in Areas I and 2. Areas I and 2 are two of the five residential areas that are slurry sealed on a rotation basis in Diamond Bar. Furthermore, the City works with the schools to facilitate traffic circulation and safety and paid for three additional crossing guards this year. In order to implement Objective 3.2 and provide adequate infrastructure facilities and public services to support growth and planned development, the City continues to impose fees for or require the project sponsor to provide traffic mitigation measures/impact fees along with water, sewer, drainage, public sewer system, necessary infrastructure for new capital facilities 5 and the expansion of existing facilities in proportion to the demand created by development. PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES The Public Services and-Faci-l-ities Element deals with the -long term provision of municipal services and facilities, and what types of facilities are needed to support those services. This element focuses on: identifying City facilities and services needed to sustain the community's quality of life; long-range planning to fund City services and buildings; and coordinating and cooperating with various local agencies to provide those services not provided by the City. In 1999, a task force was established to investigate possible sites for a civic center with a multi -use community center. In 2000, the City has selected Summitridge Park as the preferred site for the development of a community/senior center/library project and continues to work toward the development of such a center. The development of a community/senior center/library implements Objective 1.5 and Objective 1.2 and related Strategies. Diamond Bar maintains a public information program to inform residents of community events. This program includes: three community bulletin boards at major locations throughout the City, a web site, Diamond Bar Community Newsletter, Community Calendar and City of Diamond Bar Community Recreation Guide. In January 2000, the Diamond Bar Community Newsletter is now published every two months instead of every three months and an expanded version is now online. In October 21, 2000, the City also implemented an automated citizens information telephone system identified as "Info to Go". This is an information service with 24-hour access and is also on the City's web site. The public information services provided by the City implements Objective 1.5 and related strategies Conclusion For the City of Diamond Bar, the General Plan continues to direct all land use decisions and remains an effective guide for future development. The City continues to pursue economic development to increase city revenues, address traffic related issues and preserve open space. The City looks forward to the adoption and implementation of the Housing Element and Recreational Trails and Bicycle Master Plan. The City continues to create a community environment that nurtures social, cultural, religious, educational and recreational opportunities for it citizens. 6 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 1.114:16h 11 - MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: APPLICATION REQUEST: PROPERTY LOCATION: :1061 :14 ml BACKGROUND: City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report UA July 5, 2001 July 10, 2001 Development Review No. 2001-04(1) and Minor Variance No. 2001-09(1) A request for a revision of hours of operation. 2020 Brea Canyon Road, Suite A-7, Diamond Bar (Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 10337) . Nathaniel Williams, 3029 Wilshire Blvd. #202, Santa Monica, CA 90703 Akbar Ali, 8481 Holder Street, Buena Park, CA 90620 On June 12, 2001, the Planning Commission approved Development Review No. 2001-04 and Minor Variance No. 2001-,09 to modify an existing retail suite to a restaurant and to approve a Minor Variance for a decrease of 16% in the number of required off-street parking spaces for the shopping center. The approved restaurant will occupy a 2,200 square foot retail suite. Approximately 1,237.5 square feet of gross floor area will be utilized for patrons and 962.5 square feet of gross floor area will be utilized for service area. The approved . application makes only interior tenant improvements. No square footage will be added to the restaurant structure and as a result, its exterior physical appearance will be the same. The current Parcel 1 site has 130 parking spaces. Per the Development Code, 155 spaces are required to support the mix of uses. The conclusions of the Shared Parking Analysis reports were based on a typical Friday from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The peak -shared demand for parking was noted between 11:45 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. for the existing uses. 1 Based on the initial review, the study showed that excess parking spaces were available to the existing businesses when the proposed uses were factored into the equation. At 11:45 a.m., of the 130 spaces 108 were occupied by the existing businesses, leaving 22 spaces available for the new use. Of those 22 spaces, 20 were required for the restaurant leaving two available spaces on this site. The Planning Commission determined that two available spaces were not adequate for the restaurant use during lunch time. To adequately serve all patrons and businesses of this center, the Commission and the Applicant agreed to the hours of operation from 5:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily. The hours of operation were established and approved as 5:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily. The property owner, Nathaniel Williams, and applicant, Akbar Ali, are requesting a revision of hours of operation for the public from 11:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. Additionally, the Applicant requests to use the premises from 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, for food preparation and the taking of reservations and catering orders. ANALYSIS: REVIEW AUTHORITY Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.66.060(a)(3), this application requires review and approval by the Planning Commission. Any change to a specific consideration by the review authority, in this case the change in hours of operation, requires the review authority's approval. REVISION The current Parcel 1 site has 130 parking spaces. Per the Development Code, 155 spaces are required to support the mix of uses. The conclusions of the Shared Parking Analysis reports were based on a typical Friday from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. However, it should be noted that many of the businesses on Parcel 1 are closed from Saturday afternoon until Monday morning. Therefore, the Applicant is making his request for a revision in the hours of operation for Saturday and Sunday. Per the attached analysis, in addition to the 20 spaces required for the restaurant use, 19 additional spaces are available on site for those businesses that are open on Saturday after 12:00 p.m. to Monday morning. z 2 SITE INFORMATION FOR PARKING MULTI TENANT COMMERCIAL CENTER lUnit!Square Tenant Name (Tenant Use Days & Hours of Parking # of i# I Footage ((Type of (Operation !Requirement Spaces !Business) I. (oer so. ft.) Al 1,000 DISCOVERY TRAVEL TRAVEL AGENT M -F 8:00 A.M.-5:30 P.M. 1/250 = 4 SAT 10:00 A.M.- 2:00 P.M. A2 1,200 DB DELICATESSEN DELI 10:00 A.M.-4:30 P.M. DAILY 1/75 - 700 SQ.' = 9 1/300 - 500 SQ.' = 2 A3. 1,200 PLAZA CLEANERS CLEANERS M -F 7:00 A.M. - 7:00 P.M. 1/400 - 400 SQ.' = 1 SAT 9:00 A.M. - 4:00 P.M. 1/1000 - 800 so., = 1 A4 1,200 REALTY EXECUTIVES REAL ESTATE M -F 8:00 A.M. - 4:00 P.M. 1/400 = 3 A5 1,200 DIAMOND DANCEWEAR RETAIL DANCE ATTIRE M -F 10:30 A.M. - 6:00 P.M. 1/250 = 5 SAT 10:00 A.M.- 4:00 P.M. A6 1,200 MERCURY INSURANCE OFFICE M -F 8:00 A.M. - 4:00 P.M. 1/400 = 3 V 2,200 HALAL TANDOORI RESTAURANT M -F 5:30 P.M. -10:00 P.M. 1/75 - 1,237.5 SQ.' 16.5 1/300 - 962.5 SQ.' = 3.1 E101 3,838 SHANGHAI PALACE RESTAURANT 11:30 A.M. -10:00 P.M. DAILY 1[75 - 2,938 SW = 39 1/300 - 900 SQ.' = 3 E104 2,164 PLAZA DIAMOND LIQUOR RETAIL STORE M-TH 7:00 A.M. -11:00 P.M. 1/250 = 9 F-SUN8:00 A.M. -10:00 P.M. E106 4,805 S.P.A.R.C. PHYSICAL THERAPY M, W, F 8:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. 1/250 = 19 T, TH. 9:00 A.M. - 7:00 P.M. SAT8:00 A.M.-12:00 P.M. E210 3,566 DR. ROBIN ABARI DENTIST MJU 9:00 A.M. - 6:00 P.M. 1/250 = 14 W -F 8:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. SAT8:00 A.M,- 3:00 P.M. E230 1,325 DR. RON SALEM MEDICAL M -F 8:00 A.M. - 9:00 P.M. 1/250 = 5 SAT 9:00 A.M.- 2:00 P.M. E240 2,475 GREAT EXPECTATION TUTORING M -F 3:30 P.M. - 6:30 P.M. 1/200 = 12 E250 875 MARTIN C. EMO, CPA OFFICE M -F 8:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. 1/400 = 2 E260 1,847 FOCUS ON CHINESE FAMILY OFFICE M -F 9:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. 1/400 5 SAT BY APPOINTMENT TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING SPACES PER DEVELOPMENT CODEJ 155 PARKING ALLOTMENT FOR BUSINESSES CLOSED SATURDAY AND SUNDAY FROM 12:00 P.M. to 10:00 A.M. 44 TOTAL REQUIRED FOR SAT. & SUN. BUSINESSES 111 TOTAL SPACES ON SITE 130 AVAILABLE SPACES 19* 'Note: The calculation of 19 available spaces is in addition to the 20 spaces required for the subject restaurant. This analysis supporWlhe Applicant's request to open on Saturday and Sunday from 11:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 3 Additionally, the Applicant is requesting to use the premises from 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, for food preparation and the taking of reservations and catering orders. Based on a typical retail use with a parking ratio of 1/250, this suite would normally utilize 9 spaces. Since the business is not open to the public during lunch on Monday through Friday, other tenants in the center. are utilizing those parking spaces. The total number of employees for the restaurant is four. Even if all of the employees were on site during this time, only four of the nine spaces would be utilized. This still allots five spaces to the existing tenants that would normally be used by occupants of this suite. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this request. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: On June 26, 2001, 35 property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the project site were notified by mail. On June 29, 2001, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers and a notice of public hearing on a display board was posted at the site and displayed for at least 10 days before the public hearing. Three other public places were posted within the vicinity of the application. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), Section 15303(a). Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. 2001-04(1) and Minor Variance No. 2001-09(1), Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolution. REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FINDINGS: 1 The design and layout of the proposed development are consistent with the General Plan, development standards of the applicable district, design guidelines, and architectural criteria for 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; 4. The design of thb proposed development will provide a desirable environment for its 0 occupants and visiting public; as well as, its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing; 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). REQUIRED MINOR VARIANCE FINDINGS 1. There, are special circumstances applicable to the property (e.g., location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other conditions), so that the strict application of this Development Code denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zoning districts or creates an unnecessary and non -self created, hardship or unreasonable regulation which make it obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards; 2. Granting the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zoning district and denied to the property owner for which the Variance is sought; 3. Granting the Variance is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; 4. The proposed entitlement would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; and 5. The proposed entitlement has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Prepared by: Linda Kay Smith Development Services Assistant ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution; 2. Letter from Applicant; 3. June 12, 2001 Planning Commission minutes; 4. June 12, 2001 staff report; 5. Exhibit "A", June 12, 2001. D: WORD-LINDA\PLANCOMM\PROJECTS\DR 2001-04(1) 2020 Brea .... /REPORT DR 2001-04(1)... in 0 PLANNING COMMISSION ` `i`A,.' RESOLUTION NO. 2001-xx A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 2001-04(1), MINOR VARIANCE NO. 2001-09(1), AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION 15301(a), A REQUEST FOR A REVISION OF HOURS OF OPERATION FOR A RESTAURANT IN AN EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER. THE PROJECT SITE IS 2020 BREA CANYON ROAD, SUITE A-7, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. A. Recitals 1. The property owner, Nathaniel Williams, and applicant, Akbar Ali, have filed an Application for Development Review 2001-04(1) and Minor Variance No. 2001-09(1) for a property located at 2020 Brea Canyon Road, Suite A-7, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review Revision, Minor Variance Revision and Categorical Exemption shall be referred to as the "Revised Application". 2. On June 12, 2001, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on Development Review No. 2001- 04, Minor Variance No. 2001-09, and Categorical Exemption, and approved such per Planning commission Resolution No. 2001-18. 3. On June 26, 2001, 35 property owners within a 700 -foot radius of the project site were notified by mail. On June 29, 2001, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers and a notice of public hearing on a display board was posted at the site and displayed for at least 10 days before the public hearing. Three other public places were posted within the vicinity of the Revised Application. 4. On July 10, 2001, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted, and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the Revised Application. B. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Planning Commission hereby determines that the project identified above in this Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. This is pursuant to Section 15301(a) of Article 19 of Chapter 3, Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the approved project set forth in 'the Revised 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 rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning Commission, hereby finds as follows: (a) The revised application relates to a previously approved Development Review NO. 2001-04 and Minor Variance No. 2001-09. This approval was for an intensification of use and parking variance for a restaurant use in a retail suite at 2020 Brea Canyon Road, Suite A-7 within an existing commercial shopping center with mixed uses of community retail and service. The project site is 4.73 acres. The previous approval per Planning Commission Resolution No. 2001-18 included the hours of operation for restaurant use as 5:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily. (b) The General Plan Land Use designation is Office Professional (OP). The zoning designation for the project site is Community Commercial - Planned Development— Billboard Exclusion (C -2 -PD -BE). (c) Generally the following zones surround the project site: to the north, south and east are Open Space and SR -57; to the west is open space and Commercial Plan Development (CPD) Zone. (d) The Revised Application requests a revision of hours of operation for the public from 11:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. Additionally, the Applicant requests to use the premises from 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, for food preparation and the taking of reservations and catering orders. K DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (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). There is no change in the Revised Application to the design and layout approved in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2001-18 for the intensification of use by opening the restaurant for extended hours on Saturday and Sunday. The design and layout of the approved project is consistent with the applicable elements of the City's General Plan and Design Guidelines. (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. There is no change in the Revised Application to the design and layout approved in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2001-18 for the intensification of use by opening the restaurant for extended hours on Saturday and Sunday. The design and layout of the approved project does not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. (g) The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood ' and will maintain the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.48, the General Plan, City Design Guidelines, or any applicable specific plan. There is no change in the Revised Application to the architectural design and layout approved in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2001-18 for the intensification of use by opening the restaurant for extended hours on Saturday and Sunday. The design and layout of the approved project is compatible with the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.48, the General Plan, City Design Guidelines, or any applicable specific plan. (h) The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public, as well as its neighbors, through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing. KI There is no change in the Revised Application to the design and layout approved in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2001-18 for the intensification of use of the existing retail suite. However, the Development Review and Minor Variance approved a decrease in the number of required off-street parking spaces for the restaurant use in the shopping center with hours of operation for the restaurant from 5:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily due to the parking spaces provided on site of existing businesses on site. The Revised Application requests additional operating hours from 11:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, and to use the premises from 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, for food preparation and the taking of reservations and catering orders. A parking analysis indicates that in addition to the 20 spaces required for the restaurant use, there are an additional 19 spaces available on site for Saturday and Sunday since many of the existing businesses are closed from Saturday noon to Monday morning. Therefore, the design and layout of the approved project will provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public, as well as its neighbors, through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing. 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. There is no change in the Revised Application to the design and layout approved in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2001-18 for the intensification of use of the existing retail suite. However, the Development Review and Minor Variance approved a decrease in the number of required off-street parking spaces for the restaurant use in the shopping center with .hours of operation for the restaurant from 5:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily due to the parking spaces provided on site of existing businesses on. site. The Revised Application requests additional operating hours from 11:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, and to use the premises from 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, for food preparation and the taking of reservations and catering orders. A parking analysis indicates that in addition to the 20 spaces required for the restaurant use, there are an additional 19 spaces available on site for Saturday and Sunday since many of the existing businesses are closed from Saturday noon to Monday morning. The approved project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative affect on 0 property values or resale(s) of property) to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. (j) The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The environmental evaluation shows that the approved project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), Section 15301(a). (k) There are special circumstances applicable to the property (e.g., location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other conditions), so that the strict application of this Development Code denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zoning districts or creates an unnecessary and non -self created, hardship or unreasonable regulation which make it obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards. Minor Variance No. 2001-09 was approved for a decrease in the number of required off-street parking spaces for the restaurant use in the shopping center with hours of operation for the restaurant from 5:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily in order to allow the existing businesses on site adequate parking. The Revised Application requests additional operating hours from 11:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, and to use the premises from 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, for food preparation and the taking of reservations and catering orders. Many businesses in the shopping center are closed from 12:00 p.m. Saturday to Monday morning. Therefore, a revision to the intensification of use and the Minor Variance is supported, and strict adherence to the regulation would create an unnecessary and non - self -created, hardship or unreasonable regulation that make it obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards. (1) Granting the Minor Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zoning district and denied to the property owner for which the Minor Variance is sought. Minor Variance No. 2001-09 was approved for a decrease in the number of required off-street parking spaces for the restaurant use in 0 the shopping center with hours of operation for the restaurant from 5:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily in order to allow the existing businesses on site adequate parking. The Revised Application requests additional operating hours from 11:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, and to use the premises from 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday though Friday, for food preparation and the taking of reservations and catering orders. A parking analysis indicates that in addition to the 20 spaces required. for the restaurant use, there are an additional 19 spaces available on site for Saturday and Sunday since many of the existing businesses are closed from Saturday noon to Monday morning. Therefore, a revision to the Development Review and the Minor Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zoning district and denied to the property owner for which the Minor Variance is sought. Granting the Minor Variance is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. Granting the Minor Variance is consistent with the Development Code standards. As stated in Item (e), the approved project and Revised Application are consistent with the General Plan. Therefore, granting the Minor Variance is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. (n) The proposed entitlement would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. There is no change in the Revised Application to the design and layout approved in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2001-18 for the intensification of use of the existing retail suite. However, the Development Review and Minor Variance approved a decrease in the number of required off-street parking spaces for the restaurant use in the shopping center with hours of operation for the restaurant from 5:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily due to the parking spaces provided on site of existing businesses on site. The Revised Application requests additional operating hours from 11:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, and to use the premises from 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, for food preparation and the taking of reservations and catering orders. A parking analysis indicates that in addition to the 20 spaces required for the restaurant use, there are an additional 19 spaces available on site for Saturday and Sunday since many of the existing businesses are closed from Saturday noon to Monday morning. Therefore, the Revised Application would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. (o) The proposed entitlement has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CE0A), Section 15301(a). 5. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth above, the Planning .Commission sion hereby by approves this Revised Application subject to the following conditions: (a) Condition 5(m) of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2001-18 shall be revised as follows: Restaurant hours of operation shall be between 5:30 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 11:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday. The Applicant shall be allowed to use the premises from 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, for food preparation and the taking of reservations and catering orders. (b) Planning Commission Resolution No. 2001-18, approved June 12, 2001, shall remain in full force and effect except as amended herein. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail to Nathaniel Williams, 3029 Wilshire Blvd. #202, Santa Monica, CA 90703 and Akbar Ali, 8481 Holder Street, Buena Park, CA 90620. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 10'h DAY OF JULY, 2001, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. 0 Bob Zirbes, Chairman f S i5l 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 10th day of July, 2001, by the following vote: ATTEST: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: James DeStefano, Secretary D:WORD-LINDA/PLANCOMM/PROJECTS/DR 2001-04(1) 2020 ... /RESO ... in L -*3 BROKERAGE SERVICES June 19, 2001 Ms. Linda Smith Development Services City of Diamond Bar 21825 E. Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178 RE: Restaurant Use 2020 Brea Canyon Road Suite A-7 Dear Ms. Smith: CB ® Richard Ellis �r7-4--gen t7-vr 11,2- CB Richard Ellis, Inc. 4141 Inland Empire Boulevard Suite 100 Ontario, CA 91764 www.cbre.com _On behalf of my client, Mr. Ali Akbar, I. am writing to i aquest an amendment to the use of the subject premises as follows: We respectfully request that in addition to the hours of operation granted by the Diamond Bar Planning Commission at the hearing on June 12, 2001, that Mr. Akbar be allowed to open his business beginning at the lunch hour on Saturdays and Sundays. We feel this privilege would not create any parking congestion, as the majority of the office users do not occupy their units during the weekend. The proposed hours would be 11 :30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. Please be aware that while Mr. Akbar will comply to the agreement that he will not open his restaurant to customers before the above hours on Saturday and Sunday, he wishes to enter the premises earlier for the purpose of meal preparation and the taking of reservations. The same will occur during the week, but under no circumstances will his doors be open to customers before 5:30 p.m. as previously agreed. We appreciate your patience in this matter and apologize for failing to clarify the weekend hours at the June 12th meeting. We look forward to answering any questions you may 'lave before and at the forthcoming meeting scheduled for July 10". Very truly yours, CB Ric and Ellis David HF Catlin Senior Associate (909) 418-2023 S:\[ HCATLIN\Leltor\5mith.doc:"d JUNE 12, 2001 6. NEW BUSINESS: PAGE 2 6.1. General Plan Conformity Report for FY 2001-200f Capital Improvement General ogram. DCM/ Stefano presented staff's rep rr. Staff recommends that the Planning C p Commissi approve a resoluti finding that the FY 2001-2002 Capital I Improvement t Improvement ogram is in co staff's with the General Plan. Following a brief qu�"n and answer session between Commissioners and DCM/DeStefano, . u kKa moved, C/Nelson seconded, to approve Resolution V M No. 2001-12 find the i cal Year 2001-2002 Capital Improvement Program I I is-inconform cewiththieGen I Plan. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: 7 AYI��. COMMISSIONERS: '"C WES: COMMISSIONERS: Nor ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Tye 7. ONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: None. 8: PUBLIC HEARING: , Nelson, VC/Ruzicka, Chair/Zirbes 8.1 Development Review No. 2001-04 and MinorVarianceNo. 2001-09 (pursuant to Code Sections 22.48.020(A)(2) and 22.52.020(D)) is a request for an intensification of land use for the conversion of an existing retail suite in a commercial center to a restaurant and to permit a decrease of 16% in the number of required off-street parking spaces. PROPERTY .ADDRESS: 2020 Brea Canyon Road, Suite A-7 (Lot 1.80, Tract 30578) - Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Nathaniel Williams 3029 Wilshire Boulevard #202 Santa Monica, CA 90403 APPLICANT: Akbar Ali 8481 Holder Street Buena Park, CA 90620 JUNE 12, 2001 PAGE 3 C PLANNING COMMSSION DSA/Smith presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. 2001-04 and Minor Variance No. 001-09, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within the resolution. Chair/Zirbes opened the public hearing. David Catlan, Real Estate Broker, C. B. Richard Ellis, Ontario, representing the applicant and owner, said he has handled the property off arid on for about 12 years, and has been in charge of the leasing for the past two years. He supports the restaurant use in the center. Mr. Catlan indicateo to C/Nelson that he visits the site frequently and has received no complaints or cornments from any tenants he has represented over the years with regard to parking at the center. The parking is in -common. Security personnel park their vehicles up against the fence facing the service road. Some competing centers within the City supply more parking, some supply less parking. To his knowledge, all centers comply with the code. Mr. Catlan responded to Chair/Zirbes that the property owner/applicant concurs with the conditions of approval for this project. The lease document discusses the reciprocal parking agreement, which prevents designated/allocated parking. In his opinion, the property owner would be willing to acknowledge the shared -parking agreement. Mr. Catlan indicated to C/Nelson that the previous occupant of this property was Century 21. He estimated that the office accommodated approximately 26-30 agents and 7-9 support staff. Peggy Guess, 202C, Brea Canyon road, #A5, Diamond Dance Wear, said she has been a tenant in tho-center* for many years. She said the reason Century 21 left is lack of parking. There is not sufficient parking for this project. She disagreed that there is no parking problem in the center. Tenants have complained for seven years. She is also concerned that there are no fire walls in the buildings. When the building was reconstructed after a fire, no fire walls were included. She is very concerned about food odors penetrating the clothing in her store, smoke fumes and fire potential of this project. Don Ferderer, Chino Hills, occupies the space directly adjacent to the proposed project lQcation, 2020 Brea Canyon Road, #6. He has been there only about seven months. However, he believes parking is an issue at certain times. He is also concerned about fire hazard. JUNE 12, 2001 PAGE 4 Chair/Zirbes closed the public hearing. DSA/Smith clarified the parking study parameters. She reported that the applicant indicated to staff that he would be willing to remain closed during lunch time and request only the 5:30 p.m. until closing hours for operation. By today's standards, the development is under -parked. VC/Ruzicka said he has always been able to find a parking spot in the center. He asked if staff has received complaints from residents or tenants about this project. DSA/Smith said she has received only one letter. C/Kuo asked the appilcant's representative why Century. 21 moved out of the space to which he responded he does not know why they moved across the street. They took a smaller space and may have received a better lease rate. He would imagine that the parking demand would decrease in the center since Century 21 is no longer there. He reiterated the applicant's willingness to remain closed during lunch time and open in the evening only after most tenants have left the center. C/Nelson moved, VC/Ruzicka seconded, to approve Variance No. 2001-04, Minor Variance No. 2001-09, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within the resolution subject to amending the operating hours indicated in the first sentence of Condition (m), page 7, to read: "Regular hours of operation shall be between 5:30 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. daily." Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMI-iSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMKISIONERS: Kuo, Nelson, VC/Ruzicka, Chair/Zirbes None Tye Chairman Zirbes recu,,*,ad himself from discussion of Ap.--Mda Item No. 8.2 and left the dais. 8.2 Develop Review No. 2001-06 (pursuant to ctions 22.48.020(A)(1)) _"*Gristruct a two-story, single ily residence is a request to Co�iloyvdrerdernlce of approximately 12,513 gross square including balc s, porch, covered patio and four -car garage. PROJEcT4ADD 2"ater Course Drive (Lot 46 ct 47850) Diamond Bar, 91 765 MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: APPLICATION REQUEST: PROPERTY LOCATION: APPLICANT: BACKGROUND: 70"=P June 5, 2001 June 12, 2001 Arne- W" G k'T " q " City of Diamond Bar COMMISSION Staff Report Development Review No. 2001-04 and Minor Variance No. 2001-09 A request to modify an existing retail suite to a restaurant and to approve a Minor Variance for a decrease of 16% in the number of required off- street parking spaces for the shopping center. 2020 Brea Canyon Road, Suite A-7, Diamond Bar (Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 10337) Nathaniel Williams, 3029 Wilshire Blvd. #202, Santa Monica, CA 90703 Akbar Ali, 8481 Holder Street, Buena Park, CA 90620 The. property owner, Nathaniel Williams, and applicant, Akbar Ali, request to modify an existing retail suite to a restaurant at 2020 Brea Canyon Road, Suite A-7. The shopping center is on Parcel 1 of four, Parcel Map 10337. The site plan shows four parcels, however, the other three are separate units. There is however, one owner for all four parcels at this time. Please note the attachment to the site plan. The request for a restaurant requires the approval of a Development Review for an intensification of use that is permitted in the Zone. There are no changes, expansion, or structural alterations to the existing structure. The applicant does not propose to provide alcoholic beverages, outdoor dining, and/or entertainment with this application. A Minor Variance approval is required for a decrease of 16% in the number of required off-street parking spaces for the shopping center on Parcel 1 of Parcel.Map 10337. The use within the center does not comply with current standards regarding off-street parking. 1 The project site of Parcel 1 is approximately 4.73 gross acres. The existing retail shopping center of two buildings contains professional office, a restaurant and sandwich dell, mini -market, and retail services. The retail shopping center was processed and built using the Los Angeles County Development Standards. The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Office Professional (OP). Pursuant to the General Plan, this land use designation provides for the establishment of office -based working environments for general, professional, and administrative offices, as well as support uses. The proposed project and use could be considered a support use and as such is consistent with the General Plan. The zoning designation for the project site is Community Commercial -Planned Development— Billboard Exclusion (C -2 -PD -BE). The C -2 -PD -BE zoning designation permits a restaurant use by right. However, the proposed application is considered an intensification of land use. The existing retail shopping center will be accommodating the operation of a proposed restaurant, which requires more parking spaces than the former use. It is anticipated the proposed restaurant will generate more activity at the project site. Generally the following zones surround the project site: to the north, south and east are Open Space and SR -57; to the west is open space and Commercial Plan Development (CPD) Zone. ANALYSIS: REVIEW AUTHORITY This application requires Development Review approval by the Planning Commission per the City's Development Code, Section 22.48.020(A)(2), that states a Development Review approval is required for an application when a project involves a substantial change or intensification of land use (e.g. the conversion of an existing structure to a restaurant). Development Review is a discretionary review process, which allows the whole project area to be reviewed for possible improvements. The Planning Commission is the review authority. The Minor Variance is required pursuant to Development Code, Section 22.52.020(D) for a decrease of 16% in the number of required off-street parking spaces for the shopping center. Structures with parking space deficiencies may be permitted with a Minor Variance for a decrease of not more than 20%, in the number of required off-street parking spaces. The application requests 16%/ The Hearing Officer is the review authority. Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.48.030, permits shall be acted upon concurrently and the highest authority shall make final determination. In this case, the Planning Commission is the highest authority. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 0 Tenant Improvements The proposed restaurant will occupy a 2,200 square foot retail suite. Approximately 1,237.5 square feet of gross floor area will be utilized for patrons and 962.5 square feet of gross floor area will be utilized for service area. The applicant proposes to make only interior tenant improvements. No square footage will be added to the restaurant structure and as a result, its exterior physical appearance will be the same. Additionally, the venting for this project has not been addressed. Staff has spoken to the architects and informed them that all venting must be at the rear of the building on the side of the freeway. Venting and equipment if required will be screened and both will be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of any City permits. ® Hours of Operation/Number of Employees This is an Islamic, Halal Tandoori Restaurant. Regular hours of operation per the application documents for the proposed use are between 11:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. daily. Special event operating hours shall be reviewed, approved, and permitted by the Planning Division. The restaurant will have four employees. 0 Landscaping The project site contains existing landscaping. A site visit indicates that the landscaping is in a reasonably good condition. The plants are green and free of weeds. Therefore, the applicant is not being required to provide additional landscape improvements as part of this project's conditions of approval. • Signage Signage is not a part of this application. Proposed signage will be reviewed at a later date. MINOR VARIANCE 0 Shared Parking Analysis/Study The current Parcel 1 site has 130 parking spaces. Per the Development Code, 155 spaces are required to support the mix of uses. The conclusions of the Shared Parking Analysis reports are based on a typical Friday from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The peak -shared demand for parking is noted between 11:45 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. for the existing uses. Pursuant to Code, reqjaurants require one parking space per each 75 square feet of gross floor area for patrons, plus one parking space for each 300 square feet of service area. The proposed restaurant contains approximately 1,237.5 square feet of gross floor area for patrons (16.4 spaces) and 962.5 square feet of gross floor area for service (3.2 spaces). As a result, a minimum of 20 parking spaces is required for the proposed restaurant. The study shows that excess parking spaces are available to the existing businesses when the proposed uses are factored into the equation. At 11:45 a.m., of the 130 spaces 108 are occupied by the existing businesses, leaving 22 spaces available. Of those 22 spaces, 20 are required for the restaurant leaving 2 available spaces on this site. The parking analysis and approval letter from the City's Traffic Engineer, Warren Siecke, support the methodology and conclusion of the analysis that show excess parking on site. This supports a Minor Variance for reducing the required number of parking spaces for this shopping center by 25 spaces or 16%. Additionally, the plans show a total seating for 38 patrons. The conditions of approval and Minor Variance limit this approval to seating for 38 patrons as represented on plans. Additionally, though only Parcel 1 was studied, it is possible that patrons would park on Parcel 2 for businesses in Building B. Building B is 8,868 square feet. Real estate offices occupy 7,557 square feet requiring 19 spaces. A doctors office occupies 1,311 square feet requiring 5.2 spaces for a total of 25 spaces for Building B. Parcel B has approximately 40 spaces available which has an excess for an adjacent use. Staff has made a condition of approval that a shared parking and access agreement be available for the four parcels as discussed below. ® Parking/Parking Lot Area/Lighting Though there is minimal parking in the rear of the center, all employees of the various businesses should park at the rear of the buildings on all four parcels that are owned by the same owner, Nathaniel Williams. Staff has had conversations with the Management Company and apparently a shared parking and access agreement does not exist. Therefore, staff informed them that a Shared Parking and Access Agreement for all four parcels would be a condition of approval for this use based on preliminary analysis of parking for the businesses on all four parcels. Should the owner sell any of the parcels, this would anticipate future difficulties of parking. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the owner shall agree to a Shared Parking and Access Agreement with all four parcels of PM 10337 in writing to the City. The Shared Parking and Access Agreement running with the land of the four parcels and approved by the City, shall be recorded by the owner guaranteeing the continued availability of shared parking and access. ADDITIONAL REVIEW The Public Works Division and the Building and Safety Division reviewed this project. There are no comments to note except for the requirement of building permits for the interior improvementste and signage. NOTICE OF PUBLICi'HEARING: I rd On May 29, 2001, 35 property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the project site were notified by mail. On June 1, 2001, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers and a notice of public hearing on a display board was posted at the site and displayed for at least 10 days before the public hearing. Three other public places were posted within the vicinity of the application. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), Section 15303(a). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. 2001-04 and Minor Variance No. 2001-09, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolution. 1. The design and layout of the proposed development are consistent with the General Plan, development standards of the applicable district, design guidelines, and architectural criteria for 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; 4. The design of the proposed development will provide * a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public; as well as, its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing; 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). 1 . There are special circumstances applicable to the property (e.g., location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other conditions), so that the strict application of this Development Code denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zoning districts or creates an unnecessary and non -self created, hardship or unreasonable regulation which make it obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards; 2. Granting the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity, and zoning district and denied to the property owner for which the Variance is sought; 3. Granting the Variance is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; 4. The proposed entitlement would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; and 5. The proposed entitlement has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Prepared by: Lindav Kay Smitw Development Services Assistant ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution; 2. Applications and attachments; 3. Shared Parking Analysis, City Engineer concurrence; 4. Site Photos; 5. Exhibit "A" - site plan, floor plan, dated June 12, 2001. D: WORD-LINDA\PLAN,COMM\PROJECTS\DR 2001-04 2020 Brea ...,/REPORT DR 2001-04... P I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.2001:X-e/6 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 2001-04, MINOR VARIANCE NO. 2001-09, AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION 15303(a), A REQUEST TO MODIFY AN EXISTING RETAIL SUITE TO A RESTAURANT AND TO APPROVE A MINOR VARIANCE FOR A DECREASE IN THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES FOR THE SHOPPING CENTER. THE PROJECT SITE IS 2020 BREA CANYON ROAD, SUITE A-7, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. A. Recitals 1. The property owner, Nathaniel Williams, and applicant, Akbar Ali, have filed an application for Development Review 2001-04 and Minor Variance No. 2001-09 for a property located at 2020 Brea Canyon Road, Suite A-7, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review, Minor Variance and Categorical Exemption shall be referred to as the "Application". 2. On May 29, 2001, 35 property owners within a.600 -foot radius of the project site were notified by mail. On June 1, 2001, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers and a notice of public hearing on a display board was posted at the site and displayed for at least 10 days before the public hearing. Three other public places were posted within the vicinity of the application. 3. On June 12, 2001, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. B. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The .Planning Commission hereby determines that the project identified aboA ig'this Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. This is pursuant to Section 15303(a) of Article 19 of Chapter 3, Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 0 7%, r (h) The design of the proposed development will provide a k—iriaole environment for its occupants and visiting public, as well as its neighbors, through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing. As referenced in the above findings, the project site's current exterior design is consistent with the applicable elements of the General Plan and development standards of the zone through its design, use of materials, colors and landscaping. The stucco and siding materials are low maintenance and long lasting. The, variety of texture and color add to the design's good aesthetics. Therefore, the existing design of the proposed project continues to provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing and will retain a reasonably adequate level 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. Health Department, Fire Department, City permits, and inspections are required for construction. These 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. Pursuant to the Development Code a Shared Parking Analysis was completed for the subject site and approved by the City's Traffic Engineer substantiating adequate parking spaces on-site for the current business uses and the proposed restaurant. (j) The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), Section 15303(a). MINOR VARIANCE (k) There are special circumstances applicable to the property (e.g., i- location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other conditions), �o that the strict application of this Development Code denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zoning districts or creates an unnecessary P and non -self created, hardship or_ unreasonable regulation which make it obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards. This center was originally constructed under the Los Angeles County Code. Today's Development Code adopted in 1998 requires stricter parking requirements. New. allowed uses with parking space deficiencies may be permitted provided that the new use can prove that adequate parking is available on site. A Minor Variance approval for a reduction of not more than 20% in the number of off-street parking spaces may be granted provided that a Shared Parking Analysis shows adequate parking for all uses based on the businesses' staggered hours of operation. In this case a Shared Parking Analysis for the subject site was prepared by a registered traffic engineer based on site observations on a typical Friday, with current Development Code parking standards and uses. The City's Traffic Engineer approved this Analysis. The analysis confirms that adequate parking spaces are provided on site for the current business uses and the proposed restaurant. Therefore, strict adherence to the regulation creates an unnecessary and non -self-created, hardship or unreasonable regulation that make it obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards. Granting the Minor Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zoning district and denied to the property owner for which the Minor Variance is sought. This center was originally constructed under the Los Angeles County Code. Diamond Bar's Development Code has stricter requirements, yet allows for the process of a Minor Variance for a reduction of not more than 20% in the number of required off-street parking spaces. Based on the analysis, the approval of the Minor Variance will not hinder the businesses in the shopping center that have varying hours of operation and uses. Therefore, without a Minor Variance approval, the applicant is denied the same enjoyment and privileges, which other neighboring shopping centers in the same zoning district possess. Granting the Minor Variance is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. i Granting the Minor Variance is consistent with the Development Code standards. As stated in Item (e), the proposed project is consistent 9 with the General Plan. Therefore, granting the Minor Variance is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. (n) The proposed entitlement would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. Health Department, Fire Department, City permits, and inspections are required for construction. These 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. Pursuant to the Development Code a Shared Parking Analysis was completed for the subject site and approved by the City's Traffic Engineer substantiating adequate parking spaces on-site for the current business uses and the proposed restaurant. (o) The proposed entitlement has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), Section 15303(a). 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, and floor plans collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" dated June 12, 2001 as submitted and as amended herein. (b) The -shopping center site shall be maintained in a condition that is free of debris both during and after the implementation of the entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste contractor utilized has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. BUILDING AND SAFETY (c) Plans shall meet all A -3 -occupancy requirements. (d) The structure shall meet the 1998 California Building Code, California PLANNING Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and California Electrical Code requirements. (e) Men's and Women's restrooms shall be provided if the restaurant establishment employs four or more employees at any given time. (f) The existing restroom shall. meet current handicap accessibility requirements. (g) The restroom access doors shall be clearly marked with symbols. (h) One seating space in the restaurant patron area shall be provided for handicap use. (i) The Applicant shall obtain approvals and comply with the requirements of the Fire Department, Los Angeles County Business License Department, Los Angeles County Health Department, and City Planning, Building and Safety, and Public Works Divisions. The Applicant shall be in compliance with all requirements of said agencies at all times and receive all licenses, permits/inspection, and approvals prior to opening the restaurant. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the owner shall agree to a Shared Parking and Access Agreement with all four parcels of Parcel Map 10337. The Shared Parking and Access Agreement running with the land, approved by the city, shall be recorded by the owner, guaranteeing the continued availability of shared parkin.9 prior to Certificate of Occupancy. (k) Employees of the restaurant shall utilize parking in the rear of the shopping center.. (1) Applicant shall have seating for no more than 38 patrons. (m) f We"guours of operation shall be between J�AAO`and 10:00 p.m. daily. Special event operating hours shall be 'reviewed and permitted by the Planning Division. (n) Prior to business opening, Applicant shall obtain City approvals and permits for signs. (o) i� Prior to business opening, Applicant shall obtain building permits for interior tenant improvements. A (p) New rooftop venting and equipment visible from the"streef shall be screened. All venting or exterior equipment required for this project shall be at the rear of the building on the side of the freeway. All venting and equipment shall be screened, all shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. (q) 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. (r) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed, within fifteen (15) days of approval of this grant, at the City of Diamond Bar Community and Development Services Department, their affidavit stating that they are aware and agree to accept all the conditions of this grant. Further, this grant shall not be effective until the permittee pays remaining City processing fees. (s) 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 Resolution, by certified mail to Nathaniel Williams, 3029 Wilshire Blvd. #202, Santa Monica, CA 90703 and Akbar Ali, 8481 Holder Street, Buena Park,- CA 90620. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 12th DAY OF JUNE 2001, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. A -- Bob Zirbes, Chairman n. 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 12th day of June, 2001, by the following vote: ce' AYES: 7W -z' ` ' NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: James DeStefano, Secretary D:WORD-LINDA/PLANCOMM/PROJECTS/DR 2001-04 2020.../RESO ... 4 (' COARAUNE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTAfM Wt21660., Drive Suite 190 (909)396-5676 (909)861-3117 I'VELOPI ffM REVIEW APPLICATION Record Owner Applicant Name U%ILLI film) . 0 PVTH P4, I E L, sem (Last name first) - st name first) Address c3OoZr1 U•�lt.•S 119,e16LV:)*Z02. E4R1 KQL. M51 City 5PrmTj a Mcw t r A • '• 90(02-0 . Ug . FPL h ?- 6 0 i& Deposit S 2,,ZO.2% Receipt# By L17�7— Date Rec'd y� Applicant's Agent (Last name fust) Phonc(AD) 8'�G—//1 3 Phoae( !'���� —yp Phone( ) it is iuo applicant's responsitury to notify the Community Development birectorLm waiting of any c�angt-of' the principals irvolved during the processing of this case. (Attach a separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships&int ventures, and directors of corporations.) Consent: I certify that I am the owner of the herein described property and permit the applicant to fele this request. i% 4 ��� Si� ed' / � -� 'Z .JO' Data - � _ � �./ L1• (All record owners) Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. Print Name q K -Biz, R L (Applicant or Agent) i Signed / Date (Applicant or Agent) Location . 9- 0 (S ,•cet address or tract and lot number) �,� i otunHNM� _ la i �i : � •-� � � k. Previous Cases ,f �, �' x _ ! Present Use of Site D Use applied for 1` e-) TA U �L A.ni"1 h •y AASHIANA PAKISTANI AND INDIAN CUISINE RESTAURANT This Restaurant will serve Pakistani and Indian food during the dinner time which is from 6 pm onwards. All the Offices and Restaurant in this plaza close by 6 pm. This Restaurant will mostly cater food for parties at major hotels, clubs and residences. Most of the parking will be available by 6 'o' clock and customers will easily park their cars in the parking lot. I C), co F'"J Crff OF L-AMOND BAR castr COMMUNITY DEVELOPI►MW DEPARTMENT ` t : FPL a 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 1904 [IJ y Deposit S (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 �` Recetpttr VARIANCE APPLICATION ®®v B i y Date Recd W4 Record Owner Applicant • pp O Applicant's Agent name AL A -L Ra a, a -Ju t name fust) - (7.= nsina fust) Address -3-0 5-) LJ i L 5 i I r =1a L _ `7 q q-.! � , t_. CitY��L,� fans ra �. Phono60—SA9 Photfe( ) (Last name first) MOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Coatmuuity 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 1 am the owner of the herein described prn request. pupy stud permit the applicant to file thi Signed (All record owners) Qa Date 1-----r :a Cerrifrcation: 1, the undersigned; hereby eert{fy under e J ' correct to the best of my knowledge. P °f Perjury that the irtjormatfon hernia prtevided is Print Name ; VARLA,NCE CASE -BURDEN OF PROOF In addition to the information required in the application,_ the applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the planning Commission, the following facts: A. That the requested use at the location proposed will not: Adversely affect tate health, peace, comfort or welfare or persons residing or working in the surrounding arra, or 2. Be materially detrimental to the use, emjoyme nt or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site, or 3. Jeopardize, endanger or other wise constitute a metnsce to the public health, safety or' general welfare. !1v B. That the proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this Ordinance, or as is otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding arra. C. That the proposed site is adequately served: r1. By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to carry the kind and L quantity of traffic such use would generate, and 2. By other public or-,-nvate service facilities as are required. fG"O D. That there are spepal circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property involved, such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which are not generally applicable to other properties in the same vicinity and under identical zoning ciassifrcatioa. (t C A S i. f — I I RIO I :11 Lipa LO tE tn U) LL CL U) 0 Z E 0 �E S try Jr,Ly Lu et u .J C CL 3 UJ ca z ql 'Ci to 0 00 r) Ism— ll-- (n m CC) -E Y 2 ;F E L Q i = C)A U LM 2 U 07 u 0 tm C: co . ....... U u o z 0 QSE E 2 E C92 0 I I RIO I 0 :11 Lipa LO tE tn U) LL CL U) 0 Z E 0 �E S try Jr,Ly Lu et u .J C CL UJ ca z ql 'PR 26 Ism— ll-- (n m CC) -E Y 2 Low L Q i = C)A U LM 2 U 07 u 0 0 LO tE tn LL LO U) Z E 0 �E S try Jr,Ly Lu .J C CL UJ I Rl 9 0 tE tn tn U) Z E 0 �E S try Jr,Ly � C CL ca z ql 'PR 26 (n m CC) -E Y 2 CL L Q i = C)A U LM 2 U 07 u 0 E U u o z 0 QSE E 2 E C92 0 0 E 0 Q 4 ul 0 0 .9 c > Ln j ai LM 9 0 tn U) S try Jr,Ly � C CL U Z b o (n m CC) -E Y 2 CL L Q i = C)A U LM 2 U 07 0 U u Ln j ai LM -7L 9) U QCS t2 0 0 U CL LM 0 9) U L.6 LW LA AM u u c a B. N V a a A E n u lA a m N cn Nux '.GE o C)rw opo 0 0� 0 _ "X c u v L M 0� a A u = 1fy E E � Ul e- O - z -6- Cb rn M b zf- Q 0 0 cc c v z = d J v ? 00 U) d )j J > c u ® a Lw co c U s ® C N O►p U s W v u a -- Q E Lid LOW a E m LOW 0 E O O 0 E V -r- 00 L > L.6 LW LA AM u u c a B. N V a a A E n u lA a m N cn Nux '.GE o C)rw opo 0 0� 0 _ "X c u v L M 0� a A u = 1fy E E � Ul L O - z -6- Cb rn M b zf- Q 0 0 cc c v z = d J v ? 00 O d )j J > c u d = E a 0 01 ) o` U s Uo U O U d W v �. m E m 0 E O O 0 F- V -r- 00 L > d O L 0 Q� cn cn C? g •o c 0 s a ma° C 41 r c fo a 9 y T. �z a � G Lo N Qry O� c o � `0 c U 3 u xWdg � dcc t:. c yy L.6 LW LA AM u u c a B. N V a a A E n u lA a m N cn Nux '.GE o C)rw opo 0 0� 0 _ "X c u v L M 0� a v - = 1fy 9 m C � L O - z -6- Cb rn M b zf- cc c v z = d J v ? 00 O d )j J > c u d = E d Y U 3 0 d d o � g F- V � d P.� ® G s O1 m ® 41 r c LM U h Y Lo Q z��� F- xWdg � dcc yy O - m OUai Oua m —0 � d s r E ua -1LU )" L zG ¢V) LCA "QU F E FZ L.6 LW LA AM u u c a B. N V a a A E n u lA a m N cn Nux '.GE o C)rw opo 0 0� 0 _ "X c u v L M 0� a 1 u - = 1fy 9 Lh O - o -6- Cb N _ M b zf- z E! O z = d J v Z y 3 J > � t 1 } E L d �'. U a N s c a t%3 ® L N 0400 �o�= ® U V a N F 1 E — v; o -6- Cb N _ b zf- z E! O z = d J v Z y 3 z 3 ua d Y 3 } E L d �'. U a N s c a t%3 ® L N 0400 �o�= ® U V a N F 1 E — v; Memo TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 20142 Canyon Drive, Yorba Linda, CA 9 Phone: (714) 9706247, Fax: (714) 779-1644 DATE: June 5, 2001 TO: Linda Smith FROM: Warren Siecka SUBJECT: Parking Study Review 2020 Brea Canyon Road, A•7 Per your request, I have reviewed the parking study prepared by Lin Consulting, Inc. for the proposed Aashiana Restaurant at the subject location. I concur with the study methodology and conclusions. a-. CO Traffic, Civil and Electrical Consulting Engineers May 15, 2001 Mr. Akbar Ali Owner Aashi ana. Restaurant 3414 W. Ball Road Anaheim, CA 92804 3333 bi-ea Canyon Road, Suite 120 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Tel (909) 598-0899 - Fax (909) 598-3899 E-mail: inbox Ca)linconsulting.com Re: Parking Survey and Analysis Aashiana Restaurant 2020 Brea Canyon Road, Suite A7, Diamond Bar, California Dear Mr. Akbar Ali: Per your request, we have conducted a survey of the actual parking utilization for the proposed Aashiana Restaurant. This letter presents our methodology and review findings in regards to the sufficiency of on-site parking spaces. PROPOSED OPERATION The project site is situated in an existing building of Plaza Diamond Bar, at the northeast corner of Pathfinder ,Road and Brea Canyon Road. The project plans for a new Indian style dine -in restaurant at the currently vacant suite, as shown on the Site Plan (Exhibit A). Floor area of the proposed restaurant is approximately 2,200 square feet. The proposed business hours are from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily. SURVEY METHODOLOGY With City staffs prior acknowledge, the survey was performed on Friday, May 11, 2001 between 11:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., ai. A I -hour duration. The observations were totaled every 15 minutes and the number of veYlicles parked in each survey area was counted. As shown on the Site Plan, the par','.,ing area immediately adjacent to the proposed restaurant ��ially divided into 12 areas for observation purpose. Such area provides a )to total 3�0�rking spaces including four spaces for handicapped. parking. The availability of unused parking spaces during the survey period will be used to examine and compare with the parking demand generated from the project to determine the- adequacy of parking. SURVEY RESULT The result of the pa1! rkin g survey is shown in Table A. These data have been used to find out the availability of parking spaces during the eleven -hour survey period. The fewest number of available parking spaces was found at 12:00 p.m. with 22 spaces. "providing professional services with best value and quality on .time and within budgets " Parking Survey and Analysis Aashiana Restaurant May 15, 2001 Page 2 of Based on the tenant data provided by project owner and our field observation, all suites in Building "A" and "E" are occupied except the project site, Suite A7. Parking demand for "Restaurant" is calculated, based on its gross floor area in the "Diamond Bar Development Code" which requires one space for each 75 sq. ft. 'of gross floor area for patrons, plus one space for each 300 sq. ft. of service area, plus one space for each 100 sq. ft. of outdoor'dining area. The project proposes 1237.5 sq. ft. of gross floor area for patrons, 962.5 sq. ft. of service area, and no outdoor dinning area, as shown in Table B. Accordingly, the peak parking requirement for t_he_ r 'ect is 20sppa s Considering the typical hourly accumulation pattern of restaurant, t epar ing demand of each time period i:: shown in Table C. ADEQUACY OF PARKING Exhibit B illustrates the relationship between demand and supply of the project parking based on the survey result and analysis. It has shown that the minimum surplus (supply minus demand) is 10 parking spaces at 12:45 p.m. when 24 spaces are available and the project demands 14 spaces. CONCLUSION Based on the code requirement and the result of this analysis, it is evident that adequate on-site parking has been provided. No additional parking spaces would be required for the project. Sincerely, LIN Consulting, Inc. V A California Corporation DENWLIN LIN No. 21 1 7 * Exp 6/30/01 9lF OF C Denwun Lin, P.E. Principal ATTACHMENT C Kay Hsu, E.I.T. Project Engineer < N=. SURVEY AREA 130 PARKING SPACES INCLUDING 4 HANDICAPPED PARKING. THIS SITE PLAN IS PROVIDED BY THE OVVNFR FOR PARKING STUDY PURPOSE ONLY. a NOT TO SCALE Lacil= Al PARKING SURVEY AREA (D PARKING SPACES PROVIDED LIN Consulting, Inc, PARPONG SURVEY AND ANALYSIS EXHIBIT A r—frx- ChR, and V—W.d C --$ting Engirt AASHIANA RESTAURANT SITE PLAN 75 (n C 0 0 LO 0 El 0 CT co a- m M M Cq 00 0 - CD It a) co Lo! LO' N 0 N CO FC4Cf) m C.0 CO N C14 Co i -,:I-: 'i �i: V- 14" It M u M C) m co CD m CD m C) co ol co C) m co C) co 0 co 'M C) 0 C) C: C C' C) 0 m m m co co m co m co I m u xC) 0 I- m CD co m m 0 0 0 co 0 m r-_ In Ln a 0 C* ol co N I M j Im co co CO CO M M CO 1 M CO CO 4-N Ocn 'm 01 C:, CO co M CO N co m N r r CN co ,t co N cor- N! o 00O CO 0) 0 Ln CO I- r-- CO U) co N N N N I T T T T I T I T C, C, O d) t- CM co a) t-- m CD I-- w 0 W > —�-CD Ln U.) co Ln Co r to (01 C3) a) cr) a) CC) o P- d N r d -;T CY) cr) Cf) .19 --------- --- co: CD cn co; 0 0) i j t- I Ul) M ct M T M LO Ln M Lo U-) t d o f m i U.) U-) I co, I 'tT Lo M LO "'T m -T CV) M I q, -'T - -tt - C,41 - 'It - N - r - N - N - T - T - 0 - N - N - C14CD to d I --T Lo COI O I Lo u7 I Ul CN Cyl to V- CY) CV C-4 M CIJ 04 CV) fl -CO CD r-! O I C7D I CA 0) co co (3) CD CO co Lo C) C) <0 IL (L cL cL L2. mu o< L<O LO 0 LO 0 U) a. a- a- a. a. E n- E jL jL cL w CL C) co It C) 0 LO C:) U) C:� U-) C:, U-) C:, W 0 G. C M C14 CY) co .T 0 C,) C;i 0 CT co a- 9 O LO 0 (1) cc El 0 CIO ! U') 0) a) I N• LO to CY) � i CY) 0o: 0 co C. -I m CO 0 C:) cc "t cy.) cy) cy) in 1 r- r-, co co 00 00; OD 05 0) co co cc) co y V a i I i � I I ! � � 0 0 0 0 0 C! 0Li) i C C) C) 0 0 m co m m cn cn co m co cn co m1 com CO! cn cn co: cn CO 0 1- LOI, CO t— U') Lf) Lo U.) "q N 0 CO - Ict 0) 0) 0) 0) co to LO M W "T i t el r N 0 0, m m co 0 0 ol C:) O le co N 04 CN N Lu - cn co CD I-- r.- u-, 't C" m 0 C) L CL co eq C14 C\j 1 C14 N N O V r- C-4 C:)L7p I i m CD t` f` 0 f` m w m N N N M O cliU'l CO 0 N 0 cr) 0 0 cv O U') i col r- i r-- I LO Ln m w rl- II- w w m m II- 11- 0 tn -,t Lo m U)vM � C) 0 m m m m m 0 0 m N m N N N 0 fl- co CO I- m I- co co m Na O C) M N m co N co —Cq N N N E .2 1 CL CL CL 1 CL 12- (L IL 0- fL a- CL 0- 0. CL m CL CL CL a. to 0 m 0 to 0 LO 0 LO I;r 0 CD w 0 M LO It; 0 0 LO 0 M U*) 0 0 to 0. 0 m 4 4 u-) u-) Ln c . o w is 66 rte: h: 66 66 w c CIO U) cu U) m cc (L) ee U to I n I 0 i CO (D r,c') OI 0i OI r m cv) cc00cy) 0 0 cy) mc C) 0 m 0 m CL 0 co CY) Cf) m 0 m 3- N CY) r— IL C) 0 0 C) 0 C 4) Oct 0 C) C) 0 0 O CD Co 0 C) O 0 C) C) I C) CL co CN4 c c O. o 0 o Oil C) I co O C) I O T i r i O I C:) cu IL Lb- 0 C14 Lo U-) ct -'T, LO h I cr) Lo m Lo! cy)! C-4 C'4 co CD LO i T' 0 co CD I co i v LO C4 C:, CY) al cm m co 4) E Zj m D- a- (I a- a. n. o U) 0 `Tr) 0 Ln CL m N TABLE B. PROPOSED AREA SCHEDULE Aashiana Restaurant AREA USE I QUANTITY UNIT DINING AREA 950 S.F. RECEPTION / CASHIER 155 S. HALLWAY 132.5. S.F. TOTAL (PATRON) 1237.5 S.F. STORAGE AREA 242 S.F. TOILETS AREA 112.5 S.F. DRESSING 30 S.F. PANTRY 45 S.F. KITCHEN 533 S.F. TOTAL (SERVICE) 962.5 S.F. Source: Floor plan omprovided bythe project owner TABLE C. PARKING SUPPLY AND DEMAND ANALYSIS Aashiana Restaurant LIN Consulting, Inc. Survey Date 05.11.01 (a) (b) (p)=(a)x(b) F (d) I (e)=(d)-(c) Time Period Accumulation by Percentage (1) Maximum Demand (2) Parking Demand Available Space (from Table A) Parking Surplus 11:00 AM 30% 20 6 30 24 11:15 AM 30% 20 6 40 34 11:30 AM 50% 20':':' 41 31 11:45 AM 50% 20 10 34 24 12:00 PM 50% 20 10 22 12 12:15 PM 50% 20 10 28 18 12:30 PM •.70%2t) 1.4 30 ,,•. 16 .. 12:45 PM 70% 20 14 24' 10 =:► 1:00 PM 70% 20 14 6. 36.'- 22 1:15 PM 70% 20 14 41 27 1:30 PM 60% 20 12 43:;: 37 1:45 PM 60% :20 12 45;::. 2:00 PM 60% 20 12 45 33 2:15 PM 60% 20 12 40 28 2:30 PM 60% 20 .12 29 2:45 PM 60% "20 12 42 3:00 PM 60% 20 12 40 28 3:15 PM 60% 20 12 42 .30 3:30 PM 50% 2010 4$ 38 3:45 PM 50% 20 ..1.0 4:00 PM 50% 20 10 33 23 4:15 PM 50% 20 10 35 25 4:30 PM 70% 20 14 39' 25 4:45 PM 70% 20 14 49 " 35 5:0OM P 70% 0 /0 20 14 52 38 5:15 PM 70% 20 14 65 51 5:30 PM 90% 20 18 75 . 57 5:45 PM 90% 20 1$ 73 55 6:00 PM 90% 20 18 80 62 6:15 PM 90% 20 18 82 64 6:30 PM 100% 20 20 :$0 . '. 60 ...: 6:45 PM 100% :20 20 $3 63 . 7:00 PM 100% 20 20 88 68 7:15 PM 100% 20 20 90 70 7:30 PM 100% ::20 20 69, ; 7:45 PM 100% 20.. 20 82 62 .. , 8:00 PM 1 00y 20 20 83 63 8:15 PM 100% , 20 20 86 66 8:30 PM 100% 20 20 8:45 PM 100% 20 20 97 77, Page 1 of 2 w TABLE C. PARKING SUPPLY AND DEMAND ANALYSIS Aashiana Restaurant LIN Consulting, Inc. Survey Date 05.11.01 Minimum parking surplus: 10 spaces at 12:45 PM (1) Data source: "Shared Parking, a study conducted under the direction of ULI- the Urban Land Institute", page 47, Exhibit 28 (2) Maximum Demand calculated based on Diamond Bar City Code under category "Restaurant" Page 2 of 2 (a) (b) (c)=(a)x(b) (d) (e)=(d)-(c) Accumulation by Maximum Parking Available Space Parking Time Period percentage (1) Demand (2) Demand (from Table A) Surplus 9:00 PM 100% 20 20 100 80 9:15 PM 100% 20 20 106 86 9:30 PM ":90% 20 "? 18 106. 88 9:45 PM 90°l0 .2D... 18 107 .. .: $9 10:00 PM 90% 20 18 113 95 Minimum parking surplus: 10 spaces at 12:45 PM (1) Data source: "Shared Parking, a study conducted under the direction of ULI- the Urban Land Institute", page 47, Exhibit 28 (2) Maximum Demand calculated based on Diamond Bar City Code under category "Restaurant" Page 2 of 2 C, ........... _........ 6 —: - ____ C5�2_nl•,S (�.?' :: - — _ `" - . "d9Lt9b' •=.LtgC�iCs''iai- 't^'»:g NGf�tvld d�'i0lrto`iifTv.7'oYoi.' r9t5i0 N:,^.':anC xYw .I'!`�''�ti/��.y :.x1-;. >ao^rrJa..G�sc�v-do• � ii •bnracao�nu-nm . -. i� � e 1 t d a I) h 10'05 - - ._----_-.. _..-------�'----�•0::. ' I � � 0 3 i M ;o OAj f IL 4— I I k I I kzj LO =j SURVEY MEA PG 5 TRACT NO 45 I J5 IP lolul 21-, 921 - 21 10067 55 '14 rt P M uw L12114 2 31053 3 K 11 .Wwcno 'Al .1 p -- --------- ------ 17 PG LEV-200' IPS Al PMX'MC SURVEY MEA r 0 2 SK r 0 M City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 8_2 REPORT DATE: June 29, 2001 MEETING DATE: July 10, 2001 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Development Review . No. 2000-01(1), Variance No. 2000-01(1), and Minor Variance No. 2000-01(1) APPLICATION REQUEST: Extension of time of the Planning Commission grant PROJECT LOCATION: 22840 Ridgeline Road Tract 30091, Lot 156) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Mr. and Mrs. Wen Chang 1011 Summitridge Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 APPLICANT: Ku and Associates, Inc., Habitant Development Corp., 18725 E. Gale Ave., #217, City of Industry, CA 91748 BACKGROUND: The property owners, Mr. and Mrs. Chang and applicant, Ku and Associates, Inc., Habitant Development Corporation are requesting an extension of time. The time extension is for of Development Review No. 2000-01, Variance No. 2000-01 and Minor Variance No. 2000-01 (pursu!ant to Code Section 22.,66.050) which the Planning Commission approved on February 8, 2000 by Resolution No. 2000- 03. The Planning Commission's approval allows the construction of a two-story single-family residence of approximately 15,602 0 2. The proposed project the provisions of the (CEQA). Prepared by: has been reviewed in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act A,h7 J. Lur�gu, Td-sociAte Planner Attachments: 1. Extension of time draft resolution; 2. Staff reports dated January 26, 2000; 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000-03; and 4. Exhibit "A" - site plan, floor plan, elevations, sections, grading plan, landscape/irrigation plan and colors/materials board dated February 8, 2000. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF TIME OF THE FEBRUARY 8, 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2000-01(l), VARIANCE NO. 2000-01(l), MINOR VARIANCE NO. 2000-01(l) AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, WHICH ALLOWS THE CONSTRUCT OF A TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE OF APPROXIMATELY 15,602 SQUARE FEET WITH A BASEMENT, SIX CAR GARAGE, INDOOR SWIMMING POOL, OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOL/SPA, TENNIS COURT WITH FENCING AND LIGHTING, RESTROOM/POOL EQUIPMENT STRUCTURE, TRELLIS AND RETAINING WALLS. THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 22840 RIDGELINE ROAD (TRACT NO. 30091, LOT 156), DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. A. RECITALS. 1. The property owners Mr. and Mrs. Wen Chang and applicant, Ku and Associates, Inc., Habitant Development Corporation have filed an extension of time application for Development Review No. 2000-01, Variance No. 2000-01 and Minor Variance No. 2000-01 approved by the Planning Commission on February 8, 2000 for a property located at 22840 Ridgeline Road, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject extension of time for Development Review, Variance, Minor Variance and Categorical Exemption shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. Notice for this project was provided in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on June 29, 2001. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 33 property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the project site on January 27, 2001. Furthermore, the project site was posted with a display board and the public notice was posted in three public places on June 29, 2001. 3. On July 10, 2001, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 1 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the project identified above in this Resolution is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15303(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. 3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence before this Planning Commission that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to a vacant lot located within a gated community identified as 'The Country Estates." The project site is currently vacant except for a keystone retaining wall system within the front portion. The project site is irregular shaped, sloping up from Ridgeline Road to a flat pad and sloping down toward the rear and side property lines. The project site is approximately 1.70 acres. (b) On February 8, 2000, the Planning Commission approved a project that allows the construction of a two-story single-family residence of approximately 15,602 square feet with a basement, balcony, six car garage, indoor swimming pool, outdoor swimming pool/spa, tennis court with fencing and lighting, restroom/pool equipment structure, trellis and retaining walls. (c) The Application request is for an extension of time of the Planning Commission's February 8, 2000 approval. (d) The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential (RR) Maximum 1 DU/AC. (e) The project site is within the Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot Size 40,000 Square Feet (R-1-40,000) Zone interpreted as Rural Residential (RR) Zone. (f) Generally, the following zone and use surround the project site: to the north, south and west is the R-1-40,000 /RR Zone; and to the east is the R-1-40,000/RR Zone and the Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD) property which contains three water tanks. Extension of Time Finding (g) The permittee has established, with substantial evidence beyond the control of the permittee (e.g., demonstration of financial hardship, legal problems with the closure of the sale of the parcel, poor weather conditions in which to complete construction activities, etc.), why the permit should be extended; E On April XX, 2001 the applicant submitted a request in writing for a one-year extension of time. It has taken more time then anticipated to obtain construction permits because of engineering issues. Therefore, the extension of time is needed. (h) The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15303(a) and guidelines promulgated thereunder, the City has determined that this project is categorically exempt. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth -above, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Application subject to the following conditions: (a) The project shall substantially conform to site plan, grading plan, floor plan, elevations, sections, final landscape/irrigation plan, and colors/materials board collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" dated February 8, 2000, as submitted and approved by the Planning Commission on February 8, 2000. (b) Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000-03 approved on February 8, 2000 shall remain in full force and effect except as amended herein. (c) This extension of time grant is valid for one year and shall be exercised (i.e., construction started) within that period or this grant shall expire on February 8, 2003. (d) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed, within fifteen (15) days of approval of this grant, at the City of Diamond Bar Community and Development Services Department, their affidavit stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all the conditions of this grant. Further, this grant shall not be effective until the permittee pays remaining City processing fees, school fees and fees for the review of submitted reports. (e) 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 Resolution, by certified mail, to: Mr. and Mrs. Wen Chang, 1011 Summitridge Road, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 and Ku and Associates, 3 Inc., Habitant Development Corporation, 18725 E. Gale Avenue, #217, City of Industry, CA 91748. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH OF ON JULY 2001, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.OF THE CITY. OF DIAMOND BAR. W Bob Zirbes, Chairman 1, James DeStefano, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of July 2001, by the following vote: ATTEST: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: I James DeStefano, Secretary 9 City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 8.1 REPORT DATE: January 26, 2000 MEETING DATE: February 8, 2000 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Development Review No. 2000-01, Variance No. 2000-01, and Minor Variance No. 2000-01 APPLICATION REQUEST: To construct a two-story single family residence of approximately 15,602 square feet with a base- ment, balconies, six car garage, indoor swimming pool, outdoor swimming pool/spa, tennis court with fencing and lighting, restroom/pool equipment, trellis and retaining walls. PROJECT LOCATION: 22840 Ridgeline Road Tract 30091, Lot 156) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Mr. and Mrs. Wen Chang 1011 Summitridge Road Diamond Bar, CA'91765 APPLICANT: Ku and Associates, Inc., Habitant Development Corp., 18725 E. Gale Ave., #217, City of Industry, CA 91748 1 BACKGROUND: The property owner, Mr. and Mrs. Chang and applicant, Ku and Associates, Inc., Habitant Development Corporation are requesting approval of Development Review No. 2000-01, Variance No. 2000-01 and Minor Variance No. 2000-01 (pursuant to Code Section 22.48.020, 22.54.020 and 22.52.020). Approval of this request will allow the construct of a two-story single-family residence of approximately 15,602 square feet with a basement, balconies six car garage and indoor swimming pool. It will also allow the construction of an outdoor swimming pool/spa, pool equipment/ restroom structure, tennis court, trellis and retaining walls. The project site is located at 22840 Ridgeline Road (Tract 30091, Lot 156) within a gated community identified as "The Country Estates". The project site is irregular shaped, sloping up from Ridgeline Road to a flat pad and sloping down toward the rear and side property lines. The project site is approximately 1.70 acres. According to Tract Map No.30091, the project site does not contain any easements or restricted use areas. The original tract approval indicates that the project site was 1.24 acres. On June 27, 1987, Los Angeles County approved a lot line adjustment, which added approximately .44 acres to the project site. The additional acreage was acquired from adjacent Lot 155 owned by the Wa'lnut Valley Water District. Currently, the project site is vacant. It was developed with a single-family residence of approximately 2,800 square feet that was destroyed by fire in July 1999. on October 1, 1999, the City issued a demolition permit, which allowed the property owner to clear the project site. The only structure remaining is the retaining wall with wrought iron fencing that creates the circular driveway leading to the pad area. The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential (RR) Maximum 1 DU/AC and zoning designation of Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot Size 40,000 Square Feet (R-1-40,000) interpreted as Rural Residential (RR). Generally, the following zone and use surround the project site: to the north, south and west is the R-1-40,000/RR Zone; and to the east is the R-1- 40,000/RR Zone and the Walnut Valley Water District property which contains three water tanks. ANALYSIS: Applications This project's processing requires three applications, Develop- ment Review, Variance and Minor Variance. The purpose of Development Review is to establish consistency with the General K Plan through the promotion of high aesthetic and functional standards to complement and add to the economic, physical, and social character of the City. The process will also ensure that new development and intensification of existing development yields a pleasant living, working, or shopping environment and attracts the interest of residents, workers, shoppers and visitors as the result of consistent exemplary design. Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.48.020, an application for Development Review is required for residential projects, which involve construction on a vacant parcel and new structures, additions to structures, and reconstruction projects which are equal to 50 percent or greater of the floor area of existing structures on site, or have a minimum 10,000 square feet of combined gross floor area. The proposed residential project is on a vacant lot with a gross floor area of approximately 15,602 square feet. As such, this project requires Development Review and the Planning Commission is the review authority. The purpose of a Variance is to allow for adjustment from the development standards of the Development Code. The adjustment may be granted when special circumstances applicable to the property (i.e. location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, unreasonable regulations, other conditions, or the strict application of the Development Code) denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zoning districts. The special circumstances must create an unnecessary, and non -self create ' d hardship that makes it obviously impractical to require compliance with the develop- ment standards. The Planning Commission is the review authority for a Variance application. Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.54.020, an application for a Variance is required for this project in order to obtain: • More than a 20 percent relief from the required setback for structures; and • more than a 30 per*cent relief from the required maximum height allowed for walls and fences. The Variance application for this project is requesting to: • reduce the setbacks for the residence, pool equipment/restroom structure, tennis court and tennis court lighting; and • Authorize fencing and wall heights to exceed the maximum allowed height of six feet. The purposed of a Minor Variance is to allow minimum deviations from the development standards identified within the Development Code. -The Minor Variance is to allow a minimal increase in structure height, projections, and other standards and a minimal 3 decrease in building site area, setbacks, distance between structure and off-street parking. Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.54.020, an application for a Minor Variance is required for this project in order to obtain: e An increase of not more than 10 percent, pin the maximum -allowed structure height. The Minor Variance application for this project is requested to: ® Allow cupolas (architectural feature) that extend 3.5 feet above the maximum 35 -foot -height permitted for a residence. Typically, the Director is the review authority for a Minor Variance application. The DevelopmentCoderequires that all applications be processed concurrently. Since the Planning Commission is the highest review authority for two applications, the Commission will review all the applications. Development Review Development Standards The following is a comparison of the development standards set forth by the City's Development Code and the project's proposed development standards. CITY'S DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PROPOSED PROJECT'S DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SETBACKS: MINIMUM FROM PROPERTY LINES SETBACKS: FROM PROPERTY LINES Residence: Residence: • Front yard - 30 ft.; • Front yard - 60 ft.; • Side yard - 10 & 15 ft. with 25 ft. • Side yard - 110 & 180 ft. with 150 between structures on adjoining ft. to next residence and 60 ft. parcels; from a water tank; • Rear yard - 20 ft.; • Rear yard - varying with 5 ft. from Walnut Valley Water District property to 65 ft.; Ir 0 BUILDING HEIGHT: BUILDING HEIGHT: • Two stories - maximum 35 ft.; • Two stories with a basement - 35 ft.; • Cupolas (architectural feature) 3.5 ft in height; PARKING: PARKING: • Two car garage minimum; • six car garage; ACCESSORY STRUCTURE: MINIMUM SETBACKS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE: SETBACK FROM THE FROM PROPERTY LINES PROPERTY LINES • Storage shed, workshop, greenhouse, • restroom/pool equipment structure etc. - front, side, rear and height rear placed at the property line; same as residence; sides minimum 55 ft.; front 80 ft.; height - 10 ft.,- • Tennis Court - front, side and rear • Tennis Court - same as residence; front - 21 ft.; rear - placed at property line; sides - minimum 10 ft.; • Tennis Court Lighting - 10 ft. from • Tennis Court Lighting - nearest property line; front - 21 ft.; rear - placed at property line; sides - minimum 10 ft.; • Pool/spa street side same as • Pool/spa - street side/front - 62 residence; side and rear 5 ft.; ft.; sides - minimum 90 ft.; rear 27 ft.; • Trellis - front, side and rear same • Trellis - sides - minimum 85 ft; as residence; rear - 165 ft; front - 26 ft.; 40 ft. separation from pool/spa; FENCING/WALLS: FENCING/WALLS: • Maximum height within the side and • Tennis court fencing - 12 ft.; rear setback - 6 ft; • Maximum height within the front • Height of retaining wall within the setback - 42 inches; front setback - 5 ft.; LOT COVERAGE: LOT COVERAGE: • Maximum - 40 percent; • 26.74 percent; The several dekrelopment standards of the proposed project are not in compliance with the required development standards as specified in the City's Development Code. The description of these development standards are listed above in the staff report R section titled Applications. The detailed analysis for the specific development standard adjustments will occur further into the staff report. Architectural Features and Colors The proposed residence's architectural style, as referred to in the application is California Mission. This style is compatible with other residences in "The Country Estates" due to.the eclectic architectural style that is existing in this area. A materials/colors board has been submitted which delineates the following: stucco colors La Habra -X48 #13 and X-86 #14 (light and medium off-white) Roof U.S. "S" Tile (Terra Cotta) Stone Accent Coronado Stone - County Castle/Oatmeal # 15 and Smooth Lime Off-white #16 The proposed materials/colors residences within the area. received the approval of "The Association. Floor Plan board is compatible with other Additionally, this project has Country Estates" Home Owners' A floor plan is included as part Of Exhibit "A". The proposed single-family structure's first floor contains an entry, living room, dining room, kitchen with a nook and adjacent Chinese kitchen, pantry, storage area, nook, powder room, two bathrooms, maid's room, parent's room, theatre, laundry chute and elevator. The second floor contains a master bedroom with a master bathroom and two walk-in closets, three bedrooms, three bathrooms, bonus room, office, laundry chute, linen closet and hallway. The basement level contains a six -car garage, game room, indoor pool, storage room, bathroom, laundry room, elevator and mechanical equipment room. Lot Line Adjustment The site plan presented in Exhibit "A" is with the project site's current property lines. The project is being processed taking into consideration the current property lines. However, the property owner is in the process of purchasing approximately 3,966 square feet (0.0910 acres) from the Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD;} that owns the property adjacent to the project site. An attachment identified as PROPERTY TO BE PURCHASED FROM, WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT delineates the property to be purchased. 'If the property owner is successful with this purchase, it is required that a Lot Line Adjustment be processed N. and approved. The Lot Line Adjustment (pursuant to the applicant -s request) will cause: the tennis court to be located at the new rear property line and five feet further back (25 feet instead of 21 feet) from the front property line; a corner of the proposed residence will be located approximately 39 feet instead of five feet from the WVWD property; and the restroom/pool equipment structure to be located at the new rear property line. In order to construct the proposed project with the benefit of the purchased property, it is required that a Lot Line Adjustment be approved before the issuance of any City permits. Staff has spoken with Eric Hitchman of the WVWD. It appears that the purchasing of this property will occur. Grading The grading plan indicates that proposed project will generate approximately 2026 cubic yards of cut and 4,141 cubic yards of fill will occur. The fill work will occur at the slope adjacent to the proposed driveway and retaining wall. The cut work will occur on the area that contains the recreational amenities and at the rear of the pad. According to the project's engineer (Sampson and Associates), the fill work may be reduced because the proposed retaining wall adjacent to the proposed driveway will be constructed with caissons, thereby eliminating half the fill work. If -this is the case, cut and fill will be balanced on site. Previously, illegal grading occurred on th creating uncertified fills in various area cation of any grading on the project site or approved by the City. Prior to the iss permits, a thorough soils investigation is completed and reviewed and approved bythe report is required to include a review of proposed improvements, recommended design measures. The soils report is required to uncertified fills and recommend mitigation Retaining Walls/Walls e project site, thereby S. To date, certifi- has not been received uance of any City required to be , City. The soils existing conditions, and any mitigation address the or certification. Two walls are proposed. one is a perimeter retaining wall at the property line that borders the WVWD property. The maximum height of this wall will be six feet. Another retaining wall is proposed adjacent to the new driveway and curves the perimeter of the pad to the rear of the site. The height of this wall varies from one to four feet. Its purpose is to support the new driveway area.s, Generally, the Development Code allows retaining walls/walls with a maximum exposed height of six feet. As proposed, these walls comply with the Code. 7 A keystone retaining wall exists on-site. Its supports the circular driveway that leads up to the buildable pad. The pad area of the site that will contain the recreational amenities will be lowered. As a result, a portion of the keystone retaining wall will be lowered by approximately three feet to accommodate the lower elevation of this pad area. Landscaping/Irrigation A landscape plan was submitted with this projectl.s application. The applicant is required to submit a final landscape/irrigation plan for the City's review and approval prior to the issuance Of any City permits. The landscape plan shall delineate the species, size and quantity of all plant materials including plant materials utilized for slopes. The final landscape plan shall also delineate plant material utilized to screen the tennis court from the street easement. All landscaping shall be installed prior to the project's final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy issuance. The project site does not contain trees as specified in the Development Code for protection and preservation. However, the project site does contain palm, evergreen and eucalyptus trees that will be removed. The site also contains a large Cora'l tree, which will remain. Trellis Pursuant to the Development Code, the proposed trellis is considered an accessory structure and is required to maintain the same setback as the residential structure. As proposed, it maintains the required rear and side setbacks but not the 30 foot required front setback. The front setback is delineated at approximately 26 feet. In order to maintain the required setback, the trellis will need to be moved approximately four feet back from the front property line. variance Residential Structure Setback Pursuant to the Development Code, a proposed residential structure in the R-1-40,000/RR Zone is required to maintain a 20 foot rear setback. The proposed residential structure's rear setback varies from five feet to 65 feet. The five foot setback is at the cornier of the residence which is adjacent to the WVWD property. Considering the lot configuration and the fact the setback reduction is not adjacent to a residence, it is anticipated that the setback reduction impact will be 9 insignificant. However, the purchase of the WVWD property will change this setback at this point to approximately 50 feet. Retaining Walls Adjacent to the existing driveway turn -around, a retaining wall is proposed with exposed height of five feet. This wall expands the turn -around area, thereby allowing for a planter and water wall. This wall is not within the dedicated easement for Ridgeline Road; however it is in the requited 30 foot front yard setback. Pursuant to the Development Code, the maximum height of a retaining wall/wall/fence within the front yard setback is 42 inches (3.5 feet). Through the Variance process, it is possible to exceed the allowed height by more than 20 percent, which is allowed by the minor Variance process. The applicant desires to increase the height by more than 20 percent, therefore a Variance is required. The elevation of Ridgeline Road at the proposed retaining wall is 1185. The driveway pad elevation is 1199.8. The grade difference is approximately 14 feet. Additionally; the area adjacent to the wall slopes down five feet plus to the new driveway. It is this grade difference and the existing pad location that caused the wall height of over 42 inch and its location within the setback. Furthermore, as stated previously, the driveway is existing and was not destroyed by the fire. The applicant intends to utilize this driveway as an access to.the residence's main entrance. Tennis Court/Tennis Court Lighting and Fencing The tennis court requires a Variance because, as proposed, it does not comply with development standards specified in the Development Code. A concrete slab does not have specific development standards, nor does it require a construction permit. However, a tennis court is considered an accessory structure due to the needed fencing and lighting, and required construction permit. As an accessory structure, a tennis court is required to maintain the same setbacks as a residential structure (see development standards matrix above). The tennis court does not meet the required development standard. As a result, a Variance is needed because the setback relief for the court and lighting is more than 20 percent and the height relief for the fencing is more than 30 percent. The buildable pad is irregular shaped with the proposed recreational amenities on the narrowing portion and the residence on the deeper portion of the buildable pad. Since the pad area and main driveway are existing, the design of the site plan, as presented, is logical. It is the pad configuration that causes the setback reduction for the tennis court. The impact of the 0 rear setback reduction is considered insignificant because this area is adjacent to WVWD property and not a residence. The front setback varies from 21 feet to 25 feet instead of the 30 feet as required by Code. With the purchase of the WVWD property, the front setback will vary from 26 feet to 30 feet. Tennis courts are common place in ',The Country Estates"--and-have been approved in the past with similar setbacks. Due to the narrowing of the lot and the most advantageous direct for a tennis court due to rising and setting of'the sun, the proposed location is probably best suited for the court. Tennis court fencing is proposed at a height of 12 feet. It is required to be wrought iron and will surround the court, and in some areas be placed upon a wall. When placement is upon a wall, the total height (wall and fencing) will not exceed 12 feet. Because the required setbacks are reduced, a Variance approval is required for the fence height within the required setback. The same setback requirement applies to the tennis court light fixtures. Since the some of the fixtures will be located within the required setback, a Variance approval is also required. The pole light fixtures are proposed at a height of approximately 17 feet. Pursuant to Code, these fixtures are,not to be located closer than 10 feet to the adjacent property line (except as approved by a Variance) and not located more than 18 feet from the court surface. The light poles are required by Code to have a five-foot extension arm and shielded in a manner that completely cuts off light source when viewed from any point five feet or more beyond the property line. The incident light level at a property line is required to not exceed one -footcandle measured from grade at a 12 -foot height. The incident light level upon any habitable building on an adjacent property shall not exceed .05 footcandle. The applicant will be required to demonstrate the incident light levels and the one -footcandle measurement. In the event that the illuminated court surface is visible from another parcel, it will be required that the applicant treats the court surface with a low reflecting, dark - colored coating. Additionally, it is required that court lighting not be operated between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and between 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. Restroom/Pool Equipment Structure Pursuant to the Development Code, the restroom/pool equipment structure is considered an accessory structure. As such, it is required to maintain the same setbacks as the residential structure. It maintains the required front and side setbacks but not the required rear setback. As proposed, it is located at the rear property line, shared by the WVWD not a residential 10 property, as such, the impact of a setback reduction is expected to be insignificant. Minor variance The maximum height permit for a residential structure is 35 feet as measured from the natural or finished grade at the front setback, extending towards the rear of the project site. The proposed residential structure meets this requirement except for the two cupolas on the roof, which may be considered as an architectural feature. The Development Code allows for a 10 percent height increase. The cupolas increase the residential structure's height by 3.5 feet or 10 percent. Pursuant to the City's Design Guidelines, roof articulation is encouraged. The cupolas along with changes in roof planes strengthen roof articulation. Additionally, the cupolas appear to be an intricate part of the residential structure's design and allows light to radiate down through the residence. Additional Review The City's Public Works and Building and Safety Divisions reviewed this project. Their recommendations are within the attached draft resolution. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15303(a) and guidelines promulgated thereunder, the City has determined that this project is categorically exempt. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel,Valley Tribune on January 27, 2000. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 33 property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the project site on January 26, 2000. Furthermore, the project site was posted with a display board on January 27, 2000 and the public notice was posted in three public places on January 26, 2000. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No.'2000-01, Variance No. 2000-01 and Minor Variance 2000- 11 01, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolution. REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FINDINGS: 1. The design and layout of.the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, City Design Guidelines, development standards of the applicable district, and architectural criteria for special areas,,(e.g. theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards, or planned developments); 2. The design and layout of the proposed development will not unreasonably 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 of the City's Development Code, the General Plan, or any applicable specific plan; 4. The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing; 5. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious (e.g. negative affect on property values ore 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). REQUIRED VARIANCE/MINOR VARIANCE FINDINGS: 1. There are special circumstances applicable to the property (e.g., lc3cation, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other conditions), so that the strict application of the City's Development Code denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zoning districts or creates an unnecessary and 11H non -self created, hardship or unreasonable regulation which makes it obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards; 2. Granting the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zoning districts and denied to the property owner for which the Variance is sought; 3. Granting the Variance is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable*specific plan; 4. The proposed entitlement would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; and 5. The proposed entitlement has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Prepared by: An+nJ. L g , A ociate Planner Attachments: 1. Draft resolution; 2. Exhibit "A" - site plan, floor plan, elevations, sections, grading plan, landscape/irrigation plan and colors/materials board dated February 8, 2000; 3. Exhibit identified as PROPERTY TO BE PURCHASED FROM WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT; 4. Application; 5. Tree Statement dated January 7, 2000. ,i 13 PROPERTY TO BE -PV ';HASED FROM WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 3,966 scg. ft. mt - PT" 091,43 ' . p I'46-0— un O p See QR,�1 rl'2 3ct�9 07-1 155 � 2 1 o 'F3tc -t8� �9 S 1- 7 (c v+ ro M z $' . e o � m � a w •� t?5.43 rl s5'6o"E . 1 I t. "L2. z $' . m � z rl N £; CITY O - `OND BAR COMMUNITY D.. rELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 (989)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Record Owner CHANG, WEN PIN Name =499 MET 3o-1HN (hast name first) Address 22840 RIDGE LINE City DIAMOND BAR Zip 91765 Applicant CHANG, WEN PIN CHANG; 1!H!: u61EN Last name first) 22840 RIDGE LINE DIAMOND BAR, CA. 91765 Case}t 11 V �no - o J FPL # Ao oo =o I Deposit 1" °" Receiptt/ O_�- 61 ?,v By Date Recd Applicant's Agent YAU, RAYMOND (Last name first) 18725 E. GALE AVE. 1217 Industry, Ca. 91748 Phonc(90JR 860-2915 Phone(909-860-2915 Phone(624-961-1191 F,44 Gu. - 93'7 -5 -4.0.& - NOTE: 35 -5'4.0.& - 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. (Arach a separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors of corporations.) Consent. I certify that 1 am the owner of the Signed owners) Cerrification: I, the undersigned, h�rAy certify to the best of my knowledge. Print Name HABITANT DEVELOPMENT described property and permit the applicant to file this request. eDate penalty of perjury that the information herein provided is correct (Applicant or Agent) Signed DatelZ-2.000. ppiican Agent) Location 22840 RIDGE LIEN, DIAMOND BAR, CA. 91765 TR30091, LOT 156 (Street address or tract and lot number) Zoning I�r R-1 —OO�DM /05 H 3� Previous Cases &410 93-r 1V, 43-1 lorga —1 Ion fj - 0111 l" 04L 00 7.s /• Present Use of Site R-1 Use applied for NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING si G t�. eco o %%gal description (all owns a., sing the proposed lots)/parcel(s)) r TR -30091 LOT 156 y APN #8713-030-017 & 8713-030-028 Area devoted to structures 8,250 SF Landscaping/Open space 78.490 SE 86,740SF Lot Coverage 13.52 Proposed density 1/2 Project Size (Units/Accts) Style of Architect" CALIFORNIA MISSION • TWP +GARAGE Slope of Roof 4.12 Number of Floors Proposed Grading __ _ _—__ y -S If yes, Quantity ty Cut 2026 GY Fill 4141 GY Import YES If yes, Quantity 2115 CY Export If yes, Quantity 0 UO %_J.L L vt' .vAr1"r1vl,+1J .DAX( `�_�i`fi�ltV ��—o / COAEMRJNITY YELOPMENT DEPARTMENT _ FPL #,� ,�Yc y_--� 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 � De sit s (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 �.'' �.: ` ! MOr;pRtweipt# VARIANCE APPLICATION 'Date Recd r!1 Record Owner Applicant Applicant's A ent G'IANG� W% PIN GHANZ., weN f N HABITANT DMPMENT CoFf Name C+jANto, M61 UE -M C*LAt4G7, Me I UaN YA V , PAYM ON D (hast name fust) (Last name first) (Last name first) Address 2284-0 NP- e LINE* 2284.0 NMe ANE 1872,5 E-. GAX- Q.V6./*t 247 city DMDND 5AQ, 6A DIAMOND BAP-, CA It"dDt4S1RY 4 5-A zip `i 1 Eby 11 1765 91748 Phone( i�� Phone( oq 86D-^ 1 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 shed, 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. Signed " Date (All record owners) Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify underpenalty ofperjury that the ir{formation herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. Print Name j-1ABJT7&^1T U�-w rMENT COP -P. (Applicant or A t) Signed Date 2-2-00 (ApplAdcant or t) Location 2Z8+0 P-Irka5 LINE' DIAMDND BAR, GA q 17657 Tfz*Wq I I,OT 156 (Street address or tract and lot number) and (Street) Zoning R '" HNM Project Size (gross acres) + 2 A4pz—S (Street) Project Density I /L Previous Cases Present Use of Site Use applied for NeW (f:MJ6 TTFRU GT1 C*A 0F- 4 51 h1&L6 r -AM I L.Y t)KS-iJ_. V, 6., Domestic Wates Source Company/District ill A4 --N LAT Method of Sewage Disposal Sanitation District L-A COUNTY Grading of Lots by Applicant? YES V NO Amount '� 'L,pDD C.Y. (Show necessary grading design on site plan or tent. map) LEGAL DESCRIPTION (All ownership comprising We proposed .lots/project). If petitioning for zone change, attach legal description of exterior boundaries of area subject to the change.) " 3Ooq I LOT IF& +�?N 8713 - 030 - 017 S,-. 8713 030 - 02B Project Site: 4 8674.0 S� 2 . Gross Area No: of Lots Area devoted to : Structures Open Space Residential project: 11 1'% < < r-�'-�• and Gross Area Proposed Density 12- Units/Acres 2 + GA;zA&r1- No. of floors Number and types of Units I '91h1C Lr,- 12:M1LY DW t4,L1 N & Residential Paridng: Type Required Provided (O Total Required Total Provided (0 41 VARIANCE CASE BURDEN OF PROOF In addition to the information required in the application, the applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission, the following facts: A. That the requested use at the location proposed will not: i. Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare or persons residing or working in the surrounding area, or 2. Be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site, or 3. Jeopardize, endanger or other wise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general weMm. TI416✓- pE9U66T DOS NO'T' AVVeK%C- r°+ T �Nt NG oR J DPARD IzE "Jiit Risuc. KEALTtf f'��. coMFbR"i' OR WEI.FA!', DF REaID1NC� SURROuNDIi`t(o primp p,ND INS 1T WILL- ENHAN66 `('HE- WST"t uNOE51t?,4P,t t✓ VCEW COODITIZ)N5 OF WAISRTANKS ?6 VlaL-ASSNTOyMWT I,-VAWA'Tlot4 ot= aT,leg F51Z66t4✓ t.ac. t>rt� tN THEYIGNItY of THE -SIT>✓ . B. That the proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this Ordinance, or as is otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area. -tH t5 V.aR 1,ANC.E IS FoR THE ANN IS COURT SEC E9AC.IC THAT TO C✓U M l rJ,o•T5 ?%1.1`( UNusal3LE� LA AM- AReb., AMC, TO Auow To lwot Asr— �?1-If - HT U MIT To 38.51, BM VAWAsCZ6 Do NOT AST THE5I1't; To MIST IW FEcUIpz-MeNT5 OF LANDSCA.I' , J'AmQW o %- OTHOR FVAiUr<--S p SGRt!°�>✓D C. That the proposed site is adequately served: IN 'THS ORD1WA? ICS . By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of traffic such use would generate, and 2. By other public or private service facilities as are required. -j"HE SOF' --D '5116 is LocA7F:D (WGIDI✓ THEE 6 ISP C-OMMUWIT C-01=- �� TN6 GoU NTR`( b--.l:oeS NoT A.1s-i7, opAHT-r-T ANY r,-xt5r1 N C– I'RAFfiI:�- �- ROAD WAYS 7o -ME SITE t,VD 4G, A47Z-7b, AT a.LL- . D. That there are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property involved, such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which are not generally applicable to other properties in the same vicinity and under identical zoning classification. rmc- To Na Wlt>TH `v- TOM&P-4PHY OP- TttE L.dT S- To MAXIMIZE 7HR LI E oF- MFE -M( To 9WhAINAM ANY 1.n5AM-5 FAC,70M F'oR THE r�65iD6NGFs,THE 'jl:tJNi6 cWfr.T 5_E'T' 13WJ<, VARIANGF lev N <Z96ARY 7'o ACM tSVE THE I ^r tFt4TS of= Mau�7atNINC-� FU6LtG IN"AM S -SAF TY. 31t--1CZ-; -Me HSiMTv oFTHE WATT TANK tS HIGHS "THAN THE FZ&uESTBV AE16HT SV -6°, 50 THAT -TH15 HEI6HT VAR(AN6e W1L.L.NoT AFt=E6T THE SUKR0uND1r-4& Ateras, 1'J T -� __—� .w. _�.�__w ..�. .,r._, abi.� I_• a_,wa !1/w.r./l Tisll.�/., E. That such variance is r ,sacy for the preservation of a substantial pro- 'y right of the applicant such as that possessed by ow --,s of other property in the saw vicinity and v- . SIGH VARIANCES .RC— NSr�6e66j;4"Y f:69 -M& fFE9SPVATio1`I Oj= 4 A 5(46! Cr�NTL4L fl2oPFWY R16HT OF THC- A-MGAM' 614cH A5 THAT AND ZONE AND INGR&A-eZ-I:; THE VAUA ATI oN '&-- EI�LTOYMEI.IT OF P!:nPEPT Y pF olHEs. F. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to other property or improvements in the sa— vicinity and zone. iHE' (-2rAN7It46, CF= 'THELE V.ARIANGI✓5 WIU.. NOT OQLT BE DE IZ41ANW- -b TH5 NSWC, N i^RE OP- BE NTUWoUS To ai7q5:2� FR6M IYOR iM}96V6mS JTS IN ?HI✓ 6AME VIONIT`( AND ZONE, EUtT IN FAT To tN H•&NCE -tHE CIRP%::) WDIN & 13Y THE UN M5�IRAR E \AEW Or WATM TAN KS -- .1 1 Staff Use Project No. INITIAL STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE A. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Applicant (Owner): Project Representative: MK �- 1AR5 Wel C.k4W o FAYM oN d YAU �+ o r4r *a Li Ne m AME 72.5 E-- 217 ADDRESS ADDRESS t)IAMOND BAJR. , CA (NDVlSTIRY , c A Caoa) %0-Zqt� C6�.b�atb.t-►I 1 PHONE_ # PHONE # 1. Action requested and project description: VAPZ1ANGE5 P:VF7, HC-IGHT F- IS -WN US c01A RT 5ET BAG.K , I -loco s.I= SiN&5 P)wyr Rz-:51 pat4 GE, 3-rJCDR`( IN HS(GHT UXATe-b A7 ZZ A-0 F4D6t; WN0 D11ti.MOND ! . 2. Street location of project: ZZ84-0 WP6F LINE , PlAAA ND BARZ 1 N SIDE " 3a. Present Present use of site: NbN� 3b. Previous use of site or structures: - 1 N(est,ZE ?=AML R£51 DEN06 4. Please list all previous cases (if any) related to this project, t1i 5. Other related permit/approvals required. Specify type and granting agency. VARIArW -rS %— DSI" (6+4 FRC—VI WJ �UBUc- HEAFLI N & , C'IT'E of= r>JAJvloN P BAR . 6. Are you planning future phases of this project? Y If yes, explain: 7. Project Area: Covered by structures paving: Landscaping, open space: Total Area: 8(o j f= 8. Number of floors: 3 9. Present zoning:, R 10. Water and sewer service ,.,,omestic Public Water Sewers Does service exist at site? �7 N V N If yes, do purveyors have capacity to meet demand of project and all other approved U N O N projects? If domestic water or public sewers are not avallable, how will these services be provided? Residential Projects: 11. Number and type of units: 12. Schools: What school district(s) serves the property? K4At-r W U T D ! 6 CT Are exi school facilities adequate to meet project needs? NO If not, what provisions will be made for additional classrooms? Non -Residential projects: ' 13. Distance to nearest residential use or sensitive use /school, hospital, etc.) 14. Number and floor area of buildings: W IA 15. Number of employees and shifts: 16. Maximum employees per shift: N/A 17. Operating hours: NIA 18. Identify any: End products Waste products N �� Means of disposal ��► 19. Do project operations use, store or produce hazardous substances such as OR, pesticides, chemicals, paints, or radioactive materials? YES NO s, If yes, explain N 1A B. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION 1. Environmental Setting—Project Site a. Existing use/structures N �� b. Topography/slopes 6WTL '- e .Dff �3 Wl MATEP,U P14P r� Hotter *c. vegetation 5-MIST046, 8—,UCALYPrU5, MA6WOWA ANP f'ALM TR6a-ry . *d. Animals N l�b, *e. Watercourses NZA f. Cultural/historicalresources N/A► g. Other.. t4 /A► 2. Environmental Setting — Surrounding Area a. Existing uses structures (types, densities): 5l t4 &Lj5r rA M I L.`(' ReQ DE.NCC— b. Topography/slopes C:5�TM SLDfE<o kJ f ELATE: -AU }'Ab FOR SOUS" *c. Vegetation EXt:!5TIN6o eUCAL`(fM49, N1AeMOLIA Awb f ALA TREes . *d. Animals tJ �P► *e. Watercourses N 1A s, f. Cultural/historical resources N �,r&r g. Other N/A * Answers are not required if the area does not contain natural, undeveloped land. 3. Are there any major `trees n the site, including oak trees? I YES ONO If yes, type and number. c I i 4. Will any natural watercourses, surface flow patterns, etc., be changed through project development?: YES If yes, explain: 5. Grading: Will the project require grading? OYES NO If yes, how many cubic yards? CR T' "Z6 W. , Pi LL. CY Will it be balanced on-site? YES (EO) If not balanced, where will dirt be obtained or deposited? 6. Are there any identifiable landslides or other major geologic hazards on the property (including uncompacted fill)? YES 0 If yes, explain: 7. Is the property located within a high fire hazard area (hillsides with moderately dense vegetation)? YES NO Distance to nearest fire station: 8. Noise: Existing noise sources at site: N �� Noise to be generated by project: �a Fumes: Odors generated by project. N Could toxic fumes be generated? 9.. What energy -conserving designs or material will be used? POUBLj6 'STL CCz> WALL. S-- STONE V him, E�C(�rfZi 0 WALL._ . 20. Do your operation n x any pressurized taalca? YES No If yes, explain 21. Identify any flammable, reactive or explosive materials to be located on-site. 22. Will delivery or shipment tmelm travel through residential areas to reach the nearest highway? YES NO If yes, explain M CERTIFICATION- I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the the data and the attached exhibits present that the facts on mgtured for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and , and information presented are true and connect to the best of my knowledge and belief. Z -2 —oo C� ''>� Date Si 1 _ ---For. - — G.�- d.�,7` " . 9 TREE PRESERVATION STATEMENT •pp JAN 19 P 4:11 . �] The subject property contains no oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, or naturalized 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 five (5) feet of the outer dripiine of any oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, or naturalized California Pepper tree. [ ) The subject property contains one or more oak, walnut, sycariiore, willow, or naturalized California Pepper trees. The applicant states that activity (grading and/or construction) will take place within five (5) feet of the outer dripline of any oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, or naturalized California Pepper tree. A Tree Permit has been or will be applied for prior to any activity taking place on the property. �-�7 �Zv (Applicant's Signature' (Date) l ' t D:W0RD-L1NDA\F0RMS\TREE STATEMENT A. B. PLANNING COMMISSION -----RESOLUTION_NO. 2000-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2000-01, VARIANCE NO. 2000-01, MINOR VARIANCE NO. 2000-01 AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE OF -APPROXIMATELY- 15,602 APPROXIMATELY15,602 SQUARE FEET WITH A BASEMENT, SIX CAR GARAGE, INDOOR SWIMMING POOL, OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOL/SPA, TENNIS COURT WITH FENCING AND LIGHTING, RESTROOM/POOL EQUIPMENT STRUCTURE, TRELLIS AND RETAINING WALLS. THE PROTECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 22840 RIDGELINE ROAD (TRACT NO. 30091, LOT 156), DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. RECITALS. 1. The property owner Mr. and Mrs. Wen Chang and applicant, Ku and Associates, Inc., Habitant Development Corporation, have filed and application for Development Review No. 2000-01, Variance No. 2000-01 and Minor Variance No. 2000-01 for a property located at 22840 Ridgeline Road, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review, Variance, Minor Variance and Categorical Exemption shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. On January 26, 2000, the public hearing notice was posted in three public places within the City of Diamond Bar. On January 27, 2000, the project site was posted with the required display board. Furthermore, on January 27, 2000, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers, and public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 33 property owners of record within a 500 -foot radius of the project on January 26, 2000. 3. On February 8, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. ►1 Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 01 ti 1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the project identified above in this Resolution is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15303(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. 3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence before this Planning Commission that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to a vacant lot located within a gated community identified as "The Country Estates." The project site is currently vacant due to a fire that occurred in July 1999 and a demolition permit issued by the City on October 1, 1999. Before the fire, the project site was developed with a two-story single family residence of approximately 2,800 square with a garage, swimming pool/spa and keystone retaining wall system that supports the main driveway access to the buildable pad. The only structure remaining on the site is the keystone retaining wall system. The project site is irregular shaped, sloping up from Ridgeline Road to a flat pad and sloping down toward the rear and side property lines. The project site is approximately 1.70 acres. (b) The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential (RR) Maximum 1 DU/AC. (c) The project site is within the Single Family tRes i dence -Minimum, Lot Size 40,000 Square Feet (R-1- 40,000) Zone interpreted as Rural Residential (RR) Zone. (d) Generally, the following zone and use surround the project site: to the north, south and west is the R -1- I 40,000 /RR Zone; and to the east is the R-1-40,000/1RR Zone and__the Walnut_ - Valley Water District (WVWD) property which contains three water tanks. (e) The Application request is to construct a two-story single-family residence of approximately 15,602 square feet with a basement, balcony, six car garage, indoor swimming pool, outdoor swimming pool/spa, tennis court with fencing and lighting, restroom/pool equipment structure, trellis and retaining walls. Development Review (f) The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the applicable elements o*f the City's General Plan, City Design Guidelines, and development standards of the applicable district, design guidelines, and architectural criteria for special areas (e.g., theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards or planned developments). Tract Map No. 30091 was approved by Los Angeles County in 1969 prior to the City of Diamond Bar's incorporation and sited for residential development. Eventually, a two-story single family residence was built on Lot 156, the project site. In July 1999, a fire destroyed this residence. On July 25, 1995, the City adopted its General Plan. Although the Tract was established prior to the General Plan's adoption, it complies with the General Plan land use designation of RR -Maximum 1 DU/AC since the project site is 1.70 acres. Additionally, the proposed project complies with the General Plan objectives and strategies and the City's Design Guidelines related to maintaining the integrity of residential neighborhoods and open space. Furthermore, the proposed project is compatible with the eclectic architectural style, colors and material of other homes within "The Country Estates." (g) 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 was sited for and developed with ,,single family residence destroyed by fire. The proposed project is a single-family residence, which is consistent with single family residences established within "The Country Estates". As such, the proposed single family residence is not expected to interfere with the use and enjoyment of 3 neighboring existing or future development. The proposed single family residence is not expected to create traffic or pedestrian hazards due to that fact that the use is the same and Ridgeline Road adequately serves the project site and was established to handle minimum traffic created by this type of development, (h) The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the harmonious, orderly and attractive 'development contemplated by Chapter 22.48.20. Development Review Standards, City Design Guidelines, the City's General Plan, or any applicable specific plan. The proposed project's architectural style (as referred to in application) is California Mission. Architectural features such as a main entry with columns, balcony, tile roof with cupolas and roof articulation, stucco exterior walls with stone accents and color scheme are -consistent and compatible with the eclectic architectural style, materials and colors of other homes within "The Country Estates." Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with and will maintain and enhance the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.48.20, the General Plan, and City Design Guidelines. Additionally, there is not a specific plan for this area. (i) The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing and will retain a reasonably adequate level of maintenance. As referenced in the above findings and the colors /materials, the proposed project will provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture and color that will remain aesthetically appealing while offering variety in color and texture related to stucco and stone accent and a low level of maintenance (j) The proposed development will not be detrimental to 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 4 Before the issuance of any City permits, the proposed project is -required to comply with all conditions within the approved resolution and the Building and Safety Division, Public Works Division, and Fire Department requirements. The referenced agencies through the permit and inspection process will ensure that the proposed project is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. (k) The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 and guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15303(a) of Article 11 of the California Code of Regulations. Variance/Minor Variance (1) There are special circumstances applicable to the property (e.g., location, shape, size, surroundings,, topography, or other conditions), so that the strict application of the City's Development Code denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zoning districts or creates an unnecessary and non -self created, hardship or unreasonable regulation which makes it obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards; The Variance request is to allow a reduction in the rear. setback for the residence, restroom/pool equipment structure, tennis court and tennis court lighting; and authorize fencing and wall heights to exceed the allowed maximum height. The Minor Variance request is to allow a minimum deviation in the residence's maximum permitted height by.the addition of two cupolas, which the City considers an architectural feature. The project site is bordered on three sides by the Walnut Valley Water District property and contains three water storage tanks. The project site is irregular shape and may be described as a backward "L" (J) . The site's buildable pad and main circular driveway access, establish with a keystone retaining wall system to the site, is existing. The existing pad elevation is approximately five feet to 14 feet 5 above Ridgeline Road. The applicant desires to utilize the existing driveway and maintain the existing pad elevations as much as possible, thereby keeping grading as minimal as possible. The project design is such that the deepest portion of the buildable pad will be utilized for the residence; and the narrowest portion of the buildable pad will be utilized for the proposed recreational amenities. Siting the proposed structures in this manner is logical and conducive to quality design; A Variance approval would allow the proposed residential structure to be constructed with a reduced rear setback. Pursuant to the Development Code, a residential structure in the R-1-40,000/RR Zone is required to maintain a 20 -foot ' rear setback. The proposed residential structure's rear setback varies from five feet to 65 feet. The five foot setback is at the corner of the residence, which is adjacent to the WVWD property. Considering the lot configuration and the fact -the setback reduction is not adjacent to a residence, it is anticipated that the setback reduction impact will be insignificant. However, the purchase of the WVWD property will change this setback, at this point, to approximately 50 feet. Approval of the Variance would 'allow a retaining wall with an exposed height of five feet within the 30 foot front yard setback but not in the dedicated easement for Ridgeline Road. Pursuant to the Development Code, the maximum height of a retaining wall/wall/fence within the front yard setback is 42 inches (3.5 feet). However, due to the elevation difference between the street and buildable pad and the utilization of the existing driveway, it is not practical or cost effective to remove the - driveway and lower the pad elevation. Because of the site's elevation, the retaining wall needs to be established at the five- foot height. The tennis court requires a Variance because, as proposed, it does not comply with.the required front and rear setback. A tennis court is considered an accessory structure due to the needed fencing and lighting, and requires a construction permit. As an accessory structure, a tennis court is required to maintain Code specified 20 foot rear setback. The sbuildable pad is irregular shaped with the proposed tennis court located on the narrowing portion of the pad. Since the pad area and main driveway are existing, the design of the site plan, as presented, is logical. It is the pad configuration that causes the setback reduction for the tennis court. The I impact of the rear setback reduction is considered insignificant because this area. is adjacent to WVWD property and not to a residence. The front setback varies from 21 feet to 25 feet instead of the 30 feet as required by Code. With the purchase of the WVWD property, the front setback will vary from 26 feet to 30 feet. Tennis courts are common place . in "The Country Estates" and have been approved in the past with similar setbacks. Due to the narrowing of the lot and the most advantageous direct for a tennis court due to rising and setting. of the sun, the proposed location is probably best suited for the court. 'Additionally, plant materials will be utilized to assist in screening the tennis court from Ridgeline Road. Tennis court fencing requires a Variance because, as proposed, it does not comply with the allowed maximum six foot height. The wrought iron tennis court fencing is proposed at a height of 12 feet and will surround the court, and in some areas be placed upon a wall. When placement is upon a wall, the total height (wall and fencing) will not exceed 12 feet. Because the required setbacks are reduced, a Variance approval is required for the fence height within the required setback. The same setback requirement applies to the tennis court light fixtures. Since the some -of the fixtures will be located within the required setback, a Variance approval is also required. The pole light fixtures are proposed at a height of approximately 17 feet. Pursuant to Code, these fixtures are not to be located closer than 10 feet to the adjacent property line (except as'approved by a Variance) and not located more than 18 feet from the court surface. It is the lot configuration and pad elevation that also causes this Variance. , Furthermore, the tennis court is adjacent to the WVWD property and is not expected to have a significant negative effect on residential properties. Pursuant to the Development Code, the restroom/pool equipment structure 'is considered an accessory structure. As such, it is required to maintain the same setbacks as the residential structure. it maintains the required front and side setbacks'but not the required rear setback. Due to lot configuration, the established buildable pad and the location of the ,,swimming pool, the location of the restroom/pool equipment structure is logical. As proposed, it is located at the rear property line, shared by the WVWD not a residential property. As such, the impact of a setback reduction is expected to be insignificant. 7 Approval of the Minor Variance would allow two cupolas to extend a maximum of 3.5 feet above the maximum allow height of 35 feet for a residential structure'.' Pursuant to the City's Design Guidelines, roof articulation is encouraged. The cupolas along with changes in roof planes strengthen roof articulation. Additionally, the cupolas are an intricate part of the residential structures design and allows light to radiate down through the residence. (m) Granting the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zoning districts and denied to the property owner for which the Variance is sought; As stated above in Item (1) , the granting of this Variance and Minor Variance is based on the facts that the buildable pad area is already established, the main access driveway to the site is existing, the difference between the pad and street elevations and lot configuration. Additionally, other homes with in "The Country Estates are similar in size and enjoy the same recreational amenities as proposed by this Application. As a result, granting the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zoning districts and denied to the property owner for which the Variance and Minor Variance is sought. (n) Granting the Variance is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; As stated above in Items (f) and (1), granting the Variance and Minor Variance is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. (o) The proposed entitlement would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; As stated above in Items (g), (h), (i), (j), (1), (m), and (n), the proposed entitlement would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. 5. Basedon the findings and conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Application subject to the following conditions: (a) The project shall substantially conform to site plan, grading plan, floor plan, elevations, sections, final I landscape/irrigation plan, and colors/materials board collectively,labeled -as - Exhibit 'W, dated February 8, 2000, as submitted and approved by the Planning Commission, and as amended herein. (h) The site shall be maintained in a condition, which is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be done only by the property 'owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste contractor utilized has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. (c) Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit a final landscape/ irrigation plan for the City's review and approval. Said plan shall delineate plant species, size, quantity and location and shall include plant materials utilized -for all slopes and the screening of the tennis court from Ridgeline Road. Additionally, said plan shall delineate enhanced landscaping adjacent to the proposed driveway at Ridgeline Road with trees and shrubs that will create a buffer against noise and vehicle headlights for the adjacent neighbor. Prior to final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant installed all *approved landscaping and irrigation. (d) Prior to construction, the applicant shall install temporary construction fencing pursuant to the building and Safety Division's requirements along the project perimeter. (e) The applicant shall locate the trellis 30 feet from the front property line and shall indicate said setback on the revised landscape plan or site plan. (f) In the event that the applicant purchases or obtains an easement of approximately 3,966 square feet from the adjacent wVWD property,- the applicant shall ,,process a Lot Line Adjustment for the City's review and approval prior to the issuance of any City permits. In the event of an easement, the applicant shall record said easement prior to the issuance of any City permits. Additionally, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan delineating how the OJ N acquisition of said property affects the location of proposed structures for the City's review and. approval. Tennis court light fixtures shall not be located more than 18 feet from the court surface. The light poles shall have a five-foot extension arm and shielded in a manner that completely cuts off light source when viewed from any point five feet or more beyond the property line. The incident light level at a property line shall not exceed one -footcandle measured from grade at a 12 -foot height. The incident light level upon any habitable building on an adjacent residential property shall not exceed .05 footcandle. In a tennis court lighting plan/study, the applicant shall demonstrate the incident light levels and the one - footcandle measurement. The applicant shall submit said plan for the City's review and approval prior to the issuance of any City permits. Additionally, tennis court lighting shall not be operated between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and between 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. (h) Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit a complete grading plan in accordance with the City's grading requirements for the City's review and approval. The grading plan shall delineate the following: (1) Cut and fill quantities with calculations; (2) Existing and proposed topography; -- (3) Flow lines and drainage/drainage outlets; (4) Finish surface and finished grade; and (5) Grading plan shall be signed/stamped by a civil engineer, geotechnical engineer and geologist, as required. (i) Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit. -a retaining wall plan for the City's review and approval. The retaining wall plan shall delineate the following: (1) Sections to scale with the appropriate details; (2) Top of wall, finished surface, bottom of wall and top of footing; (3) Type of retaining wall; (4) Calculations; and s,(5) Retaining walls are subject to the City's Hillside Management Standards. (i) Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit a soils report for the City's review and approval that incorporates the suitability 10 and stability of all retaining walls (including the existing driveway retaining walls)- to withstand the pressure of the retained soil and surcharge created by the proposed loads. Additionally, the soils report shall evaluate the existing conditions of the previous illegal grading and uncertified fill in various areas of the project site. Furthermore, the soils report shall review the proposed improvements, recoim nend design and any required mitigation related to the illegal grading and uncertified fill. (k) Applicant shall obtain a Rough Grade and Fine Gra ' de Certification prior to the project's final inspection. (1) Slope of the proposed driveway shall not exceed 15 percent and shall obtain Fire Department approval. (m) Before the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit an erosion control plan for the City's review and approval. The erosion control plan shall conform to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards and incorporate the appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's). Additionally, the applicant shall obtain the necessary NPDES permits. (n) The applicant shall make a new application for sewer connection with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works and the Sanitation District. (o) The proposed residence shall comply with the State Energy Conservation Standards. (p) Surface water shall drain away from the proposed residence at a two -percent minimum slope. (q) The proposed single"family residence is located within "Fire Zone 4" and shall meet all requirements of said zone. (1) All roof covering shall be "Fire Retardant." Tile roof shall be fire stopped at the eaves to preclude entry of the flame or members under the fire. (2) All unenclosed under -floor areas shall be constructed as exterior walls. (3) All openings into the attic, floor and/or other Is enclosed areas shall be covered with corrosion - resistant wire mesh not less than 1/4 inch or more than 1/2 inch in dimension except where such openings are equipped with sash or door. (4) Chimneys shall have spark arrests of maximum 1/2 inch screen. 11 (r) Plans shall conform to state and Local Building Code (i.e., 1997 Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, and the 1996 National Electrical Code) requirements. (s) Construction plans shall be engineered to meet wind loads of 80 M.P.H. with a "C', exposure. (t) Construction plans shall delineate natural light and ventilation for the basement game room. (u) Building setback for the rear of the residential structure at top of slope shall be provided at H/3 or a special footing designed by a geotechnical engineer. (v) Pursuant to Fire Department requirement, the restroom/pool equipment structure shall maintain a three-foot setback from the rear property line. (w) Prior to the --issuance of any construction permits, the applicant shall submit construction plans to the Los Angeles County Fire Department for review and approval. (x) This grant is valid for two years and shall be exercised (i.e., construction started) within that period or this grant shall expire. A one-year extension of time 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. (y) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed, within fifteen (15) days of approval of this grant, at the City of Diamond Bar Community and Development Services Department, their affidavit stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all the conditions of this grant. Further, this grant shall not be effective until the permittee pays remaining City processing fees, school fees and fees for the review* of submitted reports. (z) $,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 cash ' ier's check of $25.00 for a documentary handling fee in connection with Fish and 12 Game Code requirements. Furthermore, if this project is not exempt from a filing fee imposed because the p I roject 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 Resolution, by certified mail, to: Mr. a Bar, Mrs. Wen Chang, loll summitridge Road, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 and Ku and Associates, Inc., Habitant Development Corporation, 18725 E. Gale Avenue, #217, City of Industry, CA 91748. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS STH OF FEBRUARY 2000, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY: eve Tye, hairman I, James DeStefano, Planning Commission secretary, do herebycertify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 8th day of February 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Tye, Nelson, Kuo, McManus, Ruzicka NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: j.'46es Destefan6, Secretary 13 w 99 Dig 1 4I tii p� ;vA i Irr2 ! d 3r I }�9 E pt t b b} . i b • , e I.ti {{{ '� Y8?Y (y(CJ� $ t YLFr' 9S6 Sr Y %i Dili ili p 1 f Y r=^ p ` � YI Y f YrM. i-- tt E b v? Y i e 4 • eY 11 ,"Y 1 rs$ '• ?�Q r� � a%=� es�tf : fQ a � j, € E �Y � : b°�l�Y � = ?" d aIli!s YY 1 P} f fi % . 5 S@ r- 'j, r x g4 n i pe ac 1 ? Y7 a �iY+ Qy? " ? f "B ! } 6Y s Y L "pi r 3 Elio '+ter IY p 1;11140 ali y 4#tom Yf G �Y y r�' S • L g r Y+�BG::� It i.le ff 'V 8 e f ?"� : 4 NJ! e fY li ;dll 1 111 Ad hr }}gg.l H , l is CS r I° J- �r-} I=? a� ��Ila a C-11 1 iG% d YQ y _ b u 3 y%YY t■� Sip^ Y gig 3 1.691 § it i +` lit! s ? % fi } ■Y it: pY. a f t?.x1 � Iy" Qd f Q`' ? f Q` uE p 7� @ Y -f ' yl1 4x Y rt Q L I. iNi = y } G■ '� ? p 1Lii S f,j; r fas: yg�j," a IG ? r».Tn^ yG E f` gel Qrd�111 %S 5'� at� t %ib a y5E 4}:iqf: YY% 1 % . 1Y% a •a%d d y i- re r } sI+ y! Q . #y$���1. ;� e , 'i - IIr -, r I pp lbb Q f : a Ig s f9f I� � qY *Vol, ja ;�= 6 `YY :Y . Y% • . v a»Y? i . a. Ye r Y " + d ■ " by ip � A � Q p U �ti �t � � y � Lo WrrA WM■ri■�Yrrr YlfYb121 ■OIC :��eb"t:�`.'.^'.2� e�db��� - �4^j zi4�z A"ndt ggG /w'■wwwto vows co Q m ovarsnaonuarwcsa�mre k N ! i f ` w[tYYrnrl,t.o�e■m+�"�� lvaoiq�cotlw'<'mnmo�r `d�1DJt�id{Y�fiI�A710]NKCAVN wlno'Mltlnu�e,��s LL' . i � :�Yi ' [ % ! e�r+YloMr+®r . " y� l wvuvDossYvnv ib M S �' A (F b Y w 99 Dig 1 4I tii p� ;vA i Irr2 ! d 3r I }�9 E pt t b b} . i b • , e I.ti {{{ '� Y8?Y (y(CJ� $ t YLFr' 9S6 Sr Y %i Dili ili p 1 f Y r=^ p ` � YI Y f YrM. i-- tt E b v? Y i e 4 • eY 11 ,"Y 1 rs$ '• ?�Q r� � a%=� es�tf : fQ a � j, € E �Y � : b°�l�Y � = ?" d aIli!s YY 1 P} f fi % . 5 S@ r- 'j, r x g4 n i pe ac 1 ? Y7 a �iY+ Qy? " ? f "B ! } 6Y s Y L "pi r 3 Elio '+ter IY p 1;11140 ali y 4#tom Yf G �Y y r�' S • L g r Y+�BG::� It i.le ff 'V 8 e f ?"� : 4 NJ! e fY li ;dll 1 111 Ad hr }}gg.l H , l is CS r I° J- �r-} I=? a� ��Ila a C-11 1 iG% d YQ y _ b u 3 y%YY t■� Sip^ Y gig 3 1.691 § it i +` lit! s ? % fi } ■Y it: pY. a f t?.x1 � Iy" Qd f Q`' ? f Q` uE p 7� @ Y -f ' yl1 4x Y rt Q L I. iNi = y } G■ '� ? p 1Lii S f,j; r fas: yg�j," a IG ? r».Tn^ yG E f` gel Qrd�111 %S 5'� at� t %ib a y5E 4}:iqf: YY% 1 % . 1Y% a •a%d d y i- re r } sI+ y! Q . #y$���1. ;� e , 'i - IIr -, r I pp lbb Q f : a Ig s f9f I� � qY *Vol, ja ;�= 6 `YY :Y . Y% • . v a»Y? i . a. Ye r Y " + d ■ " by ■ c y FR : b`$ f $ " hbk ?f -,R, S Yt IGY Qj y ' Y p E6 $ l yl y` 3^g iY�y ® ❑ L y$.?t r t!i YyYa 7�. �F"(p f� t�y> �L. YbFFtl r? QY yy! 19a y; b $ vQ YyyL Y8� $9 1YC"eG $• Y4L ypyp. II"q NI - 1.11i,52, t �- "c'�$Y s� yxE Y r f` c Sar t 5 1 y�YfC i r. I t 9 s 3$ Y3 h a 1i3 •p� �"�" �c1i tr, ?r. ¢ Ly ? Yb E Y rC' Y Y s2r Yui ck A b S C: y g}A ipgpi3 }a }YS:�} tY ¢ 6} y I} 1 y 1 c3}Y Q?if:$ yab IN !al r'¢ $si tib Of C y Rye ? 6 Y: r Z Y a i p b � b y 'Ic Nil, T y: b�05 i TY L b tlQ pQ Y Y 7�Yr $ 3 Yi .¢+1t -tb RY. Y • I Y g. %M� �,. Y p Yr ■. !.Y 6^' Y bt y a I y III! C 9 §f} 1 t} .° Yf Pr fYa ib.p Y T Y y • yEx ``C r-•. 4. ilk"M ZI 1 eIy 5"a 6 � b e 8» x YYe 1t R db Sr III! fb iGi I%i �x1 Y Q �e�tt�l %5h� 11 1 ��'" 3; Y' r R rY q- l! t`c ° �� i ?1 b .a b% %A ?}i Li" AG r. 4v Ho � i �v "i r ": fYsY^ d 1 %bFQ fit{ yj�S} j$� f 1�yig" �v ?dY� MGi3 }i�x�i I i{i YCix YSYz i3 yy i ;g� �= yie SsY1�S kY 9L� 1.IlY! Y 3'3pap^" n x 7 Si�I $ Ytl? %? yf ry R511ya HS r %co M! yei C1§IM quit i..tlY CBHr Y 1A 'Y HA cIa r n v r _ ■ Y _ _ _ _ - _ _ . R C b f" j Sed t -m is 1,11111011 e t��ge1� s! :4pfeiit:g: .A�fcttKs}°s?.{} f�p.dp;la.°.,p 3s ik • '� bbb� b s ip � A � Q p U �ti �t � � y � Lo :��eb"t:�`.'.^'.2� e�db��� ':I4 ?�!9 9Y$ S : ]. 3 g zi4�z A"ndt ggG f} 8 8 d st Q ■ c y FR : b`$ f $ " hbk ?f -,R, S Yt IGY Qj y ' Y p E6 $ l yl y` 3^g iY�y ® ❑ L y$.?t r t!i YyYa 7�. �F"(p f� t�y> �L. YbFFtl r? QY yy! 19a y; b $ vQ YyyL Y8� $9 1YC"eG $• Y4L ypyp. II"q NI - 1.11i,52, t �- "c'�$Y s� yxE Y r f` c Sar t 5 1 y�YfC i r. I t 9 s 3$ Y3 h a 1i3 •p� �"�" �c1i tr, ?r. ¢ Ly ? Yb E Y rC' Y Y s2r Yui ck A b S C: y g}A ipgpi3 }a }YS:�} tY ¢ 6} y I} 1 y 1 c3}Y Q?if:$ yab IN !al r'¢ $si tib Of C y Rye ? 6 Y: r Z Y a i p b � b y 'Ic Nil, T y: b�05 i TY L b tlQ pQ Y Y 7�Yr $ 3 Yi .¢+1t -tb RY. Y • I Y g. %M� �,. Y p Yr ■. !.Y 6^' Y bt y a I y III! C 9 §f} 1 t} .° Yf Pr fYa ib.p Y T Y y • yEx ``C r-•. 4. ilk"M ZI 1 eIy 5"a 6 � b e 8» x YYe 1t R db Sr III! fb iGi I%i �x1 Y Q �e�tt�l %5h� 11 1 ��'" 3; Y' r R rY q- l! t`c ° �� i ?1 b .a b% %A ?}i Li" AG r. 4v Ho � i �v "i r ": fYsY^ d 1 %bFQ fit{ yj�S} j$� f 1�yig" �v ?dY� MGi3 }i�x�i I i{i YCix YSYz i3 yy i ;g� �= yie SsY1�S kY 9L� 1.IlY! Y 3'3pap^" n x 7 Si�I $ Ytl? %? yf ry R511ya HS r %co M! yei C1§IM quit i..tlY CBHr Y 1A 'Y HA cIa r n v r _ ■ Y _ _ _ _ - _ _ . R C b f" j Sed t -m is 1,11111011 e t��ge1� s! :4pfeiit:g: .A�fcttKs}°s?.{} f�p.dp;la.°.,p 3s ik • '� bbb� b s ip � A � Q p U �ti �t � � y � Lo :��eb"t:�`.'.^'.2� e�db��� ':I4 ?�!9 9Y$ S : ]. $St YL#tstS zi4�z A"ndt +L Yg fait!-.tat f} 8 8 d st Q ...� .-.cz 5:� � $2$ 211911 anza aa -add "h! Maosauld --uh-A__.A -• irio//rwavn /arw. IdOtl?tILLSTIOJ 7/dtflNfJN/ 7tl/U7WOty d -60j IMMOMA301NVJAVH -VQ *SUYrK Y *v n x 7E yL� r.i°n �«� 4 .1 2•t w F _ H V -j we. Gy NG ,'OJ—, 2 -.*."l J Tri30.3r gnt3•.bW n►w.v • r X rkILI V,i • I 10 V I ��,.�rrsnrtiior @ ! r w i N�LIO4Y� � IOL7I��OIrID�9r1CfOOiI OMdl Dffi0011NUoc�lOro � i , V ���q?qui C� 4 �� i � -1'J�Yf1l1lD�� jrCAlNiYdO?iAiG1�':K�� OIIYIG'IHltin umntirs L '„ri'jz((�woasv i n i BS X 5 i6 i4 F b i I 10 V I I A 8 z I C4 U1.1 wsuvDossv i n x I A 8 z 3 ................to } © I Y N [ i anrtwt�� �01ppS��E1f'tllt�O�M C . i 3 ................to } © I Y N IE I -------- ... D 4 ...................... ............... va va DROCTIMM ti i 4 w y ' i ' �[ @ f i ( � i 119 ��� Rsear�arec� �o�oaP +nr pp'�fw01�0 1QL�I�IODT/®O� YrOD.iN�ViOrAAiOl)irf3W}i w iuYoosSY: n x g9MW0A7G OVOiIUf1i0d1iUs�Q MMq'fN�iw ue�rr � ]Cpa( S = � a t��rr.,•.6 �6� �i: � i1 i ��}} � 4 { 3 ; { 1 10; -2 3• �� ii�ii%»µ��.. � . ». ............... Alk ... .. %• ...f.. i............................................. < , ....................... . `• ,..E • ............................................ (; ate; ......:�i I .............. ..... .... ..... ......._....................... '............ %y S i ..:Ys ' res I i r jHV.:{ �MO'W91YW erot i � ��g�i i . lb, I i aw aw�snamnrw�s�.o rn i '�4w�•••oob�w�no�bwr ' i Yi0D.1l�SAi01t11/1Wi� erhow���nue.,..o !� a i'�p `� r�oa�wn�n� 7N vzLvEx v v n v t wsitypossy i n x 0 Fl, P Y 5#loll ; z s ddddddddbd d WIN \ i ca 0 r �qD r5 . (o � ::4. u m �rn'�1II Q V � e � � M O a WN � i i ��4s��8'�Reepgi�q1.4111l z ��" �eeereetels►.�3t�ial5 8+ A Y� 3 g� r 9�� Y s bbbbbbbbb I' Q it ����ryrrrrrryrrrrr7r�rrrrir, rpf = a= 3 a Z R Jilt 6� s A Its, i �� �� j i°` � 't �'f �� }� j•' I `� ° a I .- � • � , � a=S s tt; �, , , s; , iRj .� r;� t �� 3 Y=>iY • ,� } ;lid , . �f; �a�e� 6� �_ il�i . 9 ,6�4� ��� til it 5 �t 1!•'i�� ��t!'�t 4'�'11i'sf� � � f f� • f� iirit ,t, t,. �rj fl 1{ fi fi 7S'► � fQ� �1 lt�:�f X�i� �s �t�i :�r 1i7�� �• = i� O z > 7— u Lr) 00 0 1:4 Z/ cz C. C) clq 00 M 00 z 00 0 C4 U ti 0 Z x z 00 z V) z U I-- 00 rz Uo LL) o c z 0 It 00 00 LL) V) u Cie00 00 C-4 II it iI rl, C4 C,4 CJ it cy- C L:j V., En Llj ML cn 0 z < cn M 72 Z �— Z z aE O Z z < cn Z V) < U < 2 " C� P t i z C: 0 , C/) FS Z cl .0 z z C4 u M 1'. C) z ot < > z mc n 0 u -1 O z > 7— u Lr) 0 0 1:4 Z/ cz C. C) clq 00 M 00 z V 0 C4 U ti Z x z > z V) z z > 7— u Lr) 0 0 1:4 Z/ CL. C. C) z > Lr) 00 C) clq z z ti Z x z z V) I I I z I z I z I z 0 0 0 0 :3 c oz 0 Z C Z oz Z U Z U — Z Z < 0 D < 0 z LL cz < E: z 0 C) 0 o 0 E- QH FT wo IE < = < 0 0¢ 0< zo z0 zzZZzo E- ¢C7 Uz ¢C7 u z ¢C7 L.) K- < L) z E- �! L- �j �- 0 CL. < cit: < LLJ cr cr z V) C�cN tr, Lr, Lr; rt C14 rN C11 C-4 ZD 7C5 E E EE cr C4 = —Q) z < cr z z z z VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION GENDA ITEM SUBJECT: pll-e-3+au V of 0: planning Commission Secretary DATE: ROM: DDRESS: RGANIZATION: UBJECT: would like to address the Planning Commission on the above stated item. Please have the Commission Minutes effect my name and address as printed above. Signature re TOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the Planning Commission. This form is intended to assist the Chairman in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Commission will have the opportunity and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. lei VDrei ai i, 'Isi3