Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/12/1994MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 12, 1994 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Meyer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Board Room, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner Huff. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners: Chairman Meyer, Schad, Fong, Huff, Flamenbaum Also Present: Community Development Director James DeStefano; Associate Planner Robert Searcy; Assistant Planner Ann Lungu; Interim City Attorney Michael Montgomery, Consultant Engineer Michael Myers; Recording Secretary Carol Dennis MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS - None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of August 8, 15, 23, 30, September 12, 22, 26, and 27, 1994. A motion was made by C/Schad, seconded by C/Fong, and carried to accept the minutes as presented. C/Huff Abstained CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 1. VARIANCE No. 94-2. A request to construct a new three story single family residence in excess of the maximum 35 foot height limit. The site is located within the gated residential community known as "The Country". ! Applicant: Frank Piermarini, 2100 S. Reservoir, Pomona Property Owner: Jeff and Regina Jan, 1553 Deer Crossing, Diamond Bar. Property Location: 22104 Rimfire Lane. i iingCommissio' �i�Page 2 Plann December 12, 1994 AstP/Lungu reported that this project was reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 14, 1994. At that time, the Commission directed the staff and the applicant to work together and provide plans more reflective of the proposed project than a conceptual design. The applicant has provided' plans which more accurately show the elements of the project''. The project is a request for relief from compliance of Section 22.20.110, HEIGHT LIMITS., of the Los Angeles°County Code as adopted by the City of Diamond bar. As required, "Ever'y residence and every other building in Zone R-1 shall have is height of not to exceed two stories or 35 feet, includinga basement but excluding a cellar;..... The subject site can be characterized as a hillside lot with slopes ranging from 2:1 to 1.5:1 as the lot falls westward into a ravine. The lot possesses a flood hazard area that extends along two thirds of the western property line. Additionally, approximately 73 percent of the site is within a restricted use area. Together these areas establish a large degree of development restrictions on the site. The project site has stands of oak trees located at the rear of the property, down slope from the existing foundation. The remainder of the site is covered with natural grasses. The site possesses an extremely limited level area which is located adjacent to the street and does not provide an area capable of supporting habitable structures. , The revised plans submitted to staff indicate that the existing foundation will be expanded for the proposed residence. Additionally, the incorporation of the retaining walls at the rear and side elevations will reduce the exposed portions of the structure and also -assist in bringing the residence closer into conformance with the height requirements. An average finished grade (AFG) calculation and sections for the project are provided by the applicant. The applicant revised the original site plan adding retaining walls to the east and west elevations, ranging in height from 0 to 8 feet. A stairway is incorporated into the design,of the western retaining wall and wraps around the rear of the structure. As a result of these retaining walls, the AFG is favorably adjusted. The house is now 36 feet above AFG although the rear elevation exposes in excess of 60 feet of r floor is, however, still building face. The structure's lowe considered a basement. By code, only one floor can be constructed above this area. �p ..i^. ...m va .� el it r•.... �. `.�• 1�rn�^� �! �4iry wk�l n'[r I, t'`^l�'I::7,1 I December 12, 1994 Page 3 Planning Commission The applicant provided a conceptual landscape plan. It does not provide enough specific information to determine the extent the visual impact could be reduced. The landscape plan also does not adequately address the immediate benefits of the incorporation of plant materials for this area. However, staff will have the opportunity to ensure the plan's effectiveness upon submittal of the final landscape plan. The side elevations exhibit over 50 feet of structure. Within "The Country" there are many parcels which exhibit similar qualities and topographic features as the subject site. There residences were constructed in a similar fashion to this proposed house. A review of the Planning Division's files does not indicate the granting of any modifications to height restrictions in the immediate area of this project site. Staff has found the project not in conformance with development standards applied within the City. The site presents topographic difficulties, although a design in conformance with development standards can be attained. This project has been revised and incorporates techniques to bring the project as close to conformance with the code as possible. The house is approximately l foot over the AFG, although the residence does not conform to the number of required stories. The staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing, receive testimony, and approve Variance No. 94-2, Findings of Fact, and conditions as listed within the Resolution. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing open. Kenneth Welch, Engineer, 2440 S. Hacienda Boulevard, Hacienda Heights, stated that for anything to be built on this site, he believes the height cannot be improved. Chair/Meyer asked why the Planning Commission is being asked to approve a variance in a flood hazard area. CE/Myers responded that the Commission is not being asked to approve construction in a flood hazard area because there have been no submittals regarding the flood hazard area. If it is a recorded flood hazard area, to eliminate the designation, the development would be reviewed by the City Council. Chair/Meyer asked Mr. Welch if the applicant has read and December 12, 1994 Page 4 Planning Commission accepts the draft resolution and conditions. Mr. Piermarini responded he has no problems with the conditions. CDD/DeStefano stated all of the foundation footing details must be reviewed and approved by the City's Building and safety Division prior to issuance of -construction permits. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing closed. RECESS: Chair/Meyer recessed the meeting at 7:50 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Meyer reconvened the meeting at 8:00 P.M. A motion was made by C/Huff and seconded by VC/Flamenbaum to approve Variance No. 94-2 with the addition of the following conditions: "That the flood hazard area question be addressed and that no structure will be permitted to be constructed within any easement without first receiving permission from the owner of the easement approving 'such structures." The motion was carried unanimously. , 2. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW No. 94-2. A request to construct an 18,110 square .foot, two-story office/professional building. The 40,496 square foot project site is undeveloped and is located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Lycoming Street in Zone C -1 -BE. The project additionally proposes a freestanding 6 ft. high monument sign on the Brea Canyon Road frontage. Applicant/Property owner: G. Miller Development, 721 Brea Canyon Road #7. AP/Searcy reported that in 1990 the subject site was rezoned from R-1 (Single Family Residence Zone) to C-1 (Restricted Business Zone). The property is currently vacant. Formerly, the property had been developed with a single family residence. Abutting the site from the east to north lies a Los Angeles County Flood Control Channel, to the south' a recreation vehicle storage site which is located adjacent to the SR 60 Freeway, to the north a convenience store and a condominium project, and to the west single family residential development, a day care center, and a variety of miscellaneous industrial/manufacturing type uses. i r 7 ,{.. J tf:t,�piri4a0 tri s December 12, 1994 Page 5 Planning Commission L - The project is designed with an orientation toward the interior of the site rather than to Brea Canyon Road. The advantage of this design allows for a substantial swath of landscaping along the Brea Canyon Road frontage thereby reducing the perception of the mass of the building. The structure will be located at distances ranging from 10 ft. to 20 ft. behind the sidewalk. An extensive mixture of plants including shrubs and trees are proposed along this rear elevation. The applicant is providing - approximately 25 percent landscaping throughout the site. The project proposes a lot coverage ratio of 69 percent and a FAR of .56. There is an entry statement provided at the entries to the project in the form of 42 in. high stucco walls that screen the parking area from the street with assistance of landscaping. A six foot high block wall is proposed along the extreme southeast property, line as an extension of the existing wall. All �._ lighting will be designed so as to provide a minimum of one candlefoot over the site while minimizing light spillage off- site. Landscaping for the project is quite extensive and is intended to give the project the appearance of instant maturity. For example ,11the landscaping along Brea Canyon Road features four 36 in. box Queen Palms and three 25 ft. tall Mexican Fan Palms in addition to extensive shrubbery and ground cover. The parking area will be encased by Yew Pines and Dwarf Salmon along thle southerly perimeter and Mexican Fan Palms, Loquats and various shrubs at the easterly boundary along the flood channel. The interior area of the site will be planted with a variety of trees and shrubs in site, and quantities sufficient to detract from the visibility of the hardscape. The site provides for two points of ingress and egress, one on Brea Canyon Road, a four lane major arterial, and the other on Lycoming,Street, a secondary road. All drive aisles conform to the Los Angeles County standard of 26 feet. The project is designed!, with a shared access easement to afford future inter - parcel c',irculation for any future development. The subject project is designed with parking spaces within this easement. The easement enters the site from the south and follows the flood channel to the Lycoming Street access. Staff recommends that the' easement be recorded with the County Recorder upon approval of the City once the instrument is crafted and approved''by the City. December 12, 1994 Page 6 Planning Commission The.parking standard stipulates a parking ratio of one space per 400 sq. ft. of retail/commercial office space. Additionally, the code requires one space per 250 sq. ft. of professional/medical office space. The minimum requirement for this project is 45 spaces if no professional/medical uses are located within the structure. Fifty parking spaces have been proposed on site and there is no on=street parking on Brea Canyon Road or Lycoming Street. Landscaping has been distributed in islands to break up the harshness of the hardscape. Thirty one spaces are standard size, 16 are compact stalls and three handicapped spaces are proposed and one of these spaces must accommodate van accessibility requirements. The site is currently vacant and the construction of the project will generate traffic volumes in excess 'of the previous land use (a single family residence). The increase will not, however, have a significant adverse impact. The traffic report prepared for a more intensive but similar project identifies a projection of approximately 1,500 trips per day. For this project the trip generation will be less;. The report identified mitigation measures which will assist in reducing the impacts associated with the project. Included as mitigation measures are restriping Lycoming at the approache's to Brea Canyon Road to provide a left turn lane into the project and at the intersection and to prohibit parking on Lycoming Street (currently in effect). The building orientation is toward the interior of the site but the appearance of the structure from all sides displays consistency of theme and style. The design of the two floor office building features a French architectural style and a height of 35 feet. The applicant has proposed the primary exterior finish as Bisque stucco complemented by a darker Balsa accent. Additional channel accents are incorporated over areas of the first floor in the central portion of the building and the corners. The project offers second floor access to the outside via balconies from all elevations and is encased by the precast concrete balustrades. Cloud White trim is proposed for the fascia, trim, qudins and second floor precast concrete balustrades. The material proposed for the 12:12 roof is a typical flat concrete tile of dark adobe, adobe, avante light grey and sand topped with a painted sheet metal roof cap. Perched atop the protruding roof elements; the project proposes ornamentations. The windows of the project will display painted sheet metal caps above and typical stucco finish on the remaining perimeter. The December 12, 1994 Page 7 Planning Commission b. w� applicant has chosen to place the air conditioning and heating equipment on the roof in a well area that, in addition to the parapet, conceals the equipment from view. Signage for the project is proposed for the corner of the site closest to the intersection of Brea Canyon Road and Lycoming Street. -The freestanding sign is designed with a maximum height of 6 ft. The sign will display the "BREA CANYON PLAZA" center identification in 12 inch high illuminated reverse pan channel letters. The stucco monument structure will have a 10 foot long split face in order to maximize exposure to commuters in all directions. The sign features architectural treatments which include a central 6 foo capped stucco pilaster as well as a 42 in. pilaster with hannels, on the perimeter of each side. No other signage ii requested as a part of this application. The staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the r� public hearing and receive testimony and approve the Resolution of Approval with the attached conditions. I Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing open. Louis Marcellin, owner of adjacent property known as Walnut Valley Trailer, stated he would agree with a simple lot bine adjustment to give up about 1500 square feet fo= a parking easement. He does phot wish to give up an addi,,,.ional 3000 square feet for parking as shown on the subject plans. He further stated he would be in favor of an ingress/egress to Lycoming Street. Ben Pissaro, 21040 Lycoming, stated he is opposed to the flood channel being covered. In addition, he stated he is very concerned about the traffic flow on Lycoming. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing closed. C/Flamenbaum asked for information regarding the flood control easement. CE/Myers responded that the information provided .is the best available information. The assessor's map indicates the channel may depart from a concentric curvature -with the -.-, channel as it nears Lycoming. The Assessor's map indicates a 15' wide storm drain: Chair/Meyer indicated that the information provided during the December 12, 1994 Page 8 Planning Commission Public Hearing shows a set of plans indicating development on an adjoining piece of property and the adjoining property owner registering his opposition: The options are to deny the plans since they are inaccurate or to continue the public hearing and allow the applicant and the ajoining property owner the opportunity to work out the real lot lines. C/ Fong indicated his concerns about the left turn traffic from the project site onto Lycoming. Chair/Meyer stated that staff has suggested a traffic analysis for the project. Chair/Meyer further stated the traffic analysis should be provided prior to the staff review. Chair/Meyer continued that the project has merit in its concept although it may be slightly overbuilt for the lot. Some fine tuning needs to be done. If the applicant is gfrom to show development on someone elses property, app the property owner would be prudent prior to submitting the project to the City. Responding to C/Huff, CDD/DeStefano stated staff's position is to insure that the maximum number of parking spaces permitted by the code be the appropriate goal to reach, particularly on a site such as this where there is no street parking or adjacent parking currently available. A motion was made by C/Schad and seconded by C/Huff to continue the public hearing to January 23, 1995 and have staff address the following items: 1) Traffic Study 2) Parking Easement 3) Lot Line Correction 4) Offstreet Parking. The motion was carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS - None PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS - None ANNOUNCEMENTS CDD/DeStefano indicated the Development Code discussion will begin January 23, 1995. Chair/Meyer cautioned the Commission not to, prejudice themselves before the City Council when giving testimony on the General Plan. December 12, 1994 Page 9 Planning Commission Chair/Meyer thanked staff for their support to the Commission during 1994 and wished them happy holidays. A motion was made by C/Schad and seconded by C/Huff to adjourn the meeting to January 9, 1995. The motion was carried unanimously. Chair/Meyer declared the meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Attest: David eey6 e'' , Chairman / Respectfully Submitted, les DeStefa�no Secretary