Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/9/2002MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 9, 2002 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ruzicka called the meeting to order at 7:09 p.m. in the South Coast Air Management/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, C 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chairman Tye led in the pledge of allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Joe Ruzicka, Vice Chairman Steve Tye, Commissioners Steve Nelson and Dan Nolan. Commissioner Jack Tanaka was excused. Also Present: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager, Linda Smith, Developmen Services Assistant, and Stella Marquez, Administrative Assistant. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of Regular Meetings of June 119 2002, and June 25, 2002. VC/Tye moved, C/Nelson seconded, to approve the minutes of June 11, 2002, submitted, and the minutes of June 25, 2002, as corrected. Without objection, i motion was so ordered, 5. OLD BUSINESS: None. 6. NEW BUSINESS: None. 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7.1 Development Review No. 2002-10 (pursuant to Code Section 22.48.020) is a request to construct a two-story, single family residence of approximately 12,716 gross square feet including balconies, porch, covered patio and four car garage. JULY 9, 2002 PAGE 2 PLANNING CONaUSSION PROJECT ADDRESS: PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT: 3078 Windmill Drive (Lot 6, Tract 48487) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 C&A Developers 3480 Torrance Boulevard #300 Torrance, CA 90503 DSA/Smith presented staff's report. Staff recommends Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. 2002-10, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. VC/Tye asked if within 60 days of approval it is possible that a certificate of occupancy is issued and no landscaping is installed. DCM/DeStefano responded that the shorter time would be the final inspection. A more appropriate timeframe would be 60 days from a certificate of occupancy that is granted after the final inspection. However, if the Planning Commission is concerned with timely landscape installation, staff has not found such a problem with these products. C/Nelson stated that if an extension of the building pad disrupts one or more of the preserved trees located on the property replacement mitigation should be required. This property is adjacent to natural areas. Therefore, restrictions should be placed on invasive plants. DCM/DeStefano explained that the Mitigation Monitoring Plan and Environmental Impact Report created for this tract deals with the types of species that can be permitted on the edge of natural areas. DSA/Smith responded to C/Nolan that generally, a dirty kitchen is created to accommodate Wok's and other similar type instruments that create smoke during cooking. Chair/Ruzicka asked if it would be appropriate to require front yard landscaping for this project as was required for other similar projects. DCM/DeStefano responded that adding such a condition would not be inconsistent with prior approvals. The specific reason for requiring front yard landscaping for the Pulte project was to mitigate a problem experienced by properties in close proximity JULY 9, 2002 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION where several years later, some lots still do not have a first blush of landscaping. similar condition could be added. However, he believed that this matter was cove: within the conditions contained in the resolution for this project. Richard Gould, JCC Homes, said that regarding front yard landscaping, these are custom homes and the purchasers intend to initiate a very elaborate Ian plan. Accordingly, the applicant has requested that the owner be allowed to cc their landscaping after they move into the residence. Chair/Ruzicka opened the public hearing. There being no one present who wished to spear on this item, Chair/Ruzicka the public hearing. C/Nelson moved, C/Nolan seconded, to approve Development Review No. 2002-1 Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolutic subject to the corrections in staff's report as noted. Motion carried by the followh Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Nolan, VC/Tye, Chair/Ruzicl NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Tanaka S. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: C/Nelson asked what process he pursue to recommend a change in the City's Tree Ordinance to remove the natty peppers. DCM/DeStefano responded that upon such a request, staff would place the matter on the ne: Planning Commission agenda for discussion. If the discussion results in such recommendation, a recommendation would be forwarded to the City Council to consider code change. C/Nelson requested the matter of recommending a change in the City's Tree Ordinance be placed on the July 23 Planning Commission agenda for discussion. VC/Tye recognized that Diamond Bar's 4th of July show was "spectacular." He asked DCM/DeStefano to pass along kudos to the Parks and Recreation Commission and to the City Council so that next year's event is even bigger and better. 9. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: DCM/DeStefano stated that following VC/Tye s comments about the status of the chain link fencing at Administaff, he met with the developer of the project and its primary tenant. There is significant discussion between the JULY 9, 2002 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION two parties as to who is responsible for the change in the fencing requirement. Through contractual relationship, Administaff was responsible for the fence. Administaff will not get occupancy of the parking structure or the day care center until that issue is resolved. With respect to the Notice of Public Hearing signs that go up on properties, staff talked about creating a policy related to their removal. Code requires that these signs be removed within three (3) days of the conclusion of the public hearing. The policy would be that if the signs are not removed within the prescribed time, the developer deposit would be reduced by about $100, staff's charge for removing the sign. Staff believes that protection of certain types of trees is contained within the City's General Plan. If this is a General Plan issue, Council would concurrently agree to pursue changes in both the Development Code and General Pian. VC/Tye asked if a change in the General Plan required a vote of the public, to which DCM/DeStefano responded no, it does not with one exception — if the change touches open space. VC/Tye believed that if the Planning Commission denies an applicant's request, they may appeal to the City Council to which DCM/DeStefano replied "correct." 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As scheduled. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chairman Ruzicka adjourned the meeting at 7:43 p.m. Re t . 11 u tte James DeStetager Deputy City Attest: F / `Chairman ke Ruz\*ka