Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/11/1995r MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 11, 1995 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at 7:00 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 Chairman Flamenbaum. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners: Chairman Flamenbaum, Vice Chairman Huff, Commissioners Schad and Fong. Absent: Commissioner Meyer Also Present: Community Development Director James DeStefano; Senior Planner Robert Searcy; Assistant Planner Ann Lungu; Recording Secretary Carol Dennis. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS - None CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Minutes of August 14, 1995. VC/Huff made a motion, seconded by C/Flamenbaum, to approve the minutes of August 14, 1995 as submitted. The motion was approved 4-0 with the following roll call: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Huff, Chair /Flamenbaum, Schad, Fong NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer OLD BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS: 1. Tree Preservation Ordinance Study Session. Chair/ Flamenbaum suggested the Commission establish content issues for the Tree Preservation Ordinance and request staff to prepare the proposed language. He further proposed that j the Commissioners determine the specific trees and whether they are to be preserved, added or eliminated, and who will be requested to comply with the ordinance. For purposes of discussion, he suggested that the Commission consider possible incentives the City might wish to offer in exchange for September 11, 1995 Page 2 Planning Commission compliance with the ordinance and what penalties might be imposed for non-compliance. C/Schad stated he had been working to implement a Tree Preservation Ordinance since Diamond Bar became a City. In June, 1989 he submitted a proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance based upon his findings from a number of different cities: San Marino, Los Angeles, Rancho Cucomonga, Upland, etc. He further stated that the intent of his proposed ordinance is to preserve Diamond Bar's natural features and, in particular,' to preserve all indigenous trees and place controls on historical and scenic trees. The ordinance should encompass all trees. C/Fong stated the ordinance could encompass all trees in the City with varying degrees of protection. The native trees should have priority with a greater degree of protection. In his opinion, the ordinance should encompass all trees with particular emphasis on the native oak, black walnut, sycamore, and toyon trees:' The ordinance, should also include the heritage eucalyptus. He further tatedlthe ordinance should apply to certain trees and not all trees. VC/Huff stated his idea of a tree ordinance is to make certain Diamond Bar has beautiful trees. In his opinion, this'woiild include encouraging people to plant trees. He further stated he would like to see the following trees protected: oak, walnut, and sycamore. He would like to selectively protect the slow growing trees. C/ Schad stated the preservation factor will have to encompass location, aesthetics, etc: He indicated the arroyo willow Iis a unique species. There are only two areas in Diamond Bar where the arroyo willow is found: upper Sycamore Canyon and an area of Sandstone Canyon which has been destroyed. C/Fong indicated that an arborist could determine which existing trees should be preserved. For example, Cold Springs Lane between Castle Rock Road and Brea Canyon Road is lined with Canary Island pine trees. These trees are more than'20 years old and should be preserved. Chair/Flamenbaum stated an ordinance could state certain categories could be 'preserved in toto and other categories could be individually tagged for preservation. C/Huff stated the community is in one small segment of time. What is now in effect is important to the current Commission. However, unless there is an ordinance that encourages planting without punitive consequences, 100 years hence the City may not enjoy the benefit of large trees. C/Flamenbaum stated that in order to avoid selective compliance, some trees may be prevented from growing into the 11 September 11, 1995 F- } Page 3 Planning commission protection of the ordinance by being cut back. He indicated he would not like to see this happen. He proposed the tree ordinance should encompass all trees but in different varieties and to varying degrees. For example, all live oak trees might be under category "X", all sycamore trees of a size greater than "X" are under category A, and all sycamore trees of a lesser size than "X" are under category B. In an effort to be proactive rather than reactive, he indicated he would favor an ordinance that includes all trees. As a part of the City's Development Code or Tree ordinance, for every house built or for every square foot of house erected, "X" number of trees must be erected within a certain number of feet of the right-of-way. The General Plan states "Develop a Tree Preservation Ordinance that requires preservation of native trees. In addition, the ordinance should emphasize retention of mature sycamore, pepper, arroyo willow and significant trees of -cultural value. The ordinance should provide a replacement and relocation mechanism for trees". He stated he would like to go beyond this statement and include that, as part of new development, the developer be required to plant trees. C/Schad referred the Commission to Section 66-19 of his proposed -ordinance. I C/Huff concurred that he would like -the City to be proactive. He stated he is philosophically opposed to another level of government policing for private citizens. However, the City must consider the trees that are in the public right-of-way to be certain they are properly trimmed and maintained. This can be done by using a carrot or a stick and he would prefer to use a carrot. He suggested that if Diamond Bar spends the funds necessary to become a "Tree City USA" it could send out fliers to the public encouraging: them to trim and advising the proper methods for trimming. He indicated -he would favor a proactive educational process to gain community support. Chair/Flamenbaum suggested the ordinance be proactive. Without objection, the Commission concurred. C/Fong recommended the City require developers to plant trees as part of the project improvements. Chair/Flamenbaum responded to VC/Huff that, in his opinion, there are not enough trees in Diamond Bar. In twenty years when the current trees mature, there may be sufficient trees in the City. Most neighborhoods have no trees. Most homes have only bushes and possibly one tree in the -rear yard area. The ordinance will not apply to current homes. However, the ordinance can incorporate future building. He suggested that when the City removes a tree it could be replaced. September 11, 1995 Page 4 Planning commission VC/Huff stated the Commission needs to determine what kinds of trees will be planted. , C/Fong stated other cities have shade trees in developments and parkways - Diamond Bar does not. The City needs to be more proactive. The Development Code should require trees in developments and parkways— Chair/ Flamenbaum arkways. Chair/Flamenbaum reiterated the Commission's concurrence to have a proactive tree ordinance to include the preservation,. of certain trees and encourage the planting of successive and new trees. C/Schad referred the Commission to Section 66-19 of his proposed tree ordinance in .response to Chair/ Flamenbaumfs concern regarding the definition of "'significant" trees. Chair/Flamenbaum stated Section 66-19 defines what is determined to be significant for the present time. However, he is concerned with"20 years hence when the new trees have been eliminated because they have matured to a size which will approach the protection of the ordinance. In his opinion, the new plantings will have to be protected so that they re'ch maturity. VC/Huff-stated the impetus for having a tree ordinance ought to encourage and provide incentives for the planting of trees. Cities make the mistake of planning selfishly for what they want now without preparing for decades hence. Chair/Flamenbaum responded to C/Schad that, setting aside the trees that are to be preserved (oak, black walnut, etc.), to assure the replanting of certain species, the ordinance could clearly state that certain incentives would be granted lto developers and homeowners for the planting of certain species. For example, "Dear Homeowner/Developer, if you plant any one of the following species of tree, 'you are entitled to receive a credit of "X" dollars or a coupon for a hamburger, etc." This is not to say that homeowners cannot plant whatever tree they wish to plant. C/Schad suggested that an arborist should be consulted to determine the species and quantity that should be encouraged for purposes of planting and replacing trees. VC/Huff stated he would like to see the City earmark additional resources for the preservation and planting of trees in public areas. C/Schad suggested setting specific standards be set for the City to follow. He would like to see public participation encouraged. I =-r --- 1M MIS_ 1.140.4n,kd.R., 4.... --. - September 11, 1995 Page 5 , Planning Commission Chair/Flamenbaum proposed the ordinance contain a requirement that the City be mandated or compelled to plant trees in any and all public works projects. C/Fong stated the preservation portion of the ordinance should apply to all entities (private, public, commercial, etc.) equally. The Commission concurred. C/Schad suggested the replacement ratio be 4:1. Chair/ Flamenbaum responded he would like to have the arborist determine the ratio. Chair/Flamenbaum invited members of the audience to come forward and state their views. Arun Virginkar, 23464 Coyote Springs Drive, stated he was recently appointed to the Traffic and Transportation Commission and is present to observe the proceedings of the Planning Commission. He indicated he would like to see tree - lined streets in the City. Chair/Flamenbaum directed staff to formulate a tree ordinance utilizing the Commission's input. -"' RECESS: Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 8:25 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Flamenbaum reconvened the meeting at 8:35 p.m. 2. Parking Ordinance Study session. Chair/Flamenbaum suggested the Commission consider the following:- parking "space" ordinance, off-street parking, parking lot parking (to include or exclude compact parking spaces), percentage of spaces, and employee parking (encourage or discourage). The Commission concurred that the ordinance should include off-street parking. C/Fong stated he prefers limiting parking areas and encouraging the use of parking, structures to accommodate more parking by using less ground space for commercial. VC/Huff stated he would like to encourage bike parking. Chair/Flamenbaum suggested incentives could be offered for fewer parking spaces. C/Fong suggested that the parking ordinance could be designed to limit development and size of office buildings. September 11, 1995 Page 6 Planning Commission Chair/Flamenbaum stated he is concerned about limiting the size of buildings in the Gateway Corporate Center. C/Fong stated there are special considerations for industrial that need to be.researched independent of commercial. Chair/Flamenbaum reiterated the Commission's desire to walk a fine line between encouraging business/commercial structures and minimizing parking spaces to promote mass transit without discouraging business participation. With respect to industrial parking, the Commission referred staff to the Los Angeles County code. VC/Huff suggested assembly uses be granted a 3:1 parking ratio. CDD/DeStefano indicated tandem parking could be considered for certain assembly uses. Chair/Flamenbaum suggested churches determine their parking needs and that the issue should be ignored in the parking ordinance. VC/Huff stated that if churches were not allowed to utilize commercial parking they would be encouraged to purchase prime commercialro ert for parking. l� P Y P g CDD/DeStefano stated a church in the Fullerton area acquired a 5 to 7 acre commercial center to accommodate their parking needs which removed the center from the City's tax rolls and eliminated the sales tax generation to the City. Chair/Flamenbaum suggested the ordinance could eliminate all street parking and transfer the burden to the property owner. VC/Huff stated there should be standards. The City can be judicious in interpreting the standards and grant variances. In his opinion, the City needs guidelines. The Commission concurred that the ordinance should contain guidelines for all entities. CDD/DeStefano indicated that compact parking spaces tend to work for commercial office, parking where there are "all -day parkers". Compact spaces tend to work less favorably where there is frequent parking movement. Some cities have incorporated a hybrid of compromise between compact and full- size spaces. C/Fong stated he favors a percentage of compact parking spaces for commercial office use only and the elimination of compact parking for retail. September 11, 1995 Page 7 Planning Commission C/Schad stated he favors no compact parking spaces. VC/Huff stated he may favor compact parking spaces as a variance. Chair/Flamenbaum concurred. Regarding landscaping for parking areas, the Commission concurred in favor of strip landscaping throughout the parking lot rather than pocket or single area landscaping. CDD/DeStefano stated the 1:5 ratio for planting applies to the number of trees rather than location. VC/Huff requested other city parking lots be included as a part of the Planning Commission field trip. The Commission concurred the City currently has no need for parking meters. PUBLIC HEARING: - None PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: VC/Huff thanked staff for responding to his inquiry regarding the lack of water for the Grand Avenue island between Diamond Bar Boulevard and Golden Springs Drive. SP/Searcy responded to C/Fong that staff contacted the developer with respect to the -signs at the northeast corner of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Cold Springs Lane. The developer contends the signs were approved as part of the Los Angeles County approval for the project. Staff is currently negotiating with the developer to determine a termination period. Staff contends the sign is an existing non -conforming sign. Staff will continue to negotiate to resolve the matter with the 'developer. INFORMATION ITEMS: CDD/DeStefano requested that the Commissioners provide their list of specific projects or cities to be included in the field trip for the Planning Commission as good and bad examples that Diamond Bar might wish to embrace or reject. Date and time for the field trip is yet to be determined. ANNOUNCEMENTS - None ,September ii; 1995 Page 8 Planning Commission ,a ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct, Chairman Flamenbaum declared the meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Attest: y - Bruce Flamenbaum Chairman Respectfully Submitted, �p es DeStefano Community Devel pment Director