Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/28/2003MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMI JANUARY 28, 2003 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ruzicka called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. in the South Co st Air Management/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond ar, C 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Tanaka led the pledge of allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Joe Ruzicka, Vice Chairman Ste e Tye, and Commissioners Steve Nelson, Dan Nolan, and Jack anaka. Also Present: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager, Ann Planner, Lorena Godinez, Planning Intern, Administrative Assistant, David Meyer, LDM A 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chair/Ruzicka recommended amendin the agena to the following order: Item 7.3, followed by 7.2, 7.1 and 5.1 respectively. Th Commis ion concurred with Chair/Ruzicka's recommendation. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of Regular Meeting of December 10, 2002. C/Nolan moved, C/Tanaka seconded, to approve the Regular �eweti g minute of December 10, 2002, as presented. Without objection, the motia so ordered. 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7.3 Development Review No. 2002-35 (pursuant to Code Section 22.4 .020.A.) is a request to construct a two-story single family residence of approximately 12,127 gross square feet including balconies, porch, patio porte cochere, attached four -car garage, and a side yard retaining wall with maximum exposed height of six feet JANUARY 28, 2003 PROJECT ADDRESS PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT: Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 3079 Windmill Drive (Lot 3 of Tract No. 50314) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Windmill Estates, LLC 3480 Torrance Boulevard #300 Torrance, CA 90503 PI/Godinez presented staff's report. Staff recommends Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. 2002-35, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Richard Gould, applicant, said he read staff's report and concurs with the conditions of approval. Chair/Ruzicka opened the public hearing. There being no one who wished to speak on this matter, Chair/Ruzicka closed the public hearing. C/Nolan moved, VC/Tye seconded, to approve Development Review No. 2002-35, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan, VC/Tye, Nelson, Tanaka, Chair/Ruzicka NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7.2 Develo meet Review No. 2002-25 Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-16 and Tree Permit No. 2003-01 (pursuant to Code Sections 22.38, 22.48, 22.56, and 22.68) is a request to remodel and add approximately 6,446 square feet to an existing 3,392 square feet single family residence with a total of five -car garage, site retaining walls with a maximum exposed height of seven (7) feet, and swimming pool. Additionally, the applicant requests approval of a Minor Conditional Use Permit to allow for the continuation of a legal nonconforming 22 foot front yard setback and Tree Permit for the removal and replacement of preserved/protected trees. PROJECT ADDRESS: 2601 Wagon Train Lane (Los 49, Tract No. 30578) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Li 1 1 JANUARY 28, 2003 PROPERTY OWNER: 10aw► � Page 3 PLANNING Karambir Fhullar 314 N. San Dimas Avenue San Dimas, CA 91773 S & W Development 20272 Carrey Road Walnut, CA 91789 AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report. Staff recommends Pla approval of Development Review No. 2002-25, Minor Cond No. 2002-16 and Tree Permit No. 2003-01, Findings of Fact, approval as listed within the resolution. Chair/Ruzicka opened the public hearing. There being no one present who wished to speak on this matter, the public hearing. C/Nelson moved, C/Tanaka seconded to approve Development RevieN Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-16 and Tree Permit No. 200; of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolutio modifications regarding defining the tree species. Motion carried by Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Tanaka, Nolan, Chair/Ruzicka NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None Use on M No. 20025, -01, FinIngs with st f's 7.1 Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-08 Variance No. 2002-03 aind Miti Ne ative Declaration No. 2002-09 Pursuant to Chapters 22.58 and 22.54 of the of Diamond Bar Development Code the applicant has requested approval Conditional Use Permit to use an existing approximate 20,140 squfoot vai building for a church. Additionally, the proposal requests approval of i Varianc permit less than the minimum number of required onsite parking space for a cht use. The subject building is situated on a 40,750 square foot lot that is ocated in Commercial -Manufacturing (CM) zone with a consistent underlying 3eneral F Land Use designation of Commercial/Office (Maximum 1.0 F.A.R.) a to an JANUARY 28, 2003 PROTECT ADDRESS: PROPERTY OWNER: Page 4 PLANNING COMMISSION 23425 Sunset Crossing Road (APN 8706-001-008) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar Properties 9454 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 602 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 APPLICANT: Global Mission Church 3032 Hacienda Boulevard Hacienda Heights, CA 91745 PC/Meyer presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive staff's report, open the public hearing, continue the public hearing to February 11, 2003, and direct staff to prepare a resolution approving the project. Mark Novak, applicant's attorney, 16633 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1200, Encino, thanked the Commission for their consideration in this matter. He explained that when Global Mission Church considered this site, it knew that parking would be a concern to the City. Because the Church entered into a reciprocal parking agreement with the northerly property owner in advance of seeking approval for the project, staff has recommended approval. Assuming a 15 percent growth in membership, it would take eight years for the congregation to exceed the current available parking. If the church grows out of its parking, it would add services so that on -street parking would never be necessary. Additionally, all parishioners will receive advance notice of no on -street parking and volunteer patrol will monitor for compliance To that end, the church has offered a $10,000 bond to insure these conditions. Mr. Novak pointed out that 27 of the 60 families who are members of the church reside in Diamond Bar. C/Nelson asked Mr. Novak how much time elapses between the two Sunday morning services. Mr. Novak responded to C/Nelson that there is one and one-quarter hourbetween the two Sunday morning services (8:45 a.m. to 9:45 a.m.). The third service is at 8:00 P.M. C/Tanaka asked Mr. Novak to explain his conflicting statement that there is only one service and that the Church would grow into two services, and a later statement that there are two services. 1 1 JANUARY 28, 2003 Page 5 PLANNING Mr. Novak explained that there is one major service at 11:00 a.m. The 8:45 a.m. service accommodates 30 families only. Mr. Novak confirmed that the Onsite parking is 49 spaces and the reciprocal parking adds 140 spaces forr a total o 189 parking spaces. Grace Ku, 20847 E. Cliffside Lane, thanked the Commission for the opportun speak on this project. She and her family have resided in Diamon Bar for i years and would welcome the opportunity to attend her church locally. CurnE services are held at Wilson High School and her congregation has longed for a church to further assist in the spiritual education of their children. Shthanked for their participation. Chair/Ruzicka opened the public hearing. Charlie Koeller, Pastor of Beach Cities Community Church, Huntington Be stated that a few years ago his church purchased an LA Fitness building frorr same seller who is working with Global Mission Church. His church went throe: similar process and was granted a CUP. After a minor remodeling program, facility opened about a year and a half ago. His church supports aboul 400 fami Three services are offered on Sunday morning at 8:00 a.m., 9:30 a.m. z nd 11:00 Similar to the Global Mission Church proposal, his church is adjac nt to a r, center and they share parking. The retail center has 60 stalls and his church ha onsite stalls, for a total of 115 parking stalls. His church has not received complaint from any resident or commercial use facility. In fact, du ng the w{ adjacent residents use the church parking lot and it does not create a pi oblem fol church. He felt the proposed use would be compatible with the property. Ralph Cutruzzola, 19834 E. Navilla Place, Covina, currently serving Principal of Glen A. Wilson High School, Hacienda Heights. Global M at the high school about six years ago with a small group to begin school provided use of six classrooms, the little theater, ASB Room, de and staff room, that the church has used on a weekly basis for the past spite of active use of the high school, there has never been a fines complaints including those related to parking have been forthcom adjacent residents or from the administration and staff. In addition, have supported the high school in time of need. VIR to the ;h a the m: 55 church. he n, and faci ilty six years. In tenant. No ng from he JANUARY 28, 2003 Page 6 PLANNING COMMISSION Cassandra Maclnnis, 23427 Pleasant Meadow, speaking on behalf of her rental property at 23430 Sunset Crossing Road, was concerned about the steep two-lane road bordering the property. She felt that human nature would dictate street parking likely on both sides of the street because it was closer to the church than the parking lot. If vehicles are parked on the street, they will undoubtedly make unsafe U-turns. She said she represented the condo association members who were very concerned and worried. She understood the church would try its best to control the situation. She felt that perhaps they could find a better location. The City should consider the safety of the residents. Steve Kaderli, 23430 Sunset Crossing #A, said there were already problems with parking at the center. He took exception to portions of the Conditional Use Permit application. He felt the applicant had not properly represented himself even though the Commission had the information available in writing. When people park on both sides of Sunset Crossing Road the travel lanes become very narrow and dangerous. Leo Cho, 5520 S. Wilton Place, Los Angeles, agent for the applicant, stated that this has been a long process beginning in 2001. The church has absolute faith that it will be a good citizen. It would actually be less convenient for parishioners to park on Sunset Crossing Road because of the street's steep incline. The parking lot is flatter and has direct access to the church building and would be much more convenient. He also stated that the number of 35.0 is the maximum capacity of the building. Current church membership is about 60 families. Projecting 15 percent annual growth it would take about eight years to reach maximum capacity. He felt the parking issue had been adequately addressed and mitigated. Brian Kang, 24161 High Knob Road, was pleased that the City was exploring the possibility of Global Mission Church locating in Diamond Bar. There are many Asian -Americans and Koreans living in Diamond Bar and there are no adequate churches or facilities that would accommodate this church. He felt the church would bring a lot of good to the City. He felt the church had done its due diligence to meet current and future parking needs and did not feel there would be a problem. They have done their best and more to accommodate the City's code. He asked the Commission to consider granting the Permit for the good of the City. Fernando Robles, 23360 Sunset Crossing Road, has lived in his neighborhood for 20 years and witnessed parking problems created by LA Fitness patrons. He agreed with a prior speaker that there were inconsistencies in the numbers of patrons and the related number of parking spaces that would be required. As a result, he believed the church members would overflow into the public parking. He felt the church would do their best to regulate the parking but he was not sure they would be able to control 1 1 JANUARY 28, 2003 Page 7 PLANNING the situation. The report also states that the church will hold bazaars project is not being explained correctly or they are deviating from showed photographs of the scene. He has a problem with the con across the street from his residence. Patrons park on the street or whe convenient to them. He recommended the church not be granted th Lee Kemble, 23837 Bower Cascade Place, lives north of the pro represents the board for the community north of Navajo Springs Roa is an eyesore for the community and pulls down values in the City continues to dilapidate over time. He was opposed to the parking be possibility the vehicles would flow into the street. He was more con( look of the building and felt that if it remained empty it wou deteriorate. fairs the reportl He ever it is permit. )sed site. He This building This building cruse therd is a med abothe I continu to Mr. Novak clarified the facts and numbers in the application and poini ed out an in the number of projected church attendees. He explained how the r presenta are not inconsistent. A resident living at 3408 Falcon Ridge Road, attends the 8:45 a.m. Global Mission Church service. She explained how the traffic comes and goes at different ti es because of choir members arriving early and people staying after sen ices for sinall group meetings. Church members have been very responsive to the concerns of the neighbors and have abided by instructions from their senior pastor. It Would be iin the best interest of the congregation to abide by the City's regulations and members would stand faithful to the parking rules. Chair/Ruzicka closed the public hearing. C/Nolan agreed that the current state of the property was not good.a asked i an ingress/egress could be cut through the retaining wall giving access via iamond ar Boulevard. DCM1DeStefano explained that the property is accessed by a private al ey em from Diamond Bar Boulevard and Sunset Crossing, a private alley on iam( Boulevard between Boulevard Bagels and the Diamond Bar Auto Sale 3 and ; building. Another private alley extends to the glass box office buildir g that additional driveway access to the facility. JANUARY 28, 2003 Page 8 PLANNING COMNIISSION C/Nolan pointed to the northeasterly corner of the LA Fitness building and the pathway between the supplemental parking area. Is there a way to open that area so that the parking could go through from the old LA Fitness building past the fast food restaurants and enjoy the same ingress/egress as the supplemental parking building. DCM/DeStefano indicated that the parking lot supporting the building has one way in and one way out. A wall separates two parking lots and there is a slight change in grade between the two parking lots. Pedestrians can walk through in the current configuration, vehicles cannot. In conversations with the applicant and their representative yesterday morning, he learned that it is the applicant's desire to create an opening (pointing to an overhead of the area.) Near the door on the first floor there is an opportunity to open the wall and create a pathway between the two parking lots with vehicles in the area suggested by C/Nolan. If he understands the applicant's wish correctly, it would be added as a condition recommended for the Commission's approval. C/Nolan asked if red curbing on Sunset Crossing Road would help mitigate safety concerns. DCM/DeStefano explained that the issue of red curbing on Sunset Crossing Road is a double-edged sword. The condominiums were not developed to current code standards for parking. As a result, there is insufficient parking for the complex and residents must use the public street for parking. Strategically placed red curbing could help with site visibility and safety concerns. However, the City must exercise caution that the measure improves safety and does not diminish the ability for area residents to park on the street. C/Nolan asked if the reciprocal parking agreement could be amended to stipulate that the City be notified in the event that there is a change to the agreement. DCM/DeStefano explained that if the Planning Commission approves the project, staff would insure the City Attorney's satisfaction with the agreement. C/Nolan appreciated the enthusiasm of the applicant's speakers. He felt assured that if the project was approved the church would improve the aesthetics of the property. VC/Tye said that when he belonged to LA Fitness 23 years ago, parking was a disaster and parking is a serious issue. In addition, he is a member of a church that did battle to provide additional on-site parking that required development of the property. In spite of those improvements, his church members continue to park on the street. The Commission recently approved a project at Lemon Avenue and 1 1 JANUARY 28, 2403 Page 9 PLANNING Lycoming Street. The two dissenting voters were concerned tht parking was deficient by 10 percent (five parking spots). The project under consideration is deficient by SO percent. This location is correctly zoned for a church and it is still a neighborhood. The residents have to live with the results of any project that is approved for the area. He believed the Commission must be very ser sitive to s ety concerns. The growth of St. Denis Church, for instance, has created the need or a traffic signal at Silver Hawk Drive. While he sincerely apprecia es the Gl abal Mission Church's interest in Diamond Bar, he believed it would be be ter to con., -ider an alternative location for that use. C/Nelson pointed out reasons he believed that VC/Tye's examples., vere not all similar to this project. He wanted to have more input about the neigh ors cone(rns. The only vehicles he saw in the photograph of Sunset Crossing Rood were or the condominium side. Do the residents want to be able to park on both sk es of the sil reet and do they believe the church would interfere with their ability to do so. DCM/DeStefano said that on that on both sides of the street, the public spaces that are afforded residents and their visitors are usually parked with owned by residents of the complex. During peak morning and evening parkii one would likely observe that all of the street parking was taken. C/Nelson pointed out that LA Fitness did not have a reciprocal park He surmised that most visitors to LA Fitness were individuals and automobiles visiting the facility. DCM/DeStefano agreed that the ratio of persons per vehicle would fitness facility than it would be for a church use. C/Nelson had a high level of confidence that the project could work. erratically from time to time and he was not certain that the residents the same thing. He felt that an increase in "no parking zones" would ii and some amount of parking on the street for residents would be a believed in self -policing. Other than staff's recommendations for incre Sunset Crossing Road, he felt confident that the project was feasible. 1 concern was about safety issues. DCM/DeStefano believed that staff addressed some of the safety Planning Commission directed staff to move forward additional infoi be requested of the City's traffic engineer and public works director. families in lower for a lople ve )uld not do If on wodld JANUARY 28, 2003 Page 10 PLANNING COMMISSION Chair/Ruzicka wondered whether if the Commission denied this project, would it be faced with the possibility of tenants who would bring worse traffic and parking concerns to the property. The applicant has made several concessions to insure that safety, parking and other issues are mitigated and have even offered a $10,000 bond to the City. DCM/DeStefano responded that the City's code allows for a long list of permissible uses, some by right, such as a real estate office. Offices and retail uses are permitted by right. Other uses require conditional use permits like this land use that would be considered by the Planning Commission. Certain retail uses may generate other parking issues. There are uses that may be worse than this type of use such as high impact parking generators that have daylight business hours. There are uses that may be less of an impact. The building is situated in a very difficult location and it is difficult to say whether anyone else would be interested in such a building and if so, would they be able to secure a parking agreement with an adjacent property owner. C/Nelson moved to continue this matter to February 11, 2003, and requested staff to offer recommendations on how to implement measures on Sunset Crossing Road that would insure the greatest degree of safety possible, including red curbing, while balancing the needs of the residents for on -street parking. Additionally, staff should meet with the residents to address their concerns and reach consensus. DCMIDeStefano restated the motion: reopen the public hearing and continue the matter to February 11, 2003, to allow for the opportunity to work with other staff members regarding traffic safety measures that might be appropriate for this stretch of Sunset Crossing Road (in response to comments expressed this evening.) In addition, staff is directed to create an opportunity for staff and church members to meet with area residents (principally those who have spoken this evening) to further discuss the areas .of concern in a more casual atmosphere. VC/Tye asked that the motion include providing information about the possibility of access from the other parking area, removal of the handicap ramp and how many parking spaces would be lost as a result. DCM/DeStefano asked that the matter be continued to February 25, instead of February 11. C/Nelson accepted the aforementioned amendments to his motion. C/Nolan seconded the motion. 1 Li 1 JANUARY 28, 2003 Page 11 PLANNING C�MMISS�ON Mr. Novak agreed to the February 25 continuance date Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Nolan, Chair/Ruzicka NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None RECESS: Chair/Ruzicka recessed the meeting at 9:00 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Ruzicka reconvened the meeting at 9:05 p.m. 5. OLD BUSINESS: 5.1 tvo. LUU2-U5 'Tentative Parcel May No. 26771 and Miti a ed Ne ive Declaration No. 2002-07 - The proposed project is a request for pproval f a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Specific Plan, Development Rev ew, Conditional use Permit, Tentative Parcel Map and Mitigated Negative eclarati of Environmental Impact. This would allow for the construction of a ret I/comme ial shopping center consisting of a three-story hotel, two freestanding re taurants, nd two office/retail building pads totaling approximately 70,370 square feet of gloss building area. The proposed development will be located on an appro imately .50 gross acre site. (Public Hearing closed on December 10, 2002) PROJECT ADDRESS: 850 Brea Canyon. Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: Louis Marcellin 20326 Fuerte Drive Walnut, CA 91789 Phil Williams (Extended Stay America) 2525 Cherry Avenue #310 Signal Hill, CA 90806 JANUARY 28, 2003 Page 12 PLANNING COMMISSION - PC/Meyer presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt resolutions recommending City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2002-01, Zone Change No. 2002-01, Specific Plan No. 2002-01 and continue deliberation of Development Review No. 2002-07, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-05, Tentative Parcel Map No. 26771, and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolutions for final consideration. DCM/DeStefano stated that in response to concerns about truck parking and site safety voiced by residents during prior hearings, the area has been monitored by law enforcement. As a result of staff's continued review, additional red curbing was added in front of Farmer Boys and in front of the gas station on the Lycoming side. C/Nelson asked for clarification on his request for points of reference. He doesn't know what a foot-candle looks like. If the darkest areas of the diagram indicate there will be no increase in ambient light levels then he is satisfied. If there is an increase anticipated, he needs to understand what that is in the form of a qualitative response. His concern about noise was what would be generated from the project (trash trucks, engines starting, etc.,) not from traffic coming off of the freeway. He wanted to be certain that the residents adjacent to the project would not feel they were sleeping in the middle of a parking lot. He asked for a qualitative response, not an answer in decibels. Al Ariz, project director, thought the problems had been addressed. He said he would continue to work with PC/Meyer in an effort to bring forth the information in the manner requested by the Commission and staff. VC/Tye visited the Extended Stay facility in San Dimas. He asked how difficult it would be to mimic the exterior of that facility as opposed to the exterior proposed for the Diamond Bar facility. Phil Williams responded that certain elements of the San Dimas design could be incorporated. However, this three-story project has a height restriction that would not accommodate the California look. The project is forced to incorporate a flat roof design. He offered to provide photos of a similar project located at Kramer and LaSalle just south of Diamond Bar city limits. The height of the ridge would be 45 to 48 feet. Chair/Ruzicka felt that more information regarding traffic, the ingresslegress, turning lanes, stacking lanes, etc., must be forthcoming. u 1 JANUARY 28, 2003 Page 13 PLANNING VC/Tye moved, C/Nolan seconded, to recommend City Council approAd of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2002-07, General Plan Amendment No. 2002-01, Zone Change No. 2002-01 and Specific Plan No. 200 -01 amei ding the Land Use Element from Professional Office to General Commercial chap e of zone from M -1 -PD -BE to C-2SP and adoption of a Specific Plan to imple nt a comprehensive development for property located at 850 Brea CanyoRoad. M tion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Nolan, Chair/Ruzicka NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None C/Tanaka moved, C/Nelson seconded, to continue review of the Tentative Parcel Map No. 26771, Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-05 and Architectural Review portions of this element to the meeting of February 11, 2003. Sta is directed to provide responses to concerns identified in earlier deliberation End to prepare resolutions of approval. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Tye, Nelson, Nolan, Tanaka, Chair/Ruzicka NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None S. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: None Offered 10. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: DCM/DeStefano asked Commissione to advise taff immediately about their intentions to attend the March 20 through 22,. 2 03, Planners Institute. Staff provided Commissioners with a quarterly report of sales tax re eipts. The city attorney provided a brief memo regarding conflict of interest requirements. so provid d to the Commission was information received on Friday from Senator Marquette gardingtate budget issues. DCM/DeStefano responded to Chair/Ruzicka that he believed the purpose of the toll of waste as listed on the schedule of events was an effort toward recycling is oppa discarding them in the general waste stream. He did not know how often it would take He expected that within the next 45 days the Commission would receive a report changes to the Development Code and property enforcement measures. The City re hired a prosecutor who has made several changes to eliminate duplication to JANUARY 28, 2003 Page 14 PLANNING COMMISSION contradictions as well as, tighten up requirements. That matter is currently with a subcommittee of the City Council and will likely come to the Commission in a separate freestanding code amendment process. 11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As presented in the agenda. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chairman Ruzicka adjourned the. meeting at 9:45 p.m.. Respectfully Submitted, via 6� .11, Jags DeStefai Deputy City Mahager Attest: F Chairman Joe uzic a