Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/24/1995MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION - JULY 24, 1995 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive,) Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner Meyer. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners: Chairman Flamenbaum, Vice Chairman Huff, Commissioners Meyer, Schad and Fong. Also Present: Community Development Director James DeStefano; Assistant Planner Ann Lungu; Consulting Engineer Mike Myers; Recording Secretary Carol Dennis. I I� MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS - None CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Minutes of June 26, 1995. VC/Huff stated that the motion on Page 7, Paragraph 5 should be corrected to indicate a vote of 3-0 so that sentence reads: "The motion was approved 3-0 with the following roll call:" A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by C/Schad to approve the minutes as corrected. The motion was approved 4-0 with the following roll call: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer, Schad, Fong, VC/Huff NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Flamenbaum ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None OLD BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS: r 1. General Plan Conformity Report for Vacation of Right -of - Way (Gona Court) Pursuant to Government Code §65402. CD/Myers stated the City of Diamond Bar has received a request from the Cross Keys Homeowners Association to i F 111 lil lIF V'I 11 1 July 24, 1995 Page 2 Planning Commission it„dpi vacate Gona Court southerly from Golden Springs Drive to its cul-de-sac approximately 425 feet southerly. This property was dedicated to public use with the recording of Tract No. 34157 and is fully improved. There exists public utility, sanitary sewer and storm drain facilities within the public right-of-way. However, as the facilities exist it would be necessary, should- the vacation be approved, that the property 'be reserved for public utility and public' services easements. In accordance with Section 65402(a) of the Government Code, no real property shall be disposed of or street vacated until the Planning Commission reports on conformity of the location, purpose and extent with the General Pian. Gona Court is not shown in.the Draft General Plan nor,on the Master Plan of Highways as a primary or secondary highway. The design and dedication of this street for circulation purposes is for specific service to the adjacent properties which are all members of the Cross. Keys Homeowners Association. CE/Myers continued that this proposed vacation appears to be in conformance with the Draft General Plan. There is little or no probability that taking this recommended action would be detrimental to or interfere with any future adopted General Plan. Additional Section 892 of the Streets and Highways Code requires that the City Council find that the right-of-way is not useful as a non -motorized transportation facility (bicycle, pedestrian or equestrian way). Gona Court is not shown in the Draft General Plan to be planned nor required for bicycle, pedestrian or equestrian use. Therefore, the property is found: • not to be required for general public access or circulation; • not to be any longer needed for the present .'. nor for the prospective use of the general public which use cannot be served by the reservation of a public utility and public services easement; and • not to be useful as a non -motorized transportation facility. Pursuant to Section 15312 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this -matter is categorically exempt. July 24, 1995 Page 3=', Planning Commission r - i I � i t Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution finding and reporting that: 1) pursuant to Section 65402 of the Government Code, the location, purpose and extent of the vacation of this property is in conformance with the Draft General Plan; and further recommending that, 2) as required by Section 892 of the Streets and Highways Code, the City Council find that Gona Court is not useful as a non -motorized transportation facility. A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by VC/Huff to adopt the resolution. Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, CE/Myers stated that, upon vacation, the maintenance for the public utilities would be the public utility entities. The storm drains would continue to be maintained by Los Angeles County Flood Control District and the sewer would be maintained by the Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District. There are some Los Angeles County storm drains located in "The. ,I Country Estates". The City does not pay for the maintenance of storm drains. The City does pay for the 1' maintenance of catch basins .and inlets as required under the City's commitment to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Chair/Flamenbaum stated he is concerned about the trend toward the City giving up street right-of-ways. CE/Myers responded that if the Planning Commission finds this request to be in conformance with the General Plan, the matter will proceed to the City Council in accordance with other sections of the Government Code regarding vacations of public right-of-ways. The matter is subject to public notice, public hearing and deliberation by the City Council. Chair/Flamenbaum indicated he does not see a benefit to the City with respect to the vacation. In addition, he questioned why the City would not vacate every street and thereby save money on road repair. CE/Myers responded that the City could save maintenance and liability costs. C/Meyer stated his reason for the motion to adopt the resolution was that the resolution meets the criteria for the Draft General Plan. He indicated that his rt observation of Gona Court is that it has very little public benefit. Currently, the City of Diamond Bar is asked to maintain what is essentially a private street with access only to the condominium development. The benefit of vacation is reduced costs to the City and its taxpayers. July 24, 1995 Page 4 Planning commission ED Chair/Flamenbaum 'stated the next step after vacation of this street will be the installation of a gate. He further stated that, in his opinion, this is contrary to the intent of the Draft General Plan. C/Meyer stated that the least amount of property held by a public entity is of benefit to the community because the', City doe's not have to maintain the property, the liability is reduced'and the property is taxable. VC/Huff stated he agrees with C%Meyer-that Gona Court is surrounded by the condominium project. He indicated he sees no benefit for the City to retain the street. He further stated he is not -'prepared to propose the - privatization of all streets. In addition, he stated that a request for 'a gate at the street entrance would be a separate ,,consideration by the City. Chair/Flamenbaum stated that while he does not have a problem with vacating Gona Court, he does not agree that this resolution conforms with the intent of the Draft General Plan. He indicated he is concerned with the trend. C/Meyer stated that upon approval' of vacation of Gona Court, he would favor amendments .to the Cross Keys Homeowners Association CC&R's to insure the proper maintenance of the property. CE/Myers responded that the complex has other streets which have been well maintained. The Cross Keys Homeowners Association CC&R's have been reviewed by the Department of Real Estate. The vacation will result in amendments to the CC&Rfs and the budget. CE/Myers responded to C/Schad that the public services easements will remain with the street. The lighting system, upon vacation of the property, will be taken out of the Street Lighting Maintenance District and the cost for power and maintenance of the light poles will become the responsibility of the homeowners association. The current infrastructure will not be disturbed. The lighting cost is based upon an fixed annual per -pole fee. CDD/DeStefano, responding to C/Fong and Chair/Flamenbaum stated -that upon request from the Cross Keys Homeowners Association for installation of a gate at Gona Court and Golden Springs Road, the matter' would come before the City for consideration and approval. dF, " , , -.--_. , . I I , 1 _..' - , ,, .-r.. I -" n 1_11 "1 ,11!, I "I ",.,r•, • L _. _ _.-.. 1, . � JF I ,. 11.. , -,:1. rw Hd �..ueL lrr1,1,. , rv, ­-_ - _ _ _ ___ __ -- - — i r — —A" ,,.INoI•d.uLLi�lebm�dnmm J-=-±=—= ___.� -- - _ i.+..nt uu.w.u...0 mxu.m..x_ _ July 24, 1995 Page 5 Planning Commission ' I The motion to approve the resolution was approved 4-1 with the following roll call: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer, VC/Huff, Fong, Schad NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Flamenbaum ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 95-3. A request to operate an unmanned public utility substation for a cellular communication facility with a 60 foot monopole with antennae and microwave dishes.- The radio equipment will be housed within an underground vault. Continued from June 26, 1995. Because C/Meyer's business is located at the site under consideration for this project, he recused himself and left the dais. CDD/DeStefano stated this item was continued in order for the i applicant to provide additional photographs requested by the } Planning Commission. In addition, the Planning Commission and staff requested additional time to examine documents provided by the applicant on June 26, 1995. Data contained in the report indicates that the applicant is seeking a site that meets their criteria for efficiency rate. Staff has noted the receipt of more and more questions and comments regarding monopoles and other cellular telecommunications devices in the community. In staff's opinion, this is a result of a growing use of these types of tools in the immediate area as well as, the sale of additional air wave rights allowing more users in the area. The applicant has focused on the site known as the "Walnut Pool" site. The applicant believes that this is the best location to connect with the existing cell sites in the immediate area. The monopole is proposed not to exceed a height of 76 feet. The applicant has looked at a number of other sites in the immediate area including the Raddison Inn. Staff has indicated several concerns with the proposed location. Staff believes that a monopole of up to 76 feet in height is inappropriate for the proposed location within the community. Staff is not opposed to the technology. In fact, the City has approved a number of cell sites over the past ,..j five years. Cell sites have been approved at the Diamond Bar High School, Torito Lane, Prospectors Road and the Raddison Inn. Each of these locations have been modified from the original request of the applicant. All of the approved sites July 24, 1995 Page 6 Planning commission have resulted from the cooperative effort of the applicant and the City. Staff feels this cooperative effort is lacking with this application. The City has a draft General Plan that encourages aesthetic values which are described in policy statements. The City is seeking the retention -of "Country. Living" by various definitions. The'City is seeking overall superior land use planning and the protection of views from properties and developments. A number of scenic areas -have been'identified as posing ideal characteristics for- preservation, not the least of which has been the SR 57 corridor. The City has spent considerable time and energy to encourage the utility companies to underground utilities that are currently located overhead within the community. For the past six years, the City has required underground utilities for all new developments. The City, through policy statements and regulations, has adopted low -scale monument signage and 35 foot height building maximums in most zones. Staff believes the application is inconsistent with the General Plan and policy statements the City has adopted and implemented over the last'few years. Alternative locations and heights need to be explored by this applicant. Absent a specific willingness by the applicant to seek, at a minimum, an alternative height, if not an alternative location, staff recommends the Planning Commission deny the application by directing staff to prepare the appropriate resolution. CDD/DeStefano, responding to C/Schad, stated that the applicant's package incorporated the identification of Walnut Pool's at the top of the monopole. Staff indicated such signage was inappropriate. The applicant stated at the June 26, 1995 meeting that should the application be approved, they would remove the signage from the top of the transmission tower. € Responding to C/Fong, CDD/DeStefano stated the existing Walnut Pool sign is a non -conforming sign. The sign was established in 1978. Based upon the existing sign ordinance, the sign has a 15 year life. The Planning Commission could include the elimination of the current sign into an approval for a future a development of the site. The existing sign is 35 feet high and the current ordinance allows a sign of 6 feet in height. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing reopened. Joe Richards, Richards Mueting Wilkes Planning & Engineering, 6529 Riverside Avenue f115, Riverside stated his firm represents AirTouch Cellular on this matter. He introduced Maria Lamb, AirTouch Radio Frequency Group -and Eric Mears, I!, July 24, 1995 Page 7 Planning commission Real Estate and Site Development Group. He stated that staff's concern that cities and counties are becoming increasingly concerned about towers is valid. Despite the concern, the cellular source is a regional service and the objective is to give customers the ability to access the network through cellular facilities that are permitted in adjacent cities. The applicant recognizes there is no obligation for the cities and counties to provide for this service. The two current AirTouch facilities reside on buildings. He stated that in his opinion, AirTouch has made ever effort to locate on buildings when they exist. In this case, there is no building to house the proposed site. Based on analysis of the City of Diamond Bar, the proposed site is a good location for a monopole. The proposed isolated commercial property site is adjacent to a freeway infrastructure land a CalTrans facility. He further stated there has been no written or verbal opposition to this project. Regarding aesthetics, the need for cellular facilities is increasing. Cellular facilities provide business and residential use as well as 911 'emergency access. He stated that, in his opinion, the service provides a better quality of urban life. The industry has an obligation to consider co - locations and existing structures where feasible for its facilities. He indicated he believes AirTouch has fulfilled, this obligation. AirTouch believes that a monopole is a proper support structure for the Diamond Bar location and the site is conducive to such a structure. Responding to VC/Huff, Mr. Richards stated that some AirTouch locations are in the process of converting to digital service. With the advent of digital service, there will continue to be a need for the monopole at this site to handle the capacity. Mr. -Richards responded to C/Schad that, at the discretion of the property owner, AirTouch would be amenable to having another cellular company co -locate on the monopole. Maria Lamb, AirTouch Cellular and a Diamond Bar resident stated the proposed site is a split between the cell site at Rowland Heights and Golden Springs Drive. She emphasized the site is needed to accommodate the projected increase in use. She further stated that the Raddison Hotel building was considered for a cell site, however, it is too high. (r , In response to VC/Huff, Ms. Lamb stated any location on the _r I Raddison Hotel building is too high to accommodate the line of site. Of the sites considered, the Walnut Pools location is the best. July 24, 1995 Page '8 Planning Commission C/Fong asked if the current AirTouch cell sites could be relocated to accommodate a more favorable site than the Walnut Pools location. Ms. Lamb responded AirTouch has considered that possibility. However, because of the terrain, it is not feasible to 'alter the existing sites to meet the current facility 'needs A temporary cell site was located on Valley Boulevard between Brea Canyon Road and Lemon Avenue which proved inadequate. Eric Mears, Site Development Manager, AirTouch Cellular and a Diamond Bar 'resident, responded to VC/Huff that even going to the ':lowest' level" on the 'side of the Raddison Hotel building; the facility would be much higher than the proposed site at Walnut Pools. The facility could not be placed low enough to be in contact with the other,cell sites in the vicinity. The facility currently located on the side of the Raddison Hotel building' allows for only"'two sectors.The Walnut Pools site would allow for three sectors' which would accommodate all outlying cell sites. Responding to C/Fong; Mr. Mears stated AirTouch has researched the possibility of relocating the current sites to accommodate a new cell site and found that there would continue to be a gap in service due to the terrain. Mr. Mears,' in response to C/Schad, stated all cell sites are licensed with the FCC. Other possible sites were identified by AirTouch. However, the proposed Walnut Pools site appears to be the most technically feasible. There is currently a temporary cell site located on the Shell Oil property in Tonner Canyon. Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, Mr. Mears stated AirTouch will be offering digital service. It is not currently available commercially. Ms. Lamb responded that the proposed monopole at the Walnut Pools location will not operate on the same frequency as the Rowland Heights or the Torito Lane and Golden Springs Drive cell site. Interference will occur if the users cell phone is operating at the same frequency as the cell site. The proximity of cell sites depends on the transmission power and the site height. f: Chair/Flamenbaum stated the proposed site is not offensive to him. However, as .the need for service increases so do the requests for additional sites and the Diamond -Bar area will soon look like an antenna farm. In response to Chair/Flamenbaum, Ms. Lamb stated the Raddison Hotel building is not a good site for micro cell application. Micro cell operates on zone areas and the zones have to be interconnected with fiber optics. Clustering will not accommodate the corridor which needs to be improved. Chair/Flamenbaum stated there are sites other than the D July 24, 1995 Page 9`'' Planning Commission Raddison Hotel that would accommodate clustering of the cell sites. Ms. Lamb responded that the Diamond Bar Honda location suggested by Chair/Flamenbaum would not facilitate the handoff proceeding southbound on the SR 57. Mr. Mears stated it is contemplated that technology will surpass the need for any additional cell -sites in this area. As the digital technology advances, the current frequencies should provide greater usage. Micro cell technology is very limited and clustering would not prove to be effective. Mr. Mears responded to C/Schad that the existing tower to the east of the Raddison Hotel is located at Golden Springs Drive and Torito Lane. Responding to C/Fong, Mr. Mears stated -that the Diamond Bar Golf Course' would be too easterly for a monopole site to provide a clean line of site to the next cell site to the west. In addition, it would be too close to the Golden Springs Drive and Torito Lane site. C/Fong stated he has a problem with the proposed site because staff indicated that the applicant is unwilling to consider other sites. He further stated the applicant has not provided anything in writing to the Planning Commission to indicate that any alternate studies have been conducted by AirTouch. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed. CDD/DeStefano stated that the Planning Commission has had the opportunity to hear the staff report and receive testimony from the applicant. The applicant has yet to respond to the Planning Commission request for additional photographs showing this particular site at the proposed location. According to the applicant's testimony, the Planning Commission is considering a site that is poor planning on the part of the applicant. This site has been chosen principally to fulfill the needs of the applicant. It seems to staff that this is an inappropriate height for this utility at the proposed location. The Planning Commission has considered a number of projects over the last few years. There has always been concern expressed for the degradation of the community and the quality of urban life. In addition, there have been concerns regarding aesthetic values, retention of open space and the continuing urbanization of the community. The application before the Planning Commission is for the eighth facility within the City of Diamond Bar. CDD/DeStefano stated that the staff recommends that the Planning Commission take action to deny this particular application at the proposed location. July 24, 1995 Page to Planning commission In response to Chair/Flamenbaum, CDD/DeStefano stated NexTel is proposing_a 50 foot monopole next to the Diamond Bar Honda location. LA Cellular is proposing a 90 foot monopole at Brea Canyon Cutoff. LA Cellular has a temporary facility on Pathfinder Road. VC/Huff stated he is concerned with the- proliferation of towers in the community. He indicated the community is attempting to underground utility services. Erecting monopoles in the'City of Diamond Bar does not lend to the country living atmosphere which the City's residents are seeking. However, there is a need to access 911 and have the cellular benefits available for emergency. He stated he is concerned with the large number of projected cell sites due' to increase in demand. He further stated he is also concerned that staff has taken a strong position on this matter. Since staff usually does not!respond'in this matter, it indicates to him' that there are unanswered questions regarding- this proposal. Therefore, he indicated he would like to see the applicant work with staff to': consider additional alternatives and present the results to the Planning Commission for further consideration. As a 1 result 'of' the Walnut Pools location proposed to be the only sitei considered by AirTouch he stated he would not be in favor of'''ithisi,proposal. C/Schad stated he discussed the proposal with the applicant. Based upon discussions this evening, he is concerned that more should be done by the applicant to research an alternate location in order to improve the aesthetics of the City. C/ Fong stated he is not in favor of the AirTouch proposal. In his view, a better location can be determined in order to preserve the aesthetics of the community. Mr. Richards requested a continuance to October 9, 1995. Chair/Flamenbaum stated he feels the proposed site is perfect. He indicated he has difficulty with future proposals and the inability of cellular companies to co -locate their facilities. Mr. Richards responded that AirTouch is willing to work with competitors to share facilities. He stated they will contact NexTel to discuss the matter. A motion was made by C/Schad and seconded by VC/Huff to continue Conditional Use Permit No. 95-3 to October 9, 1995. The motion was approved 4-0 with the following roll call:, AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Schad, VC/Huff, Fong, Chair/Flamenbaum None Meyer None July 24, 1995 Page 11 Planning Commission C/Meyer returned to the dais. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: VC/Huff stated he is pleased to see the signs acknowledging the businesses. during the Grand Avenue rehabilitation project. ANNOUNCEMENTS: CDD/DeStefano stated that the City of Diamond Bar is the host City for the East San Gabriel Planning Committee meeting to be held Thursday, July 27, 1995 at 6:30 p.m. at the Raddison Hotel. Dr. David Bess, CalPoly Urban Planning Professor who is a former Dean of the School of Environmental Design will present 1115 Way to Fix the Suburbs". He encouraged the Planning Commissioners to attend. CDD/DeStefano stated consideration of the Draft General Plan is agendized for the July 25 City Council meeting. ADJOURNMENT: Chairman Flamenbaum declared the meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Jas DeStefano Community Development Director Attest: Bruce Flamenbaum Chairman