HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/26/1996.. ���..,,,.,�_._ r i. -- - ri _- _. - �.,,���I• Il Fxnrw411H>6nn.xnln4axwu�e�«IL
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 26, 1996
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Goldenberg called the meeting to order at 7:15 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
McManus.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Chairman Goldenberg, Vice Chairman Ruzicka,
Commissioners McManus and Schad.
Absent: Commissioner Fong.
Also Present: Acting Community Development Director
Catherine Johnson, Assistant Planner Ann
Lungu, City Attorney William Rudell, and
Recording Secretary Carol Dennis.
DEVELOPMENT CODB PUBLIC WORKSHOP - a workshop for community
residents and business owners to help identify issues related to
how the City regulates/oversees future development in concert with
the recently adopted General Plan. This is the first in a series
of public workshops being held to receive citizen's ideas about how
to better serve the public's interests in matters of property
development. Future workshops will be announced.
Chair/Goldenberg stated that one of the Planning Commission's major
goals is to present to the City of Diamond Bar a Development Code
that will provide an incentive to residents, businesses and
developers, to fully utilize the guidelines of the Code. The
finished product will help enhance property values, encourage
business development, and allow property development to remain
within the guidelines of the existing General Plan.
SP/Johnson stated the City of Diamond Bar is currently operating
under the Los Angeles County code which was adopted upon
incorporation. Since adoption, the City has expanded and modified
the code to reflect local issues and the mandates of State
legislation. Until recently the City operated without an adopted
General Plan. As a result, development has not been guided by
policies that are reflective of a General Plan which defines the
needs of the community. The City adopted its General Plan in July,
M1995. The General Plan establishes strategies for implementing the
City's vision for its future. This vision includes the retention
of its hillside community character, the preservation of open
space, reduction of regional traffic impacts on local streets, the
promotion of viable commercial activity, and the provision of well
August 26, 1996 Page 2 Planning Commission
maintained and attractive housing. The overriding goal of the
General Plan, reflected in the Vision Statement, is the creation of
a community environment which nurtures social, cultural, religious,
educational and recreational opportunities for its citizens., One
of the major implementation tools of the General Plan is the
Development Code. The Development Code achieves this
implementation in a number of ways. For example, ',theCity's
General Plan identifies the retention of hillside community
character' as one of its primary goals and further includes a
strategy requiring creation of a Slope Density Ordinance' limiting
the number of dwelling ,units within hillside areas. The slope
density formula and its related standards will be included, as part
of the new Development Code. Another goal is the promotion' of
viable',,;commercial activity. The existing commercial zoning
categories will be reviewed and, if .necessary, be renamed and
consolidated to accommodate the commercial needs of the City. The
Development Code will include an updated list of permitted,uses'to
reflect changes in technology and lifestyles, such as regulations
addressing telecommunications facilities, automated car washes, and
more specific standards for uses such as fast food restaurants and
daycare centers. The Development Code will include approval
processes for''' commercial, industrial and residential uses. One of
the City's goals is to streamline and simplify these processes and
provide clearerl and more specific standards for development. Staff'''
believes' simplifying the process will encourage businesses to
locate', in!, the City. The new comprehensive Development Code is
envisi'on'ed to be a single development services related document
integrating' the applicable portions of ;the existing code and
recently adopted ordinances into a single development services
volume which includes zoning and subdivision regulations,
development standards, and design guidelines.
SP/Johnson continued stating tonight's workshop is to kickoff a
series of meetings and workshops toward formulating a Development
Code. She introduced representatives from the three participating
consulting groups: Urban Design Studio, Jacobson & Wack, and
Crawford''Multari &'Starr.
Ron Pflugrath, Urban Design Studio indicated tonight's presentation
focuses on three major areas: 1) An opportunity for the Planning
Commission and the public to meet the consulting groups; provide a
Scope of Work schedule and how the community can be involved;, and
for the consultants to receive input from the Planning Commission
and the public.
Bruce Jacobson, Jacobson & Wack, stated a Development Code
comprises the current zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance,
references the State's Subdivision Map Act, and references any ;
design guidelines that have been adopted as part of the City's
current Zoning Ordinance. The Development Code may also contain
unique needs and considerations for special areas of the City, such
as hillsides. The Development Code allows for the compilation of
all of the individual documents currently referenced by the City.
August 26, 1996 Page 3'`'` Planning Commission
Beyond incorporating all of the documents into one "binder", the
Development Code must be internally consistent. The design
guidelines incorporated in the Development Code will be prepared by
the City staff. The consultants will properly locate and integrate
the design guidelines within the Development Code. The Development
Code user will refer to the City's General Pian as a separate
document. The challenge is to be certain that the Development Code
is consistent with the General Plan. As a result, the Development
Code will likely include purpose statements for each of the land
uses designated in the General Plan. The policies and goals
established in the General Plan will be considered within the
Development Code. The Development Code will address the City's
special areas of concern such as hillside development, noise,
grading, certain types.of housing, etc. Emphasis will be placed on
streamlining the building permit process. Mr. Jacobson stated the
true test of a Development Code is whether the document is user
friendly. He further stated that as consultants they can provide
the' city with a completed Development Code that will provide
relative ease of use in locating items, and give a clear
understanding of what the items require of the property
owner/applicant, as well as what is 'expected of staff to meet the
needs of the property owner.
Mr. Pflugrath outlined the four components of the Development Code
preparation:
1) Need Identification and Document Review
1.1. Startup meetings
1.2 Document review
1.3 Staff workshops
1.4 Public outreach
1.5 Planning Commission workshop
1.6 Phase 1 report
1.7 Draft format and outline of code
2) Administrative draft Development Code
2.1 Zoning district provisions
2.2 Administrative provisions
2.3 Development standards (general and specific)
2.4 Subdivision regulations
2.5 Design guidelines (prepared by staff)
2.6 Complete administrative draft
3) Public Review Draft and Final Draft Code
3.1 Public review draft
3.2 Planning Commission
review draft
3.3 Planning Commission
hearings
3.4 Final Development Code
workshop revisions; public
and City Council public
August 26, 1996
Page 4 planning commission
4) Electronic Code - hypertext version
Mr. Pflugrath stated that,a submittal 'generally takes about one
month of preparation and one month of staff review,. Once the draft
is completed, public and Planning Commission review, commences.
Four Planning Commission workshops and seven public workshop
sessions are scheduled. At the end of the workshop schedule, a
third public draft is 1prepared ,for approximately two Planning
Commission'Public;Hearing meetings and three City Council Public
Hearing meetings to.complete the process., Upon completion of the
Public Heating process, a final draft Development Code is prepared.
In addition, a hypertext interactive version, will be completed for
use on the Internet.
Mr. Pflugrath stated that to properly complete the Public Hearing
process, he anticipates the preparation of the City's Development
Code will take approximately 18 months.' He emphasized that the
process is not a rethinking or„ a restructuring of the' City's
General'Plan. The General Plan is used as a tool of direction for
the City's Development Code.
Paul Crawford, Crawford Multari & Starr, reiterated that the
Development Code is the City's primary tool for implementing the
General Plan. Whereas the General Plan is a broad brush
description of what the community wants to become, the Development
Code provides the details for development decisions, development
project designs, and land use establishment and operation. The
consultant's objective is to create 'a document that is "user
friendly". He presented a preliminary outline which reflects a six
part Development Code. The concept is that the code should be
organized so the most frequently utilized information is at the
beginning, organized into tables, concise in language, and
profusely illustrated. Using this concept, the code begins with a"
a six or seven page article explaining how the code works, what it
applies to, and what kinds of activities might be exempt from its
provisions. The second article discusses the material the public
is typically most interested in - the zoning districts and the uses
of land allowed within the zoning districts ("what can I do with my
land and what permit is required?) reflecting the land use
categories that the General Plan establishes. This article would
be expanded to provide regulations and standards for implementing
the General Plan categories. Included within this article are
Residential Districts, Commercial/ Industrial Districts, Special
Purpose Districts and Combining and,Oyerlay Zoning Districts. He
suggested the Land Use categories would appear down the left side
of a matrix with the Zoning Districts listed across the top of the
matrix. The Zoning Districts and Allowable Land:Uses chapter would
also contain standards for development relevant to --the particular
Zoning District. He presented a sample matrix for public viewing.
Article III, Site Planning and General Development Standards,
discusses standards that do not apply,to any particular zone,,but
may apply to development in any zoning district. Article III
P
August 26, 1996 1,Page 5 Planning Commission
expands to talk about information regarding Fences, Hedges and
Walls; Height Limitations and Exceptions; Hillside Development
Standards; Home Occupation Standards; Landscaping and Irrigation
Standards; Nonconforming Uses, Structures and Parcels; Off -Street
Parking and Loading Standards; Solid Waste/Recyclable Materials
Storage; Telecommunications Facilities (i.e. antennae); Tree
Preservation, and Standards for Specific Uses (service station, car
wash). Provisions contained in the back of the Code are provisions
related to procedural aspects of the Development Code
administration. He indicated that a "Subdivision Regulations"
Article should be added to the outline between Article III and Part
IV as shown on the preliminary outline. The administrative
provisions talk about how development permit applications are
prepared, filed and processed. It contains criteria for approval
or denial, authority for imposing conditions of approval, and
identifies requirements for scheduling Public Hearing Notices and
concludes by discussing provisions enforcement of the Development
Code. The final part of the book would contain definitions or a
glossary of the terms used in the Development Code. Mr. Crawford
stated the Development Code will appear to look like a reference
work with the glossary and index at the back of the book in order
that people can locate relative information in a variety of ways.
C/McManus asked if, as a business owner, he could go�to City Hall
y and access information on the Cityfs computer informing him what
documents need to be completed and the process for obtaining a
permit.
Mr. Crawford responded to C/McManus that the approach to. the
Development Code is to provide the document in two forms : 1) a
printed hard copy for purchase or review, and 2) an electronic
version that will link to the City's web page and allow anyone to
access the document from any location including a public access
terminal in the City's Community Development Department anal/or'
branch libraries.
C/McManus asked if the Development Code will attempt to eliminate
duplication of documentation.
Mr. Crawford responded to C/McManus that the Development Code
should eliminate internal conflicts between provisions.
C/McManus asked if the electronic system would allow him to
generate a list of all documents required to accomplish a specific
task.
Mr. Crawford responded to C/McManus that the electronic version of
the Development Code will be designed to accept key word commands
to search the document.
C/Schad asked if the proposed schedule for compiling the
Development Code is flexible.
August 26, 1996 Page 6 Planning Commission
Mr. Crawford responded to C/Schad that the schedule is designed to
accommodate maximum public participation and is intended to be
realistic.
C/Schad asked what would occur df in the process of clarifying the
Development Code the consultants found what they.felt to be flaws
within the General Plan.
Mr. Crawford responded to C/Schad that the consultant's role s that will
be to bring to the attention of staff any.
identified. He reiterated' that -the consultants have written, a
number of Development Codes and, Zoning ordinances immediately
following the adoption of City's General Plans. often
implementation :of a General Plan provision may turn out, to be
problematic.', He indicated they would present alternatives to staff
and suggest that a discussion oftheimatter take place�before the
Planning Commission and City Council.
Chair/Goldenberg stated to Mr. Pflugrath that the Planning
Commission would like to present the final document to the City
Council by December,1997. He asked Mr. ,Pflugrath to explain Item
1. 4, Public outreach, under 1. Needs Identification and Document
Review of the Proposed Work Program.
Mr. Pflugrath responded to Chair/ Goldenberg that the public
outreach program is a series of events including tonight's
workshop, the survey which was compiled and. distributed, newspaper
articles and announcements, and meetings with special interest
groups.
Mr. Pflugrath responded to Chair/Goldenberg that in his opinion,
the document can be completed in 16 months. What drives Ithe
overall schedule is the amount of time staff is allowed to assist
with review of the administrative sections. A great deal of"
staff's time is needed to complete the review process. Public
workshops will require the Planning Commission's time and
dedication. Saturday morning workshops are usually the most
effective use of time.
Chair/Goldenberg stated the Planning Commission will look to the
consultants to maintain a pace for presenting the document to City
Council by December, 1997.
VC/Ruzicka asked how long it took to prepare the Development Code
for Mission Viejo.
Mr. Jacobson responded that the draft Development Code was complete
in less than two years. He stated that the document was completed
several years ago and the review process came to stalemate at the
Planning Commission level. Although portions of the document have
been reviewed and approved by the City Council, the entire document
has not yet been approved by the Council.
ylE
August 26, 1996 Page 7 Planning Commission
Mr. Pflugrath stated Mission Viejo elected not to review the
document in a public forum. When the document got to the Planning
Commission, the public had a lot of questions. The original
proposal included a series of workshops.
Mr. Pflugrath concurred with VC/Ruzicka that experience has taught
him that certain criteria including public input needs to be
incorporated in the process to bring the document to final approval
in a timely manner.
Chair/Goldenberg asked for public comment.
Craig Clute, 21217 Fountain Springs Road, asked if the Development
Code will apply to existing developments and/or redevelopments.
Mr. Crawford responded to Mr. Clute that because the document will
include development standards covering all aspects of development
in the community, rules applying to new developments may differ
from rules applied to existing development. The long term effect
will be determined by the non -conforming provisions of the
Development Code. Although it is yet to be determined what the
differences may be, it is probable that differences will exist.
Items will be highlighted in the proposed Development Code which
I differ from the existing standards.
Chair/Goldenberg responded to Mr. Clute that for all intents and
purposes, in-place residential properties will not change. A small
portion of a few commercial properties may change for clarification
and not for rezoning.
C/McManus responded to Mr. Clute that if his concern is that
according to the new Development Code an existing property becomes
non -conforming it would be grandfathered in until such time as the
property changed ownership, such an occurrence is a possibility.
The Planning Commission and City Council will ultimately determine
whether the code will be applied in this respect.
C/McManus responded to Mr. Clute that the review process will
determine whether or not, if the new Development Code renders an
existing property non -conforming, it could be grandfathered in
until such time as the property changed ownership.
There being no one else who wished to speak, Chair/Goldenberg
closed the public testimony portion of the workshop.
Mr. Pflugrath referred the Planning Commission to Item 6. Topics
for Discussion. The Development Code seeks a slope density formula
to apply to hillside development and protect the hilly areas,
canyons and ridgelines, etc.
C/McManus asked what options, in addition to the public meetings,
are available for public input.
August 26, 1996 Page 8 Planning Commission
Mr. Pflugrath responded to C/McManus that the Planning Commission
workshops are designed to handle most of the public input prior to
public hearings. .
With respect to tree preservation, Mr. Pflugrath stated the goal is
to write an ordinance which preserves indigenous trees. In the
event a tree cannot be, preserved,,appropriate mitigation measures
will be included.
Mr. Pflugrath indicated the existing Zoning ordinance does not
speak to density ranges. The City's General Plan is based upon a
range, and the Zoning Ordinance should also be based on a density
range.
Regarding parking and access, Mr. Pflugrath indicated the
identified items are incentives for shared parking and shared
access. In addition, the code will identify parking standards -
how much parking is required for what types of uses.
Mr. Pflugrath stated the issue identified with respect to signs is
the fact that in some cases a low six-foot high monument sign may
not be adequate for larger projects. All signage aspects for every
kind of development throughout the City will be researched. This
will include a proposal to provide incentives to insure higher'
-quality signs.
Mr. Pf lugrath indicated the issue of fast growing home-based
businesses will be discussed. The Planning Commission will be
asked to determine the allowable threshold of these types of
business.
The development review and approval process will be discussed. As
a result, current processes may be changed or reassigned.
C/McManus asked about the inclusion of "reasonable" action.
Mr. Pflugrath responded to C/McManus that certain aspects of the
code may include flexible language such as "subject to the approval
of the Community Development Director".
The City does not currently have a Certificate of Occupancy and a
Business License process. The code should allow the City to assist
businesses with successful openings rather than having a Code
Enforcement officer advise business owners after the fact that it
is not in compliance.
Currently the City notices property owners within 300 feet and 500
feet radius of a proposed project for the public hearing process.
In some instances. and due to the City's terrain, 300 or 500 feet
is insufficient. Other alternatives such - as 1000 feet will be
investigated with respect to hillside development.
- . ,�: .i P� m. � if Y tib;•='-: �1� `1 �'�<<!�Y��"�;':a `P.��;�a9i
F- -,
August 26, 1996 Page 9 Planning Commission
Mr. Pflugrath stated a zoning district consolidation will require
a substantial amount of effort. The City is currently divided into
33 zones. In some cases the distinction between the zones is
finite.
Mr. Pflugrath responded to Chair/Goldenberg that a building permit
request would trigger a development review and approval process
which would be discussed under Item G.
Lois McManus, 23561 Coyote Springs Drive, asked that prohibition of
overnight parking be added to the Topics for Discussion.
Mr. Pflugrath responded to Chair/Goldenberg that the next joint
meeting with the Planning Commission will be scheduled when the
public review draft is completed. The administrative draft will
require four to five months of preparation time. He indicated that
in the meantime, he would be willing to meet with special interest
groups, organizations such as the Chamber of Commerce, Homeowners
Associations, or individuals when they are in the community
conducting business.
In response to C/Schad, Mr. Pflugrath stated special interest
r., groups should contact staff to set appointments to work with the
consultants.
Chair/ Goldenberg thanked the consultants and staff for their
presentation. He requested that'.the project proceed in a timely
fashion.
RECESS: Chair/Goldenberg recessed the meeting at 8:30 p.m.
RECONVENE: Chair/Goldenberg reconvened the meeting at 8:50 p.m.
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
PUBLIC HEARING:
1. Conditional Use Permit 93-7 (3), pursuant to Code Chapter
22.56. - Part 1) is an extension of time request for an
existing temporary telecommunication facility. The
project's original approval was on December 13, 1993 for
the purpose of restoring communication service to the
area. A permanent site was approved at Diamond Bar High
School by the Planning 'Commission on October 9, 1995.
The Extension of Time is needed until the school site is
completed.
Project Address: 21308 Pathfinder Road, Diamond Bar
Property Owner: Rhinehart Management Co., P.O. Box
4428, Covina, CA 91723
August 26, 1996
Applicant:
Page 10 Planning Commission
MINE
L.A. Cellular, 17785 Center Court
Drive No., Cerritos, CA 90701
AstP/Lungu read the staff report into the record. She
stated that she received a facsimile from the Department
of State Architect indicating the applicant has been
through plan check, completed the corrections, and have
received their stamped set of plans. The applicant will
forward the original plans to the State. The State will
issue the first letter of approval which will allow the
applicant to proceed with the construction. Upon
completion of construction, the. State will grant final
approval. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
approve Conditional Use Permit No. 93-7(3) for a six
month extension of time, Findings of Fact, and conditions
as listed w thin�the resolution.
Chair/Goldenberg opened the public hearing.
.Dan Hare, L.A. Cellular, thanked staff for their work.
He stated the approval process should have been, completed
by April I. Howeverj, due to the State's stiff
reductions, the process now takes six'to eight months.
Over 50 percent of the users in the area utilize L.A.
Cellular including the emergency 911 service. The
current system iscosting the company a large amount of
revenue. The new system will provide four times, the
capacity of the current system.
Responding to C/Schad, Mr. Hare stated he is proposing
cape honeysuckle and oleander as landscaping for the
slope facing the single family residence in order to
reduce the visual impact of the equipment building.
Mr. Hare responded to C/McManus that only L.A. Cellular
subscribers have access to the system. L.A. Cellular is
a provider for freeway 911 emergency call box service.
Chair/Goldenberg closed the public hearing.
C/Schad made a motion, seconded by VC/Ruzicka, to approve
Conditional Use Permit No. 93-7(3) for a six month
extension of time, Findings of Fact and conditions as
listed within the resolution. The motion was approved 4-
0.
2. Conditional Use Permit No. 96-11 and Development Review
No. 96-10 is a request (pursuant to Code Chapter 22.56 -
Part T and Section 22.72.020.h) for an unmanned, wireless
telecommunications transmission facility at an existing
self -storage facility located at 275 South Prospectors
(south side, east of SR 60). The facility consists of
three (3) antenna assemblies to be roof -mounted behind a
August 26, 1996 Page ii" Planning Commission
single screening structure designed to match the existing
architecture and ground level equipment cabinets to be
screened behind a walled enclosure.
Project Address: 275 South Prospectors Road, Diamond
Bar
Property Owner: NSS So. Calif. L.P., 17 West Wetmore
Rd., #302, Tucson, AZ 85705
Applicant: Cox Calif. PCS, Inc., 2381 Morse
Avenue, Irvine, CA 92714-6233
SP/Johnson read the staff report into the record. Staff
recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Conditional Use Permit No. 96-11 and Development Review
No. 96-10, Findings of Fact, and conditions as listed
within the resolution.
Chair/Goldenberg opened the public hearing.
Rudy Figueroa,. JMCG, Inc., Long Beach, 3760 Kilroy
Airport Way, Suite 440, stated his company represents Cox
Calif. PCS, Inc. in its efforts to establish a
telecommunications network throughout California. Cox is
one of two Federal Communications Commission licensees
working to meet the increased demand for cellular
telephone services. Three sites have been selected in
the City of Diamond Bar to complete the Los Angeles
County network. He stated he concurs with staff's
recommendations and conditions of approval.
Mr. Figueroa responded to Chair/Goldenberg that this
project has -not been submitted to the DBIA.
Frank Schubarum, JMCG, Inc. stated that of the three
projects being processed through the City of Diamond Bar,
the design drawings for the site on Armitos way next door
to the Los Angeles County Fire Department Station were
submitted to and approved by the DBIA. The proposed
project will be submitted to DBIA after Planning
Commission approval.
Mr. Figueroa responded to C/Schad that three projects are
needed to provided adequate carrier service throughout
Diamond Bar and adjacent areas. Pacific Bell Mobile
Service is the only other provider that uses the same
type of equipment as Cox Calif. PCS, Inc. and there would
be no problem co -existing the services if the application._.
TW for service was made and approved through the Conditional
Use Permit process and acceptable to the landlord.
August 26, 1996 Page 12 Planning Commission
Responding to C/Schad's concern regarding a proliferation
of antennas in the City, Mr. Figueroa stated the proposed
project is for an addition to the top of a building and
notan antenna, .,as required by the City's Planning
Department.
VC/Ruzicka made a motion, seconded by C/Schad, to approve
Conditional Use Permit No. 96-11 and Development Review
No. 96-10, Findings of Fact, and conditions as listed
within the attached resolution.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes of August 12, 1996.
VC/Ruzicka made a motion, seconded by C/Schad to approve
the minutes of August 12, 1996 as presented. Without
objections, the motion was so ordered.
IIIc
OLD BUSINESS - None
NEW BUSINESS - None
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
SP/Goldenberg asked where the October 4, 1996 CCAPA lecture is
being held. SP/Johnson responded,she will advise the Commissioners
of the meeting location.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - None
ADJOURNMENT:
At 10:17 p.m., there being no further business to come before the
Planning Commission, C/McManus moved, VC/Ruzicka seconded, to
adjourn the meeting to September 9, 1996. There being no
objections, Chair/Goldenberg adjourned the meeting.
�.
Respectfully S itted,
4Ae2--'0
mes DeStefanQ
Community Development Director
test:
I
Michael G ldenberg
Chairman
11