HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/14/2020
PLANNING
COMMISSION
AGENDA
January 14, 2020
6:30 PM
The Windmill Room at Diamond Bar City Hall
First Floor
21810 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on
file in the Planning Division of the Community Development Department, located at
21810 Copley Drive, and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding
an agenda item, please call (909) 839-7030 during regular business hours.
Written materials distributed to the Planning Commission within 72 hours of the Planning Commission
meeting are available for public inspection immediately upon distribution in the City Clerk's office at
21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California, during normal business hours.
Chairperson Naila Barlas
Vice Chairperson Frank Farago
Commissioner Jennifer "Fred" Mahlke
Commissioner Kenneth Mok
Commissioner William Rawlings
In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title II 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 Community Development Department at
(909) 839-7030 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting.
Please refrain from smoking, eating or
drinking in the Windmill Community Room
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 to the Secretary.
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. When speaking, please direct your
questions and comments to the Commission, not to staff or other members of the public.
In accordance with State Law (Brown Act), all matters to be acted on by the Commission must be
posted at least 72 hours prior to the Commission meeting. In case of emergency or when a subject
matter arises subsequent to the posting of the agenda, upon making certain findings, the Commission
may act on item that is not on the posted agenda.
INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COMMISSION
Agendas for Diamond Bar Planning Commission meetings are prepared by the Planning Division of the
Community Development Department. Agendas are available 72 hours prior to the meeting at City Hall
and the public library, and may be accessed by personal computer at the contact information below.
Every meeting of the Planning Commission is recorded and duplicate recordings are available for a
nominal charge.
ADA REQUIREMENTS
A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot access the
public speaking area. The service of the cordless microphone and sign language interpreter services
are available by giving notice at least three business days in advance of the meeting. Please telephone
(909) 839-7030 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 CONTACT INFORMATION
Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Commission, CDs of Meetings (909) 839-7030
Email: info@diamondbarca.gov
Website: www.diamondbarca.gov
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
PLANNING COMMISSION
January 14, 2020
AGENDA
Next Resolution No. 2020-01
CALL TO ORDER: 6:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Jennifer "Fred" Mahlke,
Kenneth Mok, William Rawlings, Frank Farago,
Vice Chairperson, Naila Barlas, Chairperson
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS:
This is the time and place for the general public to address the members of the
Planning Commission on any item that is within its jurisdiction, allowing the public
an opportunity to speak on non-public hearing and non-agenda items. Please
complete a Speaker’s Card for the recording Secretary (completion of this
form is voluntary). There is a five-minute maximum time limit when
addressing the Planning Commission..
3. APPROVAL OF
AGENDA:
Chairperson
4. 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 - Special Meeting - December 4, 2019
4.2. Minutes - Regular Meeting - December 10, 2019
5. OLD BUSINESS: NONE.
6. NEW BUSINESS: NONE.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
7.1 Development Review No. PL2016-143 - Under the authority of Diamond
Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48, the applicant and property owners are
JANUARY 14, 2020 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
requesting Development Review approval to convert an existing 492
square-foot garage into living area and construct a 46 square-foot addition
and 400 square-foot garage to an existing 1,330 square-foot, single-story
residence on a 6,100 square-foot lot. The subject property is zoned Low
Medium Density Residential (RLM) with an underlying General Plan land
use designation of Low Medium Density Residential
PROJECT ADDRESS: 20515 Flintgate Dr.
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Manilyn and Isosua Matau
20515 Flintgate Dr.
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
APPLICANT: Patricio Culqui
5239 W. 120th St.
Inglewood, CA 90304
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The project has been reviewed
for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be
Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Article 19
under Section 15301(e) (additions to existing structures) of the CEQA
Guidelines. No further environmental review is required.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
approve Development Review No. PL2016-143, based on the Findings of
Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the draft
resolution.
7.2 Development Review No. PL2019-138 - Under the authority of Diamond
Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48, the applicant and property owner are
requesting Development Review approval to construct a 2,067 square-foot
addition, 118 square-foot front porch, 180 square-foot second story deck,
60 square-foot balcony, 353 square-foot lower level deck and an exterior
and interior remodel at an existing two-story, single-family residence on a
1.11 gross acre (48,352 square-foot) site. The subject property is zoned
Rural Residential (RR) with an underlying General Plan land use
designation of Rural Residential.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2137 Rocky View
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Jonathan Samson
2442 Alamo Heights Dr
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
JANUARY 14, 2020 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
APPLICANT: Walt Patroske
2132 S Grove Ave #F
Ontario, CA 91761
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The project has been reviewed
for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be
Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Article 19
under Section 15301(e) (additions to existing structures) of the CEQA
Guidelines. No further environmental review is required.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
approve Development Review No. PL2019-138, based on the Findings of
Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the draft
resolution.
7.3 Conditional Use Permit No. PL2019-158 - Under the authority of
Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.58, the applicant is requesting a
Conditional Use Permit to operate massage establishment uses in three
suites (#110, #118, and #119) at Phenix Salon Suites, located within the
93,835 square-foot Diamond Bar Ranch shopping center. The subject
property is zoned Regional Commercial (C-3) with an underlying General
Plan land use designation of Town Center Mixed Use.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 237 S Diamond Bar Blvd, Ste A
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Diamond Springs LLC
9034 W Sunset Blvd
West Hollywood, CA 90069
APPLICANT: Anita Ortega for Phenix Salon Suites
19850 Blue Ridge Road
Rowland Heights, CA 91748
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The project has been reviewed
for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be
Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Article 19
under Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines. No
further environmental review is required.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
approve Conditional Use Permit No. PL2019-158, based on the Findings
of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the draft
resolution.
JANUARY 14, 2020 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
8. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS / INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
9. STAFF COMMENTS / INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
9.1. Project Status Report
10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
11. ADJOURNMENT:
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION MEETING:
Thursday, January 9, 2020, 6:30 pm
Diamond Bar City Hall
Windmill Community Room
21810 Copley Drive
CITY COUNCIL MEETING: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 – 6:30 pm
South Coast Air Quality Management
District Auditorium
21825 Copley Drive
PARKS AND RECREATION
COMMISSION MEETING:
Thursday, January 23, 2020, 6:30 pm
Diamond Bar City Hall
Windmill Community Room
21810 Copley Drive
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Tuesday, January 28, 2020, 6:30 pm
Diamond Bar City Hall
Windmill Community Room
21810 Copley Drive
CITY COUNCIL MEETING: Tuesday, February 4, 2020 – 6:30 pm
South Coast Air Quality Management
District Auditorium
21825 Copley Drive
PRESIDENTS’ DAY HOLIDAY: Monday, February 17, 2020
In observance of the holiday, City offices
will be closed. City offices will re-open on
Tuesday, February 18, 2020.
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 4, 2019
CALL TO ORDER:
Chair/Barlas called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room,
21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Mahlke led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL: Commissioners: Jennifer “Fred” Mahlke, Kenneth Mok,
William Rawlings, Vice-Chair Frank Farago and Chair
Naila Barlas
Staff present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; James
Eggart, Assistant City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; May Nakajima, Associate
Planner; Natalie T. Espinoza Associate Planner; and Stella Marquez, Administrative
Coordinator.
Consultants present: Gina Kotos, Assistant Planner, Dyett & Bhatia Urban and
Regional Planners; Steve Nelson, ESA Project Consultant; Paul Herrmann, P.E.,
Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes – Special Meeting – October 30, 2019:
C/Rawlings moved, C/Mok seconded, to approve Consent Calendar Item 4.1
as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mahlke, Mok, Rawlings, VC/Farago,
Chair/Barlas
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
5. OLD BUSINESS: None
6. NEW BUSINESS: None
4.1
Packet Pg. 7
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
7. PUBLIC HEARING(S):
7.1 Diamond Bar Comprehensive General Plan Update and Climate Action
Plan
PROJECT ADDRESS: Citywide
APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar
CDD/Gubman presented staff’s report and recommended the following: That
the Planning Commission adopt resolutions recommending the City Council
certify the Final Environmental Impact Report, prepare and adopt the
Statement of Overriding Conditions, and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program for the Diamond Bar General Plan Update and Climate
Action Plan; that the City Council adopt the Diamond Bar General Plan Update
and that the City Council adopt the Diamond Bar Climate Action Plan.
Chair/Barlas opened the public hearing.
Robert Cruz, Public Affairs Manager, Southern California Gas Company,
referring to a letter submitted to the Commission, requested that the Climate
Action Plan promote balanced energy solutions that include renewable natural
gas.
Robert Hamilton, biologist, said he prepared a biological resources report on
behalf of a group of residents that the City’s consultants incorporated into the
EIR for the General Plan. He commented that Figure 5.4 in the final EIR
showed basically no special status species anywhere within the City limits
which was not consistent with what he showed in his report and what was
entered into online database that consultants would normally access as doing
basic research for this kind of project. He recorded approximately 15 different
species he and others personally documented within the City limits within the
last few years which he said he would do in another submission to the City.
He pointed out that while he appreciates that several of the items from his
report were recorded in the City’s report, he thought his approach to large -
scale planning was more conducive to looking at the whole and seeing
different parts of it and then trying to see how the City could plan so that in
2040 when the City is doing this again, it does not find it has all been done in
a piecemeal way. To do that, he mapped out the open spaces and
characterized their resources and what kind of protective overlays could be
developed so that the City could see how they fit together and try to avoid the
4.1
Packet Pg. 8
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
kind of project by project planning that does not lend itself as well toward
conserving the ecological values of the whole. The response to that approach
from the City was the establishment of biological protection overlays goes well
beyond the scope of the General Plan and while it is acknowledged that such
overlays are useful in the design of projects, they are more appropriate to
include at the specific planning stage after more detailed information about a
project biological baseline is discovered and known. Having done this work
for 30 years, his understanding was that cities devise overlays at the large
scale planning stage, not for individual projects, which allows the individual
project to be designed to make them consistent with large scale pl anning
direction as identified in the General Plan. The City also said that when he
presented this data on specific sightings of rare animals within the City, the
response was that presentation of data as suggested in the comment could
lead to the interpretation that the existing sightings and records are the only
place where special status species may occur. And he does not think that is
what people think when a bird was seen “here” that it is the only place that bird
could occur. His point is that the City’s map shows nothing where actually,
things have been documented and he felt it was misleading to show nothing
versus showing what had been seen.
Lee Paulson said that when he has addressed the Commission he has spoken
about taking the time to get this right. He has said that it is his belief it is
possible to find agreement so that everyone’s issues get resolved in a good
way and he has been summarily ignored. The City is poised to approve the
General Plan and EIR documents presented by staff and for those who have
spent the last several years studying and learning about what proper General
Plans and EIRs should look like, what you have before you is an
embarrassment. He could go well past his five minute allotment in discussing
all of the things that are wrong with these documents and the process by which
they were created so he opined a few highlights. The 1995 General Plan was
filled with so much of what Council Members call “flexibility” that it allowed
some horrendous developments, such as Millennium to be inflicted upon the
City. The language haircut that was approved during the last joint meeting
gives the City officials the same flexibility to keep inflicting this type of
development upon the City for the next 20 years. The authors of the California
General Plan Guidelines Manual addressed the issue of flexibility and said “for
a policy to be useful as a guide to action, it must be clear and unambiguous.
Adopting broadly drawn and vague policies is poor practice. Clear policies are
particularly important when it comes to judging whether or not zoning
decisions, subdivisions, public works projects, etc. are consistent with the
General Plan. It is better to adopt no policy than to adopt a policy with no
4.1
Packet Pg. 9
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
backbone.” Could it be possible that the folks who wrote the manual knew
what they were doing? How is it that the Planning Commission and City
Council seem to think that they know more about General Plan language than
the people that wrote the manual about how language should be written? One
hundred and seventy-two policy changes meet any definition of significant for
which CEQA require a new 45-day comment period which did not happen. In
addition, the study sessions were scrubbed from the City event portal. The
process was flawed that he can only shake his head and the question the
Planning Commission must answer now and live with, is how does the
Planning Commission wish to be remembered? When you sign off on these
documents, they become yours. But, you have the power to slow the process
down and get more input and get it right. The question is, is there the courage
to do so? The language is just the tip of the iceberg. Others went into more
detail about the environmental issues and from their perspective, the entire
EIR meets the State’s definition of fundamentally and basically inadequate
because a proper EIR is supposed to allow the facts to determine the best
alternative. Diamond Bar’s EIR is backward. It starts with a pre -supposed
conclusion and bends the facts to meet tha t conclusion. In addition, the
alternatives offered are not feasible because the golf course is still in operation.
A 20-year plan cannot base alternatives on the fantasy that the county is going
to give Diamond Bar the golf course land. All attempts to bring this up during
GPAC meetings were blown up. From all appearances, these documents do
not represent the citizens of the City.
Grace Lim-Hayes said she attended several GPAC meetings and participated
in the public discourse as well as, the opportunity to comment on the General
Plan Update and she hopes her comments can still make a difference in
continuing to improve a document that meets the goals of the community.
Throughout the General Plan process, the residents of Diamond Bar have
strongly expressed their desire to protect and preserve the valuable ecological
resources of Tres Hermanos. While the City has expressed it shares this goal,
so far the General Plan and Draft EIR as written, does not prevent its
development. The Diamond Bar portion of Tres Hermanos is currently
designated as a planning area which would allow development as currently
described in the General Plan Land Use Element. The only thing necessary
to develop this area is a plan, according to California Code 65640. Moreover,
the language of the deed restriction allows its use as “open space, public use
or preservation” and she is concerned that the language of “public use” can be
defined as any development considered beneficial by the City. During the last
General Plan Housing Element update in 2014, the City designated 16 acres
of Tres Hermanos as High Density housing to satisfy SCAG and meet HCD’s
4.1
Packet Pg. 10
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
requirements. During the next update in 2022, more development could be
allowed in Tres Hermanos to address the housing shortage. According to City
officials, the State will not count infill development toward meeting the City’s
fair-share of housing. Tres Hermanos can be spared development if tonight it
is designated as open space. During the last GPAC meetings, public
discourse and deliberation involving Tres Hermanos was not allowed due to
pending litigation. We now insist this be discussed and deliberated
thoughtfully before approving the General Plan and urge the Planning
Commission to formally designate Tres Hermanos as Open Space to reflect
the will of the people and provide clear direction for the future of Diamond Bar.
Robin Smith stated that the Diamond Bar General Plan and EIR documents
as offered at this hearing are a disappointment. Overall, it displays information
that is vague, fragmented, erroneous and curiously different than scientific
standard definitions used by the established ecological monitoring community
and state and federal conservation agencies. Standardized specific language
in natural resources conservation is important to define. This language needs
to be specific in order to defend, protect, and restore natural communities. The
language and descriptions used in the Diamond Bar Resource Conservation
chapter in the FEIR are inconsistent with standards such as the following
specific items. The vegetation communities in 5.2 are still a little wonky
because they seem to insist that the dominant tree species in the City is walnut
when it is oak. At the very least, the legend should sta te oaks/walnut
woodlands or maybe mixed hardwood. It should match one of the copies she
attached to her comments. Another example is Sycamore Canyon Park is
depicted as coast live oak woodlands in the legend but what is missing is the
sycamore trees. The attached USGS map identifies Sycamore Canyon as a
riparian habitat. She asked why the ESA designations were confusing and
inconsistent with the authority source. The City has received numero us
reports of the gnatcatcher and she does not see that in the revisions which, in
her opinion, is a significant find and she is concerned that these findings of a
federally protected species is being ignored. Item #4 in the 7.1 comments
states that the revision comments claim that the map changes do not change
the environmental conclusions which she said is a false statement. Please
consider the following: Incorrect information can lead to many expensive
problems including potential litigation. Misidentifying existing conditions of
natural communities contribute to mistakes in conservation planning causing
degradation, conversion or loss of a natural system. She opined that the
Sycamore Canyon erosion repair project is not a good thing. The erosion
repair is fine, but it has replaced an authentic Sycamore riparian watershed
with ornamental landscape which is invasive. Almost an acre’s worth of the
4.1
Packet Pg. 11
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
acacia redolens is planted on the hillside which, in her opinion, is not a good
thing. She spoke with the City about this and no one would commit to replacing
the oak trees, willow trees and other plant community that goes on that slope
which means this natural habitat, bringing down the biodiversity level and
causing other damages in Sycamore Canyon Park is being degraded. She
appreciates consideration of these matters before approval of a flawed
document.
Douglas Barcon cited California Government Code Section 65302(f) requires
each city to include a Noise Element in its General Plan. This is addressed in
the Public Safety section of the Draft General Plan, specifically in Section 7.8.
Noise sources should include passenger and freight railroad operations. As
per the Draft General Plan, the noise element is required to map noise level
contours such that it may be used as a basis for land use decisions and should
include noise mitigation strategies. The City overlooked that the Union Pacific
rail line by the Transit-Oriented Mixed Use area near Brea Canyon Road
continues eastward along Ferrero Parkway in the City of Industry and through
the Lanterman property past the nearby homes along the route near the
ballfield. The eastward portion of the rail line slipped through the cracks and
was not included in the Draft General Plan or in the EIR. The City
concentrated on the TOD Mixed Use area and ignored the rest. Those rail
lines are used for heavy freight and Metrolink. The City’s reply to his EIR
comment on railroad noise only noted Metrolink, which is a minor source of
railroad noise. It did not address the significant number of allowed heavy
freight trains traveling to and from the Long Beach and Los Angeles harbors
heading to or from areas of the entire country. Although he provided sound
measurement levels from the residential area near Pros pectors Road and
Sunset Crossing Road these levels appear to have been ignored , and there
was no noise contour shown on maps for that residential area. The noise
contours in figure 7-11 on existing noise contours 2016 address only road and
highway noise and were not updated to include other areas in figure 7-12,
projected noise contours 2040. The projected 2040 noise contours show a
decrease in noise levels on the roadways and highways. Further, the City’s
response to his comments stated “ambient noise measurements were
conducted for the General Plan Update to characterize the general ambient
noise environment in the program area, however, not for impact assessment
in the program EIR. Mr. Barcon asked if the EIR was meant to include impacts.
Draft EIR, Page 3.10-25 regarding impacts discussed on a qualitative basis,
he provided sound levels from specific noise sources and he believes such
sound level measurement levels or official sound level measurements should
be included in the EIR and the General Plan. Policy PS-P-52 cited in the City’s
4.1
Packet Pg. 12
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
response to his Draft EIR comments is specific to highways and freeways, not
railroads. Policy PS-P-52 addresses railroads and mitigation of railroad noise
by implementation of a quiet zone and other methods, bu t it does not mean
much if the area is not recognized as having a noise problem. A railroad quiet
zone will have no impact other than stopping locomotive horns on the area
addressed in his Draft EIR comments. Where horns are allowed, they are of
much shorter duration than noise from locomotives and rolling stock.
Moreover, the 1995 Diamond Bar General Plan did not address this in any
depth. Since the noise contour maps in the current Draft EIR did not address
the railroad noise he noted in his comments, it is as if the City does not
recognize the area around Sunset Crossing Road and Prospectors Road as
having a problem with railroad noise even though it has been about 25 years
since the 1995 General Plan. He asked the Planning Commission and City to
look further into how to handle the noise issue that has not been addressed.
Gregg Fritchle, a resident of Walnut, has relatives who moved to Diamond Bar
in 1969, 20 years prior to incorporation. Back then, nearly all of what is now
the City of Diamond Bar was open space, and a lot of the highways did not
exist at that time. He is present this evening to agree with concerns expressed
by other speakers regarding the continuing designation of the Diamond Bar
portion of the Tres Hermanos ranch as keeping open the possibility of
development, that it needs to be protected and designated as open space.
There has been damage to the wildlife corridor that passes through the
property and the cities are suffering the effects because the wildlife are now
migrating through residential neighborhoods. In response to comments made
by the SoCalGas employee, he argued that the term “renewable natural gas”
is a misleading concept. All of the gas that is trapped underground is finite
and not renewable. The only truly rene wable natural gas is that which is
regurgitated by cattle. The other argument that underground natural gas is not
as subject to environmental impacts to the extent that electricity lines and
storages are is refuted by Aliso Canyon where one can see evidence that this
is not true. This is an effort by gas company lobbyists to go around the State
and lobby for local support for a resolution that would essentially water down
the 100 percent clean renewable energy provisions of SB100. They have gone
from city to city including Diamond Bar and Walnut and unfortunately, both
cities have given blessing to their resolution without thinking it through. He
asked that as several people have pointed out, the Commission recognize that
the information being provided does not present all of the facts and he
encouraged the City to examine all of the facts carefully and closely before a
decision is made. He hopes that when the decision is made it will protect the
open space in Tres Hermanos and renew the City’s commitment to 100%
Clean Renewable Energy.
4.1
Packet Pg. 13
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
Chair/Barlas closed the public hearing.
C/Rawlings thanked the consultants and staff for their work on these
documents. He has been in the City for quite a long time and has seen
different iterations of plans, and this discussion captures a lot of concerns
people have had over the years. He asked about the gnatcatcher and
documents from the Fish and Wildlife Service indicating they have spotted
gnatcatchers, and about the possibility of capturing that information in this
document.
CDD/Gubman explained that in the Draft EIR there is a table that
acknowledges there have been several recent sightings of the gnatcatcher
within the study area and it provides localized sighting areas where those
observations were made.
C/Mahlke asked about the land use designation for Tres Hermanos which she
understands involves other jurisdictions and she would like to know if there is
a way to handle that situation with staff providing education on what the
Commission’s options might be.
CDD/Gubman responded to C/Mahlke that the Commission could include in
its recommendation to the City Council to designate it as “Open Space” but
there are issues to consider, one of which is that in the successful effort to
prevent the solar farm from gaining traction, the Tres Hermanos Conservation
Authority was reformulated and rebooted to include voting members on the
Authority from the cities of Industry (the owner of the real property), Chino Hills
and Diamond Bar. The Tres Hermanos Conservation Authority is the
custodian of the land and they will be the planning agency that will guide the
efforts. The Authority has expressed pretty clearly that development is not
something they are interested in. Their interest is to create opportunities for
access through trail planning and preservation of the natural features and
possibly even finding opportunities to establish mitigation banks within the
acreage of Tres Hermanos to restore habitat that other developments have
taken. The other issue is that there is still pending litigation. San Gabriel
Water and Power is suing the Authority and the individual cities, and Diamond
Bar has been advised to not address land use planning issues such as Land
Use designations while there is pending litigation.
C/Mok asked if the seven member governing board of directors is in place
within the Tres Hermanos Conservation Authority with two councilmembers
from Chino Hills, two councilmembers from Diamond Bar and three
councilmembers from the City of Industry who each hav e one vote in case a
project were to be introduced in the future.
4.1
Packet Pg. 14
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
CDD/Gubman said he is not certain how the votes are weighted, but the
makeup is as stated by C/Mok so that Chino Hills and Diamond Bar would
have a majority vote if they were at odds with the City of Industry, for example.
C/Rawlings said he has spent a considerable amount of time over the years
with regard to Tres Hermanos. Conservation has been a passion of his for the
time he has lived in Diamond Bar and he is fairly satisfied w ith the level of
current protection given by the deed restrictions, primarily because the
Conservation Authority is already in the JPA and the intent there and the
reason the Authority was founded and the Board was set up, in order to
preserve the gains that have been made, the only way that the City could gain
stronger protection is having the State of California or Federal Government
intervene in the use of that land which he does not believe will happen anytime
soon. He looks forward to seeing how the pending litigation gets resolved and
regarding it being designated as a “planning area”, he would prefer that it be
designated as a planning area rather than naming a certain type of use for it
because that certain type of use would drive the agenda for wha tever
development that might be. Open Space may be an option, but that may undo
some of the work that has already been done.
C/Rawlings heard Mr. Paulson from Responsible Land Use talking about the
language being more specific rather than being more flexible which he hears
and understands. His response to that is, with the language being as it is
currently, it would not create a problem for the City to have more restrictive
and specific Zoning Codes, regulations and site specific requirements. He
asked if that was correct.
CDD/Gubman responded to C/Rawlings that he was correct. When the
Development Code is updated it will have specific development standards and
restrictions that are regulatory.
C/Rawlings said that while he would prefer more specific language throughout
the document as the staff and GPAC had created, he will focus on making sure
that the code language provides the enforcement that is intended. As the City
creates these topical documents that have an extended life and it is really
important for everyone involved to hold the City Council and Planning
Commission responsible for making the right decision on how the Zoning Code
is developed, what kind of development is allowed and, what the culture of the
City really looks like. He believes the documents under consideration provide
a good framework and as the discussion moves to the details, that is what
everyone needs to pay attention to.
4.1
Packet Pg. 15
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
C/Rawlings said that with respect to Mr. Barcon’s concern about the noise
component, he would like for staff to explain the process for determining where
the City chose to include data on the noise component versus not doing so
around the rail traffic. Is there a reason why there was not more detail included
about how the City responds to how it can mitigate the noise.
CDD/Gubman responded to C/Rawlings that the answer is that the noise
readings were taken along City surface streets and not the freeway or the
railroad. He believes the investment in taking the noise measurements along
the City surface streets is very informative because the noise levels along
Grand Avenue and some segments of Diamond Bar Boulevard are surpris ingly
higher than one would intuitively think, which is important when the City
continues to have infill and other types of development occur to know what
those noise levels are that one normally assumes are only along the freeways.
Having said that, any general plan that does include freeways in its noise
contours at the freeway right-of-way line would find 70 to 75 decibels. And,
staff knows that development adjacent to the freeway is subject to noise
analysis. In fact, moving on to the railroad noise, the General Plan does
include some very specific language with regard to the Transit-Oriented
Development Mixed Use District and its adjacency to the railway (Page 7 -41
of the Public Safety Element). It states that noise impacts from the railway will
need to be considered as the Transit-Oriented Mixed Use area is developed,
particularly with respect to sensitive receptors. The freeway noise and the
railway noise is addressed explicitly in the General Plan document, but would
it have been nice to also have those noise contours delineated on that map?
Yes, and at some point it will be a business decision to have a map that is
based on technically valid information to add those contours, but it is also the
case that there is policy language and analysis in the General Plan and it is
obvious to a reasonable person that development adjacent to those noise
sources will have to be addressed when the City is planning developments
within those proximities.
C/Mok asked if the Planning Commission was supposed to discuss the specific
changes that were made from the Draft General Plan to the one being
considered this evening as part of tonight’s agenda.
CDD/Gubman responded to C/Mok that the Planning Commission’s
recommendation would be whether to accept those changes. During the
October 8th Study Session, in response to the comments and direction staff
received at the September 25th Study Session, staff provided redline strikeout
versions of all of those policies that were of concern to the Planning
4.1
Packet Pg. 16
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
Commission and City Council. The feedback received after the October 8th
meeting was that the changes staff drafted were acceptable to the joint body
and as a result, staff incorporated them into the General Plan document with
one exception. Staff reverted back to the policy language related to electric
vehicle charging stations to say that the City will develop requirements for
projects to incorporate accommodations for electric vehicles, which is
consistent with the mitigations in the EIR and with the Climate Action Plan.
C/Mahlke referred to Chapter 5, Page 5-29, figure 5.4 and said it shows a map
where the coastal California gnatcatcher may or may not be located in
Diamond Bar’s areas of interest, which indicates to her that it puts the
gnatcatcher under “special status animals” in the General Plan Update.
Because it has been designated as a “special status animal”, is there another
layer that needs to happen to make sure it is protected or to ensure that the
information the Commission has recently received from the California Fish and
Wildlife has been represented well in the General Plan Update.
Gina Kotos responded to C/Mahlke that information about the gnatcatcher’s
critical habitat is located on Page 3.3-12 of the Draft EIR, on Page 3.3-15, and
is also included in Table 3.3-4 titled “Special Status Animal-Wildlife Species
occurring or potentially occurring within the Planning Area” and the records
column on the back states “several recent recorded occurrences in the study
area at Summitridge and Pantera Parks, Steep Canyon and the hills south of
Diamond Bar Ranch High School - high potential and sage scrub habitats; and,
also provided in Table 3.3-5 titled “Focus Habitat Evaluations of Surveys” it
states there is a high potential for occurrence, which is included as part of
Mitigation Measure Bio-1f for impacts 3.3-1.
C/Mahlke said she believed some of this information mimics what was
recorded in the Hamilton Report as well with respect to location and Ms. Kotos
responded “yes”.
Steve Nelson responded that with respect to C/Mahlke’s question regarding
whether there were additional things that had to be done to preserve and
protect the animal, first, there was a question about critical habitat and Critical
Habitat is a Federal designation that is mapped by the Federal Government to
ensure the recovery of the species. At this point, there is no Federal Critical
Habitat designated in Diamond Bar. That does not mean that the habitat in
which the gnatcatcher occurs in Diamond Bar is not regulated. It is regulated
under the Endangered Species Act under Section 7 and Section 10. Section 7
of that Act is if somebody has a Federal action that they are proposing – for
4.1
Packet Pg. 17
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
instance, should someone propose to fill or remove something from a federally
jurisdictional wetlands, they can go through Section 7. And the Army Corps of
Engineers has to go to the US Fish and Wildlife Service to do a Section 7
consultation to ensure that the gnatcatch er is not going to be adversely
affected. If there is no Federal action required, then the proposal has to go
through a Section 10, which is the Habitat Conservation Plan for the
gnatcatcher. So, the gnatcatcher, as far as the City is concerned, other th an
making sure as it says in the EIR, anytime you get into such a project or you
project any removal of impacts to its habitat (Coastal Sage Scrub), surveys
must be done. Other than that, it is a federal action after that point in time.
There was never an attempt to diminish the gnatcatcher as occupying habitat
in Diamond Bar. The second thing to remember is that there is a reason it was
not mapped. These are birds and they fly. And they have obviously flown
from either Bonelli or from the Puente Hills into Diamond Bar and now occupy
the habitat. And if you start specifying where exactly they are found as
opposed to saying what was said in the EIR that anytime you are involved in
Coastal Sage Scrub you have to do surveys for the gnatcatcher, it might
mislead the naïve person to think that well, it’s not been found here so we can
do whatever we want in this area. That is not the case and that is not what the
EIR says.
C/Rawlings felt it would be helpful to further discuss how the City has talked
about the need to do specific surveys when it has projects coming up and how
it means doing something site specific because he believes a lot of the “active”
protection of species is going to occur when we have the site specific surveys.
To that end, he asked that staff offer an explanation about what happens when
a proposed project comes into City Hall and what steps are taken to ensure
that the proper surveys are being conducted.
CDD/Gubman explained that if a project such as the recent Hampton Inn
project is presented to the City, the City hires a consultant to do the
environmental analysis and based on their expertise and site conditions such
as freeway adjacency it requires comments from Caltrans. There were other
issues set forth in CEQA about light and shadow impacts, noise impacts, traffic
intersection impacts, and so forth. Through staff’s knowledge and
understanding of the planning process and through working with the
environmental experts that the City enlists, staff moves through that analysis
process. When a project that may be more relevant to the subject matter under
discussion such as the currently vacant land at the south end of Crooked
Creek where there was previously a subdivision approved which expired, the
current owners are interested in proceeding with a new subdivision proposal
4.1
Packet Pg. 18
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
and that project will be subject to an Environmental Impact Report. There has
been observation of a species of Special Status Animal (bird) called the least
Bell’s vireo that was encountered during the Edison overhead line project in
Tonner Canyon and as a result, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is already aware
and concerned about that. There are woodlands on the property and there are
a whole host of other potential environmental sensitivities associated with that
site. So, as part of the EIR, the scope of work is going to include surveys for
certain special status plant species that occur during certain times of the year
when per protocol, that is when the survey for that plant species is done and
gnatcatcher surveys would be part of that survey as well, and other indicators
based on the plant communities in that area that would support certain types
of plant or animal species would be part of that biological impact analysis
component of the EIR and would be subject to public review, and review by
California Fish and Wildlife. And because the property is in the vicinity of Brea
Canyon Creek, there is potential Army Corps of Engineers interest in that site.
It will be subject to the EIR process and the public review process, and it will
go through the state, and the State Clearing House will also make decisions
on who should be reviewing the Draft EIR. And the engaged public will loo k
at the document very closely as well and will zero in on those site specific
potential impacts.
Steve Nelson stated that initially, before an EIR is determined to be needed,
CEQA requires that an initial study be done that follows Appendix G of the
CEQA Guidelines. One of the questions of the six or seven that are included
regarding biological resources is, “could the project have an effect on any listed
or special status species” so before a decision is made about an EIR, the
applicant would have to come in to the City with his initial study and typically,
that is going to involve a study by a biologist to determine what is on site, what
could be on site and what might be effected by it. And that is the early warning
position that makes the City aware that there is an issue. Plus, the City has
the General Plan and the policies and mitigation measures required therein.
So it is not something that can be overlooked.
C/Mok said that he received a document this afternoon that referred to the
project at Sycamore Canyon Park and it was noted that in the repair of the
slope that some oak trees were removed or had fallen as a result of the storm
and water runoff. What disturbed him was the notation that several City staff
were quoted to have said that “oak trees were not protected” and that “they
were removed with no permits and no replacement of native vegetation and ,
that the area is classified as Sycamore riparian”. He asked staff to respond to
those comments.
4.1
Packet Pg. 19
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 14 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
Steve Nelson stated that oak trees, as an individual species, are not protected.
The City has a Tree Ordinance that governs the permit requirements and
replacement of trees that are removed of a certain size. There is a State law
about the conservation of oak woodlands that has to be recognized. And this
was made clear in the EIR that in addition, you cannot just take out a bunch of
oak trees and say that because you are going to meet the City’s requirements
that that action has mitigated that to less than significant. You also have to
consider the taking of the oak woodlands and what that is going to do from a
long-term conservation and preservation standpoint. But as an individual
species, no, the oak tree is not protected.
C/Mahlke said that in the letter received from Robin Smith, she stated that
when Sycamore Canyon Park erosion repair was done the idea that she
promoted was that the erosion repair project replaced a certain type of
vegetation with other vegetation that was going to be detrimental to that entire
area – that it was going to take over and erode everything and it did not speak
to the nature of what that land was supposed to do in terms of supporting the
biodiversity. C/Mahlke asked what in the document protects this from
happening.
Steve Nelson said he could not speak to the actions of the City because he
was not involved in the project, but the EIR is pretty specific about replacing
native vegetation and habitat with native vegetation and habitat. From the
standpoint of a private development, they are required to adhere to those
mitigation measures. The City may have felt it was necessary to put in
something that would better protect the slope against future floods. He was
not involved in that as it was not part of the General Plan Update, but it is taken
care of in the EIR in the General Plan policies as something that needs to be
done moving forward into the future.
C/Mahlke asked if the City was due to update any of the plans in terms of
protective trees and environment, etc. The Housing Element update is in 2020
and she agrees with C/Rawlings that some of this is bigger and more detailed
at the more expert level between the staff and Commissioners who have an
understanding of those types of updates.
CDD/Gubman responded to C/Mahlke that the City has to undertake a
comprehensive Development Code update. To implement the General Plan,
the City also has to update its zoning regulations, and tree preservation and
protection which is an entire chapter in the Code. Chair/Barlas said she is
aware that once this moves to the City Council, the next step for the
Commission is to move forward with the zoning codes, Development Code,
etc., and she wondered if staff had set a timeline for these updates.
4.1
Packet Pg. 20
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 15 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
CDD/Gubman explained that staff has to move forward with the Housing
Element next in order to get it completed and submitted on time. The schedule
has not yet been set for update of the Codes and Ordinances.
Chair/Barlas asked for an explanation of the General Plan change from
Neighborhood Mixed Use to Commercial along Diamond Bar Boulevard, south
of Sunset Crossing.
CDD/Gubman responded to Chair/Barlas that the Neighborhood Mixed -Use
District is shown in pink on the illustrations on the screen. The district in the
public review draft Land Use Plan extended from Highland Valley Road on the
north to the eastbound SR60 off ramp on the south so it jumped Sunset
Crossing Road to those properties on the south. Currently, those properties
south of Sunset Crossing Road that are shown in pink on the left illustration
are zoned General Commercial (GC) and at that corner is Wienerschnitzel.
The property south of Wienerschnitzel site is, for the most part, a slope (hill)
and homes on Decorah Road are on top of that hill. There is very little
opportunity for development with very little flat area on the site, and given the
topography and adjacency to the freeway off ramps, would be very unlikely
that a building could be placed there because the building could not abut the
street and it would lack parking etc. In addition, with the freeway off ramp there
is no opportunity to turn left into that site which has physical barriers that are
not conducive to being part of that neighborhood mixed use as envisioned.
Therefore, there was agreement that it was unlikely that development on that
site could meet those policies and objectives for what the City wanted as
character for the Neighborhood Mixed-Use District. In short, it was, in the
opinion of staff, more appropriate to keep the area as a commercial
designation.
C/Mahlke moved, C/Rawlings seconded, to adopt the attached resolutions
recommending the City Council Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report,
that they prepare and adopt the Statement of Overriding Conditions and adopt
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Diamond Bar General
Plan Update and Climate Action Plan; that the City Council adopt the Diamond
Bar General Plan Update and, that the City Council adopt the Diamond Bar
Climate Action Plan, with the added recommendation to the City Council for
special consideration of a zoning change for Tres Hermanos to a General Plan
designation of Open Space when appropriate. Motion carried by the following
Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mahlke, Mok, Rawlings, VC/Farago,
Chair/Barlas
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
4.1
Packet Pg. 21
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 16 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
8. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS/INFORMATION ITEMS:
C/Mok thanked staff for all of the time spent preparing all of this material and to his
colleagues for reading it all. He especially thanked the public for their participation,
many of whom were members of the GPAC. It has been repeated many times and
bears repeating again, the amount of effort and time it took to contribute what these
people have contributed to this document, which was no small task. What the
Commission did in reading it was nothing compared to what all of the public and
especially the GPAC members contributed. He appreciates everyone coming to the
Commission to express their opinions and passions about certain things in the
documents.
C/Rawlings said the participation in this effort is such a testament to what makes our
democracy work at the City level. Sometimes it feels like we don’t make a difference,
but he can say that having seen quite a number of participants at these meetings o n
a regular basis, they have and are really making a difference. While we do not always
get to a point we want to reach, he believes that the City is at a very good place,
especially around the idea of conservation and preservation of biodiversity. There is
more work to do, especially when it comes to the details of the different codes and
regulations, and he knows everyone will be engaged in that process as well. Thank
you to everyone in the public for their participation and feedback and for doing their
best to hold the City accountable by being made aware of the issues and concerns
of the residents. This process helps inform staff and staff are here to serve and
support the residents. And as we move forward, we need to stick with it and keep
supporting staff in making sure we are doing the right thing.
C/Mahlke echoed her colleagues and said for those who are disappointed in the
Commission or feel like the staff and Commissioners did not hold up their end of the
bargain or didn’t stand by them, it does not change the respect she has for members
of the public who spoke out this evening. As a Cal Poly instructor who teaches
argumentation advocacy, these participants are often times the examples she gives
to her students about why learning how to publicly speak and be critical thinkers and
come out and stand up for their beliefs is important and significant. What everyone
says makes a difference. Whether the public knows that or not, it is important that
she says it. What you say to Commissioners and staff educates us with your passion,
and your experience makes a difference in the decisions the Commissioners and staff
make. Thank you to the participants for their time and energy and thank you to staff
for their time and energy.
Chair/Barlas thanked staff and consultants and especially all of the speakers who
spoke out this evening. C/Mahlke said it well that whatever the Commissioners hear
from the public, they try their best to incorporate those things and the public’s
participation is very, very crucial to this process. She appreciates their engagement
in the process.
4.1
Packet Pg. 22
________________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 4, 2019 PAGE 17 PLANNING COMMISSION
________________________________________________________________________
9. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
9.1 Project Status Report.
CDD/Gubman stated that tonight was a Special Meeting and next Tuesday,
December 10th will be the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting
for which there are three public hearing items on the agenda – the proposed
parking lot expansion to accommodate additional medical tenants at 750 N.
Diamond Bar Boulevard, consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for the
Jasmine Restaurant to establish outdoor dining which requires a Variance, and
a new custom home at 2244 Indian Creek in The Country Estates.
The December 24th Planning Commission will be canceled.
10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in the agenda.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair/Barlas
adjourned the regular meeting at 8:31 p.m.
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 14th day of January, 2020.
Attest:
Respectfully Submitted,
__________________________________
Greg Gubman
Community Development Director
______________________________
Naila Barlas, Chairperson
4.1
Packet Pg. 23
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 10, 2019
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice Chair/Farago called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room,
21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chair Farago led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Jennifer “Fred” Mahlke,
Kenneth Mok, Vice-Chair Frank Farago.
Absent: Commissioner William Rawlings and Chairperson
Naila Barlas were excused.
Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; David
DeBerry, City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Mayuko Nakajima, Associate
Planner; Natalie T. Espinoza Associate Planner; and Stella Marquez,
Administrative Coordinator.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR: None
5. OLD BUSINESS: None
6. NEW BUSINESS: None
7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING(S):
7.1 Conditional Use Permit No. PL2017-139 – Under the authority of Diamond
Bar Municipal Code Section 22.58, the property owner and applicant
requested a Conditional Use Permit to increase the medical office uses from
11,634 square feet to 16,906 square feet located within a 35,687 square
foot professional office building; construct three tiered six foot high retaining
walls and, add 19 new parking spaces. The subject property is zoned
Professional Office (OP) with an underlying General Plan land use
designation of Commercial Office (CO).
4.2
Packet Pg. 24
______________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
\ PROJECT ADDRESS: 750 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Johnney Y. Zhang
Zhang Group
750 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard, Ste. 188
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
APPLICANT: Howard Zelefsky
9735 La Capilla Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
AP/Nakajima presented staff’s updated report and recommended that the
Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. PL2017-139
based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as
listed within the Resolution.
C/Mahlke asked why the three reserved parking spots (FCU) are not shown
on the map and where they are located or planned to be placed. The
summary survey indicates that three parking spots are underutilized and
hardly used during the morning hours and never at capacity. AP/Nakajima
responded that the parking spots are notated in red at the right hand corner
of the map for the existing site plan; however, the existing site plan indicates
they will no longer be considered reserved spots. In addition, all of the
parking will have to be re-allocated when the employee and short-term
parking program is implemented.
C/Mahlke asked if the spaces would be designated at the time the project
is implemented. AP/Nakajima referred C/Mahlke to the condition of
approval in the resolution that states the applicant must submit the parking
management plan to staff for review and approval. The employee parking
program will be required and the short term parking program will be
dependent on the needs of the medical office and pharmacy.
C/Mahlke said she did not find the landscape plan and protected tree
mitigation readdressed in the current packet. AP/Nakajima explained that
there were a couple of entitlements associated with this property. The
building previously went through a façade remodel by means of a plot plan
4.2
Packet Pg. 25
______________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
review and as a result, the applicant had to remove a few protected trees
that were damaging the property and replan t them on the slope during the
remodel.
C/Mok asked about comment #2 on Page 9 of the packet that states that
the modifications to the parking lot require written consent from all property
owners. C/Mok asked if to date, those property owners had given written
consent and AP/Nakajima responded no, but that it would apply to all of the
property owners subject to the Reciprocal Parking Agreement (five property
owners) along North Diamond Bar Boulevard.
VC/Farago opened the public hearing.
Howard Zelefsky, applicant, thanked AP/Nakajima for her help through this
process. He said she has been fabulous to work with and super responsive
to all questions of the applicant and owner. He further stated that they have
reviewed staff’s report and concur with the recommended conditions of
approval and are anxious to move forward with all of t he conditions as
suggested by staff. Following the last meeting, they engaged Linscott, Law
and Greenspan, premier traffic engineers, who provided a report confirming
what the owner knew, that there was an excess of parking. One of the key
findings is that on the day of peak demand (Wednesday) there is a need for
83 spaces where 102 spaces exist and that number will increase to
118 spaces. Accordingly, the applicant and owner believe that the 35 space
cushion more than satisfies the minor increase in medical use.
VC/Farago closed the public hearing.
C/Mok moved, C/Mahlke seconded, to approve Development Review
No. PL2017-139. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mahlke, Mok, VC/Farago
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Rawlings, Chair/Barlas
8. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
8.1 Variance and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2019-122 – Under
the authority of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code Sections 22.54 and 22.56,
the property owner and applicant proposed to construct a 1,600 square foot
4.2
Packet Pg. 26
______________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
patio at the north (front) and west sides of an existing 3,871 square foot
restaurant (Jasmine Grill). A Variance was requested to allow a reduction
in the required distance separation between the outdoor dining area and
residential uses to 85 feet (where 200 feet is required), and a Minor
Conditional Use Permit was requested to allow outdoor dining within
the proposed patio. The subject property is zoned Community Commercial
(C-2) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of
Commercial (C).
PROJECT ADDRESS: 21130 Golden Springs Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Gary K. and Anna M. Malkhasian Trust
And Shaunt Trust
11534 Dellmont Drive
Tujunga, CA 91042
APPLICANT: MHD Marwan Almannini
6 Monitor
Irvine, CA 92620
AP/Espinoza presented staff’s report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Variance and Minor Conditional Use Permit
No. PL2019-122, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the
conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution.
VC/Farago opened the public hearing.
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, VC/Farago closed
the public hearing.
C/Mahlke moved, C/Mok seconded, to approve Variance and Minor
Conditional Use Permit No. PL2019-122, based on the Findings of Fact,
and subject to the conditions of approval as listed with the Resolution.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mahlke, Mok, VC/Farago
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Rawlings, Chair/Barlas
4.2
Packet Pg. 27
______________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
8.2 Development Review and Tree Permit No. PL2019-42 – Under the
authority of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code Sections 22.48 and 22.38, the
applicant and property owner requested Development Review approval to
construct a new 31,458 square foot, single family residence with a 2,100
square foot garage, an 800 square foot porte cochệre, and 8,675 square
feet of balcony area on an 8.54 gross acre (370,696 gross square foot)
undeveloped site. A Tree Permit is also requested to remove three
protected California Black Walnut trees that are in fair and poor health and
replace them with nine (9) coast live oak trees on site. The subject property
is zoned Rural Residential (RR) with an underlying General Plan land use
designation of Rural Residential.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2244 Indian Creek Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Henry Hua
19811 Colima Road #201
Walnut, CA 91789
APPLICANT: Pete Volbeda
164 N. 2nd Avenue, Suite 100
Upland, CA 91786
AP/Nakajima presented staff’s report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Development Review and Tree Permit No.
PL2019-42, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of
approval as listed within the Resolution.
VC/Farago opened the public hearing.
Pete Volbeda, Architect, stated that he and the applicant are pleased to
present this house on a very large lot and appreciated working with Planning
staff and other departments to obtain approval of this proposed project.
Because the lot is very large, there is wider separation (about 100 feet
around the house) beyond the usual 25 feet from houses typical The
Country.
C/Mahlke said there was inconsistency on the application and asked for
explanation of the owner’s name. Mr. Volbeda responded that Adam Estate
is the official company name for this residence.
4.2
Packet Pg. 28
______________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
Paul Sherwood, 2330 Clear Creek, said he lives above the proposed project
and was not present this evening to speak against the project per se.
However, he has some concerns. As has been stated, this is proposed to
be the largest home in Diamond Bar and he wanted to know how long it
would take to build a home that exceeds 31,000 square feet with a 2 ,800
square foot garage. He is concerned about the noise that accompanies a
project of this size and duration. There have been many homes that were
in the process of being built and removed during the last recession, and his
neighborhood was blighted with abandoned and unfinished homes for a
period of time. He is concerned that this project gets completed because if
it does not, there are not many with the financial wherewithal to be able to
take over a project of this size and the house could sit unfinished if the
applicant is unable to complete it. He is curious if the City has any
wherewithal to see that a project like this is, in fact, completed. And, is this
home being built to be occupied or as a spec home to be sold on the open
market, because he has observed a number of homes sitting on the market
for a long period of time because homes of this size are not moving with
any great speed. On the environmental side, is the C ity placing
requirements on this home with respect to the energy use because a home
of this size will require a great deal of energy and could tax the
neighborhood’s electrical grid. And, will his neighborhood electrical grid
system support a project of this size. Are there other considerations or
requirements being made such as solar panels which would support the
electrical needs of a home this size and, given its location, would this home
being many feet below the grade of Indian Creek, is it going to be on sewer
with an uplift station or will it utilize septic.
Mr. Volbeda responded to Mr. Sherwood that the house will be on a septic
system. Percolation reports have been ordered which will be submitted to
and approved by the Health Department prior to issuance of building
permits. With respect to timing of construction, he is anticipating grading to
take three to four months and construction three years.
Henry Hua said he is the owner of the property and he will occupy the
house. He is a builder and is building many houses. He has development
in Malibu but has been a resident of Diamond Bar for 40 years and loves
Diamond Bar. Even though he knows the market is not that good and a lot
of folks are moving out of the area, he is not. This will be his home. He is
a very experienced builder and guarantees that his home will be very energy
4.2
Packet Pg. 29
______________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
efficient. It will be one of the safest and most efficient houses because it
will use solar power and be fully automated and include a rain harvest
system to conserve water. Finally, he is ve ry financially sound and if
needed, he is willing to provide bank references.
VC/Farago closed the public hearing.
CDD/Gubman responded to Mr. Sherwood that whether the City has any
enforcement authority to ensure completion of construction, it depends on
whether or not the project, if abandoned, would become a public nuisance.
For example, when the Shell Station at Palomino and Diamond Bar
Boulevard was abandoned, the City filed a civil suit and had a court
appointed receiver that took over the project, took possession and
completed the project, and received compensation through the proceeds of
the sale of that property. This is a worst case scenario. Since this proposed
project is behind the guard-gated community and subject to a homeowner’s
association, it might be more of a partnership with the homeowner’s
association if there were public nuisance concerns. However, if the project
discontinued construction and failed to meet the deadlines to pass
inspections by certain milestones in the construction process, the City would
initially work to at least secure the property and keep the construction site
maintained clear of weeds and debris and further erosion with best practices
in place for any soil runoff or erosion. There are enforcement measures the
City can take, if necessary. In any type of project, there is the potential that
the project will not be completed and the City has had such experience with
smaller projects including room additions.
CDD/Gubman stated that in terms of energy usage, the construction will be
subject to the latest update of the California Building Code – the Green
Building Code (CALGreen) which has the most stringent energy-efficient
standards in the country assuring that new residences will potentially be
more energy-efficient than many of the smaller houses in the neighborhood.
CDD/Gubman stated that given the architecture and amount of flat roof
surface, he would strongly encourage the applicant to take advantage of the
rooftop solar opportunities that would seem to be available for this to
potentially even take the property off the grid. In terms of its potential
burdens on the electrical grid, a “will serve” letter would have to be provided
by SoCal Edison before they would provide electrical service to energize
4.2
Packet Pg. 30
______________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
the property. Edison has its own criteria before it would be willing to serve
the property and staff believes there are sufficient safeguards in place to
assure that the house will be energy efficient and will not create an impact
on other users of the grid.
VC/Farago asked CDD/Gubman to respond to Mr. Sherwood’s concern
about noise during construction.
CDD/Gubman responded to VC/Farago that the City’s construction Noise
Ordinance limits construction hours from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday
through Saturday. Construction noise is not permitted on Sundays. If
anything were to occur on Sundays, it would be in the later phase of the
project during interior finish work.
C/Mok moved, C/Mahlke seconded, to approve Development Review and
Tree Permit No. PL2019-42, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to
the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. Motion carried by
the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mahlke, Mok, VC/Farago
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Rawlings, Chair/Barlas
9. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS/INFORMATION ITEMS: None
10. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
10.1 Project Status Report.
CDD/Gubman reiterated that the Christmas Eve (December 24th) Planning
Commission meeting is canceled and the next meeting will take place on
January 14, 2020. At this time, there are two items for the January 14th
agenda and there is business to take care of on January 28th as well.
CDD/Gubman stated that the final adoption hearing for the General Plan
goes before the City Council next Tuesday, December 17 th when the
Council will consider adoption of the General Plan Update, Climate Action
Plan and certification of the Environmental Impact Report with Statement of
Overriding considerations.
4.2
Packet Pg. 31
______________________________________________________________________
DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in the agenda.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission,
Vice Chair/Farago adjourned the regular meeting at 7:21 p.m.
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 14th day of January, 2020.
Attest:
Respectfully Submitted,
__________________________________
Greg Gubman
Community Development Director
_______________________________
Frank Farago, Vice Chairperson
4.2
Packet Pg. 32
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 7.1
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2020
CASE/FILE NUMBER: Development Review No. PL2019-143
PROJECT LOCATION:
20515 Flintgate Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91789 (APN: 8762-034-025)
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Medium Density Residential (RLM)
ZONING DISTRICT: Low Medium Density Residential (RLM)
PROPERTY OWNER:
Isosua and Manilyn Matau
20515 Flintgate Dr.
Diamond Bar, CA 91789
APPLICANT:
Patricio Culqui
5239 W. 120th St.
Inglewood, CA 90304
SUMMARY:
The applicant is proposing to convert an existing 492 square-foot garage into living area
and construct a 46 square-foot porch addition and 400 square-foot garage, and a
façade remodel to an existing 1,330 square-foot, single-story residence on a
6,100 square-foot lot.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment A) approving Development Review
No. PL2019-143, based on the findings of Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC)
Section 22.48, subject to conditions.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ~ 21810 COPLEY DRIVE ~ DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 ~ TEL. (909) 839-7030 ~ FAX (909) 861-3117
7.1
Packet Pg. 33
Development Review No. PL2019-143 Page 2 of 9
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is located on the north side of Flintgate Drive, between Arkley
Drive and Calpet Drive. The property was developed in 1966 under Los Angeles
County standards with a 1,330 square-foot, one-story, single family residence and
492 square-foot attached garage. There are no protected trees on site.
The property is legally described as Lot 19 of Tract No. 25391, and the Assessor’s
Parcel Number (APN) is 8762-034-025.
Site and Surrounding General Plan, Zoning and Land Uses
The following table describes the surrounding land uses located adjacent to the subject
property:
General Plan Designation Zoning
District Land Use
Site Low Medium Density Residential RLM Single Family Residential
North N/A N/A SR-60 Freeway
South Low Medium Density Residential RLM Single Family Residential
East Low Medium Density Residential RLM Single Family Residential
West Low Medium Density Residential RLM Single Family Residential
7.1
Packet Pg. 34
Development Review No. PL2019-143 Page 3 of 9
Project
Location
N
Site Aerial
Existing Residence
7.1
Packet Pg. 35
Development Review No. PL2019-143 Page 4 of 9
Project Description
The existing 1,330 square-foot, single-story home consists of common areas (living
room, dining room, and kitchen), three bedrooms; two bathrooms; and a two -car
garage.
The applicant is proposing to remodel the existing kitchen and dining room and convert
the garage into a seating area, laundry room, and master bedroom with a walk -in closet
and master bathroom. A 46 square-foot addition is proposed to create a porch, and
construct 400 square-foot garage at the front of the house to replace the existing
garage.
The height of the existing house is 12 feet, seven inches. The proposed addition will
not increase the height of the existing house.
The proposed single-story addition consists of the following components:
PROJECT SUMMARY (square footage)
Living Area
Existing 1,330
New 46
Converted Garage
Space 492
Total 1,868
Total Living Area 1,868
Garage
Existing 492
Converted to Living Space -492
New Garage 400
Total Garage Area 400
TOTAL FLOOR AREA 2,268
Adjacent Property to West
Adjacent Property to East
7.1
Packet Pg. 36
Development Review No. PL2019-143 Page 5 of 9
Proposed Site Plan
N
Legend
Garage Conversion
Addition
7.1
Packet Pg. 37
Development Review No. PL2019-143 Page 6 of 9
Site and Grading Configuration: The property is a rectangular-shaped lot. The
existing house is situated on a leveled pad and is not a hillside propert y. The proposed
addition is located on an existing leveled pad at the front of the house. No grading is
required for the proposed addition beyond minimal excavation for footings and
foundation placement.
Architectural Features, Colors, and Materials: The home is a 1960s tract home with
a gable roof and asphalt roof shingles. The applicant is proposing to retain the existing
building form but is proposing changes to the façade to enhance the front elevation by
relocating the existing bedroom window, add ing an additional bedroom window, and
adding a furred-out wall to the existing portion of the front of the house to break up the
large span of blank wall that faces the street. The applicant is also proposing to
restucco the entire house with a light blue-grey stucco and add grey stone veneer
wainscoting along the base on the front and side elevations where there is visibility from
the street. Additionally, the porch /front entrance to the house is being added to face
the street. The roof on the addition will be integrated into the existing roof by using the
same roof pitch as the existing house, but reroofing the entire house with new dark grey
color asphalt shingles.
A condition of approval is included to recess the proposed windows at the front of th e
house with trim to be compatible with the adjacent homes.
Landscaping: Landscape plans are not required because the site is already
developed, and because the project is exempt from the City’s Water Efficient
Landscaping Ordinance. The ordinance would only apply if new or rehabilitated
landscaping of 2,500 square feet or more was being installed or altered. However,
landscaping that is damaged during construction will need to be restored upon project
completion. This requirement is included as a condition of approval.
Proposed Front Elevation
7.1
Packet Pg. 38
Development Review No. PL2019-143 Page 7 of 9
ANALYSIS
Review Authority
The proposed project requires a land use approval through the Development Review
process. The analysis that follows provides the basis for staff’s recommendation to
approve the Development Review application.
Development Review (DBMC Section 22.48)
Additions which are equal to or greater than 50 percent of the existing habitable floor
area of all existing structures on site, or substantially change the appearance of an
existing residence require Planning Commission approval of a DR application.
Development Review approval is required to ensure compliance with the City’s General
Plan policies and design guidelines, and to minimize adverse effects of the proposed
project upon the surrounding properties and the City in general.
As stated in Section 22.48.010 of the Development Code, the Development Review
process was established to ensure that new development and additions to existing
development are consistent with the General Plan “through the promotio n of high
functional and aesthetic standards to complement and add to the economic, physical,
and social character” of Diamond Bar.
Development Standards: The following table compares the proposed project with the
City’s development standards for residential development in the RLM zone:
Development
Feature
Residential
Development
Standards
Existing Proposed Meets
Requirements
Front Setback 20 feet 20’-8” 20’-8” Yes
Side Setbacks 5 feet on one side and
10 feet on the other side
5’-9”– west side
5’-3” – east side
5’-9”– west side
5’-3” – east side
No*
Yes
Distance to
Structures on
Adjoining Lots
15 feet 11’-5”– west side
12’-10” – east side
11’-5”– west side
12’-10” – east side
No*
No*
Rear Setback 20 feet 20’-10” 20’-10” Yes
Lot Coverage Maximum of 40% 30.9% 38.2% Yes
Building Height
Limit 35 feet 12’-7” 12’-7” Yes
Parking 2-car garage 2-car garage 2-car garage Yes
*Existing legal nonconforming structure and does not further encroach into setbacks.
7.1
Packet Pg. 39
Development Review No. PL2019-143 Page 8 of 9
Compatibility with Neighborhood
The project will not be intrusive to neighboring homes since the house is already
existing and the height will remain. The proposed project will not block existing views
from adjacent properties. The adjacent homes to the west and east are two -story
homes and have views to the north. The proposed garage is set back 27’- 2” from the
front property line. The addition does not further encroach into the existing 5’-9” side
setback to the west, the 11’-5” distance to the structure on the adjoining lot to the west,
or the 12’-10” distance to the structure on the adjoining lot to the east since it is located
at the front of the house.
Based on the foregoing, staff finds that the project follows the principles of the City’s
Residential Design Guidelines as follows:
• The addition will conform to all development standards, including building height
and setbacks (with the exception of the pre -existing west side setback and
distances to the structures on the adjacent lots);
• A gradual transition between the addition and existing residen ce is achieved
through appropriate setbacks, building height and window and door placement;
• Large expanses without windows or doors are avoided; and
• Roof type and pitch of the addition match the primary structure. The roofing
material will be updated with dark grey asphalt shingles.
Additional Review
The Public Works Department and Building and Safety Division reviewed this project,
and their comments are included in the attached resolution as conditions of approval.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
On December 30, 2019, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a
500-foot radius of the project site. On January 3, 2020, the notice was published in the
San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. A notice
display board was posted at the site, and a copy of the notice was posted at the City's
four designated community posting sites.
Public Comments Received
No comments have been received as of the publication date of this report.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
This project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be
Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to the provisions of
7.1
Packet Pg. 40
Development Review No. PL2019-143 Page 9 of 9
Article 19 Section 15301(e) (additions to existing structures) of the CEQA Guidelines.
No further environmental review is required.
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Attachments:
A. Draft Resolution No. 2020-XX and Standard Conditions of Approval
B. Color and Material Board
C. Site Plan, Floor Plans, and Elevations
7.1
Packet Pg. 41
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
NO. PL2019-143 TO CONVERT AN EXISTING 492 SQUARE-FOOT GARAGE
INTO LIVING AREA AND CONSTRUCT A 46 SQUARE-FOOT PORCH
ADDITION AND 400 SQUARE-FOOT GARAGE, AND A FAÇADE REMODEL
TO AN EXISTING 1,330 SQUARE-FOOT, SINGLE-STORY RESIDENCE ON A
6,100 SQUARE-FOOT LOT LOCATED AT 20515 FLINTGATE DRIVE,
DIAMOND BAR, CA 91789 (APN 8762-034-025).
A. RECITALS
1. The property owners, Isosua and Manilyn Matau, and applicant, Partricio
Culqui, have filed an application for Development Review No. PL2019-143
to convert an existing 492 square-foot garage into living area and construct
a 46 square-foot addition and 400 square-foot garage to an existing
1,330 square-foot, single-story residence located at 20515 Flintgate Drive,
Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California. Hereinafter in this
Resolution, the subject Development Review shall be referred to as the
"Proposed Project."
2. The subject property is made up of one parcel totaling 6,100 gross square
feet (0.14 gross acres). It is located in the Low Medium Density Residential
(RLM) zone with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Low
Medium Density Residential.
3. The legal description of the subject property is Lot 19 of Tract No. 25391.
The Assessor’s Parcel Number is 8762-034-025.
4. On December 30, 2019, public hearing notices were mailed to property
owners within a 500-foot radius of the Project site. On January 3, 2020,
notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San
Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers; and
public notices were posted at the City’s designated community posting sites.
In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted
with a display board.
5. On January 14, 2020, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar
conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all
interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 42
2 DR PL2020-XX
B. RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set
forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; and
2. The Planning Commission hereby determines the Project to be
Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the provisions of Article 19,
Section 15301 (e) (additions to existing structures) of the CEQA Guidelines.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required.
C. FINDINGS OF FACT
Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein and as prescribed under
Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.48, this Planning Commission
hereby finds as follows:
Development Review Findings (DBMC Section 22.48.040)
1. The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the
applicable elements of the City's General Plan, City Design Guidelines, and
development standards of the applicable district, design guidelines, and
architectural criteria for special areas (e.g., theme areas, specific plans,
community plans, boulevards or planned developments).
The design of the Project is consistent with the applicable elements of the
City’s General Plan, City Design Guidelines and development standards.
The City’s General Plan Policy CC-G-4 requires the preservation of the
scale and character of existing residential neighborhoods and ensure
sensitive transitions between densities and uses. The Project will be
compatible with neighboring homes since the house is existing and the
height will remain. The Project will not block existing views from adjacent
homes since it is a single-story house and the adjacent homes are two-story
and have views to the north.
A gradual transition between the project and adjacent uses is achieved
through appropriate setbacks, building height , and window and door
placement. The applicant is proposing to enhance the front elevation by
relocating the existing bedroom window, adding an additional bedroom
window, and adding a furred-out wall to the existing portion of the house to
break up the large span of blank wall that faces the street, which complies
with the City’s Design Guidelines where large wall expanses that have no
windows should be avoided [City’s Design Guidelines D. Fenestration
(Placement of Doors and Windows) (2)]. The proposed exterior changes
include restuccoing the house with a light blue-grey stucco, and adding grey
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 43
3 DR PL2020-XX
stone veneer wainscoting along the base on the front and side elevations
where there is visibility from the street. Additionally, the porch is being
added to face the street. The roof on the addition will be integrated into the
existing roof by using the same roof pitch as the existing house, but
reroofing the entire house with new dark grey color asphalt shing les, which
complies with the City’s Design Guidelines where architectural design
should accentuate simplicity of line and form, restrained and understated
elegance, as opposed to the overly ornate or monumental [City’s Design
Guidelines A. Site Planning (2) and B. Architecture (2)].
The Project complies with all development standards of the Low Medium
Residential zoning district by meeting all development standards such as
required setbacks (with the exception of the pre-existing west side setback
and distances to the structures on the adjacent lots), building height, and lot
coverage. The project site is not part of any theme area, specific plan,
community plan, boulevard or planned development.
2. The design and layout of the proposed development will not in terfere with
the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development s, and
will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards.
The proposed addition will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of
neighboring existing or future developments because the use of the project
site is designed for a single-family home and the surrounding uses are also
single-family homes. In addition, no protected trees exist on site.
The proposed addition will not interfere with vehicular or pedes trian
movements, such as access or other functional requirements of a single -
family home because it complies with the requirements for driveway widths
and is a continuation of an existing use.
3. The architectural design of the proposed development is compati ble with
the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain and
enhance the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated
by Chapter 22.48: Development Review Standards, the City’s Design
Guidelines, the City's General Plan, or any applicable specific plan.
The City’s General Plan Goal CC-G-4 also requires the preservation of the
scale and character of existing residential neighborhoods and ensure
sensitive transitions between densities and uses. The City’s Design
Guidelines Architecture (1) requires compatibility with the surrounding
character including harmonious building style, form, size, color, material
and roofline. The City’s General Plan Policy LU-P-8 ensures that new
residential development be compatible with the prevailing character of the
surrounding neighborhood in terms of building scale, density, massing, and
design. The Project will be compatible with neighboring homes since the
house is existing and the height will remain. The Project will not block
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 44
4 DR PL2020-XX
existing views from adjacent homes since it is a single-story house and the
adjacent homes are two-story and have views to the north.
The Project is designed to be compatible with the character of the existing
homes in the neighborhood, in terms of size and scale. The Project is
located between existing, two-story homes to the west and east that have
views to the north. The proposed garage is set back 27’- 2” from the front
property line. The addition does not further encroach into the existing 5’-9”
side setback to the west, the 11’-5” distance to the structure on the adjoining
lot to the west, or the 12’-10” distance to the structure on the adjoining lot
to the east since it is located at the front of the house.
4. The design of the proposed develop ment will provide a desirable
environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors
through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, color, and will remain
aesthetically appealing.
The home is a 1960s tract home with a gable roof and asphalt roof shingles.
The applicant is proposing to retain the existing building form but is
proposing changes to the façade by enhancing the front elevation by
relocating the existing bedroom window, adding an additional bedroom
window, and adding a furred-out wall to the existing portion of the front of
the house to break up the large span of blank wall that faces the street. The
applicant is also proposing to restucco the entire house with a light blue -
grey stucco and add grey stone veneer wainscoting along the base on the
front and side elevations where there is visibility from the street.
Additionally, the porch/front entrance to the house is being added to face
the street. The roof on the addition will be integrated into the existing roof
by using the same roof pitch as the existing house, but reroofing the entire
house with new dark grey color asphalt shingles. Therefore, the addition
will be visually integrated into the existing home and not negatively impact
the look and character of the neighborhood.
5. The proposed development will not be detrimental to public health, safety
or welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative effect on property values or
resale(s) of property) to the properties or improvements in the vicinity.
Before the issuance of any City permits, the proposed project is required to
comply with all conditions within the approved resolution, and the Building
and Safety Division and Public Works Departments requirements.
Through the permit and inspection process, the referenced agencies will
ensure that the proposed project is not detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in
the vicinity.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 45
5 DR PL2020-XX
6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as set forth under Article 19
Section 15301 (e) (additions to existing structures) of the CEQA guidelines.
Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby
approves this Application, subject to the following conditions:
1. Development shall substantially comply with the plans and documents presented
to the Planning Commission at the public hearing.
2. On the plans submitted for plan check, provide recessed windows with a trim on
the south (front) elevation.
3. Standard Conditions. The applicant shall comply with the standard development
conditions attached hereto.
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 the property owners, Isosua and Manilyn Matau, 20515 Flintgate
Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91789, and applicant, Patricio Colqui,
5239 W. 120th St., Inglewood, CA 90304.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020, BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
By: ______________________________________
Naila Barlas, Chairperson
I, Greg Gubman, 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 14th day of January, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
ATTEST: ___________________________
Greg Gubman, Secretary
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 46
6 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
USE PERMITS, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL NEW AND
REMODELED STRUCTURES
PROJECT #: Development Review No. PL 2019-143
SUBJECT: To convert an existing 492 square-foot garage into living area
and construct a 46 square-foot addition and 400 square-foot
garage to an existing single-story residence.
PROPERTY Isosua and Manilyn Matau
OWNERS: 20515 Flintgate Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91789
APPLICANT: Patricio Colqui
5239 W. 120th St.
Inglewood, CA 90304
LOCATION: 20515 Flintgate Dr., Diamond Bar, CA 91789
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
I. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION AT (909) 839-7030,
FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City,
and its officers, agents and employees, from any claim, action, or
proceeding to attack, set-aside, void or annul, the approval of
Development Review No. PL2019-143 brought within the time period
provided by Government Code Section 66499.37. In the event the
city and/or its officers, agents and employees are made a party of
any such action:
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 47
7 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
(a) Applicant shall provide a defense to the City defendants or at
the City's option reimburse the City its costs of defense,
including reasonable attorneys fees, incurred in defense of
such claims.
(b) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered
against the City defendants. The City shall promptly notify the
applicant of any claim, action of proceeding, and shall
cooperate fully in the defense thereof.
2. This approval shall not be effective for any purpose until the applicant
and owner of the property involved have filed, within twenty-one
(21) days of approval of this Development Review No. PL2019-143,
at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department,
their affidavit stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all
the conditions of this approval. Further, this approval shall not be
effective until the applicants pay remaining City processing fees,
school fees and fees for the review of submitted reports.
3. All designers, architects, engineers, and contractors associated with
this project shall obtain a Diamond Bar Business License; and a
zoning approval for those businesses located in Diamond Bar.
4. Signed copies of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2020-XX,
Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be
included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only
to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are
not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed
Engineer/Architect.
5. Prior to the plan check, revised site plans and building elevations
incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for
Planning Division review and approval.
6. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being
commenced thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed.
7. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance
with the conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable
regulations.
8. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections
of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and
any applicable Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit
issuance.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 48
8 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
9. All site, grading, landscape/irrigation, and roof plans, and elevation
plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of City
permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.)
or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first.
10. The hours during which construction activities causing the operation
of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair,
alteration, or demolition work are limited to Monday through
Saturday, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., or at any
time on Sundays or holidays.
11. The property owner/applicant shall remove the public hearing notice
board within three days of this project's approval.
12. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of City Planning,
Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works Department, and the
Fire Department.
13. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall record, and
provide the City with a conformed recorded copy of, a Covenant and
Agreement or similar document in a form approved by the City
Attorney, which restricts the rental of rooms or other portions of the
property under two or more separate agreements and prohibits use
of the property as a boarding or rooming house, except to the extent
otherwise permitted by the Diamond Bar Municipal Code or
applicable state or federal law.
B. FEES/DEPOSITS
1. Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to
Planning, Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works Department
and Mitigation Monitoring) at the established rates, prior to issuance
of building or grading permit (whichever comes first), as required by
the City. School fees as required shall be paid prior to the issuance
of building permit. In addition, the applicant shall pay all remaining
prorated City project review and processing fees prior to issuance of
grading or building permit, whichever comes first.
2. Prior to any plan check, all deposit accounts for the processing of
this project shall have no deficits.
C. TIME LIMITS
1. The approval of Development Review No. PL2019-143 expires
within two years from the date of approval if the use has not
been exercised as defined pursuant to Diamond Bar Municipal Code
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 49
9 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
(DBMC) Section 22.66.050(b)(1). In accordance with DBMC
Section 22.60.050(c), the applicant may request, in writing, a one -
year time extension for Planning Commission consideration. Such a
request must be submitted to the Planning Division prior to the
expiration date and be accompanied by the review fee in accordance
with the Fee Schedule in effect at the time of submittal.
D. SITE DEVELOPMENT
1. This approval is to convert an existing 492 square-foot garage into
living area and construct a 46 square-foot porch addition and
400 square-foot garage and a façade remodel to an existing
1,330 square-foot, single-story residence with an located at
20515 Flintgate Drive, as described in the staff report and depicted
on the approved plans on file with the Planning Division, subject to
the conditions listed herein.
2. The construction documents submitted for plan check shall be in
substantial compliance with the architectural plans approved by the
Planning Commission, as modified pursuant to the conditions below.
If the plan check submittal is not in substantial compliance with the
approved Development Review submittal, the plans may require
further staff review and re-notification of the surrounding property
owners, which may delay the project and entail additional fees.
3. To ensure compliance with the provisions of the Planning
Commission approval, a final inspection is required from the
Planning Division when work for any phase of the project has been
completed. The applicant shall inform the Planning Division and
schedule an appointment for such an inspection.
4. The above conditions shall run with the land and shall be binding
upon all future owners, operators, or successors thereto of the
property. Non-compliance with any condition of approval or
mitigation measure imposed as a condition of the approval shall
constitute a violation of the City’s Development Code. Violations
may be enforced in accordance with the provisions of the
Development Code.
5. Failure to comply with any of the conditions set forth above or as
subsequently amended in writing by the City, may result in failure to
obtain a building final and/or a certificate of occupancy until full
compliance is reached. The City’s requirement for full compliance
may require minor corrections and/or complete demolition of a non -
compliant improvement, regardless of costs incurred where the
project does not comply with design requirements and approvals that
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 50
10 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
the applicant agreed to when permits were pulled to construct the
project.
6. The project site shall be developed and maintained in substantial
conformance with the approved plans submitted to, approved, and
amended herein by the Planning Commission, collectively attached
referenced as site plans, floor plans, architectural elevations, and
landscape plans on file with the Planning Division, the conditions
contained herein, and the Development Code regulations.
7. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, air
conditioning condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and
adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete
or masonry walls, berms, and/or landscaping to the sa tisfaction of
the Planning Division.
8. All roof-mounted equipment shall be screened from public view.
9. All structures, including walls, trash enclosures, canopies, etc., shall
be maintained in a structurally sound, safe manner with a clean,
orderly appearance. All graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours by
the property owners/occupant.
10. All landscaping, structures, architectural features and public
improvements damaged during construction shall be repaired or
replaced upon project completion.
E. SOLID WASTE
1. The site shall be maintained in a condition, which is free of debris
both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of
the entitlement approved herein. The removal of all trash, debris,
and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be
done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted
waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide
collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from
residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the
City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste
contractor used has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar
to provide such services.
2. Mandatory solid waste disposal services shall be provided by the City
franchised waste hauler to all parcels/lots or uses affected by
approval of this project.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 51
11 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
II. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT, (909) 839-7040, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
A. GENERAL
1. An Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted concurrently with the
grading plan clearly detailing erosion control measures. These
measures shall be implemented during construction. The erosion
control plan shall conform to national Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) standards and incorporate the appropriate Best
Management Practices (BMP’s) as specified in the Storm Water
BMP Certification.
B. DRAINAGE
1. Detailed drainage system information of the lot with careful attention
to any flood hazard area shall be submitted. All drainage/runoff from
the development shall be conveyed from the site to the natural
drainage course. No on-site drainage shall be conveyed to adjacent
parcels, unless that is the natural drainage course.
III. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION,
(909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
General Conditions:
1. At the time of plan check submittal, plans and construction shall conform to
current State and Local Building Code (i.e., 2016 California Building Code
series will apply) requirements and all other applicable construction codes,
ordinances and regulations in effect.
2. Provisions for CALGreen shall be implemented onto plans and certification
shall be provided by a third party as required by the Building Division.
Specific water, waste, low VOC, and related conservation measures shall
be shown on plans. Construction shall conform to the current CALGreen
Code.
Plan Check – Items to be addressed prior to plan approval:
3. The minimum design load for wind in this area is 110 M.P.H. exposures “C”
and the site is within seismic zone D or E. The applicant shall submit
drawings and calculations prepared by a California State licensed
Architect/Engineer with wet stamp and signature.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 52
12 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
4. This project shall comply with the energy conservation requirements of the
State of California Energy Commission. All lighting shall be high efficacy or
equivalent per the current California Energy Code 119 and 150(k).
Permit – Items required prior to building permit issuance:
5. Solid waste management of construction material shall incorporate
recycling material collection per Diamond Bar Municipal Code 8.16 of
Title 8. The contractor shall complete all required forms and pay app licable
deposits prior to permit.
6. Prior to building permit issuance, all school district fees shall be paid.
Please obtain a form from the Building and Safety Division to take directly
to the school district.
7. AQMD notification is required at least 10 days prior to any demolition. Proof
of notification is required at permit issuance.
8. All workers on the job shall be covered by workman’s compensation
insurance under a licensed general contractor. Any changes to the
contractor shall be updated on the building permit.
Construction – Conditions required during construction:
9. All structures and property shall be maintained in a safe and clean manner
during construction. The property shall be free of debris, trash, and weeds.
10. All equipment staging areas shall be maintained in an orderly manner and
screened behind a minimum 6’ high fence.
11. The project shall be protected by a construction fence to the satisfaction of
the Building Official, and shall comply with the NPDES & BMP requirements
(sand bags, etc.). All fencing shall be view obstructing with opaque
surfaces.
12. The applicant shall contact Dig Alert and have underground utility locations
marked by the utility companies prior to any excavation. Contact Dig Alert
by dialing 811 or their website at www.digalert.org.
13. The applicant shall first request and secure approval from the City for any
changes or deviations from approved plans prior to proceeding with any
work in accordance with such changes or deviations.
14. All glazing in hazardous locations shall be labeled as safety glass. The
labeling shall be visible for inspection.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 53
13 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
15. Pursuant to California Residential Code (CRC) Section R315, carbon
monoxide detectors are required in halls leading to sleeping rooms.
16. Drainage patterns shall match the approved grading/drainage plan from the
Public Works/Engineering Department. Surface water shall drain away
from the building at a 2% minimum slope. The final as-built conditions shall
match the grading/drainage plan or otherwise approved as-built
grading/drainage plan.
17. Special inspections and structural observation will be required in
conformance with CBC 1704 to 1709.
18. All plumbing fixtures, including those in existing areas, shall be low-flow
models consistent with California Civil Code Section 1101.1 to 1101.8.
19. The garage floor being converted to habitable space shall be waterproofed
to prevent moisture intrusion.
20. All sleeping rooms shall be provided with a window that has adequate
emergency egress.
21. An occupancy separation shall be provided between the dwelling unit and
garage.
END
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 54
7.1.bPacket Pg. 55
7.1.c
Packet Pg. 56
7.1.c
Packet Pg. 57
7.1.c
Packet Pg. 58
7.1.c
Packet Pg. 59
7.1.c
Packet Pg. 60
7.1.c
Packet Pg. 61
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 7.2
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2020
CASE/FILE NUMBER: Development Review Planning Case No.
PL2019-138
PROJECT LOCATION:
2137 Rocky View Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (APN 8713-030-009)
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Rural Residential (RR)
ZONING DISTRICT: Rural Residential (RR)
PROPERTY OWNER:
Jonathan Samson, 2442 Alamo Heights Drive,
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
APPLICANT:
Walt Patroske, 2132 S Grove Avenue #F,
Ontario, CA 91761
SUMMARY:
The applicant is requesting approval of a Development Review (DR) application to
construct a 2,067 square-foot living space addition, a 118 square-foot front porch, a
180 square-foot second-story deck, a 353 square-foot lower level deck, a 60 square-
foot balcony, and an exterior and interior remodel to an existing 2,159 square-foot, two-
story, single-family residence on a 1.11 gross acre site.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment A) approving Development Review
No. PL2019-138, based on the findings of Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC)
Section 22.48, subject to conditions.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ~ 21810 COPLEY DRIVE ~ DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 ~ TEL. (909) 839-7030 ~ FAX (909) 861-3117
7.2
Packet Pg. 62
Development Review Planning Case No. PL2019-138
Page 2 of 9
BACKGROUND:
The project site is located in the Diamond Bar Country Estates (The Country), on the
west side of Rocky View Road, south of Lazy Trail Road. The property was developed
in 1977 under Los Angeles County standards with a 2,159 square -foot, single-family
residence and a 678 square-foot garage. There are no protected trees on the property.
The proposed project was approved by the Diamond Bar Country Estates Arc hitectural
Committee on May 8, 2019.
The property is legally described as Lot 131 of Tract No. 30091, and the Assessor’s
Parcel Number (APN) is 8713-030-009.
Site and Surrounding General Plan, Zoning and Land Uses
The image below highlights the subject property:
Site (Plan View) Aerial
7.2
Packet Pg. 63
Development Review Planning Case No. PL2019-138
Page 3 of 9
Project Site
Adjacent Property to South
Adjacent Property to North
7.2
Packet Pg. 64
Development Review Planning Case No. PL2019-138
Page 4 of 9
The following table summarizes the land use status of the subject property and its
surroundings:
General Plan Designation Zoning
District Land Use
Site Rural Residential RR Single-Family Residential
North Rural Residential RR Single-Family Residential
South Rural Residential RR Single-Family Residential
East Rural Residential RR Single-Family Residential
West Rural Residential RR Single-Family Residential
Project Description
Site Plan
The existing two-level home sits on split-level pads on a slightly descending slope with a
circular driveway at the front. A separate driveway leads to a front -facing garage. The
existing house is also oriented toward the front (east) property line , approximately
21 feet from the edge of the private street easement line . The house consists of three
bedrooms, three bathrooms, one powder room and a three-car garage.
The applicant is proposing to construct a 2,067 square -foot addition, 118 square-foot
front porch, 180 square-foot second-story deck, 353 square-foot lower level deck,
60 square-foot balcony, and an exterior and interior remodel to the existing residence.
The existing front porch will be redesigned with a taller, modern portico entry.
The height of the existing house is 31 feet. With the remodel, the height will be lowered
by a few inches to 30’-7”, as measured from the finished grade to the highest point of
the roofline.
Floor Plan
On the upper floor (street level), the existing family room and master bedroom are
proposed to be extended towards the existing rear deck area. The existing dining room
and front entry is proposed to be extended towards the front. The total square footage
being added to the upper floor is 587 square feet. On the lower floor, there is exist ing
880 square feet of habitable space that was never permitted. With the proposed
project, the applicant intends to permit the existing game room, bedroom and bathroom.
A 600 square-foot addition is also proposed to the existing 880 square feet. If the
project is approved and completed, the home will have a total of four bedrooms, three
bathrooms and a powder room.
7.2
Packet Pg. 65
Development Review Planning Case No. PL2019-138
Page 5 of 9
The floor area distribution is summarized below:
Grading Plan
The subject property is a rectangular-shaped lot. The existing house is situated on two
leveled pads. The property has a slightly descending slope that starts from the street
easement to the rear yard. There will be no grading nor site improvements proposed on
the property.
Architecture
The architecture of the existing house is a 1970s custom home with textured stucco,
vinyl windows and coral colored concrete tiles on a gabled roof. The proposed exterior
façade remodel will change the architectural style of the house to a contemporary
design, with grey concrete tile roofing, smooth stuccoed wall surfaces, casement
windows set flush with the outer walls, dark trim, metal awnings and railings. The
simple, yet clean color scheme and updated metal garage doors will further enhance
the minimalist style.
7.2
Packet Pg. 66
Development Review Planning Case No. PL2019-138
Page 6 of 9
Landscaping
Landscape plans are not required because the site is already developed, and because
the project is exempt from the City’s Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. The
ordinance would only apply if new or rehabilitated landscaping of 500 square feet or
more was being installed or altered. However, landscaping that is damaged during
construction will need to be restored upon project completion. Furthermore, the front
yard landscaping is currently void of live vegetation and is required to be restored upon
project completion. These requirements are included as a condition of approval.
Rendering of the Front Elevation
Rendering of the Rear Elevation
7.2
Packet Pg. 67
Development Review Planning Case No. PL2019-138
Page 7 of 9
ANALYSIS:
Review Authority
The proposed project requires a land use approval through the Development Review
process. The analysis that follows provides the basis for staff’s recommendation to
approve the Development Review application.
Development Review (DBMC Chapter 22.48)
Additions that are equal to or greater than 50 percent of the existing habitable floor area
of all existing structures on site or substantially change the appearance of an existing
residence require Planning Commission approval of a DR application. Development
Review approval is required to ensure compliance with the City’s General Plan policies,
development standards, and design guidelines, and to minimize adverse effects of the
proposed project upon the surrounding properties and the City in general.
As stated in Section 22.48.010 of the Development Code, the Development Review
process was established to ensure that new development and additions to existing
development are consistent with the General Plan “through the promotion of high
functional and aesthetic standards to complement and add to the economic, physical,
and social character” of Diamond Bar.
Development Standards: The following table compares the proposed project with the
City’s development standards for residential development in the RR zone:
Development Feature
Residential
Development
Standards
Existing Proposed
Meets
Requirements
Front Setback 30 feet 21’-6” 21’-6” No*
Side Setbacks
15 feet on one side,
10 feet on the other
10 feet - east side
57’-8” - west side
10 feet - east side
57’-8” - west side Yes
Side Yard Minimum
Between Adjoining
Structures
25 feet 25 feet - east side
69’-8”- west side
25 feet - east side
69’-8”- west side Yes
Rear Setback 25 feet 189’-2” 189’-2” Yes
Lot Coverage Maximum of 30% 12% 10.8% Yes
Max. Building Height 35 feet 31’ 30’-7” Yes
Parking 2-car garage 3-car garage 3-car garage Yes
* Existing legal nonconforming structure and does not further encroach into setback.
7.2
Packet Pg. 68
Development Review Planning Case No. PL2019-138
Page 8 of 9
Compatibility with Neighborhood
The project is located on an existing split-level pad, ranging between 9 to 12 feet below
street level. The project will not be intrusive to neighboring homes since the house is
already existing and the height will decrease by a few inches with the addition and
remodel. The proposed project will not block existing views from adjacent properties.
The adjacent homes to the north and south have views to the west and southwest. The
existing house to the east has views to the east.
Although the applicant is adding 2,067 square feet of living space, the house will be
similar in mass and scale to other existing homes on similar lots in The Country. The
architecture in The Country is eclectic, and includes a variety of architectural designs.
The scale and proportions of the proposed addition are well balanced and appropriate
for the site. In sum, the proposed project fits the character of the neighborhood on
which it is proposed.
• The addition will conform to all development standards, including setbacks (with the
exception of the pre-existing front setback), height and lot coverage;
• A gradual transition between the existing residence and addition is achieved through
appropriate setbacks and building height;
• The addition is visually integrated with the primary structure, by utilizing matching
colors and materials, and consistent architectural details, throughout the proposed
addition;
• Placement and relationship of windows, doors, and other window openings are
carefully integrated with the building’s overall design; and
• Roof pitch of the addition match the primary structure. The roofing material will be
updated with grey concrete tile roofing.
Additional Review
The Public Works Department and Building and Safety Division reviewed this project,
and their comments are included in the attached resolution as conditions of approval.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
On January 3, 2020, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a
1,000-foot radius of the project site. On January 3, 2020, the notice was published in
the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. A notice
display board was posted at the site, and a copy of the notice was posted at the City's
four designated community posting sites.
Public Comments Received
No comments have been received as of the publication date of this report.
7.2
Packet Pg. 69
Development Review Planning Case No. PL2019-138
Page 9 of 9
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
This project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be
Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to the provisions of Article
19 Section 15301(e) (additions to existing structures) of the CEQA Guidelines. No
further environmental review is required.
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Attachments:
A. Draft Resolution No. 2020-XX and Standard Conditions of Approval
B. Color and Material Board
C. Site Plan, Floor Plans, and Elevations
7.2
Packet Pg. 70
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
NO. PL2019-138 FOR A 2,067 SQUARE-FOOT ADDITION, 118 SQUARE-
FOOT FRONT PORCH, 180 SQUARE-FOOT SECOND-STORY DECK, 353
SQUARE-FOOT LOWER LEVEL DECK, 60 SQUARE-FOOT BALCONY, AND
AN EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR REMODEL TO AN EXISTING TWO-STORY,
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ON A 1.11 GROSS ACRE (48,352 SQUARE-
FOOT) LOT LOCATED AT 2137 ROCKY VIEW ROAD, DIAMOND BAR, CA
91765 (APN 8713-030-009).
A. RECITALS
1. The property owner, Jonathan Samson, and applicant, Walt Patroske, have
filed an application for Development Review No. PL2019-138 to construct a
2,067 square-foot addition, 118 square-foot front porch, 180 square-foot
second-story deck, 353 square-foot lower level deck, 60 square-foot
balcony, and an exterior and interior remodel located at 2137 Rocky View
Road, Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California. Hereinafter in this
Resolution, the subject Development Review shall be referred to as the
"Project."
2. The subject property consists of one parcel totaling 48,352 gross square
feet (1.11 gross acres). It is located in the Rural Residential (RR) zone with
an underlying General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential.
3. The legal description of the subject property is Lot 131 of Tract No. 30091.
The Assessor’s Parcel Number is 8713-030-009.
4. On January 3, 2020, public hearing notices describing the Project were
mailed to property owners within a 1,000-foot radius of the Project site. On
January 3, 2020, notification of the public hearing for this project was
published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspapers. Public notices were also posted at the project site and
the City’s four designated community posting sites.
5. On January 14, 2020, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar
conducted a duly noticed public hearing for the Project, solicited testimony
from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date.
B. RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 71
2 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set
forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; and
2. The Planning Commission hereby determines the Project to be
Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the provisions of Article 19, Section
15301(e) (additions to existing structures) of the CEQA Guidelines.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required.
C. FINDINGS OF FACT
Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein and as prescribed under
Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.48, this Planning Commission
hereby finds as follows:
Development Review Findings (DBMC Section 22.48.040)
1. The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the
applicable elements of the City's General Plan, City Design Guidelines, and
development standards of the applicable district, design guidelines, and
architectural criteria for special areas (e.g., theme areas, specific plans,
community plans, boulevards or planned developments):
The design of the Project is consistent with the applicable elements of the
City’s General Plan, City Design Guidelines and development standards.
The City’s General Plan Policy LU-P-56 requires that development on
privately-owned, residentially designated land in hillside areas shall be
compatible with the surrounding natural areas promoting design principles
such as minimizing grading, preserving existing vistas, incorporate site and
architectural design that is sensitive to the hillsides , and require fuel
modification. The Project does not propose any grading, will not block any
views, proposes a simple architectural design as not to detract from the
hillsides and will be required to implement fuel modification.
A gradual transition between the project and adjacent uses is achieved
through appropriate setbacks, building height, window and door placement,
and the proposed exterior remodel of the single-family residence
incorporates various details and architectural elements such as grey
concrete tile roofing, smooth stuccoed wall surfaces, casement windows set
flush with the outer walls, dark trim, metal awnings and railings , which
provide for a contemporary, minimalist style that complies with the City’s
Design Guidelines where architectural design should accentuate simplicity
of line and form, restrained and understated elegance, as opposed to the
overly ornate or monumental [City’s Design Guidelines A. Site Planning (2)
and B. Architecture (2)].
The Project complies with all development standards of the Rural
Residential zoning district by meeting all development standards such as
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 72
3 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
required setbacks, building height, and lot coverage. The project site is not
part of any theme area, specific plan, community plan, boulevard or planned
development.
2. The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with
the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development s, and
will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards;
The proposed addition and renovation will not interfere with the use and
enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments because the use
of the project site is designed for a single-family home and the surrounding
uses are also single-family homes.
The proposed single-family house will not interfere with vehicular or
pedestrian movements, such as access or other functional requirements of
a single-family home because it complies with the requirements for
driveway widths and exceeds the minimum number of required off -street
parking spaces.
3. The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with
the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain and
enhance the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated
by Chapter 22.48: Development Review Standards, the City’s Design
Guidelines, the City's General Plan, or any applicable specific plan;
The City’s General Plan Policy LU-P-56 requires that residential
development be compatible with the prevailing character of the surrounding
neighborhood in terms of building scale, density, massing, and design. The
City’s General Plan Goal CC-G-4 also requires the preservation of the scale
and character of existing residential neighborhoods and ensure sensitive
transitions between densities and uses. The City’s Design Guidelines
Architecture (1) requires compatibility with the surrounding character
including harmonious building style, form, size, color, material and roofline.
Although the applicant is adding 2,067 square feet of living space with a
total living space of 4,226 square feet, the home is still comparable in mass
and scale to existing homes on similar lots in The Country. The scale and
proportions of the proposed addition are well balanced and appropriate for
the 1.11-acre site. The contemporary building style, white smooth stucco
color, and gabled roofline is compatible with other homes in the
neighborhood since the architecture in The Country is eclectic, and includes
a variety of architectural designs. The Project minimizes negative impacts
on surrounding uses since the house is already existing and the height will
be lowered by a few inches with the addition and remodel. Additionally, the
Project will not block existing views from adjacent properties. In sum, the
Project fits the character of the neighborhood on which it is proposed.
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 73
4 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
4. The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable
environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors
through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, color, and will remain
aesthetically appealing;
The proposed exterior remodel and addition will not be intrusive to
neighboring homes and will be aesthetically appealing by integrating
updated materials such as, tile roofing, smooth stuccoed wall surfaces,
casement windows set flush with the outer walls, dark trim, metal awnings
and railings. The color scheme and updated metal garage doors will further
enhance the minimalist style. The scale and proportions of the proposed
home are well balanced and appropriate for the site.
5. The proposed development will not be detrimental to public health, safety
or welfare or materially injurious (e.g., negative effect on property values or
resale(s) of property) to the properties or improvements in the vicinity; and
Before the issuance of any City permits, the Project is required to comply
with all conditions within the approved resolution, and the Building and
Safety Division and Public Works Departments requirements.
Through the permit and inspection process, the referenced agencies will
ensure that the proposed project is not detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in
the vicinity.
6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The Project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as set forth under Article 19
Section 15301(e) (additions to existing structures) of the CEQA Guidelines.
Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth above, the Planning Commission
hereby approves this Application, subject to the following conditions:
1. Development shall substantially comply with the plans and documents
presented to the Planning Commission at the public hearing.
2. Prior to final inspection, the landscaping in the front yard shall be restored.
3. Standard Conditions. The applicant shall comply with the standard
development conditions attached hereto.
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 74
5 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
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 the property owner, Jonathan Samson, 2442 Alamo Heights Dr,
Diamond Bar, CA 91765; and applicant, Walt Patroske, 2132 S Grove
Ave #F, Ontario, CA 91761.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020, BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
By: ______________________________________
Naila Barlas, Chairperson
I, Greg Gubman, 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 14th day of January, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
ATTEST: ______________________________________
Greg Gubman, Secretary
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 75
6 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
USE PERMITS, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL NEW AND
REMODELED STRUCTURES
PROJECT #: Development Review No. PL2019-138
SUBJECT: Construction of a 2,067 square-foot addition, 118 square-foot front
porch, 180 square-foot second story deck, 60 square-foot balcony,
353 square-foot lower level deck and an exterior and interior remodel.
PROPERTY Jonathan Samson
OWNER: 2442 Alamo Heights Dr
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
APPLICANT: Walt Patroske
2132 S Grove Ave #F
Ontario, CA 91761
LOCATION: 2137 Rocky View Road, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
I. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION AT (909) 839-7030,
FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City,
and its officers, agents and employees, from any claim, action, or
proceeding to attack, set-aside, void or annul, the approval of
Development Review No. PL2019-138 brought within the time period
provided by Government Code Section 66499.37. In the event the
city and/or its officers, agents and employees are made a party of
any such action:
(a) Applicant shall provide a defense to the City defendants or at
the City's option reimburse the City its costs of defense,
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 76
7 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred in defense of
such claims.
(b) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered
against the City defendants. The City shall promptly notify the
applicant of any claim, action of proceeding, and shall
cooperate fully in the defense thereof.
2. This approval shall not be effective for any purpose until the applicant
and owner of the property involved have filed, within twenty-one
(21) days of approval of this Development Review No. PL2019-138,
at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department,
their affidavit stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all
the conditions of this approval. Further, this approval shall not be
effective until the applicants pay remaining City processing fees,
school fees and fees for the review of submitted reports.
3. All designers, architects, engineers, and contractors associated with
this project shall obtain a Diamond Bar Busin ess License; and a
zoning approval for those businesses located in Diamond Bar.
4. Signed copies of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2020-XX
and Standard Conditions shall be included on the plans (full size).
The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the
construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet
sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect.
5. Prior to the plan check, revised site plans and building elevations
incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for
Planning Division review and approval.
6. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being
commenced thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed.
7. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance
with the conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable
regulations.
8. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections
of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and
any applicable Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit
issuance.
9. All site, grading, landscape/irrigation, and roof plans, and elevation
plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of City
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 77
8 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment,
building, etc.,) or approved use has commenced, whichever comes
first.
10. The hours during which construction activities causing the operation
of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair,
alteration, or demolition work are limited to Monday through
Saturday, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., and are not
allowed at any time on Sundays or holidays.
11. The property owner/applicant shall remove the public hearing notice
board within three days of this project's approval.
12. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of City Planning,
Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works Department, and the
Fire Department.
13. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall record, and
provide the City with a conformed recorded copy of, a Covenant and
Agreement or similar document in a form approved by the City
Attorney, which restricts the rental of rooms or other portions of the
property under two or more separate agreements and prohibits use
of the property as a boarding or rooming house, except to the extent
otherwise permitted by the Diamond Bar Municipal Code or
applicable state or federal law.
B. FEES/DEPOSITS
1. Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to
Planning, Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works Department
and Mitigation Monitoring) at the established rates, prior to issuance
of building or grading permit (whichever comes first), as required by
the City. School fees as required shall be paid prior to the issuance
of building permit. In addition, the applicant shall pay all remaining
prorated City project review and processing fees prior to issuance of
grading or building permit, whichever comes first.
2. Prior to any plan check, all deposit accounts for the processing of
this project shall have no deficits.
C. TIME LIMITS
1. The approval of Development Review No. PL2019-138 expires
within two years from the date of approval if the use has not been
exercised as defined per Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC)
Section 22.66.050 (b)(1). In accordance with DBMC
Section 22.66.050(c), the applicant may request, in writing, a one -
year time extension for Planning Commission consideration. Such a
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 78
9 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
request must be submitted to the Planning Division prior to the
expiration date and be accompanied by the review fee in accordance
with the fee schedule in effect at the time of submittal.
D. SITE DEVELOPMENT
1. This approval is for the construction of a 2,067 square-foot addition,
118 square-foot front porch, 180 square-foot second story deck, 60
square-foot balcony, 353 square-foot lower level deck and an
exterior and interior remodel to an existing single-family residence
located at 2137 Rocky View Road, as described in the staff report
and depicted on the approved plans on file with the Planning
Division, subject to the conditions listed below.
2. The construction documents submitted for plan check shall be in
substantial compliance with the architectural plans approved by the
Planning Commission, as modified pursuant to the conditions below.
If the plan check submittal is not in substantial compliance with the
approved Development Review submittal, the plans may require
further staff review and re-notification of the surrounding property
owners, which may delay the project and entail additional fees.
3. To ensure compliance with the provisions of the Planning
Commission approval, a final inspection is required from the
Planning Division when work for any phase of the project has been
completed. The applicant shall inform the Planning Division and
schedule an appointment for such an inspection.
4. The above conditions shall run with the land and shall b e binding
upon all future owners, operators, or successors thereto of the
property. Non-compliance with any condition of approval or
mitigation measure imposed as a condition of the approval shall
constitute a violation of the City’s Development Code. Violations may
be enforced in accordance with the provisions of the Development
Code.
5. Failure to comply with any of the conditions set forth above or as
subsequently amended in writing by the City, may result in failure to
obtain a building final and/or a certificate of occupancy until full
compliance is reached. The City’s requirement for full compliance
may require minor corrections and/or complete demolition of a non -
compliant improvement, regardless of costs incurred where the
project does not comply with design requirements and approvals that
the applicant agreed to when permits were pulled to construct the
project.
6. The project site shall be developed and maintained in substantial
conformance with the approved plans submitted to, approved, and
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 79
10 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
amended herein by the Planning Commission, on file with the
Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, and the
Development Code regulations.
7. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, air
conditioning condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and
adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete
or masonry walls, berms, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of
the Planning Division.
8. All roof-mounted equipment shall be screened from public view.
9. All structures, including walls, trash enclosures, canopies, etc., shall
be maintained in a structurally sound, safe manner with a clean,
orderly appearance. All graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours by
the property owners/occupant.
10. All landscaping, structures, architectural features and public
improvements damaged during construction shall be repaired or
replaced upon project completion.
E. SOLID WASTE
1. The site shall be maintained in a condition, which is free of debris
both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of
the entitlement approved herein. The removal of all trash, debris,
and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be
done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted
waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide
collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from
residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the
City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste
contractor used has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar
to provide such services.
2. Mandatory solid waste disposal services shall be provided by the City
franchised waste hauler to all parcels/lots or uses affected by
approval of this project.
II. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
(909) 839-7040, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. GENERAL
1. An Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted clearly detailing erosion
control measures. These measures shall be implemented during
construction. The erosion control plan shall conform to National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards and
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 80
11 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
incorporate the appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP’s) as
specified in the Storm Water BMP Certification.
B. DRAINAGE
1. Detailed drainage system information of the lot with careful attention
to any flood hazard area shall be submitted. All drainage/runoff from
the development shall be conveyed from the site to the natural
drainage course. No on-site drainage shall be conveyed to adjacent
parcels, unless that is the natural drainage course.
III. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION,
(909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
General Conditions:
1. At the time of plan check submittal, plans and construction shall conform to
current State and Local Building Code (i.e. 2016 California Building Code
series will apply) requirements and all other applicable construction codes,
ordinances and regulations in effect.
2. Provisions for CAL Green shall be implemented onto plans and certification
shall be provided by a third party as required by the Building Division.
Specific water, waste, low VOC, and related conservation measures shall
be shown on plans. Construction shall conform to the current CAL Green
Code.
Plan Check – Items to be addressed prior to plan approval:
3. The minimum design load for wind in this area is 110 M.P.H. exposures “C”
and the site is within seismic zone D or E. The applicant shall submit
drawings and calculations prepared by a California State licensed
Architect/Engineer with wet stamp and signature.
4. This project shall comply with the energy conservation requirements of the
State of California Energy Commission. All lighting shall be high efficacy or
equivalent per the current California Energy Code 119 and 150(k).
5. Indoor air quality shall be provided consistent with ASHRAE 62.2 as
required per California Energy Code 150(o).
6. All balconies shall be designed for 1.5 times the live load for the area served
per CBC Table 1607.1 (emergency regulations).
7. All easements shall be shown on the site plan.
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 81
12 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
8. Fire Department approval shall be required. Contact the Fire Department to
check the fire zone for the location of your property. If this project is located
in High Hazard Fire Zone, it shall meet requirements of the fire zone per
CBC Chapter 7A.
a. All unenclosed under-floor areas shall be constructed as exterior wall.
b. All openings into the attic, floor and/or other enclosed areas shall be
covered with corrosion-resistant wire mesh not less than 1/4 inch or
more than 1/2 inch in any dimension except where such openings are
equipped with sash or door.
c. Eaves shall be protected.
d. Exterior construction shall be one-hour or non-combustible.
e. Fuel modification plans shall be approved through LA County Fire Fuel
Modification Unit.
f. LA County Fire shall approve plans for fire flow availability due to home
being over 3600 sf as required per CFC Appendix B105.1.
9. A soils report is required per CBC 1803 and all recommendations of the
soils report shall be adhered to.
10. Slope setbacks shall be consistent with California Building Code Figure
1805.3.1 and California Residential Code R403.1.7. Foundations shall
provide a minimum distance to daylight.
11. Plans shall reflect that the existing areas to be legalized shall be exposed
and where required to be retrofitted.
12. Electrical loading to the existing panel shall be justified for adequacy.
Permit – Items required prior to building permit issuance:
13. Solid waste management of construction material shall incorporate
recycling material collection per Diamond Bar Municipal Code 8.16 of Title
8. The contractor shall complete all required forms and pay applicable
deposits prior to permit.
14. Prior to building permit issuance, all school district fees shall be paid.
Please obtain a form from the Building and Safety Division to take directly
to the school district.
15. Submit grading plans clearly showing all finish elevations, drainage, and
retaining wall locations. No building permits shall be issued prior to
submitting a pad certification.
16. AQMD notification is required at least 10 days prior to any demolition. Proof
of notification is required at permit issuance.
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 82
13 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
17. All workers on the job shall be covered by workman’s compensation
insurance under a licensed general contractor. Any changes to the
contractor shall be updated on the building permit.
Construction – Conditions required during construction:
18. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until all California Building
Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been met. The buildings
shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy.
19. All structures and property shall be maintained in a safe and clean manner
during construction. The property shall be free of debris, trash, and weeds.
20. Existing fencing shall remain in-place during construction including pool
barrier fencing. Any alteration of the fencing may result in a discontinuation
of construction until the fences are returned to its original state.
21. All equipment staging areas shall be maintained in an orderly manner and
screened behind a minimum 6’ high fence.
22. The project shall be protected by a construction fence to the satisfaction of
the Building Official, and shall comply with the NPDES & BMP requirements
(sand bags, etc.). All fencing shall be view obstructing with opaque
surfaces.
23. The applicant shall contact Dig Alert and have underground utility locations
marked by the utility companies prior to any excavation. Contact Dig Alert
by dialing 811 or their website at www.digalert.org.
24. The applicant shall first request and secure approval from the City for any
changes or deviations from approved plans prior to proceeding with any
work in accordance with such changes or deviations.
25. All glazing in hazardous locations shall be labeled as safety glass. The
labeling shall be visible for inspection.
26. Pursuant to California Residential Code (CRC) Section R315, carbon
monoxide detectors are required in halls leading to sleeping rooms.
27. Drainage patterns shall match the approved grading/drainage plan from the
Public Works/Engineering Department. Surface water shall drain away
from the building at a 2% minimum slope. The final as-built conditions shall
match the grading/drainage plan or otherwise approved as -built
grading/drainage plan.
28. Decks, roofs, and other flat surfaces shall slope at least 1/4”/ft with
approved and listed water proofing material. Guardrails shall be provided
for these surfaces at least 42” minimum in height, 4” maximum spacing
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 83
14 PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
between rails, and capable of resisting at least 20 pounds per lineal foot of
lateral load.
29. Special inspections and structural observation will be required in
conformance with CBC 1704 to 1709.
30. All plumbing fixtures, including those in existing areas, shall be low-flow
models consistent with California Civil Code Section 1101.1 to 1101.8.
END
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 84
7.2.bPacket Pg. 85
PROPOSED ADDITION / REMODEL
D E S I G N
WALT PATROSKE
7.2.cPacket Pg. 86
A2UPPER FLOORDEMO PLANPROPOSED ADDITION / REMODEL
D E S I G N
WALT PATROSKEUPPER FLOOR DEMOLITION PLAN7.2.cPacket Pg. 87
A3UPPER FLOORPLANPROPOSED ADDITION / REMODEL
D E S I G N
WALT PATROSKEUPPER FLOOR PLAN7.2.cPacket Pg. 88
A4LOWER FLOORPLANPROPOSED ADDITION / REMODEL
D E S I G N
WALT PATROSKETO BE LEGALIZEDLOWER FLOOR PLAN7.2.cPacket Pg. 89
A5ROOFPLANPROPOSED ADDITION / REMODEL
D E S I G N
WALT PATROSKEROOF PLAN7.2.cPacket Pg. 90
A6EXTERIORELEVATIONSPROPOSED ADDITION / REMODEL
D E S I G N
WALT PATROSKEEAST ELEVATION(FRONT)NORTH ELEVATION(RIGHT SIDE)7.2.cPacket Pg. 91
SOUTH ELEVATION(LEFT SIDE)WEST ELEVATION(REAR)A7EXTERIORELEVATIONSPROPOSED ADDITION / REMODEL
D E S I G N
WALT PATROSKE
7.2.cPacket Pg. 92
NO.DOORDOORTHICKMATERIALMATERIALFRAMEFINISHFIRERATINGREMARKSQUANTITYWIDTHHEIGHTDOOR TYPESHARDWAREPROPOSED ADDITION / REMODEL
D E S I G N
WALT PATROSKE 1. Landings or floors at the required egress door shall not of the threshold. The exterior landing or floor shall notthreshold provided the door does not swing over theNOTES: be more than 1 ½ inches lower than the topbe more than 7 3/4 inches below the top of thelower landing or floor. R311.3.1THRESHOLDS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING (R311.3.1)1. 3/4 INCHES MAX. AT SLIDING DOORS2. 1/2 INCHES MAX. AT ALL OTHER DOORS3. THRESHOLDS > 1/4 INCHES SHALL BE BEVELED AT 1:24. 7 3/4 INCHES MAX. THRESHOLD DROP EXTERIOR DOORS THAT ARE NOT A COMPONENT OF A MEANS OF EGRESS AND DO NOT SWING OVER LANDING OR STEP7.2.cPacket Pg. 93
MEANS OF EGRESS1. Openable escape opening shall meeting all of the following: R310a. A net clear opening area of not less than 5.7 sq. ft. b. Minimum clear opening height of 24 inches.c. Minimum clear opening width of 20 inches.d. the bottom of window opening shall not be moree. Window control opening device shall not reduce the requiredwindow R 312.2.2.LIGHT & VENTILATION2. Exterior glazed openings of habitable rooms for natural lightshall be minimum 8% of the room floor3. Openable ventilation area of habitable rooms must beroom floor area. R303. area. (5.0 sq. ft. escape for grade - floor window).than 44 inches from the floor.net clear opening area of the 4% or more of theWINDOW OPENING CONTROL DEVICES4. Window opening control devices shall comply with ASTM F 2090. The window opening control device, after operation to release the control device allowing the window to fully open, shall not reduce the minimum net clear opening area of the window unit to lessthan the area required by Section R310.1.1 CRC.*SEAL ALL TYVEKâ JOINTS AND PENETRATIONS WITH APPROVED TAPE. (ex. DUPONT CONTRACTORTAPE)*FASTEN TYVEKâ TO SHEATHING WITH LARGE HEAD NAILS OR USE NAILS WITH LARGE PLASTICWASHER HEADS. (ex. DUPONT WRAPCAPS)*LOCAL LAWS, ZONING, AND BUILDING CODES VARY AND THEREFORE GOVERNS OVER MATERIALSELECTION AND DETAILING SHOWN BELOW.*INSTALL STUCCO ACCORDING TO MANUFACTURER'S WRITTEN INSTRUCTIONSCAULKINGRESIDENTIAL WOOD FRAME STRUCTURE w/ STUCCOINSTALL TYVEKÒ FLEXWRAPÔAROUND PERIMETER OF OPENINGLAP & TAPE TYVEKAT JOINTS (UPPER SHEETOVER LOWER SHEET)MINIMALLY EXPANDINGPOLYURETHANE FOAM ORAPPROVED CAULK(AROUND WINDOW RSO)WRAP TYVEKâ INTOOPENING & TAPE TOSILL (ESP. @ CORNERS)USING TYVEKÒ FLEXWRAPÔGENERAL NOTESWINDOW WITHINTEGRAL MOUNTINGFLANGETYPICAL WALLFINISH COATBROWN COATSCRATCH COATWIRE LATHWEATHER RESISTIVE BARRIER(TYVEK HOMEWRAP RECOMMENDED)TYVEK STUCCOWRAPSHEATHING2 x WOOD STUDSw/ BATT INSULATIONGYPSUM BOARDFASTEN TYVEKÒ FLEXWRAPÔCORNER USING MECHANICALFASTENER*SEAL ALL TYVEKâ JOINTS OR PENETRATIONS WITH APPROVED TAPE. (ex. DUPONT CONTRACTOR TAPE)*FASTEN TYVEKâ AND RIGID INSULATION TO STEEL STUDS USING SCREWS W/ WASHERS. (ex. DUPONT WRAPCAPS)*LOCAL LAWS, ZONING, AND BUILDING CODES VARY AND THEREFORE GOVERNS OVER MATERIAL SELECTION AND DETAILING SHOWN BELOW.GENERAL NOTESMINIMALLY EXPANDINGPOLYURETHANE FOAM ORAPPROVED CAULK(AROUND WINDOW RSO)WINDOW WITHINTEGRAL MOUNTINGFLANGEINSTALL TYVEKâ FLEXWRAPÔOVER MOUNTING FLANGE. LAPTYVEKâ & TAPE JOINTS.CAULKINGTYPICAL WALLFINISH COATBROWN COATSCRATCH COATWIRE LATHWEATHER RESISTIVE BARRIER(TYVEK HOMEWRAP RECOMMENDED)TYVEK STUCCOWRAPSHEATHING2 x WOOD STUDSw/ BATT INSULATIONGYPSUM BOARDRESIDENTIAL WOOD FRAME STRUCTURE w/ STUCCOR E M A R K SFINISHFRAMEWINDOWMATERIALMATERIALFRAMESIZEQUANTITYWINDOW TYPESLETTERWINDOWSIZEPROPOSED ADDITION / REMODEL
D E S I G N
WALT PATROSKE
7.2.cPacket Pg. 94
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 7.3
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2020
CASE/FILE NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit Planning Case No.
PL2019-158
PROJECT LOCATION:
237 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard, Suite A
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
(APN 8717-008-019)
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Town Center Mixed Use
ZONING DISTRICT: Regional Commercial (C-3)
PROPERTY OWNER:
Diamond Springs, LLC
9034 W. Sunset Boulevard
West Hollywood, CA 90069
APPLICANT:
Anita Ortega for Phenix Salon Suites
19850 Blue Ridge Road
Rowland Heights, CA 91748
SUMMARY:
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to operate
massage establishment uses in three suites (#110, #118, and #119) at Phenix Salon
Suites, located at Diamond Bar Ranch shopping center.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment 1) approving Conditional Use Permit
No. PL2019-158, based on the findings of Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC)
Section 22.58, subject to conditions.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ~ 21810 COPLEY DRIVE ~ DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 ~ TEL. (909) 839-7030 ~ FAX (909) 861-3117
7.3
Packet Pg. 95
Conditional Use Permit Planning Case No. PL2019-158
Page 2 of 8
BACKGROUND:
The project site is located at the Diamond Bar Ranch shopping center on the westerly
side of Diamond Bar Boulevard, between Gentle Springs Lane and Golden Springs
Drive. The center consists of a recently renovated 93,835 square-foot, multi-tenant
commercial building (previously operated by Kmart and currently occupied by Sprouts
and Ross Dress For Less), a 4,200 square-foot building (occupied by Chipotle Mexican
Grill and Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf), and a 2,790 square-foot fast food restaurant
(occupied by The Habit Burger Grill). Phenix Salon Suites occupies 5,568 square feet
of the shopping center.
The site shares reciprocal parking and access with the Diamond Bar Plaza shopping
center to the south, anchored by Ken’s Ace Hardware and AutoZone; and the
McDonald’s restaurant at the corner of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Gentle Springs
Lane. The subject property does not share any common boundaries with the 76 gas
station nor the Walnut Valley Water District pump station, which is in the immediate
vicinity. There are 573 total off-street parking spaces on site, inclusive of Diamond Bar
Plaza shopping center and the McDonald’s site.
Site and Surrounding General Plan, Zoning and Land Uses
The subject property is located along the Diamond Bar Boulevard commercial corridor
between Golden Springs Drive and the Pomona Freeway (SR 60) flyover. The site is
surrounded on three sides by a mix of retail stores, a motel, restaurants, gas stations
and other automotive services. To the southwest is the Fall Creek condominium
complex.
Aerial View of Shopping Center
7.3
Packet Pg. 96
Conditional Use Permit Planning Case No. PL2019-158
Page 3 of 8
The following table describes the surrounding land uses located adjacent to the subject
property:
General Plan Designation Zoning Land Uses
Site Town Center Mixed Use C-3 Supermarket, Retail,
Restaurants, Personal Services
North Town Center Mixed Use C-3 Restaurants, Motel, Tire Center
South Town Center Mixed Use C-3 Retail, Restaurants, Personal
Services
East Town Center Mixed Use C-3 Retail, Service Stations,
Restaurants
West High-Density Residential RMH Townhomes
Project Description
Phenix Salon Suites is a franchise with 250 locations nationwide, that offers beauty and
wellness services such as nails, hair, facials, massage, tanning, eyebrows and
eyelashes. Phenix Salon Suites offers salon and business professionals with individual,
smaller lease spaces to operate their own business without the expense of facility
management and maintenance. This particular salon consists of 33 individual suites, of
which 22 are currently occupied and open for business. The hours of operation are
seven days a week from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.
The applicant is requesting approval for massage establishment uses in three suites
(#110, #118, and #119). Each suite is 110 square feet in size. Services will be offered
only during operating hours from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Each suite will consist of a massage
table, chair, sink, and curtain.
Storefront of Existing Business
7.3
Packet Pg. 97
Conditional Use Permit Planning Case No. PL2019-158
Page 4 of 8
The photos below are posted on the Phenix Salon Suites website and demonstrates
how individual suites are utilized at other locations.
Phenix Salon Suites Floor Plan N
118
110
119
Entry
Lobby Hair Salon
7.3
Packet Pg. 98
Conditional Use Permit Planning Case No. PL2019-158
Page 5 of 8
ANALYSIS:
Review Authority (DBMC Section 22.58)
A CUP is required for uses whose effect on the surrounding area cannot be determined
before being analyzed for suitability at a particular location.
When reviewing a CUP, consideration is given to the location, design, configuration,
operational characteristics and potential impacts to determine whether or not the
proposed use will pose a detriment to the public health, safety and welfare. If it can be
found that the proposed use is likely to be compatible with its surroundings, the
Commission may approve the proposed use subject to conditions stipulating the
manner in which the use must be conducted. If the Commission finds that the proposed
use is likely to be detrimental to the general peace, health and general welfare, then it
must deny the request.
When a CUP is approved, it runs with the land and all conditions placed on the CUP are
binding on all successors in interest. In other words, if the owner of the proposed
massage establishments were to close the business, a new tenant could locate in the
space and operate the same type of business. The new tenant would be required to
comply with the same conditions as the previous tenant and would not be permitted to
expand the business without full review and approval by the Planning Commission. In
this case, since all businesses are located and managed under Phenix Salon Suites, if
one massage establishment closes their business, a new tenant may operate a
massage establishment in a different suite within the facility. However, only a maximum
of three 110 square-foot tenant spaces shall be permitted for massage establishment
uses at the Phenix Salon Suites at any given time.
Nail Salon Massage Establishment
7.3
Packet Pg. 99
Conditional Use Permit Planning Case No. PL2019-158
Page 6 of 8
Business Regulations for Massage Establishments (DBMC Section 5.08.070 and
State Assembly Bill 1147
State Assembly Bill 1147 went into effect on January 1, 2015, which restored the land
use authority back to local governments, as well as assigning certain responsibilities of
massage regulation to the State. The State is able to regulate the certification of
massage technicians through the California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC). This
organization requires massage technicians to meet specific State requirements, such as
a minimum age requirement of 18 years, a minimum amou nt of education and training
hours, and fingerprint and background checks by the Department of Justice. Local
governments are able to regulate massage businesses through their land-use authority
and business licensing regulations to ensure that massage establishments will be
operating in its intended manner. In 2016, the City amended sections of the Municipal
Code to restore its authority on the regulation of massage establishments proposed
within the City.
Business Licensing
When the City amended Title 5 of the Municipal Code, it revised provisions relating to
the issuance of business licenses and operational requirements of massage
establishment businesses and the practice of massage. The amendment created a
more robust process before a business license can be issued. Business owner(s) for
massage establishments are required to submit documentation prior to the issuance of
a business license, including, but not limited to:
• Background check of the owner(s);
• Proof of CAMTC certification;
• Personal information such as current and previous residential and business
addresses;
• Complete business, occupation and employment history; and
• Such other information and identification deemed necessary by the Sheriff's
Department.
Operational Requirements
Specific operational requirements were included to ensure that all proposed facilities are
operated adequately. Each massage establishment business will be responsible to
comply with these operational requirements, such as specific building and facility
requirements, maintenance of the suite and related equipment, personnel lists, hours of
operation, posting requirements, acknowledgement of what is considered prohibited
conduct and inspection requirements. Future massage establishment businesses
located within the Phenix Salon Suites will be subject to all business license and land
use requirements to comply with current regulations.
7.3
Packet Pg. 100
Conditional Use Permit Planning Case No. PL2019-158
Page 7 of 8
Parking
Staff does not foresee any parking issues resulting from the proposed use , since the
proposed massage establishment businesses will be located within Phenix Salon
Suites. Massage uses will not change the parking requirements for personal service
uses at Phenix Salon Suites, and the proposed businesses will not increase any square
footage to the existing building.
Compatibility with Neighborhood
Diamond Bar Ranch shopping center has a variety of uses, including restaurants, retail
uses, personal services, and a supermarket. The proposed massage establishments
will be located within an existing business with other personal service uses such as hair
and nail salons, and is located inside of the Diamond Bar Ranch shopping center.
Additionally, Phenix Salon Suites is equipped with security cameras throughout the
facility to protect its employees and customers. A security camera is placed in the front
and rear entrances, and at each of the four corners in the hallway. Given the proposed
hours of operation, the availability of parking, security measures and types of adjoining
uses, it is reasonable to conclude that the massage establishments will be compatible
with the other uses in the center.
Locations of Security Cameras
7.3
Packet Pg. 101
Conditional Use Permit Planning Case No. PL2019-158
Page 8 of 8
Additional Review
The Building and Safety Division reviewed this project and included their comments in
the attached resolution as conditions of approval.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
On January 3, 2020, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a
700-foot radius of the project site. On January 3, 2020, the notice was published in the
Inland Valley Daily Tribune and San Gabriel Valley Tribune newspapers; the project site
was posted with a notice display board; and a copy of the public notice was posted at
the City’s four designated community posting sites.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
This project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City has determined the project to be
Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to the provisions of
Article 19 Section 15301(a) (Interior alterations involving partitions and electrical
conveyances) of the CEQA Guidelines. No further environmental review is required.
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Attachments:
A. Draft Resolution No. 2020-XX and Standard Conditions of Approval
B. Site Plan and Floor Plans
7.3
Packet Pg. 102
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. PL2019-158, TO OPERATE MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT USES IN
THREE SUITES (#110, #118, AND #119) AT PHENIX SALON SUITES,
LOCATED WITHIN A 93,835 SQUARE-FOOT, SHOPPING CENTER AT 237
SOUTH DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, SUITE A, DIAMOND BAR, CA
(APNS 8717-008-019).
A. RECITALS
1. Property owner, Diamond Springs, LLC, and applicant, Anita Ortega for
Phenix Salon Suites, have filed an application for Conditional Use Permit
No. PL 2019-158 to operate massage establishment uses in three suites
(#110, #118, and #119) at Phenix Salon Suites located within an existing
shopping center. The project site is more specifically described as 237 S.
Diamond Bar Blvd., Suite A, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California.
Hereinafter in this resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit shall
collectively be referred to as the “Project” or “Proposed Use.”
2. The subject property is comprised of an 8.14 gross acre parcel. It is located
in the Regional Commercial (C-3) zone with a General Plan land use
designation of Town Center Mixed Use.
3. The Assessor’s Parcel Number is 8717-008-019.
4. On January 3, 2020, notification of the public hearing for this project was
published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspapers. On January 3, 2020, public hearing notices were
mailed to property owners within a 700-foot radius of the Project site and
posted at the City’s designated community posting sites.
5. On January 14, 2020, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar
conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all
interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date.
B. RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set
forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
7.3.a
Packet Pg. 103
2
PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
2. The Planning Commission hereby determines the Project to be
Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the provisions of Article 19,
Section 15301(a) (Interior alterations involving partitions and electrical
conveyances) of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required.
C. FINDINGS OF FACT
Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein and as prescribed under
Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.58, this Planning Commission
hereby finds and approves as follows:
Conditional Use Permit Review Findings (DBMC Section 22.58)
1. The Proposed Use is allowed within the subject zoning district with the
approval of a conditional use permit and complies with all other applicable
provisions of this Development Code and the Municipal Code.
Pursuant to DBMC Section 22.10.030 Table 2-6, personal services -
massage establishments—as defined by DBMC Section 22.80.020—is
permitted in the C-3 zoning district with approval of a conditional use permit.
The proposed massage establishments will be located within an existing
business with other personal service uses such as hair and nail salons, and
is located inside of the Diamond Bar Ranch shopping center.
Pursuant to DBMC Section 5.08.070, massage establishment businesses
will be subject to all business license and operational land use requirements
to ensure that all proposed facilities are operated adequately.
2. The Proposed Use is consistent with the general plan and any applicable
specific plan.
The Proposed Use is consistent with General Plan Goal CC-G-11: (“Support
an intense mix of active uses on both sides of Diamond Bar Boulevard
within the Town Center focus area”) in that the proposed massage
establishment uses will provide a service to Diamon d Bar residents not
available in the immediate vicinity. The Proposed Use is consistent with
General Plan Goal CC-P-42: (“Prioritize retail and other uses that promote
pedestrian activity on the ground floor of buildings”) in that the Proposed
Use will be located on the ground floor of an existing business.
The Project site is not subject to the provisions of any specific plan.
3. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the Proposed
Use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity.
7.3.a
Packet Pg. 104
3
PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
The Proposed Use is located within a multi-tenant shopping center occupied
by a variety of uses including restaurants, retail uses, personal services,
and a supermarket. The proposed massage establishments will be located
within an existing business with other personal service uses such as hair
and nail salons, and is located inside of the Diamond Bar Ranch shopping
center. The Proposed Use complies with the City’s Development Code
parking requirement as well as parking demand. The Proposed Use will
only operate during operating hours of Phenix Salon Suites from 8 a.m. to
8 p.m.
Given the proposed hours of operation, the availability of parking, and types
of adjoining uses, it is reasonable to conclude that the massage
establishments will be compatible with the other uses in the center.
Through compliance with the conditions of approval stipulating the manner
in which the use must be conducted, the Proposed Use will be compatible
with the other uses within the shopping center.
4. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of
use being proposed, including access, provision of utilities, compatibility
with adjoining land uses, and the absence of physical constraints.
The Proposed Use is physically suitable within the subject site because it
will be located in an existing building that is currently operating with personal
service uses, and no additional square footage is being proposed. In
addition, the Proposed Use is intended to operate within an existing
shopping center and will be using existing access and parking in the center.
5. Granting the conditional use permit will not be detrimental to the public
interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or injurious to persons,
property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the
property is located.
Prior to the issuance of any city permits, the Project is required to comply
with all conditions of approval within the attached resolution, and the
Building and Safety Division.
6. The proposed Project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The proposed use is categorically exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as set forth under Article 19
Section 15301(a) (Interior alterations involving partitions and electrical
conveyances) of the CEQA Guidelines.
7.3.a
Packet Pg. 105
4
PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
D. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth above, the Planning Commission
hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. PL2019-158 subject to the following
conditions:
1. This approval is for the establishment and operation of massage
establishment uses in three suites (#110, #118, and #119) at Phenix Salon
Suites as described in the application on file with the Planning Division, the
Planning Commission staff report for Conditional Use Permit
No. PL2019-158 dated January 14, 2020, and the Planning Commission
minutes pertaining thereto, hereafter referred to as the “Use.”
2. The Use shall substantially conform to the approved plans as submitted and
approved by the Planning Commission and on file with the Community
Development Department.
3. This Conditional Use Permit shall be valid only for 237 S. Diamond Bar
Blvd., Suite A, as depicted on the approved plans on file with the Planning
Division. Only three 110 square-foot tenant spaces shall be permitted for
massage establishment uses at a given time. If the Proposed Use expands
into additional tenant spaces, the approved Conditional Use Permit shall
terminate and a new Conditional Use Permit, subject to Planning
Commission approval shall be required for the new location.
4. If, at any time, the City finds that the Use is the cause of a parking deficiency
or other land use impact, the Community Development Director may refer
the matter back to the Planning Commission to consider amending this
Conditional Use Permit to address such impacts.
5. No changes to the approved scope of services comprising the use shall be
permitted unless the applicant first applies for an amendment to this
Conditional Use Permit, pays all application processing fees and receives
approval from the Planning Commission.
6. Prior to operation, each massage establishment business shall apply for a
Diamond Bar Business License and related documentation required
pursuant to DBMC Section 5.08.070.
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 the property owner, Diamond Springs, LLC, 9034 W. Sunset Blvd,
West Hollywood, CA 90069; and applicant, Anita Ortega for Phenix
Salon Suites, 19850 Blue Ridge Rd, Rowland Heights, CA 91748.
7.3.a
Packet Pg. 106
5
PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2020, BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
By: ______________________________________
Naila Barlas, Chairperson
I, Greg Gubman, 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 14th day of January, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
ATTEST: ___________________________
Greg Gubman, Secretary
7.3.a
Packet Pg. 107
6
PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
USE PERMITS, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL
NEW AND REMODELED STRUCTURES
PROJECT #: Conditional Use Permit No. PL2019-158
SUBJECT: To operate massage establishment uses in three suites
(#110, #118, and #119) at Phenix Salon Suites
PROPERTY Diamond Springs, LLC
OWNER(S): 9034 W. Sunset Boulevard
West Hollywood, CA 90069
APPLICANT: Anita Ortega for Phenix Salon Suites
19850 Blue Ridge Road
Rowland Heights, CA 91748
LOCATION: 237 S. Diamond Bar Blvd., Suite A, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION AT (909) 839-7030, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and
its officers, agents and employees, from any claim, action, or proceeding
to attack, set-aside, void, or annul the approval of Conditional Use Permit
No. PL2019-158 brought within the time period provided by Government
Code Section 66499.37. In the event the city and/or its officers, agents
and employees are made a party of any such action:
7.3.a
Packet Pg. 108
7
PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
(a) Applicant shall provide a defense to the City defendants or at the
City's option reimburse the City its costs of defense, including
reasonable attorneys fees, incurred in defense of such claims.
(b) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against
the City defendants. The City shall promptly notify the applicant
of any claim, action of proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the
defense thereof.
2. This approval shall not be effective for any purpose until the applicant
and owner of the property involved have filed, within twenty-one
(21) days of approval of this Conditional Use Permit No. PL2019-158 at
the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department, their
affidavit stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all the
conditions of this approval. Further, this approval shall not be effective
until the applicants pay remaining City processing fees, school fees and
fees for the review of submitted reports.
3. The business owners and all designers, architects, engineers, and
contractors associated with this project shall obtain a Diamond Bar
Business License for those businesses located in Diamond Bar.
4. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced
thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed.
5. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance with
the conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable regulations.
6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of
the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and any
applicable Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
7. To ensure compliance with all conditions of approval and applicable
codes, the Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to periodic review. If
non-compliance with conditions of approval occurs, the Planning
Commission may review the Conditional Use Permit. The Commission
may revoke or modify the Conditional Use Permit.
8. Property owner/applicant shall remove the public hearin g notice board
within three (3) days of this project's approval.
9. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of City Planning,
Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works Department, and the Fire
Department.
B. FEES/DEPOSITS
7.3.a
Packet Pg. 109
8
PC Resolution No. 2020-XX
1. Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to
Planning, Building and Safety Divisions, and Public Works Department)
at the established rates, prior to issuance of building permits, as required
by the City. School fees as required shall be paid prior to the issuance
of building permit. In addition, the applicant shall pay all remaining
prorated City project review and processing fees prior to issuance of
grading or building permit, whichever comes first.
2. Prior to any plan check, all deposit accounts for the processing of this
project shall have no deficits.
C. TIME LIMITS
1. The approval of Conditional Use Permit No. PL2019-158 shall expire
within one (1) year from the date of approval if the use has not been
exercised as defined per DBMC Section 22.66.050 (b)(1). The applicant
may request in writing a one year time extension subject to DBMC
Section 22.60.050(c) for Planning Commission approval.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION,
(909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. All work shall be in conformance with the 2020 California Building Code series.
2. No construction shall occur as a result of this permit.
END
7.3.a
Packet Pg. 110
A1.01SCALE: 1" = 100'-0"SITE PLAN (FROM LANDLORD)NORTHPHENIX SALONTENANT SPACE 7.3.bPacket Pg. 111
A3.09TYP.A3.0A3.0171111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111122183333333444444445666666667777777771A4.032A4.054A4.0986A4.0710A4.01112A4.0A4.0161513A4.01418A4.0A5.13A5.15 FLOOR PLANA2.0SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4GENERAL NOTESWALL TYPESSCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"TYPE 1-TYP. INT. WALLDIMENSION KEYPLAN KEY NOTESSCALE: 3/4 = 1'-0"TYP. INT. PARTITION SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"TYPE 2-SOUND WALLA2.01SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"GENERAL WALL NOTESSCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"TYPICAL SLAB INFILL DETAILA2.0SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"3SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"TYPE 3-EXIST. DEMISING W.NORTHSCALE: 3/4 = 1'-0"TYP. TOP OF WALL BRACING DETAILA2.02NO SMOKINGNO SMOKING SIGNAGETYPE 7-FURRED INT. WALLEXISTING SLAB NOTESSCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"TYPE 5-DOOR INFILLSCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"TYPE 4-EXIST. EXT. W.TYPE 6-EXIST. EXT. WALLSCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"TYPE 8-6" INT. WALL91765
DIAMOND BAR, CA
237 SOUTH DIAMOND
BAR BLVD.
7.3.b
Packet Pg. 112
7.3.b
Packet Pg. 113
7.3.b
Packet Pg. 114
7.3.b
Packet Pg. 115
Project Status Report CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
January 14, 2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
LEGEND PH = PUBLIC HEARING
X = NON PUBLIC HEARING
AP = ASSIGNED PLANNER
PC = PLANNING COMMISSION
AR = ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
CC = CITY COUNCIL
PROPERTY LOCATION
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW File # AP Applicant PC
1/14/20
CC
1/21/20
PC
1/28/20
CC
2/4/20
PC
2/11/20
CC
2/18/20
20515 Flintgate
(Convert garage into living space and
addition)
DR PL2019-143 NTE Patricio Culqui PH
237 S. Diamond Bar Blvd.
(Massage at Phenix Salon)
CUP PL2019-158 MN Anita Ortega PH
2137 Rocky View
(Addition and remodel to single family
residence)
DR PL2019-138 MN Walt Patroske PH
2432 Indian Creek
(New single family residence)
DR PL2018-226 MN Jeffrey Sun PH
Annual General Plan Status Report GL Citywide X
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
Property Location AP Applicant
NONE
PENDING ITEMS
Property Location File # AP Applicant Status
Crooked Creek
(11-unit subdivision)
TTM, DR, CUP, TP
PL2017-203
MN Under review
800 N. Diamond Bar Blvd.
(Sign program)
CSP PL2019-164 MN Raj Panchal Incomplete letter sent 10/1/19 – waiting for additional information
900 N. Diamond Bar Blvd.
(Sign program)
CSP PL2019-165 NTE Raj Panchal Second incomplete letter sent 12/5/19 – waiting for additional information
1111 N. Diamond Bar Blvd.
(New Single family residence)
GPA/ZC/DR PL2015-253 GL Creative Design
Associates
Sixth incomplete letter sent 12/18/19 - waiting for additional information
2825 S. Diamond Bar Blvd.
(New gym)
CUP PL2019-103 NTE Chase Villafana Incomplete letter sent 7/1/10 – waiting for additional information
340 Fern Place
(New single family residence)
DR Pl2018-100 NTE Alan Lim Fourth incomplete letter sent 4/19/19 – waiting for additional information
9.1
Packet Pg. 116
Project Status Report CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Page 2
January 14, 2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PENDING ITEMS (continued)
Property Location File # AP Applicant Status
20657 Golden Springs
(Sign program amendment)
CUP PL2019-172 MN Sign Express Incomplete letter sent 10/10/19 – waiting for additional Information
2360 Indian Creek
(Addition and remodel to single family
residence)
DR PL2019-185 MN Pete Volbeda Incomplete letter sent 11/13/19 – waiting for additional information
23135 Ridge Line Rd.
(New single family residence)
DR PL2018-233 MN Faiz Ennabe Incomplete letter sent 1/8/19 - waiting for additional information
2775 Shadow Canyon
(New single family residence)
DR PL2019-188 NTE Edwin Agabao Incomplete letter sent 11/14/19 - waiting for additional information
22438 Steeplechase
(Additon to single family residence)
DR PL2019-162 NTE Joan Lee Incomplete letter sent 11/18/19 - waiting for additional Information
1959 Viento Verano
(Addition to single family residence)
DR PL2019-179 NTE Xin Wang Under review
Public Right-Of-Way on Grand Ave.,
adjacent to Golden Springs Dr.
(Wireless facility)
CUP PL2017-69 MN Christopher Yoo Third incomplete letter sent 1/2/20 - waiting for additional information
9.1
Packet Pg. 117