HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/12/1990� CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 12, 1990
� The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar convened in m
� regular session at 7:00 p.m. in the Walnut Valley School District
Board Meeting Room, 880 South Lemon Avenue, Walnut, California.
'
PRESENT: 5 COMMISSIONERS: 8rothe, Lin, Kane, Vice Chairman
Harmony, and Chairman Sohey
ABSENT: O COMMISSIONERS
ALSO -PRESENT: Bill Curley, Assistant City Attorney
Ron Kranzer, City Engineer
Dennis Tarango, Acting Planning Director
Robert Gearcy, Assistant Planning Director
Dawn Anderson, Planning Technician
Chairman 8ohey stated that the Commission was now going to request
those individuals who wished to speak during the public hearing to
�
sign e statement indicating which item(o) they were interested in
� speaking about and also indicating their address so that this
information will accurately be reflected in the Minutes of the
meeting.
/
MINUTES:
� |
�
Chairman Sohey asked the Commission to consider the Minutes of
)
February 12, 1990.
�
Vice Chairman Harmony quest,
oned the wording of the applicant's,
Bob Bucannon, statement. The app licant had stated that at the last
�
Municipal Advisory Committee meeting that their project went
�
through with the County of Loo Angeles, the request for C3 zoning
was approved.Vice Chairman Harmony wanted this changed to clearly
ind�omte that thia wae only wh�� �he applio�nt represented at the
meeting but not an accurate statement.
� Motion was mode by Vice Chairman Harmony and seconded by
Commissioner Kane to approve the minutes with this amendment.
MOTION CARRIED unanimously.
�
�)
�
�
� .
� � ^
�
�, -
{T'
MATTERS FROM THE PUBLIC:
Don Schad, 1824 Shaded Wood Road, Diamond Bar, asked the Commission
to consider the following three items:
1. A moratorium to be placed on any new building in the City of
Diamond Bar until such a time as the General Plan has been
established, as this will provide better guidelines for
development;
2. EIRs established for any further development be based upon a
1 year survey of any areas that may be considered for
development due to the fact that some rare plants take a year
to cycle as they progress in their development; and
3. Standards for building construction, particularly in the
electrical code, be raised so that all structures use flex or
EMT for wiring, all of the wiring be raised up to THHN which
is Thermal Plastic Nylon covered wire which resists corrosion,
and any wiring for kitchen, garage or utility circuits be
raised from No. 12 to No. 10.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. City Council Minutes - meeting of February 20, 1990.
2. R-eso-1-ution for Zone Chanqe/Con-dlitional Use Perm -It -8,944:0, a
reauest for zone change from CPD Corlime rci an. ned
Development) to C-3 (Unlimited Commercial) with a Conditional
Use Permit application to allow for a fully automated car wash
with related services (detail shop, accessory sales) on I
acre, located at 3100 South Diamond Bar Boulevard at the
southeasterly corner of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon
Road. 4-
3. Request to withdraw Zone Change/Conditional Use Permit
4. Request to withdraw Zone Change/Conditional Use Permit 89075.
Motion was made by Commissioner Kane and seconded by Commissioner
Grothe to approve the Consent Calendar. MOTION CARRIED
unanimously.
2
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1 Parcel Map 15625, a request to subdivide a 4.8 acre parcel
into four (4) lots, located at 525 South Grand Avenue,
westerly of Grand Avenue, southerly of Brea Canyon Road,
northerly of Orange (57) Freeway and Pomona (50) Freeway in
the City of Diamond Bar.
Rob Searcy gave an overview of the project, referencing to the
site plan and elevations. The project is located to the north
and partly to the west of the Pomona Freeway. It is currently
zoned C3 -DP -BE (Unlimited Commercial -Development Program -
Billboard Exclusion). The surrounding properties 'located east
and south are zoned Open Space, Diamond Bar Golf Course, the
rest of the project is surrounded by property in the City of
Industry. The parcel is currently the home of Diamond Bar
Honda. A negative declaration was prepared which dealt with
the grading of the project. The applicants have also
submitted a soils report and a Biota report stating that the
subdivision -itself will not create any negative impacts at
this site.
Public Hearing was opened:
Emad Hamdy, 233 N. Euclid Avenue, Ontario, CA 91762, Architect
and owner and Mark Logan, 525 S. Grand Avenue, Diamond Bar,
CA 91765, General Manager at Diamond Bar Honda and Assistant
to Russ Hand who is the owner of the property, did not have
a presentation for the Commission but were available for
questions.
The Commission is only addressing the subdivision and the
Conditional Use Permit will be presented to them at the next
meeting on March 26, 1990.
Mr. Logan explained that the reason for separating the project
is because they have exhausted the funds set aside, for the
project and upon approval and grading of the subdivision they
will request additional funds to finish the project. Their
goal is to get to finished grade so that future building can
take place.
The applicants did not have information on the traffic study
as it was submitted as part of the Conditional Use Permit.
The applicants stated that there was a parcel map submitted
earlier for this property requesting a subdivision to 3 lots.
The County expressed the desire to redesign this project from
3 parcels to the present proposal. This was submitted to
County 1 1/2 years ago but has beenpostponed since then.
�71171r*r T7
Secretary Tarango stated that the C3 zoning would still allow
all three of the uses that have been requested by the
applicants on the present site whether the property was
subdivided or not. The subdivision will not intensify the use
nor will it generate additional traffic or any other negative
impact. The subdivision is a financial mechanism instead of
a land use purpose.
Mr. Curley stated that the approval of the subdivision does
not limit, in any way, the Commission's ability to approve,
deny or modify the Conditional Use Permit.
Chairman Schey was concerned that if the parcel was
subdivided, that the parcels might be sold to individual
parties thus possibly creating a situation where the
individual owners might not cooperate with each other to
develop a unified project.
Mr. Curley stated that granting the subdivision would not
inhibit the Commission's ability to set requirements
establishing uniformity among the individual parcels. The
landscape requirements, etc. can be applied to each parcel
through a mutual access development rights. These can be
mitigation measures pertaining to the project as a whole.
John Brewster, 4071 2nd Street, Yorba Linda, CA 92680, leaser
of the parcel intended for the construction of the car wash,
wanted to address the traffic issue. The bulk of McDonalds
patrons will be using Grand Avenue for ingress and egress.
There is a center median on Grand which will have right turns
in and out of the parcel. The car wash will be equipped to
stack 120 to 140 cars on-site, keeping them off of the public
streets and helping to alleviate potential traffic problems.
Ron Kranzer, the City Engineer and Traffic Engineer for the
City of Diamond Bar, also addressed the traffic issue. When
the County reviewed this project, they -were concerned as to
the ingress and egress to the site off of Grand Avenue. One
of the conditions from the County is that Mr. Kranzer concurs
with and recommends to the Commission is that Parcels 2 and
4 that ingress and egress be limited to a single driveway and
that the vehicular dedi-cation rights for the remaining
frontage of those two parcel be granted tothe City.
Secondly, although it falls on City of industry to regulate
because the street portion is in the City of Industry, the
original traffic impact analysis, as submitted by the
developer, had indicated that they wanted to remove the entire
raised median and have a painted median allowihg1for a two-
way left turn lane. The City Engineer finds this unacceptable
and has requested that the Traffic Engineer working for the
applicants revisit the site. The applicants' latest proposal
is to only provide a left turn off of Grand Avenue into
4
1414,
McDonalds by providing a cut into the median. The peak hour
for a car wash does not coincide with the traffic peak hour.
However, there is a small conflict with a McDonalds
establishment and the evening peak hour. The volumes
projected do not indicate that there will be an adverse
situation if the project is approved with the conditions
proposed. Any revision to the median should allow for ingress
into the site only and that vehicular access be dedicated for
Lot 2 and 4 with exception of the one right-of-way which will
have to be mutually accepted before the map is finalized.
Those who wish to speak in favor of the project:
There were none.
Those who wish to speak in opposition of project:_
There were none.
Public Hearing was closed,
Discussion among the Commission followed. Vice Chairman
Harmony voiced his concern for not being able to review the
Conditional Use Permit in conjunction with the parcel map.
He also had concerns regarding traffic and stated that he
would like know more about plans for a signal installation at
the intersection of Grand Avenue and Brea Canyon. He also
wished to know what the City of Industry's plans are
pertaining to the traffic issue. He did not want to create
conditions that would be inconsistent with City of Industry's
development plans. He was in favor of continuing the project.
Commissioner Grothe felt that approving the parcel map was
irrelevant to what uses are eventually developed on the
parcels.
Commissioner Kane was concerned with the traffic issue.
Commissioner Lin also felt that the approval of the parcel map
would not affect the final decision of the uses of the
parcels.
Chairman Schey was willing to approve the subdivision based
on the fact that the Commission is going to be strict in the
conditions of the approval of the parcels. He was concerned
that at the time the property is actually developed that there
may be a need to realign some of the parcels.
9
—I - -- - - 117`47711717-17- ' ' -
Secretary Tarango stated that there is a Development Program
which allows the Commission to review the grading, walkway,
landscaping, height of walls, arrangement of buildings,
structures, size and colors of the buildings.
Ron Kranzer explained Condition No. 20 on the recommended
conditions of approval. The applicants have provided a
traffic analysis report and have complied with that condition.
Mr. Kranzer has agreed with the findings and the mitigation
measures that were contained within the report, with the
revision that they do not remove the raised median and that
the site be restricted to a left turn only in and out of the
site. The last part of Condition 20 regarding the forming of
a thoroughfare is not applicable to this case because the City
does not have a thoroughfare program. There is a signal
planned for the project location and he believed that it was
already funded for as part of the Grand Avenue extension but
would have to verify this information. Parcel 4 will be
accessed from the McDonalds parcel and they will be required
to have a reciprocal access agreement. In response to a
question from Vice Chairman Harmony, Mr. Kranzer concurred
that at the time the Commission reviews a subdivision
proposal, it would be appropriate to discuss and include as
part of the final decision, the points of ingress and egress
for the site.
Vice Chairman Harmony again expressed his concern for making
a decision on the subdivision without having the Conditional
Use Permit presented to them. He felt that without a detailed
description of the proposed uses including site plans,
elevations, traffic studies, and the City of Industry's
feelings and recommendation, the Commission can not see the
complete proposal, thus not accomplishing the goals of the
City Council inherent in the development review ordinance.
Mr. Curley felt' that it would be appropriate to delete the
"Engineering Departm4nt" and replace them with "City
words
Engineer" and also delete the last sentence of Condition No.
18.
Motion was made by Commissioner Grothe and seconded by
Commissioner Lin to approve Parcel Map No. 15625 with the
amendment of replacing the words "Engineering Department" with
"City Engineer" and deleting the last sentence of Condition
No. 18.
M
J
Chairman Schey proposed an amendment to the motion to add a
Condition 45 stating that the review under the PD (Planned
Development) zoning designation be required for the overall
site without any regard to change of ownership or the timing
or phasing of the development on various parcels, thus putting
in writing that the Commission wants to review the project as
an uniformed proposal instead of reviewing it on a parcel by
parcel basis.
Motion was made by Chairman Schey and seconded by Commissioner
Kane to amend the proposal by adding the requirement of Part
2 of Chapter 2240, the DP (Development Program) zone shall be
applied in its entirety to the site.
Discussion among the Commission followed
Chairman Schey made a call to question on the motion made.
Vice Chairman Harmony abstained, 4 Commissioners were in
favor.
Chairman Schey made a call to question on the motion made as
amended. Vice Chairman Harmony was opposed, 4 Commissioners
were in favor. MOTION CARRIED.
2. Proposed Development Review Ordinance, Bill Curley explained
the ordinance to the Commission. At the request of the City
Council, the City Attorneys office has prepared a Development
Review Ordinance with the intent to create a means to look at
a comprehensive development program. This ordinance will
provide a series of reviews. Some projects will be strictly
handled by staff, while others will require Planning
Commission and City Council review. Projects reviewed on
staff level, in the case of denial, are appealed to the
Planning Commission, and Planning Commission decisions are
appealed to the City Council.
Public Hearing was opened:
Those who wish to speak in favor of the protect:
There were none.
Those who wish to speak in opposition of project:
There were none.
N
Public Hearing was closed.
Chairman Schey proposed that under the Development Review
Application on Page No. 3, Item A, . . . detailed plot plan
showing . . . add a No. 4 that would require a landscape plan
showing existing and proposed landscaping to be submitted as
part of the development package.
Motion was made by Chairman Schey and seconded by Commissioner
Kane to approve the Development Review Ordinance as submitted
by staff with an amendment to Section 2272030 adding an Item
A4 requiring a landscape plan showing existing and proposed
landscaping to be submitted as part the detailed plot plan.
MOTION CARRIED unanimously.
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. Art in Public Places, Bill Curley reviewed the -City of Brea's
Ordinance for Art in Public Places with the Commission. The
City of Brea has set a requirement that certain levels of
development measured by the amount of the building evaluation
is required to contribute art to the community. They have
established a Cultural Arts Commission to ensure that there
is city input in selecting the art. This ordinance has been
submitted to the Diamond Bar Planning Commission for their
consideration and input to determine if this is something that
the City of Diamond Bar might be interested in pursuing.
Commissioner Grothe was aware that the City Council has
recommended that the Planning Commission review this
ordinance, but he felt that there are numerous other issues
such as directing staff to work on the landscape area,
maintenance ordinance, parking ordinances, etc. that need the
Commission's immediate attention.
Commissioner Kane stated that he felt art was in the eyes of
the beholder, making the decision of approving art designs
very difficult. What is art to one person might be offensive
to another person.
Vice Chairman Harmony brought up the fact that the City of
Diamond Bar is a pretty well developed area. The City of
Brea, when this ordinance was established, had large ratio of
land being developed with industrial and commercial complexes.
He wondered how applicable this ordinance wouId be to the City
of Diamond Bar as it now exists.
Chairman Schey also felt that there are some current issues
that should take precedent over the Art in Public Places
Ordinance.
171177171-7-
G)
Motion was made by Chairman Schey and seconded by Commissioner
Grothe to recommend to the Council that the Art in Public
Places Ordinance be considered a lower priority than setting
the development standards 'for the City and completing the work
on the General Plan, and at such time that it is reviewed, the
program of implementation',be geared toward the conditions of
the City of Diamond Bar as opposed to the transference of the
program from another city. Discussion among the Commission
followed.
Vice Chairman Harmony was in favor of turning down the
proposal entirely on the basis that he felt, due to the City
being largely developed, the City of Diamond Bar did not have
a need for this ordinance at this time.
Chairman Schey stated that he favored a program similar to
what Commissioner Grothe discussed when considering a
situation like Diamond Bar where there is not a vast amount
of development taking place, when the City collects an art fee
from all development and determine on a City level to place
that art in strategic locations like the library, City Hall,
a major entry point into the City, etc.
Commissioner Grothe was concerned with creating a bureaucracy
that would over burden developers by mandating that
development will not proceed until the Art in Public Places
application is approved. He is not against strictly enforcing
all the City standards; however, he felt the devei'loper should,
from the beginning, be made aware of all the requirements and
fees he will be subjected to.
Chairman Schey was in favor of recommending to the City
Council that the Planning Commission feels that there are
other issues that should take precedent rather than passing
on this issue altogether. He felt this ordinance needed to
be addressed when the pressing issues have been reviewed and
resolved.
Chairman Schey made a call 'Ito question on the previous motion.
MOTION CARRIED unanimously:.
2. Combined study Session with City Council April 2, 1990,
Secretary Tarango explained that the City Council has proposed
to discuss philosophies with the Commission so that they will
know the expectations and'Idesires of the City Council.
Vice Chairman Harmony proposed that this meeting be delayed
until after the City Council elections to ensure that each
Council member has the opportunity to have input in the
decisions accomplished in the proposed meeting. The
Commission concurred with this proposal and directed staff to
inform the Council of the Commission's recommendations.
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Commissioner Grothe wanted to discuss at what point does the
Commission direct staff to work on policies pertaining to
landscaping, parking, etc. Chairman Schey felt that it was
appropriate to direct staff to collect data on relevant parking
standards or ordinances of similar cities that have been adopted
setting landscape standards and other types of development
standards. Discussion among the commission followed.
Commi ' ssioner Grothe requested a copy of the section of the code
pertaining to "Conflict of Interest" or an in-depth explanation of
this section. It was established that if the Commissioners felt
that they might have a conflict of interest with one of the
projects being heard, that they should discuss the matter with the
City Attorney prior to the public hearing.
Chairman Schey had two (2) items that he wished to direct to staff.
The first being, that when the 2 projects proposed for Brea Canyon
Road and Lycoming Street come back to the Commission, he would like
to know whether Lycoming Street is proposed by the City of Industry
to be extended. Secondly, he is disturbed by the fact that the
nursery located by the site for the proposed hotel on Lemon Avenue
and Colima Road would be cut off from access onto Colima Road and
Lemon Avenue if this project is approved. If this did occur, it
might create a situation where the parcel where the nursery is
located will be limited as to what uses can be developed at this
site. He asked staff to review the possibility of reviewing the
parcel as a piece of the over-all area. Secretary Tarango thought
that the parcel where the nursery is located had been dedicated as
an off -ramp or on-ramp to the freeway. Ron Kranzer confirmed, that
this parcel became surplus when the on-ramp, off -ramp configuration
was changed by Cal -Trans. There is a provision that the parcel can
be an off -ramp east bound and an on-ramp west bound in the future
when funds are available.
Secretary Tarango stated that the nursery site was approved for
wholesale, but they were currently operating as retail which is a
violation of the site approval. This is currently being
investigated and discussed.
Vice Chairman Harmony wanted to know when staff planned to address
the sign ordinance. it was stated that this would be addressed
after the City Council elections.
Vice Chairman Harmony also requested th'at the staff reports and
related items be better identified so that the commission can
easily discern which project these items are referencing.
TIMOR. "M
There being no further business to come before the Commission,
Motion was made by Commissioner Kane and seconded by another
Commissioner and carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 9:30
p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting of March 26, 1990 to
be held at the Walnut Valley Unified School District Board Room at
7:00 p.m.
ATTEST:
�✓15L f� G�-
Dennis A. Tarango
Secretary, Planning commission
11
David Schey
Cirman
-----F 7 T 'IrI7T-7—"'1---
-�T