Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/27/2011MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 23, 2011 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Shah called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chairman Lee led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Jimmy Lin, Steve Nelson, Tony Torng, Vice Chairman Kwang Ho Lee, Chairman Jack Shah Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Natalie Tobon, Planning Technician; and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 12, 2011 C/Torng moved, C/Nelson seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 12, 2011, as amended. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, Torng, Chair/Shah NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Lee ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 4.2 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 26, 2011 VC/Lee moved, C/Torng seconded, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 26, 2011, as presented. AUGUST 23, 2011 PAGE 2 AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS 5. OLD BUSINESS: None. 6. NEW BUSINESS: 6.1 General Plan Status Report for 2011 PLANNING COMMISSION Lin, Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee None Chair/Shah None SP/Lee presented staff's report and proposed the Planning Commission to recommend approval of the General Plan Status Report for 2011 to the City Council. C/Torng asked where Silver Tip Park was located and CDD/Gubman responded that the park is off Longview Drive. C/Torng asked if the NFL Stadium project had to be included in the report whether or not it would happen. SP/Lee responded that commitments regarding the NFL stadium were provided by the City of Industry and have been included in the report regardless of whether the stadium is built in Industry or downtown Los Angeles. C/Lin asked if Diamond Bar had a diagram and cost indications of what would impact the City's streets and CDD/Gubman responded that the settlement agreement was deliberately vague with respect to how the funds would be earmarked. The commitment is to provide public improvements and services that have a nexus/relationship to the impacts that the stadium would impose. There is not a particular intersection where the money would be spent, it could be to improve intersections or to provide other amenities that would somewhat offset the potential impacts to the quality of life in the City. Funds cannot be spent on something that cannot be tied to the stadium but the City has a lot of latitude as to how the funds can be spent. C/Lin moved, C/Nelson seconded to recommend approval of the General Plan Status Report for 2011 to the City Council. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AUGUST 23, 2011 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee, Chair/Shah NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 Development Review and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2011-72 — Under the authority of Development Code Sections 22.48, and 22.56, the applicant, Ricky Huang and property owner Duncan Yeung, requested approval to construct a 318 square foot addition to the front of an existing 1,952 square -foot single family home, and a Minor Conditional Use Permit for an existing non -conforming front yard setback (15' 9" from the front property line where 20' is required on one side and 10' is required on the other), and non -conforming distance to the structure on the adjacent lot (10' 1" to the structure to the north where 15' is required) on a 7,288 square -foot (0.17 acre) lot. The subject property is zoned Low Medium Residential (RLM) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential. PROJECT ADDRESS PROPERTY OWNER APPLICANT: 1580 Kiowa Crest Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Duncan Yeung 1580 Kiowa Crest Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Ricky Huang 12515 Morningside Street EI Monte, CA 91732 PT/Tobon presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2011-72, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. C/Nelson asked for confirmation that the standards called for a 20 foot setback and the existing setback because it was built to Los Angeles County standards which is 15' 9" and the proposed does not go beyond 15' 9" and with the addition, is still within the maximum lot coverage of 40 percent to which PT/Tobon responded "correct." AUGUST 23, 2011 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Lin asked under what conditions a setback variance would be granted and not granted. PT/Tobon explained that this is not a Variance but a Minor Conditional Use Permit to continue an existing setback that was built under Los Angeles County standards. On Page 5 of staff's report, it states that "the City encourages homeowners to make appropriate improvements to their properties even if the existing improvements do not fully conform to current development standards, etc." This project meets the findings for the Minor Condition Use Permit. Chair/Shah opened the public hearing. Duncan Yeung said that he has lived in Diamond Bar for more than 25 years and the reason for this request is to be able to accommodate his family in a contemporary home. Chair/Shah closed the public hearing. C/Nelson said he has always been a proponent of making sure families can stay in Diamond Bar. He does not feel that this Minor Conditional Use Permit is egregious or extreme in any way. C/Nelson moved, C/Torng seconded, to approve Development Review and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2011-72, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee Chair/Shah NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7.2 Conditional Use Permit and Parking Permit No. PL2011-251 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Development Code Section 22.58, the applicant, Saanand Sethee, Steel Lotus LLC, and the property owner, Country Hills Holding LLC, requested Conditional Use Permit approval for a child daycare facility at an existing 7,450 square foot building at the south end of the Diamond Hills Plaza. A parking permit is requested to share access and parking with Diamond Hills Plaza. The subject property is zoned Community Commercial (C-2) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of General Commercial. PROJECT ADDRESS: 21385 Cold Spring Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 AUGUST 23, 2011 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: Country Hills Holding, LLC 8115 Preston Road, Suite 400 Dallas, TX 75225 Saanand Sethee Steele Lotus LLC 14514 Central Avenue Chino Hills, CA 91710 PT/Tobon presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit and Parking Permit No. PL2011-251, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. VC/Lee commented that Daycare Centers are great for the community. He asked for clarification on the parking requirement and shared parking demand analysis on Page 7, and the statement that peak hours and parking needs do not conflict with the existing uses. However, there is no foundation for this statement. PT/Tobon stated that in the Traffic and Parking Assessment (Attachment 3) it was noted that the daytime peak hours are 1:00 to 2:00 p.m. and the evening hour is 6:00 p.m. The table indicates that there are between 152 and 173 available during those times and on the weekend there are between 323 and 326 available parking spaces during those times. According to the Traffic and Parking Assessment there would be no conflict with the traffic for the Daycare use. VC/Lee said that when he and his wife visit the center on the weekends there are almost no parking spaces available. PT/Tobon stated that there are a lot of parking spaces available toward the south end of the parking lot. C/Nelson asked if the individuals who monitor child movement will cover the reciprocal parking area as well as the on -parcel area and PT/Tobon responded "correct" and referred the Commission back to the slide showing the path of travel where a staff member will monitor safe crossing for the children for which a condition is included. Chair/Shah asked why there was not a staff member required to be present to monitor children in the afternoon. PT/Tobon responded that the afternoon program runs from 2:20 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. and the after school program would provide shuttle service for the children which would take them adjacent to the entrance to the Daycare Center for drop off. AUGUST 23, 2011 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Torng felt that parents would park and take their children to the door of the Daycare Center and as long as staff has asked that a monitor be present that should suffice. He asked if there was a limit on the capacity of young children in this building. PT/Tobon stated that maximum number proposed is the maximum number the City would allow. The applicant must also obtain a maximum capacity from the Fire Department, and the Building and Safety Division before occupancy is permitted. C/Torng asked if there was a daycare currently operating at this location and PT/Tobon responded that the building was vacant_ C/Torng asked when the daycare would commence operation if the Planning Commission approved the CUP and Parking Permit and PT/Tobon referred C/Torng to the applicant to respond. C/Lin asked for clarity on the table and trip generations. CDD/Gubman explained that the table shows the previous average daily trips for the entire shopping center and compares it to the current situation with the amendments to the shopping center remodel that occurred since the 2005 approval. C/Lin asked if the building is being used and PT/Tobon reiterated that it is currently vacant. C/Lin asked if there was help to direct the parents driving to the building and PT/Tobon responded that the accented pathway is laid out with brick. SP/Lee explained that there are existing paved surfaces/sidewalks adjacent to the parking spaces. When one crosses from the parking area to the other side of the parking area the path is marked with brick pavers that distinguishes the pedestrian pathways. C/Lin asked if the applicant was willing to hire a full time crossing guard to provide safety of the children. PT/Tobon explained that as it is indicated in staff's report and in the resolution, the applicant would have a staff member monitor the area. C/Lin questioned the safety of the children in this proposal. CDD/Gubman stated that the children would be prohibited from going from their parents' vehicles to the entrance of the daycare center unescorted so they must be escorted by an adult from the building entrance to and from the vehicle. There will be no unsupervised pedestrian activity by the children. The fact that there are no physical barriers to keep the children and their escorts on those pedestrian pathways is the reason for recommending that an attendant be present to provide enforcement to ensure the parents and children follow those paths to provide for maximum safety. In addition, staff has included a condition to re-evaluate how the behavior, pattern, and habits of the daycare center patrons actually work in real life. CDD/Gubman further stated that it is difficult to contemplate where there may be conflicts or issues that staff would need to specifically address, therefore, have included a condition to allow the business to commence operations and provide for a test of how AUGUST 23, 2011 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION the traffic would flow. After reaching an equilibrium, staff will better be able to address any unforeseen pedestrian and vehicle traffic safety that must be resolved. C/Lin asked how many staff members the daycare would employ and where they would park and PT/Tobon responded that there would be 13 staff members present and that they would be directed to park away from the parking lot in front of the building. Chair/Shah said he too was concerned about the safety of the students and that if the City was certain to make it safe, it seemed to him to be a reasonable solution for the time being. CDD/Gubman added that the operators of the daycare center are also under the scrutiny of their insurance carriers that will have expectations for keeping the students safe in order to keep the insurance in effect. The City will not defer to the insurance company, rather stating that it will be an additional level of scrutiny with respect to liability and safety. C/Torng said that access was limited to one entrance on the south parking lot and PTlTobon pointed out the two ingress/egress points using the overhead and indicated the point at which there is no access. Chair/Shah opened the public hearing. Saanand Sethee, Kiddie Academy of Diamond Bar, said he has worked on this project for several months and everyone is excited to see it come to fruition. His family is a franchisee of Kiddie Academy, a national franchise based in Baltimore with 110 locations nationwide. He believes Kiddie Academy is a good fit because of the national support and local and area network of residents. He plans to completely remodel the interior with a state of the art interior and playground area for the kids from Diamond Bar and surrounding areas. He asked for the Commission's support of this project. C/Nelson asked if the applicant would be open to working with the owner of the shopping center to put blue lines adjacent to the brick walkway to delineate pathways and to put pedestrian crossing signs up coming from the shopping center and coming off of Cold Spring, Mr. Sethee said he would work with the owner to see if the owners would approve these installations. VC/Lee concurred with C/Nelson. He asked if the applicant concurred with staff's recommendation to have a staff member present to guide AUGUST 23, 2011 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION pedestrian and vehicular traffic for the safety of the children. Mr. Sethee responded that he will require staff members to not park in the 17 internal parking spaces and will point out the parent travel paths in the "Parent Handbook" so that they know exactly where and how they should be traveling to and from the building. In addition, it is a state requirement that parents accompany their children to and from the childcare center and at no time will a child be unaccompanied by a parent. He stated that he intends to comply with staff's condition that a staff member will be present during the required times to guide vehicle and pedestrian traffic. VC/Lee said his question was whether the applicant could meet the recommended condition to have a staff member or security guard present during the required hours and Mr. Sethee said he believed that they would be willing to do that. So far they have considered only the two recommendations mentioned in the Planning Department's report but if the Commission is asking for additional, probably 30 minutes would be sufficient during peak times but they must also consider the flow of traffic with respect to when parents actually come to the center to drop off their children and it will be determined through the enrollment process. There are a couple of enrollment schemes — one for a full day program and another for a one- half day program so it will depend on the capacities during different times of the day as to what the adjustments will be as they materialize. C/Lin suggested the applicant work with the property owner and the City's Traffic Engineer to mitigate the situation. He suggested that the applicant could work with the property owner to restripe the parking spaces and red line a certain area so that no cars would be allowed to park in the area allowing the shortest distance possible for crossing the driveway. VC/Lee said the suggestion made sense to him because if there is a red line the driver has time to recognize pedestrians are close. Mr. Sethee felt the parking spaces were beneficial because one does not have to cross the pathway and he is hoping that he can guide parents to drop off and pick up at a location he pointed to when the parking lot is full so that the kids can exit onto the curb and walk to the front of the building. Chair/Shah asked if the applicant had read staff's report and concurred with the conditions of approval to which the applicant responded that certainly they had. He asked staff to verbalize additional conditions prior to the Commission's approval. CDD/Gubman offered to reflect back to the Commission what he heard. He believed that he heard a suggestion that there be some signage similar to what one might see in school zones and staff can add a condition requiring similar signage to alert motorists that they are in a children's AUGUST 23, 2011 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION pedestrian safety zone. Examples of where those could be located would be starting at the Cold Spring Drive approach. Staff can work out the details of those and a condition requiring that a pedestrian safety alert signage program be incorporated into the site layout. The next comment he heard was from VC/Lee for staff to specify a minimum 30 -minute continuous timeframe for an attendant to be out in the parking lot to monitor the arriving and departing students and parents and presently, the Commission is still focusing on the two peak periods indicated in staff's report but would add the condition that during those peak periods the pedestrian activity be monitored for a minimum of 30 -minutes. He believed the third comment was to stripe a pedestrian path by removing one of the parking spaces on left side of the entry approach somewhere midway along that row of parking spaces to reflect the tendency for the parents and other pedestrians to seek the shortest path of travel. He does not believe the property owner is present this evening; however, the Commission has the authority to impose that as a condition, that one of those parking spaces be removed to accommodate such striping which can be an additional condition of approval. SP/Lee stated that the property owner is present. Chair/Shah said that although the City dictates the design, it is always good for the applicant to come up with a proposed solution for the parking recommendation made by the Commission such as signing and striping and let the property owner decide whether they want to put in a crosswalk. He does not believe the Commission should take on the liability of deciding where to place a crosswalk. In this process, the Commission will place a condition for a plan to be reviewed and approved accordingly. VC/Lee said he concurred with the Chair's comments. CDD/Gubman said the condition could be worded more generally to say that the applicant may include those components that the Commission discussed and have the Public Works staff review the plan so that rather than continuing this matter it can be conditioned for technical review of the applicant's pedestrian safety circulation plan. Chair/Shah thanked Mr. Gubman and asked if the property owner wished to address the Commission. Richard Yeh, representing the owner of Diamond Hills Plaza, asked if there was anything that he needed to respond to other than being encouraging and supportive of the applicant. His firm owns everything in the center except for the AAA building and parcels on the north end. AUGUST 23, 2011 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Nelson asked if Mr. Yeh would have any problem with the striping of the crosswalk or signage being discussed this evening and Mr. Yeh responded in concept no, but the idea of losing a parking spot to create a crosswalk in the middle section as earlier referred to would not necessarily be a good idea for the shopping center. Although there is abundant parking, any idea of losing more parking spaces would be resisted by the property owner. C/Nelson asked if he felt that would trump child safety and Mr. Ye said that obviously, child safety is the most important thing but his point is that there can be a crosswalk without having to lose a parking space. C/Lin asked if the property owner concurred with the findings of the Traffic Engineer's report and Mr. Ye said he is not a traffic engineer and he would not be able to comment. C/Lin said that the report refers to a residual of 156 plus spaces and the loss of one space would be minimal at best in the grand scheme of things and the Commission is asking for a six foot wide striped area for a walkway and if the property owner were to restripe the rest of the parking there may not be any spaces lost. Mr. Ye said he believed Diamond Bar has a minimum width for parking spaces and that would not be an option. To Mr. Lin's point that there are 156 and losing one space in an abstract way is correct but he believed there could be a crosswalk that started at the end of the parking space. To Mr. Lee's point, the property owner would have to consider whether that is the best place for a crosswalk given that it is much closer to the entrance of the shopping center than the proposed red stripe area, given there is already a stop sign where the red striped line is. C/Lin said he believed the decision should be left to the traffic engineers. C/Lin asked if Mr. Yeh knew the minimum width and Mr. Ye said he believed it was 20 feet. CDD/Gubman said the minimum width is 9 feet and Mr. Ye said that 20 feet must be the required length. C/Torng asked if the applicant had the capacity figures and Mr. Sethee said he does not yet have the numbers because the process has to go through Fire Department. More importantly, the more rigid standard is likely to be the California State Licensing standard which will issue the childcare license for this building. In addition to the City of Diamond Bar's Building and Safety Department, the Fire Department will come to the building to give the business a Certificate of Occupancy and the State of California will send a childcare licensing person to the site to determine what the square footage is and how much is usable for children. The state has a requirement that each child have a minimum of 35 square feet of interior space after subtracting hallways, office spaces, closets, etc., and that is how the center arrived at the 120 number. The state also has AUGUST 23, 2011 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION Ell 9 maximum classroom sizes per age group depending on the age of the children. For the younger children the maximum classroom size is smaller and as the children get older the classroom capacity increases. These numbers have been constructed with safety in mind. In short, the requirements put in place by the state licensing board will be much more stringent than the fire departments requirements. VC/Lee asked when the applicant plans to open the facility and Mr. Sethee said he anticipates a March 2012 opening. Chair/Shah closed the public hearing. C/Lin said he believed Mr. Sethee was a very sincere person and would live up to what he agreed to do and he believed Diamond Bar needed such a facility to provide convenience for the working fathers and mothers. VC/Lee cautioned the property owner that the Commission's mission for child safety should be uppermost in the minds of all concerned. C/Lin moved, VC/Lee seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit and Parking Permit No. PL2011-251, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution and the addition of a condition to stipulate that the applicant will work with staff to present a satisfactory child safety route to the childcare center proposal. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee Chair/Shah None None PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: VC/Lee reiterated that the City must visit on the issue of the safety of the young children who will occupy a building in this shopping center. STAFF COM MENTSIINFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. CDD/Gubman stated that there are no agenda items for the next regularly scheduled meeting on September 13 and staff recommends that the Commission adjourn tonight's meeting to September 27, 2011. On the AUGUST 23, 2011 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION September 27 agenda there will be at least two items: An after-school tutoring school in a 900 square foot space at the north end of the same shopping center as the daycare center and, a Conditional Use Permit for a wireless cell site facility proposed to be mounted atop the street signal at the corner of Grand Avenue and Summitridge Drive. CDD/Gubman updated the Commission regarding the See's Candy's soft opening that took place on August 22 and there will be an official ribbon cutting ceremony on September 9 with classic cars on display. The community and staff are very pleased to have a national retail tenant choose Diamond Bar at that particular intersection and are hoping that the presence of a national retail tenant will send a message to other national retail chains that this is a lucrative site to which they will hopefully be attracted. This is especially important since Ralph's Market closed last week. At this time, the City is not aware of a lease for a new tenant to occupy the currently vacant 40,000 square foot space. The City in collaboration with the owner of that shopping center contacted 19 grocery retail chains and most passed on the site, many because they simply are not in an expansion mode at this time and others did not show interest in the site due to potential location conflicts with other stores within their market regions. There are at least a couple of grocers that are still interested, Fresh and Easy being an interested grocer. Their typical store size is about 25,000 square feet so they would not be able to occupy the entire space. Should they decide to locate in the center 15,000 square feet would be divided off and staff would hope to see a drug store or compatible business share that shell. There is also another national well- known retailer that continues to show interest in the site and would be able to occupy the entire 40,000 square feet. If any developments are disclosed to staff he will be sure to pass the information along to the Commission. He wished everyone a happy and safe Labor Day weekend. C/Lin said he would not be available for the September 27 Planning Commission meeting. C/Lin asked CDD/Gubman what kind of sales tax the City gleaned from Ralph's on an annual basis and CDD/Gubman responded that he could not reveal this information as it is confidential information. 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in tonight's agenda. AUGUST 23, 2011 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairman Shah adjourned the regular meeting at 8:32 p.m. to September 27, 2011. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 27th day of September, 2011. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubma Community Development Director Jack Shah, + hairman