Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc 2002-15A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF TIME OF THE APRIL 11, 2000, PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 99-09 (1) AND TREE PERMIT NO. 2000-02(1) THAT ALLOWS THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO- STORY, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE OF APPROXIMATELY 16,795 SQUARE FEET WITH A BASEMENT, BALCONIES, PORCH, PATIOS, INDOOR SWIMMING POOL, AND A FIVE -CAR GARAGE ON A VACANT PARCEL. ADDITIONALLY, THE REQUEST INCLUDES ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: TENNIS COURT, ROSE GARDEN WITH GAZEBO, AND TRELLIS. THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 23622 RIDGELINE ROAD, DIAMOND BAR, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA. A. RECITALS. 1. The property owner/applicant, David and Christina Dang, have filed an ' extension of time application for Development Review No. 99-09 (1) and Tree Permit No. 2000-02(1) approved by the Planning Commission on April 11, 2000, for a property located at 23622 Ridgeline Road, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject extension of time for the Development Review and Tree Permit shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. On May 14, 2002, 30 property owners within a 500 -feet radius of the project site were notified by mail. On May 17, 2002, this item was advertised in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Vallev Daily Bulletin newspapers. A notice of public hearing on a display board was posted at the site on May 17, 2002, 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 May 28, 2002, 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: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2002-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF TIME OF THE APRIL 11, 2000, PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 99-09 (1) AND TREE PERMIT NO. 2000-02(1) THAT ALLOWS THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO- STORY, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE OF APPROXIMATELY 16,795 SQUARE FEET WITH A BASEMENT, BALCONIES, PORCH, PATIOS, INDOOR SWIMMING POOL, AND A FIVE -CAR GARAGE ON A VACANT PARCEL. ADDITIONALLY, THE REQUEST INCLUDES ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: TENNIS COURT, ROSE GARDEN WITH GAZEBO, AND TRELLIS. THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 23622 RIDGELINE ROAD, DIAMOND BAR, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA. A. RECITALS. 1. The property owner/applicant, David and Christina Dang, have filed an ' extension of time application for Development Review No. 99-09 (1) and Tree Permit No. 2000-02(1) approved by the Planning Commission on April 11, 2000, for a property located at 23622 Ridgeline Road, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject extension of time for the Development Review and Tree Permit shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. On May 14, 2002, 30 property owners within a 500 -feet radius of the project site were notified by mail. On May 17, 2002, this item was advertised in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Vallev Daily Bulletin newspapers. A notice of public hearing on a display board was posted at the site on May 17, 2002, 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 May 28, 2002, 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: 1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Planning Commission hereby determines that'the project identified above in this Resolution 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. 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 time extension of the April 11, 2000, Planning Commission approval by Resolution No. 2000-05. The Planning Commission approval allows the construction of a two-story, single- family residence of approximately 16,795 square feet with a basement, balconies, porch, patios, indoor swimming pool and a five - car garage on a vacant parcel. Additionally, the request includes accessory structures: tennis court, rose garden with gazebo, and trellis. (b) The General Plan Land Use designation is Rural Residential (RR), 1 du/acre. (c) The project site is zoned R-1-40,000, single-family residence. (d) Generally, the following zones surround the subject site: to the north is R-1-8,000, to the south, east and west is the R-1-40,000 Residential Zone. Extension of Time Finding (e) 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 a conditions in which to complete construction activities, etc.,) why the permit should be extended; The applicant submitted a request in writing for a one-year extension of time. The extension of time is needed because the Applicants traveling schedule, bank loan processing and contractual negotiations were not in order to meet the first deadline. Therefore, the extension of time is needed. The extension of time request does not modify the project's original approval in any way. (f) 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). The City has determined that the extension of time does not substantially change the project and no further review is required. 5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Application subject to the following conditions: (a) The project shall substantially conform to the site plan, floor plans, elevations, grading plan, landscape plan, site photos, and materials/colors board collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" dated April 11, 2000, as submitted and as approved by the Planning Commission on April 11, 2000. (b) Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000-05 approved on April 11, 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 April 11, 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. 3 (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: David and Christina Dang, 2668 Highridge Drive, Chino Hills, CA 91709. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28th DAY OF MAY 2002, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY:ee. -;z — Joe Ru a, C airman I, James DeStefano, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 28th day of May 2002, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: Tanaka, V/C Tye, Chair/Ruzicka NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners: Nolan, Nelson ABSTAIN: ATTEST: roes DeSte+no, Secretary 4 'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2002-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF TIME OF THE APRIL 11, 2000, PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 99-09 (1) AND TREE PERMIT NO. 2000-02(1) THAT ALLOWS THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWOSTORY, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE OF APPROXIMATELY 16,795 SQUARE FEET WITH A BASEMENT, BALCONIES, PORCH, PATIOS, INDOOR SWIMMING POOL, AND A FIVE -CAR GARAGE ON A VACANT PARCEL. ADDITIONALLY, THE REQUEST INCLUDES ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: TENNIS COURT, ROSE GARDEN WITH GAZEBO, AND TRELLIS. THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 23622 RIDGELINE ROAD, DIAMOND BAR, LOS A. RECITALS. 1. The property owner/applicant, David and Christina Dang, have filed an extension of time application for Development Review No. 99-09 (1) and Tree Permit No. 2000-02(1) approved by the Planning Commission on April 11, 2000, for a property located at 23622 Ridgeline Road, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject extension of time for the Development Review and Tree Permit shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. On May 14, 2002, 30 property owners within a 500 -feet radius of the project site were notified by mail. On May 17, 2002, this item was advertised in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Vallev Daily Bulletin newspapers. A notice of public hearing on a display board was posted at the site on May 17, 2002, 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 May 28, 2002, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted B. RESOLUTION. OW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of iamond Bar as follows: This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Planning Commission hereby determines 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 15303(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 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 time extension of the April 11, 2000, Planning Commission approval by Resolution No. 2000-05. The Planning Commission approval allows the construction of a two-story, singlefamily residence of approximately 16,795 square feet with a basement, balconies, porch, patios, indoor swimming pool and a fivecar garage on a vacant parcel. Additionally, the request includes accessory structures: tennis court, rose garden with gazebo, and trellis. (b) The General Plan Land Use designation is Rural Residential (RR), 1 du/acre. (c) The project site is zoned R-1-40,000, single-family residence. (d) Generally, the following zones surround the subject site: to the north is R-1-8,000, to the south, east and west is the R-1-40,000 Residential Zone. Extension of Time Finding (e) 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 2 conditions in which to complete construction activities, etc.,) why the permit should be extended; The applicant submitted a request in writing for a one-year extension of time. The extension of time is needed because the Applicants traveling schedule, bank loan processing and contractual negotiations were not in order to meet the first deadline. Therefore, the extension of time is needed. The extension of time request does not modify the project's original approval in any way. (f) 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). The City has determined that the extension of time does not substantially change the project and no further review is required. 5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Application subject to the following conditions: (a) The project shall substantially conform to the site plan, floor plans, elevations, grading plan, landscape plan, site photos, and materials/colors board collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" dated April 11, 2000, as submitted and as approved by the Planning Commission on April 11, 2000. (b) Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000-05 approved on April 11, 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 April 11, 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. 3 (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 shal 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 anc 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: David and Christina Dang, 2668 Highridge Drive, Chino Hills, CA 91709. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28th DAY OF MAY 2002, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY: 'Joe Ru ka, C airman I, James DeStefano, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 28th day of May 2002, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: Tanaka, V/C Tye, Chair/Ruzicka NOES ABSENT: Commissioners: Nolan, Nelson ABSTAIN: ATTEST: mes DeStek-ano, Secretary 12