HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/14/1995MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 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 Vice Chairman
Huff.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners: Chairman Flamenbaum, Vice
Chairman Huff, Commissioners Meyer, Schad and
Fong.
Also Present: Community Development Director James
DeStefano; Associate Planner Robert Searcy:
Consulting Engineer Mike Myers; Recording
Secretary Carol Dennis.
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes of July 24, 1995.
C/Fong requested the first sentence, Paragraph 5, Page 9
be corrected to read as follows: "CIFong stated he has
a problem with the proposed site because staff indicated
that the applicant is unwilling to consider other sites."
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by VC/Huff to
approve the minutes as corrected. The motion was
approved 5-0 with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer, VC/Huff, Schad,
Fong, Chair/Flamenbaum
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
OLD BUSINESS - None
NEW BUSINESS:
1. General Plan Conformity Report No. 95-2 for Acquisition
of Sanitary Sewer Easement and Summary vacation of
Sanitary Sewer Easement Pursuant to Government Code
965402 for property located within Lots 21, 40 and 41 of
Tract No. 47851.
August 14, 1995
Page 2 Planning Commission
II
Property Location: vacation of Existing Easement (Lois
21 and 40, Tract 47851) Acceptance of Proposed Easement
(Lot 41, Tract 47851)
Applicant: Hunsaker Associates
Property Owner: Diamond Bar East Partners
CE/Myers stated the City of Diamond Bar has received a
request from Diamond Bar East Partners to construct one
of .the sanitary sewer lines for this subdivision at a
location different from that approved on the original
sewer improvement plans and as was shown on the final map
of Tract No. 47851.
This subdivision (Tract No. 47851) was approved and
recorded in July of 1994. Lots 21 and 40 were burdened,
by dedication on the final map, with easements for
sanitary sewer purposes. Subsequently, the Subdivider
determined that Lots 21 and 40 could be better utilized
if they were free of the sewer easements that encumbered
them. Prior to construction of any sewer improvements l in
this vicinity the Subdivider prepared a revision to the
sewer improvement plans which realigned a portion of the
proposed sewer mainline out of Lots 21 and 40 and across
Lot 41. This proposed revision of the improvement plan
has been approved (subject to the dedication and
acceptance by the City of an easement for sanitary sewer
purposes across Lot 41) and the sewer facilities have now
been constructed.
No sanitary sewer service point of connection for any lot
was changed by this revised alignment. Lots 40 and 41
continue to be serviced by house laterals in Oak Knoll
i Drive and Lot 21 by a lateral in Woodbridge Court.
The exhibits attached to the staff report show both the
existing easements (proposed vacation) and proposed
easement (offer of dedication). The owner has offered to
the City a sanitary sewer easement across Lot 41 which is
described in Exhibit "B". Those easements proposed to be
abandoned are described in Exhibit "C".
CE/Myers continued that upon acceptance by the City
Council of the offer of dedication of a sanitary sewer
easement over Lot 41, the existing sewer easements over
Lots 21 and 40 which are proposed to be vacated would:
be -no longer needed for the present or
prospective use of the general public;
have been superseded by an alternate sewer
easement location and no other public
facilities are within the easement;
i 31 P T i �'�Ctqqlp�t
August 14, 1995 Page 3' Planning commission
`- have not diminished service to any property
which previously enjoyed such planned
services;
• be sanitary sewer easements in excess of that
required for the necessary and proper service
to these properties and the general public; '
The California Bicycle Transportation Act, Section 892 of
the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California
requires in part that "(r)ights-of-way established for
other purposes by cities, counties or local agencies
shall not be abandoned unless -the governing body
determines that the rights-of-way or parts thereof are
not useful as a non -motorized transportation facility."
The sanitary sewer easements to be abandoned are
generally on steep slopes (approximately 2:1) and do not
provide opportunity for extension of interconnection of
any master planned or General Plan bicycle, equestrian or
pedestrian facility in the City of Diamond Bar.
Pursuant to Section 15312 of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), this matter is categorically exempt.
It is'recommended the Planning Commission approve the
y
attached resolution finding and reporting that:
1) pursuant to section 65402 of the Government Code,
the location, purpose and extent of both the
acquisition and vacation of sanitary sewer,
easements is in conformance with the General Plan;
and further recommending that,
2) as required by section 892 of the Streets and
Highways code, the City Council findS that the
sanitary sewer easements proposed to be vacated are
not useful as a non -motorized transportation
facility.
Responding to C/Schad, CE/Myers stated their request does
not affect the pumping station, electrical equipment,
loads on the facility, and does not change the quantities
going into the pump station.
CE/Myers, responding to C/Meyer, stated that, in his
judgement, there would be no future use nor any other
benefits to the public by retaining the existing
easements. The proposed uses at the alternate location
-
are identical to the original use.
A motion was -made by C/Schad and seconded by C/Meyer to
�I
approve General Plan Conformity Report No. 95-2. The
motion was approved 5-0 with the following roll call:
August 14, 1995 Page 4
Planning Commission
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Schad, Meyer, Fong,
VC/Huff, Chair/Flamenbaum
NOES:, COMMISSIONERS: None
.ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
2. General Plan Conformity Report No. 95-3 for acquisition
of property located._ adjacent to summit Ridge Park (Lot 51
of Tract 42560) Pursuant to Government Code §65402.
CDD/DeStefano stated in early 1995 the City had an
opportunity to acquire a 1.27 acre parcel which currently
functions as a neighborhood pocket park and is located
adjacent to Summit Ridge 'Park on Summit Ridge Drive. The
property became available as a result of notification by
the County,,of Los Angeles Tax Collector of a pending sale
and auction relating to' the non-payment of taxes for this
privately held piece of property. The City exercised its
legal prerogative to acquire the subject property. Since
that time, the office of the County Tax Collector has
been finalizing its, documents and it is now appropriate
for the City to ,take final action to secure the purchase
of this acreage. The City maintains that the property
should be acquired through the public acquisition process
to insure proper ,utilization of the property in
conjunction with Summit Ridge Park.
The City's Planning Commission, in accordance with
Government Code §65402, must make a finding that this
purchase has been acknowledged and that it is consistent
with and conforms to the General Plan. The Vision
Statement contains a component related to the
preservation of open space resources. The Land Use
Element and map designates the property as "Park" (PK).
The acquisition of the property is consistent with the
Resource Management Element as identified within
Objective 1.3 and Strategy 1.3.3, located on Page III -12,
and the Public Services and Facilities Element as
described within Strategy 1.5.1, located on Page VI -6.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the
attached resolution finding the acquisition of Lot 51 of
Tract 42560 in conformance with the General Plan.
Responding to C/Meyer, CDD/DeStefano stated this pocket
park was a requirement of a subdivision. The mother
tract for this property has a number of small pocket
parks. These parks are privately held by the development
company that subdivided the tract with restrictions, or
as part of the homeowners association. The City
determined a benefit to acquire this property for non-
payment of taxes rather than have it go to public auction
for possible acquisition for single family residential
1-1
August 14, 1995 1Page 55 Planning Commission
development. The approximately five pocket parks in the
immediate neighborhood are maintained via the local
lighting and landscape maintenance district.
VC/Huff questioned why this pocket park became available
due to non-payment of taxes and the other parks have not.
He asked if 'the City should be researching this
circumstance with respect to the other pocket parks with
the expectation that developers may be routinely
abandoning them because they have no value to the -
developer. CDD/DeStefano responded that although the
other properties have not come up for non-payment of
taxes, they may come up in the future. A report is sent
to the City by the County of Los Angeles in January of
each year that indicates all properties subject to tax
sale. The City has attempted to reach the property owner
to no avail.
C/Meyer stated his concern that if this park was
constructed for recreational purposes to service a
subdivision development, the intended use can be
abandoned simply by not paying taxes. If this park was
a condition of the development, the enforcement of those
conditions is lacking and the City should review all such
conditions for compliance. The public should not be in
a position of assuming the maintenance of a park that was
originally intended to be part of a subdivision and
therefore a responsibility of the subdivider and the
homeowners association. In the future, the City should
be certain that, with the creation of pocket parks, the
conditions and CC&Rls are written to assure the
developers long term responsibility and that the
developer may not avoid that responsibility simply by not
paying the property taxes.
VC/Huff suggested the City may need to set aside funds to
acquire the other pocket parks if the developer is
systematically abandoning them. He further suggested
that it might be advantageous to negotiate the donation
of these parks to the City at the time of development
rather than monitoring for acquisition. CDD/DeStefano
responded that the City recently acquired property from
Bramalea in a similar circumstance.
Responding to C/Fong, CDD/DeStefano stated the pocket
park is a flat area below Summit Ridge Park immediately
adjacent to Summit Ridge Drive. It is primarily grass
with trees that were installed by the developer.
In response to Chair/Flamenbaum, the pocket park is not
part of the General Plan inventory matrix of parks. The
pocket parks are designated as Public Parks in the
General Plan.
August 14, 1995
3.
Page 6 Planning Commission
A motion was made by VC/Huff and seconded by C/Meyer to
approve the resolution finding the acquisition of Lot 51
of Tract 42560 in conformance with the General Plan. The
motion was approved 5-0 with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Huff, Meyer, Schad,
Fong, Chair/Flamenbaumi
NOES:= COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
Planned sign Program No. 95-4. A request to amend
Planned Sign Program No.
Property Location: 1180 South Diamond Bar Boulevard
Applicant: Ron Underwood, 3600 Birch Street,
Suite 220 Newport Beach, CA 92660
Property Owner: Nikko Capital,- 3961 Mac Arthur
Boulevard, Suite 105, Newport Beach,
CA 92660
AP/Searcy stated that this request is to amend Planned
Sign Program 94-2 which was approved by the Planning
Commission on March 14, 1994 for the "Diamond Bar Towne
Center". This project is located in an Unlimited
Commercial -Billboard Exclusion (C -3 -BE) Zone. The
General Plan land use designation is Commercial (C).
The owner and applicant are requesting to ' amend the three
existing monument signs. Sign A is located at the north
end of the center along Diamond Bar Boulevard; Sign B is
located at the south end of the center along Diamond Bar
Boulevard; and Sign C is located on Grand Avenue*'The
existing Planning Sign Program allows for each monument
sign to be six feet six inches (6' 611) in height and
eight feet (8' 011) wide. The signs along Diamond Bar
Boulevard (Signs A and B) include the street address in
six inch numbers. The proposed amendment to the Planned
Sign Program requests the following changes:
* All monument signs will include center
identification along the top edge.
* Sign A: This sign will be for shop tenant
identification. It shall be six feet (6' 011)
tall and five feet (5' 0") wide. Currently,
this sign extends four feet into the City's
right-of-way. To correct this, the proposed
monument sign shall be located at the property
line, perpendicular to the screen wall.
August 14, 1995
Page 7 Planning commission
* Sign B and Sign C: These monument signs are
for anchor tenant identification and shop
tenant identification. Both are six feet (6'
011) tall and twelve feet (12' 011) wide. The
proposed monument signs shall be a minimum of
five feet from the property line and two feet
from any curb. Sign B shall be located a
minimum of four feet from the windmill. Sign
C shall be located approximately six feet from
the property line (adjacent to screen wall)
and will include the removal of ten feet of
the screen wall along Grand Avenue.
Currently, there are several large trees in the vicinity
of the Grand Avenue monument sign. If the removal of the
large Sycamore tree becomes inevitable, the applicant has
agreed to replace it with two similar 24 inch box trees.
The City's Public Works Division has conducted a
preliminary review of this project. Comments from
Consulting Engineer Mike Myers include:
1) Any part of the monument sign shall be a minimum of
two feet from any curb that is adjacent to parking
spaces or an aisle of traffic, and
2) Each monument sign shall be a minimum of five feet
from the property line.
Pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined
that this project is Categorically Exempt §15301.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Planned Sign Program No. 95-4, Findings of Fact, and
conditions as listed within the resolution.
Responding to VC/Huff, AP/Searcy stated that the Planned
Sign Program was originally approved in 1994. The center
was built a number of years prior to the City's
incorporation. 'The existing monument signs were erected
during the construction of the center. Therefore, the
four foot encroachment into the City's right-of-way is a
pre-existing condition which will be corrected by this
amendment.
Responding to C/Meyer, AP/Searcy stated the City's Sign
Ordinance permits tenant signs. C/Meyer stated he is not
in favor of these types of signs. The small reader
boards are a waste of time and a blight on the area.
CDD/DeStefano stated the primary purpose is to facilitate
the new occupant of the vacant Boston Stores unit to have
advertising on the street. In order to accomplish the
August 14, 1995 Page 8 Planning Commission
facilitation, the property owners elected to approach the
City with new monument signs that would reduce the number
of tenants advertised at the street and identify and
advertise for the major retailers. C/Meyer further
stated he believes the 'proposed signs are a major
improvement over what was approved in 1994.
AP/Searcy, responding to C/Meyer, stated the Cityrs
Public Works Department believes proposed sign C will
promote safer traffic flow than the existing sign.
In response to C/Schad, AP/Searcy stated the current
street modification will leave adequate space for the new
signs.
C/Fong stated he is concerned about the removal of the
existing Sycamore tree. AP/Searcy responded that the
applicant has agreed to take all measures to maintain the
existing tree. In the event there is a problem in
retaining the tree, staff has included mitigation
measures for replacement.
In response to C/Schad, Chair/Flamenbaum stated the
applicant is complying with the current sign ordinance.
C/Schad stated if the applicant has to remove the tree,
he would like to have a guarantee of replacement in the
approval.
Applicant Ron Underwood, in response to Chair Flamenbaum,
stated it is his belief that the Sycamore tree will have
to be removed to facilitate the proposed sign. However,
the owners preference is to retain the tree.
Stan Heikenen, Nikko Capital, stated the property owner
is interested in cooperating with the City. If removal
of the Sycamore tree is necessary, 36 inch box trees
could be used for replacement as long as it is
horticulturally feasible.
C/Meyer reiterated. his motion to approve Planned Sign
Program- No. 95-4 with an amendment to replace the
Sycamore tree with two 36 inch box trees rather than 24
in box trees. VC/Huff concurred with a second to the
motion.. The motion was approved 5-0 with the following
roll call.
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
Meyer, VC/Huff, Schad,
Fong, Chair/Flamenbaum
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
-1
August 14, 1995
PUBLIC HEARING:
.... . .,. . - -- . ,.... ___I . _1 a - ---+u J.0 u..-um..�a�oaa.,id-.o
Page 9 Planning Commission
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 95-2. This is a request to
locate an unmanned remediation compound at the existing
mini -market. The purpose of the facility is to remove,
by vapor extraction, petroleum by-products which have
leached into the soil as a result of gasoline storage
tanks -which had been used as a part of a gasoline station
previously operating on-site.
Property Location: 3302 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard
Applicant: Ralph Moran, P.O. Box 6037, Artesia,
CA 90702
Property Owner: ARCO
Chair/Flamenbaum stated he has a leasehold interest in
the property, recused himself and left the dais. The
gavel was passed to VC/Huff for this item.
AP/Searcy stated the General Pian .land use designation
for the subject site is OP (Professional Office) and the
site is located in Zone CPD (Commercial Planned
Development). The use is conditionally permitted within
the zone pursuant to section 22.28.150 of .Title 22 of
Planning and Zoning Code.
The project site is currently developed with an AM/PM
Minimart with self -serve gasoline facilities. The site
is served by Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road.
The development of the site was approved by the Planning
Commission and development of the site was completed
approximately two years ago. During the preparation for
development of the site there was a determination made
that gasoline storage tanks previously located on-site,
had leaked petroleum hydrocarbons into the soil. Site
development was allowed to proceed with the understanding
that future remediation of the site would be required.
The applicant has completed the testing of the site and
has determined the plume of contamination. The
preliminary tests indicate that the contamination extends
across the area currently used as the driveway aisle,
parking area, and into the public right of way.
The available techniques for remediation of contaminated
soil include removal of the soil and deposition of the
soil in an approved location. Another method would
include soil aeration, a method which requires removal of
the soil and spreading the soil in a manner that allows
oxygen to commingle with the sample and speed the
decomposition of the contaminated compounds. This method
�_k 777=_
August 14, 1995 Page 10 Planning commission
can be accelerated with the application of bacteria
specifically developed with an appetite for hydrocarbons.
A much more economical method is implementation of a
vapor extraction system.
A vapor extraction system involves establishing an
underground system of extraction wells that connect with
an above ground unit that encompasses the control panels,
contamination receptacles and air stack. When the unit
is in operation, the hydrocarbons are leached from the
soil at ,variable rates,, transferred to the receptacle or
furnace and the contaminates are then disposed of by
incineration. The incineration i is, conducted in
conjunction with a mixture of natural gas within the
unit. By-products include water and air and are disposed
of in concurrence with South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD) requirements.
The length of time for the remediation is difficult to
estimate. The f irst 90 percent of the hydrocarbons
removed from the site will occur generally within the
first six months. The remaining contaminates may take an
additional period that can extend as long as a few years.
The soil materials and other factors will influence the
progress over the remaining period.
The maintenance of the system will be fairly consistent
throughout service to the site. Vehicular traffic
related to the project will not exceed 10 total trips a
year and will not have an identifiable impact to parking
or circulation on-site.
The system operates on the principle -of pumping
hydrocarbons from the soil and consuming them within the
unit. In conducting this procedure exhaust and
condensation are produced as by-products. The
condensation is filtered and returned to the ground but
the exhaust is filtered and vented to the atmosphere via
a 13 foot air stack. The pressurized emission escaping
the stack, in conjunction with the other equipment
operating the unit, will generate a sound at a noise
level of approximately 85 decibels. With mitigation
measures implemented within the design of the unit, the
sound produced by the system will -be reduced by 15
decibels at the site and will produce noise levels
commensurate with ambient levels 20 feet from the site.
The system proposed to remediate the contamination at the
subject site is an efficient cost effective method' of
soil remediation. The plume of contamination is
widespread over the site and extends off-site as well.
The system is self contained and requires little
maintenance and site visitation. The primary impacts
-August 14, 1995 Page il' Planning Commission
i
associated with this type of use revolve around the
exhaust produced by the unit.
The exhaust is required to meet all AQMD air quality
standards. The sound levels produced by the pressurized
emissions, unconstrained, can produce noise levels
upwards of 85 decibels. The design of the system has
been modified to reduce noise by 17.5 percent. Twenty
feet (20' ) from the project site the noise level conforms
to the ambient noise levels. The unit is located over
200 feet to the nearest residence and will have no direct
noise impact on the development.
The unit will operate at high efficiency for the first
six months removing more than 90 percent of the
hydrocarbons. The remainder of the operation time is
presently indeterminate as various factors will affect
the long term duration of use.
Pursuant to the terms of California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) this project has been determined to be
categorically exempt pursuant to section 15301 (f) and
15303.
This application was advertised in the Inland Valley
Daily Bulletin,.and San Gabriel -Valley Tribune on August
4, 1995 and all property owners (28) within a 500 radius
were mailed notices of the public hearing.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the
public hearing, receive testimony and adopt the attached
draft Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 95-
2.
AP/Searcy referred the Planning Commission to the 11
Conditions of Approval and cited condition 18 as evidence
that staff has given latitude in making certain that this
project is compatible with adjacent neighbors.
Responding to C/Schad, AP/Searcy stated the proposed
system is not the same system that is running next to the
Y Y g
theater at Country Hills Towne Centre.
AP/Searcy, responding to VC/Huff, stated the contaminates
have leached into the water table. It is difficult to
determine how far the plume has extended into the water
table. Vapors have been cemented over and are not
leaking into the air. The plume is approximately seven
feet (71) below the surface. The dimensions of the pad
r., for the incineration unit are 15 feet by 8 1/2 feet, and
12 feet high enclosure with a 13 foot stack. The County
will determine the threshold of the mitigation measures.
- -
777"
August 14, 1995 Page 12 Planning Commission
The site will be monitored by computer and visited once
a month for maintenance.
VC/Huff declared the public hearing open.
Bruce Flamenbaum, a Diamond Bar citizen, stated he has a
leasehold interest in the property immediately adjacent
to the project site. He indicated he 'favors locating the
equipment on the opposite side of the ARCO station to
that proposed by,the applicant.
Christian Faulk, CE'Thomas-Company representing ARCO,
stated the applicant chose the location for the equipment
because it was determined '.to' be the least visible
location to vehicular traffic.
j Ken Allen, ARCO Products Company, stated the location
1J proposed by Mr. Flamenbaum may not belong to ARCO.
Therefore, the permit process could be. lengthy. In
addition, there is a sewer easement in the area which
could interfere with the necessary underground piping.
Responding to C/Schad, Mr. Allen stated the unit is
-contained in a semi -sound proofed enclosure. In
addition, acoustic panels can be mounted on the interior
of the enclosure.
Mr. Allen stated the applicant is driven by the
conditions of approval, specifically citing Condition 18.
Mr. Faulk, responding -to C/Meyer stated an electrical
meter is installed to keep the cost of'the installation
separate from the dealer. In addition, the meter assists
in monitoring the efficiency of the unit. The average
installation time is one to one and one-half years with
the maximum time being two years. ARCO is interested in
the maximization of time since the cost to run the unit
is approximately $6,000 per month.
VC/Huff declared the public hearing closed.
C/Meyer stated he is in agreement with the proposed
location. He suggested a masonry wall similar to the
trash enclosure be built around the proposed facility.
In addition, he suggested power poles be eliminated and
the facility be served underground. He proposed two 36
inch boxed trees to screen the proposed facility.
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by C/Schad for
conditional approval of the project subject to a masonry
wall enclosure, elimination of the overhead electrical
and installation of at least two 36 inch box trees.
August 14, 1995 Page 13 Planning Commission
r �
C/Fong stated that, instead of masonry block wall, he
suggested minimizing additional masonry walls or
construction, and proposed the applicant be allowed to
fence the equipment with temporary fencing. He suggested
a temporary redwood picket fence which would be less
expensive.
C/Meyer stated he would oppose C/Fong's suggestion since
the facility is new and built of masonry material. A
masonry wall to enclose the unit would cost approximately
$800 and would be more consistent with the current
facility.
Mr. Faulk, in response to C/Schad stated the motor is
approximately 15 horsepower. He indicated he did not
believe it would be a problem to secure an underground
power source.
Responding to C/Meyer, Mr. Faulk stated he believes the
chain link fence with wooden slats is more aesthetically
pleasing than the masonry wall and it is easier to
_ remove. He indicated he is also concerned that explosive
materials might be contained in a confined area. He
further stated he would propose shrubs in place of trees
because the trees tend to turn brown from the fumes.
In response to CDD/DeStefano, Mr. Faulk stated it would
take approximately one to two weeks to return to the City
with drawings to incorporate the proposed amendments.
CDD/DeStefano stated that with the number of doubts with
respect to the items expressed by the Commissioners it
would be appropriate for the Commission to consider a
continuance of this item.
Responding to C/Meyer, Mr. Faulk stated they would prefer
to proceed with the facility. He further stated that if
it is the Commissions desire, the applicant will install
a masonry wall. He indicated he does not feel it is in
the public interest to delay the project.
C/Meyer responded to Mr. Allen that a six foot high
enclosure would be adequate. Mr. Allen suggested that
the Commission consider shrubs in place of the box trees.
C/Meyer agreed that the applicant should continue the
current landscaping and include the enclosure.
C/Meyer reiterated his motlion to adopt the Resolution
approving Conditional Use permit No. 95-2 subject to a
six foot high masonry enclosure, elimination of overhead
electrical and landscaping for the enclosed area that is
consistent with the current landscaping.
August 14, 1995
Page 14 Planning Commission
C/Schad suggested that soundproofing panels be installed
on the interior of the block wall. Mr. Faulk responded
that the block wall is a tremendous sound barrier and
should not require additional soundproofing. However, if
the noise level is found to be problem, the applicant
will take the necessary measures to mitigate the problem.
The motion to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 95-2
subject to the stated amendments was approved 4-0 with
the following roll call:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
Meyer, VC/Huff, Schad,
Fong
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
Chair/Flamenbaum
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
Chair/Flamenbaum returned to the dais.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
VC/Huff questioned whether the Grand Avenue median is being
watered regularly during rehabilitation. CDD/DeStefano
responded that he understands there is a problem with the
water line. He believes the median is currently, being hand
watered.
VC/Huff requested a calendar of events for the Planning
Commission.
VC/Huff asked for a status on his earlier request that the
Planning Commission review current projects on a Saturday
field trip.
VC/Huff requested an update with respect to recommendations
for proposed high school ingress/egress:
CDD/DeStefano responded to VC/Huff that the review of projects
was to coincide with the Development Code process. Staff land
the Planning Commission agreed that the Commission should
review projects that have been developed as a result) of
current codes to assist in deciding whether those codes are
appropriate for the City's future projects. Staff indicated
the tour could include other cities.- Staff requested that the
Commissioner's provide staff with a list of projects in other
cities they would include in the Development Code process.1 As
previously related to the Commission regarding the second
access road for the Diamond Ranch High School, there are three
road alignments that are possible: From Golden Springs Drive
cutting through the property commonly known as the "Eric
Stone" site, paralleling the 60 Freeway and entering the
property at the rear of the high school; from one of the cul-
de-sac's off of Armitos; and the end of Deep Springs Drive
_. , ..
,_r �7
1
August 14, 1995
-3._-ci.�ecse�l�.-._.�hL-�,z �•,tl,,�__�.� -- .+. iiaM IN n...H46n Ii�iMnmlL_.—____- _ -__-. __..�, ____ _ _ -_-
Page 1°5' Planning Commission
where there is a drainage structure. The school district is
considering the third option as a second access point which
would be designed solely for emergency purposes. The City is
interested in a second access road, however, the City is not
interested in paying for such a road. The district would
prefer that the road be constructed at the City's expense. It
has been estimated that, de�ending on the route, the cost
could be $3,000,000. to $10,000,000. He indicated he has been
informed that the City will not investigate this item any
further until there is some type of agreement'proposed.
Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, CDD/DeStefano stated there is
no authorization to the City's Engineering staff to expend
City funds for these types of road alignments. Attempting to
plan for the eventual connection of the school to Diamond Bar
is a good one. However, the City's position at this time is
that there will be no City funds expended for the school
project. Some streets were designed in a conceptual manner at
the time the concept plan for Tres Hermans was completed.
There is only one cul-de-sac that would not involve the
purchase of a residential dwelling. All other cul-de-sac's
would involve the elimination of one or more houses. The
r consideration in this matter is the use of City resources for
a school district project.
C/Fong stated he noticed at the northeast corner of Diamond
Bar Boulevard - and Cold Springs Lane that the existing
apartment development is still displaying old banners and
wooden signs. He asked that staff review this location to
determine if the signs conform to the City's sign code.
C/Meyer commended the City Council for adopting a General Plan
recognizing the fact that there is not a General Plan in
existence that will please loo percent of the population. At
a minimum, the first rock of the foundation is in place. In
addition, he commended staff for their stellar efforts in
moving forward with this seemingly lost cause and doing it
with a minimum amount of personnel and a maximum amount of
effort.
Chair/Flamenbaum presented staff and Planning Commissioners
with a copy of "Proposed General Plan Provision for the
Conservation of Oak Woodlands" which was produced by the
California Oak Woodlands Conservation Society to be considered
for policies and proposed language for the proposed Tree
Ordinance.
INFORMATION ITEMS:
1. Status Report regarding implementation of General Plan
(i.e. Tree Preservation Ordinance, Slope Density
Ordinance, Development Code, etc.
August 19, 1995
Page 16 Planning Commission
ANNOUNCEMENTS - None
ADJOURNMENT:'
Chairman Flamenbaum declared the meeting adjourned at 900
p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
J&DeStefano
Cvel pment Director
Attest:
Bruce Flamenbaum
Chairman
4wi..�__.vi.wf..ea,�,Nt:Efida�a
�'�
CDD/DeStefano stated that with the adoption of the
General Plan staff is beginning the implementation
process. The Planning Commission will begin with the
creation of a new Development Code. The City recently
adopted a new Municipal Code which creates- a better
structure for the Development Code with respect to the
code sections, citations and the overall outline. Staff
proposes to'bring individual ordinances to the Planning
Commission such as the Tree 'Preservation Ordinance, a
Slope Density Ordinance, the Parking Ordinance, etc. The
City is close to issuing the Request for Proposal to
development code consultants. The effort to produce the
previously mentioned ordinances will be a staff driven
effort. Staff will begin the public notice process for
these items to be agendized for 'the ''September' 11 Planning
Commission°mseting.
CDD/DeStefano continued that in addition to copies of the
General Plan, the Planning Commission has been provided
copies of the annotated version of the Political Reform
Act which discusses campaign contributions, disclosures,
gifts, etc.In addition, staff. is transmitting
information'o the Commissioners received from the July
't
San Gabriel Planning Committee, meeting attended by
VC/Huff and AstP/Lungu.' The subject discussed was 015
Ways to Fix the Suburbs".
ANNOUNCEMENTS - None
ADJOURNMENT:'
Chairman Flamenbaum declared the meeting adjourned at 900
p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
J&DeStefano
Cvel pment Director
Attest:
Bruce Flamenbaum
Chairman
4wi..�__.vi.wf..ea,�,Nt:Efida�a