Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/10/1990CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION rte, DECEMBER 10, 1990 ,_CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Schey called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. in the Walnut Valley School District Board Meeting Room 880 South Lemon Street, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chairman Harmony. ROLL CALL: Commissioner Grothe, Vice Chairman Harmony, Chairman Schey. Commissioner Lin and Commissioner MacBride were absent. -- Also present were Planning Director James DeStefano, Assoc. Planner Robert Searcy, City Attorney Bill Curley, City Engineer Sid Mousavi, Contract Secretary Liz Myers. CONSENT CALENDAR: VC/Harmony requested the Minutes of November 26, 1990 be amended on page 13, eighth paragraph, to change "grates" to "grades". . Motion was made by VC/Harmony, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Consent Calendar and the Minutes of November 26, 1990 as amended. 1EA BUSINESS: v,_,_zequest for Staff reported the request is for an extension of an Extension of existing Tentative Parcel Map for property commonly Tentative Map known as Country Hills Town Center, located on Diamond #18722 Bar Boulevard, nearing Brea Canyon Road. The map was ap- proved by the County on December 23, 1987 and should have expired December 23, 1989. A letter was submitted, dated December 5, 1989, requesting an extension, but was never acted upon. City Planning and Engineering staff members have had discussions with the owners of the de- velopment project. Staff requested,' and received from the applicant, an outline of the chronology of events regarding the tentative map. The approval of the exten- sion request will extend the life of the map from Decem- ber 23, 1989 to December 23, 1990. The applicant has stated their ability to submit the final map, for City review, prior to December 23, 1990. The final map will be scheduled for review at a future City Council meet- ing. It is staff's opinion that the extension request has merit and should be granted. The development pro- ject is physically complete and to the knowledge of the Planning Staff, all conditions of the approved map have been satisfied. Staff recommended the Planning Commis- sion approve an extension of time for Tentative Parcel i Map No. 18722, extending the life of the map through De- cember 23, 1990. -- December 10, 1990 i �y Page 2 Chair/Schey asked if this is the first extension of the Tentative Map and inquired as to the reason the map has not been recorded. VC/Harmony inquired if the codes, relative to the devel- opment of the shopping center, were all under County standards. James DeStefano, Planning Director, responded the map was processed prior to incorporation. The development of the Center was constructed, prior to incorporation. He explained the County standards, in which the project was approved, are essentially the same standards the City embraces today. He suggested asking the applicant to explain why the map was not previously recorded. Chair/Schey, with the consensus of the Commission, perm - itted the applicant to speak before the Commission. Mike Joyce, Legal Counsel fbr the developer, replied the final map was submitted to the County for a plan check in June 9, 1988. There was a bad hand off from the County to- the City in the incorporation process. An additional refiling had been made in 1989, but further problems were encountered. He stated, in addition to the retroactive extension through December 23, 1990, they're requesting an additional three (3) month exten- sion to get them through any problems that may arise. The situation is unusual in which the map is being pre- sented after the completion of the shopping center. He 'r explained the urgency of completing the map is their I'I need to finance a portion of the center. Chair/Schey inquired if the applicants intent is to re- cord the map sometime in the next two or three months. Mike Joyce stated it will be submitted before December 23, 1990, after approval of the plan check. James DeStefano stated staff is not opposed to extending the life of the map until March 23, 1991, as long as it is the intent of the applicant to submit the map immedi- ately for final processing. �i Chair/Schey asked if the map has been plan checked by the City Engineer. Mike Joyce stated the final map was not checked by the City Engineer. It was submitted to the County in 1988 but nothing came of it. VC/Harmony inquired who the current owner is. �'ll• Cary Treff, representative of the Wolff Company, stated i„ the present owner is Lansing Pacific Fund. December 10, 1990 Page 3 VC/Harmony questioned the applicants plan to correct the illegal monument signs and the signs on the back of buildings. Cary Treff responded the only monument sign he is aware of was approved by the County. The signs in back of the building will be taken care of if they are not in con- formance with the final results of the sign ordinance. VC/Harmony asserted there are two (2) monument signs, one small monument sign behind the Wherehouse, and an- other restaurant pad sign, as well as a few small signs behind the building. Cary Treff agreed to remove the monument signs immedi- ately. ' VC/Harmony requested some type of assurance that the monument signs and the small signs behind the building will be removed. Cary Treff preferred not to take down the signs behind the back of the buildings until the sign ordinance has been resolved. He believed the small signs are pres- ently in conformance to the sign ordinance. He was un- ure as to the kind of assurance requested. Chair/Schey inquired, .assuming the sign ordinance will have provisions for a sign program, if the requirement for a sign program would be applicable to the Center, or would the Center signage become a non -conforming and un- touchable with the new ordinance. James DeStefano responded that it is too early in the process to know what the sign ordinance will be com- prised of and, therefore, it is difficult to evaluate the outcome of each sign at the shopping center. Bill Curley, City Attorney, explained developing sign regulations, in which pre-existing signs don't meet the standards, would require an abatement process to exped- ite their removal. The abatement process is not a pro- blem with signs that have no pre-existing rights. VC/Harmony stated the City has issued letters in the past requesting compliance on the issue. He maintained the necessity of obtaining assurance the applicant will be in compliance with the minimum of the County stand- ards. He would like verbal assurance, as well as lock- ing it in with a bond or cash assurity, if the agreement is not complied with, the City has authorization to re- move the signs. ad.uie��eulu. dWnwdddl•.m 4d.dwlwi»�n..�_. _ December 10, 1990 Page 4 James DeStefano explained the issue of signage and code enforcement responsibilities are different than the is- sue of the tentative map extension of time before the Commission. The Commission does not have the legal abil- ity to apply new conditions to the Tentative Map. VC/Harmony inquired why the Commission does not have latitude to condition and requested a verbal explanation of the conditions of the tentative. Bill Curley explained the City inherited the map with all the conditions. The map is now at the stage of be- ing looked at as basically a ministerial act to see if the conditions of the tentative are met. He stated the conditions of the tentative pertain to the parcelization of the site. VC/Harmony asserted his inability to vote for approval to expedite an extension knowing there are obvious vio- lations. He would like to see some sort of good will effort on the part of the developer. Cary Treff verbally assured the Commission the monument signs will be removed immediately. Chair/Schey suggested a motion to extend the Tentative Tract, with direction to staff to pursue the code en- �,.y' forcement letters submitted earlier and entertain a statement from the applicant for the record. C/Grothe felt assured the applicant will follow the ve- rbal agreement, especially since the applicant will need to return to the Commission for future approval of pro- posals.- James DeStefano stated the Commissions direction is ei- ther to approve or deny the map. With respect to the code enforcement of signage, he recommended the Commis- sion give direction to staff to work with the applicant on the removal of all free standing signs. Wall signs should be left alone until the final adoption of the sign ordinance, to avoid removing signs that may be per - witted in a couple of months. He recommended approval of the extension of the map. VC/Harmony inquired when an existing condition become acceptable by not enforcing it's removal. Bill Curley explained the failure to enforce our own regulations cannot be raised as a defense in any legal action the City may take. Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by Chair/Schey and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the extension of the Ten- tative Tract No. 18722, retroactive through December 23, i 1989 and extending through March 23,1991. December 10, 1990 ?UBLIC REARING ITEMS: "-"-Cup 90-0109 Cellular Phone. Page 5 Staff reported the matter is a continued public hearing from November 26, 1990. The Commission requested alter- native sites at this location, and in the general vicin- ity, be reviewed. Staff has received the information needed in order to provide the Commission with an appro- priate recommendation. Robert Searcy, Associate Planner, reported pursuant to the Commissions request for a site review of final al- ternative locations for the monopole, he met with the applicant and the property owner representative at the site. Two (2) potential locations on the property were identified and analyzed: 1. The only portion of the property along the north- ern boundary that appears to provide a possible alternative lies between the one (1) and the two (2) floor structures. The placement of the 60 foot monopole at this location would expose the monopole to both east and west bound traffic on the 57 freeway. The monopole would be located within 100 feet of the freeway and would offer an unobstructed visual impact to vehicular travelers to a much greater extent than the currently pro- posed location. Additionally, the trash dumpsters and two (2) parking stalls occupy the space and would have to be relocated elsewhere on the site. The relocation of the trash enclosure would create a major difficulty because of the configuration of the site. No other alternative would provide ade- quate.access and maneuverability for the public, and the refuge disposal vehicle. Also, there is no area identified that could be transformed into the two (2) deleted parking stalls. 2. At the western end of the parcel, the parcel nar- rows to a blunted point. The property adjacent to this property line is under County and Cal Trans jurisdiction. To locate the monopole here, would offer the most unobstructed and continuous view to freeway traffic. This portion of the site yields the closest approximate grade to the freeway and provides almost no visual obstructions. This lo- cation would also decrease the desired performance of the monopole and repeater station because of the inability to locate the repeater station in the nearest building. The interior storage unit requires in excess of a seven (7) foot ceiling for adequate connections and ventilation. The build- ing adjacent to this location cannot provide this ceiling height. To run the coaxial to the nearest available storage unit would require a series of three (3) inch in diameter cables to extend over 300 feet. Beyond increasing exposure to problems which could interrupt service, each foot of cable represents diminished service capabilities. December 10, 1990 Page 6 Staff recommended the most appropriate location of the monopole would be the original planned loca- tion. The applicant stated it would be an approp- riate condition to put larger fruit trees on the outside of the retaining wall along the street on Prospectors Road to hide the appearance of the monopole. Staff recommended the Planning Commis- sion approve the said application with conditions. C/Grothe was not fully convinced the mini -storage site is the only site geographically suited. He stated since pole signs along the freeway will be restricted, he can't see allowing a 60 foot monopole. VC/Harmony conceded to the possibility of a better geo- graphic location existing, but as a governmental agency dealing with a private enterprise, our authority extends to deciding if the requested location is acceptable or unacceptable, and not deciding which location would be most appropriate. C/Grothe maintained business should not be allowed to install something private individuals would be prohibit- ed from. j Chair/Schey declared the Public Hearing open. Jerome Buckmelter, representative of L.A. Cellular Tele- phone Co., stated the location chosen is the most appro- priate. They would be willing to plant 36" to 42" box trees to aid in obstructing visibility. Chair/Schey, with no,one requesting to speak either in favor of or opposed to the proposal, declared the Public Hearing closed. Chair/Schey contended the business is a public utility that serves the public and is regulated by the CPUC. He maintained the location of the monopole is inconsequen- tial. Motion was made by VC/Harmony, seconded by Chair/Schey and CARRIED to approve the Resolution for adoption and the CUP subject to the seven (7) conditions "listed by staff in the packet, as well as the condition that four (4) 36" box trees be installed adjacent to the monopole subject to approval of a landscaping plan by the Direc- tor of Planning, and to include the condition that no microwave dishes, or antennae whips will be installed. 1 Nay - C/Grothe 2 Ayes - VC/Harmony and Chair/Schey December 10, 1990 7A 90-2 i Development `� Agreement �___d,WOUNCEXENTS: Page 7 - Staff reported the development agreement is being formu- lated between the City and the Developer for the proper- ty known as the Gateway Corporate Center. A Draft Devel- opment Agreement has been prepared and is being circu- lated for review by the Zelman Development Company, the City's Traffic Engineer and the City Attorney. Once their comments have been received, a final document will be prepared for the presentation to the Planning Commis- sion. Since the Final document has not yet been prepar- ed, it is suggested the matter be continued to the Plan- ning Commission Meeting of January 14, 1991. Chair/Schey declared the Public Hearing open. Ben Refiling, 1611 Hanover, City of Industry, represent- ing the Zelman Company, stated his willingness to answer any questions. Chair/Schey closed the Public Hearing. VC/Harmony stated his support of the Gateway Center and hope for its' success. Motion made by VC/Harmony, seconded by C/Grothe and CAR- RIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the matter to the next reg- ular meeting of January 14, 1991. VC/Harmony,referred to the memo he submitted to the com- mission. He suggested the formation of a speakers bu- reau composed of volunteers from staff and Commission members. He stated the volunteers must be available to go out and talk to community groups and bring the demo- cratic processes to Civic organizations. The opportun- ity of carrying out informal discussions on a one to one basis with civic organizations is important to the in- formation gathering process. With these informal dis- cussions, comes the opportunity of inviting the public to attend, and get involved with, the formal hearings and deliberations of the Planning Commission. Chair/Schey inquired if VC/Harmony had any particular requests from any agencies or groups. VC/Harmony replied there have been no requests. He sug- gested sending out a letter to the Civic Organizations and making a press release to the public stating its' availability. C/Grothe asked for a further explanation on subjects to discuss. --r----=�T_7 �,I .a,.. �---r- — 'rl='�T-T—"r;raml:,,, i�'�I�I111�I I�,Illli lVI i T"*rr—.«.:. December 10, 1990 Page 8 VC/Harmony explained the purpose of the informal discus- sions is not so much to state our opinions on matters, but to help clarify any complexities that may exist within the subject matter. As Public officials, there is a responsibility to play an active role in addressing questions from the public. Chair/Schey noted in most cases these type of appearanc- es are going to be more with Rotary Club groups or Cham- ber of Commerce groups asking for details on specific time frames of issues. C/Grothe asserted in most cases, staff would answer questions on a lot of issues. He suggested that an up- coming calendar would be appropriate to help the Commis- sioners answer questions pertaining to issues submitted to the City. Chair/Schey remarked on the merits of a Speakers Bureau but is uncertain how the concept could be implemented. Bill Curley explained the agenda items are announcements without specificity. He stated VC/Harmony's proposal would have to be reset to the following meeting to come back for a formal action. Chair/Schey requested staff to investigate if there is a Wy formalized process being used by neighboring communities that might create that availability. The matter will be placed on the next agenda of January 14, 1991. !'ADJOURNMENT: i ca es Destefano Secretary/Planning ISI, Chair/Schey commented on several maintenance concerns, i.e. irrigation, turf, and the facilities.of the parks are abysmal. He noted Charles Janiel's expertise in the area and wondered if he has authority over the mainte- nance and if he's being properly staffed. C/Grothe concurred the maintenance of the parks are slipping. Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by VC/Harmony and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at 8:20 p.m. Commission David Schey. _ . Chairman