Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/14/1992CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DECEMBER 14, 1992 CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 6:20 p.m., at the South Coast Air Quality Management District in Room CC3, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. ROLL CALL: Community Development Director James DeStefano, Planning Technician Ann Lungu, owner Praful Shah, contractor Gary Jackson and two neighbors. PUBLIC HEARING: PT/Lungu reported that Administrative Development Review 92-10 is a request, made by Praful & Neena ADR 92-10 Shah to construct a two story single family residence of 7,330 square feet and retaining walls varying in height from 2 feet to 7.5 feet, on a vacant lot of approximately 2.29 acres located at 2920 Wagon Train Lane, within the gated community called "The Country". The project site is zoned R- 1-20,000. According to the General Plan, the land use designation is rural -residential. PT/Lungu reported that in July, 1992, earth was illegally stockpiled on the project site and that the stockpiling exists on the site at this time. The City Engineer is aware of this condition and will require the applicant to meet specific requirements in order to construct the proposed project. PT/Lungu stated that the proposed project meets all development requirements. The architectural style of the single family residence is Mediterranean and is compatible with the neighborhood. The applicant has submitted evidence of approval from "The Country's" Homeowners Association. PT/Lungu stated that the floor plan for the lower level of the residence indicates two kitchens. As per Code, only one kitchen is permitted in a single family residence. Therefore, the applicant will be required to eliminate the second kitchen. There are California Black walnut trees on the site. Some of them are located in the construction area. An arborist report was submitted with the application stating that the trees had many defects, such as basal wood decay, trunk wood decay, limb breakage, lack of defined structure, and bent and leaning trunks. Per the arborists report, the trees located within the construction area should be removed. The trees located east of the proposed construction area shall be protected and preserved as a natural walnut woodland. The applicant is constructing retaining walls in order to create pads for a swimming pool and tennis court. The retaining walls range in height from 1 December 14,1992 Page -2 foot to 7.5 feet. Plans for the tennis court and swimming pool will be submitted to the City at a later date. PT/Lungu stated that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigated measures have been incorporated into the proposed project and a Mitigation Negative Declaration has been prepared according to the guidelines of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). PT/Lungu recommended that the Community Development Director approve ADR No. 92-10, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Findings of Fact and the conditions listed. CDD/DeStefano declared the public hearing opened. Neighbors in the audience were concerned about the location and the height of the retaining walls. They reviewed the plans and were satisfied that the location and height of the walls were not a problem There were no more comments. Prafal Shah and his contractor, Gary Jackson, stated that they understood the staff report and the conditions of approval. CDD/DeStefano declared the public hearing closed. CDD/DeStefano stated that he has reviewed the application and the plans, visited the site, and is approving ADR 92-10, Mitigated Negative_ Declaration, Findings of Fact and conditions. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Respectively, James DeStefano Director of Community Development - - . 1 1. 1 -. - CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 6:20 p.m., at the South Coast Air Quality Management District in Room CC3, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. ROLL CALL: Community Development Director James DeStefano, Planning Technician Ann Lungu, owner Praful Shah, contractor Gary Jackson and two neighbors. PUBLIC HEARING: PT/Lungu reported that Administrative Development Review 92-10 is a request, made by Praful & Neena ADR 92-10 Shah to construct a two story single family residence of 7,330 square feet and retaining walls varying in height from 2 feet to 7.5 feet, on a vacant lot of approximately 2.29 acres located at 2920 Wagon Train Lane, within the gated community called "The Country". The project site is zoned R1-20,000. According to the General Plani the land use designation is rural -residential. PT/Lungu reported that in July, 1992, earth was illegally stockpiled on the project site and that the stockpiling exists on the site at this time. The City Engineer is aware of this condition and will require the applicant to meet specific requirements in order to construct the proposed project. PT/Lungu stated that the proposed project meets all development requirements. The architectural style of the single family residence is Mediterranean and is compatible with the neighborhood. The applicant has submitted evidence of approval from "The Country's" Homeowners Association. PT/Lungu stated that the floor plan for the lower level of the residence indicates two kitchens. As per Code, only one kitchen is permitted in a single family residence. Therefore, the applicant will be required to eliminate the second kitchen. There are California Black Walnut trees on the site. Some of them are located in the construction area. An arborist report was submitted with the application stating that the trees had many defects, such as basal wood decay, trunk wood decay, limb breakage, lack of defined structure, and bent and leaning trunks. Per the arborists report, the trees located within the construction area should be removed. The trees located east of the proposed construction area shall be protected and preserved as a natural walnut woodland. The applicant is constructing retaining walls in order to create pads for a swimming pool and tennis court. The retaining walls range in height from 1 December 1-4,1992 Page 2 foot to 7.5 feet. Plans for the tennis court and swimming pool will be submitted to the City at a later date. PT/Lunqu stated that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigated measures have been incorporated into the proposed project and a Mitigation Negative Declaration has been prepared according to the guidelines of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). PT/Lungu recommended that the Community Development Director approve ADR No. 92-10, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Findings of Fact and the conditions listed. CDD/DeStefano declared the public hearing opened. Neighbors in the audience were concerned about the location and the height of the retaining walls. They reviewed the plans and were satisfied that the location and height of the walls were not a problem There were no more comments. Prafal Shah and his contractor, Gary Jackson, stated that they understood the staff report and the conditions of approval. CDD/DeStefano declared the public hearing closed. CDD/DeStefano stated that he has reviewed the application and the plans, visited the site, and is approving ADR 92-10, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Findings of Fact and conditions. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Respectively, Ja es DeStefano Director of Community Development M CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SITE TOUR MASTER PLAN SITE TOUR DECEMBER.14, 1992 r ,-CALL TO ORDER Vice Chairman MacBride called the meeting to order at 2:10 p.m. at the City Hall, 21660 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Meyer, Li and Vice Chairman MacBride. Also present were Community Development Director James DeStefano, City Planning Consultant Hardy Strozier, City Environmental Consultant Peter Lewandowski. STUDY TOUR VC/MacBride announced the purpose and intent of the tour and provided directions to the first viewing location. VC/MacBride recessed the tour/meeting at approximately 2:15 p.m. and reconvened the tour/meeting at approximately 2:25 at the rear parking lot of the Avery Dennison Building located at 20955 Pathfinder Road. Mr. Strozier provided a brief overview of the tour and briefly described the project location and proposed uses as seen from the parking lot. VC/MacBride recessed the tour/meeting to the terminus of Rapid View Drive to begin a walking tour of the Arciero and RNP property. Mr. Lewandowski provided an overview of the EIR prior to the tour of the property. CDD/DeStefano pointed out that Peter Lewandowsky is with the firm of Ultrasystems. Ultrasystems is an independent contractor that the City hired to create the Environmental Impact Report that analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed project. Lewandowski pointed out that they would be walking in the bottom of the canyon which is identified as Sandstone Canyon in the EIR. The perspective will be a rather focused one and pointed out that this only represents a portion of the 171 acres. He also pointed out an area not contiguous with the project site, that is an open space area identified as Homeowners Association Open Space which will be left in a preserved condition. December 14, 1992 Page 2 Similarly, on the other side of Shaded Wood, there is also another Homeowners Association Open Space Area. The intent of this tour is to give people a focused perspective of the canyon. A Water course was pointed out that at one time commenced on the other side of Pathfinder Rd. With the previous development of the Office Building and Water Tanks, the tributary has been impacted, and in Ultrasystem's opinion, the water that is now being seen is primarily urban runoff, as opposed to a stream -fed canyon. Lewandowski introduced Jim Harrison who is qualified to respond to questions about the biology on the site. Harrison pointed out many plant species and Oak trees in the area. Lewandowski mentioned that the EIR was on file at the City Hall and Library for the public's review. He also pointed out that in the second chapter of the EIR is a 25 page condensed version of all the analyses of the existing setting, impacts and mitigation measures which he recommended reading as a summary of the document. Harrison also pointed out that a number of technical studies were utilized to derive the information in the EIR. These studies in two volumes are on file at the City of Diamond Bar. END OF TOUR: Upon completion of the tour CDD/DeStefano announced the Study Session would convene at approximately 5:30 at South Coast Air Quality Management District Building in room CC -3. VC/MacBride adjourned the tour at approximately 4:15 p.m. Respectively, Ja DeStefano Secretary d >.i7d0.q .Si m F.✓.s 5'Y3h`z ma kQN CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SITE TOUR MASTER PLAN SITE TOUR DECEMBER.14, 1992 ,CALL TO ORDER Vice Chairman MacBride called the meeting to order at 2:10 p.m. at the City Hall, 21660 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. ROLL CALL: commissioners Meyer, Li and Vice Chairman MacBride. Also present were Community Development Director James DeStefano, City Planning Consultant Hardy Strozier, City Environmental Consultant Peter Lewandowski. STUDY TOUR VC/MacBride announced the purpose and intent of the tour and provided directions to the first viewing location. VC/MacBride recessed the tour/meeting at approximately 2:15 p.m. and reconvened the tour/meeting at approximately 2:25 at the rear parking lot of the Avery Dennison Building located at 20955 Pathfinder Road. Mr. Strozier provided a brief overview of the tour and briefly described the project location and proposed uses as seen from the parking lot. VC/MacBride recessed the'tour/meeting to the terminus of Rapid View Drive to begin a walking tour of the Arciero and RNP property. Mr. Lewandowski provided an overview of the EIR prior to the tour of the property. CDD/DeStefano pointed out that Peter Lewandowsky is with the firm of Ultrasystems. Ultrasystems is an independent contractor that the City hired to create the Environmental Impact Report that analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed project. Lewandowski pointed out that they would be walking in the bottom of the canyon which is identified as Sandstone Canyon in the EIR. The perspective will be a rather focused one and pointed out that this only represents a portion of the 171 acres. He also pointed out an area not contiguous with the project site, that is an open space area identified as Homeowners Association Open space which will be left in a preserved condition. December 14, 1992 Page 2 Similarly, on the other side of Shaded Wood, there is also another Homeowners Association open Space Area. The intent of this tour is to give people a focused perspective of the canyon. A Water course was pointed out that at one time commenced on the other side of Pathfinder Rd. With the previous development of the Office Building and Water Tanks, the tributary has been impacted, and in Ultrasystem's opinion,the water that is now being seen is primarily urban runoff , as opposed to a stream -fed canyon. Lewandowski introduced Jim Harrison who is qualified to respond to questions about the biology on the site. Harrison pointed out many plant species and Oak trees in the area. Lewandowski mentioned that the EIR was on file at the City Hall and Library for the public I s review. He also pointed out that in the second chapter of the EIR is a 25 page condensed version of all the analyses of the existing setting, impacts and' mitigation measures which he recommended reading as a summary of the document. Harrison also pointed out that a number of technical studies were utilized to derive the information in the EIR. These studies in two volumes are on file at the City of Diamond Bar. END OF TOUR: Upon completion of the tour CDD/DeStefano announced the Study Session would convene at approximately 5:30 at South Coast Air Quality Management District Building in room CC -3. VC/MacBride adjourned the tour at approximately 4:15 p.m. Respectively, Ja DeStefano Secretary Hardy Strozier stated that, earlier in the afternoon, staff, consultants, the majority of the Planning Commission, and some members of the public, went to the 171 acre project site in order to get a comprehensive review of the site. The project represents 5 different interests: the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD), the City, Arciero & Sons Development, RnP Development, and Sasik Corporation. At the request of Councilmember Papen, copies of the Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, a brief summary CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION DECEMBER 19, 1992 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at 5:30± p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Building, Room CC-3, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. ROLL CALL: Commissioners: Meyer, Grothe, Li, Vice Chairman MacBride, and Chairman Flamenbaum. Also present were Community Development Director James DeStefano, Associate Planner Robert Searcy, Planning Technician Ann Lungu, Interim City Engineer George Wentz, and Contract Secretary Liz Myers. STUDY SESSION: CDD/DeStefano introduced Hardy Strozier and Peter Lewendowski. Hardy Strozier, from the Planning South Pointe Associates, is retained by the City as a General Master Plan Consultant and overall Project Manager to assist the City in processing this project. Peter Lewendowski, from Ultra Systems, an Environmental Consultant Firm that is the independent environmental consultants retained by the City to prepare an environmental impact report (EIR), will address the potential impacts of the proposed project. CDD/DeStefano stated that the project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan, is generally located west of Brea Canyon Road, north of Pathfinder, east of Morning Sun Drive, and south of Rapid View Drive. The proposal is to develop 171 acres incorporating the following variety of land uses: a permanent middle school located on 30 acres; a 30 acre mix use commercial site off of Brea Canyon Road; approximately 95 homes located on Brea Canyon Road just south of the pump station; and approximately 110 homes in two separate developments generally east of Morning Sun Drive. The reason for the meeting tonight is to introduce the Planning Commission to the draft EIR, and to provide an overview of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process. The public comment period for the EIR ends on January 18, 1992, and there are two Planning Commission public hearings scheduled.on January 11 & 25, 1993. Hardy Strozier stated that, earlier in the afternoon, staff, consultants, the majority of the Planning Commission, and some members of the public, went to the 171 acre project site in order to get a comprehensive review of the site. The project represents 5 different interests: the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD), the City, Arciero & Sons Development, RnP Development, and Sasik Corporation. At the request of Councilmember Papen, copies of the Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, a brief summary December 14, 1992 Page 2 found in the EIR, has been provided. There is also a binder available at City Hall that contains all the background technical documents that formed the foundation for the draft EIR. He outlined the following 6 important project benefits that the City will gain from the proposed 171 acre project: a 20 acre park site, of which 10 acres will be flat usable park land; a 31 acre commercial office site, of which the City will gain 1/2 of the 31 acres for their own future financial inventory of revenue; at project build -out, there should be 465 new jobs created in the City; the completion of South Pointe Middle School, as well as the removal of 400,000 cubic yards of dirt; greatly improved road access to the South Pointe Middle School, which will reduce traffic on existing Larkstone; and significant roadway and signalization improvements off site and approximate to this project site. CDD/DeStefano reported that the project came before the City approximately a year ago as independent interests, and the City merged these separate interests into one master planned area for the overall community benefit. He explained that Mr. Armed Patel, one of the developers, has a company called Sasik Corporation, and that the names are often interchanged. Also, Mr. Jan Dabney, the Engineer for RnP Development, also works very closely with, and often speaks for both Mr. Arciero, and/or Mr. Patel. Peter Lewendowski explained that intra Systems was selected, as part of a competitive process, by the City to act as an independent third party consultant to assess the environmental impacts associated with the proposed South Pointe Master Plan project. The objective of today's presentation is to provide a brief overview of the CEQA process, to present the EIR and the findings presented therein, to answer specific questions the Commission may have, and to receive any public testimony that the Commission may wish to receive on the EIR. He recommended that any public comments received tonight be accepted into public record, but that a formal response be given at a later date after individual consultants have had an opportunity to review those comments made. Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 6:03 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 6:10 p.m. in the AQMD Auditorium. Peter Lewendowski, continuing with his presentation, explained that CEQA was designed to a December 14, 1992 Page 3 establish some environmental policies for the State of California. All projects that are undergoing discretionary actions are subject to review in accordance to the CEQA, and the resulting State CEQA guidelines. The City of Diamond Bar is identified as the lead agency, and will have the primary discretionary action in reviewing this project. The other agencies identified, in the environmental analysis, as responsible agencies that may also be issuing permits or approvals, are the WVUSD, the Walnut Valley Water District, the Army Corps of Engineers, the California Fish and Wildlife Service, and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. CEQA requires that significant environmental impacts, which deal with substantial adverse changes in the physical environment, be focused upon. The decision as to what constitutes a significant impact is based upon reasoned judgment on the part of the local decision makers. Ultra Systems was selected to prepare the EIR as an impartial third party observer to the project, ensuring a full disclosure of an �- environmental impact associated with the development of the South Pointe Master Plan site. The prepared draft EIR, which is available for public review, is an informational document only and not a policy document. It contains Ultra Systems professional judgment of the impacts associated with the project, and contains a set of mitigation measures designed to minimize, or avoid the impacts identified, as well as identifying project alternatives which, if implemented, might reduce, avoid, or minimize some of the impacts defined. The EIR serves as a problem solving device through the identification of mitigation measures and project alternatives. It provides a vehicle to assure a full open dialogue on a projects potential impacts, and provides a vehicle for public participation. The City will be soliciting oral and written comments on the findings of the EIR between now and January 18, 1993. The public is encouraged to submit letters to the City, and those comments will be included into a document called The Response to Comment Document, which is part of the EIR. The EIR is an informational tool only, and the City can elect to implement the mitigation measures,, elect to adopt �^ the project alternatives, or elect to take other actions not fully disclosed in the EIR. Peter Lewendowski then presented a brief overview of the CEQA process. The process starts with a submission of a formal application for discretionary action. Upon submittal of those December 14, 1992 Page 4 tentative maps, in conjunction with the Master Plan and other discretionary approvals, the City prepared an initial study, or preliminary assessment, of the project, identifying potential environmental impacts to determine if an EIR should be prepared. The City concluded that the implementation of the project has the potential to produce significant unavoidable adverse impacts, thereby necessitating the preparation of an EIR. The City has published a Notice of Preparation informing public agencies of the City's election to prepare an EIR, and soliciting comments from government agencies and special districts. Those comments have been included in the technical appendix section of the EIR. Ultra systems has prepared the draft EIR based upon thee comments initial study, our independent analysis, received in response to the Notice of Preparation, our field inspections of the property, and on the work by other subconsultants. CEQA does not require that a public hearing be scheduled, however, it does encourage full open disclosure information. Upon completion of the public hearing process before the Planning Commission, a document, identified as a Response to Comments, is produced, providing a technical, detailed response to all the issues that have been raised on the draft EIR by the Planning Commission, the City Council, by government agencies reviewing the document, and by the citizenry who have full opportunity to review and comment upon that document. The final EIR fll or also include, as either part of the approval denial of the project, Findings of Fact and statement of Overriding Considerations. In reviewing the project, there are other considerations, balanced against the projects potential impacts, that the City may wish to address, such as employment opportunities, and revenue generation. Mitigation measures, which are ultimately adopted by the City as conditions of approval, are incorporated into a document called The Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program. r nditions of approval It ensures that the co incorporated into the identified are in fact project either through project design changes, enforcement during construction, or enforcement after project construction. Peter Lewendowski then reviewed the conclusions reached, as presented in the draft EIR. Based upon the initial study, an assessment of a number of technical issues were reviewed which included earth resources, hydrology, land use issues, boloand traffic, circulation, public services ,47 1,` „ 77 .yIN �4d December 14, 1992 Page 5 utilities, aesthetics, growth'inducing impacts, and project alternatives. It was determined that the implementation of the South Pointe Project, as presented, will result in the creation of two significant adverse impacts: the air quality impacts during project construction activities will result in exceeding established SEAQMD standards for nitric oxide, and the project, in combination with other development activities which have been identified in the project area, will result in cumulative air quality impacts which will result in exceeding SEAQMD standards for a number of other criteria pollutants; and based upon the findings of an independent traffic study, it has been concluded that, although the project itself will not produce significant impacts upon the areas roadways, the project, in combination with other development activities, will result in exceeding established level of 'service standards at six intersections. Though other impacts have been identified, they have not been determined to be significant impacts. The removal of 92% of the 835 oak trees identified, in project implementation, is not a significant impact because compliance with the Oak Tree Ordinance, which clearly identifies a mitigation measure of a 2:1 replacement ratio, will fully mitigate all impacts to existing oak tree resources. The project implementation will also result in substantial grading of the project site, and convert a rural piece of property to a developed use. However, based upon the City's General Plan, and existing State and County policies, there is no rationale to conclude that the development of the urbanite site itself is a significant impact. There are different standards of beauty, and we are unable to document any evidence, any public policy, which would conclude for significance for aesthetic impacts. Furthermore, the conversion of this undeveloped site to an urban use will result in the removal of existing vegetation and the loss of habitat areas to those animal species which now inhabit the site. However, based upon detailed biologic surveys, we have not found any plant or animal species on site which are legally protected either by State or Federal statute, and there is no public policy in the City indicating that the loss of habitat area constitutes a significant impact. Also, the project development will result in the introduction of additional students to the area schools. However, the school district has indicated that the schools can accommodate the growth projected by the project. Project development will increase demands upon police services and fire services. However, �77 December 14, 1992 Page 6 those resource agencies have not identified significant adverse impacts. Peter Lewendowski then concluded his presentation by reviewing the alternatives identified in the EIR: No Project - either identified as the site's ultimate preservation as an open space parcel, or developed in accordance to the existing zoning standards; the development of a similar project intensity but with a cluster development concept; different lot configurations proposed for the various tentative maps; the absence of the Sasik project from the ultimate project site; and an analysis of just the Sasik project in terms of it's ultimate development. C/Meyer requested further elaboration on the analysis and the requirements of CEQA, and alternative land uses of the site. Peter Lewendowski explained that CEQA requires that, in addition to the project, a reasonable range of alternatives be identified that are designed to minimize, avoid, or mitigate the impacts identified in the project. Six separate project alternatives have been analyzed, and are designed to provide a comparative analysis, relative to the impacts produced by the proposed project. He then reviewed each of the project alternatives, as presented in the draft EIR, as well as the impacts and mitigation measures identified. Hardy Strozier explained that, as one of the alternative project, RnP and Sasik clustered their developments to minimize the intrusion into the woodland area, the Arciero property clustered c apartments or townhouses on the ridge necessitating extensive use of retaining walls, to stay out of that canyon area, and the future commercial site was reduced from 31 acres to 3 acres. The net effect of this alternative is almost an 8o% preservation of this Sandstone Canyon area and it's tributaries. Hardy Strozier also explained that when the three developers, Arciero, RnP, and Sasik, originally made applications, Sasik was combined with the RnP tract. When the environmental documentation was about 80% complete, Mr. Patel indicated that he would like to file a separate tract map from RnP. For purposes of environmental analysis, it was decided to place the separate tract map, as an alternative to the draft EIR. The tract map was December 14, 1992 Page 7 F then evaluated, and three. separate alternatives, to Sasik Corporations newly submitted tract map, was developed. Peter Lewendowski reiterated that the draft EIR document is not a policy document, but an informational document for the City's consideration to balance the projects environmental impacts with other considerations. C/Meyer requested that more information be provided as to how it was concluded that going from a rural, or a non urbanized use, to urbanized uses is a non significant impact. Chair/Flamenbaum, concurring with C/Meyer's request, suggested that the consultants review the General Plan Land Use section 1.2.4 on page I-11, and section 3.3, on page I-19, and Resource Management section 1.1 and 1.2, on page III -8, in conjunction to their response. C/Meyer inquired how far the radius review is in analyzing traffic impacts on intersections and existing facilities. Peter Lewendowski stated that there is no formal standard required by statute. Traditionally, we look at something within a one mile radius, believing that projects within that area, in conjunction with the proposed action, may cumulatively impact a project. We met with the various planning departments, or traffic engineering departments, of the adjoining cities, and ask them of currently proposed projects. Based upon the inventory of projects which are developed through that interview process, we develop an inventory of related project activities. Information is also obtained from CalTrans. The level of service, after the project, would be different at various intersections and different by a.m. or p.m. peak period, as noted on the table on page IV -96. C/Li requested information regarding the exact dollar amount for future fiscal benefits to the City. He inquired how it was determined that 465 jobs would be created. Peter Lewendowski explained that the employment projections were based upon industry standards for commercial and/or office uses, based upon the U.S. Department of Transportation which assumed generation factors of 4 employees per 1,000 square December 14, 1992 Page 8 feet for non residential uses. We multiplied the number of non residential square foot proposed on site, or ultimately developed on site, times that factor to produce the employment generation ratio. C/Li requested further elaboration as to why the off site analysis resulted in one conclusion while the on site analysis resulted in a separate conclusion. Peter Lewendowski explained that the development of additional collector roads on the project site, primarily connecting Morning Sun and Brea Canyon Road, enhances internal circulation impacts. However, the external circulation to the South Pointe project, in combination with other projects, further impacted arterial roadways in proximity. C/Grothe inquired if other vegetation or trees have been quantified, beside oak trees. Peter Lewendowski explained that only the oak trees were quantified because the City's Oak Tree Ordinance directs us to identify and mitigate the loss of that one tree species. However, the acreage for each of the 7 vegetation species identified on site were quantified. C/Grothe stated that, it seem uncomprehendable, to indicate that the removal of 835 trees, with their various range in sizes, are not significant, even with a 2:1 replacement ratio. He then requested that an alternative project be considered that eliminates one of the major residential developments. VC/MacBride requested that there be more information on the relationship of this total South Pointe project to other possible developments, or potentials for development, so as to get a feeling of what's happening beyond the confines of this particular mass proposal. Chair/Flamenbaum requested that the report also include discussion regarding the impacts of moving the dirt both within the project area and off the project area. He also requested information regarding the impacts of any increase in noise to both the surrounding community, and remaining wildlife in the area. VC/MacBride requested a cross section analysis to illustrate the proportion of density of the impact of the fill upon the canyon. �. a�anr^"M m December 14, 1992 Page 9 CDD/DeStefano stated that various members of the City staff are available to the public to answer any questions, and to provide documents, or details needed to further understand the project. The public review period runs through January 18, 1993. The Planning Commission public hearings are scheduled for the January 11 & 25, 1993. This is the first opportunity the City has had to Master Plan a variety of interests on a remaining piece of property within our community, to the maximum benefits to the community as a whole. The project in the EIR is not necessarily the project that is going to be approved, denied, or modified, but rather it is only the project that has been presented by the development team at this point. RECESS: Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the study session meeting at 7:06 p.m. to be reconvened to the Regular Planning Commission meeting. -, Respective y J es DeStefano Secretary Attest: Bruce Flamenbaum Chairman