Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/08/2017 PC MinutesMINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 8, 2017 CALL TO ORDER: Chair/Wolfe called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chair Mok led the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. 3. 4. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Naila Barlas, Frank Farago, Jennifer "Fred" Mahlke, Vice Chair Ken Mok, and Chair Raymond Wolfe Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; James Eggart, Assistant City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; May Nakajima, Associate Planner; Natalie T. Espinoza, Assistant Planner; and Stella Marquez, Administrative Coordinator. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: CM/Dan Fox introduced himself to the Planning Commission. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 25, 2017: C/Farago moved, Chair/Wolfe seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 25, 2017, as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: 5. OLD BUSINESS: 6. NEW BUSINESS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: None None Barlas, Farago, VC/Mok, Chair/Wolfe None Mahlke None AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7.1 Development Review No. PL2017-45 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48, the applicant, Phillip Chan and property owners, Stanley Chan and Yuen Kiu Choi requested Development Review approval to construct a 988 square -foot addition and 157 square -foot balcony extension to an existing 2,205 square -foot, two-story single family residence with an attached 482 square -foot garage and 331 square -foot porch/balcony area on a 0.26 acre (11,166 square foot) lot. The subject property is zoned Low Density Residential (RL) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential. PROJECT ADDRESS PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: 1617 Acacia Hill Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Stanley Chan and Yen Kiu Choi 1617 Acacia Hill Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Phillip Chan 68 Genoa Street, Unit B Arcadia, CA 91007 AP/Espinoza provided staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. PL2017-45, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed in the Resolution. Chair/Wolfe opened the public hearing. Phillip Chan, architect, spoke about the proposed project and indicated that many options were considered for this unique lot. Instead of adding space at the back of the house, the family of five chose to retain the larger back yard which led them to consider the option of adding space to the front of the house instead. Since the property is sloped they gave careful consideration to privacy issues which led them to split the addition with a small amount toward the front and a small amount toward the rear of the house. They also looked into adding a second story addition. The key issue for him was to provide family space with a well-balanced addition which he believes he and his design team were able to do by paying attention to staffs recommendation to provide a continuous height and roof line so it would appear to have been part of the original house. Mr. Chan said he hopes to obtain the Commission's support for this proposal. AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION Chair/Wolfe agreed that it was a very unique design and said he appreciated the style that was applied to the garage door which provides a balance to the windows on the side of the house. He complimented Mr. Chan on maintaining while modernizing the style of the house. VC/Mok said he noticed neighbors to this property modernizing their homes and it appeared that the area of the block is beginning to change with respect to architectural look and elevation of the homes. The design is very nice and in good taste. Douglas Barcon, North Rock River Drive, said this reminds him of what was going on with the mansion on Diamond Bar Boulevard near Temple, yet quite different. His concern is that looking at Arcadia and how they are pushing back on mansionization, he is not sure whether this project fits that criteria. The design looks really good and the side windows remind him of what is being proposed for the mansion on Diamond Bar Boulevard. He is concerned about whether this proposed project fits in the neighborhood and are the houses in the neighborhood similar size and with the addition, will it fall under mansionization. Also, is this a multi -family or multi -generational home? Chair/Wolfe closed the public hearing. C/Mahlke moved, C/Barlas seconded to approve Development Review No. PL2017-45, 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: Barlas, Farago, Mahlke VC/Mok Chair//Wolfe NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7.2 Development Review No. PL2017-41 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48 and 22.70, the applicant, Fariba Shantiyal and property owner, Joyce Chen, requested Development Review approval to convert an existing 1,060 square foot garage into livable space and construct a 900 square foot addition, 863 square foot garage and 538 square feet of deck and patio area to an existing 4,844 square foot single family residence on a 1.04 gross acre (45,302 gross square foot) lot. The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential. AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION PROJECT ADDRESS: 2522 Steeplechase Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Joyce Chen 2522 Steeplechase Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 APPLICANT: Fariba Shantiyal 3670 W. Temple Avenue, Suite 193 Pomona, CA 91765 Chair/Wolfe suspended presentation of staffs report and recommendation for Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. PL2017-41, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. , Chair/Wolfe opened the public hearing. Saeid Shatiyai, architect, explained that this house has a special setting on top of the hill with a lot of slope from one side to the other. The consideration for design of this addition in accordance with the owner's desires, the natural progression of this extension would be in the front so as not to disturb the natural setting at the back of the home. At the same time the design considered the transition of this house being a split level, to the adjacent property and for that reason as well, brought the addition to the front and converted the garage to a rumpus room which would provide great access and view. The entrance has been enhanced with tiered retaining walls in order to add landscaping which will further enhance the view from Steeplechase as well. The architecture of the addition was complemented to the house by the elevations and by using the same elements and materials. Chair/Wolfe closed the public hearing. C/Farago moved, VC/Mok seconded, to approve Development Review No. P12017-41, 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: Barlas, Farago, Mahlke, VC/Mok Chair//Wolfe NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION 7.3 Development Review, Conditional Use Permit and Comprehensive Sign Program — Planning Case No. PL2016-161 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Sections 22.48, 22.58 and 22.36.060, the applicant, Jessica Steiner and property owner, McDonald's Corporation, requested Planning Commission approval of the following land use applications: 1. Development Review. (architectural and site plan design review of the proposed site improvements) — The key components of the Development Review application and plans are as listed below. • Demolition of an existing 2,489 square foot McDonald's fast food restaurant building and the construction of a new 3,746 square foot building. • Renovation of the parking lot, including resurfacing and striping, new lighting, and landscaping and accessibility upgrades in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 2. Conditional Use Permit. The applicant requested CUP approval to establish dual drive-thru service lanes for the proposed fast food restaurant. 3. Comprehensive Sign Program. The applicant is required to establish design criteria for all new exterior on -premises signage. The applicant has thus submitted a proposed Comprehensive Sign Program as part of the overall project. The subject property consists of approximately 0.69 gross acres on the southwest corner of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Gentle Springs Drive. The subject property is zoned C-3 (Regional Commercial) with an underlying General Plan Designation of General Commercial. PROJECT ADDRESS PROPERTY OWNER: 205 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Lorraine Fortelka McDonald's Corporation One McDonald's Plaza Oak Brook, IL 60523 APPLICANT: Jessica Steiner Bickel Group Architecture 3600 Birth Street, Suite 120 Newport Beach, CA 92660 AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION AP/Nakajima presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review, Conditional Use Permit and Comprehensive Sign Program No. PL2016-161, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed in within the Resolution. ChairMolfe asked for the following clarifications. 1) If staffs recommendation for the 15 -gallon Chitalpa Tree would be for both trees on the north elevation to which AP/Nakajima responded that Chair/Wolfe was correct. 2) If the wall that runs parallel to the sidewalk in front of the building will be maintained and AP/Nakajima responded that the wall would be removed. C/Farago asked if in the proposed Resolution on the north elevation if the enhancement was being included or merely what the applicant proposed with the metal cladding around the parapet and AP/Nakajima responded that the "enhancement" was prepared by staff as an example and the condition has been left open so that if the applicant proposes an alternate design, it is subject to review by the Director. CDD/Gubman added that if C/Farago's question was whether it was staff's recommendation to proceed with the applicant's modified proposal with the trim piece along the parapet line that it was not what staff was recommending. Staff supports those proposed enhancements including the parapet treatment and the upgraded doors at the utility closet portion of the building; however, that does not fully address staffs concern about the unbroken mass along the north elevation where no windows are proposed. So, staff is including a condition that the mass be enhanced through an appropriate means and in a way that meets the intent of the illustration that staff provided side-by-side to show how a modest upgrade to that elevation would achieve that objective. VC/Mok asked if an enhancement along the north side simply meant another color added on to that palette and CDD/Gubman said in his opinion, no. Staff needs to see some articulation through some movement in the vertical surfaces and/or some contrasting materials to really emphasize a break in that mass. C/Mahlke commented that the retaining wall height maximum of 42" and fencing height maximum of 42" between Gentle Springs would be quite high and asked if there was a minimum and AP/Nakajima said that there is a maximum height and she is not sure if there is a minimum height. In this case, if the maximum height was attained it would mean a 42" wall with a 42" decorative railing on top so the top would not be solid. C/Mahlke asked if one were driving down the freeway and looked toward the building they would see the decorative rail and the building behind it. C/Mahlke asked the purpose of AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION the retaining wall and CDD/Gubman responded that there is a certain amount of topography in Diamond Bar in general which also exists on this site. If one goes deeper into Gentle Springs the slope can be seen to increase quite substantially. On this project site, with reconfiguration of the site to create a level pad, it will result in an increased grade differential which means that the retaining wall needs to be provided to splice the two grades on the McDonald's side versus the sidewalk side, and the decorative wrought iron fencing on top provides a safety measure. When one is on the sidewalk on Gentle Springs one will see three and one-half feet of ledge stone (stacked stone) plus three and one-half feet of an open -rail decorative fence. C/Mahlke said she was concerned about the parking because three of the 19 parking spaces are proposed to be truck delivery areas at the site where traffic currently backs up. She read the report about the Inglewood facility on Manchester and understands it works, but it seemed to her that whether it works is contingent on a few things including off-peak hours. The Inglewood location has a much bigger capacity for overflow vehicles and where they show 15 cars in the drive-thru, the first three are blocking what would, in this case, be the truck delivery area. Currently, there are no McDonald deliveries in that area, they deliver off-site of McDonald's coming into Gentle Springs and walk over to the basement storage area. Unless the applicant is changing the location of their storage area, they are putting more foot traffic, more truck traffic and more car traffic on the one place it should not be, which is now the only viable entrance to the facility from South Diamond Bar Boulevard. Traffic already backs up into the South Diamond Bar Boulevard intersection. Perhaps she. does not understand the rendering, but it seems to her that the storage is not being moved and the plans indicate they are still building over the storage basement. She does not know if the current practice of parking off-site and walking into that area will continue with the new plan but it seems to her to be a very inefficient way to handle delivery and the easiest way to back patrons up into Diamond Bar Boulevard. AP/Nakajima said that the applicant's Traffic Study indicated that it would not have an impact on or into Diamond Bar Boulevard. She suggested the applicant be asked to provide more details on plans for future truck deliveries. C/Barlas said she shares C/Mahlke's concerns because she has seen a lot of traffic backup on Diamond Bar Boulevard and looks forward to hearing from the applicant. Chair/Wolfe opened the public hearing. Carlos Madrigal, McDonald's Corporation, talked about the proposed project. Staff made a good presentation. With respect to queueing and peak hours, the peak hours for McDonald's is breakfast and lunch and deliveries would AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION occur during McDonald's off-peak hours. McDonald's has a palletized delivery zone which means that the truck comes in during McDonald's off-peak hours (not during breakfast and lunch), delivers the pallets and leaves immediately thereafter. Staff moves the items from the pallets to the storage area. In addition, the walk-in cooler will be out of the basement and up on the top which shortens the delivery time and process. He understands about the traffic on Diamond Bar Boulevard which is good for the restaurant. Currently, McDonald's receives deliveries toward the back at the basement ramp and it takes a long time to offload. The new method will greatly enhance efficiency. C/Mahlke said that in staff's report there was no indication where deliveries were received. Mr. Madrigal said it is on the side. The proposed layout has the kitchen and storage on the side where deliveries are made just as it is at the Inglewood site on Manchester and Airport. C/Mahlke said she is very concerned about the Commission rendering its decision based on a truck delivery area that might not work for this location which would necessitate changes. Diamond Bar loves its McDonald's and the building is beautiful. Residents love it so much that they are already backed up into the street which is already at an intersection which, while fortunate for McDonald's and customers she would not want to create more traffic issues that could not be resolved. Mr. Madrigal said that McDonald's intent is to make the flow better by design and system for more efficiency and better traffic flow. C/Farago asked where the entrance will be and Mr. Madrigal explained there will be an entrance on the front by the Thank -You lettering and an entrance on the side where the ADA parking stalls are located. C/Mahlke asked if the storage would be in the bike rack area and Mr. Madrigal responded that C/Mahlke was correct. He pointed to the delivery door on the site plan. C/Farago asked if the rear door entered into the dining area and Mr. Madrigal said not the rear, just the side and front. The rear door is not a public entrance, it is strictly for delivery. C/Farago asked about the door in the top left corner of the site plan which Mr. Madrigal said was an office door in the back and not a public entrance. C/Mahlke asked if the basement would no longer be used for storage and Mr. Madrigal said it would be used for "dry' storage only. Mr. Madrigal said that with respect to the architecture of the building, they would be working with staff in terms of enhancements. They understand that they must obtain the Director's approval prior to permits and McDonald's is AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION good with that. They have a couple of concepts to present and, eventually, the project will get to where it needs to be. Mr. Madrigal said that with respect to the Condition for Reciprocal Parking, he wanted to make sure about the old open non -recorded agreement that runs with the land with the other party because no parking spaces are designated in case they wanted to speak on the matter. He believes it can be kept open and work with staff prior to permits but he does not want it to become a legal issue. McDonald's will reach out to the other party and get back to staff if there are any unresolved issues and whether it can be written as, prior to the permits the reciprocal parking agreement can be worked out if both parties are not in agreement. Chair/Wolfe acknowledged a letter from Golden Diamond Springs, LLC which states they will work with the city and neighboring tenant on the reciprocal parking agreement. C/Mahlke asked how big the delivery trucks are and Mr. Madrigal said it would depend. McDonald's can get smaller trucks to deliver more often or bigger trucks to deliver less frequently. The typical delivery truck is an 18 -wheeler. Douglas Barcon, N. Rock River Drive, said he and his friends spend a lot of time at this McDonald's all hours of the day and night. From what he has observed, McDonald's peak hours are typically Saturday and Sunday mornings, Saturday night around midnight and during proms. If trucks pull into the back is it possible they could pull through straight into the Sprouts parking area and exit where the Sprouts trucks exit. He agrees that the north elevation needs windows which would make it safer for patrolling the site. The parking on the north side of the building, cars will get stuck in the angled slots because there are cars in the drive-thru and they would not be able to get out of their parking spots. Again, this is Diamond Bar and not Inglewood and he would like to see something more in line with Diamond Bar aesthetics that looks more open and inviting than a view window in what is mostly walls. He asked if the proposed building was intended to be one or two -stories. It appears to be a good sized enlargement over what is currently in place although it appears the play area is being converted to an eating area. He likes the idea of updating this McDonald's and making a change is appropriate. He would like to see it more open and inviting with windows on all sides except for the rear delivery area. Brian Carmack, franchisee, thanked staff for accommodating them during this big effort. As it has been mentioned, the building is very well past its time and will look even more dated as the beautiful new shopping center behind McDonald's reaches conclusion. Unfortunately, while his family has been AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION discussing upgrading for many years, they were in "real estate purgatory" for a dozen or so years when they were unable to upgrade because of parking, etc. which was not achievable until the recent development. He thanked staff for working to make it happen. Sooner rather than later is their mantra as well and worked to make this a 2017 project to match the timing of the center. His family has been in business for many years in Diamond Bar and wants to be part of the "new look." With respect to comments made about the project, currently at peak times traffic is tough for a number of reasons. The new proposed design will accommodate four more cars at peak times which means those cars won't be on the street which will mean a significant improvement to stacking on the lot. The width of the drive aisle is being increased which will provide more comfort for vehicles parking and interacting with the drive-thru traffic. Over the last number of years there have been a number of operational changes for McDonald's. The restaurant cooks differently, there is a much bigger menu and a lot more technology which the current buildings and layouts do not accommodate. He feels sorry for the hard working crew who do their best to live with the current layout. Franchise operators ask their crews to rub their stomach and pat their head at the same time to serve customers out of an old kitchen and facility. The new kitchen will be much more accessible to the food storage area. The new system will allow the truck to drop a fully wrapped palletized delivery inside the building which is a much quicker process than what is currently in place. Delivery, stacking and all of the other items mentioned tonight will be significantly enhanced with this new building and design. Further, being able to take orders two at a time and having a new modern kitchen, this location should be able to accommodate customers much quicker. This site will also be much more comfortable for the customers with large and improved restrooms, a better dining room, and a much better work atmosphere for the employees and more. McDonald's strives to make it a very comfortable and pleasant experience to enter, place an order and depart. Much time and attention has been given to all of these details and while perhaps not perfect, the new facility will offer many improvements and enhancements and all of the concerns the Commissioners have about the current site will be significantly improved with the new site layout. He again thanked CDD/Gubman and his staff for their diligence in working to get this project to this point. Gene Detchemendy, the Charles Company, said that when Kmart approached his company and said that even though they had another seven or eight years left on the original lease and had other options they would give the Charles Company a limited opportunity to not pay rent over the next 10 years but give them $2.8 million now, Kmart would leave immediately. Had it not been for the City staff and CM/DeStefano and the way this City works, they probably would not have come up with the money in the timeframe provided to them. When this happened, his first call was to McDonald's because they had been AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 11 PLANNING .COMMISSION calling him for six years and let their management know they had taken back control of the property. He acknowledges that there is a reciprocal agreement that has existed between the parties that pre -dates almost everything that was built on the property and acknowledged that if it were not for the City, the Charles Company would not have made that quick action absent a good City to work with throughout the years. Chair/Wolfe closed the public hearing. C/Farago said as far as parking and traffic, all of his questions have been answered. However, he agrees with staff regarding the aesthetics that if the Commission moves to approve this project that the enhancements and recommendations from the applicant and from staff should be incorporated because he believes it would tie in nicely with the rest of the development. VC/Mok echoed C/Farago and agreed that with these enhancements it will be a much nicer looking building, especially from the northerly direction. If this project is approved he hoped that it would influence surrounding businesses to follow suit because that entire center has needed a facelift for a long time. He understands it is a slow process but perhaps this project will set the wheels in motion and everyone else will jump on board. Chair/Wolfe said the comment from Mr. Barcon regarding windows was interesting. There really are limited opportunities to look at windows because there are restrooms along the north face in the middle toward the bank and the freezer is in the back area as well. However, he agreed that in the eating area he would like for staff to work with the applicant to see if there was an opportunity to add windows in that area in the north face. He did not believe it was sufficient to address the "mass" issue and agreed with the condition to direct staff to work with the applicant to resolve that issue. And from the applicant's comments it sounded like they were willing to work toward a resolution that would be amenable to all parties. In addition, his colleagues had some very good points about the traffic pressures and truck deliveries. When he looks at windows and off-peak McDonald's hours, from 12:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m., the traffic in Diamond Bar is not an issue in his mind nor is it an issue from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m., but it is a concern from 1:00 to 5:00 p.m. He wondered if the Commission could add a condition that says that deliveries cannot be made in the 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. or 6:30 p.m. window. DCA/Eggart said such a condition could be added and he would recommend that the applicant be invited back up and provided an opportunity to respond to such a condition. Chair/Wolfe reopened the public hearing and asked the applicant to come forward and respond to the proposed condition. Mr. Madrigal said that such a AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION condition is fairly typical of most cities which is why McDonald's conducts their Traffic Studies and reports and usually deliveries are restricted to certain hours which is not a problem for McDonald's. Mr. Madrigal said windows could be added but he believed as much as could be done had already been done. Along the kitchen there is kitchen equipment which should not be viewed. Behind that are the restrooms and deliveries at the rear. Toward the front and side it is pretty much maxed out as far as windows. There is a booth close to the entrance. Mr. Madrigal said he would look at that area again but he believed it was a shear wall and structurally, it might be difficult to include windows. If the Commission could keep it open to working with staff that will be done such as the enhancement to the delivery door. Because this project is being fast -tracked, if the conditions are such that McDonald's can work with staff and Director for approval, McDonald's will do that. C/Mahlke asked if staff had current information regarding traffic at that intersection to understand what timeframe the Commission should set aside for delivery and non-delivery times. CDD/Gubman said that the information he could provide would not suggest that delivery times would create the conflicts that have been suggested. One of the significant issues is the driveway closest to Gentle Springs which is a two-way driveway and there is a significant problem when vehicles are exiting. It is not ideal to have any driveway that close to the curb return but if it is an entry -only, that will be a significant reduction in conflicts. The new prototype design for the vehicle stacking does compress the footprint that vehicles would need to queue up. The analysis provided was determined with validation through the City's consultant peer reviewer that the peak stacking would be about 12 vehicles which is indicated on the diagram that that peak hour stacking could be facilitated without conflicts. There will be sporadic and perhaps rare instances where stacking might go beyond that, but the capacity of the site, as proposed, is going to be significantly improved. If the Commission is still concerned about loading and unloading, a Condition of Approval could be added to include the current restriction from 1:00 to 5:00 p.m. for unloading, as well as a statement that after a certain time period -such as six months after Certificate of Occupancy issuance. Staff would evaluate complaints, observations and so forth. If he and PWD/Liu determined that modifications to the delivery operations were warranted, the matter could be brought back to the Commission after that six- month review to consider recommendations for addressing any potential conflicts that were observed. Chair/Wolfe proposed that the Commission not stipulate a condition at this time. Understanding there are concerns at the Commission level, after hearing from staff and the applicant, he believes it is appropriate that after the operation starts there is a period of time that the operation is allowed to move forward and if staff starts to see problems, the Commission could come back AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION and address those issues six -months or 12 months after start of business. In his mind, 1:00 to 5:00 p.m. is not the issue, but for him it is about 4:00 to 7:00 p.m. when traffic pressure is at its peak in that area. C/Mahlke continued to be concerned about traffic flow and truck deliveries and pointed out that the comparison between the proposed Diamond Bar Boulevard location and the Inglewood facility did not provide adequate comparison. Matters of concern for the Diamond Bar location included the following: The two layouts are entirely different, Inglewood (Manchester) has an entirely different layout with two entrances from different roads, and while they are located on a corner as the Diamond Bar facility is, the Diamond Bar facility has both entrance and exit from and onto one of the busiest roads in town at an intersection where a lot of children walk and there will be a much busier shopping center with more people visiting the shopping center and McDonald's. C/Mahlke said that as backed up as it gets now, she is, not sure that the Inglewood layout is an equivalent. She prefers the restriction on deliveries with a six-month reassessment. C/Mahlke moved to approve Planning Case No. PL2016-161, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution with the addition of a restriction of delivery times from 1:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. not being allowed. Six months following Certificate of Occupancy issuance, City staff shall evaluate loading and delivery operations for conflicts with vehicle and pedestrian circulation. Should the Community Development Director and Public Works Director determine that modifications to such operations are warranted, this matter shall be scheduled for further review by the Planning Commission to consider recommendations to mitigate such conflicts. Chair/Wolfe reopened the public hearing to obtain the applicant's consent to the motion. Mr. Madrigal concurred to C/Mahlke's motion because it also benefits McDonald's and conversely, if it is not a problem he would ask that the hours be adjusted in McDonald's favor as well. Chair/Wolfe closed the public hearing. C/Mahlke restated her motion to approve Planning Case No. PL2016-161, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as recommended by staff and listed within the draft resolution with the addition of a restriction of delivery times from 1:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. not being allowed. Six months following Certificate of Occupancy issuance, City staff shall evaluate loading and delivery operations for conflicts with vehicle and AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 14 PLANNING COMMISSION 91 0 pedestrian circulation. Should the Community Development Director and Public Works Director determine that modifications to such operations are warranted, this matter shall be scheduled for further review by the Planning Commission to consider recommendations to mitigate such conflicts. Chair/Wolfe asked C/Mahlke to amend her motion to include "that staff—work with the applicant on the north face including seriously considering a window in the middle area of the section." C/Mahlke concurred and Chair/Wolfe seconded the motion. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS Barlas, Farago, Mahlke, VC/Mok Chair//Wolfe None None PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: None STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. CDD/Gubman stated that there is one item on the August 22nd agenda which is the Habit Burger Grill as the second outpad in the Diamond Bar Ranch Shopping Center. Staff is currently working on filling the September 12 agenda which will be detailed at the next regular meeting on August 22nd Staff will be scheduling its second General Plan Public Workshop on Thursday, October 1 gth at 6:30 p.m. at the Diamond Bar Center Grand Ballroom. Notice will be broadcast through the City's usual venues including social media and in the October edition of the DB Connection. The focus of the workshop is to follow up on the last GPAC meeting where there was consideration of three land use scenarios that are anchored around alternative potential locations for a town center. After receiving input from the GPAC staff will be conducting "stress -testing" on three preferred alterntives. At the Community Workshop, staff will provide feasible alternatives to get the public's input which will be followed up with a GPAC meeting wherein staff will ask that the GPAC member provide some recommendations after which staff will schedule the third Joint Planning Commission/City Council meeting to gain further input on those recommendations. Following the joint meeting, staff will be ready to begin writing the Draft General Plan document. AUGUST 8, 2017 PAGE 15 PLANNING COMMISSION 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As posted in the Agenda. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair/Wolfe adjourned the regular meeting at 8:27 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 22nd day of August, 2017. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, L� Greg Gubman Community Development Director Raymond olfe, Chairperson