Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021.04.16 - Minutes - Special MeetingCITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL JOINT MEETING April 16, 2021 CALL TO ORDER2 Mayor Lyons called the Special Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission to order at 3:35 p.m. Mayor Lyons announced that consistent with COVID-19 regulations, all Council Members and staff participated via teleconference and there was no physical location for public attendance. The Public was invited to join the meeting online or by phone at the numbers printed on the agenda. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Lyons led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Andrew Chou, Stan Liu, Steve Tye, Mayor Pro Tern Ruth Low, and Mayor Nancy Lyons ABSENT: None PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Naila Barlas, Kenneth Mok, Raymond Wolfe, and Chairperson William Rawlings ABSENT: Commisisoner Mahendra Garg Staff participating telephonically: Dan Fox, City Manager; Ryan McLean, Assistant City Manager; Anthony Santos, Assistant to the City Manager; Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Mayuko Nakajima, Associate Planner; Joy Tsai, Associate Planner; Stella Marquez, Administrative Coordinator; Marsha Roa, Public Information Manager; Cecilia Arellano, Public Information Coordinator; Kristina Santana, City Clerk Also Present: Marty Borko, Executive Director, ULI Los Angeles and TAP panel members Andrew Fogg, Chairman; Roland Wiley; Jorge Mutis; John Zimmerman, John Wardy, Derek Wyatt, Jennifer Pehr, Jennifer Smith, Matt Romero, Ashley Atkinson, Roger Sanchez, Steve Nelson, and Traffic Consultant, Paul Hermann. 1. PRESENTATION BY THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE LOS ANGELES DISTRICT COUNCIL: DIAMOND BAR TOWN CENTER TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PANEL (TAP) RECOMMENTATIONS. APRIL 161 2021 PAGE 2 CC/PC JOINT SPECIAL MTG CDD/Gubman reported that staff invited ULkLA to assemble a Technical Assistance Panel (TAP) to provide expert and objective advice on strategies for implementing the General Plan's Goals and Policies for the future Town Center. During the week the panel conducted an intensive examination of the study area and will share their insights through a series of presentations by experts in a variety of land use disciplines. He introduced Marty Borko, Executive Director, ULI Los Angeles who, along with Diamond Bar TAP members, provided an overview of their examination of the Town Center Mixed Use study area and recommendations for product component potential. CC/Santana read the following public comments submitted via email: Diane Reisz wanted to know information about the develop and how the project will be paid for. Public Comments provided telephonically: Lee Paulson thanked ULI for an amazing presentation and encouraged the City Council, Planning Commissioners and residents, to talk about town building and creation of an urbanized village and to make a plan and hold on to the vision. Responsible Land Use has no issue with the proposed densities if done properly. Paul Deibel agreed with Lee Paulson that it was an excellent and thorough presentation. He especially likes placement of residential housing to the south of the development and believes the City Council would be well- advised to follow these recommendations as a program for a focal village pedestrian -oriented development of the Town Center Mixed -Use area and he does not believe the community should be overly concerned or afraid of higher density if done properly, which may require additional incentives of affordable housing or fees in lieu. Mayor Lyons asked the Planning Commission and City Council to offer questions or comments at this time. C/Barlas was extremely excited to receive this presentation for potential development that she feels will allow family members to remain in Diamond Bar and hoped she would live to see the project unfold. C/Wolfe felt the presentation was very well thought out. He participated in a workshop earlier in the week during which a conversation about traffic calming measures took place and wondered if TAP had considered traffic calming measures for Diamond Bar Boulevard and whether the SR57/60 Confluence Project might help to mitigate some of those concerns. APRIL 161 2021 PAGE 3 CC/PC JOINT SPECIAL MTG Andrew Fogg responded that the panel recommended enhanced pedestrian crosswalks across Diamond Bar Boulevard while recognizing that making major changes to arterials proximate to the freeway might be a bit beyond the scope of what this project could tackle so they focused on the internal circulation in not creating additional gridlock within the City. Paul Herrmann, P.E., Fehr &Peers, further responded to C/Wolfe that the focus was an attempt to balance capacity on Diamond Bar Boulevard with safety for bikes and pedestrians using the facility as well as, those crossing the street. He supports the "complete streets" concept and might have recommendations for increased widths for pedestrian facilities while retaining six lanes, that would including protected bike lanes and sidewalks along Diamond Bar Boulevard with decreased widths which would slow speeds in combination with increased pedestrian activity. C/Wolfe stated that with respect to the discussion about the cost of creating the parking necessary for this to succeed (between $80-135 million), he saw Diamond Bar as a transit desert and many of the examples drawn upon in putting this presentation together looked at areas that had significantly more advanced transit options available. As Diamond Bar continues to grow and looks to meet the RHNA requirements, the community needs to think about how it can provide more options for alternative transportation to community members as well as, those who travel through the community. C/Mok was surprised to hear about the redevelopment cycle of 30 years and the time it would take to accomplish this huge project. Like C/Barlas and M/Lyons he too, hopes to be around if this plan comes to fruition. He liked the idea of warming up the community to food trucks, popups, movie nights, etc. to monitor the interest of residents in wanting to gather in a common area. He asked about the feasibility of a bridge joining the east and west portions of the project (Sprouts Center with Smart & Final Center). Andrew Fogg responded that the possibility of a pedestrian bridge was discussed and the panel recognized that there were impediments depending on how and when the structures were being built on the east and west because the span is quite long. In addition, the nature and elevation of the uses limit the ability to include such a structure in the recommendations at this time due to cost concerns and how it would be coordinated with the challenges of control of development under different property ownerships. C/Mok asked if there was consideration of a particular monument as an essential focal point of the Town Center, and was there discussion about a small community theater. Mr. Fogg responded that the theater was not specifically discussed by the panel. However, the panel believes that any kind of community spaces are important to the mix. Jennifer Smith said APRIL 16, 2021 PAGE 4 CC/PC JOINT SPECIAL MTG she believes there is an opportunity for an art program and wholeheartedly agrees that any area along the public realm offers a great opportunity to infuse art and send out receptors in the community to compare with local artists and institutions such as CalPoly Pomona to infuse a local art program and encourage local participation. Any element that enhances a community gathering spot is definitely part of the vision including something suspended in the air, effective lighting or a focal monument in the center of the Town Plaza along the promenade and street furnishings that would define an entry. Chair/Rawlings agreed with C/Mok that the district idea is a great idea and understands that communities have had great success introducing night markets drawing attention to centers that have been underutilized and found it interesting and encouraging that parking was integrated with the housing projects. He asked for more in depth information about how the panel would propose to accommodate pedestrian traffic across Diamond Bar Boulevard. Jorge Mutis referred back to the slide that showed one method that could easily be incorporated to enhance the crosswalk where art could be safely incorporated or greenery could be placed along the rebuild to extend from one site to the other. M/Lyons asked how safe crosswalks proved to be at the LA Museum. Jorge Mutis responded that despite the size of the roadway, there is a lot of activity on both sides and because of the amount of pedestrian traffic, vehicular traffic cannot speed. In this case, because there is so much pedestrian traffic predicted between the sites, widening and highlighting of the crosswalk would enhance the safety. C/Liu said he appreciated the presentation that draws parallels to other es' mixed use areas. He wanted to know more about the type of outreach and information gathering the City would seek from stakeholders. Andrew Fogg responded that ULI is a non-profit organization that brings together folks to assist on panels such as this and works with the City to address the scope of work and series of questions. Initially, the panel engaged with CDD/Gubman and CM/Fox and CDD/Gubman's team put together a list of folks to interview that included individuals from the City Council and Planning Commission, major property owners both large and small within the site, community stakeholders, regional players and community members, each of whom were invited to five one -hour sessions over the course of an afternoon as they were interviewed by various panel members and engaged in discussion. C/Chou agreed the presentation was great and looked forward to the work ahead. Considering there are some 24 property owners involved C/Chou asked what steps other cities have taken to compel property owners to go along with their vision. Andrew Fogg said that creating a great plan is APRIL 1612021 PAGE 5 CC/PC JOINT SPECIAL MTG important and based on the information in the briefing book, it appeared that at least a couple of the owners have expressed interest in exploring this vision. This led the panel members to believe that the Phase One starting point might be a good place from which to work. Ashley Atkinson responded that one of her questions to the development members of the team was "what would make you participate in this project" and ultimately, it comes down to financials. The 30-year timeline is an estimate for every property in the Town Center to potentially turn over. Certainly, there are many things that can be done on a shorter timeline, but for full development of a 45-acre site that is controlled by multiple different entities, it will take time. C/Tye referred to slide 30 and said he loved how Mr. Paulson began by referring to this as the "town building" because C/Tye believes this is the opportunity for Diamond Bar to get it right and not use short-term thinking. Diamond Bar has a hodgepodge of development and his vision for the Town Center area would be to flatten everything from Golden Springs Drive to the SR60 and from Diamond Bar Boulevard to Palomino Drive, save the condos, and start over. When he looks at slide 30 and hears the reference to start with a willing developer in Phase One, how then does the City prevent a hodgepodge of development and how then does the City make it look like it belongs here and how does the City avoid Grand Avenue and Diamond Bar Boulevard with a bank on a corner and offices on top hidden from view. As one travels south there is a Pollo Loco and Mr. G's Pizza and also hidden from view is India Palace and other businesses in the area. If one starts with a willing developer, how does the City make it look like this proposed spectacular plan and grand idea? Ashley Atkinson responded that this is where the City's General Plan comes into play and should contain design standards that dictate the appearance of what goes in to the Town Center, not necessarily dictate specific uses in specific places. There will always be a boundary and she does not know that any Planning Department gets everything specifically right within the given parameters, but that is how the City would achieve a more consistent look even if the development occurs overtime and with different ownership. In addition, she would suggest that the Specific Plan not be so flexible that it would allow for just anything. There needs to be review conducted by staff that a specific site proposal meets the intent of the Specific Plan and how that is structured is up to the City and its Community Development staff. C/Tye thanked the panel for their exciting presentation. MPT/Low referred to a slide that compared the current state of the City and what would be allowed under the General Plan, and what is projected under a higher density plan, and asked for clarification that the proposal is that the City provide a Specific Plan geared toward the potential market alternative. Andrew Fogg responded that the panel used current APRIL 1612021 PAGE 6 CC/PC JOINT SPECIAL MTG developments under multiple ownership and the slide explores the amount of parking area that would be required if the City kept the residential at 900 units and backfilled with a 1.5 FAR (nearly 7,000 parking spaces), much of which does not offer the opportunity for the wrapped or public parking. The purpose of this slide was to illustrate that the FAR of 1.5 can remain if there is a feasible project that gets the City to 1.5 and provides for flexibility; and, at the 1,500 versus 900, what the residential density is and how that plays in and how those parking facilities would be managed and what would be provided. So as the City moves forward in the Specific Plan programming, it should make sure the proposals are detailed enough that the City has certainty it will get the amenities it wants allowing the City to respond to market conditions over time and the feasibility that there will be enough funding in this project, both on the public side and the private side, to make sure that the improvements can be constructed. MPT/Low said that n her opinion, this presents a concept of a Town Center on steroids instead of the Town Center that was presented two years ago, which is fine if that is what the community wants. She asked if the panel considered including photos of Town Centers that better replicate what it has in mind in terms of the density proposed such as the development in the Yorba Linda/Placentia area that would correspond to what is being proposed. And, did the panel consider showing the community what that looks like and penciling that out in terms of infrastructure. Mr. Fogg said the slides shown included projects that were similar in size and density and it is important to keep in mind that the TAP is working with the information available and in a relatively limited amount of time and many of these questions can be explored further during the Specific Plan process. The panel was responding to the questions put forward by the City and challenging some of the assumptions including the assumption that this is the right amount to provide a project that works, that is financially feasible, and that the City be able to make these improvements with the development community that owns the site. Tonight's presentation was intended to challenge some of the thinking and give the community something to think about and ways to think through the Specific Plan moving forward. MPT/Low asked what would happen to the City's infrastructure services with the addition of 1,500 units and who would provide these answers in order to put together a feasible plan moving forward. Andrew Fogg reiterated that this is not within the scope of the TAP report, rather an iterative process with Planning staff and the community as the Specific Plan is developed. MPT/Low commented that the concepts are great and creative showing a step from the lower to higher elevation as a good use of natural topography. She agreed with the questions and discussion about the community spaces and believes more such discussions are necessary, especially since the City is contemplating bringing in 900 to APRIL 16, 2021 PAGE 7 CC/PC JOINT SPECIAL MTG 1,500 new families into an area where they will need open space. She thanked TAP for an excellent presentation. M/Lyons echoed comments of the Commission and Council that this is a very exciting and beautiful presentation that includes many things the public has been asking for. She asked how many units are included in Phase One and Andrew Fogg responded that he would estimate 200 to 300 units and Jennifer Smith said that retail would comprise approximately 19,000 square feet on the left and 14,000 square feet on the right and most of the building would be residential. Mr. Fogg emphasized the importance of putting together a Specific Plan that is clear and executable. M/Lyons agreed. CM/Fox felt this was an incredible exercise and thanked Andrew Fogg and panelists for their efforts. This was a very high-level visioning session and the City has a lot of work ahead of it in putting together a Specific Plan and working with property owners to figure out what development will look like. M/Lyons thanked the panel and staff. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Lyons adjourned the Joint City Council/Planning Commission Special Meeting at 5:48 p.m. Respectfully submitted: Kristina Santana, City Clerk The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 15t" day of June, 2021. &i UITA I Lyfol sw ?zVA kv, 11m WR2 I Q William Rawlings, Planning Commission Chairman