Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/25/2000N1111,idol oddl—. AT[NUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 25, 2000 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Nelson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management -Headquarters Building Auditorium, 21865 -East. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Tye. i 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Steve Nelson, Vice Chairman Bob Zirbes, and Commissioners George Kuo, Joe Ruzicka and Steve Tye. Also Present: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager; Ann Lungu, Associate Planner; Sonya Joe, Development Services Assistant; Linda Smith, Development Services i Assistant, and Stella Marquez, Administrative Secretary. 12. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None offered. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Approved as submitted. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of the April 11, 2000, meeting. C/Ruzicka moved, VC/Zirbes seconded, to approve the minutes of the meeting of April 11, 2000 subject to the following correction: On Page 6, the end of the last sentence of the first paragraph should indicate pampas grass. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: j AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kuo, Ruzicka, Tye, VC/Zirbes, Chair/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None r ° 7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS: None APRIL 25, 2000 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 8. PUBLIC HEARING: 8.1 Development Review No. 2000-02 (pursuant to Code Section 22.020) is a request for architectural design review of 127 single family homes within the approved subdivision identified as Vesting Tract Map No. 52267. The proposed request consists of six, two story plans, ranging from approximately 3,366 square feet to 7,135 square feet, with two and three car garages and additional floor plan options. 'Each plan will have three architectural styles. This request also includes architectural approvals of the project's main entry designs, perimeter fencing, landscaping and walls. Project Address: 700 Block of Diamond Bar Boulevard (East side of Diamond Bar Boulevard at Tin Drive) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Property Owner: " Pulte Home Corporation 18401 Von Karman Avenue Irvin, CA 92612 Applicant: Scott Wright Pulte Home Corporation 18401 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92612 - DSA/Joe and DSA/Smith presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. 2000-02, Finding of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. C/Ruzicka asked staff to review the City's Development Code parking requirements. He asked if the applicant discussed parking with staff prior to design of the project. DCM/DeStefano responded that the City's Code requires a minimum of a two garage for every new single family home. The garage must be a minimum size of 20 feet by 20 feet. The Code further discusses residential parking spaces as being 10 feet by 20 feet. The developer contacted staff for development standards and review of the City's requirements. Both SunCal and Pulte Home Corporation discussed these matters with staff. C/Tye asked referred to a letter from Larry Lazar, Project Manager for SunCal included in the May 12, 1998, Planning Commission Agenda wherein he requested consideration of the utilization of Highcrest Drive as an access route for ingress/egress for Diamond Hills Ranch residents. On page 9 of tonight's presentation a secondary access is proposed at Highcrest Drive and that the applicant has determined that the gate will serve as an emergency access only. He recalls that the Planning Commission previously discussed Highcrest Drive being used for ingress and egress and determined that ingress and egress would be permitted only at DiamondI�'NA Bar Boulevard and Tin Drive. He asked how this change occurred. APRIL 25, 2000 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION DCM/DeStefano stated that when the project was first submitted to the City it was a public street project and later became a proposed private street project. With that, there was consideration for both ingress and egress at Tin Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard as the primary ingress/.egress point for the project along with a secondary ingress/egress being at the end of Highcrest Drive. When the project was before the Planning Commission the discussions focused on the ingress/egress at Highcrest there were pros and cons discussed. Staff favored the Mghcrest Drive ingress/egress because it provided access to Pantera School and Park that these residents would be primarily utilizing. The Planning Commission made its recommendation to the City Council. The City Council deliberated on the project and came to the conclusion that the gate at Highcrest Drive would be used as a secondary access only. Recently, the applicant has been working with the Highcrest homeowners who have an interest in relocating the proposed gate and creating a private street for their portion of Highcrest Drive. This discussion has not yet reached a conclusion. As a gesture of goodwill, Pulte has requested the City of Diamond Bar to consider making the gate at the end of Mghcrest Drive an emergency ingress/egress. Staff has determined that the request should be embraced. C/Kuo said he is concerned about the number of parking spaces reserved for this development. He asked if other cities require parking spaces related to the number of bedrooms. DCM/DeStefano reiterated that the City's Code requires a minimum two parking spaces per - dwelling unit and does not add to the provision based upon the number of bedrooms in the house. In this marketplace, developers are providing three and four car garage spaces beginning with four bedroom homes. This is a discretionary review and staff has been indicating that there should be more garage parking spaces based upon the number of bedrooms proposed and the market that Diamond Bar is within. Some cities have variable ratios of parking spaces to the number of bedrooms. Chair/Nelson asked if staff has looked at the number of potential parking spaces existing on the street for off-site parking per house. DCM/DeStefano responded that staff does not have a specific answer to the question. The lots range in size from 6000 feet to 10,000 feet and have varying front yard property lines from about 60 feet to over 100 feet. The driveways will be about 25-28 feet in width. Therefore, you could reasonably achieve one car on the street per house and in some instances, two cars per house. This particular site has some streets with relatively steep slopes which may take up more space than a flat space in terms of parking availability. DCM/DeStefano stated that "The Country Estates" is developing a new standard that has been applied to products within the recent year or so which is a ratio of parking per bedrooms, i.e. one garage parking space for every two bedrooms. DCM/DeStefano responded to Chair/Nelson that there is no specific time frame for relocating the equipment parking from Mghcrest Drive to another location. Staff spoke with the developer last - °LL week on this issue and already some of the equipment has been moved. Currently, the end of Highcrest Drive is the only relatively flat area that is available. APRIL 25, 2000 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION Scott Wright, Pulte Home Corporation, thanked staff for their help and guidance throughout this process. He assured the Commission that the plan presented does not illustrate elevation type. Pulte agrees to the condition to provide staff elevations and color schemes through the precise review process. Pulte has a total of six plans with three elevation types for each. Twelve separate color schemes have been developed which provides up to 218 variations and there will be very little, if any, color repetition. There has been no time set forth with respect to the relocation of the equipment. The relocation plan was brought to their attention yesterday when they received the conditions of approval. He stated that Pulte has no problem with the Commission setting forth a time frame for equipment relocation. In the meantime, green screen has been placed on the fencing. As of today, the trailer and engine blocks that were situated close to Highcrest Drive were moved: Pulte will submit a relocation plan to staff for acceptance. Pulte does not assume that the emergency access gate will be granted. This is cun•ently a request which has come about as a result of working with the Highcrest residents. The residents requested that if the gate cannot be relocated and related issues cannot be resolved that Pulte would consider making it an emergency access. As a result the Highcrest residents will not be disturbed by the project traffic and both areas will have a cul-de-sac. He assured the Commission that Pulte has no problem with staff's condition as drafted to provide a three car garage with any structure with 6 or more bedrooms. He asked for clarification of the definition of six bedrooms. He further stated that Pulte agrees with all of the conditions as proposed. C/Ruzicka stated that these homes will be in existence for many years to come and in order to vote favorably on this project he must be assured that adequate parking will be provided. Mr. Wright responded that Pulte does not disagree with the condition as it is written. A three car garage will be provided with six or more bedrooms. VC/Zirbes said that he too has concerns about the garages. Each of the proposed products show a minimum .of six bedrooms with options and each indicate a three car garage with varying sizes and placement which seem to be inadequate in size. Since Pulte is able to design a project with many available options, would the applicant object to.a mandatory three car garage with deed restrictions against future remodeling if so determined by this Commission. Mr. Wright responded that in most cases Pulte would not object to such a condition. Pulte has looked at eliminating certain features to increase the garage size to the mandatory 10'x 20'. One of the problems with a split garage on a steep street is that the applicant cannot meet the requirements to not exceed a 15 percent grade and having two driveways and a front yard because of the steepness of the street. VC/Zirbes emphasized that parking is a major, major issue in this community. When homes are proposed that would have as many as eight bedrooms. Assuming full use of the bedrooms and children reaching driving age the parking is rendered inadequate. Therefore, the garage issue is a major obstacle to approval. He further expressed concerns about the depth, placement and`' APRIL 25, 2000 PAGE 5 :�.,r� PLANNING COMMISSION design of the main gate providing ingress/egress from Diamond Bar Boulevard and the potential for vehicles stacking out onto the already congested boulevard. He asked how the main gate will be accessed, i.e., guard entry, two gates, one entry gate, etc. Mr. Wright presented a conceptual drawing of the proposed gate for the Commissions consideration. He stated that as designed, it is 120 feet from the curb radius to the gate. Construction drawings have not yet been submitted to the City's staff for review. Issues regarding the type of gate and entry facility have not been detailed. Part of the package requirement was to present a conceptual overview. The intent is to provide a non -manned gate with the guard tower providing an aesthetic detail only. As designed in the conceptual state there is one gate with one entrance/one exit which would be shared between residents and guests. Molly Carmichael, Director of Marketing, explained the floor plan design process. She explained that most home buyers convert bedroom areas to offices, libraries, etc. which reduces actual bedroom count. She explained the demographics of similar projects. On average today's household makeup is about 2.5 persons per unit. She asked for clarification of room count. VC/Zirbes stated that the variety of products show three car garages. However, the third space is shown as an option. He asked if Pulte would be willing to accept the condition that the third space option be changed to a mandatory garage space. He reiterated his concerns for potential - ' parking problems. « Ms. Carmichael asked the Commission to consider the fact that based upon consumer studies the third garage space is typically used as a storage space and does not accommodate parking. For this particular buyer profile they are choosing to have storage contained within their homes or to have the third car option. She agrees with the Commissioner's concerns regarding the parking issues and she believes that the applicant is attempting to accommodate these concerns. She believes that the third space will serve more as a storage space than as a parking area. VC/Zirbes pointed out that Ms. Carmichael's theory holds true for a two car garage and that the second space would then be used for storage and thereby reducing the parking to one vehicle. Ms. Carmichael pointed out that optional spaces within the residence (bedrooms converted to dens, playrooms, offices, etc.) tend to serve as storage areas. Ms. Carmichael explained to C/Tye that although Pulte offers eight bedroom homes there has never been a case where the actual house was plotted with eight bedrooms. Product 2 offers eight places to locate bedrooms. Therefore, this project is workable within the six bedroom limitation and the three car garage requirement. Mr. Wright further explained that the revised plans submitted to the City show up to six F bedrooms with an optional game room or den. He asked if the Commission has the revised plans in their packet. APRIL 25, 2000 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION DCM/DeStefano recommended that the Commission not get bogged down in the details. These are options that the developer is providing to the buying market and there could be a number of different options including accessory rooms that may not be familiar to this area but that are j provided in upper scale homes and have been provided in many homes in Diamond Bar, primarily within "The Country Estates" as well as, in the Diamond Crest project where there were music rooms and other types of optional features. From staff s prospective, the Commission needs to focus on the issue of the number of "sleeping" rooms (bedrooms) and the number of parking spaces provided for those bedrooms. As a result, staff recommended that a five bedroom house could be developed with a two car garage. However, a six or eight bedroom home would require the three car garage. C/Ruzicka asked the applicant for a more detailed explanation of the room function. Mr. Carmichael pointed out that when a buyer chooses the game room option, there is no enclosure wall, bathroom or closet provided. Therefore, such a space would not function as a bedroom. Chair/Nelson opened the public hearing. Michael Chen, 23610 Chandelle Place, asked if after the project is completed, will the dedicated open public space on the ridge between Chandelle Place and the northern part of the tract be, preserved as a wildlife area and will there be any access to the area by pedestrians. He has j observed construction vehicles parked at the top of the ridge. DCM/DeStefano responded to Mr. Chen by displaying the most recent City map which is highlighted to show the area of the project. The portion referenced by the speaker is an open area that is part of the dedicated open space that came to the City of Diamond Bar as a result of the recordation of this Map. It is too early to determine whether or not human habitation will be permitted by the City in the form of access trails, etc. The City is currently formulating a Trails Master Plan. that will eventually come to the Planning Commission. It is more likely that a pedestrian trail would be in the more open space that extends from Tin Drive to Grand Avenue adjacent to Summitridge Park. Construction should not be occurring within the designated open space area. The area referred to by the speaker is meant to be kept as open space and the construction vehicles are on the development site. Dave Kersey, 23403 E. Wagon Trail Road, said he recalls that the Planning Commission determined that entrances were to be located at both Highcrest Drive and Tin Drive to assist with the traffic flow and Diamond Bar Boulevard and Tin Drive. Hebelievesthat 120 feet of gate frontage is not sufficient to allow access for residents as well as, others who will be entering the project. He believes the parking within the tract is insufficient and does not allow for boats and motor homes. He asked if the wall height is 42 inches or six feet. He asked if Pulte is required to build homes in accordance with lot elevations proposed by. SunCal. DCM/DeStefano responded that with respect to the walls, the perimeter of the project will have Li block wall and wrought iron fencing and will be six feet in height. Walls or fences in front yard APRIL 25, 2000 PAGE 7 r`' ' PLANNING COMMISSION F ' areas cannot exceed 42 inches. Artist's renderings were provided by SunCal. However, there will be no true picture of this project until it is completed. With approval of the project, there were additional rear yard setbacks applied to the perimeter houses which was a deliberate attempt to minimize the view of the homes from below. The graded pad elevations that SunCal provided and that Pulte is developing are effectively the same. Martha Bruske, 600 Great Bend -Drive, said she appreciates that the Commission is as concerned as she is about the parking situation. If anyone in Diamond Bar decided they could afford to upgrade and move into the development, they have already been burned by on -street parking. She said she assumes there will be a left turn arrow on westbound Diamond Bar Boulevard at Tin Drive and she, is concerned about traffic backing up onto Diamond Bar Boulevard as it does at Gold Rush Drive on Diamond Bar Boulevard. She is also concerned about additional cut - through traffic in her tract as a result of this project and about the ability of the Highcrest residents to easily travel to Pantera Park and School. She again thanked the Commission for the concerns regarding parking and the effect of this project on adjacent homeowners. Chair/Nelson closed the public hearing. i C/Tye said he believes,the Commission needs more information about the.main gate's location. He reiterated his concern about traffic backing up on Diamond Bar Boulevard. He also believes that the Commission needs to require that Condition 5 (v) on page 9 of the draft resolution provide a minimum of a three car garage regardless of the number of bedrooms. He likes ., VC/Zirbes's recommendation to place a deed restriction on the properties to prohibit conversion of the garage areas. C/Ruzicka agreed with C/Tye regarding the layout and location of the gate which will potentially have a huge effect on Diamond Bar Boulevard. He said he would like to have the issue of the gate and wall monument sign be a part of the resolution. With respect to the number of parking spaces and their sizes, future planning should be taken into consideration. He also agrees that all of these houses should have a mandatory three car garage. C/Kuo stated that if, as the applicant has stated, some of the areas do not function as bedrooms that the development advertise the proper use of the room and not mislead the buyer. He concurs that the garage area should contain a sufficient number of spaces. A gated community is a high quality living area. Therefore, less street parking should be encouraged. VC/Zirbes reiterated his major concerns about the parking and about the entry gate. He said he does not feel comfortable voting for anything this evening that incorporates the gate either on Diamond Bar Boulevard or on Highcrest Drive.', He believes a three car garage should be mandatory for this project regardless of the number of sleeping rooms and further, he would like to see that deed restrictions are recorded on the properties that would prohibit any garage conversion in he future. In his opinion, the houses seem to be very similar architecturally. He would like to review the model placement plan and he would like to see a landscape plan for the front yards. He suggested consideration of three gates: One for general exit, one for general entry and one for homeowners entry. APRIL 25, 2000 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION Chair/Nelson asked for definitive information about the amount of parking that will be available 1 on the streets excluding fire plugs within the project. Due to the steepness of the streets he is concerned about the safety of the residents. C/Ruzicka moved, VC/Zirbes seconded, to reopen the Public Hearing and continue the matter to May 9 in order to allow staff and the applicant to respond to the Commission's questions and concerns. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: _ AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kuo, Ruzicka, Tye, VC/Zirbes, Chair/Nelson NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 9. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: VC/Zirbes said that today he received a telephone call from a former Planning Commissioner who stated his concern that the owner of the Shell property at Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard is painting over handicapped parking spaces. It was his understanding that under the approval for the expansion or remodel of that property that three handicapped parking spaces would be provided. Apparently the property owner is painting over two of the spaces which will leave one space. DCM/DeStefano indicated that staff is aware of the comment and is monitoring the situation. As part of „y an evaluation process, the City is currently reviewing all of the Conditional Use Permits issued since the City's incorporation. Chair/Nelson asked staff to apprize the Commission regarding the upper Tonner Canyon reservoir plans. DCM/DeStefano stated that what has been published in the newspaper is generally true. The City of Industry continues to have a desire to build one or two reservoirs on that property. 10. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 1. Public hearing dates for future projects. DCM/DeStefano stated that one additional Public Hearing is scheduled for May 9 which is consideration of a large house proposed in "The Country Estates." He stated that staff has been working with residents who suffered storm damage that recently occurred in the community. Staff has received inquiries regarding the City of Industry's Majestic Development project and its current status. Staff has yet to receive the anticipated Environmental Impact Report. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in the agenda. APRIL 25, 2000 PAGE 9 < = PLANNING COMMISSION i ADJOURNMENT: C/Ruzicka moved, C/Tye seconded, to adjourn the meeting. There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair/Nelson adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m. i Respectfully Submitted, Jm4g DeStefano Deputy City Manager Attest: Sv Nelson Chairman