HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 2016-19MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MEETING • THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 24, 2016
Chair/Mahlke called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room,
21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C/Farago led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Naila Barlas, Frank Farago,
Ken Mok, Raymond Wolfe, Vice Chairperson
and Jennifer "Fred" Mahlke, Chairperson
Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development
Director; David DeBerry, City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Kimberly
Young, Senior Civil Engineer; Natalie T. Espinoza, Assistant Planner; and Stella
Marquez, Administrative Coordinator.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Mary Wehmeier spoke to the Commission about the Charles Company's plan to
redevelop the Kmart Center. This weekend the ficus tree next to the McDonald's
at the north end of town was illegally removed. Residents on the north end of
Diamond Bar are very angry about the fact that this was removed early on Sunday
morning and was cut in such a way that according to the City's Arborist it cannot
be salvaged. If this is allowed to happen what else might such a developer do to
this City. Although the development plan has not been officially submitted to the
City, the plan that is floating around town includes over 400 homes and over 220
hotel rooms in these two parcels. She asked that the Planning Commissioners
use their common sense to understand that the original General Plan of Diamond
Bar never would have allowed for this type of development and the residents do
not want it.
Douglas Barcon lives west of the SR57 and south of Sunset Crossing Road and
he too, has the same issues regarding redevelopment of the Kmart property. He
called the City yesterday and discovered that the ficus is not a protected species
of tree. He spoke about consequences of and impacts to current businesses and
MAY 24, 2016
a, T, INCT: 5 mUll
traffic if the proposed plan is implemented along with other area projects. The tree
was removed illegally and the remodeling of the Kmart Center needs to be carefully
addressed in accordance with the City's sphere of influence and whether it will
negatively impact the property owners and well-being of the community. The
removal of the tree may be in violation of County laws.
Julie Lagos, 23853 Twin Pines Lane, also spoke about the Kmart Center and said
she was excited that perhaps Diamond Bar would no longer be a bedroom
community. She believes this is a perfect opportunity for the City's revitalization.
She understands there will 'be impacts to traffic and to the community but she has
faith in her elected officials that they will do the right thing. Contrary to a previous
speaker indicating that everyone was against this project, she and her friends who
live in Diamond Bar are excited for change and they have faith in their Planning
Commission and City Council.
Brian Worthington spoke about the revitalization of the Kmart Center. The 40 foot
view of the City has changed and although it is a commuter city it needs retail and
redevelopment in north Diamond Bar in particular, and the idea of redoing the
Kmart Center makes a lot of sense to him. What does not make sense is that the
tree that has been in existence for the past 30-40 years was removed without
communicating beforehand to the residents. He recommended that the
Commissioners become involved in social media so that they are aware of these
things happening and can address them immediately. The redevelopment of the
Kmart Center is critical to this City that needs retail and tax revenue and he would
like to see mixed-use at the Kmart Center.
CDD/Gubman responded to speakers about remarks regarding the legality or lack
thereof, of removal of the tree. City staff is very disappointed that the tree was
removed without the opportunity to have a dialogue to discuss the possibility of
integrating that tree into plans to repurpose the site, even though there was no
requirement regarding mitigation because it is not a protected tree under the City's
Ordinances. Still, that does not take away from the fact that there was an
opportunity for discussion and consideration regarding whether or not the tree
could have co -existed with the future development. Secondly, he does not believe
it is the case that LA County had jurisdiction over the tree. The City is incorporated
and local regulations over land use would prevail, and the action was taken within
the rights of the property owner to do so.
With respect to references to plans that have been seen online from the Charles
Company website for very high intensity/high density development that included,
among other things, 400 homes and 220 hotel rooms, that project is not a real
project and is not being proposed. The City will not be reviewing a project of that
MAY 24, 2016 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
magnitude. Several years ago at an International Council of Shopping Centers
Conference, a rendering was shown depicting a development of that scale which
extended from Golden Springs Drive to the freeway. To accommodate that project
it consumed all of the land that included Golden Springs, the Best Western Hotel
and all of the restaurants on that side of the street. As far as staff could tell this
was an attempt by the Charles Company to attract interest to retailers and other
commercial enterprises. Subsequent to that, the Charles Company asked
Diamond Bar about what support there might be to build an outlet mall on the Kmart
property. Again, it would require the consolidation of parcels that they apparently
do not have ownership of at this time and it was questionable whether the site
could support that much intensity. It would require a parking structure and
infrastructure that the City would not be able to provide financial support to make
it pencil out because Diamond Bar did not have a redevelopment agency. Through
the City Manager's discussions with the Charles Company, the plan is to repurpose
the Kmart building by dividing it into smaller tenant spaces ranging from 15,000 to
25,000 square feet possibly adding another 8,000 or so square feet to the north
end of the current Kmart building. The tenant mix being described is a grocery
chain store, a pet supply chain store, an apparel/home fashion retailer and possibly
a standalone building that would accommodate a coffee house and fast food chain
restaurant. The square footage would probably be a net increase of about 10,000
in addition to the size of the current Kmart building.
The third speaker talked about opportunities for change and other ways to attract
retail and other more diverse commercial uses to the City's commercial inventory.
In response, he stated that the City's current General Plan is due for a
comprehensive update. All cities are required to have a General Plan and ideally,
General Plans should be updated about every 20 years. Diamond Bar's General
Plan is about 21 years old now and the time is right for this venture. The City has
gone through an RFP process and staff will be recommending a General Plan
Consultant to prepare the General Plan and guide the City through the entire public
outreach process. Staff intends to take the General Plan Consulting Services
Agreement to the City Council at its June 21st meeting. This process will involve a
lot of public outreach. There will be booths at as many community events as
possible such as the Concerts in the Park, the City Birthday Party, Snowfest, etc.
and there will be a dedicated website for the General Plan Update. There will also
be public workshops, surveys and various outreach efforts. And as part of any
General Plan process, there will be a General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC)
which will be comprised of a central core of community stakeholders that would be
guiding other offshoots of the GPAC to look at certain topic areas of the City such
as economic development, anti-mansionization perhaps, and creation of other
MAY 24, 2016 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
3.
housing types possibly near the Metrolink station in Industry. There will be many
issues the City will have an opportunity to visit and to think about when it considers
the community's aspirations for the next 20 years and there will be a very
significant effort to reach out to the community to engage the community so that
collectively, the updated General Plan document can be crafted.
Chair/Mahlke asked if there is anything currently in plans or in rotation coming to
the Planning Commission regarding remodeling of the Kmart anytime soon and
CDD/Gubman said that all he is aware of is that the Charles Company is seeking
Letters of Intent from major retailers to be involved in the redevelopment of that
site (grocery story, fast food casual restaurants, apparel/home fashion and pet
store). Chair/Mahlke said that Charles Company can say whatever they would like
but it does not matter until a formal proposal gets to the City and CDD/Gubman
said yes, that is absolutely the case.
Chair/Mahlke thanked residents for voicing their concerns which is a very important
part of city government — input and clear communication. She asked that they
please continue to support the process, especially as the City goes through the
General Plan update process and continue to build up north Diamond Bar. She
loved that tree. It was one of her favorite trees in the City and she was very
disheartened to see it taken down. She knows from being on social media that
there have been talk of boycotting any potential business that come into town. She
looks to her social network friends to be the voice of reason that residents will
consider to build their City in whatever way deemed best with people who have
been elected to office. She hopes for residents' continued support.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented
4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 26, 2016.
VCN\Iolfe moved, C/Mok seconded to approve the Minutes of the Regular
Meeting of April 26, 2016, as presented. Motion carried by the following
Roll Call vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
Barlas, Mok, VCNVolfe,
Chair/Mahlke
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
Farago
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
MAY 24, 2016 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
A
NEW BUSINESS:
None
6.1 Review of Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
Conformity with the General Plan
CDD/Gubman explained that in some instances the Commission is acting
in an advisory capacity to the City Council to approve or disapprove a
project such as the General Plan update, a zone change, or a subdivision
map. This item is different in that in this case the Commission is looking at
the City's Fiscal Year Budget for 2016-2017 and part of the budget is always
to fund various capital improvement projects. State law requires the
Planning Commission to review the list of projects that are being considered
by the City Council when approving the budget and determine whether or
not those projects are consistent with the General Plan and whether these
projects are furthering the goals, objectives and policies set forth in the
General Plan. If found to be so, the Commission is asked to adopt the
attached Resolution that makes the finding that indeed, these projects are
consistent with the General Plan.
SP/Lee presented staffs report and recommended that the Planning
Commission find the Fiscal Year 2016-17 Capital Improvement Program
(CIP) to be in Conformance with the City's General Plan.
VC/WoIfe said he felt it would be important to consider replacing the
Diamond Bar Center roof with something that has a longer life -span than
10 years. Secondly, Objective 2.1 at the bottom of Page 3 of the Circulation
Element speaks to maximizing the use of alternative transportation modes
within and through the City to decrease reliance on single passenger
automobiles and he was curious what the City is doing to further this goal,
if anything.
SCE/Young stated that the Public Works Division works closely with the
Metrolink Station to improve routes and also works directly with Metrolink to
enhance bike lanes and bike paths to promote alternative means of travel.
Although there are no other immediate plans, these are goals of the City
that staff will continue to work to fulfill.
MAY 24, 2016
PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
SP/Lee said she would relay VC/Wolfe's concerns and recommendations
to the Community Services Department regarding the replacement of roof
at the Diamond Bar Center.
Chair/Mahlke moved, C/Farago seconded, to Adopt the Resolution finding
the proposed Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Capital Improvement Program in
conformance with the General Plan. Motion carried by the following Roll
Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
7. PUBLIC HEARING(S):
Barlas, Farago, Mok, VC/Wolfe,
Chair/Mahlke
None
None
7.1 Development Review No. PL2016-28 -- Under the authority of Diamond
Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48, the applicant and property owners
requested Development Review approval to construct a 1,058 square foot,
single story addition to an existing 1,276 square foot, one-story single family
residence esidence with an attached 445 square foot garage on a 0.25 gross acre
(10,717 gross square foot) lot. The subject property is zoned Low Medium
Density Residential (RLM) with an underlying General Plan land use
designation of Low Density Residential.
F9001=610010"i
1748 Morning Canyon Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Li and Dai Tian
1748 Morning Canyon Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Ming Huo
554 N. Nora Avenue
West Covina, CA 91790
AP/Espinoza presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Development Review No. PL2016-28, based on
the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed
within the Resolution.
Chair/Mahlke opened the public hearing.
MAY 24, 2016 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
With no one present who wished to speak on this matter, Chair/Mahlke
closed the public hearing.
VC/Wolfe moved, C/Barlas seconded, to approve Development Review
No. PI -2016-28, 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: Barlas, Farago, Mok, VC/Wolfe,
Chair/Mahlke
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
7.2 Development Review and Tree Permit No. PL2015-144 — Under the
authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Sections 22.48 and 22.38, the
applicant and property owner, Lawrence Wang, on behalf of Grandway
USDEV I B LLC, requested Development Review approval to demolish an
existing single family residence and construct 8,989 square foot, single
family residence with a 745 square foot garage and 1,050 square feet of
patio/deck area, and preserve a portion of an existing accessory to
accommodate a 1,299 square foot recreation building on a 1.27 gross acre
(55,450 gross square foot) lot. A Tree Permit was also requested to protect
two (2) coast live oak trees. The subject property is zoned Rural Residential
(RR) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of Rural
Residential.
F21, �Q- AW'
PROPERTY OWNER/
APPLICANT:
2163 Indian Creek Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Lawrence Wang, on behalf of
Grandway USDEV I B LLC
55 S. Lake Avenue #700
Pasadena, CA 91101
AP/Espinoza presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Development Review and Tree Permit
No. PI -2015-144, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the
conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution.
Chair/Mahlke opened the public hearing.
MAY 24, 2016 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/Mahlke closed
the public hearing.
VC/Wolfe asked about the location of the two trees because it appeared to
him that they are straddling the property line on the site plan. AP/Espinoza
said' she spoke with the neighboring property owners this afternoon and
they were concerned about the trees. She explained to them that these
trees were to be protected and she showed them the Conditions of Approval
and they were fine with the protection because it is temporary. Once the
project is completed, the chain link fence and protection zone will be
removed. Clarification was made that the protective fencing would only be
located on the subject property and will not encroach on to the neighbor's
property.
C/Farago moved, C/Barlas seconded, to approve Development Review and
Tree Permit No. PL2015-144, 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: Barlas, Farago, Mok, VC/Wolfe,
Chair/Mahlke
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
7.3 Development Review and Minor Conditional Use Permit
No. PL2015-321 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code
Sections 22.48 and 22.56, the applicant and property owner requested
Development Review approval to remodel the exterior fagade and construct
an addition consisting of 4,504 square feet of livable area, 1,602 square feet
of additional garage area, and 336 square feet of balcony/porch area to an
existing 3,771 square foot, one-story single family residence with an
attached 565 square foot garage on a 1.48 gross acre (64,469 gross square
foot) lot. A Minor Conditional Use Permit was requested to allow an addition
to an existing nonconforming structure with a front setback of 25 feet (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: 24085 Falcons View Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
MAY 24, 2016 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION
PROPERTY OWNER:
Offlinalwam
Kenny Su
24085 Falcons View Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 917865
John Ma
10904 Grand Avenue
Temple City, CA 91780
AP/Espinoza presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Development Review and Minor Conditional Use
Permit No. PL2015-321, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the
conditions of approval as listed with the resolution.
Chair/Mahlke opened the public hearing.
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/Mahlke closed
the public hearing.
VC/Wolfe asked if staff believed there should be a deed restriction on this
item similar to the last project and AP/Espinoza said that based on the floor
plan staff was not concerned. He again stated his concerns because of the
addition to the second floor which he felt was similar to the concerns on the
last project. AP/Espinoza responded that in the case of the last project the
builder will be selling the property. In this case the owner will be living at
the property once the project is complete. Additionally, on the second floor,
the den area connects all of the bedrooms and there is no sectioned -off
area for a common room on the second floor. However, if the Planning
Commission wishes to add a deed restriction it will be included as a
Condition of Approval.
CDD/Gubman explained that the applicant should be asked if they would
be agreeable to adding the condition prior to proceeding with the vote.
Chair/Mahlke reopened the public hearing.
The applicant John Ma explained that Dr. Su recently lost his wife and the
owner's son and his family will be moving into the house which is the reason
for the addition and they are not opposed to the condition if the Commission
believes it is suitable. This building is not for sale, it is for the use of the
current property owner.
Chair/Mahlke closed the public hearing.
MAY 24, 2016 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSIOK
VC/Wolfe moved, C/Farago seconded, to approve Development Review
and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PI -2015-321, based on the Findings
of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the
resolution with the addition of a deed restriction as a Condition of Approval.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Barlas, Farago, Mok, VC/Wolfe,
Chair/Mahlke
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
8. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: None
VC/Wolfe said it is important that the City garner as much community input as
possible as the City works through the General Plan update and he is excited to
have the opportunity to participate in that venture. He looks forward to working
with staff and hopefully the broader community.
C/Barlas said that she and her son were sorry to see the tree go away. While there
is a limitation as to what can be done it would have been appreciated if the
developer had entered into a dialogue with the City before proceeding.
Chair/Mahlke said she understood how people feel about the tree. It was her
favorite tree in the City and she appreciated the information about its taking was
brought forward to the Commission tonight because it helps the City to be more
successful in addressing these types of issues in the future.
9. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects.
CDD/Gubman stated that for the next meeting of June 14 there is one
confirmed item slated which is an addition to a single family residence at
2311 Evergreen Drive.
10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in tonight's agenda. Chair/Mahlke noted that Memorial Day approaches
and that offices will be closed on Monday, May 30. Standard meetings apply and
the good news is that this year's Concerts in the Park and Movies under the Stars
series will begin June 15.
MAY 24, 2016 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission,
Chair/Mahlke adjourned the regular meeting at 8:10 p.m.
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 14th day of June, 2016.
Attest:
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Gubman
Community Development Director
Je ife4rhITWe, Chairperson