HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/13/1991CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 13, 1991
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Schey called the meeting to order at 7:00
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 Lin, Commissioner MacBride,
Commissioner Grothe, Vice Chairman Harmony, and
Chairman Schey.
Also present were Planning Director James
DeStefano, Associate Planner Robert Searcy,
Planning Technician Ann Lungu, City Engineer Sid
Mousavi, Deputy Attorney Bill Curley, and Contract
Secretary Liz Myers. City Planner Emeritus Irwin
Kaplan arrived at 8:33 p.m.
MINUTES:
Planning Director James DeStefano explained that
the Minutes of Jan. 10, 1990 and July 9, 1990 had
Jan. 10. 1990
never been approved. The oversight was found
during a review of Planning Department files.
�.
Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/Lin and
CARRIED to approve the Minutes of Jan. 10, 1990.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Grothe, Harmony and
Chair/Schey.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: MacBride.
July 9, 1990
Motion was made by C/MacBride, seconded by
VC/Harmony and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the
Minutes of July 9, 1990.
April 22, 1991
Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/MacBride
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of
April 22, 1991.
PUBLIC HEARING:
Associate Planner Robert Searcy addressed the
Commission regarding the request for a Conditional
CUP 90-0125
Use Permit to construct a two story office building
with 15 subterranean parking stalls. This project
is a `continued public hearing from the April 22,
1991 meeting. The traffic study requested by the
Commission is currently being completed, and will
be placed on the earliest available agenda for the
Traffic and Transportation Commission (TTC). Staff
recommended that the item be continued until such
�3
time that the application has been before the TTC,
May 13, 1991 Page 2
and is renoticed for public hearing before the
Planning Commission.
The Public Hearing was declared open.
Fred Janz, the applicant, consented to a
continuance pending the traffic study report.
Joe Bacara, resident of Diamond Bar, stated that
his neighbors and himself are concerned with
potential traffic hazards due to poor visibility
within the project entrance. He stated that there
would have been a greater audience had the public
hearing notice better described the project
location.
VC/Harmony indicated to staff that it would be
appropriate to be more specific in the public
hearing notices as to the location of the project.
Chair/Schey stated that the notice area should be
increased due to the nature of the project
location.
Motion was made by C/MacBride, seconded by C/Grothe
and CARRIED to continue the matter indefinitely to
a date to be decided by staff.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Grothe, Harmony and
Chair/Schey.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: MacBride.
DA 91-2 Planning Technician Ann Lungu addressed the
Commission regarding the request for a Development
Agreement to allow a project consisting of a
restaurant, an automatic car wash, a two story
structure to house six detail bays on the first
story and corporate offices of the applicant on the
second story, and a gasoline island for self-
service gasoline sales. The Planning Commission
recommended denial of the proposed project on the
March 25, 1991 meeting. Toran Development and
Construction withdrew the proposed project. At
this time, Toran Development and Construction is
proposing a newly designed project which addresses
the issues of concern expressed by the Commission
concerning the last proposed project. PT/Lungu
presented the application analysis, as well as the
p� environmental assessment for the newly proposed
project. Staff recommended that the Commission
approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Development Agreement 91-2 with the listed
conditions.
-- -- 7 i 111 1ud,iI'd 1 11r' 11
May 13, 1991 Page 3
PD/DeStefano stated that there are changes to the
Resolution and the Development Agreement. The
changes to the Resolution are:
Page 1 of the Resolution, the heading has been
changed to indicate 11 ... City of Diamond Bar
Recommending Approval..."
Page 3 Condition F, the last sentence should be
omitted.
Page 4 Condition U, the word "Traffic" should be
added to the beginning of the statement.
Page 4 Condition V, should read "The applicant
shall provide to the engineer...".
Page 5 Condition AA, add to the end of the
statement "...of the development agreement.".
The changes to the Development agreement are:
Page 4 section 7 should be clarified in terms of
the "effective date".
Page 11 section 28 allows the developer two options
to the conveyance of the Restaurant Parcel. The
developer has chosen the second alternative.
Paae 11 section 28 will be stricken and inserted
with the proceeding page which is the alternative
p_ option.
Paae 12 will indicate John Forbing instead of Gary
Werner.
Staff recommends the Commission forward a
recommendation of approval to the City Council.
Deputy Attorney Bill Curley informed the Commission
that the Title Report had not yet been submitted.
VC/Harmony requested staff define the Conveyance of
Restaurant Parcel.
PD/DeStefano explained that the issue of repayment,
or in lieu payment, is addressed in the Development
Agreement to assure that the City receives liquid
damages, from the developer, for loss of sales tax
revenue if the proposed project is not developed.
DA/Curley specified that if the project is not
developed, the intent is not to penalize the
developer, but rather to allow a means for the City
to obtain liquid damages for the loss of revenue.
C/Grothe noted that the way the agreement is
written, it indicates that it is a one time fee
r rather than an annual payment. He directed staff
to insert wording to clarify the issue.
PD/DeStefano affirmed that the intent was to
receive an annual fee. If the project is approved, j
I'.
May 13, 1991 Page 4
i
the Commission can direct staff to refine the
document.
The Public Hearing was declared open.
Gary Clapp, of Toran Development and Construction,
explained the changes made to the project, and
displayed various illustrations that demonstrated
the structural changes made. He stated that every
effort was made to utilize the recommendations made
by the Commission on the last project. He
specified that two feet of the project will be
dedicated to the City.
C/Lin inquired if, in comparison to the previous
application, there is an increase in the parking
space area.
Gary Clapp stated that the parking abilities have
been almost doubled. He noted that every compact
parking has been eliminated, and extra handicapped
parking have been added.
Ben Reiling, of Zelman Development, in support of
the entire proposed project, stated that he is
comfortable that the issues of concern have been
addressed.
Frank Schabarum, representing Mr. Arciero, stated
that Mr. Clapp is in escrow and prepared to move
forward with the project upon approval.
John Brewster, 4071 Second Street, Yorba Linda,
speaking also in behalf of Russ Hand of Diamond Bar
Honda, opposing the project, assured the Commission
that the already approved car wash/restaurant is
not a dead project. He explained that the grading
permit has been received and they now await the
plan check for the parcel map. He emphasized that
approval of two very similar projects within a one
mile radius could create financial difficulties for
one of the projects.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
VC/Harmony inquired if the deceleration lanes are
being recommended.
City Engineer Sid Mousavi explained that it is not
being recommended because there is an additional
lane in the plans, on the easterly portion of the
project, bringing the total to three lanes.
VC/Harmony inquired about the setbacks and the
dedication.
May 13, 1991 Page 5
CE/Mousavi stated that because there will be
sidewalks within the property itself, the two feet
dedication will suffice.
C/Grothe made the following requests: There should
be a sidewalk on either side of the street; the
terminology needs to be changed to indicate that
reclaimed water will be used for landscaping; the
restaurant pad should be maintained and landscaped
until construction; the car wash should have an
architectural style wrap; and the monument sign
agreement with Mr. Arciero needs to be satisfied.
PD/DeStefano explained that an architectural design
contest is in progress. The winners package will
have elements that should be incorporated into the
City's monument sign and/or the signage proposed in
this project. The timing of the award is running
concurrently with this project. It was suggested
that the proposed clock tower be part of the
signage for the entire program and come back to the
Commission for approval at a later date.
-m VC/Harmony stated that the previous monument sign
was an historical representation of Diamond Bar.
There is no relevance between the proposed clack
' tower and the City's monument sign. The monument
sign should remain separate from the project. He
also expressed concern for allowing the project -,to
be piece-mealed.
PD/DeStefano, in response to Chair/Schey's inquiry,
confirmed that the restaurant project will have to
come back to the Commission for a CUP and
development review.
C/MacBride stated that the applicant has made great
strides in addressing the traffic concerns
previously stated. He will accept the
architectural style of the project since the
corporate neighbors are satisfied with the total
projected concept. He emphasized the importance of
architectural symmetry.
VC/Harmony noted that the agreement does not have a
clause for mediation.
PD/DeStefano explained that normally there is not
such a clause within a development agreement.
Because it is an ordinance, it is subject to
interpretation, review, and amendment through the
public hearing process.
C/MacBride stated that there is an ordinance
regarding the inclusion of a mediation clause in
— - -771_ I!,g1—.lf'f7" ��� 11H1k1, oil1d[:1u —
May 13, 1991 Page 6
all public works contract. He suggested that staff
review it and included it into the agreement as a
reaffirmation of the City Council's intent.
C/Grothe reiterated his concern that there is an
immediate need for a sidewalk.
CE/Mousavi indicated that it would be difficult to
create sidewalks on the northern part of the
project because of the difference of elevation of
the existing street and the golf course. If the
street is not extended, there would be room for a
sidewalk. However, staff felt it is in the best
interest of the City to have 3 lanes for traffic.
C/Grothe suggested a sidewalk on the corporate
center side, as it abuttes the property.
C/Lin inquired who determines the designs for the
driveway entrance signs.
CE/Mousavi stated that the signs must meet uniform
traffic signs spaces, and is not subject to the
sign program.
1 VC/Harmony inquired if competing car washes is an
issue that the City's economic development program
and GPAC would deal with in any way.
PD/DeStefano indicated that it is not probable the
City would get into this level of detail to dictate
the number of competing businesses that may be
appropriate in the City.
Chair/Schey stated that even though the project
redesign has mitigated a number of concerns, he is
not favorably inclined toward using a development
agreement as a procedure to allow a use in a zone
otherwise not permitted.
Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/Lin to
send the project to the Council with a
recommendation of approval of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Development Agreement 91-2
with the listed conditions, and modifications of
those conditions as amended by staff, including the
conditions requested by the Commission which
consist of landscaping the pad; an architectural
style wrap; a four foot wide sidewalk built on the
south side of Golden Springs from Gateway to Copley
Drive; and that the monumentation sign be submitted
concurrently with the sign program reviewed by the
Planning Commission.
The MOTION CARRIED.
May 13, 1991 Page 7
a—a
4
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Grothe, MacBride,
and VC/Harmony.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Schey.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None.
Chair/Schey called a recess at 9:06 p.m. The
meeting was called to order at 9:20 p.m.
NEW BUSINESS: PD/DeStefano informed the Commission that the
California Government Code section 65401 requires
CIP FY 1991-1992 the Planning Commission to review public works
projects proposed for the ensuing fiscal year and
determine compliance with the General Plan. He
stated that the CIP scheduling is based upon fiscal
resources and the choice of public improvements.
The CIP budget is the facilities that are
programmed for a specific fiscal year. The program
is generally outlined for an additional four or
five year period. The benefits of the CIP are:
assurance that the plans are carried out in a
schedule; allows for public participation and long
range financial planning; and a general overall
management of City affairs. PD/DeStefano reviewed
some of the fiscal resources available to obtain
revenue to fund CIP projects. Staff recommended
that the Commission review and approve the document
with a recommendation to the City Council for it's
adoption May 21, 1991.
CE/Mousavi explained that a chart has been
developed to give an idea of how and when these
projects will be implemented, as well as the costs
and the fiscal impact on the City's available funds
in general. The Parks and Recreation, and the
Traffic and Transportation Commission has
established a priority list for each project, as
well as recommendations for street improvements and
other projects. The list may be changed or revised
as additional funds are received.
VC/Harmony made the following comments:
Item 148 - He questioned the improvement of the
athletic facilities when there is no agreement with
the Pomona School District to have recreation
programming in north Diamond Bar schools.
Chair/Schey also indicated concerned with
ongoing maintenance once the project is
completed, unless the City is willing to take
r on that responsibility.
Item #44 - Upon learning that the project does not
involve freeway frontage roads, he inquired if it
is part of the assessment district.
PD/DeStefano responded that it is. This is
the reflection of the desire to eliminate the
May 13, 1991 Page 8
asphalt medians between the frontage roads and
the major streets.
Item #12 & #17 - He indicated that construction or
improvement of these borderline streets should be
held up until the City gets the annexation of the
adjacent property.
Item 136 - He stated that this project is
inconsistent with GPAC and the General Plan. A $13
Million Water Reclamation Project is 'I not a City
project, but a Water Company Project and should be
taken out of the CIP.
Item #27 - He inquired why this project is a
consideration, since there is no residential
district in there.
CE/Mousavi stated that the project is
presently on hold, pending what will happen
with developments in the golf course area.
C/MacBride commented on Item #49. He inquired if
the pending date for the Senior Citizen Center
remains undetermined.
PD/DeStefano explained that the actual date for the
Senior Citizen Center is subject to many different
�i
issues. He indicated that the location of a site
i�
still needs to be resolved.
Chair/Schey, referring to Item 042 & 43, noted that
there is no wooden play equipment at the indicated
location. He stated that Softwind and Stardust is
the actual park that has the wooden equipment that
fell down.
4/Lin noted that the summarization of the estimated
costs differ from the costs stated in the item
breakdown. She inquired if the reason for this is
ecause the summarization is updated.
E/Mousavi concurred and explained that as the
Projects move along, there is a better indication
as to their costs. He also pointed out that
funding sources are also different than first
proposed.
Notion was made by VC/Harmony, seconded by
C/MacBride and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the
Resolution as drafted by staff with the proviso
that the comments of the Commission are noted in
the minutes and thereby transmitted to the Council
for their information.
esentation
on upcoming
CPE/Kaplan stated that the Economic Development
Economic
Strategy will examine existing potential funding
Development
resources to support the community -lifestyle. He
Strategy Study
explained that the General Plan is made up of land
i d1hioi iii' u
May 13, 1991 Page 9
use components, circulation components, and
economic development components. There is an
interactive nature with decisions made in the
General Plan regarding commercial, circulation, and
economic development areas. These decisions must
be tested against an Economic Development Strategy.
The firm of Kotin, Regan, and Mouchly has been
retained to assist in defining some of the issues,
such as the type of fiscal resources available, and
the tradeoffs that need considering. An Economic
Development Strategy workshop has been designed
involving the community, GPAC, the Chamber of
Commerce, the Commissions and the Council for the
purpose of discussing these issues and placing our
priorities. The workshop is scheduled sometime mid
June.
VC/Harmony inquired where the City stands on
forming- a redevelopment agency. He discussed
reasons to support it's formation.
I PD/DeStefano stated that the City is not
discussing, currently, the creation of the
redevelopment agency.
C/MacBride indicated that the premise and the
assumptions must be well known by the people
attending to assure the success of the workshop.
The community must be aware that the decisions can
go in any given direction.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: PD/DeStefano informed the Commission that the
Council was introduced to the Sign Ordinance at
Staff their last meeting. Through conversation with the
Chamber of Commerce, it was determined that
additional time was needed for the Chamber to work
on the program, and for the Council to review the
material. The Sign Ordinance was postponed to
June 18, 1991 for further discussion.
PD/DeStefano stated that the Commission will
receive replacement pages for the Draft Setting
Document as it is received. The Commission's
comments should be given to staff prior to May 23,
1991 so they can be incorporated.
C/MacBride suggested including the names of those
volunteers who attended & contributed to the GPAC
meeting, as well as the number of times attended.
It would give a better community feeling towards
�i the document if it were perceived as a community
effort and not a consultant firm project.
May 13, 1991 Page 10
PD/DeStefano, in reponse to Chair/Schey's inquiry,
stated that hearings for the General Plan should
come before the Commission in August.
Chair/Schey suggested structuring the review of
these documents much like the review of the
Development Code.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by VC/Harmony, seconded by
C/MacBride and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the
meeting at 10:30 p.m.
Respectively,
Jam DeStefano
Secretary/Planninig Commission
,,_Attest:
David Schey
Chairman