HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/09/19976:00 P.M.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Auditorium
21865 East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California
Chairman
Vice Chairman
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Toe Ruzicka
Don Schad
Franklin Fong
Mike Goldenberg
Toe McManus
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 5676 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.
FAA&UPCAGHNDkOM
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.
,,,TY OF DL"10ND BAR
PLANNING COMMISSIONAGENDA
Tuesday, September 9, 1997
Next Resolution No. 97-12
CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Joe Ruzicka, Vice Chairman
Don Schad, Mike Goldenberg, Franklin Fong, and Joe
McManus
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 August 26, 1997
4. OLD BUSINESS: None
5. NEW BUSINESS: None
6. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
6.1 Draft Development Code (Zoning Code Amendment ZCA 97-1) Review of all
Articles of the Draft Development Code and Draft Design Guidelines.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission review
the Draft Design Guidelines and make an informal recommendation.
6.2 Development Review No. 97-4 is a request (pursuant to Section 22.72.020.A) to
construct a 35,461 square foot, two story industrial building to be utilized for
warehousing, assembly and associated office uses on a 78,442 square foot (1.8
acre) vacant site. (Continued from August 12, 1997)
Property Location: Northeast corner of Lemon Avenue and Lycoming Street
Property Owner: Lan Plus, Andy Teng, 17088 E. Green Drive, City of
Industry, CA 91745
Applicant: Kent Wu Architects, 1274 E. Center Court Drive, Suite 211,
Covina, CA 91724
Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California
{ Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that this project
requires a Negative Declaration.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Development Review No. 97-4, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as
listed within the attached resolution.
7. PUBLIC HEARING: None
8. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
9. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION - September 11, 1997 - 7:00 p.m. - AQMD Board
Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive.
CITY COUNCIL - Tuesday, September 16, 1997 - 6:30 p.m. - AQMD Auditorium,
21865 E. Copley Drive
PLANNING COMMISSION - Tuesday, September 23, . 1997 - 6:00 p.m. - AQMD
Auditorium, 2186 E. Copley Drive
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - Thursday, September 25, 1997 - 7:00 p.m. -
AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive.
11. ADJOURNMENT: Tuesday, September 23, 1997 - 6:00 p.m.
2
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 26, 1997
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Ruzicka called the meeting to order at 6:08 p.m. in the
South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley
Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Don Gravdahl.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Chairman Ruzicka, Vice Chairman Schad,
Commissioners Goldenberg, McManus and Fong
Also Present: Acting Planning Commission Secretary Catherine
Johnson, Associate Planner Ann Lungu and
CA/Jenkins.
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes of August 12, 1997.
VC/Schad moved, C/Goldenberg seconded, to approve the
minutes of August 12, 1997 as presented.
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS - None
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
1. Draft Development'Code (Zoning Code Amendment ZCA 97-1)
Article III - Site Planning and General Development
Regulations: Review of Article II - Zoning Districts and
Allowable Land Uses, and Article V - Subdivisions and the
Zoning Map.
Mr. Pflugrath continued with Article III presentation for
the Chapter entitled Tree Preservation and Protection
(Page III-129 thru III7136.
VC/Schad requested the second line of I. DBH (diameter at
breast height) on Page III-130 be changed to read:
"...feet at the lowest point of the natural grade etc."
Following discussion, the Commission concurred to change
the second line as follows: Omit "highest point of -the
natural grade or" so that the second line reads:
"...feet at the existing grade adjacent to the trunk."
AUGUST 26, 1997 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
VC/Schad requested that the first line of R. Protection
zone. on Page III-130 be changed to read as follows:
"The area within the drip line of a tree and extending to
a point at least 15 feet" instead of five feet.
Following discussion, the Commission did not concur to
accept VC/Schad's request.
VC/Schad requested that the first line of B. under Tree
Replacement/Relocation Standards on Page III-133 be
changed as follows: "Replacement trees shall be planted
at a minimum 4:1 ratio for residential properties
...etc." instead of a 2:1 ratio. Following discussion,
the Commission did not concur to accept VC/Schad's
request. Mr. Pflugrath pointed out that the last
sentence of paragraph B. gives the Director or Commission
the ability to grant exceptions and to require a greater
replacement ratio based upon considerations 1., 2. and 3
listed on Page III-134.
Mr. Pflugrath pointed out that E. Enforcement. 1. is
corrected to read as follows: "Any person who cuts,
damages, or moves a protected tree in violation of this
Chapter shall be deemed guilty of an infraction or a
misdemeanor in compliance with Section 22 XXX legal
remedies."
Mr. Pf lugrath responded to C/McManus that information
regarding legal remedies should be requested from the
City Attorney.
Chair/Ruzicka asked for public comment.
Bob Zirbes said his first thought upon reading the
proposed Tree Preservation and Protection chapter was
that this item should be a ballot initiative. He said he
believes it would be difficult to impose these
overbearing and burdensome restrictions upon current
homeowners. He suggested that the Ordinance be applied
to new development/construction and recommended the
following exception be added as G. under Exemptions on
Page III-132: ."Trees, except those designated by the
City Council as historical or cultural trees, located on
all developed properties prior to the adoption of this
ordinance."
John Forbing said that based upon the fact that he has
lived in Diamond Bar for 23 years and that he is
President of the Historical Society, he is fairly
familiar with the trees in the community. The City is
currently maintaining 10,000 trees. He pointed out that
the Eucalyptus trees at the -Evangelical Free Church that
were planted by.the Diamond Bar Ranch founder in 1927
were deemed historical through the permit process. He
indicated thathe believes there are no additional
AUGUST 26, 1997 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
existing trees on the Diamond Bar Ranch that have any
significance with the exception of oak trees living in
undeveloped canyons. He stated that 1940's and 1950's
photographs of the Ranch do not show trees except for the
oak trees located on the north slope. The majority of
this Ranch was all open grassland used for grazing and
was not a tree lined area. The trees this community
enjoys today have been planted since 1960 when the first
homes were built. Every homeowner has planted trees of
their choice and maintained them as they choose. He
explained that he planted a weeping willow which overtook
his backyard and infringed upon his neighbors pool. As
a result, it was necessary to remove the tree. He said
he believes removal would not have been allowed as the
proposed code is written and does not know what recourse,
if any, his neighbor may have had. He stated that the
difficulty with a 4:1 ratio is that depending upon the
type of tree to be replaced, a residential back yard can
become a jungle. He concurred that Mr. Zirbes' exemption
recommendation should be considered by the Commission.
Don Gravdahl concurred with Mr. Zirbes and Mr. Forbing.
The homeowners have planted and cared for trees in
residential neighborhoods .and will continue to do so
without imposing the proposed conditions. He said he
believes this portion of the proposed Development Code
will invite noncompliance and discourage future planting
of trees.
Todd Kurtin,� developer, strongly supports tree
replacement and preservation of oaks and walnuts that are
on their property.. He indicated that there is not
sufficient room on his property for a 4:1 replacement and
such a ratio would insure failure. He said he believes
it is more important to preserve the replacement trees
than increase the number.
SP/Johnson reminded the Commission that the City
currently requires oak tree permits for the removal of
oak trees located on private property and asked if it is
the Commission's desire to create regulations that are
less restrictive than the regulations that are.currently
in place.
Chair/Ruzicka responded affirmatively.
C/McManus stated he would like for the City to
proactively distribute literature concerning the care of
trees to new homeowners.
The Commission concurred to. request that staff add
language to the ordinance in accordance with C/McManus'
suggestion.
AUGUST 26, 1997 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
AP/Lungu reminded the Commission that properties under
development requiring a mitigation monitoring program as
part of the approval should be eliminated from the
proposed exemption.
Following discussion, the Commission concurred to add Mr.
Zirbes' recommended exemption as Item A. under Exemptions
on Page III-131 and revised the language as follows:
"Trees, except those designated by the City Council as a
historical or cultural tree, and trees required to be
preserved, relocated or planted as a condition of
approval of a discretionary permit, located on all
developed properties prior to adoption of this
Development Code."
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (Page III-137 thru III-141)
Bob Zirbes asked for clarification of 4. Commuter
matching service. under B. Projects 50,000 square feet
and above. on Page III-140.
C/Goldenberg suggested that "capable of" be added to C.
Buspool. on Page III-137 so that it reads: "A vehicle
capable of carrying 16 or more passengers... etc."
C/Goldenberg recommended that the language of Item D.
Carpool and N. Vanpool be less stringent.
STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC LAND USES ( Page III-142 thru III-166)
Chair/Ruzicka asked if the code can address view blockage
(See H. Workshops or studios on Page III-162). with
respect to second story units without complicating the
issue.
Mr. Pflugrath suggested the matter be included in the
Design Guidelines for Single Family Residential.
VC/Schad suggested that Table 3-xx on Page III-164 be
changed to reflect 5 feet instead of 3 feet for Required
setback under Single -Family Detached Homes Item 2-
Swimming pool, spa, fish pond, outdoor play equipment.
Bob Zirbes asked if 111,000 feet" could be increased to
2,000 feet in the third line of 8. Separation/measurement,
on Page III-145.
CA/Jenkins responded that the number of feet is based
upon allowing a reasonable number of sites within the
City.
Mr. Pf lugrath indicated he will review the matter with
staff to determine if 2,000 feet is a reasonable number.
AUGUST 26, 1997 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
CA/Jenkins responded to Mr. Zirbes that if an applicant
satisfies the distance requirements, adult businesses
must be allowed.
Mr. Zirbes stated he believes the distances requirements
should be as stringent as possible.
Mr. Pflugrath stated that CA/Jenkins indicated cities may
not limit adult businesses hours of operation and
therefore, 2. Hours of operation on Page III-144 will be
deleted from the Development Code.
CA/Jenkins responded to C/Goldenberg that the City would
have no recourse in assisting residents whose property
borders a neighboring city which may allow an adult
business.to be located within a shorter distance of the
property line because the use would be outside of the
City's jurisdiction. The property owner could attempt to
persuade the neighboring city to take steps to eliminate
such a facility or bring a nuisance abatement action
against the neighboring city, etc.
Mr. Zirbes asked that 3. Signs be referenced as not
allowed if ina residential zone with respect to Child
Day -Care Facilities on Page'III-147.
Mr. Zirbes pointed out that ";and" should be deleted from
the end of 10. Parcel coverage and replaced by a period
Responding to Mr. Zirbes, Mr. Pflugrath suggested, that 5.
Family members only on Page III-152 be changed to
Residents only.
Martha Bruske said she is concerned about permitted
changes to single family residential homes (such as
relocation of air conditioners) that may distress the
neighbors. She reiterated her concerns about lack of
maintenance and attraction of rodents and insects in the
commercial recycling areas. She indicated she is
concerned about home based businesses. She has no
problem with people who work on computers in their homes
.- she has a great deal of concern about business parking
on residential streets. She said she is concerned about
the aesthetics of second story additions.
John Forbing asked if the code addresses Day -Care
Facility parking and dropoff/pickup..
Mr. Pflugrath responded to Mr. Forbing that Chapter 22.xx
addresses off-street parking and loading for residential
properties (See PROPERTY MAINTENANCE STANDARDS - Single-
family Standards on Page III-95 and III-96.
AUGUST 26, 1997 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
Mr. Forbing asked if Item 11. Sale and storage of
merchandise on Page III-152 will limit home businesses
such as Amway, Princess House, Mary Kay which require
distributor meeting and product pickup.
Mr. Pflugrath stated that the code allows for garage
storage of products and equipment as long as vehicle
parking is not prohibited. He indicated he will add
language to clarify this item.
Tom Van Winkle expressed his concerns about how the code
will address home based businesses..
RECESS: Chair/Ruzicka recessed the meeting at 8:25 p.m.
RECONVENE: Chair/Ruzicka reconvened the meeting at 8:45 p.m.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: (Continued)
2. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 50314, Conditional Use
Permit No. 96-1, Oak Tree Permit No. 96-1 and Zone Change
96-1 (pursuant to Code Sections Title 21, and Title
22.56.215, 22.26 Part 16 and 22.16 Part 2) are requests
to approve a 15 lot subdivision on approximately 44
acres. The average lot size will be 2.92 acres. Six of
the proposed lots are part of two approved tracts.
Therefore, VTTM 50314's development will result in a net
increase of 13 residential lots. The project site is
within Los Angeles County Significant Ecological Area No.
15. The Zone Change will convert the current zoning of
R-1,200 and A-2-2 to R-1-40,000. (Continued from August
12, 1997.
Project Address: Southeast of the most southerly
intersection of Steeplechase,.
Lane and Wagon Train Lane.
Project Owner/Applicant: Kurt Nelson, Windmill
Development, 3480 Torrance
Boulevard, Suite 300, Torrance,
CA 90503
AP/Lungu explained that staff received a letter from Kurt
Nelson, Windmill Development Company, Inc. dated August
19, 1997, requesting that the public hearing for.VTM
50314 be continued to September 23, 1997.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the
public hearing, receive comments, and continue the public
hearing to September 23, 1997.
Chair/Ruzicka reopened the public hearing.
AUGUST 26, 1997 )PACE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
There was no one present who wished to speak on this
item.
VC/Schad moved, C/McManus seconded, to continue Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 50314, Conditional Use Permit No.
96-1, Oak Tree Permit No. 96-1 and Zone Change 96-1 to
September 23, 1997. The motion was carried 5-0.
3. Development Review No. 97-4 is a request (pursuant to
Section 22.72.020.A) to construct a 35,461 square foot;
two story industrial building to be utilized for
warehousing, assembly and associated office uses on a
78,442 square foot (1.8 acre) vacant site. (Continued
from August 12, 1997)
Property Location: Northeast corner of Lemon
Avenue and Ly.coming Street
Property Owner: Lan Plus, Andy Teng, 17088 E,
Green Drive, City of Industry,
CA 91745
Applicant: Kent Wu Architects, 1274 E.
Center Court Drive, Suite 211,
Covina, CA 91724
SP/Johnson presented staff's report. She requested that
Condition Q. on Page 5 of the Resolution be deleted. She
further requested that Condition I. on Page 6 be modified
to read: "Prior to final inspection, the applicant/owner
shall install a decorative masonry wall not less than 30
inches and not greater than 42 inches in height parallel
and adjacent to the parking lot not closer than five feet
,from the property line".
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Development Review No. 97-4, Findings of Fact and
conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
Chair/Ruzicka reopened the public hearing.
Chang Lee, applicant's representative, said that Mr. Teng
is a resident of Diamond Bar and is a long-term developer
who will use the facility for his own business. He
indicated the applicant is concerned about the City's
imposition of a 10 foot dedication at this time and asked
that Conditions 4. F . and 5. X . , Y . , Z . be deleted at
this time. He said the applicant would like Condition
aa. documentation to be presented to the applicant for
consideration as soon as possible. He stated he believes
the applicant should be requested to participate in the
dedication along with other commercial residents when the
entire street is widened to 80 feet in accordance with
the City's General Plan. He said he believes that by
AUGUST 26, 1997 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION
requiring a 10 foot dedication at this time, the property
owner should be compensated for the"taking". Mr. Lee
asked for clarification of "proportionate share" as
stated in Condition V.
Kent Wu, Architect, explained the proposed project using
plan drawings.
Mr. Wu responded to VC/Schad that the applicant will not
utilize rail shipments. All ingress/egress will be at
the Lycoming side of the structure. The business
transports equipment by UPS or Federal Express.
Mr. Wu asked for consideration of a greater number of
smaller than 48 inch box trees. He suggested 15 gallon
pepper trees at a 4:1 ratio.
Chair/Ruzicka asked if it is possible to widen Lycoming
Avenue to 80 feet east of the proposed project to Brea
Canyon Road.
SP/Johnson responded to Chair/Ruzicka that the dedication
is part of the development process and a condition of
approval. The City's General Plan calls for Lycoming
Avenue to be widened from 60 to 80 feet between Lemon
Avenue and Brea Canyon Road. She indicated that
CA/Jenkins advises that if'the applicant objects to the
10 foot dedication, staff should require that this item
be continued to allow for further analysis.
Jeff Asay, Union Pacific Railroad staff attorney, stated
the railroad would like to sell the property. The
railroad is concerned that the applicant has newly
imposed conditions that may, prevent the sale from
progressing in a timely manner. He indicated he is
hopeful that an agreement can be reached between the
applicant and the City within the next 30 days or so.
Mr. Asay responded to VC/Schad that he is not aware of a
storm drain on the property.
C/Fong stated he believes that the future developer of
the school property on the southwest corner of Lycoming
Avenue should carry the burden of a street easement
dedication.
C/Goldenberg moved, C/McManus seconded, to continue
Development Review No. 97-4 to September 9, 1997. The
motion was carried 5-0.
4. Draft Development Code (Continued):
Paul Crawford, AICP, The Planning and zoning Alliance,
presented Article V Subdivisions.
AUGUST 26, 1997 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION
Bob Zirbes asked for the City's minimum residential lot
size.
SP/Johnson responded that the minimum residential lot
size is proposed to be 8,000 square feet.
Mr. Zirbes recommended a 10,000 .square foot minimum
residential lot size.
Mr. Crawford indicated lot sizes will be discussed in
Article II.
Mr. Crawford responded to C/Goldenberg that Townhomes are
common interest developments and the Tentative Map and
Parcel Map process is employed for approval. Article
III's Multiple Family Design Guidelines and Standards
deal with multi -family housing such as Townhomes and
condominium projects.
C/Fong asked that "and Civil Engineer" be included at the
end of the first paragraph under Survey Procedure and
Practice on Page V-71.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS - None
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - None
SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As presented in the agenda.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business to come before the Planning
Commission, Chair/Ruzicka adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m. to
6:00 p.m., September 2, 1997 in the South Coast Air Quality
Management Board Hearing Room.
Respectfully Submitted,
Catherine Johnson
Acting Secretary
Attest:
Joe Ruzicka
Chairman
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO:
CHAIRMAN
AND PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM:
CATHERINE
JOHNSON-,. SENIOR PLANNER
SUBJECT: DR 97-4, INDUSTRIAL BUILDING, NORTHEAST CORNER
. LEMON AVENUE AND LYCOMING STREET
DATE: SEPTEMBER 5, 1997
At the Planning Commission meeting of August 26, 1997, the public
hearing for the above mentioned project was opened and the Planning
Commission continued the project to the meeting of September 9,
1997.
Since that
time, staff
has done
further analysis on this project and
based on
discussions
with the
Public Works Department, made,
revisions to
conditions
of approval
as noted below.
(i) Prior to final inspection, the applicant/owner shall install a
decorative masonry wall not less than 30" and no greater than
42" in height parallel and adjacent to the parking lot andnot
nln er than fivefeet from the ultimate property line (innluding
the 10' dedication ly tion on eeminn Street
TT-i 7 �
This condition has been modified to accommodate the future widening
of the Lycoming Street, which would necessitate the elimination of
two parking spaces if the required wall was placed 5' from the
ultimate right-of-way. This revision is in compliance with the Planning
and Zoning Code 22.52.1060.D.1.b.(i).
(q) An elevator, constructed in compliance with ADA requirements
is required to allow the public and staff access to the second
floor.
Planning Commission
September 5, 1997
Page 2
Memorandum, DR 97-4
This condition has been eliminated in compliance with the provisions
of the Americans with Disabilities Act which does not require an
elevator for multi -story office buildings less than three stories high.
This exception has been applied to this project because the only
multi -story portion of this building is for office use only.
(x) The applicant/owner shall irrevocably dedicate to the City of
Diamond Bar, 10' of land along the entire length of the subject
property along Lycoming Street. Written proof that the said
dedication has been duly recorded and accepted by the County
Recorder of the County of Los Angeles shall be provided prior
to final Gertiflea building permit issuance.
This condition of approval has been revised to ensure that the City
acquires the required dedication of land prior to any construction
occurring on the site.
The following three conditions have been deleted. It has been
determined that the requirement for the irrevocable dedication to the
City of the additional 10' of property for the ultimate right-of-way is
sufficient for. compliance with the General Plan.
(y) Prior to issuance of any City permits, the applicant owner shall
submit a detailed cost estimate for surety purposes for all
public improvements associated with this project, subject to
approval by the Engineering Division.
(z) Prior to issuance of any City permits, surety shall be posted by
the applicant/owner in an amount approved by the City. This
surety shall in the form of a bond, letter of credit or other
instrument approved by the City.
(aa) An agreement shall be executed between the applicant/owner
and the City, guaranteeing that at the time Lycoming Street is
widened to its ultimate right -of way width of 80', the
applicant/owner shall pay a fair share cost (as determined by
the City) of demolition, widening and street improvements along
K
Planning Commission Memorandum, DR 97-4
September 5, 1997
Page 3
the property's frontage on Lycoming Street. These
improvements shall include all costs for demolition, asphalt,' curb
gutter sidewalk and all costs associated with the relocation of
any utilities or other infrastructure.
The following condition of approval has been added. to address the
improvement of the existing right-of-way along the property's frontage.
(x) The owner shall be responsible for the installation of all required
improvements along the property's frontage along Lycoming
Street, which shall include the extension of the curb, gutter and
sidewalk. The owner shall also be responsible for any sidewalk
repair along the frontage of the property and for the installation
or upgrade of any handicap access ramps at the intersection.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the attached
revised resolution and approve Development Review 97-4 subject to
the Conditions of Approval contained within Planning Commission
Resolution 97-XX
Attachment:
Draft Resolution of Approval for Development Review 97-4
3
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 97-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR APPROVING NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ND) 97-2 AND
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 97-4, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A.
35,461 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING LOCATED AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF LEMON AVENUE AND LYCOMING STREET,
DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA.
A. RECITALS.
1. The applicant/owner, Andy Teng of Lan Plus, and the
applicant's agent, Kent Wu have filed an application for
Development Review No. 97-4 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. On July 25, 1995, the City of Diamond Bar adopted its
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
August 26, 1997 conducted a duly noticed public hearing
on the Application, the project was continued to
September 9, 1997.
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 July 18, 1997. Eight
(8) property owners within a 300 foot radius of the
project site were notified by mail on July 10, 1997.
B. 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,
1
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The Planning Commission hereby determines that the
there is no substantial evidence that the project
may have a significant effect on the environment and
therefore a Negative Declaration (ND 97-2) has been
prepared, pursuant to the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act 'of 1970, as
amended, and the guidelines promulgated thereunder,
pursuant to Section 15070 of Article 19 of Chapter
3 of Division 13 of Title 14 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 wildlife 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 relates to a 78,442 square foot
vacant parcel, located at the northeast corner
of Lemon and Lycoming.
(b) The project site has a General Plan land use
designation of Light Industrial (I). It is
within the Restricted Heavy Manufacturing (M-
1.5) zone.
(c) Generally, the following zones and uses
surround the project site: to the north are
railroad tracts and the City boundary; to the
south is a school site zoned Residential
Agricultural (R-A 8,000), to the east is an
industrial building within the Commercial
Manufacturing (CM) zone and to the west is an
industrial building located within the M-1.5
zone.
(d) The proposed project is a request to construct
a 35,461 square foot, two story. industrial
building, to be utilized for warehousing,
assembly and associated office uses.
(e) The design and layout of the proposed
development review 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 areas, such as designated historic
districts, theme areas, specific plans,
community plans, boulevards or planned
developments.
The proposed industrial building is consistent
with the General Plan Land Use Element which
provides for light industrial uses within areas
designated Light Industrial (I).
Further, the applicant is proposing replacing
the pepper trees which will be removed as a
result of development of this site, at a three
to one ratio. This is consistent with the
Resource Management Element which calls for the
retention and preservation of pepper trees, as
well as other identified species of trees "as
part of a tree preservation ordinance.
(f) The design and layout of the proposed
development will not unreasonably interfere
with the use and enjoyment of the neighboring
existing or future development and will not
create traffic or pedestrian hazards.
The proposed industrial building is permitted
by right within the Restricted Heavy
Manufacturing (M-1.5) zone.
The applicant is dedicating an additional 10'
of property along the entire length of the
Lycoming Street frontage for the ultimate
widening of this side of the street to a 40'
half -width in compliance with the General Plan
requirement for an ultimate 80' right-of-way
for Lycoming Street.
On -site parking and loading facilities have
been provided for the proposed building in
compliance with Code requirements and in an
amount exceeding the minimum standards.
A sidewalk will be extended in front of the
building, and a condition of approval has been
included requiring the applicant to be
responsible for any needed repairs. All
sidewalks, walkways and parking will be
constructed in compliance with ADA
requirements.
(g) The architectural design of the proposed
development is compatible with the character of
the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain
the harmonious, orderly and attractive
development contemplated by Chapter 22.72 of
the Development Review Ordinance No. 5 (1990)
and the City's General Plan.
3
The proposed industrial building is.a concrete
"tilt up" type structure, which is typical of
the buildings in the surrounding area. While
simple in design, the building features design
elements such as varying setbacks, rounded
corners and accent colors, which add interest
and variety to the building's exterior
elevation..
(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 design of the proposed industrial building
will utilize a variety of colors, textures and
shapes as well as a varied front setback to
create interest, and landscaping in an amount
that' exceeds the .minimum Code requirements.
This will result in a site that is
aesthetically appealing, and enhances the
appearance of the surrounding area. Further,
the site is located at the northerly boundary
of the City, and will serve as an attractive
"entry statement" for the community .
(i) The proposed development will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare or materially injurious to the
properties or improvements in the vicinity.
Before the issuance of any City permits, the
proposed project is required to comply with all
conditions of the approved resolution and the
Building .and Safety Division, Public Works
Division and Fire Department. The referenced
agencies, involvement will ensure that the
proposed project 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
plans collectively labeled as Exhibit "A"
dated September 9, 1997, 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 entitlement granted herein. The removal
of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether
N
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 applicant's obligation
to insure that the waste contractor utilized
has obtained permits from the City of Diamond
Bar to provide such services.
(c) The applicant shall comply with all State, M-
1.5 zone, Public Works Department and Building
and Safety Division requirements.
(d) 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.
(e) This grant shall not be effective for any
purpose until the permittee and owner of the
property involved (if other than permittee)
have filed, within fifteen (15) days of
approval of this grant, at the office of
Diamond Bar Community Development Department,
their Affidavit of Acceptance stating that the
applicant/owner is aware of and agrees to all
conditions of this grant. Further, this grant
shall not be effective until the permittee pays
any remaining City processing fees.
(f) If the Department of Fish and Game determines
that Fish and Game 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, payable to the County of Los Angeles,' 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 de minimis 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.
(g) Within 30 days of this grant's approval, the
applicant/owner shall submit revised site
plans, landscaping plans and floor plans
reflecting the additional 10' dedication along
the property's frontage on Lycoming Street.
These plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the Planning Division prior to issuance of City
permits.
5
(h) Within 30 days of the grants approval the
applicant/owner shall submit final landscaping
and irrigation plans subject to approval by the
Planning and Building and Safety Divisions. -
All landscaping shall be installed prior to
issuance .of Certificate of occupancy.
(i) Prior to final inspection, the applicant/owner
shall install a decorative masonry wall not
less than 30" and no greater than 42" in height
parallel and adjacent to the parking lot.
(j) The parking lot shall be lighted to a 1 candle
foot minimum level of illumination. All
lighting shall be adequately shielded so as to
not spill over on to adjacent surrounding
properties or roadways.
(k) Any roof mounted equipment shall be hidden from
view by either the building parapet or behind
screening that is constructed using materials
and colors that are complimentary with the
overall architectural design of the building.
(1) Plans shall conform to State and local building
codes (i.e. Table 10-A of the 1994 edition of
the Uniform Building Code and the 1994 editions
of Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, and 1993
edition of the National Electrical Code) as
well as the State Energy Code.
(m) The plans' for new construction shall be
engineered to meet wind loads of 80 m.p.h. with
an exposure "C."
(n) All ramps shall be handicapped accesible.
(o) All exterior access doors shall be clearly
marked with handicapped symbols.
(p) The Fire Department shall review and approve
plans for Fire Code compliance.
(q) All bathrooms and restrooms shall comply with
the new State Handicapped Accessibility
regulations.
(r) Prior to grading _permit issuance, a soils
report and final grading and drainage plans
shall be submitted and approved by the
Engineering Department.
(s) The location of the borrow site for imported
fill materials and the transport route shall be
identified on the grading plans. All trucks
hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose
materials shall be covered and maintain at
least two feet of freeboard (i.e. minimum
vertical distance between top of the,load and
the top of the trailer).
(t) The building shall have roof drains to direct
water to paved surfaces or to underground
drainage facilities.
(u) The applicant/owner shall be responsible for a
proportionate share of the cost.of any future
warrant study or signal modifications needed
due to the traffic impacts resulting from this
project.
(v) No access shall be permitted to the property
from the right-of-way adjacent to the railroad
tracts.
(w) The applicant/owner shall irrevocably dedicate
to the City of Diamond Bar, 10' of land along
the entire length of the subject property on
Lycoming Street. Written proof that the said
dedication has been duly recorded and accepted
by the County Recorder of the County of Los
Angeles shall be provided prior to building
permit issuance.
(x) The owner shall be responsible for the
installation of all required improvements along
the property's frontage along Lycoming Street,
which shall include the extension of the curb
gutter and sidewalk. The owner shall also be
responsible for any sidewalk repair along the
frontage of the property and for the
installation or upgrade of any handicap access
ramps at the intersection.
(y) The trash storage area shall be constructed on
a concrete pad.
(z) The applicant/owner agrees to comply with any
and all NPDES mitigation requirements which may.
be imposed on or related to the property.
(aa) The applicant/owner agrees to comply with
adopted Congestion Management Plan (CMP)
regulations of the City.
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 Andy Teng,
Lan Plus 17088 E. Green Drive City of Industry
CA 91745 and Kent Wu Architects, 1274 E. Center
Court Drive, Suite 211, Covina, CA 91724.
7
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER,
1997, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
BY:
Joe Ruzicka, Chairman
I, James DeStefano, Acting 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 9TH day
of September 1997,.by the following vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
James DeStefano, Secretary
0