Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/8/2008MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 8, 2008 CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chairman Torng called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Shah led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Kathleen Nolan, Jack Shah and Vice Chairman Tony Torng Absent: Chairman Steve Nelson was excused. Also present: Nancy Fong, Community Development Director; Greg Gubman, Planning Manager; David Alvarez, Planning Technician; Anthony Santos, Management Analyst; and Marcy Hilario, Senior Administrative Assistant. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of Regular Meeting of March 25, 2008. C/Lee moved, C/Nolan seconded to approve the March 25, 2008, Minutes as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None Lee, Nolan, VC/Torng None Shah Chair/Nelson APRIL 8, 2008 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 Development Review No. 2006-07 and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-03 — Under the authority of Development Code Section 22.66, the applicant requested approval of a one-year extension of time to the Planning Commission's original approval of an 829 square foot addition to an existing dwelling. The initial deadline for commencing construction of this project was March 28, 2008. PROJECT ADDRESS: 2605 Rising Star Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER/ Steven and Luzmaria Babbitt APPLICANT: 2605 Rising Star Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PT/Alvarez presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of a one-year extension of time for Development Review No. 2006-07 and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-03. There were no ex parte disclosures offered. VC/Torng opened the public hearing. With no one present who wished to speak on this matter, VC/Torng closed the public hearing. C/Shah moved, C/Lee seconded, to approve a one-year extension of time for Development Review No. 2007-13 and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2007- 08, Findings of Fact, and Conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Shah, Lee, Nolan, VC/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Nelson 7.2 Development Review No. 2008-43 and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-03 — Under the authority of Development Code Sections 22.48, 22.42.080 and 22.10, Table 2-5, the applicant requested approval of architectural and landscape plans to remodel and make exterior improvements to an existing restaurant building. In addition, the applicant requested approval of a Minor Conditional Use Permit for the sale and on-site consumption of APRIL 8, 2008 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION alcohol beverages in connection with a restaurant and, to construct an outdoor patio area. PROJECT ADDRESS: PROJECT OWNER 23525 Palomino Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 AP Diamond Bar, LLC 310 Golden Shore #300 Long Beach, CA 90802 APPLICANT: JS Foods, LLC 1320 Johnson Drive City of Industry, CA 91745 PM/Gubman presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. 2008-43 and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-03, Findings of Fact, and subject to conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. C/Lee asked if there was another business that served alcohol in the shopping center. CDD/Fong responded that in the center there is a bar, a restaurant, daycare, and real estate office. C/Nolan confirmed that Happy's Restaurant serves beer and wine only. C/Lee asked if there were restaurants in Diamond Bar that served alcohol in patio areas because he was concerned about an adverse impact to children. PM/Gubman said he could not recall a restaurant in Diamond Bar that served alcohol outside of its building; however, there are numerous restaurants in the surrounding cities that do serve alcohol in patio areas. ABC has stringent regulations with respect to the service of alcohol out of doors. CDD/Fong said she understood C/Lee's concern and suggested that a compromise would be to restrict the service of alcohol with food only and review the project within a year to determine whether any adverse incidents had arisen regarding the serving of alcohol within the patio area. C/Lee said that would not mitigate his concern because alcohol is a very dangerous thing. CDD/Fong reminded C/Lee that the Planning Commission needed to address the land use issue about whether there should be the service of alcohol both inside and outside in accordance with the Minor Conditional Use Permit. Without allowing the restaurant the option the City would have no way of measuring the impact, if any. PM/Gubman responded to C/Nolan that it is unknown at this time whether the patio will be a part of this project and the designated area would not affect the parking. APRIL 8, 2008 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Shah said he previously understood that the outdoor was totally closed off from outside but he noticed that at one end there is an opening to the parking lot. He wanted to know how individuals would be restricted from walking out to the parking area with a drink in their hand. PM/Gubman said the applicant would be required to have a gate to any outside access. Also, the restaurant is subject to the ABC liquor licensing which precludes taking alcohol outside of the enclosed area. C/Nolan asked how the P.M. hours would differ from Sizzler's (the former tenant) and PM/Gubman said he did not know. VC/Torng thanked PM/Gubman for making his presentation via PowerPoint because for him it led to a clearer understanding of the proposal. He agreed with C/Lee that there would be a concern about serving alcohol because of prior bad experiences with other restaurants. However, the problem stemmed more from an entertainment atmosphere and one condition of this project is that no entertainment is allowed. CDD/Fong confirmed that there was no entertainment proposed for this upscale sit-down restaurant. There were no ex parte disclosures offered. Eugene Lawless, JS Foods, LLC, thanked staff and the landlord who is present this evening for their excellent support and help in launching this unique restaurant. East 180 is not a fusion or glitzy Las Vegas type restaurant; it is a Chinese Restaurant and it is grounded in the sensibilities of a good quality upscale casual restaurant. The hard liquor license will simply provide a convenience to the guests. The operating hours are not oriented to bar and nightclub hours. The restaurant proposed to close between 10:00 and 11:00 p.m. every evening. The project expects that alcohol will represent only about 13 percent of the total sales. In addition, the project proposes unique and interesting patio dining. Staff is oriented to providing a very upscale experience for its patrons. The applicant is very excited about being able to serve the underserved community of Diamond Bar and that it will provide a great opportunity to create a very unique type of dining experience that the applicant believes will help bring business to Diamond Bar. Rose Bacinski, Bacinski & Associates, stated that because this restaurant sits in the middle of a parking lot, the intent of the design for the patio is to be very inwardly focused. It will not be open to the outside with railings because there is not a great view out to the parking lot for customers to enjoy. Therefore, the project intends to offer an enclosed patio. The only exit from the patio to the APRIL 8, 2008 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION outside would be for emergency and handicap purposes. The patio is accessible to customers only from inside the restaurant. The ramp is an emergency exit for handicapped. She indicated that the applicant was comfortable with a one-year review of the alcohol service and had no problem with the conditions of approval. She asked to clarify Condition D 3 on page 11 because the applicant did not intend to restripe the entire parking lot because of its good condition. C/Lee asked if the applicant anticipated any adverse impact from selling alcohol in the patio area. Mr. Lawless said it would be difficult to conduct business in the patio area if alcohol was not served in that area. If the City disallowed alcohol service in the patio area the applicant would probably not build the patio because the service disconnect would disrupt the business. CDD/Fong recommended amending Condition D 3 on page 11 to state "project" area to ascertain that striping is not required for the entire parking lot area of the center. Ms. Bacinski asked that the condition refer to "the parking lot area adjacent to the restaurant. PM/Gubman suggested eliminating language about slurry and restriping to say that "the parking lot surface immediately adjacent to the building shall be in good repair at the time of occupancy." The applicant concurred. Dennis Loput, Jr., 310 Golden Shore #300, Long Beach, CA 90802, representing The Abbey Company, landlord for the site, said he was present to show support for the new tenant, JS Foods, LLC. Unfortunately, The Sizzler was in a constant state of turmoil and was unable to maintain the premises to code. He asked that the Planning Commission remove the condition requiring removal of an abandoned sign pole under Section B 5 A. 6 because the sign pole was not abandoned. Sizzler vandalized the inside and stole the sign from the top of the pole and it is the landlord's intent to deliver the sign pole to a new tenant. Therefore, a requirement to remove the sign pole would devalue the property. PM/Gubman said that if it was the Commission's desire to do so the condition regarding removal of the sign pole could be deleted and staff would deal with the landlord regarding the issue of whether or not it was abandoned. At this point staff believes that it is abandoned and, therefore, has lost its non- conforming status. However, staff would not want to encumber this project during resolution of that issue. Mr. Lawless said he understood the landlord's position. For purposes of serving the new project the applicant does not see the sign post as central to the APRIL 8, 2008 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION restaurant. This project is a destination rather than an impulse location. It would provide a benefit to the restaurant; however, it would not be central to the restaurant's brand identity. Mr. Loput said that loss of a freeway sign impacts the value of the property beyond this tenant's use. CDD/Fong said that staff would agree to eliminate the condition for this specific project and work with the landlord to resolve the issue. VC/Torng closed the public hearing. C/Shah said he was excited about the project and welcomed the new business to the community. C/Lee said he was still concerned about alcohol being served in the patio area but he too was excited about the business. C/Nolan felt the project was a beautiful restaurant and was excited for the City and the residents. She liked the patio and had full confidence that all ABC rules would be followed. She felt that serving alcohol with food was very reasonable with the review in one year to help C/Lee feel comfortable with the project. C/Nolan moved, C/Lee seconded, to approve Development Review No. 2008- 43 and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-03, Findings of Fact, and subject to conditions of approval as listed within the resolution with the proposed change in language to Condition D 3 as stated by PM/Gubman, deletion of Condition A 6 and inclusion of requiring the service of food with alcohol in the patio area and a one-year review of the CUP. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nolan, Lee, Shah, VC/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Nelson 7.3 Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-02 — Under the authority of Development Code Sections 22.58 and 22.42, the applicant requested approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to operate an art studio within a lease space of 1600 square feet in an existing center zoned C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial). PROJECT ADDRESS: 3209 Brea Canyon Road, Suite B&C Diamond Bar, CA 91765 APRIL 8, 2008 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION Q PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: Aaron Raphael 12400 Ventura Boulevard #238 Studio City, CA 91604 Soo Kim 2729 Saturn Street #A Brea, CA 92821 PT/Alvarez presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-02, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. There were no ex parte disclosures. VC/Torng opened the public hearing. With no one present who wished to speak on this matter, VC/Torng closed the public hearing. C/Lee moved, C/Shah seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2008- 02, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call Vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Shah, Nolan, VC/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Nelson PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: C/Shahsaid he was sorry he missed the last meeting and the Planners Institute. C/Nolan said the trip was good and there were many worthwhile sessions held during the Planners Institute. She offered to share training materials with C/Shah_ VC/Torng thanked the Commissioners for a good meeting and discussion on tonight's items. He thanked staff for helping the Commissioners during the Planners Institute and hoped that the City would set a goal of "Going Green." APRIL 8, 2008 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION 9. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 9.1 Moratorium - Issuance of Permits for Establishment of Amusements Entertainment and Other Specified Congregation Uses. CDD/Fong reported that in February the City Council adopted an Urgency Ordinance establishing the moratorium in a commercial/office zone and recently extended the moratorium for an additional ten and one-half months. The moratorium allows the City time to study the matter and determine whether additional standards should be developed to regulate these types of uses. Only new businesses and not existing businesses would be affected. Staff is currently analyzing other city's codes to assist with establishing a code amendment for Planning Commission review and recommendation to City Cou ncil. 9.2 Public Hearing dates for future projects. CDD/Fong announced that due to lack of items for consideration the Commission may go dark for its April 22, 2008, regular meeting. If so, staff will inform the Commissioners in advance of the meeting date. 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in tonight's agenda. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Vice Chairman Torng adjourned the regular meeting at 8:04 p.m. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Nart6y V'ong,;(Worrimuny y Development Director T orng, Vice Chai n