Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/25/1991CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 25, 1991 �—,CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Schey called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. in the Walnut Valley School District Board �J Meeting Room, 880 South Lemon Street, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Grothe. ROLL CALL: Commissioner Grothe, Commissioner Lin, Commissioner MacBride, and Chairman Schey. Vice chairman Harmony was absent (excused). Also present were Planning Director James DeStefano, Assoc. Planner Robert Searcy, Deputy City Attorney Bill Curley, City Engineer Sid Mousavi, Planning Technician Ann Lungu, and Contract Secretary Liz Myers. CONSENT CALENDAR: Motion was made by C/MacBride, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Consent Calendar and the Minutes of February 11, 1991. OLD BUSINESS: Irwin Kaplan, City Planner, reported that the Zoning Code Amendment NO. ZCA 91-1, presented in 91-1 the packets, represents the concerns of the IF-7ZCA Planning Commission reflected in the February 11, 1991 meeting. Chair/Schey inquired if it would be legitimate to remove an existing wall sign in lieu of requesting a pole sign. CP/Irwin Kaplan clarified that the wall sign would become non -conforming and would have to be removed unless the Planning commission determines that such existing signage can continue. C/MacBride stated the proposal is consistent with the ideas suggested at the last meeting. Chair/Schey directed staff to prepare the resolution ZCA 91-1 for the Planning Commission's consideration for the meeting of March 11, 1991. NEW BUSINESS: James DeStefano, Planning Director, reported that the applicant did not appear to make his Illumination presentation. Staff recommended postponing the Presentation item, or receive and file the information without the presentation. February 25® 1991 Chair/schey stated that street signs are not appropriate vehicles for advertising. The Commissioners concurred. Motion was made by Chair/Schey, seconded by C/MacBride and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to receive and file the matter. Review of Draft Upon the consensus of the Commission, discussion of Development Code the matter was postponed untli later in the Chapters 1.1 evenening. & 1.11 PUBLIC HEARING Robert Searcy, Assoc. Planner, reported the request ITEMS: is to construct a two (2) story structure totaling 8,352 square feet to provide additional classrooms Cup 90-0130 for a parochial school grades K-8. The request includes approval for the expansion of the playground area. Chair/Schey inquired if the school would still be within the permitted student capacity. AP/Searcy explained the new building would allow housing for the students currently enrolled. He pointed out that there will be a slight addition'to the northern elevation on the playground area. C/MacBride inquired if the expansion would preclude the use of the trailers. AP/Searcy responded that the trailers would be removed once the building is completed. The Public Hearing was declared open. Gary Stuve, member of Mount Calvary, explained the existing trailers will be removed and that the school will be operating with the same number,of students as presently. The expansion will allow for some area of growth and permit applicants on the waiting list to attend the school. C/Grothe commented that the site on Golden Springs needs improved landscaping and maintenance. i He requested the church make some form of change' in regards to curb appeal. C/Lin inquired if there will be additional traffic problems with the expansion. Gary Stuve stated there is no problem with the traffic to his understanding. The entrance will be made one way to make it less confusing. I r)k„f,.._' February 25, 1991 Page 3 Chair/Schey asked if the categorical exemptions will still apply to the expansion of the school population. Bill Curley, Deputy City Attorney, replied that both elements have been considered and still follow within the parameters. Pastor Dennis Stuve, of Mount Calvary, stated the landscaping plans in process will include curb appeal landscaping as well. William McNeal, residing adjacent to the proposed building, concurred that the existing church grounds are in need of additional landscaping. He stated the planned expansion will block the view of the existing residents. He inquired where the air conditioning units will be placed and on which side of the building will the parking be located. He commented that the school is presently big enough. Paul Lowd, residing at 23309 E. Gold Rush, is also concerned with the height of the proposed building, and the location of the air conditioning. He stated that the school presently operates on Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 12:00. He is concerned the additional students will create more disturbing noises. He stated it was his impression that the school was limited to operate only Monday through Friday. Chair/Schey asked staff to respond to the concerns. AP/Searcy replied there is no additional parking provided in the plans because there is already available parking. He explained the proposed building will be further away from the residents than the existing building. The mechanical equipment will be located on the exterior of the main structure. The school function is prohibited from operating 10:00 p.m. through 8:00 a.m., and the athletic field should not be utilized between dusk and 8:30 a.m. Monday through Friday, and dusk to 10:00 a.m., Saturday and Sunday. Chair/Schey inquired if the building is the same height as the gymnasium. AP/Searcy replied that the gymnasium is two (2) feet higher with the grade sloping towards Golden L-2 Springs. February 25, 1991 Page 4 Mr. McNeal indicated on the site plan where the existing homes are located in respect to the church. He reiterated that the new homes will 'be higher than the existing homes. Chair/Schey stated he -would like further information before' making a decision on the matter. The points of concern are the potential impact of the elevation difference, and the general maintenance condition of the site. He directed staff to visit the residents homes and take pictures of the site, obtain more information in regards to grading, and verify that the existing landscaping condi"It-J"or.'is being observed. Motion was made by C/MacBride, seconded by C/Grothe I and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the matter to the next meeting of March 11, 1991 to include the outlined informat'Lcn directed to staff. DA 91-2 Ann Lundu, Planning Technician, reported that the request is for a development agreement to develop the property for the following uses: self-service gasoline sale, automated car 'wash, automotive detail facility with :fffices, and a restaurant.' Staff recommended approval of the negative declaration with the listed conditions. Chair Schey noted it was indicated by the applic ant that the cumulative traffic is expected to result in an unacceptable level of service at Golden Springs and Grand Avenue. He inquired what are the improvements proposed by the traffic study. Sid Mousavi, City Engineer, stated the information provided by the applicant was not acceptable. Staff has requested additional reports and studies. There is not adequate traffic impact information. i Chair/Schey asked if the main entrance lines up with anything on the other side. CE/Mousavi stated the main entrance lines up with the left turn pocket already in existence. There is also a median break in existence. Staff is questioning the right turn coming out of the center because it may not be designed with an adequate turning radius for trucks. C/Lin inquired why there is only one entrance. CE/Mousavi stated the egress and ingress shoul&be limited to one access to the site to reduce the possibility of hazards of the street. 4k. X February 25, 1993. .Page 5 The Public Hearing was declared closed. Gary Clapp, 2344 Golden Springs, displayed the map and indicated the location of the proposed project. He stated the location of the driveway is adequate for visibility and speed. The traffic will be slowed because the signals are set to trigger more frequently with the onset of more traffic. Jay Nelson, Traffic Engineer, stated the increment of the project has been identified before the intersection and was found to be insignificant. He concurred that the driveways need to provide a larger radius than proposed to provide adequate ingress and egress. He stated there is a stopping distance of 700 feet which is adequate for the posted speed limit. The improvements done at Grand and Golden Springs were previously identified by L.A. County, in a traffic study done approximately a year ago, as feasible improvements. If the City feels otherwise, there are a few alternatives. The Public Hearing was declared open. Rita Shaw, resident of the area, stated she in favor of the project because it will bring revenue and the City needs a local car wash. Mike Citel, President of Champion Restaurant, stated he plans on building a restaurant in the general area and a car wash would be beneficial. Marylou Street, a business owner in Diamond Bar, stated the vacant land is an eyesore. The additional revenue for the City is beneficial. Frank Schabarum, realtor on the project, stated the pad is expansive and would be hard to utilize by restaurant owners, unless done so by the stated proposal. The project will be a good sales generator. Joe McManus, restaurant owner, stated the area is best suited for a car wash. Ben Reiling, with Zellman Development Co, 1661 Hanover, City of Industry, was concerned about controlling the traffic for the five (5) different uses on the 106 square foot site. Jack Guiso, Director of Administrative Services for South Coast Air Quality Management, was concerned the project would obstruct the view and recommended reducing the stated height. He suggested moving February 25® 1991 Page 6 the car wash building up against and parallel to Golden Springs, which would solve the circulation problem. There needs to be internal circulation. He stated the style of architecture is not keeping with the neighbors. Chair/Schey inquired as to the status of the approved car wash at the Honda location. PD/DeStefano stated there has been no permits issued, nor playas for a plan check submitted. Chair/Schey inquired which zones are capable of accommodating a car wash through either right or Conditional Use Permit (CUP). AP/Searcy stated zone C-1 and C-2 allow coffin operated car washes, and C-3 allow automated car washes. Chair/Schey stated he is bothered by the use of, a development agreement to provide a use not permitted in the zone. DCA/Curley explained the development agreement does provide a vehicle by which uses otherwise prohibited can be allowed it. It is a legitimate, permissible use as established here. C/MacBride stated he visited the ,parcel and noted the key question is that of traffic and safety. It was difficult to pull off and park, as well as getting back into the traffic stream. He would like to see the necessary data imperative to make a decision. He had not considered the aspect of view impairment from the project and is sensitive to the concern. He noted the tudor architecture design! is confusing with the existing neighbors. C/dein affirmed the need for a more detailed traffic report. She inquired if the future restaurants egress and ingress will tie with the driveways. Mr. Clapp responded that the restaurants egress and ingress will primarily be at the main driveway. C/Grothe stated the proposal has too many large holes at the current time, the architectural designs of the different projects needs to match one another, need a submittal of a sign program, and the traffic issues need to be reviewed further. Chair/Schey reiterated his concern that 11 a development agreement is more of an ancillary' or accessory use to a project to permit uses otherwise not permitted. He recommended denial and suggested February 25, 1991 Page's -7- i the age-7- the applicant go through a proper process of a zone change, and then the appropriate development processes. DCA/Curley stated that if a zone change is permitted, then other uses that would otherwise not be permitted, would be allowed in. The method proposed gives moderate control. Chair/Schey contended the existing zoning designation states the uses, and those uses should be the ones that govern the development of the site, unless the zone is changed. C/Grothe recommended giving the applicant guidance as to the process to follow for an avenue to receive acceptability of the project. CP/Kaplan suggested keeping the discussion narrowly focused and separate it from the policy question as to the use of a development agreement. Mr. Clapp emphasized that the development agreement process suggested by staff seems a just and fair way to proceed with the project. Mr. Williams requested guidance from the Commission as to the direction to proceed. Many of the concerns stated are answered within the packet submitted. Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/MacBride and CARRIED to continue the matter to the meeting of March 25, 1991 pending the resolution of the mitigation measures that would be required as part of the mitigated negative declaration for the approval of the development agreement. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Grothe, MacBride, and Lin NOES. COMMISSIONERS: C/Schey ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS., None CUP 1634-1 PD/DeStefano suggested the matter be continued to the meeting of March 11, 1991. The Public Hearing was declared open and upon receiving no comment, was declared closed. Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/MacBride and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the matter to the March 11, 1991 meeting. L—,'Review Draft PD/DeStefano requested postponement of the Development Code discussion of the Administration Chapter 1.1 until Chapt. 1.1 & 1.11 the next meeting. February 25, 1991 Page 9 Mr. Dunham stated five (5) documents were reviewed from different cities, which included Moreno Valley, Pasedena, Santa Monica, Irvine, and Buena Park, to establish a basis for the development code. CP/Kaplan suggested staff give a presentation ,to the Commission to report on the implications 'of each section of the document. Chair/Schey stated definitions could be best handled by the staff and any item out of the ordinary can be pointed out. Items like the Design Review would need a more detailed review. The zoning chapters would have to be looked at anecdotedly to get a grasp of the implications.; PD/DeStefano suggested continuing the discussion�at a time when the Commissioners have the document before them, To help staff prepare for the next meeting, it would be helpful if the Commission describes more fully the type of process they wish to go through on a chapter by chapter basis. CE/Mousavi suggested the Commission mark off individual sections that cause concern. During the meeting, the document can be reviewed page by page at those points of concern. Chair/Schey requested staff also flag any issues the Commission should be particularly cognizant of, in advance to the discussion scheduled. PD/DeStefano clarified that the evaluation will) be:�� done in the form of a verbal presentation. 1 Chair/Schey requested a table of contents for the entire document be given at the next meeting. Dan Dunham, a principal with the Planning Network, u outlined some of the significant components of the code. He stated the Planning Network was asked specifically to; I. prepare a document that organizes the various sections into a logical format. the 2. Eliminate the non -relevant portions of code. 3. Establish criteria applicable to Diamond Bar. 4. Incorporate the informal ongoing decision making process. 5. Incorporate the sign ordinance. 6. Prepare a development code which reflects the policies and the goals of the general plan and establish a balance between the two documents. Mr. Dunham stated five (5) documents were reviewed from different cities, which included Moreno Valley, Pasedena, Santa Monica, Irvine, and Buena Park, to establish a basis for the development code. CP/Kaplan suggested staff give a presentation ,to the Commission to report on the implications 'of each section of the document. Chair/Schey stated definitions could be best handled by the staff and any item out of the ordinary can be pointed out. Items like the Design Review would need a more detailed review. The zoning chapters would have to be looked at anecdotedly to get a grasp of the implications.; PD/DeStefano suggested continuing the discussion�at a time when the Commissioners have the document before them, To help staff prepare for the next meeting, it would be helpful if the Commission describes more fully the type of process they wish to go through on a chapter by chapter basis. CE/Mousavi suggested the Commission mark off individual sections that cause concern. During the meeting, the document can be reviewed page by page at those points of concern. Chair/Schey requested staff also flag any issues the Commission should be particularly cognizant of, in advance to the discussion scheduled. PD/DeStefano clarified that the evaluation will) be:�� done in the form of a verbal presentation. 1 Chair/Schey requested a table of contents for the entire document be given at the next meeting. February 25® 1991 Page't%�, - Chair/Schey, with the consensus of the Commission, directed staff that the meeting of March 11, 1991 will convene at 7:00 p.m., to include discussion of chapters 1.1 and 1.11., and the meeting of March 25, 1991 will convene 6:30 p.m., to be properly notified. ANNOUNCEMENTS: PD/DeStefano announced there will be a public meeting held by the Walnut Unified School District on March 4, 1991 and March 11, 1991 at Castle Rock Elementary School in regards to the development of site D (Brea Canyon and Diamond Bar Blvd.). The purpose of the meeting is to gather public input on the housing project proposed by the District, and the desire by the City to see the acreage developed into a community park. The meetings will begin at 7:00 p.m. PD/DeStefano announced that the City Council will receive a presentation by Dan Loyzola, as well as the Planning Network, on the current status of the general plan at the regular Council meeting of March 5, 1991. All Commissions and committees are invited to attend. Chair/Schey inquired as to the proper process to be able to attend the conference of the Annual League of California Cities. PD/DeStefano recommended notifying staff within the next few working days to assure a reservation with the hotelo The conference is scheduled for Wednesday, March 20, 1991 through Friday, March 22, 1991. C/Grothe inquired if there has been any news in regards to the Pomona School district. PD/DeStefano stated the Pomona School District is undergoing an evaluation process to determine the location of a new Diamond Bar High School. The State is insisting the funds allocated for a study be used quickly to determine a site, as well as the development of the site. They are seeking community input towards their number one site. February 25, 1991 Page 10 ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/MacBrid and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting a 10;45 p.m. � C4� David Schey Chairman Atte Ja_n DeStefano Secretary/planning Commiss'On y 1, ii v,.,,.,,,,v,,.,,,.,•, .e. ri,.,r^^,^ „srs, ,wirxw ri�asx,';^zr�2a ux��+npw,du;urhu^.t