Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/24/2019MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 CALL TO ORDER: Chair/Barlas called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Rawlings led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Jennifer "Fred" Mahlke, Kenneth Mok, William Rawlings, Vice Chairperson Frank Farago and Chairperson Naila Barlas Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; James Eggart, Assistant City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; May Nakajima, Associate Planner; Natalie T. Espinoza Associate Planner; and Stella Marquez, Administrative Coordinator. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As. presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes —September 10, 2019: C/Rawlings moved, C/Mok seconded, to approve Consent Calendar Item 4.1 as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mahlke, Mok„Rawlings , VC/Farago, Chair/Barlas NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 7. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7A Development Review and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2018-157 - Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48 and 22.56, the applicant and property owners requested Development Review approval to construct an addition consisting of 4,367 square feet of living area, a 349 square foot garage addition, 4,446 square feet of deck/patio area, and 817 square feet of storage/mechanical area to an existing 4,120 square foot, single family residence on a 49,891 gross square foot (1.15 gross acre) lot. A Minor Conditional Use Permit was requested to allow the continuation of an existing nonconforming structure with a 21'-2" front setback where 30 feet is required. The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential. PROJECT ADDRESS PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: 1607 Derringer Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Amit and Sandeep Kaushal 1607 Derringer Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Shiv Talwar Design Concepts 3340 Riverside Drive #M Chino. CA 91710 AP/Espinoza presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2018-157, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. C/Rawlings asked if the pad would be constructed on the grade that exists or using part of it for the fill. AP/Espinoza referred to the map and stated that the house addition would be on part of the fill which will be terraced. C/Rawlings asked if there were any issues with mitigating the traffic that would be supplying the fill and AP/Espinoza said she is aware that The Country Estates charges for truckloads of dirt. In addition, applicants often obtain fill from other projects within The Country to mitigate that concern. SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION Chair/Barlas opened the public hearing. Amit Kaushal, property owner, introduced himself to the Commission and briefly described the project objectives Shiv Talwar thanked AP/Espinoza and Planning and Engineering staff for their guidance through the project which has taken more than a year. Chair/Barlas closed the public hearing. C/Mok moved, ClRawlings seconded, to approve Development Review and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2018-157, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mahike, Mok, Rawlings, VC/Farago, Chair/Barlas NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7.2 Development Review No. PL2016-195 —Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48, the applicant and property owners requested Development Review approval to demolish an existing 3,820 square foot residence, and construct a 15,011 square foot single family residence with 2,915 square feet of garage area; 3,599 square feet of patio/gazebo area and, 3,491 square feet of interior and exterior storage areas on a 1.84 gross acre (80,146 gross square foot) lot. The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential. PROJECT ADDRESS: 24030 Shotgun Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Andrew Oei and Semiwati Tan 933 Summitridge Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICANT: Pete Volbeda 164 N. 2nd Avenue Upland, CA 91786 AP/Espinoza presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. PL2016-195, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. C/Mok asked staff to elaborate on what a "trash bin ramp" is in connection with this proposal. AP/Espinoza stated that it is a ramp for the trash bins to be rolled down for access from the street by the trash hauler. Chair/Barlas opened the public hearing. Pete Volbeda, Architect, spoke about the project and said that this is one of the more challenging houses he has designed because of the slope. As mentioned in staff's report, they were able to balance the dirt, which negates the need for dirt trucks on the streets. Because the house is above street level, the owner was concerned about taking the trash down to the street, thus the small ramp was included for that purpose. C/Mok asked if the trash bins would be outside of the gate and Mr. Volbeda said that the trash bins are next to the garage with screening and doors at the front of them for access. C/Mok asked when the refuse truck shows up to pick up the trash, if the bins would be at the bottom of the driveway. Mr. Volbeda said "at the street level" and C/Mok asked if the trash truck would have to back up the shared driveway for pickup. Mr. Volbeda said they would typically pick up the bin from where it is standing on the street so there should be no reason for the trucks to have to be driven up the driveway. Chair/Barlas closed the public hearing. C/Rawlings moved, C/Mahlke seconded, to approve Development Review No. PL2016-195, based on the findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mahlke, Mok, Rawlings, VC/Farago, Chair/Barlas NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7.3 Conditional Use Permit No. PL2017-139 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.58, the property owner and applicant requested a Conditional Use Permit to increase the medical office uses from 11,634 square feet to 16,906 square feet located within a 35,687 square foot professional office building; construct three tiered six foot high retaining walls and, add 19 new parking spaces. The subject property is zoned Professional Office (OP) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Commercial Office (CO). PROJECT ADDRESS: 750 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard Diamond bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Johnney Y. Zhang Zhang Group 750 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard, Suite 188 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 APPLICANT: Howard Zefefsky 9735 La Capilla Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 AP/Nakajima presented staff's report and recommended that the Planning Commission continue Conditional Use Permit No. PL2017-139 to October 30, 2019, to allow for further investigation of the parking issue. C/Rawlings asked if the City addresses hydrology issues related to cutting into the hillside before the project comes before the Planning Commission. CDD/Gubman explained that the matter typically comes after the Planning Commission's consideration when construction documents are prepared and engineering calculations and specifications are designed based on soil and drainage conditions, as well as structural requirements set forth in applicable building codes. SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Rawlings said he would be in favor of continuing this matter to a date certain and would like to see if some of that work could be done ahead of time. Having grown up in the area he is aware of several springs from the hillside and as a result, there used to be a pond near Oak Tree Lanes. He is sure there could be hydrology issues and would like for the City to be extra diligent on that front to save the applicants and property owners time and money. VC/Farago asked if there were any other plans proposed for reconfiguring the striping to determine whether the applicant could meet the fire lane and parking requirements if they did angle parking in combination with parallel against the building or, were they just looking at the current configuration for adding the spaces. AP/Nakajima said they are just looking at the current configuration and adding spaces accordingly. The current parking stalls are actually compact spaces which are no longer allowed. C/Mok said that the spaces are very small and it appears to him that the parking spaces are maxed out. C/Mahlke said she experienced the same thing when she visited the site. In addition, she does business in several buildings in this area. From what she can tell from the reciprocal parking agreement documents submitted to the Commission, several of these properties have executed their right to show that these spots are for their customers only and that they are no longer sharing their spaces with the adjacent properties. She wants to know if the City has all of the information about which properties originally agreed to share the spaces and which are the ones no longer doing so. AP/Nakajima reminded the Commission that it is a private agreement among the property owners and the City is not a party to a private contract. C/Mahlke said that she understands that it is a private agreement, and wants to understand how much, if any, the Commission needs to give weight to in making its decision understanding there are drainage issues, etc. CDD/Gubman said the Commission would put zero weight into the private parking agreement because there is no proposal for shared parking. If there was a proposal for shared parking the City would require authorization from property owners who have parking spaces within 300 feet of the subject SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION property to authorize shared use of the parking, for which the City would perform an analysis in the aggregate of those properties as part of this proposal. In this case, the City is not a party to this reciprocal parking agreement, therefore, for purposes of this application, applies the parking standards to the individual parcel. The Code requires off-street parking on premises to meet the parking requirement. All of the documentation the property owners have provided is part of a squabble among five property owners that the City cannot be a party to. Chair/Barlas opened the public hearing. Howard Zelefsky, applicant, said that he believes CDD/Gubman's statement is appropriate. This is a private agreement and while one could call it a squabble among property owners, he is not participating in that squabble. And because they have not set out parking parameters, the neighbors are still allowed to park on their site consistent with the easement agreement. Mr. Zhang bought the property in 2015. In 2017 he decided to make some capital improvements to the site including the fagade and internal portions of the building, and to modify or allow for the option of a small addition in the medical office. In order to achieve that without dealing with the easement agreement, he decided to explore, totally within his property, adding 19 more parking spaces. Toward that effort, in 2018, they submitted two traffic reports done by Linscott, Law & Greenspan to justify the use of the additional medical use with the corresponding number of spaces. Staff is requesting continuance to October 30th and if asked, they are willing to have Linscott, Law & Greenspan provide additional information needed for the Commission to make its decision on that date. Mr. Zelefsky stated that AP/Nakajima has been great to work with through this process which he very much appreciates. Jim Wood, Stonewood Properties, owner and representative of owners of the auto center at 780 N. and 790 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard, stated that a letter was provided to the City about some of their concerns and their opposition. Stonewood Properties wants to make sure there is sufficient parking and that the parking stalls are sufficient on 750 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard so there is no spillover and that in addition, the hydrology and engineering concerns are looked at very carefully. SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 PAGE 8 E E PLANNING COMMISSION C/Mahlke wanted to understand the task or job of the PVC pipe running down the hill at the site. Richard de la Fuente, architect for the project, said that if it is white PVC pipe it is probably the irrigation system for the trees that are being planted according to the landscape improvements that were recently approved. Chair/Barlas moved, C/Mok seconded, to continue the public hearing for Development Review No. PL2017-139 to October 30, 2019, at 6:30 p.m. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mahlke, Mok, Rawlings, VC/Farago, Chair/Barlas NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: None STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 9.1 Project Status Report. CDD/Gubman reminded Commissioners that the following night the Planning Commission and City Council meet for the first of two planned joint workshops to unveil the new General Plan document and begin discussing the documents with the overall purpose of covering the first four chapters. The second meeting is scheduled for October 8ch to continue review of the chapters and time permitting, the Climate Action Plan and EIR. Should the Commission and Council wish to have a third study session, October 22°d is being held open for that purpose. The update process commenced three years ago with an extensive public process and a meticulously crafted Vision Statement, Guiding Principles and hundreds of goals and policies that have been scrutinized, refined and vetted by the public and GPAC. This process formed the framework for the General Plan document text and this is a major lifetime achievement for any Planning Commission to be involved in. SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in the agenda. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair/Barlas adjourned the regular meeting at 7:25 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 30�h day of October, 2019. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman Community Development Director r Naila Barlas, Chairperson