HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/28/1993CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
JUNE 28, 1993
- CALL TO ORDER:
F F'
Chairman Meyer called the meeting to order at 7:10
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:
Chairman Meyer.
ROLL CALL:
Commissioners: Grothe, Li, Vice Chairman Plunk,
and Chairman Meyer. Chairman Meyer arrived at 7:30
p.m..
Also present were Community Development Director
James DeStefano, Planning Technician Ann Lungu,
Deputy City Attorney Craig Fox (left meeting at
7:30 p.m.), Attorney Deborah Hackman, and Contract
Recording Secretary Liz Myers.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
VC/Plunk requested the Minutes of June 14, 1993 be
amended on page 6 to properly indicate "elect"
Minutes of
instead of "nominate".
June 14, 1993
Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/Li and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of June
14, 1993, as amended.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Motion was made by VC/Plunk, seconded by C/Grothe
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to move agenda item #3 to
Planned Sign
agenda item 12.
Program No. 93-2
AP/Searcy presented the staff report regarding the
application made by the applicant, Kirkelie
Business Parks, LTD. V, for approval of a planned
sign program for wall signs and freestanding
monument signs for the commercial center, Colima
Plaza, located on the northwest corner of Lemon
Avenue and Golden Springs Drive. AP/Searcy then
made the following revisions to the staff report:
the term "pylon", on page 5, should be amended to
indicate "all cabinets of monument signs shall be
primered with one coat of finish paint with a
minimum two coats of acrylic enamel", which would
be the same for any center or monument sign; and
all references to "pylon" signs will now be changed
to monument signs. It is recommended that the
Commission approve the Planned Sign Program,
Findings -of Fact, and conditions as listed within
the attached resolution.
Chair/Meyer declared the Public Hearing opened.
i
Craig Kirkelie, representing the applicant, stated
that they concur with all the conditions as
recommended by staff.
June 28, 1993
page 2
)
Hearing no further testimony, Chair/Meyer declareCtl
the Public Hearing closed.
Motion was made by VC/Plunk, seconded by C/Grothe
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adopt the resolution for
Planned Sign Program No. 93-2.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Li, Grothe, VC/Plunk, and
Chair/Meyer.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Flamenbaum.
Referral of
CDD/DeStefano reported that the City Council.,
1993 General
pursuant to the Government Code, has directed the
Plan to the
Planning Commission to review the significant
Commission
modifications being proposed within the March 1963
General Plan. Attorney Deborah Hackman, from the
firm of Richards, Watsons and Gershaun, will assist
as special counsel on the General Plan process. He
then introduced the following members of the
consultant team, retained by the City in March of
1993 to further develop the draft General Plan:
Michael Jenkins, special legal counsel from the law
firm of Richards, Watson, and Gershaun, who is not
P1
present; Daniel Isafano, of the firm Moore,
ss
Isofano, and Goldsmen, utilized to facilitate the
public workshop process; Terry Austin, of the firm
Austin, Faust, utilized to assist in the
Circulation Element, who is not present; and Dale
Beland, of the firm Cotton, Beland Associates,
utilized for the development of the General Plan
policy issues. Five community workshops have been
held in April and May of 1993 to identify planning
issues and to discuss a variety of General Plan
policy options. An extensive out reach program was
initiated by the City in order to solicit the
broadest base community input for the workshop
program. The following key planning issues were
identified during those workshops: the amount and
type of future residential development; open space
preservation; a reduction of traffic congestion;
and a transportation corridor through Tonner
Canyon. As a result of the workshops, public
hearings have been utilized to suggest further
revisions to the General Plan. To date, five
public he-arings have been conducted to discuss the
General Plan. The City Council has reviewed a
variety of workshop and public hearing comments 'to
develop the specific policy recommendations framed
in the 1993 draft General Plan. The 1993 General
Plan incorporates all the State mandated
requirements, specifically the seven mandatory
elements. The document has been distributed to a
June 28, 1993
_N�nv km 11 brvwwYii.IdlebAu.i�4a�mlwxy�_- __� __
Page 3
wide variety of people and is available for public
review at City Hall, and the library, and can
either be purchased or borrowed. The 1993 General
Plan utilizes the 1992 General Plan as it's
foundation. The changes, which respond to
statements made within the referendum petition, and
the community workshops, and public hearing
comments are identified in strikeout and highlight
form. This public hearing has been extensively
noticed by publishing ads within the San Gabriel
Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, in
accordance with State Law. Staff also has noticed
those within the General Plan mailing list. It is
recommended that the Commission open the public
hearing, receive the presentation and public
testimony, and forward a. report to the City Council
recommending adoption.
Dale Beland reviewed the following substantial
significant changes to the General Plan: the amount
and intensity of future development, including
retail; the preservation of open space and policy
for the sphere of influence (Tonner Canyon); the
mitigation and reduction of regional traffic
impacts on local streets; a vision statement in the
Introduction; a proposed substantial reduction in
buildout intensity throughout much of the developed
single family area by reflecting the land use
policy map to allow only that development which
currently exists in most of the single family area;
the need to increase and amplify policy definition,
with respect to retention of existing deed
restricted open space throughout the community; the
direction to initiate a, feasibility study for
acquisition of open space lands and to explore all
other techniques to achieve the basic goal
maximizing the retention and maintenance of open
space in the community; requiring the submission of
a title report or other acceptable documentation of
deed and map restriction; require a public hearing
before any City action that would change those
existing deed restrictions; the enhancement of
recognition of the natural resources in SEA #15;
and to proactively address how the City deals with
the regional circulation system and reduce
circulation impacts on local streets. Dale Beland
recommended that the Commission review each
element, beginning with the Land Use Element. In
response to Chair/Meyer, Dale Beland stated that
the draft document, at this point in the process,
.� is substantially consistent with the direction
given in the General Plan guidelines in the State
of California.
June 28, 1993
Page 4
Deborah Hackman, in response to Chair/Meyer's M4tipo
inquiry, stated that internal consistency of the
document is continually under review as the
document unfolds.
Chair/Meyer declared the Public Hearing opened.
Don Schad, residing at 1824 Shaded Wood Road,
recommended that the City allow a 90 day review
period following the public hearings, due to the
size of the document. The document should also be
available for weekend review. He suggested the
utilization of a conservancy to assist in the
preservation of the natural wilderness areas within
the City. Also, the Tree Ordinance should be made
part,of the General Plan.
Gary Neely, residing at 344 Canoe Cove Drive,
clarifying his written statement, on page II -12,
submitted to the Planning Commission, stated he
would prefer a minimum of a specific plan of the
undeveloped property, on the Tres Hermanos
property, along with a dotted line demonstrating
the reclaimed lake and the high school.
C/Flamenbaum questioned the reasoning behind
changing the designation Specific
Plan/Agricultural, given the language that follows
the terms.
Dale Beland explained that the Council felt, given
the uncertainty and the lack of any definite plans
for development of that property, it is more
appropriate to show it in the current plan as
Agricultural with the intent of transitioning to a
development at such time as there is specific
plans. Additional work on the language may _;be
needed in that paragraph.
Oscar Law, residing at 21511 Pathfinder, expressed
his concern that the reclaimed water lake proposed
at Tres Hermanos may increase humidity.
Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig Lane,
concurred that the Tree Ordinance should be
included in the General Plan. He then suggested
that the homes proposed at Tres Hermanos 'be
included on the Land Use Map. He stated that there
is a lack of protection for Sandstone Canyon,
Tonner Canyon, and upper Sycamore Canyon in the
1993 General Plan.
Chair/Meyer recessed the meeting at 8:15 p.m. The
meeting was reconvened at 8:25 p.m.
June 28, 1993 Page 5
Don Schad then made the following comments
regarding the 1993 Draft General Plan: change the
statement "additional growth could place" on page
I-9, to "additional growth will place unacceptable
limits on sensitive and scarce resources; change
the word "enhance" to maintain the quality of life
for its residents as indicated on page I-10; change
from 1DU/AC on page I-11 to 5DU/AC; omit "where
appropriate" in strategy 3.2.1, on page I-21; add
"visual resources including Sandstone Canyon, and
Upper Sycamore Canyon" on page III -2; add 1.1.4.a
to strategy 1.1.4, on -page III -10, inserting the
Tree Ordinance; delete "where practical" from
strategy -1.2.1, page III -11, and add "will
provide"; add the statement "add tunnels, or
whatever is necessary so wildlife can move freely
without crossing roads" to strategy 1.2.2; add
"after school, and volunteers, and conservancies"
to strategy 1.2.3, on page III -11; delete the word
"pursue" from strategy 1.2.4, on page III -11, and
indicate "Preserve canyon areas in natural state";
include his 3 page recommendation submitted to the
Parks and Recreation Commission.to strategy 1.3.1
on page III -11; clarify the term "intenuation" in
strategy 1.10.5, on page IV -11; indicate in
strategy 1.10.1, page IV -12, that if existing noise
level is less than standard, than it should be left
alone; and remove "Tonner Canyon" from item 4, page
V-3.
Oscar Law suggested that strategy 1.3.9, page III -
12, be deleted.
Don Schad thanked staff for their efforts in
preparing the Tree Ordinance which was denied by
the City Council.
Chair/Meyer clarified that the City does have a
Tree Ordinance, however, it is not one endorsed by
Don Schad, nor the one that Don Schad would like in
the General Plan.
Hearing no further testimony, Chair/Meyer declared
the Public Hearing closed.
VC/Plunk stated that she would like a goal included
in the document to develop a cohesive program that
coordinates open space preservation with
sustainable conservation and development goals.
This can be done be setting criteria and a grading
system looking at conservation.
The Commission concurred to come back to that
issue.
-F
June 28, 1993 Page 6
C/Grothe stated that he prefers having Tres
Hermanos zoned Specific Pian because it indicates
that the property will not be piece mealed.
Dale Beland explained that the property owner has
indicated their intent to ultimately develop
something on Tres Hermanos, subject to careful
review and approval by the City of Diamond Bar.
With the exception of the high school site, there
is no detail plan available for the entire
property. The .City Council has modified the
classification name to Agricultural/ Specific Plan
to reflect the true intent which is a transition in
the short range to hold it agricultural yet
expressing the long range intent to go towards,a
complete specific plan for the entire property.
CDD/DeStefano, referring to the correspondence
{ received by Diamond Bar from the City of Industry,
included in the staff report, stated that the City
of Industry has raised some concern regarding the
Agricultural designation indicated in the 1993
draft General Plan. The City of Industry has
suggested that the Planning Commission, and more
specifically the City Council, give some strong
consideration to labeling the property as
Agricultural/Specific Plan.
The Planning Commission concurred to recommend to
the City Council to utilize the
Agricultural/Specific Plan designation in the
General Plan.
Chair/Meyer, referring to Mr. Law's comment,
inquired if the Commission wants any modification
in the General Plan regarding the water feature.
The Commission concurred to leave the water feature
as is.
CDD/DeStefano suggested that the cohesive plan, as
suggested by VC/Plunk, might be appropriately
placed in a strategy under Objective 1.2, on page
III -10.
C/L,i stated that he does not agree with the concept
expressed by VC/Plunk because another program will
develop another level of bureaucracy.
VC/Plunk stated that the value of the open space
property can be determined by developing a check
'<<
list of items that are important so those areas
i deserving protection are protected when there is
development.
June 28, 1993 Page 7
j C/Flamenbaum pointed out that the overall goal of
Resource Management is to provide and maintain
adequate open spaces in the City, etc. The General
Plan is to balance the needs between natural
resources and the push to develop versus
circulation. If VC/flunk's desire is to strengthen
this overall policy, he stated he would support any
specifics, but not another strategy or policy.
Chair/Meyer concurred.
C/Grothe stated that the City should encourage
government to look at open space at a regional
level and not look towards creating another program
which could possibly create a gridlock.
The Commission concurred that the General Plan does
not need to create another policy.
VC/Plunk suggested that page III -2 include the
"gnatcatcher" in the list of endangered, protected,
and sensitive species.
C/Flamenbaum pointed out that the particular
-, section is under Existing Conditions.
CDD/DeStefano stated that adding the gnatcatcher to
a� the list would not effect the process. The
language could be changed to indicate "may
contain", and add the gnat catcher as a possible
resident of this area. The Commission concurred.
VC/Plunk suggested that the top sentence on page
III -8 be modified to read "this includes wildlife
corridors with quality sustainable habitat 'to
prevent isolation and loss" with "quality
sustainable" meaning that it could regenerate
itself.
CDD/DeStefano stated that the term "quality" would
need to be defined.
The Commission concurred that the modification
suggested is not appropriate.
VC/Plunk inquired if the Commission is in
concurrence with the suggestion made by Mr. Schad
to add reference of the Tree Ordinance in strategy
1.1.4.
The Planning Commission concurred that it is not
appropriate to put the Tree Ordinance in the
General Plan. The Tree Ordinance can be revisited
at a future date.
June 28, 1993 Page 8
VC/Plunk, referring to the suggestion made by Mr. ;
Schad to amend strategy 1.2.4, on page III -11, to
indicate preserving canyons in a natural state,
suggested that the strategy be amended to keep the
word "pursue" and add "enhancement" in case there
are natural disasters, such as fire. I
C/Flamenbaum stated that "enhancement" and "natural
state" are contradictory statements. The
Commission concurred.
C/Flamenbaum inquired if the Commission concurs
with the suggestion made by Mr. Schad to delete
"where practical", referring to wildlife linkages,
in bullet two on page III -11, and add the issues of
tunnels and/or corridors.
VC/Plunk suggested that the words "as practical" be
added instead. The Commission concurred.
Chair/Meyer inquired if the Commission concurs with
Mr. Schad's suggestion to add a funding mechanism
to strategy 1.2.3, such as conservancy, in the
General Plan.
C/Flamenbaum suggested that strategy 1.2.3 be
amended to indicate "in conjunction with civic
organizations". He also suggested that a statement
regarding "some wildlife corridor" in Tres Hermanos
roads be added in the Circulation Element as a
policy to protect wildlife.
Chair/Meyer suggested the Commission now focus on
major issues, as outlined by Dale Beland, rather
than specific wording.
Vision statement
Dale Beland stated that staff would appreciate any
comment from the Commission on substantive problems
with the way the components are identified.
C/Flamenbaum suggested that the vision statement, be
amended to read "within and adjacent to SEA 015"
instead of just "within". The Commission
I�
concurred.
VC/Plunk suggested that the word "natural" be
deleted from "natural hillsides". The Commission
concurred.
Land Use Element I-11
5 I
June 28, 1993 Page 9
Dale Beland stated that this section describes land
use classifications. There is a change in meaning
of the maximum permitted density in the low medium
residential (RLM) from 6DU/AC to 5DU/AC or existing
density, whichever is greater. The Land Use Map
reflects the land use policy change whereas
substantial areas have been reclassified from RLM
(6DU/AC) to RL (3DU/AC) which reflects existing
development. In response to C/Flamenbaum, Dale
Beland confirmed that the City would be required to
notice all zone changes.
C/Grothe stated; that he would recommend to the City
Council to leave all zoning of existing residential
properties at its current zoning, as originally
recommended by the Commission.
Chair/Meyer indicated that, because this is one of
the major issues of the referendum, this is an
opportunity for the Commission to reconsider our
position.
Deborah Hackman,, in response to VC/Plunk, stated
- that this issueis a policy question that will have
to be debated amongst the Commission. There are no
legal implications whether the zoning designation
`�. is kept as is or if it is down zoned in this
fashion. However, the zoning must be consistent
with the General. Plan.
CDD/DeSt-efano advised the Commission to recommend
classification of the property as the Commission
believes the property should be classified for the
ensuing 15 to l0 year time period of the General.
Plan.
C/Flamenbaum stated that, though he believes that
down zoning will create a great expense to the
City, as well jas create opposition to the zone
changes, he will support such a down zoning since
it is .a strong issue of the supporters of the
referendum.
Oscar Law suggested that the City consider
grandfathering in existing housing.
The Commission debated if a grandfathering clause
can actually be�implemented.
CDD/DeStefano indicated that there are economical
ways to achieveithe down zoning.
Dale Beland, in response to VC/flunk's inquiry if a
statement "grandfather existing housing" can be
June 28, 1993 Page 10
included, stated that the wording on page I-11 qua
seems to be consistent with the intent expressed by
the Commission, and a discussion of adding a term
"grandfathering" is not appropriate for a General
Plan text, but more appropriate in the Development
Code.
Following discussion the Commission concurred to
support the down zoning.
Land Havinq Significant Slopes - Page 1-11
C/Grothe pointed out that the Hillside Management
ordinance encompass the issues regarding grading,
cut and fill, etc. The Commission concurred.
Definition of Open Space - Paae I-17
Dale Beland pointed out that Goal 2 on page I-19
covers the concerns expressed by VC/Plunk regarding
sustainability and balance of land use, open space
preservation, and conservation. This goal
statement would provide additional support for
strategies 1.5.4, 1.5.5, and 1.5.6 on page I -17.I
VC/Plunk suggested that strategy 1.4.7 on page I-,16
be amended to delineate "active facility and open
space preservation", rather than have just
"recreational plan" because they are two separate
items.
Dale Beland suggested that the wording as being
proposed would fit more appropriately in the next
series of strategies 1.5 because the objective 1.4
focuses on education, cultural recreation,_ etc..
The Commission concurred.
C/Flamenbaum inquired of the definition of "deed
restriction", as indicated in strategy 1.5.3, as
well as the definition of the term "undeveloped
property". Both terms need to be more definitive
since every property has some sort of "deed
restriction" in regards to mineral rights and
easements, and virtually every area in Diamond Bar
has some farm of building on it such as a fence,
water pumps, power poles, etc.
Deborah Hackman explained that apparently there are
many properties in the City that contain deed
restrictions to preserve open space, which was
originally done for the benefit of the County. The
City is now the beneficiary of those restrictions.
i
,. _ _w, L tIA
June 28, 1993 Page 11
VC/Plunk suggested that open space lands be defined
as vacant, deed restricted from development. She
also pointed out that private recreational space
was considered in the City's calculations for the
open space totals.
Dale Beland suggested that the ,second sentence,
"Recreational facilities", in strategy 1.5.3, be
deleted if desired by the Commission. Staff can
then pursue the question of the definition of "deed
restriction etc."
Chair/Meyer inquired if State law defines the open
space element.
Dale Beland stated that there are no explicit
guidelines on the substance of an open space
element.
Chair/Meyer pointed out that the General Plan
should be as generic as the State law that
implements it.
C/Flamenbaum stated that, since the strategy
specifically defines open space as vacant deed
restricted land, the definition should be correct.
He suggested the following verbiage for strategy
1.5.3: "Require a public hearing prior to any City
action which would change ' the existing
characteristic of open space land."
Dale Beland explained that the General Plan law
clearly states that an owner of a property must be
able to read the adopted plan and understand the
implications for his/her property.
Following discussion, Dale Beland suggested the
following wording for strategy 1.5.3: "Define open
space lands as vacant, deed restricted, undeveloped
properties which are to be retained for purposes of
visual amenity, environmental resource protection,
fire, slopes stability, hazard, abatement, and
recreation. Recreational facilities, both active
and passive, which incorporate undeveloped land,
are included in this definition."
C/Flamenbaum expressed his concern that though the
wording of the strategy is improving, there is
f still not one piece of land that falls under that
definition.
Chair/Meyer recessed the meeting at 10:05 p.m. The
meeting was reconvened at 10:12 p.m.
June 28, 1993
Page 12
Dale Beland recommended that strategy 1.5.4, on
page I-17, which reads "Develop an open space
program which will identify and acquire/ preserve
open space land...', be moved in lieu of strategy
1.5.3, amending the existing .wording in strategy
1.5.3 to delete the first two sentences so that it
reads "Require a public hearing prior to any City
action..." The Commission concurred.
SEA #15 - Page I-17
C/Grothe suggested that surrounding areas adjacent
to the City's borders be included in the Map as
well, as suggested by Mr. Neely.
Dale Beland pointed out that Figure 3 on page 16 of
the Introduction provides that information. �n
response to C/Flamenbaum, he concurred that it
would be appropriate to put the SEA on the Land U'se
Map. The Commission concurred.
C/Grothe, in regards to Figure 3 on page 16,
clarified that the suggestion made refers to the
Zoning Map because it is equally important to know
the zoning of adjacent properties outside the
City's borders when dealing with tract map
applications.
Regional Traffic Mitigation - Page V-6
Dale Beland pointed out that strategy 1.1.4, page
V-6, explicitly states the intent to get involved
in, participating in, regional planning.
Furthermore, page V-12 contains a comprehensive
definition of environmentally sensitive
transportation corridor which responds to input
received from a variety of people.
C/Flamenbaum, referring to the Roadway
Classification on page V-13, stated that he recalls
that the Commission decided to classify Lemon
Avenue as a major road because it is designated�as
a truck route north of Colima. He then inquired'if
this would imply that Grand Ave. would also bear
the potential for being a truck route.
Dale Beland explained that the column labeled Los
Angeles County classification, in Table V-1, is a
statement of prior existing facts that does not
have any significant policy impact. Furthermore,
there is a distinction between existing function
and/or developed width versus master plan
classification, which are not always the same.
Also, it is important to establish the hierarchy of
- --T
1
... _-�.�.�_ ..�...., -. __ . . __ ._..k-.w..6d,iaexiI�W A.,,h_,—"-- --- —'---- —_--- 4 ---
June 28, 1993 Page 13
Diamond Bar classification for the different
LLa' roadways so that the City has the ability to tie
assessable future funding to a particular road
identified as a -certain classification.
C/Flamenbaum expressed his concern that the
classifications do not seem to be consistent and
need further review. Furthermore, Brea Canyon cut-
off needs to be classified.
Dale Beland stated that the traffic consultants
will investigate the continuity issue of going from
secondary to major, and vice versa, as one travels
down a particular route. The Commission concurred.
VC/Plunk suggested that the Issue Analysis on page
V-2 be amended to read "To maintain or improve...".
The Commission concurred.
C/Grothe, referring to page V-3, expressed his
concern that the statement "within the existing
right-of-way", referring to Grand Ave., in the
Issue Analysis, is both restrictive and
�., contradictory since new developments are asked for
donate additional right-of-way along Grand Ave.
CDD/DeStefano pointed out that some of the measures
indicated within section V.on page V-3 incorporate
optimizing signal coordination, providing
acceleration and deceleration lanes, etc.
The Commission concurred to leave the statement as
is.
C/Flamenbaum suggested that language be added to
encourage or work with the State to get a 60/57
freeway northbound on ramp, or to remove Diamond
Bar Blvd. from the States transportation corridor.
He also suggested that language be added regarding
the City's concern that the high school road
should be constructed with the least impact
possible to existing neighborhoods to avoid another
Lemon Ave. situation to South Pointe Middle School.
CDD/DeStefano suggested that the statement
"minimize impact to existing residential
neighborhoods" be added to strategy 2.2.2 on page
V-7. The Commission concurred.
r
VC/Plunk suggested that language be added to
strategy 2.1.8 on page V-6 to connect the park
system and to have more bicycle racks and drinking
fountains, which would improve it's useability.
J i l'I[I 4� 111
June 28, 1993
Page 14
The Commission concurred that such a statement doe's
not belong in the General Plan.
Environmentally Sensitive Transportation Corridor
CDD/DeStefano reported .that the 1993 General Plan
refers to two specific areas of major significant
change with respect to the environmentally
sensitive transportation corridor in regards to
Tonner Canyon. Strategy 1.1.4 now reads
"Proactively work with adjacent jurisdictions in
the evaluation of a regional transportation linkage
options through the easterly portion of the sphere
of influence area which recognize and prioritize
environmental sensitivity.", and it also refers
back to a specific plan strategy within the Land
Use Element. Furthermore; page V-11 begins to
define specifically an environmentally sensitive
corridor.
C/Flamenbaum stated that he would like a policy
encouraging San Bernardino Canyon to build a Soquel
Canyon road, emphasizing it as a higher priority
over this transportation corridor.
CDD/DeStefano explained that because Soquel Canyon
is so far out of the City's influence, it would be
more appropriate to include strategies that refer
to working with adjacent jurisdictions and agencies
with respect to alternatives for Diamond Bar. He
suggested the following language for new strategy
1.1.5 on page V-5: "Encourage San Bernardino and
orange Counties to fund and construct an
environmentally sensitive road for Soquel'Canyon."
The Commission concurred.
Chair/Meyer stated that the Commission has now
completed discussing the major issues, and can
review any minor issues of concern.
VC/Plunk stated that she would prefer the
Introduction included that the reason people moved
to Diamond Bar was for it's proximity to job
centers in Los Angeles, orange, and San Bernardino
Counties and not for it's historically low taxes.
The Commission concurred.
Deborah Hackman, in response to Chair/Meyer,
confirmed that the Government Code provides that
density bonuses be at least 250. 1
VC/Plunk suggested that strategy 1.3.4 on page I1-14
specify encouraging home occupations are not
consistent with a residential pattern.
_,. ,.. _..__.,...._.. .. .1., . gar � - .M."... ■ ..._..,
June 28, 1993 Page 15
CDD/DeStefano suggested that strategy 1.3.4 be
amended to read, "Encourage the retention,
rehabilitation, refurbishment and/or expansion of
existing business establishments and residentially
compatible home occupations." The Commission
concurred.
C/Flamenbaum inquired if the revised Housing
Element has been approved.
CDD/DeStefano stated that the comments on the
existing Housing Element has been provided to the
consultants who are now working on some minor word
changes.
VC/Plunk suggested that page VI -5 indicate that
emergency service is inadequate in the City. She
also suggested that page VI -9 indicate that the
City needs to "implement our emergency plan" not
"prepare" it since the City currently has one. The
Commission concurred.
C/Li reiterated his comments made during the study
session regarding the formation of a professional
lobby, by the City, for our transportation needs,
and the fact that the proposed surcharge with MWD
is now a reality.
C/Flamenbaum stated that strategy 1.3.1, on page
VI -5, regarding securing land for a High School, be
deleted since it is outdated.
Motion was made by C/Flamenbaum, seconded by C/Li
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to recommend that the City
Council adopt the draft General Plan dated June 16,
1993 as recommended, with the inclusion of the
comments made this evening.
DR 93-1 & It is recommended that the Commission continue
CUP 93-4 Development Review No. 93-1 and Conditional Use
Permit No. 93-4 to the next meeting.
Chair/Meyer declared the Public Hearing opened.
Hearing no testimony, Chair/Meyer declared the
Public Hearing closed and to be continued.
Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by VC/Plunk
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue Development
Review No. 93-1 and Conditional Use Permit No. 93-4
to the meeting of July 12, 1993.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Li, Grothe, VC/Plunk, and
Chair/Meyer.
June 28, 1993 Page 16
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Flamenbaum.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None.,
SPECIAL
PRESENTATIONS: Chair/Meyer presented C/Flamenbaum with a plaque in
recognition of his dedicated service as the
Presenting a Planning Commission chairman,from April of 1992 to
plaque to June of 1993, which is presented by the Planning
C/Flamenbaum Commission and staff.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by C/Li, seconded by VC/Plunk and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at 10:55
p.m.
Attes
Respectivel
es DeStefano
Secretary
I
J II
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Meyer called the meeting to order at 7:10 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: Chairman Meyer.
ROLL CALL: Commissioners: Grothe, Li, Vice Chairman Plunk, and Chairman Meyer. Chairman Meyer arrived
at 7:30 P.m..
Also present were Community Development' Director James DeStefano,
Planning Technician Ann Lungu, Deputy City Attorney Craig Fox (left meeting at
7:30 p.m.), Attorney Deborah Hackman, and Contract Recording Secretary Liz
Myers.
CONSENT CALENDAR: VC/Plunk requested the Minutes of June 14, 1993 be amended on page 6 to properly
indicate "elect" Minutes of instead of "nominate".
June i4, 1993
Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/Li and CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of June 14, 1993, as amended.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: Motion was'made by VC/Plunk, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to
move agenda item f3 to Planned Sign agenda item 12.
Program No. 93-2
AP/Searcy presented the staff report regarding the application made by the
applicant, Kirkelie Business Parks„ LTD. V, for approval of a planned sign
program for wall signs and freestanding monument signs for the commercial
center, Colima Plaza, located on the northwest corner of Lemon Avenue and
Golden Springs Drive. AP/Searcy then made the following revisions to the staff
report: the term "pylon", on page 5, should be amended to indicate "all cabinets
of monument signs shall be primered with one coat of finish paint with a minimum
two coats of acrylic enamel", which would be the same f or any center or
monument sign; and all references to "pylon" signs will now be changed to
monument signs. It is recommended that the Commission approve the Planned
Sign Program, Findings -of Fact, and conditions as listed within the attached
resolution.
Chair/Meyer declared the Public Hearing opened. Craig Kirkelie, representing
the applicant, stated that they concur with all the conditions as recommended by
staff.
June 28, 1993 Page 2
DD/DeStefan0 reported that the Ci Council,
1993 General ursuant to the Government Code, has directed the
Hearing no further testimony, Chair/Meye .r declared the Public Hearing closed. q
Motion was made by VC/Plunk, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY to adopt the resolution for Planned Sign Program No. 93-2.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Li, Grothe, VC/Plunk, and Chair/Meyer. NOES:
COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT:
Referral of
Ian to the :11anning Commission to review the significant
ommission odifications being proposed within the March 19-3
eneral Plan. Attorney Deborah Hackman, from the
irm of Richards, Watsons and Gershaun, will assist
s special counsel on the General Plan process. He
hen introduced the following members of the
onsultant team, retaine d by the City in March of
1993 to further develop the draft General Plan:
Michael Jenkins, special legal counsel from the law
irm of Richards, Watson, and Gershaun, who is not
resent; Daniel Isafano, of the firm Moore,
sofano, and Goldsmen, utilized to facilitate the
ublic workshop process; Terry Austin, of the firm
ustin, Faust, utilized to assist in the
irculation Elementl who is not resent; and Dale
eland, of the firm Cotton, Beland Associates,
tilized for the development of the General Plan
oolicy issues. Five community workshops have been
eld in April and May of 1993 to identify Tannin
ssues and to discuss a variety of General Plan
oolicy options. An extensive out reach program was
nitiated by the City in order to solicit the
roadest base community input for the workshop
orogram. The following key Tannin issues were
dentified during those workshops: the amount and
e of future residential development; open sace
reservation; a reduction of traffic congestion;
nd a transportation corridor through Tonner
an on. As— a result of the workshops, public
Barin s have been utilized to suggest further
evisions to the General Plan. To date, f ive
ublic hearings have been conducted to discuss the
eneral Plan. The City Council has reviewed a
variety of workshop and public hearing comments to
Jevelop the specific policy recommendations framed
n the 1993 draft General Plan. The 1993 General
Ian incorporates all the State mandated
e uirements, specifically the seven mandator
lements. The document has been distributed to a
.June 28, 1993 Page 3
wide variety of people and is available for public review at City Hall, and the
library, and can either be purchased or borrowed. The 1993 General Plan utilizes
the 1992 General Plan as it's foundation. The changes, which respond to
statements made within the referendum petition, and the community workshops,
and public hearing comments are identified in strikeout and highlight form. This
public hearing has been extensively noticed by publishing ads within the San
Gabriel Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, in accordance with State
Law. Staff also has noticed those within the General Plan mailing list. It is
recommended that the Commission open the public hearing, receive the
presentation and public testimony, and forward a. report to the City Council
recommending adoption.
Dale Beland reviewed the following substantial significant changes to the General
Plan: the amount and intensity of future development, including retail; the
preservation of open space and policy for the sphere of influence (Tonner
Canyon); the mitigation and reduction of regional traffic impacts on local streets;
a vision statement in the Introduction; a proposed substantial reduction in
buildout intensity throughout much of the developed single family area by
reflecting the land use policy map to allow only that development which currently
exists in most of the single family area; the need to increase and amplify policy
definition, with respect to retention of existing deed restricted open space
throughout the community; the direction to initiate a feasibility study for
acquisition of open space lands and to explore all other techniques to achieve the
basic goal maximizing the retention and maintenance of open space in the
community; requiring the submission of a title report or other acceptable
documentation of deed and map restriction; require a public hearing before any
City action that would change those existing deed restrictions; the enhancement
of recognition of the natural resources in SEA #15; and to proactively address
how the City deals with the regional circulation system and reduce circulation
impacts on local streets. Dale Beland recommended that the Commission review
each element, beginning with the Land Use Element. In response to Chair/Meyer,
Dale Beland stated that the draft document, at this point in the process, is
substantially consistent with the direction given in the General Plan guidelines in
the State of California.
June 28, 1993 Page 4
Deborah Hackman, in response to Chair/Meyer's inquiry, stated that internal
consistency of the document is continually under review as the document
unfolds.
Chair/Meyer declared the Public Hearing opened.
Don `Schad, residing at 1824 Shaded Wood Road, recommended that the City
allow a 90 day review period following the public hearings 'due to the size of the
document. The document should also be available for weekend review. He
suggested the utilization of a conservancy to assist in the preservation of the
natural wilderness areas within the City. Also, the Tree Ordinance should be
made part of the General Plan.
Gary Neely, residing at 344 Canoe Cove Drive, clarifying his written statement,
on page 11-12, submitted to the Planning Commission, stated he would prefer a
minimum of a specif is plan of the undeveloped property, on the Tres Herman6s
property, along with a dotted line demonstrating the reclaimed lake and the high
school.
C/Flamenbaum questioned the reasoning behind changing the designation
Specific Plan/Agricultural, given the language that folio `s the terms.
Dale Beland explained that the Council felt, given the uncertainty and the lack of
any definite plans for development of that property, it is mo re appropriate to
show it in the current plan as Agricultural with the intent of transitioning to a
development at such time as there is specific plans. Additional work on the
language may be needed in that paragraph.
Oscar Law, residing at 21511 Pathfinder, expressed his concern that the
reclaimed water lake proposed at Tres Hermanos may increase humidity.
Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig Lane', concurred that the Tree
Ordinance should be included in the General Plan. He then suggested that the
homes proposed at Tres Hermanos be included on the Land Use Map. He stated
that there is a lack of protection for Sandstone Canyon, Tonner Canyon, and
upper Sycamore Canyon in the 1993 General Plan.
Chair/Meyer recessed the meeting at 8:15 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at
8:25 p.m.
June 28, 1993 Page 5
Don Schad then made the following comments regarding the 1993 Draft General
Plan: change the statement "additional growth could place" on page 1-9, to
"additional growth will place unacceptable limits on sensitive and scarce -
resources; change the word "enhance" to maintain the quality of life for its
residents as indicated on page 1-10; change f rom 1DU/AC on page 1-11 to
5DU/AC; omit "where appropriate" in strategy 3.2.1, on page 1-21; add "visual
resources including Sandstone Canyon, and Upper Sycamore Canyon" on page
111-2; add 1.1.4.a to strategy 1.1.4, on -page 111-10, inserting the Tree
ordinance; delete "where practical' from strategy -1.2.1, page 111-11, and add "will
provide"; add the statement "add tunnels, or whatever is necessary so wildlife
can move freely without crossing roads" to strategy 1.2.2; add "after school, and
volunteers, and conservancies" to strategy 1.2.3, on page 111-11; delete the word
"pursue" from strategy 1.2.4, on page 111-11, and indicate "Preserve canyon
areas in natural state"; include his 3 page recommendation submitted to the
Parks and Recreation Commission,to strategy 1.3.1 on page 111-11; clarify the
term "intenuation" in strategy 1.10.5, on page IV -11; indicate in strategy 1.10.1,
page IV -12, that if existing noise level is less than standard, than it should be left
alone; and remove "Tonner Canyon" from item 4, page V-3.
Oscar Law suggested that strategy 1.3.9, page 11112, be deleted.
Don Schad thanked staff for their efforts in preparing the Tree Ordinance which
was denied by the City Council.
!Chair/Meyer-clarified that the City does have a Tree Ordinance, however, it is
not one endorsed by Don Schad, nor the one that Don Schad would like in the
General Plan.
Hearing no further testimony, Chair/Meyer declared the Public Hearing closed.
VC/Plunk stated that she would like a goal included in the document to develop a
cohesive program that coordinates open space preservation with sustainable
conservation and development goals. This can be done be setting criteria and a
grading system looking at conservation.
The Commission concurred to come back to that issue.
June 28, 1993 Page 6
C/Grothe stated that he prefers having Tres Hormanos zoned Specific Plan
because it indicate s that the property will not be piece mealed.
Dale Beland explained that the property owner has indicated their intent to
ultimately develop something on Tres Hermanos, subject to careful review and
approval by the City of Diamond Bar. With the exception of the high school site,.
there is no detail plan available for the entire property. The City Council has
modified the classification name to Agricultural/ Specific Plan to reflect the true
intent which is a transition in the short range to hold it agricultural yet expressing
the long range intent to go towards,a complete specific plan for the entire
property.
CDD/DeStefano, referring to the correspondence received by Diamond Bar from
the City of Industry, included in the staff report, stated that the City of Industry
has raised some concern regarding the Agricultural designation indicated in the
1993 draft General Plan. The City of Industry has suggested that the Planning
Commission, and more specifically the City Council, give some strong
consideration to labeling the property as Agricultural/Specific Plan.
The Planning Commission concurred to recommend to the city Council to utilize the
Agricultural/ Specific Plan designation in the General Plan.
Chair/Meyer, referring to Mr. Law's comment, inquired if the Commission wants any
modification in the General Plan regarding the water feature. The commission concurred to
leave the water feature as is.
CDD/DeStefano suggested that the cohesive plan, as suggested by VC/Plunk, might be
appropriately placed in a strategy under Objective 1.2, on page III -10.
C/Li stated that he does not agree with the concept expressed by VC/Plunk because another
program will develop another level of bureaucracy.
VC/Plunk stated that the value of the open space property can be determined by developing a
check list of items that are important so those areas deserving protection are protected when
there— is development.
June 28, 1993 Page 7
C/Flamenbaum pointed out that the overall goal of Resource Management is to
provide and maintain adequate open spaces inthe city, etc. The General Plan is
to balance the needs between natural resources and the push to develop versus
circulation. If VC/Plunk's desire is to strengthen this overall policy, he stated he
would support any specifics, but not another 'strategy or policy. Chair/Meyer
concurred.
C/Grothe stated that the City should encourage government to look at open
space at a regional level and not look towards creating another program which
could possibly create a gridlock.
The commission concurred that the General Plan does not need to create
another policy.
VC/Plunk suggested that page 111-2 include the Ilgnatcatcher" in the list of
endangered, protected, and sensitive species.
C/Flamenbaum pointed out that the particular
section is under Existing Conditions.
CDD/DeStefano stated that adding the gnatcatcher to the list would not effect the
process. The language could be changed to indicate "may contain"I and add the
gnat catcher as a possible resident of this area. The Commission concurred.
VC/Plunk suggested that the top sentence on page 111-8 be modified to read
"this includes wildlife corridors with quality sustainable habitat'to prevent
isolation and loss" with "quality sustainable" meaning that it could regenerate
itself.
CDD/DeStefano stated that the term "quality" would need to be defined.
The commission concurred that the modification suggested is not appropriate.
VC/Plunk inquired if the commission is in concurrence with the suggestion made
by Mr. Schad to add reference of the Tree Ordinance in strategy 1.1.4.
The Planning Commission concurred that it is not appropriate to put the Tree
Ordinance in the General Plan. The Tree Ordinance can be revisited at a future date.
Schad's suggestion to add a funding mechanism
VC/Plunk, referring to the suggestion made by Mr. Schad to amend strategy
1.2.4, on page III -11, to indicate preserving canyons in a natural state, suggested
that the strategy be amended to keep the word "pursue" and add "enhancement"
in case there are natural disasters, such as fire.
C/Flamenbaum stated that "enhancement" and "natural state" are contradictory
statements. The commission concurred.
C/Flamenbaum inquired if the Commission concurs with the suggestion made by
Mr. Schad to delete 11where practical", referring to wildlife linkages, in bullet two
on page 111-11, and add the issues of tunnels and/or corridors.
VC/PlunX suggested that the words "as practical" be 'added instead. The
commission concurred.
o strategy 1.2.3, such as conservancy, in the
Chair/Meyer inquired if the Commission concurs with
eneral Plan.
Flamenbaum suggested that strategy 1.2.3 be
mended to indicate "in conjunction with civic
r anizations". He also suggested that a statement
e ardin "some wildlife corridor" in Tres Hermanos
oads be added in the Circulation Element as a
1policy to protect wildlife.
hair/Meyer suggested the Commission now focus on
a'or issues, as outlined by Dale Beland, rather
han specific wording.
ision Statement
Dale Beland stated th at staff would appreciate an
omment from the Commission on substantive problems
ith the way the components are identified.
Flamenbaum suggested that the vision statement be
mended to read "within and adjacent to SEA #1511
nstead - of just "within". The Commission
oncurred.
C/Plunk suggested that the word "natural' be
eleted from "natural hillsides". The Commission
oncurred.
and Use Element 1-11
June 28, 1993 Page 9
r-7 Dale Beland stated that this section describes land use classifications. There is a change in meaning of the maximum
permitted density in the low medium residential (RIM) from 6DU/AC to 5DU/AC
or existing density, whichever is greater. The Land Use Map reflects the land use
policy change whereas substantial areas have been reclassified from RLM
(6DU/AC) to RL (3DU/AC) which reflects existing development. In response to
C/Flamenbaum, Dale Beland confirmed that the City would be required to notice
all zone changes.
C/Grothe stated—that he would recommend to the City Council to leave all zoning
of existing residential properties at its current zoning, as originally recommended
by the Commission.
Chair/Meyer indicated that, because this is one of the major issues of the
referendum, this is an opportunity for, the commission to reconsider our position.
Deborah Hackman, in response to VC/Plunk, stated that this issue —i is a policy
question that will have to be debated amongst the Commission. There are no
legal implications whether the zoning designation is kept as is or if it is down
zoned in this fashion. However, the zoning must be consistent with the General
Plan.
CDD/DeStef ano advised the Commission to recommend classification of the
property as the Commission believes the pr6perty should be classified for the
ensuing 15 to —0 year time period of the General. Plan.
C/Flamenbaum stated that, though he believes that down zoning will create a
great expense to the City, as well as create opposition to the zone changes, he
will support such a down zoning since it is a strong issue of the supporters of the
referendum.
Oscar Law suggested that the City consider grandfathering in existing housing
The commission debated if a 'grandfathering clause can actually
belimplemented.
CDD/DeStefano 4dicated that there are economical ways to achieve'Ithe down
zoning.
Dale Beland, in response to VC/Plunk's inquiry if a statement "grandfather
existing housing" can be
June 28 1993 Page 10
VC/Plunk suggested that strategy 1.4.7 on page 1-,16 be amended to delineate
"active facility and open space preservation", rather than have just "recreational
plan" because they are two separate items.
Dale Beland suggested that the wording as being proposed would fit more
appropriately in the next series of strategies 1.5 because the Objective 1.4
focuses on education, cultural recreation, etc.. The commission concurred.
C/Flamenbaum inquired of the definition of "deed
restriction", as indicated in strategy 1.5.3
included, stated that the wording on page I-11 seems to be consistent with the
intent expressed by the Commission, and a discussion of adding a term
"grandfathering" is not appropriate for a General Plan text, but more
appropriate in the Development Code.
as
Following discussion the Commission concurred to support the down zoning.
Land Havinq Significant Slopes -Page 1-11 C/Grothe pointed out that the Hillside
Management ordinance encompass the issues regarding grading, cut and fill,
etc. The Commission concurred.
Definition of Open Space -Page 1-17
Dale Beland pointed out that Goal 2 on page 1-19 covers the concerns
expressed by VC/Plunk regarding sustainability and balance of land use, open
space preservation, and con servation. This goal statement would provide
additional support for strategies 1.5.4, 1.5.5, and 1.5.6 on page 1-17.
Well as the definition of the term "undeveloped
operty". Both terms need to be more definitive
ince every propertyhas some sort of "deed
estriction" in regards to mineral rights and
asements, and virtually every area in Diamond tar
as some form of building on it such as a f ence,
Nater pumps, power poles, etc.
Deborah Hackman explained that apparently there are
-nany properties in the City that contain deed
estrictions to preserve open space, which was
Aginally done for the benefit of the County. The
joity is now the beneficiary of those restrictions.
Y", 7
June 28, 1993 Page 11
VC/Plunk suggested that, open space lands be defined as vacant, deed
restricted from development. She also pointed out that private recreational space
was considered in the City's calculations for the open space totals.
Dale Beland suggested that the second sentence, "Recreational facilities", in
strategy 1.5.3, be deleted if desired by the commission. Staff can then pursue the
question of the definition of "deed restriction etc."
Chair/Meyer inquired if State law defines the open space element.
Dale Beland stated that there are no explicit guidelines on the substance of an
open space element.
Chair/Meyer pointed out that the General Plan should be as generic as the State
law that implements it.
C/Flamenbaum stated that, since the strategy specifically defines open space as
vacant deed restricted land, the definition should be correct. He suggested the
following verbiage for strategy 1.5.3: "Require a public hearing prior to any City
action which would change 'the existing characteristic of open space land."
Dale Beland explained that the General Plan law clearly states that an owner of a
property must be` able to read the adopted plan and understand the implications
for his/her property.
Following discussion, Dale Beland suggested the following wording for strategy
1.5.3: "Define open space lands as vacant, deed restricted, undeveloped
properties which are to be retained for purposes of visual amenity, environmental
resource protection, fire, slopes stability, hazard, abatement, and recreation.
Recreational facilities, both active and passive, which incorporate undeveloped
land. are included in this definition."
C/Flamenbaum expressed his concern that though the wording of the strategy is
improving, there is still not one piece of land that falls under that definition.
Chair/Meyer recessed the meeting at 10:05 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at
10:12 p.m.
June 28, 1993 Page 12
Dale Beland recommended -that strategy 1.5.4, on page 1-17, which reads
"Develop an open space program which will identify and acquire/ preserve open
space land... 11, be moved in lieu of strategy 3-5.3, amending the existing
wording in strategy 1.5.3 to delete the first two sentences so that it reads
"Require a public hearing prior to any city action..." The Commission concurred.
SEA #15 - Page 1-17
C/Grothe suggested that surrounding areas adjacent to the City's borders be
included in the Map as well, as suggested by Mr. Neely.
Dale Beland pointed out that Figure 3 on page 16 of the Introduction provides that
information. in response to C/Flamenbaum, he concurred that it would be
appropriate to put the SEA on the Land Us—e map. The Commission concurred.
C/Grothe, in regards to Figure 3 on page 16 clarified that the suggestion made
'refers to the Zoning Map because it is equally important to know the zoning of
adjacent. properties outside the City's borders when dealing with tract `map
applications.
Reqional Traffic Mitigation - Page V-6
Dale Beland pointed out that strategy 1.1.4, page V-6, explicitly states the intent
to get involved in, participating in., regional planning. Furthermore, page V-12
contains a comprehensive definition of environmentally sensitive transportation
corridor which responds to input received from a variety of people.
C/Flamenbaum, referring to the Roadway Classification on page V-13, stated that
he recalls that the Commission decided to classify Lemon Avenue as a major
road because it is designated as a truck route north of Colima. He then inquired if
this would imply that Grand Ave. would also bear the'potential for being a truck
route.
Dale Beland explained that the column labeled Los Angeles County classification,
in Table V-11 is a statement of prior existing facts that does not have any
significant policy impact. Furthermore, there is a distinction between existing
function and/or developed width versus master plan classification, which are not
always the same. Also, it is important to establish the hierarchy of
V9k'K W7T
June 28, 1993 Page 13
Diamond Bar classification for the different roadways so that the City has the
ability to tie assessable future funding to a particular road identified as a -certain
classification.
C/Flamenbaum expressed his concern that the classifications do not seem to be
consistent and need further review. Furthermore, Brea Canyon cutoff needs to
be classified.
Dald Beland stated that the traffic consultants will investigate the continuity issue
of going from secondary to major, and vice versa, as one travels down a
particular route. The Commission concurred.
VC/Plunk suggested that the Issue Analysis on page V-2 be amended to read
"To maintain or improve... The Commission concurred.
C/Grothe, referring to page V-3, expressed his concern that the statement "within
the existing right-of-way", referring to Grand Ave., in the Issue Analysis, is both
restrictive and contradictory since new developments are asked to, donate
additional right-of-way along Grand Ave.
CDD/DeStefano pointed out that some of the measures indicated within section
V.on page V-3 incorporate optimizing signal coordination, providing acceleration
and deceleration lanes, etc.
The Commission concurred to leave the statement as is.
C/Flamenbaum suggested that language be added to encourage or work with the
State to get a 60/57 freeway northbound on ramp, or to remove Diamond Bar
Blvd. from the States transportation corridor. He also suggested that language be
added regarding the City's concern that the high school road
should be constructed with the least impact possible to existing neighborhoods to
avoid another Lemon Ave'. situation to South Pointe Middle School.
CDD/DeStefano suggested that the statement 11 minimize impact to existing
residential neighborhoods" be added to strategy 2.2.2 on page V-7. The
Commission concurred.
VC/Plunk suggested that language be added to strategy 2.1.8 on page V-6 to
connect the park system and to have more bicycle racks and drinking fountains,
which would improve it's useability.
June 28, 1993 Page 14
The commission concurred that such a statement does not belong in the General
Plan.
Environmentally Sensitive Transportation corridor
CDD/DeStefano reported that the 1993 General Plan refers to two specific areas
of major significant change with respect to the environmentally sensitive
transportation corridor in regards to Tonner Canyon. Strategy 1.1.4 now reads
"Proactively work with adjacent jurisdictions in the evaluation of a regional
transportation linkage options through the easterly portion of the sphere of
influence area which recognize and prioritize environmental sensitivity.", and it
also refers back to a specific plan strategy within the Land Use Element.
Furthermore— page V-11 begins to define specifically an environmentally
sensitive corridor.
C/Flamenbaum stated that he would like a policy encouraging San Bernardino
Canyon to build a Soqupl Canyon road, emphasizing it as a higher priority over
this -transportation corridor.
CDD/DeStefano explained that because Soquel Canyon is so far out of the City's
influence, it would be more appropriate to include strategies that refer to working
with adjacent jurisdictions and agencies with respect to alternatives for Diamond
Bar. He suggested the following language for new strategy 1.1.5 on page V-5:
"Encourage San Bernardino and orange Counties to fund and construct an
environmentally sensitive road for Soquel,Canyo4.11 The commission concurred.
Chair/Meyer stated that the Commission has how completed discussing the
major issues, and can review any minor issues of concern.
VC/Plunk stated that she would prefer the Introduction included that the reason
people moved to Diamond Bar was for it's proximity to job centers in Los
Angeles, Orange, and San Bernardino Counties and not for it's historically low
taxes. The Commission concurred.
Deborah Hackmant in response to Chair/Meyer, confirmed that the Government Code provides
that density bonuses be at least 25%.
VC/Plunk suggested that strategy 1.3.4 on page 1714 specify encouraging home occupations
are not consistent with a residential pattern.
June 28, 1993 Page 15
CDD/DeStefano suggested that strategy 1.3.4 be
amended to read, "Encourage the retention, rehabilitation, refurbishment and/or
expansion of existing business establishments and residentially compatible
home occupations." The Commission concurred.
C/Flamenbaum inquired if the revised Housing Element has been approved.
CDD/DeStefano stated that the comments on the existing Housing Element has
been provided to the consultants who are now working on some minor word
changes.
VC/Plunk suggested that page VI -5 indicate that emergency service is
inadequate in the City. She also suggested that page VI -9 indicate that the City
needs to "implement our emergency plan" not "prepare" it since the City currently
has one. The Commission concurred.
C/Li reiterated his comments made -during the study
session regarding the formation of a professional lobby, by the City, for our
and the fact that the proposed surcharge with MWD is now a reality.
C/Flamenbaum stated that strategy 1.3.1, on page VI -5, regarding securing land
for a High School, be deleted since it is outdated.
Motion was made by C/Flamenbaum, seconded by C/Li and CARRIED -
UNANIMOUSLY to recommend that the City Council adopt the draft General
Plan dated June 16, 1993 as recommended, with the inclusion of the comments
made this evening.
DR 93-1 & It is recommended that the Commission continue CUP 93-4 Development Review No. 93-1 and
Conditional Use Permit No. 93-4 to the next meeting.
Chair/Meyer declared the Public Hearing opened
Hearing no testimony, Chair/Meyer declar 'ed the Public Hearing closed and to
be continued.
Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by VC/Plunk
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue Development Review No. 93-1 and
Conditional Use Permit No. 93-4 to the meeting of July 12, 1993.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Li, Grothe, VC/Plunk, and Chair/Meyer
JUne 28, 1993 Page 16
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Flamenbaum.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None., SPECIAL
PRESENTATIONS: Chair/Meyer presented C/Flamenbaum with a plaque in rec
'ognition of his dedicated service as the Presenting a Planning Commission chairman,from April of 1992 to plaque
to June of 1993, which is presented by the Planning C/Flamenbaum Commission and staff.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by C/Li, seconded by VC/Plunk and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn
the meeting at 10:55 p.m.
AttestAtte
II
Respectivel Lj' v e -I—L
es DeStefano es DeStefano Y