Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/8/1993CONTINUED PT/Lungu reported that, per Commission's direction PUBLIC HEARING: at the last meeting, staff met with the applicant to resolve the issue regarding installation of Variance 92-3 & monument signs which exceed the height permitted by Planned Sign the Sign Ordinance. The applicant has requested Program 92-4 additional time, to March 10, 1993, to prepare an addendum to the application for a Planned Sign Program and Variance. Staff is recommending that the project be continued to March 22, 1993. General Plan Amendment 92-2; DA 92-1, 92-2, 92-3; Vesting TT Map 5140, CUP 92-8 & Oak Tree Permit 92-8; Vesting TT 32400, CUP 91-5, Zone Change 91-2 & Oak Tree Permit 91-2; TT Map Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing opened. Hearing no testimony, Chair/ Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the item to the meeting of March 22, 1993. CDD/DeStefano reported that the project site, approximately 171 acres, is located within the South Pointe Middle School/ Sandstone Canyon area, generally north of Pathfinder, west of Brea Canyon Road, east of Morning Sun Drive, south of Larkstone Dr., and south of Rapid View Drive. The purpose of tonight's public hearing is to further the presentations by the two consultants, hired by the City, to review this project. The Planning Commission will not be taking any action on the merits of this project, but will be receiving testimony, and providing comments and direction to staff. There can be no final action on this CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY'8, 1993 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at 7:14 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: Vice Chairman Meyer. ROLL CALL: Commissioners: Grothe, Li, Vice Chairman Meyer, and Chairman Flamenbaum. C/Plunk was absent. Also present were Community Development Director James DeStefano, Associate Planner Robert Searcy, Planning Technician Ann Lungu, Deputy City Attorney Craig Fox, and Contract Secretary Liz Myers. CONSENT CALENDAR: VC/Meyer requested that the minutes be amended on page 1 to correctly indicate Commissioner Plunk. Minutes of Jan. 25, 93 Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Li and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes. of January 25, 1993, as amended. CONTINUED PT/Lungu reported that, per Commission's direction PUBLIC HEARING: at the last meeting, staff met with the applicant to resolve the issue regarding installation of Variance 92-3 & monument signs which exceed the height permitted by Planned Sign the Sign Ordinance. The applicant has requested Program 92-4 additional time, to March 10, 1993, to prepare an addendum to the application for a Planned Sign Program and Variance. Staff is recommending that the project be continued to March 22, 1993. General Plan Amendment 92-2; DA 92-1, 92-2, 92-3; Vesting TT Map 5140, CUP 92-8 & Oak Tree Permit 92-8; Vesting TT 32400, CUP 91-5, Zone Change 91-2 & Oak Tree Permit 91-2; TT Map Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing opened. Hearing no testimony, Chair/ Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the item to the meeting of March 22, 1993. CDD/DeStefano reported that the project site, approximately 171 acres, is located within the South Pointe Middle School/ Sandstone Canyon area, generally north of Pathfinder, west of Brea Canyon Road, east of Morning Sun Drive, south of Larkstone Dr., and south of Rapid View Drive. The purpose of tonight's public hearing is to further the presentations by the two consultants, hired by the City, to review this project. The Planning Commission will not be taking any action on the merits of this project, but will be receiving testimony, and providing comments and direction to staff. There can be no final action on this February 8, 1993 Page 2 51253 & CUP proposed project, until the issue of pending 92-12; Oak Tree litigation of the City's General Plan is resolved. Permit 92-9; the CDD/DeStefano then introduced Peter Lewendowski, South Pointe from the firm of Ultra Systems, who has managed the Master Plan; & preparation of the EIR, and Hardy Strozier, of the EIR 92-9. Planning Associates, who is the independent analyst and the Project Manager. Hardy Strozier stated that, upon the conclusion of any additional public testimony,_ they will draw upon the questions and comments received from the audience and the Commission and present a brief review of the draft EIR. If the Commission determines that the information in the draft EIR is complete, and recommends certification of the draft EIR, discussion can begin regarding the various entitlement issues. The Commission can recommend P certification of the draft EIR and take action against the proposed project. All comments received this evening will be responded to in writing as part of the final EIR. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing opened. Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig Lane, requested that the responses to the questions raised regarding the draft EIR be presented first to allow the audience an opportunity to respond to the consultant's responses. Sherry Rogers, residing at 2660 Broken Feather, President of the South Pointe Middle School Community Club, stated that a school was promised to the community four years ago. With the recent passing of Proposition H, the school should be under construction now. She submitted 300 letters of parents and students who have joined in pleading for the construction of the permanent South Pointe Middle School as soon as possible. Oscar Law, residing at 21511 Pathfinder Road, requested that the EIR address the following issues: the change of air quality to the residents in and around this construction; the responsibility of the builder involved in the construction of the Middle School to remove the 400,000 cubic yards of dirt from the school site; can the City master plan a section of the community without having a General Plan for the City; and, by law, can the City be a partner in this project. CDD/DeStefano, noting that there are many in the audience that may appreciate a brief overview of N February 8, 1993 Page 3 r -1I 1 _k the project, and the EIR issues, recommended that the consultants provide a brief presentation. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed. Hardy Strozier reviewed the eight specific elements that the project is composed of: the draft EIR, an information type document; the General Plan Amendment redesignating the existing water district property to Planned Development; three Development Agreements; Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32400 - Arciero; Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 - Patel; Vesting Tentative Map No. 51407 - RNP three separate Hillside Management Ordinance CUP; and three Oak Tree Removal Permit. The proposed project consists of the following: two hundred (200) dwelling units proposed within this project area, with lot sizes ranging from 6,500 square foot to 8,000 square foot; a 31 acre retail office/commercial site; a 26 acre community park site proposed for dedication to the City; and the removal of 400,000 cubic yards of dirt from the South Pointe Middle School site to be deposited on part of the project area residing within Vesting Tentative Map No. 32400. The City has chosen to tie each one of these applications, both private and public, in one Master Plan. Mr. Lewendowski, Director of Planning with the consulting firm Ultra Systems, explained that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires governmental agencies, who have authority over particular projects, to include, in their decision making process, an analysis of the projects impacts upon the environment. The City prepared an initial study for this project and concluded that the project implementation had the potential to result in significant impacts upon the environment. Based upon that conclusion, the City directed the preparation of an EIR, which represents a detailed technical analysis of the project's direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts upon the environment. The intent of CEQA is to provide an environmental basis for the decision making process. It is also the intent of CEQA to insure public access to the decision makers so as to insure a full disclosure of the projects potential impacts, and potential alternatives that may be available to the decision makers. The purpose of CEQA is to adopt project alternatives that may produce lesser impacts, and to identify and develop mitigation measures which might further reduce the impacts identified in the analysis I�I'llll� I � iii i Pebruary 8, 1993 Page 4 brought forward through public testimony. The following is a brief summary of the topical issues identified in the draft EIR: Land Use Impacts o Land Use Compatibility: The project, as proposed, is consistent with the General Plan designation for the site. o Zoning: The project is consistent with the zoning designations of the site. o Hillside Management Ordinance: There are a number of areas that the project may not be consistent with the Ordinance, but the Ordinance specifies that there are CUP mechanisms which allow site specific interpretation of the project Earth o Geotechnical Studies: Although unstable slope conditions on the site, there are no faults that have been identified. Geotechnical conditions that occur on the site are typical of other development properties in southern California. Water o Surface Water and Ground Water Impacts: Three regional storm drain conduits exist. Two are sufficient to accommodate post development discharge. Those areas where deficiencies exist will be improved to accommodate future discharge that may occur from the site. Traffic o Traffic Assessment: There are 6 area wide intersection (Colima Rd./Brea Canyon Cut-off, Colima Rd./Lemon Ave., Colima Rd./eastbound 60 freeway ramps, Brea Canyon Rd/westbound 60 freeway ramps, Brea Canyon Rd./Colima Rd., Pathfinder Rd./northbound 57 ramps) which will be impacted both by the project and by cumulative development activities which will occur between now and the year 2002, and through the year 2012, notwithstanding whether the project is built. Air Quality o During Grading Operations: Emissions associated with heavy duty equipment and fugitive dust will create a short term air quality impact which is defined as exceeding existing SCAQMD adopted standards. o Upon Project Development: The emissions associated with the project generated traffic, and the consumption of natural gas and electricity associated with the on site uses will result in an exceedance of conditions. There are no available mechanisms or February 8, 1993 Page 5 r , technologies which will result in the reduction to those standards below significant levels. Biology o Existing resources which are recognized by Sate & Federal agencies: Seven vegetation communities are identified -on the property and are as follows: the riparian, coastal sage shrub, and the California Walnut Woodlands. In accordance with the Tree Ordinance, each Oak removed must be replaced at a 2:1 ratio in such a manner as to create a replacement habitat either on site or off site. It has been concluded that the impacts upon biological communities can be minimized to a level which is insignificant. Aesthetics o Existing Public Policy: The General Plan and Zoning indicates that the long term objective of this area is urban development. There is no clear cut direction, in other policies in the General Plan, which indicate that the change ,- from rural to urban is a significant adverse change. However, there appears to be a need for additional mitigation measures that might reduce some of the perspectives of the site. Project Alternatives o Preservation Alternative o Higher Density Options o Lower Density Options o The Clustering of Development Peter Lewendowski explained that the final EIR contains all the information derived from dialogue, the draft EIR, and information that materializes through further analysis based upon the public testimony. The EIR is an independent document of the project, and it's intent is informational to insure that the decision makers has the environmental bases to make their decisions, and that the public has a vehicle to make their comments known through this decision making process. The EIR is not a policy document. It attempts to represent a nonbias professional, technical opinion of the projects impacts. To assist the decision makers to make a well balanced decision, public comments are needed that primarily `- focus upon whether or not the EIR provides a faithful and reasonable analysis of the project's impacts. Hardy Strozier pointed out that, in the CEQA process, experts, in their various fields, are asked to provide differing opinions on similar l'I'A p r o 1111L 11 ui 1 February 8, 1993 Page 6 topics so that the decision makers are exposed to all sides of the issue. Upon conclusion of the review period, the environmental consultant will return a document called a Response to Comments, to be presented at the February- 22, 1993 -meeting. Based upon all the written and oral comments received during this review period, formal detailed written replies will be 'provided on the various comments raised. Chair/Flamenbaum reopened the public hearing. Paul Bramonte, residing on Tam 01Shanter, the unincorporated part of Walnut, expressed his concern of the increase in traffic that will be created on Walnut Leaf Road and Tam O'Shanter. He requested that the EIR evaluate the.need for more residential dwelling units and commercial units when there are many homes and businesses currently vacant in the area. Elizabeth Hodges, residing at 1604 Morning Sun, j. Walnut, within the unincorporated area, requested that the EIR address how traffic will impact the streets in the Emerald Hills housing project, specifically Colima/Walnut Leaf, and Colima/Lake Canyon. The roads in the area are steep, without stop signs, centerlines, or sidewalks. The Rowland Unified School District has written the City to express their concern for the safety of the children, with the increase in traffic resulting from the development of this proposed project, especially since there are no sidewalks, and they must walk in the street to get to the bus'stop. Don Schad, residing at 1824 Shaded Wood Road, stated that the EIR in incomplete because it does not mention amphibians in the canyon, nor the process used to discover creatures within the '` canyon at night. He requested the dates and times j of observation, and the names and qualifications of the individuals that conducted the observation. The removal of 97% of the vegetation in the canyon, as noted in the EIR, will annihilate everything living in that canyon. He made the following comments: the canyon contains one of the densest grove of oaks in the City; the canyon can provide studies in botany, herbitology, entomology, astronomy, and plant and tree propagation; the canyon is a cougar migration corridor; wildlife and bird lose will be horrendous; and.the soil can be removed at a minimum expense (written suggestions F were provided) and should be done so during the summer so that there is no audio impact on the M February 8, 1993 Page 7 children. Mr. Schad then presented two maps, submitted to the Commission for the record, illustrating alternative concept plans for the Sandstone Canyon area. The concept plans include such features as a children's museum, an observatory, trails, a school, as well as internal on site street configurations. Oscar Law,'residing at 21511 Pathfinder, requested that the VIR address the following items: the noise level, during and after construction will be greater than the noise level emitted from a home smoke detector; though air quality currently exceeds the SCAQMD standard, it need not go beyond that point, and something should be done to improve the condition, not worsen it; who will pay for further widen the Pathfinder Bridge to accommodate the increase in traffic from this development, as well as pay for maintaining all the streets in the area; since Oak Trees are very slow growing, and susceptible to dying if transplanted, they cannot be replaced in a similar manner; trees clean the air, and the removal of this many trees will affect the air quality for as long as 400 years. Jan C. Dabney, 671 Brea Canyon Road, noting that many people are leaving after addressing their concerns, reminded the audience that since the consultant', will answer questions raised following the public',hearing, it may be beneficial to remain to hear some of their responses. John Anderson stated that EIR needs to address the "Country Living" atmosphere in Diamond Bar, the environmental aspects of driving down the 57 freeway and seeing cows, and the other aesthetics that this project will eliminate. The EIR should also evaluate the financial gains, of the project land holders, by building this development in our community.!, Joyce Hill', residing at 1836 Shaded Wood Road, requested that the EIR address the following: the current vacant commercial buildings in the City; the reduction of property values of those homes now overlooking Sandstone Canyon because the view will become that of ' buildings, rooftops, air conditioning equipment, etc.; what compensation will be provided in the event of landslides; the unique wilderness area is being replaced by noise pollution, lair pollution, and increased traffic, which is alproblem the City has been working hard to mitigate; and consider an alternative concept February 8, 1993 Page 8 which builds the school, limits the dwelling units,, and preserves Sandstone Canyon. Mike Collins, residing at 1612 Morning Sun, Walnut, submitted, to the Commission, written comments addressing concerns on the EIR. George Barrett, residing 1884 Shaded -Wood Road, made the following comments: many centers, within the City are currently .vacant, yet the City is proposing ;more commercial area; the elementary schools are overcrowded, and facilities for them are lacking; the Middle School should be built regardless of this development; the removal of the dirt should be the responsibility of the developer who put it there; alternatives to removing the dirt should be explored; arida sign on Brea Canyon Road indicates that it is a slide area. Norman Beach Cushane, residing at 2021 Peaceful Hills Road, President' of the Pathfinders Homeowners Association, requested- that the EIR address the following: the California Burrowing Owl, a threatened species in orange County, may exist on the flat land' 'to be developed by RnP; the possibility of moving the dirt to fill a hole elsewhere should be explored; 20 acres of open area is not a fair exchange for developing on this existing 139 acres of open area, excluding the school site; there will be a need for traffic signals for the future intersections on Brea Canyon; this construction will bring rattlesnakes, coyotes, and bobcats into the backyards of existing homes; and since the existing homes will be devalued, there should be a reduction in property tax. Bob Roberts, residing on Morning Sung Walnut, opposed the opening of Morning Sun Avenue as the main residential access. Larkstone Dr. and/or Rapid View should be considered as secondary access roads regardless of the opinions of school officials, local residents, and local officials who do not find these alternatives acceptable, and who may have a conflict of interest being involved in this project. Lee Doyle, residing at 20206 Evening Breeze Dr., Walnut, expressed the following concerns: the increase in noise from the freeway; the loss of wildlife; the cutting of the hillsides; and the increase in traffic. February 8, 1993 Page 9 Phil Duarte, residing on 1343 Red Bluff, expressed his concern that the size of the proposed lots, 6,000 to 8,000 square feet, is not consistent with the existing neighborhood which has an average lot size of 20,000 square feet. He submitted pictures to the Commission of deer and the canyon in it's natural setting. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing review of the EIR closed. Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 9:03 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:25 p.m. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing opened to general comments. i Marlene Tangeman, residing at 20671 Larkstone Dr., Principal of South Pointe Middle School, expressed her concern that the longer it takes to certify the EIR, the longer the Middle School is delayed. I Carolyn Elfelt, residing at 21119 Silver Cloud, pointed out that the South Pointe Master Plan benefits the entire community, and gives our children a school they deserve. overall, the good points, such as the school, the park, the community building, and the access road, far outweigh the bad points mentioned. Lauren Minck, residing at 2067 Tierra Loma, a teacher at South Pointe Middle School, stated that the permanent Middle School is needed immediately. Linda Bishop, residing at 1281 Rapid View Dr., expressed her opposition to accessing Rapid View to Brea Canyon Road. The area has already been impacted by traffic created from the Middle School. Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig, expressed his support that the Middle School should be built. However, the City should not conceive a Master Plan community against the wishes of a lot of people. The developer should remove the dirt at this own cost, and the City should separate the projects within -the Master Plan, and stop using the school as an excuse to construct the dwelling units, and the commercial development. This project should not even be in the public hearing stages until the decision on the General Plan Referendum has been made. The proponents of the referendum have been called liars, and accused of being con artists, and the entire process has been delayed because of the City of Diamond Bar's action, including staff. February S, 1993 Page 10 Chair/Flamenbaum requested Mr. Maxwell- to direct��� his comments to the issue at hand. Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 9:40 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:41 p.m. Chair/Flamenbaum apologized for calling a brief recess. He encouraged the audience to continue to direct comments to the issue at hand. Elizabeth Hodges, residing at 1604 Morning Sun Ave, Walnut, expressed her opposition to the attitude that the Middle School must be built at all costs, regardless of the change in quality of life of the existing community. Oscar Law, residing at 21511 Pathfinder, expressed his concern that the Commission is not responding to the alternative concept plan to remove the dirt, at no cost to the City, as suggested by Mr. Beach Cushane. The Middle School should be built first, and the development at Sandstone Canyon considered separately. I� CDD/DeStefano stated that the City has announced this Master Plan to the community via three public study sessions, two public hearings, and the of gathering community newsletter, as a process information and reviewing this specific proposal. The Planning Commission is not the proponent of but judicial body which will this project, a quasi make a recommendation to the City Council. The City is a participant in this project because the City owns land in small pockets within this 171 acre area, and from a professional planning standpoint, it made sense that boundary lines of ISI ownership be erased to look at the whole area comprehensively. The Planning Commission and staff p i collectively, to all the concerns are listening, c Y, that have been made. All concerns and suggestions will be responded to. John Anderson, a resident, stated that the City has a responsibility to begin holding the developer accountable for cleaning up their project after i development. The dirt should have been removed by the developer long ago. There can be no Master is held Plan in the City until the developer accountable. Barbara Beach Cushane, residing at 2021 Peaceful III Hills Road made the following comments: if there H11, i o ect then wh o the r Y acts t 7 'cant impacts p are no significant p must there be variances, and CUP's to develop it; i 17 February 8, 1993 Page 11 these impacts cannot be satisfactory under the General Plan, as indicated, because there is no _General Plan that can be implemented at this time; many people in the City are concerned with the flaws in the General Plan, specifically dealing with the situations planned in this project; there is slippage on the land bordering Brea Canyon; the EIR should be corrected to indicate that there are no "recognized" faults; is there a document of approval from the LA Flood Control; 20 acres of open area is not a fair exchange for the loss of over 100 acres of open area; the canyon maintains itself at no cost to the City; Brea Canyon and Pathfinder are adversely affected by this development; there is a conflict of interest because all the officials in Diamond Bar are a lead agency and developer; Mr. Arciero should fulfill his responsibility and remove the dirt, without affecting the canyon; though the permanent Middle School is needed, quality education comes from teachers and administrators, not brick and mortar, and the school can be built'without the development of Sandstone Canyon; and the existing property owners were promised that the land would never be developed. Ms. Beach Cushane stated that the consultants should have responded tonight to the concerns made at the last meeting before opening the public hearing so that the audience could respond to them. Hearing no further testimony, Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed. VC/Meyer requested that the EIR address the following: address an alternative concept of constructing the South Pointe Middle School without the rest of the elements on the Master Plan; further elaborate on the items of unavoidable adverse impacts, which are air quality, traffic, and circulation, specifically in regards to mitigation measures that could be implemented to address those three .areas; expand on the issue of opening Morning Sun Dr., to include empirical data that assesses the impacts of the potential traffic into that existing development, and include mitigation measures that would reduce the impact, as well as address the issue of no sidewalks, alternative designs of the intersection, and/or the elimination of the intersection; elaborate as to why Rapid View, a collector street, is disregarded as an alternative, and is not put together in some sort of on site circulation system; the amount of dirt to be moved on site has not been adequately mitigated to a point of non significance, and February 8, 1993 Page 12 further information is 'regarding needed some migration trails of wildlife; 'there should be further elaboration as to what the grading controls will be to insure incremental grading ,on the project site coordinating the three property owners; since the small wildlife,, such as snakes and rodents, will move out of the canyon, during grading, and probably move into the habitat of the existing dwellings, the method to control this activity should be addressed; the circulation issues regarding the cross section for Brea Canyon should be examined by the traffic engineers; there is no provision for the cross section for Brea Canyon for sidewalks or any pedestrian type of controls; the circulation analysis at Colima/Brea Canyon, which" identified that the,signals to the west, and the signals for the on and off ramps to the freeway need to work in tandem with the phasing for that intersection,' should be expanded to address the various types of'improvements; address the responsibility this project would have to the impacts on the'various intersections and street sections; address the type of technical judgement, with respect to this project, being used to mitigate the issue of air quality to an acceptable level, understanding that it is impossible to mitigate to a, level of nonsignificance; there should be more creativity in saving some of the provisions of the canyon; and effort should be expended between this project and the property owners to the south to develop a cooperative venture to save some of the significant natural environment. VC/Meyer stated that, first blush, the EIR identifies the issues arising from each elements needs and efforts to compromise, as well identifies a lot of the ways to mitigate the impacts, and impacts of urbanization. C/Li requested that the predevelopment and post development calculations, regarding water on site, be further examined in terms of public safety for further landslides, if the project is developed. C/Grothe requested that the EIR address the following: a traffic study that further addresses the on site circulation system, specifically the problem of cut -through traffic upon opening many of these streets; the area in the City's sphere of influence needs further analysis in regards to :1 traffic impacts and needed signals; the project is j similar to all the other past development in Diamond Bar, and there needs to be more creativity in it planning with effort expended to possible save the canyon; there could be more creativity in February 8, 1993 Page 13 grading alternatives of the Middle School site; and the Middle School project should be addressed as a separate element of the Master Plan. Chair/Flamenbaum requested that the EIR address the following; further discussion identifying the ways to minimize the impacts of moving 9.3 million cubic yards of dirt, as well as the actual moving of the dirt; address an alternative to removing 800 oak trees that would leave more of those trees in place; and further evaluate the impacts of removing the trees and the closing of the stream, which has been identified as mostly run off. Chair/Flamenbaum stated that the comments and concerns raised tonight by the audience and the Commission will be responded to in a report, to be included in the ETR, and presented at the February 22, 1993 public hearing meeting. The Commission concurred to declare the public input portion of the meeting closed. The next meeting on the South Pointe Master Plan is !^I scheduled for February 22, 1993. Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 10:30 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:35 p.m. Vesting Tentative AP/Searcy presented the staff report regarding the Tract No. 50519, request, by Diamond Development Company, to DR No. 91-2, subdivide a 2.3 acre site into 34 individual ZCA No. 91 -3, -and ownership lots/ units and three (3) common lots, to DA No. 91-3 change the zone classification from C-1 (Restricted Business) to Zone R-3 (Limited Multiple Residence) and to enter into a Development Agreement with the City. The Planning Commission directed staff, at the December 14, 1992 meeting, to draft Resolutions and conditions of approval. Since the project has evolved into the present design, it is in compliance with the General Plan and the current development standards, and no specific exceptions are necessitated, therefore, the Development Agreement is no longer required. AP/Searcy then noted the following items in the Resolution that need further revision: a date change to November 21, 1993 on page 1, item A.(iv); an address correction to 23575 Golden Springs on page 2, item B.4(a); page 3 item 4.(g) indicates that ' notification was done in conformance to State Law; page 5, item(10) indicates the location of the air conditioning units; page 5, item (11) deals with the Quimby fees,, and staff will indicate that it is the Diamond Bar code as adopted from the Los Angeles County Code section; page 5, item(14) deals with February 8, 1993 Page 14 the CC&R's and a third party mediation -service, and staff will add the word "bell between the words _-- "shall" and "created"; page 7, item?--- thephase,, '=to e�Citv's:: �:u: on9°; page 7, item (;7) deals with on street parking; page 7, item (8) requires that written evidence of the approval from the County Sanitation be provided to the City; and page 7, item (9) will be rewritten with the concept that all standard conditions are in the separate attachment. Dr.'Crowley, the applicant, 'st6ted that he accepts all conditions as stated.' Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing opened. Hearing no testimony, Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed. AP/Searcy stated that staff recommends that the Commission approve the Development Review application, and recommend approval of the Vesting Tentative Map .No. 50519 and ZC 91-1 to the City Council, as is so stated in the Resolutions. There is an additional condition that would null and void the Development Review application, if the tentative tract and zone change application are not approved by the City Council. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Li and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve Resolution 93 -XX for approve of DR 91-2. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Li and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve Resolution 93 -XX as amended, recommending approval of ZC 91-1. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Li and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve Resolution 93 -XX, recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50519. PUBLIC HEARING: Chair/Flamenbaum noted that staff report, as presented, recommends that the item be continued. DR 92-6 & Variance 92-5 Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing opened. Hearing no testimony, Chair/ F lamenbaum declared the j public hearing closed. -;f __ —_ — _---.•—. _. ...., ... � w- � T-= �_,�- �. �,.. _—.� -._ --�.,�«..,ipg �i.uwadobun»i�u�tl.i61�V�_ - --_ .__.: - - I February 8, 1993 'Page 15 x -� Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY - to continue the public hearing to February 22, 1993. i ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Grothe requested that the South Pointe Master Plan item be placed on the agenda following any other items. CDD/DeStefano reported that he approved the following Administrative Development Review items earlier this evening: a minor exterior mod- ification to Chuck -E -Cheese; a 1,000 square foot addition to a 1,600 square foot home off of Top Court; and a new home within the Piermarini tract. I CDD/DeStefano stated that Mr. Lewendowski, from Ultra Systems, has been retained by the City to review the City of Industry's EIR on the proposed MRF. The City .has scheduled an informational public meeting on February 9, 1993. CDD/DeStefano stated that regarding the referendum lawsuit, the Judge has indicated that he will render his decision on February 9, 1993. He informed the Commission of the Planners Institute about a month from now, for those wishing to participate. CDD/DeStefano, in response to C/Li, stated that the City Council is moving toward establishing a Sewer Assessment District in "The Country Estate". ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at 11:03 p.m. RDme tively JDeStefano Secretary l Attest: <� Bruce Flamenbaum Chairman - - - --- T - T/Lungu reported that, per Commission's direction CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 81 1993 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at 7:14 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by ALLEGIANCE: vice chairman Meyer. NUED ROLL CALL: Commissioners: Grothe, Li, Vice Chairman Meyer, and Chairman Flamenbaum. C/Plunk was absent. Also present were Community Development Director James DeStefano, Associate Planner Robert Searcy, Planning Technician Ann Lungu, Deputy City Attorney Craig Fox, and Contract Secretary Liz Myers. CONSENT CALENDAR: V Meyer requested that the minutes be amended on page 1 to correctly indicate Commissioner Plunk. Minutes of Jan. 25, 93 Motion was m de by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Li and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve Minutes. of January 25, 1993, as amended. the last meetina. staff met with the resolve the issue regarding installation of Hearing no testimony, Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed. ✓ariance 92-3 & onument signs which exceed the height permitted by 'fanned Sign the Sign ordinance. The applicant has requested 'roaram 92-4 bdditional time, to March 10, 1993, to prepare an General Plan mendment 92-2; A 92-1, 92-2, 2-3; vesting T Map 5140, UP 92-8 & Pak Tree Permit 2-8; Vesting T 32400, CUP 1-5, Zone han a 91-2 & ak Tree Permit 1-2" TT Ma General Plan ddendum to the application for a Planned Sign ro ram and Variance. Staff is recommending that he project be continued to March 22, 1993. hair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing ened. Hearing no testimony, Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the item to the meeting of March 22, 1993. CDD/DeStefano reported that the project site, approximately 171 acres, is located within the South Pointe Middle School/ Sandstone Canyon area, generally north of Pathfinder, west of Brea Canyon Road, east of Morning Sun Drive, south of Larkstone Dr., and south of Rapid View Drive. The purpose of tonight's public hearing is to further the presentations by the two consultants, hired by the City, to review this project. The Planning Commission will not be taking any action on the merits of this project, but will be receiving testimony, and providing comments and direction to staff. There can be no final action on this 2; Oak Tree litigation of the City's General Plan is resolved. 51253 & CUP Permit 92-9; the DD/DeStef ano then introduced Peter Lewendowski, Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing opened. Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig Lane, requested that the responsev to the questions raised regarding the draft EIR be presented first to allow the audience an opportunity to respond to the consultant's responses. the firm of Ultra Systems, who has managed the Sherry Rogers, residing at 2660 Broken Feather, President of the South Pointe Middle School Community Club, stated that a school was promised to the community four years ago. With the recent passing of Proposition H, the school should be under construction now. She submitted 300 letters of parents and students who have joined in pleading for the construction of the permanent South Pointe Middle School as soon as possible. aster Plan; & 1preparation of the EIR, and Hardy Strozier, of the Oscar Law, residing at 21511 Pathfinder Road, requested that the EIR address the following issues: the change of air quality to the residents in and around this construction; the responsibility of the builder involved in the construction of the Middle School to remove the 400,000 cubic yards of dirt from the school site; can the City master plan a section of the community without having a General Plan f or the City; and, by law, can the City be a partner in this project. IR 92-9. lanning Associates, who is the independent analyst nd the Project Manager. ardy Strozier stated that, upon the conclusion of ny additional public testimony, - they will draw on the questions and comments received from the udience and the Commission and present a brief eview of the draft EIR. If the Commission etermines that the information in the draft EIR is om Iete, and recommends certification of the draft IR, discussion can begin regarding the various ntitlement issues. The Commission can recommend ertification of the draft EIR and take action ainst the proposed project. All comments eceived this evening will be responded to in kriting as part of the final EIR. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing opened. Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig Lane, requested that the responses to the questions raised regarding the draft EIR be presented first to allow the audience an opportunity to respond to the consultant's responses. Sherry Rogers, residing at 2660 Broken Feather, President of the South Pointe Middle School Community Club, stated that a school was promised to the community four years ago. With the recent passing of Proposition H, the school should be under construction now. She submitted 300 letters of parents and students who have joined in pleading for the construction of the permanent South Pointe Middle School as soon as possible. Oscar Law, residing at 21511 Pathfinder Road, requested that the EIR address the following issues: the change of air quality to the residents in and around this construction; the responsibility of the builder involved in the construction of the Middle School to remove the 400,000 cubic yards of dirt from the school site; can the City master plan a section of the community without having a General Plan f or the City; and, by law, can the City be a partner in this project. CDD/DeStefano, noting that there are many in the audience that may appreciate a brief overview of TR February 81 1993 Page 3 the project, and the EIR issues, recommended that the consultants provide a brief presentation. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed. Hardy Strozier reviewed the eight specific elements that the project is composed of: the draft EIR, an information type document; the General Plan Amendment redesignating the existing water district property to Planned Development; three Development Agreements; Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32400 Arciero; Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 - Patel; Vesting Tentative Map No. 51407 - RNP three separate Hillside Management Ordinance CUP; and three Oak Tree Removal Permit. The proposed project consists of the following: two hundred (200) dwelling units proposed within this project area, with lot sizes ranging from 6,500 square foot to 8,000 square foot; a 31 acre retail office/ commercial site; a 26 acre community park site proposed for dedication to the City; and the removal of 400,000 cubic yards of dirt from the South Pointe Middle School site to be deposited on part of the project area residing within Vesting Tentative Map No. 32400. The City has chosen to tie each one of these applications, both private and public, in one Master Plan. Mr. Lewendowski, Director of Planning with the consulting firm Ultra Systems, explained that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires governmental agencies, who have authority over particular projects, to include, in their decision making process, an analysis of the projects impacts upon the environment. The City prepared an initial study for this project and concluded that the project implementation had the potential to result in significant impacts upon the environment. Based upon that conclusion, the City directed the preparation of an EIR, which represents a detailed technical analysis of the project's direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts upon the environment. The intent of CEQA is to provide an environmental basis for the decision making process. It -is also the intent of CEQA to insure public access to the decision makers so as to insure a full disclosure of the projects potential impacts, and potential alternatives that may be available to the decision makers. The purpose of CEQA is to adopt project alternatives that may produce lesser impacts, and to identify and develop mitigation measures which might further reduce the impacts identified in the analysis Pebruary 8, 1993 Page 4 and Use Compatibility: The project, as ro osed, is consistent with the General Plan brou jht forward through- public testimony. The following is a brief summary of the t pical issues identified in the draft EIR: esi nation for the site. Land Use Impacts onin : The project is consistent with the oning designations of the site. illside Management Ordinance: There are a umber of areas that the project may not be onsistent with the Ordinance, but the rdinance specifies that there are CUP echanisms which allow sitespecific interpretation of the project Earth eotechnical Studies: Although unstable slope onditions on the site, there are no faults hat have been identified. Geotechnical onditions that occur on the site are typical f other development properties in southern California. hater urface Water and Ground Water Impacts: Three ional storm drain conduits exist. Two are fficient to accommodate ost develo ment schar e. Those areas where deficiencies 3'11scharge ist will be im roved to accommodate future that may occur from the site. Traffic raf f is Assessment: There are 6 area wide ntersection Colima Rd./Brea Canyon Cut-off, olima Rd./Lemon Ave., Colima Rd./eastbound 60 reeway ramps Brea Canyon Rd/westbound 60 Teeway ramps Brea Canyon Rd./Colima Rd., athfinder Rd. /northbound 57 rams which will e impacted both by the project and b umulative development activities which will ccur between now and the year 2002, and hrou h the year 2012, notwithstanding whether he project is built. Air Duality )uring Grading operations: Emissions ssociated with heavy duty equipment and u itive dust will create a short term air juality impact which is defined as exceeding Wsting SCAQMD adopted standards. on Project Development: The emissions ssociated with the project generated traffic, nd the consumption of natural gas and Dlectricity associated with the on site uses ill result in an exceedance of conditions. There are no available mechanisms or 41 February 8, 1993 Page 5 technologies which will result in the reduction to those standards below significant levels. Biology 0 Existing Resources which are recognized by Sate & Federal agencies: Seven vegetation communities are identified -on the property and are as follows: the riparian, coastal sage shrub, and the California Walnut Woodlands. In accordance with the Tree Ordinance, each Oak removed must be replaced at a 2: 1 ratio in such a manner as to create a replacement habitat either on site or of f site. It has been concluded that the impacts upon biological communities can be minimized to a level which is insignificant. Aesthetics 0 Existing Public Policy: The General Plan and Zoning indicates that the long term objective of this area is urban development. There is no clear cut direction, in other policies in the General Plan, which indicate that the change from rural to urban is a signif icant adverse change. However, there appears to be a need for additional mitigation measures that might reduce some of the perspectives of the site. Project Alternatives 0 Preservation Alternative 0 Higher Density Options 0 Lower Density Options 0 The Clustering of Development Peter Lewendowski explained that the final EIR contains all the information derived from dialogue, the draft EIR, and information that materializes through further analysis based upon the public testimony. The EIR is an independent document of the project, and it I s intent is informational to insure that the decision makers has the environmental bases to make their decisions, and that the public has a vehicle to make their comments known through this decision making process. The EIR is not a policy document. it attempts to represent a nonbias professional, technical opinion of the projects impacts. To assist the decision makers to make a well balanced decision, public comments are needed that primarily focus upon whether or not the EIR provides a faithful and reasonable analysis of the project's impacts. Hardy Strozier pointed out that, in the CEQA processf experts, in their various f ields, are asked to provide differing opinions on similar February 8, 1993 page 6 topics so that the decision makers are exposed to all sides of the issue. Upon conclusion of the review period, the environmental consultant will return a document called a Response to comments, to be presented at the February- 22„ 1993 -meeting. Based upon all the written and oral comments received during this review period, formal detailed written replies will be 'provided on the various, comments raised. Chair/Flamenbaum reopened the public hearing. Paul Bramonte, residing on Tam O'Shanter, the unincorporated part of Walnut, expressed his concern of the increase in traffic that will be created on Walnut Leaf Road and Tam O'Shanter. He requested that the EIR evaluate the -need for more residential dwelling units and commercial units when there are many homes and businesses currently vacant in the area. Elizabeth Hodges, residing at 1604 Morning Sun, Walnut, within the unincorporated area, requested that the EIR address how traffic will impact the streets in the Emerald Hills housing project, specifically Colima/Walnut Leaf, and Colima/Lake Canyon. The roads in the area are steep, without stop signs, centerlines, or sidewalks. The Rowland Unified School District has written the City to express their concern for the safety of the children, with the increase in traffic resulting from the development of this proposed project, especially since there are no sidewalks, and they must walk in the street to get to the bus'stop. Don Schad, residing at 1824 Shaded Wood Road, stated that the EIR in incomplete because it does not mention amphibians in the canyon, nor the s used to discover creatures within the proces canyon at night. He requested the dates and times of observation, and the names and qualifications of the individuals that conducted the observation. The removal of 97% of the vegetation in the canyon, as noted in the EIR, will annihilate everything living in that canyon. He made the following comments: the canyon contains one of the densest grove of oaks in the City; the canyon can provide studies in botany, herbitology, entomology, astronomy, and plant and tree propagation; the canyon is a cougar migration corridor; wildlife and bird lose will be horrendous; and -the soil can be removed at a minimum expense (written suggestions were provided) and should be done so during the summer so that there is no audio impact on the February 8, 1993 Page 7 children. Mr. Schad then presented two maps, submitted to the Commission for the record, illustrating alternative concept plans for the Sandstone Canyon area. The concept plans include such features as a children's museum, an as well as internal a school, Oscar Law, residing at 21511 Pathfinder, requested that the )EIR address the following items: the noise level, during and after construction will be greater than the noise level emitted from a home smoke detector; though air quality currently exceeds the SCAQMD standard, it need not go beyond that pointi and something should be done to improve the condition, not worsen it; who will pay f or further widen the Pathfinder Bridge to accommodate the increase in traffic from this development, as well as pay for maintaining all the streets in the area; since Oak Trees are very slow growing, and susceptible to dying if transplanted, they cannot be replaced in a similar manner; trees clean the air, and the removal of this many trees will affect the air quality for as long as 400 years. Jan C. Dabney, 671 Brea Canyon Road, noting that many people are leaving after addressing their concerns, reminded the audience that since the consultant will answer questions raised following the public hearing, it may be beneficial to remain to hear some of their responses. John Anderson stated that EIR needs to address the "Country Living" atmosphere in Diamond Bar, the environmental aspects of driving down the 57 freeway and seeing cows, and the other aesthetics that this project will eliminate. The EIR should also evaluate the financial gains, of the project land holders, by building this development in our community.!— Joyce Hill, residing at 1836 Shaded Wood Road, requested that the EIR address the following: the current vacant commercial buildings in the City; the reduct'— on of property values of those homes now i overlooking Sandstone Canyon because the view will become that of buildings, rooftops, air conditioning equipment, etc.; what compensation will be provided in the event of landslides; the unique wilderness area is being replaced by noise pollution, air pollution, and increased traffic, which is a—problem the City has been working hard to mitigate; and consider an alternative concept February 8, 1993 Page 8 which builds the school, limits the dwelling units, and preserves Mike Collins, residing at 1612 Morning Sun, Walnut, submitted, to the Commission, written comments addressing concerns on the EIR. George Barrett, 'residing 1884 Shaded -Wood Road, made the following comments: many centers, within the City are currently vacant, yet the City is proposing more commercial area; the elementary schools are overcrowded, and facilities for then are lacking; the Middle School should be built regardless of this development; the removal of the dirt should be the responsibility of the developer who put it there; alternatives to removing the dirt should be explored; and a sign on Brea Canyon Road indicates that it is a slide area. Norman Beach Cushane, residing at 2021 Peaceful Hills Road, President of the Pathfinders Homeowners Association, requested- that the EIR address the following: the California Burrowing owl, a threatened species in Orange County, may exist on the flat land to be developed by RnP; the possibility of moving the dirt to fill a hole elsewhere should be explored; 20 acres of open area is not a fair exchange for developing on this existing 139 acres of open area, excluding the school site; there will be a need for traffic signals for the future intersections on Brea Canyon; this construction will bring rattlesnakes, coyotes, and bobcats into the backyards of existing homes; and since the existing homes will be devalued, there should be a reduction in property tax. Bob Roberts, residing on Morning Sun„ Walnut, opposed the opening of Morning Sun Avenue as the main residential access. Larkstone Dr. and/or Rapid View should be'considered as secondary access roads regardless of the opinions of school officials, local residents, and local officials who do not find these alternatives acceptable, and who may have a conflict of interest being involved in this project. Lee Doyle, residing at 20206 Evening Breeze Dr. Walnut, expressed the following concerns: the increase in noise from the freeway; the loss of wildlife; the cutting of the hillsides; and the increase in traffic. LJ expressed her opposition to accessing Rapid View to Brea Canyon Road. The area has already been February 8, 1993 Page 9 impacted by traffic created from the Middle School. Phil Duarte, residing on 1343 Red Bluff, expressed his concern that size of the proposed lots, 6,000 to 8,000 square feet, is not consistent the existing neighborhood which has an average lot size of 20,000 squ feet. He submitted pictures to the Commission of deer and the canyon i I s natural setting. Chair/ Flamenbaum declared the public hearing review of the EIR close Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig, expressed Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 9:03 p.n. The meeting w Chair/ Flamenbaum declared the public hearing opened to gen comments. Marlene Tangeman, residing at 20671 Larkstone Dr., Principal of So Pointe Middle School, expressed her concern that the longer it take certify the EIR, the longer the Middle School is delayed. Carolyn Elf elt, residing at 21119 Silver Cloud, pointed out that the So Pointe Master Plan benefits the entire community, and gives our child a school they deserve. overall, the good p.oints, such as the school, park, the community building, and the access road, far outweigh the points mentioned. Lauren Minck, residing at 2067 Tierra Loma, a teacher at South Poi Middle School, stated that the permanent Middle School is nee immediately. Linda Bishop, resic ng at 1281 Rapid view Dr., is su ort that the Middle School should be built. However, the City should not conceive a Master Plan �ommunitv against the wishes of a lot of people. The developer should remove the dirt at this own ost, and the City should separate the projects ithin-the Master Plan, and stop using the school s an excuse to construct the dwelling units, and he commercial development. This project should of even be in the public hearing stages until the ecision on the General Plan Referendum has been made. The proponents of the referendum have been alled liars, and accused of being con artists, and he entire process has been delayed because of the �Jty of Diamond Bar's action, including staff. February 8. 1993 Page 10 Chair/ Flamenbaum requested Mr. Maxwell to direct his comments to Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 9:40 p.m. The meeting was Chair/ Flamenbaum apologized for calling a brief recess. He encouraged the audience to continue to direct comments to the issue at hand. Elizabeth Hodges, residing at 1604 Morning Sun Ave, Walnut, expressed her opposition to the attitude that the Middle School must be built at all costs, regardless of the change in quality of life of the existing community. Oscar Law, residing at 21511 Pathfinder, expressed his concern that the Commission is not responding to the alternative concept plan to remove the dirt, at no cost to the City, as suggested by Mr. Beach Cushane. The Middle School should be built first, and the development at Sandstone Canyon considered separately. CDD/DeStefano stated that the City has announced this Master Plan to study sessions, two public hearings, and the community newsletter, as a process of gathering information and reviewing this specific proposal. The Planning commission is not the proponent of this project, but a quasi judicial body which will make a recommendation to the City council. The city is a participant in this project because the City owns land in small pockets within this 171 acre area, and from a professional planning standpoint, it made sense that boundary lines of ownership be erased to look at the whole area comprehensively. The Planning Commission and staff are listening, collectively, to all the concerns that have been made. All concerns and suggestions will be responded to. John Anderson, a resident, stated that the City has a responsibility to begin holding the developer accountable for cleaning up their project after development. The dirt should have been removed by the developer long ago. There can be no Matter Plan in the City until the developer is held accountable. Barbara Beach Cushane, residing at 2021 Peaceful Hills Road, made the following comments: if there are no significant impacts to the project, then why must there be variances, and CUP's to develop it; 77-77 February 8, 1993 Page 11 these impacts cannot be satisfactory under the General Plan, as indicated, because there is no -General Plan that can be implemented at this time; many people in the City are concerned with the flaws in the General Plan, specifically dealing with the situations planned in this project; there is slippage on the land bordering Brea Canyon; the EIR should be corrected to indicate that there are no "recognized" faults; is there a document of approval from the LA Flood Control; 20 acres of open area is not a f air exchange f or the loss of over 100 acres of open area; the canyon maintains itself at no cost to the City; Brea Canyon and Pathfinder are adversely affected by this development; there is a conflict of interest because all the officials in Diamond Bar are a lead agency and developer; Mr. Arciero should fulfill his responsibility and remove the dirt, without affecting the canyon; though the permanent Middle School is needed, quality education comes from teachers and admini 'strators, not brick and mortar, and the school can be built without the development of Sandstone Canyon; and the existing property owners were promised that the land would never be developed. Ms. Beach Cushane stated that the consultants should have responded tonight to the concerns made at the last meeting before opening the public hearing so that the audience could respond to them. Hearing no further testimony, Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed. VC/Meyer requested that the EIR address the following: address an alternative concept of. constructing the South Pointe Middle School without the rest of the elements on the Master Plan; further elaborate on the items of unavoidable adverse impacts, which are air quality, traffic, and circulation, specifically in regards to mitigation measures that could be implemented to address those three areas; expand on the issue of opening Morning Sun Dr., to include empirical data that assesses the impacts of the potential traffic into that existing development, and include mitigation measures that would reduce the impact, as well as address the issue of —no sidewalks, alternative designs of the intersection, and/or the elimination of the intersection; elaborate as to why Rapid View, a collector street, is disregarded as an alternative, and is not put—together in some sort of on site circulation system; the amount of dirt to be moved on site has not been adequately mitigated to a point of non significance, and iF7 February 8, 1993 Page 12 on is n —rc further- informati eeded --garding some migration trails of wildlife; 'there should be further elaboration as to what the grading controls will be to insure incremental' grading on the project site coordinating the three property owners; since the small wildlife„ such as snakes and rodents, will move out of the canyon, during grading, and probably move into the habitat of the existing dwellings, 'the method to control this activity should be addressed; the circulation issues regarding the cross section for Brea Canyon should be examined by the traffic engineers; there is no provision for the cross section for Brea Canyon for sidewalks or any pedestrian type of controls.: the circulation analysis at Colima/Brea Canyon, which identified that the signals to the west', and the signals for the on and off ramps to the freeway need to work in tandem with the phasing for that intersectiop, should be expanded to address the various types of improvements; address the responsibility this project would have to the impacts on the various intersections and street sections; address the type of technical'judgement, with respect to this project, being used to mitigate the issue of air quality to an acceptable level, understanding that it is impossible to mitigate to a level of nonsignificance; there should be more creativity in saving some of the provisions of the canyon; and effort should be expended between this project and the property owners to the south to develop a cooperative venture - to save some of the significant natural environment. VC/Meyer stated that, first blush, the EIR identifies the issues arising from each elements needs and efforts to compromise, as well identifies a lot of the ways to mitigate the impacts, and impacts of urbanization. C/Li requested that the predevelopment and post development calculations, regarding water on site, be further examined in terms of public safety for further landslidest if the project is developed. C/Grothe requested that the EIR address the following: a traffic study that further addresses the on site circulation system, specifically the problem of cut -through traf f is upon opening many of these streets; the area in the City's sphere of influence needs further analysis in regards to traffic impacts and needed signals; the project is similar to all the other past development in Diamond Bar, and,there needs to be more creativity in it planning with effort expended to possible save the canyon; there could be more creativity in �P/Searcy presented the"staff report regarding the Tract No. 50519, kequest, by Diamond Development Company, to grading alternatives of the Middle School site; and the Middle School project should be addressed as a seDarate element of the Master Plan. R No. 91-2, kubdivide a 2.3 acre site into 34 individual Chair/ Flamenbaum requested that the EIR address the following; further discussion identifying the ways to minimize the impacts of moving 9.3 million cubic yards of dirt, as well as the actual moving of the dirt; address an alternative to removing 800 oak trees that would leave more of those trees in place; and further evaluate the impacts of removing the trees and the closing of the stream, which has been identified as mostly run off. Chair/Flamenbaum stated that the comments and concerns raised tonight by the audience and the commission will be responded to in a report, to be included in the EIR, and presented at the February 22, 1993 public hearing meeting. The Commission concurred to declare the public input portion of the meeting closed. The next meeting on the South Pointe Master Plan is scheduled for February 22, 1993. Chair/ Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 10:30 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:35 p.m. Vesting Tentative ?CA No. 91 -3, -and wnership lots/ units and three (3) common lots, to DA No. 91-3 hange the zone classification from C-1 (Restricted Business) to Zone R-3 (Limited Multiple Residence) nd to enter into a Development Agreement with the ,ity. The Planning Commission directed staff, at he December 14, 1992 meeting, to draft Resolutions nd conditions of approval. Since the project has volved into the present design, it is in om liance with the General Plan and the current evelo ment standards, and no specific exceptions re necessitated, therefore, the Development I\greement is no longer required. AP/Searcy then oted the following items in the Resolution that eed further revision: a date change to November 1, 1993 on page 1, item A. iv ; an address orrection to 23575 Golden Springs on page 2, item 3.4(a); pa e 3 item 4. indicates that otification was done in conformance to State Law; )age 5, item 10 indicates the location of the air onditionin units; page 5, item 11 deals with the Duimby fees„ and staff will indicate that it is the Diamond Bar code as adopted from the Los Angeles lCounty Code section; page 5, item 14 deals with ff-M7 i j T-1 February 8, 1993 Page 14 the CC&RIs and a third party mediation -service, and staff will add the word "bell -between the words "shall' and 'created" page 7, item the phra 11to- thp.-Ci-ty Is F-7- Uonll; page 7, item (7) deals with on street parking; page 7, item (8) requires that written evidence of the approval from the County Sanitation be provided to the City; and page 7, item (9) will be rewritten with the concept that all standard conditions are in the separate attachment. Dr Crowley, t:he applicant, —stdted that he accepts all conditions as stated. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing opened. Hearing no testimony, Chair/ Flamenbaum declared the public hearing AP/Searcy stated that staff recommends that the Commission approve the Development Review application, and recommend approval of the Vesting Tentative Map -No. 50519 and ZC 91-1 to the City council, as is so stated in the Resolutions. There is an additional condition that would null and void the Development Review application, if the tentative tract and zone change application are not approved by the City Council. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Li and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve Resolution 93 -XX for approve of DR 91-2. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Li and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve Resolution 93 -XX as amended, recommending approval of ZC 91-1. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Li and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve Resolution 93 -XX, recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50519. PUBLIC HEARING: Chair/Flamenbaum noted that staff report, as presented, recommends that the item be continued. DR 92-6 & Variance 92-5 Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing opened. Hearing no testimony, Chair/ Flamenbaum declared the public hearing J February 8, 1993 'Vage 15 Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY-to continue the public hearing to February 22, 1993. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Grothe requested that the South Pointe Master Plan item be placed on the agenda following any other items. CDD/DeStefano reported that he approved the following Administrative Development Review items earlier this evening: a minor exterior modification to Chuck-E-Cheese; a 1,000 square foot addition to a 1,600 square foot home off of Top Court; and a new home within the Piermarini tract. CDD/DeStefano stated that Mr. Lewendowski, from Ultra Systems, has been retained by the City to review the City of Industry's EIR on the proposed MRF. The City has scheduled an informational public meeting on February 9, 1993. CDD/DeStefano stated that regarding the referendum lawsuit, the Judge has indicated that he will render his decision on February 9, 1993. He informed the Commission of the Planners Institute about a month from now, for those wishing to participate. CDD/DeStef ano, in response to C/Li, stated that the City Council is moving toward establishing a sewer Assessment District in "The Country Estate". ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at 11:03 p.m. t' vely ResRpctively s N— :m5eDleStefano J me DeStefano Secretary Attest: 41 Bruce Flamenbaum Chairman IrF [T