Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/10/2019MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 10, 2019 CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chair/Farago called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chair Farago led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Jennifer "Fred" Mahlke, Kenneth Mok, Vice -Chair Frank Farago. Absent: Commissioner William Rawlings and Chairperson Naila Barlas were excused. Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; David DeBerry, City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Mayuko 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: None 5, OLD BUSINESS: None 6, NEW BUSINESS: None 7, CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING(S): 7.1 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). DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION PROJECT ADDRESS: 750 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: JohnneI Y. Zhang Zhang Group 750 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard, Ste. 188 Diamond Bar. CA 91765 APPLICANT: Howard Zelefsky 9735 La Capilla Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 AP/Nakajima presented staffs updated report and recommended that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. PL2017-139 based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. C/Mahlke asked why the three reserved parking spots (FCU) are not shown on the map and where they are located or planned to be placed. The summary survey indicates that three parking spots are underutilized and hardly used during the morning hours and never at capacity. AP/Nakajima responded that the parking spots are notated in red at the right hand corner of the map for the existing site plan; however, the existing site plan indicates they will no longer be considered reserved spots. In addition, all of the parking will have to be re -allocated when the employee and short-term parking program is implemented. C/Mahlke asked if the spaces would be designated at the time the project is implemented. AP/Nakajima referred C/Mahlke to the condition of approval in the resolution that states the applicant must submit the parking management plan to staff for review and approval. The employee parking program will be required and the short term parking program will be dependent on the needs of the medical office and pharmacy. C/Mahlke said she did not find the landscape plan and protected tree mitigation readdressed in the current packet. AP/Nakajima explained that there were a couple of entitlements associated with this property. The building previously went through a fagade remodel by means of a plot plan DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION review and as a result, the applicant had to remove a few protected trees that were damaging the property and replant them on the slope during the remodel. C/Mok asked about comment #2 on Page 9 of the packet that states that the modifications to the parking lot require written consent from all property owners. C/Mok asked if to date, those property owners had given written consent and AP/Nakajima responded no, but that it would apply to all of the property owners subject to the Reciprocal Parking Agreement (five property owners) along North Diamond Bar Boulevard. VC/Farago opened the public hearing. Howard Zelefsky, applicant, thanked AP/Nakajima for her help through this process. He said she has been fabulous to work with and super responsive to all questions of the applicant and owner. He further stated that they have reviewed staffs report and concur with the recommended conditions of approval and are anxious to move forward with all of the conditions as suggested by staff. Following the last meeting, they engaged Linscott, Law and Greenspan, premier traffic engineers, who provided a report confirming what the owner knew, that there was an excess of parking. One of the key findings is that on the day of peak demand (Wednesday) there is a need for 83 spaces where 102 spaces exist and that number will increase to 118 spaces. Accordingly, the applicant and owner believe that the 35 space cushion more than satisfies the minor increase in medical use. VC/Farago closed the public hearing. C/Mok moved, C/Mahlke seconded, to approve Development Review No. PL2017-139. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mahlke, Mok, VC/Farago NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Rawlings, Chair/Barlas 8. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 8.1 Variance and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2019-122 —Under the authority of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code Sections 22.54 and 22.56, the property owner and applicant proposed to construct a 1,600 square foot DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION patio at the no (front) and west sides of an existing 3,871 square foot restaurant (Jasmine Grill). A Variance was requested to allow a reduction in the required distance separation between the outdoor dining area and residential uses to 85 feet (where 200 feet is required), and a Minor Conditional Use Permit was requested to allow outdoor dining within the proposed patio. The subject property is zoned Community Commercial (C-2) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Commercial (C). PROJECT ADDRESS: PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: 21130 Golden Springs Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Gary K. and Anna M. Malkhasian Trust And Shaunt Trust 11534 Dellmont Drive Tujunga, CA 91042 MHD Marwan Almannini 6 Monitor Irvine, CA 92620 AP/Espinoza presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Variance and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2019-122, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. VC/Farago opened the public hearing. With no one present who wished to speak on this item, VC/Farago closed the public hearing. C/Mahlke moved, C/Mok seconded, to approve Variance and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2019-122, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed with the Resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mahlke, Mok, VC/Farago NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Rawlings, Chair/Barlas DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION 8.2 Development Review and Tree Permit No. PL2019-42 — Under the authority of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code Sections 22.48 and 22.38, the applicant and property owner requested Development Review approval to construct a new 31,458 square foot, single family residence with a 2,100 square foot garage, an 800 square foot porte cochere, and 8,675 square feet of balcony area on an 8.54 gross acre (370,696 gross square foot) undeveloped site. A Tree Permit is also requested to remove three protected California Black Walnut trees that are in fair and poor health and replace them with nine (9) coast live oak trees on site. The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential. PROJECT ADDRESS: 2244 Indian Creek Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Henry Hua 19811 Colima Road #201 Walnut, CA 91789 APPLICANT: Pete Volbeda 164 N. 2nd Avenue, Suite 100 Upland, CA 91786 AP/Nakajima presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review` and Tree Permit No. PL2019-42, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. VC/Farago opened the public hearing. Pete Volbeda, Architect, stated that he and the applicant are pleased to present this house on a very large lot and appreciated working with Planning staff and other departments to obtain approval of this proposed project. Because the lot is very large, there is wider separation (about 100 feet around the house) beyond the usual 25 feet from houses typical The Country. ClMahlke said there was inconsistency on the application and asked for explanation of the owner's name. Mr. Volbeda responded that Adam Estate is the official company name for this residence. DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION Paul Sherwood, 2330 Clear Creek, said he lives above the proposed project and was not present this evening to speak against the project per se. However, he has some concerns. As has been stated, this is proposed to be the largest home in Diamond Bar and he wanted to know how long it would take to build a home that exceeds 31,000 square feet with a 2,800 square foot garage. He is concerned about the noise that accompanies a project of this size and duration. There have been many homes that were in the process of being built and removed during the last recession, and his neighborhood was blighted with abandoned and unfinished homes for a period of time. He is concerned that this project gets completed because if it does not, there are not many with the financial wherewithal to be able to take over a project of this size and the house could sit unfinished if the applicant is unable to complete it. He is curious if the City has any wherewithal to see that a project like this is, in fact, completed. And, is this home being built to be occupied or as a spec home to be sold on the open market, because he has observed a number of homes sitting on the market for a long period of time because homes of this size are not moving with any great speed. On the environmental side, is the City placing requirements on this home with respect to the energy use because a home of this size will require a great deal of energy and could tax the neighborhood's electrical grid. And, will his neighborhood electrical grid system support a project of this size. Are there other considerations or requirements being made such as solar panels which would support the electrical needs of a home this size and, given its location, would this home being many feet below the grade of Indian Creek, is it going to be on sewer with an uplift station or will it utilize septic. Mr. Volbeda responded to Mr. Sherwood that the house will be on a septic system. Percolation reports have been ordered which will be submitted to and approved by the Health Department prior to issuance of building permits. With respect to timing of construction, he is anticipating grading to take three to four months and construction three years. Henry Hua said he is the owner of the property and he will occupy the house. He is a builder and is building many houses. He has development in Malibu but has been a resident of Diamond Bar for 40 years and loves Diamond Bar. Even though he knows the market is not that good and a lot of folks are moving out of the area, he is not. This will be his home. He is a very experienced builder and guarantees that his home will be very energy DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION efficient. It will be one of the safest and most efficient houses because it will use solar power and be fully automated and include a rain harvest system to conserve water. Finally, he is very financially sound and if needed, he is willing to provide bank references. VC/Farago closed the public hearing. CDD/Gubman responded to Mr. Sherwood that whether the City has any enforcement authority to ensure completion of construction, it depends on whether or not the project, if abandoned, would become a public nuisance. For example, when the Shell Station at Palomino and Diamond Bar Boulevard was abandoned, the City filed a civil suit and had a court appointed receiver that took over the project, took possession and completed the project, and received compensation through the proceeds of the sale of that property. This is a worst case scenario. Since this proposed project is behind the guard -gated community and subject to a homeowner's association, it might be more of a partnership with the homeowner's association if there were public nuisance concerns. However, if the project discontinued construction and failed to meet the deadlines to pass inspections by certain milestones in the construction process, the City would initially work to at least secure the property and keep the construction site maintained clear of weeds and debris and further erosion with best practices in place for any soil runoff or erosion. There are enforcement measures the City can take, if necessary. In any type of project, there is the potential that the project will not be completed and the City has had such experience with smaller projects including room additions. CDD/Gubman stated that in terms of energy usage, the construction will be subject to the latest update of the California Building Code —the Green Building Code (CALGreen) which has the most stringent energy -efficient standards in the country assuring that new residences will potentially be more energy -efficient than many of the smaller houses in the neighborhood. CDD/Gubman stated that given the architecture and amount of flat roof surfaceI he would strongly encourage the applicant to take advantage of the rooftop solar opportunities that would seem to be available for this to potentially even take the property off the grid. In terms of its potential burdens on the electrical grid, a "will serve" letter would have to be provided by SoCal Edison before they would provide electrical service to energize DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION the property. Edison has its own criteria before it would be willing to serve the property and staff believes there are sufficient safeguards in place to assure that the house will be energy efficient and will not create an impact on other users of the grid. VC/Farago asked CDD/Gubman to respond to Mr. Sherwood's concern about noise during construction. CDD/Gubman responded to VC/Farago that the City's construction Noise Ordinance limits construction hours from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. Construction noise is not permitted on Sundays. If anything were to occur on Sundays, it would be in the later phase of the project during interior finish work. C/Mok moved, C/Mahlke seconded, to approve Development Review and Tree Permit No. PL2019-42, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Mahlke, Mok, VC/Farago NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Rawlings, Chair/Barlas 9. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS/INFORMATION ITEMS: None 10. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 10.1 Protect Status Report. CDD/Gubman reiterated that the Christmas Eve (December 24th) Planning Commission meeting is canceled and the next meeting will take place on January 14, 2020. At this time, there are two items for the January 141h agenda and there is business to take care of on January 28th as well. CDD/Gubman stated that the final adoption hearing for the General Plan goes before the City Council next Tuesday, December 17th when the Council will consider adoption of the General Plan Update, Climate Action Plan and certification of the Environmental Impact Report with Statement of Overriding considerations. DECEMBER 10, 2019 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION 11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in the agenda. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Vice Chair/Farago adjourned the regular meeting at 7:21 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 14th day of January, 2020. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman Community Development Director