HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/28/2006MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 28, 2006
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice Chairman Low called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality
Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar,
California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Torng led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Dan Nolan, Tony Torng,
Vice -Chairman Ruth Low.
Absent: Chairman Joe McManus was excused.
Also present: Nancy Fong, Interim Community Development Director; Gregg
Kovacevich, Assistant City Attorney; Ann Lungu, Associate
Planner; Linda Smith, Development Services Associate and
Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCEIPUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 14, 2006.
C/Nolan moved, C/Lee seconded, to approve the minutes of February 14,
2006 as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Cali vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5. OLD BUSINESS:
Commissioners:
Commissioners:
Commissioners:
None
6. NEW BUSINESS: None
Nolan, Lee, Torng, VC/Low
None
Chair/McManus
FEBRUARY 28, 2006 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
7.1 Develo ment Review No. 2005-31 and Minor Conditional Use Permit
No. 2006-03 — In accordance with Code Sections 22.48 and 22.56, this was
a request to construct a new three-story single family dwelling of
approximately 9,288 square feet (including porches, balconies, covered
patios, swimming pool, tennis court and an attached six car garage) on an
existing vacant 1.68 acre parcel in the R1 20,000 zone with a consistent
underlying General Plan Land Use designation of Rural Residential. The
applicant also requested approval of a Minor Conditional Use Permit to allow
a driveway width greater than fourteen (14) feet at the street property line.
(Continued from February 14, 2006)
Project Address: 2502 Razzak Circle (Lot 181, Tract 30578
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Property Owner: Mr. And Mrs. Wasif Siddique
11076 Venture Drive
Mira Loma, CA 91752
Applicant: Bob Larivee
17 Rue Du Chateau
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
TCDD/Fong stated that once again the applicant failed to produce the
necessary plans to allow staff the opportunity to forward this item to the
Planning Commission and according to the city attorney this would be the
last continuance allowed. If the plans are not received, this item will be
pulled from future agendas and staff will re -advertise the public hearing as
appropriate.
C/Torng moved, C/Nolan seconded to continue this matter to March 14,
2006. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Tomg, Nolan, Lee, VC/Low
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Chair/McManus
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
8.1 Develo Ment Review No. 2006-06 — In accordance with Code
Section 22.48, this was a request to construct a three story single-family
FEBRUARY 28, 2006
PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
residence of approximately 7,360 gross square feet including the three car
garage, Porte Cochere, terraces, balconies and deck. The request also
included a play court, swimming pool/spa, and retaining walls with a
maximum exposed height of eight feet.
Project Address
Property Owner/
Applicant:
24141 ' Lodge Pole Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Mr. and Mrs. Juzer Jangbarwala
1441 Autumn Hill Lane
Chino Hills, CA 91709
DSA/Smith presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission
approval of Development Review No. 2005-06, Findings of Fact, and
conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
VC/Low asked if the covenant regarding the sewer would be attached to the
draft resolution and DSA/Smith responded that it was a separate document
that came from the Public Works prior to issuance of the building permit.
VC/Low said it was nice to see a house within "The Country Estates" being
presented without any Variances and Conditional Use Permits.
VC/Low opened the public hearing.
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, VC/Low closed the
public hearing.
C/Nolan moved, C/Torng seconded to approve Development Review No.
2006-06, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the
resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Nolan, Torng, Lee, VC/Low
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Chair/McManus
8.2 Develo ment Review No. 2006-04 Minor Conditional Use Permit
No. 2006-01 and Minor Variance No. 2006.01 — In accordance with Code
Sections 22.48, 22.52, 22.56 and 22.68, this was a request to remodel and
construct an approximate 1,683 gross square foot addition including porch,
balconylpatio cover, storage room and garage to an existing 2,577 livable
square foot two story single-family residence. A Minor Conditional Use
Permit approval permits the continuation of legal non -conforming front and
FEBRUARY 28, 2006 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
side yard setbacks. The Minor Variance approval permits a decrease of the
required setback/yard area for this irregularly shaped lot.
Project Address: 22088 Cedardale Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Property Owner: Dr. Jacob Said
22088 Cedardale Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Applicant: Khanjian Agop
2721 N. Michigan Avenue
Pasadena, CA 91106
DSA/Smith presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission
approval of Development Review No. 2006-04, Minor Conditional Use Permit
No. 2006-01 and Minor Variance No. 2006-01, Findings of Fact, and
conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
VC/Low asked if the material colors shown on the renderings were accurate
for the remodel and DSA/Smith responded that they were accurate.
C/Torng asked DSA/Smith to point out the location of the three-foot minor
variance because he visited the site and felt that it was very tight. DSA/Smith
showed C/Torng the area on the map and pointed out the location of the
building and the variance in relationship to the lot. She also explained the
setbacks that Diamond Bar inherited from Los Angeles County as they
related to the current setback requirements. C/Torng hoped the applicant
could improve the home's front views.
VC/Low felt that the large amou nt of landscape materials tended to make the
lot look more crowded than it would normally appear.
C/Nolan felt that a three-foot section out of 55 feet was not unreasonable.
The legal non -conforming is compelling because the house was originally
built within the Los Angeles County Code and a new property owner should
probably not be held to the new standards.
VC/Low opened the public hearing.
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, VC/Low closed the
public hearing.
FEBRUARY 28, 2006 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
C/Lee moved, C/Nolan seconded, to approve Development Review
No. 2006-04, Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-01 and Minor Variance
No. 2006-01, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the
draft resolution.
AYES:
Commissioners
NOES:
Commissioners
ABSENT:
Commissioners
Lee, Nolan, Torng, VC/Low
None
Chair/McManus
8.3 Development Review No. 2006-03 — In accordance with Code
Section 22.48.020(a) this was a request to construct a two-story office
building of approximately 25,000 square feet on a vacant lot within the
Gateway Corporate Center.
Project Address:
Property Owner/
Applicant
21671 E. Gateway Center Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Dr. Acbar Omar
222 N. Sunset Avenue
West Covina, CA 91790
AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Development Review No. 2006-03 and Negative
Declaration No. 2006-01, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as
listed within the resolution.
AssocP/Lungu responded to C/Torng that the applicant met the traffic study
requirements prior to issuance of the permits. C/Torng asked if there was a
requirement for a contribution to art and AssocP/Lungu responded not at this
time.
AssocP/Lungu confirmed to VC/Low that this application was completely
revised as of the January 20, 2006, submission.
C/Torng asked whether it was a two or three story building and TCDD/Fong
responded that it was a two-story office building. Because the building is
situated on a slope and caissons are being used to build up the foundation it
appears taller than other two-story buildings.
ICDD/Fong responded to C/Lee that the EIR was done underthe auspices of
the Gateway Master Plan that was approved by the County. The use is
FEBRUARY 28, 2006 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
allowed and a pad was provided in the plan. Accordingly, this is a Design
Review of an office building within the Gateway Master Plan.
C/Lee said he received this package on Friday, and that it was a large project
and he felt he had not had sufficient time for review. TCDD/Fong responded
to C/Lee that the Planning Commission approved this project in 2002. The
reason the applicant came back to the Commission was that he was not
vested into the project because they had not started construction. According
to the city attorney the applicant must reapply. Since the project was
previously approved staff did not tell the applicant to redesign the entire
project so it is staff's objective to make certain that the current plans are
consistent with the previous approval and the conditions of approval.
AssocP/Lunge responded to VC/Low that there were no substantial or
material changes from the prior submission.
Dr. Omar stated that his project was approved and all of the permits were
pulled. The entitlement required that sufficient grading should have been
done. He misunderstood the amount of grading that was required and
thought it had been done in accordance with the requirements. The contracts
are signed and the contractors are prepared to proceed with construction.
C/Torng asked if art was included in this project. VC/Low asked Dr. Omar if
he was willing to place a piece of art in the public area of his building and
Dr. Omar said that he would take it under consideration because it would be
a good addition to his structure.
ACA/Kovacevich cautioned the Commissioners that they could not condition
the project in this manner. He noted, however, that the applicant had offered
to consider the option within this public forum.
VC/Low thanked Dr. Omar for his consideration.
VC/Low opened the public hearing.
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, VC/Low closed the
public hearing.
C/Torng moved, C/Lee seconded to approve Development Review No.
2006-03, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the
resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
FEBRUARY 28, 2006 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
AYES: Commissioners: Torng, Nolan, Lee, VC/Low
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Chair/McManus
9. PLANNING COMMSSIONER COMMENTWINFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
C/Nolan said that this would be his last Planning Commission meeting. He served
on the Commission four years and on the Parks and Recreation Commission for the
two prior years. He has enjoyed his service on the Commission and has enjoyed
working with staff and Paul Wright. He attended the Sycamore Canyon Traiihead
ribbon -cutting ceremonies and felt that it was a great project. One of his goals for
the City is to work on the Lorbeer Middle School project.
C/Lee strongly believed that retaining walls were one of the most important
elements in a residential project. He proposed that for any residential proposals
containing retaining walls the applicant should be required to submit retaining wall
cross-section elevation plans like those that were included in the first project
presented this evening. He said that it was a simple drawing that contained
sufficient information to assist him in evaluating projects.
VC/Low said that she had truly enjoyed working with C/Nolan who had been very
helpful to her. She appreciated his insight and hard work. She learned a lot from
him and he had been a great inspiration to'her. She believed that this would be her
last Planning Commission meeting as well and said she had enjoyed every meeting
over the past two years. She hoped that the Planning Commission would continue
to do good things for the City.
10. STAFF COMMENTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
10.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects.
TCDD/Fong said she understood C/Lee's request for sufficient information to
properly evaluate the application and indicated that staff would make certain to
include sufficient cross sections whenever there were retaining walls within a project
area.
TCDD/Fong stated that the Planning Commission would receive a report from staff
on reconsideration of Scribble's Conditional Use Permit for review, modification or
possible revocation. The sheriff's department has alerted staff to several incidents
that have caused safety concerns and required a considerable amount of sheriffs
department resources to address the situation.
FEBRUARY 28, 2006 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION
ICDD/Fong presented plaques to C/Nolan and VC/Low and thanked them for their
service on the Planning Commission and to the City. She appreciated the their
commitment and felt they were very fair and professional in their deliberations. She
thanked CINolan and VC/Low for their hard work toward making Diamond Bar a
better place.
VC/Low thanked ICDDIFong and her staff for their hard work and dedication to the
City.
11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in tonight's agenda.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission,
AC/Low adjourned the meeting at 8:05 p.m.
Atte
CIM
McManus, Chairman
Respectfully Submitted,
i W
C
Nancy ong
Interim Communit a opment Director