HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/23/1992CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 23, 1992
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Grothe called the meeting to order at 7:14
j p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management
I District Board Meeting Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Flamenbaum.
ROLL CALL: Commissioner Li, Commissioner Flamenbaum,
Commissioner Meyer, and Chairman Grothe. Vice
Chairman MacBride was absent.
Also present were Community Director James
DeStefano, Associate Planner Robert Searcy,
Planning Technician Ann Lungu, City Engineer Sid
Mousavi,- Deputy City Attorney Bill Curley, and
Contract Secretary Liz Myers.
MINUTES:
Motion was made by C/Flamenbaum, seconded by C/Li,
and CARRIED to approve the Minutes of March 23,
Mar. 23, 1992
1992. C/Meyer abstained.
NEW BUSINESS:
C/Flamenbaum suggested that discussion regarding
Planning Commission Standards of Operation should
PC Standards
be held at the end of the meeting. The Commission
w of Operations
concurred.
6.TT Map 51079/
AP/Searcy reported that the application, to convert
Amendment to
a 54 unit apartment complex to condominiums,
Cup 89-551
located at 800 S. Grand Ave., was conditionally
approved on the February 24, 1992 public hearing.
Staff has, per Commission's direction, prepared the
amended Resolutions. It is recommended that the
Commission approve Resolution 92-07, and 92-08,
approving an Amendment to CUP 89-551 and
recommending approval of Tentative Tract 51079 to
the City Council. AP/Searcy explained that the
changes made to the Resolutions are in bold print.
He reviewed those changes made, to the Commission.
C/Meyer stated that, because he is not adequately
familiar with all the issues of the project, he
will not be participating in the vote.
C/Flamenbaum stated that item #19, of Resolution
92-07, should reflect that the 8 parking spaces are
to be outside of the gate.
CE/Mousavi, responding to C/Flamenbaum's inquiry,
stated that there should be a minimum of 4 guest
parking spaces.
Chair/Grothe requested item #19 be amended to
insert that there is to be a minimum of 4 parking
spaces, outside of the gate, to total 130 parking
spaces. The Commission concurred.
.,7
l
n _____._w:v-,�1^.., ..-,.,-,.-. . -------
hill �, Ilii I �.I �
March 23, 1992
Page 2
C/Flamenbaum suggested that the Resolution be
modified to eliminate the traffic light and the
current median cut because the traffic light may
cause further traffic congestion, and, it is not
certain that the driveway of the proposed hospital
project will align with the present median cut.
CE/Mousavi stated that the developers of the
proposed hospital project has indicated that it
would not be a problem to align the driveway with
the present median cut.
CD/Destefano indicated that the developer may be
asked to contribute a fair share of the costs of
the signal now, but to not install it until a later
date, when it is needed. The developer will then
receive a portion of his contribution back when the
other projects are developed.
redesigning the project. They are incorporating
the following changes: reduce the massiveness in
,,._.... .�. .. � ,I �! �- h`�'i � �� J'" ..� i.. ��� i �.��. � ��, a�+i � i' �,R .i�:-�.�• j � i w i ii � �t u;,�nrl b'd� ��.�-.�
CE/Mousavi stated that he believes the statue of
limitation, to use money held, is three years.
Motion was made by Chair/Grothe, seconded by
C/Flamenbaum and CARRIED to approve Resolution
92-7, with the modifications made to item #19.
C/Meyer abstained.
Motion was made by Chair/Grothe, seconded by
C/Flamenbaum and CARRIED to approve Resolution
92-8, as presented. C/Meyer abstained.
CONTINUED
AP/Searcy reported that at the conclusion of the
PUBLIC HEARING:
March 9, 1992 meeting, the Commission requested the
applicant to provide staff with additional
Tentative Parcel
information for review and evaluation related to
Map 22986/
the visual impacts and the compatibility of the
DR 92-1
proposed office building in relation to adjacent
developments. _ The applicant did not provide the
information, and requested another continuance to
the March 23rd Commission meeting. As of the date
of the staff report, the requested information has
not been received. Based on the findings and
conclusions, set forth in the Resolution, staff
recommended that the Commission adopt the attached
Resolution 92 -XX, denying DR 92-1, and Resolution
92 -XX recommending that the City Council deny
Tentative Parcel Map 22986.
David Ayala, designer of the proposed building,
residing at 140 Yolinda Place, Brea, explained that
the reason the requested information was not
submitted was because they are in the process of
redesigning the project. They are incorporating
the following changes: reduce the massiveness in
,,._.... .�. .. � ,I �! �- h`�'i � �� J'" ..� i.. ��� i �.��. � ��, a�+i � i' �,R .i�:-�.�• j � i w i ii � �t u;,�nrl b'd� ��.�-.�
. d6.b ♦N,�,x16114Jalfl«WkI.�Ix�mn4lxWdrr=- a_. L. .. -... .- .^.r.u, .,._,., ..... ._._�.___.__-`-- _..-,�................r•..�,.r^a+..^_..�.,......F^_.::_� ---_—_
March 23, 19-92 Page 3
II
the rear of the building; break up the remaining
massiveness by reducing the elevation, having more
roof top in the front of the building, and
splitting the office above and below the parking
structure; and create a rear ingress into the
building. He requested that the matter be
continued to the next meeting.
DCA/Curley advised that the application should be
withdrawn because it appears that the applicant has
made substantial changes to the project as
originally presented.
David Ayala explained that there has not been much
revision made to the drawings, except for exterior
revisions. The elevation of the project is being
changed to reduce massiveness.
C/Meyer indicated that he feels he is adequately
familiar with the project, and will be
participating in the vote. He inquired why the
applicant did not supply the information that the
Commission had requested.
David Ayala explained that they are in the process
mai of finishing a model of the building incorporating
the changes made to the proposed project. They do
not anticipate any more revisions.
CD/DeStefano stated that, because it appears like
there has been major changes made to the project,
and that it is a significantly different package
then the one staff has been analyzing in the past,
the application should be resubmitted with the new
design.
DCA/Curley, noting that the applicant is proposing
a new auxiliary access, stated that there would
need to be an environmental review. Furthermore,
since the applicant is changing the basic design of
the project, another public hearing should be
reinitiated.
Fred Janz, residing at 2683 Shady Ridge, explained
that the changes being made are in response to the
concerns voiced by the Commission that the building
is too massive. The building is still 6,000 square
feet, but will sit on the lot differently. The
model will be more effective in visualizing the
building in the surrounding area.
The Public Hearing was declared open.
�l,HIIIuli�_oull
I ill �,,'L1'I II,P,Lill 'I
March 23, 1992 page 4
Nancy Villalobos, residing at 23910 Decorah Rd.,
representing the following individuals opposing the
project: Eve Terrien, residing at 23976 Minnequa
Dr.; Chalyce Rolfness, residing at 23960 Sunset
Crossing; Stewart Liddell; Mattie Roberts, residing
at 23917 Decorah Rd.; Wanda Bowman, residing at
23968 Sunset Crossing; Donald Reinhart, residing at
23612 Stellgate Dr.; Mae Benson, residing at 24023
Willow Creek Rd.; May Hart Wycorn, residing at 414
N. Del Solla; Don Gravdahl and Dean Gravdahl,
residing at 23988 Minnequa, stated the following
concerns: Sunset Crossing and Willow Creek are the
only access roads into the tract, therefore 90% of
the traffic exits or enters through Sunset
Crossing; the area is already congested by the LA
Fitness Health Club; the increase in traffic will
be dangerous to the youth and elderly that are
participants to the Racquetball/ Swim Club on the
corner across from the proposed building; the
building will create a lack of privacy to the
residents east of the project; the parking for the
workers and customers of the building is
insufficient; there's already excessive parking in
the alley way; there will be an increase traffic
accidents; and speeding.
Don Gravdahl, residing at 23988 Minnequa, a member
of the Racquetball/Swim Club, stated the following
concerns: it is a minimum parking situation;
because there is a 6% slope on the hill, left turns
in and out of the project may cause traffic
problems; it would be a detriment to the Diamond
Point community; there is a heavy traffic count in
the area now; it will impact parking for those
wanting to use the Racquetball/Swim Club
facilities; and the applicant has indicated that
there will be major revisions made to the exterior
of the building, but nothing has been done
regarding the parking situation.
CE/Mousavi, responding to Chair/Grothe's inquiry of
the Traffic and Transportation Commission's (TTC)
response upon review of the traffic concerns
regarding the project, explained that the TTC
reviewed the egress/ingress situation, the site
distance issues from the driveway, and how the
driveway should be oriented. The TTC approved the
design of the driveway, with a right turn only.
The parking situation, on site and off site, was
not reviewed.
Don Gravdahl noted that a customer or an employee
may be more apt to park at the tennis courts, as F
,.
. r. ,:_ 7...�_. f , 74'.�.k. L..:. ��.� I � ,c71Yu � _7..I 7 . ,. II ` .� � i �.... .. ,"'.. «., i `l a;.I .'."d7" `� C e _._' i4ARDFid'! .jek..
March 23, 1992 Page 5
4
r opposed to walking through the health club, which
would directly impact the neighborhood.
Nancy Villalobos stated that the Racquetball/ Swim
Club is open 5 days a week from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00
p.m. Parking is now already limited.
Roger and Elizabeth Mejia, residing next to the
proposed building site, opposing the project,
presented pictures of the proposed site in relation
to the sloped hill.
David Ayala stated that the project is not a
minimum parking situation. Furthermore, they are
attempting to revise the project to mitigate the
parking and traffic concerns stated. In response
to C/Meyer's inquiry if they would prefer to
withdraw the application until the plans are
suitable for the Commission's review, he stated
that they are requesting a continuance to be able
to revise the project, and present it to the
Commission at the next meeting.
Fred Janz stated that the parking problem was
created by LA Fitness. He reminded the Commission
that there is a shared parking agreement with LA
Fitness that will help alleviate some of the
parking congestion.
Nancy Villalobos noted that the parking situation
occurs all day long. The 19 additional parking
spaces will not help the problem.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
C/Meyer noted that the applicant is proposing to
put the building on a slope easement, which is
usually dedicated to the public for maintenance to
the roads. He inquired what uses are permitted in
the CM zone.
AP/Searcy reviewed some of the uses permitted. It
is one of the most potentially intense uses, or
zoned areas, in the City.
CD/DeStefano explained that the property on Diamond
Bar Blvd, from Sunset Crossing north to the bowling
center are all zoned Commercial Manufacturing.
Motion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by C/Li and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adopt the Resolution to deny
Development Review 92-1.
March 23, 1992 Page 5
��.a.
Motion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by
C/Flamenbaum and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adopt a
Resolution recommending to the City Council to deny
Parcel Map #22986.
Chair/Grothe called a recess at 8:39 p.m. The
meeting was called back to order at 8:43 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING: CD/DeStefano reported that the City Council
approved Tract Map 31977, proposing 22 lots on 16
Tentative Tract acres, in February of 1990. The project is located
Map 31977 north of Goldrush Dr. and Highcrest Dr. Staff has a
variety of concerns regarding the map. It does not
match the current standards of development
practices for both planning and engineering. Staff
is not aware of any legal obligation to extend a
tentative map. It is recommended that the
Commission deny the request for the extension of
time.
CD/DeStefano, in response to Chair/Grothe,
explained that the City Council approved the map in
February of 1990. This is the first application
for an extension of time.
CE/Mousavi, responding to C/Meyer's inquiry, stated
that there was no action on behalf of the staff
which would have delayed recordation of the final
map. Because the conditions proposed at the time
of approval have not been satisfied at this time,
staff cannot recommend recordation of the map to
the City Council.
AP/Searcy, responding to C/Meyer's inquiry if the
Tentative Map could be modified to comply with the
Hillside Management Ordinance, stated that the
applicant has indicated that he would be amenable
to look into if the tract map may be able to be
modified to bring it closer to conformance with
existing standards and codes.
CD/DeStefano stated that staff would need to
understand the issues behind not only changing the
map, but the previously approved conditions. Also,
the issues before the staff are not related to
density, but related to the overall lot site design
and configuration.
C/Meyer suggested that, if the applicant is
amenable to redesigning the map, staff can add new };
conditions as part of the extension process.
Andrew King, the applicant, residing at 1595 South^
MacVerne Ave., Monterey Park, explained that when
I �i
March 23, 1992 Page 7
the map was approved by the City Council, the
consultant at the time, RKA, was to give the
details of the final conditions. However, only a
draft version of the conditions was received in
,dune of 1990. Because of the changes in staff, the
final conditions had never been received. We had
been operating under the draft conditions assuming
that it would be the final conditions. He
clarified that they are applying for an automatic
extension under the Map Act.
AP/Searcy explained that State Law provides an
automatic 60 day extension of time for tentative
tract maps. The Subdivision Map Act, and the
County Code allow a one year maximum extension of
time on a two year approval, for a maximum of three
years of any tentative approval of a map. Noting
the correspondence received by the applicant, he
stated that the applicant is requesting a two year
extension of time on the tentative map. However,
the maximum allowed by State Law and the Code is
for a period of one year.
DCA/Curley indicated that, notwithstanding the
vesting map, the Map Act provides that we can
- ------ ---
Wes Lind, engineer, located at 44 S. Chester Ave.
Pasadena, stated that there is also a provision in
the State Map Act which allows for an automatic
extension of time when there are circumstances
where the processing through the government agency
has caused delay. He explained that the draft set
of conditions received are very different from the
set of conditions approved under the Planning
Commission resolution. We are trying to work to
resolve the matter and abide by both of them.
Andrew King explained that because the final
conditions were not received, the Department of
Real Estate was delayed in the processing of the
tentative map.
The Public Hearing was declared open.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
C/Meyer inquired if the applicant is amenable to
exploring the possibility of modifying the map so
it would comply with the Hillside Management
Ordinance.
Andrew King indicated that they could probably
accommodate changes to the CC&R's and the grading
conditions.
DCA/Curley indicated that, notwithstanding the
vesting map, the Map Act provides that we can
- ------ ---
March 23, 1992
Page 8
condition a time extension if we can make a finding
that to not do so can place the residence of the
subdivision, the immediate community, or both, in a
condition of "dangerous to their health, or safety,
or both." This aspect has not been investigated.
Chair/Grothe indicated that since the Commission
has never had the' opportunity to be part of
developing this tract map, he would be apt to deny
the continuance.
The Public hearing was declared open.
The applicant stated their consent to the
continuance.
Motion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by
C/Flamenbaum and CARRIED to continue the matter to
the April 13, 1992 meeting, with concurrence from
the applicant.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Li, •Flamenbaum, and
Meyer.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Grothe.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MacBride.
Planning CommissionCD/DeStefano presented the Draft Planning
Standards of Commission Handbook to the Commission. The
Operations handbook is a composite of procedural guidelines
prepared by the City Attorney in late 1989;
outlining the creation of the Planning Commission,
their powers and duties, and the council handbook
created mid-1990.
Chair/Grothe suggested that public comments be
limited to five minutes."
C/Flamenbaum concurred that there be a modicum of a
time limit. He further suggested that there be a
policy whereas public hearings would not commence
passed 9:00 p.m., and that all meetings end by
10:30 p.m.
CD/DeStefano recommended placing a statement on the
agenda that indicates that no public hearing items
would be open after a particular time period, and
that the Commission will adjourn at a particular
time period.
Following discussion, the Commission concurred to
begin the meeting at 7:00 p.m., and placing a
statement on the agenda indicating that no Public
Hearings are to be held passed 9:30 p.m., and
meetings are expected to adjourn around 10:30 p.m.
i
March 23, 1992 Page 9
I •
C/Flamenbaum suggested that the Approval of the
Minutes not be a separate item.
CD/DeStefano suggested that the Minutes, and the
Resolutions brought back for the Commission's
consideration, be placed on the Consent Calendar.
The Commission concurred.
Chair/Grothe, noting that new Commission
appointments are in March, but reelection for the
chair is held in July, suggested that the
Commission recommend to the City Council
modification of their ordinance so that the two
actions coincide.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: CD/DeStefano made the following announcements: the
Planning Commission's discussion on the White Paper
is expected to begin at 7:30 p.m., March 24, 1992;
he suggested that, since the May 25th meeting is on
Memorial Day weekend, the meeting be held later in
the week; the Tree Ordinance was not approved by
the Council; the Dry Cleaners decision was appealed
and approved by the City Council, the JCC project
will come back for a City Council Public Hearing on
April 7th; the Planners Institute is April 9th
through the 11th; this meeting should be adjourned
to March 24th, at 7:30 p.m. for the study session;
and, if desired, the April 13th meeting should be
held at 6:00 p.m for a study session on the General
Plan.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by C/Flamenbaum, seconded by
C/Meyer and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the
meeting at 9:55 p.m. to March 24, 1992 at 7:30 p.m.
Rens ctiveI
l �nn� 7' i ,)
James DeStefanof
Secretary/Plann�ng Commission
ttes '4`-� __---
ack Grothe
Chairman