Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/25/1996%:04. P.M. South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California Chairman Vice Chairman Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Ml'ke Goldenberg Toe Ruzicka Franklin Fong .Toe McManus Don Schad Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Community Development Office, located at 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190, and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please call (909) 396 5'676 during regular business hours. In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title II 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 accomodation(s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting must inform the Community Development Department at (909) 396-5676 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking in the Auditorium The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper and encourages you to do the same. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Monday, November 25, 1996 Next Resolution No. 96-21 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Mike Goldenberg, Vice Chairman Joe Ruzicka, Franklin Fong, .Joe McManus and Don Schad 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. 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: 3.1 Minutes of October 28, 1996 4. OLD BUSINESS: None 5. NEW BUSINESS: 5.1 General Plan Conformity Report No. GPC 96-2 finding that the sale and disposal of approximately 6.5 acres of surplus real property located on the west side of Brea Canyon Road is in conformance with the General Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planing Commission adopt a resolution finding the sale::.and disposal of the referenced property in conformance with the General Plan in accordance with Government Code Section 65402. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: 6.1 Development Review No. 96-13 is a request (pursuant to Code Section 22.72.020.A.4.) to convert a retail use to a 2,950 square foot restaurant with patio dining identified as the Boston Market. The project involves interior remodeling/expansion to the adjacent unit, new * doors, windows, awnings and removal of a 400 square foot landscaped area to accommodate patio dining. Project Address: 1136 Diamond Bar Blvd, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Owner: Nikko Capital Corp., 3961 MacArthur Blvd., #105, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Applicant: Boston West, L.L.C. P.O. Box 61083, Anaheim, CA 92803- 6183 Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that this project is Categorically Exempt § 15303 (c). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. 96-13, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolution. 7. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: . 8. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 9. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 9.1 THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY - November 28 & 29, 1996 - City offices will be closed. Will reopen Monday, December 2, 1996. 9.2 CITY COUNCIL - December 3, 1996 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive 9.3 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR HOLIDAY FESTIVITIES - Wednesday, December 11, 1996 - 5:30 - 8:30 p.m. - Diamond Bar Country Club 9.4 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - December 12, 1996 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive. 9.5 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - December 19, 1996 7:00 p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive. 10. ADJOURNMENT: December 9, 1996 I MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 1996 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Goldenberg called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by VC/Ruzicka and dedicated to the 221st November birthday anniversary of the United States Marine Corps. ROLL CALL: Present:' Chairman Goldenberg, Vice Chairman Ruzicka, and Commissioners, McManus and Schad Commissioner Fong arrived at 7:10 p.m. Also Present: Community Development Director James DeStefano, Senior Planner. Catherine Johnson, Assistant Planner Ann Lungu and Assistant City Attorney Robin Harris. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS - None. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Minutes of October.14, 1996. VC/Ruzicka made a motion, seconded by C/Schad to approve the minutes of October 14, 1996 as corrected. The motion was approved 4-0 with the following Roll Call Vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: OLD BUSINESS - None PUBLIC HEARING• VC/Ruzicka, Schad, McManus, Chair/Goldenberg None Fong 1. Development -Review No. 94-2(1). A request for a one year Extension of Time (pursuant to Code Section 22.72.160.A.) f or a project approved on January 23, 1995. The extension would allow additional time to begin the construction of a 17,867 square foot two-story professional office building. Property Address: 21008 Lycoming Street, Diamond,Bar NOVEMBER 19, 1996 PAGE 2 DR Owner/Applicant: G. Miller Development Co., P.O. Box 4682, Diamond Bar CDD/DeStefano read the staff report into the record. He indicated that the project previously underwent two Public Hearings and was unanimously approved by the Planning Commission. Due to circumstances beyond his control, the applicant is requesting a one year extension of time for the development of the project. The extension request is allocated within *the City's rules and regulations. He stated the project conforms to the City's current General Plan philosophy and Development Code rules and regulations. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. 94-2(1) for a one year extension of time, Findings of Fact and conditions as listed -within the attached resolution. Chair/Goldenberg opened the Public Hearing. Seeing no one who wished to speak, Chair/ Goldenberg closed the Public Hearing. Commission Fong arrived at 7:10 p.m. CDD/DeStefano responded to C/Schad that there is * a lot line adjustment and future access road agreement 'between the applicant and Walnut Valley Trailer. Walnut'Valley Trailer was notified of tonight's Public Hearing. . VC/Ruzicka moved, C/McManus seconded, to approve Development Review No. 94-2(1) for a one year extension of time, Findings of Fact and conditions as listed within the resolution. The motion was carried 5-0. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Presentation on the Basics of Redevelopment, Selection of the Diamond Bar Economic Revitalization Area, and Approval of the Preliminary Plan formulated for the Diamond. Bar Economic Revitalization Area. CDD/DeStefano stated that in accordance with California Redevelopment Law, the Redevelopment Agency Board has directed the Planninq Commission to select a Redevelopment Project Area from within the boundaries of the previously approved survey area and to approve a Preliminary Plan for the selected project area. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive a presentation on redevelopment, adopt a resolution selecting the boundaries of the project area, and approve the Preliminary Plan formulated for the redevelopment of the project area. NOVEMBER 19, 1996 PAGE . 3 A CDD/DeStefano responded to C/McManus that the Agency Board has sent the Planning Commission a study area for purposes of consideration of a project area. The Board has requested that the Planning Commission select a project area from within the boundaries provided. The Planning Commission may reduce the size of the project area. If the Planning Commission wishes to expand the project area by adding property that is not presently within the study area, the project will need to go, back to the Agency Board for the City Council to amend its study area to include the proposed area. The project will be referred back to the Planning Commission to adopt a new Preliminary Plan and a new Project Area Map, which may delay the process for up to one month. CDD/DeStefano suggested that the Commissioners list for discussion the properties they feel should or should not be part of the project. CDD/DeStefano responded to C/Fong that the project area is the same area shown on Exhibit A. Responding to C/Schad, CDD/DeStefano stated the granny flat issue is discussed in the City's current regulations. This issue will be discussed by the Planning Commission during the single family zoning phase of the Development Code adoption process. He indicated there is no prohibition with respect to granny flats on adjacent properties. The restrictions would be based upon thelot size, setbacks between dwelling units, parking requirements, etc. Felise Acosta, Rosenow, Spivacek Group, Inc., presented an overview of basic redevelopment and presented the specific Redevelopment Project Area and Preliminary Plan. Redevelopment is provided for by the Health and Safety Code Community Redevelopment Law Section 33000. It provides for the creation of Redevelopment Agencies and the implementation of redevelopment through the adoption of Redevelopment Plans. Redevelopment agencies can be formed by legislative bodies (cities or counties) in a number of different ways. The City Council can appoint themselves as the Redevelopment Board. The City Council may appoint a separate body as the Redevelopment Board which makes recommendations to the City Council for final action. The City can create an Economic Development or Community Development commission which acts as a Redevelopment Agency Board and a Housing Commission. In Diamond Bar, the Redevelopment Agency is the City Council which is the most common form of Agency throughout California. The purpose of a Redevelopment Agency, according to law, is to assist the community in redeveloping adverse and unhealthful or blighted areas. In addition, the Agency provides necessary tools to create economic development to insure the community functions economically,. and provide needed. services to insure public infrastructure is intact and that adverse conditions do not develop. NOVEMBER 19, 1996 PAGE 4 Ms. Acosta stated a Redevelopment Agency functions through the adoption of a Redevelopment Plan. The Redevelopment Plan is the legal document that sets forth what powers an Agency has or does not have- within--a-Proj ect - Area -and --what powers -it has for financing redevelopment. Ms. Acosta responded to VC/Ruzicka that with respect to adopting a new Project Area or amending a Project Area, all existing Redevelopment Agencies must adhere to the new standards of AB 1290. She explained that in many cases, AB 1290 effects both old and new Redevelopment Agencies. In some respects, new Project Areashavecertain limitations. Ms. Acosta continued stating a Redevelopment Plan is not a land use document. A Redevelopment Plan is a legalese document that sets forth the goals and objectives of the Project Area, what types of powers the Agency has, the land uses, the Agency's obligations in terms of affording owners and tenants the right to participate, and an Agency's obligation to provide relocation assistance where applicable. . The Redevelopment Plan also contains a Projects List, which is a list of public improvement projects the Agency anticipates it wishes to accomplish over the term of the plan. Ms. Acosta reviewed the Tax Increment Revenue. Ms. Acosta explained to CISchad and VC/Ruzicka that the tax base of an assessed home addition would be the same whether or not a Redevelopment Agency existed. However, the tax benefit resulting from the addition would be shared differently if the Redevelopment Agency existed. The Agency does not tax property. Ms. Acosta reviewed the nine month to one year Redevelopment Agency Plan adoption process. The goal is to complete the adoption process by the targeted June date in order for the City to capture the 1996-1997 tax base year. This would enable the agency to begin collecting tax increments in Fiscal Year 1998-1999. C/Schad asked how commercial building tenants can remain in business during a redevelopment project. Ms. Acosta responded that the majority of commercial Redevelopment Agency projects are accomplished without displacing- existing tenants. Displacement generally occurs as a result of increased rent related to the property upgrade. The Agency assists the building owner in structuring programs that do not adversely effect existing tenants. Chair/ Goldenberg asked Ms. Acosta to comment on an Agency Board member's statement that "redevelopment will raise taxes and cut public services". Ms. Acosta responded she has never been confronted with a situation where redevelopment has cut NOVEMBER 19',,1996 PAGE 5 v, w I izT, k 7 services. Redevelopment Agencies do not have the, power to raise taxes. CDD/DeStefano responded to Chair/Goldenberg that the project area's recoverable taxation will. be used by the City to improve and increase services. Responding to C/McManus, CDD/DeStefano stated the purpose of redevelopment project area revenue generation is to help promote further economic redevelopment activities within the project area. The money does not go to the City's general fund. Acosta* commented that by carefully investing redevelopment funds, cities are able to create economic development opportunities by attracting users and businesses that generate additional revenue to the general fund. Additionally, cities are able to use redevelopment funds for infrastructure and other 'improvements that would have been funded out of the general funds. Instead of creating a losing revenue situation for cities, the opposite is true. Most Agencies work hand in hand with their city general funds to maximize general fund revenues. Ms.- Aco.sta responded to Chair .1 Goldenberg that she has never seen that a Redevelopment Agency results in less police and fire protection to cities. City's have the power to invoke Eminent Domain for public purposes. She indicated that in her experience, she has never experienced a City condemning anything and everything they wish as a result of establishing a Redevelopment Agency. C/McManus asked Ms. Acosta to comment on concerns of some local business people that a Redevelopment Agency might displace their business by bringing competing businesses into the City. Ms. Acosta stated that many Redevelopment Agencies have economic development as a goal. Therefore, there may be instances when new businesses will compete with existing businesses and instances when new businesses compliment existing businesses. Ms. Acosta explained the goal of Diamond Bar's Redevelopment Agency is to evaluate the situation and determine whether redevelopment is appropriate for the City and whether or not the proposed boundaries will be the ultimate boundaries that are adopted and what kinds of project implementation the Agency may wish to pursue. The Redevelopment Agency sets policy for determining what kinds of businesses it may wish to pursue to locate in the City. Such a policy is primarily market driven. Ms. Acosta responded to C/Fong that having ones property condemned is a very emotional issue whether it is for a freeway, street or a redevelopment project. She stated that in her 20 plus years of experience in running a redevelopment NOVEMBER 19, 1996 PAGE 6 agency and consulting, agencies go to great lengths to make businesses and individuals whole when they acquire property. The law is very heavy handed on the side of the property owner to insure that they.are.treated-fairly. An agency, by law, must pay fair market value for the.property.. The property's value is based upon two independent 'appraisals. In addition, the property owner has a right to go to court for jury trial. The property owner is compensated for any loss of goodwill to the business and awarded relocation benefits. These items can result in significant amounts of money to the property owner. C/McManus questioned why there are conflicting census numbers throughout the Prospect for Economic Development in the City of Diamond Bar report. CDD/DeStefano stated that 56,000 population figure is the most recent number received from the State Department of Finance. The reference to 63,100 is a number that has been projected to represent the future by the private company Urban Decision Systems (UDS) The population figure of 58,427 (Table 6-1) in the year 2020 was prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments using growth projections based on prior City statistics. The City's General Plan project 62,000 to 63,000 in the year 2020. Each organization has incorporated their individuals methods of projecting future numbers. C/McManus asked why Diamond Bar's rental space is projected at .90 cents per square foot compared to higher per square foot costs in surrounding areas. CDD/DeStefano responded that the author may be suggesting that the per square foot rental rates in Diamond Bar have not been reduced to compensate for the high vacancy level. In addition, it is sometimes more prudent for a landlord to maintain the current rental rates rather than lower the rates in an effort to fill vacant space. C/McManus asked for further clarification of the apparent inconsistencies in the report. Ms. Acosta stated the map includes a study area which encompasses all of the commercial/ industrial areas of the City. An attempt was made to exclude all existing residential. In addition, many "opportunity locations" have been included to effectuate their development in a manner acceptable to the City and provide for up front capital to the Agency. Responding to C/Schad, Ms. Acosta stated that the undeveloped Arciero property presented a real opportunity to, the Agency. Inclusion of the Arciero property in the project area would give the City and the Agency more controls over the property as well as, an opportunity for revenue generation. C/Schad asked for consideration to include the area west of the corner of Brea 'Canyon Road on Golden Springs Drive adjacent to the SR 57/60. CDD/DeStefano responded that the NOVEMBER 19, 1996 PAGE 7 A LU area is considered to be part of the Redevelopment Project Area. CDD/DeStefano responded to C/McManus that with respect to the two residences located within the project area, one is located at the intersection of Washington Street at Brea Canyon Road and the other is located at the terminus of Via Sotella. C/McManus moved, VC/Ruzicka seconded, to adopt Resolution 96.19, a Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar selecting the Diamond Bar Economic Revitalization Area and approving a preliminary plan formulated for the redevelopment of the Project.Area. CDD/DeStefano responded to C/Fong that all of the City's commercial and industrial properties, some of the parks and two residences are included in the Project Area Map. . I Ms. Acosta responded to C/Fong that all vacant City properties were considered. However, because of the 80/20 law, many of the vacant properties were eliminated. She stated that in her opinion, the map, as presented, incorporates the maximum amount of vacant properties. She recommended that the project area should not include any additional vacant properties. With respect -to the . Sandstone Canyon area, ' an �elementary school and administrative center is. included in the project area that is adjacent to industrial and it -may be feasible to relocate the facilities to'the school district's Sand Canyon area. She further stated that the Brea Canyon Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard school district property was included as an opportunity area. CDD/DeStefano responded to Chair/ Goldenberg that the Planning Commission will revisit the details of the Redevelopment Plan, comment on the draft EIR and determine conformity with the City's General Plan on March 24, 1997. Any properties determined not to be appropriate through further detail studies would most likely be eliminated from the presentation. Ms. Acosta stated that prior to final adoption, any changes to the Project Area Map would, by necessity, be reviewed by the Planning commission. CDD/DeStefano responded to C/Schad that project 'area vacant property will have a base value. The property will not change in value because it is included in a project area. C/McManus reiterated his request for redevelopment information in a PERT chart form and for a critical path analysis. Responding to C/Fong, Ms., Acosta reiterated her recommendation not to include any additional vacant land in the proposed project area. once the project is -adopted, the Agency has the NOVEMBER 19; 1996 PAGE 8 - power to amend the boundaries, and to add or delete territory. Any changes require the same nine to twelve month process. Ms. Acosta and CDD/DeStefano responded to C/Schad that they have not entered into any redevelopment discussions with the Walnut Valley School District regarding Site D and Sandstone .Canyon. In response to C/Fong, Ms. Acosta stated her agency has not had contact with any businesses included in the project area. The businesses will be contacted during the detail studies period. chair/ Goldenberg called for the question on the motion to Adopt Resolution 96-19, a Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar selecting the Diamond Bar Economic Revitalization Area and approving a Preliminary Plan formulated for the redevelopment of the Project Area. The motion was carried with the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Goldenberg thanked Ms. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: McManus, VC/Ruzicka, C/Fong, Chair/Goldenberg Schad None Acosta for her presenta . tion. C/Schad emphasized his desire to preserve Diamond Bar's open spaces for the pleasure and education of its children. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: CDD/DeStefano reminded the Commission about the Saturday, November 2, Town Hall Parks Master Plan meeting at Heritage Park from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. He asked the Commissioners to complete and return the Parks Master Plan survey form to. Community Services Director Bob Rose prior to the meeting. CDD/DeStefano stated that with respect to VC/Ruzickafs question regarding CalPers building homes in Diamond, Bar, CalPers is a funding arm of the State California retirement fund which funds home loans and development efforts. CalPers funded a 75 unit project at the corner of Brea Canyon Cutoff and the SR 57. NOVEMBER 19, 1996 PAGE 9 ADJOURNMENT: At 9:00 p.m., there being no further business to come before the Planning commission, C/Schad moved, VC/Ruzicka seconded, to adjourn the meeting to November 25, 1996. There being no objections, Chair/Goldenberg adjourned the meeting. Respectfully Submitted, James DeStefano Community Development Director Attest: Michael Goldenberg Chairman CITY OF DIAMOND BAR INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM Agenda Item Number: 5.1 To: Chairman and Planning Commissioners From: James DeStefano, Community Develop Director Subject: General Plan Conformity Report No..GPC 96-2 finding that the sale and disposal of. approximately 6.5 acres of surplus real property located on the west side of Brea Canyon Road is in conformance with the General Plan. Date: November 21,, 1996 Background:. In October 1994 the City.Council approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32400 for the development of 91 single family homes located adjacent to Brea Canyon Road., north of Pathfinder Road, south of Via Sorella, as shown on Exhibit "All attached. The proposed project and approval incorporated approximately 6.5 acres of City owned property. The developer, Arciero and Sons Inc. was required to enter into an agreement with the City to exchange or purchase the City property. Earlier this year Arciero proposed the purchase of the referenced City property and the subdivision (VTM 52203) of two remainder lots contained within VTM 32400. In July 1996 the City Council approved the sale of the 6.5 acre, site setting forth numerous steps necessary prior to the disposal of the property. on September 17, 1996,.after completion of the formal sixty day period wherein the property is offered to other public agencies, the City Council directed staff to accept Arciero's offer and commence the sale. On September 23, 1996 the Planning Commission recommended approval of a sixteen parcel subdivision of Lot Nos. 92 and'93 of VTM 32400. On November 51 1996 the City Council approved VTM 52203. Memorandum to the Planning Commission November 21, 1996 Page 2 Government Code Section 65402 requires that no street or real property shall be disposed of until the location, purpose and extent of such disposition has been submitted to and reported. upon by the Planning Commission as to conformity with the adopted General Plan. The sale and disposal of the property does implement the adopted General Plan. The property is designated within the Land Use Element.as Low Density Residential. The property is zoned single family residential and has been approved for construction of 107 homes in conformance with the General Plan. The proceeds of the sale will be placed, pursuant to the direction of the City Council, within a parks and facilities. development fund. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planing Commission adopt a resolution finding the sale and disposal of the referenced property in conformance with the General Plan in accordance with Government Code Section -65402.. Attachments- Draft Resolut ' ion Exhibit "All P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -XX RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA FINDING THAT THE SALE AND DISPOSAL OF APPROXIMATELY 6.5 ACRES IS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65402, IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. A. RECITALS: M WHEREAS, the sale and disposal of approximately 6.5 acres is requested by the City of Diamond Bar for the purpose of implementing the General Plan and; (ii) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar has considered the matter of the sale and disposal of said real property, the location and extent of which is shown on Exhibit "A", attached hereto, and; (iii) WHEREAS, Section 65402 of the Government Code of the State of California requires that no real .property shall be sold or disposed of until the location, purpose and extent has been. reported upon by the planning agency of the city as to conformity with the General Plan. B. RESOLUTION: NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES HEREBY RESOLVE: Section 1 The Planning Commission hereby finds that the sale and disposal of property as shown on Exhibit "A:, attached hereto, as the "subject property" is in conformance with the adopted General Plan of the City of Diamond Bar. Section 2 The Planning Commission hereby finds that the sale and disposition of the parcel is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of said Act. ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1996 BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. Michael Goldenberg, Chairman I, James DeStefano, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of August, 1995, by the following vote to -,wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: James DeStefano, Secretary Attachments: Exhibit "All EXHIBIT "A" Parcel 1: That portion of Section 17, Township 2 south, range 9 west, S.B.M. in the City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California described as: Commencing at the intersection of the general westerly line -of that certain 100 foot strip of land described in the deed to the State of California, recorded in Book 11634, Page 114 of official records in the office of the County Recorder of said County, with the southerly line of said Section 17; thence along said southerly line south 89 degrees 49'14" west a distance of 270.85 feet to the true .point of beginninq of the herein described parcel; Thence north 45 degrees 48'27P' -west a distance of 124.65 feet; thence north 22 degrees 04104" east a distance of 119.78 feet; thence north 38 degrees. 07'31" east a distance of 200.85 feet; thence north. 34 degrees 15'21" west a distance of 83.39 feet; thence north 00 degrees 05'22" east a distance of 115.94 feet; thence north 34 degrees 47'42" _east a distance of 29.43 feet; thence north 07 degrees 46'31" east a distance of 81.59 feet; thence north 01 degrees 15'10" east a distance of 46.33; thence north 37 degrees 26'42" east a distance of 268.36 feet; thence south 86 degrees 27'56" east a distance of 23.35 feet to a point of non -tangent intersection with a .curve, concave easterly and having a radius of 4040.00 feet and a central angle of 3 degrees 11'54", through which a radial line bears north 77 degrees 09'06" west; thence southerly along the arc of said curve a distance of 225.52 feet to the end of said curve; thence south 09 degrees 39'00" west a distance of 604.16 feet to the beginning of a curve, concave westerly and having a radius of 2040.00 feet and a central angle of 2 degrees 27'38"; thence southerly along the arc of said curve a distance of 87.61 feet; thence south 89 degrees 49'14" west a distance of 90.09 feet to the true point of beginning. Containing 2.57 acres of land more or less. M Parcel 2: Situated in the State of Californ'ia, County of Los Angeles: "Commencing at the intersecUon of the general westerly ,: - certain 100 foot Strip, of described in the deed to the State of California, recorded in Book 11634 Page 114 of official Records, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, With the sou#*fiy line of said Section 17; #*nce along said southerly line south 89 degrees 49' 14" west 270-85 feet to the true point of beginning; thence north 45 degrees 48' west 124.65 feet; thence north 22 degrees 1 1• • north.78 feet; thence •-• east 200-85- thence • r 34 degrees 15'21" west 83.39 _g--- •feet;thence north, 01 • -• 15' 22" east 70.23 feet thence, ;• degrees 14'40".west 181.59 feet to a point Said point being called point 'Wfor the purpose of this desc:iptw; twwoce con�nuing south 89 degrees 1,iV 40" west 213.4 11 -_ #W" south 00 degrees _ east 491.00 feet moreor - the southerty line of said section 17; thence'north 89 degrees 49' 14" east 355.69 feet more or less to true point of beginning. --t��.��.��rl• ���.�`37�,�.. G�,,,o�► circ Fee . Z..,t� fir•• `�W:Sil.E�ae. pS E SW. A' ' ryhets/er j Lc»►13+" 1. S. 31'•! B K. 8765 300K 8763 'AGE 26 . /,?OC ,a .See Q�xk! —• POR: S E. 1/4 SEC, 17 OV i X -�w. �i.71 wol�u�l• 1�et � w•e3 � water a,3 .-1 Q 77 Exhibit "A" Resolution. of Intention 0 SUBJECT PROPERTY June 13, 1996 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: REPORT DATE: MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: APPLICATION REQUEST: PROPERTY LOCATION: PROPERTY OWNERS: APPLICANT: "W—�, tT*1qzL6X City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COADUSSION Staff Report 6.1 November 15, 1996 November 25, 1996 Development Review No. 96-13 To convert a retail use to a 2,950 square foot restaurant with outdoor patio dining. Also, the request includes interior remodeling/expansion to the adjacent unit, new doors,- windows, awnings and removal of a 400 square foot landscaped area to accommodate patio dining. 1136 Diamond Bar Blvd. Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Nikko Capital Corporation 3961 MacArthur Blvd., #105 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Boston West, L.L.C., P.O. Box 61083 Anaheim, CA 92803-6183 The property owners, Nikko Capital Corporation and applicant, Boston West L.L.C. are requesting approval of Development Review No. 96-13 (pursuant to Code Section 22.72.020.A.4.). This request's objective is to expand a vacant retail unit, thereby incorporating a portion of the adjacent vacant unit to accommodate a 2,950 square foot restaurant identified as the Boston Market. Additionally, the request includes interior remodeling, new doors and windows/ awnings and the removal of 400 square feet of landscaped area to accommodate patio dining. 1 The project site is located within the Diamond Bar Towne Center at 1136 Diamond Bar Boulevard (Parcel 2, Parcel Map 10252). The center is approximately 9.47 acres. Approximately 105,500 square feet is devoted to structure. The uses within the center include Ralph's, Blockbuster Video, Bank of America, Great Western Bank, two restaurants, offices and general retail. The project, site has a General Plan Land Use designation of General Commercial (C). it is within the Unlimited Commercial-Billboatd Exclusion (C -3 -BE) Zone. Generally, the following zones surround the project site: to the north is the Single Family Residence -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet (R-1-8,000) Zone; to the south and west is the C -3 -BE Zone; and to the east is the Limited Multiple Residence -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet -30 Units Per Acre (R -3-8,000-30U) Zone. The shopping center's installation was reviewed and approved by Los Angeles County Reqional Planning. It was finaled in 1982. ANALYSIS: Development Review: In 1990, the City established Development Review ordinance No.5. Its purpose is to: support the General Plan's implementation; stress quality community design standards; encourage an orderly and harmonious appearance of structures and property; assist development to be more cognizant with public concerns of aesthetics; reasonably ensure that new development does not have an adverse aesthetic, health, safety or architecturally related impact upon adjoining properties or the City in general and preserve significant topographic features. Pursuant to the Development Review Ordinance's Section 22.72.020, an application for Development Review is required for any and all commercial, industrial and institutional development which involves the issuance of a building permit for construction or recon- struction of a structure. Additionally, projects involving a substantial change or intensification of land use, such as conversion of an existing building to a restaurant requires Development Review. Therefore, the proposed project, a commercial development involving the issuance of a building permit and a land use intensification, requires Development Review by the Planning Commission. The interior remodeling, as shown in Exhibit "A", includes the installation of a fully equipped kitchen, storage areas,food display/service areas, counter/cashier area, dining room, restrooms and electrical room. The exterior remodeling, as shown in Exhibit "A", includes the installation of new doors and windows at the main entry, emergency exit door and red, black and white stripe awnings constructed from vinyl and the existing service door's relocation. The exterior remodeling does not change the architectural style or expand the building's foot print. 2 Pursuant to the Code, structures utilized for dining shall provide the number of parking spaces based on occupancy, as calculated by the Building Official. Furthermore, the Los Angeles County Planning and Zoning Code requires that one parking space be provided for every three occupants. The Building official's calculations indicate a maximum occupancy of 91. Therefore, 30 parking spaces are required. The shopping center's parking area provides 436 spaces. With the current uses and vacancies, 431 parking spaces are required. Considering the uses and their peak times of operation, the parking is adequate. Adjacent to the northwest corner of the Boston Market's unit is a landscaped area. Approximately 400 square feet of this area is proposed for outdoor patio dining. The patio dining area will consist of a tan colored salt finish concrete slab and four dining tables with umbrellas which seat four patrons each. Pursuant to the ' Los Angeles County Planning and Zoning Code, outdoor patio dining is permited without ' a conditional Use Permit if the following standards are satisfied: 1. Lighting shall be so arranged to prevent glare or direct illumination in any residential zone; 2. All applicable provision of Title 11 (Health and Safety) of the Los Angeles County Code shall be observed in all areas of the restaurant; 3. All awnings shall conform to the Building Code requirements for roof coverings; 4. There shall be no amplified sound of music; 5. A 42 inch high wall fence'or hedge, or five foot wide landscape area shall be established along the outside eating, drinking and assembly area which adjoins any public sidewalk, street or highway, except where all the tables and chairs are removed daily; and 6. Automobile parking spaces shall be provided pursuant to Section 22.52.1110 (one parking space for every three occupants). The applicant will meet all the referenced standards. Additional- ly, it is requested that the existing 42 inch high wall (located parallel and five feet from the sidewalk) be extended at an angle toward the Boston Market's unit, thereby closing the patio dining area from the public right-of-way. Shrubs will be removed in order to accommodate the patio dining area. Five shrubs will be located adjacent to the patio area's west side. It is -requested, where feasible, that the remaining shrubs be relocated in *other landscaped areas within the shopping center. The proposed days and hours of operation are Sunday through Saturday from 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. There will be approximately eight to ten employees per shift and three shifts per day. Supply deliveries will take place every day during the week. The City requires that these deliveries occur during the restaurant's non -peak hours. 3 Signage is not a part of this request. At a later date, the applicant is required to submit a sign request to the City for review and approval. The City's Public Works Department and Building -and Safety Division reviewed this project. Their recommendations are within the attached draft resolution. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15303 (c). NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Notice for this .project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on November 13, 1996. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 210 property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project site on November 6, 1996. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning commission approve.Development Review No. 96-13, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the attached resolution. REQUIRED DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS: 1. The design and layout of the proposed project is consistent with the applicable elements of the City's general plan, design guidelines of the appropriate district, and any adopted architectural criteria for specialized area, such as designated historic districts, theme area, specific plans, community plans, boulevards,* or planned developments; 2. Approval of the design and layout of the proposed project will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards; 3. The architectural design of the proposed project is compatible with the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.72 of Development Review Ordinance No. 5 (1990) and the City's General Plan; 4. The design of the proposed project would provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good aesthetic. use of materials, texture, and. color that will remain aesthetically appealing 4 and will retain a reasonably adequate level of maintenance; and 5. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety' or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. Prepared by: a"--- �W- An J. L�/, ngu ,,A/ss taut Planner Attachments: 1. 'Draft resolution; 2. Exhibit * "All - site plan, floor plan and elevations dated November 25, 1996; and 3. Application. 5 A. PLANNING.COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 96-13 AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303 (c) (1), A REQUEST TO CONVERT A RETAIL USE TO A 2,950 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT AND INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR REMODELING LOCATED AT 1136 DIAMOND BAR BLVD. (PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP 10252), DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. - RECITALS. 1. The property owners, Nikko Capital Corporation and applicant, Boston West, L.L.C., have filed an application for Development Review No. 96-13 located at 1136 Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, as described above in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review shall be referred to as the .'!Application". 2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State of California. Thereafter, the City Council of 'the City of Diamond Bar adopted its ordinance No. 14 (1990), thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County Code contain the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, including the subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar. 3. Action was taken on the subject application as to the consistency with the General Plan. It has been determined that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan.. 4.- The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on November 25, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. 5. Notification of the public hearing for this project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on November 13, 1996. Two hundred and ten property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project site were notified by mail on November 6, 1996. 1 4!�pB. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the" Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The Planning Commission hereby determines that the project identified above in this Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, and the guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section'15303 (c) Article 19 of Division 13 of the California Code of Regulations. 3., The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence before this Planning Commission that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this Planning commission hereby rebuts the presumption'of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5.(d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning commission hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relat6s to a 9.47 acre site developed with a retail shopping center with approximately 105,000 square feet devoted to structure. The center is identified as Diamond Bar Towne Center located at 1136 Diamond Bar Boulevard. (b) The project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of General Commercial (C). It is zoned Unlimited Commercial -Billboard Exclusion (C -3 -BE). (c) Generally, the following zones surround the project site: to the north is the Single Family Residence - Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet (R-1-8,000) Zone; to the south and west is the C -3 -BE Zone; and to the east is the Limited Multiple Residence -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet -30 Units Per Acre (R -3-8,000- 30U) Zone. (d) The proposed Development Review is a request to expand a vacant retail unit, thereby incorporating a portion of the adjacent vacant unit to accommodate a 2,950 square foot rest ' aurant identified as the Boston Market. Additionally, the request includes interior remodeling, new doors and windows, awnings and the removal of 400 square feet of landscaped 2 area to accommodate outdoor patio dining. The remodeling does not change the architectural style or expand the building's foot print. (e) The design and layout of the proposed development is . consistent with the applicable elements of the City's general plan, design guidelines of the . appropriate district, and any adopted architectural criteria for specialized area, such as designated historic districts, theme areas, specific plans, community plans, boulevards, or planned developments. The proposed project does not alter the shopping center's existing architectural style or expand the restaurant building's foot print. However, the design and layout of the proposed restaurant is consistent with the General Plan in that it enhances pedestrian activity by utilizing an outdoor patio dining area. Furthermore, pursuant to the General Plan, the proposed restaurant is a revenue gen- erating use that will aid in minimizing sale tax leakage out of Diamond Bar. (f) The design and layout of the proposed development will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future development and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. The proposed,restaurant is wi.1--hin the'Unlimi-ted Commercial -Billboard Exclusion*(C-3-BE) Zone which permits restaurants by right. This is an established retail shopping center *which can accommodate the proposed restaurant without expanding its originally approved square footage. The parking lot area provides 436 parking stalls. With the existing uses, proposed restaurant and vacancies, 431 parking stalls are required. Considering the uses and their peak hours of operation, the parking stalls provided are adequate. Furthermore, the Public Works Department reviewed this project and determined that there are no traffic or pedestrian hazards. (g) The architectural designofthe proposed development is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the harmonlous, orderly and attractive development contemplated by Chapter 22.72 of Development Review Ordinance No. 5 (1990) and the City's general plan. The shopping center was originally processed and approved through Los Angeles County Regional Planning and finaled in 1982. The proposed restaurant does not alter the shopping center's architectural design. However, the architectural design of commercial and residential development in Diamond Bar is eclectic. The center's architectural 3 style is Mediterranean. The addition of awnings nd an outdoor patio dining area is an enhancement fo the center. Therefore, the proposed project is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by the City's Development Review Ordinance. (h) The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing and will retain a reasonably adequate level of maintenance. The originally approved design of the shopping center will not be altered by the proposed restaurant. However, adjacent to the northwest corner of the restaurant unit, an outdoor patio dining will be installed providing a secondary desirable dining area. The proposed awnings are constructed from vinyl which will retain a reasonably adequate level of maintenance. The awning colors are compatible with the existing colors utilized within the shopping center and other development in the vicinity. (i) The proposed development will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in -f-he vicinity. Before, the issuance of any City permits, the proposed project is required to comply with all conditions within the approved resolution and the Building and.Safety Division, Public Works Depart- ment, Health Department, Fire Department and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. The referenced agencies' involvement will ensure that the proposed restaurant is not detrimental to the public health, safety or , welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in. the vicinity. 5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Application subject to the following conditions: (a) The project shall substantially conform to site plan, floor plan and elevations collectively labeled as Exhibit "All dated November 25, 1996, as submitted and approved by the Planning commission. (b) The site shall be maintained in a condition which is free of debris both during and after the construction,*addition, or implementation of the 4 entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applican't's obligation to insure that the waste.contractor utilized has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. (c) The days and hours of operation shall be Sunday through Saturday from 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. (d) Supply.deliveries shall occur during the restaurant's non -peak hours of operation. (e) The restaurant structures, including the outdoor patio area, shall not exceed a maximum occupancy of 91. (f) The existing 42 inch high block wall located -adjacent to the outdoor patio dining area (parallel and five feet from the sidewalk) shall be extended at an angle toward the restaurant unit. (g) Any landscaping destroyed during the remodeling process shall be replaced to match existing. (h) Lighting for the outdoor patio dining area shall be so arranged as to prevent glare or direct illumination in any residential zone or in a manner which will not cause a traffic hazard. There shall be no amplified sound of music within .the outdoor patio dining area. (j) The restaurant shall comply with American Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements as approved by the Building Official. (k) All sign requests shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. (1) The project obtain the Los Angeles County Health Department's approval. (m) The project shall obtain the Los Angeles County Fire Department's approval. (n) The project shall meet all A-3 occupancy requirements. W (6) The restaurant structure shall meet the 19 B.C., U.P.C., U.M.C. and.the 1993 National Electro ode requirements. (p) The project shall comply with the National PolluK.;k Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements.%' (q) The applicant shall install a trash 'enclosure that is compatible with the shopping center's architectural style. The trash enclosure's design and location shall be reviewed and approved by the City. (r) This grant 'is valid for two years and shall be exercised (i.e. construction started) within that period or this grant shall expire. A one year extension may be requested in writing and submitted to the City 30 days prior to the expiration date.. (s) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed, within fifteen (15) days of approval of this grant, at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department, their affidavit stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all the conditions of this grant. Further, this grant shall not be effective until the permittee pays remaining City processing fees. (t)—.1f the Department of Fish and Game determines that - Fish and Came Code Section 711.4 applies to the approval of this project, then the applicant shall remit to the City, within five days of this grant's approval, a cashier's check of $25.00 for a documentary handling fee in connection with Fish and Game Code requirements. Furthermore, if this project is not exempt from a filing fee imposed because the project has more than a deminimis impact on fish and wildlife, the applicant shall also pay to the Department of Fish and Game any such fee and any fine which the Department determines to be owed. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: Nikko Capital Corporation, 3961 MacArthur Blvd., #105, Newport Beach, CA 92660 and Boston West, L.L.C., P.O. Box .61083,,Anaheim, CA'92803-6183. 0 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1996, B THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY: Mike Goldenberg, Chairman I, James DeStefano, Planning Commission secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly -introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning commission held on the 25th day of November, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: None NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: James DeStdfano, Secretary 7 f CITY OF DIAMOND BAR COMMUNIT)MVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 21660 E. Cople'nrive Suite 190 (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Record Owner Applicant Name Nikke Capital Corp. Boston West L.L.C. -nom name (Last name first) Address 3961 MacArthur #105 P.O. Box 61083 City Newport Beach Anaheim,* CA MUM -11W—.11-11 W phone(71)1 AR -2-0651 Phoney a 51 g-271 Case# 2C 91,-413 AOL FPL# ap Deposit Receipt# I By Date Recd Applicant's Agent Olsen, Lee H. (Last name first) -Aegis Consulting Allian, 5140 E. La Palma #201 MINT. -M11-113 NOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Community Development Director in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this case. (Attach a separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors of corporations.) tha the property and permit the applicant to fele this request. Consent: I certify Mhe f the herein. described owner Date f6 Signed record owners) Certification: j, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information' herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. PrintNameLee H. Olsen ica A plIC01) b-} n Signed Date 9-13-96 (ApplicantorAgent) Location— 1136 Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, California (Street address or tract and lot number) Zonina, C-3 HNM Previous Cases Unknown Present Use of Site Commercial Retail Use applied for Change from Retail to a restaurant use. There will be no_ c-hanqp- tr) fhiz ar hii J 1 � J ng exteri or (exnept J gns ar�rl ax,mings; for _ s / arcel^4~G k►~~ Legal description (all ownershi prising the proposes lot () ! (s)) � PM 1 (1 � � � Rr�nlr Parcel A ihd J vi s nrl of ' a part i nn� of section 15, T 2 S, R 9 „y., S u R M A nn� i nn of narrpl 1 Parcel Map 21 34 filed in Booge 76 of Parris -1 maps, Re x rrla of ArLeoa �evo�eg?ols?isucSrU'2! y�� s f �pr&3pdscaping/Open space existing Project Size—anT rnx 441 ?�c�.,ot Coverage 0 Proposed densitygpprox 1 0 acres (Units/Acres) Style of Architecture Stjirrn hi . 1 di ng with Sz ani sh-i.le roof Number of Floors Proposed one Slope of Roof 53.11- 2 w/ f 1 a t Grading' AI- r- A If yes, Quantity Cut Fill import If yes, Quantity Export If yes, Quantity I SHOPPING CENTER BUILDING "C ao,ouo au MM a onlw avt'. cuaoto ox. curorfaa 1` DIAMOND aAK BL",/D. I Mill