HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/25/2006IL H I IL 2 1001,
FILE COPY
U
M
CIOR&M MISAM•N
AGENDA
April 25,2006
7:00 P.M.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Government Center Building - Auditorium
21865 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
Chairman
Joe McManus
Vice Chairman
Steve Nelson
Commissioner
Ron Everett
Commissioner
Kwang Ho Lee
Commissioner
Tony Torng
Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on
file in the Planning Division of the Dept of Community & Development Services, located at
21825 Copley Drive, and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding
an agenda item, please call (909) 839-7030 during regular business hours.
In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title 11 of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any
type of special equipment, assistance or accommodation(s) in order to communicate at a
City public meeting must inform the Department of Community & Development Services at
(909) 839-7030 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting.
Please refrain from smoking, eating or The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper
drinking in the Auditorium and encourages you to do the same
PUBLIC INPUT
City of Diamond Bar
Planning Commission
MEETING RUI-Eil
The meetings of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission are open to the public. A member of the
public may address the Commission on the subject of one or more agenda items and/or other items of
which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission. A request
to address the Commission should be submitted in writing at the public hearing, to the Secretary of the
Commission.
As a general rule, the opportunity for public comments will take place at the discretion of the Chair.
However, in order to facilitate the meeting, persons who are interested parties foir an item may be
requested to give their presentation at the time the item is called on the calendar. The Chair may limit
individual public input to five minutes on any item; or the Chair may limit the total amount of time
allocated for public testimony based on the number of people requesting to speak and the business of
the Commission.
Individuals are requested to conduct themselves in a professional and businesslike manner.
Comments and questions are welcome 'so that all points of view are considered prior to the
Commission making recommendations to the staff and City Council.
In accordance with State Law (Brown Act), all matters to be acted on by the Commission must be
posted at least 72 hours prior to the Commission meeting. In case of emergency or when a subject
matter arises subsequent to the posting of the agenda, upon making certain findings, the Commission
may act on item that is not on the posted agenda.
INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COMMISSION
Agendas for Diamond Bar Planning Commission meetings are prepared by the Planning Division of
the Community and Development Services Department. Agendas are available 72 hours prior to the
meeting at City Hall and the public library, and may be accessed by personal computer at the number
below.
Every meeting of the Planning Commission is recorded on cassette tapes and duplicate tapes are
available for a nominal charge.
ADA REQUIREMENTS
A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot access the
public speaking area. The service of the cordless microphone and sign language interpreter services
are available by giving notice at least three business days in advance of the meeting. Please
telephone (909) 839-7030 between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday, and 7:30 a.m.
and 4:30 p.m., Friday.
HELPFUL PHONE NUMBERS
Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Commission, Cassette Tapes of Meetings (909) 839-7030
General Agendas (909) 839-7030
email: infoO-ci-diamond-bar.ca.us
■ K
- •. A
11.
Next Resolution No. 2006-17
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Joe McManus, Vice Chairman
Steve Nelson, Ron Everett, Kwang Ho Lee, Tony Torng
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS:
This is the time and place for the general public to address the members of the
Planning Commission on any item that is within their jurisdiction, allowing the public an
opportunity to speak on non-public hearing and non -agenda items. Please complete a
Speaker's Card for the recording Secretary (Completion of this form is voluntary.)
There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressing the Planning Commission.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chairman
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
The following items listed on the consent calendar are considered routine and are
approved by a single motion. Consent calendar items may be removed from the
agenda by request of the Commission only.
4.1 Minutes of Regular Meeting: April 11, 2006.
5. OLD BUSINESS: None.
6. NEW BUSINESS:
6.1 Consideration of change to Commissions' meetings starting time from
7:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. which is comparable to City Council meetings.
7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): None.
8. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS / INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
9. STAFF COMMENTS I INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
9.1 Public Convenience and Necessity (Alcohol Beverage Control.)
9.2 Public Hearinq dates for future proiects.
10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
PARKS AND RECREATION
COMMISSION MEETING:
CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENTPROGRAM
MEETING:
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING:
PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
Thursday, April 27, 2006
SCAQMD/Government Center Hearing
Board Room — 21865 Copley Drive
Tuesday, May 2, 2006 - 6:30 p.m.
SCAQMD/Government Center Auditorium
21865 Copley Drive
Thursday, May 4, 2006 — 7:00 p.m.
(for neighborhoods of Armitos PI., between
Pantera Dr. and Top Ct. and Pantera Dr.
between Armitos Pl. and Bowcreek Dr.)
Diamond Bar Center — Pine Room
1600 Grand Avenue, Diamond Bar
Tuesday, - May 9, 2006 — 7:00 p.m.
SCAQMD/Government Center Auditorium
21865 Copley Drive
DIAMOND BAR CHAMBER OF "Building Success in the Southeast
COMMERCE: San Gabriel Valley"
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
7:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m., Diamond Bar Center
1600 Grand Avenue, Diamond Bar
PUBLIC WORKS
COMMISSION MEETING:
11. ADJOURNMENT:
Wednesday, May 10, 2006 — 7:00 p.m.
(for neighborhoods of Bent Twig Ln. and
Adel Ave./Gemdal St.)
Diamond Bar Center — Pine Room
1600 Grand Avenue, Diamond Bar
Thursday, May 11, 2006 — 7:00 p.m.
SCAQMD/Government Center Hearing
Board Room — 21865 Copley Drive
R DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 11, 2006
Chairman McManus 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.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Torng led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Ron Everett, Kwang Ho Lee, Tony
Torng, Vice -Chairman Steve Nelson and Chairman Joe McManus.
Also present: Nancy Fong, Interim Community Development Director;
David Doyle, Assistant City Manager; Ann Lungu, Associate Planner; Gregg
Kovacevich, Assistant City Attorney; Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant
Lt. Maxey and Sgt. Sachs, Diamond Bar/Walnut Sheriff Department.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 28, 2006.
C/Evereft moved, C/Torng seconded, to approve the minutes of March 28,
2006, as corrected. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5. OLD BUSINESS:
6. NEW BUSINESS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
None.
Everett, Torng, Lee, VC/Nelson,
Chair/McManus
None
None
6.1 GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65402 — Resolution of the Planning
Commission finding that the sale of surplus property is in conformance with
the General Plan (GC §65402).
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 2
PLANNING COMMISSION
ICDD/Fong presented staffs report and asked thatthe Planning Commission
find that the sale of surplus property was in conformance with the City's
General Plan.
VC/Nelson asked if the property was original set-aside in association with the
development of the tract and ICDD/Fong explained that the City purchased
the land at auction when the private property owner defaulted. It was not part
of the park or open space development requirement. VC/Nelson asked the
appraised value of the property and what percentage of the budget went
toward the purchase. ICDD/Fong responded that the appraised value was
confidential information.
ICDD/Fong responded to C/Evereft that the property is contiguous to but not
part of Su mmitridge Park. The property is zoned Residential. C/Evereft said
he was concerned that a continuous stream of revenue would seem to him to
be preferable. He asked if a change in use would require a zoning change
because he thought the City was in a critical situation for lack of open space.
ICDD/Fong responded that the .1.27 acres was too small to be included in
open space and the City could use the funds to purchase other open space
areas to create more parkland.
C/Torng asked if this piece of land was being considered for a community
swimming pool and ICDD/Fong responded "no." C/Torng agreed that the City
needed the money. I
VC/Nelson moved, C/Evereft seconded
ded to adopt a resolution finding that the
sale of surplus property was in conformance with the City's General Plan.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
VC/Nelson, Everett, Lee, Torng,
Chair/McManus
None
None
7.1 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 061702 — In accordance with Chapter 21 of
the City of Diamond Bar Development Code, the applicant requested the
following approval: Tentative Parcel Map No. 061702 to subdivide one lot
I DRAFT
2§
APRIL 11, 2006
into three parcels. The project is consistent with and an implementation of
the Diamond Bar Village Specific Plan. (Continued from March 28, 9006)
PROJECT ADDRESS:
PROPERTY OWNER:
West of Grand Avenue and
South of Golden Springs Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Target Corporation
1000 Nicollet Mall
Minneapolis, MN 55403
APPLICANT: Pfeiler & Associates Engineers, Inc.
660 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
ICDD/Fong presented staffs report and recommended that the Planning
Commission adopt a resolution recommending City Council approval of
Tentative Parcel Map No. 061102 to subdivide one lot into three parcels.
C/Torng thanked staff for providing additional information in its report. He
asked that April 26, 2006, be corrected to April 26, 2005 on page 2, third
paragraph of the report. He felt it was mysterious that the previous decision
included only 20 parking spaces for Parcel 3 and believed it would create
problems for the future because Target would have a lot of business.
ICDD/Fong responded that depending on the future use additional parking
spaces may be required and staff would work with Target toward a solution.
Parcel 3 has a reciprocal agreement for parking and that parcel may use
some of the Target parking spaces.
In response to C/Everett, ICDD/Fong said that with respect to Item (10) on
page 6, an association would be formed prior to a final map approval.
C/Everett felt the. association should be set up sooner rather than later.
ICDD/Fong explained that typically, the CC&Rs provide criteria forforming an
Association. The City Attorney approves the CC&Rs prior to City Council
approval and recordation with the County. C/Everett asked if "when" should
be included and ICDD/Fong said that the Commission could add "priorto the
final map" on Item (10). C/Evereitt said that following language should also be
added: "shall be recorded with the final map." C/Everett pointed out that the
items on page 6 after Item (5) needed to be renumbered.
;If
APRIL 11, . 2006 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
VC/Nelson speculated that due to the parking configuration Target wanted to
maintain a window onto Golden Springs Drive and if so, could that be
accomplished by way of an easement that would provide for parking only.
He asked if there was any scenario or circumstance that might come before
the City for approval under which a particular use could come in to parcel 3
and; for whatever reason Target and the new owner of Parcel 3 disagreed
about the reciprocal parking agreement, the parking would be separated with
each parcel standing on its own. ICDD/Fong responded that because the
reciprocal agreement was a condition of the tentative map it runs with the
land and the property owner would have to get approval from the City in
order to change the reciprocal parking condition.
C/Lee asked if the installation of public art was mandatory, voluntary or
discretionary. ICDD/Fong responded that because this was a tentative map it
could be discretionary. The City has an ordinance that recommends placing
art in public places. If the project were conditioned for art it would be
mandatory. C/Lee asked by what standard the condition was removed.
ICDD/Fong stated that the item was continued and no action was taken;
thus, a condition was not imposed. And, the applicant asked that the
proposed condition be removed due to cost and staff complied. The Planning
Commission has the authority to impose such a condition. C/Lee asked if the
applicant said how much it would cost and ICDD/Fong said that the Target
project was already over budget.
Doug Cooper, Greenberg Farrow Architects, 15101 Red Hill Avenue, Tustin,
consultant for Target, explained that the reason Target requested the
condition for art be removed was because the project is approaching $1
million over budget. In addition, Target annually contributes about 5 percent
of its corporate federal taxable income to community involvement programs
that include education, arts, social services and community partnerships.
Mr. Cooper responded to Chair/McManus that the project was over budget
due to additional off-site requirements and increases in construction costs.
Chair/McManus said he understood the additional costs reached into the six -
figure bracket. Mr. Cooper agreed.
C/Torng said this would be a major development for Diamond Bar and felt it
would be even more attractive for the business to have an art piece at a
major intersection of the City. He asked Mr. Cooper if there was a possibility
that in the future art could be added. Mr. Cooper responded that it might be
possible through the community involvement program but as a construction
cost the budget would not allow it.
ICDD/Fong responded to C/Torng that in the future the Development Code
could be modified to clarify the timing for a development to provide an art
piece and even further specify the size and type of development that would
include art.
Chair/McManus recommended that through the sale Mr. Cooper could
possibly include placement of an art object. Mr. Cooper responded that such
a requirement might create an adverse response from a potential buyer.
ICDD/Fong explained that the Planning Commission would have another
opportunity to ask a corner restaurant applicant whether they would like to
include a fountain at the corner as a special architectural treatment, for
example.
Chair/McManus opened the public hearing.
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/McManus
closed the public hearing.
C/Evereft said he was disappointed about art not being included. However,
he respected the applicant's position. Finding no errors or problems based
upon the process to date he offered the following motion:
C/Evereft moved, C/Torng seconded to approve Tract Parcel Map
No. 061702 to subdivide 13.69 acres into three parcels as outlined in the
recommended resolution as amended. Motion carried by the following Roll
Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Everett, Torng, Lee, VC/Nelson,
Chair/McManus
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
7.2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-01 — Originally approved on
May 27, 2003, to allow for the operation of a restaurant and bar with
entertainment (i.e., entertainment shall only include a jazz band, guitarist and
pianist on a small stage within the bar; and a DJ with dancing for banquets
and private parties held within the banquet room) at the location referenced
below. Condition No. 5(o) of the Conditional Use Permit requires that the City
periodically review the operation to assure compliance with conditions of
APRIL 11, 2006
PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
approval and to consider whether to modify, add conditions as necessary, or
revoke the permit. (Continued from March 14, 2006)
PROJECT UNDER REVIEW:
APPLICANT:
Scribbles Grille & Restaurant
245 Gentle Springs Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
P.N. Patel, Ratan Hospitality, LLC
1205 W. Sierra Madre Avenue
Glendora, CA 91765
Raj Astavakra
6226 N. Calera Avenue
Azusa, CA 91702
ACA/Kovacevich said he was present this evening to represent the Planning
Commission and has had no contact with staff regarding this item. Tonight
the Planning Commission resumes a public hearing that was opened on
March 14, 2006, and continued to tonight's meeting. Upon conclusion of
staff's report each Commissioner should present his disclosures to disclose
into the record whether the Commissioner has gathered any evidence
outside of the packet and public hearing information. Following the
disclosures the meeting will move to the public testimony portion of the
hearing. Generally, the applicant is given about 15 minutes to testify and
should be notified about the ground rules prior to giving testimony including
rebuttal. Other interested members who wish to -speak are given up to five
minutes each. ACA/Kovacevich recommended strict adherence to the time
limits. Questions from Commissioners should be offered following the
speaker's testimony so as not to interrupt their allotted time. At the end of the
public testimony the Chairman will close the public testimony portion of the
public hearing to begin deliberation. At any point during deliberations the
Commission may direct questions to staff, the applicant and any member
who previously offered testimony. Tonight's issue for the Commission is
whether it feels there is substantial evidence in the record to support findings
necessary for revocation or modification of the Conditional Use Permit
pursuant to Chapter 22.76. ACA/Kovacevich referred the Commissioners to
page 6 of staffs report wherein staff sets forth evidence in support of its
recommendation.
ICDD/Fong presented staff's report ' and indicated that two issues were
before the Commission: 1) To determine whetherthe business was operating
A& DRAFT
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
in accordance with the Conditional Use Permit that was approved in
May 2003; and 2) was the business a public nuisance and is it a threat to the
public health, safety and welfare. ICDD/Fong recommended that the
Planning Commission reopen the public hearing, receive testimony and
direct staff accordingly.
Lt. Maxey stated that response information was included in the
Commissioners' packets and that he and Sgt. Sachs and other officers have
responded to Scribbles on numerous occasions, usually in the aftermath of
problems that have occurred on the site to determine whether the issues
could be prevented from reoccurring. What he has seen and what he has
discovered is that there is a huge volume of people and when an event is
over they congregate in adjacent parking lots such as Kmart and whatever
problems occur usually occur at that location. The local Sheriffs Department
has a limited amount of resources and the deployment is heavy and focused
during incidents that have occurred at Scribbles and crime in the City is
focused at the Scribbles parking lot. As a result, the rest of the community
remains at will during the time the department is focused at Scribbles and
this scenario creates a public safety issue for the entire community.
Sgt. Elizabeth Sachs said she works the 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. shift.
Generally, the four available units are dispatched to Scribbles until about
2:00 a.m. because the department knows that if a problem were to occur it
would likely happen between 1:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. in the Kmart (overflow)
parking lot. She said that her department believes there is going to be a
bigger problem than has occurred to date because there is a lot of drinking
including under -aged drinking and individuals who drink before entering the
business. Individuals congregate in the Kmart parking lot and there is a sea
of beer, whiskey and other hard liquor bottles left in the parking lot by the
time the parking lot empties out at about 2:00 a.m. She said she has
personally responded to incidents where during fights bottles were thrown
creating a safety hazard for the patrons, the deputies, and the adjacent
family -type businesses. At times there are about 600 people that patronize
the very successful club to enjoy the music and atmosphere. The problem is
that patrons leave at the same time and the department's goal is to have
everyone leave the site without a problem. Unfortunately, there are usually
problems'and she believes there would be even more problems without the
presence of the officers. Her 17 years of experience with the department
leads her to believe that with the mix of alcohol, young patrons, etc., there
would be even bigger problems than what the City had experienced so far.
Some of the injuries she witnessed were broken eye sockets, split lips,
M "DRAFT
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION
people hit with bottles, windows broken, etc. One man was brandishing a
baseball bat to fend off other patrons. The security inside the facility is good.
However, once the patrons exit the club they are out and about in the City
and it is up to the four units and the supervisor to rein everyone in. She has
witnessed street racing, bad collisions,- etc. She reiterated that many of the
patrons were becoming intoxicated outside of the club in the overflow parking
area. Most of the problems occur on Thursday evenings. And she again
reiterated that in her opinion, it was a "time bomb" and needed to be
addressed.
Chair/McManus asked Sgt. Sachs if when the officers were called to the
scene they contacted Scribbles to make them aware of the incident and of
their presence and Sgt. Sachs responded yes, most of the time. She again
stated that most of the time Scribbles was very cooperative and that most of
the calls come from outside of the club and from the overflow parking across
the street from the club's parking area (Kmart parking lot).
ICDD/Fong responded to Chair/McManus that the maximum occupancy of
the building is 580. She believed that at times there were possibly 100 to 200
people outside of the building after Scribbles had closed its doors because it
has reached maximum capacity. And the overflow patrons have caused
additional public safety issues.
C/Lee asked if the City had taken any action against the businesses
inappropriate actions and ICDD/Fong said that tonight's hearing was the first
step.
ICDD/Fong responded to C/Everett that a copy of staffs report was provided
to the business owner and to the property owner.
Lt. Maxey responded to C/Everett that an individual who is victimized has a
right to decide whether to file charges, which dictates what the department
does in response. If a traffic accident occurs the suspect has no say in the
matter because the department enforces those laws. Sgt. Sachs said she
had witnessed substantial injuries and the victim did not want a police report
filed. In such cases the department cannot force individuals to become
documented victims.
C/Torng felt that due to the number of problems the City should have started
its review earlier. ACA/Kovacevich explained that whatever decision the
Commission made this evening would be appealable to the City Council.
4
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION
ICDD/Fong stated that the applicant could reapply for a Conditional Use
Permit and it would be subject to the Commission's review. She responded
to C/Torng's statement about responding earlier that staff received
complaints and sent a letter to the applicant in late 2004/early 2005
reminding him that the Conditional Use Permit allowed limited entertainment
only.
C/Torng said he drove the area on a Sunday to become familiar with the site.
Since Scribbles was not open he saw no crowds.
C/Evereft said he too did a drive through during the day to confirm staffs
map and layout.
There were no other Commissioner disclosures offered.
ACM/Doyle wanted the Commissioners to understand that during certain
hours on Thursday nights every law enforcement resource that the City had
'was dedicated to this single operation which meant that there were no law
enforcement patrols or other types of criminal deterrence taking place in
other parts of the community. Bottom line is that this is a significant drain on
the City's public safety resources and creates an issue for the health, safety
and welfare for the balance of the community. The Sheriffs Department
responds to specific issues but is unable to patrol as usual when they are
dedicating their resources to this problem. Therefore, it is not a matter of
responding to a series of incidents it is a matter of dedicating every public
safety resource available to Diamond Bar as well as drawing from other
adjacent communities to address this situation almost every Thursday night.
Chair/McManus announced that the applicant would be given 15 minutes to
speak and that public speakers would be limited to five minutes each.
Frank Weiser, Attorney, 3460 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 903, Los Angeles
raised the following objections and asked that the hearing be continued
because he was hired last night and because the partners and property
owner received their copies of the staff report on Saturday. He said he
understood the hearing was continued from March 14. However, the owner
was out of the country. Due process requires that the applicant be given
meaningful opportunity and notice to be heard. He cited cases involving due
process. In addition, the applicant is entitled to copies of the underlying
reports referred to during tonight's meeting and in staffs report so that he
can adequately prepare his defense, Mr. Weiser said he was concerned that
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 10
A DRAFT
PLANNING COMMISSION
given the evidence presented so far this evening that there was no formal
notice given to the applicant. He heard Sgt. Sachs say that Scribbles had
been cooperative when notified about some of the alleged problems.
However, his client tells him that he was never given formal notice of any of
the charges and never told in writing that there was a problem that would
cause his Conditional Use Permit to be modified or revoked. State law
(Health and Safety) requires that the applicant be given notice and an
opportunity to correct the problem before he is put out of business. He
submitted evidence that the applicant had invested more than $900,000 in
the property and in accordance with state law (Goat Hill Tavern vs. City of
Costa Mesa) a Conditional Use Permit and the amount of investment is a
fundamental property interest. He asked if the City was proposing mitigation
measures. He asked for fundamental fairness.
Raj Astavakra, applicant said that he had not received one citation for
exceeding the maximum occupancy. In 2004 there were no incidents. In
2005 there were incidents cited and no citations issued. He said he was very
surprised at the allegations. People who live in the condominium complex
complain that the gate was lifted by one of his patrons and how do they know
it was one of his patrons. They also complain about ladies changing clothes
in front of the complex and he was never told about such incidents. The
problem of someone speeding down Diamond Bar Boulevard and elsewhere
in the City does not necessarily come from Scribbles patrons. There are
fights at Acapulco and inside Oak Tree Lanes and there was even a murder
at that location and nothing happened. He felt like a victim when he was
given a letter on Friday that contained complaints from the Sheriffs
Department. The Sheriffs Department has not given him a letter or any type
of document that says he violated his Conditional Use Permit. He asked the
Commission to give him a chance to respond to the City's complaints and
said he would respond honestly and to the best of his ability.
C/Lee said he was concerned that the Conditional Use Permit was based on
certain conditions and the conditions were promises between the applicant
and the City. If the applicant d * oes not comply there is no foundation for the
Conditional Use Permit. Staff reports so many findings such as Item d, "that
the permit was obtained by misrepresentation orfraud;" and c— "one or more
of the conditions of the permit have not been met or have been violated." Is it
true or false? Mr. Astavakra responded "it is false, sir." He said he does not
run just a 'club. He has a sit down restaurant with a band playing in
accordance with his Conditional Use Permit. If someone rents his place and
hires a DJ they can have any kind of music they wish. C/Lee asked
D DRAF
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION
Mr. Astavakra if he has complied with the conditions of his permit and
Mr. Astavakra responded "yes" and said that he could charge whatever
admission he felt was appropriate. C/Lee asked staff if that was true and
ICDD/Fong responded "no, according to the Conditional Use Permit."
According to the Conditional Use Permit the applicant can have a jazz band,
a guitarist or a pianist on a small stage within the bar and a DJ with dancing
only for private parties and only within a banquet room.
C/Lee said that perhaps the applicant's interpretation of the Conditional Use
Permit was incorrect and perhaps the City Attorney would clarify why the
applicant said he had a right to charge an admission fee. ICDD/Fong said
that a nightclub that had a promotion of a known performer would charge an
admission fee and for private parties such as weddings there would not be
an admission fee. She cited the applicant's statements from previous
Planning Commission minutes wherein he testified as follows: "Scribbles
would provide upscale dining with a band playing. The last call is at 12:00
midnight. We kept it at 1:00 a.m. so that patrons could finish their drinks and
have a cooling off period before leaving the restaurant. There will be no DJ
music or any dancing except for private events if they want to dance, like
graduation parties or things like that." ICDD/Fong went on to say that staff's
report indicates that the applicant misrepresented the use to the Planning
Commission and the Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit
based on what the applicant promised.
Mr. Astavakra said that his Conditional Use Permit does not say he cannot
charge at the door. He has provided security in accordance with his
Conditional Use Permit. He asked Lt. Maxey if he could pay to have the
Sheriffs Department on duty for four hours at a cost to him of $500. Seven
times there has been no response from the Sheriffs Department. In fact,
there was a huge command post outside of Scribbles because the Sheriffs
Department believed there would be 2,000 to 3,000 people. The City
authorized more than 16 deputies at a cost of $3500 to $4,000 and nothing
happened. The fire department came twice on that same night. Scribbles'
was not overcrowded and was not over capacity. In fact, it was under the
maximum at 562 people including the Scribbles staff members. Scribbles
contributed $200,000 in sales tax revenue and property tax revenue over the
past two years. Thirty-seven individuals work at Scribbles.
VC/Nelson asked if Mr. Astavakra was typically present on the premises on
Thursday evenings and Mr. Astavakra responded "every night, sir." He said
he was there until 4:00 a.m. and in fact, when the Sheriffs Department
DRAFT
PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION
comes to his establishment he is there and he talks with them. VC/Nelson
asked if Mr. Astavakra had been outside between the hours of 1:00 a.m. and
2:00 a.m. and gone into the Kmart parking lot and Mr. Astavakra said he
goes into his parking lot and to the Kmart parking lot. VC/Nelson asked if Mr.
Astavakra had witnessed the problems and whether he felt the behavior was
acceptable. Mr. Astavakra said that four times there have been problems in
the Kmart parking lot. Exactly four times Scribbles called the Sheriff s
Department to intervene. VC/Nelson asked if Mr. Astavakra had not
witnessed some of the activity that others commented on and Mr. Astavakra
said that under aged drinking takes place in the Kmart parking lot. Scribbles
does not allow under aged drinking and if people want to hang around
outside and drink it is their problem and Scribbles cannot do anything about
it. People drink at Carl's Jr., and he cannot stop them. It is the Sheriffs job to
stop them. It happens at Taco Bell across the street too.
C/Evereft asked if Mr. Astavakra had a copy of staff report and Mr. Astavakra
responded that he received it on Friday evening.
C/Torng asked Mr. Astavakra when he started with KITS -FM and
Mr. Astavakra' said that the flyer was only one flyer for only one event.
C/Torng asked why the Sheriffs Department says that every Thursday
Scribbles has a special event. Mr. Astavakra said that people do rent the
place and he was not saying that they did not. C/Torng said that there were
fewer incidents in 2004 and more incidents in 2005 and that was why he was
wondering if the special events on Thursday started in 2005. The Conditional
Use Permit says no DJ. Mr. Astavakra responded that Thursday night is one
night. People -mostly rent the facility on Friday and Saturday nights. The
complaints are not all Thursday nights. And he wondered why the paper trail
started all of a sudden. The condominium complex started complaining about
the noise. If you look at the Sheriffs report there are only four complaints
during the past year. Nothing happened in 2004 and nothing happened in
2003. And people have complained about sound decibels of 85 to 120. He
said he found it hard to believe. This would be like a jumbo jet landing on an
air strip and at 2500 square feet away from his place with a Best Western in
between and no one from that location complaining. In fact, the owner of the
Best Western is his landlord and obviously his business would suffer the
most.
Chair/McManus took exception to Mr. Astavakra's statement that there were
only four complaints during the past year.
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION
Chair/McManus reopened the public hearing.
Vince Galloway, 300 Prospectors Road said that although the current
discussion is about Scribbles it is a continuation of the Platinum Club that
was previously in business on the site. He said he was at a Diamond Bar City
Council meeting three, four and five years ago where a lot of these same
concerns were voiced and a lot of promises were made about how the
problems would be fixed. The noise was so loud that residents with windows
facing the club had pictures rattling on their walls. Three homeowners moved
away because they could no longer tolerate the noise. Whereas noise is a
concern there are other issues. Fall Creek Community is a condominium
project consisting of 144 units and approximately 73 percent are Diamond
Bar residents that pay taxes and vote. During the history of the club there
was never a concern until the level of incidents with the new club escalated
and caused the residents concern about public safety within their community.
On February 12 the residents met with Sgt. St. Amant and Deputy Clark to
share their concerns about drug dealing, overt and public sexual activities
and vehicle break-ins. On one Friday night there were 12 to 15 vehicle break-
ins and every one was reported to Sheriffs Department. During the entire 25
years I that he has lived in the complex there were not that many break-ins.
Although they cannot confirm that these incidents involve patrons of
Scribbles they are fairly certain because of the increase in the number of
incidents that occur primarily on Thursday evening. In fact, to avoid
additional confrontations the complex has equipped the back gate with a
timer that turns the gate off between 10:00 p.m. and 4:00 a.m. especially on
Thursday nights. Now there are reports of people climbing over the gate
because they have parked inside the complex and can exit on Prospectors
Road and avoid DUI detection. Before the timer was installed five or six
residents would take turns standing guard from 10:00 p.m. to midnight
believing that if there were a number of residents present the homeowners
would not be confronted and people would be less likely to inflict damage. He
said he would not be surprised if a future incident involved guns. The
homeowners no longer feel safe and the noise level keeps people awake.
The security remains in front of the club and does not venture down the
street to see that people are drinking, breaking bottles and disrobing.
Rob Eknil, Fall Creek Property, felt that by his own admissions the applicant
was in clear violation of Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-01. While there
have been numerous incidents at the complex the bottom line is whether or
not the applicant is in compliance with the Conditional Use Permit and the
fact that the City is sifting at risk when all of the deputies are at one location.
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 14 PLANNING COMMISSION
He felt it was a stretch for the applicant to advertise on the radio and
signposts for private parties. Mr. Eknil felt there was little reason to continue
the hearing because the applicant publicly admitted he was in violation of the
o I
Conditinal Use Permit.
Eddie Martinez said he has witnessed several of the aforementioned
incidents. In fact, his wife was confronted by one of the patrons trying to get
into the gate by following her. When she did not let him in he became very
upset and threatened her. Mr. Martinez said he reported the incident to the
Sheriffs Department. Especially on Thursday nights there is a lot of action in
the area, a lot of drinking and people milling about. It is unsettling to the
residents to have people hanging about the area because it seems unsafe to
be outside and risk possible confrontation.
Michael Case, 328 S. Prospectors Road #52, said he serves on the Board of
his homeowners association and since Scribbles opened there has not been
one meeting during which this issue was not discussed. Residents complain
about the noise, traffic, car break-ins, people following residents through the
gate, harassment, etc. On several occasions he has seen people hop the
gate from the club to get to their cars parked in the condominium complex. It
is obvious that the individuals are drinking in the parking lots outside of the
club and there. are flyers advertising the club strewn about the grounds and
the flyers show scantily clad females, which he felt did not meet the definition
of a "private. party." On any Thursday, Friday or Saturday one can pass by
the club and see 20-30 people waiting outside to gain access and another
20-30 people standing outside on the patio smoking and listening to the
music, which is certainly not within the banquet room. The community is
concerned about safety. He and his wife live on the opposite side of the
complex and, hear people fighting and driving recklessly in and out of the
Kmart parking lot at 1:00 a.m. Even at a distance from the club they can hear
the music at 10:00, 11:00, 12:00 and 1:00 a.m. The Board is concerned that
something major could happen and the residents are thankful that the City
has provided a forum for addressing their concerns.
Danoush Tehrani, 364 S. Prospectors Road #141 said the noise is terrible
and his car was vandalized. The repair cost was $8,000, $1100 of which he
paid from his own pocket. He was inside the nightclub once and he paid $10
to the applicant for entry. He saw three different groups on three different
stages. The noise is so bad that it keeps him awake on Thursday, Friday and
Saturday nights.
DRAFT
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 15 PLANNING COMMISSION
Sharman Haynes concurred with her fellow residents and said she was most
concerned about the safety issue. She is single and has been threatened.
Clearly, the club is not in compliance with their Conditional Use Permit.
Amanda Pechy, 364 S. Prospectors #140 said she also concurred with her
fellow residents. She has two small children and she usually sends them to
grandma's house on Friday and Saturday night so that they can sleep. She
felt it was an infringement on her rights that she could not have her children
with her and that they were deprived of their sleep and she should not have
to take sleeping pills in order to get rest because the music is so loud and
her doors rattle.
Henry Lee, Prospectors Road said that he had witnessed Scribbles patrons
hiding in the cul-de-sac area, urinating by the gate and climbing the gate to
get to their cars. He wondered if the applicant allowed minors to frequent the
restaurant and why there was a cover charge.
Wen Hui Su, Prospectors Road, said she had the same problems as her
neighbors. She has stood outside her unit witnessing non-residents trying to
enter through her complex gates. The residents do not want the business to
fail but the elders are unable to sleep at night. She has called the Sheriffs
Department and asked that the nightclub turn down the music a little bit. The
noise level subsides for about 10 minutes and then increases again. And if
the applicant really wanted to correct the situation he would make sure the
noise level was lowered for the entire evening. The problems occur outside
of the business and even if they corrected the noise level there are still a lot
of people outside and out of control of the club. How would the applicant be
able to correct the problems that occur outside of the club and around her
complex?
Yumi Branstad, 394 Prospectors Road #107, said she had been in the
commercial lending business for about 30 years and believes the Scribbles
parcel would be difficult to convert to another use. In her opinion a
Conditional Use Permit is an evolving document and when the City approved
it the owner probably had a good intention of keeping it that way but when
the business does not come in he has to adjust the way he does business
and deviate from the original spirit of the Conditional Use Permit. When the
owner has someone sign a lease they probably do not foresee that they will
have all of the problems. The owner is responsible. Many people come from
other countries and learn that they have rights and must respect other
people's rights as well. Fall Creek is proud of its project and the fact that it
aDRAFT
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 16 PLANNING COMMISSION
has made good use of unused land adjacent to the freeway. While Fall
Creek is not extravagant it is a place that the tenants love and it is sad that
the residents have to make fortresses out of their homes. Last Friday she
was coming home from out of town and drove into her complex about
2:00 a.m. on Saturday morning just about the time the club was closing
down. She forgot that the gate was closed and when she tried to gain entry
she could not move because she was completely surrounded by people. She
was finally able to turn around, drive through the Kmart lot and gain access
to her complex through the front area. She said, she was ashamed that she
had left it to her neighbors to defend the complex because she had no idea
what was happening next door. She said it is a very scary situation to her
and she believes that the property owners are responsible for keeping
harmony with the surrounding community 365 days a year 24 hours a day.
When the applicant originally applied for a Conditional Use Permit to operate
as a restaurant there was no need to complain. because a restaurant would
not be intrusive.
Chair/McManus asked Lt. Maxey if there was any reason other than
Scribbles for people to congregate in the area on Thursday, Friday and
Saturday and Lt. Maxey said none that he was aware of.
ACA/Kovacevich responded to Chair/McManus that the Commission could
choose to grant a continuance. He said he did not agree with the due
process concern raised by the applicant's attorney. This is a quasi-judicial
administrative hearing - there are no formal rules of evidence and no
"charges." This is the hearing to decide on the revocation and this is the time
when everybody presents evidence including the applicant. The applicant
received the packet with the staff report and corresponding evidence at the
same time the Commission received the information. ICDD/Fong responded
to Chair/McManus that the City sent a letter to the applicant a year ago
reminding him that he needed to operate within the Conditional Use Permit
and not have entertainment that was outside of the approved Conditional
Use Permit because the City had received complaints. Chair/McManus
asked if a new tenant was obligated under the Conditional Use Permit in
effect at the time of the lease and ICDD/Fong responded "yes."
Mr. Weiser said he disagreed with ACA/Kovacevich and believed that the
property owner, adjacent property owners, the Sheriff's Department and the
City of Diamond Bar could be involved in protracted litigation. He said he had
been through this over and over again with a lot of cities. The City of Los
Angeles has the resources to fight this out in the courts and there may be
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 17 PLANNING COMMISSION
policy reasons. He said he has represented motels in the downtown area of
San Bernardino. He has nationally published cases and referred to Patel v.
Penman, City of San Bemardino Hotel/Motel Association v. City of San
Bernardino, Montez v. City of Bellflowerand other recent cases. He asked in
the beginning that the City find a middle path and said he had not heard
anybody talk about whether there would be a way of mediating the alleged
problems without having to put the applicant out of business along with the
37 people who work for him; any proposals of modifications of the
Conditional Use Permit; any ability to sit down with the applicant to see if he
has proposals and, instead of getting this City involved in the waste of a lot of
taxpayer money and protracted litigation because it will not end here and it
will not end with the City Council and there will not be a solution five years
down the line. Try to resolve it — it is not an all or nothing proposition. As far
as notice, he could have brought in a number of people including the security
guards about what they perceive is happening in the area. So, there is good
reason to have a continuance in addition to wanting the underlying reports.
Mr. Astavakra assured the community that if things continue he will put a
security guard in the area to prevent people from jumping over the wall or
gate and to make sure things like that never happen. He asked for a chance
to at least work on the problem. At the same time he would like the Sheriffs
Department to work with them to prevent such occurrences and to protect his
investment so that the City does not have to pay for it. As a human being he
has a right to voice his opinions and he would like a chance to work it out.
C/Lee asked Mr. Astavakra if he understood the nature of the problem and
Mr. Astavakra responded affirmatively. C/Lee said he strongly believed that
there was no need for this matter to be continued and asked Mr. Astavakra if
he agreed. Mr. Astavakra said the problem was not as it was portrayed
because he could bring in 20 people from the same condominium complex
who would say there was no problem. He could bring various people from the
Sheriff's Department who would say there were no such problems as was
portrayed in the report. The last report and last incident says no suspects
found — everything is okay.
ICDD/Fong explained that there was a second "finding" contained in staffs
report and there were findings that supported the revocation or modifications
of the Conditional Use Permit as well as other options for the Planning
Commission. One of the options recommended by staff was to modify the
Conditional Use Permit to eliminate an entertainment element, which,
according to the applicant through his testimony is ancillary to his restaurant
MDRgFi
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 18 PLANNING COIVIIVIISSIOv�l
use. The City has not indicated that it would shut down his business. The
applicant did not have approval for the entertainment.
ICDD/Fong reviewed the Planning Commissions' options: 1) To modify the
Conditional Use Permit to eliminate the entertainment; 2) to allow the
operation to continue with the entertainment and modify the Conditional Use
Permit to add conditions of approval to address the public safety issue and
eliminate the nuisance issue; 3) if the applicant desires to continue to have
this type of nightclub use he would need to apply to modify the Conditional
Use Permit and at the same time the Planning Commission would have the
authority to impose additional conditions of approval to address any potential
nuisance problem and, 4) the Planning Commission has the authority to say
there is no nuisance problem and that the business is operating within the
Conditional Use Permit.
Chair/McManus asked whether the Commissioners wished to grant the
applicant another continuance.
C/Lee said he was not in favor of a continuance.
Lt. Maxey responded to VC/Nelson that when an individual or business
seeks to hire a deputy they believe it will eliminate the problem. Asking one
deputy to deal with 700, 800, 900 people presents a safety issue and the
department would never station an officer in such a circumstance. Whether
the applicant agreed to pay one, two or three deputies, they would not be
able to deal with that many people and the balance of officers on duty would
be called in to assist and the department would be compromised and the
response would fall to the taxpayers of the City of Diamond Bar. The intent
would be to make it appear to be a Sheriff's Department problem whereas in
realty the problem originated with Scribbles. He saw no benefit of having the
applicant pay for a deputy because it would not alleviate the department's
responsibility for responding to incidents and it would most certainly have
little or no impact on the problems the department has experienced at the
location.
VC/Nelson said he had a difficult time being convinced that there was no
sense on the part of the applicant that no problem existed. He did not like
Sheriffs reports being referred to as "allegations." The Commissioners are
not judges, just simply citizens. Commissioners are appointed and told that
as Commissioners their responsibilities are to act as citizens for the good of
the community and it offends him when individuals try to turn this venue into
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 19 PLANNING COMMISSION
a court of law. He said he believed that based on staffs report that the
applicant had pushed the envelope in several ways. He was surprised that at
his first hearing following a two-year hiatus from the Commission that the
applicant had requested a continuance because he was out of town and then
to hear an advertisement on KIIS-FM radio about a big event on that very
Thursday night. He would have thought that in such an instance discretion
would have been the better part of valor if the applicant were serious about
trying to resolve these issues with the City and the community. He believed
that the gravity of this situation dictated immediate action. However, he was
not inclined to only consider making a decision tonight. He said he was on
the fence about granting the continuance on the condition that until a
planned program was worked out that these events should cease and desist
and further, that consideration be given as the plan was developed to offerto
have representatives from Fall Creek work with the City and the applicant to
provide a solution. In short, he was inclined to be fair and work out the
problems. He wants the restaurant to stay but the ancillary problem areas
need to be dealt with as expeditiously as possible.
C/Evereft said he was extremely troubled and concerned about the safety
issue and he was very concerned about continuing this matter to the next
meeting. He said he was equally troubled about allowing the applicant time to
respond. He received the packet on Friday and he is still digesting the
material. He understood the residents' concerns and had experienced the
same frustrations and fears when he lived in another city. As residents each
of us have rights and tough as it is sometimes, property owners on a different
side of a decision have rights as well. He felt it had been confirmed this
evening that staffs report was very clear about violations of the Conditional
Use Permit and probable violations of the original intent due to statements by
the applicant to the previous Commission. And in his opinion, there had
indeed been as was earlier stated, a pushing of the envelope. He said he
could note vote,tonight on any action without allowing the applicant time to
respond by the next meeting. For these reasons he would be inclined to vote
in favor of a continuance to the next Planning Commission meeting.
C/Torng stated that based on all of the evidence the basis of the Conditional
Use Permit was described by the applicant and he felt it was important proof
that there was a promise that there would be no DJ and no DJ music except
for private events. He felt it was very strong evidence and felt it was not a
matter of pushing the envelope but rather the applicant opened the envelope
and this was a direct violation of the Conditional Use Permit. This is a public
safety issue and what kind of image does this City intend to project? He
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 20 PLANNING COMMISSION
believed that in accordance with the General Plan the City should be a safe
and rural community and believed that this was not in the City's image. This
matter was postponed from March 14 to today and why should the
Commission wait another two weeks. The applicant surely had enough time
to talk with the lawyer and to make his presentation this evening. He
appreciated the good effort by staff and the Sheriffs Department and he
supported the evidence presented during tonight's meeting.
C/Lee agreed that Commissioners were appointed to work for the common
benefit of the people. Although there are no children present tonight to
express themselves a mother who spoke about having to send her kids to
their
eir grandparent's house to avoid the environment. It behooves the
Commission to create a better community for the children. The Commission
should decide based on the City's ordinance whether the applicant has kept
his promise to comply with the conditions of the Conditional Use Permit.
C/Evereft moved to continue the public hearing to April 25, 2006. The motion
failed for lack of a second.
C/Torng moved, C/Lee seconded to adopt a resolution amending Planning
Commission Resolution No. 2003-1-6 to prohibit any and all entertainment
use finding that the current operation of the business is a violation of the
approved Conditional Use Permit; that the business constitutes a public
nuisance and threatens the public health, safety and welfare of the
community.
VC/Nelson asked if in the event this motion was adopted whether the
applicant would be allowed to offer a plan for a modified entertainment use.
ICDD/Fong said the applicant had two options: 1) To appeal the Planning
Commission's decision to the City Council, and 2) to apply for a new
Conditional Use Permit to allow for the current type of entertainment use.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Torng, Lee, VC/Nelson,
Chair/McManus
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Everett
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
By virtue of the vote, the public hearing was closed.
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 21 PLANNING COMMISSION
S. PLANNING COMMSSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
C/Lee believed that residents should trust their government and thanked staff for
providing a complicated report. -
VC/Nelson said his hesitation was not reflective of any disregard for or lack of
confidence in this City's staff. Diamond Bar staff is the best there is.
C/Everett echoed VC/Nelson's statement and said he voted against the resolution
due to the timing and his conviction of what he believed to be due process and a
significantly written due process. He thanked staff and the Diamond Bar/Walnut
Sheriffs Department and stated he was an advocate and a supporter and trusted
both entities. He acknowledged C[Torng for chairing the Wine Soiree, a very
successful event. He thanked staff for a terrific birthday celebration. His daughter
who grew up in Diamond Bar and now lives in Indiana. She returned to the City for
the party and was very impressed with the "community spirit." He said he
appreciated the City's recognition of Joe and Lois McManus for their volunteerism
and thanked them for their excellent service and support to the City of Diamond Bar.
He wished everyone a happy Easter.
C/Torng congratulated Chair/McManus on his award and thanked C/Evereft for his
comments. He thanked staff for a very good report that helped make his decision
easier. The City celebrated an excellent birthday and the City wants to maintain its
good image and he felt the Commission did a good job in that regard today.
Chair/McManus thanked staff for a good report and commended the
Commissioners for their thoughtful conclusions. More than 22 residents attended
tonight's meeting conveying their concerns about a problem they believe needs to
be remedied.
9. STAFF COMMENTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects.
10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in tonight's agenda.
DRAFT
APRIL 11, 2006 PAGE 22 PLANNING COMMISSION
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission,
Chair/McManus adjourned the meeting at 9:38 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Nancy Fong
Interim Community Development Director
Joe McManus, Chairman
vM-
MEMORANDUM
CommuNm & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
PLANNING DivisioN
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Nancy Fong, Interim Community Development Director
BY: Sandra Campbell, Contract Senior Planner
DATE: April 11, 2006
SUBJECT: Findings of Public Convenience and Necessity — City Council Delegation
of Authority to the Planning Commission
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the following report and
attachments with regards to the authority of making findings of public convenience and
necessity for alcohol licenses for retail outlets and for bars.
Within the past 15 years, many studies have determined that there is a direct link
between high alcohol availability and increase in crime. It is also argued that the
destruction in Los Angeles riots was partially a result of community resentment against
the large number of alcohol sales in neighborhoods in South Central Los Angeles. For
both these reasons, the restrictions on the sale and transfer of alcohol licenses were
toughened with the California Legislature's adoption of the Caldera Bill in 1994. The
Caldera Bill also gave the state and local governments the authority to consider the
density of alcohol outlets and the crime rates when deciding to approve alcohol
licenses.
Section 23958.4 of the Business and Professions Code (the Code) allows the California
Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control to consider "undue concentration" when
reviewing an application for an alcohol license. Section 23958.4 defines undue
concentration as location of an alcohol establishment in an area that is one or both of
the following:
1. A crime reporting district with a 20 percent greater number of reported
crimes than the city's average;
Memo to Chairman and
Page 2
April 25, 2006
Members of the Planning Commission
2. A census tract where the ratio of on -sale licenses to population exceeds
the ratio of on -sale retail licenses to population in the county in which the
license is being issued;
3. A census tract where the off -sale licenses to population exceeds the
county's ratio of off -sale to population.
The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) established acceptable
levels of alcohol outlet density per census tract. Attachment 4 displays a table showing
the census tracts within the city of Diamond Bar and the current number of on -sale and
off -sale licenses within those tracts. Crime statistics are kept by the local police
department according to procedures established in the code.
If the area in which the license application is determined to have an undue
concentration of licenses, the ABC must deny the license application unless a finding of
"Public Convenience and Necessity" (PCN) can be made. Depending on the type of
license, the finding of PCN is made by the ABC or the local government.
Under the Code, the ABC retains the right to determine whether to issue alcohol
licenses for restaurants (on -sale alcohol) in areas of undue concentration when a
finding of public convenience and necessity (PCN) can be made. Local municipalities
were given the authority to deny an application based on findings of PCN for alcohol
licenses for retail establishments (off -sale alcohol) and bars.
State law does not establish criteria to be used to determine PCN. Establishing criteria
for findings of PCN is left to the local government. 1.
Although the Caldera Bill was adopted in 1994, the City of Diamond Bar had not
received any requests from the ABC to make a determination on PCN for an alcohol
license application until recently. In the fall of 2005, the ABC requested that the City
make a PCN determination on request to sell wine bottles in pre -wrapped gift baskets.
Since the City did not have a process in place to review the request, the City authorized
the ABC to make the PCN findings.
Subsequently, the city staff sought to remedy this situation by requesting that the City
Council delegate authority to the City Manager. However, the City Council felt that it
was more appropriate for the Planning Commission to have the authority to make PCN
findings.
On January 17, 2006, the City Council approved a resolution delegating to the Planning
Commission the authority to make findings of public convenience and necessity for
alcohol licenses applications for retail outlets and bars.
2
Memo to Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Page 3
April 25, 2006
DISCUSSION
The process for determining public convenience and necessity begins with the submittal
of an alcoholic beverage license applying to the ABC. It should be noted that the
process is separate from local municipalities' requirements for approval of a conditional
use permit for alcoholic beverage sales. If one is required by the City in which the use is
located, the ABC requires that a CUP be obtained before the alcohol license can. be
issued. The City of Diamond Bar requires approval of a CUP for sales of alcoholic
beverages at a gasoline station and a MUP for on -sale of alcohol.
The process for determination of PCN is as follows:
1. Application received by the ABC for an alcoholic beverage license for off -
sale alcohol or for serving alcohol at a bar;
2. ABC determines whether the license location is whether a high crime or
over concentration area. If the ABC determines that a waiver of PCN must
be obtained, then the applicant will be referred to the City in which the
establishment is located for an PCN determination;
3. Application is submitted to City for PCN decision by the Planning
Commission;
4. Planning Commission reviews the PCN application for issues that may
include the following:
• Police Department crime statistics and calls for service;
• Proximity to sensitive uses such as schools, parks, churches, and
residences;
• Whether the city would be afforded greater shopping opportunities;
• Suitability of site for the type of business;
• Contribution to the economic vitality of an area;
• Positive cultural or entertainment value;
• Amount of loitering and homelessness within the location of the
establishment.
3
Memo to Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Page 4
April 25, 2006
5. Planning Commission makes determination via adoption of a resolution;
6. If PCN waiver is approved, ABC is notified of City's determination;
7. If PCN waiver is denied, the applicant may appeal decision to the City
Council.
8. Once the City makes the determination on the PCN and the ABC is
notified, the applicant may further appeal the decision if it is negative.
Community members may also file a protest on PCN approvals with the
ABC within 30 days of the issuance of the letter to the ABC.
9. The review of PCN doe ' s not require a public hearing. A PCN
determination will be placed under consent calendar section of the
agenda.
Summary
With the approval of the Caldera Bill, the California Legislature recognized the
importance of giving local governments control over the number of alcohol licenses that
can be issued in the community. By allowing the local government to make the PCN
findings for off -sale alcohol outlets and bars, the city can take into account such issues
as proximity to sensitive uses, police calls for service, and appropriateness of the
location.
The City Council has determined that the Planning Commission is the most suitable
venue for PCN decisions because the decisions are related to land use. As such, the
City Council adopted. Resolution No. 2006-04 authorizing the Planning Commission to
make decisions for the city on PCN applications.
Attachments:
1. City Council Resolution No. 2006-04
2. Business and Professional Code Section 23958.3
3. Census tract data on alcohol licenses
4. Excerpts from the Development Code
RESOLUTION 2006- 04
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
DELEGATING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THE DUTIES OF DETERMINING
WHETHER A FINDING OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY WARRANTS THE
ISSUANCE OF AN ALCOHOLIC LICENSE
WHEREAS, in 1994, the State of California passed legislature that amended the
Business and Professions Code relating to alcoholic beverage licensing which affect the local
governing bodies of cites and counties.
WHEREAS, Section 23958.4 of the Business
ss and Professions Code was added to
define "undue concentration" of license and to establish the procedure for determining if
public convenience and necessity will warrant the issuance of a license notwithstanding a
determination that there is an undue concentration of licenses.
WHEREAS, Section 23958.4 allow the City Council, to delegate the duties of
determining whether public, convenience and necessity would be served to the Planning
Commission.
WHEREAS, Section 23958.4 requires the City Council to issue a written notification to
the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control regarding the delegation of the duties of
determining whether public convenience and necessity would be served.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Diamond
Bar as follows:
Section 1. That the Planning. Commission is authorized to determine whether a
finding of public convenience and necessity warrants the issuance of an alcoholic license
from the California State Department of Alcohol Beverage Control as allowed by
Section 23958.4 of the California State -Business and Professions Code.
Section 2. That the decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the
City Council subject to the provisions of Section 22.74.040.
.Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage
and adoption.
2006-04
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 17th day of January, 2006.
Carol Herrera, Mayor
1, Linda C. Lowry, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, California do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution Number 2006-g_4 was duly and regularly passed, approved and
adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California, at its regular meeting held
on the 17th day of January, 2006, by the.following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Chang, Tanaka, Tye, M/Herrera
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: MPT/Zirbes,
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
j
Linda C. Lowry, City Grerk
City of Diamond Bar
2006-04
W
i --
z
0
W
V
W
cc
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL ACE 111
110 Ai.C{)HOiiC BEVERAGE CONTAOGACT
complied with, and shall investigate all matters connected therewith which may affect
(3) As to off -sate retail license applications, the ratio of off -sale- retail licenses to
in the applicant premises are
the public welfare and morals. The department shall deny an application for a license
license
population in the census tract or census division which
the ratio of off -sale retail licenses to population in The county in which
or for a transfer of a lioense if either the applicant or the premises for which a
located exceeds
is applied do not qualify for a license under this division.
license if issuance of that
She applicant premises are located.
Notwithstanding Section 23958, the department my Issue a license as follows:
The department further shall deny an application. for a
(b) on -sale bona fide eating Place license,
license would tend to create a law enforcement problem, or if issuance would result
(1) With respect to a nonretail license, a retail
t `C"iun a�tai,lt�hnv-nt AC riPfinCrl
in rtr n d to an undue CenCentratien r.f it=c=� CX=,. �a ry �'�—eed ,.s Swivel LJf%JV,Y.
w� wr- Y
Ch. 778% in January 1,
t r L t s rt.
u evu s iriC�icy ui S t, r
aretail Ilt:erlst: to iUCtl iVl , iiusi r rw '
543.16, a retail license issued is conjunction
(b) of Section 25th a
tthat
nisborys.—Added by stats. L9aq Ch. ]794, in effect ijacuaq f, 2985. S9a1a.1988, effect
Lsn$ obsHtvted`JDWfor°I9W.Aniend dbyStatsI934,Gh.640.ineS8etJmtoasy I,IMnmemdedSOreavace
in subdivision shows
�r manu€hetuser's license, or a winegrower's license, if the. applicant
x29958.4,
Pollee pmbtem eeaaideratiaaa—EridurY Vut S,.�. Beard of Equalisadan in Passing m eppliratioa "on.-mle" bas and rvWe
liansc acrd m poa= repot out opssatiac of pram in s,"iccaovr immased polka poblems ccaimm cmcvLkms. atkh was na dnr)E.d
public convenience or necessit would be served by the issuaflcei .�=
li y Fes"
{2} Itll respect to any other license, ;� gavrrmt g;• �.e iii e�area in
-s biirdlrtate officer or body,
at hewing, justified d=W of licenses. Pturnrr v.Swre BewJ of FXswttaarttaa 1743t� I GSI. App. 2d 738, 367'x. 2d 437.
Merai twrttudedenned..0knasfaras involving inf=1 rnal dst,cmty for the oxposeofreamwg�m�,nmeta<a.�ade.
Or rt5 (1`51 at
which the applicant premises are located:,v #m
ttleterrnrneS days�ofinotifcahon�:of a completed application that public
trtrrHaNsrian.48Cal. 2d52.
F ;Dei tr�aor�.— gra s�ifw�ara�wm P,.*, lxr� a
a„a�a �,brr,e�f�nRt',sl�n z�ans� dnna,.r�rr�.nr ,nne rrfAa �rw��rcantec e�c,,.Apr.zas63
1y�,tthtn4
t� ,•; zw the issuance. The 9f3 day period shat
Fconventent�e'or neisessrty would'be serveclby
upon receipt by the local governing body of {A) notification by the
Privatengseemeutscot binding on deprrrtmnat.—An altegat apomsas bat n pans cot to proom usv ora liaenre
isrtotbindingontbedepsotarntsirtcaUtaComOutianbndcsigruteddb depdrmxwestheagencycbuaedwith (be denya inixs6pdt g
a Ak •.elfsic arra morals. Sdw46k Inc,
commence
department of an application for licensure, or (B) a completed application according
if whichever is later-
appUcaslons for Umnses, and smh im=Ugasions most be made With a lila a the prolan. Pd
o. DrtAarrtt m rf Akah"rie 8nc+r,ge Cnxtmt 153 CAF. App.—MM
to local requirements, any, ot
If the local governing or or its designated subordinate officer or body, nes n
nesEdentlntate+wa—Funding dnagnxdsts are ra a resideorial wren. upon ac,sicdng ewdeaoe eamriroam too vp For dcaiai era
!same. t yidcrta d at a traffic L—rd wvuld be co:Wod hY rwted CitZ at a pte-1—arse coasUnrtes "goadclaw-for denial of a floret.
make a determination within rile 9{1 -day pe rind then the department may issue a license
or necessity would be
Mrb Y.AlrraSafrc8eY uge Cmtm,t Appear, Board and BkMrdr. $2 Cllr. M 238, Sao Pec. 2d r.
a
6Sc
if the applicant shows the department that public convenience
the department shall not alai ute
Aubman ie, denial of applieatiaa—The pure m.f Cmlitomia Admin .=ui a Code, Tak A, Scotian askaitiag mnpmads:
denlnl by the Depusment oFAI-ohelic 7snorageCwtrml of an app6radco for Uowvng aha` an a}gtidtion has bora denied wiihie eac
-celRiors
served by the issuance. In making Its detL'.trrllnatiOn,
to the failure of the Local governing body, its desinience EL subordinate
7ca,is mpermltotedepwU=d Wpmkctag,irtst1oYina todevcict anorswh-dung .sou.Ny-Ay-ppr anddh
pro.:kA by the saaioo For granting , h an,ppucstkm arra the sevxts tot o+a oti�sE drr+.'nl ne Pn Must. aecdts. cw does r_+, Rgstl,a
any weight
li
t^ :rptCe 1; t?pteTlt2lnnfiinn f�eganding public convenience or necessity
ren exercise ardisc+etcm to onndtittr orb ,n wlnlinrv. air Y. d(C^6e!?i 9ltrttyr {:r..^: A„^pe�: a.. .... '.'=..r1.7 .:.f�..'.9
� �
J
within the 90 -day period.
the following definitions shall
23958.1. Invest' tion exception. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section
� P g Pgeog;W
{c} For purposes of this section,
boundaries
'cal areas within the boundaries of a single
,Reporting districts” ttrans t
23958, the department is not requited to investigate the personal qualifications of a
(1)
rxttity fCitV nF the uriineOlDflratijd area of a cD�tnijr that a[>r 3de>llified
lioe7>fied brei And w1;6C wtarlle_calar whoa any tinc for nc%lititi»at Faeu+r aril wine .�t7,.,?aY�IPr
onvar»mr�nta,
by the local law enforcement agency in the compilation slut maintenance of statistical
licenses_
sense.—Added Btmt� ISt,g,[�s. lea ;m�oreecseate�rla I9cs.
information on reported crimes and arrests..
"Reported crimes" means the most recent yearly eoltrpilation by the ]tical taw
23958,2. Transfer between partners. Notwithstanding die provisions of Section '
{2)
enforcement agency of reported ogees of criminal homicide, forcible tape, robbery,
theft, cotnbirted with
23958, the rtment is not required to investigatethe nal qualifications or miser
between
'avat� assaut� bilary, larceny, theft, and motor vehicle
except traffic citations.
of a currently licensed person when a licene being partners
cu
alL arrcm for other crimes, broth felonies and rnisderneanors,
the pops
lio,isse d.
new partnere being licensed.
and newbeing
(3) ``population within the census tract or census division" means
decennial or special census. The
Hieno
dby Btaie l9 Jtauumsy 1, Isis.
as determined by the most recent United Staten
from establishing
23958.3. Investigation of orf -sale beer and Brine applications. Repealed fly
elation determination shall not (WCMe to prevent an applicant
within the census tract or census
Soars. 1982, Cil. 1189, in effect January 1, 1984,
that. an increase of resident population has occurred
' - 239584 Undue_tPrubdC c05tY:fi�f'orrt0L12S5ity. (a) ��
division.ui
"Population in the county" shall be determined by the anmiaFpopationestimate
of Section 23958, "undue concentrattott" mans the case in which the applicant premises
transfer of any retail license are located in
(4)
for California counties published by the population Research Unit of the ii�epartmant
for an original or premi ses-to-premises
an area where any of the following conditions exist:
(1) 'lite applicant premises are located in a crime reporting district that has a 2{J(5)
of Finance.
"Retail licenses" $hall include the following:
Type 20- (off -sale beer and wine) and i�ype 21 off -
percent greater number of reported crimes, as defined in subdivision (c), than the average
(A) Off -sale retail licenses:
number of reported crimes as determined from all crime reporting districts within the
sale general). 43 on -sale beer
licenses: All retail do -sate licenses, except `I}rPe {
jurisdiction of the local law enforcement agency.
a
(2) As to on -sale retail license applications, the ratio of on -sale retail licenses to
(B) On -sale tti�lail 45
44 (on -sale beer and wine for fishing party boat}, Type
and wine for train), `i'ype ,
46 on -sale beer and wino for airplane} Type
b�`Pe (�
population in the census tract or census division in which thea applicant rises are
' PP t
{on -sale beer and wine for
54 on -sate `neral for boat),
for train and sleeping `
:.; located exceeds the ratio of on -sale retail licenses to population in the county in which
53 {an -sale general neral for vessels of more
55 (on -sale general for airplane),' ype 56 {sale
the applicant premises are located.
Type
m
m
N
N
l7�
LO
N
�o
N
N
112 ALCOHOLIC BiIMAGP Cil:v"rROLAU
than 1,000 tons burden), and Type fit (on -sale general bona fide public eating place m
intermittent dockside license for vessels of more than 15,000 tons displacement}.IL
(6) A "premise,; to premises transfer" refers to each license being separate and IL
distinct, and transferable upon approval of the department. Cr
(d) For purposes of this section, the number of retail licenses in the county shall 0
be determined by the most recent yearly retail license count published by the department
in its Procedure Manual.
(e) The enactment of this section shall not affect any existing rights of any holder
of a retail license issued prior to April 29, 1992, whose premises were destroyed or
tendered unusable as a result of the civil disturbances occurring in Las Angeles from
April 29 to May 2, 1992, to reopen and operate those licensed premises.
ffl This section shall not apply if the premises have been licensed and operated
with the same type license witmn W oat's 01 me appucatwn.
history.—Added by state. 1994, Ch. 630, inetfcetJenunryi.749G u� e�ifbyStata.29".ch.aIIana86%
in effect January j, 307. to require govening bodies to make detasmioation of pablie owwonience and necessity
within 40 days Amended by State. 199%Ch. 91, in effect January 7, 799.8, to stake techoieai,non•sobstantivc
ebanges.
23954 Fee refund, if an application is denied or withdrawn, one-fourth of the
license fee paid, or not more than one -hundred dollars ($100), shall be deposited in
the Alcohol Beverage Control Fund as provided in Section 25761. The balance of
this amount shall be credited on any taxes then due from the applicant under Part 14
(commencing with Section 32001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code
or the Sales and Use Tax Law, and the remaining portion shall be returned to the
applicant.
History.-8tato. 7955, t:rbr 3842, in ,fleet 8ep4ember 7, 1965subadto ted "Part 14 or Dioiarnn 8 or the Revenue
and Taxation Code"ior R6ia diviston:'S W& 1857, Ch, 8987, in effect Jnry 1% 191M revima reload fee. staLL
1979 CIL WS. in"yea ona"y1,7979,eabatitutedMfor S.°5.31sI&t994CIN 900,9neffeat5eptember2b,1902*
inereasad amountto $100 and provided (bat it hedeposfto iohSC Fund.
239660. ..a': i:.'.a� 6vi..�i.aiiiu. WJZCP- Lu vy uFrae.I. i77i,
23961. Drawing for priority. (a) If, at fire conclusion of the period prescribed
by the department for the filing of applications for issuance or transfer of on -sate general
licenses or off -sale general licenses in any county in its notice of intention to receive
applications therefor published pursuant to Sections 23821 and 24070, the department
finds that there are more applicants for the particular type of license than there are
licenses available for issuance or transfer under Sections 23821 and 24670, the
department shall, within 60 days fallowing the conclusion of said period, conduct a
drawing to determine the priority in which all; of such applications filed with it shall
be considered. No more than one such drawing shall be made in any county in any
one year, and no person will be entitled to more than one opportunity to participate
in such a drawing in any county with respect to an application for issuance oe transfer
of any one type of license. The number brawn by any applicaw shall indicate the priority
to be given to the consideration of his application but shall not insure the issuance
of a license by the department.
(b) If a drawing is not conducted as provided in subdivision (a) of this section,
applications ft issuance of original on -sale general licenses and off -sale general licenses
in a county or transfer of such licenses into such county shall be made and considered
as otherwise provided in this article.
(e) No person shall be qualified to participate in such a drawing unless such applicant
is a resident of California for at least 90 days prior to the drawing Prior to the issuance
of any license, pursuant to such a drawing, the applicant shall present proof of such
City of Diamond Bar Census Tract Ma�
and Alcohol License Data
4U]3]6
4832|
14033.20 1
-ense Type-
i Sale
Number
Allowed
On Sale
41
49
Number
Type- Allowed.
E
4 #214 1 3
DEVELOPMENT CODE § 22.10.030
Supp. No. 12 CD22:33
Permit Requirenzent by District
LAND USE (1)
C-1
C-2
C-3
I
See Standards
in Section:
Metal products fabrication, machine/
welding shops
P
Paper product manufacturing
P
Plastics and rubber product manu-
factoring
P
Printing and publishing
P
Recycling—Reverse vending ma-
chines
P
P
P
Recycling—Small collection facility
P
P
P
Research and development (R&D)
P
Small scale manufacturing
P
Warehousing, wholesaling and dis-
tribution
P
RECREATION, EDUCATION & PUBLIC
ASSEMBLY
USES
Adult oriented businesses
P
22.42.020
Clubs, lodges, and private meeting
halls
CUP
CUP
Community/cultural centers
CUP
Computer services/network gaming
centers
CUP
CUP
22.42.35
Cultural facilities, libraries and mu-
seums
P
P
P
Health/fitness facilities
CUP
CUP
Indoor amusement/entertainment fa-
cilities
CUP
CUP
Outdoor recreation
CUP
Religious places of worship
CUP
CUP
CUP
CUP
Schools—Public and private
P
P
Schools—Specialized education and
training
P
P
P
P
Studios—Aft, dance, music, photog-
raphy, etc.
CUP
CUP
CUP
TI -waters, auditoriums, meeting halls
CUP
I CUP
RETAIL TRADE USES
Alcoholic beverage sales, off-site (3)
P
P
P
Alcoholic beverage sales, off-site, in
conjunction with the sale of motor
fuel (3)
CUP
CUP
CUP
Alcoholic beverage sales, on-site
MUP
MUP
MUP
Supp. No. 12 CD22:33
DEVELOPMENT CODE § 22.10.030
KEY TO PERMIT REQUIRERIENTS
Symbol
Permit Requirement by District
LAND USE (1)
C-1
C-2
C-3
I
See Standards
in Section:
Hotels and motels
P
P
P
tional use permit required (2)
Medical services—Clinics and labs
P
P
P '
use permit required (2)
Medical services—Hospitals
CUP
CUP
CUP
Offices—Accessory to primary use
P
P
P
Offices—Business and professional
P
P
P
Personal services
P
P
P
Personal services—Acupressure, oras-
sage therapy, tattoo parlors
CUP
CUP
CUP
Psychic reader
P
P
P
P
Public safety facilities
P
P
P
P
Public utility facilities
P
P
P
P
Repair services
P
Service stations
P
P
P
P
Storage, outdoor
P
P
22.42.090
Storage, indoor
P
P
Vehicle services—Maintenance/mi-
nor repair
P
P
P
Vehicle services—Major repair/body
work
CUP
P
Veterinary clinics and animal hospi-
tals
CUP
P
TRANSPORTATION & COMMUNICATIONS USES
Heliports -
CUP
Parking facilities/vehicle storage
CUP
CUP
Radio and television antennas and
wireless telecommunications antenna
facilities(4)
22.42.130
Transit stations and terminals
P
Utility lines
P
P
P
P
Vehicle and freight terminals
CUP
CUP
KEY TO PERMIT REQUIRERIENTS
Symbol
Permit Requirement
Procedure is in Chapter
P
Permitted use, zoning clear-
22.46
ante required (2)
MUP
Conditional use, minor condi-
22.56
tional use permit required (2)
CUP
Conditional use, conditional
22.58
use permit required (2)
Supp. No. 12 CD22:35
LEGEND PH = PUBLIC HEARING
X = NON PUBLIC HEARING
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
Project Meeting Schedule
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
April 25, 2006
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW PROJECTS
PM 2 '
PC ��CC y. PC , C r: PC 'sCC
/065/9/06 5/23ProJect x:16/6/06
Location
J
4/25/06
_
DIAMOND BAR/COLD
CUP 2004-01 SC/
MCC REALTY
Cont.
SPRINGS (Country Hills
DR 2004-19 NF
(Modification to CUP
PH
Towne Ctr.)
VAR 2004-02
400 RANCHERIA
CUP 2005-06 AJL
NORTHMINSTER PRIES. CHURCH
PH
DR 2005-33
Remodel and Addition
3131 STEEPLECHASE
DR 2005-22 AJL/
LIANG HUO YOU
PH
TP 2005-07 LDM
2 -Scor Sin le Family Residence
3145 STEEPLECHASE
DR 2005-30 AJL/
S&W DEVELOPMENT
PH
LDM
New Single Family Residence
GRAND/GOLDEN
TPM 61702 SC/
TARGET CORPORATION
PH
SPRINGS(Target)_NF
Subdivide lot into 3 lots
_._ _ _ _... _.._._.__ _-__• .._..
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS
70L
._t.... :. i"'`:.. y 'i•a Pt :' ,�... fb. (:"Ji<ce,KZ z n`-su�_•4tL'Cn•;w ri .. (? tt' 4.if `Y :�{ i(' ,i.,, t L� ...tbv
ttr-
_ �, t` - - :..�„i. _ '.-y ... r"rf.`•t'= :r T -, a;.:f(. ifs ,— :}.t",xC�c.. L�j ,•, t •'c V� �s .r .u-4 c _ Fy'�s•l -, ?tom.•:'==s,...:.. f.. �7 i
y w� `Is`:. 'I L•: k t � '�� . s; t.�; f...... 'Lk -�S.n f :�.^ 'S�•. _ �a fir,_. :3i : s.{, �, r.l .- .r�- S< ..+�_ . �}. ,r�"!<:,G:�:F,c>.:;'t.5 :,r.1r:.S,...��r z•'.^^K:
..,7 �=" E3 _.c. - <rA •;. `Szc,„b•.. �.j„.%=.�+�,`•,.,i'z:`-v-
Y�; �� ' ��"'=' :-(',' r& �'- _ �`"• _ � y�tf =�t x�. kr �; it�?4}•rn. '�kti. �Z7 � �3 '� f3 ✓r-. r ss::r:. ��;z•. 2;: �_ _
a tea' Ilian l.• 5 .y. ti..
Case # �lPM�
Project Location
utt.: _ .Firer
.: -f ,.y
a� `f a
��, L � ,.f_. Y:�--�
?'.r'. � F.,r.-.. '%
_ar-1 �.,. _App _:�,,. �.: �..r.:
{`ic „'��n. 7
_����" ., .� � (�
:,.,t"5',"^ ,�>'.x.._-�.W.. _
ri. F .: .,J_:...,::: �. �...... t. _
- - - -- -- --
,......
_... _ - -
--
NONE
PENDING PROJECTS
j
!(.
MUM r .y
'MY.: 3r. _+l, iri .2 { L
t .u•:'_
_rr-,-. ,.,.:r....`'^'$t,?r�'. 7:...v `S- `� '"rt. ;�"tatus��.. •r-:. _[' z :r
a'T"r+r#" t "` f �r '.
i-w""J,-t-t� A
Project Location
(n r jw.+a r f p'Sr,
= F:�-x�.r,.
f" ..4 - I iCid:i�.l .02,7^"eF v^gt
.•� �:t',.,,.r�4.t -t.. ...5 -'....R'
AJL
KAISER MEDICAL
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
1336 BRIDGE GATE
DR 2005-32
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Medical Offices
LKS
APPLICANT IFIED OF MPLETE PLICATION —
2600 BROKEN FEATHER
DR 2005-41
o over 50%)
FORMATION
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
WAITING FOR DM
MCUP 2005 16
(Addition/Remodel
MV 2005-12
CITYWIDE
DCA 2006-01 AJL
DEVELOPMENT CODE
PROCESSING
AMENDMENT
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
CLEAR CREEK CYN/
TTM 06166 AJL
OMAR, AKBAR
(5 -lot Single Family Residential)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONNEW PLANS TO
MONUMENT CYN
TM 2005-02
SUBDEVELOPER.INFORMATION.
LEGEND PH = PUBLIC HEARING
X = NON PUBLIC HEARING
Project Meeting Schedule CITY DFDIAMOND BAR Page 2
".~.""O""= COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PENDING PROJECTS (continued)
Project Location
_W12-0
2366 CLEAR CREEK LN.
-i'l:'-ER
DR 2006-13
LDM/
MIDLEY, GEORGE
PROCESSING
AJL
(Demo and rebuild Single Family
23649 COUNTRY VIEW
DR 2006-15
AJL
WILSON, HUBERT
PROCESSING
(I stand 2nd Floor Additions)
TERMINUS AT CROOKED
VTTM 54081
AJL
SINGH, DANIEL
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
CREEK
(19 Lot Residential/ Subdivision)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
150 DIAMOND BAR BL.
CUP 2006-02
SC
CHEVRON PRODUCTS
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
DR 2006-05
(Demolish and rebuild gas station)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
CSP 2006-01
206 DIAMOND BAR BI.
ZC 2005-02
AJL
SHELL
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
CUP 2005-07
(Remodel/addition of car wash)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
DR 2005-36
SR 2005-32
2707 DIAMOND BAR BI.
DR 2005-38
LKS
T -MOBILE
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
MV 2005-11
(Wireless Telecom Facility)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
23655 FALCONS VIEW
DR 2006-02
LDM/
YEH, CHIEN
PROCESSING
AJL
(Demolish and build new SFR)
1600 GRAND
CUP 2005-08
AJL
CINGULAR
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
(Wireless at Diamond Bar Center)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
(102 Single Family Residential)
21324 PATHFINDER
DR 2004-33
LKS
SALIMNIA:,:MOHAMAD
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
(Gas Station Remodel)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
2755 PROSPECTORS
DR 2006-10
LDM/
ROYAL STREET COM.
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
AJL
(Cell Site)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
2505 RAZZAK
DR 2005-311
LDM/
LARIVE, BOB
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
MCUP 2006-03
AJL
(New Single Family Residence)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
2887 SHADOW CANYON
DR 2005-35
LKS
KUNJORO,EKO
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
TP 2005-09
(Single Family Residence)
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. NEW PLANS TO
BE SUBMITTED BY DEVELOPER
2695 SHADY RI DGE
DR 2005-21
LKS
XLART GROUP
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Project Meeting Schedule
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Page 3
April 25, 2006
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
-
PENDING PROJECTS (continued)
Project Location
1425 SUMMITRIDGE
(City Property)
CUP 2006-03
DR 2006-16
24142 SYLVAN GLEN
Peterson Park
CUP 2006-01
DR 2006-01
24418 TOP COURT
DR 2006-12
20405 WALNUT
DR 2005-34
441 WAYSIDE
DR 2006-09
24115 WILLOW CREEK
DR 2006-14/
MCUP 2006-05
AJL OMNIPOINT COM.
Wireless Co -location)_
LKS CINGULAR
(Expand telecommunication
LKS TANNA, HIMANSHU
1 st & 2nd story addition
AJL LAMPS PLUS
Warehouse/Retail Building'
LDM/ BARBERO
AJL Add/Remodel
AJL MIJARES, MARTHA
(Remodel/Addition)
PROCESSING
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
PROCESSING
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION —
WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
• 0
CITWOF'TMWND
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
On April 25, 2006, the Diamond Bar Planning Commission will hold a regular
session at 7:00 p.m., at the South Coast Quality Management District/Government Center -
Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
Items for consideration are listed on the attached agenda.
1, Stella Marquez, declare as follows:
I am employed by the City of Diamond Bar. On April 20, 2006, a copy of the Notice
for the Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission, to be held on April 25,
2006, was posted at the following locations:
South Coast Quality Management
District Auditorium
21865 East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Diamond Bar Center
1600 Grand Avenue
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Heritage Park
2900 Brea Canyon Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on April 20, 2006, at Diamond Bar, California.
CS . CXR C-�- --
Stella Marquez
Community Developmapartment
g:\\affidavi tposti ng. doc
File ® ad
1 O and is ready for
ring