HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/14/19947:00 P.M.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Auditorium
21865 East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California
to I I—,- I
Daidd Meyer
LydiaPlunk
Bruce Ra// ` / I • //
Don Sc/ad
/, / n
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.
Please refrain from smoking, eating or drin!
in the Auditorium
'he City of. Diamond Bar uses recycled paper
and encourages you to do the same. .
CITY 0gv..DL4,M0NDBAR
PI. , � COADUSSION AGENDA
'1994 Next Resolution No. 943
.1 ; M
CALL TO ORDER.- 7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman David Meyer, Vice Chairwoman
Lydia Plunk,' Bruce Flamenbaum, Don Schad and Franklin Fong
1 1 11. 1 1 1
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.Seeretary (Completion of this form
is voluntary). There is a five minute maximum time limit when addressing the Planning Commission
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:
1. Minutes of February 28, 1994
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS:
Planned Sign Program No. 94-2. A request for approval of a
2. Planned Sign Program for a commercial shopping center located at
Diamond Bar Towne Center, 1180 S. Diamond Bar Blvd.
Property Owner/Applicant: Nobuo Okumura, V.P., Nikko Capital
Corp., 2961 MacArthur Blvd. #105, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Environmental evaluation shows that the proposed Planned Sign
Program will not have a significant effect on the environment and is
categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301 Class 1 of the Califor-
nia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission approve Planned Sign Program No. 94-2, with the Find-
ings of Fact, and conditions.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
Conditional Use Permit No. 94-1. A request to locate an emergency
3. helispot on an existing knoll overlooking the Pantera Park site. The
proposed helispot is for firefighting related activities and will be able
to provide service for two helicopters and support vehicles. The
1
helispot will provide an increased response to the central and north-
ern Diamond Bar area. The site will only be used as a landing site
during emergency situations.
Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has deter-
mined that this project requires a Negative Declaration.
Applicant: County of Los Angeles Fire Department
1320 N. Eastern, Los Angeles, CA 90063
Owner: Bramalea, 100 Bayview Circle, Ste.200, Newport Beach,
CA 92660
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Com-
mission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 94-1 with the Findings
of Fact and listed conditions.
4. Conditional Use Permit No. 89-528(2) and Development Review No.
92-03(1) A request for a modification of previously approved 35 ft.
freeway oriented sign proposed for a vacant lot adjacent to Grand
Ave. The applicant proposing a redesign of the sign although the
facia sign area will remain unchanged. Additionally, the applicant is
requesting to delete stamped concrete pavers from the drive aisles at
three locations. The site is located between 525 and 531 N. Grand
Ave. and is currently developed with a Burger King restaurant.
Applicant: Card Investments Inc. 527 S. Grand, Diamond Bar, CA
Owner: Tedrus Properties, 5880 Centinela Ave., Los Angeles, CA
Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has deter. -
mined that this project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to § 15301
Class 1(g).
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Com-
mission approve the alteration to the 35 foot freeway oriented sign
and deny the requested omission of stamped concrete pavers.
PLANNING COMIVIISSION ITEMS:
5. Annual Reorganization of the Planning Commission
6. Planning Commission representation on the General Plan Advisory
Committee
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: Verbal report on General Plan Advisory Committee progress.
ADJOURNMENT: March 28, 1994
2
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION 4io
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
FEBRUARY 28, 1094 *
40�
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Meyer called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. in the AQMD
Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Chairman Meyer.
ROLL CALL:
Present:- chairman Meyer, vice Chairman Plunk,
Commissioners Grothe and Li.
Commissioner Flamenbaum arrived at 7:11 p.m.
Also Present: Community Development Director James
DeStefano, -Planning Technician Ann Lungu,
Interim City Attorney Michael Montgomery, and
Recording Secretary Liz Myers
Absent: None
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Al Perez, residing at 703 Pantera Drive, questioned why he received
a notice of a public hearing regarding the heliport issue if it is
not on the agenda for tonight's meeting.
Chair/Meyer apologized to Mr. Perez for the apparent error. He
explained that the public hearing for the heliport issue is to be
held next month. However,' he invited, Mr. Perez to address the
Planning Commission on issues of concern if he is unable to attend
the March meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes of February 14, 1994
Moved by C/Grothe, seconded by C/Li and carried unanimously to
approve the minutes of February 14, 1994, as presented.
OLD BUSINESS:
2. Planned Sign Program No. 94-1
CDD/DeStefano 'reported - that, upon notification of the
Commission's direction, the applicant, Emilio Estrada,
indicated a desire to redesign the freestanding sign. However,
staff has not yet received a proposal for a redesign of the
sign. It is recommended that the Commission review and
consider adoption of the Draft Resolution of Denial.
VC/Plunk, noting that the phone number indicated on the
February 28, 1994 Page,2
proposed sign is not a Diamond Bar number, inquired if the
sign*,is actually for an off-site business.
Chair/M6yer explained that the business. on site sells
wholesale nursery items. The location of the primary business
is in the city of La Puente.
Moved by C/Grothe and seconded by C/Flamenbaum to adopt the
,Resolution of Denial.
The Motion CARRIED 5-0 as follows:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Grothe, ti, Flamenbaum, VC/Plunk and
Chair/Meyer
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None,
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
NEW BUSINESS - None
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
3. Zoning Code Amendment No. 93-3 - Property Maintenance
Ordinance
CDD/DeStefano reported that staff has revised the draft
Property Maintenance Ordinance by incorporating, the changes
specified at the February 14, 1994. However, staff has noted
that there are still some areas in the document that need
further refinement. Furthermore, staff has also received
communication from two members of the'public with some very
specific changes to the document. It is recommended that the
Planning Commission review the draft document make
appropriate change's and f orward the Property MaiAenance
Ordinance tothe City Council for their consideration.
Chair/Meyer requested the Commission to provide their input
prior to opening the public hearing.
Chair/Meyer requested the following amendments: delete the
word "between" from the definition of Driveway on page 6; item
(B), which was omitted from Section 22.54.120 Motor Vehicle
Parking, should be put back into the document as written on
page 12; the phrase "within the front yard or side yard
abutting a street, or within the side yard or rear yard" in
Section 22.54.120, page 8, needs further work, or the section
should be written as on page 12; replace the words "deemed
substandard", in Section 22.54.130 Building Maintenance, with
"deemed to be in violation of this section"; add the word "so"
after the words "watered" and "manner" in Section 22.54.140
Landscape Maintenance on page 9; add "or a nuisance per sell
f ol lowing," constitute a public nuisance" in Section 22.54.150
Fence and Wall Maintenance (A) 'on. page 9, as well. as
throughout the document for consistency; replace -"as permitted
February 28, 1994 Page 3
by the Building Code" - in the last sentence in Section
22.54.150 Fence and Wall Maintenance (B) , on page 10, with "as
permitted 'by applicable law", and do so throughout the
document for consistency; eliminate the word "except" from
Section 22.54.190 Motor Vehicle Parking (B) on page 12, and
readdress if "two" or "three" such vehicles are permitted;
amend Section 22.54.210 Landscape Maintenance, on page 13., the
sate way as on page 9; indicate "applicable laws" in Section
22.54.-250 Storage in Yards, on page 15; add "or nuisance per
sell to "nuisance" on page 23, Section 22.54.400 Abatement
Procedures; change the word "party" to "affected party" in
Section 22.54.400 (A) Hearing Notice, item 3, and add
"certified and regular mail" to this section as well in item
(C) Order of Abatement; amend the word "hearing" to
"hearing(s)" as indicated in item 2, section 22.54.400 (B),
page'24; the "Code Enforcement official" found in the seventh
line in Section 22.54.400 (D) Extension of time To Perform
Work, on page 25, should be amended to read the. "Hearing
Officer", and include a provision that the hearing officer may
take into account economic hardship as -well as "physical
ability"; and perhaps a flow chart would be beneficial, at
some point, in terms of the abatement process.
Chair/Meyer, in regards to the second paragraph -of Description
of Actions Necessary (To Abate Unlawful Conditions), on page
26, question if the public right-of-way is the responsibility
of the property owner to maintain or the City's.
ICA/Montgomery explained that the right-of-way to the curb,
typically, is the property owner's duty to keep neat and tidy;
however, since it is in a public right-of-way, the City can
remove or trim trees, etc. The City has an easement over it
for public street purposes.
Chair/Meyer, continuing
inuing with suggested amendments, stated the
following: include "or City Council if applicable" to
"...after. the date of such decision of the Planning
Commission", on page 27, Section 22.54.410 Limitation of
Filing Judicial Action;. insert "or City Council" to the
statement, "...extended by the Planning Commission," in
section 22.54.420 (A) Abatement of Public Nuisances by the
City, on page 27,' and change "Code Enforcement official" to
read "City Manager or his designee"; change."Code enforcement
Official" throughout Section 22. ' .54.430 to indicate "City
Manager or his designee."; delete "Planning Commission
Secretary" and replace with "City Clerk" on page 28, Section
22.54.450, and revisit if it is appropriate that the
determination of "assessments" should be a responsibility of
the Planning Commission; replace "Planning Commission
Secretary" in Section 22.54.450 (B) , on page 29, with "City
Clerk" and included "and the City * Council" following
"...protest to the Planning Commission"; replace "Code
Enforcement official" with "City Manager" as indicated in the
first line of Exhibit B, Example of Notice, on page 30;
February 28, 1.994 Page 4
replace the word "order a refund" with "recommend a refund" in
the first line of Section 22.54.490 (C), on page 31; and
Section 22.54.510 should be drafted in accordance with the
District Attorney's letter -dated June 28, 1993.
PDD/DeStefano, correcting a statement he made earlier that
Section - 22.54.120 (A) Motor Vehicle Parking, onpage 8, should
correspond with the same section on page 12, stated that,
after reviewing his notes, Section 22.54.120 (A) iswritten as
directed by the Planning Commission; therefore, further
direction will be needed. He noted that Section 22.54.120
will also need to incorporated subsection (B) as referenced.on
page 12. .
C/Flamenbaum, referring to Section 22.54.120, stated that he
prefers the verbiage as written on page 12; however, if it is
the desire of the Planning Commission to amend the section, he
suggested that Section 22.'54.120 (A) be amended to read, "All
parking of motor vehicles... in compliance with all applicable
codes, 11 deleting the remainder of the paragraph, and inserting
subsection (B) from page 12. He stated that the sentence, "If
parked on a side yard, pedestrian walkway of a width of not
less than 3611 shall be maintained for public safety access
purposes." could be retained. However, the statement "within
the front yard or side yard abutting a street or within the
side yard or rear yard" is confusing, and should be omitted.
C/Grothe concurred that the last sentence, "If parked on a
side yard ... access purposes," is acceptable. He pointed out
that omitting "on one side yard" now permits the parking of an
8 foot motor home on the side yard, but with a 3611 walkway,
which was not the intent of the Commission. Therefore, the
statement "on one side yard" should be retained. He concurred
that the verbiage on page 12 is preferable.
ICA/Montgomery expressed concern that Public Safety Officials
may require access on both sides of the property. Upon the
concurrence of the Planning Commission, staff will reinsert
the statement if deemed necessary.
The Planning Commission concurred.
C/Flamenbaum made the following suggestions to amend the
document: delete the word 11maybell in Section 22.54.050 on
page 5,1 and include those specific items believed to be a
nuisance per se, such as the parking of 18 wheelers on private
residential property, tires used as planters in front yards,
and automobiles parked on unpaved portions of the front yard
for periods in excess of 72 hours; and reword the first
sentence in Section 22.54.140 Landscape Maintenance, on page
9, to read, "All landscaped areas within the front yard within
any developed lot... 11
CDD/DeStefano pointed out that some properties back up to the
February 28, 1994.
Page 5
boulevard and their back yards can be seen off of Diamond Bar
Boulevard.
C/Flamenbaum stated that it was the consensus of the
Commission that any area behind the house was a private
concern of the property owner'..
C/Grothe stated that he recalled it was the consensus of the
Planning Commission that the landscaping in all yards shall be
maintained with the intent of getting the weeds pulled on
those hillsides.
C/Flamenbaum pointed out that the problem of weeds on slopes
are better addressed with hillside abatement or weed abatement
provisions, not landscape maintenance. The back yard of
someone's property should not be the concern of the City.
Following discussion, the Planning commission concurred to
reword the first sentence in Section 22.54.140 to specifically
indicate front yards, and developed property.
C/Flamenbaum suggested that the second paragraph, first
sentence of Section 22.54.140 be amended to add the word
"substantially" before the words "free of -debris". He
reiterated his desire.to specify examples of "public nuisance
or nuisance per sell in the Abatement section.
ICA/Montgomery explained that a "nuisance per sell is defined
as something that exists that is hazardous to health or
safety, and a "nuisance" in general is a question of fact if
it is a nuisance or not. He stated that it would be
acceptable if the Planning Commission desired to insert
examples of a "nuisance per se."
VC/Plunk suggested that Section 22.54.110 Storage --Front
Yard/Side Yard Abutting a Street (A) , on page 7, be amended to
permit boats. She also suggested that Section 22.54.140
Landscape Maintenance,. on. page 9, include a. provision
addressing property owners that are maintaining a portion of
the property specifically for wildlife habitat.
Chair/Meyer noted that one of the suggestions is to specify
that landscape maintenance provisions apply only to front
yards. Therefore, if the suggestion is accepted, then
maintaining back yards in a natural condition would be
acceptable.
Chair/Meyer declared the.
public hearing opened and invited
those wishing to speak to come forward.
Al Rumpella, residing at 23958 Golden Springs, pointed out the
Vehicle Code does not permit commercial vehicles over 10,000
pound gross weight to be off a truck route, thus addressing
any problems regarding 18 wheelers in residential areas. He
February 28, 1994 Page 9
then made the following recommended changes to the document:
delete "of the community or the comfort or convenience" from
the second sentence in Section 22.54.040 Public Nuisance, on
page 5, and delete the words'"comfort and convenience" at the
end of the sentence; delete "boats" and "camper shells" from
Section 22.54.110 (A) Storage, on page 7; and define the word
"fence" in Section 22.54.110 (C) because wrought iron and
chain link fences provide no screening from public view as
required. -
C/Grothe, suggested the word "from public view" be stricken so
it would read, "a street shall be 'screened by an approved wall
or fence."
Al Rumpella continued with the following suggested changes:
amend Section 22.54.120 Motor Vehicle Parking, on page 8, to
indicate "on one side yard"; define "fence" as indicated on
page 10, Section 22.54.150 (B) Fence and Wall Maintenance, a I nd
on page 17, Section 22.54.290; include language addressing the
need for a reply to written notices as indicated on page 24,
Section 22.54.400 (A), item 3; replace the word "Code
Enforcement Official" on page 25, Section 22.54-400 (D) and
throughout the document, with "City Manager or his designee,,;
correct the spelling of "follow" as indicated on page 27;
amend Section 22.54.520 Continuing Violations to indicate one
offense until the problem is taken care of; and include
language pertaining to a "grandfather clause".
Don Gravdahl, residing on Minnequa, suggested the following
amendments: the statement "maintained for the transportation
of persons for hire, compensation, or profit...", as indicated
in Section 22.54.060 Commercial Vehicles (a), needs further
work because it includes a vehicle used by a business person
to carry a briefcase; Section 22.54.120 Motor Vehicle Parking,
as written, effectively takes all RV's off the side yard and
on to the street, and should be amended to indicate "on one
side yard"; there should be a provision addressing the
maintenance of public facilities by public agencies; the
provisions should address the, maintenance of landscaping in
drought conditions; and Commercial Parking, should define
"paved" because the RV storage area parking lot on -the corner
of Brea .Canyon and the- 60 freeway is gravel.
Bob Zirbes made the following suggested changes: define
"indecent" as indicated on page 5, Section 22.54.030 Nuisance
in General; omit "boats" from Section 22.54.110 Storage,'on
page 7, and.address "camper shells" in the Parking section;
add "economic hardship, and/or physical handicap" to the last
sentence of Section 22.54.400 (D) Extension of Time to Perform
Work; and delete Section 22.54.520 Continuing Violations, on
page 31.
Oscar Law suggested that the Draft PMO include a "grandfather"
clause to permit existing nonconforming.uses. -
February 28, 1994 Page 7
CDD/DeStef ano pointed out that allowing a "grandfather" clause
may require an inventory of the entire community in order to
determine the amount of time the situation has been existing,
and to verify that it did not occur just shortly before the
enactment of the ordinance.
Rick Imperial, residing at 1318 Crestmont Drive, expressed his
support.of the draft PMO.
There b ' eing no one else wishing to speak, Chair/Meyer declared
the public hearing closed and returned the matter back to the
Planning Commission.for consideration.
C/Flamenbaum questioned if including a grandfather clause
would - make it difficult to enforce the Ordinance on such
problems as spare tires in front yards, parking on grass, etc.
ICA/Montgomery stated that a zoning ordinance can't operate to
compel immediate discontinuance of an otherwise lawfully
established use, unless that use constitutes a public
nuisance. A provision could be included in the PMO allowing
a reasonable amount of time to abate that nuisance; however,
the City cannot categorically permit certain nuisances to
continue if declaring more recently arriving nuisances to be
illegal. ICA/Montgomery then defined a "nuisance per sell as
a nuisance which is a nuisance by. virtue of it's very
existence and requires no burden of proof on the public agency
to establish it as a nuisance, such as an- open hole in a
school yard, a car on fire in a parking lot, etc.
Chair/Meyer pointed out that the discretionary review
procedure allows these unusual cases to be determined on an
individual basis, allowing discretion to the hearing officer
relative to abatement proceedings based on economic hardship,
physical disability, and other such items in the relevant
staff report. He concurred with C/Flamenbaum that
grandfathering in existing situations thwarts the entire
process of the,PMO.
Following discussion, the Planning Commission concurred to
direct staff to include verbiage in Section 22.54.400 (D)
Extension of Time to Perform Work, on page 25, adding a
provision similar to a variance finding of fact giving the
hearing officer greater latitude to determine extending the
period of time for abatement.
RECESS: Chair/Meyer recessed the meeting at 8:50 p.m
RECONVENE: Chair/Meyer reconvened the meeting at 9:03 p.m.
CDD/DeStefano suggested that Section 22.54.400 (D), page 25,
could be amended to indicate "there are special circumstances
or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property
involved, such as . size, shape, topography, location, or
February 28, 1994 Page a
surroundings that are not generally applicable to other
properties in the same vicinity -and under identical zoning
classification", and indicate "an extension of time is
necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right
of the applicant, such as that --possess by owners of other
property or in the same vicinity and zone", and make a finding
that "the extension of time would. not be, materially
detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to other
property or improvements in the same vicinity and zone."
The Planning Commission concurred with the suggested language.
The * Planning Commission then discussed all the issues brought
forward, and concurred with the following:
0 Section 22.54.110 Storage --Front yard/side yard abutting
a street (page 7)
Reword item C. to read, "...side yard abutting a street
shall be screened by an approved wall or fence." Side
yard is defined as that which is behind the approved
fence or wall.
Reword item A. to delete "boats",, and change "camper
shells" to "dismounted camper shells".
0 Section 22-54.120 Motor Vehicle Parking (page 8)
Reword item A., last sentence, to read, "If parked on a
side yard,, an open pedestrian walkway or a width of not
less tan 3611 shall be maintained on one side yard for
public safety access purposes." Include the verbiage on
page 12 for item B.
0 Section 22.54.140 Landscape maintenance (page 9)
'Reword the first sentence to read, "All landscaped areas
within the front yard of any developed lot or parcel
designated as single-family... 11, and throughout the
document for consistency. Reword the first sentence in
the second paragraph to read, "Landscaped areas shall be
kept in a neat and clean condition, substantially free of
debris and dead... 11
0 Section 22.54.150 Pence and wall maintenance (page 10)*
Reword item B. to read, IIAll fences and walls
utilized... such materials, as permitted by applicable
law.". All references to the Building Code should be
changed to "applicable law."
o Section 22.54.190 Motor vehicle parking (page 12)
Change item B. to indicate that "no more than two such
February 28, 1994 Page 9
permitted vehicles may be parked on any such lot or
parcel at any one time." The intent of the provision is
to restrict the number of vehicles used for business
purposes.
0 Section 22.54.280 Landscape maintenance (page 16)
Include the word "substantially" prior to the words "free
of debris..." in the second paragraph, first sentence.
The entire document' should be amended to repeat the
changes adding the, word "substantially",, replacing
"Building Code" with "applicable laws", and adding
"nuisance per sell, etc., throughout the document for
consistency purposes.
0 Section 22.54.400 Procedure for abatement of public
nuisances (page 23)
. Reword the first sentence in item - 3. to read, "The
written notice and order of abatement shall be served to
the affected party by certified and regular mail...
The PMO need not include a provision that notices should
be in multiple languages because it may not be required,
and, if it were, a different statute would apply to that
situation.
Change "Code Enforcement Official". to "Hearing Officer",
on page 25, Item (D) Extension Of Time To Perform Work,
and include "economic hardship, and/or physical
disability." to the last sentence, and include the
provision mention earlier by CDD/DeStefano granting the
Hearing officer discretionary approval to extend the
length of time for the abatement proceeding based upon
findings of fact.
0 Diagram A Illustration Of Lot Line And Yard Designation
(page 22)
Change the "Street" designation to "Curb Face".
0 Exhibit "All (page 26)
Include a flow chart in an administrative manual to
reference Exhibit "A".
0 Section 22.54.420 Abatement of -public nuisances by the
city (page 27)
Insert "City Council" where applicable, and indicate the
"City Manager or his/her designee", where appropriate
throughout the document..
0 Section 22.54.430 Abatement of imminently dangerous
February 28® 1994 Page 10
public nuisances (page 28)
Change "Code Enforcement Official" to "City Manager,"
where appropriate throughout the document. It may be
appropriate to redefine that the Code -Enforcement
Official is the City Manager or his/her designee.
o Section .22. 54.450 Procedure for special assessment (page
28)
Change "Planning Commission Secretary" to "City Clerk,"
where appropriate throughout the document.
0 Section 22.54.510 Right of entry (page 31).
Retain subsection (A) as drafted per the opinion of the
Deputy City Attorney's letter dated June 28, 1993 which
indicated that the right to enter private property will
be governed by all applicable.State'and Federal law.
Retain subsection (B) as drafted, per the opinion of the
Deputy City Attorney's letter dated June 28, 1993, since
it is a matter*of case law.,
0 Section 22.54.520 Continuing violations (page - 31)
The Planning Commission concurred to retain the language
as written.
The Planning Commission concurred that the desire is to
reference that the intent is to correct the situation
through the abatement procedure, not through fines.
ICA/Montogmery suggested that the violation be viewed as
one violation that continues till abated.
The Planning Commission then discussed those issues brought
forward but not yet addressed, and concurred on the following:
0 Responsibility of Maintaining Public Facilities
The Planning Commission noted.that a public agency can't
impose it's ordinance on other governmental agencies, nor
can a public agency impose it's ordinance upon itself
because it would not prosecute itself.
0 Watering Property during Drought Conditions
The Planning Commission noted that "adequate" watering
does not preclude over watering or cutting back as
appropriate. Weather conditionsneednot be mentioned
because other codes would automatically vacate the
provision in the code.
February 28, 1994 Page 11
0 Commercially Paved Areas.
The Planning Commission noted that gravel isacceptable
in the definition of paved.
0 Sunset Clause
The Planning Commission concurred that a sunset clause
need not be recommended because it is already the
responsibility of the Planning Commission to review the
General Plan every two years, and since implementing
ordinances must be consistent with the General Plan, a
-forum is already provided to review such ordinances..
0 Nuisances per se
There was discussion to insert specific definitions that
were cited by the applicable civil code, or case law in
the State of California.
ICA/Montgomery reviewed the various examples cited. He
noted that aesthetic tastes would probably not come under
a nuisance per se. A nuisance per se must be a genuine
health and safety hazard.
Following discussion, the Planning Commission concurred
to retain the language as written.
Moved by C/Grothe and seconded by C/Li to recommended that the
City Council adopt draft Property Maintenance ordinance, as
amended.
The Motion CARRIED 5-0 as follows:,
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Grothe, Li, Flamenbaum, VC/Plunk and
Chair/Meyer.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
C/Li and C/Grothe expressed their- appreciation for having been able
to serve on the Planning Commission.
PRESENTATION OF PLAQUES TO OUTGOING COMMISSIONERS
Chair/Meyer presented plaques to C/Li and C/Grothe extending the
Planning Commission and staff's appreciation for their input and
service the past year(s).
Chair/Meyer informed the Commission that the City Council has
requested the appearance of the Commissioners, both incoming and
outgoing, of all Commissions to attend the City 'Council meeting of
February 28, 1994
Page 12
March 1, 1994 for the swearing in and the presentation of City
Tiles.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by C/Grothe, seconded by C/Li and carried unanimously to
adjourn the meeting at 9:55.p.m.
Respectively,
James DeStefano
Secretary
Attest:
David Meyer
Chairman
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
REPORT DATE: -
MEETING DATE:
CASE/FILE NUMBER:
APPLICATION REQUEST:
PROPERTY LOCATION:
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT:
BACKGROUND:
City of Diamond Bar
PLANNING COMMISSION
Staff Report
2
February 28, 1994
March 14, 1994
Planned Sign Program No.
94-2
A request for approval of
a Planned Sign Program
for a commercial shopping
center.
Diamond Bar Towne Center
1180 S. Diamond Bar Blvd.
Nobuo Okumura, V.P.
Nikko Capital.Corporation
3961 MacArthur Blvd. #105
Newport Beach, CA 92660
The applicant, Nikko Capital Corporation is requesting approval of
Planned Sign -Program No. 94-2 for an existing commercial shopping
center identified as the Diamond Bar Towne Center located at 1180
S. Diamond Bar Boulevard. A majority of the uses within the
shopping center are retail with Ralph's grocery store as the anchor
tenant and the Boston Store as the major tenant.
The project site consists of five (5) parcels and is approximately
9.50 acres. The parcel which consists of the Bank of America is a
separate parcel; owned by Bank of America and is not part of this
application.
The project site is located within an Unlimited Commercial -
Billboard Exclusion (C -3 -BE) Zone and has a contemplated draft
General Plan land use designation of General Commercial (C).
Generally, the following zones surround the project site: to the
11
north is Single Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square
Feet (R-1-8,000)Zone; to the south is C -3 -BE Zone; to the east is
R-1-8,000 and Unlimited Multiple Residential -Minimum Lot Size 8,000
Square Feet -30 Units (R -3-8,000-30U) Zones; and to the west is C-3
-BE Zone.
The purpose and intent of the Sign Ordinance is to encourage the
use of modest signs which are harmonious with existing signs, to
assure the appropriate level of review, and as much as feasible,
bring existing signs into compliance with the provisions of the
Sign Ordinance while *giving due regard for the needs of the
business community.
The applicant is not requesting new signage at this time. The
applicant is requesting approval of a Planned Sign Program to
prepare for future signage and to comply with Section 108 - Special'
Conditions which states: 11 No permit shall be issued for a wall
sign in a multi -use building or commercial center in which more
than one signis proposed without Planning Commission review and
approval."
ANALYSIS:
The following is a comparison of the proposed Planned Sign Program,
and the City's Sign Ordinance.
CITY'S SIGN ORDINANCE
PROPOSED PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM
STANDARDS
FREESTANDING MONUMENT SIGNS
FREESTANDING MONUMENT SIGN: 3
existing - permit finaled in
FOR COMMERCIAL CENTERS: Max.
Area: 72 sq. ft.; Max.
1987 by L.A.-County; Height -
Height: 6 ft.; Max Number: 1
6.5 ft.; Sign face area: 44
per frontage along public
sq. ft.;
street.
Special Conditions: shall not
Applicant will be required to
count toward maximum sign
install address numerals on
area otherwise permitted;
each monument sign min. 6 in.
Zone: commercial.
high.
IN
WALL SI Max. Area: 1.25
sq. ft. per 1 lineal ft. of
frontage, to max. 125 sq. ft.
per use. Sign shall not
exceed 80% of building
frontage; Max.. Number: 1 per
outer wall.
Special Conditions: No permit
'shall be issued for a wall
sign in a multi -use building
or commercial center in which
more than 1 sign is proposed
'without Planning Commission
review and approval.
Zone: All
CANOPY AND AWNING SIGNS: Max.
Area: Limited to letters or
numbers no greater than 7 in.'
in height designating busi-
ness name or address; Max.
Number: 1 per use; Zone: Com-
mercial.
HOURS OF OPERATION/INCIDENT-
IAL SIGNS: Max. Area: 1 sq.
ft.; Configuration: Wall or
window; Max. Number: I per
use.
NAMEPLATELADDRESS SIGN: Max.
Area: 4 sq. ft.; Configur-
ation: Wall; Max. Number: 2
per use.
3
WALL SIGNS: Max. Area:
Tenant is responsible for
submitting plans to the City
of Diamond Bar for required
approvals and permits.
Location: visually centered
horizontally and vertically,
within the facia (sign band)
above their entry door. Sign
shall not exceed 50% or 70%
of building frontage depend-
ing tenant classification
(refer. to Exhibit "A". pgs-
8, 9, 10, 11, 12, & 13).
SECONDARY WALL SIGNS: Max.
Area: 1 sq. ft. per each
lineal foot of building
frontage. Secondary signage
area shall count against the
allowable maximum square
footage of sign face area.
UNDER CANOPY SIGNS: Max.
Area: Three (30 sq. ft. with
a sign of 611 x 216"; Max.
height of letters shall be
611. Max. Number: I per use
designating business name
only; logo allowed at the
discretion of the landlord.
Location: Centered on shop
entrance.
INFORMATION SIGN: Max. Area:
1 sq. ft. with letters max.
height of 21. Location: En-
try to business. Copy:
Limited to hours, phone
number, emergency information
or business instruction,
Max. Number: 1 per tenant.
OPTIONAL DELIVERY ENTRY SUITE
I.D. SIGNS: Max. Area: 4 sq.
ft.; Configuration: Wall;
Location: Adjacent to de-
livery entry. Max. Number: 1
per use. Copy: Business name
and suite number.
The proposed Planned sign Program submitted by the applicant
complies with the City's Sign Ordinance in almost all aspects
except for the following:
.1. Address 'numerals are required on freestanding monument
signs.
21. In the beginning of the applicant's written Planned Sign
Program (labeled Exhibit "All dated March 14, 1994), a
statement must be added making reference to the fact that
all signs shall be required to thecomplywith'the City
of Diamond Bar's Sign Ordinance. 1
3. The City's Sign Code allows name and address only on,
.canopy signs. The applicant is request that a business
logo be permitted on canopy signs also.
Existing on the site are three freestanding monument signs. These
signs are six (6) inches taller the Sign Code allows. Permits were
issues and finaled in 1987 by Los Angeles County. Therefore, these
signs are legal non -conforming and may remain as is.
The proposed Planned Sign Program has a color palette of Green
(Rohm & Haas #2119), Red (Rohm & Haas # 2415), Blue .(Rohm & Haas
#2016), and White (Rohm & Haas #7328) with trim caps and -returns in
Gold.. The letter styles chosen for the proposed. Planned Sign
Program is Clearface Bold and Helvetica Bold (refer to page 14 of
Exhibit "All) The color palette and letter styles chosen are
consistent with what is existing within the shopping center and is
compatible with existing signs in the other three shopping centers
located at the corner of Grand Avenue and Diamond Bar Boulevard.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
The environmental evaluation shows that the
Program will not have a significant effect
is categorically exempt pursuant to Sectio'n
California Environmental.Quality Act (C-EQA)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
proposed Planned Sign
on the environment and
15,301. Class 1 of the
A Planned Sign Program review by the Planning Commission does not
require a public hearing.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Planning'Comm'ission approve Planned sign
Program No. 94-2, Findings of Fact, and conditions as listed within
the attached resolution.
4
Prepared by:
Attachments:
Draft Resolution of Approval
Exhibit "All - Written- Criteria, Elevations, and Site. Plan dated
March 14, 1994
Application
Photographs
5
RESOLUTION NO. 94 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING PLANNED
SIGN PROGRAM NO. 94-2 AND CATEGORICAL
EXEMPTION (SECTION 15301, Class 1), AN
APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM FOR AN
EXISTING COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER
IDENTIFIED AS DIAMOND BAR TOWNE CENTER
LOCATED AT 1180 SOUTH DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD
(TRACT 35026, LOTS 28, 29, 30, 31, AND 32).
A. Recitals
1. The applicant/property owner, Nikko Capital Corporation
has filed an application for * Planned Sign Program No.
94-2 for an existing commercial shopping center located
at 1180 South Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, Los
Angeles County, California, as described in the title of
this Resolution. Hereinafter -in this Resolution, the
subject Development Review application is referred.to as
"Application".
2. On April 18, 1989, the City of DiamondBar was
established as a duly organized municipal organization
of the State of California. on said date, pursuant to
the requirements of the California Government Code
Section 57376, Title 21 and 22, the City Council of the
City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 1, 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 contains the Developtent Code of the
County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to
development applications, including the subject
Application, within the City of Diamond Bar.
3. The City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan.
Accordingly, action was taken on the subject
application, as to consistency to the future, adopted
General Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of an
.office of Planning and Research Extension granted
pursuant to California Government Code Section 65361.
4. The Planning. Commission of the City of Diamond Bar,. on
.March 14, 1994 conducted a meeting on said Application.
5. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolu-
tion have occurred.
B.. Resolution
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1 The. Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that
all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part. A, of
this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that
the project identified - above in this Resolution is
categorically exempt 'from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as
amended, and guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant
to Section 15301, Title 15 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
Commission that the projectas proposed by the
Application, and conditioned for approval herein, will
have the potential o ' f an adverse effect..on wildlife
resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife
depends. Based upon substantial evidence presented in
the record before the Commission, the Commission hereby
rebuts the presumption of adverse effect contained *in
Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth
herein, this Commission, hereby, finds as follows:
(a) The project relates to a site consisting of 5
parcels of approximately 9.50 acres developed with
a commercial shopping. The project site is within
the Unlimited Commercial-Billboard'Exclusion (C -3 -
BE) Zone with a contemplated. draft General Plan
land use designation of General commercial (C).
'The.project site is located at 1180 South Diamond
Bar Boulevard, City of Diamond Bar, California.
(b) Generally, the following zones surround the
project site: to the north is ..Single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet R-
1-8,000)Zone; to the south is C -3 -BE Zone; to the
east is R-1-8,000 and Unlimited Multiple
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square Feet -30
K
Units (R -3-8,000-A) Zones; and to the west is C -3 -
BE Zone*.
(c) The project site is adequately served by Grand
Avenue and Diamond Bar Boulevard.
(d) The propo ' sed Planned Sign Program complies with
the City's Sign Ordinance No. 5 (1991).
(e) Substantial evidence exists, considering . the
record as a whole, to determine that the project,
as proposed and conditioned herein, will not be
detrimental to or interfere -with the contemplated
draft General Plan.
(f) The proposed Planned Sign Program will have signs
that are legible to the intended audience under
normal viewing conditions based on the location
and the design of the visual element.
(g) The proposed Planned Sign Program will not have
signs that obscure from view or detract from
existing signs, based on the location, shape,
color, and other similar considerations.
(h) The proposed Planned Sign Program will be in
harmony with adjacent properties and surroundings
based on the size, shape, height, color,
placement, and the proximity of such signs to
adjacent properties and surroundings.
(i) The proposed Planned Sign Program will be
designed, constructed and located so that they
will not constitute a hazard to the public.
5. Based upon findings and conclusion set forth above, the
Planning Commission hereby approves this Application
subject to the following conditions:
(a) The project shall substantially conform to all
plans dated March 14, 1994 collectively- labeled.
Exhibit "All as submitted to and approved by the
Planning Commission.
(b) The Applicant shall attach address numerals to all
freestanding monument signs with a minimum height
of six (6) inches within 30 days of approval of
this resolution.
(c) The Applicant shall add to the written Planned
sigh Program a declaration stating "All signs
shall are required to comply with the City of
3
Diamond Barfs Sign Ordinance" and submit the
revision to the City within 30 days of approval of
this resolution.
(d) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose
until the permittee and owner of the property
involved (if other than the permittee) have filed
within fifteen .(15) days of approvalof this
grant, at the City of Diamond Bar Community
Development Department, their affidavit stating
that they are aware of and agree to accept all the
conditions of this grant. Further, this grant
shall not be effective until the permittee pays
remaining Planning Division processing fees.
(g) The Applicant shall comply. with Planning and
Zoning, Building and Safety, and- Engineering
requirements.
(h) Notwithstanding any previous subsection of this
resolution, if - the Department of Fish and Game
requires payment of a fee pursuant to Section
711.4 of the Fish and Game Code, payment therefore
shall be made. by the applicant prior to the
issuance of any building permit or any other
entitlement.
The subject property shall be maintained and
operated in full compliance with the condition of
this grand and any law, stature, ordinance or
other regulations applicable to any development or
activity of the subject property.
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, Knob Okumura, Vice President, Knack
Capital. Corporation, 3961 MacArthur Boulevard., #105,
Newport Beach, CA 92660.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 1994,
BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
BY:
David Meter, Chairman
4
0
I, James DeStef ano, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the
City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was duly introduced,. passed, and adopted, at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of March,
1994, by the following vote:
AYES: [COMMISSIONERS:]
NOES: [COMMISSIONERS:]
ABSENT: [COMMISSIONERS:]
ABSTAIN: [COMMISSIONERS:]
ATTEST:
James DeStefano, Secretary
9
iV
cc
FROM
Wa, 0 Z IX
?O V w0H� �1
U H 0 O ti0 U w w� .94 0 A
F" d vxi O H Ex "' Wq
Z
x wF. Ura oa O LHU 2 C�
CR H o'! Z 2 Aw �H, A Lf) z F:5 m
w V ;EI<CO O U z Uw A p
H w O x a s a U A a¢¢x 071—
u» a �~;: a A 0 vai z O rx w o
W a1�0 F.
Z q I:)
WEU ca
O U O
HP.
w 2 U 0 z z a x
¢�H
p 3 u zLn
x a w p
O'W U� W x�x
H
H a W z x z z -< HE��aH
u w xz w C7 O O o42
U z x w a Lu "' �
W ¢ H H a IL - x ad w p n x
w wa Z pzx q U z ^Ln
U 4jp ?¢ ¢x �H O tD vi
WFp�vai r�
H¢ H UH 9 H hH bM
x V d d cx 0 w d z Z a 00 < I= -o
wzn d H 0 0 w
¢ O+wA xw w0- Hw M
zw H ¢a 0U OU A NSE`F-�z
C7 OO A a ww w w C) 0cn ir,E�O -®
w U a.
Um H 0 =lzu.�
AH W x O vii U W W a -V) ®.
OOH x 03 wA U.� x �`y Uc�z7Z C�
ww _U ww u,w z H
u- x �0 w U �'�oz m
3W Ow �
z Aa n �� ")d WOz z
O z�0 a HO u1A �U p O Wu.�x
U w O Q 0 d H z O d H
A ZV P. cox m (. o"J
a¢ zx o3 zw " z wzzo-�
z z H; O w O H u 2 Z H
N u W Q 0 W
w O>U p a W N H Q N x A w w
A a� q as Ino p o vzoHa
P4 U n H A
W inu UA H�x w
U I
z W W E" H 2✓ W v n
a w z w.< 3a, .az ¢v x>
wH A E"2 z aw W aaiH•a>
d w z 0 2 0 w a 0
o W� z oH. H�3 Ex-A�aa cr)
ZCw7 N w� NxA pz.Vzxw� �o
U 2 w H w U p in A W �UwA m
a (A w O� z� zA
H w O W Ew W O <z ¢ w uH.U�a
x xa un SCO >a
a,
00 H Fx,a azw A x�3aa tdz
A w
Q) WQ oxo zI zw o o Ha8
as a � H w p A
x qq a a wa ww w z�.gAc7 rn(M
H Z,"1 0 0 n^ x"C z .1 a'dw,zyz c,;
u. vi u„ > 0 H � z
O ¢z w cz7zO �� z wrQHa c
O Qx a nz co
d �U Nd H L UpW WO CO
a px � zz Uw w�» O z cxp 04A cu
a �H z ¢A Owl H �w�Z n -m
W U0 vU^i wU zH p O z ZV)izw�
x w3 x� �H oh H ¢ oA��z N
�-.O d tw- OW v,z W A wwNO0 o
z zU U
A -a �� wA [-� da�W
W q W A "s
20 w wzW xw x4 z a Wopz� s
dw H UWU HH HA d OHa.�cdi
o/
9
i
I
� 4
� O
�
� I
Q �
O'
— � —
c� I
Q
• — � — r
anuan� puei�
o/
9
--c �I
;
� 4
� O
�I
Q �
O'
— � —
c� I
Q
• — � — r
anuan� puei�
M
bP!
� 4
�
Q �
�
��
.�
U u
■
V
i
I
W
M
bP!
------ - ------ --._._.- -a nUOAV PURif)._.- -------
ONDIS INIMINO ' -
• ------
a el®i '
N
IC
�Kyl
l7gs-IF
/c cl
's` CAS
'�`' \ ��\ ° i G
0 z
� � O
i
m to
\ ` r-! ' c
�m
® '? `• m D
ctl
ED
c .\
�� -._ice. N
J
-----...... ---—anuaAV puui�.._._._._._.�._
Hots ImawfiNow i
v\ � � ��� rr'�•�r
IBM
IN
,\ J ii
rl
rl
IT
ACS
N m
O N
o°
z
ct3 g
C
zcoo
N
ED
m
cucu
c
s
�s
c�
r
.EA
pF:4 O
d
a
v
tti
x
w
�
o
z
o
w
24
o
A
w
o
x
w
a
lull
ca
J
W
2
O
�
oa
a
�
A
W
R
A
A
�
x
�
2
a
�
�s
c�
r
.EA
pF:4 O
C) . >�aq — z :4 . V) 6
U
Z Www m
Z Z Z
LT. ::) < , P I-- �n 0
0 0 Z z 0 -< W4
LLI P� u w
z Ll. V)
> 0
U o ma
H V) a. V) uj
J:) 0
—u z U.) 0 o o
i- rl, V) 0 P4 Z
LLI < z — -
0 Ln
V u --I C) u V�H
0 z >- o P
Z U U) Z
_5 Pl 0 < 0 z <
.2 z 0
z Z z W4
Ln LL. R a F� < Al
z P:j .A — — UA
HH 0 j7= V) 04 0
z
cy 0 w F.
z
..d., 94 W
Z 0 -T- 00. Vi
Un 04
WW x ce
0
Z z z 0 LLI w H 0 V) < C4 H W. —
w
o
z
OW 0
Nr z -j z
u V)
0 1-4 0 u z
Z
u
z z VE 'm <
0 < z z
P4 Z 0 z co W 'j w U
iH 0 UA C4
0 Z 00 W-4 0 z
U¢ =) 5 0 4 z
> > no, :5 u u NSU r.- . F�UUzo Z0"1 ooz
�L Z P4 Uig U-)
U :D Z 0 0
0 Z t2 = —
L14 - co - P a � �
pQ
z 0 z
u w —< = z
z =
g -4 z
z �5 a: :j w 0 Z <4 U
<c < Z u = z
z pl�- r. U4
C4 'A Z. o � P - V) 04 w
o 0 0 0 5 M H
o z H Ch —X c
Z
> > Z Z Z 0
0 z — -n
04 z d 0
u x z 0 vi >ana
z o 6 W H Q 0 z
0 UCH
Z UNC
:9 0. U.,
u �- U < V) d!i 0
H w 9 0 Z z Z-I�
0 V) W4 = 0 Z
0 z
P64 z z u u 8
U Z z 0 z C) 0 e Z
Z 0 W = 4 0 Z 0 Z
u U
O
z Z LT.
C4 0 w SawC4 z z U 0 U Z
V) — -cc —
z 3 1--U X ce
Z V4 a4
0 z z o 00
LOZ V� Z
Q Ln U 0
vii F U U. 0
U. zz H -c Z f- .0 U 0
0 C4 V. 7) - zOx F-4 Z > 0 Z U
0
LisH wQ 0 OQ o -1 - P a.
p4 1-4 Z 0
u W-
z 0 <4 0 uF,w Lrl
0
C4 2 0 z
0
002
0 V) U U
U Z U. V) 0 U U-)
00 W-z u 0 kn 0 F� 0 0 P&
0 Ln vi C4 (..� < < p u
,.1 0 UQ U W W Z
A ccs
LL4 V) �) = < Z
O 0 V)
0 C4 H z W Z 0 F-4 0 L)
xq 0 0 W z z ca
Z Z cn (L)
0z m
z 0
ui 0 Z Z 0 t2
OW E4. C) �. >-, ,4 -
Z Z 0 Lu 0 CL
O IE -4 Z Z �D 9
H 0 a� �) W V)
U
~¢
o o O-
z j C4 C46
0 wa u a. -
LLI LQ 0 Z
ZA W ~ z 0
H Z
�D A P <
z -A Z cm
tf) - C4 UJ
W 0 -J UJ 0 Z71 o C) Z C) C: En
C) 04 �j C4 Z z .j -C� z - 0
< OO-0 0 Z0M F. Z0z z z
0 V.
Z W u (-� w Z W z - co
q as tA * Z X V)
0 04 cu
< w w - Z :1� F. 0
ig z V. o Lu
u
M u
�Z) z z Iz- 0 cr)
<4 2 --!� �: z
0
z Z 0 z 0 0 J:) C)
W < 0 m Z H U M W Z
dW� N
z P4 W<
0 u F Z< WR
z uj I
z 0 0 V) Z M z D 0
F- w z
zaW 0¢ x d C4 o z 0
r� z ffi 0. U4 1- 06
m 194 ot?R— I IIJ4.�0,YYl KVIC 11 L&n '-'7LI I
75
bio
-j
LLI
1:4
0
id
z
0
r.0
z
u
8�4 10
z
0
u
u via.u
LLJ
0
0
H
Ln Z
V) W
z w
z
w
z Z)
0
Ln
z 0
ce
fm
0
V)
0.
Z
U
U LLI
u
w
oz
-.1 Wz
0
0
z
z
0
z z
0,
z z
w
Im
< Z
<
C)
.j C4
z
0
w H
0 <
u z
(.)
0
Z
Z Z
z
o
V4 <
z
WH
00
Ir; H
'6
o
V)
LU
U
z
W4
O
x m
W0
0 u
vw)
0
z
w u
U z
z -A
X
W
Ir4
p
w
<
UO
< �L'
C) C)
z
o
Z Z
C) o z
0
-j
z
U
Ln
P
<
Ww
Z Li.
W
Z
WO
LU
xw
04
awui
Lij
w o
H
Z
H
z
W,
0
z
.<
V.
go
W uj (y
un
z VW) -U<
Wo
00
-j u
Z U C4
CD
w
H Baa
o
Z
<0
u
<
7
z
o
0
CY
V)
r'i O
r'i
75
bio
0
W 0
0
z
02
Q�
<
Z f -
(y
as
z z
o
www
z W
0
z
0
0
z 0-
u
u
ZD
CY
z w z
°w
Z Z
U
0- w
x
iii
00
0
<
0
z
0
bo
�-, 0
z
wU-)
U
"i z
F,
W. z
H U az
06
d0
n LuIX
rxz �
0U .
o
Z U P.
O < uul
Z
a
I --
U Z Z
W
z >
W
0.-
Z ,,H
�
1=)
z *
4
0
0 W u
Ow
tri H 0
�d Lu
0
0
z
F. Co
u
W
W
:D
U
0 x
Hno
F�
0
.uu
X X
0
0
0
F� Z
0 .j
Z j
cis bo
HN
asa�
bo
Wo
-j
In
0
tw
U
z
0
F-
-------
...... .......
P
0
rwa
0>
0 Z
F -
Z <
z z
W0
F,
W
0
0
O O
'7 0
ry 11. H
ri u
0
E
%
0
"Ilk
ca
C) (n M(U
'RW C'Lif
0
Z
C6
U)
rM
PON
P
m
COO
cu
N
M
IFF: -
r. -M2
z
0
z
t3
oin
16
F
�W
Y3 ���
wyZo
F
p'd�0
W
A
'T
w.
uCz�
0 5d
a
tA
ttttttav�W3
a�6tiW
Z
�✓^
�
Z"
^.
ax0
t3
oin
16
Y3 ���
p'd�0
r�`:• ai in
t3
oin
16
W--
9
P12
F 4
L7�
0
0
0
ll�
oj
N
0-2-
I
viz
O
1:4
O
ti
z
d
z
0
W.
z
z
0
H
V
z
z
z
z
R
0
0
0 vwi.!2
N
U 0
U Op
z
0
6—j
z 0
x +
u
!d >
Ln w W
UH 0
CY
z UO L=
cc z 0
0 z
z
Z CL viv
.-j
0 0
F. U
W Z
;� N u
-Z 0 Ln r-4 * UF) own% MIM%
U tn
< 0 0-0
w j —
Z Iz j � Z�- Z �j '=
0 <
LIU 0 uj X :1-0=-% co
GL F wz 00
r
:D oz '�5 .,.4 t-
00
a: �g �; :4
0 0 14 0 U. IM
0 I=
2 Zn ca ui Ln
U -0 04� . - r:� 0 to
Z Z 04 0._4 m
z -i;tt w
- i 3, � w - 0
IV --j 0 Ei 0
z -I Q
0 tA
02 �� cit
Q
Lu z
0 >
m 0
a4 I- Z C4
F. Lu rq Z
c 0 (S 0
1::) a� U-) � 7 0 �i z 0
z C4 -0- n 0 U 0
z u 0
u F� -
0 z uj ce. 0 Z
LU Z u Z Z M F- �� Z uj
z z z u
0 U
V) z U
U 0
w < 2: 2 X �5 UJ
z < U UJ �r 0
W Z U. = V) > OU F�n- n F.
ILI 0- z u F. Z" 00'>' .12� < UJ Z y g
F- C) U V) Z Z 0
< z tn
P. P z 0
u �4 0 F� C:l w z r.
u U. 04 u uj tn
C4 5 �, F� < 0 P: z 0 LO
U -4
VF " ;F� >, b 6 0 X W U
0 z u 0 Z
wzz U 0 z
04 Z u < 0 P 00 z
z �: w - � z H � -4 ) F� -4
< z 'if H 0 0 u
a. z U Lj� 94 u Ln
Ng0U Z- c
cai
t7 0 <
w < 0 u LU z 10
u 0 0 0 uj
u 0 0 9 04 z > u
u Cl ::) p 0. 0 U V)
0 C) a tn < U 0
4 VJ P-opzww C:3 (D
z -e Z Ln u Z Ln
u0020
z z lwn z " < w a) t2
(D :� 0 0 Z 0 < 0 F. W.V. =
V) > 0 z 00
uj �Q X U Z Z 0 U F -
Z �, �g 0 < F.
0< u cd
Z 0 u
z Z LU < 0 D W, E _-j u Z< C6
Z < ww (.D 8
0 F- 0 U Z u
< ;F
z <
Wi g4 V.
0 CD Z wx U-)
Z n u z 0 UJ F -
Z CIA
04 c w > uj 04 F. >::d
Z Z 5: 0 x
Z
x nc4-;t- OXOW U
- 4 < 0
w U Z ZOL'- OAF -7 ;g
C) -j u w 0 F. Z E� < -j < V4 0 M Ln �- Z
- < U Z Z N < 04 F� aj < z z --tc
- < = F� . -cc m
0 < 0 m < w H z 0 Ole;
d v) M 0 Ln 0 W 0
W 0 H 0 Z
V) 2a; F� 0 W < cu
F,
Wcri
Z w z p F. Ln W u zA < zz w
< _0 z F -
Ln < 0 z 0 � 1 0
_ < < 0
A z z z U U W 0OW z w
ul -,� -j UJ C) 0 Z=p2Xo."�< -< ZZ F- H C4 F�
P� U tA Ul) z m F4 pi z Ip
t7 z Ll- z w Ln
z V4 Ln < V) P. 0 w
z a Z U
< z ;�
0 u C�
�O Z 4 CIE
< > F- z< Z�� z u
" I
ew
in
I
lD
Ii
0
LO
LO
r,
ci
a)
cCD
(D
0 0 L
(D
C6 �
0 8
W.cm
c .
.� 63.
z c
Coo
co
K.a
I
-, Z
'50
w
Z
0.
UUJ
z
—0
d
u
z
Z
u 0
:,.
w
U
:Z) z
w
(Y
Z
Z C4
0
P
Z
2
uj w
F- F -
F-
0 90
'D
U0
u
Z
IX
Q Z
z
0
Z
U
O
z0
30
0.-j
0
LL V)
o 4,j
F� z
0
Z
V) —
U In
�n
z
z
w
0
U
E-4 U W
D x
U)
F� Lu
j
Op
w
0 0 p4
t -n
uj 0
14
p0 o
NX �-
Ili
I
lD
Ii
0
LO
LO
r,
ci
a)
cCD
(D
0 0 L
(D
C6 �
0 8
W.cm
c .
.� 63.
z c
Coo
co
K.a
I
7AP
H
z
w
W
W
A
F2
A
a
d
z
Trs
to
a
I -we
IMM
0
�m m
O Q o
3
Z
c6 g
c
�i
A=�
Cm
@0
N
aco
CM OF DIAMOND BAR Case#� p. 9 4 --0 i -FP�- 9`�—Oq-S
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING Filed
21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 Fee $ 500 Deposit
(714)396-5676 Fax (714)861-3117 Receipt 4s 6 00
REQUEST FOR PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM, REVIEW By
Record Owner(s) Applicant
Name Nikko Capital Corp. Nikko Capital Corp.
(Last name first)
Address 3961 MacArthur Blvd., Same
city
Zi 92660
Applicant's Agent
Nobuo Okumura, Vice President
poDA VN1�"00D.
L)N1>a;z;_,W60j) P-NvNjor- *
YSIP-Cd bl' NEWFOR7 DS`r—"ti
Phone( 714) 852-0651 (114) 852-0651 ni 4 )15-7 - 0
Certification: X,.the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that
the information herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge.
Printed Name Nobuo Okumura for Nikko Capital Co
— r Agent) (Applicant o
-7 Vo'
Signed ,7 7 Date February7,1994
Location 1180 So. Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, CA
(street address or tractand totnumber)
Zoning C 3 BE --- HNM
List number, size and type of sign(s) requested.
(Example: 2 - 8' x 91 Freestanding, double faced signs 6 ft.high
I - 31 x 241 Wall sign)
Length of lot frontage(s), if freestanding or roof sign(B)
If roof sign, height of building
Length of building (space occupied) frontage, if wall sign
CONSENT: X consent to the submission of the application accompanying this
request.
'Signed
Nobuo Okumura for Nikko Capital Corp.
Date 2/7/94
Agenda Item 2 — PSP 94-2, 1180 S. DB Blvd.
Plans found in project file.
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
REPORT DATE:
MEETING DATE:
CASE/FILE NUMBER:
City of Diamond i.
PLANNING COMMISSION
Staff Report
3
March 4, 1994
March 14, 1994
Conditional Use Permit No. 94-1
APPLICATION REQUEST: A request to locate an, emergency helispot on an existing knoll
overlooking the Pantera Park site. The proposed helispot is for
fire fighting related activities and will provide service for two
helicopters and support vehicles.
PROPERTY LOCATION: 800 S. Pantera Dr.
APPLICANT: Los Angeles County Fire Department
1320 N. Eastern
Los Angeles, CA 90063
PROPERTY OWNER: Bramalea California, Inc.
100 Bayview Circle, Suite 2000
Newport Beach, CA 92660
BACKGROUND:
The proposed helispot has been contemplated for this area for some time in order to serve the
northern portion of the City. The site is located on a knoll west of the Walnut Valley Water District
reservoir tanks which overlook the vacant Pantera Park and school sites. There is residential
development to the east, west and south of the site ranging from approximately 650 to 800 feet from
the location of -the helispot. The helispot is situated approximately 120 feet above Pantera Drive. The
proposed site has been rough .graded and is primarily free of vegetation. The down drains are the
most notable features of the westerly down sloping elevation with natural grasses and cacti on the
southerly . and easterly slopes.
The site will be utilized for emergency fire protection and periodic training for the Fire Department.
Vehicular access to the site will be taken from an extension of the existing maintenance road serving
the reservoir site which is taken from Eastgate Dr. The project will require grading and the extension
of water services from an existing 12 inch waterline which runs parallel to the helipad along the
eastern elevation.
FIRE DEPT.HELISPOT 1
APPLICATI®N ANALYSIS:
The helipad is proposed as an unmanned project which will be used infrequently for training sessions
and as emergency situations dictate. The helicopters (typically Hughes 500E) that will use the helipad
are utilized primarily for water drops during grass fires which are known to occur during the yearly
fire season. A fire hydrant is proposed for installation on-site with a connection from a water line fed
by the adjacent water reservoirs. No lighting is proposed as a part of this project as night flights are
extremely rare in fighting grass fires. Additionally, the site is not designed to be used as a MEDI-
VAC site. I
Development of the immediate surrounding area is primarily of a residential character although the
future Pantera Park and Pantera School sites are located immediately to the west of the site. Zoning
of the subject site and surrounding development is Zone RPD 20,000-2U. No change in zoning is
requested as a part of this project.
The project proposes to complete a cut/fill grading project in order to create twin concrete 20' X 20'
landing pads and the 8 inch deep all weather surface around them. Currently the site has been rough
graded as a part of the construction of the adjacent water reservoirs. The helispot will have a berm
constructed around the perimeter in order to reduce the quantity and velocity of runoff attributable to
the increase in nonpermeable surfaces. This is important as there are cacti and oak trees adjacent to
the site which are not receptive to large amounts of unseasonal moisture.
Traffic
Servicing and maintenance of the facility is projected to require site visits no more than four (4) times
a year. The demand for parking is therefore minimal and can be provided on the 20 feet wide drive
approach from the reservoir. This project will not significantly increase the traffic or parking demand
of the surrounding residential area nor of the subject site. Staff does not recommend any scheduling
of special hours for maintenance of the facility because of the distance to sensitive uses (residential
development and schools). Training sessions should be conducted during daytime hours and on
weekends to reduce the noise impacts that helicopter flights will generate. Additionally, staff
recommends that the Fire Department limit training sessions at this facility to a minimum. and
concentrate training sessions to more isolated facilities.
Noise
The noise impacts generated by the project will increase the ambient noise levels of the surrounding
area significantly during the periods that the project site is in operation. There are three time frames
when noise is generated; during landing, departure, and while re -filling with water. During these
infrequent periods of activity, the greatest noise impacts will result from the engine noise during the
departure of the water ladened helicopter. During departure, the helicopter can produce noise levels
that are louder than the levels produced when landing because of the increase in engine torque.
In response to these increases in noise levels, staff is recommending that the helicopters be required to
FIRE DEPT.HEIISPOT 2
reduce the ground idle to 67 percent of in flight rpm's. Additionally, the helicopters will be required
to point the noise of the craft directly toward the residential development to the northwest, the closest
adjacent sensitive use, in order to direct away the dispersement of major noise generation. The flight
path which will be followed by the pilots will be restricted, to the extent possible, in a manner which
limits overflights of sensitive uses. Because of the location of the proposed Pantera school, park site,
existing residences in addition to the geographical features, the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) approved flight path will not completely exclude flights over these sensitive uses.
Grading
In order for the project to be developed, the rough graded pad will undergo additional grading. The
preliminary grading plan indicates that earthwork will total 2,754 cu. yds. with approximately 2,469
cu. yds. of export. The exportation will require approximately 80 one way trips from the site.
The design of the helipad project will require that a paved driveway approach which leads from the
existing water tank reservoirs to the helipads be provided. The remaining portion of the project
is designed to house the two landing areas. A. 24" berm will be graded around the edge of the area
and filled with 8" gravel so as to reduce the flow runoff water to the surrounding area.
Environmental Review
Section 15269(c) of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) indicates that "specific actions
necessary to prevent or mitigate an emergency are statutorily exempt under CEQA. "Emergency" is
defined to include an identified fire danger (Section 15359, CCR) which necessitates immediate action
by a public agency.
The City have determined that this project is in compliance with Section 15269(c) but that the project
is of a magnitude that public participation in the process is warranted. As such, the staff has prepared
a negative declaration which includes mitigation measures to reduce potentially adverse impacts
created by the project.
Community Responses
Staff has received one response from the public prior to this public hearing. At the heart of the issue,
the resident expressed concerns for the blowing trash and debris. The property owner stated that in
the past, debris from the site has been blown into the pools and backyards of residents on Sunriver
Dr. which is located on the east side of the reservoir and ridge.
Review of the proposed flight path does not indicate that the helicopters will be entering or exiting the
helipad in a configuration that would create these.impacts to the residential developments surrounding
the project site. Staff has required that the. pilots conform to this flight path at all times that
conditions do not dictate alternative approach and departure paths.
FIRE DEPT.HELISPOT 3
PREP BY _
,4
Rob rt Searcy, Ass fate Planner
ATTACEMI ENTS:
Application
Site Plan
Draft Resolution of Approval
Site Photos
F:\LETTERS\REPORTS\CUP94-1A.STY
FIRE DEPT.HELISPOT 5
DEP.,M'i NT OF PLAINND�G
21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190
(714)396-5676 Fax (714)861-3117
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
. I I Record Owner(s)
Name
(Last name first)
Address
City
R,tcvd—��
Fee S
Receipt
Applicant Applicant's Agent
Los Angeles County
Fire Department Randy Gomez
.1320 N. Eastern -
Los Angeles, Ca 90063 Same
Los Angeles, CA
Zip; 90063
Phone 213) 881-6122
(Attach separate sheet if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures
of members- of partnerships, joint ventures,- and directors of corporations) .
CONSENT: I consent to the submission of the application accompanying this request
Signed
(ALL recorded owners)
ate— �ZS�a3
Certification: X, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that
the information herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge.
Printed Name: Randy Gomez
(Applicant or Agent)
Signed_-�--�c--iE,: ATTAcvkoL-c,--�� Date Q/20 A:3
(Applicant or Agent)
Location
(Street address or tract and lot nurber)
KZoning PD HNM
Previous Cases
Present Use of Site Vacant
Use applied for Fire Department Helispot
Project Size (gross acres) 1 Project density
Domestic Water Source Hydrant Company/DistrictWalnet Valley Water
Method of Sewage disposal. Sanitation District
Grading of Lots by Applicant? Yes X No
(Show necessary grading design on site plan or tent map)
APPROPRIATE BURDENS OF.PROOF MUST ACCOMPANY REQUEST
C,
DESCRIPTIO (all ownership comprising the proposed lots)/parcel(s)
Area devoted to structures N/A
Landscaping/Open space N/A
Residential Project: N/A N/A
_(gross arand ea) _- :_ _ •--__- (No. of lots)
Proposed density
(Units/Acres)
Parking Required
Provided
Standard
Compact.
Handicapped
Total
P. MIC 4ARL FREEMAN
Fins CHIEF
FOAEBTER I. FIRE WAMEN
September 24, 1983
LHLOt-V r -W- LOBBY— TO 19098613117 P.03
COUNTY OF LOS ANGFLES
FIRS DEPARTMENT
I= HOAYH FASTERN AVENIX
LOS MK3EI.ES. CAl.IFOR A nu
(213) 881-8121
t X93
Tlm McGinnis, Executive Vice President
Br8ma198 California, Inc.
100 Bayvialw Circle, Suits 2000
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Dear Mr. McGinnis:
SUBJECT: PROPOSED HEUSPOT 120A, DIAMOND BAR
This Department is proceeding with development plans for proposed Hellspot 12 -OA
In Diamond Bar. Enclosed, is a copy of the proposed grading pian for the project.
The City of Diamond Bar is rowdy to issue a temporary permit for construction and
operation of this helispot. They are requiring a letter from your firm, as property
owner of record, Indicating your concurrence with this project,
As stater In previous correspondence, all costs associated with this project will be
absorbed by the Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County (District)
With compliance to City of Diamond Bar codes and ordinances. The District is a self-
Insured entity and, as such, is unable to provide the standard "Certificate of
Insurance.* The District agrees to hold Bramalea California, Inc., harmless from any
liability, costs, damages, or other causes of action which may arise by reason of the
use of these .premises by the District, its agents, employees, and representatives.
If you require additional Information on alis matter, please contact me at the above
telephone numbf,
SERViC11-41110YX NR u STRUCTION COORDINATOR
RG:dkj
Enclosure
SERVING{ THE UNINOORPORATED AREAS OF Lo,$ ANGELr;S COUNTY AND
THE
CITIES M
AAMAoBuRr
n RtiR�DOE
UNTA
U
9 40WIN PARK
� HAWAMMI.�U( atoo ig
IX.�Rl�iONT
u �
MRADA1piaRl�jAIK
YtiVobD
i{OiilMfi FOILS AMOWO PALM V1 liDFg
g441 rM pA� rA
"UpLpWBp
rEli OA�6SN6
� HR.L$
COMMMA SARK
LANG #dM
f10LLiF1O H a E$tATt:17
"
TEMPLE 0"
wAtFltlr
CUDANY IN�N{!yy
LAWNDALS
PAL a MAWS
"y INMAWME
6AMACUAiTA
W�EpcVILLoAM
(staff use)
PROJECT NLMER(s):
pq q-
------------------
-------------------
------------
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
INITIAL STUDY rY=QrTAIRF
Project Applicant (Owner): Project Repr'esentative:
Los Angeles County
-Eire Department Randy Gomez
1320 N. Eastern Ave. NAMESam . e MAME
Los Angeles, Ca 90063 ADDRESS AJ)DRESS
(213) 881-6122
PHONE # MHONE #
1. Action requested and project description: Conditional
Use Permit for Fire Department heliport.
2., Street location of project:
3a.
Present use
of
site:
Vacant
3b.
Previous use
of
site
or structures:
Vacant
4. Please list all previous cases
(if' any) related to this project: Unknown
5. Other related permit/approvals required.
Specify type and granting agency. Grading Permit
Conditional Use Permit
6. Are you planning future phases of this project? X N
If yes, explain:
7. Project Area:
Covered by structures, paving:
Landscaping, open space: —T
Total Area: macre---
ac
8.. Number of floors: 0
9. Present zoning: Unknown
10. Water and sewer service: Walnut Valley Water District N/A
Domestic Public
Water Sewers
Does service exist at. site? )Y)( N N
If yes, do purveyors have
capacity to meet demand of
project and,all other approved
projects? Y N Y N
If domestic water or public sewers are not available, how will these
services be provided? Hydrant will be provided by water
district. Temporary sanitation.as required.
Residential Projects:
11. Number and type of units: N/A
12. Schools:
What school district(s) serves the property? N/A
Are existing school facilities adequate to meet project needs?
YES NO
If not, what provisions will be made for additional
classrooms?
Non -Residential projects:
13.. Distance to nearest residential use or sensitive use (school, hospital,
etc.) 2 miles
14: Number and floor area of buildings: N/A
15. Number of employees and shifts: N/A
16. . Maximum employees per shift: N/A
17. Operating hours: As needed
18. Identify any: End products None
Waste.products None
Means of disposal N/A
I. Background
1. Name of Applicant: Los Angeles County Fire Department
2. A d d r e s s a n d P h o n e N u m b e r o f P r o p o n e n t
1320 N. Eastern Avenue, Los angeles, CA 90063
(213) 881-6122
3. Name Address a n d Phone of Project Contact:
Randy Gomez, Same
4.
Date of Environmental
Information,
Submittal:
Lo Z2.G /q 1211
5.
Da t e of Environmental
Checklist
Submittal:
A
6.
Lead A g e n c -Y (Agency
Required
C h e c I-, s t
7.
Name of Proposal if applicable
(Tract 1,41o.
if Subdivision):
Los Angeles County Fire Department Helispot
120A
8.
Related Applications (under the
authority. of
this environmental
determination):
YES NO
Variance: x
Conditional Use Permit:
Zone Change:
General Plan Amendment:
(Attach Completed Environmental information Form)
21660. EAST COPLEY DRIVE - SUITE 100
DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765-4177
714-860-2489 - FAX 714-861-3117
1. Background:
1. Name of.Appricant:
2. Address an d Phone
hone Number of Pr011onerit:
< �nnri Phone 3. Nj =me, Address -a Phon P rmo e �--
Z� -ad P�hon of t ri�taLlt:
4. Dat -°
f Enviro mental Information Submittal:
107
5. Dat Fn ental Checklist Submittal:
-V 4T
6. Lead Agency Requiring t (Agenp R Ch Tl:st)-.
,I
A
7. Name of roposal N applicable (Tract No. if Subdivision):
S..Related Applications (under the authoniy of this environmental determination):
Yes No
Variance:
GondItIonal Use Permit:
Zone Change:
General Plan Amendment:
(Attach Completed EnvIronmental Infor7natIon Form)
,.. �. City of Diamond BarWtW Study Form
Page 2
11. Environmental Impacts:
(Explanations and additional Information to supplement all "yes" and "possibly" answers are required to be
submitted on attached sheets)
• Yes No Possibly
1. Earth. Will the proposal result In:
a Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures? t�
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? _
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical feature?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? V
f. Changes in deposition, erosion of stream banks or land adjacent to standing water,
changes in siltation, deposition or other processes which may modify the channel of
constant or intermittently flowing water as well as the areas surrounding permanent
or intermittent standing water? lZ
g.: Exposufa of people or property to geologic hazards such s earthquakes, landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards?
2 Air. Will the proposal result In:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any changes in climate,
either locally or regionally?
3. Water. Will the proposal result In:
_.. ..
a. Changes in currents or the course or direction of water movements?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface run-off?
c. Afteratlons of the course or flow of flood waters?
d. Changes in the amount of surface water in any body of water?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality including but
not limited to dissolved oxygen and turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals,
or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? —44 '
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies?—
i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding?
- " City of Diamond Barinitlal Study Fo 3
T'•� r.
Yes No Possibly
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result In: '
a, Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees,
shrubs, grass, cps, and aquatic plants}?
b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique rare or endangered species of plants?
as or plant communities which are recognized
c. Reduction in the size of sensitive habitat are
as sens-Mve? -
d• Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species?.
e. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result In:
dive
of species, or number of any species of animals (b
a. Change in the divirds, land
animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms and insects)?
b. Reduction,in the numbers of any dnique rare or endangered species of animals?
Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or in a barrier to the normal migration , /
c. _J��
or movement of resident species? .
d. Reduction in size or deterioration in quality of existing.fish or wildlife habitat? —
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a- Significant increases in existing noise levels? �-
b- Exposure of people to severe noise levels
7. Light and Glare. WIII the proposal result In:
existing levels of fight and glare? _______-------
a Significant new light and glare or contnbute significantly to ex g
8. Land Use. WIII the proposal result In:
a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use in an area?
9. Natural Resources. Wilt the proposal result In: �-----
a. An increase in the rate,of use of any natural resources?
10 Risk of Upset- Will the proposal Involve:
risk of an explosion or the release of hazardoussubstancescident o upset conbut not fimit diiioed
n
aAn
to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) m the e
response plan or an emergency evacuation plan?
b. Probable interference with an emergency
,
w
r-- •• ..•- City of Diamond Bar Initial Study Form
Page 4
Yes No Possibly _
11. Population_ WIl1 the proposal:
a. Atter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area?
— V--
12. Housing. VIII the proposal affect:
a.. Existing housing, or create a•demand for additional housing?
a
13. TransportatIoniClrcuIatIon. Will the proposal result In:
a- -Generation of Substantial additional vehicular movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking?
c. Substantial impact on existing transportation systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and goods.
e. Alterations to waterbome, rail or air traffic? •
_�- � -
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
`14. Public Services. Will the proposal:
Have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or altered governmental services in any
a.
of the following areas:
V
1. Fire protection?
2. Police protection?
3. Schools?
4. Parks or other recreational facilities?
5. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
6- Other governmental services?'
—�
15. Energy. Will the proposal result In:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing energy sources or require the development
of new sources of energy.
16. Utilities. Utilities. NVIII the proposal result In:
A need for new systems, or Substantial alterations to public utilities?
a
C
• C!ry of Diamond Bar:nitfal SwdyPF�a 5
.:. y
Yes No Possibly
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result In:
tential health hazard (excluding mental health)?
a. Creation of any health hazard or po— (/
b, Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result In:
of an scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in -
a. The obstruction Y
the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to the public vie
19. Recreatlon. VYill the proposal result in:
a. An impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? V
20. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result In:
a: The alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site?
b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object?.—
ffect unique ethnic cultural values?
b. A physical change which would a
ng religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area.
d. Restrictions on existi
-C[-/ of Diamond Bar InIflat Study Form
Page 6
Yes No ruz)"IWI)
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance?
a. Does the roposed project have the . tential to degrade the quality of the environment,
'er fish or
substantially reduce the habitat of a isl�, or wildlife species, cause a f
wildlife- popu fiatio n to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate or
significantly reduce a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the majorperiods of Calffo . mi2 history or prehistory?
b. Does the proposed project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage
of long-term, environmental goals?
c. Does the proposed project pose impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively
considerable?
d. I Does the project pose environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? .
III Discussidn of Environmental Evaivation:
(Attach NarratIve)
IV. Determination:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
effect on the environment,
I find that, the -proposed pr *ect COULD NOT have as significant
ignt 1 t ----
'NRATION will be prepared.
and a NEGATIVE DEC
I find that although . the prop9sed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described
on the attached sheet have been incorporated into the proposed project.
A MITIGAT-ED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED., ---
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, n an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
,2- Signature:
Date:
Title
For the City of Diamond. Bar, falffomia
Agenda Item 3 — CUP 94.1 — Pantera Park Helispot
Plans found in project file.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-1
Applicant: Los Angeles County Fire Department
1320 N. Eastern
Los Angeles, CA 90063
Proposal: A request to locate an emergency Helispot on an existing knoll
overlooking the Pantera Park site. The proposed helispot is for
firefighting related activities and will provide service for two
helicopters and support vehicles.
Location: 800 S. Pantera Dr.
Environmental Findings: The proposed project, as determined by the Planning Commission
of the City of Diamond Bar, will not have a significant effect on
the environment. This conclusion is based on the attached
environmental checklist.
Lead Agency: City of Diamond Bar
Mitigation Negative Declaration No. 94-2
All "yes" and "possibly" answers and mitigation measures.
1. Earth. (b,c,e)
Explanation:
Grading of the site will require cut and fill grading procedures to be conducted in order to
provide a service road and two helipads on primarily level surface. Some graded areas including
the access road will be over covered with an 8 in. gravel layer, the helipads will be composed
of a 20'X 20' concrete slab and. the approach road will be constructed with asphalt concrete
paving. During the grading activities there will be an increase in wind blown soil on the site.
Mitigation Measures:
During the grading phase the site will be required to be watered down to reduce the occurrence
of blowing soil. All grading and erosion control measures shall be in compliance with the
requirements of the Public Works Department as shown on the final grading plans. All fill areas
will be compacted to the approved design specifications but not less than 90 percent.
All grading activities shall be 'restricted to operation between the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday through Friday and off-site transportation of export materials shall be restricted to the
hours between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. All staging areas shall be shown on
the approved grading plans. Street cleaning with water and sweepers of all residential streets
on the truck route to the site shall be cleaned every other day for the duration of on-site grading
and exportation activities.
The applicant must comply with all federal, state, Zone RPD 20,000-2U, Engineering
Department, and Building and Safety Department requirements, and that all grading, and
drainage plans shall conform to all City standards or as amended by this action and shown on
the approved plans.
3. Water. (b)
Explanation:
There will bean increase in non -permeable surfaces as a result of the construction of the project
thus decreasing the absorption rates on portions of the site.
Mitigation Measures:
The project is designed with a berm surrounding the pad and covered with an 8 in. gravel layer
to act as a basin to retain modest amounts of runoff and to reduce the velocity and quantity of
runoff directed to the natural drainage courses. The access road to the pad is designed with
gravel on either side to reduce runoff velocity. A gutter flare, directing runoff to light rip rap,
has also been incorporated into the design.
6. Noise. (a,b)
Explanation:
There may be short term periods of significant noise levels when the project is in operation
related to the landing and departure of the helicopter.
Mitigation Measures:
(a) Reduce ground idle to 67 percent of the in-flight rpm's (100 percent);
(b) Point the nose of the helicopter toward the nearest sensitive use (ie residential or school)
during departure maneuvers as conditions allow;
(c) Maintain the approved Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) flight path to the extent
conditions permit so as to reduce the overflight of sensitive uses.
(d) Fire Department training shall be limited to conducting sessions only between the hours of
9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
13. Transportation/Circulation. (e)
Explanation:
While the project is in operation, there will be flights by the helicopter in areas and at elevations
which are not standard flight paths.
Mitigation Measures:
See 6. Noise. Mitigation Measures
PC RESOLUTION NO. 94 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA' APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 94-19 A REQUEST TO OPERATE AN EMERGENCY
HELISPOT ON IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONE (RPD 20,000-2U) LOCATED
AT 800 PANTERA DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, AND MAK-
ING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
(i) The County of Los Angeles Fire Department, 1320 N. Eastern Ave., Los
Angeles,California, 90063, has heretofore filed an application for approval of a conditional
use permit, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution referred
to as "the application".
(ii) On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as -a duly
organized municipal corporation of the State of California. On said date, pursuant to the
requirements of the California Government Code Section 573761 Title 21 and 22, the City
Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 14, 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 contains 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.
(iii) Because of its recent incorporation, the City of Diamond Bar lacks an
operative General. Plan. Accordingly,. action was taken on the subject application, as to
consistency to the future adopted General Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of an
office of Planning and Research Extension granted pursuant. to California Government Code
Section 65361.
(iv) On February 14, 1994, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond
Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said public
hearing on that date.
(v) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
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
1
set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the initial study review
prepared by the City of Diamond Bar and a .Negative Declaration has
been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder,
-
-and, further said -negative declaration reflects -the independent judgement
of the City of Diamond Bar;
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 wild life
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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during
the above -referenced public hearing on March 14, 1994, and concluded
on said date, including written and oral staff reports, together with public
testimony, and in conformance with the terms and provisions of Califor-
nia Government Code Section 65361, this Commission hereby specifi-
cally finds as follows:
(A) The application applies to property located east of 800 Pantera
Drive, on lot 9 of Tract 31479, and is located in the RPD
20,000-2U Zone.
(B) Properties to the south, east and west are developed with single
family residences, the site immediately to the east and north is
the future location of the Pantera Park and Pantera School.
(C) The applicant's request is to operate an emergency helispot on a
knoll overlooking the future Pantera Park and Pantera School
sites. The project will assist in fire fighting grass fires in area
and fire fighting training.
(D) The subject property has been rough graded and will require
minimal improvements to complete the project.
(E) The site is sufficient in size and can provide adequate ingress and
egress. to allow helicopter flight landings and vehicles for
intermittent maintenance and training.
(F) There is a reasonable probability that the project proposed in the
application will be consistent with the proposed General Plan;
(G) That the requested use at the location proposed will not:
(1) Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of.
persons residing or working in the surrounding area, or
(2) . Be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or
valuation of property of other persons located in the
vicinity of the site, or
(3) Jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to
public safety or general welfare; and
(4) That the proposed site is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and
loading facilities, landscaping and other development
features prescribed in this title, or as is otherwise required
in order to integrate said use with the uses in the
surrounding area; and
(5) That the proposed site is adequately served:
(a) By highways or streets of sufficient width and
improved. as necessary to carry the kind and
quantity of traffic such use would generate, and
(b) By other public or private service facilities as are
required.
5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3,
and 4 above, this Planing Commission hereby approves the application
subject to the restrictions and conditions listed below:
(1) This permit shall not be effective for any purpose until a duly
authorized representative of the owner of the property involved
has filed, at the office of Diamond Bar Community Development
Department, an affidavit stating that the applicant is aware of,
and accepts all the conditions of this permit;
3
(2) That three copies of the plot plan and marked Exhibit "A" and
conforming to such of the following conditions as can shown on a
plan, shall be submitted for approval of the Community
Development Director. The property shall thereafter be
developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the
approved plans.
(3) Notwithstanding any previous Subsection of this Resolution, if the
Department of Fish and Game requires payment of a fee pursuant
to Section 711.4 of the Fish and Game Code, payment thereof
shall be made by the applicant prior to the issuance of any
building permit or any other entitlement.
(4) The property shall be maintained in a condition which is free of
debris both during and after the construction, addition, or
implementation of the entitlements granted herein. The removal
of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether 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.
(5) The applicant must comply with all federal, state, Zone RPD
20,000-2U, Engineering Department, and Building and Safety
Department requirements, and that all grading, and drainage
plans shall conform to all City standards or as. amended by this
action and shown on the approved plans.
(6) The pilot shall comply with the following restriction related to the
operation of the helicopter:
(a) Reduce ground idle to 67 percent of the in-flight rpm's (100
percent);
(b) Point the nose of the helicopter toward the nearest sensitive
use (ie residential or school) during departure maneuvers as
conditions allow;
(c) Maintain the approved flight path to the extent conditions
possible so as to reduce the overflight of sensitive uses.
(7) All grading. activities shall be restricted to operation between the
hours of 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday and off-site
4
transportation of export materials shall be restricted to the hours
between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. All staging
areas shall be shown on the approvedgrading plans.
NOW, TBEREFOREq BE IT RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be
transmitted via certified mail, to the Los Angeles County Fire Department, at the address as
set forth on the application.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED, this 14th day of March, 1994.
David Meyer, Chairman
I, James DeStefano, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, by the Planning Commission on the 14th
day of March, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
James DeStefano, Secretary
City of Diamond Bar
PLANNING COMMISSION
Staff Report
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 4
REPORT DATE:- March 9, 1994
MEETING DATE: I March 14, 1994
CASE/FILE NUMBER: Amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 89528
And Development Review No. 92-03
®v
APPLICATION REQUEST: The applicant is requesting an' amendment .to the
Development Review to allow the deletion of the
pavers in the parking . area and the Conditional Use
Permit. for the revision of the design of the freeway
oriented sign.
PROPERTY LOCATION: 525 S. Grand Ave.
APPLICANT: Card Investments
527 S. Grand Ave.
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Charles Cobh
527 S. Grand Ave.
Diamond. Bar,-. CA 91765
BACKGROUND:
The public hearing for the project as approved was held. on July 13, 1992 by the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission opened the. public hearing, received testimony, reviewed the
project and directed the staff and applicant to address some very specific issues. The Planning
Commission also took action to approve an Extension of Time request in order that the applicant could
process a revised site plan and begin construction within the allotted time frame. The grant gave the
AMENDMENT CUP89528(B)/DR92-3 - 1
applicant one additional year to exercise the CUP.
The remainder of the application was approved on September 28, 1992 with a revised site plan,
freeway oriented sign, and new restaurant operator. Specific references were made by the Planning
Commission relating to the internal circulation of the site, pedestrian circulation and the freeway
oriented sign.
APPLICATION ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a revised site plan that seeks to remove the stamped concrete pavers that
were approved for the drive aisles and parking area of. the project and to .revise the freeway oriented
center sign to include an additional operator.
Pavers
m
The applicant and staff were directed by the Planning Commission to improve internal automobile and
pedestrian circulation of the fast food site during the review of the original. project. The Commission
had concern that the walk areas for pedestrians traversing the site may not have been adequately
addressed. Pedestrians accessing the site from adjacent sites as well as from Grand Ave. and Old
Brea Canyon Rd. have to cross drive aisles to enter the restaurant. To reduce potential
vehicular/pedestrian hazards and at the direction of the Commission, concrete file pavers were
incorporated into the circulation design.
The pavers accentuated areas that pedestrians and motor vehicles were likely to cross paths. The.
pavers were to be approved at the entrance of the drive-thru, which is bisected by a pedestrian
crossing from the stairs to the Honda dealership; at the exit of the drive-thru, which is a likely
pedestrian crossing from the sidewalk on Old Brea Canyon Rd; and at a point just east of the play
area gate which provides a crossing area linking. the restaurant to the area providing 53 percent of the
total number of parking spaces.
The .functional value aside, staff is of the opinion that the pavers also offer an aesthetic quality to the
project. The pavers break up the massive impervious area and. offer an a visual quality that attempts
to compensate for the limited landscaping incorporated within the development.
Signage
As a component of the 1992 approved project,. the freeway oriented sign was revised to delete the car
wash use and to. remove the shingled roof from the sign design. As a result of the absence of the car
wash from the sign fascia, the remaining uses were approved to share 336 sq. ft (12' X 28') of
signage per side:
The revised sign represents a reduction in the actual sign area of approximately 10 sq. ft. in relation to
the existing entitlement. The sign height is consistent with previous. entitlements (25 ft. above the top
of curb on Grand Ave) and will maintain its location on lot No. 4.
AMENDMENT CUP89528(B)/DR92-3 2
The applicant is however requesting that the design of the pylon be revised from a bi-pedestal to a
single pedestal .configuration. The single pylon will be constructed of 22 gauge electrical galvanized
steel pole cover with off-white stucco finish and trim color to match the Burger King restaurant
exterior colors.
The minor revisions to this sign are in compliance with the previous approval by the Commission and
in the future, the Commission may direct staff to process similar modifications at the administrative
level.
The project is located in Zone C -3 -DP -BE and in a Commercial land use designation as stipulated in
the contemplated General Plan.
Conclusion
Staff has reviewed the proposed changes in the historical ogptext from which the pavers and the
freeway oriented center sign were approved. Staff has determined that the stamped concrete pavers
werean outgrowth of concerns expressed by the Planning Commission and staff related 'to internal
circulation as it relates to pedestrian safety. Additionally, the pavers .were incorporated for the
aesthetic! contributions that they afford the site.
The freeway oriented sign is primarily the same sign that was approved in 1992 except for the
incorporation of an additional tenant on the sign face and a redesign of the pedestal. Staff funds the
new sign to be aesthetically consistent with and to substantially conform to the previous approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Pursuant to the Negative Declaration that was been prepared for this project for the approval of
Conditional Use Permit No. 89-528(a) and Development Review No. 92-3, this project has been
determined to have no significant impacts.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
This application was advertised in the Inland Valley. Daily Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune
on February 22,1994 and all property owners (3) within a 500 radius were mailed notices of the
public hearing.
RECOMMONDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the request for the deletion of the pavers from
the drive aisles and pedestrian crosswalks and direct staff to insure the installation of the pavers in a
timely manner. Additionally, staff recommends that the Commission approve the modification of the
freeway oriented sign and direct the Community Development Director to review future minor
modifications to the signage on-site pursuant to the approved sign program and the City's sign code.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the proposed amendments to CUP 89 -
AMENDMENT CUP89528(•B)/DR92-3 3
528(b)/DR 92-03 with the Findings of Fact and conditions as listed within the attached resolutions.
That the requested use at the location proposed will not:
(a). Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing or working in the
surrounding area, or
(b) Be materially detrimental to the use; enjoyment or valuation of property of other, persons
located in the vicinity of the site, or
(c) Jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to public safety or general welfare;
and
m�
(d) That the proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences,
parldng and loading facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this title, or as
is otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area; and
(e) That the proposed site is adequately served:
(1) By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to cavy the kind
and quantity of traffic such use would generate, and
(2) By other public or private service facilities as are required.
PREPARED BY:
Robert Searcy, Associate Planner
:1 1
Revised Site Plan
Revised Freestanding Freeway Oriented Sign
Planning Commission Minutes of September. 28,.1992
Draft Resolutions of Approval
F:\LETTERS\REP0RTS\CUP89528.AHD
AMENDMENT CUP89528(B)/DR92-3 4
September 28, 1992
Page 2
Motion was made by C/Meyer,- seconded by
VC/MacBride, and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue
CUP 92-05/DR 92-02 to the meeting of October 12,
1992.
Planned Sign . PT/Lungu presented the staff report on Planned Sign
Program No. 92-01Prog-ram No. 92-01, located in the Sunset Village
Shopping Center at 1241 S. Grand Avenue. The item
was continued to September 28,1 1992 at the
September 14, 199 2 Planning. Commission public
hearing, due to'the suspension of the General Plan.
Staff is requesting that the item be continued to
the meeting of October 12, 1992, with the
concurrence of the applicant. %
C/Meyer inquired if the applicant is in concurrence
with the continuance.
The applicant has concurred.
Notion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue Planned Sign
Program No. 92-01 to. the meeting. of October 12,
1992.
CUP 89-528 & AP/Searcy presented the staff report regarding the
DR 92-03 request on an amendment to Conditional Use. Permit
89-528 and Development Review 92-03, to allow the
development of -a Burger King restaurant with drive
through facilities. The item was continued by the
Planning Commission on the July 13, 1992 meeting.
Staff and the applicant have worked on the
following concerns raised by the Planning
Commission: parking and circulation; the trash
enclosure; the 'pedestrian access; , signage; - and
compliance with existing. standards. The Planning
ing
Commission's packet contains the revised site plan.
He then summarized the changes made, as well as the
changes suggested by staff, as indicated' in the
staff report. It is recommended that the Planning
commission approve the proposed amendments to CUP
8.9-518, DR 92-03 with the findings of Fact and
conditions as listed , within 'the attached
resolutions.
C/Meydr. made the following suggestions: if the
island, and the sidewalk, is to be removed, then
some of that area should be turned into landscaping
so as to give a visual designation of where the
drive approach should be; widen the planter to 3
1/2 feet, to serve the dual purpose of a wheel stop
and reduce the amount of impervious material by
increasing the landscaping.; include stamp concrete
at the stop area for the drive through where it
September 28, 1992
Page 3
intersects with drive Out to Brea Canyon to
encourage stopping at that point; and use a heavy
metal gate, with metal decking, on 'the trash
enclosure.
AP/Searcy, in response to C/Meyet's inqUiry
regarding signage, explained that signage for this
project was approved as a MacDonald's restaurant'
but it is now being revised by the applicant, and
reduced on the MacDonald's site. Additionally, the
freeway oriented sign, approved with 480 square
feet of signage, is now being proposed at
approximately 336 squgre feet. The applicant is
Also revising the a4sthetics of the sign by
removing a canopy. The signing program approved
originally complied with the code requirements in
effect at that time.
C/Meyer inquired if the original approval exceeds
the current standards, since the sign ordinance has
subsequently been modified.
VC/MacBride inquired why the medians on Grand Ave.
should be removed.
AP/Searcy explained that one of the requirements of
the Fire Department is that there be 26 feet of
unobstructed driveway aisle. - However, staff did
not receive a definitive response from. the Fire
Department, therefore, staff and the applicant
sought to preclude any problems that may follow, by
removing the medians to comply with the
requirements of the LA -County Fire Department.
VC/MacBride indicated that he was under the
impression that the 26 foot requirement is for
traffic in both direction. He requested staff to
verify the requirement before making the decision
to remove the median.
AP/Searcy stated that the monument sign, located
adjacent t to the median on Grand Ave., with a 10 x
10 - foot facia on top of a two foot pedestal would
not.be approved under the existing code without a
*
variance. The maximum square - footage is a 72
square foot monument sign. The address numbers on
the free standing signs, and on the buildings, will
be included to concur with the existing sign
ordinance.
C/Meyer suggested that, if this project is
approved, it would be appropriate to have those
additional types of 'conditions specifically
included in the Resolutions.
VC/MacBride inquired why the medians on Grand Ave.
should be removed.
AP/Searcy explained that one of the requirements of
the Fire Department is that there be 26 feet of
unobstructed driveway aisle. - However, staff did
not receive a definitive response from. the Fire
Department, therefore, staff and the applicant
sought to preclude any problems that may follow, by
removing the medians to comply with the
requirements of the LA -County Fire Department.
VC/MacBride indicated that he was under the
impression that the 26 foot requirement is for
traffic in both direction. He requested staff to
verify the requirement before making the decision
to remove the median.
September 28, 1992
Page 4
C/Meyer also noted that the driveway is too wide.
The median would have to go out to the curb face
because the Road Department specifies that it can't
be over 30 feet.
Chair/Flamenbaum inquired why the concrete
sidewalk, coming 'from the east down to the Burger
King, has to be eliminated.
AP/Searcy stated that the City Engineer has
determined that the grade differential, from Grand
Ave. to that point of ingress, is such that the
sidewalk would not comply with -,he UBC requirement
for grade -change, whether or note there are steps,
or a landing.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Charles Cobb, the Burger King franchisee, stated
that he does not have any problems with the
suggested changes made by 'staff. He made the
following responses to Chair/Flamenbaum's
inquiries: he would not object to reducing the 44
foot width of the driveway; he will ask his
engineer to consider some sort of walkway coming
from the east down to the Burger King; he has no
problem with adding pavers by the -stop area at the
drive through exit; and he does not object to using
a metal gate for the trash enclosure. He then
inquired if the actual square footage for the
freeway oriented sign has been reduced . from what
was approved for MacDonalds.
AP/Searcy stated that the freeway. oriented sign
submitted in the plans 'is reflected in the staff
report as a reduction from 480 square feet to 330
square feet. . Staff concurs with the. sign as
proposed in these plans.
Cl
es Cobb stated that they -had not intended to
reduce the sign, and requested that they be allowed
to maintain the same size of the previous sign
originally approved for MacDonalds.
AP/Searcy explained that the sign approved
specifically for MacDonalds was a 100 square foot
monument sign at the entrance on Grand Ave. This
sign, that is submitted for the. freeway oriented
sign, was a sign approved for -the whole center,
which was 480 square feet that would have listed
the car wash, the Honda*, and the then MacDonalds.
The car wash has been 'omitted from the sign.
September 28, 1992 Page 5
Charles Cobb stated that the car wash had indicated
that they were not interested in having a freeway
oriented sign. Mr. Hand assumed that the total
amount of signage would -then be able to be split
between the Honda Dealership, and Burger King.
They would like to be able to take advantage of the
480 square foot sign previously approved. The sign
would sit on the overall parcel of land that has
been subdivided.
Chair/ Flamenbaum, noting that the present plans
indicate a completely different sign than what is
now suggested, explained that the Planning
Commission would have ito continue the meeting in
order to allow the applicant to resubmit a revised
sign plan.
C/Meyer stated that the freeway sign is*an off site
sign, and off site signs are not usually permitted.
It is a standard requirement to advertise your
business on the same parcel of land on which it is
constructed. The land that the sign is on can be
sold individually to another land owner.
r. AP/Searcy noted that the lot cannot be developed
with anything else other than that sign per the
existing CUP. Staff would concur with the sign as
submitted in these plans.
CD/DeStefano advised that if the applicant desires
a larger sign than what is presently before the
Commission, then the applicant should suggest that
this matter be continued to the next meeting for,
discussion of the merits of the applicant's desired
signage.
Charles Cobb stated that he would prefer the
Commission to proceed, and that he withdraws his
earlier comment.
Chair/Flamenbaum inquired if there was any
discussion about reducing the surface area of the
parking, lot, it's material,. and reflectivity.
AP/Searcy stated that there was no specific
discussion. Because of the increased sidewalk, and
the driveway aisles, to comply with fire department
standards, the overall landscaping was reduced in
some areas. The entrance to the site on Gr*and *Ave.
has been revised, reducing,the landscaping in that
area, as well. However, deleting the concrete
sidewalk, and narrowing the entrance, would
increase the landscaping once again. This is the
September 28, 1992
Page 6
most landscaping staff thought possible, and still
have it comply with standards.
Hearing no further testimony, the Public Hearing
was declared closed.
C/Grothe made the following comments: there should
be an entrance statement made on Grand Ave.; he
doesn't like the sidewalk pedestrian circulation
plan,, with sidewalks leading nowhere;the sidewalk,
on the southside nearest the car wash, should be
removed; there should eventually be a sidewalk that
will.lead to the proposed car wash; there should be
pavers.at the stop sign; the pa*--rs throughout the
project will help slow down ptople; and he is
concerned that the lighting on the drive through
aisle is minimal on the backside of the building.
C/Meyer.made the following comments: he concurred
with a need for an entry statement, and the removal
of the median; heavy landscaping should be -used to
clearly define the driveway; the Res ' olution of
approval should indicate the land use generically - ically
rather than specifically naming Burger King.; the
drive approach -should be reduced; the trash
enclosure gate should be metal; the signs, on Grand
Ave. and Brea Canyon, should have addresses; and
there should be some sort of a restriction made in
terms of the off site signage whereas the signs
should only advertise those businesses that are on
the parcel. Though the original concept of this
project was to advertise the center, it no longer
does so, but rather now advertises two businesses,
both off site.
C/Grothe stated that he would like to specifically
exclude. the lot, that the sign sits on, from the
approval, because, to his recollection, - the
existing CUP does not preclude any type of
development on that lot.
DCA/Curley explained that the design of the
original Resolution contemplated ultimate
development, 'however, it was precluded 'without
coming back and doing a CUP amendment. The signing
issues would get tied into whatever land use was
being allocated to that remaining site.
C/Grothe stated that, if the parcel numbers that
can be advertised are to be spelled out, then he
would like that particular parcel number excluded
so as to avoid it turning into a billboard with 12
tenants listed. - The sign was to advertise just the
three major tenants.
September -28, 1992 Page 7
VC/MacBride concurred with the following: there
should be a condition that deals with the concerns
regarding this off site sign; there may need to be
an additional lighting . standard; and - the trash
enclosure gate should be made of solid metal with ith
metal decking rather than of wood.
C/Grothe suggested that the lighting condition in
the Resolution be amended to read. "minimum" instead
of "average".
chair/Flamenbaum sugge'sted that there be. a
condition added indical-ing that every effort should
be made to install And maintain some sort of
sidewalk from Grand Ave. down to the restaurant
area.
C/Grothe suggested that the applicant be asked to
mai ' ntain about 4 feet of flat, mowed, 'grass
landscaping next to the curb as an alternative if
the sidewalk cannot be achieved.
Motion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by C/Grothe
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to direct staff to prepare
the Resolutions of Approval for CUP 89-528 and DR
92-03, incorporating all the issues that remain
outstanding, and all the conditions as stated . by
the Commission, to be brought back to the next
meeting for the Commission's consideration.
Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 8:22 p.m.
The meeting was reconvened at 8:40 p.m.
DR 92-04
presented the staff report regarding the
request by the applicant, Food -4 -Less and Landsing
Pacific Fund, for Development Review approval -to
remodel the exterior. of Alpha Beta and Shop
'Hills
Building #4, located in the Country Towne
Center. She presented a slide show of the partial
remodeling done to the shopping center in April of
19881 and reviewed the currents plans for the
proposed remodeling of the Alpha Beta and Shop
Building 14, as indicated in the staff report. It
is recommended that the exterior remodeling of the
shops be completed at one time, not in two phases
as indicated by the applicant. Staff recommended
that the Commission approve DR No. 92-04, with the
yJ
Findings of - Fact and conditions, as listed within
the attached resolution.
Li
CD/DeStefano,stated that, upon the detailed review
of the resolution, by.the City. Attorney, staff has
provided a modified resolution for the Commission -'s
consideration. The modified *resolution clarifies
I
March 9th 1994
City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission
2t660 E. Copely Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Re: Burger King #7985, 527 S. Grand Avenue / Parking Lot Pavers
Dear
During the Planning Commission meeting on October 12th 1992 at which Resolutions
92-18 &19 relating to the construction of the above referenced Burger King were
approved, there was extensive discussion on how to provide offsite handicap access to
the restaurant. Various options were considered which included access. alongside the
main entrance on Grand Ave. and two possible access routes from the lower entrance
on Old Brea Canyon Road. My recollection is that where these two routes crossed the
drive through lane in one option and the parking lot in the other, the Commission
required that pavers be provided to clearly indicate the presence of a pedestrian
crossing. -
In the ensuing months it became apparent that, due to the excessive grade of the site, it
was practically impossible to comply to with this ADA requirement. The City Engineer
accordingly issued a letter dated June 23rd 1993 (copy attached) which stated we were
not required to provide handicap access. As a result of this decision our architect
removed- the. access ramps and the pavers from the working drawings in the areas of the
drive through exit and. center parking lot
The only other area where pavers were shown on the original plans submitted to the
Commission was at the entrance to the drive through lane indicating the pedestrian
crosswalk leading to'the stairway.to the Honda site. These were removed from the
working plans as a result of miscommunication and were. subsequently not installed.
This crosswalk is currently clearly marked with white hash lines:
Staff have stated that aesthetics may have been a consideration in the Commission's
requirement of pavers. We would respectfully site Country Hills Towne Center, where
we also operate a restaurant, as an example of how pavers failed after four years and
became extremely unsightly as well as posing a safety hazard.
Attached herewith are photos showing the areas of our drive through and parking lot in
question. We sincerely request that for the reasons stated we not be required to install
pavers at this time.
Yours truly, .
Card Investments Inc.
Charles D, Cobb, President
encls.
21660 EAST COPLEY DRIVE - SUITE 100
DIAMOND BAR, CA 917654177
909-860-2489 - FAX 909-861-3117
June 23, 1993
Charles Cobb
BURGER KING
2711 Diamond Bar Boulevard
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Dear Mr.' Cobb:*
Based on the grade, topography and improvements'related to
your project, the City is not requiring offsite handicap
access from either Grand Avenue or Brea Canyon Road at this
time.
However, you will be required to make such improvements in
the future should they be determined feasible by the.City
due to buildout of surrounding properties ot,based.on ADA
requirements that may be placed on your site.
All other onsite handicap improvements are still.requir'ed
per the -approved plans.
Sincerely,
A
.neer
i GARY G. MILLER PHYLLIS E. PAPEN JOHN A. FORBING DEXTER D. MaCBRIDE GARY H WERNER
Mayor Mayor Pro Tem CouncHmember Coundimemb . er Coundlinember
RECYCLED PAPER
28-0'
-4' 12'-0- SQUARE 4'
EXTERIOR
PLASTER
(Y-134)
EXTERIOR
PLASTER
(x-73)
JR
3'
4
12'-0' SQUARE 4
RED ACCENT
-TILE
0
FREEWAY MONUMENT SIGN
0
EXTERIOR
PLASTER
.(X-34)
N
N
RED BACKLIT
LOGO.
-URB 2
]RAND AVE,
EXTERIOR
PLASTERI
'LA-HABRA'
PRODUCTS
X-73 EGGSHELL
EXTERIOR
PLASTER:
'LA HABRA'
PRODUCTS
X-34 SAN SIMEON----\
JR
3'
4
12'-0' SQUARE 4
RED ACCENT
-TILE
0
FREEWAY MONUMENT SIGN
0
m
0
Agenda Item 4 — CUP 89-528, 527 Grand
Plans found in project file.
PC RESOLUTION NO. 94-X8
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA DENYING AN AMENDMENT 10
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 92-3 AN APPLICATION FOR THE
DELETION OF THE STAMPED CONCRETE PAVERS FROM THE DRIVE
AISLES FOR A PROJECT LOCATED AT 527 S. GRAND. AVE. ON
PARCEL NO.2 OF PARCEL MAP 15625, DIAMOND BAR,
CALIFORNIA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
(i) Charles Cobb, 527 S. Grand Ave, Diamond Bar, CA
91765, as agent for Card Investments at the same address, has
heretofore filed.an application as described above in the title of
this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the project,
located at address indicated in the title of, this Resolution,
shall be referred to as "the application".
On 'April '18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State
of California. On said date, pursuant to the requirements of the
California Government Code Section 57376, Title 21 and 22, the
City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No.
14, 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 contains the Development Code of the County of Los.
Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, in-
cluding the subject application, within the City of Diamond Bar.
(iii) Because of its recent incorporation, the City of
Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan. Accordingly, action
was takeri on-the.subject application, as to consistency to the
future adopted General Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions
of an Office of Planning and Research Extension granted pursuant
'California Government Code Section 65361.
(1y) On March 14, 1994, the Planning Commission of the
City of Diati6nd Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the
application and concluded said public -hearing on that date.
(v) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this
Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found,
AMENDMENT CUP89528(B)/DR92-3
determined and resolved by the
01
Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar.as follows:
1. The Community Development Director hereby specifi-
cally finds that all of the facts set forth in the
Recitals, Part A,. of this 'Resolution are true and
correct.
2. Based on the substantial evidence presented to the
Planning Commission during the above -referenced
public hearing opened and concluded on March 14,
1994, including written and oral staff reports,
together with public testimony, and in conformance
with the terms and provisions of California
Government Code Sections 65360, the Planning
Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
1. The subject property is located at 527 S.
Grand Ave., parcel No. 2 of Parcel Map 15625
in the City of Diamond Bar and is located
adjacent to Diamond Bar Honda.
2. The property is located in Zone C -3 -DP -BE and
allows this use by Conditional UsePermit.
The site is approximately 1.21 acres . in size
and has been graded.
3. The applicant's request' is for the revision
of the site plan to deleted the concrete
paver tiles from the drive aisles.
4. The subject property is developed with a fast
food restaurant which is in operation
pursuant to a temporary Certificate of
Occupancy. The property to the north is
currently developed with Diamond* Bar Honda
Auto dealership, and the sites to south,*
east, and west. are currently vacant. The
site can be accessed via. Grand Ave. and Brea
Canyon Rd.
5. The subject site lies within the 'Commercial
designation of the contemplated General Plan.
The current zoning of the site is in
compliance with the land use designation.
6. There were no protests to the use prior to
the public hearing.
7. Notification of the public hearing for this
project has been made.
8. The design and layout of the proposed devel-
opment is not consistent with the applicable
AMENDMENT CUP89528(B)IDR92-3 2
elements of the contemplated General Plan,
,design guidelines and architectural criteria
of the appropriate district;
The design and layout of the proposed devel-
opment will unreasonably interfere with the
use and enjoyment of the neighboring existing
and future developments, and will create
traffic or pedestrians hazards by removing
visual warnings from areas that pedestrians
and vehicles are likely to come into contact;
The design of the development as a result of
the proposed deletion is not compatible with
the character of the surrounding current and
proposed developments and will not maintain
the harmonious, orderly, and attractive de-
velopment contemplated by this Chapter and
the contemplated General Plan of the City;
The design of .the proposed development would
not provide a desirable environment for its
occupants and visiting public as well as its
neighbors through because the deletion of the
pavers would not create a good aesthetic use
of materials, texture and color and would not
remain aesthetically appealing or retain a
reasonably adequate level of maintenance if
omitted from the project.
The proposed use could be detrimental to the
public health, safety - or welfare or mate-
rially,injurious to the properties or impro-
vements in the vicinity by removing
mitigation measures applied to the project to
contribute to a safe environment for
pedestrians and to increase to visual
attractiveness of the site.
3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in
paragraphs 1 and 2 above, the Planning Commission
hereby denies the application:
The Planning Commission Secretary shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy'of this Reso-
lution, to Charles Cobb at the address as set
forth on the application.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 1994 BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
AMENDMENT CUP89528(B)/DR92-3 3
BY:
David Meyer, Planning -
Commission chairman
I, James DeStef ario, Planning Commission secretary, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed,
and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission
Public Hearing opened and concluded on the 14th day of March,
1994.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
James DeStefano, Secretary
AMENDMENT CUP89528(B)IDR92-3 4*
PC RESOLUTION NO. 94 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 89528(b) FOR THE REVISION OF THE FREEWAY
ORIENTED SIGN FOR A 4.8 ACRE COMMERCIAL CENTER LOCATED
AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF GRAND AVE. AND BREA CANYON
ROAD AND NORTH OF STATE ROUTE.60 FREEWAY, DIAMOND BAR,
CALIFORNIA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. _Recitals
(i) Charles Cobb, 527 S. Grand * Ave., Diamond Bar, CA
91765, acting as agent for Card Investments at the same address,
has heretofore filed an application for approval of an Amendment
to Conditional Use Permit No. 89528 as described in the title of
this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Conditional Use Permit 89528(b) is referred to as "the
application".
(ii) On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State
of California. on said date, pursuant to the re I quirements of the
California Government Code Section 57376, Title 21 and 22, the
City Council of the City of Diamond Bar -adopted its ordinance No.
14,,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 contains the Development Code of the county of Los
Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, in-
cluding the subject application, within the City of Diamond Bar-,
(iii) The city of Diamond Bar lacks an operative
General Plan. Accordingly,. action was taken 'on the subject
application, as to consistency to the future adopted General Plan,
pursuant to the terms and*provisions of an office of Planning and
Research Extension granted pursuant to California Government Code
Section 65361.
(iv) On March 14, 1994, the.Planning commission of the
City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the
application and concluded said public hearing on that date.
(v) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this
Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by
Planning commission of the city of Diamond Bar as follows:
1
1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds
that all of facts set forth in the Recitals, Part
A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The Planning Commission hereby. finds that a
Negative Declaration has been prepared in
-compliance with the calif ornia Environmental
Quality Act of 1970, as amendedl and the
Guidelines promulgated'thereunder,.and, further;
3. The .Planning Co ' mmission hereby specifically finds
and determines that, based upon 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,
no significant adverse environmental effects will
occur.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth
herein, this Commission, in conformance with Title
22 of the Los Angeles County Code as heretofore
adopted and amended by the City Council, hereby
finds as follows:
(a) The application applies to the property
located at Grand Ave., Brea Canyon Road and
State Route 60 Freeway, also identified as
Parcel Map 15625, zoned C -3 -DP -BE, with a
gross area of 4.8 acres subdivided into four
parcels, and is currently partially developed
with Diamond Bar Honda Auto Sales and
accessory facilities located on parcel No. 1
and a fast food restaurant on.parcel No. 2;
(b) That the
requested use at the location will
not:
(i)
Adversely affect the health, peace,
.comfort or welfare of persons
residing in the surrounding area,
or
.(ii)
Be materially detrimental to the
use, enjoyment or valuation of
property of other persons located
in the vicinity of the site, or
(iii)
Jeopardize, endanger or otherwise
constitute a menace to public
health, safety or general welfare;
and
(c) That the proposed site is adequate. in size
and shape to accommodate the yards, walls,
parking facilities, landscaping and other
2
development features prescribed in this
approval;..and
(d) That the proposed site is adequately served:
(i) By highways or . streets of
sufficient width and improved as
necessary to carry the kind and
quantity of traffic such use would
generate, and
By. other public or private service
facilities as are required.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth
herein, this commission, in conformance with the
terms and provisions ofCalifornia Government Code
Sections 65360, hereby finds as follows:
(a) The I project is consistent with the General
Plan;
(b) The project will not be of substantial
detriment to, or interfere with, the General
Plan land use designations for the area in
the vicinity of the subject sites;.and
(c) The project, as proposed and conditioned
herein, complies with all other applicable
requirements of State law and local
ordinances.
6. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in
paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 above, this
commission hereby approves the application subject
to the following restrictions as to use and
standard conditions contained .within this
document:
7. For the purpose of this Resolution, the site plan
and freeway oriented sign plan, as approved by the
Planning commission on March 14, 1994, as
referenced herein:
Planning Division Conditions:
1) This approval shall apply to the Conditional
Use Permit No 89528(A) for the approved
development of the following parcels as
listed below.
3
(a) PARCEL NO. 1 Diamond Bar Honda
Dealership: Approved for the expansion' of
the existing dealership by 4,375 square feet
to be used for retail, storage and service
space and a 3 1/2 floor parking structureas
shown on approved site plan.
1. All new construction, including the 3
1/2 floor parking structure, will
utilize materials on the exterior (i.e.
exterior finish, roof tile, trim, etc.)
which are substantially the same as the
materials currently exhibited on the
existing structure.
2. Lower floor of the parking structure
shall, be clearly marked or otherwise
indicated as being reserved for customer
and employee parking only.
3. Seventy five (75) parking spaces
available for customer parking. on the
east side of the existing Honda display
and service facility as shown on the
approved site plan.
4. A 61 x 13 1/21 monument sign is approved
at the Grand Ave entrance to Parcel No.
1.
5. A 241 x 51 wall sign attached to the
sough elevation of the 3 1/2 floor
parking structure to display the "HONDA"
logo with white individual block letters
against a blue background. The sign
shall be internally illuminated.
6. The existing freestanding "HONDA" logo
sign shall be removed from its present
location on the eastern elevation.
7. Landscaping and irrigation is approved
as displayed and shall not deviate from
the approved site plan.
(b) Parcel No. 2 Burger King Restaurant:
Approved for a 4,292 square feet fast food
restaurant with drive through window and an
occupancy limit of 126 persons.
4
1. Fifty one (51) parking spaces shall be
provided as shown on the approved site
plan.
2. Materials used for the exterior finish
shall be eggshell stucco above a San
Simeon base trim. The roof will be
topped with clay roof tile known as
.Bermuda Blend. Additional trim will
feature white gray Vermillion ceramic
tile.
3. Internal direction indicators
encouraging traffic to BREA Canyon Rd
exit shall be painted on drive aisles.
4. A 101 x lot monument sign located at the
Grand Ave. entrance to the parcel
displaying the. Burger King logo is
approved as shown.
5. The parcel shall implement the approved
sign program as approved by *Planning
Commission and dated September 28, 1992.
(c) Parcel No. 3, Automated Car Wash:
Approved for 4,850 square feet structure
containing an automated car wash and gasoline
dispensing facilities. The use shall not
exceed two service islands and a maximum of
six gas pumps.
1. Fourteen I parking spaces are to be
provided for patron -and employee parking
on the site. No less than eight parking
stalls shall be standard size stalls.
2. One 611 x 13'6" -monument sign located at
the Brea Canyon Road entrance to display
gas prices and the business logo/name.
No other signs for this parcel are
approved as part of this application.
3 A wall eight (8) feet in .height as
measured from grade, shall be
constructed to separate parcel no. 3.
from. the Orange freeway on the south
elevation and also from parcel No. 4 on
the east elevation. This wall shall be
landscaped and maintained with a growing
61
ivy on each side thereby minimizing
exposed surfaces.
4. The exterior materials of the structure
shall be composed of white stucco and
Redwood trim and red mission tile will
be used.on the roof.
(d) Parcel No. 4
1. No project is approved for this parcel
as part of this approval.
2. The owner of record shall maintain this
parcel with in good condition with
landscaping as approved by Council on
the landscaping and irrigation plan.
3. Any future development of this site must
be approved by Conditional Use Permit by
the Planning '. Commission and be
consistent with all applicable
conditions.
General Conditions Applicable to All Parcels (Parcel Map
15628 Parcels 1, 2, 3, and 4)
1. The hours of operation shall be limited
from 6:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. for the
project.
2. Outside speaker volumes shall be
modulated so as not exceed 10 decibels
beyond the property line.
3. Landscaping must be maintained in
accordance with landscape plans approved
by the Planning Commission and shall be
maintained in good condition by owner of
record of each parcel or lessee thereof.
4.. Unless otherwise apparent from the
context, the term "permittee" shall
include the applicant and any other
person, corporation, or other entity
making use of this approval.
5. This approval shall not be effective for
any purpose until the permittee and the
owner of the property involved (if other
than the permittee) have filed, at the
city,of Diamond Bar Planning Department,
their affidavit stating acceptance ' of
R
all conditions of this approval..
.Additionally, this approval shall
conform with conditions of Parcel Map
15625.
6. The Conditional Use Permit approval
shall expire, unless extended pursuant
to the city codes and ordinances, if
building '.permits are not issued or
approved use has not commenced within
twelve (12) months from the date of
approval.
7. occupancy of the facilities shall not
commence until such time as all Uniform
Building Code, State Fire Marshall's
regulations., and the. Los Angeles County
Department of Health services
regulations have been complied with.
8. A freestanding pylon sign 25 feet above
top of curb (Grand Ave.') to the highest
point of the sigh. The location of said
sign is approved to be located on parcel
No. 4. The sign shall be installed as
shown on approved sign program with
fascia not to exceed 336 square feet.
Remaining signage within the center
shall conform to the Sign plan approved
for the center. All proposed signs must
be submitted to the city Planning
Department for final approval pursuant,
to the approved plans dated March 14,
1994. All revisions to the sign shall
be submitted to the community
Development Director for approval
pursuant to this entitlement and the
Sign ordinance in effect at the of the
proposed revision.
9. Parking and landscaping must be provided
as approved and shall be in compliance
with City requirements. Parking provided
shall be at least 60 percent standard
size parking stalls. Any alterations
must be approved by the Planning
Commission or its designee. Lot No. 2
is approved for 47 pt x 9") parking
stalls, 2 handicapped stalls, and 2
Recreational Vehicle (101 X 20f) parking
stalls for a total of 51 stalls.
7
10. All appropriate permits shall be
obtained prior to issuance of
Certificate of Occupancy.
11. All traffic mitigation measures
identified by the City Engineer and
..including but not limited those
incorporat * ed on the site plan shall be
completed to the satisfaction of the
Public Works Director.
12. The subject parcels shall be developed,
maintained, and operated in full
compliance with the conditions set forth
in this approval, the schedule of the
development program as required by code
and all laws, statutes, ordinances, or
other regulations applicable to any
development or activity on the subject
parcels. Failure of the permittee to
cease any development or activity not in
full compliance with this approval shall
.be a violation of these conditions.
13. Notice is hereby given that the Planning
Commission may, after conducting a
public hearing, revoke or modify, this
approval if the Planning Commission
finds these conditions to have been
violated.
14. All conditions of approval on CUP 89525,
not amended as a part of this action,
shall remain in full force and effect.
8. This 'Commission hereby provides notice to Charles
Cobb that the time within which judicial review of the
decision represented by this Resolution must be sought
is governed by the provisions of the California Code of
Civil Procedures Section 1094.6
9 The Planning Commission Secretary Shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution;
and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this
Resolution, by certified mail, return receipt
request, to: Charles Cobb at their addressed
as set forth on the Application.
0
NOW, THEREFORE,. BE IT. RESOLVED, that a copy of this
resolution be transmitted via certified.mail, to Diamond Brothers
One -1 ownership at the address as set forth.'on the application.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED,, this 14th day of March,
1994.
BY:
David Meyer, Chairman
I, James DeStefano, Planning commission Secretary, do hereby.
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed,
and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning commission
Public Hearing opened and concluded on the 14th day, of March,
1994..
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST: J I ames DeStefano, Secretary
F:\wP51\W0RK\R0B\89528(b)-RES
FIE
ti
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Chairman and Planning Commissioners p
FROM: Ann J. Lungu, Planning Technician
SUBJECT: Agenda Item #5 - Reorganization of the Planning
Commission
DATE: 'March 8, 1994
According to Ordinance No.25D (1989),. the Planning Commission
shall, at its first regular meeting in March of each calendar
year, elect a Chairman from among its appointed members for a term
of one (1) year, and may create and fill such other offices as it
may determine. For the Planning Commission, the other office it
the Vice Chairman.
At the March 14, 1994 Planning Commission meeting, the Chairman
will -relinquish the gavel to the Commission Secretary.
Nominations for and the * election of the Planning commission
Chairman will take place. The gavel will be awarded•to the newly
elected Chairman and nominations will b6 accepted for Vice
Chairman.
RECOMMENDATION.:
It is recommended that the Planning . commission consider and elect
a Chairman and Vice Chairman from its membership.
I
ATTACHMENTS:
City . Council Ordinance No. 25D (1989)
ORDINANCE NO. 25D (1989)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 25 (1989),r
AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, CONCERNING THE SELECTION
OF A CHAIR AND OTHER OFFICES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
The,City Council of the city of Diamond Bar does ordain
as follows:
Section I.' section 5(g) of Ordinance No. 25 (1989), as
heretofore amended, of the City Council of the City of Diamond
Bar hereby is amended to read, in words and figures, as follows:
11(g) The Planning Commission shall,' at its first
regular meeting in March of each calendar year, elect
a chairman from among its appointed members for a
term of one (1) year, and may create and fill such
other offices as it may determine and shall hold
regular meetings at least once a month and other
meetings at such additional times as are deemed
necessary."
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the
adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted
in three (3) public places within the City of Diamond Bar
pursuant to the provisions of Resolution 89-6.
1992.
ADOPTED, AND APPROVED this 21st day Of April I
OR
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond
Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was
introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Diamond Bar held on the 7th day 'of p, r;
1992, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City
Council'of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 21st day of
April _, 1992, by the. following vote:
AYES: CO'UNCILMEMBERS: Miller, Wer-ner, Forbing
Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Mayor Kim
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 'None
ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ATTEST:adA
Cit Clerk of the
City of Diamond Bar
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Chairman and Planning Commissioners
FROM: Ann J. Lungu, Planning Technician
4?n
MAC)
SUBJECT: Agenda Item #6 - PlanniffdVtbiM1S§1
,#gentation
on General Plan Advisory Committee
DATE: . March 8, 1994
The City -that--.-each commission shall have two
representatives on OPA�q��,ij �fflhe4jxepZesentation shall consist of the
commission's chairman and one commissioner appointed by the
chairman.
Since the reorganization of *the Planning Commission, it is
appropriate for the Commission to consider the GPAC appointments.
File
oa.q and is ready r-
clestruction by City Clark
C.
