HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/23/19941
.AUGUST 23, 1994
7.00 P.M.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Auditorium
21865 East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California
•rr/r •r"
•/tit
Daidd Meyer
I P /
Bruce. Hamenbaum
Dbn Schad
FrankUn Fong
Copies of staff reports or other. written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Community
Development Office, located at 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190, and are available. for public inspection.
If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please call (909) 396-5676 during regular business hours.
In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title H 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
accomodation(s)'in'order to communicate at a City public meeting must inform the Community
Development Department at (909) 396-5676 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled. meeting.
Please refrain from smoking, eating or drip)
. in the, Auditorium
.'lie City o f , Diamond Bar lues recycled paper
and encourages you to do the same.
0
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
August 23, 1994
CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Next Resolution No. 9420
ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman David Meyer, Vice Chairwoman
Lydia Plunk, Bruce Flamenbaum, Don Schad and Franklin Fong
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 their jurisdiction, allowing the publican opportunity to
speak on non-public hearing and non -agenda items. Please complete a Speaker's Card for the
recordine Secretarv_Comvletion of this form is voluntary). There is a five minute maximum time
limit when addressing the Planning, Commission.
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS: None
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
2. Adoption of the 1994 General Plan. The General Plan is a statement
of goals, objectives and strategies to guide the long-range physical
development of the City. The Plan is required by State law and
determines the size, form and character of the City over the next 20
years. It is the most significant tool utilized by the community to
ensure a balanced, comfortable environment in which to live and
work. It represents the community's view of its future and serves as
the "blueprint" to define the long term character of the City. In
January the City Council appointed a General Plan Advisory
Committee to develop the Draft General Plan. Fifteen public
meetings have been conducted to identify key planning issues and
define General Plan policy. The results have been forwarded to the
Planning Commission for consideration.
The purpose of the August 23, 1994 public hearing is to continue the
Planning Commission's review of the Draft 1994 General Plan from
August 15, 1994, commencing with the Housing Element, the
Circulation Element, and concluding with the Land Use Element.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the Planning
Commission open the public hearing, receive a presentation from
staff receive public testimony, forward comments City_staffand
continue the public hearing to August 29, 1994.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
ADJOURNMENT: August 29,. 1994
E
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Chairman and Planning Commissioners
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development D4
SUBJECT: Informational Items
DATE: August 18, 1994
On August 23, the Planning *Commission will resume review of the
General Plan.
Please review the General Plan materials (previously transmitted)
relative to the Housing, circulation, and Land Use Elements. -In
addition to the policy plan and the Environmental Impact Report,
the Master Environmental Assessment contains information useful for
these topic areas. Staff has previously distributed excerpts from
the'State of California General Plan Guidelines containing content
-suggestions.
On August 17, 1994, the Planning Staff received a copy of the
attached submittal', prepared by Jan Dabney, regarding slope
density. I have forwarded a copy to our City Engineer for review
and comment.
Also enclosed are, the August 15 Planning Commission revision sheets
for the Circulation Element and copies of memos from Gary Neely
submitted through the BBS.
Please contact the Planning Staff ,if you have any questions,
comments, or a need for additional iinformation necessary to
facilitate the adoption of the 1994 General Plan.
Attachments
JDS\Mco
cc: city council
GPAC members
City Manager
August 12, 1994
SLOPE DENSITY PACKAGE REVIEW
AS APPLIED TO THE GENERAL PLAN
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
CONSIDERATIONS:
RECEIVED COMMUNITY
DEVEILOPY:,FNT
F`4 AMG 17 P11 2: 57
1. The proposed GPAC slope density language just doesn't work.
2. The Rancho C. ordinance resembles what GPAC was attempting to implement,
but you have to review it with the rest of the picture. In Ran . cho, must of City falls
under the 20% slope category.. The portion of the City above 20% lies within the
foothills and .falls within special planning areas, ie., conservation, specific plans etc.
Rancho also allows density transfers etc-. When you take into consideration these
additional incentives the ordinance looks a lot better to the land owner then the bare
bones ordinance you're reviewing.,
3. - The City of La Habra Heights ordinance is excellent and can be applied
directly to Diamond Bar's RR zoning (1 unit/acre) in the proposed General Plan
because of the high-end product .found within the "The Country" setting. The
supporting language indicates to.the land owner that his rights are being strongly
conside:re-d'and- protected and'allows for thoughtful development by taking into
considerati'o'n surrounding intensity etc.
For all other applications of'si ngle family subdivisions, you use the chart that
indicates how much land must remain in natural state versus average percent of
slope. For example, remove lines entitled 2 t-hru 5 acre and retitle the 1 acre line as
required" and allow clustering.
ILLUSTRATION:
20 acre parcel, zoned 3 units per acre.
Minimum undisturbed set-aside = 15% @ 10% average slope
20ac x 15% = 3.0 ac
Allowed density = (20ac-3ac) x 3 units/ac = 51 units
Assume average slope = 35%
then:
Minimum undisturbed set-aside from chart = 58.3%
26ac'x 58.3% = 11.66ac *
Allowed density = (20ac-1 1.66ac) x 3 units/ac = 25 units
You can see that this simple application,of an undisturbed natural setting set-aside
chart accomplishes what you would like to implement within a general plan. With
consideration given to the existing Hillside Ordinance further modifications can be
applied through ordinance.
cc: David, Lydia & Bruce
Section 17.24.080 Density
Slope density regulations which correlate intensity of development to steepness of
terrain will be used to minimize grading, removal of vegetation, land instability, and
fire hazards. The total allowable residential dwelling units shall be calculated based on
the total (buildable) land area within each slope category multiplied by the capacity
factor for each to the. slope category.
A. Calculation of densitv. The maximum number of units that may be permitted in a
proposed development shall be determined by multiplying that area of land in each
"slope category" by the "capacity factor" shown in the following table, taking the
products of these calculations converted to square feet, and dividing this figure by
the required site area unit in square feet prescribed in the underlying zoning
district (except the Hillside Residential District where there is no minimum lot
size required). In the Hillside Residential District, .the allowable amount of
buildable area resulting from the Capacity Factor calculation will constitute the
adjusted net buildable area.
B. Land Capability Schedule. Y
Adusted Net
*Buildable area Capacity Buildable Area
Slope Catagory in square feet Factor (square feet)
Under 10 percent X. 1.00 =
10-14.9 percent X 0.75
.15-19.9 percent X 0.50 =
20-24.9 percent X 0.25 =
25-29.9ercent X 0.025 =
P .
,30+ percent X 0.0 = `
Divided Permitted
` by minimum number of
lot size units
requirement
o(under-
lying zoning
district ex-
cept in Hill-
side Residential
* Buildable area is a contiguous area of the lot which is less than 30 percent in
natural slope, or in the area determined, through environmental studies and
investigation, as buildable.
-�l!1 /�_ C/ _/ — , 1 16
61 1-2al-C
A
//e r v -� ri-r-- �Y �s'/ � /F 1
re a21Gr. C�rr',�s/�e�r�?�' r��ire
MMS.
e• �•�� �ucltice, the inclination of which is expressed as a�
z ratio of the vertical distance (rise), or change in elevatiorl, to the horizontal
distance (run). The percent of an
by the run, multiplied by 100, y given slope is determined by dividing the rise
EXAMPLE A
• sso
—840
30 Vertical change
in elevation (rise)
—830
1
100 —820
.
Horizontal distance between contours (run)
REE—Ely ED old/ jd-Z
AUG- 4-94 RI 8:28 A
ORDINANCE NO. 188
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS
...REGARDING MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS AND
AMENDING THE LA HABRA HEIGHTS MUNICIPAL CODE
The City Coundl of the City of La Habra Heights does ordain as follows:
Section 1. Section. 9206.5 of Chapter 2 of Article IX of the L8 Habra Heights
Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
-"9206.5 Zone R -A,— Required Area.
7, di -1. -A �c� �)
(a) The minimum net'lot
area for parcels in Zone R -A shall be
determined by the numerical suffix following
the R designation of a specific parcel. In
the case of properties designated R -A-1,
the minimum net lot size shall be forty
thousand (40,000) square feet
(b) The following slope -density provisions shall be preeminent over
the zoning designations for new sub -divisions of land:
Average Slooe of a New
Parcel to Be Created by a
Minimum Lot Area
Acres
Proposed Subdivision
in Gross
Less than 30
1.00 (43,560 sq. feet)
30
1.06 (46,174 sq. feet)
31
1.13 (49,223 sq. feet)
32
rW
1.21,(52,708 sq. feet)
!"'I
.122 t C 33
34
1.30 (5.6,629 sq. feet). LIf
1.44 (62,726 sq. feet) �k:�Y.
35
1.61 (70,132 sq. feet)
36
1.84 (80,150 sq. feet)
37
2.14 (93,218 sq. feet)
38
2.55 (111,078 sq. feet)
39
3.16 (137,650 sq. feet)
40
4.00 (174,240 sq. feet)
41 and above
5.00 (217,800 sq. feet}.
J (c)'When a project is located adjacent to predominantly. developed
areas, the intensity and topography of such development may be used to override of
modify the slope -density provisions of paragraph (b) of this Section, except that, under
no circumstances may a newly created lot be less than 40,000 square feet in net area.
Ve; dc/d
7)
-4r 7
In such cases where the intensity and topography of adjacent development are
Proposed to override or modify the above slope -density pro - -
that: visions, it Must be shown:
(a) The 'variance from the slOPe-density formula will not be
-materially detrimental to the public welfare Or be injurious to other improvements in the
same vicinity; and
(b) The variance from the slope -density formul . a is necessary
for the Preservation Of a substantial Property right of the applicant such as that
Possessed by owners of other property in the same vicinity. and
(c) The majority of the surrounding area contains similar
topography and is developed at 'a greater intensity '
formula; or than allowed by the slope-densily
2. There are special circumstances or *except'
applicable to the exceptional characteristics
fill surroundings. property Involved, such as shapei topography, location, or
which not generally applicable to other properties in the same vicinity
and under identical zoning and general plan classifications.
(d) For purposes of this section, the term 'gross acre. sh
43,560 Square feet and net lot size P shall be determihed in light of the de
net' set forth in Section 9120 Of this Code."
., finitiall mean
on of 'Area,
�i �1002- 'Ordinance No.'188-U is hereby repealed.
jection 3. The City Council hereby declares that the intent of this'ordinance is to
clarify the intent of Section 9206.5 of the La Habra Heights Municipal Code a
before and after the adoption of s it existed both
declarative of existing law. Ordinance No. 188-U and,therefore that this Ordinance is
If any Section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence,'clause
phrase of. this Ordinance Or any part hereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or
or
otherwise Invalid, such decision shall not affect ft validity
Ordinance or an pad hereof Of the remaining portions of this
. y . The City Council 'hereby declares that it would have passed
each section, subsection; subdivisions paragra
irrespective Ph, *sentence, clause or phrase hereof,
of the fact that any Om or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs
sentences. clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
11
- - ------------ -
SLOPE/DENSITY
p
A.. Intent
Correlates intensity of development,
to steepness of terrain as a means to:
Minimizer 'n 'n
g ad��g i sensitize areas
Protect significant views
Limit the removal of vegetation
Retain significant amounts of open space
r Reduce possible environmental and safety
impacts that could result; ie, flood,,
fire, erosion and access limitations
`
B. Provisions
_
Sets capacity factors which . limit the
allowable density based- on . the' percent,
of natural slope
- Determine- amount of land in each slope
category based on slope analysis map
- Multiply _ the buildable land acreage im
each slope category by its slope
capacity. factor
- Use minimum' lot size requirements or
maximum allowable density of a district
to determine maximum density for a site
L
10 20 30 X40 50
a.,
85i I I I_ -
G•
so ci
sc
5 Ac.
0 00 — - 6C
3
G 2 PG• 5 5.a/ .
40 4
o ,
0 20 I I I 2
I /5
o
0 10 20 30 40 30
% Slope ( Avg.) /
r 2-lej6T
a� �'
From
----------------------------------------
: GARY NEELY
Number
: 104 of 113
To
: JAMES DESTEFANO
Date
: 08/16/94 12:18pm
Subject
: Housing Element
Reference
: NONE
Read
: 08/17/94 1:29pm (REPLIES)
Private
: NO
Conf
: 005 - Planning Commission
Mr..DeStefano,
For the record and to reiterate my points regarding the
Housing Element made at last night's Planning Commission meeting,
(none of which were resolved, or even discussed, to my satisfaction):
1.* The map on page 11-15 is STILL wrong. It contains
properties listed as "additional housing opportunities" which
are map and/or deed restricted.
The GPAC said they wanted ALL map and/or deed
restricted property listed as "Open Space". Contrary to your
remarks last night, the GPAC NEVER instructed Staff to
make exceptions for Eric Stone's property in•this regard.
They did NOT identify the other two parcels (one up against
SR -60 and Tres Hermanos, the other in the middle of
Bramaleals holdings) as exceptions.
21. The Table on page 11-14 is STILL wrong. It includes'
housing figures for the three parcels discussed above. There
has been no documentation or itemization provided for the
figures -listed and the columns don't add up. (As.
Commissioner Fong pointed out.)
Further, the GPAC APPROVED Housing Element
says, on page 11-16:
"The most significant residential development opportunity
remaining in Diamond Bar exists on the 800 acre Tres
Hermanos property. The Land Use Element calls for a
mixed residential community on this site, and provides for a
mix*of,housing,types and densities subject to.preparation of a
Specific Plan. The Specific Plan mechanism will allow for
flexibility in development standards and clustering of housing
beyond that provided for through zoning. It is intended that
housing developed within Tres Hermanos could be built at
densities higher than 16 units per acre, providing afford-
ability for the City's identified share of lower income
housing needs. The City of Industry owns the*Tres Hermanos
property, and has prepared a concept plan for a mixed
residential community.on the site pursuant to Diamond Bar's
request."
The Table on page 11-14 DOES NOT reflect this
GPAC APPROVED philosophy. Table 11-4 is entitled
"Residential Development Potential".: Under "Specific Plan"..
the potential is listed- ZERO". How can it be "The most
significant residential development opportunity remaining in
Diamond Bar" on one page, and have "ZERO Residential
Development Potential" on a preceding page? (Which is
exactly the point that was made by the State's
tate's Housing &
Community Development Office, only in different words.)
3. There is no definition of the "Mixed Use" land use
designation ANYWHERE * in the General Plan, including the
Housing Element. Nor, has the acreage been set aside in the
Housing Element, as was suggested by H.C.D. as being a
potential action that would allow for the reversal of their
frequently stated conclusion that our General Plan did not
I (and would not) meet their approval.
4. 1 suggest the best compromise to the "Slope -Density"
debate would be to leave the GPAC approved Slope -Density
formula for Rural Residential the way it was, and apply
Messrs. Meyer's and Flamenbaum's Slope -Density alternative
formula to the other four categories of -Residential Land Use.
The alternative formula has been described as covering ALL
Diamond Bar. This isn't true unless you can explain how it
would -
apply to Commercial; -Industrial, Professional Office,
-
etc., land use categories.
The fact of the -matter is: This alternative Slope-'
Density formula is just a shell game. If the underlining Land
Use Category of any particular parcel'is changed from, say,
Low Density Residential to Low -Medium Density Residential,
the formula has NO MEANING or TEETH. (e.g., If a
developer wanted to build 125 homes on 50 acres of 250 or
greater slope, held just ask that a higher and higher density
Land Use Category be applied to his property until, once he
received approval of that underlying land -use density, when
you multiplied the Slope -Density factor, whatever that turns
out -to be, times the total number of homes allowed for.50
acres under that land use category, you ended up with 125,or
more homes!) Like I said: Its just a meaningless shell game!
Respectfully submitted,
Mr. Gary L. Neely
From :
JAMES DESTEFANO
Number :
108 of 114
To :
GARY''NEELY
Date :
08/17/94 1:49pm
Subject :
Housing Element
Reference
: 104
Read :
08/11/94 5:32pm
Private
: NO-
Conf :
005 - Planning Commission
Gary:
Thank you
for.your comments. I will.forward
a copy of your
message to
the Planning Commission.
Please note that the Planning Commission will meet to further
discuss the Draft General Plan on Tuesday, August -23, 1994, 7:00 p.m.,
at the SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive.
Jim
From
: LYDIA PLUNK
Number
109 of 114
To
: GARY NEELY
Date
08/17/94 4:11pm
Subject :
Housing Element
Reference
: NONE
Re ' ad :
08/17/94 5:33pm (REPLIES)
Private :
NO
Conf :
005 - Planning Commission
As I recall, the direction from staff from the Commission has been
to revisit the maps and charts once the Land Use Map has been completed.
The reason is that there are potentially a number of changes that could
occur that would effect the final numbers. Rather than have several
erata sheets that we might confuse with one another, when we have
finished our basic review, then staff is to go over the maps with 'a
fine tooth comb. At that point, it is important that descrepancies
between maps, other maps, and charts need to be corrected. I do
agree that 'there is a need to be concerned with the overlaying of
these documents for accuracy and atrue picture of what the
General Plan means. Should we miss any of.these adjustments (current
and future), I hope that you will contact the Commission.
aesthetic -- views from the corridor should reinforce the feeling in the traveler that they are in
an environmentally sensitive .area. Similarly, views of the corridor from adjacent properties
should reinforce the feeling that the corridor is a natural part of the landscape. Corridor
structures, as necessary, should be a natural part of the terrain.
By nature of the location of the by-pass corridor in and around the SEA 15, the corridor should
be for regional traffic and should not encourage local access for adjacent development except as
required by safety and emergency access requirements. Construction activity should be limited
to the right-of-way envelope. End points of the corridor would incorporate value criteria.
An environmentally sensitive transportation corridor does.not presume to specify the type of vehicles that
will utilize the facility. Rather, it should encourage and foster high occupancy, clean operation, modes
that are integrated with the corridor. Planning efforts should look to the future and anticipate
technologies that will emerge and contribute to development of a corridor that meets the growing travel
demands of the region and maintains precious natural resources.
d. Level of Service Standards
Level of service standards define the desirable traffic volumes on City streets in relation to the capacity
of those streets. The City has utilized level of service standards in the traffic analysis work for the
General Plan, and these are summarized in the EIR. The City should continue to use such standards,
maintaining and updating them when necessary to be consistent with current prevailing standards in the
region and requirements such as the statewide Congestion Management Program. 'Fe
Table V-1
Daily Roadway Capacity Values
6 Lanes Divided Major Arterial 33,900 39,400 45,000 50,600 56,300
4 Lands Divided
Minor Arterial
22,500
26,300
30,000
33,800
37,500
4 Lanes (Undivided)
Collector
15,000
17,500
20,000
22,500
25,000
2 Lanes (Undivided)
Collector/Residentia
1 Collector
7,500
8,800
10,000
11,300
12,500
2 Lanes (Undivided)
Local Road
1,875
2,190
2,500
2,810
3,125
Diamond Bar General Plan Circulation Element
August 15, 1994 Planning Commission Revisions V-5
Strategies:
Objective 1.2
1.1.1 Preclude the connection of roadways from adjacent jurisdictions into the City unless
demonstrable benefits to Diamond Bar residents and businesses are indicated.
1.1.2 In reviewing transportation improvements, maintain a clear distinction between local and
regional objectives.
1.1.3 Ensure the opportunity for public comment on 'major changes in operational
characteristics of the circulation system.
1.1.4 Proactively work with adjacent jurisdictions'
n the evaluation of envir-onmentally sensitiv
Fegienal tmnspe4atien IiBkage eptions d3feu& the emter4y per-tien ef the Sphe
lefluenep ffea -ANeh reeegnize, prioritize sensitivity and avoid dismption
1.1.5
Continue to seek support for Regional State Transportation Improvement Program
(RSTIP) projects as proposed by the City of Diamond Bar such as:
(a) Encourage modification of the SR57/SR60 interchange;
(b) t Pursue construction of HOV lanes on SR60, from SR57 north to San
Bernardino County;
(C)
§U-pb# Aafsu construction of HOV lanes on SR60, from Brea Canyon Road
..... . .....
.to SR57 north;
(d) Pursue construction of HOV lanes on SR57, from Orange County to
SR60; and
(e) PUFFae Pafk and iide expansien adjaGent te the SR57 and 9-R60 ifiterehange.
1.1.6 Encourage Orange and*San Bernardino Counties to fund and construct an environmentally
sensitive transportation corridor roadway through Soquel Canyon and or Carbon Canyon.
1.1.7 The Citv should encourage the efforts of other Jurisdictions and agencies to complete the
work on other circulationrp oleos outside of Diamond Bar that will ositivel effect
Diamond Bar's traffic conditions. These include:
Lai completion of SR -30
M Upgrade of SR -71 to freeway standards
(c) The construction ofSoquel Canyon Road extension to SR -57
?d—)
lursue Development of additional lanes on SR60 easterly of the City.
1.1.8 Coordinate the use of land use policies from neighboring communities and incorporate
all existing traffic data including improvements and proposal for the regional circulation
system.
Balance the need for optimum traffic flow on City arterials within economic realities,
environmental, and aesthetic considerations.
Diamond Bar General Plan Circulation Element
August 15, 1994 Planning Commission Revisions V44
Strategies:
1.2.1 Prepare programs for traffic control measures including, but not limited to,
additional stop signs at problem intersections, timing of stop lights, and regulation
of speed limits.
1.2..2 Maintain flexibility in the cross sections and configuration of streets within
topographically rugged or environmentally sensitive areas.,
1.2.3 Pursue•a #iyi �F c��. eassuresito�enha P circulation and transient traffic movements.
�&i .m.aarcr..vawnluw•unw
Objective 1.3 Maintain the integrity of residential neighborhoods. Discourage through traffic.
Strategies:
1.3.1 Prevent the creation of new roadway connections which adversely impact existing
neighborhoods.
1.3.2 Implement heighberheed traffic control programs t- to reduce and divert
through traffic.
1.3.3 Design iew d'v lop eggs antltiheir access points in sueh-a wayithat the capacity of -
local rsdtial streets i �rir%t�exc '` ed. o E9' t t E
1.3.4 Minimize impacts of roadways serving the Diamond Ranch high school site on
surrounding residential neighborhoods.
1:35 The Cy should implement stro��n measures to maintain the inte9d of the. Sunset
Crossin Road residential area at .the western ci limits bv cul-de-sacins Sunset
CrossinRoad and rem the cul-de-sacinQ of Washin on and Beaverhead
Streets.
GOAL 2 "Provide a balanced transportation system for the safe and efficient movement of
people, goods and services through the City."
Objective 2.1 Maximize the use of alternative transportation modes within and through the City to decrease
reliance on single passenger dutomobiles.
Strategies:
2.1.1 Maximize the availability and use of public transit service.
2.1.2 Investigate the feasibility of establishing a local transit system. Support privately
funded local transit systems for seniors and youths.
2.1.3 Support mixed-use developments to maximize transportation efficiency.
2.1.4 Pursue a cooperative effort with Caltrans and regional transit providers to develop
a major intermodal transportation facility at the prepesed Metrolink Station near Brea
Canyon'Road and State Route 60.
Diamond Bar General Plan Circulation Element
August 15, 1994 Planning Commission Revisions V-15
File nevi uu d by �z�~
ora ° and is ready forsl� �!G �q uol�aru�ssp
d�struciio by Gity Gls� Joh Xpeaa sl pus rio
Rq Ps Iwo 9II:1