HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/8/1992CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
JUNE 8, 1992
CALL TO ORDER: Chair/Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at
7:04 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management
District Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond
Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE:
City Manager Terrence Belanger.
ROLL CALL:
Commissioners: Grothe, Li, Meyer, Vice Chairman
MacBride, and Chairman Flamenbaum.
Also present were Community Development. Director
James DeStefano, Associate Planner Rob Searcy,
Planning Technician Ann Lungu, Lloyd Zola, with the
Planning Network, Carlton Walters, from DKS, and
Contract Secretary Liz Myers.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
VC/MacBride requested that the Minutes of May 4,
1992 be amended on page 12, sixth paragraph, to
Minutes:
replace the word "was" with "were".
May 4, 1992
Motion was made by VC/MacBride, seconded. by
C/Meyer, and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept the
Minutes of May 4, 1992, as amended.
May 18, 1992
VC/MacBride requested that -the Minutes of May 18,
1992 be amended on page 3, second paragraph, to
LL
correctly spell "criteria"; and on page 12, to
reflect that Mr. Neely did not state that he
approved of Mr. Stone's request for modification.
Motion was made by VC/MacBride, seconded by
C/Grothe, and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept the
Minutes of May 18, 1992, as amended.
May 21, 1992
VC/MacBride requested that the Minutes of May 21,
1992 be amended on page 8, fifth paragraph, to
properly spell "handicapped".
Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by
VC/MacBride, and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept the
Minutes of May 21, 1992, as amended.
The Commission concurred to discussing item 3,
Tentative Tract Map No.' 50519, before discussing
item 2, the Tres Hermanos Conceptual Plan.
CONTINUED
AP/Searcy reported that the application, for a
PUBLIC HEARING:
Tentative Tract Map No. 50519, a Development Review
or•,
No.91-2, a Development Agreement No. 91-2 and a
TT 50519/DR 91-2/
Zone Change 91-1, -is a request to subdivide a 2.3
DA 91-2/
acre site into six lots with 80 condominium units
Zone Change 91-1
for a Senior Citizen complex designed with
underground parking. The, development would be
comprised with five (5) story structures,
containing 16 units per building. The project is
located near the northwest Torito Lane and Golden
June 8, 1992
Page 2
Springs Avenue. Because of its coincidence with
the General Plan, the applicant, Diamond
Development Co, a' California Limited Partnership,
has requested a continuance to the next public
hearing of June 22, 1992.
AP/Searcy, in response to a series of Commission
inquiries, stated that the plans circulated January
of 1992 have not been revised, and that a
preparation of the perspective of different views
and surrounding buildings, have not been received
by staff at this time.
C/Grothe stated that since the Commission 'had
requested modification to the project, and those
modifications have not yet been submitted, then the
project is not complete and should not be before
the Commission. The matter should be taken off
calendar until it is deemed complete.
Chair/Flamenbaum requested staff to include a copy
of the Minutes of January 1992, in the Commission
package, should the Commission grant the
continuance.,
C/Li informed staff that he has not received a full
package regarding the project.
CD/DeStefano stated that it is staff's
recommendation that the Commission continue the
item to June 22nd, as requested by the applicant.
If the applicant has not provided the information
at that time, then staff will suggest an
alternative date.
Chair/Flamenbaum pointed out that only two of ;the
Commissioners have reviewed the entire plan
package.
The Public Hearing was declared open.
Don Gravdahl suggested that, since there are people
in the audience that had anticipated a hearing on
this project tonight, everything should be in hand
before scheduling another public hearing.
Continuing a project tends to diminish 'the
attendance of those people wishing to speak on that
project.
Red Calkins, residing at 240 Eagle Nest Dr.,
inquired why another senior citizens complex is
being built in Diamond Bar when the Heritage
Complex for Senior Citizens, near Oak Tree Lanes,
has never even been filled to capacity.
Furthermore, it seems this project will also have
the same problem with inadequate parking spaces as
the existing complex.
June 8, 1992 Page
Gary Neely, residing at 344 Canoe Cove, opposing
the project, stated that it would be unconscionable
to put a residential development on that particular
piece of property. It is dangerous to add more
cars on a street that is already seriously
congested with traffic. The site should be kept
zoned as Commercial.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
Chair/Flamenbaum stated that it may be appropriate
to renotice the public hearing to assure attendance
of those that may wish to speak on the project.
C/Meyer suggested that, since the project is to be
renoticed, and the applicant still has further
information to submit to staff, the public hearing,.
with the exception of the Tract Map, should be
continued to a date certain that would go beyond
June 22nd.
DCA/Curley stated it would be appropriate to have
the developers consent to any extension beyond the
requested date. It is recommended that it be
continued to the next meeting, use that time to
determine if the package is complete, and then use
the next"meeting to develop a timeline as to what
is required for further information.
C/Meyer inquired if the application could be split
to continue the Tract Map to June 22nd and the rest
of the application to a more reasonable time frame.
CD/DeStefano stated that, since the applicant is
not present, it is staff's recommendation that the
'matter be continued to the date requested. If the
materials are not satisfactorily presented at the
June 22nd meeting, then the Commission can continue
the project to some other date. The project can be
renoticed for June 22nd, to see if it generates any
new input, and then dealt with at that time.
Motion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the matter to
the June 22, 1992 meeting.
C/Meyer, noting that the application itself is
incomplete, and that it is not a simple
application, suggested that the applicant meet with
g staff beforehand to identify some of the major
issues.
f C/Grothe requested staff to gather statistical
information on the other senior citizen complex,
and compare it with this proposed project. He
further requested information, from surrounding
June 8, 1992 Page 4
Mike Rust reviewed the topographic and slope
considerations, considering the opportunities and
constraints of the property. He stated the
, '. .'....- .. _ ._��..�.... M , .. � , , .. ., _ 'L���� r , i �ry.:. "'� . „ "-_. „Ii.a�-. T G'F`' e
,I;.. ��!.e.'��
cities, on the good and bad points on these types
of complexes.
SPECIAL
CD/DeStefano stated that the Commission is hosting
PRESENTATION:
a presentation of the Tres Hermanos Conceptual
Plan. The Tres Hermanos Ranch, owned by the City
Tres Hermanos
of Industry, consists of about 2,600 acres, of
Conceptual Plan
which 800 acres are located in the City of Diamond
Bar. The City of Industry and Diamond Bar
contracted with a team of consultants, headed by
the firm of Kotin, Regan, and Mouchly, in late
1991, to prepare a conceptual land use plan for the
800 acre Tres Hermanos Ranch property. The two
principle land uses identified, at that time, for
inclusion within the project area, were a new High
School site for the Pomona Unified School District,
and a reservoir, for the City of Industry, for the
purposes of reclaimed water. The consultant team
will give a presentation on the Tres Hermanos
conceptual plan. The results of the presentation
will be part of the final report, prepared by the
consultant team, to be presented to the City`
Council, shortly.
James Regan, principal' of the firm Kotin, Regan,
and Mouchly, introduced the members, of the
consultant team: ' Woody Tescher and Lisa Picard,'a
from Invitcom, responsible for the environmental
background and information studies; Mike Rust, of
PMD Technologies, responsible for the topographic
slopes analysis and water considerations, including
(land
infrastructure; James Goodell, of Goodell
Associates, acted as technical coordinator of the
planning and engineering, and assisted the
development strategies; and Peter Kamnitzer and
Randy Jacobsen, of Peter and Randy, responsible for
the concept plan definition. Mr. Regan explained
that the broad objective of this effort was to
synthesize and evaluate the potential of this
property, and the requirements of both
constituencies into some innovative land iuse
concepts that would simultaneously generate
significant long term revenue to the land owner,
and improve both the revenue and the quality of
life for the City of Diamond Bar. Associated with
this objective was the following: ascertain the
priorities and requirements of the constituencies;
create a vision of this property to include the
High School; evaluate some alternative visions for
the property in the context of a conceptual plan;
provide sufficient definitions to provide some
general planning guidelines; and identify the
prerequisites for further planning.
Mike Rust reviewed the topographic and slope
considerations, considering the opportunities and
constraints of the property. He stated the
, '. .'....- .. _ ._��..�.... M , .. � , , .. ., _ 'L���� r , i �ry.:. "'� . „ "-_. „Ii.a�-. T G'F`' e
,I;.. ��!.e.'��
June 8, 1992 Page 5
following: within the 829 acres are 14 acres of
existing streets; there is a Metropolitan Water
District right of way and easement running through
the property comprising about 8.2 acres; there is a
tunnel easement for the elevations of 950 to 1050;
the highest ridgeline is Pomona Peak, with an
elevation of 1471; the lowest elevation is 913, on
the north side, and 1,000, in Tonner Valley; the
freeway is on the north; there is a single family
development on the west side; there is vacant
property on the southside and the eastside; there
are overhead powerlines on the south side and the
east side of the boundaries; and there is the
Walnut Valley reservoir. He then briefly reviewed
the slope analysis, as indicated in the topographic
map obtained from the Pomona Unified School
District.
Lisa Picard reviewed the biological resources and
environmental characteristics of the site. She
stated the following: There is a wide diversity of
plant and animal species existing on site; patches
of native vegetation remain, especially in areas
not accessible to cattle, found primarily north of
�- the major ridgeline; regionally, its biological
significance is located in the northern end of the
Tonner Canyon drainage area; the sensitive"habitat,
which supports sensitive, endangered, or threatened
species, are coastal sage scrub, southern oak,
sycamore, and woodlands; traversing through the
habitat areas are the habitat linkage, which are
those areas that have the potential to facilitate
the movement of wildlife; and there is a natural
spring located in the northeast portion of the
site, east of Chino Hills Parkway. The following
are some development considerations to maintain
that biological integrity: Development should not
fragment the open space; it should remain
contiguous with designated off site open space
areas; there should be a clustering of development;
and there should be a buffering of habitat linkage
areas from intensities of development.
Mike Rust explained that the Tres Hermanos property
has been a subject of study by Boyle Engineering,
as requested by the City of Industry to look at the
feasibility of water reservoir sites that could be
developed on the property. After analyzing the
various sites, Boyle Engineering concluded that,
for an optimum surface water reservoir for this
location, the reservoir should be confined south of
Grand Avenue. The MWD will be studying the area,
in the future, for a potable water reservoir.
Lisa Picard briefly addressed the health and safety
hazards associated with a reclaimed water facility,
which the City of Industry does currently plan for
June 8, 1992 Page 6
the site. She stated there are three basic
designations given to reclaimed water, which is Mill determined by the degree of treatment and level of
adequate disinfection: a non -restricted
impoundment, which has no limitations on body
contact; a restricted impoundment, which limits the
activities to fishing, boating, and other non body
contacts; and landscape impoundments, which is for
aesthetic enjoyment, only. The County Sanitation
District stated that, the reclaimed water, leaving
the San Jose Creek mater reclamation plant, which
would service the site, could be used for non
restrictive recreational impoundment.
James Regan explained that one of the constraints
in developing the conceptual plan was that the City
of Industry has indicated that they did not have
near term plans to develop this property for urban
uses, other than a desire to develop a reclaimed
water reservoir. This desire effects the potential
uses of the property. Upon studying 'the
conventional urban uses, as well as the
unconventional uses, the following was determined:
there would be no possible way to have regular
fluctuation leading to some recreational use
because of the shape and depth of the reservoir no
potential for major educational use; no potential'!',
for a major entertainment attraction use; there.is
poor visibility from the freeway; there is limited
market for major regional spending attraction;lthe
location of the high school also precludes
developing a major retail window; and a research
park is not feasible because it should be in
proximity to a major University base.
Jim Goodell stated that a large number of,,
alternatives was developed, however, we will review
two or three of the basic alternative uses of'the
site that are viable, given the market and the site
constraints. He stated that,it was ascertained
that this site would, require an addition of an
elementary school, in addition to the proposed
Pantera facility.
Peter Kramnitzer lead the audience through a number
of slides to explain the development of ''the
thinking that lead to the three alternative land
use plans. The reservoir could be used as the
major focal point of the development. It could be
located three different ways: as a 142 acre fake,
with a 10,000 acre feet capacity, which would be
the least expensive way to create the lake because
of the elevations surrounding the area; asj two
different lakes, one higher than the other one, and
one featured for more recreation than the other;
and as one reservoir, utilizing the other valley
7
__ •,_ - - - - _ _ _ _. -r_- _rJwLJ�.Yr-t. 4.F1'IWh' /1141W�WHr .,.. ___..r. �,_.�nsarNn .-.. > ._-, ' �ti�f'�a•, � -s ��LL.1h�C�ua M^IL-__— __— _ _ _ __ _ _. _
June 8, 1992 Page 7
for residential mixed use. He reviewed the three
: alternative land use plans:
Plan A - The reservoir could be used for
recreational purposes. There would be a mixed use
areas consisting of retail, cafes, restaurant,
apartments and a water front development. There
would be single family residents that would have
direct water frontage. There would also be a
hotel, a 64 acre school site, multi -residential
developments, and a golf course, leading into other
parks and developed along the ridges. However,
there would be no structures on the ridelines.
There would be a very modest commercial area, and
perhaps stables, at the entry of the freeway.
Plan B - This plan shows two different reservoirs.
It is very similar to the first plan.
Plan C - This plan has one reservoir, with the
other area reserved for a mixed used development,
and a residential development.
He reviewed the conventional method of developing
sloped areas, and compared it with the hillside
traditional development method. The traditional
method has narrower streets, modest setbacks from
the street, pockets used for guest parking, and
there is less grading of the hillsides.
James Regan stated that one of their objectives was
to assess the probable fiscal impacts of this
conceptual plan. The property, which is unique in
its size, location, topography, the slope, MWD
line, and the canyon area, is difficult to come up
with a major use not now in existence in the market
place that would consume the majority of the
property. The characteristics of the property is
such that it is very difficult to accommodate large
scale uses that will house, on a temporary basis,
large volumes of people, such as a major campus, or
a theme park, because of its sloped areas. At the
same time, a large portion of the relatively
developable portion of the property is taken up by
a reservoir. Therefore, the idea of using the
water resource, as the focus of the development,
was used. The water feature affords the
development of something that is revenue positive
to the City. Scheme A generates a positive fiscal
revenue, to the City, of close to 500 million.
dollars. Scheme -B generates a comparable positive
fiscal revenue. Scheme C does not generate a
comparable revenue to the City primarily because of
the loss of those elements that generate positive
tax dollars to the City.
June S. 1992 Page 8
Peter Kramnitzer, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum's
inquiry, stated that ,scheme A is the preferred
plan. In response to VC/MacBride, he stated that
schemes A,B, or C are not antagonistic to the.MWD
fee and easement holdings. The northeast corner
will not be developed because of the MWD's right of
way, and the native growth from the spring.
Lisa Picard, in response to VC/MacBride's inquiry
if the plans are sympathetic to the biological
movements, stated that the schemes respects the
biology of the site and the intensity of that one
valley on the northeast side of Pomona Peak.
C/Li inquired why reclaimed water is being
recommended, on site, for this particular
reservoir, instead of potable water. He pointed
out that reclaimed water is sewage.
,lames Regan explained that when they started the
process, the City of Industry was already in the
process of planning a reservoir for this property.
They are interested in both the potable reservoir
and the reclaimed water reservoir to balance off
the needs of their customers. However, the MWD' is
not interested in a, potable water reservoir that As
this small for this site. He pointed out that they
were only asked to do a conceptual plan given i.he
constraints of the area.
Lisa Picard stated that they can provide the data,
regarding the safety of reclaimed water, to the
Commission, if so desired.
C/Meyer inquired if the consultants report Will
include the information on how the other
development scenarios dropped out.
James Regan stated that the results will,'be
presented to staff, which will include the market
investigation, and the physical investigation .In
response to C/Grothe,,the High School site may move
towards the parkway, depending upon the Pomona
School District's investigation of the site.
Therefore, it would not dramatically alter the plan
other than that it would shift over to the west.
Chair/Flamenba'um recessed the meeting at 9:15 p.m.
The meeting was reconvened at 9:30 p.m.
The Public Hearing was declared open.
Sue Sisk, residing at 1087 Flintlock, inquired if
the consultants developed ways to minimize ',the
costs to bring the infrastructures into the area.
June 8, 1992 Page 9
James Regan explained that it did not seem that
there would be a typically high or out of the
ordinary site development costs, with the exception
of the water feature.
Gary Neely, 344 Canoe Cove, stated his concern that
the location of the Tonner Canyon Road was not
taken into consideration. He stated that he would
not dismiss the possibility of having a higher
education facility. He congratulated the
contractors on the work they have done.
Sue Sisk, concerned with traffic congestion,
inquired why a single family residential
development is being proposed by the High School.
James Goodell explained that the idea was to have
as many houses fronting the water as possible.
They thought it better to have the High School
adjacent to the residential neighborhood, as
opposed to having it isolated from the rest of the
community. It would be a very low density
development with plenty of parking for the High
School.
Richard Ide, residing at 1624 Range Court, inquired
if having a reclaimed water reservoir by a potable
-3=- reservoir is acceptable to the MWD, taken into
consideration a possible flooding, whereas the
reclaimed water may run off into the potable water
and ruin it. He also inquired when there will be
information regarding the location of the Tanner
Canyon Road.
Mike Rust stated that he is unsure if that concern
was addressed by the scheme. There would probably
have to be some separation between the two, and
have some sort of containment area below that would
separate the two.
Chair/Flamenbaum, in regards to the location of the
Tonner Canyon Road, explained that, as part of the
General Plan discussion, the Commission indicated
that a transportation corridor is appropriate
through Tonner Canyon. The location of the road is
predicated by the specific plan, which the
perspective land owners would have to develop.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
CONTINUED CD/DeStefano stated that the Commission, on June 1,
PUBLIC HEARING: 1992, received the latest draft of the General
Plan, with the cumulative total of changes made by
Draft General the Commission. Since June 1st, additional
Plan comments have been received by VC/MacBride, as well
as some refinements to the documents, as prescribed
by the Commission on June 1st, and amendments to
June 8, 1992
Page 10
the mitigation monitoring program as the result of 0"11
the final input from DKS. The document beforeI,theCommission indicates these changes.
C/Meyer, referring to page I-13, strategy 1.3.5b',
noting that the Gateway Corporation is the only
area in the City that mentions the floor area
ratio, inquired why it is mentioned and why it
would not be subjected to the terms of the land use
which is FAR 0.25. He suggested that it, be
deleted, or that the wording be changed to indicate
that the FAR will be in compliance with the
development agreement. The Commission concurred to
delete the statement, "Maintain an overall FAR of
0.50.".
C/Meyer suggested that strategy 1.1.9, on page II -
18, be changed to read, "...10 percent of the units
within the project affordable to households with, an
income of 80 percent of the County median income,
or make 50 percent of the units available
exclusively to senior citizens.", and deletethe
examples in bullet one. The Commission concurred.
C/Meyer made the following suggestions: Delete "in
their natural state" from strategy 1.2.4 on page
III -10; delete the last bullet from strategy 1:.3..1
on page III -11; reword strategy 1.3.5 to read,
"Recreational open Space shall be preserved.";
delete the last bullet from strategy 1.3.2 on page
IV -8; and reword the Issue Analysis on page V-20 to
state, "Measures to enhance Grand Avenue while
maintaining its traffic -carrying capacity within
the current right-of-ways could include:", ,and
delete the first bullet.
Lloyd Zola indicated that all revision made to any
of the strategies will also be made in the MMPI. ,
CD/DeStefano, in response to VC/MacBride's concern
with the wording of strategy 1.5.2c, on page I'-14,
suggested that it be reworded to state "Investiligate
the potential for establishment of a maintenance
district for slope areas that are along or visible
from major roadways.".
Carlton Walters, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum's
concern regarding Table 2-1, explained that the
numbers in .the table, other than level of service
C, come from the definition of the level of
service, based on engineering practice i and
historical precedent that has been adopted by
various agencies throughout the County.
Chair/Flamenbaum, referring to page V-22, noted
that since the Commission had previously concurred
to keep Diamond Bar Blvd. as a major arterial,
June 8, 1992 Page 11
F
section 6. Emphasize Diamond Bar Blvd. As A Local
Arterial, should be deleted. The Commission
concurred.
CD/DeStefano stated that the Commission has
received a document, with a cover letter from the
Planning Network, dated June 8, 1992, which
highlights the changes suggested, as a result of
input from VC/MacBride and staff, as well as
amendments to the MMP, as a direct result of the
incorporation of the DKS data, and the last changes
made to the Goals, Objectives, and'Strategies.
Lloyd Zola indicated that page I-7, fifth
paragraph, fourth line, should be reworded to
state, "...exploiting regional market potential."
CD/DeStefano reviewed the changes made, as redlined
in the document before the Commission, and the
changes made to the MMP, which reflect the changes
made in the other portions in the strategies, up
through Circulation. The next document, before the
Commission, labeled Attachment _A, Statement of
Environmental Effects, Mitigation Measures, and
overriding Considerations, is an attachment to the
Resolution recommending approval of the General
Plan certification of the EIR. The Commission
received a very similar document, on June 1, with a
Resolution outlined by the consultant. It is the
environmental analysis that helps support the
Resolution.
DCA/Curley stated that there are two alternatives:
The Commission could clearly state, for the record,
that they have considered it, recognize that within
this Attachment A, which is chapter 4 of the'MEA,
their quality section cannot be mitigated' to a
level of insignificance; or alternatively,,a short
paragraph can be included into the Resolution
recommending to the Council that these findings and
recommendations, within Chapter 4, are in fact
acted upon by the Council, including the statement
of overriding considerations.
C/Meyer inquired if the EIR could be incorporated
into the Resolution by reference, rather than
attaching this as Attachment A.
DCA/Curley explained that this would not be a
separate attachment, but rather built into the
Environmental Impact Report. The followig language
could be included to the end Section 3: "The
recommendation to the Council includes the findings
and determinations that all identified adverse
environmental effects have been reduced below a
level of significance with the exception of air
quality, which has been reduced by the greatest
June 8, 1992
Page 12
extent possible via feasible mitigation measures,
and further that such identified impact has
overriding environmental, social, or other concerns
that should override the significant impacts; as
described in the environmental documents appended
as exhibits hereto." It is recommended that the
Commission adopt the Resolution, as amended.
Motion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by C/Li ,and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adopt the Resolution, as
presented and amended.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer, Li, Grothe,
VC/MacBride, and
Chair/Flamenbaum.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: VC/MacBride submitted a letter informing the
Commission and staff the he will not be present for
Commission meetings June 20 through July 12, 19'92.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting'at
10:57 p.m.
Resp ecti
'J es DeStefano
Secretary
Attest.•
Bruce Flamenbaum
Chairman
d
PIIIJ �. =. S. "I"._i. ., „... �,_ ., 1, i�,,,. "T ,_