Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10/08/2002
PLANNING FILE Copy COMMISSION AGENDA October 8, 2002 Study Session 6:00 P.M. - Room CC -8 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. - Auditorium South Coast Air Quality Management District 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA Chairman Joe Ruzicka Vice Chairman Steve Tye Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Steven Nelson Dan Nolan Jack Tanaka 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 /I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or 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 drinking in the Auditorium The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper and encourages you to do the same 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 Agenda, (or Diamond Bar Planning Commission meetings are prepared by the Planning Division of the ('onununnc and Development Services Department. Agendas are available 72 hours prior to the meeting at City Hall and the public librar%. and may be accessed by personal computer at the number below. E�er\ mceun,_ of the Planning Commission is recorded on cassette tapes and duplicate tapes are available for a nommal charec %I)A RF.Ot'IRENIENTS cordlcss microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot access the public ,neakmL_ area. The service of the cordless microphone and sign language interpreter services are available by ening 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 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, October 8, 2002 AGENDA STUDY SESSION: 6:00 p.m., Room CC -8 Discussion regarding entitlement process - policy and procedure. REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER: +rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr+++++++rr++r 7:00 p.m., Auditorium Next Resolution No. 2002-34 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Joe Ruzicka, Vice -Chairman Steve Tye, Steve Nelson, Dan Nolan., and Jack Tanaka. 2. 3. 4 5. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENT'S: 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 voluntarv.) There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressing the Planning Commission. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chairman. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following items listed on the consent calendar are considered routine and are approved by a single motion. Consent calendar items may be removed from the agenda by request of the Commission only: 4.1. Minutes of Regular Meeting: September 24, 2002. OLD BUSINESS: None. October 8, 2002 NEW BUSINESS: Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 6.1 Discussion of Telecommunication Ordinance. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission direct staff as appropriate. 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7.1 N0.2000-15(1UMInor Variance No. 2000-17(1) pursuant to Code Section 22.66.050.C.) is a request for a one-year extension of time for a project approved by the Planning Commission on October 24, 2000. The Planning Commission approval allows the construction of a two-story, single-family residence, of approximately 12,340 square foot two-story single-family residence with two garages for five -cars, pool/spa, gazebo, and tennis court. A Minor Conditional Use Permit is required to process the circular driveway. The Minor Variance is a request to decrease the rear yard setback by 20 percent. The extension of time, if approved, will allow the continuation of this entitlement until October 24, 2003. Project Address: 2521 Braided Mane (Lot 91 of Tract No. 23483) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Property Owner: Ton -Dei Chiu 2822 Bentley Way Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Applicant: Tein Wang 801 S. Garfield Avenue Alhambra, CA 91801 Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15303(a),,the City determined and approved that this project was Categorically Exempt. The City has determined that the proposed extension of time does not substantially change the project or the Categorical Exemption. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. 00-16(1)/Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-15(1)/Minor Variance No. 2000-17(1), Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. October 8, 2002 Page 3 PLANNING COMMISSION 7.2 Review No. 2002-18 (pursuant to Code Sections 22.42.130.G.4, 22.58, 22.54,and 22.45) is a request to install a wireless telecommunications facility with antennas (mounted on a monocypress) camouflaged as a cypress tree and equipment cabinet. The Variance relates to the height of the monocypress which exceeds the maximum allowable 35 -foot height. The Development Review relates to architectural/design review. Project Address: 2151 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Property Owner: Roman Catholic Abp 3424 Wilshire Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90010 Applicant: Cingular 2521 Michelle Dr. Tustin, CA 92780 Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15070, the City has determined that a Negative Declaration is required for this project. Negative Declaration No. 2002-04 has been prepared. The Negative Declaration's review period begins September 17, 2002 and ends October 6, 2002. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 2002-07/Variance No. 2002-02/Development Review No. 2002-18, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. 7.3 Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-10 (pursuant to Code Sections 22.58. 22.42.035 and 22.10.030.Table 2-5.) is a request to allow a computer services/gaming center in an existing shopping center. A computer services/gaming center is defined as a business establishment that provides the space, equipment and technology to make fast, multi -player PC games and high speed computers available to patrons for a fee. Project Address: 962 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard (The Oak Tree Plaza) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Property Owner: Beal Bank 6000 Legacy Drive, #4E Plano, TX 75024 October 8, 2002 91 10. Page 4 PLANNING COMMISSION Applicant: Paul Esteves 23025 Paseo De Terrado Diamond Bar CA 91765 Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15303 (c), the City has determined that this project is categorically exempt. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-10, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING: CITY COUNCIL MEETING ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING: 11. ADJOURNMENT: Thursday, October 10, 2002 — 7:00 p.m. AQMD/Govt. Center Hearing Board Room 21865 E. Copley Drive Tuesday, October 15, 2002 — 6:30 p.m. AQMD/Govt. Center Auditorium 21865 E. Copley Drive Tuesday, October 22, 2002 — 6:00 p.m. AQMD/Govt. Center Auditorium 21865 E. Copley Drive Tuesday, October 22, 2002 — 7:00 p.m. AQMD/Govt. Center Auditorium 21865 E. Copley Drive Thursday, October 24, 2002 — 7:00 p.m. AQMD/Govt. Center Hearing Board Room 21865 E. Copley Drive MEMORANDUM DIAMOamsne COMMUNITY & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Stella Marquez, Administrative Assistant MEETING October 8, 2002 DATE: SUBJECT: Study Session An oral presentation and informational documents regarding entitlement process will be provided by staff and the City's Planning Consultant. :sm MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 24, 2002 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ruzicka called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management/Govemment Center Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Nelson led the pledge of allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Joe Ruzicka, Vice Chairman Steve Tye, and Commissioners Steve Nelson, Dan Nolan and Jack Tanaka. Also Present: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager, Ann Lungu, Associate Planner, Linda Smith, Development Services Assistant, and Stella Marquez, Administrative Assistant. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of Regular Meetings of September 10, 2002. C/Ianaka moved, C/Nolan seconded, to approve the minutes of September 10, 2002, as presented. Without objection, the motion was so ordered. 5. OLD BUSINESS: None. 6. NEW BUSINESS: None. 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7.1 Development Review No. 2002-15 (pursuant to Code Sections 22.48.020.A.1) is a request to construct a three story (two-story with basement), single-family residence with portico, balconies, covered patio, and basement garages totaling to approximately 10,308 gross square feet. The request also includes a series of site retaining walls with an exposed height varying from three (3) feet to six (6) feet. DRAFT 24, 2002 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION PROJECT ADDRESS: 22119 Steeplechase Lane (Lot 179, Tract 30578) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Yogesh K. Pahwal 1528 Ruby Court Diamond Bar, CA 91765 APPLICANT: J.C. Dagam 1000 N. Regal Canyon Drive Walnut, CA 91789 DSA/Smith presented staff's report. Staff recommends Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. 2002-15 Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Charlie Dagam, applicant, explained that this project was designed to be compatible with the lot and surrounding neighborhood. Chair/Ruzicka opened the public hearing. There was no one present who wished to speak on this item. Chair/Ruzicka closed the public hearing. VC/Tye pointed out the discrepancy in staff's report regarding tree preservation. Mr. Dagam stated that although there are no Walnut trees in the construction area, he understood that all Walnut trees located on the property would be protected. C/Nolan moved, C/Tanaka seconded, to approve Development Review No. 2002-15, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution, including a corrected tree preservation statement. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan, Tanaka, Nelson, VC/Tye, Chair/Ruzicka NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7.2 Development Review No. 2002-27 (pursuant to Code Section 22.48.020.A.1) is a request to construct a two story, single-family residence with porch, SEPTEMBER 24, 2002 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION balconies/covered patio, and dual two car garages totaling to approximately 11,983 gross square feet. The request also includes a site retaining wall in areas of varying topography that varies in exposed height from 42 inches to a maximum of eight (8) feet. PROJECT ADDRESS PROPERTY OWNER: 24037 Goldrush Drive (Lot 3, Tract No. 31977) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Goldrush Investment Group 1595 S. McPherrin Avenue Monterey Park, CA 91754 APPLICANT: Andrew King 1595 S. McPherrin Avenue Monterey Park, CA 91754 DSA/Smith presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue Development Review No. 2002-27 to a future public hearing date to allow the applicant time to submit revisions to the project. VC/Tye was very concerned about the untidy project site and felt that the surrounding neighbors should not have to tolerate such blight. Andrew King, applicant, explained the history of the proposed project to the Commission. He explained that he has invested considerable time and money to c lean up the area. In fact, someone recently dumped another load of scrap lumber on one of his lots. Cleaning of the job site is an ongoing process. Chair/Ruzicka asked Mr. King if he was agreeable to implementing staff's suggestions to which Mr. King responded "yes." VC/Tye reemphasized that the hillside adjacent to the project site that extends downward toward Cromarty Drive is littered and overgrown with brush and should be cleaned up. Mr. King said that the slope referred to by VC/Tye was recently landscaped. He has spent about $10,000 removing litter. He reiterated that he is responsive to complaints about trash and litter. Chair/Ruzicka opened the public hearing. SEPTEMBER 24, 2002 �77 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION There was no one present who wished to speak on this matter. VC/Tye moved, C/Tanaka seconded, to continue Development Review No. 2002-27 to a future public hearing date to allow the applicant to submit revisions to the project in accordance with staff's recommendations. Further, the property behind the lots looking down on Cromarty Drive must be cleaned up of any building debris. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Tye, Tanaka, Nelson, Nolan, Chair/Ruzicka None None 7.3 Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-03 and Development Review No 2002-12 (pursuant to Code Sections 22.58, 22.42 and 22.48.020.A.) is a request to install two monopoles with two cellular phone antennas on each pole. The poles with antennas will not exceed a height of 25 feet. Additionally, the request includes equipment cabinets enclosed by a block wall. The project site, approximately seven net acres, currently contains a residential structure and three unmanned wireless telecommunications facilities. PROJECT ADDRESS: 24401 Damn Drive (Lot 51, Tract No. 425 84) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNERS: Eric and Robin Stone 24401 Damn Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 APPLICANT: Verizon Wireless 1550 S. Sand Canyon Avenue Irvine, CA 92618 AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report. Staff recommends Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-03 and Development Review No. 2002-12, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Kevin Avery, representing Verizon Wireless, said he was present to answer questions regarding this project. i SEPTEMBER 24, 2002 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Nelson asked the applicant to go back to his landscape architect and inquire as to whether he could suggest an alternate to the Pepper Tree. Mr. Avery responded that he would do so. C/Tanaka asked what the two monopoles would do for Verizon to which Mr. Avery responded that they would provide coverage along the SR 60 as well as some coverage to the north of the City. Chair/Ruzicka opened the public hearing. There was no one present who wished to speak on this item. VC/Tye asked wanted the City to choose an Arborist to review this project. He believed that during prior deliberations regarding cell sites, the Commission requested staff to provide input as to the maximum number of monopoles acceptable for one site. Chair/Ruzicka said he was also concerned and felt the Commission should have some guidelines regarding the number of monopoles that one site might accommodate. The last time the Planning Commission was asked to approve a cell site on this particular property, the Commissioners expressed concern about the number that could be approved for each property within the entire City. We asked, "When is enough, enough! Is 3 enough? 4? 5? 10? 20? Could some pieces of property here in Diamond Bar start to look like antenna farms? As of tonight, we still do not have any idea. As a consequence I would like to recommend to my colleagues on this Commission that we postpone approval of this project until the Commission has guidance to assist in making decisions in this area. Policy guidelines should include, and not be limited to, lot size, number of sites per lots, (larger lots being able to accommodate more sites than smaller ones), camouflaging requirements and so forth. The policy should also include all property within the territorial limits of the City whether it is private property, commercial property or church property. He said he was terribly disappointed by the project submitted to this Commission for one of these sites at St. Denis Catholic Church. He found a complete lack of concern for the effects the project would have on the surrounding neighborhood by Cingular and by the church leaders. This policy should be put together and be based upon the best policies of other cities with characteristics similar to those of Diamond Bar. The policy should include a provision for the appearance of both the telecommunications company and the property owner at the public hearing before the Commission so that the appropriate questions could be asked about the site's effect on the surrounding neighborhoods and the possible mitigation. to minimize that effect. This action should be taken to insure that Diamond Bar has a sensible policy for the future. He added in closing that the request to draft this policy has nothing to do with the ^"7. SEPTEMBER 24, 2002 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION validity of the project before the Commission tonight. He suggested that this policy must be drawn up at some point in time and he believed the time was now. The City needs a telecommunications policy to supports its decisions so that in the future Diamond Bar can have a sensible progression of these sites taking into account all of the concerns previously expressed by the Commission as well as the citizens. C/Nolan believed that one of Diamond Bar's biggest problems was traffic. While he believed the City needed a more cogent or restrictive policy, he felt it was unfair to an applicant to come before the Commission playing within the existing rules and find they are subject to the change. He was confused about zoning issues. This site is proposed for a residential area. VC/Tye felt that a policy and discussion of this particular project could take place simultaneously. He said he visited the site on Saturday and received two telephone calls from Mr. Stone today. V/C Tye believed that with respect to prior approval of cell sites on this property, someone dropped the ball with respect to conditions of approval and preservation of the trees on-site. Chair/Ruzicka said he was concerned about annexation issues. He would also like to see included in the policy a reasonable timeframe for when each site is re -visited. This property owner is extremely conscientious about the facilities located on his land. He reiterated his belief that by the next Commission meeting, a policy should be in place. Chair/Ruzicka responded to C/Nolan that Diamond Bar has a population of about 50.000. What will it be like 10 years from now? Will the geographical boundaries be the same in the future? There should be some sensible policy that the Commission can follow with respect to all of these considerations. DCM/DeStefano explained that there are approximately 30 wireless communications facilities in the City. Part of the reason there are so many cell sites in the City is due to its physical characteristics. There are a number of "dead" areas within the City and when demand exceeds availability, requests are made -to incorporate additional sites. Additionally, technology, size and types of devices, available frequencies, etc., are changing on a daily basis. These factors can contribute to the increase in cell sites/antennas for sites within the City. He felt that at some point 10 to 20 years in the future cell sites would vanish and the technology would be available via satellite. Diamond Bar created an ordinance a few years ago that incorporated input from the wireless telecommunications industry and citizens within the community. The ordinance has been refined within the past couple of years. This site is listed within the ordinance as being a potential site for future carriers. He explained the circumstances under which a residential property might be selected for a site. He SEPTEMBER 24, 2002 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION suggested that the Planning Commission revisit the current Ordinance. In the short term, staff would require at least 30 days to provide adequate support including legal input to the Commission. He requested the matter be scheduled for the meeting of October 22, 2002. C/Nelson asked if the proposed project is consistent with the City's Telecommunications Ordinance to which DCM/DeStefano responded that from staff's prospective, the application is consistent, therefore, recommending approval. C/Nelson felt that this project should move forward on its own merits. Any further consideration of the current Telecommunications Ordinance could be taken under advisement. C/Nelson moved, C/Tanaka seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-03 and Development Review No. 2002-12, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. VC/Tye requested that the motion contain a provision that the Certified Arborist would be selected by the City to which C/Nelson and C/Tanaka agreed. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Tanaka, Nolan, VC/Tye, Chair/P uzicka NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 8. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: C/Nolan attended a golf tournament in honor of Ken Hewitt who is being honored on September 27 at the Los Angeles County Fair as a Diamond Bar hero. The proceeds of the tournament are used to send burned children to summer camp. C/Nelson asked that staff research vehicles such as endowments and performance bonds for maintaining landscaping around telecommunications facilities. VC/Tye objected to Big Lots storing merchandise in large unsightly containers on their property and believed the containers should be removed. He asked that the graffiti on the retaining wall in "The Country Estates" be removed. VC/Tye referred to a July 29 sent by DCM/DeStefano to "The Country Estates" requesting access to projects in the Country. The entry points have no record of such a request or acknowledgement. He thanked staff for sending C. J. Pilkerton to view the trees at the SunCal project site. Chair/Ruzicka asked that discussion of the Telecommunications Ordinance be agendized. L�-<: -- i SEPTEMBER 24, 2002 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION 9. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: DCM/DeStefano invited the Commissioners to participate in field trip to locate the cell sites within the City and in other cities. Tomorrow, staff will provide each Commissioner with copies of the current Telecommunications Ordinance and a map that identifies the sites where facilities are presently located as well as, potential future sites. C. J. Pilkerton is the City's likely candidate to view what is believed to be a dead black Walnut tree and to assist in determining the cause of its demise. Staff will research the matter of access to "The Country Estates" projects and advise the Commissioners accordingly. With respect to VC/Tye's concern, a Code Enforcement Officer reported that the property owner in "The Country Estates" would remove the graffiti from the wall by September 29. He agreed with VC/Tye that the bins located in the Big Lots parking lot should be removed. In fact, the Code Enforcement Officer has been instructed to get them removed. The City Council will consider the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval of the Best Western property subdivision on October 1. The Planning Commission will likely receive a presentation by the Fair Housing Foundation about the last meeting in October. 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As presented in the agenda. ADJOURNMENT: Therr heing no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chairman Ruzicka adiuurncd the meeting at 8:58 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, James DeStefano Deputy City Manager Attest: Chairman Joe Ruzicka MEMORANDUM orroa+a COMMUNITY & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager, via Stella Marquez, Administrative Assistant MEETING October 8, 2002 DATE: SUBJECT: Item 6.1 - Telecommunications Ordinance At the last meeting on September 24, 2002, the Planning Commission requested for information regarding the City's telecommunications ordinance. Attached please find a copy of the City's Telecommunications Ordinance and a copy of the Telecommunications Facility Map. Also attached for your review, are copies of various information obtained from the Federal Communications Commission and other sources. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the attached documents and direct staff accordingly. Attachments: 1. Telecommunications Ordinance 2. Telecommunications Facility Map 3. Information from the Federal Communications Commission and other sources. DEVELOPMENT CODE § 22.42.130 A second kitchen shall not constitute approval of second dwelling unit and such kitchens shall not be so located as to facilitate the establishment of a second independent dwelling including a servant's quarters. (Ord. No. 02(1998), § 2, 11-3-98) Sec. 22.42.130. Radio and television antennas and wireless telecommunications antenna facilities. (a) Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish development standards and land use controls for the installation and maintenance of radio and television antennas, including amateur radio station antennas and wireless telecommunications antenna facilities within specified land use zones of the city. The standards and controls are intended to insure the design and location of those antennas and related facilities are consistent with previously adopted policies of the city, as set forth in the general plan, to guide the orderly development of the community, to promote the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare of the city s residents, to protect property values, and to enhance the aesthetic appearance of the city by maintaining architectural and structural integrity and by protecting views from obtrusive and unsightly accessory uses and facilities. As related to health, safety and structural integrity, all such facilities shall comply with the structural design require- ments of the current Uniform Building Code. The purpose of compliance with the Uniform Building Code is to insure that such facilities do not fail in a seismic event or high winds that traditionally occur in the city. The city council expressly finds and determines that these regulatory requirements relating to a conditional use permit are necessary, desirable, and in the best interests of the community in order to protect public health, welfare and safety, to promote aesthetic objectives, and to maintain property values. The city council further finds and determines that these regulatory requirements are applicable only to the proposed installation of satellite earth station antennas that are not permitted accessory uses and that do not meet the criteria for exemption from local regulation established by the FCC under the Telecommunications Act of 1996. (b) Applicabilih•. The standards of this section apply to all earth station antennas, amateur radio station antennas, and wireless telecommunications antenna facilities. (c) Satellite earth station antenna regulation. The regulatory provisions of this paragraph are applicable to all satellite earth station antennas within the city that are installed or modified after the effective date of this section. )11 Permitted accessory uses. Satellite earth station antennas described below in this subsection may be installed as permitted accessory uses without obtaining either a conditional use permit or a building permit, provided that they comply with all applicable development standards set forth in paragraph (d) (Development standards), as well as all applicable building codes, electrical codes, and fire codes: a. An antenna located in any zoning district that is designed to receive direct broadcast satellite service, including direct -to -home satellite services, that is one Stipp No & CD22:217 § 22.42.130 DIAMOND BAR CODE meter (39 inches) or less in diameter and that is either building -mounted or if elevated by a mast, shall not extend more than 12 feet above the roof line without a permit from the building and safety division. b. An antenna that is designed to receive video programming sefVices and that is located in any zoning district where commercial or industrial uses are generally permitted, which antenna is two meters (6.5 feet) or less in diameter and is either building -mounted or, if elevated by a mast, shall not extend more than 12 feet above the roofline without a permit from the building and safety division. C. An antenna located in any zoning district that is designed to receive video Programming services by means of multipoint distribution services, including multichannel multipoint distribution services, which antenna is one meter (39 inches) or less in diameter or diagonal measurement and which is either building -mounted or, if elevated by a mast, shall not extend more than 12 feet above the roofline without a permit from the building and safety division. d. An antenna located in any zoning district that is designed solely to receive television broadcast signals, which antenna, whether building -mounted or ground - mounted, shall not extend more than 12 feet above the roofline without a permit from the building and safety division. Idi Satellite earth station antenna development standards. i 11 City-wide standards. The following development standards apply in all zoning districts to the siting, construction, and operation of all satellite earth station antennas, including those that require the issuance of a conditional use permit and the issuance of a building permit, as provided for in paragraph (e). The director may modify or waive any standard or requirement that impairs the installation, maintenance, or use of over -the -air reception devices. a- The. height of a ground -mounted satellite earth station antenna shall not extend more than 12 feet above the roofline without a permit from the building and safety division. b. No satellite earth station antenna may be installed in any zoning district if it will impede normal vehicular or pedestrian circulation, or ingress to, or egress from any building, structure, or parking facility. C. Satellite earth station antennas, whether ground -mounted or building -mounted, including any guy -wires, masts, and accessory equipment, should, to the extent feasible, be located and designed so as to mitigate adverse visual impacts from adjacent properties and from public streets, which mitigation may involve screening by means of landscaping or the addition of new architectural elements that are compatible with the designed of adjacent buildings. Satellite earth station antennas shall be located in rear yards or side yards not visible or Supp. v.. 8 CD22:218 DEVELOPMENT CODE C 22.42.130 screened from view from adjacent properties and/or public right-of-way where such placement does not impair an antenna's reception. The director may modiA any requirement in this section if the antenna reception is impaired. d. Satellite earth station antennas must be finished in a non-metallic finish or painted in a color that is compatible with the surrounding environment. e. All satellite earth station antennas must be installed with adequate ground wire to protect against a direct strike of lightning. The ground wire must be of a type approved by the electrical code for grounding masts and lightning arrestors. f. All satellite earth station antennas must be located away from utility lines by a four -meter (13 -foot) vertical distance and a two -meter (6.5 -foot) horizontal distance. Any mast that will be used to elevate a satellite earth station antenna must be secured by a separate safety wire in a direction away from adjacent power lines or other potential hazards. g. To the extent feasible, all cables, wires, or similar electrical transmission devices that connect with a satellite earth station antenna must be placed underground. h. If footings are required for the installation of a satellite earth station antenna, engineering calculations for those footings must be signed by a licensed struc- tural or civil engineer. i. All connectors on a satellite earth station antenna, and on any mast to be used for elevation, must be capable of sustaining a wind loads of at least 20 pounds per square foot. Due to the fact that the city is located in an area traditionally subject to high winds, all structures including satellite earth station antenna shall be required to withstand an 80 -mile -per -hour wind load. j. No satellite earth station antenna, nor any of its component parts or accessory facilities, may encroach into the public right-of-way unless that encroachment is authorized by the city engineer as provided for in this Code. k All satellite earth station antennas must be properly maintained. 1 2 i Residential standards. In addition to the development standards set forth above in subsection )1), the following development standards apply in,all residential zones to the siting, construction, and operation of satellite earth station antennas: a. The height of the roof -mounted satellite earth station antenna shall not extend more than 12 feet above the roofline without a permit from the building and safety division. b. The height of a ground -mounted satellite earth station antenna shall not extend more than 12 feet above the roofline without a permit from the building and safety division. C Satellite earth station may not exceed three meters (ten feet) in diameter. Supp. \o. 8 CD22:219 § 22.42.130 DIAMOND BAR CODE (3) Nonresidential standards. In addition to the development standards set forth above in subsection (1), the following development standards apply in all nonresidential zones to the siting, construction, and operation of satellite earth station antennas: a. All ground -mounted satellite earth station antennas must be located at least 11/_ meters (five feet) from any property line. b. A satellite earth station antenna that is ground -mounted shall be located within the side or rear yard and at least five feet from any property line. If locating a ground -mounted satellite earth station antenna within the side or rear yard and at least five feet from any property line precludes the reception of acceptable quality signal, unreasonably delays installation, or unreasonably adds cost to the installation, the director may modify this setback requirement. C. The height of a ground -mounted satellite earth station antenna shall not extend more than 12 feet above the roofline without a permit from the building and safety division. d. The height of a ground -mounted satellite earth station antenna may not extend above the roofline. (e) Satellite earth station antenna conditional use permit. ( 1) If a proposed satellite earth station antenna will exceed the applicable height limitations referenced above in subparagraphs a. through d. of paragraph (c)(1) (permitted accessory uses) or if the diameter or diagonal measurement of the proposed satellite earth station antenna exceeds the one- or two -meter limitation specified in subparagraph a. through c. of paragraph (c)(1) (permitted accessory uses), then an application for a conditional use permit must be submitted in accordance with chapter 22.58 and, if the application is approved, a building permit must be obtained. (2) In addition to the requirements set forth in chapter 22.58, the application for a conditional use permit must include the following: a. Construction drawings that show the proposed method of installation, screening and the manufacturer's specifications. b. A plot plan showing the proposed location of the satellite earth station antenna. C. Engineering data evidencing that the satellite earth station antenna will be in compliance with all structural requirements of the building code. (f) Amateur radio station antenna regulation. ( 1) Conditional use permit required. The proposed installation of an amateur radio station antenna in any zoning district must be preceded by an application for a conditional use permit in accordance with chapter 22.58 and, if the application is approved, a building permit must be obtained. supp. No. 8 CD22:220 DEVELOPMENT CODE t 22.42.130 (2) Application requirements. In addition to the requirements set forth in chapter 22.58. the application for a conditional use permit must include the items set forth above in paragraph (e)(3), and copies of all licenses issued to the applicant by the FCC to engage in amateur radio service operations and to use the site as an amateur radio station. (3) Review factors. In conducting the conditional use permit review process for a proposed amateur radio station antenna, the reviewing authority must consider the following factors: a. The proposed height of the amateur radio station antenna, and the applicant's representations as to the technological necessity of that height to engage in amateur radio service operations of the nature contemplated. b. Proximity of the proposed amateur radio station antenna to inhabited buildings and structures. C. The nature of existing uses on adjacent and nearby properties. d. Surrounding topography, tree coverage, and foliage, and their effect on the proposed height of the amateur radio station antenna. e. Design of the proposed amateur radio station antenna, with particular reference to design features that provide for retraction of the antenna when not in use and design features that may reduce or eliminate visual obtrusiveness, particularly in or adjacent to residential zones. �4) Guidelines. In making any determination during the conditional use permit review process to deny or to condition the application for an amateur radio station antenna, the reviewing authority must adhere to the following guidelines: a- The imposition of conditions or restrictions relating to the placement, screening, or height of a proposed amateur radio station antenna, which conditions or restrictions are based upon protection of the public health, welfare, and safety, aesthetic considerations, or the preservation of property values, must be consid- ered on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the unique features of the proposed site, the factors specified above in subsection (3), and the reasonable accommodation required under subparagraph b. below. b. The conditional use permit review process must be conducted so as to (1) reasonably accommodate the paramount federal interest in promoting amateur Stipp, No.6 - CD22:220.1 DEVELOPMENT CODE $ 22.42.130 radio communications as voluntary, noncommercial communications services, Particularly with respect to emergency communications; and (2) impose the minimum practical restrictions, limitations, and conditions in order to achieve the citys legitimate regulatory objectives. (g) Wireless telecommunications antenna facility approval process. (1) Applicability. The regulatory provisions of this paragraph (g) are applicable to all wireless telecommunications antenna facilities within the city that are installed or modified after the effective date of this section, including all facilities for which previously issued building permits have expired. All facilities for which applications were submitted and deemed to be complete prior to the effective date of this section are exempt from these regulatory provisions. (2) Administrative review. A wireless telecommunications antenna facility may be autho- rized under an administrative review conducted by the director. The application for administrative review must include the information required by subparagraphs a. through i. of paragraph (gl(5) as applicable. The director must consider the factors set forth in paragraph (g)(6) and must determine that the facility complies with the following requirements: a. Concealed antennas. Concealed antennas must be architecturally integrated with a building or structure so as not to be recognized as an antenna. b. Height and screening. Building or roof -mounted antennas must not exceed 442 meters (15 feet) in height and must be screened from view. C . Minor addition /modification. The director may approve the following: Up to two additional omnidirectional (whip) antennas not to exceed 442 meters (15 feet) in height; the reconfiguration or alteration of a fisting antennas on a single support structure; or the addition of a single dish under one meter (39 inches) in diameter to an existing freestanding antenna structure (i.e. monopole). The physical area of the reconfigured or altered antenna shall not exceed 15 percent of the area of the antenna as originally approved. d. Base stations. Support equipment and base stations must be located within a completely enclosed building or otherwise screened from view. e. Wireless telecommunications antenna facility sites. The facility must be located in any of the following zone districts: OP, OB, CO, C-1, C-2, C-3, I, or as identified on the city telecommunications facilities opportunities map. f. Freestanding antenna structures. No freestanding antenna support structures may be authorized under an administrative review. g. Development standards. The facility must be located, constructed, and main- tained in accordance with all applicable development standards that are set forth below in paragraph (h) (Development standards). Supp. No. 6 CD22:221 § 22.42.130 DIAMOND BAR CODE (3) Minor conditional use permit. A wireless telecommunications antenna facility may be authorized under a minor conditional use permit issued by the hearing officer. The application for a minor conditional use permit must include the information required by subparagraphs a. through j. of paragraph (gx5), as applicable. The hearing officer must consider the factors set forth in paragraph (gX6) and must determine that the facility complies with the following requirements: a. Narrative. The applicant must provide a written narrative describing why the facility does not meet the criteria for an administrative review. b. Location. The facility must be located in any of the following zone districts: Op, OB, CO, C-1, C-2, C-3, I, or as identified on the city telecommunications facilities opportunities map. C. Micro wireless telecommunications antenna facilities. The wireless telecommuni- cations antenna facilities must be one-half meter (19 inches) or less in length and must be integrated with the architectural design and color of the surrounding buildings or support structures, such as light standards, utility poles, etc. d. Freestanding antenna support structure setback. The setback for a freestanding antenna support structure will be no less than 15 meters (50 feet) or the height of the antenna plus 20 percent, whichever is greater, from any existing or fixture residential structure. e. Development standards. The facility must be located, constructed, and main- tained in accordance with all applicable development standards that are set forth below in paragraph (h) (Development standards). Al Conditional use permit. All wireless telecommunications antenna facilities other than those meeting the criteria for an administrative review approval or minor conditional use permit specified above must be authorized by a conditional use permit. These facilities may be located in any zone, provided that the facility is in compliance with the following requirements: a. Narrative. The applicant must provide a written narrative describing why the facility does not meet the criteria for an administrative review or minor conditional use permit. b. Development standards. The facility will be located, constructed, and maintained in accordance with all applicable development standards that are set forth below in paragraph (h) (Development standards). ( 5) Application. In addition to the information required by chapter 22.58, the application for an administrative review, minor conditional use permit, and a conditional use permit must include the following: a. Site plan. A site plan, drawn to scale, showing the proposed location of the wireless telecommunications antenna facility, the height of any existing or proposed new support structure, accessory equipment facility, above and below Supp. No. 6 CD22:222 DEVELOPMENT CODE § 22.42.130 ground wiring and connection cables, existing or proposed easements on the property, the height above ground of any antenna array, and the distance between the antenna facility and any existing or proposed accessory equipment facility. b. Narrative. A brief narrative accompanied by written documentation that de- scribes the applicant's efforts to locate the facility in accordance with the factors set forth in paragraph (6)f. of this section. C. Landscape plan. A landscaping plan for freestanding antenna support structures showing the location and type of plant materials, landscape elements, and associated irrigation system. d. Master plan. A master plan showing existing wireless telecommunications antenna facilities sites within the city that are owned or operated by the. applicant and any proposed sites in the city that may be required for fixture area coverage. The master plan shall be overlaid on the city telecommunications facilities opportunities map. Proposed sites are not restricted to those shown on the telecommunications facilities opportunities. e. Photographic simulation. An exhibit ("photo -Sim-) showing how the completed facility will appear when viewed by the public. f Engineering documentation. Detailed engineering calculations for foundation and wind loads, plus documentation that the electromagnetic fields (EMFs) from the proposed wireless telecommunications antenna facility will be within the limits approved by the FCC. g. Environmental assessment. A preliminary environmental assessment, with spe- cial emphasis placed upon the nature and extent o1'visual impacts. h. Licenses. Evidence of any required licenses and approvals to provide wireless telecommunications services in the city. i. Architectural elevations. Applicants may be required to provide architectural elevations showing the facility, as it will be viewed by the public. j. Mock-up. Applicants may be required to erect full-scale "mock-ups" of their proposed facilities. (6) Factors considered in approving wireless telecommunications antenna facilities. in determining whether to issue an administrative review approval, minor conditional use permit, or conditional use permit for a wireless telecommunications antenna facility, the reviewing authority must consider the following factors: a. Environmental integration. The extent to which the proposed facility blends into the surrounding environment or is architecturally integrated into a concealing structure, taking into consideration alternate sites that are available. b. Screening. The extent to which the proposed facility is screened or camouflaged by existing or proposed topography, vegetation, buildings, or other structures. Supp. No. 6 CD22:223 § 22.42.130 DIAMOND BAR CODE C. Size. The total size of the proposed facility, particularly in relation to surrounding and supporting structures. d. Residential proximity. Proximity of the proposed facility to residential structures and to boundaries of residential districts. e. Access. Proposed ingress to and egress from the site of the proposed facility. f Location. The location of the proposed facility and the extent to which it conforms to the following in order of preference (item I. being the most preferred): 1. Co -located with an existing facility or located at a pre -approved location. 2. Attached to an existing structure, such as a building, communication tower, church steeple, or utility pole or tower. 3. Located in an industrial/business park zoning district. 4. Located in a commercial zoning district. (h) Development standards. (1) Architectural integration. Antenna arrays on wireless telecommunications antenna facilities that are proposed to be sited on an existing nonresidential building or support structure must, to the extent feasible, be integrated with the architectural design and color of that existing building or support structure. (2) Freestanding antenna structures. No new freestanding antenna structure will be permitted unless the reviewing authority makes the additional finding that, based upon evidence submitted by the applicant, no existing building or support structure can reasonably accommodate the proposed wireless telecommunications antenna facility. Evidence supporting this fording will be considered by the reviewing authority, and may consist of any of the following: a. Location. No existing buildings or support structures are located within the geographic area proposed to be served by the applicant's facility. b. Structural criteria. Existing buildings or support structures are not of sufficient height or structural strength to meet the applicant's operational or engineering requirements. C. Interference. The applicant's proposed facility would create electromagnetic interference with another facility on an existing structure, or an existing antenna array on an existing building or support structure would create interference with the applicant's proposed antenna array. d. Limiting factors. There are other limiting factors that render existing buildings and support structures unsuitable for use by the applicant. e. Setback. A new freestanding antenna structure that is to be located near a residential use or the boundary of a residential zoning district must be set back from the nearest residential lot line or boundary a distance that is at least equal to the height of that structure plus 20 percent. Supp. No. 6 CD22:224 DEVELOPMENT CODE § 22.42.130 f. Lattice towers. The use of a lattice tower as a support structure for a wireless telecommunications antenna facility is prohibited in all zoning districts. g. Skyline. Freestanding antenna support structures shall be located downslope from ridgelines so as not to impact significant public views of -skylines. (3) Screening. If a new support structure for a facility will be visible from adjacent residential properties or from major arterial streets, the reviewing authority may require that the support structure be screened or camouflaged to mitigate adverse visual impacts. (4) Base stations. Protective structures housing accessory equipment must not exceed four meters (13 feet) in height, must comply with all applicable setback requirements, and must be screened from public view or be made compatible with the color and architectural deign of adjacent structures. (5) Undergrounding. All utilities and connection cables for a facility must be placed underground or within a protective structure for accessory equipment. (6) Security. Where applicable, each facility site shall have a security program that includes features such as fencing, anti -climbing devices, elevated ladders on towers, and monitoring to prevent unauthorized access and vandalism. (7) Landscaping. Landscaping, or the use of existing trees or vegetation on a proposed site, may be required for screening purposes, subject to such conditions as may be imposed by the reviewing authority. All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy condition. (8) Fencing. Fencing shall be wrought iron or similar decorative material. Prohibited fencing includes razor wire and barbwire. Chain link fencing shall be screened by landscaping or topography, or both. (9 ) Finish. The exterior of anew wireless telecommunications antenna facility must have a noncorrosive, nonmetallic finish that is not conducive to reflection or glare. The support structure, the antenna array, and the accessory equipment facility must all be painted or camouflaged to blend with surrounding materials and colors. (10) Lighting. Artificial lighting shall be limited to mandatory safety lighting required by regulatory agencies possessing jurisdiction over wireless telecommunications antenna facilities. Security lighting around the base of a tower may be provided if such lighting does not adversely affect adjacent property owners. (11) Signage. The wireless telecommunications antenna facility shall not bear any signs or advertising devices other than certification, warning, or other required seals or required signage. Required signage shall be no higher than 212 meters (eight feet). A concealed wireless telecommunications facility may bear signs or advertising devices where such signs or devices are an integral part of the design of the facility. Supp. No. 6 CD22:225 § 22.42.130 DIAMOND BAR CODE (12) Co -location agreement. The applicant and the property owner must consent to the future co -location of facilities on the building or support structure to be used by the applicant, unless technical considerations preclude that co -location. (i) Maintenance and cessation of use. The following requirements Ipply to wireless telecommunications antenna facilities located on existing buildings or support structures and on new support structures: (1) Maintenance. The site must be maintained in a condition free of trash, debris; refuse, and undesirable vegetation. All graffiti must be removed within 72 hours. (2) Abandonment and remoual. If a support structure, or an antenna array affixed to a building or to a support structure, becomes inoperable or ceases to be used for a period of six consecutive months, the permittee must give written notice of such inoperability or nonuse to the director. The antenna array and, if applicable, the support structure, must be removed within a 90 -day period. If such removal does not occur, the city may remove the antenna array and, if applicable, the support structure, at the permittee's expense; provided, however, that if other antenna arrays owned or operated by other service providers are affixed to the same support structure, then only the antenna array that has become inoperable or has ceased to be used is required to be removed, and the support structure may remain in place until all service providers cease to use it. The permittee shall not be required to remove antenna structures or support structures that are architecturally concealed in a pre-existing structure or are concealed as part of a new freestanding structure. (3) Bonding. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the construction or modification of a wireless telecommunications facility, the applicant may be required to provide to the city a bond or other approved security for the removal of the facility, and any accessory equipment, if that facility is abandoned or if the reviewing authority revokes the use of that facility. (j) Modifications to existing facilities. Q) Modifications. Modifications to wireless telecommunications antenna facilities that (i) were legally constructed prior to the effective date of this section, or (ii) are constructed after the effective date of this section in accordance with a minor conditional use permit or a conditional uae permit, may be authorized by a minor conditional use permit or by an amendment to a minor conditional use permit if those proposed modifications comply with the following requirements: a. There will be no increase in the height of the support structure or the antenna array. b. Potential adverse visual impacts will be mitigated to the maximum extent possible. C. No required parking spaces will be eliminated as a result of the proposed modifications. Supp. No. 6 CD22:226 DEVELOPMENT CODE § 22.42.130 (2) Conditional use permit. All modifications to wireless telecommunications antenna facilities that do not meet the criteria specified above in subsection (1) must be authorized by a conditional use permit or by an amendment to a conditional use permit. s (k) Nonconforming facilities. Any wireless telecommunications antenna facility that was constructed in accordance with any ordinance or regulation of the city that preceded the effective date of this section, and that becomes nonconforming due to noncompliance with the development standards and other requirements set forth in this section, is subject to the provisions of chapter 22.68 of the development code, which is entitled 'Nonconforming Uses, Structures and Parcels." (1) Enforcement. (1) Inspection. All wireless telecommunications antenna facilities that are authorized by an administrative review, minor conditional use permit, or a conditional use permit are subject to periodic inspection by the city to determine whether they are in compliance with all applicable provisions of this section. ) 2 1 Notice. Upon inspection, if any condition is discovered that may result in a danger to life or property, the city will give written notice to the permittee or to the property owner, or both, at their last known address, describing the dangerous condition and demanding that said condition be corrected within a specified period of time, but not later than ten days after that notice. 3 i Abatement and permit revocation. Failure to comply with any applicable provision of this section. or with conditions imposed by a minor conditional use permit or conditional use permit may constitute a public nuisance subject to immediate abatement as well as grounds for revocation of that permit. (in) Liability and indemnification. The applicant will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the city. its city council, boards, commissions, agents, officers, and employees, from any claim, action. or proceeding, arising out of or attributable to the ownership or operation of any wireless telecommunications antenna facility that is authorized under this section, and any injure to persons or damages to property proximately caused by any conduct undertaken by the applicant. its agents, emplovees, or subcontractors. )Ord. No. 02(1998), § 2, 11-3-98; Ord. No. 04(1999), § 2, 3-2-99; Ord. No. 02(2001), §§ 4-__15, 11-6-01) Supp. Nu.a CD22:227 0 Z W U W J J Le �s Q 7 � dV - p N � � N O J L OC G y� o�m UQ UUi G 7 Z U U z w o £ m m > = o w a a 0 3 U w OOO O. J Le nGN n4L1Uud1 Y\llG1eaJ IuWer J1Ling YUllC1eb, Aplll_U, I"o rage 1 o11U April 23, 1996 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FACT SHEET Information provided by the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau NEW NATIONAL WIRELESS TOWER SITING POLICIES The Telecommunications Act of 1996 contains important provisions concerning the placement of towers and other facilities for use in providing personal wireless services. Most state and local communities have worked closely with cellular and other wireless service providers on such placement plans, but this new law establishes new responsibilities for communities and for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The rapid expansion in the wireless industry makes these issues even more important. This fact sheet is intended to explain the new provisions and to help state and local governments as they deal with the complex issues of facilities siting in their local communities. At the end of this fact sheet, you will find names of contacts for additional information about this area and other issues before the FCC. Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (the "1996 Act") governs federal, state and local Government oversight of siting of "personal wireless service" facilities. The 1996 Act establishes a comprehensive framework for the exercise of jurisdiction by state and local zoning authorities over the construction. modification and placement of facilities such as towers for cellular, personal communications service (PCS). and specialized mobile radio (SMR) transmitters: - The new law preserves local zoning authority, but clarifies when the exercise of local zoning authority may be preempted by the FCC. - Section 704 prohibits any action that would discriminate between different providers of personal wireless services, such as cellular, wide -area SMR and broadband PCS. It also prohibits any action that would ban altogether the construction, modification or placement of these kinds of facilities in a particular area. - The law also specifies procedures which must be followed for acting on a request to place these kinds of facilities, and provides for review in the courts or the FCC of any decision by a zoning authority that is inconsistent with Section 704. - Finally. Section 704 requires the federal government to take steps to help licensees in spectrum -based services. such as PCS and cellular. get access to preferred sites for their facilities. Federal agencies and departments will work directly with licensees to make federal property available for this purpose. and the FCC is directed to work with the states to find ways for states to accommodate licensees who wish to erect towers on state property, http://wireless.fcc.aov/siting/factl.html 10/3/2002 INC" illauuuai V1Ilcl"b lower wung Yo11cieb, Apra 1.7, ig" Page _ of 1 or use state easements and rights-of-way. The attachments to this fact sheet seek to provide information concerning tower siting for personal wireless communications services. They include a summary of the provisions of Section 704 of the 1996 Act, the actual text of Section 704, and a technical information summary that describes the cellular, wide -area SMR and broadband PCS technologies that underlie the majority of requests for new tower sites. Questions about the Telecommunications Act of 1996 generally may be addressed to Sheryl Wilkerson in the FCC's Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs, 202-418-1902 (e-mail: swilkers@fcc.gov). Questions about tower siting, licensing issues or technical matters may be addressed to Steve Markendorff, Deputy Chief, Commercial Wireless Division in the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, 202-418-0620, (e-mail: smarkend@fcc.gov). This Fact Sheet is available on our fax -on -demand system. The telephone number for fax -on demand is 202-418-2830. The Fact Sheet may also be found on the World Wide Web at http://wireless.fcc gov/. SUMMARY OF SECTION 704 OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996 The following is a summary of key provisions. The text of Section 704 is reproduced in its entirety as an attachment to this summary. 1. Local Zoning Authority Preserved Section 704(a) of the 1996 Act amends Section 332(c) of the Communications Act ("Mobile Services") by adding a new paragraph (7). It preserves the authority of state and local governments over decisions regarding the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities, except as provided in the new paragraph (7). 2. Exceptions a. States and Localities May Not Take Discriminatory or Prohibiting Actions Section 704(a) of the 1996 Act states that the regulation of the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities by any State or local government or instrumentality thereof shall not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services and shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(i). Review: Any person that is adversely affected by a state or local government's action or failure to act that is inconsistent with Section 332(c)(7) may seek expedited review in the courts. 47 U.S.C. § 1 12(c)(7)(B)(v). b. Procedures for Ruling on Requests to Place Construct or Modih,, Personal Wireless Service Facilities Section 704(a) also requires a State or local government to act upon a request for authorization to place. construct. or modify personal wireless service facilities within a reasonable time. Any decision to deny a request must be http://wireless.fcc.gov/siting/factl.html 10/3/2002 ♦ ICVt ♦\atl Ullal W u`CJUJO I UWer Jlung rulwlCJ, tipr1l _�, J"O rage U UI 1 U made in writing and be supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record. 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(ii), (iii). C. Regulations Based On Environmental Effects of RF Emissions Preempted Section 704(a) of the 1996 Act expressly preempts state and local government regulation of the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the FCC's regulations concerning such emissions. 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(iv). Review: Parties may seek relief from the FCC if they are adversely affected by a state or local government's final action or failure to act that is inconsistent with this provision. 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(v). 3. Federal Guidelines Concerning RF Emissions Section 704(b) requires the FCC to prescribe and make effective new rules regarding the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions, which are under consideration in ET Docket 93-62, within 180 days of enactment of the 1996 Act. NOTE: The pendency of this proceeding before the FCC does not affect the rules which currently are in effect governing the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions. Section 704(b) gives preemptive effect to these existing rules. See related attachments to the Fact Sheet. 4. Use of Federal or State Government Property a. Federal Property Section 704(c) of the 1996 Act requires the President (or his designee) to prescribe procedures by which the federal government may make available on a fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory basis, property, rights-of-way and easements under their control, for the placement of new spectrum -based telecommunications services. b. State Property With respect to facilities siting on state property, Section 704(c) of the 1996 Act requires the FCC to provide technical support to States to encourage them to make property, rights-of-way and easements under their jurisdiction available for the placement of new spectrum -based telecommunications services. NOTE: Information concerning technical support for tower siting which the FCC is making available to state and local governments is attached to the Fact Sheet. �. Definitions hnp://wireless.fcc.gov/siting/factl.html 10/3/2002 114" 114auurral wrrcress lower bluing roncres, April L.), i9go Page 4 of 1 u "Personal wireless services" include commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless exchange access services. 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(C) (i). "Commercial mobile services" are defined in Section 332 of the Communications Act and the FCC's rules, and include cellular telephone services regulated under Part 22 of the FCC's rules, SMR services regulated under Part 90 of the FCC's rules, and PCS regulated under Part 24 of the FCC's rules. 47 C.F.R. §20.9. "Unlicensed wireless services" are defined as the offering of telecommunications services using duly authorized devices which do not require individual licenses; direct -to -home satellite services are excluded from this definition. 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(C)(iii). COMPLETE TEXT OF SEC. 704 OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996 SEC. 704. FACILITIES SITING; RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSION STANDARDS. (a) NATIONAL WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS SITING POLICY- Section 332(c) (47 U.S.C. 332(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph: '(7) PRESERVATION OF LOCAL ZONING AUTHORITY - '(A) GENERAL AUTHORITY- Except as provided in this paragraph. nothing in this Act shall limit or affect the authority of a State or local government or instrumentality thereof over decisions regarding the placement, construction. and modification of personal wireless service facilities. '(B) LIMITATIONS- ' (i) The regulation of the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities by any State or local government or instrumentalin,thereof--- ' (1) shall not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functional] equivalent services; and '(11) shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. (ii) A State or local government or instrumentality thereof shall act on any request for authorization to place. construct. or modify personal wireless service facilities within a reasonable period of time after the request is duly filed with such government or instrumentality-. taking into account the nature and scope of such request. '( iii) Any decision by a State or local government or place. construct. or modift personal wireless service facilities shall be in writing and supported b} substantial evidence contained in a written record. http://wireless.fcc.gov/siting/factl.html 10/3/2002 i,wc% ivauonai wireless lower wtmg?olicies, April 23, 1990 '(iv) No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement. construction. and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions. '(v) Any person adversely affected by any final action or failure to act by a State or local government or any instrumentality thereof that is inconsistent with this subparagraph may, within 30 days after such action or failure to act, commence an action in any court of competent jurisdiction. The court shall hear and decide such action on an expedited basis. Any person adversely affected by an act or failure to act by a State or local government or any instrumentality thereof that is inconsistent with clause (iv) may petition the Commission for relief. '(C) DEFINITIONS- For purposes of this paragraph -- '(i) the term 'personal wireless services' means commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless exchange access services; '(ii) the term 'personal wireless service facilities' means facilities for the provision of personal wireless services: and '(iii) the term 'unlicensed wireless service' means the offering of telecommunications services using duly authorized devices which do not require individual licenses, but does not mean the provision of direct -to -home satellite services (as defined in section 303(v)).'. (b) RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS- Within 180 days after the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall complete action in ET Docket 9;-62 to prescribe and make effective rules regarding the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions. (c) AVAILABILITY OF PROPERTY- Within 180 days of the enactment of this .Act, the President or his designee shall prescribe procedures b} which Federal departments and agencies may make available on a fair. nondiscriminatory basis, property, rights-of-wa} . and easements under their control for the placement of new telecommunications services that are dependent. in whole or in part, upon the utilization of Federal spectrum rights for the transmission or reception of such services. These procedures may establish a presumption that requests for the use of property, rights-of-way. and easements by duly authorized providers should be (ranted absent unavoidable direct conflict with the department or agency's mission. or the current or planned use of the property, http://wireless.fcc.gov/siting/factl.html ?age D of I 10/3/2002 New National Wireless Tower Siting Policies, April 23, 1996 Page o of 1 u rights-of-way, and easements in question. Reasonable fees may be charged to providers of such telecommunications services for use of Property, rights-of-way, and easements. The Commission shall provide technical support to States to encourage them to make property, rights-of-way, and easements under their jurisdiction available for such purposes. TECHNICAL INFORMATION CONCERNING CELLULAR, SPECIALIZED MOBILE RADIO AND PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES April 1996 Cellular Information The FCC established rules and procedures for licensing cellular systems in the United States and its Possessions and Territories. These rules designated 306 Metropolitan Statistical Areas and 428 Rural Service Areas for a total of 734 cellular markets and spectrum was allocated to license 2 systems in each market. Cellular is allocated spectrum in the 824-849 and 869-894 MHz ranges. Cellular licensees are generally required to license only the tower locations that make up their outer service contour. Licensees desiring to add or modify any tower locations that are within an already approved and licensed service area do not have to submit an application for that location to be added to their cellular license, although they may need FCC approval if the antenna would constitute a major environmental action (See question 2, below) or would exceed the criteria specified in Part 17 of the FCC's Rules ("Construction, Marking and Lighting of Antenna Structures"). Part 17 includes criteria for determining when construction or placement of a tower would require prior notification to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). (See question 3, below.) A cellular system operates by dividing a large geographical service area into cells and assigning the same frequencies to multiple, non -adjacent cells. This is known in the industry as frequency reuse. As a subscriber travels across the service area the call is transferred (handed -off) from one cell to another without noticeable interruption. All the cells in a cellular system are connected to a Mobile Telephone Switching Office (MTSO) by landline or microwave links. The MTSO controls the switching between the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) and the cell site for all wireline -to -mobile and mobile - to -wireline calls. Specialized Mobile Radio (M) Information Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) service licensees provide land mobile communications on a commercial (i.e.. for profit) or private basis. A traditional SMR system consists of one or more base station transmitters. one or more antennas and end user radio equipment which often consists of a mobile radio unit either provided by the end user or obtained from the SMR operator. The base station receives either telephone transmissions from end users or low power signals from end user mobile radios. SMR systems operate in two distinct frequency ranges: 806-821/851-866 MHz (800 MHz) and 896- 901!9:5-940 MHz (900 MHz). 800 MHz SMR services have been licensed by the FCC on a site -by -site basis. so that the SMR provider must approach the FCC and receive a license for each and even, tower/base site. In the future the FCC will license this band on a wide -area market approach. 900 MHz SMR was originally licensed in 46 Designated Filing Areas (DFAs) comprised of only the top 50 markets in the country. The Commission is in the process of auctioning the remainder of the United http://wireless.fec.gov/siting/fact l .htm] 10/3/2002 New ivauonal Wireless lower Siting Policies, Apnl Ls, 1990 Page % of 1u States and its Possessions and Territories in the Rand McNally defined 51 Major Trading Areas. PCS Information Broadband PCS systems are very similar to the cellular systems but operate in a higher frequency band, in the 1850-1990 MHz range. One other difference is that the FCC used different market areas for licensing purposes. The FCC used the Rand McNally definitions for 51 Major.Trading Areas (MTAs) and 493 Basic Trading Areas (BTAs). PCS was allocated spectrum for six Broadband PCS systems and 26 Narrowband systems. The six Broadband PCS systems will be licensed as follows: two Broadband PCS licenses will be issued for each of the 51 MTAs and four for each of the 493 BTAs. The 26 Narrowband systems will be licensed as follows: eleven Narrowband PCS licenses will be issued for nationwide systems, six for each of five regional areas, seven for each of the 51 MTAs and two for each of the 493 BTAs. PCS licensees are issued a blanket license for their entire market area and are not required to submit applications to license individual cell sites unless construction of the facility would be a major environmental action or would require FAA notification. Major environmental actions are defined by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 that is discussed in question 2, below. Therefore, the FCC has no technical'information on file concerning PCS base stations. Frequently asked questions concerning tower siting for personal wireless services. 1. Do local zoning authorities have any authority to deny.a request for tower siting? Answer: Yes. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 specifically leaves in place the authority that local zoning authorities have over the placement of personal wireless facilities. It does prohibit the denial of facilities siting based on RF emissions if the licensee has complied with the FCC's regulations concerning RF emissions. It also requires that denials be based on a reasoned approach, and prohibits discrimination and outright bans on construction, placement and modification of personal wireless facilities. 2. What requirements do personal wireless communications licensees have to determine whether a site is in a flood plain? A historical sites must also comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). as well as other mandatory federal environmental statutes. The FCC's rules that implement the federal environmental statutory provisions ire contained in sections 1.1301- 1.1319. The FCC's environmental rules place the responsibility on each applicant to investigate all the potential environmental effects, and disclose any significant effects on the environment in an Environmental Assessment (EA), as outlined in section 1.1311, prior to constructing a tower. The applicant is required to consult section 1.1307 to determine if its proposed antenna structure will fall under any of the listed categories that may significantly affect the environment. If it does, the applicant must provide an EA prior to proceeding with the tower construction and. under section 1.1312, must await FCC approval before commencing any such construction even if FCC approval is not otherwise required for such construction. The FCC places all proposals that may significantly impact the environment on public notice for a period of 30 days, seeking any public comments on the proposed structures. The categories set forth in section 1.1307 include: Wilderness Area http://Wireless.fcc.gov/siting/factl.html 10/3/2002 iNe" i,,auonal Wireless l ower Jitmg Policies, April 2S, lyyo Wildlife Preserve Endangered Species Historical Site Indian Religious Site Flood Plain Wetlands High Intensity White Lights in Residential Neighborhoods Excessive Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure 3. Are there any FCC regulations that govern where towers can or cannot be placed? Page 8 of 10 Answer: The FCC mandates that personal wireless companies build out their systems so that adequate service is provided to the public. In addition, all antenna structures used for communications must be approved by the FCC in accordance with Part 17 of the FCC Rules. The FCC must determine if there is a reasonable possibility that the structure may constitute a menace to air navigation. The tower height and its proximity to an airport or flight path will be considered when making this determination. If such a determination is made the FCC will specify appropriate painting and lighting requirements. Thus, the FCC does not mandate where towers must be placed. but it may prohibit the placement of a tower in a particular location without adequate lighting and marking. 4. Does the FCC maintain any records on tower sites throughout the United States? How does the public get this information (if any)? Answer: The FCC maintains a general tower database on the following structures: (1) any towers over 200 feet. (21 any towers over 20 feet on an existing structure (such as a building, water tower, etc.) and f ; ) towers that are close to airports that may cause potential hazards to air navigation. The FCC's licensing databases contain some base site information for Cellular and SMR systems. The general tower database and the Cellular and SMR data that may be on file with the FCC is available in three places: (1 ) Cellular licensing information is available in the Public Reference Room of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau's Commercial Wireless Division. The Public Reference Room is located on the fifth floor of 2025 M Street, NW, Washington, DC 20554, telephone (202) 418-1350. On-line database searches of cellular licensing information along with queries of the FCC's general tower database can also be accomplished at the Public Reference Room. (2) People who would like to obtain general tower information through an on-line public access database should call or write Interactive Systems, Inc., 1601 North Kent St.. Suite 1103. Arlington. VA 22209. telephone 703-812-8270. http://witeless.fcc.-ov/siting/factl.html 10/3/2002 ivew 'National Wireless lower Siting Policies, April 23, 1996 Page 9 of 10 (3) The FCC does not duplicate these records, but has contracted with International Transcription Service, Inc. to provide this service. Requests for copies of information should be addressed to International Transcription Service, Inc. (ITS, Inc.), 2100 M St.. NW, Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037, telephone 202-857-3800. 5. Why do Cellular and PCS providers require so many tower sites? Answer: Low powered transmitters are an inherent characteristic of Cellular Radio and Broadband PCS. As these systems mature and more subscribers are added, the effective radiated power of the cell site transmitters is reduced so frequencies can be reused at closer intervals thereby increasing subscriber capacity. There are over 30 million mobile/portable cellular units and more than 22 thousand cell sites operating within the United States and its Possessions and Territories. PCS is just beginning to be offered around the country. Due to the fact that Broadband PCS is located in a higher frequency range. PCS operators will require more tower sites as they build their systems to provide coverage in their service areas as compared to existing Cellular carriers. Therefore, due to the nature of frequency reuse and the consumer demand for services, Cellular and PCS providers must build numerous base sites. 6. Can Cellular, SMR and PCS providers share tower structures? Answer: Yes, it is technologically possible for these entities to share tower structures. However, there are limits to how many base station transmitters a single tower can hold and different tower structures have different limits. Moreover, these providers are competitors in a more and more competitive marketplace and may not be willing to share tower space with each other. Local zoning authorities may wish to retain a consulting engineer to evaluate the proposals submitted by wireless communications licensees. The consulting engineer may be able to determine if there is some flexibility as to the geographic location of the tower. 7. is the Federal government helping to find ways to accommodate multiple licensees of personal wireless services? Answer: Yes. The FCC has designated Steve Markendorff, Chief, Broadband Branch, Commercial Fireless Division. Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, FCC to as and respond to questions conceming lower siting issues. His telephone number is 202-418-0620. Also, President Clinton issued an Executive Memorandum on August 10, 1995 directing the Administrator of General Services (GSA), in coordination with other Government departments and agencies, to develop procedures to facilitate appropriate access to Federal property for the siting of mobile services antennas. GSA recently released "Government -Wide Procedures for Placing Commercial Antennas," 61 Fed Reg 14,100 (March 29, 1996). For further information contact James Herbert. Office of Property Acquisition and Realty Services. Public Building Service, General Services Administration, 18th & F Streets, NW, Washington, DC 20405. telephone 202-501-0376. 8. Have any studies been completed on potential hazards of locating a tower/base site close to residential communities? Answer: In connection with its responsibilities under NEPA, the FCC considers the potential effects of radiofrequency (RF) emissions from FCC -regulated transmitters on human health and safety. Since the http://wireless.fcc.gov/siting/factl.html 10/3/2002 New National Wireless 1 ower biting Policies, April 2.3, 1990 Page lu of lu FCC is not the expert agency in this area, it uses standards and guidelines developed by those with the appropriate expertise. For example, in the absence of a uniform federal standard on RF exposure, the FCC has relied since 1985 on the RF exposure guidelines issued in 1982 by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI C95.1-1982). In 1991, the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) issued guidelines designed to replace the RF ANSI exposure guidelines. These guidelines (ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992) were adopted by ANSI. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 mandates that the FCC complete its proceeding in ET Docket 93-62, in which it is considering updating the RF exposure guidelines, no later than early August 1996. Copies of this proceeding can be obtained from the International Transcription Service, Inc. (ITS), telephone 202-857-3800. Presently, RF emission . requirements are contained in Section 1.1307(b) of the FCC's rules , 47 C.F.R. § 1.1307(b), for all services. PCS has service specific RF emission provisions in Section 24.52 of the FCC's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 24.52. Additional information concerning RF emission hazards can be obtained through a variety of sources: (1) Information concerning RF hazards can be obtained on the World Wide Web at http://www.fcc.gov/oet/faqs. RF safety questions are answered and further RF documents and information are contained under the Cellular Telephony Section. (2) OET Bulletins 56 and 65 concerning effects and potential RF hazards can be requested through the Radiofrequency Safety Program at 202-418-2464. Additionally, any specific questions concerning RF hazards can be answered by contacting the FCC at this phone number. The FCC maintains a Communications and Crisis Management Center which is staffed 24 hours a day, seven days a week. In the event of an emergency, such as a radiofrequency hazard threatening public safety or health, you may call 202-632-6975. The watch officer who answers at that number can contact our compliance personnel in your area and dispatch them within a matter of hours. http://wireless.fec.gov/siting/factl.html 10/3/2002 0h --Human Exposure To Radiofrequency Fields From Cellular and PCS Radio Transmitt Page 1 of b CCFederal FCC Home I Search I Updates I E -Filing I Initiative=_ j =or Consumers Communications Find People Commission Office of Engineering and Technology FCC > OET > RF Safely > Cellular/PCS RF exposure OET Index OET Organization Chart Information On Human Exposure To Office Functions Radiofrequency Fields From Cellular and PCS Radio Spectrum Home Page Radio Transmitters January 1998 (1) Cellular and PCS base stations Radiofrequencies constitute part of the overall electromagnetic spectrum. Cellular communications systems use frequencies in the 800-900 megahertz (MHz) portion of the radiofrequency (RF) spectrum (frequencies formerly used for UHF -TV broadcasting), and transmitters in the Personal Communications Service (PCS) use frequencies in the range of 1850-1990 MHz. Primary antennas for cellular and PCS transmissions are usually located on towers, water tanks and other elevated structures including rooftops and the sides of buildings. The combination of antennas and associated electronic equipment is referred to as a cellular or PCS base station" or "cell site." Typical heights for base station towers or structures are 50-200 feet. A typical cellular base station may utilize several 'omni -directional" antennas that look like poles or whips, 10 to 15 feet in length. PCS (and also many cellular) base stations use a number of "sector" antennas that look like rectangular panels. The dimensions of a sector antenna are typically 1 foot by 4 feet. Antennas are usually arranged in three groups of three with one antenna in each group used to transmit signals to mobile units (car phones or hand-held phones). The other two antennas in each group are used to receive signals from mobile units. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) authorizes cellular and PCS carriers in various service areas around the country. At a cell site, the total RF power that could be transmitted from each transmitting antenna at a cell site depends on the number of radio channels (transmitters) that have been authorized and the power of each transmitter. Typically, for a cellular base station, a maximum of 21 channels per sector (depending on the system) could be used. Thus, for a typical cell site utilizing sector antennas, each of the three transmitting antennas could be connected to up to 21 transmitters for a total of 63 transmitters per site. When omni -directional antennas are used, up to 96 transmitters could be implemented at a cell site, but this would be very unusual, While a typical base station could have as many as 63 transmitters, not all of the transmitters would be expected to operate simultaneously thus reducing overall emission levels. For the case of PCS base stations, fewer transmitters are normally required due to the relatively greater number of base stations. Although the FCC permits an effective radiated power (ERP) of up to 500 hnp:/iwww.fcc.,aov/oet/rfsafety/celipcs.html 10/3/2002 UE1 --Human Fxposure To Radiofrequency Fields From Cellular and PCS Radio Transm:... Page 2 of 6 watts per channel (depending on the tower height), the majority of cellular base stations in urban and suburban areas operate at an ERP of 100 watts per channel or less. An ERP of 100 watts corresponds to an actual radiated power of 5-10 watts, depending on the type of antenna used (ERP is not equivalent to the power that is radiated but is a measure of the directional characteristics of the antenna). As the capacity of a system is expanded by dividing cells, i.e., adding additional base stations, lower ERPs are normally used. In urban areas, an ERP of 10 watts per channel (corresponding to a radiated power of 0.5 - 1 watt) or less is commonly used. For PCS base stations, even lower radiated power levels are normally used. The signal from a cellular or PCS base station antenna is essentially directed toward the horizon in a relatively narrow beam in the vertical plane. For example, the radiation pattern for an omni -directional antenna might be compared to a thin doughnut or pancake centered around the antenna while the pattern for a sector antenna is fan -shaped, like a wedge cut from a pie. As with all forms of electromagnetic energy, the power density from a cellular or PCS transmitter decreases rapidly (according to an inverse square law) as one moves away from the antenna. Consequently, normal ground -level exposure is much less than exposures that might be encountered if one were very close to the antenna and in its main transmitted beam. Measurements made near typical cellular and PCS installations have shown that ground -level power densities are well below limits recommended by RF/microwave safety standards. In 1996, the FCC adopted updated guidelines for evaluating human exposure to radiofrequency (RF) fields from fixed transmitting antennas such as those used for cellular radio and PCS base stations'. The new guidelines for cellular and PCS base stations are identical to those recommended by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP)Z. These guidelines are also similar to the 1992 guidelines recommended by the American National Standards Institute and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992)3. The FCC adopted guidelines for hand-held RF devices, such as cellular and PCS phones, that are the same as those recommended by the ANSI/IEEE and NCRP guidelines (see later discussion). In the case of cellular base station transmitters, at a frequency of 869 MHz (the lowest frequency used), the FCC's RF exposure guidelines recommend a maximum permissible exposure level of the general public (or exposure in "uncontrolled" environments) of about 580 microwatts per square centimeter (PW/cm2), as averaged over any thirty -minute period. This limit is many times greater than RF levels typical found near the base of typical cellular towers or in the vicinity of other, lower - powered cellular base station transmitters. For example, measurement data obtained from various sources have consistently indicated that "worst-case" ground -level power densities near typical cellular towers are on the order of 1 pW/cm2 or less (usually significantly less). Calculations corresponding to a "worst-case" situation (all transmitters operating simultaneously and continuously at the maximum licensed power) show that in order to be exposed to levels near the FCC's limits for cellular frequencies, an individual would essentially have to remain in http://www.fec.gov/oet/rfsafety/cellpes.html 10/3/2002 UZ I --Human hxposure 1 o kadiotrequency kields J-rom Cellular and PCS Radio 'I Page 3 of 6 the main transmitting beam (at the height of the antenna) and within a few feet from the antenna. This makes it extremely unlikely that a member of the general public could be exposed to RF levels in excess of these guidelines from cellular base station transmitters. For PCS base station transmitters, the same type of analysis holds, except that at the PCS transmitting frequencies (1850-1990 MHz) the FCC's exposure limits for the public are 1000 pW/cm2. Therefore, there would typically be an even greater margin of safety between actual public exposure levels and the recognized safety limit. When cellular and PCS antennas are mounted at rooftop locations it is possible that RF levels greater than 1 pW/cm2 could be present on the rooftop itself. This might become an issue if the rooftop were accessible to maintenance personnel or others. However, exposures approaching or exceeding the safety guidelines are only likely to be encountered very close to and directly in front of the antennas. Even if RF levels were to be higher than desirable on a rooftop, appropriate restrictions could be placed on access. Factoring in the time -averaging aspects of safety standards could also be used to reduce potential exposure. The fact that rooftop cellular and PCS antennas usually operate at lower power levels than antennas on free-standing towers makes excessive exposure conditions on rooftops even less likely. This reason and the significant signal attenuation of a building's roof also minimizes any chance for harmful exposure of persons living or working within the building itself. (2) Mobile (vehicle -mounted) antennas Vehicle -mounted antennas used for cellular communications normally operate at a power level of 3 watts or less. These cellular antennas are typically mounted on the roof, on the trunk, or on the rear window of a car or truck. Studies have shown that in order to be exposed to RF levels that approach the safety guidelines it would be necessary to remain very close to a vehicle -mounted cellular antenna. For example, a study done for AT&T Bell Laboratories by the University of Washington documented typical and "worst-case" exposure levels and specific absorption rates (SAR) for vehicle occupants and persons standing close to vehicle - mounted cellular antennas. Worst-case exposure conditions were considered when an individual was at the closest possible distance from the antenna. Several configurations were tested using adult and child "phantom" models. The results of this study showed that the highest exposure (1900 pW/cm2) occurred with a female model at a distance of 9.7 cm (3.8 inches) from one of the antennas operating at a power level of 3 watts. Although this levef is nominally in excess of the FCC's exposure limits for power density at this frequency, analysis of the data indicated that the antenna would have to be driven to 7 W of power before the limit for specific absorption rate (SAR) allowed by the FCC guidelines would be exceeded. The intermittent nature of transmission and the improbability that a person would remain so close to the antenna for any length of time further reduces the potential for excessive exposure. The University of Washington study also indicated that vehicle occupants are effectively shielded by the metal body. Motorola, Inc., in comments http://N-�Au.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety/cellpcs.html 10/3/2002 Ur; i --Human hxposure 1 o kaWouequency Melds I-rom Cellular and PCs Radio 1 ransm:... Page 4 oI o filed with the FCC, has expressed the opinion that proper installation of a vehicle -mounted antenna to maximize the shielding effect is an effective way of limiting exposure. Motorola and other companies have recommended antenna installation either in the center of the roof or the center of the trunk. In response to concerns expressed over the commonly -used rear -window mounted cellular antennas, Motorola has recommended a minimum separation distance of 30-60 cm (1 -2 feet) to minimize exposure to vehicle occupants resulting from antenna mismatch for this type of antenna installation. In summary, from data gathered to date, it appears that properly installed, vehicle- mounted, personal wireless transceivers using up to 3 watts of power would result in maximum exposure levels in or near the vehicle that are well below the FCC's safety limits. This assumes that the transmitting antenna is at least 15 cm (about 6 inches) or more from vehicle occupants. Time -averaging of exposure (either a 6 or 30 minute period is specified) will usually result in still lower values when compared with safety guidelines. (3) Hand-held cellular telephones and PCS devices A question that often arises is whether there may be potential health risks due to the RF emissions from hand-held cellular telephones and PCS devices. The FCC's exposure guidelines, and the ANSI/IEEE and NCRP guidelines upon which they are based, specify limits for human exposure to RF emissions from hand-held RF devices in terms of specific absorption rate (SAR). For exposure of the general public, e.g:, exposure of the user of a cellular or PCS phone, the SAR limit is an absorption threshold of 1.6 watts/kg (W/kg), as measured over any one gram of tissue. Measurements and computational analysis of SAR in models of the human head and other studies of SAR distribution using hand-held cellular and PCS phones have shown that, in general, the 1.6 W/kg limit is unlikely to be exceeded under normal conditions of use. Before FCC approval can be granted for marketing of a cellular or PCS phone, compliance with the 1.6 W/kg limit must be demonstrated. Also, testing of hand-held phones is normally done under conditions of maximum power usage. In reality, normal power usage is less and is dependent on distance of the user from the base station transmitter. In recent years publicity, speculation and concern over claims of possible health effects due to RF fields from hand-held wireless telephones prompted industry -sponsored groups, such as Wireless Technology Research, L.L.C. (WTR) and Motorola, Inc., to initiate research programs aimed at investigating whether there is any risk to users of these devices. Past studies carried out at frequencies both higher and lower than those used for cellular and PCS phones have led expert organizations to conclude that typical RF exposures from these devices are safe. However, the Federal Government is monitoring the results of the ongoing industry -sponsored research through an inter -agency working group led by the EPA and the FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health. http:/1wwH.fcc.Pv/oet/rfsafety/cellpcs.html 10/3/2002 UE1 --Human Exposure To Radiofrequency Fields From Cellular and PCS Radio Transco... Page 5 of b In a 1993 "Talk Paper," the FDA stated that It did not have enough information at that time to rule out the possibility of risk, but if such a risk exists "it is probably small." The FDA concluded that there is no proof that cellular telephones can be harmful, but if individuals remain concerned several precautionary actions could be taken. These included limiting conversations on hand-held cellular telephones to those that are essential and making greater use of telephones with vehicle -mounted antennas where there is a greater separation distance between the user and the radiating structure. NOTE: For more information on these and other RF -related topics, you may call the FCC's toll-free number: 1 -888 -CALL FCC (1-888-225-5322) or contact the FCC's RF Safety Program, in the Office of Engineering and Technology, at (202) 418-2464. Information is also available at the FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology World Wide Web Site under the "RF Safety" heading at the following address: http://www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafe /. Endnotes: 1. FCC Report and Order in ET Docket 93-62, 61 Federal Register 41006 (August 7, 1996); 11 FCC Record 15123 (1997). See also, FCC Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, ET Docket 93-62, 62 Federal Register 47960 (September 12, 1997), 12 FCC Record 13494 (1997). For more information on these documents contact the FCC's toll-free number: 1 -888 -CALL FCC (1-888-225-5322). They may also be viewed and downloaded at the FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology World Wide Web Site under the "RF Safety" heading at the following address: www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety. The FCC's RF exposure guidelines are based on recommendations made to the FCC by U.S. federal safety and health agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA'), the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2. The NCRP is a non-profit corporation chartered by congress to develop information and recommendations concerning radiation protection. 3. The American National Standards Institute is a non-profit, privately -funded, membership organization that coordinates development of voluntary national standards in the United States. The IEEE is a non-profit technical and professional engineering society. Last Updated/Reviewed on: Thursday, September 20, 2001 FCC Home I Search Updates I E -Filing I Initiatives I For Consumers I Find People hnp://wv<u.fcc.gov/oct/rfsafety/cellpcs.html 10/3/2002 OET --Human Exposure To Radiofrequency Fields From Cellular and PCS Radio Transm.... Page 6 of o If you have questions about this web page or would like more information pertaining to OET please send email to cetinfoCa fcc.qov Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street SW Washington, DC 20554 More FCC Contact Information Phone: 888 -CALL -FCC (225 - TTY: 888 -TELL -FCC (835-5322) Fax: 202-418-0232 E-mail: fccinfoCcbfcc dov - Web Policies & Privacy - Customer Service Standards - Freedom of Information Act http://wuu.fcc.goy/oet/rfsafety/cellpes.html 10/3/2002 FCC and Local Government Advisory Group Release "Plain English" Guide on Antenna En Page I of This News Release: Text I Word97 The Guide: W orde7 T Acrobat r . NEWS Federal. Communications Commission 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 News media information 202 / 418-0500 Fax -On -Demand 202 / 418-2830 Internet: http:/iwwwAc.Qov TTY: 202/418-2555 This is an unofficial announcement of Commission action. Release of the full text of a Commission order constitutes official action. See MCI v. FCC. 515 F 2d 385 (D.C. Circ 1974). FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 2, 2000 NEWS MEDIA CONTACT David Fiske 202-418-0513 FCC AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT ADVISORY GROUP RELEASE "PLAIN ENGLISH" GUIDE ON ANTENNA EMISSION HEALTH AND SAFETY; DESIGNED TO HELP LOCAL OFFICIALS AND COMMUNITIES Washington - - The FCC and the Local and State Government Advisory Committee (LSGAC) today released a "plain -English" guide on radiofrequency (RF) emissions to assist local governments and individual citizens in better understanding the origin and application of FCC safety rules to safeguard public health from RF exposure. The handbook was issued at a meeting today of the LSGAC. The guide, entitled "A Local Government Official's Guide to RF Emission Antenna Safety: Rules, Procedures, and Practical Guidance." is available on the FCC's RF safety web page at uA\Ic.fec.<_ovioetirfsafety. It is also available on the LSGAC website at 1\ wN\.lcc.L,0\^Stat6gW. The -2uide is designed to provide local communities with a greater understanding of RF emission issues and comprehensive information and guidance in devising efficient procedures for assuring that local antenna facilities comply with the FCC's limits for human exposure to RF electromagnetic fields. It is designed to answer in clear, understandable language the questions of elected officials and local residents alike on the impact of antenna towers on communitc health. A purpose of the guide is to inform citizens and to help state and local government officials pla' an important role in ensuring that innovative and beneficial communications services in the wireless telecommunications and broadcast industries are provided to the public in a manner consistent with public health and safety. FCC Chairman William Kennard said. "I commend LSGAC for its tremendous effort toward developing this guide. I believe the guide will be an invaluable resource for countless communities around this nation." LSGAC Chairman Kenneth Fellman said. "LSGAC welcomes the opportunity, to join with the FCC in increasing public access to quality information about the health effects of RF emissions. Efforts such as this Guide demonstrate both the importance we attach to our public accountability as elected officials. and the FCC's commitment to support that accountability http:/iwww.fcc. sovBureaus/Engineering_Technology/News_Releases/2000/nret0008.htm1 10/3/2002 1•lA, and Local Uovernment Advisory Group Release "Plain English" Guide on Antenna F... Page 2 of through vigorous enforcement of their existing RF Guidelines." The guide explains the process whereby federal, state and local agencies with expertise in health and safety issues, including the EPA and FDA, assisted the FCC in establishing consensus limits for human exposure to RF emissions. It says the limits themselves are set many times below levels generally accepted as having the potential to cause adverse health effects. The guide explains the RF exposure limits themselves, how they are derived, their margin of safety and how exposure is calculated. It describes the FCC's requirements for broadcasters and wireless telecommunications providers to comply with the RF emission limits. It discusses FCC procedures to verify compliance with the RF exposure guidelines, particularly in reviewing license applications for new, renewed or modified facilities. The guide also provides information as to how local officials can identify, in a manner not burdensome to either the officials or the service providers, facilities that are unlikely to raise issues of compliance with the federal guidelines. It focuses on the FCC limits for human exposure to RF emissions. It does not address other issues falling generally under the jurisdiction of state and local governments, such as construction, antenna siting, permits, inspections, zoning, or environmental review. Topics in the guide discussed in text, charts, illustrations and check -off lists include: u What an RF signal is, where various services that produce RF emissions fit into the radiofrequency spectrum, and ways different RF frequencies can result in different levels of maximum permissible exposure under the guidelines. u The methodology, in clear English, the FCC used to develop its guidelines for human exposure to RF emissions. x An explanation of how to apply the guidelines. x Discussion of how local officials and citizens can initially contact a facility's operator regarding any questions about compliance. x Instructions as to how local officials and citizens can contact the FCC with any compliance questions they have after communicating with the facility's operator. x Explanations of procedures to determine compliance and to bring violators of the guidelines into compliance. x Explanations and comparisons of determining RF emission measurements for facilities with single antennas as opposed to multiple antennas. x A checklist for determining which kinds of facilities are by their very nature highly unlikely to result in RF exposure in excess of the guideline limits, and therefore are excluded from processing procedures. x A list of transmitters, facilities and operations subject to routine environmental evaluation. http://www.fec.govBureaus/Engineering_Technology/News_Releases/2000/nret0008.htm1 10/3/2002 FCC and Local Government Advisory Group Release 'Plain English" Guide on Antenna F... Page 3 of 3 x An appendix listing distances that should be maintained from single cellular. PCS and paging base station antennas. The FCC and the LSGAC said this handbook highlights many of the most common concerns and questions connected with the process of siting wireless telecommunications and broadcast antennas. They said it will allow local officials to make initial judgments whether RF emissions are and should be of concern, consistent with FCC regulations, and is designed to insure that FCC and state and local officials can work together to ensure public health and safety. -FCC- FCC Contacts: Jeffrey Steinberg (WTB) 202-418-0620: Robert Cleveland (OET) 202-418-2464; Bruce Romano (MMB) 202-418-2120 LSGAC Contacts: Kenneth Fellman, Chairperson, 303-320-6100; Marilyn J. Praisner, Vice Chairperson, 240-777-7968; Jonathan L. Kramer, Technology Advisor, 818-344-5100 http://vim .fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/News_Releases/2000/nret0008.htm1 10/3/2002 Information on Human Exposure To R ... ellular and PCS Radio Transmitters http://www.fcc.gov/oevrfsafety/celipcs.hrml FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION OFFICE OF ENGINEERING & TECFLNOLOGY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 January 1998 INFORMATION ON HUMAN EXPOSURE TO RADIOFREQUENCY FIELDS FROM CELLULAR AND PCS RADIO TRANSMITTERS (1) Cellular and PCS base stations Radiofrequencies constitute part of the overall electromagnetic spectrum. Cellular communications systems use frequencies in the 800-900 megahertz (MHz) portion of the radiofrequency (RF) spectrum (frequencies formerly used for UHF -TV broadcasting), and transmitters in the Personal Communications Service (PCS) use frequencies in the range of 1850-1990 MHz. Primary antennas for cellular and PCS transmissions are usually located on towers, water tanks and other elevated structures including rooftops and the sides of buildings. The combination of antennas and associated electronic equipment is referred to as a cellular or PCS base station" or "cell site." Typical heights for base station towers or structures are 50-200 feet. A typical cellular base station may utilize several "omni -directional" antennas that look like poles or whips. 10 to 15 feet in length. PCS (and also many cellular) base stations use a number of "sector" antennas that look like rectangular panels. The dimensions of a sector antenna are typically 1 foot by 4 feet, Antennas are usually arranged in three groups of three with one antenna in each group used to transmit signals to mobile units (car phones or hand-held phones). The other two antennas in each group are used to receive signals from mobile tints. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) authorizes cellular and PCS carriers in various service areas around the country. At a cell site, the total RF power that could be transmitted from each transmitting antenna at a cell site depends on the number of radio channels (transmitters) that have been authorized and the power of each transmitter. Typically, for a cellular base station, a maximum of 21 channels per sector (depending on the system) could be used. Thus, for a typical cell site utilizing sector antennas. each of the three transmitting antennas could be connected to up to 21 transmitters for a total of 63 transmitters per site. When omni -directional antennas are used. up to 96 transmitters could be implemented at a cell site, but this would be very unusual. While a npical base station could have as mane as 63 transmitters, not all of the transmitters would be expected to operate simultaneously thus reducing overall emission levels. For the case of PCS base stations, fewer transmitters are normally required due to the relatively greater number of base stations. Although the FCC permits an effective radiated power (ERP) of up to 500 watts per channel (depending on the tower height), the majority of cellular base stations in urban and suburban areas operate at an ERP of 100 warts per channel or less. An ERP of 100 watts corresponds to an actual radiated power of 5-10 watts. depending on the type of antenna used (ERP is not equivalent to the power that is radiated but is a measure of the directional characteristics of the antenna). As the capacity of a system is expanded by dividing cells, i.e.. adding additional base stations, lower ERPs are normally used. In urban areas, an ERP of 10 watts per channel (corresponding to a radiated power of 0.5 - 1 watt) or less is commonly Information on Human Exposure To R...ellular and PCs Radio Transmitters http://www.fcc.govpoet/rfsafety/celipcs.hrmi safety guidelines it would be necessarc to remain very close to a vehicle -mounted cellular antenna. For example, a study done for AT&T Bell Laboratories by the University of Washington documented typical and "worst-case" exposure levels and specific absorption rates (SAR) for vehicle occupants and persons standing close to vehicle -mounted cellular antennas. Worst-case exposure conditions were considered when an individual was at the closest possible distance from the antenna. Several configurations were tested using adult and child "phantom" models. The results of this study showed that the highest exposure (1900 µW/cm2) occurred with a female model at a distance of 9.7 cm (3.8 inches) from one of the antennas operating at a power level of 3 watts. Although this level is nominally in excess of the FCC's exposure limits for power density at this frequency, analysis of the data indicated that the antenna would have to be driven to 7 W of power before the limit for specific absorption rate (SAR) allowed by the FCC guidelines would be exceeded. The intermittent nature of transmission and the improbability that a person would remain so close to the antenna for any length of time further reduces the potential for excessive exposure. The University of Washington study also indicated that vehicle occupants are effectively shielded by the metal body. Motorola, Inc., in comments filed with the FCC, has expressed the opinion that proper installation of a vehicle -mounted antenna to maximize the shielding effect is an effective way of limiting exposure. Motorola and other companies have recommended antenna installation either in the center of the roof or the center of the trunk. In response to concerns expressed over the commonly -used rear -window mounted cellular antennas. Motorola has recommended a minimum separation distance of 30-60 cm (1 -2 feet) to minimize exposure to vehicle occupants resulting from antenna mismatch for this type of antenna installation. In summary, from data gathered to date, it appears that properly installed, vehicle- mounted, personal wireless transceivers using up to 3 watts of power would result in maximum exposure levels in or near the vehicle that are well below the FCC's safety limits. This assumes that the transmitting antenna is at least 15 cm (about 6 inches) or more from vehicle occupants. Time -averaging of exposure (either a 6 or 30 minute period is specified) will usually result in still lower values when compared with safety guidelines. (3) Hand-held cellular telephones and PCS devices A question that often arises is whether there may be potential health risks due to the RF emissions from hand-held cellular telephones and PCS devices. The FCC's exposure guidelines, and the ANSI/IEEE and NCRP guidelines upon which they are based, specify limits for human exposure to RF emissions from hand-held RF devices in terms of specific absorption rate (SAR). For exposure of the general public, e.g.. exposure of the user of a cellular or PCS phone, the SAR limit is an absorption threshold of 1.6 watts/kg (W/kg), as measured over any one gram of tissue. Measurements and computational analysis of SAR in models of the human head and other studies of SAR distribution using hand-held cellular and PCS phones have shown that, in general, the 1.6 W/kg limit is unlikely to be exceeded under normal conditions of use. Before FCC approval can be granted for marketing of a cellular or PCS phone. compliance with the 1.6 W/kg limit must be demonstrated. Also, testing of hand-held phones is normally done under conditions of maximum power usage. In reality, normal power usage is less and is dependent on distance of the user from the base station transmitter. In recent vears publicity, speculation and concern over claims of possible health effects due to RF fields from hand-held wireless telephones prompted industry -sponsored groups, such as Wireless Technology Research. L.L.C. (WTR) and Motorola. Inc., to initiate research programs aimed at investigating whether there is anv risk to users of these devices. Past studies carried out at frequencies both higher and lower than those used for cellular and PCS phones have led expert organizations to conclude that typical RF exposures from these devices are safe. However, the Federal Government is monitoring the results of the ongoing industry -sponsored research through an inter -agency working group led by the EPA and the FDA's Center for Devices and Radioloeical Health. In a 1993 "Talk Paper," the FDA stated that it did not have enough information at that time to rule out Radiofrequency FAQs Page http://www.fcc-govioevrfsafery/rf-faqs.hrmi Question: When are the Commission's new exposure limits effective? Answer: The Commission released the 2nd- Memorandum Opinion and Order on August 25, 1997 extending the effective date of compliance to October 15, 1997 for all services except the Amateur Radio Service. The Amateur Radio Service has until January 1, 1998. The effective date for mobile and portable devices was August 7, 1996. In the interim, all non -excluded services, except the Personal Communications Service, should continue to evaluate compliance base on the ANSI 1982 exposure guidelines. PCS base stations are required to comply with the ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992 guidelines. Question: When will the revised OST Bulletin No. 65 (OET Bulletin 65) be available to the public? Answer: The Commission issued the revised OET Bulletin Number 65 on August 25, 1997. It is currently available for downloading athtto://www.fcc.eov/oet/info/documents/bulletins/#65. Hard copies may be obtained by calling 202-418-2464. Question: Has the FCC adopted the new ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992 guidelines as proposed? Answer: The FCC is primarily a regulatory agency and is not an expert on matters pertaining to health and safety. The Commission generally followed the recommendations of expert health and safety agencies such as the EPA, FDA, OSHA, NIOSH, and others, to adopt field and power density limits as recommended by the NCRP Report No. 86 and the SAR limits from the ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992 guidelines. Question: Is the FCC going to preempt local and state government regulations relating to radiation guidelines and aesthetics? Answer: Congress has passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, P.L. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56(1996). Section 704 of the Act amend the Communications Act by providing federal preemption of state and local regulation of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of RF environmental effects. The Telecommunications Act also provides for resolution of conflicts related to the regulation of RF emissions by the courts or by petition to the Commission. Accordingly, we have amended § 1.1307 of our rules to incorporate the provisions of Section 704 of the Act. You may contact the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau at (202)418-1310 for further guidance with respect to the Commission's policies implementing the Telecommunications Act of 1996. In addition, the Wireless Telecomunications Bureau (WTB) released an NPRM on August 25, 1997. Please see 20' Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for further information. Question: Is it safe to use a cellular phone? Answer: The ANSI/IEEE and NCRP RF safety, guidelines recommend that low-power devices such as cellular hand-held phones not cause a localized exposure in excess of specific absorption rate (SAR) of l .6 is aStudies of human head models using cellular phones have generally reported that the SAR levels are below 1.6 W/kg level as averaged over 1 gram of tissue under normal conditions of use. However. some recent studies have reported higher peak levels under "worst-case" conditions that suggest the need for further dosimetric studies. of 3 08/27/1999 3:49 PM Radiofrequency FAQs Page hrtp:/iwww.rcc.gov/oetirfsafetyirt-taqs.niTni Question: Is spatial or time averaging allowed with respect to Maximum Permissible Exposure limits for field strength and power density? Answer: Yes, both the IEEE C95.3-1991 and NCRP Report No. 119 provide information on spatial and time averaging. The NCRP states, "the concept of spatial and time averaging may be appropriate from o thermal standpoint due to the dynamics of the body's thermal regulation characteristics." The premise of spatial averaging is that the human body can regulate the thermal load caused by high localized exposures as long as the total exposure does not exceed the whole body average limit. Similarly, the premise of time averaging is that the human body can regulate a specific thermal load within a given period. Thus, the human body can endure relatively high exposures for short periods of time as long as the average exposure does not exceed the exposure limit. For more information on this topic please note: OET Bulletin No. 56: Questions and Answers About the Biological Effects and Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Radiation. Any questions regarding this subject matter should be addressed to.- The o:The RF Safety Program F071 FFOCC Ome: FA s Home Last updated: June 1, 1998 3 of 3 08/27/1999 3:49 PM RF Safety Program Page http://www.fcc.govioet/rfsafetN The FCC is required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to evaluate the effect of emissions from FCC -regulated transmitters on the quality of the human environment. At the present time there is no federally -mandated radio frequency (RF) exposure standard. However, several non-government organizations, such as the American National Standards Institute ANSI), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE), and the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) have issued recommendations for human exposure to RF electromagnetic fields. The potential hazards associated with RF electromagnetic fields are discussed in OET Bulletin No. 56, "Questions and Answers About the Biological Effects and Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Radiation. " On August 1, 1996, the Commission adopted the NCRP's recommended Maximum Permissible Exposure limits for field strength and power density for the transmitters operating at frequencies of 300 kHz to 100 GHz. In addition, the Commission adopted the specific absorption rate (SAR) limits for devices operating within close proximity to the body as specified within the ANSMEEE C95.1-1992 guidelines. The Commission's requirements are detailed in Parts 1 and 2 of the FCC's Rules and Regulations [47 C.F.R. 1.1307(b), 1.1310, 2.1091, 2.1093]. Certain applicants will be required to routinely perform an environmental evaluation with respect to determining compliance with the Commission's exposure limits. In the event that an applicant determines the site is not within compliance, the submission of an Environmental Analysis is required. The SAR limits for portable and mobile devices became effective August 7, 1996. The Commission's limits for field strength and power density became effective October 15, 1997 (see 2°d MQ&O) for all services except the Amateur Radio Service. The new limits became effective for the Amateur Radio Service on January 1, 1998 (see First Memorandum Opinion and Order). Therefore, all new stations, modifications, renewals and new facilities constructed under a blanket license, will be evaluated with respect to the new limits after October 15, 1997. By September 1, 2000 all FCC licensees will be expected to be in compliance with the new limits. The following services and devices will be required to routinely perform an environmental evaluation unless below specified radiated power and antenna height requirements (see Report and Order for exclusion criteria) : • Experimental Radio Service - Part 5 • Radio Frequency Devices - Pan 15 • Multipoint Distribution Service - Part 21, subpart K • Paging and Radiotelephone Service - Part 22, subpart E • Cellular Radiotelephone Service - Part 22, subpart H • Personal Communications Services - Part 24 • Satellite Communications - Pan 25 • General Wireless Communications Service - Part 26 • Wireless Communications Service - Part 27 • Radio Broadcast Services - Pan 73 • Experimental, auxiliary, and special broadcast and other program distributional services - Part 74 • Stations in the Maritime Service - Part 80 • Private Land Mobile, Paging Operations - Part 90 of 3 08/27/1999 3:48 PM K} salery Program Page htrp://www.fcc.gov/octirfsafetN OET RF Safety Bulletins: ® OET Bulletin No. 56: Questions and Answers About Biological Effects Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Radiation ' NOTE: This document contains numerous pages of text and/or graphics and is only available for downloading. This document is currently under revision and will be available late Summer 1999. This is an informative bulletin written as a result of increasing interest and concern of the public with respect to this issue. The expanding use of radio frequency technology has resulted in speculation concerning the alleged "electromagnetic pollution" of the environment and the potential dangers of exposure to non -ionizing radiation. This publication is designed to provide factual information to the public by answering some of the most commonly asked questions. ®OET Bulletin No. 65: Evaluating Compliance With FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields This technical bulletin was issued to provide guidance in the implementation of the Commission's new exposure limits and policies. The bulletin provides acceptable methods of determining compliance Commission limits through the use of mathematical and empirical models. . Supplement A: Additional Information for Radio and Television Broadcast Stations . Supplement B: Additional Information for Amateur Radio Stations . Supplement C: Additional Information for Evaluating Compliance of Mobile and Portable Devices with FCC Limits for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Emissions if you have any comments or suggestions regarding this page please address them to: RF Safety Pronram i FCC OET' Home Home; FW I L__I Last updated: August 1999 3 OF 08/27/1999 3:48 PM Information on Human Exposure To Radiofrequen.. C,rn FEDERAL, COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION OFFICE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY_ _•s. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 January 1998 Pagel of 5 INFORMATION ON HUMAN EXPOSURE TO RADIOFREQUENCY FIELDS FROM CELLULAR AND PCS RADIO TRANSMITTERS (1) Cellular and PCS base stations Radiofrequencies constitute part of the overall electromagnetic spectrum. Cellular communications systems use frequencies in the 800-900 megahertz (MHz) portion of the radiofrequency (RF) spectrum (frequencies formerly used for UHF -TV broadcasting), and transmitters in the Personal Communications Service (PCS) use frequencies in the range of 1850-1990 MHz. Primary antennas for cellular and PCS transmissions are usually located on towers, water tanks and other elevated structures including rooftops and the sides of buildings. The combination of antennas and associated electronic equipment is referred to as a cellular or PCS base station" or "cell site." Typical heights for base station towers or structures are 50-200 feet. A typical cellular base station may utilize several 'omni -directional" antennas that look like poles or whips, 10 to 15 feet in length. PCS (and also many cellular) base stations use a number of "sector" antennas that look like rectangular panels. The dimensions of a sector antenna are typically I foot by 4 feet. Antennas are usually arranged in three groups of three with one antenna in each group used to transmit signals to mobile units (car phones or hand-held phones). The other two antennas in each group are used to receive signals from mobile units. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) authorizes cellular and PCS carriers in various service areas around the country. At a cell site, the total RF power that could be transmitted from each transmitting antenna at a cell site depends on the number of radio channels (transmitters) that have been authorized and the power of each transmitter. Typically, for a cellular base station, a maximum of 21 channels per sector (depending on the system) could be used. Thus, for a typical cell site utilizing sector antennas, each of the three transmitting antennas could be connected to up to 21 transmitters for a total of 63 transmitters per site. When omni -directional antennas are used, up to 96 transmitters could be implemented at a cell site, but this would be very unusual. While a typical base station could have as many as 63 transmitters, not all of the transmitters would be expected to operate simultaneously thus reducing overall emission levels. For the case of PCS base stations, fewer transmitters are normally required due to the relatively greater number of base stations. Although the FCC permits an effective radiated power (ERP) of up to 500 watts per channel (depending on the tower height), the majority of cellular base stations in urban and suburban areas operate at an ERP of 100 watts per channel or less. An ERP of 100 watts corresponds to an actual radiated power of 5-10 watts, depending on the type of antenna used (ERP is not equivalent to the Information on Human Exposure To Radiofrequen... Page 2 of 5 power that is radiated but is a measure of the directional characteristics of the antenna). As the capacity of a system is expanded by dividing cells, i.e., adding additional base stations, lower ERPs are normally used. In urban areas, an ERP of 10 watts per channel (corresponding to a radiated power of 0.5 - 1 watt) or less is commonly used. For PCS base stations, even lower radiated power levels are normally used. The signal from a cellular or PCS base station antenna is essentially directed toward the horizon in a relatively narrow beam in the vertical plane. For example, the radiation pattern for an omni -directional antenna might be compared to a thin doughnut or pancake centered around the antenna while the pattern for a sector antenna is fan -shaped, like a wedge cut from a pie. As with all forms of electromagnetic energy, the power density from a cellular or PCS transmitter decreases rapidly (according to an inverse square law) as one moves away from the antenna. Consequently, normal ground -level exposure is much less than exposures that might be encountered if one were very close to the antenna and in its main transmitted beam. Measurements made near typical cellular and PCS installations have shown that ground -level power densities are well below limits recommended by RF/microwave safety standards. In 1996, the FCC adopted updated guidelines for evaluating human exposure to radiofrequency (RF) fields from fixed transmitting antennas such as those used for cellular radio and PCS base stationst. The new guidelines for cellular and PCS base stations are identical to those recommended by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP)z. These guidelines are also similar to the 1992 guidelines recommended by the American National Standards Institute and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992)3. The FCC adopted guidelines for hand-held RF devices, such as cellular and PCS phones, that are the same as those recommended by the ANSMEEE and NCRP guidelines (see later discussion). In the case of cellular base station transmitters, at a frequency of 869 MHz (the lowest frequency used), the FCC's RF exposure guidelines recommend a maximum permissible exposure level of the general public (or exposure in "uncontrolled" environments) of about 580 microwatts per square centimeter (p W/cm2), as averaged over any thirty -minute period. This limit is many times greater than RF levels typical found near the base of typical cellular towers or in the vicinity of other, lower -powered cellular base station transmitters. For example, measurement data obtained from various sources have consistently indicated that "worst-case" ground -level power densities near typical cellular towers are on the order of I µW/cm2 or less (usually significantly less). Calculations corresponding to a "worst-case" situation (all transmitters operating simultaneously and continuously at the maximum licensed power) show that in order to be exposed to levels near the FCC's limits for cellular frequencies, an individual would essentially have to remain in the main transmitting beam (at the height of the antenna) and within a few feet from the antenna. This makes it extremely unlikely that a member of the general public could be exposed to RF levels in excess of these guidelines from cellular base station transmitters. For PCS base station transmitters, the same type of analysis holds, except that at the PCS transmitting frequencies (1850-1990 MHz) the FCC's exposure limits for the public are 1000 p W/cm2. Therefore, there would typically be an even greater margin of safety between actual public exposure levels and the recognized safety limit. When cellular and PCS antennas are mounted at rooftop locations it is possible that RF levels greater than 1 pW/cm2 could be present on the rooftop itself. This might become an issue if the rooftop were accessible to maintenance personnel or others. However, exposures approaching or Information on Human Exposure To Radiofrequen... Page 3 of 5 exceeding the safety guidelines are only likely to be encountered very close to and directly in front of the antennas. Even if RF levels were to be higher than desirable on a rooftop, appropriate restrictions could be placed on access. Factoring in the time -averaging aspects of safety standards could also be used to reduce potential exposure. The fact that rooftop cellular and PCS antennas usually operate at lower power levels than antennas on free-standing towers makes excessive exposure conditions on rooftops even less likely. This reason and the significant signal attenuation of a building's roof also minimizes any chance for harmful exposure of persons living or working within the building itself. (2) Mobile (vehicle -mounted) antennas Vehicle -mounted antennas used for cellular communications normally operate at a power level of 3 watts or less. These cellular antennas are typically mounted on the roof, on the trunk, or on the rear window of a car or truck. Studies have shown that in order to be exposed to RF levels that approach the safety guidelines it would be necessary to remain very close to a vehicle -mounted cellular antenna. For example, a study done for AT&T Bell Laboratories by the University of Washington documented typical and "worst-case" exposure levels and specific absorption rates (SAR) for vehicle occupants and persons standing close to vehicle -mounted cellular antennas. Worst-case exposure conditions were considered when an individual was at the closest possible distance from the antenna. Several configurations were tested using adult and child "phantom" models. The results of this study showed that the highest exposure (1900 µW/cm2) occurred with a female model at a distance of 9.7 cm (3.8 inches) from one of the antennas operating at a power level of 3 watts. Although this level is nominally in excess of the FCC's exposure limits for power density at this frequency, analysis of the data indicated that the antenna would have to be driven to 7 W of power before the limit for specific absorption rate (SAR) allowed by the FCC guidelines would be exceeded. The intermittent nature of transmission and the improbability that a person would remain so close to the antenna for any length of time further reduces the potential for excessive exposure. The University of Washington study also indicated that vehicle occupants are effectively shielded by the metal body_ Motorola, Inc., in comments filed with the FCC, has expressed the opinion that Proper installation of a vehicle -mounted antenna to maximize the shielding effect is an effective way of limiting exposure. Motorola and other companies have recommended antenna installation either in the center of the roof or the center of the trunk. In response to concerns expressed over the commonlv-used rear -window mounted cellular antennas, Motorola has recommended a minimum separation distance of 30-60 cm (1 -2 feet) to minimize exposure to vehicle occupants resulting from antenna mismatch for this type of antenna installation. In summary, from data gathered to date, it appears that properly installed, vehicle- mounted, personal wireless transceivers using up to 3 watts of power would result in maximum exposure levels in or near the vehicle that are well below the FCC's safety limits. This assumes that the transmitting antenna is at least 15 cm (about 6 inches) or more from vehicle occupants. Time -averaging of exposure (either a 6 or 30 minute period is specified) will usually result in still lower values when compared with safety guidelines. (3) Hand-held cellular telephones and PCS devices A question that often arises is whether there may be potential health risks due to the RF emissions from hand-held cellular telephones and PCS devices. The FCC's exposure guidelines, and the Information on Human Exposure To Radiofrequen... Page 4 of 5 ANSMEEE and NCRP guidelines upon which they are based, specify limits for human exposure to RF emissions from hand-held RF devices in terns of specific absorption rate (SAR). For exposure of the general public, e.g., exposure of the user of a cellular or PCS phone, the SAR limit is an absorption threshold of 1.6 watts/kg (W/kg), as measured over any one gram of tissue. Measurements and computational analysis of SAR in models of the human head and other studies of SAR distribution using hand-held cellular and PCS phones have shown that, in general, the 1.6 W/kg limit is unlikely to be exceeded under normal conditions of use. Before FCC approval can be granted for marketing of a cellular or PCS phone, compliance with the 1.6 W/kg limit must be demonstrated. Also, testing of hand-held phones is normally done under conditions of maximum power usage. In reality, normal power usage is less and is dependent on distance of the user from the base station transmitter. In recent years publicity, speculation and concern over claims of possible health effects due to RF fields from hand-held wireless telephones prompted industry -sponsored groups, such as Wireless Technology Research, L.L.C. (WTR) and Motorola, Inc., to initiate research programs aimed at investigating whether there is any risk to users of these devices. Past studies carried out at frequencies both higher and lower than those used for cellular and PCS phones have led expert organizations to conclude that typical RF exposures from these devices are safe. However, the Federal Government is monitoring the results of the ongoing industry -sponsored research through an inter -agency working group led by the EPA and the FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health. In a 1993 "Talk Paper," the FDA stated that it did not have enough information at that time to rule out the possibility of risk, but if such a risk exists "it is probably small." The FDA concluded that there is no proof that cellular telephones can be harmful, but if individuals remain concerned several precautionary actions could be taken. These included limiting conversations on hand-held cellular telephones to those that are essential and making greater use of telephones with vehicle -mounted antennas where there is a greater separation distance between the user and the radiating structure. NOTE: For more information on these and other RF -related topics, you may call the FCC's toll-free number. 1 -888 -CALL FCC (1-888-225-5322) or contact the FCC's RF Safety Program, in the Office of Engineering and Technology, at (202) 418-2464. Information is also available at the FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology World Wide Web Site under the "RF Safety" heading at the following address: htto:/hvww.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety/. Endnotes: 1. FCC Report and Order in ET Docket 93-62, 61 Federal Register 41006 (August 7, 1996); 11 FCC Record 15123 (1997). See also, FCC Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, ET Docket 93-62, 62 Federal Register 47960 (September 12, 1997), 12 FCC Record 13494 (1997). For more information on these documents contact the FCC's toll-free number: 1 -888 -CALL FCC (1-888-225-5322). They may also be viewed and downloaded at the FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology World Wide Web Site under the "RF Safety" heading at the following address: www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety. The FCC's RF exposure guidelines are based on recommendations made to the FCC by U.S. federal safety and health agencies such Information on Human Exposure To Radiofrequen... Page 5 of 5 as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2. The NCRP is a non-profit corporation chartered by congress to develop information and recommendations concerning radiation protection. 3. The American National Standards Institute is a non-profit, privately -funded, membership organization that coordinates development of voluntary national standards in the United States. The IEEE is a non-profit technical and professional engineering society. McC7rrcxrx Dons, BltowN & ENrasE K u.r WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS: LEGALITIES AND LOCAL APPROACHES TO ANTENNA SITING Planning and Zoning for the Wireless Invasion Panel League of California Cities 1997 Planners Institute Monterey, California Thursday, March 13, 1997 2:00 -3:30 pm. Adam U. Lindgren McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen. LLP Walnut Creep G 94596 A T 7 O N N E: Y S A -I" L A w' 1331 N. California Blvd., P.D. Box V Sen Francisco Palo Alto Walnut Creek. California 94596-1270 Los Angeles Washington, D.C. Tel. 15101 937-9000 Fax 15101975-5390 San Jose Taipei http://www.mccutchen.com Walnut Crook There has been a flurry of telecommunications land use permitting activity since President Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996 just over a year ago. The Act itself is extremely complex and broadly regulates the entire field of telecommunications'. However, many of the issues that planners and local officials currently face, relate to the narrower subject of zoning and permitting for cellular towers and antennas. This paper highlights the key provisions of the Act relating to cities'2 authority to regulate personal wireless service facility? siting and construction. It then provides an update on cellular site permit moratoria, permit decisions based on environmental effects and recent telecommunications litigation. 1- LOCAL AUTHORITY OVER CFL i rtr a TOWFRS AND Ferri r Under the Telecommunications Act, cities have the authority to make decisions regarding the placement, construction and modification of personal wireless service facilities, subject to a few critical limitations: The Act defines "tclecommunications" as "the transmission, between or among points specified by the user of information of the user's choosing, without change in the forth or the content of the information as sent and received_" 47 U.S.C. 153(B)(48). "Cities" is used in this paper to refer to both "cities" and "counties." 3 The term `personal wireless service facilities" as used in the Act includes cellular telephones and wireless paging services. 47 U.S.C. § 153(n); 47 C.F.R. § 22.99 (1995). More technically, personal wireless service facilities include facilities to transmit radio communication services carried on between either 1) mobile stations or receivers and land stations; or 2) mobile stations communicating amongst themselves." 47 U.S.C. § 153(n)). Cities cannot discrimination among nrovid rs. "The regulation of the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities by any State or local government or instrumentality thereof shall not unreasonably discriminate among providers affunctionally equivalent services." (emphasis added) 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(1). Cities cannon prohibit service. "The regulation of the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities by any State or local government or instrumentality thereof shall not prohibit or have the effect ofprohibiting the provision of personal wireless services." (emphasis added) 47 U.S.C. 332(e)(7)(B)(i)(11). Cities must act on requests within reasonable period. "A State or local government or instrumentality thereof shall act on arty request for authorization to place, construct, or modify personal wireless service facilities within a reasonable period of time after the request is duly filed with such government or instrumentality, taking into account the nature and scopc of such request." (emphasis added) 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(ii). C'itic�' decisirnts mint he sunnorted by snhstantial vid n "Airy dccisio^ by a State or local government or instrumentality thereof to delay a request to place, constn:cL� or modify personal wireless service facilities shall be in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record." (emphasis added) 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(iii)- PTeemntimof decision based on environmental effects. "No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions." 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(Bxiv). Subject to these legal constraints, cities have a wide variety of tools at their disposal to minimize any negative impacts associated with new personal wireless facilities. For example, cities can prohibit cellular towers in certain zoning districts, such as residential zones, so long as there are other technologically feasible areas where the facilities could be installed. E.g., City of Sonoma Ordinance 96-23, section 5.32.060. In order to reduce the number of places where cellular towers and antennae are installed, cities can also encourage facilities from many providers to be "co -located" at a few technologically acceptable locations in the community. E.g., City of Sonoma Ordinance 96-23, section 5.32.100. Perhaps, the best know example of local control over personal wireless facilities is the right of cities to require visual mitigation measures, such as vegetative screening, camouflage or disguises to make facilities blend into the landscape and fit into the affected communities. 11. RECENT LEGAL DEVELOPMEN S RELATING TO CFLLi1LAR SITING A. FCC C� California Cities ahnut 1haS9 of Moratoria According to recent reports, dozens of California cities have already adopted moratoria on personal wireless service facility siting. In imposing moratoria, cities have relied on the decision in Sprint Spectrum v. City of Medina, 924 F. Supp. 1036 (W.D. Wash. 1996) which upheld a six-month moratorium. Despite this decision, a recent petition by the leading wireless industry group and a warning letter by the FCC may foreshadow increased restrictions on these popular devices. 4 In Sprint, the City of Medina in the State of Washington adopted a six-month moratorium on issuing permits for additional wireless communications facilities. Sprint challenged the moratorium on the grounds that it violated the sections of the Act discussed above which state that 1) a city cannot prohibit the provision wireless services, 2) a city must act on an application within a reasonable period of time of the request, and 3) a city may not unreasonably discriminate against providers of functionally equivalent services. See above, 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(t)(11), 332(c)(7)(B)(ii) and 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(D. The court ruled against Sprint on all three grounds. It first held that a temporary moratorium does not "prohibit" cellular services, but merely delays it until the city has developed an appropriate regulatory standard. Turning to the provision of the Act requiring cities to act on applications within a reasonable time, the court cited the legislative history which says: If a request for placement of a personal wireless service facility involves a zoning variance or a public hearing or comment process, the time period for rendering a decision will be the usual period under such circumstances. It is not the intent of this provision to give preferential treatment to the personal wireless service industry in the processing of requests, or to subject their requests to any but the generally applicable time frames for zoning decision. The Court continued, stating: 'There is nothing to suggest that Congress ... intended to force local government procedures onto a rigid timetable where the circumstances call for study, deliberation, and decision-making among competing applicants." The court reasoned that because the "generally applicable time frames" for zoning decisions, in Washington, may include reasonable moratoria, the City of Medina's six-month moratoria on additional wireless communications facilities did not violate provisions of the Telecommunications Act requiring action on permit applications within a reasonable time. Finally, the Sprint court held that the City of Medina's ordinance did not violate the provision of the Act that prohibits local governments from unreasonably discriminating among providers of functionally equivalent services. Here the court reasoned that Sprint and other wireless companies were trying to enter the local the market after other companies had already begun business. The court said that there was no way that the City could have put the new applicants in the saute position enjoyed by the earlier entrants. More importantly, the court pointed out that the moratorium applied equally to new applications from both the newcomers and the earlier entrants. The flood of local moratoria triggered in partby the Sprint decision has drawn the attention of the leading wireless industry group, the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) and the concern of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). CTIA recently filed a petition with the FCC requesting a declaratory ruling from the Commission Preempting siting and zoning moratoria on the grounds that state and local governments are prohibited by the Act from "regulating entry into mobile services." The Chairman of the FCC has since sent form letters to over thirty cities across talc country, and eleven in California, that have adopted moratoria on personal wireless service facilities. The letters state the limitations the Act places on cities' authority over the placement, construction and modification of these facilities. The letters then say that most cities have been doing a good job processing applications for sites. They say many communities are able to process applications in as little as two months, while some cities arc much slower. The FCC suggests that cities will need to explain the causes for these differences. The letters then state that "according to wireless industry sources" the city that the letter is addressed to has imposed a r-7 moratorium that could result in a blanket denial of all applications for new facilities for a specified number of months. In an apparent warning about possible Congressional action to limit or prohibit moratoria, the letters then say that the FCC expects "Congressional inquiries about the progress of facilities siting." The tetters then ask cities to send the Commission information about the facilities siting requests they have received and the usual time for processing comparable permits. The combination of the pending CTIA petition and the warning letter from the FCC suggest that the PCC may attempt to restrict or preempt cities' powers to impose moratoria. Ciucs that are considering adopting moratoria may wish to proceed with caution. Planners and city officials should carefully consult with their attorneys about the actual findings that would support a proposed moratorium and whether they satisfy a narrow reading of the Act's limitations and the Sprint decision. B. New FCC Letter Addresses Preemption of Land Decisions Based on Environmental Effects Planners and city officials in a growing number of California cities have heard concc.ns from local citizens about the potential dangers of wireless service facilities. Under the Ac:, cities cannot regulate the placement, construction and modification of personal wireless facilities on the basis of their environmental effects so long as the facilities comply with FCC regulations. 47 U.S.C. 332(e)(7)(B)(iv). " The Commission's new "Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequcncy Radiation" were released on August 1, 1996. The Guideline are available from the FCC. A recent letter from the Chief of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau of the FCC to the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, indicates that the Commission may broadly interpret its authority under this provision.' The CEO of CTIA asked the Chief of the Wireless Bureau to advise him on a number of issues, including the legality of a hypothetical scenario in which a county denied a wireless carriers application for a use permit to construct a wireless communications facility, At the public hearing on the hypothetical application a significant portion of the testimony and evidence submitted into the record by the County Board of Adjustments pertained to cnvirotunental issues posed by wireless facilities. After being advised that it was not permitted to base its decision on environmental issues posed by radio frequency emissions, the Board of Adjustments continued to hear testimony and admit evidence concerning the same. Further, although the Board's decision omitted references to environmental concerns surrounding RF emissions, it did refer to community opposition which, as evidenced by record testimony, centered largely around cnvirorunental concerns of RF emissions. The Board's decision contained no reference to factual support in the record for the stated basis for its denial. The Chief of the Wireless Bureau of the FCC responded that these facts "raise senous question whether the Board's decision was impermissibly based on the environmental effects of RF emissions in violation of Section 332(c)(7)(B)(iv) [47 U.S.C. 332(e)(7)(B)(iv)j." The Chief of the Wireless Bureau reasoned that "although tite Board's decision did not expressly cite RF emissions as a reason for denying the permits, its reliance on community opposition as a ` Letter dated January 3, 1997 from Mr. Wheeler, President and CEO of CTIA to Ms. Farquhar, Chief of the Wireless Telecommunications bureau of the FCC. Ms. Farquhar's response to Mr. Wheeler dated January 13, 1997. 8 ground for denial" indicates that the decision may have been impermissibly based on environmental concerns. While this response is not a binding, official decision or interpretation by the FCC, it demonstrates that the Commission interprets it authority under 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(iv) to broadly prohibit cities from basing decision either directly or indirectly on environmental effects. C. Litivatinn ilnde Last fall a lower court in Texas granted residents a temporary restraining order and temporary injunction against the continued construction of a 300 -foot cellular tower on tate grounds that the tower would induce the plaintiffs property values and degrade their quality of lives. 360 Degree Communications Company v. Grundman, as discussed in Plan Wireless, Kreines d Kreines, October 1996. While this temporary injunction was overturned on appeal, the lower court decision indicates that local residents may still challenge the siting of cellular and other telecommunications infrastructure on nuisance theories. 360 Degree Communications Componv r Grrmdman, 1996 WL 693546 (December 3, 1996). Other lawsuits which may clarify the requirements of the Act have been filed and arc nD�� waiting decisions. For example, Seattle SMSA L.P. and U.S. West New Vector Group, Inc. have filed suit against San Juan County, Washington alleging that the denial of an application for use permits to construct cellular antennas was not based on substantial evidence in the administrative record. In the year since passage -of the Telecotttm mications Act of 1996, most California cities have made many of the adjustments necessary to comply with the new law's requirements for cellular facility siting. While the Act's basic requirements are settled, planners and city officials should continue to monitor the FCC, Congress and relevant lawsuits for decisions, statements and other actions that will clarify the scope of cities' authority. In particular, in coming months planners and city officials should watch for possible FCC action on cellular facility moratoria. CA970670.006 10 Evaluation of Environmental and Planning Effects of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities On Local Jurisdictions in Southern California ?z :i 4 777 December, 1995 Prepared by: Z - THE KEITH COMPANIES co Z� 22690 Cactus Avenue, Suite 300 �l Moreno Valley, CA 92553 December, 1995 Prepared by: - THE KEITH COMPANIES 22690 Cactus Avenue, Suite 300 Moreno Valley, CA 92553 (909) 653-0234 i � F ni L 2Nt Z December, 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION TO TOMORROW 1.0 TECHNICAL DATA 1.1 Electromagnetic Radiation 1.2 Radiation Measurement 1.3 Electromagnetic Spectrum 1.4 Antennas 2.0 PUBLIC HEALTH CONSIDERATIONS 2.1 Ionizing versus Non -Ionizing Radiation 2.2 Resonance Frequencies 2.3 Heating versus Non -Heating Effects 2.4 Overview of Biological Effects 2.5 Radiation "Myths" 2.6 Public Health Standards 3.0 WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION SYSTEMS 3.1 System Requirements 3.2 Cell Configurations 3.3 Types of Cell Sites 3 4 Cell Site Requirements 3.5 Analog versus Digital Technology 3 6 Antenna Types 3 7 Co -Location 3 8 Stealth Technology 3 9 Local Providers 3 10 Regulatory Framework 4.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 Land Use 4.2 Environmental Review 4.3 Aesthetics 4.4 Interference 5.0 OTHER ISSUES 5.1 Fiscal Benefits 5.2 Emergency Communications BIBLIOGRAPHY GLOSSARY 1 1 N 5 t7 15 W EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is intended to provide local planning staff and elected officials with sufficient information to make informed decisions regarding the siting of wireless telecommunication facilities. While Parc Bell Mobile Services will provide digital Personal Communication Services exclusively, this report contains information which will help local officials make decisions about cellular telephone and Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio Services facilities as well. One day in the not too distant future everyone will have the ability to communicate with other people and computers throughout the world. This almost limitless system will be provided by a variety of companies using sophisticated wireless telecommunication networks. These networks will depend on transmitting information via electromagnetic radiation (EM) rather than old-style wired systems. Our earth is bathed in EM radiation from low energy (frequency) electric power waves up to high energy cosmic rays. Wireless telecommunication (telecom) systems use the portion of the EM "spectrum" from 500 to 2,200 megahertz or million cycles per second (500 to 2,200 MHz). Telecom systems use relatively low power antennas to transmit and receive electronic data which effectively provides seamless communications to mobile customers via a distributed network of "cells.' Telecom systems typically use either free-standing "monopoles° or building -mounted antennas depending on engineering and logistical requirements. The EM radiation produced by telecom facilities is roughly a thousand times lower than accepted public exposure standards. Telecom antennas can be effectively screened for aesthetic purcoses. In some cases, these facilities can generate revenue or provide emergency communication for local jurisdictions. INTRODUCTION TO TOMORROW Before we begin discussing the technical aspects of wireless communication, let us look into the not too distant future to see how this technology can benefit our lives. All of us know how useful cellular telephones have become, especially in emergencies or to immediately contact a worker or family member. In the future, each person will have their own compact personal telephone which can be programmed with individual options (this feature will be a big relief to those with teenage children). You will be able to videoconference, receive eMail, fax computer files, talk with no static or cut-out while traveling, and perform a whole host of previously uncoordinated tasks via a seamless integrated telecommunications network. We are quickly approaching a time when computer and communication technologies will be married to provide almost limitless access to people and information throughout the world. How will such a networked system come about? The following report details the requirements of the various technologies which will eventually provide this miraculous system. 1 1.0 TECHNICAL DATA The following sections provide background technical data regarding electromagnetic radiation, antennas, and biological effects. 1.1 Electromagnetic Radiation Our world is literally bathed by invisible energy produced by a variety of natural and man-made sources. This energy is called electromagnetic (EM) radiation because it consists of electric and magnetic components traveling together as waves. The amount of energy an EM wave carries is proportional to its frequency, which means the higher the frequency, the more energy the wave carries. 1.2 Radiation Measurement The frequency of EM waves is measured in cycles per second (cps) which is called Hertz (Hz). A convenient unit of this measure is a million cps or 1 megahertz (MHz). In general, as the frequency of EM radiation increases, so does the amount of energy it carries. The amount of EM radiation received at a given point is commonly measured in watts per square centimeter (W/cm2) which is also called the power density. Two common sub -units of power density are milliwatts (a thousandth of a watt) and microwatts (a millionth of a watt) per square centimeter. The intensity of EM radiation from a point source drops off by the square of the distance; this is called the inverse square rule. For example, if the distance is doubled from an EM radiation source, the power will be reduced by a quarter. However, antennas are used to concentrate EM radiation for specific purposes. 1.3 Electromagnetic Spectrum The wncle range of EM energies is referred to as the electromagnetic spectrum. This specs , ranges from low energy (low frequency) electric power waves at 60 Hz up to high energy X-rays and gamma rays at a billion billion Mhz. The frequency of visible light is approximately a billion MHz compared to radio waves at 10 to 100 MHz. Radiofrequency (RF) raciation is a broad category of EM radiation ranging from 300 Hz to just below infrarec light (a million MHz). Wireless telecommunication uses specific frequencies assignec by the federal government ranging from approximately 500 to 2,200 MHz. Three main types of wireless telecommunication systems are offered by five main local providers. Cellular telephone and enhanced specialized mobile radio (ESMR) both operate at frequencies between 800-900 MHz, while Personal Communication Services (PCS) operates at 900 MHz and 1850-2200 Mhz. 1.4 Antennas EM waves normally radiate away from a point source equally in all directions, much like the ripples caused by a rock thrown into a pond. Antennas are used to concentrate or focus RF radiation in certain directions. For example, dish antennas focus RF radiation into a fairly tight beam, similar to a searchlight, while "dipole" antennas focus RF radiation into more of a doughnut shape, with most of the energy directed in the horizontal plane. 2 ELECTRIC POWER 10' ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM Frequency/Hz CELLULAR PHONES 8 ENHANCED SIPECIALIZED MOBILE RADIO IESMR) RADIO d TV 1 MICROWAVE INFRARED VISIBLE ULTRA LIGHT VIOLET RADIOFREQUENCY RADIATION X-RAYS GAS RAYS 10'. 10" 10" 10" INAL COMMUNICATION SERVICES (PCS) 10" 10' Non Ionizing Electromagnetic -t—Ionizing Electromagnetic —► Radiation (NI/EMR) 1 Radiation I 1 PCS Visible I Generatorlight I Medical 60 cycle Ultra- diagnosis \ TV Microwaves violet and 1 Radio Toaster lamp therapy © COD Wavelength (cm) Frequency (Hertz) Electric I -rays X Waves Radio & TV waves Intra -red Ultra- � Cosmic (, violet amma1i Rays 1 Electromagnetic Spectrum Types of Wave -Like Radiation _ Radio waves Low Frequency Low Energy PCS Frequencies♦ Microwaves Infrared waves (radiant heat) Visible light Ultraviolet light High Frequency High Energy X-rays and gamma rays TRANSMISSION SIGNALS ANALCG SIGNAL DIGITAL SIGNAL 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 OPERTE�G FREQUENCIES NIHZ I use (10 Hz) 0.55 1.605 AM Radio 46.6 47 Cardless Phones 54 108 Channels 2.6 TV 83 108 FM Radio 174 1_16 Channels 7-13 470 890 Channels 14 - 83 820 890 Cellular Radio f Charnncis 70 - 83 1-800 - 23.000 Microwave Coeorourucauons 1_56-000 -_75. 000 Radio Asuonomo 2.0 PUBLIC HEALTH CONSIDERATIONS This section will explore potential biological effects of EM radiation relative to telcom sites and describe appropriate public health standards. As discussed previously, some forms of EM radiation like X-rays pass completely through some materials. More often though, some amount of EM radiation is absorbed depending on the type of material, its orientation to the radiation, and the frequency and intensity of EM radiation. The interaction of EM radiation and living systems is complex due to a variety of factors. In general, the potential for biological effects is a function of the frequency, intensity, and duration of the EM radiation and the particular characteristics of the affected organism, such as species, mass, and affected tissue. 2.1 Ionizing vs. Non -ionizing Radiation EM waves with frequencies "above" (i.e., with more energy than) visible light are considered ionizing radiation, because they carry enough energy to actually strip electrons from atoms. Ionizing radiation includes ultraviolet light, X-rays, gamma rays, and cosmic rays. EM waves "below" (with less energy) than visible light are considered non -ionizing radiation. Non -ionizing radiation, including RF radiation, is considered much less damaging to biological systems than ionizing radiation because it does not cause substantial physical or chemical changes in living cells. 2.2 Resonance Frequencies Various materials absorb EM radiation in different ways and to different degrees. For example, an adult human body absorbs the most amount of EDA radiation in the frequency rance of 70 to 100 MHz, which includes broadcast TV and FIVI radio. 2.3 Heating vs. Non -Heating Effects EM rao aeon can cause heating at resonance frequencies in certain absorbing materials; tris is the concept upon which microwave ovens work. However, these devices operate at freQuenCleS a thousand times higher than RF radiation (100,000 MHz vs. 10 MHz) and at power levels much higher than those used in wireless communication systems (10 milliwatts vs. 1 microwatt). Although research in some countries in the past indicated potential non -thermal or behavior changes in living systems as a result of lower level exposure to RF radiation, studies in the U.S. have failed to duplicate these results, and detrimental effects to biological systems have not been observed at exposures expected with telecom equipment (i.e., 0.1 mW/cm2 or less). 2.4 Overview of Biological Effects Various biological effects, including tissue heating, have been observed at very high power densities, usually above 50 mW/cm2, especially at resonant frequencies. However, there is no scientific data at present of demonstrable biological effects from power densities typically associated with telecom facilities (less than 1 mW/cm2). Research is ongoing regarding non -thermal effects (such as behavior) which are more difficult to establish with statistical certainty. However, the U.S. and international scientific communities have 5 generally determined there is sufficient information to set appropriate standards to protect public health and safety. 2.5 Radiation "Myths" The term "radiation" suffers undeservedly from a poor public image for several reasons. Just the term itself conjures up images of mushroom clouds and gigantic nightmarish creatures created by "lingering atomic radiation." Sadly, the uninformed public often lumps all fors of radiation together, and sometimes considers radiation, of any kind or in any amount, harmful. The public often considers controversies surrounding high voltage electric power lines or nuclear power plants the same as concerns over microwave ovens or video display terminal (VDT or computer) screens, which involve completely different types of radiation. While clinging to many of these "myths" of radiation, the public unknowingly continues to take advantage of its many useful forms. 2.6 Public Health Standards Government agencies and private organizations have both proposed various guidelines that limit exposure to non -ionizing EM radiation, including RF radiation. Standards can be broken into two parts; emission standards and exposure standards. While emission standards limit the amount of radiation a particular devise can emit, exposure standards are most applicable to questions of public health because they limit the amount of EM radiation to which people can be exposed. ANSI/IEEE- At present, there are no official, mandatory federal standards for EM radiation protection in the U.S. The first "official" guideline for FCC regulated facilities was develooed in 1982 by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), more specifically its Institute of Electric and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) sub -committee. This guideline incoroorated data on absorption of RF energy at certain (resonant) frequencies by the human body. The ANSI/IEEE developed this "consensus" standard over a period of several years by scientists and engineers with considerable experience and knowledge of RF biolooical effects and related issues. The recommendations were based on a determination that the threshold for hazardous biological effects was a Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) of approximately 4 watts per kilogram (4 W/kg). The current ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992 standard specifies 2 sets of exposure guidelines, one for "controlled environments" usually involving workers and another for "uncontrolled environments" usually involving the general public. It limits public exposure to RF radiation to a sliding scale based on frequency, ranging from 0.58 mW/cm2 at 500 MHz to 1.2 mW/cm2 at 2,200 MHz, and is based on revisions to the 1982 standard. This standard is generally considered to be set at a level for which reasonable scientists with appropriate expertise would conclude the data is adequate to provide a significant margin of safety between environmental exposures and known effects. Copies of this standard, known officially as the "IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz, 1992 (ANSI/IEEE c.95.1-1992)" is available through ANSI at (212) 642-4900. N O 0 0 0 0 T CD 0 CDr CD O O 1n r to N r O O r T (rux:)/AXiu) il!SU9(j19A'iOd •u10 a.Mnbs sad si4rAwjotui ui oinsodx3 co i TF N_ 7 _N 7 N T a� W o ;A a�Wc T otp�o0 II .5 O U 0 ELCL 3 LU CDz o @\ Oc d 1= T N z m a xvU)cn V/ � i • Q C L a)o e O> N o = 3 aa) L) o ppN,, O� O C) „ 9 L ..�:'.''.., fa 0 Co z O _ t En LL o CD LO O r-::, c .° o O Y. o m m co � Q) C U) LLJ LO ^�te'"e Fiacai`\GCL (� —'ttsF ul.- la 'C o� CQ .0 v 7cc0 Z °� o� .a -near. •,. w'a —o Fes, a tr N N •u10 a.Mnbs sad si4rAwjotui ui oinsodx3 co i TF N_ 7 _N 7 N T NCRP & IRPC. In addition to the ANSI/IEEE standards, 2 other consensus standards are generally accepted by the governmental, scientific, and industrial communities. The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) is a non-profit corporation comprised of members from various scientific communities, while the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) represents most of the national radiation protection societies in the world. Both the NCRP and IRPA have issued a guideline of 1 mW/cm2 for public exposure in the general frequency range of wireless telecom systems (approximately 1,500 MHz to 300,000 MHz). It should be noted that typical exposure levels around telecom sites is 1 mW/cm2 or less, which is a thousand times lower than existing standards. 3.0 WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION SYSTEMS This section discusses the engineering requirements of telecom sites including cell configurations, cell sites, signal type, antenna design, local providers, and regulations. 3.1 System Requirements Wireless telecommunication systems all depend on an interlocking network of "cells' or geographic areas designed to provide seamless service for mobile users between cells. Each cell site contains both transmitting and receiving antennas. Calls placed from a wireless phone are sent to a central computer switching system which then completes the call by connecting it either to a conventional telephone through a land-based line, or to another mobile telephone through the nearest antenna. As the mobile caller exits one cell and enters another cell, the call is automatically transferred oetween the cells. 3.2 Cell Configurations The following discussion applies primarily to cellular telephcne technology, but can also oe generally applied to ESMR and PCS systems as well. The cellular telephone industry nas only 45 MHz of EM spectrum bandwidth, and each cellular carrier is limited to 396 voice channels As a result, the industry "reuses" its channels or frequencies. There are two types of cell configurations; omni and sector. The omni -cell configuration uses omni or whip antennas that have 360 degree horizontal planes and compressed vertical planes (e.g., "doughnut -shaped"). Cellular telephone channels are spit into seven reuse groups, and the system allows up to 57 channels, or 396 possible calls divided by seven reuse groups. Omni -cell sites are generally used in rural areas to cover large geographical areas. The sector cell configuration uses directional or panel antennas with variable vertical and horizontal planes that direct signals in specific directions. The sector cell configuration divides the omni cell into three sectors utilizing different frequencies which allows for greater reuse of the channels. For cellular carriers, their 396 channels are divided into 21 groups (3 sectors times 7 reuse groups) each one using panel antennas. Because they have the capacity to handle large volumes of calls, sectored sites are more commonly used in urbanized areas, especially in areas near high vehicular activity such as freeways and major intersections. 9 3.3 Types of Cell Sites There are three types of cell sites: coverage; capacity; and transition sites. Coverage sites serve to expand coverage in large areas or in areas with difficult terrains and to enhance coverage for portable systems. These sites allow users to make and maintain calls as they travel between cells. Capacity sites serve to increase a site's capacity to handle calls when surrounding sites have reached their practical channel limits. Transition sites are needed for frequency reuse. Antennas mounted on tall support structures sometimes create a problem in frequency reuse because they "see" everything. In order to control frequency reuse problems, these tall structures must be removed and replaced by transition sites which allow the provider to increase the capacity of calls and maintain coverage simultaneously. 3.4 Cell Site Requirements Line -of -sight transmission is required for all wireless systems, therefore height and unobstructed coverage are primary requirements in the design and siting of these facilities. Antennas need to be placed in specific geographic areas (called "search rings") and at specific heights for optimum service. Too high may be as bad as too low, especially for digital systems such as PCS. Each cell site operates a low-power transmitting -receiving station that reuse channels. A cell site's radius depends on surrounding topography and its capacity to handle calls. Cell sites in urbanized areas typically have a two to five mile radius, while rural sites have a five to eight mile radius. 3.5 Analog vs. Digital Technology Older cellular telephone systems have utilized analog transmission signals which electronically replicates and amplifies voice messages as they are carried from the transmitting antenna to the receiving antenna. However, this process tends to amplify electronic "noise" or static along with the voice signals which often makes the message hard to near. In digital tecnnology, voice messages are converted into digits (zeros or ones) that represent sound intensities at specific points in time. Because natural pauses in the conversation are eliminated, more calling capacity becomes available from the same amount of the EM spectrum, thus reducing the need for additional sites. An added benefit is that background noise usually associated with analog systems is eliminated. Graphioally, the difference between the two technologies is analog signals are transmitted as continuous waves, while digital technology converted the analog signal to binary digits. In recent years, the wireless telecommunications industries have moved toward digital technology, just as the land-based telephone companies embraced digital technology in the 1980's. The shift from analog rotary dial phones to digital touch tone phones demonstrates this shift. A similar phenomenon is occurring in the wireless industries. Cellular telephone systems are either converting to some digital or enhanced analog service, while ESMR and PCS systems will employ digital technology. Us L.r:�ClR THm FA m Jlw Iuoonam SwlleNing Onln 000 1-11, 3.6 Antenna Types Wireless systems can utilize three main types of antennas: lattice towers; monopole towers, and building -mounted building antennas, either on the roof or the facade. Lattice Towers. Lattice towers range from 60 to 200 feet in height and can accommodate a variety of users. Older cellular telephone or ESMR carriers often used multiple antenna mountings or co -locations on lattice towers. Such towers are still employed where great height is need, where multiple microwave antennas are required, or where weather demands a more structurally sound design. Lattice towers carry an inherent trade-off; they can accommodate several users (i.e., co -location) they represent significant aesthetic impacts because structures that concentrate equipment attract more attention than more numerous but less visible facilities such as monopoles or roof -mounted antennas. Monopoles. All three wireless systems use monopoles although their height and design can vary. Ranging from 25 to 125 feet in height, monopoles consist of a single pole, typically 2 to 3 feet in diameter at the base, narrowing to 1.5 feet at the top. Whip or panel antenna elements are mounted on top on a triangular support structure. Monopoles are generally used in rural areas or urban areas where building heights are not sufficient to meet line of sight transmission requirements. Monopoles for PCS systems are usually shorter than for cellular telephone. Cc -location has proven more difficult as the monopoles are narrowed to make them less obtrusive and competition has increased among the various providers. Monopole technology has been improving in recent years along with their proliferation. For example, antenna elements can be added to the top of street light poles, or entire monopoles constructed that resemble street lights; either of these methods is called a "flower tower " Building -Mounted Antennas. All three wireless systems use antennas mounted to either the roof or facade of a building. Roof -mounted antennas are often constructed on penthouse structures or enclosed in fiberglass, which is "transparent" to RF radiation. These antennas can also be mounted on the facade (side) of a building and painted to match almost any architectural treatment. Antennas can also be mounted on structures such as water tanks, billboards, church steeples, etc. 3.7 Co -Location It is possible to locate more than one telecom antenna system on a tower or monopole, depending on the specific antenna requirements and tower design. In recent years, lattice towers have been discouraged in many areas, and monopoles have tended to become more narrow for aesthetic reasons. There is an obvious trade-off between aesthetics and co -location; i.e., the more antennas on one structure, the more visible it becomes. 12 I / \ 4.- WHIP ANTENNAS MONOPOLE ���, i EQUIPMENT BUILDING L BUILDING -ATTACHED ROOF.MOUN7ED ANTENNAS - LATTICE TOWERS FLOWER TOWER WHIP ANTENNAS Imo] PANEL ANTENNAS \J, DISH ANTENNAS i 7C I% ! EQUIPMENT BUILDING ANTENNAS ElEQUIPMENT BUILDING 3.8 Stealth Technology All three wireless systems use a variety of antenna types depending on the local characteristics and needs. In the past, companies used fewer lattice towers for co -location but which were more visually obtrusive. Today carriers use various construction techniques to "hide" antennas or make them less visible; this is called stealth technology. Monopoles can be disguised as street lights, advertising, or even clock towers in unusual situations. Building -mounted antennas can be painted or screened from view with fiberglass to match even unusual architecture. They can be incorporated into church steeples or screened to resemble air conditioning units. In the future, carriers will become more adept at hiding their antennas using stealth technology. 3.9 Local Providers Five main providers serve the Southern California region (excluding San Diego). AirTouch and LA Cellular provide cellular telephone service, NexTel provides enhanced specialized mobile radio (ESMR), and Parc Bell Mobile Services and Cox Communications provide Personal Communication Services (PCS). As previously stated, cellular telephone and ESMR operate at frequencies between 800 and 900 MHz, while PCS operates at both 900 MHz and between 1,850 and 2,200 MHz. WIIZELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIERS IN SOUTHERN CALIFORIA Cellula: Telephone Enhanced Specialized Personal Communication (Ana=) Mobile Radio (Analo¢-Dieital) Services (PCS) (Dimtail AuTcucn NexTel Pacific Bell Mobile Services Communications C .. ia:Coz Communications 3.10 Regulatory Framework Federal. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is the primary agency responsible for licensing, setting performance standards, and regulating communication activities in the U.S. The FCC's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB) regulates cellular telephone, ESMR, and PCS carriers to provide for the most efficient use of the EM specs -Um, and to prevent interference or conflict among wireless operators in a given location. The FCC requires wireless carriers to comply with applicable ANSI/IEEE health and safety standards (see Standards). State. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is a quasi -governmental agency which establishes and enforces administrative regulations regarding utilities in California, including wireless telecommunications carriers. Although it cannot regulate licenses or terms and conditions of service, the CPUC can require compliance with local land use and environmental regulations under General Order 159. 14 4.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS This section examines local regulations that pertain to telecom sites, including land use planning, environmental review, and aesthetics. 4.1 Land Use Compatibility. Wireless telecommunications carriers are required to comply with local land use regulations in terms of zoning and consistency with the General Plan in terms of land use compatibility and consistency. Most jurisdictions consider telecom facilities to be generally compatible with industrial uses, somewhat compatible with commercial uses, depending on location and visibility, and generally not compatible with residential uses. Some jurisdictions consider these facilities not compatible with open space or conservation resource areas, although it is often strictly dependent on the specific location and antenna design proposed that determines its compatibility. Processing. Telecom facilities typically receive some type of discretionary review and approval, such as a Use Permit (UP), Conditional Use Permit (CUP), and/or a variance. Local jurisdictions often require one or more conditions of approval to be met prior to constructing the telecom facility, such as screening for aesthetic considerations or setbacks for perceived health reasons. Standard zoning for industrial, commercial, or residential land uses typically have height limits which do not account for the service requirements of telecom systems, so often a variance is required to process the project. Many jurisdictions process all telecom applications as discretionary projects, with extensive public review and comment period and review by one or more quasi -legislative bodies such as Planning Commissions, because their zoning code does not allow a variety of review processes. However, a number of jurisdictions have developed a two-tiered review process which includes design review or some other administrative approval prccess fcr "minor" projects, such as building -mounted antennas, while retaining ciscreuonary approval for "major" projects such as monopole or lattice tower projects. For examale the City of San Diego processes building -mounted antennas by administrative review in ali zones except residential, while monopoles require approval of a CUP by the Planning Commission Co -Location. Some jurisdictions require telecom carriers to at least consider co -location where practical, although there are many industry -related reasons why co -location is not usually practical or desirable. Setbacks. To assure that public exposure to EM radiation is minimized, access around the agntenna elements of telecom equipment should be precluded or limited to an area at least 10 feet directly in front of the elements and 3 feet on either side and behind the elements. In addition, the bottom of the radiating portion of the antenna should be at least 5 feet above head level (6 feet) or at least 11 feet above the ground for both workers and members of the public. Typically, the location of facade -mounted antennas does not allow for EM exposure to the general public or workers. Roof -mounted antennas might expose building maintenance personnel to RF radiation lefels in excess of accepted public exposure standards if works came within the recommended setback distances. 15 4.2 Environmental Review Local carriers are also required to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), with the local jurisdiction acting as the Lead Agency. Most local jurisdictions consider wireless telecommunications facilities as categorical exemptions under CEQA, although many are now processing these facilities under the Negative Declaration process. No city or county jurisdictions have required an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for either an individual telecom site or regional system, although some have expressed concern to local carriers about cumulative aesthetic or health-related impacts. 4.3 Aesthetics One of the major considerations for local jurisdictions regarding telecom sites is their appearance or aesthetics. In the past, lattice towers were designed strictly for engineering and for possible co -location; aesthetics were not generally a consideration. Modem telecom carriers and facilities must be sensitive to local concerns about the appearance of both monopoles and building -mounted antennas Today, monopoles can be shielded or "camouflaged" using a variety of stealth construction techniques. Monopoles can be constructed to resemble street light poles or advertising signs. In extreme cases, they can be designed to look like pine trees or clock towers. Roof- or facade -mounted antennas can be shielded with fiberglass to blend into the building architecture by resembling air conditioning units, penthouses, the mansard, or even the side of the building. In some cases, building -mounted antennas have been effectively blended into church crosses or steeples, turrets, or flagpoles. The bottom line is wireless carriers are getting more sophisticated in the types of antennas or treatments they can offer. Therefore, wireless carriers and local jurisdictions need to be willing to fully explore appropriate solutions to aesthetic concerns as part of the planning process. 4.4 Interference In general, telecom facilities do not interfere with other types of electrical or electronic devices due to the extremely low power levels used and experienced around transceiving units. Some digital PCS handset units can interfere with certain hearing aids at close range However, this problem is expected to be solved prior to the start of service sometime in late 1996. Problems reported in local newspapers typically refer to interference caused by portable computers or high-powered portable telephone equipment with medical and other sensitive electronic devices. 16 - ��:. .:y, , t if mta=—V—,l 5.0 OTHER ISSUES This section examines potential fiscal benefits and emergency communications opportunities for local jurisdictions regarding wireless telecom providers. 5.1 Fiscal Benefits Local cities and counties may derive revenue by leasing land to private carriers for the installation of wireless telecom facilities. Typically, private property is leased for telecom sites. However, more cities and counties are seeing the advantage of leasing portions of city- or county -owned land for these facilities. Often "flower towers' can replace one or more municipal street lights along a public road and the city or county can receive the lease fees rather than a private landowner. Local parks, water tanks, and communications towers are only several examples of municipal sites that might be available. 5.2 Emergency Communications Cellular telephone and PCS systems can be used directly as emergency communication systems for local jurisdictions. In limited applications, ESMR might also be useful in this application. The cellular design of these systems lends itself well to provide communications for local jurisdictions in the event of emergencies that preclude normal methods of communication (i.e., land line telephones, etc.). This could be negotiated as part of a lease agreement with a city or county for public land for a telecom site, or even as a condition of approval for a lease on private property as long as the jurisdiction could show an appropriate nexus (connection) between the new system and anticipated impacts. Two main planning constraints of this system are potential survivability in a major disaster (i.e., fire, flood, or earthquake) and emergency power. Monopoles and building -mounted antennas are built to withstand groundshaking typically expected in the region. However, local soil or other conditions could amplify actual ground movement beyond engineered desion stancards. It would be necessary to precisely determine expected groundshaking levels at any telecom site proposed to provide emergency communication purposes. In addition, tnese telecom systems have limited backup battery power in the event the regional electric grid is interrupted for more than temporary periods. It would be necessary for the local jurisdiction to assure the provision of emergency power to assure this system continued to operate during a major emergency. 19 BIBLIOGRAPHY San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), 'Wireless Communication Facilities Issues Paper (Draft),' presented to the Inland Empire Chapter of the American Planning Association, October 1995. Bushberg, Jerrold T., 'RF 101 - Overview of PCS/Cellular Telecommunications Principles, Exposures, Standards, and Systems (Draft),' October 1995. GLOSSARY ANSI American National Standards Institute CECA California Environmental Quality Act (1970 as amended) cps cycles per second (measure of frequency) CPUC California Public Utilities Commission CUP conditional use permit EM electromagnetic FCC Federal Communication Commission Hz Hertz or cps IEEE Institute of Electric and Electronic Engineers IRPA International Radiation Protection Association MHz MegaHertz or a million cps NCRP National Council on Radiation Protection RF radiofrequency telecom wireless telecommunications UP use permit Measures of Power Density W/cm2 Watts per square centimeter mW/cm2 milliWatts per square centimeter (thousandth of a watt) uW/cm2 micro Watts per square centimeter (millionth of a watt) 20 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: REPORT DATE: MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: APPLICATION REQUEST PROPERTY LOCATION: PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: BACKGROUND: City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report October 1, 2002 October 8, 2002 Development Review No. 00-16(1)/Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-15(1)/Minor Variance No. 2000-17(1) One-year extension of time of the Planning Commission grant 2521 Braided Mane (Lot 91 of Tract No. 23483) Diamond Bar. CA Ton -Dei Chiu, 2822 Bentley Way, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Tein Wang, 801 S. Garfield Avenue, Alhambra, CA 91801 The Property Owner, Ton -Dei Chiu, and Applicant, Tein Wang, are requesting an extension of time for Development Review No. 00-16(1)/Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-15(1)/Minor Variance No. 2000-17(1) pursuant to Code Section 22.66.050.C. This is a request for a one-year extension of time for a project approved by the Planning Commission on October 24, 2000. The Planning Commission approval allows the construction of a two-story, single-family residence, of approximately 12,340 square foot two-story single-family residence with two garages for five -cars, pool/spa, gazebo, and tennis court. A Minor Conditional Use Permit is required to process the circular driveway. The Minor Variance is a request to decrease the rear yard setback by 20 percent. The extension of time, if approved, will allow the continuation of this entitlement until October 24, 2003. The project site address is 2521 Braided Mane Drive (Lot 91 of Tract No. 23483), Diamond Bar, CA, within the gated community identified as 'The Country Estates." The parcel is 1.36 gross acres and 1.05 net acres. It is shaped irregularly, sloping downward toward the rear, southwesterly exposure. The project site is zoned R-1-40,000, single-family residence. The General Plan Land Use designation is Rural Residential (RR), 1 du/acre. Generally, R-1 40,000 zone surrounds the subject site to the north, south, east and west. 1 ANALYSIS: EXTENSION OF TIME Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.66.050.C., an approved permit or entitlement shall be exercised before its expiration (i.e., obtain a building permit and continuous on-site construction activity; obtain a grading permit and complete a significant amount of on-site grading; or actually implement the land use in its entirety). If the permit or entitlement is not exercised, the applicant shall file a written request for an extension of time with the appropriate review authority. In this case, the appropriate review authority is the Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission determines that the permittee has proceeded in good faith and has exercised due diligence in seeking to establish the permit, the Planning Commission shall grant an extension of time up to two consecutive periods not to exceed six months each or a total of one year. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000-21, Condition 5(cc), for the project states, "this grant is valid is for two years and shall be exercised 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 may consider the extension request at a duly noticed public hearing in accordance with Chapter 22.72 of the City of Diamond Bar Development Code." The Applicant has been working with the City's Public Works Division for the on-site walls and grading. On May 7 of this year, the City's Soils Engineer and the City's grading and retaining wall plan checking firm granted an approval of the submitted plans. A written request and funds have been submitted to request the one-year extension of time as discussed above. Due to the time required for the plan approvals and the fact the Applicant has been traveling overseas, the project was not in order to meet the first deadline. Therefore an extension is needed. The extension of time request does not modify the project's original approval in any way. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Thirty-four property owners within a 500 -feet radius of the project site were notified by mail on September 24, 2002. This item was advertised in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on September 27, 2002. A notice of public hearing on a display board was posted at the site on September 27, 2002 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). 2 RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve a one year extension of time for Development Review No. 00-16(1)/Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-15(1)/Minor Variance No. 2000-17(1) to October 24, 2003, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolution. REQUIRED EXTENSION OF TIME FINDINGS: 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. The proposed project 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. Extension of time draft resolution; 2. Extension of time correspondence; 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000-21; 4. Staff report dated October 19, 2000; 5. Exhibit "A" - site plan, floor plan, elevations, materials/color's board, dated October 24, 2000. landscape plan, grading plan, and H: WORD-LINDA\PLANCOMM\PROJECTS\DR 00-16(1) 2521 Braided Mane/REP DR 00-16(1) ... DRAFT ATTACHMENT "1" PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME OF THE OCTOBER 24, 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2000-16(1)/MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000-15(1)/MINOR VARIANCE NO. 2000-17(l) THAT ALLOWS THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO- STORY, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE, OF APPROXIMATELY 12,340 SQUARE FOOT WITH TWO GARAGES FOR FIVE -CARS, POOUSPA, GAZEBO, AND TENNIS COURT. A MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS REQUIRED TO PROCESS THE CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY. THE MINOR VARIANCE IS A REQUEST TO DECREASE THE REAR YARD SETBACK BY 20 PERCENT. THE PROJECT SITE IS 2521 BRAIDED MANE A. RECITALS. 1. The Property Owner, Ton -Dei Chiu, and Applicant, Tein Wang, have filed an extension of time application Development Review No. 00-16(1)/Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-15(1)/Minor Variance No. 2000-17(1) approved by the Planning Commission on October 24, 2000, for a property located at 2521 Braided Mane, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject extension of time for the Development Review/Minor Conditional Use Permit/Minor Variance shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. On September 24, 2002, Thirty-four property owners within a 500 -feet radius of the project site were notified by mail. On September 27, 2002, this item was advertised in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. A notice of public hearing on a display board was posted at the site on September 27, 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 October 8, 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 11 DRAFT ATTACHMENT "1" 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 October 24, 2000 Planning Commission approval by Resolution No. 2000-21. The Planning Commission approval allows the construction of a two-story, single-family residence, of approximately 12,340 square foot with two garages for five - cars, pool/spa, gazebo, and tennis court. . A Minor Conditional Use Permit is required to process the circular driveway. The Minor Variance is a request to decrease the rear yard setback by 20 percent. (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 R-1 40,000 zone surrounds the subject site to the north, south, east and west. Extension of Time Findings (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 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 Applicant's traveling schedule and grading and retaining wall plan review and approvals were not finalized 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. 2 DRAFT ATTACHMENT "1" (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. 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 October 24, 2000 as submitted and as approved by the Planning Commission on October 24, 2000. (b) Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000-21 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 October 24. 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. 3 DRAFT ATTACHMENT "'I" 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: Ton -Dei Chiu, 2822 Bentley Way, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 and Applicant, Tein Wang, 801 S. Garfield Avenue, Alhambra, CA 91801. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8th DAY OF OCTOBER 2002, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. M Joe Ruzicka, Chairman 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 8th day of October 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: James DeStefano, Secretary 0 FRX NO. : 6262548798 Sep. 16 2002 08:55RM P1 ATTACHMENT "2" August 28, 2002 Planning Depattrment City of Diamond Bat 218258 Copley Drive Diamostd Bar, CA 91765-4178 Sir/Madam: Please accept thio letter as myrequest for a one-year ateusion to build based on the above -c homed Resolution: Resolution No. 2000-21 is titre to expire on October 23, 2002, however, the public works Deparnment did not approve mypian until May 7, 2002, more than 14 months after I S ubmitted the plan. Together with the fact that 1 ant currently traveling m the par East on business,l will not be able to commence work prior to the October 23, 2002 deadline. We would appreciate if a one-year extension can be granted. Please alm be informed that a request for extension has also been submitted to the Building Deparhnetrt and the Public Works Department Should you have any question on my tsquest, please do not hesitate to contact my archi Mr. Tein_Wang. Thank you very much for yourundersttwUng. Very truly Yours, Toa -Dei Chin„ By Charles Chu. his attorney in fact ATTACHMENT "3" PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2000-21 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2000-16, MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000-15, MINOR VARIANCE NO. 2000-17, AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION 15303(a), A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A TWO-STORY, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE OF APPROXIMATELY 12,340 SQUARE FEET WITH TWO GARAGES FOR FIVE CARS, POOL/SPA, GAZEBO, AND TENNIS COURT ON A VACANT PARCEL. THE PROJECT SITE IS 2521 BRAIDED MANE DRIVE (LOT 91 OF TRACT MAP NO. 23483), DIAMOND BAR CA. A. Recitals. 1. The property owner, Ton -Dei Chiu, and applicant, Tein Wang, have filed an application for Development Review No. 2000-16, Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-15, Minor Variance No. 2000-17 for a property located at 2521 Braided Mane Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, and part of the gated development identified as "The Country Estates", as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review, Minor Conditional Use Permit, Minor Variance and Categorical Exemption shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. On October 13 and October 14, 2000, respectively, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. Thirty-two property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the project site were notified by mail. On October 13, 2000, 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 October 24, 2000, 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 Diamonc: Bar as follows: 3 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 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 upon the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning Commission, hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to a vacant parcel at 2521 Braided Mane Drive (Lot 91 of Tract No. 23483), Diamond Bar, CA, within the gated community identified as "The Country Estates." The Project site is approximately 1.36 gross acres and 1.05 net acres. It is shaped irregularly, sloping downward toward the rear, southwesterly exposure. (b) The project site is zoned R-1-40,000, single-family residence. The General Plan Land Use designation is Rural Residential (RR), 1 du/acre. (c) Generally, R-1 40,000 zone surrounds the subject site to the north, south, east and west. (d) The application is a request to construct a two- story, single-family residence of approximately 12,340 square feet with two garages for five cars, P001/spa, gazebo, and tennis court on a vacant parcel. A Minor Conditional Use Permit is required to process the circular driveway and the Minor V, Variance is a request to decrease the rear _vara setback by 20 percent. 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). The project site, was established before the adoption of the City's General Plan. However, the proposed project complies with the elements of the adopted General Plan of July 25, 1995, which has a land use designation of Rural Residential (Max. 1 du/acre). The proposed use is zoned for single- family residence at R-1-40,000. The proposed structure complies with the City's General Plan objectives and strategies related to maintaining the integrity of residential neighborhoods and open space. The structures and placement on the parcel conform to the site coverage, setback, and height criteria of the Diamond Bar Development Code with, approved applications for the Minor Conditional Use Permit and Minor Variance. Furthermore, the applicant has obtained the approval of "The Country Estates" Homeowners' Association Architectural Committee. There is no specific or additional community planned development for the site. (f) The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. The project site is currently an undeveloped lot within an existing tract designed for single-family homes. The proposed new construction does not change the use intended for the site as a single- family residence. The developed property is not expected to unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. The project site is adequately served by Indian Creek Road. This. private street is designed to 3 handle minimum traffic created by this type of development. (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. The proposed project's architectural design is compatible with the eclectic architectural style of other homes within "The Country Estates," and is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and Development Code. The project's architectural features include portico entry with precast columns and leaded glass window treatments for a focal point; balconies with precast balustrades; Foamcast stucco details, crown molding, medallions, and window treatments; and multi-levels of roof lines of Rio Grande Blend tile and copper metal roof to add texture and contrast. Additionally, the colors and materials utilized are compatible with the homes within the surrounding area. The applicant has obtained the approval of the architectural committee of "The Country Estates." The accessory structures, tennis court, precast concrete gazebo, and pool/spa are compatible with the neighborhood. Many homes in the Country Estates have similar structures. (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. A project colors/materials board is provided as Exhibit "A". The colors, materials, and textures proposed are complimentary to the existing homes within the area while offering variety. (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. GJ City permits, inspections and soils reports 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. The terrain in the vicinity of Indian Creek Road and Braided Mane Drive is hilly. The subject site is generally at a higher elevation than its neighbors. The project site slopes to the lowest point at the southeast corner of the lot. By maintaining the allowed height requirements, the proposed residential structure allows view corridors for the neighboring properties. Therefore, the proposed residence will not be significantly detrimental with respect to view blockage impact. (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 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (k) The proposed use is allowed within the subject - zoning district with the approval of a Minor Conditional Use Permit and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Development Code and the Municipal Code. The Application requests Minor Conditional Use Permit approval for the circular driveway. The Development Code requirement for driveways is generally garage door width plus two feet. Driveways may be allowed with greater widths with the approval of a Minor Conditional Use Permit. Many homes in "The Country Estates" have this design feature, and the applicant has received the approval of "The Country Estates" Homeowners' Association Architectural Committee. The Development Code requires a lot frontage of 70 feet, and the subject lot has a frontage of approximately 200 feet. The proposed application complies with all other applicable provisions of this Development Code and Municipal Code. 5 (1) The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. As stated in Item (e), the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan objectives and strategies, the Development Code and City Design Guidelines, and any applicable specific plan. (m) The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity. As stated in Items (e) and (f), the proposed new construction with circular driveway and accessory structures are consistent with the surrounding single-family homes. Therefore, the project design, location, size and operating characteristics are compatible. (n) The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/ intensity of use being proposed including access, provisions of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and the absence of physical constraints. As stated in Items (e), (f), (g), (h), (i) and (k), the proposed single-family with circular driveway and accessory structures is suitable for the type and density/ intensity of use, access, utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses and the absence of physical constraints. (o) Granting the Minor Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or materially injurious to person, property or improvements in the vicinity and zoning districts in which the property is located. City permits, structural plan check, inspections and soils reports 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. (p) 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 (q) There are special circumstances applicable to the property (e.g., location, shape, size, sur- roundings, 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. The Minor Variance request is to allow a reduction in the rear setback for the tennis court with fencing and lighting. Pursuant to the Development Code revision effective May 4, 2000, a residential structure in the R-1- 40,000 Zone is required to maintain a 25 feet rear setback. The tennis court with fencing and lighting requires a Minor Variance because, as proposed, it does not comply with development standards specified in the Development Code. A concrete slab (i.e., sports court) does not have specific development standards, nor does it require a construction permit. However, a tennis court with fencing and lighting is considered an accessory structure and requires a construction permit and is required to maintain Code specified 25 feet rear setback. The proposed tennis court is placed with a 20 feet rear setback. It is anticipated that the setback reduction impact will be insignificant considering the subject site's irregular shape and configuration and the fact the setback reduction is not adjacent to a residence and abuts the neighbor's garage. Tennis courts are common place in "The Country Estates" and have been approved in the past with similar setbacks. As an accessory structure, the tennis court fencing is proposed at a height of 10 feet and in some areas this is atop a retaining wall. However both are under the 7 height requirement of 35 feet for a structure. The tennis court fencing is % inch mesh chain link with green or back vinyl. In the area abutting the street side, the fencing is wrought iron above a retaining wall. The Development Code does not allow chain link fencing adjacent to a street. The submittal is a conceptual plan, so court lighting will be a conditioned to comply with Development Code Standards addressed in Section 22.16.050. These standards include maximum pole height, illumination, placement, hours of operation, and court surfaces. (r) 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. The granting of the Minor Variance is based on the facts that the use is consistent with the surrounding homes in the vicinity. The subject site is irregularly shaped, and considering the lot's configuration and the fact the setback reduction is not adjacent to a residence and is indeed abutting the neighbor's garage on the west side. It is anticipated that the setback reduction impact will be insignificant. The Development Code allows for a 20 percent setback reduction with the approval of a Minor Variance. Additionally, other homes within "The Country Estates" are similar and enjoy the same recreational amenities and height projection as proposed by this Application. As a result 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 districts and denied to property owner for which the Minor Variance is sought. (s) Granting the Minor Variance is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. As stated above in Items (e) and Minor Variance is consistent with and any applicable specific plan. (1), granting the the General Plan (t) The proposed entitlement would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. As stated above in 0 Items (f), (g), (h), (i), (k), (1) and (m), the proposed entitlement would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. (u) 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, floor plans, elevations, grading plan, landscape plan, site photos, and materials/ colors board collectively labeled as Exhibit "A", dated October 24, 2000, as submitted and as amended herein. (b) The subject site shall be maintained in a condition that is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction, shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and 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) Before construction begins, the applicant shall install temporary construction fencing pursuant to the Building and Safety Division's requirements along the project site's perimeter. This fencing shall remain until the Building Official approves its removal. (d) The Applicant shall provide temporary sanitation facilities while under construction. W (e) Tennis Court lighting shall be directed downward, shall only illuminate the court, and shall not illuminate adjacent property, in compliance with Section 22.16.050 (Exterior Lighting). The following standards shall apply to the lighting of tennis court: 1. Light fixtures shall not be located closer than 10 feet to the nearest property line. 2. Fixtures shall be of a type that is rectangular on a horizontal plane. The outside of the fixture, arm, and supporting pole shall be coated with a dark, low reflectance material. 3. Light fixtures shall not be located more than 18 feet from the court surface. 4. Not more than one light fixture per 900 square feet of court surface is allowed, with a maximum of eight poles and fixtures per recreational court. 5. Light fixtures shall be supported by an arm extending at least 5 feet from a support pole. 6. Light fixtures shall be designed, constructed, mounted and maintained so that, with appropriate shielding, the light source is completely cut off 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 foot-candle measured from grade to a height of 12 feet. The incident light level upon any habitable building on an adjacent property shall not exceed .05 foot-candle. 7. Recreational 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. 8. The illuminated court surface is visible from another parcel, therefore, the court surface shall be treated with a low reflectance, dark - colored coating. (f) Landscaping trees and shrubs as shown on the landscape plan shall be required to soften the height of the tennis court and walls at the westerly and southerly sections of the court. (g) The landscaping/irrigation shall be installed prior to the Planning Division's final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy issuance. 10 (h) Any walls, gates, fountains, etc., that may be proposed within the front and street side setbacks shall not be in the streets' dedicated easement or exceed a maximum 42 inches in height. (i) A separate Planning Division review and approval shall be required for the wooden lattice patio shown on the landscape plan on the south side of the house. The submittal shall include location to property line, plan, elevations and color scheme. (j) A grading and retaining wall plan review and approval is required for cut/fill quantities greater than 50 cubic yards. In accordance with the City's grading requirements, the grading plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City before the issuance of a grading permit. On a grading plan the following shall be delineated: 1. Cut and fill quantities and earthwork calculations and export location; 2. All flow lines, finished surfaces, and finished grades; 3. Proper drainage with detailed sketches; 4. Proposed and existing grades; 5. Sign/stamped by a civil engineer, geotechnical engineer and geologist; 6. Clearly delineate all easements (i.e. Flood Hazard Area and Recreation Easements); . 7. Retaining walls shall not be constructed of wood or wood products; B. Retaining walls shall be required to be ornamental by using stucco or decorative block; 9. Engineered calculations shall be submitted with retaining walls (APWA Standard is not applicable); 10. Indicate retaining wall locations on grading plan with standard detail and delineate: (a) Top of wall; (b) Top of footing; (c) Finish Surface; (d) Structural calculations; and (e) Retaining walls exposed height shall not exceed six feet; 11 11. All grading is subject to Development Code Sections 22.16.030 (Air Emissions) and Section 22.28 (Noise); 12. Erosion Control plan shall be submitted for permits issued October 1 to April 15. (k) Applicant shall submit a soils report for the proposed improvements to be reviewed and approved by the City. The soils report shall also reference the suitability of the retaining walls to withstand pressure of the retained soils and proposed development. (1) Applicant shall verify that the project site is currently connected to the public sewer system and impacts on the sewage capacity as a result of the proposed addition shall be approved. (m) Applicant shall make an application to the Walnut Valley Water District as necessary, and submit their approval to the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits. (n) Drainage pattern shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Division; surface water shall drain away from the building at a 2% minimum slope. (o) Site, driveway grade, and house design shall be approved by the Fire Department. The maximum slope is 15% per the Public Works Division. (p) The single-family structure shall meet the 1.998 California Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and California Electrical Code requirements. (q) The minimum design wind pressure shall be 80 miles per hour and "C" exposure. (r) The single-family structure requires Fire Department approval and is located in "Fire Zone 4" and shall meet the following requirements of that fire zone: 1. All roof covering shall be "Fire Retardant, Class A"; the roofs shall be fire stopped at the eaves to preclude entry of the flame or members under the fire; 12 2. All enclosed under -floor areas shall be constructed as exterior walls; 3. All openings into the attic, floor, and/or other enclosed areas shall be covered with corrosion -resistant wire mesh not less than inch nor more than 'h inch in any dimension except where such openings are equipped with sash or door; 4. Chimneys shall have spark arresters of maximum 3/3 inch screen. (s) This single-family structure shall meet the State Energy Conservation Standards. (t) Maximum height of the residence shall not exceed 35 feet from the finish grade at any exterior wall of the structure to the highest point of the roofline and may require a height survey at completion of framing. (u) Due to the site's topography, applicant shall comply with special design requirements as specified in the Universal Building Code, Section 18.4.3, building setback, top and toe of slopes. (v) Accessory structures: tennis court, swimming pool/spa, gazebo, patio covers, barbecue and site pluming fixtures shall require a separate building permit. (w) All sleeping rooms shall have windows that comply with egress requirements. (x) All balconies shall be designed for 40 pound per square foot live load. (y) Hand rails and guardrails shall be designed for 20 pound load applied laterally at the top of the rail. (z) Smoke detectors shall be provided in conformance with the 1998 California Building Code. (aa) The single-family residence shall not be utilized in a manner that creates adverse effects upon the neighborhood and environmental setting of the residential site to levels of dust, glare/light, noise, odor, traffic, or other disturbances to the existing residential neighborhood and shall not MKI result in significantly adverse effects on public services and resources. The single-family residence shall not be used for commercial/institutional purposes, or otherwise used as a separate dwelling. The property shall not be used for regular gatherings which result in a nuisance or which create traffic and parking problems in the neighborhood. (bb) The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Department and City Planning, Building and Safety, and Public Works Divisions. (cc) 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. (dd) 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. (ee) 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 14 (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail to Tor --Dei Chiu, 1432 E. Peppertree Drive, LaHabra Heights, CA 90631, and Tein Wang, 801 S. Garfield Avenue, #338, Alhambra, CA 91801. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24th DAY OF OCTOBER 2000, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. Steve Nelson, Chairman I, James DeStefano, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of October, 2000, by the following vote: AYES: Kuo, Ruzika, Tye, VC Zirbes, C Nelson NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINK ATTEST: ames Deste;:ano, D:WORD-LINDA/PLANCOPM/PROJECTS/DR2000-16 2521 Briaded.../RESO- 15 ATTACHMENT "4" City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 7.2 REPORT DATE: October 19, 2000 MEETING DATE: October 24, 2000 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Development Review No. 2000-16, Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-15, Minor Variance No. 2000-17 APPLICATION REQUEST: A request to construct a two-story, single-family residence of approximately 12,340 square feet with two garages for five cars, pool/spa, gazebo, and tennis court. A Minor Conditional Use Permit is required to process the circular driveway and the Minor Variance is a request to decrease the rear yard setback by 20 percent. PROPERTY LOCATION: 2521 Braided Mane Drive (Lot 91 of Tract No. 23483) Diamond Bar, CA PROPERTY OWNER: Ton -Dei Chiu 1432 E. Peppertree Drive LaHabra Heights, CA 90631 APPLICANT: Tein Wang 801 S. Garfield Avenue #338 Alhambra, CA 91801 BACKGROUND: The property owner, Ton -Dei Chiu, and applicant, Tein Wang, request a Development Review to construct a two-story, single-family residence of approximately 12,340 square feet with two garages for five cars, pool/spa, gazebo, and tennis court on a vacant parcel. A Minor Conditional Use Permit is required to process the circular driveway and the Minor Variance is a request to decrease the rear yard setback by 20 percent. The project situs address is 2521 Braided Mane Drive (Lot 91 of Tract No. 23483), Diamond Bar, CA, within the gated community identified as "The Country Estates." The parcel is 1.36 gross acres and 1.05 net acres. It is shaped irregularly, sloping downward toward the rear, southwesterly exposure. The project site is zoned R-1-40,000, single-family residence. The General Plan Land Use designation is Rural Residential (RR), 1 du/acre. Generally, R-1 40,000 zone surrounds the subject site to the north, south, east and west. ANALYSIS: REVIEW AUTHORITY This application requires Development Review by the Planning Commission per the City's Development Code. Section 22.48.020.A(1) states that Development Review is required for projects involving a building permit for new construction on a vacant parcel that have a minimum 10,000 square feet of combined gross floor area. The proposed 12,340 square feet single-family residence on a vacant lot applies. The purpose of this process is to establish consistency with the General Plan through the promotion of high aesthetic and functional standards to complement and add to the economic, physical, and social character of the City. The process 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. Also, this application requires Minor Conditional Use Permit approval by the Hearing Officer, in this case the Planning Commission is the review authority, pursuant to Development Code Section 22.30.080(E) to create the circular driveway. The Minor Variance application, pursuant to Development Code Section 22.52.020(B), is a request for a rear setback reduction for the tennis court. The purpose of a Minor Variance is to allow for adjustment from the development standards of the Development Code. The adjustment may be granted when special circumstances are 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 circumstance must create an unnecessary, and non -self created hardship that makes it obviously impractical to require compliance with the development standards. Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.48.030, permits shall be acted upon concurrently and the highest review authority shall make final determination. In this case, the Planning Commission is the highest review authority for all applications. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW • Development Standards The following is a comparison of the City's approved development standards and the project's proposed development standards: City's Development Standards Project's Development Standards 1. Setbacks (main structure): 1. Setbacks (main structure): • Front yard-30'from property line • Front yard- 30' from property line • Side yards -10' & 15' minimum from • Side yards- 24' and 24' from property line property line • 25' between structures on adjoining parcels • 33' from one and street side on other • Rear yard -20' minimum from property line • Rear yard -136' from property line • Site Coverage -overall maximum 30% • Site Coverage -Approximately 28% 2. Building Height: 2. Building Height: • Maximum 35' • Maximum 34'10" 3. Parking: 3. Parking: • Minimum two -car garage • Two garages for five -cars and motor court Two bas 20.5'x20' and three bas 20.5'x30' 4. Accessory Structures: 4. Accessory Structures: • Pool -Minimum 5' from sides/rear property • Pool -Minimum 17' from side (closest) line property line • Gazebo -As required for main structure • Gazebos (in side yard/closest measurement) Side yard -15' minimum from property line side yard -72' from property line • Tennis Court- As required for main structure • Tennis court (in side and rear yard): Side yards -10' & 15' minimum from property Side yard- 20' from property line line Rear yard -25' minimum from property line Rear yard- 20' from property line* • Tennis Court lighting- As required for main • Tennis court lighting (side and rear yard): structure yards -10' & 15' minimum from property ? Side yard- 37' from closest property line Ineide Rear yard -25' minimum from property line Rear yard -20' from property line* *The above analysis indicates that the proposed residence requires a Minor Variance application. The description of these standards are listed above in the section titled REVIEW A=ORTfY/APPLICATION. The detailed analysis for the specific development standard adjustments is found further in the report in the section: MINOR VARIANCE. • Architectural Features and Colors The proposed project's architectural style as referenced in the application is Mediterranean. The proposed style and palette are compatible with the eclectic architectural style of other homes within Tract No. 23483 and "The Country Estates," and consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and as amended with the Development Code. The project's architectural features include portico entry with precast columns and leaded glass window treatments for a focal point; balconies with precast balustrades; Foamcast stucco details, crown molding, medallions, and window treatments; and multi-levels of roof lines of Rio Grande Blend tile and copper metal roof to add texture and contrast. The applicant has received the approval of "The Country Estates" Homeowners' Association Architectural Committee. The following materials and colors are a part of Exhibit "A" ➢ Exterior stucco — Painted smooth and scored stucco, Dunn Edwards SP651 Millweed — Painted smooth stucco accent, Dunn Edwards SPS, Weathered Coral ➢ Exterior trims: Pre -cast items - Dunn Edwards, SP836, Swiss Coffee Stucco trims/Medallions/ Crown/Window trim & sill - Dunn Edwards, SP836 Swiss Coffee Garage doors - Dunn Edwards, SP651, Milkweed ➢ Roof tile — Monierlifetile, IESCS 6142, Rio Grande Blend ➢ Seamless metal roofs - Copper color ➢ Driveway concrete Sandstone color stamped concrete with nature color band • Floor Plans The proposed single-family structure consists of two -stories. The first -story includes the foyer/rotunda; living room; dining room; kitchen; wok kitchen; breakfast nook; family room; coat closet; powder bath; maid's bedroom and bath; laundry; home theater and bath; recreation room with bar; in-laws bedroom, bath and walk in closet; pool storage and bath and two garages for five cars. The second -story includes the master bedroom suite with walk -in -wardrobes, bath with sauna, exercise area, library with bath and balcony, sitting area and balconies; loft area with balcony; Tatami room with bath and balcony; two bedrooms with bath, walk -in -closet and balcony. There are five designated bedrooms and the library and Tatami room have amenities for conversion to sleeping rooms. There are covered parking for five cars. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES The accessory structures include a tennis court, gazebo, and swimming pool/spa. All but the tennis court (discussed in the Minor Variance section of the report) meet the setback requirements. Per the Building and Safety Division all require separate building permits. The infinity edge swimming pool/spa is shown on the landscape plan and also contains a waterfall with precast colonnade arbor at the north edge. The patio area has bar sinks and barbecue for entertaining. Elevations for the precast concrete gazebo have been provided on the drawings. This amenity has a pool and fountain at the base. Also noted on the landscape plan without elevations and details or shown on the site plan is a 20'x20' wood lattice patio cover on the south side of the house. Staff is unable to determine the specifics of this patio cover as to setbacks, etc. Therefore, this patio cover is not included in this approval process. A separate Planning Division review and approval will be required. The 400 square feet for the patio cover would be within the 30% site coverage. Additionally, other walks and planted garden areas are noted behind the main structure. These include paving treatments as well as retaining walls discussed in the site work section. MINOR VARIANCE On May 4, 2000, a revision to the rear setback in the R-1-40,000 Zone became effective. Currently, the setback is 25 feet from the rear property line. Previously, the setback was 20 feet. The Applicant came to City Hall January 2000 and inquired of the setbacks and designed his project with the 20 feet setback. At the time of submittal, he was informed that the setback had been changed. The Applicant is requesting a Minor Variance for the setback of five feet. • Tennis Court The tennis court with fencing and lighting as proposed dbes not comply with development standards specified in the Development Code. A concrete slab (i.e. sports court) 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 requires a building permit. As an accessory structure the tennis court is required to maintain the same setbacks and height requirements as a residential structure (see development standards matrix above). However, this tennis court falls within the Minor Variance category for a 20% setback reduction (20% of 25 feet = 5 feet) and placement at 20 feet from the property line if the Minor Variance Findings of Fact are approved. These findings include special circumstances, preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity, consistency to the General Plan, that the entitlement would not be detrimental to the public interest, health or safety and it must meet the CEQA criteria. The proposed tennis court is placed with a 20 feet rear setback. It is anticipated that the setback reduction impact will be insignificant considering the subject site's irregular shape and configuration and the fact the setback reduction is not adjacent to a residence and abuts the neighbor's garage. Tennis courts are common place in "The Country Estates" and have been approved in the past with similar setbacks. As an accessory structure, the tennis court fencing is proposed at a height of 10 feet and in some areas this is atop a retaining wall (see grading plan), however both are under the height requirement of 35 feet for a structure. The tennis court fencing is 3/a inch mesh chain link with green or back vinyl. In the area abutting the street side, the fencing is wrought iron above a retaining wall. The Development Code does not allow chain link fencing adjacent to a street. The submittal is a conceptual plan, so court lighting will be a conditioned to comply with Development Code Standards addressed in Section 22.16.050. These standards include maximum pole height, illumination, placement, hours of operation, and court surfaces. As well as the items stated above, staff supports the Minor Variance Application and believes there are special circumstances in this case. The Applicant did due diligence in coming into City Hall and getting 5 copies of the setbacks for the area prior to commencing work on the plans for this site. He was given all pertinent information, however, at that time, the possibility of the setback revision was unknown. Codes are often subject to change with the changing needs of the agency. However, the plans indicate his planning in complying with other City's Development Standards including but not limited to the height of the main structure, and the fencing at the street side of the tennis court. SITE WORK The grading, drainage, and retaining walls necessary for the improvements will be reviewed and permitted by the Public Works Division. The Public Works Division has reviewed the proposed grading plan and their comments are contained in the conditions of approval. • Soil Report The Applicant will submit a soils report for the proposed improvements to be reviewed and approved by the City. The soils report will reference the suitability of the retaining walls to withstand pressure of the retained soils and proposed development. • Grading and Drainage The applicant proposes to do site grading, on-site drainage, and retaining walls with a maximum exposed height of up to 6 feet. A soils report will be required. Export may be necessary with estimated cut of 677 c.y. and fill of 243c.y, and no notation of export. The grading plan will be required to note the plan for the excess dirt. Per Development Code Section 22.16.030 and 22.28, grading permits are issued with conditions related to air emissions and noise, thereby minimizing impacts to surrounding properties. The proposed design and use of on-site drains disperse runoff to the street and rear of the property. • Retaining Walls The plan calls for retaining walls in the rear from 3-6 feet. The Development Code allows six feet maximum exposed height for retaining walls and up to 7 feet with areas of varying topographical features. The project's retaining walls do not exceed the 6 feet maximum. Retaining walls will be required to be ornamental by using stucco or decorative block in the conditions of approval. • Sewer and Water System The Applicant is required to verify that the project site is currently connected to the public sewer system and impacts on the sewage capacity as a result of the proposed single-family residence will be approved. The Applicant is also required to make application to the Walnut Valley Water District as necessary, and submit their approval to the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits. MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The application requires Minor Conditional Use Permit approval, per the Development Code Section 22.30.080(E)(1) for the driveway that has a greater width than the garage. • Circular Driveway The Development Code requirement for driveways is generally garage door width plus two feet. Driveways may be allowed with greater widths with the approval of a Minor Conditional Use Permit. Many homes in "The Country Estates" have this design feature, and the applicant has received the approval of "The Country Estates" Homeowners' Association Architectural Committee. The Development Code requires a lot frontage of 70 feet, and the subject lot has a frontage of approximately 200 feet. The proposed site plan does not include a driveway approach on Indian Creek Drive, merely a tum around area for on-site vehicles. The Public Works Division has reviewed this plan with relationship to site visibility and has determined no deficiency. Because Braided Mane Drive is at a higher elevation then the subject driveway, cars parked or turning around would be no higher than the maximum 42 inches in height for structures in a setback. VIEW IMPACT The terrain in the vicinity of Indian Creek Road is hilly and Braided Mane Drive. The project site slopes to the lowest point at the southeast corner of the lot. By maintaining the allowed height requirements, the proposed residential structure allows view corridors for the neighboring properties. Therefore, the proposed residence will not be significantly detrimental with respect to view blockage impact. LANDSCAPING A landscape plan was submitted for review and approval with this project's application. It will be required that the landscaping/irrigation be installed prior to the Planning Division's final inspection or the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. There is a discrepancy for the height of the fountain at the northwest corner of the lot within the front and street side setback on the site plan and landscape plan. Therefore, it is a separate condition of approval that any walls, gates, fountains, etc. that may be proposed within the setback shall not be in the streets' dedicated easement; or, shall any such structure or plant material proposed within the front or street side setback exceed a maximum height of 42 inches. Landscaping trees and shrubs as shown on the landscape plan will be required to soften the height of the tennis court and walls at the westerly and southerly sections of the court. PRESERVED/PROTECTED TREES The applicant's signed tree preservation statement indicates no oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, or naturalized California Pepper Trees are on site and staff verified this with a site visit. No further review is required. ADDITIONAL REVIEW The Public Works Division and the Building and Safety Division reviewed this project. Their comments are included in both the report and the conditions of approval. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: On October 13 and October 14, respectively, notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. Thirty-two property owners within a 500 -foot radius of the project site were notified by mail. On October 13 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). RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approves Development Review No. 2000-16, Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-15, Minor Variance No. 2000-17, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolution. REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FINDINGS: The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, development standards of the applicable district, design guidelines, and architectural criteria for specialized area (e.g., theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards, or planned developments); 2. The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards; 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). REQUIRED MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS: 1. The proposed use is allowed within the subject zoning district with the approval of a Minor conditional Use Permit and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Development Code and the Municipal Code; 2. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; 3. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity; 4. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed including access, provisions of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and the absence of physical constraints; 5. Granting the Minor Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare, or materially injurious to persons, property or improvements in the vicinity and zoning districts in which the property is located, 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; 0 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: I", !/{ Linda Kay Smith Development Services Assistant ATTACILAENTS: 1. Draft Resolution of Approval; 2. Applications; 3. Oak Tree Statement dated September 19, 2000; 4. Exhibit "A" - site plan, floor plan, elevations, landscape plan, grading plan, site photos, and materials/color's board, dated October 24, 2000. D: WORD-LINDA/PLANCOMM/PROJECfS/DR2000-16 2521 BRAIDED ... /REP DR2000-16... 10 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - C, x ` COMMW. DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FPL # 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 Deposit S (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 Receipt# .. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION By )Y:- Dalt Rec'd''_ Record Owner Applicant Applicant's Agent Name Ce/U, ToK^ 003V _ Ozflu W ± (Last name Seat) (list name fust) (last name first) Address 32 "AW. SAAr2F as Z�F. f ^ 33P city Ci; </ �l Nlls, �,9 ��ttdzyl�h . c,9 zip Pnon sl � e7 —a A / Phone i 6 P 7 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 tate. (Atnch a separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and d-vuton of corporations.) Consent: I certify that I am the owner of the herein described property and permit the applicant to file lthis request. Date Op /%— 2- ti (All record Cerdfcation: I, the undersigned, hereby certify underpenally ofperjury that the information herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. S Print Name /Q4/) ¢'i �r�/,✓ ,� -_ - A lieant or gent - � - - Signed (Applicant c 7 Location 1S3f R9A4P3J> AaQc DR �GoT 9� OF 7Rle- — /Vo 23 _1': (Street address or tract and lot number) . Zoning _ l ^ ¢ cs61) HNM /o SH 3 $i Previous Cases At � / Present Use of Site. l/ lie -4,<J �O l Use applied for UZ?c F'% GGII\\11�L�IOJ'D B.1G Record Owner CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Planning Division 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (909)396-5676 Fax(909)861-3117 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION Name 0//IU, —rdAl— &I (Last name Inst) Add=,, /432 E. pa p�eTR DR. _city Z A #APWA H6/�i�//3 ' Zip Phone( Fax g�) 692- 76ti2 Applicant c//a . T K —Ptel (Last name first) 9063/ phone() Fax �) Casc a Gi 110-/1- - i, FPL N U Deposit S Receipt By DatcRecd I FOR CITY USE emfa Agent (I.as name first) NOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the City in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this case. (Attach separate sheet, neces s ryaza 4 � if sary, including names, addresses, and signatures of member ofpattaetships, joint ventures, and directors of corporapons.) Consent- I certify that I am the owner of the herein described property and perm¢ flee applicant to file this request �( Signed Date _ /y ZEZ'di (All record owners) r; n Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty ofperjury that the information herein provided is eor;ItO to the best of my knowledge. '_j Print Name kj.'4'<jy i 7t�1t� (Applicant or Aj6h) Signed Location 1 (Applicant or WYE- DR (Street address or tract and lot number) Y/ Date a /-a Zoning R ' (— 4 0000 House Numbering Map 0.5-wa 1/s' Previous Cases IL— Present Present Use of Site V4r_4NT Lai City of Diamond Bar CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Page Two Project Size (gross acres) ± 1, O E ACRES Project Density 7- 4`/' < 3 o/ /��`'• 0%u J $uq- 7C'J Previous Cases /�lmnlB ci� aR ti J SfrcF aN� Present Use of Site VAeL+HT Z -27 - for :5fXi Domestic Water Source L(/� //�Cu/�) Company/District Vlt. Method of Sewage Disposal T)(ZLt�r C.✓ Sanitation District Grading of Lots by Applicant? YES : NO Amount 77 Q/AW)2&P 2+7 GUg[rARn fill (Show necessary grading design on site plan or tent. map) F sEE A7714C&F-1) D R4 k)1,Sf¢.$ C l �i c 2- F° R 4-RRDIAJ1 - D 3-914N A&D /^(PokH,477 0^/. CG JITIONAL USE PERMrr BURDEN OF PI JF In addition to the information required in the application, the applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission, the following facts: (answers must be full & complete) A. That the requested use at the location proposed will not: Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing or working in the surround ng 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 otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare IAIJ0 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 Title 22, or as is otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area. C. That the proposed site is adequately served: I. 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. YE5 Residential Total r Total Pkg. Bachelor I Bedroom Cov. Pkg. Uncov. Pkg. Xi S 2 Bdrm. & larger Project Size: " 4 i. 6 %� s� —7p a CinelaD/,v6/ 8�4;.D Lot Coverage: + / O Zo '*Ho b,az—^ t Density: Maximum Height: —IL —ONo. of floors: 2—Sq. Footage Non-residential: t'iIA / 4/,4 N/4 Sq. ft. area No. of Bldgs. Occupant Load' 9 � 3 �• C4 v� a L�,ye�rl) CUP Burden of Proof - Page 1 Parking: Total Standard Compact - Handicap Landscaping: Sq. feet Grading: Y X N_ If yes, Quantity: Cut: % % nu gic Fill: Import: Y _ NIf yes, Quantity:. /1(en/F Export: Y _ N If yes, Quantity: A/a A/r ' Occupant Load as calculated by the Building & Safety Division is required for all dining, take-out or assembly use, churches, health clubs, theaters, etc. LEGAL DESCRIPTION (all ownership comprising the proposed lot(sypamel(s) 3 11-7 Area devoted to structure Landscap;a� spacec Residential Project: -¢S 6 % Sr' I and (gross area) pp�� (No. of lots) Proposed density t / cR6- Parking Required Provided Standard S Compact O Handicapped O Total S �6, 61 Sf . (&x4borll-ra-Ntr�11 %I _ . R SdYNFt/N Conditional Use Permit Burden of Proof - Page 2 i III,1�H_I.� 11 II�R CITY OF,' -AMOND BAR CONMIUNn a DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 VARIANCE APPLICATION Record Owner Name CH/L/. 7o1v—D9-/ (Last name rust) Applicant (Last none fust) Address LF W -be- /-f32E.P9YW7Z92- c PukA #&Y4WT,C4_ _es_ t zip i� 9 e z ]l l Phonal ) b �i7— ei pl? �e63I FPL X — T Deposit S Receipt# V 7 By r:• Date Recd -+ Applicant's Agent l.lswFr , 7��v (Last name Cost) ,Rc/ s, C-9 4/a° / Ph net) NOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Community Development Director in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this case. (Attach separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors of corporations.) Consent: I certify that I am the owner of the herein described property and pe»nU the applicant to file this request. Date record owners) Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of pedury that the ir(jormadon herein provided is . correct to the best /of'my knowledge. Print Name {��,lAA417 737,c/ (Applicant o ant) -ern Signed ! Date (Applicant ocLE --.� i.axxuur U a 4-0=71 (Street address or tract and lot number) .,. RRA, OW WAIF and INDIAN C 9 /lD (Street) (Street) Zoning le — l — 4 o Pas R NM Project Size(grossacres) 45-, z 78 5.r Project Density Previous Cases Present Use of Domestic Water Source A)4. , VWL7.)� Company/District S/ (cZ Method of Sewage Disposal Jj� Sanitation District 47-1 Grading of Lots by Applicant? YES Y_ NO Amount (Show necessary grading design on site plan or teat. map) LEGAL DESCRIPTION (All ownership comprising the proposed lots/project). If petitioning for zone change, attach legal description of exterior boundaries of arra subject to the change.) eF L.S AN44=5 STNS !�t e(ZA , A,8 P29 6JP Oeaeo eezn lAe rreo[c�� . esK� i o er ueas , /N Tic eic s o� ,/ / Project Site: 45670p S'L Gross Area No. of Lots gC;T0b Arra devoted to : Structures /'233 s�t� V �, I (�YcD/� AaD s�oi�/�+ru`7 % °°� Residential project: 9, f 2 sF (L tv.481b and Gross Am Proposed Density l Uitits/Acrea 2 No. of floors Number and types of Units l))VX X 1,a16Zr— F,4 1,L)' H04Sk Residential Parking: Type Required Provided S Total Required Total Provided S 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: 1. 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 mensce to the public health, safety or general welfare. B. That the proposed site is adequate in sire and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this Ordinance, or u is otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area. YES C. That the proposed site is adequately served: 1. 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 aro required. D. That there are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property involved, such as sire, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which are not generally applicable to other properties in the same vicinity and tinder identical zoning classification. E. That such variance u :essary for the preservation of a substantial . perty right of the applicant such as that possessed by owners of other property in the acme vicinity and zone. r 62FoK?� F. Tbat the granting of the variance will no be materially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to other property or improvemanta in the name vicinity and zone. TREE PRESERVATION STATEMENT 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 dripline of any oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, or naturalized California Pepper tree. [ ] The subject property contains one or more oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, -or naturalized California Pepper trees. The applicant states that activity (grading and/or construction) wiI1 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. I�h�t 1t+ppncant's Signa ate) D: WORD-UNTOATORMSITREE STATEMENT Y MGnrtcTlwE P NWxL a Nw.r CUSTOM HOME DIAMOND BAR, CA 2521 BRAIDED MANE DR. DIAMOND BAR, CA 91775 aopm xMxxNxxx NN" TITLE SHEET R:..I X.: A0.1 CUSTOM HOME 2521 BRAIDED MANE DR., DIAMOND BAR, CA 91775 SHEET INDEX ABBREVIATIONS EAST FACADE m GENERAL F.HL. In. N°ae Caxl:nl P.TD/F[ m!M•II°: RweplK°.•r Prp.neeTITLE - _ 1 L ME FIN. F:w" �, pnrtman SET AO.I HE 6 At,H FL flwr X''TR' PP•r ia.v PeeepYtlr A03 SITE PLAN Q c.vurim. FLASN. M•m.x O wmnee o .na FLOX. TI ---I + Peaa °. xnmee. FAL. ... a e.n eu D.T. w•Fn nl. F.oP. rn. W RWM ARCHITE6TURAL FD.S. W FPn . 1 nx. R Mrr ALOVS. Anu"ul P5.5 r.V X6e RAD" mew A2.1 FIRST FLOOR RAN AD. Am X..P PT. In1.. rnl pO. b.l poo ADJ. W.W.eIe Pb. rnu.X REF. wn..ne. A22 SECOND RCOR PLM' A66R. AL Aynnl• Ruew.m q,RR. Rlmn[ REFR wlrlE.nlx ti 0 0 A].3 POOP PLAN APFROXAppr.mmrle RlT. 6A wm< C•We RBTR. REINP. ImPnee E'bl=reaE A91 EAST C lgftT1 ELEVATION5 ARCH. Lrtnl4etural :ALV. e•I••meee REO. Xquuae ASB, nt°• bB. crM Xu RESILE. Xmlenl A33 WEST + 5QllH E=NATONS 5 APN a pe.. 6L. clna PM. Xnm _ GNO_ ..... RO. x°upM1 apnmC .__ __.___.______, - - A4: WILDING SECTIONS 6R r•u. RWD. wa.- i BD. Reutl b,..a cypnm RWL. 4x o n les4r 51NM. Nltummew pEV_ Xenne BLDG. wu:W �_ ELK. MKS.mnXm. ....kGIIL.N NB. H'L' X w nee M"° -W 5 GL. b.0 °e an PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DIRECTORY " BOT. e.uom NDWJ. xma.aa S.GD. A.rt w.r w.P•=... LI 6ENFRAL NOTES ANDDETAILS INWE. ww..a° . g."xw. ADIN6 AND DRAINAGE MAN L] 6RR N.M. Nate. Yn.l GD. yy .ra.rer CAB. CWIn6 HORIZ. NPE.arN Xwenw SECT. X.'li°^ PRO.PLT OW2F. LOT LOJERAbE: OXNER: CIVIL LB. CEM. Cna" Buln cw.nl H6T. x°mel N. SHR A"O^` NRC LHIU. TON -DEI 13233 5P. / a5b10 SF. TON -DEI 1WTEGH A LANDSGAPINEr CER. SNT. pens . < 3pR 6S 11TE5INC. 1CHU.452 135 K SAN 6AERIEL BLVD. 1433 E. PE C.1. ce 1 C.n Inn SIM. bll�e PRO=T ADONESS: KtGWS, A SATE 300 PA XA: HE16HT5, CO. Comn Gu°re ID. Innee Pem.Yr S.ND. xul T X.Pbn Pfpun FOOTP6.15%RINT, ]531 BRAINDED MANE DR FOOTFWNT. 2233 S.F. 6190631 PNONE: 1563/ 691-bbbl SAN 6ABRIEL, LA 9115 15 418 LI CANDY. P LAN LL nlwy INSLL, mw.wn S.NR. LWun X•p":n Xeemuel. DIA' CND BAR. LA 91T75 BLDG. FOOT PRINT. IS16 5F. FAX: (56w 69l-lbBl FAX(636) 510-122 K LLKb. CrIW W IM_ ,nlrnnr SPE,. T.wN`•I'°n (%g T TO CHANGE •]531 TO ORNEW."Y AF1EA. 4$45 S.F. CLO. Lora SO. Xw•n +2535 SRADED MAIN OR) AR T. LANDSCAPE: CLR n.n JAN. lwler "T. muWea MI 6AMS0 AREA: 12 SF. op" JT. lePl 55K.]•rle. aM OST ,SlIMIi D5 ATTA COPPORATION / SHA OLES UND10"ING CO. Cw4 STA man 45h1B:F. BLDG. W., DOI 5.6ARFlELD AVE. 416 T.RNSA.L CANYON RD. " LCL Mum A•perM SATE 390 CITY OF INPITTRIAL. CA 91145 CONIC. cnmu KIT' Rtr .. STD. N 84' -IO' < 35'-0' MAX ALNAMBRA, LA 91bO1 I'domn (636) 333-1998 COWa w.eYon 5R. ]tea ZpHE: (INCLUDING LNIMNEY) PHONE: (626) 3152-4664 FAX. (6361 533-`T162 CONSM-Caalaeu.v STOXC Au.We R -I-40000 FAX. (6]6) ]8]-9339 CONT. Caw.... LAB. W.M.n STRL xwaunl LORR bnla°r LAM. Levulr 5J5P f+•Wtlea BLDG VSE. FT�R',LYT; yL: LT'iK 2—t—X LAV. I.r.mn SUM. XTmm.lnnl SINME FAMILY RESIDENCE T 9 W CONSI.LTIN6 ENGINEERS. INC. OWM ..lm LKR. P.Yu SYN. xWm.WW 1168 N. SAN 6ABRIEL BLVD. LTR Cmla LT. WM1t BLDb. AREA. SATE F N LIVAd.E AREA: 9,913 SF. TRD. Trent FNONI! (b(6]) 2b6-0100 " TB. Tent X.r FIRST F -00F 5351 SF. FAX, (626) 260>I66 Og,. paw MAX. Ywm.. SECOND FLOOR: 4b 19 S.F. DEPT. Cm•amml ML. Yr6aa C•elo.t TEL I .. 6ARAfR AREA. I)915.F. D.P, MnMp T.wIWn MEGR W TER DET. on.0 MEMS. N.me..n ll,mb T.X:. T•W.. W G— SYMBOLS DIA. .°metre MET. Y.W . Tm X pmna°n MFR IDnWnlmn Tap at Per.mnl DISP tlNn"� TP feint RP• moaner VICINITY MAP ON O.O. [.n.r one opwlW M MIR Txn^r TPD T.V. TYl iW.wla Up 4..p ����T�T.T. A Ef MBr "A°, n DR. pnr MISC. MD. YlneWvnw aeon Porsla .—I 6 q� "1 1lrt (� Pfnsax SYnmI. uPwaPEnm DR DVF. vr•..r p I MTD TWF OP. Tev a PI.Ir 00-16, MCUP 00-15, MV D.sP. m a p`r xa.Wa NNL. YwNn q� DETAIL aEpEPBKe RAicx LIKE 00-17 OCTOEER 24, 2000 Dxlb. pe..iW U11F. pWmPx•tl x.xa Pne..la. s. a SxEET FEFEPExLE / EXTENSION OF TIME 10/8/02 uxD. �� /E. W`t N. xwY 1A2. eZSilxs �ELEVAnON GBERENLe LOxr0.A SKET e@F�ENeE EA. N.I.G. xot Iv C..veW f1 h,E / E ELL . Crptvnn. l.ml 8e..u.n NO. ,OM. N.T.S. xwm Nmlal xW A YJe vERi. o.uea yam" b/ I 1ENELT rlweewx _/ ELEC. R.eweel VEST. upWM ..T xEFEPQYE VV � x61 1.ED oR �• - I EplTP.R - EHER 0 Q(VATON RffEPENLE ENCL.nvm...v OA, w.r.o Yl YM .L- en S,p •BEET EP P�`.`iM°:re 085, OL o+e.a..W • . W KG. nP Om LLnt rl; V /� PCPERE`CE E%ISn 4 v!!6RAnE SOFT. Fwvmnt OD. pylae. vulwNe pD EAG. _ tZ.Iw• OFF OFNS anmr PIrN.p IVO W. neryrnl Q � �/t!\}�WIypN MMK PINISxFD EXPO. CRantl OFF. XPpnllr M-j[.T. I,—, Y T bRe.GE E%F. 4pen.°. Wi. IV>l /i � � 0.'DR MAIOC L. C�I.:i V�J. PRL5T. Pe-v+a } /• i V ! -.. M. Pmt, iN FA M. Amrn PLAM. . wnx.n. we®Ea FB. MI e.r MAG.FCDH AG. wnn i ® BlarnNs B.ev4noN o---FlWSN RPEREW� FD. Mer P.i. RYYD. PInW FON. r°. U" FE. Tu. X.uWwe.r PT pmol "l' IkY ;II aJ L � �C L'p'C: r :IJ � v L 1.� FE.C. �"�°'"n C.ewl P.TD. Fprr i..m aapem.r LEGAL DESCRIPTION v' r'l C3A13:138 OF L My OF LOS ANGELES. STATE OFCALIFORNIA AS FER MAP RECORDED IN FOLK LOT 91 OF TR/CT W. 33455. IN THE VNINJOR IIAMO TERRITORY 140 PAGE tO OF MAPS. IN THE OFFICE OF THE COLNTRY RECORDER OF SAID GOIIK. Y MGnrtcTlwE P NWxL a Nw.r CUSTOM HOME DIAMOND BAR, CA 2521 BRAIDED MANE DR. DIAMOND BAR, CA 91775 aopm xMxxNxxx NN" TITLE SHEET R:..I X.: A0.1 • AYLNIECNFC • FWIMN4 • INIEPIA �� w uu ties F��b s .mr CUSTOM HOME DIAMOND BAR, CA 2521 BRAIDED MANE DR. DIAMOND BAR, CA 91775 U. YANG PN MMO'ZNLX 1 . W SITE PLAN A0.3 -P' MI•N 4T 1YXYNLOY MILMMMY U. YANG PN MMO'ZNLX 1 . W SITE PLAN A0.3 ABBREVIATIONS L WI• i El m oM Y PowElar Xumene tFJ m.m{ ALgf..rn.uYul AD, u pa ACJ. A-. lye.ta. AL. ApRv .l. ARCH,RCH. ]nupapnl ASB. �ee w. ASPH 87. Gave BINY.. Bltum:nvu. ELD6. e:wain{ BOK. BIxY OCT.Bnm BOT. evnam IB c O8. [.14:= Mein GEM. nmt LER W. CumlL lrw C.6- c.mn Nuue Clb. e.lpy LLKb. cJmry CLO. tb.J LLR qv C[u.a Bv.nw COL. ca m COAL. [qKK Gmecuao CONSTR.cn.l.nu.o CONT. emunm . CGRR ce.aearn L1SK. Cmnmrnnk L1RR c.0 CTR_ Cour DEL WN. DET'P, o.p.amml D.P. dleM{ TounMW DEA. o a1 DIA. p mpe DIM. pnmaan OSP prawn P dw DBw. Opanln[ DR. Deer DWT4. d.... p5, dm•P•a D.S.P. Bra p•vevin DPK. 0..aw E, pa EA. P..n EJ. cvuaeo aapl EL. vmu.n 'LEC. oeaJ.J EMF/. venin ENER. tm.r{.nq ENOL O"Mn'^' EP. P"milea:.e EO. bnJ EOPT. 4wP..m ENOL. m•;Wa rap. ENST. [JXiet ENDO. up..e ENP. IM . ENT. Ol.a- FA N.Nm F.D. PON Rn. dJ FON. P.mLlpe FE. Rn ]maw.ee. FE.C. tiemmprvpe.. PH.G. Pin Nm• della P.TDIR F.pm•o.I .'_P_nlnr FIR Phut P'N P•ail:.n FL - Raar A3.1 F•per Ta.v M. AP , FLASH. S.•em] PS.R_ MILVA6 SEG71 ION3 FLOUR Fmn M FOA. rv...l do . O.T. N.m TI. PD,. Pu..( rtvi.e FA.S. M1e. vt Reea FPRF. N.P.val 0.. FB. FT, T" Peet .r Ml RD. Ima d•N FTG. Pmuo] REF R6mc. F.RR tum.l NEER NMN.npr Nlere Namn]'•l•r 6A,4.en 6A. RE X.hlerc.e SOON. d✓waa RED. N•a'n^a 6 d.e Bu RES L Xn6.ol 6L.L. 4pn RM. Bom 6N0. 4rvwa RD. N^•ei: UPmmp 6R CtW. RWD. xawee REV, 9e+en.l NH. Nw Dee S bole X.O. xeum c.n SC. bxe do KOM. N..a.w SCD. x.I dm Bim•^... XOWE. x.a..n SDH =. RM. NWe. WYi S 01T .pouer HORIZ. N.vw .Ja SECT bvlim ..I He. Na.. 51 A.0 HST. Neftel �pL 9avu SHT. ant Sim. Rmu.r ID. mnee pmelar SN.o. bviiu] N.Ppe MI INT hnl.um S.KR. ].a4.Y N.pt.e u..q.w INT. pin`°• SPEC. SMe�Ix.4eo 5p, ] mre .ITR NONer SET, auNeu ami JT. /.pl STA, STA. v.Nm STD. w e KIT, M. 'TL. ]le.l $TOR. nw.ar LAE. mM..r n 5TRL ]IruaunI LAM. Lmwi. E/SP Wewe.e LAV. moon SYN. ],..m.wcJ LKR IYav 5N4. xmww LT. R e TRO. Tn.e yearn® TB. T.-. I. MA, MA. Y.S.Ie. dopa '. pe WbMEL', TEAL. MEMS. Y.mener TER Tema. MET. Y4J THIO MNn MFR Y.eamner TP. T.v a P.r.mmt MH. Ymeex TPD ivmt P.p•r d•peu•r MIN. Vlnwu T.V. tn.aao° MIR O^vr TJR M nm lYnmm IYP. nwd MD. vwm d•.w rOP. iap a nN. MTV. Yemla MA. Ywue. �, unmwa UN O. Vaw xaw au...w Oft. p N.LL. Nol p cvovrt ND. rumen IDM. Nemlui VISIT. T.xIN FLT'S. $.I A x.Y VEST, vuNenx OA OEs. Men NV n0 OA. B. dao µL. :.le gvwt CO. Noma. d.n.ln W. me OFF I. YVO ndml CRL*. pPeIW NP ].Yry.M OFF. PoFJI. lJmml NR. M. N.NYI PRCST. Fn -ma PL PYI. PLAN. PY.N. I.mp.p PLA,. wa.r PLYµD. Roma PR var P P.TD. hov iv.v ei.p.m.r CUSTOM HOME 2521 BRAIDED MANE DR., DIAMOND BAR, CA 91775 EAST FACADE l PROJECT INFORMATION I PROJECT DIRECTORY PROJECT 01'[ER: MR GHIU, TON -DEI PPDFLT ADDRESS. 2521 ERAINOEO MANE DR DIAMOND EAR CA 91715 ( SLE.ELT TO CHANGE 4521 TO .2525 BRAVED MAIN DR.1 OST 4" 45b1B SF. ZONE: R-1-40000 M06 USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE P D5 AREA. LIVABLE AREA: 9A13 5F. FIRST FLOOR 5354 Sr. SECOND FLOOR. 4b19 S.F. bARNSE AREk. IJ91 S.F. VICINITY MAP LOT LOVEM6E: 12,33 SP. / 45blD SF. v 26.Tb% t 30% FOOTPRINT. 12%35 97. BLDG. FOOT P,IwT 7416 S.F. DRIVEWAY AREA, 4545 S.F. 6AZE60 AREA: 111 S.F. E.06. HT, ! 54'-10' 4 55'-O' MAX ( INLLIAIN6 CNIMNEY ) LEGAL DESCRIPTION O1 ER' CHU, TON -DEI 1431 E. PEPPERTREE DR U HAERA IEI6 5, LA 90651 PHONE: M2) 641-BbBI FAN. RNO) bol-lbbl T. lis AT, CORPORATION / SHA 5015.6ARMELD AVE. SITE 336 ALNAMB0.A.CA Awl RIOE: (6261 262-466P FAN. (626) 262-9334 STS!. T 1 W GONSI 1145 EN91NEER5, MNL. 1166 R SAN 6ABRIEL BLV. SUITE . N ROSEMEAD. CA 970 PHONE, (62b) 'Z (626) 2200>I66 SYMBOLS REVISIC STHBJL �peiAK NEPENEEKE y:Eer vEf4NENGE �4EVANON aETEREM4E 6.EET 1RfEVeD.LE —�S�iiTL,ET1' SEER v.EVAT.ax rte.ea6v4e 46EET NEPENE`V'E v�WNOOW HUtK %�0.1'RHAINC CIVIL: TRITECH ASSOCIATES INC. 155 N. SAN 6AERIEL DLVO. W1TE SOO SAN 6ABNIEL. LA 41T5 P40NE:(626) 510 -HIB F", (626) $70-1112 LANDSCAPE; COBS LMIDFLAPIN6 4161LRN94L CANYON RD. GIT, OP INDUSTRIAL. CA 41145 - PHONE (626) 533-1446 FAN: (626) 553-7162 P,�,4TA uNe �� MAiGx 0 cs+ST.Hy faxrGVR NB1 Ors PIMSMD - ctn.rcV9 Y. EY15i1X6 �1eT' 6R..OE PIN9NED yf fiR/GE M�/ -!.00H HRRER LOT Al OF TRACT NO. 23403. IN THE LNINVORPORATEO TERRITORY OF CGINTRY OF LOS AN61LES. STATE OF CALIFORNIA A5 PER MAP RECORDED IN ECG% 110 PAGE 10 OF MAPS. IN THE OFFICE OF THE GO NRRy RECORDER OF SAID LOAM. SHEET 6ENERAL AO,1 TITLE 51£ET A03 SITE PLAN ARCHITECTURAL A J FIRST FLOOR PLAN A22 SECOND FLOOR RAN A23 RDOP PUN A3.1 EAST ] NORTH ELEVATIONS A5.2 NEST . SORH ELEVATIONS Aa: MILVA6 SEG71 ION3 CIVIL LI GENERAL NOTES AND DETAILS C2 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN I AND51-APIN6 - LI LANDSCAPE PLAN EXHIBIT "ADS DR 00-16, MCUp 00-15, MV 00-17 OCTOBER 24, 2000 EXTENSION OF TIME 10/8/02 oil 03A1333? Y eRpI1ECNM RwMMY4 . nT�44x CUSTOM HOME DIAMOND BAR, CA 2521 BRAIDED MANE DR. DIAMOND BAR, CA 91775 ECBBW ONKIIxYM dam M: IiFIW M.: Y. YAVL mKa ey : 4a RG CIO]]( X LS Aej l Yv YOLMIWY PRIIIYIMWY nnE SHEET AUY1 `B CREEK_ _ _ _ _fb - -v ORA—", YrPy m TBMO WMT J 1 III I 1111 I \"I, •III <IMAH Qil n SITE PLAN 0 1 n 0 \\W ID TURATUR �Pf TQiRLL IIW6 NIOIAO dXNG W. V4 0 -', gDA SITE PLAN NOTES: y% J 1 o COLO -- -SANDSTONE' w/ LINE WrIWc d © 01Y N 9'-6'M. GAZEBO W./ BALUSTER (L9CO0 MM OWE Y 510A _S,ANPEO W./ IE W SMWM FW- NATURE COLOR CCNC BAND MAODON STE") 12" SO ATE NAM W./ 12' W. CWC. BAND: WSL R,y (] 3VM1E FENCE 11 A IT X WALL P.N. W./ G] 9' % SR' 2' WAiAT Ew rWNTA•Nla'DPIN SMOOTH 1'.m- 1 t 10"A , j\9 ` VL O 012' SWMSSIW ARSON IZ W /4 EO. 14" COLUMN k WFINJI WATER EDGE WATER FALL IB" DEEP P wxF' i.Fl9Oq�' LIII�LMWI Rl,2'_ 0 \\W ID TURATUR �Pf TQiRLL IIW6 NIOIAO dXNG W. V4 0 -', IRW FENCE k 4' W % 6' H TRW LAIC SITE PLAN NOTES: y% J 1 o COLO -- -SANDSTONE' w/ LINE WrIWc d © 01Y N 9'-6'M. GAZEBO W./ BALUSTER (L9CO0 MM OWE Y 510A _S,ANPEO W./ IE W SMWM FW- NATURE COLOR CCNC BAND MAODON STE") 12" SO ATE NAM W./ 12' W. CWC. BAND: WSL R,y (] 3VM1E FENCE 11 45 Y 18' WflMTi WATER EDGE SWWMWG POOL 3-8" TO 7'6" DEEP IT X WALL P.N. W./ G] 9' % SR' 2' WAiAT Ew rWNTA•Nla'DPIN SMOOTH RX., SPA w./ TB" RANO WAITER FALL t 10"A , j\9 ASTITILCO. POUR -W -PLATE CDNC COPPING M PRECAST CONC. CAP nl] O 012' SWMSSIW ARSON IZ W /4 EO. 14" COLUMN k WFINJI WATER EDGE WATER FALL IB" DEEP P raxiax eow ® y4" TO 60" H R.T. WALL STUCCO FIN, W./ PRECAST CWC CAP k 111vsv 5 o sDo (LAWS) `\) B M. LOW WALL STUCCO FW. W/PRECAST CWC, CM W./54'H O LANDSCAMIG PM, IRW FENCE k v W WW COTE O RA" MADE STORE (STONE PARR) W./ 12- W NAME / © WATER FALL C0.M CWC. BAND. 9IWM FIN. I 0 Ix' SLATE STONE (STONE PAM) W/ 13" W. NATURE �\ p COLWW CC. BAND. WOOD, TIN. J A '1 / Qi IO' H LOW PIANTE4 WALL STUCCO FIN. W/ PRE-CASt CONC. CAP Ilei W © MIMAMG 6 % 6 CWC. MOASTRW k - W H. BALUSTER O 12' 0.C. W/ 22 -SO 36" R PILASTER W./ CAP k l HOURS COUNT VICTIMS: UGIT FIXTURES SMALL BE LOCATED AT IIW. POS LIGMT FACT. (TW'. 9A` _. Uv MAGOON S1. ' 74-694 'N 1\ 3SC0) ( NO DIRECT UWT TO INC SIREEI PER CWN7NI UG N. W YA ART G POLE SXALL BE COATED MATERIAL. DOME STANDARD.) NiS COLOR CWC STEPS W/ GE MLNOSE ED w u NOTE: SNOW FW. CMU WALL W./ ID' MASHRWN CAP NPS016 6" CWC. COB W/ 6' H. MAX PID. - IRW FENCE k 4' W % 6' H TRW LAIC /\} \\\ 41 42'STUCM.fSIHILOOM W./ 17" SO. PILASTER O4 S TO 6' M. A.T. J 1 © 6' N. PTO, IRON FORCE W./ 2' SO. POST O 8' EACH \` } \ © 01Y N 9'-6'M. GAZEBO W./ BALUSTER (L9CO0 MM OWE Y 510A 1 \ MAODON STE") 12" SO ATE NAM W./ 12' W. CWC. BAND: WSL R,y W./ 14" W MILLNOSE EDGE CONC. STEP 11 45 Y 18' WflMTi WATER EDGE SWWMWG POOL 3-8" TO 7'6" DEEP y RX., SPA w./ TB" RANO WAITER FALL t 10"A , j\9 Qn PO0. NET BAR xdw % N'M 36"W % M"H NEMAR W / BAR 51N(, TILE FIN. W./ STUCCO WALL NN. nl] O 012' SWMSSIW ARSON IZ W /4 EO. 14" COLUMN k WFINJI WATER EDGE WATER FALL IB" DEEP P ® y4" TO 60" H R.T. WALL STUCCO FIN, W./ PRECAST CWC CAP k 111vsv 5 6011. PN. IRON FENCE 1t B M. LOW WALL STUCCO FW. W/PRECAST CWC, CM W./54'H `3 PM, IRW FENCE k v W WW COTE 24'M. LOW PLANTER WALL STUCCO FRI. W./ PRECAST COW. CAP. ' 1 i/ © WATER FALL 03fi' Y 60" K CARGEN dNAMUIi TIM. PTB RW FENCE OM 6'x. MAS 0.T. WALL STUCCO FW. W./ MASHROW CAP 111 `\ IOM. WNW. CHAIN UNIX FENCE GM ... XESTWE R.T. WALL - A '1 / © 6N. XEISTWE R.t WALL © MIMAMG ;b I DGIN FRII.TCrIA CWC fLWWRUW./TICOW CEWRS - OARX-00.WE0 COATING \\ HOURS COUNT VICTIMS: UGIT FIXTURES SMALL BE LOCATED AT T _.F45 DV ERCT COURT SURFACE. TME UWT STALL BE DIRECTED DOWNWARD) 1\ W.� UWT SHIELDS. THE WTSM OF T N%NRC. ARM ANO W/ A DARN. LOW REFLECTANCE 1tmw7a 111,1` YA ART G POLE SXALL BE COATED MATERIAL. EFSTWO TIME TO REMAIN IN. 1 w u NOTE: NAD I 0 Q 1\ 1 1. WE COWL OWNS, FOR j MORE INFO. OF PRISM GRADE, `. NT. OF R.T. WALL. AND MORE GRAGMG GETAHS I L SEE LANDSCAPING DINGS. FOR UWE DETAIL k DIMENSCN I f fl \i liAl\; Il Al �l i\\��\111\111 ����\i II�!1, 1)1t N1]a ,\mv. Nw:a Lv B WAGNITEGARE CUSTOM HOME DIAMOND BAR, CA 2521 BRAIDED MANE DR. DIAMOND BAR, CA 91775 ANN,; DOWNS ..x Dnn, CE: P.. Cew M FANG wmW 61: xW.: YYYYXXX%IX r. Ilt-o• A,UwN 1N.: XXA]XXYR PRLWNAM Ba.: SITE PLAN Sn., xo A0.3 I\ Il 0 1 R,y 11 I 1A i1 1: it O UPEL'PWONOr ;b Il 1 I 1\ \ I I � 1 I 1 IN. 1 w u _ 1 NPS016 x _J 1 6.MBDA�Y 1 Nvwr uw �. Mr WAGNITEGARE CUSTOM HOME DIAMOND BAR, CA 2521 BRAIDED MANE DR. DIAMOND BAR, CA 91775 ANN,; DOWNS ..x Dnn, CE: P.. Cew M FANG wmW 61: xW.: YYYYXXX%IX r. Ilt-o• A,UwN 1N.: XXA]XXYR PRLWNAM Ba.: SITE PLAN Sn., xo A0.3 FIRST FLOOR PLAN ® LIVING AREA N 5,354 SQ. FT. GARAGEAREA: 1,191 SO.FT. cl .. _ �.eu NN• ... m x.. YMM MI1Y9 • p�GG.lp CUSTOM HOME DIAMOND BAR, CA 252,1 - EP,AFF.D VAX- DR. l:IA.MCNC EA'?, CA 9177 Ga.r ap: pmK M,' V, aa1G G1/O$/00 aP[I upr alN xFFxx4aXX FIRST FLOOR PLAN A 2.1 SECOND FLOOR PLAN N ED 1 LNING AREA : 4,619 SO. FT. n yr 2ME • IYTAI'.:R ref � e.e MYO •n a nLCRIO CUSTOM NOi DIAMOND BAR, nl:n.x.R. SECOND FLOOR FLAN A 2.2 ROOF PLAN NED • xRp XC"' • 1. N �FlOR CUSTOM HOME DIAMOND BAR, CA 2521 BRAIDED MANE DR. DIAMOND BAR, CA 91775 cmRooRZY vRYYmY P N, ru'c m Ol/Ds/UO hoK+ N4: YRpM%%SFII ROOF PLAN Ae<i xe A 2.3 T(1P OF nwn[ NM1n G e ELEVATION NOTE: O crus aca� r:a (] •Cfr„/y' fZ `].Nf.AS' CW.Nry Mp.Mb:$ a iE.VLLiE ��MiA.Y �--a M =cO -xrani .aay.nsr ma:z« �ry a s:L. p n . =PL' na[u5: 3L�USTx p r tfr, ?c"£:L x.i 5acc-n aq O 'DE000�- T. crx:: Lncai "O 'EE.. Mf,L.:N i A"St.LU - S B 5 clr l4_S'Ee nJ CCiaP.'I pp ca. z cacx iOPOFn m ranine Gn EAST ELEVATION n NORTH ELEVATION I ••w �~ wnxo ..•y,e CUSTOM HOME DIAMOND BAR, CA 2521 3. -MCF, t AN. DR. r1AMuSD =:R. ::A 9177- nascur cxiGs/OP WEST & SOUTH ELEVATIONS A 3.1 TOPwPLATE ELEVATION NOTE [r MNC. RFT' TLE © 'p MC - PTie, IOAUC)iT CY 4 MOi NOS pp Pm. 5.w. mcc. Q $Ei4:.Ei'a P•UVVW 1'lER 11 11.:11 VACFET Ml r0R1'L T CROWII uCAlil11Y3 N9 WNVYI M,LMI Q Om,-CECCU; 1.S YLL +Q -.0 Viu'CL.U- PRECAmi RAULei1ER 1/i' W 9ENAL W./ SWPI M. OO TE;OUx' PPI. G c CC ..l C7 `.`ECO NOILLNL' I(ECALLIa_ �u $iCP• HE R SMP V[i 9l_- VCi i]:E Q /iARiGE ICOR n WEST ELEVATION TOP K PLJ„i SOUTH ELEVATION � •e'L[ivm cnvE 14 CUSTOM HOME DIAMOND BAR, CA 252' BRAIDED MANE DR. 31AMOND BAR, CA 91775 hew: pole: fLNLfiil ry1R.YR4 u. •}Nc oLDs/W Pr•jsr Yq : Y[YM:1X}yq WEST & SOUTH ELEVATIONS A 3.2 �. RMGR NSfS (.) Mn WRX.<]RY6 R LP CW<mC5 x /PRp4L WDiG xn6 MAl ][ MINUF4 0Y M YIRMG R]4« le) xi R.w} xa caaiN0*07 vwl cwaeL 0 avn]II ]J . MKar1 elanm woE (Iw] tDmeM{ Lw+ss ]wtvur Ne1W a nEst M.1a (<) M4 mrtto Wes wn w.r ORA.xa vw6. mx¢ xo onbt ?w.ct T%II PIIOII 10 MIIOIM. R Npgl WpIC.. - Ie) A CtR' R M RMW aJMN4OM WnD MAMp �iMCM. %,1L5 uOs{ ]L n M I54SWM1 R .L Blt KASRI Mq q<.M1[ .1 M SIIC .1 .Yl (e) M ]FLD Of..14fN Ny4 WT 0t<NLY2 Vu[ ]W 4 M<a.Et CfYYFi. (1) ML S1pN MVII RRI 6 10 Y ODIC IKOt UxbR<M x KC' M v M }U➢ OII.LLA. q.<LY 9AM sNiRL➢CMS LNL S 4.iL]r11D IN M rtt6 O4LII9 f0 M IOVI MPMC x0 tt C61RCI CRYL (]) IYl CbbC Yls}.s[ MP11O.fD KML OCCl/n.Y R lLYM54 wt K le]C<m. Inl [RRt mM L1wv1P b.M R M I].wwi /IO ZRwC NO[ T' snows LCCNCK .Y0.9IIs R <LL O.M lll� M M GMWC xw I}o ORrrC IICMVMK /6Y}. -. (J "n KIMYM Nwt airs VOM ON is wMM aK NR t n M YVbet mu a slMr A PFs Am MMM• OM MD Ant O[O1 IFE 0 M eaUw A!M SxCM 06rR[{.atiYL ...-. 0) =Y Tc xue TOO b.oNRY gwiLa na smeaxn w}urcx MO' ]hSLM 1NBIlfANlfD'1Sd W9p5 W.R Om, OYbx M 961RIm prion -O.00ILbOI 1. M PHtY QN1Ml 4Y'1a"LGm1 CF SM MMLS LNss s( MW}Fp Is 0' R TW.X K.WL<1MD LWO METEOR RO =ft1 1MIL MII(f]RM AELLmK Yf N. //L BO4Pt Nrt .wIRY.1F0 MIL (L) f.Orc 6MO 9myLy KWa 0 FLI M M DiCLwx.0 R Ip1-SS = FIN M F a WE M Ns a[S. N rw.YINVM pI]L K MOE FOR coNlReMORr 01oIi•OC M uL 1N6. (m) AFILLYDIIK IMNyMW TO x a M S MI 101[MML Mx4E IRRL KxNwW IWFMS fi . CrCx TO y1CLT sLOM MaC l ]a =M R M MLOOS MY A M LW ORE R OER Lraipa 9WL 01%P'r QIpN<W}G1 IM MF1 MW14. W IOX MMMa . K K.tlxa fRJu G4RD 9p[s. N) ALLII�CP 6INIL}W WRMi ]INmL .< SfQx1 CIMI }Ad[Mr MK 16 K (1) ML 41RM<I dIMS MF TOSEM I]E NO O w.KN MS RA K SLYI]11 a M M - z .cE.IM xmts (I) a1W A RiNf {9'M CLN51Ny[ryW �. pplMli IICTg11. l6] <1m6 CQNO' fdMepl R x.9C NNns FOR .wI YW, wMx d1 rzr[c1tM nwc NMnAen rAawc xONoeic aur xa uvrtn ro FIP< suets MR R MY xlO $iMl ptm15. (}) MRM II KIO M MUY 0 � . RT.]4p apN M LOLL ].-M1 W= " (el ML 9WL a cmw, Q TNpAKVI T x }Ry p:1[t0 To. R M MM20 R YUl<A1 pM OOMOr A}• arpYM(O 61 Aii.LL 5f<I, . mIKMM Thr 0lls}-s1. OEWOO 4. MO¢ MRALKF: M.M ImT /MLKM(A TEf] .1C�r]rt 0 M RUYO R/L11 9wu K 1Jfa. (G) Ml0 COHir 9WL K MID1W0l 8Y L(Oge ]CCVLIIL m M NIY. MOL IIORF.YIt Lqi , OILIt 16E R M MpM® KM1N TEer. tM1]ULY 068myRD..98LL BE OTMm I}. M SnO COK <OIRY. - (e) 51E]Cd] psis K M RL Sas awE eE JK[ TO [EftfMM M rYEL owcc 6 R M ML M IGQOMR MR M ICLLR<Vi m RL Kit IM rllO]" IAOO LLMC YNelf 0' Wt4U4 MACED. (3) ONEW M II. R M IWL to 9 1a Gtll BJLOYN' IwT YRNJL lFl OR . 1 O` (<) OPC TEST WONL M qt Po111 0mALfM IM its VOI FCa-MN (et 5.M%fM RS15 R I4 M a46Ms s1N1 Ec sol MY< 0 IEM' M} M Re1WEf CFYV MIM 4' ] MWMLMS, r aTWmRO T M avmowc grata xauMe sbl Tsts. s]wt siml6lMc NM<1[TRs MO CpMLSFOtx.IO 1II} e0p]ry x .<CIXwRUItE MM M FOJnww nlmuMs q.[(. YM (1) I, x a SLL MMR<RK mME! VS(OWORF K]LLm(LLELL rolls sTrm Twx ] xotKaw To x Lnrnx " (}) WM ltfr RtmR IM M 1xTOKL ilt 1eaOM� 11USt M.Kt T XM C<L1mM OWI'L1L1,61LSO M M aOTEdK•r KYMI 0 ' K - ME 9Y( R.Knr KwIWO]1i Oo16L<L1L M DOFt wsr t-M1W1R-M]i M /LIWI WM 16T MkC R M it1 W1fMN. ENt e.M FI.YI. - (J) F4 Al5 SILYl'K IIQ ti 0621[AJOf WRpYs. ". (O M MSRR R ]W1 T61]IC .41NL t <1[ullm x M RVOOs AEaLMm T M pants a0[ rys" 1wn mroly ... (.) ML sMLL m HC-sIKID MIR sxl.M UI tiahlCM 1[YAR R ]ewcm Me ww rc"wiTe�s Tim.ci. IDi« vi ]�w Rt1LML MM A iIMNp '1Mml �T oea aeQ LmYRY M 16-217 .7 O WV]KaWMTM. TEST OM 0' a .MY DEM ' a w. LpM � L[ ucTm+t MOwrt ra x�mr a m ea¢ III .On T ]YNI WIpIML TE<Tp MN< 1} eOa M RYaIW pw} Wf K FLn,ID.M M iLL IR{6L MCOMI[IMIOM <a p.]1 gACOOB M1L eaN Sly}Im rc' M aaIMYK IIp(11L .w6 <VMpiD x ]DULKt !I M KRdM OIM111. - 0) P) Mt YaLtm. Wa - plat .. MIHCKx 11016 (<) aU¢O r.Try ii;il�! SOyit --p-dCl[D F m M mdICIW pf xswclq. i1tOW 'sC<,IN(�m�oMt 0.0q Y�p1 ]�INLLq " m Mt1]L M R.sRIDOeI 0 ]aLCw<: l4]<UQk.Np - Ne( MN 0) Nl RpVOpT}6 NCLII'm N M l9lMI. 4RfClw'K N�6 a09lCNRY1G WM NO Ms . MRt R M tlMM4 (Z) Wr OMO OEM M IT R CRIOUCTFs V WI MR'OC aaC64 ITtcuolO MtN MMO(r. asMLMi IePOeR ro < ewnm ro M aWKY FIO htf'Ym41L p) M CpR.M RCIODit Alm Ka¢�1fC•L BiRW M6i"OAK" OEROTO[ TARS xM' ROIO.m aE, C 1L1G1a w ]. ]Wl ONRr Mfll 0 M KVpIK w' M ", ]]pIC)TO =.. !LM }eeLL avTt ]R6I ]1h+et ML 4Mr aortO..ut NOTES: T. FM11xV1IX LYMIRIe4- C1aC YMOS R qR jt�. CIIRC YMA$ R ill 2}L�. 4lAC T]]m] R ]11Gr O }." RMIOpR4 ZME: RR-1�490C O V •d •w( A yAFWOFYC lY'OP?�.�..9.y mm D1 _ riAN l .y]x Q]1 �6 �F..M )•_p• 1 o]yom..: ¢[� d4<i o0 i ]W r YiNIO YNF w avmM R'w NYd1 ..lq M ycWt .}¢ �� V-6'- 12 MMM w(��N� NI MWh]wF do SSP I OF N4+ N�tAo'x'Lwn�oax ' :'P ii;il�! SOyit --p-dCl[D F m M mdICIW pf xswclq. i1tOW 'sC<,IN(�m�oMt 0.0q Y�p1 ]�INLLq " m Mt1]L M R.sRIDOeI 0 ]aLCw<: l4]<UQk.Np - Ne( MN 0) Nl RpVOpT}6 NCLII'm N M l9lMI. 4RfClw'K N�6 a09lCNRY1G WM NO Ms . MRt R M tlMM4 (Z) Wr OMO OEM M IT R CRIOUCTFs V WI MR'OC aaC64 ITtcuolO MtN MMO(r. asMLMi IePOeR ro < ewnm ro M aWKY FIO htf'Ym41L p) M CpR.M RCIODit Alm Ka¢�1fC•L BiRW M6i"OAK" OEROTO[ TARS xM' ROIO.m aE, C 1L1G1a w ]. ]Wl ONRr Mfll 0 M KVpIK w' M ", ]]pIC)TO =.. !LM }eeLL avTt ]R6I ]1h+et ML 4Mr aortO..ut NOTES: T. FM11xV1IX LYMIRIe4- C1aC YMOS R qR jt�. CIIRC YMA$ R ill 2}L�. 4lAC T]]m] R ]11Gr O }." RMIOpR4 ZME: RR-1�490C O V •d •w( A yAFWOFYC lY'OP?�.�..9.y RJ}3LIOM¢ SA$1 EA ]AL'YYY�Y<M4M`1N11](IWNFl11L 1i anal FMk Mm wMelm9K W,,.YN4 mm D1 _ riAN l .y]x Q]1 �6 �F..M )•_p• 1 o]yom..: ¢[� d4<i o0 i ]W r YiNIO YNF w avmM R'w NYd1 ..lq M ycWt .}¢ �� RJ}3LIOM¢ SA$1 EA ]AL'YYY�Y<M4M`1N11](IWNFl11L 1i anal FMk Mm wMelm9K W,,.YN4 "�y.� D1 _ r" `+rte '161 d�Y[allp'.I x.aw V<f]n.•�wM At'+�6]LJLi t YNIMmN1 l� vnmw x w eom� .y]x Q]1 �6 �F..M )•_p• 1 o]yom..: ¢[� d4<i o0 i ]W r YiNIO YNF w avmM R'w NYd1 ..lq M ycWt .}¢ �� V-6'- 12 NOIR•P".1O AiPWw E1]�1Ny4]A�1�RyLYyx�}]{Li��}M4x�]ppY��]m1 Nor gyp' SSP I OF DLiTNilA.rr. Oif a 'pyFWl�wrF�`N�try.YiA�Y. aLQ2 wn i<Ym.wtic 6Ei. NI _MIY ;• ..O��11ea'1e`1m�imxi 4. M M 1! P] rataa"s mar. Lpea�iiarrrr.em Nm rY r-t�w].w.. Nm rse ne] _ }w IDf1"A.1m.]e � - RM�ifaiLLw�DRO1tw qa .1]]Fa .0W ae.m ]I..aATlM.<oL]wO Y..W YIN Mw.mW Mnx MOaY1MM. m rxrmn...1� R._ _.. 1WxJY�tM<]1T - A. r'aWL��.1"A`w4.�w1 sY°°OvRalmolmN �lw wr armw]cv Mon yqMnM��M Jy.w RM __ RI}RL w..m -" ,R MOIdiW d MI M 4� � �'a.{na alvv® rYi�41]�o a1 Y+o NSM]N 4 oewx u<�N apwRa sn. MNr nE ana®<]m¢a '.� :. t0'L-n�r�O�ppp�tT� �aETIt saa]11�a]0, UARLRxl A4bwiwi�s' �RE.n� fu.la o.en.mmwoo -. 1]mNi- ]wMyon n11Mw � l.iE"m R r �� laom aimlmlam wo.'aes ]wn snm coram �.o /�ans.o wyvr -. �] ' --(�Y+-�4'4vo4'Lmlew Uv F G 0] TOR f ... _�.. M. 1m ':' �' A1MwL•r KWIKMa rc'• •. " 8- CONC. -BLKI " W/SOLID GROUT 'iillnrYm - '.®vac ::_nwyMMMa.<.cio�w�.eo�y.yN ... N. _ " 2...--GLRv.t Dmaan "." awe.an n #4 O 24 0 C t' - HORIZ -.. . "A" BARS SUBDRAWACE SEE `sa•� �,TO• Faw«eiw - - SOIL REPORT OR - -;t1Y Lm. . - ARCH. _ . - ttEVIE1fD M)R CITY DY - Tx 4 CONT. KEY AREA DRA/A' DETAIL y4 0 24' O.G g s .aT f]4sA.l� A � - a. its eMmnlm]m.1u AMTWO -.• ' D dM1vIY.gw NM. wutl d.WMN _ _ "KNiee KCMm]xYA�I.. AML 0M. � M1<M W PR ' H1<B". BARS D D1 _ : _ D2 3 14.0 24' O.C. }'_O• )•_p• 6.. 5 6 -� /4 0 O.C. 4'-6', V-6'- 12 fmnM W ipAyll�iwa vD � �.!M y^.'1� OFMI . M PLAN < m A/ K, �gAMRm]D o Me.wsnMM:,m a¢ o- } mo pp Oe.ReRoeeo MaRNx (7y�cMLRRoer wrz . gyp' VV SSP I OF 2 TOPEIFFUw NAmI GRADE ELEVATION NOTE: C' ClN . R" 10.E © 'faiC(}.Pl" FIi...gP4Ca5f DiC'Mi 4ff_D�tiS © -'p < . '. STLro []' SE.MP55 P;'lYN1N L"Ri ED 'M M-T.L WW! © UlE3:RIM1' P.A: ET nSER F-3L'CkgT C20.VI uCWFIe� Q FP..x m. r'. 'm", SAS+ (] ✓16. 'CEiCU: F:MASA51 'Mrµ W T.'U k ALL Q ?fV "OefCM- MEG,: RAULASnR El ' 1/2' W 44 L W/ SMWPI flA. O 'crmw- cm s c cmw --= VQCW4" IfEU VO.l5 �u Vi FR. SRP W.% 5G'_YCS ME IS : PFP 9£ET MbTti W.O p CPRACE X. WEST ELEVATION F.F QWG RWR ELA1 a E SOUTH ELEVATION L • 4Nn1ECNME • u. Alllli. • IM12?:4 •Irl• Y�RIIRY•^L ,. `r-.ypy� CUSTOM HOME DIAMOND BAR, CA BRA:DED MANE DR. DIAMOND BAR, CA 91775 weaeul zrxarzna -Anc w/os/m xn.nrsu ,e.3r.• - r - � r.,Fr WEST 6 SOUTH ELEVATIONS A 3.2 ,. RRNL Na(a (0) N M Mdel � /LNtlLf➢ w[M: PING YEi R (a) Nt 4UMf NO c(161NLTCx sXYL CMON 10 OWRN n VRaIN elMnrN: coR VNNL mnioll) wtss samMar xEso a ntss PWM. k) n aoao arts Nusr Lwr RA.NR srs¢ Joass. A1O mlu orynrc oNILn Pepe ro .PrNarn R Bowl wort (a) A r4R CL M wLW. PpNf Np APPIO(p wpW: pL,y6 yyy} R M M M54JAW C! 1 CS10081L PIXSG M Mr4lF N M 9R N ILL (e) M RLO OYXLV uy4 SR M.Yw4[ SluRG fq( N\ wyy„'S EVILCi. O) /LL SiNy MAIL aCNrt 6 m R CCIi NlFll CpIW:A6 NSCCIW F M 1F1L Oflml. 11@1Y SLAM N{R1RI5 L' LLIy C SMIro F 1K ([ID OMAN m M IOUI MPL NO YR1T (fir CiiYS. (t) fWi wCK MICr.R YMUm RLCC MO.wNL' 4 WLN(S CL R UGm. IAI [o1Ri wm owia nw w M PLNwLC Nn awLe aR F aarc LoeNeLs No. vxn IXNL oN. nm ON M /IrnNu PIMI Mo oRArNy M A�RIOIMr[ Pqf. (i) M RNilb NN( E415 pLrf (R ]1C r1Y6'1NIE NR p{OSD F.M WOrtl YOGL JWf A NNbO 91/N rMCIAM NU M.w P[IX rE - G) �ONlattal WLOe04 RRe1m'LeR vwY6rl W er u90 arac M MM' YARM 1CHT R 9fY110f IIELNI W QRYCI I. M'OWM IUOM:I ChL2S"SLNNL fN LO NIrR.1Yrf t 1HMIID FMI'NRA INNI Wf)�1 1 NO YWCIa{p Y OPONNC ((RYIq i,MN y1LL 1J R M LNIPrY. rTAe. APO EIONC .wr PMncsArm lWL P) eAry Omit Aanu R-uro[ ro OyNtt M o5aw'cc u• NCIFSICIM'gFll fIRY M PM.(Cf AI[ N Nl lN(5. U) PMQ9M SIYLL E NiLL LM CCNINBNfgn MUNfL .LT Nl TNE4 (:) - irwJwPc Eca"�i5 a ens UL ro�iivLLna si�rtN° v�.r� rue Nmu R wRnP.o eomns'ANo A NesT nmR R NNT CK1OG 9WL OPIP'.YL uiosrlMMrae IMl1 RYWIL ' (.) aLa. oeMNIR Nusr E onNNm LPW saran rnPPx (d �eaK �l�x � wn.L A zswL oNw evxrrt Nrt ro E b) WI ESMOrN�MI �iWI4iCOLN.M VC N0 OlY11ttW. lIR S. /GOR.Y IN16 - (�) OEM AJOYr IRCY CNKIM.CMI btipl. IONrR 5[CICN. LO$ ML6 CQNM1 fOMOpI R N9N YM6 rM u1I YdE[ A111W q1 aM[cnc Nisc wNrum naata e11t1M4 art Na NNrzn ro we snsxr eaa R tsT Fno sraN DMus (a) M049YL rn MOYIE N OK SOC A LESF E CTNIO ItCL1 M LOUt 1M[ ErM114M! /RC.T i0 CgNECNG a.Ml J..ILL Lo16 (P) PLL 9WL C RYKId TRP/TtAR MV1 ML IX!M roA.WNN C! E r00.lMr a NNolrr MY msrt..�S oEwtD F Axi.N, sR. .t9pcOM RaTOIJE-N RMOD 9'. RE¢ APPWEn: NEK 101 /PILILINL A ISSf KCWjI(W M R\LAK (IMIIL 91NLL E VSm. (e) rm 000rc sxMu R RN]eNm F J[TINE Nc®wLcm M eRlalO yrLOLI MIN.S0. M]r ILSS r1Yn ICN ffi OW ALNIaFD RMF 1LSf. 4RRN.Y OSIIIRIIFD..9W1 E.. NNCD F M SMO OY< 1tiM0. (.) stmcon rrsa ai M ru aou.aNSL-EJNR to uLJrnlert ,� ' ENM..COFGIIM R. M iLL M NOftIIWQ RM M mlLwLf. ItYN NIOOaeS _ l0, OIS L[ST LM cMa Tro-rWr Kerns Ln. (x) bL RN rM NOr LEON [wCYME3 (f NVOIYL PIKFD. (J) R[ i[Sr N M IONSx R M rrNt (LL 4lMC ml Ctll BYIRW SLIC (Inf) M F1M fpp-PWC KEKJL Vl M. fCMINN MIQIX. ' (I) ryf T6} M M NWO CN Ud 9ARW PrD fM NOl rM-LOOf KIOK/.L tYl qt pECM MRF! _ _ (e> sslxral iLsls R ru sLam sxML R ssbt m Kist 11M1 M son NOTW[C Ctlstr wm M OL9Ot NCGMpO; M os1FNMiEO F M Rmm.ca OeatR NCuorC sa rwPs. SKM sMMM PMNe[lOK NO WL[RCIOIDNfr IM eRi11S M IWOA'IiR NM M (1) i NN WL M R Sa MiCYNA ro E Vm rM Ml nC anr¢ s1mNa nv.i a LcwtuLeu w ort KN1fIL . (S) 51(NI rLNT erSCR IOII M IW WJEE ILL.LN10Nt Ili1$} LIQI M dCTID M RfOI Y1YRS 45C0 N M QOICMtlII RP#1 m - RRY[ pR[ RNIIIY a[pialpFrCR nOQci M 90L Wsi R R-MCWfm-IpG M KIUI MM ll3S MYR R M I4 ' MICbLL M4L 6: M'NNF. . U) 11C DJtc SIWL R PQ R ➢Ot1Wa3 WIWILC _ I°) MEEEID R PCInCY �R N�l1m NN)M 11FPMI5 (J 'INl 9W[ Nof ENARp INR STMwb R KEEIId IfYO.PC R rMO � F M�4mRMG. (!> IR IL� Mrgq ILV Rpa�A T.11LY1D 1CII �Q M wi6RrIE LR .•ONYIIL LNrOL. 9R R ELQ ORyPC SOl$• Am e -m. -E a MO av6r sNmrL. Au wTONtS Mr 1CN[ x for ssR R to lOR9O ' sailrlt�ililr R < 6l[l1O %t P6UTMlC ml ]LRMf R qt Ellf. W eoR R LaNM LIIIONL MrAM TAF a Nuts N oNNT[n swt xor R rLILfD N M ILL IMES RRYLLGr[N6 PM SIIOL ILtLOLf IlM R(N Starllm F M RRFONfK fMiFDI MO MMOLm N .q'YLC[ F M 1111ON0 RMu. ' . H "B•L BARS '3'-6 0924 OC. O D }'-0' D7 i p'� _- D2r 6'_ �'M �)iAPrwYPn QARM1RaIlN:1CD ,,000NPPPxwm Rsuelnr pyvcxscvNF _ uJe V MJ LavWMEW FUR sNsc I• w,. au. Rresu+mss R.� _.. 5 6 j /4 0 O.C. 4-6" V-6" - -12' Man 1. OF 2 Al -5 A2-6 AND AND Al -5 Eih; 1 A3 -e AND AND I 51 P A J AND 4 n m I N ml n � njg r PQ] CMI ep2 POF EADI TRITECH ASSOCIATES INC. =v®m5al sN.RE] ErSVRPYIG Msxx u,RietL G 16: (P:R1 ffi-19:t vv: (Ezo no-rvx 2521 BRAIDED MANE DR. DIAMOND BAR, CA CLIENT: +Px .. W IXa 9M G19190�.. W. 16: 16261212-96N iY: 16261 21x-9]]9 LEGAL DUCRIPfION W0 MM RECORDER upRovu REwxNExlm rt: -' - VPPN+on fWNA,. Rf PVt PPFPOV(O Pf: V wuL .oP.S 4 WE RGVWm Due REVIERII FOR CITY BY: u4. 1 Klb Y4 K. IONf.MN'i4a Y9Y PNW GRADIg uRlsm. N x sxeeT "z Cfz "00 0413 \ CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 51C pN Ilp fi14:. +M MxL (]J COMI- 0' X. C.O'x-. REP .>MA \ $ip, p4H NC. EDI -O. 11K 1 �I cart+ 5 mxc. Pwwc x' B60w 1 D sUPGRWt Of 9Y+ C4Mp-EMl sOLL ' w axrvErPv x Puxwc u cl; can:.. Fcc. VPpwAv - 1 v '.w cs L ' .MR ML., SEE PR.n 10-: -PI I fi W-1 YL 0 1 CONS]. r IAG W iN 1 O Can] . MY OMw PPE XxfD..OV (SJ ((0�� Can+. WE OR9N. 1 `:l C.. CD . CU" PER 1 1 1 I I lYa I _ WLLGf�I 1 ]WICYXRrF WPee%4P1]! I (] IYPEwiEY W,N]Y - YNYwM MGYM 1\ wNn WxRN iW aq p� G �w ,pN �• IM�a Itm Pypxq.Ep MRMNEONrw+ 1 URME ��✓�PIINPRDVEP _ __.E.Ay •XEGNEx IY PK SCALe P-10' 4 n m I N ml n � njg r PQ] CMI ep2 POF EADI TRITECH ASSOCIATES INC. =v®m5al sN.RE] ErSVRPYIG Msxx u,RietL G 16: (P:R1 ffi-19:t vv: (Ezo no-rvx 2521 BRAIDED MANE DR. DIAMOND BAR, CA CLIENT: +Px .. W IXa 9M G19190�.. W. 16: 16261212-96N iY: 16261 21x-9]]9 LEGAL DUCRIPfION W0 MM RECORDER upRovu REwxNExlm rt: -' - VPPN+on fWNA,. Rf PVt PPFPOV(O Pf: V wuL .oP.S 4 WE RGVWm Due REVIERII FOR CITY BY: u4. 1 Klb Y4 K. IONf.MN'i4a Y9Y PNW GRADIg uRlsm. N x sxeeT "z Cfz "00 0413 /.NwIRb I.fkt o . Va 8114 WA• . N•..� taws ®5w�a•Ixe 4" .Iu�Y9 A•�eFv.-eM2W1P 96 ®6 . B t H�nPNJp O ^^" D1uY Iw b(A IIL 1 IS I nsw..fAJC GC�'J4.w< �� �SWKT •IVF \ ( Yo` Y[tiil m � .+vwaMCW 464�aWaNh y1RK4- V % b/JT/Nfr TAGF T. Fz FFyl.n ICC, < � iV'H•✓rA s•.ILE 1 wJL � JA H C �i uJJ „\ _ ;1IM fll1l , .I,I "'A pili; . iip I Illl.^R,L< , ;A�ea-'�I r'"w`T nwN•arrF PiLYI. I II.I �\'•., �9i� ulr.Y[ea� LIuH LS e f J1h F4i/ u� nliulsi AW • AusN L 1 •�• v�-'• �I.VY vv`Nh• NsfN�Lt 11 �u.la Iryl+rT [ML 0 r y ,' ,,,`. •' \Cwt!° , .,8� \` ��• • • - �a • � •.... •. �\\_ \\\\ _ �\'•., �9i� ulr.Y[ea� LIuH LS e f J1h F4i/ u� nliulsi AW \ Ylrnf st r M1.oK.- `\ ,\�+ �u.la Iryl+rT [ML '� 2i fG<dJ4.16aLrJ4 �``` ..♦\ ♦. r�• 1 '\' 7 awm. ____ \ t VN?nnrew w•F�I..rc.,.. QL Gw'A�14Gw.9ea ... _ Fs•I PL4M fI^AWN✓hca `\\ I� ) 0 r y ,' ,,,`. •' \Cwt!° , .,8� \` ��• • • - �a • � •.... •. �\\_ \\\\ _ �\'•., �9i� ulr.Y[ea� LIuH LS e f J1h \\\. IIOA 66 `\ 0 r y ,' ,,,`. •' \Cwt!° , .,8� II �- 3 III�III /.� E %�'�6. ••ri 11w �� lip \` ��• • • - �a • � •.... •. �\\_ \\\\ _ �\'•., �9i� ulr.Y[ea� LIuH LS Will511 f J1h \\\. iu `\ ,\�+ �u.la Iryl+rT [ML �� �``` ..♦\ ♦. p,+��Fy.^v@1J --- ____ \ t VN?nnrew w•F�I..rc.,.. ) r--� �' fid' � )'�- PON II �- 3 III�III /.� E %�'�6. ••ri 11w �� lip Will511 f J1h 1 iu `R� �f t VN?nnrew w•F�I..rc.,.. ) r--� �' fid' � )'�- PON Ro n`n oL- Pont II �- 3 III�III /.� E %�'�6. ••ri 11w �� lip Will511 f J1h 1 iu `R� �f t LON PON Ro Pont �.gean ,✓mss ,\ v f ON Will511 LON PON Pont �.gean ,✓mss AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: REPORT DATE: MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: APPLICATION REQUEST: PROJECT LOCATION: PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: APPLICANT'S AGENT: BACKGROUND: City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report 7.2 September 30, 2002 October 8, 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-07, Variance No. 2002-02 and Development Review No. 2002-18 To install a wireless telecom- munication facility with antennas mounted on a monocypress approximately 40 feet tall and equipment cabinets. St. Denis Roman Catholic Church 2151 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Roman Catholic Abp 3424 Wilshire Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90010 Cingular 2521 Michelle Dr. Tustin, CA 92780 The Consulting Group, 18500 Von Karman, #870, Irvine, CA 92612. The property owner, the Roman Catholic Abp, applicant, Cingular and applicant's agent, The Consulting Group are requesting approval pursuant to Development Code Sections 22.42.130.G.4, 22.58, 22.54 and 22.45 to install a wireless telecommunication 1 facility that includes antennas mounted on a monocypress that will be approximately 40 feet tall and equipment cabinets enclosed by a six foot high wall. The project site is located at 2151 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard. It is a rectangular shaped hillside lot, sloping up from Diamond Bar Boulevard and approximately 6.75 acres. It is developed with a church facility identified as St. Denis Roman Catholic Church. Permits indicate that construction for the church facility (hall/temporary church) probably began in early 1970s and was completed in the late 1980s. The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Medium High Density Residential (RMH-max 16 du/acre) and zoning designation is Multiple Residential - Maximum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet -1 Unit (R-3-8,000-1 U). Generally, the following zones surround the project site: to the north is the Single Family Residential- Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet (R-1-8,000) and Single Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 10,000 Square Feet(R-1 -1 0,000)Zones; to the south is the Multiple Residential - Maximum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet -30 Unit (R -3-8,000-30U) Zone; to the east is the R-1-10,000 Zone; and to the west is the R -3-8,000-15U Zone. On December 11, 2001, the Planning Commission reviewed a telecommunication facility, submitted by the applicant, for this project site. At that time, the public hearing was continued to February 12, 2002 due to public testimony and Planning Commission discussion. The applicant then decided to withdraw the project in order to seek a better location and design for the proposed telecommunication facility at the subject location. ANALYSIS: Development Review The City's Development Code establishes a Development Review process. The purpose of this process is to establish consistency with the General Plan through the promotion of high aesthetic and functional standards to complement and add to the economic, physical, and social character of the City. The process 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. Development Review is within the Planning Commission's review authority. For the proposed project, Development Review is utilized as an architectural/design review assessing aesthetics and functional standards. Conditional Use Permit The Conditional Use Permit allows for specified activities and uses as identified in the various zoning districts whose effect on the surrounding area cannot be determined before being proposed for a particular location. Conditional Use Permit applications are reviewed for the location, design, configuration, and potential impacts to insure that the proposed use will protect the public health, safety and welfare. The Planning Commission is the review authority for this particular application. For the proposed OA project, a Conditional Use Permit is required because the proposed telecommunication facility is located within a residential zone (R-3-8,000-1 U) and is not architecturally integrated with the building or structure on site so as not be recognized as an antenna. Variance The Variance process is utilized to allow for adjustment from the development standards of the Development Code. The adjustment may be granted because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other conditions. The adjustment also may be granted when 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 or creates an unnecessary, and non -self created, hardship. Additionally, when unreasonable regulations make it obviously impractical to require compliance with development standards, an adjustment may be granted. Planning Commission is the review authority for the Variance process. For this project, the Variance process is required because the maximum height of a structure within the R-3-8,000-1 U is 35 feet. The proposed telecommunication structure that houses the antenns is proposed at 40 feet. Development Review The proposed telecommunication facility consists of the following equipment: two quadpolar antennas concealed within a monocypress that will be approximately 40 feet tall; four equipment cabinets; and a six foot tall wall enclosure. Each antenna will be five feet tall by six inches wide by two inches. The equipment cabinets will be hidden behind an existing wall that is four feet tall. However, it is possible that the wall height will increase by two feet to screen the equipment cabinets completely. Therefore, the total height of the wall may be six feet. If it is not possible to add height to the existing wall, a new wall will be constructed at six feet. The six-foot height will occur at the northeast side of the wall and at the portion of the wall adjacent to Diamond Bar Boulevard for 10 lineal feet. The wall will then step down to match the existing height of approximately four feet. The extension of the existing wall or the new wall will be stuccoed to match existing structures on site. The proposed telecommunication facility will be located at the front of the church property (southeasterly portion) adjacent to Diamond Bar Boulevard. In this area, six cypress trees and four pine trees are bordering the existing four foot high wall that has been constructed in a backward "L" (.J) configuration (see photo simulation and Exhibit "A"). The existing cypress tree located at the wall's corner ("J") will be removed and replaced with the monocypress. All other trees and landscaping will remain. The applicant will be required to add five -gallon size shrubs between the existing cypress trees and pine trees to assist in screening the wall. Replaced will be required for landscaping destroyed during the installation of the monocypress and replacement landscaping will match existing on-site plant material. 3 The proposed facility at the subject location will be unmanned and require routine maintenance once in every four to six weeks utilizing one vehicle and one or two maintenance personnel. As a result, the proposed facility will have no impact on circulation/traffic. The design of the proposed telecommunication facility does not provide for co -location. Co -location requires a separation of approximately 10 feet between antennas from each provider because of the interference issues. The proposed monocypress will not provide adequate space and/or structural stability to accommodate another provider for co -location. If another provider were to co -locate on this facility, the height and diameter of the pole would need to be increased due to structural stability, proper separation and appropriate line of sight for their antennas. According to the applicant, Cingular is a wireless communications network that offers affordable services like voice communication, caller identification, paging, facsimile services, e-mail, video communications, and cellular digital data communications. Eventually, customers may have one single phone number for many of those services, regardless of location. The distance between antenna sites will normally range from 1/2 mile to nine miles, depending on the population density, consumer usage, existing vertical elements and geographical terrain. PCS is digital, offers better quality than an analog system and can handle more calls at a quicker rate. Analog systems are considered first generation. PCS is considered second generation — progress in technology. The equipment height is usually proportional to a combination of the distance antennas can cover and the demand of the PCS service within their sphere of influence. Wireless facilities are located throughout the service area to provide adequate call coverage capacity with quality. According to the applicant, currently Cingular Wireless is experiencing coverage and capacity problems within the area of Diamond Bar. The development of the proposed site will allow Cingular customers improved service in this area. Unlike other land use locations that can be spatially determined, the location of the wire telecommunication facility is based on technical requirements, which include service area, geographic elevations, alignment with neighboring sites and customer demand components. As a result, wireless telecommunication facilities have been located adjacent to and within all major land use categories including residential, commercial, industrial, and open space. In this case, the proposed telecommunication facility is located approximately 100 feet west of the nearest residence. Wireless telecommunication is accomplished by linking a wireless network of radio wave transmitting devices such as portable and car phones to the conventional telephone system through series of short-range, contiguous cells. Similar to a honeycomb pattern, a cellular system is composed of many neighboring and inter- connecting 'bell site" or geographical areas. Each cell site within the system contains transmitting and receiving antennas that require an appropriate/clear line of sight. In order to have a clear line of sight, antennas must be mounted high enough to overcome challenges proposed by local topography and development. The required height is usually proportional to a combination of distance the antennas can cover and the demand for the PCS service within their sphere of influence. Variance Pursuant to the Development Code, the maximum height of a structure within the subject zoning district is 35 feet. The proposed monocypress that will house the antennas will be 40 feet tall. The 40 -foot height is necessary to achieve the line of sight configuration essential for the network. However, the monocypress will blend in with the existing pine and cyprees tress that are almost or could mature to 40 feet. The installation of antenna sectors and transmission equipment will not result in significant material changes to the character of the project site. As a result, the proposed telecommunication facility's visibility will have a less than significant impact as proposed. Furthermore, the church building exceeds the maximum allowable height of 35 feet, which was permitted by Variance No. 87-320 processed by Los Angeles County. The church building's roofline is at a 40 -foot height and the tower is 49 feet tall. Conclusion Wireless telecommunication systems can be an invaluable communications tool in the event of emergencies and natural disasters where normal land line communications are often disrupted or inaccessible during and after an event has occurred. They are a valuable tool in business communication and everyday personal use. The proposed telecommunication facility as designed addresses the demand of the local network to provide seamless service to the increasing number of subscribers. According to the applicant, there are no structures in the immediate area, with property owner interest, that meet the technical height requirements necessary to achieve the line of sight configuration essential to the Cingular network. The selection of prospective sites are not determined only by technical aspects, but rather the accumulation of several factors such as interested property owners, applicable so, and decide, aesthetics, and the ability to construct proposed facility. According to the applicant, Cingular has obtained the necessary permits and authorization from the FCC. The proposed wireless telecommunication facility must operate in full compliance with all State and Federal regulations including the Telecom- munications Act of 1996. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15070(e) and guidelines promulgated thereunder, the City has determined that a Negative Declaration is required for this project. Negative Declaration No. 2002-04 has been prepared. The Negative Declaration's review began September 17, 2002 and ended October 6, 2002. M NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on September 17, 2002. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 455 property owners within a 700 -foot radius of the project site on September 13, 2002. Furthermore, the project site was posted with a display board and the public notice was posted in three public places on September 17, 2002. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 2002-07, Variance No. 2002-02, Development Review No. 2002-18, Negative Declaration No. 2002-04, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolution. REQUIRED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS: The proposed use is allowed within the subject zoning district with the approval of a Conditional Use permit/Minor Conditional Use Permit and complies with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Municipal Code; The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; 3. The design, location, size and operation characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity; 4. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed including access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses and the absence of physical constraints; Granting the Conditional Use Permit/Minor Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located; and 6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). REQUIRED VARIANCE FINDINGS: 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; 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). REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FINDINGS: The design and layout of the proposed development are 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 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; IN 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 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). Prepared by: A n J. LurAu, A06ciate anner Attachments: 1. Draft resolution; 2. Exhibit "A" - site plan, elevations and sections, dated October it, 2002; 3. Photo simulation showing existing and the facility installed; 4. Cingular Map delineating current coverage without and with the proposed project; 5. Application; and 6. Correspondence dated Sept. 14, 2002 from the resident of 1939 Silver Hawk Drive. A. RECITALS. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-07, VARIANCE NO. 2002-02, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2002-18 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2002-04, A REQUEST TO INSTALL AN UNMANNED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY WITH ANTENNAS MOUNT WITHIN A MONOCYPRESS 40 FEET TALL AND EQUIPMENT CABINETS SCREENED BY A SIX FOOT HIGH WALL. THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT ST. DENIS ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, 2151 DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. 41D qF*P* The property owner, the Roman Catholic Abp, applicant, Cingular Wireless and applicant's agent, The Consulting Group have filed an application for Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-07, Variance No. 2002-02, Development Review No. 2002-18 and Negative Declaration No. 2002-04 for a property located at 2151 Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit, Variance, Development Review, and Negative Declaration shall be referred to as the "Application". 2. Notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on September 17, 2002. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 433 property owners of record within a 700 -foot radius of the project on September 13, 2002. Furthermore, the project site was posted with a display board in three public places on September 17, 2002. 3. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on October 8, 2001 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 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 Initial Study review and Negative Declaration No. 2002-04 have been prepared by the City of Diamond Bar in compliance with the requirement of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15070(e). Negative Declaration No. 2002-04 has been prepared. The Negative Declaration's review began September 17, 2002 and ended October 6, 2002. Furthermore, Negative Declaration No. 2002-04 reflects the independent judgement of the City of Diamond Bar. 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 rectangular shaped hillside lot, sloping up from Diamond Bar Boulevard and approximately 6.75 acres. It is developed with a church facility identified as St. Denis Roman Catholic Church. Permits indicate that construction for the church facility (hall/temporary church) probably began in early 1970s and was completed in the late 1980s. (b) The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Medium High Density Residential (RMH-max 16 du/acre). (c) The zoning designation for the project site is Multiple Residential -Maximum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet -1 Unit (R-3-8,000-1 U). (d) Generally, the following zones surround the project site: to the north is the Single Family Residential- Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet (R-1-8,000) and Single Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 10,000 Square Feet (R-1- 10,000) Zones; to the south is the Multiple Residential -Maximum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet -30 Unit (R -3-8,000-30U) Zone; to the east is the R-1- 10,000 Zone; and to the west is the R -3-8,000-15U Zone. (e) The application request is to install a telecommunications facility consisting of the following equipment: two quadpolar antennas concealed within a monocypress that will be approximately 40 feet tall; four equipment cabinets; and a six foot tall wall enclosure. Each antenna will be five feet tall by six inches wide by two inches. The equipment cabinets will be hidden behind an existing wall that is four feet tall. However, it is possible that the wall height will increase by two feet to screen the equipment cabinets completely. Therefore, the total height of the wall may be six feet. If it is not possible to add height to the existing wall, a new wall will be constructed at six feet. The six-foot height will occur at the northeast side of the wall and at the portion of the wall adjacent to Diamond Bar Boulevard for 10 lineal feet. Conditional Use Permit (f) The proposed use is allowed within the subject zoning district with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit complies with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Municipal Code; The purpose of the Conditional Use Permit is to provide a process for reviewing specified activities and uses identified in a zoning district whose effect on the surrounding area cannot be determined before being proposed for a particular location. The proposed unmanned wireless telecommunications facility is permitted in the R-3-8,000-1 U Zone with a Conditional Use Permit and as amended herein will comply with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Municipal Code. (g) The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Medium High Density Residential (RMH-max 16 du/acre). Objectives and Strategies of the General Plan encourage the establishment of new technology that are deemed environmentally safe and compatible with development. The proposed project is required to comply with Federal regulations regarding radio frequency emissions, thereby considered environmentally safe. The existing telecommunications facility is compatible with the General Plan in that it will only generate a very minimal amount of additional traffic to the neighborhood by infrequent maintenance visits. It will not create a new source of light and noise. It will not be recognizable from Diamond Bar Boulevard because the two quadpolar antennas will be concealed within a monocypress that will be approximately 40 feet tall and the four equipment cabinets will be concealed behind and existing wall. The monocypress will blend in with the existing pine and cyprees tress that are almost or could mature to 40 feet. The installation of antenna sectors and transmission equipment will not result in significant material changes to the character of the project site. As a result, the proposed telecommunication facility's visibility will have a less than significant impact as proposed. (h) The design, location, size and operation characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity; The project site is a rectangular shaped hillside lot, sloping up from Diamond Bar Boulevard and approximately 6.75 acres. It is developed with a church facility identified as St. Denis Roman Catholic Church. Permits indicate that construction for the church facility (hall/temporary church) probably began in early 1970s and was completed in the late 1980s. The two quadpolar antennas will be concealed within a monocypress that will be approximately 40 feet tall and the four equipment cabinets will be concealed behind and existing wall. The monocypress will blend in with the existing pine and cyprees tress that are almost or could mature to 40 feet. The installation of antenna sectors and transmission equipment will not result in significant material changes to the character of the project site. It will not be recognizable from Diamond Bar. As a result, the proposed telecommunication facility's visibility will have a less than significant impact as proposed. The telecommunication facility will generate a minimal amount of additional traffic to the neighborhood by infrequent maintenance visits. It does not create a new source of light and noise. The facility will comply with all FCC regulations. Therefore, it is unlikely that the facility will have a negative impact on the single-family residential neighborhood adjacent to the project site. Therefore, the project's design, location, size and operational characteristics, as conditioned, is compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity. (i) The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed including access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses and the absence of physical constraints; As referenced above in Item (h), the proposed telecommunications facility still meets the required development standards for the R-3-8,000- 1 U zone except for height which a Variance application is being processed.. Provisions for utilities exist at the project site. Q) Granting the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located; As referenced above in Items (f) through (i), the proposed telecommunications facility with the Variance approval and as amended here in will meet the City's minimum development standards. Traffic is minimal. As discussed in Item (h) above, the existing telecommunications facility meets the FCC requirements regarding radio frequency emissions safety and has been installed with the appropriate City permits. Therefore, granting the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located. (k) 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 15070(e) and guidelines promulgated thereunder, Negative Declaration No. 2002-04 has been prepared. 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; Wireless telecommunications is accomplished by linking a wireless network of radio wave transmitting devices such as portable and car phones to the conventional telephone system through series of short-range, contiguous cells. Similar to a honeycomb pattern, a cellular system is composed of many neighboring and inter -connecting "cell site" or geographical areas. Each cell site within the system contains transmitting and receiving antennas that require an appropriate%lear line of sight. In order to have a clear line of sight, antennas must be mounted high enough to overcome challenges proposed by local topography and development. The required height is usually proportional to a combination of distance antennas can cover and the demand for the PCS service within their sphere of influence. The applicant's proposes to install a monocypress at a height of 40 feet that will house two antenna at the northeast portion of the project site adjacent to Diamond Bar Boulevard. According to the applicant, due to the hillside topography, existing structures and dense trees surrounding the project site, the height of the proposed monocypress is necessary in order to obtain an appropriate/clear line of site for transmitting and receiving signals. The installation of antenna sectors and transmission equipment will not result in significant material changes to the character of the project site. As a result, the proposed telecommunication facility's visibility will have a less than significant impact as proposed. Furthermore, the church building exceeds the maximum allowable height of 35 feet, which was permitted by Variance No. 87-320 processed by Los Angeles County. The church building is roofline is at a 40 -foot height and the tower is 49 feet tall. Although the proposed monocypress is taller than the permitted height of structures in the R-3- 8,000-1 U Zone, the monocypress will blend in with the existing pine and cyprees tress that are almost or could mature to 40 feet. (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 theproperty owner for which the Variance is sought; Granting of the Variance allows the proposed telecommunications facility to address the demand of the local network in order to provide seamless service to the increasing number of subscribers. This wireless telecommunications systems will be an invaluable communications tool in the event of emergencies and natural disasters were normal land line communications are often disrupted or inaccessible during and after an event has occurred. Such facilities are a valuable tool in business communication and everyday personal use. Additionally, within the City of Diamond Bar there are other such facilities located within a residential zone. (n) Granting the Variance is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; and As referenced in Item (g) above, granting the Variance is consistent with the General Plan. There is no applicable specific plan for this area. (o) The proposed entitlement would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. The proposed telecommunications facility will comply with all FCC requirements and Building and Safety Division and Public Works Division requirements. As a result, the proposed telecommunications facility will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. Development Review (p) The design and layout of the proposed development are 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); As referenced above in Items (g), (h), (i) and Q), the existing telecommunications facility as amended herein and with the Variance approval is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines, development standards of the applicable district, and architectural criteria for special areas. Additionally, a specified architectural criterion for the area does not exist. (q) 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; As referenced in Items (h above, the design and layout of the proposed telecommunications facility does not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development, and does not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. (r) 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; As referenced in Item (h) above, the architectural design of the proposed telecommunications facilitate with the Variance approval will be compatible with the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood and maintains and enhances 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. (s) 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; As referenced above in Item (h) and (I), the design of the existing telecommunications facility provides a desirable environment for a occupants of surrounding residences and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing. (t) The proposed development 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; As referenced in Items (h), (Q and (o)) above, the telecommunications facility is not 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. 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 a site plan, sections/ elevations, and landscape/irrigation plan, collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" dated October 8, 2002, as submitted, amended herein and approved by the Planning Commission. (b) 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) Property owner/applicant shall remove the public hearing notice board within three days of this project's approval. (d) Applicant shall comply with all Federal, state and City regulations. (e) To ensure compliance with all conditions of approval and applicable codes, the Conditional Use Permit/Development Review shall be subject to period review. If non-compliance with conditions of approval occurs, the Planning Commission may review the Conditional Use Permit. The Commission may revoke or modify the Conditional Use Permit (f) Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape/irrigation plan delineating the additional five -gallon shrubs to be planted between the existing cypress trees and pine trees to assist in screening the wall. Additionally, said plans shall delineate the replaced of landscaping destroyed during the installation of the monocypress. Replacement landscaping shall match existing on-site plant material. All landscaping/irrigation shall be install prior to final inspection. (g) The monocypress shall not exceed a height of 40 feet. (h) Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit documentation that the electromagnetic fields (EMFs) from the proposed wireless telecommunications antenna facility will be within the limit approved by the FCC for the City's review and approval. (i) Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit licenses and approvals to provide wireless telecommunications services to the City. (j) If any work shall occur in the public right- of- way, the applicant shall submit plans for review and approval and obtain an encroachment permit. (k) Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall submit a delineating the wall construction, height and material utilized for the City's review and approval . Said wall shall not exceed a height of six feet. (1) All plans shall conform to State and local building codes (i.e. 1998 edition of the California Uniform Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code and 1998 edition of the National Electrical Code) as well as the State Energy Code. (m) Proposed monocypress shall be engineered to meet wind loads of 80 m.p.h. with an exposure of "C". (n) All cables shall be installed underground. (o) 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. (p) 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: Roman Catholic Church Abp, 3424 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90010, Cingular Wireless, 2521 Michelle Drive, Tustin, CA 92780 and The Consulting Group, 18500 Von Karman, #870, Irvine, CA 92612. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH OF OCTOBER 2002, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. M Joe Ruzicka, Chairman 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 8th day of October 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: James DeStefano, Secretary Lus _ 1 TY OF DIAMOND 8AR MMUNITY & MENT FPL SEORVICES DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIV., r 1 LE7. Pt 21825 E. COPLEY DRIVE J ` DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 909 396 5676 FAX 909 8613117 R CM USE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION Record Owna Applicant Name Roman Catholic Abp. Cingular—Mark Rivera (IestnamefM)Ellen Kolin (Lastmimefim) Addmss3424 Wilshire Blvd 2521 Michelle Dr City Los Angeles, CA zip 90010 Phone( )909-861-7106 Fax ( ) Tustin, CA 92780 Phone( ) 714-734-7300 Fax ( ) 714-734-7530 Applicant's Agent The Consulting Group (Isst name frrsp 18500 Von Karman, 870 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone( 1714-478-7439 Fax ( )949-477-3063 NOTE: It is the applicant's respousibt7ity to notify the City in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this can. (Attach separate sheet, if necessary, ioeludiag acmes. edd`essas� and signatures of membri of patmaships, joint ventures, and dilators of corporations.) Consent I certify than I uns the Signed - " � .'. )< 6 I (All record owners) of Me herein described property and permit fhe applicant to fde this request Date .5 /S - y :I— (Applicant Z Certifwadon., I, the undersigned, hereby ec"* under penaby of perjury that the informadon herein provided is eomd to the best of my knowledge Print Name John Halminski—The Consulting Group (Applicant Or Agent) Signed (Applicant or Agent) 0 'J 1 Date S/ � l 7 i Locition 2151 Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, CA 91765 i (S(Sbcct address or tract and lot nuttiber) Zoning �Z=3 8,000 ' House Numbering lrlap Previous Cases 9FHER V Present Use of Site Use applied for Religious — Church nned Wireless Telecommunications Facility L City of Diamond Bar CONDITIONAL USE PERMU Project Size (gross acres) Approximately 300 sqft eject Density n/a Previous Cases Unknown Present Use of Site for Religious — Church Domestic Water Source n/a Method of Sewage Disposal n/a Grading of Lots by Applicant? YES No x (Show necessary grading design on site plan or teat, map) Company/District Sanitation District Amount Page Two C DMONAL USE PERMT BURDEN OF Y _ ooF In addition to the information required in the application, the applicant shall substantiate to the sludacuou of the Planning Commission, the following facts: (answers must be full & complete) A. Tbat the requested use at the location proposed will not: I. Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing or working m 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 otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safen or general %N clfarc. The project will not adversely affect, be materially dettrimental, jeopardize or endanger the public health, safety or welfare of any person or property within the surrounding area. B. That the proposed site is adequate in size aad shape to accommodate the vards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, landscaping and other development features presented in this Title 22, or as is other" ise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area The proposed project site is adequate in size and shape to accomodate the screen walls, equipment and antennas for our development. C. Tbat the proposed site is adequately served: 1. 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 The proposed project is adequately served with existing paved streets and will not generate any traffic. The proposed project also has adequate power and telco services. Residential: n/a Total Units Bachelor 1 Bedroom 2 Bdrm_ &larger Total Pkg. Cov. Pkg. Unoov. Pkg. ProjectSize: 300 s ft Lot Coverage: n/a Density: n/n Maximum Height: No. of floors: n/a Sq.Foouge 300 sgft Non-residential: 300 sgft n/a n/a Sq. ft. arae No. of Bldgs. Occupant Load• CUP Burden of Proof - Page 1 Parking: Total Standard Compact Handicap Landscaping: Sq. feet Grading: Y _ N X If yes, Quantity: Cot: Fill: Import' Y _ N_ If yes, Quantity:. Export: Y _ N_ Ifyes, Quantity: Occupant Load as calculated by the Building & Safety Division is required for all dining, take-out or assembly use, churches, health clubs, theaters, etc. LEGAL DESCRIPTION (all ownership comprising the proposed lot(s)/paroel(s) Please see attached survey 1 of 2 Area devoted to structures Landscaping/Open spa= Residential Project: and (gross area) (No. of lots) Proposed density (Units/Acres) Parking Required Plwided Standard Compact Handicapped Total Conditional Use Permit Burden of PrW- Page 2 Staff Use Project No INITIAL. STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE (to be completed by applicant) A. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Applicant (Owner): Project Representative: Cingular Wireless- Mark Rivera John Halminski - The Consulting Group NAME 2521 Michelle Dr., St#2nd Floor ADDRESS Tustin, CA 92780 714-734-7467 PHONE# FAX# NAME 18500 Von Karman, Suite'870 I. Action requested and project description: *See attached project description ADDRESS Irvine, CA 92612 714-478-7439 PHONE# FAX# 2. Street location of project: 2151 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. 3. Present use of site: Church 4. Previous use of site or structures: Unknown 5. Project Description a. Site Size (total area) 300 S g f t b. Square Footage (coveted by structures, paving 300 s g f t c. Number of floors of construction n/a d. Amount of off-street parking provided n/a e. Landscaping, open space n/a f. Propose scheduling n/a g Associated projects n/a h. Anticipated incremental development n/a laaiat SU+dy Qwmittoaim - Past 1 b.1 7 8. L If residential, mel& be number of axils, schedule of unit sizes (rang_ .f We prices or rents and type of household size expected) n/a j. If commercial,indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area and loading facilities. n/a k If industrial, indicate type, estimated employm at per ssbit and loading facilities n/a 1. If ittstimtional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy. loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived Som the project n/a m. If the project involves a variance, conditional use or rezoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required. Conditional UserPermit — A conditional use permit is requied because there is an existing CUP on the property and our facility intensifies the use previously approved for the site. Please list all previous cases (if any) related to this project: n/a List related permit/approvals required. Specify type and granting grantuag a8eoey. Are you planning future phases of this project? If yes, explain: Y N x g Present Zoning: R-3 8,000 10. Water and sewer service: n/a Domestic Public Water Sewers Does service exist at site? Y— N_ 2 _ N #yes, do purveyors have capacity to meet demand of Project agd all other approved projects? Y --N_ Y N_ Initial Study Quarimnane-pop 2 If domestic water or public & is aro not available, how will these services bet aided? n/a 11. Residential Projects: n/a A- Number and type of units: b. Floor area of each unit: C. Number of floors d. Schools: What school district(s) serves the property? Are existing school facilities adeyoate to meet project needs? YES— NO_ If not, what provisions will be made for additional classrooms? 12. Non-residential projects: (rommercial, industrial, institutional) A. Distance to nearest residential use or sensitive use (school, hospital, etc.) App, 150 ft b. Number and floor area of buildings: n/a C. Number of employees and shifts: unmanned d. MaXimum employees per shift: n/a C. Operating hours: 24 hrs/7 days/week f Community benefit tobederived from project: The citizens of Diamond Bar whom live or work within the surrounding area of 2151 S. Diamond Bar Blvd and are Cingular customers will have continuos coverage. g Identify any: End products n/a Waste products Means of disposal h. Do project operations an, store or produce har rdons substances such as oil, pesticides, chemicals, paints, or radioactive materials? YES NO x If yes, explain Mist 51dy Quaatanoa6e- papa 3 i. Do your operations require any ptsssurLted tanks? YES _ NO X If yes, explain j. Identify any !L»able, reactive or explosive materials to be located on-site. n/a k. Will delivery or shipment trucks travel through residential areas to reach the nearest highway? If yes, explain YES _ NO X 13. Associated Projects n/a 14. Anticipated incremental development n/a 15. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes n/a 16. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, xgmm footage of sales arcs and loading facilities. n/a 17. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shat, and loading facilities n /a 18. If institutional, indicate the major functit o, estimated employment per:hA estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project n/a Iawel Rudye-Pap1 . B. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION (to be completed by applicaot) 1. Environmental Setting—Project Site a Existingnee/structues religiuos — church b. Topognpby/slopes n/ a *c. Vegetation "I *d. Animals n/a *e. Watercourses n/a f. Culturallhistoricalresoursss n/a unknown g. Other 2. Environmental Setting— Surrounding Area a. Existing uses structures (types, densities): church & church rectory b. Topography/slopes *c. Vegetation *d Animals 0 Initial Sudy Qutioana6e - Pane 5 *e. Watercourses n/a f. Culturallhistoricalresources unknown g Other n/a ' Answers are not required if the area does not contain mural, undeveloped Ind. 3. Are there any major trees on the site, including oak trees, walum trees, sycamore, California pepper and arroyo willow? YES— NO If yes, type and number: 4 Will any natural watercourses, sarface flow patterns, etc., be changed through project development?: LES NO yes, explain: —_ 5. Grading: Will the project require grading? yES _ NO X If yes, how many cubic yards? Will it be balanced on-site? YES NO 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 umcompaoted fin)? LYES yes, explain: -- NO X — 7. Is the property located within a high fire hazard area (binaides with moderately dense vegetation)? YES _ NO X Distance to nearest lire station: fiat &Udytlan UwAaie-Paae6 g. Noise: Existing noise sources at site: Existing noise is generated from auto traffic on Diamond Bar Blvd. Noise or vibration to be generatedbyproject: Minimal noise generated by proposed project. Noise levels are equiva en o res A/C condensors. 9. Fumes: Odors generated by project: Could toxic fumes be generated? 10. Dust: n/a n/a Dust, ash, or smoke generated by project: n/a What energy -conserving designs or material will be used? n/a CERTIFICATION: I hereby certifj tbat the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information requited for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the beat of my knowledge and belief. Date Signature For: C�ngci/a✓ y/r/Y�II Innis' an* Quriam im-Ane7 Record Owner Name Roman Catholic Abp (Last name first) 424 Wilshire Blvd City_ Los Angeles, CA Zip 90010 Phone( ) 909-861-7106 Fax ( CITY OF DIAMOND BAR COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT/Planning Division 21825 E. Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Phone (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 ❑ ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW XO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Applicant Cingular Wireless (Last name first) 2521 Michelle Dr Tustin, CA 2780 Phone( ) 714-734-7300 Fax( )714-734-7530 Case # r '- -` Deposit $ 2000.00 ReceiptBy Date Rec'd FOR CITY LISF Applicant's Agent The Consulting Group (Last name first) 18500 Von Karman, #870 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone( )714-478-7439 Fax( P49-477-2370 An application fee in accordance with Section 22.44.040 of the Municipal Code must accompany this Application. The application fee is either a flat fee or a deposit plus payment of the City's processing costs computed on an hourly basis. The applicable fee or deposit amount for this application is indicated above. If it is a deposit, the applicant shall pay any processing costs that exceed the amount of the deposit prior to issuance of the permit; if processing costs are less than the deposit, a refund will be paid. NOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the City 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 of Owners: I certify that / am the owner of the herein -described property and permit theapplicant'to rile this request. Print Name record �,� Signed Date - D i (All record owners) Certification of Applicant: 1, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. Print Name John Halminski - The Consulting Group (Applicant or Agent) Signed kmpp scam or Agent) Location 2151 Diamond Bar Blvd. Street address or tract and lot number) Zoning R-3 8,000 House Numbering Map/aerial Previous Cases unknown Present Use of Site Religious -Church Use applied for Conditional Use Permit/Variance City of Diamond Bar DEVELOPMENT REVIEW/ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPEMNT REVIEW APPLICATION LEGAL DISCRIPTION (AII ownership comprising the proposed lot(s)/parcel(s). See Plans Area devoted to structures 300 sq. ft % Landscaping/Open space n/a Project Size/(gross square feet): 300 sq.ftLot Coverage n/a % Proposed density n/a (Units/Acres) Style of Architecture monocypress Number of Floors Proposed n/a Slope of Roof n/a Grading under 50 cubic yards Cut n/a Import n/a Export n/a Retaining Walls Maximum Exposed Height n/a Complete pages 3 and 4 Burden of Proof 2 If Yes, Quantity Fill n/a If Yes, Quantity If Yes, Quantity TREE PRESERVATION STATEMENT [ ] The subject property is '/2 acre or less and is exempt from Tree Preservation Requirements. rY" The subject property contains no native oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, or naturalized California Pepper trees. [ \Q 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 dripline of any oak, walnut, sycamore, willow, or naturalized California Pepper tree. [ ] The subject property contains one or more oak, walnut, sycamore, 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. (Applicant's Signature) (Date) Cy�ress� D:WORD•LINDA\FORMS\TREE STATEMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BURDEN OF PROOF In addition to the information required in the application, the applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the Planning Division/Planning Commission the following facts: (Answers must be detailed and complete. Attach additional sheets of paper if necessary.) 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 special areas (e.g., theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards or planned developments); The design of the site is meant to blend into the natural landscape in that it is situated in an existing grove of _live ital i a n cypress trees 2. The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards; The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the use and enjoyment, of neighboring exis o nr f.ni-ur-adayalnnmentc• and will not crea+a t—affir or parlast–=^ 3. The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain and enhance the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by the Development Code, General Plan, or any applicable specific plan; .. Dpxreiopment perific 4. The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as it neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture and color, and will remain aesthetically appealing; and The design of the monocypress will provide a desirable environment remain aasf},pti rally annealing yyl 3 5. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative affect on the property values or resale(s) of property) to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed project will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially in3urious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. 0 COINJAWNrrY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 (909)396-5676 Fu (909)861-3117.,-- c- VARIANCE APPLICATION Record Owner - Applicant None Rc:man Catholic Abp Cingular-Mark Rivera (Lsst name first) (Last name first) Addma.3424 Wilshire Blvd 2521 Michelle Dr City Los Angeles, CA Tustin, CA Zip 90010 92780 FPL X - Deposit $ - - - ReceipuV" _ By - Date Recd Applicant's Agent The Consulting Group (Lst name fust) 18500 Von Karman, #870 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone( )909-861-7106 ph,* )714-734-7300 phone( )714-478-7439 <e) PP -x • GT.G 963 / 3S3O NOPE: It is thea lieaat's � �i6X —Wk- 94? 597 4zo3 pp responsibility to notify the Community Development Director in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this case. (Attach separstc sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signsturm of members of paMerships, joint ventures, and directors of corporations.) Consent: I certify that I am the owner of the herein described property and permit the applicant to frk this request. owners) Date ry a -Q Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby cenjfy under penalty of perjury that the Information here provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. Print Name �nh1Ho� ,yak, (Applicant or Agent) Signed Date '(Applicant or Agent) - Location 2151 Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (Street addrw or tract and lot number) (Street) R-3 8,000 Project size (gross acres) Approx. 300 sq.ft. Previous Cases Unknown Present Use of Site Religious -Church and BW Use applied for Unmanned wireless facility (Street) Project Density n/a 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 W at the location proposed will not: 1. Advtaaely affect the health, PCs . comfort or welfam or persons residing or working in the surrounding area, or 2. Be materially detrimental to the un, enjoyment Of valuation of property of other persons looted in the vicinity of the site, or 3. Teopardim, endanger or other wise constitute a menace to the public bealth, safety or general welfare. The proposed project will not adversely affect, be materially detrimental, jeopardize or endanger the public health, safety or welfare of any person or property within the surrounding area. B. That the proposed site is adequate in aim and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, loading facilities, landscaping and other development feature Parking and otherwise required in order to irate Prescribed in this Ordinance, or u is Integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding arra. The proposed project site is adequate in size shape to accomodate the equipment and antennas for this project. C. That the proposed site is adequately served: By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved ae necessary to card, the kind and quantity of traffic such use would generate, and 2. By other public or private service facilities as am required. The proposed project is adequately served with existing paved streets and will not generate any traffic. The proposed project also has adequate power and telephone service. D • That there are apee;si cum m ^noes or esoeptionsi characteristics applicable to thero as sire, shape, bpograpby, location or surtroumdin P Perry involved. such in the same vicinity sad under identical zoning classifippioa� not generally applicable to other properties See at ached varian findinnc ..+ JMF M` 'J4 s: d r '�� , l 1 1<cinguIar WIRELESS m c Cr CrX LL LOCatior: St. Denis Church 2151 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. Diamond Bar. Ca. 91765 Site Number: SB -106-o1 View Lookinc Southwest from Diamond Bar Blvd. -.____I ,-- n:6, nnn nA. M, 4 ■ �o I I I n m Z c�3 Dip nlz nm 'n m E ¢v °]' Dom' neo Flo m�v]o3 nr* m m m m o w J U m N 5 pN N m N < < N < < N ] < N O ] J V ID £ n n N ¢ ¢ r mim o w v ] m w r 1 � n � m r a Z . Fo L Vi IL49 L, . jrL ' ' -0001 I l l n w m w� Owm7m nNlN7 NZ]N neo � �nJ o3 a r m 0 0 0 II o V N< m J m o m < < J 7 Oen N 10 0 n c olo I o Ou NTN mow In <�n ¢nvo n � tnw N m N N m O w N 7 r m r a n m m n m m w < m< m n N J N m 10 N M N O J < u J I m I £ m J ✓ ID n � ¢ n r o m l m w J 3 m 3 r+ y n m w r n m m m F 6 n rn c�iv`m tizn m -o °" nRry o� m v� M, a o II o UI7 � V m CIDJo or�D mmm rw r .•.o a m m,nm ma a m.. ti r N m N R O m Jf+m £ v" n R n n r a 3m3 n ^ w 3 w R m a m Z September 14, 2002 City of Diamond Bar Planning Division 21825 E. Copley Dr. Diamond Bar ,Ca Subject: Conditional Use Permit No. 2002/7/Variance 2002-02/Development Review 2002-18 Dear Sir or Madam: Please register my objection to the installation of any telecommunications equipment Installed on the St.Denis Property. As an engineering manager with a background in electrical Engineering I believe there is inclusive evidence on the health effects of such aninstallation. As a homeowner (across the street from St.Denis) I feel there is negative impact on the value of my property.. My wife and son have both been active embers of St. Denis for nearly 20 years and we are quite certain that the church will survive without this additional revenue. Therefore I object to the installation of any equipment, and especially any variation that exceeds recommended specifications. Sincerely, Lee Ladwig 1939 Silver Hawk Diamond Bar V CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2002-04 for CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-07 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2002-18 and VARIANCE NO. 2002-02 St. Denis Catholic Church 2151 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard Diamond Bar, CA 91765 City of Diamond Bar 21825 E. Copley Drive Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, CA 91765 Environmental Finding Initial Study (Environmental Information and Environmental Checklist) September 16, 2002 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2002-04 Project Description and Location CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM FOR INITIAL STUDY Pursuant to Guidelines for California Environmental Quality Act §15063 (f), this form, along with the Environmental Information Form completed by the applicant, meets the requirements for an Initial Study. This form is comprised of five parts: Part 1 Background Part 2 Summary of Environmental Factors Potentially Affected Part 3 Determination Part 4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Part 5 Discussion of Environmental Impacts PART1-BACKGROUND City Project Number: Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-07 Variance No. 2002-02 and Development Review No. 2002-18 2. Project Address/Location: St. Denis Catholic Church 2151 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Date of Environmental Information Form submittal: Last of the required environmental information submitted on July 18 2002. Applicant: Cingular, 2521 Michelle Drive Tustin CA 92780 (714) 734-7300 Applicant's Agent: The Consulting Group, 18500 Von Kannan#870 Irvine CA 92612 (714)478-7439 Property Owner: St. Denis Catholic Church /Roman Catholic Abp. 3424 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90010 (909) 861-7106 Lead Agency: City of Diamond Bar Contact: Ann T. Lungu, Associate Planner Address: 21825 E. Copley Drive, City/State/Zip: Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Phone: (909) 396-5676 Fax: (909) 861-3117 General Plan Designation: Medium High Density Residential (max. 20 du/acre) Zoning: Limitied Multiple Residence -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet (R-3-8,000- 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary). The applications request approval to install a wireless communications facility with antennas (mounted on a stealth monocypress) camouflaged as a cypress tree and equipment cabinet. The monocypress will be 40 feet tall. Two antennas, divided equally into two sectors oriented north and south respectively, will be mounted within the proposed monocypress. The monocypress will be located among a stand of approximately 10 existing cypress trees along the east side of the project site parallel and perpendicular to Diamond Bar Boulevard. The equipment cabinet area will be located adjacent to the monocpress behind a six foot high block wall. Cingular is a registered public utility, licensed and regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). As a public utility, Cingular is licensed by the FCC to provide personal communication services throughout the County of Los Angeles. Additionally Cingular and the proposed project are required to comply with all FCC guidelines related to safe EMF levels. If approved, the proposed facility will provide and integral link in Cingular network and is designed to provide coverage along Diamond Bar Boulevard and surrounding area Once constructed, the proposed facility will provide 24 hour service to customers seven days a week. Apart from the initial construction activity, Cingular will service the facility on a periodic basis. It is reasonable to expect that routine maintenance/inspection of the facility will occur once a month during normal working hours. Beyond this intermittent service, Cingular requires 24 hour access to the facility to ensure that technical support is immediately available if and when warranted. The proposed project consists of three applications - Conditional Use Permit No.2002-07 Development Code Amendment No. 2002-18, and Variance No. 2002-02. The Conditional Use Permit is required for this type of use within a residential zone. Development Review is a required architectural review. The Variance is required because the height of the monocypress is 40 feet and the maximum height of a structure in the R-3-8 000-1U zone (where the project site is located) is 35 feet. For this project, the Planning Commission is the decision maker of the submitted applications. All three applications will be processed simultaneously. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: The proposed project is developed with a church facility that includes church buildings parking lot and mature landscaping. Generally, the following zones and uses surround the proposed project: To the north and east is the R-1-10,000 zone which contains single- family residences; to the south is the R -3-8,000-30U zone which contains multiple family residences; and to the west is the R -3-15U zone which contains multiple family residences. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.): 11. List City of Diamond Bar related applications for this project that must be processed simultaneously: Listed above in Items Nos. 1 and 9 12. List prior projects for this parcel: Conditional Use Permit No. 87-320/1987 process by Los Angeles Regional Planning for the construction of the church facility. I n •q.'/i 644' .. • b� / ''• ''y�.�-� rr I i 4 � 1'� o) o `_ ,i' ,,,•` • /�Q S . • / � fir= 6! a o J i •4 e � __ - •I � •. i . \b /tet � \ n. .�0 •. ]. � e � � of Z +y l�' /. /�• 1.YlIn% 42"a �� �tu� J/ i \ �:^�. � s o /'r,i �'. � '� • '' �»'' 4 �^ " \,Hr'+ /; , v `��',��y �� •S .ice �.�/A� ' IV ' + \ t '� „ra' Y7 • /;rte �;.=� _ `_ \s ♦ Qrq 18 *' � i , �`� I +�'GI'^y •.r SL /M1 69a , �� a .„�' CVs • � � .9 '" °,. ti.:..V�'.. •n .. � O 1 a � ,+ ., py k , a rr R n Icy K •[ 6S � 4 t [ + \ K t< L1m '••v �. a 9,'SS � „•,, ` .a ' f 6 �• + • ?• � + •= a v�E By' , •+� • t • ♦ 's ° P - .' a • •v+4 • 4•• 'r ♦ ♦•" m- �- � .r• � y .+ "•+ a ••r r �'- � •. ,. ,• • + [/'- ,• 'y,♦. `meq •-�'a :' %• °M a a SS31381Mou�'dnojp �S jeInbuio X 6wilnsuo:) 1 Z3nodo(0 a Ps", CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2002-04 Initial Study and Findings (Environmental Information and Environmental Checklist) PART 2 - SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 1. Land Use and Planning _ 9. 2. Population and Housing _ 10. 3. Geologic Problems _ 11. 4. Water _ 12. 5. Air Quality 6. Transportation/ Circulation 7. Biological Resources 8. Energy & Mineral Resources 13. Hazards Noise Public Services Utilities & Service Systems Aesthetics 14. Cultural Resources 15. Recreation 16. Mandatory Findings of Significance PART 3 - DETERMINATION Project Number: CUP2002-07/VAR2002-02/DR2002-18 To be completed by Lead Agency On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the MITIGATION MEASURES described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" OR "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Ann J. Lungu Signature Printed Name September 16, 2002 Date PART 4 - EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one ,involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis.) 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. 'Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more 'Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. 'Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an affect from 'Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must described the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, 'Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section SVH at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impact (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. Existing Conditions: a. The project site is located within the General Plan land use designation area of Medium High Residential (max.12 d/u per acre) and is zoned R -3-8,000-11J. The land use and zoning designation allows for multiple -family residences and church/religious facilities with a Conditional Use Permit. The project site is approximately 6.5 gross acres and is developed with a fully operational church facility. The project application is proposing to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility that includes antennas (mounted on a stealth monocypress) camouflaged as a cypress tree and equipment cabinet. The monocypress will be 40 feet tall. Two antennas, divided equally into two sectors oriented north and south respectively, will be mounted within the proposed monocypress. The monocypress will be located among a stand of approximately 10 existing cypress trees along the east side of the project site parallel and perpendicular to Diamond Bar Boulevard. The equipment cabinet area will be located adjacent to the monocpress behind a six foot high block wall. Pursuant to the City's Development Code, the proposed project is permitted within the specified zone and at the specified project site with an approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The Conditional Use Permit process will include standards and controls related to design and location of the project equipment, thereby ensuring consistency with the policies of the City as set forth in the General Plan. Development Review is a required architectural review. The Variance is required because the height of the monocypress is 40 feet and the maximum height of a structure in the R-3-8,000-1 U zone (where the project site is located) is 35 feet. For this project, the Planning Commission is the decision -maker of the submitted applications. All three applications will be processed simultaneously. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated NP IN a. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the General plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an X environmental effect? Source #s: General Plan, p. 1,10-27; City of Diamond Bar Development Code, Title 22, Article III, Section 22.42.130, .-1-17; Project application; b. Conflict with applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Source #s: General Plan, p. 1,10-27; City of Diamond Bar Development Code, Title 22, Article 111, X Section 22.42.130, p. 1-17; Project application; C. Be incompatible with existing land uses in the vicinity? Source #s: General Plan, p. 1, 10-27; City of Diamond Bar Development Code, X Title 22, Article 111, Section 22.42.130, p. 1-17; Project application; d. Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? Source #s: X MEA, II -E-1-16; Project application: e. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? Source #s: Project site plan; General Plan, 1-1 et seq., 11-1 et seq.; City of X Diamond Bar Development Code, Title 22, p. II -8-18 Zone; Project application; Existing Conditions: a. The project site is located within the General Plan land use designation area of Medium High Residential (max.12 d/u per acre) and is zoned R -3-8,000-11J. The land use and zoning designation allows for multiple -family residences and church/religious facilities with a Conditional Use Permit. The project site is approximately 6.5 gross acres and is developed with a fully operational church facility. The project application is proposing to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility that includes antennas (mounted on a stealth monocypress) camouflaged as a cypress tree and equipment cabinet. The monocypress will be 40 feet tall. Two antennas, divided equally into two sectors oriented north and south respectively, will be mounted within the proposed monocypress. The monocypress will be located among a stand of approximately 10 existing cypress trees along the east side of the project site parallel and perpendicular to Diamond Bar Boulevard. The equipment cabinet area will be located adjacent to the monocpress behind a six foot high block wall. Pursuant to the City's Development Code, the proposed project is permitted within the specified zone and at the specified project site with an approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The Conditional Use Permit process will include standards and controls related to design and location of the project equipment, thereby ensuring consistency with the policies of the City as set forth in the General Plan. Development Review is a required architectural review. The Variance is required because the height of the monocypress is 40 feet and the maximum height of a structure in the R-3-8,000-1 U zone (where the project site is located) is 35 feet. For this project, the Planning Commission is the decision -maker of the submitted applications. All three applications will be processed simultaneously. b. The project site is developed with a church facility constructed in the late 1980's. As a result, there was not nor is there currently any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan for the project site or the project area. C. The proposed telecommunications facility is allowed in the R-3-8,000-1 U zone with a Conditional Use Permit approval. The Conditional Use Permit process will review compatibility with existing land uses and ensure that the standards and controls set forth within the Development Code prevail, thereby causing the project to be consistent with the adopted policies of the City's General Plan. d. City of Diamond Bar does not have any agricultural resources or operations. e. Although the zoning designation of project site allows multiple family residences, the project site is developed with a church facility constructed in the late 1980's and churches are permitted within any residential zone with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP 87-320). As a result, the proposed project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community). Existing Conditions: a.- c., Although the zoning designation (R3-8,000-1 U) of project site allows multiple family residences, the project site is developed with a church facility constructed in the late 1980's. Currently, church facilities are allowed within this zone with a Conditional Use Permit. Since the project site is developed with a church facility, the proposed project will not displace substantial number of people, induce gross in the area directly or indirectly or displace a substantial numbers of existing housing. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 00 a. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Source #s: 1990 Census of Population; Housing, MEA, p. II -1-19; X b. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? Source #s: 1990 Census of Population and X Housing; MEA, p. 11-1-19; General Plan EIR, p. 38; General Plan Land Use Map, p. 1-27; project site plan/application; C. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Sources #s: X Source #s: 1990 Census of Population and Housing; MEA, p. 11-1- 19; General Plan EIR, p. 38; General Plan Land Use Map, p. 1-27; project site plan/application; Existing Conditions: a.- c., Although the zoning designation (R3-8,000-1 U) of project site allows multiple family residences, the project site is developed with a church facility constructed in the late 1980's. Currently, church facilities are allowed within this zone with a Conditional Use Permit. Since the project site is developed with a church facility, the proposed project will not displace substantial number of people, induce gross in the area directly or indirectly or displace a substantial numbers of existing housing. Existing Conditions: a. No portion of the City has been identified as in an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. The closest fault is the Diamond Bar fault, which is described as a "small inactive local fault". Historically, there is no record of any earthquake with an epicenter in Diamond Bar or its Sphere of Influence, and no significant movement has ever been recorded for the Diamond Bar fault. The Whittier -Elsinore fault lies approximately four miles from the project site and has been active in historic times. Three faults with the greatest potential for activity are located in excess of 20 miles from the proposed project. Therefore, the likelihood of fault rupture is limited. It is highly unlikely that the proposed project will result in or expose people to potential impacts involving fault rupture. However, the proposed project will be designed in accordance with current codes related to seismic forces. The proposed project site lies within an area identified as Seismic Zone 4 by the Uniform Building Code. The site does not appear to be located within an Earthquake Fault Zone. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated GOI:Gf,o � o dy1 � Y 4v Y-aF+`..' '�..." s ose eo 1eEto:` ot�na c n, oIv n ,, f a. Fault rupture? Source #s: General Plan, p. IV -2, and 3, Fig. IV -1; MEA, p. II -B-7 et seq.; General Plan EIR, Section III A., pg. 7-10; X Project application; b. Seismic ground shaking? Source #s: MEA, p. II -B-14, p. II -B-10, Fig. II -B -S; Project application; X C. Seiche (water tanks, reservoirs)? Source #s: Walnut Valley Water District Map 1996; Project application; X d. Landslides or mudflows? Source #s: General Plan, p. IV -3, Fig. IV -1; MEA, p. II -B-3, Fig. II -6-2; II -B-15 State of California Seismic Hazard Zones Map dated April 15, 1998; Project application; City's Public X Works Division; e. Erosion changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? Source #s: General Plan, p. IV -3, Fig. IV -1; Project application; City's Public Works Division; X f. Subsidence of the land? Source #s: MEA, p. II -B-16; Project i application; City's Public Works Division; X g. Expansive soils? Source #s: MEA, p. II -B-16; Project application; City's Public Works Division; X Existing Conditions: a. No portion of the City has been identified as in an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. The closest fault is the Diamond Bar fault, which is described as a "small inactive local fault". Historically, there is no record of any earthquake with an epicenter in Diamond Bar or its Sphere of Influence, and no significant movement has ever been recorded for the Diamond Bar fault. The Whittier -Elsinore fault lies approximately four miles from the project site and has been active in historic times. Three faults with the greatest potential for activity are located in excess of 20 miles from the proposed project. Therefore, the likelihood of fault rupture is limited. It is highly unlikely that the proposed project will result in or expose people to potential impacts involving fault rupture. However, the proposed project will be designed in accordance with current codes related to seismic forces. The proposed project site lies within an area identified as Seismic Zone 4 by the Uniform Building Code. The site does not appear to be located within an Earthquake Fault Zone. C. The closest reservoir is the Ridgeline Reservoir, approximately 3/4 miles, by direct route, in a southwesterly direction. If seiche occurs, it will not affect the project site. Additionally, the project is not located near any volcanic mountain regions. There are no large bodies of water in close proximity to the project site. d. According to the State of California Seismic Hazard Zone Map, the project does not appear to be in a potential liquefaction zone. The installation of the proposed project could be considered minor construction compared to the current development of the project site. Additionally, City permits and inspections are required to insure compliance with all codes. e. The proposed project is considered minor construction compared to the site's current development and requires minimal time to complete the construction. It is not expected that the installation of the proposed project will make changes in the topography or unstable soil conditions from excavating grading or fill, nor is erosion problems expected to occur. Subsidence of land is not expected to occur due to the proposed project's minor construction. g. It is not anticipated that proposed project would result in or expose people to potential impacts involving expansive soils. Additionally, the proposed project is required to comply with all City standards and inspections to the issuance of City permits. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 4. . WATEL,F1� Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and 4 :x a. amount of surface runoff? Source #s: City of Diamond Bar Public X Works Division; Project site plan; b. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? Source #s: General an, p. IV - 4, Fig. IV 2, FEMA Flood X Panel No. 0650430980 B, Zone C, 12/2/80; Project application; i c. Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? Source #s: X MEA, p. II -C-3, 4, Fig. II -C-1; Project application; d. Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? Source #s: MEA, p. II -C-3, 4, Fig. II -C-1; X e. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements? Source #s: MEA, p. II -C-3, 4, Fig, II -C-1; City of Diamond Bar Public Works Division; Project application; X f. j Changes in the quantity of ground waters either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater X i recharge capability? Source #s: MEA, p. II -c-3, 4, Fig. II -C-1; Project application; g. Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? Source #s: City of Diamond Bar Public Works Division; Project application; X h. Impacts to groundwater quality? Source #s: MEA, p. 11-P-3-8; Project application; X I. Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? Source #s: MEA, p. II -P-3-8; X Project application; j. Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on the Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map or place with 100 -year flood X hazard area structures, which would impede or re -direct flood flows? Source #s: General Plan, p. IV -4, Fig. IV -2; MEA, p. II -C-1 et seq.; Existing Conditions: a. —j. The project site is completely developed with a church facility that was permitted early 1980s. The installation of the proposed telecommunications facility will take place within a landscape area adjacent to a church structure. The installation will not require extensive grading or changes in topography. The project area will only utilize approximately 320 square feet of a 6.68 acres. The project site is not located within a flood hazard area. As a result, it is not anticipated that the proposed project will change absorption rates or drainage patterns or the rate and amount of surface runoff. Additionally, it is not anticipated that the proposed project will expose people or property to water related hazards such is flooding. Furthermore is not anticipated that the proposed project will change the amount of surface water in any water body, change currents or courses of water movement, or cause discharge into surface water, thereby affecting water quality. It is not anticipated that the proposed project will cause a substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater for public supply. Additionally, the groundwater is not utilized for domestic supply, but only for reclaimed water supply. Therefore, the proposed project will not cause a significant reduction in groundwater supplies or availability of groundwater for public water supplies. Existing Conditions: a. -d. The project site is completely developed with a church facility that was permitted early 1980s. The installation of the proposed telecommunications facility will take place within a landscape area adjacent to a church structure. It will not require extensive grading and the installation of the proposed project could be considered minor construction. The project area will only utilize approximately 320 square feet of a 6.68 acres. As a result, the proposed project is not expected to conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable air quality plan or create objectionable odors. There are no sensitive receptors within the vicinity of the project site. Due to the minimal construction it will take to install the proposed telecommunications facility, the affect will be temporary it will not result in a considerable net increase of any pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated r , a. Conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Source #s: SCAQMD Air Quality Handbook; X b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? Source #s: MEA, p. II -F-8- 10, Fig. II -F-3; Project application; X C. Result in cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone X precursors)? Source #s: SCAQMD Air Quality Handbook; Project application; d. Create objectionable odors? Source #s: SCAQMD Air Quality Handbook; Project application; x Existing Conditions: a. -d. The project site is completely developed with a church facility that was permitted early 1980s. The installation of the proposed telecommunications facility will take place within a landscape area adjacent to a church structure. It will not require extensive grading and the installation of the proposed project could be considered minor construction. The project area will only utilize approximately 320 square feet of a 6.68 acres. As a result, the proposed project is not expected to conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable air quality plan or create objectionable odors. There are no sensitive receptors within the vicinity of the project site. Due to the minimal construction it will take to install the proposed telecommunications facility, the affect will be temporary it will not result in a considerable net increase of any pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard. Existing Conditions: a. -g. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed with a church facility. The telecommunications facility will require maintenance on a monthly basis by 1 to 2 maintenance personnel and one service vehicle. As a result, it is not expected that the proposed project will substantially increase in vehicle trips, thereby increasing hazards due to design or incompatibility of use. The proposed project does not affect emergency access, parking capacity on-site, or cause an increase in level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads and highways. The proposed project is not expected to conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation; nor change in rail, water, or air traffic patterns. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 6. TRANSP AMMMOR a. An increase in vehicle trips which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections) Source Its: X Project application/site plan; b. Substantially increase hazards due to design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? Source #s: City's Public Works Division; Project X application/site plan; C. Inadequate emergency access? Source #s: City's Public Works Division; Project application; X d. Inadequate parking capacity on-site? Source #s: City of Diamond Bar Development Code, Tittle 22, p. III -91, at seq.; Project site plan; X e. Exceeding, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads and highways? Source #s: City's Public Works Division; Congestion Management Plan, Ordinance No. 01 (1993); X City of Diamond Bar Development Code, III -157 et. seq.; I. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnabouts, bicycle racks)? Source #s: General Plan, p. V-22; Congestion Management Plan, Ordinance No. 01 (1993); City of Diamond Bar Development Code, X i III -157 et. seq.; g. Change in rail, water, or air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risk? Source #s: MEA, p. II -T-36; Project X application; Existing Conditions: a. -g. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed with a church facility. The telecommunications facility will require maintenance on a monthly basis by 1 to 2 maintenance personnel and one service vehicle. As a result, it is not expected that the proposed project will substantially increase in vehicle trips, thereby increasing hazards due to design or incompatibility of use. The proposed project does not affect emergency access, parking capacity on-site, or cause an increase in level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads and highways. The proposed project is not expected to conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation; nor change in rail, water, or air traffic patterns. Existing Conditions: a. -e. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed in the late 1980s with a church facility. The church facility includes structures, mature landscaping with irrigation and parking lot areas. As a result, it is not anticipated that the installation of a telecommunications facility will adversely affect any species identified as sensitive, or special status, or adversely affect riparian habitat, federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 Clean Water Act in local or regional plan, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. Additionally, the proposed project is not expected to conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources or with adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, or other approved local, and regional or state habitat conservation plans. Furthermore, the proposed project is not within a migratory wildlife corridor. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a. Substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plan, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or X U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services? Source #s: MEA, p. II -D-1-8; General Plan, p. III -11; Project site plan/ application; b. Substantial adverse effect on and riparian habitat, federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 clean Water Act, or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services? Source #s: MEA, p. X 11-D-1-8; General Plan, p. III -11; City of Diamond Bar Development Code, p. III -149 et seq.; Project site plan/application; C., A conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Source #s: MEA, p. II -D-1.8; General Plan, p. I11-11, City of Diamond Bar X Development Code, p. III -149 et. seq.; d. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? Source #s: General X Plan, p. 1-15.16, p. 111.11; MEA, p. II -D-1-8; City of Diamond Bar Development Code, p. 111-149 et. seq.; e. Substaniiai interference with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife X nursery sites? Source #s: MEA, p. II -D-1-8 & 18; Existing Conditions: a. -e. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed in the late 1980s with a church facility. The church facility includes structures, mature landscaping with irrigation and parking lot areas. As a result, it is not anticipated that the installation of a telecommunications facility will adversely affect any species identified as sensitive, or special status, or adversely affect riparian habitat, federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 Clean Water Act in local or regional plan, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. Additionally, the proposed project is not expected to conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources or with adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, or other approved local, and regional or state habitat conservation plans. Furthermore, the proposed project is not within a migratory wildlife corridor. Existing Conditions: a. -c. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed in the late 1980s with a church facility. The church facility includes structures, mature landscaping with irrigation and parking lot areas. The installation of the telecommunications facility will connect to existing on-site electricity. The proposed project will be required to comply with the Uniform Building Code designed and construction standards and City's Energy Conservation Standards. It is not anticipated that the installation of the proposed telecommunications facility will use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner or will result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? Source #s: General Plan, p. III -14; Uniform Building Code 1998; X b. Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? Source #s: MEA, p. II -S-1; Uniform Building Code, 1998; Project X application; C. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? Source #s: MEA, p. III -B-17; Project application; X Existing Conditions: a. -c. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed in the late 1980s with a church facility. The church facility includes structures, mature landscaping with irrigation and parking lot areas. The installation of the telecommunications facility will connect to existing on-site electricity. The proposed project will be required to comply with the Uniform Building Code designed and construction standards and City's Energy Conservation Standards. It is not anticipated that the installation of the proposed telecommunications facility will use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner or will result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State. Existing Conditions: a. -e. The FCC has ruled that telecommunications facilities do not cause any health hazards. The proposed project will be in compliance with all FCC requirements and standards. As a result, it is not anticipated that the proposed telecommunications will cause significant hazard to the public or the environment. It is expected that the proposed telecommunications facility will fill in an area that currently has insufficient service. Therefore, the proposed telecommunications facility should be helpful in a public emergency situation. Furthermore, it is not located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous material; or create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through X reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Source #s: MEA, p. II -M-1; Project application, General Plan, p. IV -1 et seq.; b. Impair the implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Source #s: Multihazard Function Plan, City of Diamond Bar, 1992; Project X application; C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or actively hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Source #s: Walnut Valley X Unified School District; Pomona Unified School District; City of Diamond Bar House Numbering Map; d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Source #s: MEA, p. II -M-1 et seq.; X project application/ site plan; e. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Sources #s: MEA, p. II -K-1; General Plan, p. IV -1 et. X i seq.; Uniform Building Code, 1998; project application/site plan; Existing Conditions: a. -e. The FCC has ruled that telecommunications facilities do not cause any health hazards. The proposed project will be in compliance with all FCC requirements and standards. As a result, it is not anticipated that the proposed telecommunications will cause significant hazard to the public or the environment. It is expected that the proposed telecommunications facility will fill in an area that currently has insufficient service. Therefore, the proposed telecommunications facility should be helpful in a public emergency situation. Furthermore, it is not located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Existing Conditions: a. -b. The proposed telecommunications facility is quiet operating equipment. The traffic traversing Diamond Bar Boulevard creates noise level far beyond that o which could possibly be created by the proposed facility. As a result, the proposed telecommunications facility is not expect to expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies, or expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Furthermore, it is not expected that the proposed facility will substantially increase permanently, temporarily, or periodically the ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; or exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne X noise levels? Source #s: General Plan, p. IV -15; MEA, p. 11-G-1 at seq.; City of Diamond Bar Development Code, p. 111-81 et.seq.; Project application; b. A substantial permanent increase or temporary or periodic in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Source #s: General Plan, p. IV -15; MEA, p. II -G- X 1 et seq.; City of Diamond Bar Development Code, p. III -81 et. seq.; Project application; Existing Conditions: a. -b. The proposed telecommunications facility is quiet operating equipment. The traffic traversing Diamond Bar Boulevard creates noise level far beyond that o which could possibly be created by the proposed facility. As a result, the proposed telecommunications facility is not expect to expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies, or expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Furthermore, it is not expected that the proposed facility will substantially increase permanently, temporarily, or periodically the ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Existing Conditions: a. -d. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed in the late 1980s with a church facility. The addition of an unmanned telecommunications facility is not expected to have an effect on or increase the need for fire and police protections, additional schools, additional maintenance of public facilities including roads, or other governmental services. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 11 -PUSLfPER CESS o roe - 4'^a-(.¢d K C:.Y,+A F esugIn eed forneik c� ove nm . , of iheollowin areas Fire Protection? Source #s: General Plan, p. VI-3; Project a. application; X b. Police Protections? Source #s: General Plan; p. VI-3;Function Plan, City of Diamond Bar, 1992; Project application; X C. Schools? Source #s: MEA, p. II-0-1; X d. Other governmental services? Source #s: General Plan, p. VI-1 at seq.; X Existing Conditions: a. -d. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed in the late 1980s with a church facility. The addition of an unmanned telecommunications facility is not expected to have an effect on or increase the need for fire and police protections, additional schools, additional maintenance of public facilities including roads, or other governmental services. Existing Conditions: a. -g. The installation of the proposed telecommunications facility will not result in the need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following: electrical power or natural gas; communication systems; local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities; sewer systems; storm drainage systems; and solid waste disposal systems. All systems and supplies necessary for the proposed facility are existing. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 72 tiTILITIESAND EFS SYST - -0 -;aewsystemstoru fi Le a. Power or natural gas? Source #s: General Plan, p. 1-18, VI-2; Project application; X b. Communication systems? Source #s: General Plan, p. 1-18, VI-2; Project application; X C. Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? Source #s: General Plan, p. 1-18, VI-2; Project application; X d. Sewer or septic tanks? Source #s: General Plan, p. 1-18, VI-2; Project application; X e. Storm water drainage? Source #s: General Plan, p. 1-18, VI-2; Project application; X f. Solid waste disposal? Source #s: General Plan, p. 1-18, VI-2; �Proje�ct application; X g. Local or regional water supplies? Source #s: General Plan, p. 1-18, I VI-2; Project application; X Existing Conditions: a. -g. The installation of the proposed telecommunications facility will not result in the need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following: electrical power or natural gas; communication systems; local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities; sewer systems; storm drainage systems; and solid waste disposal systems. All systems and supplies necessary for the proposed facility are existing. Existing Conditions: a. -c. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed in the late 1980s with a church facility. The church facility includes structures, mature landscaping with irrigation and parking lot areas. The proposed telecommunications facility consists of antennas (mounted on a stealth monocypress) camouflaged as a cypress tree and equipment cabinet. The monocypress will be 40 feet tall. Two antennas, divided equally into two sectors oriented north and south respectively, will be mounted within the proposed monocypress. The monocypress will be located among a stand of approximately 10 existing cypress trees along the east side of the project site parallel and perpendicular to Diamond Bar Boulevard. The equipment cabinet area will be located adjacent to the monocpress behind a six foot high block wall. Pursuant to the Development Code, the maximum of this structure within the R-3-8,000-1 U zone is 35 feet. Due to the monocypress height of 40 feet, a Variance approval is required. It is anticipated that the installation of the proposed project at the proposed height will have a less than significant impact because of its cypress tree resemblance and its location among a stand of approximate 10 cypress trees and surrounding mature landscaping and trees. Additionally, it is expected that the existing trees could eventually reach a height of up to 60 feet. Furthermore, the location of the monocypress among other cypress trees will lessen the visual impact of the proposed telecommunication facility. It is expected that the moncypress will assume the same visual characteristic as the existing trees on site. The proposed project will not create a new source of light or glare that will affect the surrounding area. The project site or the area surrounding the project site is not considered a scenic vista or scenic resource. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 13, -AIN- iE iOS1� a. Have a substantial adverse affect on a scenic vista or damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock out croppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? X Source #s: General Plan, p. III 10;Project application; b. Substantiallydegradetha existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Source #s: General Plan, p. III -10; City of Diamond Bar's Development Code, p. IV -11 et. seq.; City Design X Guidelines, p. 1.25; Project plans/application; photo simulation; c. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Source #s: City of Diamond Bar's Development Code, p. IV -11 et.seq.; City Design X Guidelines, p. 1.25; Project plans/application; Existing Conditions: a. -c. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed in the late 1980s with a church facility. The church facility includes structures, mature landscaping with irrigation and parking lot areas. The proposed telecommunications facility consists of antennas (mounted on a stealth monocypress) camouflaged as a cypress tree and equipment cabinet. The monocypress will be 40 feet tall. Two antennas, divided equally into two sectors oriented north and south respectively, will be mounted within the proposed monocypress. The monocypress will be located among a stand of approximately 10 existing cypress trees along the east side of the project site parallel and perpendicular to Diamond Bar Boulevard. The equipment cabinet area will be located adjacent to the monocpress behind a six foot high block wall. Pursuant to the Development Code, the maximum of this structure within the R-3-8,000-1 U zone is 35 feet. Due to the monocypress height of 40 feet, a Variance approval is required. It is anticipated that the installation of the proposed project at the proposed height will have a less than significant impact because of its cypress tree resemblance and its location among a stand of approximate 10 cypress trees and surrounding mature landscaping and trees. Additionally, it is expected that the existing trees could eventually reach a height of up to 60 feet. Furthermore, the location of the monocypress among other cypress trees will lessen the visual impact of the proposed telecommunication facility. It is expected that the moncypress will assume the same visual characteristic as the existing trees on site. The proposed project will not create a new source of light or glare that will affect the surrounding area. The project site or the area surrounding the project site is not considered a scenic vista or scenic resource. Existing Conditions: a. -e. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed in the late 1980s with a church facility. The church facility includes structures, mature landscaping with irrigation and parking lot areas. The project site does not contain paleontological, archeological, and/or historical resources or unique geological features. Furthermore the proposed project will not cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values more restrict existing religious or sacred uses. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated JC LIVARWE—ffIRCE"NUIft er . a. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic features? Source #s: MEA, II -H-1 et. seq.; Project application; X b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5. Source #s: MEA, II - H -1 at seq.; Project plans/application; X C. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of historical resources as defined in 15064.5? Source #s: MEA, II -H -let seq.; Project plans/application; X d. Have the potential to cause a physical change, which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? Source #s: MEA, II -H-1 et seq.; Project plans/application; X e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Source #s: MEA, II -H -let seq.; Project plans/application; X Existing Conditions: a. -e. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed in the late 1980s with a church facility. The church facility includes structures, mature landscaping with irrigation and parking lot areas. The project site does not contain paleontological, archeological, and/or historical resources or unique geological features. Furthermore the proposed project will not cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values more restrict existing religious or sacred uses. Existing Conditions: a. -b. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed in the late 1980s with a church facility. As such, the proposed project is not expected to increase the demand for existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 15.. ,iG CiR` O11FiCE r u ..the: roe ': ,' fi� a. Increase the demand use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Source X #s: General Plan, p. II -1 et seq.; Project application; b. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Source #s: General Plan, p. II -1 X et seq.; Project plans/application; Existing Conditions: a. -b. The proposed project is an unmanned telecommunications facility that will be installed on a site developed in the late 1980s with a church facility. As such, the proposed project is not expected to increase the demand for existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. Existing Condiiions: a. Due to the information presented in the application, plans submitted and site survey, it is anticipated that the proposed project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of Fish or wildlife species, cause fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining level, threatened to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or pre -history. b. Due to the information presented in the application, plans submitted, site survey, and analysis within this document, it is anticipated that the proposed project does not have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals. C. Due to the information presented in the application, plans submitted, site survey, and analysis within this document, it is anticipated that the proposed project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. d. Due to the information presented in the application, plans submitted, and analysis within this document, it is anticipated that the proposed project is not have environmental effects, which will cause substantial as adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated- ncor orateda. sd,6. ' ° , a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self X sustaining level, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or pre -history? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? X C. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other X current projects, and the affects of probable future projects.) d. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X Existing Condiiions: a. Due to the information presented in the application, plans submitted and site survey, it is anticipated that the proposed project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of Fish or wildlife species, cause fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining level, threatened to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or pre -history. b. Due to the information presented in the application, plans submitted, site survey, and analysis within this document, it is anticipated that the proposed project does not have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals. C. Due to the information presented in the application, plans submitted, site survey, and analysis within this document, it is anticipated that the proposed project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. d. Due to the information presented in the application, plans submitted, and analysis within this document, it is anticipated that the proposed project is not have environmental effects, which will cause substantial as adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. J GENERAL NOTES D 1 9 RF. TO g� SLAI.FD W,QITTEN DIMENS ON TAK[ RREf£ LYON E. DpT �I 5SET OF PLAIJSgRI��pv INTFNOP. F. O B�`I� USED POA �C Na AITO T �55C YEr NII IL�EIONS A,ID OI RI9ESFUO TMM NG US C PRIOSR pT�Q�ECTTE 51/ W' OF BEINTR9p,TH.}jE.Ei�CpM�CYyAG0.' VEp $ I TIQI ANgI I TOIT E�A {E(SH VPly CARS Th" (ATI ITC / ITNWME . T ANTTH y� OI'I P3p�T�NpE p�T�ROAryLgTO�gUCS L RREICgE2IV �W5^�gTgTE N�; NOFRIZpIA�TI(�fMAV T�iO �OT�[[EII..EAR�TNOEFlNETD BTTEPCCNST�RUCT�W OPAW t�Aa-B/CL1iTFAGT� 0.Ftiy11ty1ENT5. LpL.IL� g �q�E[� FAANdN��t OF ? 11TNI F 1 �.0 NPORTI(R155�WORK T E iRTgRLryAULCp�RFYgO1HRpglffLXJRO D,LpIR Ig. AL (�Ay1It . gyp �I1„�T�QS NISbLFIG. yy;,ISE OfdKWNER� La CODES aR ORFId1ANMKk9UTAE.e RIALS R %pppI.q.q����L. 'T� CLO q2 L IpC p,,, RFL'ILLAT� Np�r��A,j*!I y�p�g��� AE�IryIIIRF I�pI1� � RTUL REGULA ��g1�LPND jgP�N.pOD gk�EARIN6I Il.A4q`IEUUp:IFFIp11PF�EN&POR�np�AEp�NpLE TU+ERTOM�CpEhsyo@TliggTl�p"wOU/N�A.ILTY wr INVE0.NVipE1TJDWggITpypNUU@p�CTTTNUURRpgqLRLpJIGUMpl,5N fq�DUBN1 gDYpRApL,L�QPEkgd�WT1NELgC�I.T 11kk`ffD�mENkYI tFTERL ECTTT IiIgSTR111C!!!O 1N�9{T�RIICTp10N PgR�CIO�FJygEIJCTT'/1QNFL�E`ptrr 1 E LLF A,V9 UGH RIU FAR4ION5NDI'IEAY QCATI IRS TO yU�T ����{{ii pp OMAALRL yP��+��E�pp 9 TIIA M. ¢EMUKF.RRHKgMpDpJ BONS SSHIA��LI.L� 0E ITHISEFipAN�CAI/LITY pgMORAR��1 TH rvftuyl�IMATERAt9 IFRTAPRITCTADLO 1`0 ALLSPMYNA DOY THpE��T@T IAlVNFA �jT�LE TO �fiC9M�L I'+� .�BT P �IRIIY� ETC., UR UUE ta1.n1, T Tp��� A �❑�TpjQT,fp7�EI¢p�UCTN%N� i A I>ON SPECQI ry�Tlfkf�."F�E' FRS IN, OTB.�W�J�-SSEMUWGS IIION�F CCCC TNS[;A R� F 1�1 EWHAV So PS FO�T 'fO� �1 T) �jlf9RIN THE L'I %��_4L rWJA'- .I'Elk"' €€CNN♦nv��Es'FP K,MK Du�T�E�y TE W19 -V �f ENyOURs TO AVROItlp IDRISTUR'B�rFI&AFNMORnAL BU31NE54 OWNERS PREFERRED PREEFFETRREDp g �pW�TgF�1�9gp�R �RCPLy OUT N ?C�1I�MgE.p�f 11 ILTl�d gYTH�E4R ALL A, TN PI'IiNT ANCNU2L WITH V�RE�F!%ITMIPI'IF.NT FIANUF TUREER9M OF ALf.I 16, CINGULAR WIRELESS CONTRACTM M REPRESENTATIVE TO PROVIDE AND INSTALL ALL FCC MARKINGS AND SYMBOLS, VICINITY MAP CITY OF DIAMDUD BAR TIR)11AS BROTHERS PAGE, 600-A-5 SYMBOLS SECTION NUMBER � BUILDING SECTION A- REFERENCE SHEET NUMBER aw o DETAIL NUMBER RF ENGINEER SUV DETAIL REFERENCE �SNEET NUMBER O c � I ECTION NUMBER AEC TNIM PLANNING REFERENCE SHEET NUMBER CON5T. COORD. DETAIL NUMBER MM -MM ELEVATION ENC REFERENCE SHEET NUMBER 41 A W O � DETAIL NUMBER DB1-ELTYPICAL EVATION NUMBER INTERIM ELEVATION -I m 0461 '--SHEET NUMBERREFERENCE C Oj KEY NOTE REFERENCE O DOOR NUMBER IBI AREA AND/M ROOM NUMBER eMECHANICAL 2 UNIT - PROPERTY LINE --i4—)F-�E-- FENCING -E--E--E-�- ELECTRICAL SERVICE -T--T--T--T- TELCO SERVICE SHEET INDEX T-1 TITLE SHEET A-0 SITE PLAN A -I PARTIAL SITE PLAN / DETAILS A-2ELEVATIONS ASB DETAILS E-1 POWEWTIELCA PLAN SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM, DETAIL5 AND NOTES E-2 GROUNDING PLAN, 6ETAES AND NOTES C-1 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY (FM REFERENCE ONLY) C-2 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY (FOR REFERENCE ONLY) CONSULTANT TEAM CLIENT REPRESENTATIVE AMY 51" THE CONSULTING GROUP, INC. 18900 VON KARMAN AVENUE SUITE 870 IRVINE, CA 9 12 PHONE, (714) 624.3551 FAR, (949) 471-2370 ARCHITECT: BOJORNEZ 4 ANDERSON, INC. SIBS AIRWAY AVENUE SUITE, N COSTA MESA, CA 9M96 PHONE. (714) M4-3030 FAR. (714) 4M-2903 CONTACT.J. D. ANDERSON LAND SURVEYOR N DAVID EVANS 4 ASSOCIATES, INC. 800 NORTH HAVEN AVENUE SUITE SW ONTARIO, CA 91764 F(M9) 4B1-5760 FAR, 481 CONTACT, MA HART PETERSON ELECTRICAL ENGINEER GLP KARJALA ASSOCIATES, INC 3169-C AIRWAY AVENUE COSTA MESA, CA 92626 PWONEr(714) ]61-1661 FAX, (714) 791-42N. CONTACT. GARY PETRAK STRUCTURAL ENGINEER THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS SEI OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS IS PROPRIETARY 9T NATURE. ANY USE OR DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN THAT WHICH RELATES TO CIRCULAR WIRELESS IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. . UAm: w/ Al • ARCHITECT: 8MINUEZ & MOER.SO -SM DRAWN BY: T.Y. CHECKED BY: JDA REVISIONcingular S REV DATE BEscRN'TNIN BY WIRELESS SB -106-01 CYPRESS ANTENNA INSTALLATION ST. DENIS CHURCH LEGAL DESCRIPTION SEE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY APA, 8292-001-012 PROJECT SUMMARY LANDLORD: ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF LOS ANGELES 9424 WILSHIREBLVD. LOS ANGELES, CA 90JIO SITE CONTACT. ELLEN (OLIN PwomE'(WA) 861 -TION ZON)NG: CCTIMERCIAL I ADA COMPLIANCE: PSE, NOT APPLICABLE PER TITLE 24 59CTIM 1105(8) .5.4.2 OCCUPANCY - .... PLAN CHECK A. CONTACTS APPLICANT CINGULAR WIRELE55 2521 MICHELLE AVENUE IN FLOOR EIEPIIME -4 734-7300 FAN, (714) 734-7530 CMTACTr MARK RIVERA DIRECTOR ON DEPLOYMENT CUSTOMER CONTACT LINGULAR WIRELESS 2521 MICHELLE AVENUE 2M FLOUR TUSTIN E 92780 TELEPl�1NEr (2714) 734-7404 PAN.714) 734-75W CMT T JEFF JACOBS CONSTRUCTION MANAGER EXHIBPI' ..a CUP2002-07/V AR2002-02/DR2002-18 2151 Diamond Bar Blvd. October 8, 2002 APPROVALS THE FOLLOWING PARTIES HEREEFE APPRP/E AND ACCEPT THESE DOCUMENTS AND AUTHORIZE THE CONTRACTOR TO PROCEED WITH THE CONSTRUCTIW DESCRIBED HEREIN. ALL CM5TRUCTIM DOCUMENTS ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE LOCAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND ANY CHANGES AND MODIFICATIONS THEY MAY IMPOSE. PRINT NAME SIGNATURE DATE � LANDLORD no CW MANAGER aw o E�� RF ENGINEER SUV SITE AC6UISTION O c � I AEC PLANNING N Z CON5T. COORD. W PROJECT DESCRIPTION THE PROPOSED PROJECT ENTAILS. INSTALLATION OF (4) BASE TRANSCEIVER 5TATICN5 (ST5), ON CONCRETE PAD, (I) TELCO CABINET, (I) MANUAL TRANSFER SWITCH, (1) ELECTRICAL PANEL A', (I) METER AND VERIZON TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT ROUTED M WALL, (1) t40` -O' HIGH CYRESS AT GRADE WITH INTERNAL CEA% RUNS TO (2) CDNCEALEO CUADtthAR ANTENNAS. THE PROPOSED LEASE AREA 15 APPROXIMATELY 320 SQ. FT. L. tn W WLLJ i U X AL1-Ivo-vl-MII-BI SITE PTE: CYPRESS ANTENNA INSTALLATION LOCATION: ST. DENIS CHURCH 2151 S. DIAMOND BAR BLVD. DIAMOND BAR, CA -91765 nnE: TITLE SHEET SHEET NUYBFA: T-1 L. � no aw o E�� EP SUV FII�II O c � I N Z W :D N 0- cz 41 W O � a. Rs 01 *F <I NEASE m 0461 !1 AL1-Ivo-vl-MII-BI SITE PTE: CYPRESS ANTENNA INSTALLATION LOCATION: ST. DENIS CHURCH 2151 S. DIAMOND BAR BLVD. DIAMOND BAR, CA -91765 nnE: TITLE SHEET SHEET NUYBFA: T-1 L. J D05TING ST. DEN15 RECTORY ENUSTINC EST. DENI5 c13 RTYARD L_ \ THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS SET OF CONSTRUCTION DOC IS YROPRIETART BY NATURE. ANY USE OR DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN THAT WHICH RELATES TO CINOULAR WIRELESS IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. \ IXDATE: 09/20/02 P.O.C. 0 TELCO UTILITY FCLETI ARCHRECT: BOIORQU22 $ ANDER90 DRAWN BY: T.M. / \ CHECKED BY: JDA A REVISIONS REN DATE DESORRM.0% By Is \ RK1 I\/ \a Orr 1`\ VA 517E PLAN J IZ NEW G.W. T9sd/ q UyDF]EG201MD RME . SD' 20' IV O 30' (T) I SCALE SCALE: .-30-0n 3 ry K u � W O V W O If= 0 <- C,^ c N � 00 V N -m w I a z w p J LL W -J =` U U_ U i Z N H ry o n u � V1 W Ss= O If= 0 <- C,^ m 00 V Eom ri I u� ry z _ � V1 W Ss= O If= �S 0ass SB -106-01-P ll -81 RIE T1RL CYPRESS ANTENNA INSTALLATION USCATIp. ST. DENIS CHURCH 2151 S. DIAMOND BAR BLVD DIAMOND BAR. CA 91765 TREE: SITE PLAN SHEET RURD R: A-0 J L. PROPRIETARY INFORMATION • THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIN SET OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS IS �� .. AI I OR DISCLOSURE OTHERE.THAANNYTHAAROPRIETARY BY T WHICH REE TES TO CINOULAR \ t�� }4\J ISTING TREES WIRELES5 IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. DATE; 03(20(02 J i_ �> I ET (((ry � NEW L.W. PRIrIAIRY S.T,9. UNIT a'-0' HIGW CYPRESS (l ARCHITECT. p.'1 TIN( TREES BEYOND (TO REI'IAIN) .� V 11 t PRAYIE QUAOC.N. BNOBQUEZ A ANDPA50 DRAWN 6Y: T.Y. NEW SCREEN WALL ADDITKN 1V l ,r(�/ 4di A WITHIN)TO REPLACE EX15TINy�® CYPREECa (PAINT AND T®fTURE CHECKED BY:JDA C,� '1 / / ryryI r/ '` NEWr-0, Ea WALL ADDIT" TO MATCA �, ANrENNA9 TO ruTa+ NEW crPREss REVISIONS _ 1 NEW C.W. CLELTRKdI METER NEW LYL:IMIWAL iRANN'ER SWITCH/ J l7 - ' / �n �, EXISTING WA 14PCIENEWCA.HLV CYPRE:55 t4Dd (AA.L.) . DATE DFSCPoPIION BY J'II �� \ LL NEW G.W. MANUAL* Al2O (A.M.5,L.) TRANSFER SWITCH � f�Eii\ 'J I EXI5TING ST. DENIS HALL E%ISTING POWER LINES (TYP) / IB B PANS.'A'�',µT,��1,,p\ST N1�R`ILI d IDUSTING SCREEN WALL d j �\Y )}d� C �1 NW C.W. MHTER� "� "��yG� �I) � �� �-- o 1 CA. u+A's W L� 'O NEW V09= TEIfA fJYI!&T9 ..... —__ l CN® WITHINDO 5E9A-1 FF aISTUNG LANDSCAPING ry m R 0 EXISTING DRIVEWAY J � MC 1 U U 4' a. O 4. Z B' 4' O B' 9CALE� 1/4' 0 1'-O' SCALE, I/w EQUIPMENT ELEVATION SCALE: % NORTH WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1 N 0) c /1 Tk� �Hm 4 ..41 t�L �r I { �! i I ? ( ! �/ ;/ NEW LYJ. 40'-0` NIGH Ll'PRE4v C2 CONGEALED WITHIN) TO REPLACE WCTPRL)"b CPAR AND Tt XTURE TREES TO MATCH NEAt Cl'PRE55 ti.� IX15TING TREES (TO REMAIN) ELECTRI(a1. RCOYi C cm o OIPf i V <J a u D O. RS > y m �������� 1 LI __I, �,__.I �( e1 r �. onsnHG sr. DE,uIs w+u 0 / �h,,iF. .l�� 7� m5c N Z Lu V1 V IiI 1 1 �//'�". �1 1{1� I ;' NEW cx Iuu ADrnrrort S rs'r I i�rT '. •Gt^L�71 /'� (�u I-E%I�TiNu /R �rCtIOJ �(���+1 � �ru� i 1�� u.r 0�11 E 2 ��LL '4T I I 1 -.JAI -h I`ll tip f � j ;I SETE1JIDS OP SCNEBI TO MATCH ENI9TING �y L ( G '' �� —�..I•' ZI 4* � 6Yt U SR"WY . SB-106-01—Pl1—Bi o 1`7 fJt15TING E%TENT 1 PTE: CYPRESS CYPRESS ANTENNA i f Fn SCREEN WALL t I i \�, \ ! —'J I G $ 6 I I INSTALLATION UDWITRx: '0� \ I I \ f ''I i f NEW A'-0' HIGH scum KALI (PANT 1 TEcTuRtz TO MTC IXI6TtNR) Cgp gPRpptla E D'T.9. / o ( ` \ ! y'�.` :, np �4 x / \ i ST. DENIS CHURCH 2IAM A DIAMOND BAR BLVD. DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 �\ ,# c 91 B -CEASE FWWE.9• i SEE A AL G+BLE HNCI AURE N: NEW C.W. THIRD B.T.S. 4G.W. SUB -BABE FRAME PRIMARY B.T.S. ^,AIB-6U®'PRPDE 0 t 4' EXISTING e' 4' 0 E' ELEVATIONS ® LANDSCAPING SCALE, 1/4° . I'-0' SCALE. 1W P -W SI NABOB EQUIPMENT ELEVATION 5C;`E_DR 9 NORTH WEST ELEVATION 5GI L_p_Q.. 3 A-2 L. - PROPRIETARY INFORMATION THE 4WORM410N CONTAINED IN THIS SET OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS IS PROPRIETARY BY NATURE. ANY USE. OR DISCLOSURE OT R THAN THAT WHICH RELPTES TO SINGULAR WIRELESS IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. DATE: 03/20/02 ARCHITECT: BWORQDEZ k ANDZIBO - DRAWN BY: T.B. CHECKED BY: JDA REVISIONS REvDI.TE OEECRIPTII 91. Vi K co O J �� 107 4 1 w > a a= w� C J � Z_ � "- NfW C.W. BTB � 5UB E%ISTING WALL BRAE PRM1E N !n • N H p6 LCTiT. DbTTCY ry ng LL * SPON1'- DRILL EPDXY BOWEL Il As �: II M INTO F%IsnNG WALL II I N O `Gry _ 'Iy � �1L O(? .Eon E. m A-1 IH- � 5T A5 �'CONCREI'E N Z u Lu o CONCRETE CONCRETE PULL BARRIER A9VREQlIR® � - � W �s� E%15TING OLWORETE PAD :3R O €g: II. N—� I I Cc sS„ SIR SB-10106-01-Pii-87 CYPRESS ANTENNA INSTALLATION. ST. DENIS CHURCH NEW (3) 4.0 CONDUIT5- 2151 S. DIAMOND BAR BLVD. ROUTED UNDERGRd1Ntl DIAMOND BAR, CA 91165 mt¢: DETAILS SRELT MANOR, A_3 12 FOUNDATION DETAIL sca,E,o1 3 J GROUND ROD I N.T.S. 1101 GROUNDING, LE CAD WELD caro MECHANICAL CO DRIVEN! GRODND (WRNOT HYGRU L_ 11 SEW GG/ROUND RDD, > EE <12> 2 1'0 C - (1) 02 FROM MGS TO GROUNDING RING ri 4' 2' O 4' J)®SCALE. (TRENCH DETAIL I NSCTAS, 111 I GROUNDING PLAN I 54A IE I rj 1— 6-11x1' HHCS EDLTS—t 5/8' LO:KWASHERS 'GROUNDING DIAGRAM L reurn¢mn1 ""UR lryn THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS GENERAL GROUNDING NDEES• SET OE CONSTRUC110N OOCUMENtS IS PROPRIETARY BY NATUflE. pNY USE L ALL DETAILS ARE SHOWN IN GENERAL TERMS. ACTUAL GR )UNDING OR'DOCLOSURE OTHER THAN THAT MSTALLATICN AND CONSTRUCTION MAY VARY DOE TO SITE SPECIFIC WHICH RELATES TO LINGULAR CIXIDITIGNS. WIRELESS 15 STNICTLT PROHIBITED. ANTENNA AND COAX CABLE SCHEDULE UNE%4VATED AREA GROUNDING el..AN KEYNOTES A ARCHITECT,. BW5 DReI)sZ IT 1 ENDS USING MANUFACTURERS PR4,CTICE5. ALL UNDERGROUND WATER PIPES, METAL CONDUITS AND GRRJNDS THAT ARE A PART OF THIS SYSTEM SHALL DRAWN BY: Y.R. _ FILL PER O Na GROUND TO -SGB' O6 CONCRETE PLATFORM CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY AND TFST GROUND TO SOURCE TO A RANGE OF 5 B 'CIADFIXA UCTIIPTTTCOIPANY TILIT N N I�IIf ' (2M) IBI's69' EM6NT5 Yv Z D FLIX Lu 0 F o- 2 IDPEMENTS GROUND .&S'EGB' O BARE CDU. GROUNDING UNIT MCUNTiD IG IG COAX FOR R% WAR IF RIN310 G 3TINNED 44 44' TELEPHONE CONDUIT (WHERE APPLIGBLE) PLK DCN 40 (BEE O MASTER GROUND BUS -MGB' a PK -(1)12 TO VIRIZON TELCO CABINE75, (TMP OF 12) PLAN FOR WANTITY MOUNTED ON 51DE OF BTA IN SEE 3/E-1 AND SIZE) (TTP FOR 2 WEATHERPROOF NEMA 3R ENCLOSURE, SEE 6/E -a O POC (I)tYl TO PANEL A, SEE W11-1 sr1ELT NuueEx �—� SAND FILL O yl GROUND TO GROUNDING RING MUSTER GROUND .V LNAS) CLWTRICAL CCNOUIT (WHERE APPLICABLE) O 12 GROUND TO CONDUCTOR RUN WITH 10 I'AC-(I)Ca TO METER PVL BON 40 (DEE PLAN FOR 5RE) COAX, SEE 9/E-2 11 SEW GG/ROUND RDD, > EE <12> 2 1'0 C - (1) 02 FROM MGS TO GROUNDING RING ri 4' 2' O 4' J)®SCALE. (TRENCH DETAIL I NSCTAS, 111 I GROUNDING PLAN I 54A IE I rj 1— 6-11x1' HHCS EDLTS—t 5/8' LO:KWASHERS 'GROUNDING DIAGRAM L reurn¢mn1 ""UR lryn THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS GENERAL GROUNDING NDEES• SET OE CONSTRUC110N OOCUMENtS IS PROPRIETARY BY NATUflE. pNY USE L ALL DETAILS ARE SHOWN IN GENERAL TERMS. ACTUAL GR )UNDING OR'DOCLOSURE OTHER THAN THAT MSTALLATICN AND CONSTRUCTION MAY VARY DOE TO SITE SPECIFIC WHICH RELATES TO LINGULAR CIXIDITIGNS. WIRELESS 15 STNICTLT PROHIBITED. 5. NOTIFT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER IF THERE ARE ANT DIFFICULTIES INSTALLING GROUNDING SYSTEM DUE TO SITE 501L CONDITIONS. 6. BARE GROUNDING CONDUCTOR SHALL BE HARD DRAWN TINNED COPPER SU AS NOTED ON PLAN. T, ALL HORIZONTALLY RUN GROMDING CONDUCTORS SHALL BE INSTALLED MINIMUM 3D' BELOW GRADE IN TRENCH, U.O.N., AND BACK FILL SHALL BE COMPACTED. 5. ALL GROUND CONDUCTORS SHALL BE RUN AS STRAIGHT AND SHORT AS POSSIBLE, WITH A MINIMUM 12' BENDING RADIUS ACT LESS THAN M DEGREES. 9. ALL SUPPORT STRUCTURES, CABLE CHANNEL WAYS OR. WIRE GUIDES SHALL 10. ACCEPTABLE CONNECTIONS FOR GROUNDING SYSTEM SHALL BE, A, BURNDY HY-GRADE U.L. LISTED CONNECTORS (MECHANICAL B. DHWELIONHERMIO WELDS (WELDED CONNECTIONS). C. TIWJ -(2) HOLE TINNED COPPER COMPRESSION FITTINGS (BUS BAR CWNECMCNE). It, ALL CRIMPED CONNECTIONS :MALL HAVE EMBOSSED MANUFACTURER -5 DIEIURK VISIBLE AT CRIMP. 12, ALL GROUND CONNECTIONS SHALL BE BURNISHED AND SHALL HAVE A COATING OF 'KCPR-SHIELD' OR 'NO -OR -ID' APPLIED TO THE CONNECTION. 13, ALL CONNECTION NAROWARE AT ECRNRTENT SHALL BE TTPE 316 55, OR OURIEM BRONZE, 'KOPR-SHIELD' OR 'NO -OO -ID" APPLIED TO THE CONNECTION. K ANTENNA AND COAX CABLE SCHEDULE Z GROUND ALL ANTENNA BASES FRAMES, CABLE RUNS, AND OTHER METALLIC COEIFM"ATS USING Y2 GROUk WIRE5 AND CONNECT TO SURFACE MOUNTED DATE: OB 03/29 DE GROUND BUS BARS A5 5N0.JN. FOLLOW ANTENNA AND BTS MANUFACTURER'S PRACTICEFON GROUNDING REQUIREMENTS. GRIXIND COAX SHIELD AT BOTH A ARCHITECT,. BW5 DReI)sZ IT 1 ENDS USING MANUFACTURERS PR4,CTICE5. ALL UNDERGROUND WATER PIPES, METAL CONDUITS AND GRRJNDS THAT ARE A PART OF THIS SYSTEM SHALL DRAWN BY: Y.R. BE BONDED TOGETHER. CHECKED BY: JDA 3. ALL GROUND CONNECTIONS SHALL BE B2 AWG U.O.N. ALL WIRESSHALL BE COPPER THHN/THWN. ALL GRPIND WIRE SHALL BE TIN COATED OR GREEN REVISIONS INSULATED HIRE, REV DATE DESCRIPTION4. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY AND TFST GROUND TO SOURCE TO A RANGE OF 5 B 'CIADFIXA 5. NOTIFT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER IF THERE ARE ANT DIFFICULTIES INSTALLING GROUNDING SYSTEM DUE TO SITE 501L CONDITIONS. 6. BARE GROUNDING CONDUCTOR SHALL BE HARD DRAWN TINNED COPPER SU AS NOTED ON PLAN. T, ALL HORIZONTALLY RUN GROMDING CONDUCTORS SHALL BE INSTALLED MINIMUM 3D' BELOW GRADE IN TRENCH, U.O.N., AND BACK FILL SHALL BE COMPACTED. 5. ALL GROUND CONDUCTORS SHALL BE RUN AS STRAIGHT AND SHORT AS POSSIBLE, WITH A MINIMUM 12' BENDING RADIUS ACT LESS THAN M DEGREES. 9. ALL SUPPORT STRUCTURES, CABLE CHANNEL WAYS OR. WIRE GUIDES SHALL 10. ACCEPTABLE CONNECTIONS FOR GROUNDING SYSTEM SHALL BE, A, BURNDY HY-GRADE U.L. LISTED CONNECTORS (MECHANICAL B. DHWELIONHERMIO WELDS (WELDED CONNECTIONS). C. TIWJ -(2) HOLE TINNED COPPER COMPRESSION FITTINGS (BUS BAR CWNECMCNE). It, ALL CRIMPED CONNECTIONS :MALL HAVE EMBOSSED MANUFACTURER -5 DIEIURK VISIBLE AT CRIMP. 12, ALL GROUND CONNECTIONS SHALL BE BURNISHED AND SHALL HAVE A COATING OF 'KCPR-SHIELD' OR 'NO -OR -ID' APPLIED TO THE CONNECTION. 13, ALL CONNECTION NAROWARE AT ECRNRTENT SHALL BE TTPE 316 55, OR OURIEM BRONZE, 'KOPR-SHIELD' OR 'NO -OO -ID" APPLIED TO THE CONNECTION. K At I 1CnOAY� ANTI ANTS ANTS BAR ANTENNA AND COAX CABLE SCHEDULE DC ANTENNA MARK 5ECTOR AZIMUTH AMENNA GOWN FEED LCYATICN COAX SIZE DISdo At A AD 1/2' JUMPER FNO'I 7/8' i W 3OI'-6O LNA ANTENNA TO BE usm WITH ® AIRS BI B 'CIADFIXA ADPoU 7/5' N N I�IIf ' (2M) IBI's69' At I 1CnOAY� ANTI ANTS ANTS BAR (TMP OF 1B) � DC In LDGWN: TWO HOLE LW, a 0 W 2 RUNS COAX TO BE usm WITH ® AIRS C Egu o N N I�IIf I O FKN NA Yv Z D FLIX Lu 0 F o- Lu F UNIT MCUNTiD IG IG COAX FOR R% WAR MpEE: AT ANTENNA BEE B (TMP OF 12) �11 NBTALLATION OF GROUND WIRE TO GROUND BAR (TTP FOR 2 sr1ELT NuueEx �—� SCALE: SCALE: MUSTER GROUND 112"El,_D LNAS) CABLE SCHEDULE (2A) RUNS OF /�( 3 N.T.S. COAX IN HAVEGUIOE 1P4PBR) RFLIX UNS OF COAX CABLE :IT :IT TO R85 UNIT . O1 w a Q Z W � J 0 J W W -A FLOOR OR ANTENNA DC In LDGWN: TWO HOLE LW, a 0 W M� a,OS TO BE usm WITH ® AIRS C Egu o N N . O1 w a Q Z W � J 0 J W W -A SITE TIRE. CYPRESS ANTENNA FLOOR OR ANTENNA PRIMARY BTS In LDGWN: TWO HOLE LW, a A ���1L1�� M� a,OS TO BE usm WITH ® AIRS � 00 s Egu o xou I�IIf I m Zqq� Yv Z D �I Lu 0 F o- Lu F m 06 0� SITE TIRE. CYPRESS ANTENNA FLOOR OR ANTENNA PRIMARY BTS LDGWN: TWO HOLE LW, TOWER, SEE A Si. DENTS CHURCH TO BE usm WITH ® AIRS 2151 S. DIAMOND BAR BLVD. MILE OR RING _ E. DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 GROUND PROVIDE I.-T'FICATIW TAGS AT EA41 END FOR ALL COAX RUULS MpEE: N DETOAILS I ANDD NOTES �11 NBTALLATION OF GROUND WIRE TO GROUND BAR sr1ELT NuueEx �—� SCALE: SCALE: MUSTER GROUND 112"El,_D 6 CABLE SCHEDULE /�( 3 N.T.S. t��J / ♦ CURVE DATA: O R= 125.00'_ AB t9 D=570000 / ♦ ✓S L=124.35' / ♦ J © R= 12&00' N 6910'29• ED= 3258'31" 28.00' \ �� L= 71.94' © R= 36.00' ♦ D= 1552232" WaS 1 6 � /V ♦♦ 1 b.�le C 01 Q�ZU C1 4 4 I ay0�8 Q / AS E STORM RAW ASEMENT 3ORM UM8 E -78 I / CEO LOCATION PENDIA RE REQ ON LEGEND % ,LyM Fs ONSH MUTENO NUARLBOUND b -o— MNRW TN m O BOUNDARY DETAIL SCALE: 1`= 40' SONS N .N =NW WARN PAWIER� ELMS a PARDON PNN w DUE RM BF Ria ue INNu Ru[xs . Bn TW V SLIXS vnor F ttoN SEr eMwis w IN EPOAv/f-0 IKx NCM MU DWw QIEMM uar M.- eDx'.Rsc MmWN RLECMroiNrnmxs TDPPEM TORI .HND WNL M 511EDE K<EEs ERIC ELPP LOP ONE TE. MWLHr RM NRE n!. OWl MW T1Nf WAR NEW rclml DLC ARA aDi &MFT vNWW WE uTnxG neer6c ROK �N< vHnr EBN WANVAN TELUUPH, v .PE. A VK`h DD,M vuwn .An HDDB GECttM [OMp1H16 Mtt ea AN WNDTIa+m MxR rev of RIME ,� MP01='„RETMAE Trues exuo KE NL[IINC ,NNMDRMLR ,E.e,ENTH AHRNM. ECCE OF AEM1l41 suclNc IV'AEN vo1E LAMER RED YGNr &TRARIA IEIFnNMIE MNMIE LEGAL DESCRIPTION• WT MRNCN OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST. SIN WUHROUINO MERIDIAN, W THE COUNTY M LOS ANGELES. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DESCRIBED AS M LUGS: EASEMENT NOTES: ME CASEMENTS SHORAN NENECN ARE BASED UPON A PPELmMMT PRE REPORT PREPARED 61 ARERICAN TITRE COIPMY, ODER NUHWk W0912-12. DATED JANUARY 29, 201, CHOY FERN, FIE OFFICER. 1 WASEA RIGHTS, CwuS OR SOLE TO WATER, WNET9R OR HOT WILOSE0 BY ME PUBLIC RECORD. 2 RIGHTS OF ME PUBLIC AS r0 MY PORION OF THE LINO LYING 1MHN THE MFA CONMONLY KNOWN AS ANY WSUL STREET OR WgMAY 3 EASEMEM(S) MR THE PURPOSE{S) SHONN MCI AND BONES PUDERSOL MUSIC AS GRANTED M A OOUTA M: GRANTED TO: W.R &CMT NEVESTNENr 0UP)NY AND CHADDS SECURITIES COMPANY PURPOSE ROAD AND MG NAY RECO SFO: NR%6r 2B, 1951. W BOOK 37M4, PALE 297. OFFICNL RECORDS NFECTS THAT MATCH OF YA AND AS SHONN FRENCH (CW NOT PoAf FFJY RMcRG1 4 M ACHOW WAS cODUANCED IN IM "BES COUNTY. SUPERIOR COURT CASE N0. POMOHi C-203& OWNED &AINmIGOEE CORP., W ME $07 WNESMNT 0. GMNOLS SECRNMIES W.. A CORPOAnON R. AL. FOR INJUNCTION DEWDUNIXG SAID DEFENDANTS PROD CROSSDC AND WAAASM ME LINO OF ME PLANTFF OF ME TFWt TIER ME ROADWAYS OR ROUTES DESCRUEO W ME JOGMENIS MENTPHD W PARAGRAPH 3 OF PUTT H OF SCNEDUNE B SAID ACTON AB]YE MENTIONED IS RUN PENDING ( 0T a" FROM flCC640f O5 COVENWrs, CORMT I MD PESIPICnONS 6W(MEN Ntt RESTKCImxs IxgranxG ANY PREFERENCE.WTATg1 Ofl gSCRMOMIKM &SED ON COLOR. NELSON, SIX. NAYMbP. FAMIHM, TTARK OR Fw1NNV1 GROW) AS SET FORM IN ME DOCUMERT RECORDED: SEPTEMBER 29, 1961. W WOK N -PN, PAGE 342 CFROP, RECORDS (ROTTED) O6 EUENEWS) FOR ME FLWPOSE(S) SROM BELOW MO WANTS WCDEMAL THEN70 AS WHOM W A COCUMENF GRANTED iO. GRfl. COMPANY. A CORPgN1KK1 WRWSE. RHO. SORER. SEWER, URTY AND ORNMAGE RECORDED: DECEMBER 27, 1961. W WOK M864, PAGE M2, OFMUL RECORDS AFFECTS: THAT ASHT ON OF SAD RIND AS SHOWN MEMGN (ROM) O] FASEMENT(S) FON ME PRRPOSE(sl SHOWN BLLGW MO RWNR IxC,wM MEREM AS GRIMED M A OOCUMEM: GRANTED TO: SOUTHERN CAU M IA EMON CM&AA, PURPOSE UNDERGROUND ELECMKK AND COMMUMGnM STSTOAS RECORD➢: WWEIDER M. 1970. AS LKMUMEM 40. 2847. OEFICHL RECORDS AFFECTS: TMT PORK N OF SNO WD AS SHOWN MEREM EMOTION DESTRUCTORS ON ME USE. BY M OYMERS OF SAG LAND, OF ME FASEMEM AREA AS SET FORM IN ME CASSANO DYUDENF s1YNM HEREWRBOVE. OP El4MFM(S) FOR M PURPOSE(S) SHOWN M].OW AND RIGHTS WINNE& THERETO AS GRANTED IN A DO(AMEM: GRMIED r0: WRONG &R WATER COMPARED PURPOSE DORM MUM AND TRYING AND MVMNNWG A A" UNE DECORUM OCTOBER 1& 1973. AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1485. MMW. RECORDS AFFECTS: TMT PMOON OF SND LAND 4 SHOWN THEREON (ROTTED) O9 CANNERIES) MR ME PURPOSE(S). SHONN BE1DW AND RIGHTS IMYDMK OWNED AS GRAINED M A DWU.NO GRANTED r0: SOUTHERN GIAFORM MSON CMNANY RECORI 'ANWNY 51 ISM. AS WSRTMEW NO, 99-18377, OPFCM1 RECORDS AFFECTS: 11Nt PMIIgN Of SAO VNO AS SHOWN MEAEM PEs1PoCTONS M ME USE, BY ME GAINERS OF SAD RAMI. M THE EASEMENT MFA AS SET FARM W ME EXSEGEDT WNMEW S. MEIN.M4WV£ (ROBED) Vicinity Map PROPRIETARY INFORMATION THE'INFBRMATION CONTAMED IN THIS SET OF ORAMNOS IS PROPRIETARY BY NATURE. ANY USE OR DISCLOSURE OTHER LHM THAT WMCX RELATES TO PACIFIC BELL WIRELESS IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. DATE: FEB. 3, 2001 ARCHITECT: Bo30B0UE5 A ANDRSON DRAWN BY: JXGU CHECK BY: MLP REVISIONS Co� Til W O `�V jL LL c N N -m w E Q Z K J o J �- ou W J 'v = � Z N H o n VNPo V� 1� 1= Q N } C O <GNa QiE 0 Ca� eeoOn m[V n 01 rm a" vi I. N � m zQ i >O o oa $� >o z Q 2 0z pQ m0 SITE NUMBER: SB -106-01 SITE TYPE: LIGHT STANDARD SITE LOCATION: 2151 S. DIAMOND BAR BLVD. DAIMOND BAR, CA TITLE: ST. DENIS CATHOLIC CHURCH SHEET NUMBER: SB10601 F.E.M.A NOTES: THIS AREA IS W ZONE "C DEFINED AS "MEAS OF ' MINIMAL FLOODING', AS SHOWN ON E.E.MA DM FOR COMM@Ttt NUMBER 065043, PANEL NUMBER 0980-B \ ♦ WITH AN EFFECTNE DATE OF DECEMBER 2. 19M / BASIS OF BEARINGS: / ♦ THIS SUNDAYIS RASED ON ME CALIFORNIA STATE PLANE E / ♦ PLANE SYSTEM, HAD, B], ZONE 5. COORDINATE P NOTES: / \ m FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTES Wry' / \ S, ASSESSOR'S PARCELPARCELNUMBER: 8292-001-012 SIZE NUMBER: SS -106-01 Graphic Scale � G\ y= E / Al a \�♦ BENCHMARK, ( to het) yt ♦ s LOS ANGELES COUNTY BENCHMARK NO.3908 (1995 OTTEifERBEIN) RCE TAG ]8993 5. W CD DIAWND & 1 M BLVD. BCR t5.2M W/0 C/L & 1fiM 5/0 L-,, C/L KIN C/L KIOWAS CREST DP. 1 IADh o 40 INT O. \, / ♦ ♦'BB ELEVATION: 815,917 (NAVD88) t��J / ♦ CURVE DATA: O R= 125.00'_ AB t9 D=570000 / ♦ ✓S L=124.35' / ♦ J © R= 12&00' N 6910'29• ED= 3258'31" 28.00' \ �� L= 71.94' © R= 36.00' ♦ D= 1552232" WaS 1 6 � /V ♦♦ 1 b.�le C 01 Q�ZU C1 4 4 I ay0�8 Q / AS E STORM RAW ASEMENT 3ORM UM8 E -78 I / CEO LOCATION PENDIA RE REQ ON LEGEND % ,LyM Fs ONSH MUTENO NUARLBOUND b -o— MNRW TN m O BOUNDARY DETAIL SCALE: 1`= 40' SONS N .N =NW WARN PAWIER� ELMS a PARDON PNN w DUE RM BF Ria ue INNu Ru[xs . Bn TW V SLIXS vnor F ttoN SEr eMwis w IN EPOAv/f-0 IKx NCM MU DWw QIEMM uar M.- eDx'.Rsc MmWN RLECMroiNrnmxs TDPPEM TORI .HND WNL M 511EDE K<EEs ERIC ELPP LOP ONE TE. MWLHr RM NRE n!. OWl MW T1Nf WAR NEW rclml DLC ARA aDi &MFT vNWW WE uTnxG neer6c ROK �N< vHnr EBN WANVAN TELUUPH, v .PE. A VK`h DD,M vuwn .An HDDB GECttM [OMp1H16 Mtt ea AN WNDTIa+m MxR rev of RIME ,� MP01='„RETMAE Trues exuo KE NL[IINC ,NNMDRMLR ,E.e,ENTH AHRNM. ECCE OF AEM1l41 suclNc IV'AEN vo1E LAMER RED YGNr &TRARIA IEIFnNMIE MNMIE LEGAL DESCRIPTION• WT MRNCN OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST. SIN WUHROUINO MERIDIAN, W THE COUNTY M LOS ANGELES. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DESCRIBED AS M LUGS: EASEMENT NOTES: ME CASEMENTS SHORAN NENECN ARE BASED UPON A PPELmMMT PRE REPORT PREPARED 61 ARERICAN TITRE COIPMY, ODER NUHWk W0912-12. DATED JANUARY 29, 201, CHOY FERN, FIE OFFICER. 1 WASEA RIGHTS, CwuS OR SOLE TO WATER, WNET9R OR HOT WILOSE0 BY ME PUBLIC RECORD. 2 RIGHTS OF ME PUBLIC AS r0 MY PORION OF THE LINO LYING 1MHN THE MFA CONMONLY KNOWN AS ANY WSUL STREET OR WgMAY 3 EASEMEM(S) MR THE PURPOSE{S) SHONN MCI AND BONES PUDERSOL MUSIC AS GRANTED M A OOUTA M: GRANTED TO: W.R &CMT NEVESTNENr 0UP)NY AND CHADDS SECURITIES COMPANY PURPOSE ROAD AND MG NAY RECO SFO: NR%6r 2B, 1951. W BOOK 37M4, PALE 297. OFFICNL RECORDS NFECTS THAT MATCH OF YA AND AS SHONN FRENCH (CW NOT PoAf FFJY RMcRG1 4 M ACHOW WAS cODUANCED IN IM "BES COUNTY. SUPERIOR COURT CASE N0. POMOHi C-203& OWNED &AINmIGOEE CORP., W ME $07 WNESMNT 0. GMNOLS SECRNMIES W.. A CORPOAnON R. AL. FOR INJUNCTION DEWDUNIXG SAID DEFENDANTS PROD CROSSDC AND WAAASM ME LINO OF ME PLANTFF OF ME TFWt TIER ME ROADWAYS OR ROUTES DESCRUEO W ME JOGMENIS MENTPHD W PARAGRAPH 3 OF PUTT H OF SCNEDUNE B SAID ACTON AB]YE MENTIONED IS RUN PENDING ( 0T a" FROM flCC640f O5 COVENWrs, CORMT I MD PESIPICnONS 6W(MEN Ntt RESTKCImxs IxgranxG ANY PREFERENCE.WTATg1 Ofl gSCRMOMIKM &SED ON COLOR. NELSON, SIX. NAYMbP. FAMIHM, TTARK OR Fw1NNV1 GROW) AS SET FORM IN ME DOCUMERT RECORDED: SEPTEMBER 29, 1961. W WOK N -PN, PAGE 342 CFROP, RECORDS (ROTTED) O6 EUENEWS) FOR ME FLWPOSE(S) SROM BELOW MO WANTS WCDEMAL THEN70 AS WHOM W A COCUMENF GRANTED iO. GRfl. COMPANY. A CORPgN1KK1 WRWSE. RHO. SORER. SEWER, URTY AND ORNMAGE RECORDED: DECEMBER 27, 1961. W WOK M864, PAGE M2, OFMUL RECORDS AFFECTS: THAT ASHT ON OF SAD RIND AS SHOWN MEMGN (ROM) O] FASEMENT(S) FON ME PRRPOSE(sl SHOWN BLLGW MO RWNR IxC,wM MEREM AS GRIMED M A OOCUMEM: GRANTED TO: SOUTHERN CAU M IA EMON CM&AA, PURPOSE UNDERGROUND ELECMKK AND COMMUMGnM STSTOAS RECORD➢: WWEIDER M. 1970. AS LKMUMEM 40. 2847. OEFICHL RECORDS AFFECTS: TMT PORK N OF SNO WD AS SHOWN MEREM EMOTION DESTRUCTORS ON ME USE. BY M OYMERS OF SAG LAND, OF ME FASEMEM AREA AS SET FORM IN ME CASSANO DYUDENF s1YNM HEREWRBOVE. OP El4MFM(S) FOR M PURPOSE(S) SHOWN M].OW AND RIGHTS WINNE& THERETO AS GRANTED IN A DO(AMEM: GRMIED r0: WRONG &R WATER COMPARED PURPOSE DORM MUM AND TRYING AND MVMNNWG A A" UNE DECORUM OCTOBER 1& 1973. AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1485. MMW. RECORDS AFFECTS: TMT PMOON OF SND LAND 4 SHOWN THEREON (ROTTED) O9 CANNERIES) MR ME PURPOSE(S). SHONN BE1DW AND RIGHTS IMYDMK OWNED AS GRAINED M A DWU.NO GRANTED r0: SOUTHERN GIAFORM MSON CMNANY RECORI 'ANWNY 51 ISM. AS WSRTMEW NO, 99-18377, OPFCM1 RECORDS AFFECTS: 11Nt PMIIgN Of SAO VNO AS SHOWN MEAEM PEs1PoCTONS M ME USE, BY ME GAINERS OF SAD RAMI. M THE EASEMENT MFA AS SET FARM W ME EXSEGEDT WNMEW S. MEIN.M4WV£ (ROBED) Vicinity Map PROPRIETARY INFORMATION THE'INFBRMATION CONTAMED IN THIS SET OF ORAMNOS IS PROPRIETARY BY NATURE. ANY USE OR DISCLOSURE OTHER LHM THAT WMCX RELATES TO PACIFIC BELL WIRELESS IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. DATE: FEB. 3, 2001 ARCHITECT: Bo30B0UE5 A ANDRSON DRAWN BY: JXGU CHECK BY: MLP REVISIONS Co� Til W O `�V jL LL c N N -m w E Q Z K J o J �- ou W J 'v = � Z N H o n VNPo V� 1� 1= Q N } C O <GNa QiE 0 Ca� eeoOn m[V n 01 rm a" vi I. N � m zQ i >O o oa $� >o z Q 2 0z pQ m0 SITE NUMBER: SB -106-01 SITE TYPE: LIGHT STANDARD SITE LOCATION: 2151 S. DIAMOND BAR BLVD. DAIMOND BAR, CA TITLE: ST. DENIS CATHOLIC CHURCH SHEET NUMBER: SB10601 J GOWIAL Tn= SITE Rom+ GBN13UL elulsr ON_ NDTmu v CONDUIT I. 711E ELECTRICAL WSTALLAT" WOW 54ALL CoNpLY WITH ALL LOCAL, STATE AND NATIONAL I) WITHIN N BUILDINGS S - OF APPROVED ID 5TIi3AL CODES, LAWS AND ORDINANCES APPLICABLE TO ELECTRICAL WORK. • WITHIN OR Ck€ Bk11LDiNG5 -RIGID GALVANIZED 5T£FL(WHEN REOLIIRED), OR ELECTRO-METALLIC TUBING(EMT) 2, ELECTRICAL C04TRA.(TCR SHALL W51T J33MTE AND VERIFY EXNSTW. CONDITIONS BEFORE • €N UNDERGROUND - PVC SCHEDULE 40 OR EQUIVALENT FOR STRAIGHT BIDDING AND SMALL INCLUDE IN HI$ BID THE NECESSARY COSTS TO CONSTRUCT THIS PROJECT SECTIONS -BENC9 - PVC SCHEDULE 80 - IN ACCORDAKE WITH INTENT OF THE FLECTRICAL DRAW6%5, $PFCIFICA714S, AND ALL • PULL ROPES IN ALL DUCTS (MIN 3/8' POLY PULL ROPE) AND A MEASURING APPLICABLE CODES.i' TAPE MUST BE IN PLACE TO DETERMINE •A5-BUILT' CONDUIT LENGTH; I BOTH MUST BE ONE CONTINUOUS PIECE 3. ALL MATERIAL AND BZUIPIENT 31" IN THESE DRAWINGS SHALL BE NEW LNLES5 3 / d SPECIFWALLT IN0€CATM AS E€15T€NG FURNL%iED AND INSTALLED UNDER 'FINIS CONTRACT. THE 2) WITHIN OR ON 13UILDING5 EOUIRIENT SLtALL BE FREE FROM 6005 AND SHALL UE GUARANTEED FOR A PERIOD OF ONE • ELECTRICAL LWS AND CONDUTETS ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE AS PULL BOXES YEAR FROM THE DATE OF FINAL ACCEP7AF(CE BY OWNER OR MI5 REPRESENTATIVE. SAQ&D Y 9R " • NO 4O DEGREE TRM51TIONS AT OR IN PULL BOXES (UNLESS A IW BENDING ANY TROUBLE DEVELOP DURING THIS PERIOD DUE TO FAULTY WORKMASSMIP MATERIAL OR ' '+ I' �I• A RADIUS CAN BE MAINTAINED) 15WIPMENT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH ALL NECESWT MATERIAL AfD LABOR TO C/ \ • IN-L€NE PULL BOX MINIMUM DIMENSIONS a 24'Lx6'WxOD, 3WLx6'Wx6'D CORRECT {ME TROUBLE WITHOUT COST TO TINE OWNER _ PREFERRED \1€' ` f • PULL BONES MUST BE EASILY ACCESSIBLE (TELEPHONE COMPANY WILL NOT 4. ALL WORK TO BE EXECUTED IN WORKMANLIKE MAJWNER AND SHALL PRESENT A NEAT I'EC€HARCAL \ REMOVE CEILING TILES) APPEARANCE WHEN CMPL.ETEO. \ Ij • VERTICAL SECTIONS OF CONDUIT WILL REQUIRE A PULL BOX EVERY 100 FEET 5. ALL ELECTRICAL tIATTRUILS AND 15211PNENT SHALL BE U5TED BY UNDERWRITERS AND APPROVED RESTRA€NTS LABORATORIES. • MAXIMUM OF SOD FEET HORIZONTAL BETWEEN PULL BOXES 6. ELEC33iUCA1 CONTRACTOR SMALL BE RFSfX1H5U3LE FOR ALL CUT TIW AND PATUIING RELATED \ ` PO • MAXIMUM OF 2_0 DEGREE BENDS BETWEEN PULL BOXES \ ` • MINIMUM CONDUIT BEND RADIU5 OF 10 CABLE DIAMETERS (12') TO AEGTRICAL WORK, UNLE55 NOTED OMEIRWI5E AND COORDINATED WITH THE GENERAL \\ •- n i • FIRE 5TOPPING REQUIRED WHEN OPENING5 ARE MADE IN ANY FIRE RATED CONTRACTOR. \ 13ARRIEIZ 7. ALL BRANCH CIRCUIT CONDUCTORS SHALL BE CAPPER TYPETi13N '' 20, 1 010 SOLID, mB AND \ •ALL EXTERNAL CONOUET TERMINATIONS 5HALL HE WEATHER TLGHT LARGER STRANDED. C ` a S) IN UNDERGROUNO CONSTRUCTION B. ON COMPLETION OF THE NOW, THE INSTALLATION SHALL BE FRET FROM "ON1DS AND SHORT • CONDUIT LENGTH MAXIMUM OF 30D FEET BETWEEN PULL BOXES VRCUITS. \ • CONDUIT BENDS MUST HAVE A RADIUS IO TIMES CONDUIT SIRE (20') q, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR SMALL FEIRFU511 A5-BUILT DR,W W5 TO THE AWATECT ON r TRENCHING €0. �ECTRKAPLETIOR Of TOE JOB. L NOOK 5HALL INCLUDE ALL LABOR, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT REQUIRED g [2 l) MINIMUM COVERAGE ION PRIVATE PROPERTY • 15' UNDER PAVED II SURFACE OR AS SPECIFIED BY PERMITTING OWNFJR/AGFIWT INCLUDING BUT O NOT LIMITED TO CNAIfi.ETE EPANEL S75T015 PC CONTROL AND UGFETIIIG, % GROUNDI NG C ON7U I SYSTEM, SIGNAL ETC.ASYSTEMS aT- D ORp($j, CONTRpI, WIRING, J 2) MINIMUM COVERAGE OF DUCT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY • 24' UNDER O1RT GROIiNDING CCHDUIi ONLY SYSTEMS, ETC. AS INDICATED CN M ICAL AND EJECiEW-AL I .7SURFACE: OR AS SPECIFIED 6Y PERMITTING OWNER/AGENT DRAWINGS GROUNDING, REQINRED BY GOVERNING CODES. U• FUSE YTP6 SHALL BE BU5MATC1 MI LOW PEAK FUSE (€PSI-RK-100). F3 Y 3) MINIMUM COVERAGE OF DUCT IN PUBLIC R/W - 30' DELOW GUTTER GRADE \t % OR AS -SPECIFIED BY PERMITTING AGENT U. PRIORCCAC U ATIO AN ANY ELECTRICAL WORK, JOB AND B K.RE REFERENCE TO ` VERIFY EXALT MECHANICAL N€5 AND REQUIREMENTS SUPPLIERS ON THE JOB AND UL REFERENCE 70 ARCHITECTURE, r� 4) MINIMUM 12' SEPARATION IN JOINT TRENCH BETWEEN POWER AND TELCO MECHAN-6 AND F NG THE SUPPLIERS PROVISIONS, SHOULD THERE O ANY QUESTION$ R 4, PRLBLTAIi D BEFORE THE EIXW,NECESSARYWITH PROVISIONS TO BE MADE PROPER DIRECTIONS SM,L.L 5) PULL BOXES -MINIMUM 17'W X 30'L BE OBTAINED BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH AHY WRY.. p 6 SPLICE BOXES WILL BE SIZED BY SERVING TELEPHONE COMPANY: DETAILS n• S€NC£ THE DEREOULATUON THE UTILITY COMPANY P]E5 NOT PROVIDE PRFJIPPROVAL OR 7 \ / ) HILL BE PROVIDED BY 'TELEPHONE COMPANY OR €NTERC'ON14ECT ENGINEER L;MC•NEER04 ON PROJECTS. CONELRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ELECTRICAL SERVICE APPROVAL FROM 50&XE PLANNER UKH AWARD OF CONTRACT- 8 / 14. BEFORE RWUTTING BID VERIFY EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS ELECTRICAL SERVICE R • / BONDING AND GROUNDING REOWREMENTS AND THE EXACT SERVING UTILITY POINTS OI' CONNECTION. %; • s6 AWG SOLID COPPER INSULATED GROUND WIRE (24' COILED IN TELCO SERVICE WX) WITH BONDING CLAMPS IN PLACE. THE TELEPHONE GROUND !- TM STF NOTE `SPECIFICATION OR CODE 144" PRESCRIBES AND ESTAELL,INEr TOE RK41E5T •%�:' ' • MUST BE BONDED TO THE POWER GROUND. THE TELEPHONE SERVICE _ STAN06RINIS OF PERFORMANCE SUM PREVAIL IN THE WENT OF ANY CONFLICT OR CABINET MUST BE BONDED TO TINE TELPHONE GROUND WIRE. ANY INCONSISTENCY BETWEEN ITEM SHOWN ON THE FLANS AND/OR SPECIFICATIONS. f'9WFR1TE1 N (3 _P_LALIJS Y�tSZT_�r2 QUESTIINTERCONS REGARDING T ENGIER ELEPHONE GROUNDS 5NOULO BE REFERRED TO THE 16. THE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR (E.C.) SHALL FURNISH A140 PAY FOR ALL PERMITS AND RELAYED FEES. I 3'CA. TO S.C.E PAD MOUNT 7 EXISTING TF.LCO `SERVICE VAULT TO PACIFIC TELEPHONE AREA SERVICE BOA D, FC, SHALL BE RE5110 ISLE FOR tMFOR ANCE WITH THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE, STATE O TRANSFORMER - TO BE USED A5 BE USED AO P.O.C. CINGULAR WIRPL= • HiMPI AM DIMENSIONS = 24'W X 2644 X WD DF CALIFORNA ELECTRICAL SAFETY ORi E" ALL LOCAL CODES AND ORDINANCES AND ALL 0T1HER ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES HAVI€1� JURISMUKN OVER THIS WORK 222E MICFLOHELLE AVE • 3V PLYWOOD F FROM MOUNTED IN SERVICE BOX OF IC PEREPRATItTE5 OF ALL WALLS OR CEILINGS SHALL BE SEALED AND FIRE RATING MAINTAA'NFU 2N6 FLOOR • 3i' CLEARANCE FROM GROUND LEVEL TO FX7TTCM OF SERVICE BOX IN ACCMDNNCE WITH UL WILM, UL WLSM AND ALL LOYAL AND NATIONAL CODES. O2 Z` C,O. FROM IX€$TING TELEPHONE 8 NEW S,C,E, WRATFIERPROOF METER/MAIN DISCONNECT. TUSTFN, CA 92780 PREFERRED SERVICE VAULT 2' C.O. FROM PHONE+ (7L4) 734-7300 N, ALL ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT 59ALL BE BRACED OR ANCHORED TO RE515T A MORLZOUTAL FAKE BUSTING TELEPHONE DERVIC$ VAULT FAX ((714) 734-75V • FULL ACCESS FROM FRONT OF BOX; MINIMUM 56' WORKING SPACE ACTING IN ANY DIRECTION USING THE FOLLOWING ORITEREA= COINFACT, JEFF JACOBS .8OX MUST BE WATER RESISTANT O O PIKED Et#11Pl1EHF ON GRADE 33,i OF OPERATING WEIGHT NEW C.W B.T,3 UN", (TYP, FOR 4) CONSTRUCTION MANAGER NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS LEASE ARPA. • GALVANIZED STEEL BOX PAINTED INSIDE AND CUT FIXED EQUIPMENT ON STRUCTURE 301 OF OPERATING WEIGHT • HASP REQUIRED ENERGDNCY POURER I Cl NMINCATION LITII€TY EQUIPMENT ON GRADE 309 OF OPERATING HEIGHT HD NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS COAX L,A,D,W..P. VERISON TELEPHONE AREA SERVICE BOX EMERGENCY FrJWER'I COMMuilICAT€ON NEW PANEL 'A' IN WEATHERPROOF CASLKS TO NEW ANTENT ANTENNAS, BEE €I/A-I ALLEN DOYEL • FULL ACCESS FROM FRONT OF BOX; MINIMUM 36' WORKING SPACE �PMEKT ON SFREKTIIRE T3K GF OPERATING WEIGHT �J N€71A 7R EEICL OSURE. 7501 TT€2L•4NE AVE • ^aERVILE PAX W[Li. BE PROVIDED BY VERNSOhi TELEPHONE FOR FLEXIBILITY OF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT USE 2 X THE ABOVE VALUES SIMXTANEOUS VAN NUYS, CA 91405 VERTICAL FORCE lfl X HORIZONTAL FORCE, L.IFIERE ANCHORAGE DETAINS ARE NOT 5€€OLNEN ON JSEISMIC /��\ 11 NEW CINGULAR WIREL£&S (BID 77E-4064 • A 'W FIXTURE' WELL BE BUILT. 5EE DETAIL FOR VERISON REQUIREME:NT5 ORAI4ING`., THE HELD W5TALATION SHALL BE 5€ aXLT TO THE APPROVAL OF ELECTRICAL / NEW TELCO PANEL IN WBATWERPRCGP 'MONOCROG'3' ANTENNA, f BIB? 771-4066 FAX EHG€NEEN CONDUITS THE FIELD ENGIHEBt, V NEMA 5R ENCL05LFL RE. O N T�I 4-qyy,;�, PULL BOXE5� PULL BOXES. 20. ES RAI iT SYSTEM'. TEM'.SHALBE SUPPORTED AND BRACED PER T€ - IM,SMATHINAE '-jjPERSTR FOR SEISMIC N2 VERIZAN CO. TE€.CO EQUIPMENT. DO Nm DO THIS DO TH15 RESTRAINT 5Y5TET15 AND -w?i UTG 'KNG SYSTEMS IC RSTRAI THE STSY FOR P SESA14 (D 0� PACIFIC BELL RE3TRITS 5Y57EM' OR R-OUR, LOCATION TION F SEISMIC S AND TUC SYSTEM' FOR PIPES AHD //,�\ BOB BOLT£ LOHPUIiS ONLT- QNL1E THE E]€AC.F LOCATION OF ALL PIPES AND DUCTS T145 BEEN ESTABLISHED V NEW MANNUAL TRANSFER O To PHONE,ONNECT ETNC•€VEER THE STR HE ORIGINAL ENGINEER €. 15i STI04ELL THE AUEO SEE FArr OF THE S t2 4 13FOFW. STRUCTURE S- SWITCH/LUG (W IN WEATHERPROOF 13 NEW C.W. METER PHONE, (714) 475-2564 OF TIE THE ORIGINAL LIMITDESIGATIONS. S STILL ADEQUATE: 5EE FOOTNOTES n ! B OF THE FAB€.E 23-P # TITLE 24 FOR LII7ITATIQ€5. NEMA SR ENCLO'JURE. POWER/TELCO PLAN SCA Ea S GENERAL TELCO NOTES INOTF!rnGENEAL ELECTRICAL. 121 CO. TAAN3Pgml 31awm l NXdN.•3iC. THiA1€SFO1 NSTal 3.3V0 / 144' ' 9'L. P moa NEW I'M A' WITH NVIA 3T 3' C,U, PEOb1RP5TALHE'DUNS M METRO WITU 200 AMP 42,000 IXB/240v, it 3W A.I.C. } ®4� VUTIME PMTASLR 20DAI P MAIN OD. A iP. GN Umr 2aA y RFC�PT. F F A g I PANEL A MAIN 200A `M iXY240 VOLTE.1 PHASE 3 WIRE 13U9 200A R NO• L�'D VdLY-AMpJ WIRE OLM, V0.T-AMPS LOAD 4R W. cm AMF LI L2 L1 L2 1 3 40 8T5 UWT rl 5270 - 3m - BT5 UNIT 42 2 4 BT9 UNIT IU - SOUS - 3m [ITS UMT 12 6 20 _ RFLEPEACLE IEq 31" - BT9 UeBT 04 40 6 8 Y 4 RTS LRNIY 03 M 3LYT0 DT5 UNIT IM BTS UNIT s3 3U70 BPACE 10 11 7PME SPACE 12 TOTAC5 ogio TA40 6140 6N0 . TOTALS PANEL TOTAL. Ll • €24TA VA L9 . FTa'60 VA NUFEI BT5 IRNT • &WKVA . 26i11 N 240V, 10 e CUNTINU01.15 LOAD a 4125,E •- €02.4A V24OV, NO F NON—CONTINUOUZ LOAD 9 IQOVA - $,5A @00V, 10 t MIN, FEEDER SIZE: 102,4,11,25m128,0 AMP5 1, 41, =1.5 AMP5 f•UTAL a IM5 AMPS 1. ALL ELFJ;Y. 130UIP. ITNUALL HAVE A SNORT CIRCUIT RATING EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE AVAILABLE SNORT CIRCUIT CURRENT AT THE LLYAVON. 2. ALL SERVICE EQUIP. AND INSTALLATION WORK SHALL 00I FORM TO THE UTILITY C4IPANY`5 REQUIREMENTS. SCALE: N.T.Q. 1121PANEL SCHEDULE (5) UNISTROTS VERT PLEX13ET TERM€NAL I I� CABINET 18.5`X I I I 22'XO'IS II !I MAIL CODE II it 56950E (2) P1000 I 31 UNIStRUTS GND W65 TI NCTE/NIU CABINET 16'XL4'96' MATL CODE: S29T76 3/4'0 PVC CONDUITS 2'0 PVC CONDUITS TO VERIZON FEED POINT TO CINGULAR BT5 CONCRETE MAD Wl BARE TINNED BOND WIRE CAD WELDED TO GROUND RING 3 II � i€ I NOTE, I. VERIZON'5 SERVICE LATERAL SHALL 30' (MIN) OF EARTH COVER, 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AND INSTALL SUPPORT FRAME AND CABINETS CONTACT V ERIZON COORDINATOR TO OBTAIN TERMINAL �4T1 N`T.5 1 9 I TELCO It PANEL 'A' MANUAL TRA95FER SWITCH WITH LUG BOX METER AND SERVICE RATED DISCONNECT SWITCH 1777 El 0 D WEATHERPROOF NEMA 3R GFI RECEPTACLE 3' G.O. TO e U TRANSFORMER _z • Y ` (3) 03/0 t (1) N2 GND-3"C MANUAL TRANSFER -SWITCH (3) 43/0 4 (1) #2 GND-VC MANUAL PANEL 'A' TOP OF WALL (BEYOND) PANEL 'A' - BENNER-NAWMAN (OR EWIVALENT) BN 52WW-UL OR BIN 24266W-VL WEATHERPROOF EXTERIOR MOUNTING, 25- HIGH x 14,5' WIDE x 6' DEEP INCLUDES HASP AND 'S' LOCKS PADLOCK WB 620 ACB CK 152.77 (COMMONLYY-REFERRED TO AS A 'B' RACK) I.4C-(I)#2 GND TO 'MGB' UNISTRUT 'PIOOO' CHANNEL x12 WITH (2)1/2'x4' LONG WEX HEAD DRILLED ANCHORS WITH WASHERS AT 10' O.C. .CONDUIT SIZE AND POINT OF CONNECTION SEE SINGLE LINE 3/- SCALE: 3 3/4'=i'_O" THE INFORWA71ON CONTAINED IN THIS ! SET OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS IS ! PROPRIETARY BY NATURE. ANY USE OR DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN THAT WHICH RELATLS TO CINGLILAR WIRLLLSS IS SIMCTLY PROHIDITEO. DATE: 03/20/02 ARCHITECT: HOIORQURZ & ANDERSON DRAWN BY: T.M. CHECKED BY: JDA REVISIONS :EV I DATE I DESCR€PTIOR NY a � a� W L` DO �r tV � - 01 LJ Q Q Z CC � O ■ ssro � � U =_L) C3 � Z X cV C/1 to � CV M n CL #A 0 ;Nv Cry O V N� �m �On QD d£ x o 0 y60 $ITE N nam. SB-106-01—PI 1—B1 S€TF TYPE: CYPRESS ANTENNA INSTALLATION €DCATION: ST. DENIS CHURCH 2151 S. DIAMOND BAR BLVD. DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 TMLI gPgO{�W�ER€/TE ,CO ppPLAN DETA EL AI+dD Q%WAIA, S1W NUWBER. E-1 r / 1 1 • I _________________________________________P4n.N rl `, I I 1 I I vel o...a I L_______-----Q-T- tI mwn •"a Mm r I I 4 I $$ I I I I weN w I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 j -------------- 1 SEE DET "A� BELL 'e OW 1 FIA DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD \ SITE DETAIL SCALE: 1'- 40' ,REE OPoIMU MI„Efl E,tM1WX ,CP M NO EILVAMY. LJ N�oeA anRR wmuNr qwI Nd¢ m Bm1IO ^o- ¢ xW sNTNmR DqRRN IuO�RGAW,RN WTw L,j 'gam =r BT, o ITT nm.e B,Rn, UADOC m'h1F1.9 B,..v arse. n e„ „ Ear PNU HIM PANpY El aunt mam e,Bm N.z.c nn.za n.e.vn '0"rLAU e,Bas m39, eoe.er exrw� E' x..e. ens PoY,w WIEi 0.9E ,03.1. MAfrt DETAIL "A" SCALE 1'= 10' GEO LOCATION PENDING ARCHITECTS REVIEW PROPRIETARY INFORMATION THE IHFORIAKT10N CONTAINED IN THIS SO W DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY BY NATURE, ANY USE OR DISCLOSURE OTHER TNAY THAT WHICH RELATES TO PACIFIC BELL WIRELESS IS STRICTLY PRoHIBR[o. DATE: FEB. 3, 2001 ARCHITECT: BORomurs A ANomoN DRAWN BY: JXGU CHECK BY: MLP REVISIONS 11 1 W O V J 4 � 1..1.1 O 3 C � N N ELI Q 1 Q Z W � 0 J LL U � 2 N F m o CA = �CL s V E om mz N oI ^m �q w am N I - z Q 0 .d i0 TV �¢ g4 7 O Q Z o2 pQ m0 SITE NUMBER: SB -106-01 SITE TYPE: LIGHT STANDARD SITE LOCATION: 2151 S, DIAMOND BAR BLVD. DAIMOND BAR. CA TITLE: ST. RENIS CHURCH SHEET NUMBER: $810601 2 OF 2 LEGEND rs ravel NNrAtt wmuNr qwI Nd¢ m Bm1IO ^o- ¢ xW sNTNmR DqRRN IuO�RGAW,RN WTw o 'gam =r BT, o suwr Ei2 UADOC m'h1F1.9 A—A P.~ IOf 1YJ11NG Ear PNU HIM PANpY m ® EIECIgIC �N f1ECYc tlwLT uuR Rep.IT`,aman`BARN qz m 15N"`PN Akr WETw a amL ® wnmR vALaE aF a m SCG PNVP[i P P ME N � EPoxv/m YCN CECAIK INPp,NrkS ♦ gM(.V£q NWN CB GPAK &ENt MELL,U� WMY � M�6MdiWniC lMrt Graphic Scale LmO uKgO'e'ME WIEwA (N het 1 TARN FNCI➢S,gEf N a m w m P% ICNtlOmWIB6GttMlz w ImTPoL ,gAMfOgNFq ,E1ENsnx umNNA NSN AMIEXW. ANe fIFE NNNN!/fl PE UFPNTNENi KMFCrgN AVN 15(YWi [ONtlAE EIX£ I iub = 10 feet mqc c°'°'1q Lac ma a ASP114T rAu fsPP NEcnxc Paw PNt A. rax roAw TOP RETwq,w wut ". "T"F °aER "fM L OX 4TE E. sO �� sm¢T ucar lf>EBN)tIE N� NY. OhMFb N,E BB BJifOY Of apX PoY,w WIEi 0.9E ,03.1. MAfrt DETAIL "A" SCALE 1'= 10' GEO LOCATION PENDING ARCHITECTS REVIEW PROPRIETARY INFORMATION THE IHFORIAKT10N CONTAINED IN THIS SO W DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY BY NATURE, ANY USE OR DISCLOSURE OTHER TNAY THAT WHICH RELATES TO PACIFIC BELL WIRELESS IS STRICTLY PRoHIBR[o. DATE: FEB. 3, 2001 ARCHITECT: BORomurs A ANomoN DRAWN BY: JXGU CHECK BY: MLP REVISIONS 11 1 W O V J 4 � 1..1.1 O 3 C � N N ELI Q 1 Q Z W � 0 J LL U � 2 N F m o CA = �CL s V E om mz N oI ^m �q w am N I - z Q 0 .d i0 TV �¢ g4 7 O Q Z o2 pQ m0 SITE NUMBER: SB -106-01 SITE TYPE: LIGHT STANDARD SITE LOCATION: 2151 S, DIAMOND BAR BLVD. DAIMOND BAR. CA TITLE: ST. RENIS CHURCH SHEET NUMBER: $810601 2 OF 2 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: REPORT DATE: MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: APPLICATION REQUEST: PROJECT LOCATION: PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: BACKGROUND: City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report 7.3 October 1, 2002 October 8. 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-10 To operate a computer services/ gaming center within an existing shopping center. Garners X 962 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Beal Bank 600 Legacy Drive, #4E Piano, Texas 75024 Paul Esteves 23025 Paseo De Terrado Diamond Bar, CA 91765 The property owner, Beal Bank and applicant, Paul Esteves are requesting approval pursuant to Development Code Sections 22.58., 22.42.035 and Table 2-5 to operate a computer services/gaming center in an existing shopping center. The project site is located at 962 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard within an existing shopping center identified as Oak Tree Plaza. It is a square shaped lot approximately 4.24 acres. It is developed with a commercial structure of approximately 192,210 square feet constructed in the early 1980's. Uses within the shopping center are generally retail, restaurant, personal services, and a bowling alley. 1 The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Commercial/Office (CO) and zoning designation is Commercial Manufacturing (C -M) which translates to the applicable standards of the Commercial Office (CO) zone. Generally, the following zones and use surround the project site: to the north is the Multiple Residence - Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet -25 Units Per Acre (R -3-8,000-25U) zone; to the south is the C -M zone; to the east is the Multiple Residence -Development Plan (R -2 - DP) zone; and to the west is the Pomona (SR -60) Freeway. The proposed use identified as Gamers X has been operating in Diamond Bar at the subject site since the latter part of 2001. At that time, a computer services/gaming center was not a permitted use. Apparently, the business owner contacted Los Angeles County for a business license. A computer services/network gaming center is not listed as a business that requires a license to operate. As a result, the business owner believed that if a business license is not required then the business could be opened. Additionally, at this time, the City was receiving numerous requests to allow this type of business. As a result, the City adopted Ordinance No. 6 (2002) which sets forth the zones this use would be permitted and operational standards. After Ordinance No. 6 (2002) became effective, the applicant for Gamers X submitted Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-10. ANALYSIS: Conditional Use Permit Pursuant to Development Code Table 2-5, a computer services/gaming center is permitted in the Commercial Office (CO), Neighborhood Commercial (C-2) and Unlimited Commercial (C-3) zones with a Conditional Use Permit. Since the CO standards are applicable to the C -M zone, a computer services/gaming center is permitted in the C -M zone with a Conditional Use Permit in this case. The Conditional Use Permit allows for specified activities and uses as identified in the various zoning districts whose effect on the surrounding area cannot be determined before being proposed for a particular location. Conditional Use Permit applications are reviewed for the location, design, configuration, and potential impacts to insure that the proposed use will protect the public health, safety and welfare. The Planning Commission is the review authority for this particular application. For the proposed project, pursuant to Development Code Table 2-5, a Conditional Use Permit is required for computer services/gaming center. The Conditional Use Permit review will allow the City to determine the effects of this particular use on the surrounding area and standards to implement that would cause this particular use to be compatible with the surrounding area. Gamers X is a computer services/gaming center that provides the space, equipment and technology to make fast, multi -player PC games and high-speed computers available to patrons for a fee. Patrons can also browse the Internet, check e-mail and download files. The unit utilized by this business is approximately 1,900 square feet and is divided as follows: 35 computer stations using 35 square feet each; a waiting area of approximately 120 square feet; a sale area of approximately 64 square feet; a restroom; and storage room. Hours of Operation/Loitering Gamers X operates on Sunday through Thursday from 12:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. and on Friday and Saturday from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. The hours of operation are posted at the front of the store. According to the applicant, curfew is strictly enforced. Minors (under 18 years of age) shall not enter a computer services/network gaming center after 10:00 p.m. unless accompanied by an adult. Loitering is not allowed and signs are posted at the front entrance of the store regarding this issue. Security Gamers X provides two full-time adult supervisors per 20 machines. Additionally, surveillance cameras are utilized for additional security. Windows and glass doors are unobstructed. The windows are tinted, but after dark activities within the store can be viewed from outside. In the daytime, the tint minimizes the light and glare that enters the store. Fluorescent and indirect lighting is utilized within the store. Due to the rectangular shape (long and narrow) of the store, the layout of the computer stations restricts the attendant from viewing all computer screens. As a result, the surveillance cameras are utilized to provide monitoring of the computer screens. Additionally, the front door of the store is equipped with a self-closing feature. Waiting Area A customer waiting area is provided at the store entry. Currently, this area provides seating for six patrons. It will be required that three more seats be added in order to comply with the Code requirement of providing one seat for every four computer stations. Parking Oak Tree Plaza provides approximately 310 on site parking spaces. With all the existing uses and vacancies and if all business operated the same hours and had the same peak hours, approximately 360 parking spaces would be required. Garners X has peak hours after school and in the evening. Three of the existing businesses close at 6:00 p.m. and five close at 7:00 p.m., thereby causing 42 parking spaces to be available in the evening. Most of the businesses are closed on Saturday evening. Of all the businesses in the shopping center, the bowling alley and Garners X would more than likely have the same peak hours — perhaps in the afternoon but mainly in the evening. At full capacity, the bowling alley would utilize approximately 229 parking spaces and Garners X at full capacity would utilize 35 parking spaces (one for each computer) and one space for each seat in the waiting area which would be eight for a total of 43 parking spaces. As such, the bowling alley and Garners X at full capacity would need 279 parking space. Staff has visited the project site several times in the evening and parking appeared to be more than adequate. The bowling alley was not at full capacity and Garners X had approximately 10 to 12 patrons. Since, most of the businesses (8 out of 13) are closed in the early evening and more are closed on Saturday night, staff anticipates that the parking on-site will be adequate with the addition of Garners X. Additionally, Garners X has been operating for the past year without complaints related to adequate parking. Noise Certain computer games create sound that can be loud due to the sound files associated with the game programs. With 35 computers operating at one time, the concern is noise effecting neighboring businesses and residents. To remedy this issue, the applicant has used noise reduction material on both sidewalls of the unit to minimize sound. In addition, each computer station is equipped with headphones. Adult -Oriented Internet Sites Accessing adult-oriented Internet sites at Garners X are prohibited. These sites are blocked through the router and server. Alcohol Alcohol will not be provided. However, the applicant does have available soft drinks and snacks like chips pretzels, etc. Restroom One restroom is provided for the customers and employees. The Building and Safety Division will review its handicap accessibility. It will be required that the restroom comply with ADA requirements. Business License The City contracts with Los Angeles County to issue its business licenses. At this time, the County does not require a business license for this use. Los Angeles County Sheriff Department According to Lieutenant Joe Maxey of the Los Angeles County Sheriff Department/ Walnut Station, Garners X has not had any service calls. Signs The applicant has installed two signs on the unit frontage. One is a permanent sign that identifies the business and the other is a banner. The applicant has not obtained permits for these signs. A condition of approval will require the applicant to obtain permits for the signs. Conclusion Gamers X has been operating for almost a year. During this time frame, the City, Los Angeles County Sheriff Department/Walnut Station and management company of the shopping center has not received any complaints. The staff has visited the project site several time and has not found conditions such as loitering, loud noises, untidy property conditions, etc. Garners X appears to operate a respectable business that already is following the standards for computer services/gaming center set forth in the City's Development Code. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15303(c) 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 September 26, 2002. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 103 property owners within a 700 -foot radius of the project site on September 26, 2002. Furthermore, the project site was posted with a display board and the public notice was posted in three public places on September 26, 2002. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 2002-10, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolution. REQUIRED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS: The proposed use is allowed within the subject zoning district with the approval of a Conditional Use permit and complies with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Municipal Code; 2. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; 3. The design, location, size and operation characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity; 5 4. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed including access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses and the absence of physical constraints; Granting the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located; and The proposed entitlement has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Prepared by: Ari'd J. Lun u, A ocia Planner Attachments: 1. Draft resolution; 2. Exhibit "A" - site plan and floor plan dated October 8, 2002; 3. Application; and 4. Ordinance No. 6 (2002). 19 l� PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-10, A REQUEST TO OPERATE A COMPUTER SERVICES/GAMING CENTER IN AN EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER. THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN AN EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER IDENTIFIED AS OAK TREE PLAZA AT 962 DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. RECITALS. The property owner, Beal Bank and applicant, Paul Esteves have filed an application for Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-10 and categorical exemption for a property located at 962 Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit and categorical exemption shall be referred to as the "Application". 2. Notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on September 26, 2002. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 103 property owners of record within a 700 -foot radius of the project on September 26, 2002. Furthermore, the project site was posted with a display board in three public places on September 26, 2002. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on October 8, 2001 conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Planning Commission hereby determines that the project identified above in this Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, and the guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant Section 15303(c) of Article 19 of Chapter 3 of Title 14 the California Code of Regulations. 1 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 an existing shopping center identified as Oak Tree Plaza. It is a square shaped lot approximately 4.24 acres. It is developed with a commercial structure of approximately 192,210 square feet constructed in the early 1980's. Uses within the shopping center are generally retail, restaurant, personal services, and a bowling alley. (b) The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Commercial/Office (CO). (c) The zoning designation for the project site is Commercial Manufacturing (C -M) which translates to the applicable standards of the Commercial Office (CO) zone. (d) Generally, the following zones and use surround the project site: to the north is the Multiple Residence -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet -25 Units Per Acre (R -3-8,000-25U) zone; to the south is the C -M zone; to the east is the Multiple Residence -Development Plan (R -2 - DP) zone; and to the west is the Pomona (SR -60) Freeway. (e) The application request is to operate a computer services/gaming center in an existing shopping center. Conditional Use Permit (f) The proposed use is allowed within the subject zoning district with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit complies with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Municipal Code; The purpose of the Conditional Use Permit is to provide a process for reviewing specified activities and uses identified in a zoning district whose effect on the surrounding area cannot be determined before being proposed for a particular location. A computer services/gaming center is permit in Commercial Manufacturing (C- M) which translates to the applicable standards of the Commercial Office (CO) zone, with a Conditional Use Permit and as amended herein will comply with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Municipal Code. (g) The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; The project site has a General Plan land use designation Commercial/ Office (CO). Objectives and Strategies of the General Plan provide for land uses that are diverse, mixed-use commercial retail, office and services uses within this land use category. A computer services/gaming is considered a service use and is compatible with this land use category as conditioned within this resolution. (h) The design, location, size and operation characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity; The project site is located within an existing shopping center identified as Oak Tree Plaza. It is a square shaped lot approximately 4.24 acres. It is developed with a commercial structure of approximately 192,210 square feet constructed in the early 1980's. Uses within the shopping center are generally retail, restaurant, personal services, and a bowling alley. The proposed use, as conditioned within this resolution, will be compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity. Additionally, Gainers X has been operating for almost a year. During this time frame, the City, Los Angeles County Sheriff Department/Walnut Station and management company of the shopping center has not received any complaints. The staff has visited the project site several time and has not found conditions such as loitering, loud noises, untidy property conditions, inadequate parking etc. Gamers X appears to operate a respectable business that already is following the standards for computer services/gaming center set forth in the City's Development Code. (i) The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed including access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses and the absence of physical constraints; The subject property is an existing shopping center built in the early 1980's. As referenced above in Item (h), the proposed computer services/gaming center is an appropriate use at the subject property. Q) Granting the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located; As referenced above in Items (f) through (i), the proposed computer services/gaming center with a Conditional Use Permit which will implement operational standards as prescribed in the City's Development Code ensure that this use is not detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located. (k) 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(c) and guidelines promulgated thereunder, the City has determined that this project is categorically exempt. 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 a site plan and floor plan, collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" dated October 8, 2002, as submitted, amended herein and approved by the Planning Commission. (b) 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) Property owner/applicant shall remove the public hearing notice board within three days of this project's approval. (d) Within 30 days of this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits from the City for the permanent wall sign identifying the business and the banner currently locate on the storefront. (e) To ensure compliance with all conditions of approval and applicable codes, the Conditional Use Permit/ shall be subject to period review. If non-compliance with conditions of approval occurs, the Planning Commission may review the Conditional Use Permit. The Commission may revoke or modify the Conditional Use Permit (f) The applicant/property owner shall implement all standards as prescribed in Development Code Section 22.42.035 for Computer Services/Network Gaming Centers and obtain all appropriate permits from the Building and Safety Division by December 7, 2002. (g) Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.42.035, the applicant shall implement and maintain the following operational standard for a Computer Services/Network Gaming Center: (1) Shall provide at least one (1) full-time adult attendant or supervisor, 21 years of age or older for each 20 machines; additionally, the applicant shall continue to maintain the surveillance camera utilized within the store unit; (2) Computers shall be available for use only between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 midnight on Sunday through Thursday; and between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday; (3) Minors (under 18 years of age) shall not enter a computer services/network gaming center after 10:00 p.m. unless accompanied by a parent or guardian. (4) Hours of operation shall be posted in a conspicuous place; (5) Shall add three additional seats to the waiting area for a total of eight seats; and no waiting list shall be maintained beyond the seating capacity of the waiting area; (6) There shall be no loitering around any computer services/network gaming center; applicant shall post "No Loitering" and curfew signs in front of the business; (7) Shall provide at least one toilet and lavatory facility accessible to customers and employees; (8) Shall provide one parking space for every 35 square feet of gross floor area devoted to computer stations; (9) Shall provide one parking space for every seat in the waiting area; (10) Shall provide bicycle parking adjacent to the premises; (11) Business unit windows and glass doors shall remain unobstructed at all times; all entrances and interior areas shall be adequately lighted, and a lighting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of business; (12) Entrance doors shall be equipped with an automatic self- closing system; (13) Alcohol consumption shall be prohibited; (14) Accessing adult-oriented internet sites shall be prohibited unless the business has an adult business permit; business owner shall provide filters for the computer network to prevent user(s) from accessing adult web sites; (15) Walls separating the computer services/network gaming center from adjoining uses shall comply with the sound transmission code rating of at least 45 or employ other noise attenuating devices as approved by the City; and (16) A computer services/network gaming center shall not be operated in a detrimental manner (i.e. loitering, creating excessive noise, etc.) to adjoining businesses and the community. (h) 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. (i) 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: Paul Esteves, 23025 Paseo De Terrado, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 and Beal Bank, 600 Legacy Drive, #4E, Piano, Texas 75024 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH OF OCTOBER 2002, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. M Joe Ruzicka, Chairman 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 8th day of October 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: James DeStefano, Secretary aDUC4 • tr w r W R V G Y -O 0 Q m aDUC4 N •w}eH � � � ran5 0TT a:l dd0 I oe 'oH A311`dA QNVINVIN E1_ � it �- 3v a � �Q1 ^C tj!: •_r �xF Y ti �ax ju ITZ:: 3a; G G Y d d SN � rw r N •w}eH � � � ran5 0TT a:l dd0 I oe 'oH A311`dA QNVINVIN E1_ � it �- 3v a � �Q1 ^C tj!: •_r �xF Y ti �ax ju ITZ:: 3a; m e _ e h q N N CFIY OF DL,kMOND BAR DEPARWENT OF COMMUNT Y 6 DEVELOPhfENT SERVICES Planning Division 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190, Daamand Ba:, CA 91765 (909)396.5676 Fax(909)861.3117 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPtJCATION' Recmd Owner Name 6E�+� 6aNlt (Lastnatecfsm) . Address (9000 Lin e-1 -or HE CiN P I& I o _ -rdX A6 'Zip Phoac( Fa. ( j sHI- Appliemt LIE I TINA (Las, name first) r�z.13 Ln ll sli Muret"r t— ,I t7bS Phacc(gl)cl 3 9 b- 1 Z Vo Fax ( ) Coxa ^�u-i—�• FPL j)cpnsis 5 MOV, — �— Reccipt B. Date Recd FOR CIT USE Apptieanrs Aacnt GSTl�-VES, P;`r,-,L- 01ml aamc Ent) 2-302S �G See l7GT�+r Phony b5 346-(z3S Far ( ) NOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the City in writing of any chaage orthe principals involved during the processing of this case. (Anach separate sboct, irnecessary, including names, addresses, ead signatures ormembm of pasmemltips, joint ventures, and directors of corporations.) - Consent thatlamthr oJth ere' der!cribedproperryandperr»ittheapp)icanttofslr csre Est Si®ed 1 ezb � �• = Date �= Je__ (All record owners) Cerrifuation: 1, the undersigned, hereby certify under penaby of perjury that the information herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. Print Name Sipaed - Location -Applicant of Agent) (Street address or tract andt lot number) Zoning 60 House: Numbering Map I -;L 3 k4341$ Previous Cases Present Use of Site SI"'�h-'foit^'1 Eek, ar — Use Applied for =,�cinc� Services av �iIVeS City of Diamond Bar _ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Project Size (gross acres) Previous Cases Present Use of Site S wry ti t'�+ar for Project Densiry Domestic Water Source c. Company/District Method of Sewage Disposal / Sanitation District Grading of Lots by Applicant? YES NO V Amount (Show necessary grading design on site plan or tent. map) Page Two CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BURDEN OF JOF In addition to the information required in the application, the applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission, the following facts: (answers must be full & complete) A. That the requested use at the location proposed Hill not: Adverseh, affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing or working in the surroundme area, or 2. Be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located m the vicinity of the site, or 3. Jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to the public bealtb. safety or general welfare. -F 'INCA t.J -5 4-k<+ I^e.:,�— 6,; G n(i:1 tin� Per 7r>S., i r, -)r 1 � 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 Title 22, or as is otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area. 14' 47C 1—' S C. That the proposed site is adequately served: I . 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. Residential: �-' IN Total Units Bachelor Total Pkg. Cov. Pkg. Project Size: I tr.r,51,- T 11 k�X Lot Coverage: Density: I Bedroom Uncov. Pkg. 2 Bdrm. &larger Maximum Height: No. of floors: hU-2r hl:-2rSq. Footage Qnnl) U Non-residential: I `-? Sq. ft. area No, of Bldgs. Occupant Load' CUP Burden of Proof - Page I Parking: Total Standard Compact Handicap Landscaping: Sq. feet Grading: Y _ N _ If yes, Quanbi♦ Cut: Fill: Import: Y _ N_ If yes, Quantity: Export: Y _ N_ If yes, Quantity: Occupant Load as calculated by the Building & Safety Division is required for all dining, take-out or assembly use, churches, health clubs, theaters, etc. LEGAL DESCRIPTION (all ownership comprising the proposed lot(s)/parcel(s) J Area devoted to structures Landscaping/Open spacec Residential Project: and (gross area) (No. of lots) Proposed density- (Units/Acres) Parking Required Provided Standard Compact Handicapped Total 0 Conditional Use Permit Burden of Proof - Page 2 Staff use Project No INITIAL STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE (to be completed by applicant) A. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Applicant (Owner): l 1 Iti � Lt_C NAME WNP5 plre[Nll � ADDRESS )) c Mb bm . LqM �q(c - iJt�c PHONE# FAX# Project Representative: Rk L— i'" NAME 4 .ADDRESS L , V)1-r._rnYLP-),I n - ! i -7ol lf- PHO, IE # FAX# I . Action requested and project description: ��r'f i'G �'�� 4-- C L: ; 7 r; .mac 1 S e✓ C<_ .� `'1>xn�S I^ (i CC s -(4 S c t 2. Street location of project: 7 /C "-k lir,. Iji vZ 3. Present use of site: 4. Previous use of site or structures: _. V, C -4—, "- - 5. Project Description a. Site Size (total area) b. Square Footage (covered by structures, paving c. Number of floors of construction d. Amount of off-street parking provided C. Landscaping, open space f. Propose scheduling nes g. Associated projects ti' 1 is h. Anticipated incremental development IBJ /i Initial Study Questionnaire • Page I If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes (rant i sale prices or rents and r pe of hoasehoil. size expected) N I _A j. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood. city or regionalh• oriented, square footage of sales area and loading facilities. 11 T t •� {��: r�'1c%� G J�t'.�7,�_n� C C,-�-i'�'t_ k. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities N(Pr I. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy. loading facilities. and community benefits to be derived from the project. N I.� M. If the project involves a variance, conditional use or rezoning application, state this and indicate clearly tyby the application is required. 6 Please list all previous cases (if any) related to this project: 7. List related permit/approvals required. Specify type and granting agency. E-leci (a 0 a,(ry)(k-1 ill li(f1fj 7141 \ r 8 Are you planning future phases of this project? If yes, explain: — 9. Present zoning: 10. Water and sewer service: Y N Domestic Public Water Sewers Does service exist at site? Y— N— Y_ N _ If yes, do purveyors have capacity to meet demand of project and all other approved projects? Y— N_ Y_ N_ Initial Study Qucdim ave. Page 2 12 If domestic water or public sewers are not available, how will these services be , aided'. Residential Projects: a. Number and type of units: b. Floor area of each unit: C. Number of floors d. Schools: IV �A What school district(s) serves the property? Are existing school facilities adequate to meet project needs? If not, what provisions will be made for additional classrooms? Non-residential projects: (commercial, industrial, institutional) YES— NO— a. O_ a. Distance to nearest residential use or sensitive use (school, hospital, etc.) b. Number and floor area of buildings: C. Number of employees and shifts: d. Maximum employees per shift: C. Operating hours: f. Community benefit to be derived from project: g. Identify any: End products Waste products Means of disposal — ��nan ��tncit�ecl `jJtYlhYr \\ c�'1— � 8th rl�c�h S�PI'l iia nnc� C�!`�r�S� h. Do project operations use, store or produce hazardous substance uch as oil, pesticides, chemicals, paints, or radioactive materials? YES NC If yes, explain Initial Study Questintmave - Papp 3 Do your operations require any pressurized tanks? YES _ NO ✓ If yes, explain j. Identify any flammable, reactive or explosive materials to be located on-site. N�fu k. Will delivery or shipment trucks travel through residential areas to reach the nearest highway? YES _ NO If yes, explain 13. Associated Projects 14. Anticipated incremental development t'l � (•''l= 15. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes 1 FF 16. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area and loading facilities. I-)Y'`l�U')L.'{'1G.;� 17. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities I& If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project. ti, 1 N Initial Stady Quatio sim - Page 4 B. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION (to be completed by applicant) 1. Environmental Setting --Project Site a. Existing use/structures _ b. Topography/slopes *c. Vegetation *d. Animals *e. f. Cultural/historical resou g. Other 2. Environmental Setting -- Surrounding Area a. Existing uses structures (types, densities): b. Topography/slopes *c. Vegetation *d. Animals Initial Study Qualtiamaim - Page 5 'e. Watercourses f. Cultural/historical resources g. Other Answers are not required if the area does not contain natural, undeveloped land. 3. Are there any major trees on the site, including oak trees, walnut trees, sycamore, California pepper and arroyo willow? YES_ NO_ If yes, type and number: 4. Will any natural watercourses, sarface flow patterns, etc., be changed through project development?: YES_ If yes, explain: 5. Grading Will the project require grading? YES _ NOVf " If yes, bow many cubic yards? Will it be balanced on-site? N ( � YES _ NO _ 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 _ NO 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: Initial Study Quatiannafae - Page 6 Noise: -Mm U -TT I'JUVIro �Q`RVD_ Existing noise sources at site: HL -IL" Noise or vibration to be generated by project: 9. Fumes: Odors generated by project: Could toxic fumes be generated? 10. Dust: Dust, ash, or smoke generated by project: no 11. What energy -conserving designs or material will be used? CERTIFICATION: I hereby certitj• that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information requited for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. /,o / F'k�� J 2� • Date 6 Si ve For: Inaial study Quezti wave- Page 7 ORDINANCE NO. 6 (2002) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2002- 01 AND AMENDING THE DIAMOND BAR MUNICIPAL CODE A. RECITALS. On July 25, 1995, the City of Diamond Bar adopted its General Plan. The General Plan establishes goals, objectives and strategies to implement the community's vision for its future. 2. On November 3, 1998, the City of Diamond Bar adopted a Development Code. Title 22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code contains the Development Code now currently applicable to the development applications within the City of Diamond Bar. 3. Administering the Development Code for almost four years demonstrated that certain clarifications and modifications are needed based on the City's experience. The City of Diamond Bar has determined that the following existing standards within the Development Code require clarification and/or modification: Article II Section 22.10.030, Commercial/Industrial District Land Uses and Permit Requirements, Table 2-5 and Table 2-6; Article III Section 22.42.035, Computer Services/Network Gaming Centers; Article VI Lection 22.80.020 Definitions of Specialized Terms and Phrases, Definitions, 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on March 12, 2002 conducted a duly noticed public hearing with regard to the Development Code amendment. The Planning Commission concluded the public hearing on March 12, 2002 and recommended approval of said amendment to the City Council. 5. Notification of the public hearing for consideration of Development Code Amendment No. 2001-03 was provided in the San Gabriel Vallev Tribune and Inland Valle Daily Bulletin newspapers on April 5, 2002. Pursuant to Planning and Zoning Law Government Code Section 65091 (a)(3), if the number of .property owners to whom a public hearing notice would be mailed is greater than 1,000, a local agency may provide notice by placing a display advertisement of at least one -eight page in at least one newspaper of general circulation. The City placed a one -eight page display advertisement in the above mentioned newspapers of general circulation. Furthermore, public notices were posted in nine public places (City Hall/South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar Library, Country Hills Town Center Community Board, Vons/Sav-On Community Board, Ralph's shopping center Diamond Bar Boulevard, 21070 Golden Springs Drive - JoAnne Fabrics, 990 Diamond Bar Boulevard — Oak Tree Shopping Center, 1235 Diamond Bar Boulevard - Albertson's and Heritage Park) on April 4, 2002. 6. On April 16, 2002, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing with regard to the Development Code Amendment. At that time, the City Council concluded the public hearing. 7. Following due consideration of public testimony, staff analysis and the Planning Commission's recommendation, the City Council finds that the Development Code amendment set,forth herein is consistent with the General Plan. 8. The City Council hereby finds that there is no substantial evidence that the Development Code Amendment will have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality qct (CEQA), Section 15162 (a) of Article 11 of the California Code Of Regulations and guidelines promulgated thereunder, the City has determined that this project is consistent with the previously adopted Negative Declaration No. 97-03 for the City's Development Code. Therefore, further environmental review is not required. 9. The City Council hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole, including the finding set forth below, there is no evidence before this City Council that the Development Code amendments proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on the wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. B. Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby ordain as follows: 2 TABLE 2-5, ALLOWED USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICE ZONING DISTRICTS contained in Section 22.10.030, of Article II, Title 22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: TABLE 2 -5 -ALLOWED TO USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICE ZONING DISTRICTS u►no USE (1). PERMIT REQUIRED BY DISTRICT See standards RECREATION, EDUCATION AND OP OB nn in Sections: 2. TABLE 2-6, ALLOWED USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAUINDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS contained in Section 22.10.030, of Article II, Title 22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: TABLE 2 -6 -ALLOWED USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS RECREATION, EDUCATION AND PUBLIC G7 G9 1%-12 in Sections: 3. Paragraph A, Subsection 1. a. through r. and Subsection 2. contained in Section 22.42.035, Computer Services/Network Gaming Centers of Article III, Title 22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows: Section 22.42.035, Computer Services/Network Gaming Centers A. Standards for Computer Services/Network Gaming Centers. The following standards shall apply. 1. Conditional Use Permit required. Permit processing for computer services/network gaming centers shall be subject to the following: 4 a. mau provioe at least one (1) full-time adult attendant or supervisor, 21 years of age or older for each 20 machines plus one security guard for each 20 machines; (Additional attendants and/or security surveillance or guards may be required if it is deemed necessary by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department or the Planning Commission.) b. Computers shall be available for use only between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 midnight on Sunday through Thursday; and between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday; C. Minors (under 18 years of age) shall not enter a computer services/network gaming center after 10:00 p.m. unless accompanied by a parent or guardian. d. Hours of operation shall be posted in a conspicuous place; e. A business license shall be obtained, prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, if required by the City or the County of Los Angeles; Shall provide a waiting area with seating equal to one seat for every four computer stations; and no waiting list shall be maintained beyond the seating capacity of the waiting area; g. There shall be no loitering around any computer services/network gaming center, business owner shall be responsible for posting "No Loitering" and curfew signs in front of the business; Each computer services/network gaming center shall provide at least one toilet and lavatory facility accessible to customers and employees; Shall provide one parking space for every 35 square feet of gross floor area devoted to computer stations; Shall provide one parking space for every seat in the waiting area; k. Shall provide bicycle parking adjacent to the premises; i. Floor plan shall be designed in a manner that places the attendant or supervisor on duty in a position to see all computer screens; M. Business unit windows and glass doors shall remain unobstructed at all times; all entrances and interior areas shall be adequately lighted, and a lighting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of business; Entrance doors shall be equipped with an automatic self-closing system; U. Htconoi consumption shall be prohibited; P. Accessing adult-oriented Internet sites shall be prohibited unless the business has an adult business permit; business owner shall provide filters for the computer network to prevent user(s) from accessing adult websites; q. Walls separating the computer services/network gaming center from adjoining uses shall comply with the sound transmission code rating of at least 45 or employ other noise attenuating devices as approved by the City; and A computer services/network gaming center shall not be operated in a detrimental manner (i.e. loitering, creating excessive noise, etc.) to adjoining businesses and the community. Procedures for revocation or modification of the Conditional Use Permit shall be as established by Article V, Chapter 22.76, Revocations and Modifications. 2. Amortization. All computer services/network gaming center businesses in existence on the date of adoption of this Ordinance shall be in full compliance with the provisions of Section 22.42.035 within six months from the effective date of this Ordinance. 6. Paragraph "C" contained in Section 22.80.020., Definitions of Specialized Terms and Phrases of Article Vl, Title 22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Computer Services/Network Gaming Center. A business establishment that Provides the space, equipment and technology to make fast, multi -player PC games and high-speed computers available to patrons for a fee. This type of business establishment also allows patrons to browse the Internet, check e-mail and download files. (See Section 22.42.035) PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 7TH DAY OF MAY 2002, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY:�; Wen P. Chang, MAYO ., Hyl wa ow yCbS, I.ny VierK 01 the uiry or Uiamond Bar do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 16th day of April. 2002 and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 7th day of May 2002, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Herrera, Huff, zirbes, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None Lynda Burgess; City Clerk City of Diamond Bar y C 0 L V- E O L W L 0 �L (U c G x U) cuL 1 ry M 7 L 0 u U N a E 0 L w L Q C x N �j E N j i7 �1 L w T N 1 1`J U X N N fa 5' 0 FT N O Ua Uzz N X a� Y N O U� N O N O u U O _z � N u ao i a a a a'x, a � d rr� a z qd qd w col 3 i I I I CD u I z X ^J X O QO O 8 pN 8 O N ;w ;w pN O O S n x f J N N O pOpOOpOp N O g O O ��.J 8 y O O O V x x a `J y< 5 V O N v Q 0. a QV q Q i I z o E � w � F W a w �s v�o ZF O c ¢ d�; O w E z .7 n w ¢ t'�Q• N 0 q x O E Z ki v r c o o, w F �o z c Q w— E AO E O E C7 as Uw V3 5 m��' w� a4°' ON w ¢a' >`) C co qrm u z U Q O O g O 1 O ° Q Q N Q Q U U a U U F a �O a ¢O O °¢o °Qy.z°. a F Q F Q p H Q F Q ° v oaf o� o� ° x wz A z oz AC) LL q� h wz °O OO Qa_ w_QA °Q LA O Zz z� 0 ? O� H z z z o n rn �-0 z z W W Q0 U z W W Q U Z U W W W C7 C7 z W in W V) U CU-) .-, 0.. .a H U U .a H R: U U U U IZ.. ;a U F U U W�W U a na as Q° 3 a _F a Q ,:a a s a a0 c� 3 z z v j ` ¢ A z a F w F x z z O x > Q iz z z w , w — a < a a ¢ O U p A 8 CL m ww w C7 � C7 rx ,O M V M y N m •c} N M N 14 N N N N N N p U> Q � c a rn Q c a o w z p2 z Q z z LL, C W Z w o z F a F- a Q [Us7 OU J cxl v Ea ,a A n cUa� z U b U a U •o '� ;v .� aci Z w 'y E 6 o O w U 4. v ,iia,' u a ;a j� ❑ ,j V ;o C a U. z W c H Cl vJ > a O W ^. ° m h W > Q_ U 6L' Q_ < U Q_ �_ c ° ' F z •� z .> z A� 0= a� ;i>a� t E z �qv c7A Z a : C7w w z u ow ow ow x i; Qx z >z m= O zQ o �.E� a �¢F V xv V n 0U0 cz �V x x x� a� u¢.a Q V z \ § ( \ \ ( \ / / / 02 $\ #( / #( \§ 2 #§ \2 \) \/ \) C) 3\ 3\ 5 \ E§ E\ VZ \) &q Iq mq }( \( \ §( \( e )e io e LL e e (& §¥ G¥ y¥ E¥ z§z§ a§ z§ z§ §° \° g� k uz (/ )/ j( \k @/ $} \ < \ ~ m ` m § zz z § _ y \ / { / (§ \ j ( ( ; % \ \ ) /\ ® , \ z\ �7 wa \p °_ a CZ .2 ( /\ <$ LT. /) )� /\ \\ \ >\ >) X\ e�w�w�x� CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF DIAMOND BAR On October 8, 2002, at 7:00 P.M., the Diamond Bar Planning Commission will hold a Study Session and regular meeting at the South Coast Quality Management District, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. Items for consideration are listed on the attached agenda. I, Stella Marquez, declare as follows: I am employed by the City of Diamond Bar, Community and Development Services Department. On October 4, 2002, I posted a copy of the Notice for the Study Session and Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission, to be held on October 8, 2002, at each of the following locations: South Coast Quality Management Heritage Park District Auditorium 2900 Brea Canyon Road 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on October 4, 2002, at Diamond Bar, California. } Sila Marquez Community and Development Services Dept. g:\\affidavitposting, doc