HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/8/2005MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
STUDY SESSION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 8, 2005
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice Chairperson Low called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Room CC -8 of the South
Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center Building, 21865 Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, California 91765
Information Regarding Zone Changes
Information Regarding Country Hills Towne Center
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Vice Chairperson Ruth Low; and Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee,
Dan Nolan and Tony Torng.
vhairman .doe McManus was excused.
Also present: Nancy Fong, Interim Community Development Director;
Bradley E. Wohlenberg, Assistant City Attorney; Ann Lungu, Associate Planner; and
Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant.
A. Information Regarding Zone Changes
AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report on Zone Change No. 2005-01 related to
bringing Commercial and Industrial Zoning into compliance with the City's General
Plan for the following sites:
Site 1 — Sunset Crossing Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard (change from CM to C-2
Community Commercial);
Site 2 — Diamond Bar Boulevard/ Palomino (change from C-2 to C-3);
Site 3 — Diamond Bar Boulevard between Palomino Drive and Golden Springs
Driive (change from C-2 to C-3);
Site 4 — Montefino Avenue and Diamond Bar Boulevard (change from C-3 to
CO.)
Site 5 — Diamond Bar Boulevard/Cold Springs Lane/Fountain Springs Road
(Country Hills Towne Center — change from C-1 to C-2) at the request of VC/Low,
staff agreed to consider Site 5 for the two corner parcels and Country Hills Towne
Center as a separate issue to be considered tonight.
Site 6 — Brea Canyon Road/ Diamond Bar Boulevard (change R-1 to C-1.)
NOVEMBER 8, 2005
PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION
Site 7 — Brea Canyon Rd/Diamond_ Bar Blvd: Adiacent Flood Channel and
Site "D" (change CPD to C-1.)
Site 8 — Grand Avenue between Montefino Avenue and Diamond Bar
Boulevard (change from C-3 to OP.)
Site 9 — Golden Springs Drive/Grand Avenue (change from C-3 to OP and CO.)
Site 10 — Golden Springs Drive/Via Sorella Street (Walnut pool and Caltrans
Yard -- change from various to CO.)
Site 11 — Brea Canyon Road/Via Sorella (change from various to CO.)
Site 12 — Golden S rin s. Drive between Lemon Avenue and Brea Canyon
Road (change from various to C-3:)
Site 13— Golden Sprincis Drive/Lemon Avenue (change from various to C-2.)
Site 14 — Pathfinder Road and Brea Canyon Road west of SR57 (change from
C-2 and CPD to OP.)
Site 15 — SW Corner of Pathfinder Road/Brea Canyon Road (change from CPD
to CO.)
ICDD/Fong explained that the Chevron Station had applied for an almost total
redesign of the site and wanted to include a car wash. Staff informed the applicant
that the site was too small. C/Nolan felt that intensifying uses at the location would
create chaos. ICDD/Fong said that due to the tightness of the site the City may not
be able to close one of the driveways but change the design to egress only. Staff is
looking at ways to improve circulation around the gas station regardless of whether
there is a zone change.
Site 16 - Gateway Corporate Center (change CM to OB.)
Site 17 — North of Sunset Crossing and South of Happy Hollow Road (Little
League Field - change from MPD to REC.)
Site 18 — Washington Street east of Brea Canyon Road (change from M1.5 -BE
to 1) The property owner would like it to be zoned Commercial or Commercial Office
rather than "I" because he felt it was too limited. AssocP/Lungu said that the site
was already located in an Industrial zone and the City was changing the designation
only for consistency and not as a change for other uses. AssocP/Lungu further
stated that the property owner's request would mean a General Plan amendment.
NOVEMBER 8, 2005
PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION
CILee felt that Diamond Bar was more lax in granting changes than were other
cities. He respects private ownership. However, the City should stay with the zoning
and its General Plan. Staff stated that commercial uses are not allowed in industrial
zone but certain types of businesses may be allowed ancillary retail if it is part of the
same type of business through a CUP process. C/Nolan explained to CILee that
Diamond Bar was not given a blank pallet when the City incorporated and he did not
view using the CUP process as a sign of weakness or bad judgment nor did he see
the timeline being streamlined and felt that the process may be faster because this
City does not have a high level of activity. Based on the City's structure it almost has
to be more flexible to encourage economic growth and provide good governance.
CILee said he has observed that a certain percentage of the residents do not want
to improve portions of the City into retail. For instance, San Clemente is a well-
maintained City th�.t.does not have a lot of retail and commercial. He believes that- _x
the City should abide by its General Plan instead of allowing other uses. C/Nolan
said that he respectfully disagreed with CILee in that he believed that the General
Plan was a living document. VC/Low said that to her a General Plan was an
overarching document that did not cover all situations because it did not have the
ability to foresee every small parcel detail. Thus, staff and the Planning Commission
are available to offer discretionary permits under the CUP process. CILee reiterated
his belief that the City granted CUP's too easily and too often with little objection.
ACAIWohlenberg explained that the General Plan gives the overarching perspective
and the individual zones contain a list of uses that are permitted by right without
further review. Uses that are similar to the designated uses could possibly go in as
well and the City wants to make certain it has an opportunity to place conditions on
the uses to make sure they do not have an unintended significant impact on the
area. The Ordinance contains a list of uses that are permitted under CUP and those
uses are not arbitrarily granted, they must be uses that are close to those allowed
and as a result, it may appear that well-defined uses are easily granted.
Site 19 — North of Lycoming between Lemon Avenue and Brea Canyon Road
(Shea Center - change from M 1.5 -BE to 1) (West of Lemon Avenue and north of the
SR60 to the City boundary - change M 1.5 -BE to I.)
Site 20 -- North of Lycoming between Brea Canyon Road and Lemon Avenue
(change from M1.5BE to I.) CILee asked if Laundromats and carwashes could exist
in the C-3 zone.
Site 21 — West of Lemon Avenue/North of SR60 to City Boundary: (Union
Pacific RR and industrial development and Yellow Brick Road Industrial Park -
change from M1.5 -BE to I for General Plan consistency,)
NOVEMBER 8, 2005
PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION
Site 22 — North of SR601South of Lycoming between Lemon Avenue and
Glenwick Avenue (WVUSD — change R -A-8,000 to I.)
The Planning Commission and ACA/Wohlenberg concurred that this was a single
agenda item, that all of the changes were detailed in staffs report and have been
discussed by the Commission through this public meeting.
B. Information Regarding the Country Hills Towne Center project
ICDDIFong presented staffs report. In order to maximize the allowable "restaurant'
use square footage, the applicant requested clarification that certain food court uses
would not be considered as "restaurant." For example, quick service and take out
with limited seating up to a maximum of 14 seats. It would include such uses as ice
cream shops, bagel shops, donut -shops_ _Aeli's and similar types of uses which
should not be considered sit-down restaurants. Staff concurs with the applicant's
request.
VC/Low asked how much square footage and parking the property owner would
gain if the City concurred with the use clarification. ICDDIFong responded that the
property owner has already maximized the number of parking spaces required for
restaurant use. This proposal theoretically reduces the square footage for retail.
VC/Low said she was still concerned about the amount of square footage devoted
to restaurant use.
C/Lee believed that the developer had a vision for use of the private property and if
he complied with the City's requirements the uses would be permitted. At the same
time the Commission needed to know what the developer was planning and strives
to comply with his proposal.
ICDDIFong explained that the developer was proposing to maximize the square
footage and the parking ratio by accommodating up to 53,397 square feet of
restaurant use and it would be questionable whether the developer could actually
achieve that maximization. ClNolan said the request would merely change the
nuance of what was considered to be retail and would improve the parking ratio.
ICDDIFong stated that the applicant would make his presentation during the regular
meeting.
NOVEMBER 8, 2005 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Vice
Chair/Low adjourned the study session at 6:55 p.m. to the regular meeting.
Respectfully Su
Nancy Fong
Interim Community D
Attest:
R& M. Low, Vice Chairman
opment Director
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 8, 2005
STUDY SESSION: 5:30 p.m. - Room CC8, South Coast Air Quality
Management District/Government Center, 21865 Copley, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Information Regarding Proposed Zone Changes
Information Regarding Country Hills Towne Center Project
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice Chairperson Low called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the South Coast Air
Quality Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, California 91765.
PLEnGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Nolan led the Pledge..of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL.
Present: Vice Chairperson Ruth Low and Commissioners Kwang
Ho Lee, Dan Nolan and Tony Torng.
Chairman ,toe McManus was excused.
Also present: Nancy Fong, Interim Community Development Director;
Bradley E. Wohlenberg, Assistant City Attorney; Ann Lungu, Associate Planner,
Linda Smith, Development Services Associate; Kimberly Molina, Assistant Engineer
and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes of the Study Session of October 25, 2005.
4.2 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 25, 2005.
C/Nolan moved, C/Torng seconded to approve the Consent Calendar as presented.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
NOVEMBER 8, 2005
5.
PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
OLD BUSINESS:
Nolan, Torng, Lee, VC/Low
None
Chair/McManus
5.1 Planning Commission Policy and Procedures Manual Review and
Discussion.
VC/Low felt that deleted Item 6 on page 5 — Commission Membership and
Operations, should be reinstated because Commissioners serve at the
pleasure of the Council Member who appointed them and without this
provision the new Council Member would not have an opportunity to appoint
a- persdjT' of his own choosing. ACAIWohlenberg explained that the - - -
requirement that the seat be vacated within 90 days was part of the City's
Municipal Code that was the ultimate control over the Policy Manual. He
agreed that it would serve to place the Commissioners on notice without
requiring that they read the Municipal Code.
VC/Low agreed that this manual helped Commissioners to better serve on
the Commission. She asked if the Commissioners would concur that the
section on pages 6 and 7 that spoke to the effectiveness of a Planning
Commissioner and suggestions on how to be a Commissioner should be
included in the draft. C/Torng said he found very similar language in the draft
manual on pages 11 and 12. VC/Low agreed.
C/Nolan moved, C/Torng seconded to recommend adoption of the Planning
Commission Policy and Procedures Manual as amended. Motion carried by
the following Roll Call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
6. NEW BUSINESS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
IiI7ir
7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING(S):
Nolan, Torng, Lee, VC/Low
None
Chair/McManus
7.1 ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004-1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-01
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2004-19 AND VARIANCE NO. 2004-01 - In
accordance with chapter 22 of the City of Diamond Bar Development Code,
the applicant requested the following approval: A zone change from
NOVEMBER 8, 2005
PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Community Commercial (C-2) District
consistent with the General Plan Commercial designation; a Conditional Use
Permit and a Development Review for the renovation of the facade of the
existing shopping center totaling 221,083 square feet; and a Variance to
increase the building height for the proposed three story officelmedical office
building from 35 feet to 40 feet. The proposed renovations include the
existing 45,031 square feet of existing in-line shop buildings or retail and
restaurant uses with outdoor dining area, a new 49,100 square foot three
story office/medical office building and a new 6,800 square foot two story
office/retail building. (Continued from October 25, 2005)
PROJECT ADDRESS: Diamond Bar Boulevard between the northwest
corner of Cold Springs Lane and the southwest
- corner of Fountain Springs Rood (Country Hills
Towne Center), Diamond Bar, LA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER/ MCC Realty Management
APPLICANT: 9595 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 214
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
ICDDIFong presented staff's report and recommended that the Planning
Commission reopen the public hearing, receive testimony and forward a
recommendation for approval to the City Council through the adoption of the
resolutions.
The applicant, Michael McCarthy, gave an overview presentation to indicate
where certain uses were proposed to be placed within the center and how
the current buildings would be upgraded to include a 40,000 square foot
market area, new facades to update rooflines and new construction to
current standards. In addition, a walkway was added between two parking
bays to connect two buildings and a walkway was added off of Diamond Bar
Boulevard down into the site from the AAA site down to in front of the food
and coffee areas. The walkway was designed to intersect and meander
across the parking lot into other retail uses on the opposite site of the center.
Additionally, he plans to assign the center for ADA access from Fountain
Springs.
C1Lee asked Mr. McCarthy how he intended to accommodate the large
restaurant spaces into the shopping center. Mr. McCarthy said he believed
that food spaces were market-driven and at this juncture he was uncertain
what tenants would rent space at the center, where the food uses would
locate and what portion would actually come to fruition. The current demand
NOVEMBER 8, 2005 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
was for multiple interests from different food categories including Sushi,
Chinese, Italian, and American food/family style restaurants and his proposal
was to have the option to sign leases if tenants became available and
interested. He felt there was a very strong demand for restaurants in
Diamond Bar that would include the ability to serve liquor and provide some
type of entertainment. C/Lee asked if Mr. McCarthy had tangible candidates
and he responded that he has letters of intent. At this point there are no
leases signed. Once the anchor tenant market lease is signed the strategy
will unfold for filling up the in-line spaces. C/Lee said he was concerned that
without a tangible anchor tenant how Mr. McCarthy could allocate 30 percent
of the center (60,000 square feet) to food uses. Mr. McCarthy said that at this
point the cycle of interest from prospective tenants prior to signing an anchor
are mostly with food related tenants jockeying for position within the center.
The ancht;-r-atill define -the-course of the shopping center and he would begin --
to see more interest from soft retailers such as electronic retail, clothing, etc. -
Typically the life of a shopping center depends on the food vendors who are
the most aggressive and prolific. Once the shopping center becomes
anchored other tenants follow the anchor and food uses. f
VC/Low asked Mr. McCarthy to talk about the anchors. Mr. McCarthy
responded that the current tenant Rite Aid is considered a co-anchor and
that he has interest from two separate markets, one of which he prefers and
with which he is negotiating a lease. The lease should be signed within the
next 30 days. VC/Low asked how long Mr. McCarthy had been in
negotiations with the anchor tenant and how certain he was that the anchor
would sign within the next 30 days. Mr. McCarthy said there was no absolute
in his business. However, he had been in discussion with this tenant since
December 2004 and it was not untypical for markets to take a relatively long
period of time to make a decision to sign a lease. Actually, a 12 -month period
was probably on the quick side of the equation. Generally, market deals take
two years to go through committee and obtain necessary approvals. In these
instances the developer needs to stand still and let the process unfold.
Mr. McCarthy indicated to VC/Low that he felt most of the obstacles had
been overcome. The market essentially approved 40,000 square feet shown
on the plan. The market required the tower element (part of the variance
requested this evening), the addition of two loaders in the rear area and the
fountain element in the center of the shopping center. In addition, the center
was providing the market the frontage it needed. The market was in the
process of completing a fixture plan for the space and because they have
had their attorneys working on the agreement it seemed apparent to him that
the market was sincere about moving forward. The quality of the proposed
NOVEMBER 8, 2005 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
market is as close to an "A" quality market as he has seen with respect to
fixtures, merchandising and products. The theme of the market is more of a
world market theme with about 35 percent being U.S. products and the
balance being a combination of Korean, Chinese and Japanese. And, the
proposed anchor has the same types of prepared foods that one would find
at a Bristol Farms or Henry's or Whole Foods and could easily compete with
the Henry's of Chino Hills.
C/Nolan asked if the anchor tenant currently operated stores in the United
States and Mr. McCarthy responded "yes." C/Nolan stated that the
Commission previously spoke about the lack of pedestrian walkways to
connect the two buildings on Diamond Bar Boulevard as well as walkways to
connect the two buildings down through the center to the main area just
north of Rite Aid. C/Nolan asked tip,:- McCarthy if there were any
opportunities for additional pedestrian access or at the very least a softening
of the parking lot mass with additional landscaping.
Mr. McCarthy pointed out on the overhead what he felt would be active areas
and indicated that he had connected those areas with the AAA building. The
AAA building is a non -retail facility and there is a connection with the office
building up and over. He asked for an opportunity to study the area furtherto
see whether there could be additional connectivity. He also indicated that
they had struggled with the landscaping issue and in their opinion it had
failed in the past because of the view corridors. He does not want to create a
situation where the project is finished and in five or 10 years from now the
center has the same problem with landscaped areas blocking view corridors.
It is critical to be able to see the storefront to have. a sense of arrival. If the
project blocks the storefronts it would create a problem for drivers traveling
on Diamond Bar Boulevard to gain a sense of the center.
C/Nolan asked what kind of sales tax revenue the center could potentially
bring into the City. ICDD/Fong said she had not researched that subject.
C/Nolan said he believed it was important forthe Commission and Council to
know what the revenue stream would be.
C/Torng told Mr. McCarthy he appreciated the commitment to refurbishing
the Diamond Bar center. When he visited the Phillips Ranch center and
found there were several good points to the center such as a variety of
businesses. In his opinion however, there was not enough landscaping and
the parking was limited. In the case of the Country Hills Towne Center he
was pleased to see the superimposition of the three-story business and
number of trees. He was concerned about the small amount of landscaping
NOVEMBER 8, 2005 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
and hoped that Mr. McCarthy would commit to mitigating the mass of the
three-story building with sufficient landscape materials. He agreed that the
center portion should be free of large trees but felt the side streets and rear
areas could be landscaped with trees. C/Torng cautioned Mr. McCarthy that
his mall was not just for people who live in "The Country Estates" it was also
for the residents at the south end of Brea Canyon Road and other adjacent
areas. C/Torng reminded Mr. McCarthy that there were a lot of schools in the
area of the center and he felt that the young people would like a good place
to shop, eat and take advantage of a safe environment and he hoped that
Mr. McCarthy could attract businesses that would serve the youth of
Diamond Bar. He asked staff to comment on the percentage of landscaping
required by ordinance because he wanted to be certain that the center met
the requirement.
y Mr. McCarthy said that even though the Phillips ranch center was about 95
percent leased the construction was only about 85 to 90 percent completed.
For example, the restaurant building needed to be completed before the
parking lot was resurfaced. In spite of the fact that the Phillips Ranch center
sits in a very secluded area with a very low traffic count he was successful in
attracting major solid retailers such as Blockbusters, Ace Hardware, It's a
Grind Coffee, etc. Relative to the Country Hills Towne Center he recalled that
a resident was concerned about how the shopping center looked from the
rear and as part of the conditions of approval he had agreed to screen all of
the HVAC systems on the old part of the center. The new portion was
developed in 1987 and he was somewhat concerned about large trees
because the lanes on the side area were fire lanes and those must be kept
wide open for access. In addition, the existing buildings leave little room for
landscaping. However, he has shown the cornices along the sides and along
the top at the rear of the buildings. C/Torng's concern about landscaping is
his concern as well and he plans to soften the area of the office building with
heavy landscaping. The major portion of the landscaping is being
concentrated at the entryway of the center to create an exciting sense of
arrival. There is a large water element and waterfall going down the center of
the entryway that continues on down into the center. However, he is
somewhat hampered by the pre-existing conditions on a going forward basis
of the already constructed center. The center is currently at about 7.5
percent landscaped and if he was building a new center the code would
require 15 percent landscape coverage. Mr. McCarthy said he had a difficult
time attracting restaurants to Phillips Ranch because it was a neighborhood
area and would not support a lot of food uses. He estimated that he had
about 10 percent of the interest in food at Phillips Ranch that he has at the
Country Hills Towne Center which says a lot about the trade area and
NOVEMBER 8, 2005 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
demographic profile as well as the ability for a restaurant and food use to
succeed in the Diamond Bar center. Regarding youth related areas, coffee
shops, juice bars, bookstores, food uses, gift stores that would be attractive
and safe for young people, those are included in the projected uses.
C/Lee felt that in order to have 60,000 square feet of food uses succeed it
would require that about 3,000 people a day visit the center. He asked if
Mr. McCarthy had any plans for security at the center. Mr. McCarthy said that
he would like to have an armed guard 2417 on his properties. However, it was
too expensive so an unarmed guard would be located onsite during nighttime
hours as was currently the situation at the center. Security is very important
and hq is somewhat concerned because when he operated the theater for a
very short period of time it was robbed twice in two weeks. He said he was
also very concerned an&would do as much as possiblo to secure the
grounds. He is seeking high quality establishments and any type of loitering
that would detract from that quality would not be allowed.
VC/Low reiterated the importance of landscaping. Page 5 of the landscape
report indicates that staff is willing to work with the applicant to address the
proposed condition to provide tree wells within the parking lot, etc. VC/Low
asked Mr. McCarthy if he was agreeable to working with staff to provide
adequate landscaping in accordance with the conditions? Mr. McCarthy said
it sounded like a strategic approach to landscaping and not just a shotgun
blanket approach and that he, ICDD/Fong and the architect would be
discussing how to proceed. He included a budget amount for benches and
walkways including replacement of the benches outside of 31 flavors.
VC/Low wondered about landscaping the entire front of the center to attract
shoppers. Mr. McCarthy said he was concerned about the visibility and view
corridors. Typically, people driving toward the market would see the pylon
and monument signs first and anticipate the entryway. VC/Low felt that only
the rooftops of the inside buildings would be visible and if the Diamond Bar
Boulevard exterior was inviting it would draw in the public. Mr. McCarthy
agreed that signage was very important. He planned to add low-lying plants
along the hillside but he said he did not want plants growing too high and
undoing what he was trying to fix. He felt it would be best to sit down with
staff and come up with a strategy for placement of types of plants, growth
patterns of the plants, placement of the plants and consideration of how they
would look in five years.
VC/Low said she was concerned about how the existing tenants would be
treated during the rehabilitation process. She said that she had randomly
called tenants and was surprised to hear that the shop owners had no idea
NOVEMBER 8, 2005 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION
about the renovation plans. Mr. McCarthy said that timing was somewhat
tricky because he did not want to show the proposed plans to existing
tenants until a plan was approved and in place. The emphasis had been on
waiting for Planning Commission approval and anchoring the shopping
center. Beyond that he would have a plan for where he would want to place
existing tenants and would be able to sit down with them to see how they
would play a role in the approved plan. He said he wanted to keep as many
existing tenants as possible so it would behoove him to help them feel less
vulnerable through the process. With respect to retention very often, new
tenants are willing to pay much higher rents than existing tenants. Many of
his existing tenants have stepped up to market or close to market rates and
he has refurbished their spaces and their businesses have flourished as a
result and they are very happy with their locations. Sometimes tenants have
.0 be incubated for a period of three or four months irr, order for him shave
tie time to refinish their space. He cited examples of efforts to retain te, ,ants.
C/Torng wanted to know if Mr. McCarthy would advertise the center. He
asked if Mr. McCarthy was confident he could rent the entire medical/office
building spaces. Mr. McCarthy responded that the office vacancy in Diamond
Bar was less than five percent which was unusual for a sub -market of Los
Angeles. What the City was lacking was a medical facility. Ideally, he would
like to have a full -floor anchor tenant on the ground level and then fill the
upper floors with doctors and groups of doctors with varying specialties.
VC/Low reopened the public hearing.
Dr. Sanjay Doshi, 2839 Diamond Bar Boulevard, said he gathered from the
discussion that if approved there would be a drive-through coffee use at his
location. He wanted to know what "incubation" meant because dentistry is a
heavily developed space and not conducive to temporary relocation. He
anticipated major changes and felt that more tenants would produce a safer
atmosphere at the center. He suggested that Mr. McCarthy move AAA to the
proposed medical office building location and refurbish the AAA building to a
medical office building for better visibility. He believed that once his signage
was not available to Diamond Bar Boulevard he would lose business. He
also suggested that the theater be refurbished to professional use instead of
retail. If the center accommodates the amount of food usage proposed there
would likely be a parking problem. He understood the reason for revealing
the anchor tenant when the time was right but he believed it would help the
existing tenants if they had an interim arrangement so that they would not be
looking for a new location. He was looking for support from the City and from
the shopping center owner to remain at the center.
NOVEMBER 8, 2005 . PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION
Ann Cheon, Manager, Y.I.C. Taekwando, 2815 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard
explained that she and herfatherown the studio and are 100 percent behind
Mr. McCarthy. Her primary concern was that a lot of the older tenants were
apprehensive about what would happen when new tenants came in and they
would like for Mr. McCarthy to give some special consideration to the old
tenants who had struggled to stay in business at the center. She said she
wanted her concerns on the record and planned to speak with Mr. McCarthy
in person.
VC/Low closed the public hearing.
C/Nolan said he still saw a lot of question marks and small negative nuances
"to the project that were not specific to his comments. When--he-goes to
conferences and looks at what has been done to build and refurbish centers
those plans are certainly more elaborate than the plans proposed by the
applicant. He said he was still concerned about the lack of pedestrian
walkways and to him it was not that difficult to include features that would
break up the mass of the parking area. He was also concerned with the
redundant uses of food and food courts. He understood that the landlord
wanted to fill vacancies with viable tenants and businesses. He was also
concerned about the anchor tenant. Mr. McCarthy stated the anchor was
someone who had been in business for some time but citing previous
tenants who have occupied the center, they did not succeed so he was still
concerned about whether a grocery store was a viable anchor. He was also
concerned about traffic mitigation, an overriding concern throughout the City.
On a positive note, the increased revenue to the City was essential based on
the recent loss of two large tenants. Also very important was the morale of
the people in the area. He felt the area was indeed blighted and needed
refurbishing. The City talks about redevelopment but it is not the City that is
redeveloping the area, it is Mr. McCarthy who is putting his dollars on the
line. Some of the comments made by the business owners are part and
parcel of negotiations between them and Mr. McCarthy. Because the
Planning Commission is recommending a solution to the City Council his
inclination would be to recommend approval based on the fact that the City
Council would further review the proposed project and perhaps have the
ability to secure inducements that would make it more palatable for the
business owners and for the residents in the area. He felt this was one of the
most important decisions that had come before him in his four years on the
Planning Commission and believed that the City Council should have the
opportunity to review the project and decide whether to move forward.
NOVEMBER 8, 2005 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION
C/Torng felt that this was a very important project for the City and could see
there were areas of the project that needed to be improved. As Mr. McCarthy
said, in his business he needs to have some private strategy to help
guarantee success. Based on the center he visited that was 95 percent
occupied, if The Country Hills Towne Center were 95 percent occupied this
City would owe Mr. McCarthy a lot because it would be very important to the
"life" of Diamond Bar. He felt that if Mr. McCarthy improved the landscape it
would help improve the attendance at the center. He reiterated the residents'
concerns that if the project moved forward Mr. McCarthy will have good
communication with the current tenants so they would be able to chart their
future.
VC/Low agreed with C/Nolan that the concerns about the landscaping, the
redundant uses and the questions -regarding the anchor tenants were -big
question marks and rendered this prdject somewhat difficult. However, one
does not decide a project based on the question marks but instead on
careful balance between give and take. The gain for the City is that there is a
project in the works that offers a solution to a desperate condition. She too
was very appreciative that Mr. McCarthy was stepping up to move this
project forward. Perhaps some of the other matters such as traffic and the
aesthetics of the ground level of the center could be mitigated by the time the
project reached City Council. She was concerned that the Commission was
just now seeing the plans after two years of preparation and felt it may be
necessary to place a time limit on permits and entitlements.
ClTorng moved, C/Lee seconded to recommend City Council approval of
Zone Change No. 2004-1, Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-01,
Development Review No. 2004-19 and Variance No. 2004-02.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Torng, Lee, Nolan, VC/Low
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/McManus
8. PUBLIC HEARING(S):
8.1 Zone Change No. 2005-011. In accordance with Development Code
Sections 22.44 and 22.70 this was a request to change the existing zoning of
commercial and industrial properties for the purpose of General Plan
compliance.
NOVEMBER 8, 2005 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION
PROJECT ADDRESS: Citywide
APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar
21825 Copley
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
AssocP/Lungu reported that in accordance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Sections 15162 and 15168 (c)
(2), the City has determined proposed Zone Change No. 2005-01 was
consistent with the previously certified General Plan Program Environmental
Impact report and Addendum certified July 25, 1995. Therefore, further
environmental review was not required forthe proposed zone changes. Staff
recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution
recommending City Council approval of Zone Change No. 2005-01.
VC/Low opened the public hearing.
Lyle Kennedy, 650 Brea Canyon Road and 21015 Washington Street,
referred to APN 8719-010-007 as a one -acre parcel that had been in his
family since 1955. When his parents purchased the property all of the land
between the railroad tracks and 5th Avenue (Golden Springs) was zoned
Industrial. At some point, Los Angeles County decided to allow residential
uses between Washington Street and what is now the freeway. He said that
in his opinion it was poor planning to rezone a flat area residential and it
should have remained Manufacturing/industrial. Now Washington cannot be
used as an Industrial street because residents have a vested interest in
excluding truck traffic. He guessed that the area between the railroad and the
freeway should be Industrial in the City's General Plan even though it would
be a long-term approach that would enhance public revenue and reduce
costs. He asked what the allowed uses would be under the proposed
Industrial zone and said he was unhappy with the change. The Alameda
Corridor continues to expand and although his property has been inspected
for purchase he has received no firm offer for purchase.
Eric Everhart, representing the Evangelical Free Church of Diamond Bar,
3255 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard, said his church did not understand the
ramifications of the proposed zone change and how it would affect the
church. He requested that the Board of Elders have the opportunity to
receive a report from staff regarding potential impacts to the church.
Claudia Salazar, representing the owner of Plaza Diamond Bar, 1900-2040
Brea Canyon Road, was concerned about how the plaza would be affected.
NOVEMBER 8, 2005 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION
One building burned and the owner was in the process of obtaining permits
to rebuild. The other four buildings were primarily retail and the zone change
would be from C-2 to Office. She wanted to know if the 180 -day rule would
affect the completion of the plaza. The owner would prefer that the C-2
zoning remain in place.
VC/Low closed the public hearing.
ICDD/Fong reported that she provided Mr. Kennedy with a copy of the
Industrial zoning land use matrix that indicates the permitted uses and uses
requiring CUPs. All churches in Diamond Bar can be located in any zoning
district as long as they have applied for a Conditional Use Permit. In fact,
Evangelical Free Church has an approved Conditional Use Permit and the
zomr -change does not affect the church: , ..
ACA/Wohlenberg stated that generally speaking, a change in zoning from
residential to commercial would increase the property value. Should the
church choose to relocate they would have a commercially zoned parcel of
property that should be worth substantially more than the residentially zoned
property.
C/Lee was concerned that the residents and property owners had not
received adequate notice and time to learn how the proposed changes would
affect their property. ACA/Wohlenberg said that because of the number of
parcels involved the government allows the City to publish notice in the
newspaper. Because staff felt that may be inadequate although legally
adequate they decided to mail notices to all involved property owners.
Therefore, the noticing was more than what was required by law.
1CCD/Fong indicated to Ms. Salazarthat if the use was in the building priorto
when the new Code was in effect the use was "grandfathered" in and the use
could remain as long as the owner chose to operate in that location. For
example, even though the mini -market was not a permitted use it could
continue as long as it remained a mini -market. If the mini -market should
move away the space may have to be leased out to conform to existing uses
under the current code.
ACA/Wohlenberg explained that when an existing business was damaged or
destroyed as in the case of the fire the general rule was that if it was more
than 50 percent destroyed the use was considered terminated and if it was
less than 50 percent destroyed it could be rebuilt. However, in this case the
restaurant had been issued building permits and would soon commence
NOVEMBER 8, 2005 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION
construction. The contemplated zone change has not yet taken affect and
would not take affect until 30 days after Council approval.
ICDD/Fong explained that the burned building was actually an office building
even though there was a restaurant in the building and replacing the office
building was not replacing a non -conforming use and was permitted in the
office/commercial zone. It was the use inside of the building that may be of
concern and a restaurant was allowed in an OP zone. The mini -market could
potentially be an issue. However, the mini -market was already open and
would therefore be allowed since the business was moved adjacent to the
burned out location with very little downtime.
C/Nolan asked if it were necessary for all changes to be done
simultaneously. He .Understood that there would be 7�.-I.changes to anything
church related. However, he noted that others may fee: diffcrently and in Jight
of the fact that it had lingered for some time, would it be prohibitive to
continue that portion for 30 days. ACA/Wohlenberg said that legally a City
could change the zoning code as many times as it liked. However, the City is
limited in the number of times it could change the General Plan, the
constitution of local land development. This action was being taken merely to
bring the zoning code into compliance with the General Plan and the City
would like to do that as expeditiously as possible even though several years
have passed since attempting to get this project completed. If the
Commission would so choose it could act on some of the changes and not
on others.
ICDDIFong stated that this was the first in a series rezoning requests staff
would be bringing to the Commission and to the City Council and staff could
remove one parcel and move it to the next series to allow the church board
an opportunity to discuss whether the zone change would impact the church,
for example.
C/Lee wondered if the entire matter could be continued so that residents
could have an opportunity to better understand the process and the concept.
AssocP/Lungu reiterated that she received about 35 calls from residents.
ICDD/Fong stated that because property owners were not present this
evening it indicated to staff that they were in favor of or had no comment on
the rezoning. There are three property owners concerned about their
properties and if the Commission so directs staff could place those items of
NOVEMBER 8, 2005
E
10.
11
PAGE 14 PLANNING COMMISSION
concern on a future agenda to give staff an opportunity to meet with the
church and better help the board members to understand how rezoning
would impact their properties.
C/Lee said that as a Planning Commissioner he must be comfortable in
reaching a decision and if he is not comfortable he cannot decide and does
not want to give up his right. He would like to approve the rezoning changes
because it makes sense to him. However, the residents seem to have
questions and concerns that he felt needed to be addressed.
C/Nolan moved, C/Torng seconded that the Planning Commission adopt a
resolution recommending City Council approval of Zone Change
No. 2005-01 with the exception of Sites 5, 6, 14 and 18. Motion carried by
.the fc'',-Iwing Roll. Call ,rote: ,
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
Nolan, Torng, Lee, VC/Low
None
Chair/McManus
PLANNING COMMSSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
C/Lee felt that Mr. McCarthy had spent a lot of time and energy toward the
refurbishing of the Country Hills Towne Center and he wished Mr. McCarthy and his
company the best of luck. He felt the project would help to rejuvenate downtown
retail businesses in general.
C/Torng also wished Mr. McCarthy and his company much success in their
endeavor and hoped the project would move forward under staffs watchful eyes to
make sure that it was a good project for the City.
C/Nolan commended VC/Low on her skillful chairing of tonight's meeting.
STAFF COMMENTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
10.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects.
10.2 Status of approved projects.
SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in tonight's agenda.
NOVEMBER 8, 2005 PAGE 15 PLANNING COMMISSION
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission,
VC/Low adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted
Nancy Fong
Interim CommuniVMent Director
Attest:
Ruth L w, Vice Chairperson