Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/25/1994i, r APRIL 259 South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium 2.1865. 1865 East Copley Drive Diamond Ear, California •rrrr •r' •irrr •r` •rr rr Lydiar:. Bruce rr - r r, it ►•r Schad Frank& Fong 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 drip! in the Auditorium 'he City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper and encourages you to do the same. CITY OF DIAMOND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA April 25, 1994 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. Next Resolution No. 94-7 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS; Chairman David Meyer, Vice Chairwoman Lydia Plunk, Bruce Flamenbaum, Don Schad and Franklin' Fong MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is the time and place for the general public to address the members of the Planning Commission on any item that is within their jurisdiction, allowing the public an opportunity to speak on non-public hearing and non -agenda items. Please complete a Speaker's Card for the recording Secretary (Completion of this form is voluntary). There is a five minute maximum time limit when addressing the Plannine Commis - Amp 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 March 28, 1994 and April 11, 1994 OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: 2. Planned Sign Program No. 94-4 A request for approval of a Planned Sign Program for a commercial shopping center identified as Country Hills Towne Center, located at 2801 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. Property Owner: Landsing Pacific Fund, 155 Bovet Road #101, San Mateo, CA 94402 Applicant: Jacqueline Wolfe, Real Estate Marketing/Management PUBIC HEARING: None PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: ADJOURNMENT: May 2, 1994, Joint Session of City Council & Planning Commission on South Pointe Master Plan to be held at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar at 7:00 p.m. March 28, 1994 -found in Minutes Book MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR April 11, 1994 CALL TO ORDER Vice Chairwoman Plunk called the meeting to order at 7:05'p.m. in the AQMD Auditorium, 2.1865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner Fong. ROLL CALL Present:. Vice Chairwoman P ' lunk; Commissioners: Flamenbaum, Schad, and Fong Also Present: Community Development Director James DeStefano; Associate Planner Searcy; Assistant Planner Ann Lungu; Interim City Attorney Michael Montgomery; and Recording Secretary Liz Myers Absent: Chairman Meyer (excused) MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS - None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of March 28, 1994 CDD/DeStefano stated that the Minutes.of-March 28, 1994 will be amended to indicate his absence at that meeting. C/Fong, noting that page 2 is 'missing from the Planning Commission's copies of the.minutes, requested that a complete version of the Minutes ofMarch 28, 1994 be brought back at the next meeting for consideration. The Planning Commission concurred to table the matter. OLD BUSINESS - None NEW -BUSINESS 2.Review and Recommendation Regarding Fences & Walls AP/ Searcy reported that the Planning Commission -directed staff to investigate development standards in other cities and .compare those standards with the City's current development standards relating to fences and block walls mainly in front April 11, 1994 Page 2 yard setbacks. He then reviewed current City development standard and the comparative study of the standards in other cities, as outlined in the staff report, which indicated that Diamond Bar's current development standard is consistent with other communities. He stated that staff feels the current standard is an effective tool for addressing requirements for walls and fences, and to address any basis for modification of that standard. However, if the Planning Commission desires an alteration of the policy, he reviewed the following possible alternatives to address the requirements for walls: I. Main ' tain current development standards and processing procedures; 2. Create a policy whereby staff'can utilize the Yard Modification procedure to address minor modifications (5 ft. maximum height of fences. in the front yard. setback with non -view obstructing materials) within The Country Estates; and 3. Develop a policy that would allow front yard fences within The Country Estates to be constructed up* to 6 ft. in height. It is recommended that the Planning Commission take no action to change the policy in effect. However, should the Planning Commission desires a modification to the policy, it is recommended that the Planning Commission allow staff the discretion to use a 5 ft. height limit with non -view obstructing material for. any fences that may exceed the current development standard. C/Schad inquired if current policy requires a permit and Planning Department review for the construction of walls.. AP/Searcy stated that the current Development Code only requires a permit for block walls over 6 feet. However, any wall constructed, with pilasters must be permitted by the Building Department. He stated that staff would suggest that all fences and walls be permitted, or require equire Planning Department and.Building Department review, because sometimes a problem does occur with people constructing walls within the easement or the dedicated area. C/Schad, concerned with cracking and leaning walls throughout the * community, inquired if requiring permits for walls. and fences over 4 feet would provide for better constructing procedures. AP/Searcy suggested that it would be preferable if any block wall requited some type of permit and review. He explained that because the City does not require contractors to obtain a business license, it is very difficult to track the quality of some of the contractors. O/Schad stated that, when it is appropriate for discussion, he would recommend that : the . City consider utilizing a more stringent standard requiring permits for all.block walls.. April 11, 1994 Page 3 C/Flamenbaum suggested that since only about 5 to 10 walls a year, out of the approximate 10,000 residences with block walls, have suffered damage, perhaps during an earthquake, due to poor construction, it may not be appropriate to burden the entire community with a.permit requirement. AP/Searcy pointed out that, as a health and safety issue, the community would benefit from quality construction guaranteed with a more stringent permit requirement. He stated that currently a variance is required to exceed the standards. However, a variance requires a public hearing, which is more costly for the applicant than a permit, should the policy be amended. CDD/DeStef ano stated that the Planning Commission recently held a public hearing on a variance application requesting relief from the development standards to construct a wall in the front yard setback. This application resulted in Planning Commission direction to staff to review the current development standards and investigate any other tools available in the City's code that could be utilized. He stated that staff has determined it would be inappropriate to allow the proliferation of 6 ft. high walls in the front yard, for reasons indicated in the staff report, and if there are circumstances supporting. a, variance, it should be handled through the appropriate means, either the yard modification or the variance. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission take no action to change the policy currently in effect. Acting Chair/Plunk inquired why. The Country Estates was singled out in one of the alternatives. AP/Searcy explained that The Country Estates is. unique with its large lots, bigger than average frontages, and some of the homes are constructed further back from the right-of-way. He stated that most of the interest for a variance, on the part of residents, occur in The Country Estates. He then -reported that staff has recently received an application applying for a variance to construct a non -view obstructing wrought iron fence with pilasters to be constructed in the front yard setback, of a home, in The Country, indicating safety concerns. C/Schad inquired if The Country Estates' Home Owners Association (HOA) would have guidelines regarding the construction of walls in the front yard setback. AP/Searcy stated that the only HOA guideline he is aware of is the design plan must be submitted for review and approval of by the architectural committee. April 11, 1994 Page 4 C/Flamenbaum suggested that.the Planning Commission consider the staff report received and filed, and that no action be taken. AP/Searcy noted that there is a member of. the audience that desires to speak.on the issue. Acting chairwoman opened ened the meeting and invited those wishing to speak to come forward. Mrs. Rona, residing at 23107 Ridgeline Road in. The Country, who currently has filed an application for a variance, explained that because her family has been victimized by four (4) cases of vandalism in the last year, they have requested a variance to construct a 6 foot wall in the -front yard setback for security reasons. She offered to submit photos to the Planning Commission illustrating the damage done to her home. CDD/PeStefano explained to the Planning Commission that Mrs. Rona's request for a variance is currently being processed. It is being scheduled for public hearing before the Planning Commission next month. Therefore, the Planning Commission should be cautious with respect to the details of this case. He stated that Mrs. Rona could leave the photos with staff, which willbepart of -the public record. ICA/Montgomery advised Mks. Rona to submit her photos to staff at a later time since the public hearing is pending. AP/Sdarcy, in response to. Acting Chair/Plunk, stated that one of staff's suggested alternatives to the current Policy might be to allow staff to use the yard modification procedure, rather than a variance procedure, to allow people to'construct fences higher than 4211 up to 5, of non view obstructing material, thus expediting processing of those projects that are not a gross non-compliance of the current standard. There being no one else wishing to speak, Acting Chair/Plunk closed the meeting and returned the matter to the Planning Commission for consideration. C/Schad recommended that the public hearing for Mrs'. Rona's applic * ation. for a variance be scheduled for public hearing before the Planning Commission as soon as possible. C/.Flamenbaum pointed out that a 61 wall in the front yard setback would not provide security. He stated that the Code should be uniform in its application to all residents, and residents in The Country.should not be given special services from staff because of their location. April 11,-1994 Page 5 Moved by C/Flamenbaum, seconded by C/Schad and carried unanimously to maintain the current development standards and processing procedures. C/Schad requested that the building standards be increased on wall construction at any height. 3. Review of Parking Standards C/Flamenbaum recommended that staff provide a report on each of the items listed in the 'staff report regarding Parking Standards, allowing the Planning Commissionan opportunity to provide input on each item. . The Planning Commission concurred. AP/Lungu reported that the Planning commission directed staff to prepare a draft parking ordinance for their review, utilizing parking ordinance from other cities and incorporating the commission's comments from the November 8, 1994 meeting. She stated that, after reviewing the parking standards in Los Angeles County's Planning and Zoning Code as well as the parking ordinances from cities surveyed, and considering the parking situations at commercial' sites within the City, the following are staff's recommendations for incorporation into a parking ordinance for the City: 0 Landscaping - Landscaping shall not be less than 8%.of the total paved area of the parking lot. Fifty percent of the landscaping shall be distributed within the parking area and 50% shall be distributed around the perimeter of the parking area. Landscape planter areas shall not be less than three. (3) feet wide. One - 24 inch box tree shall be installed every 10 parking spaces and five (5) gallon minimum size for all shrubs. C/Flamenbaum suggested that landscaping requirements be more focused on the use of trees, rather than bushes, to reduce the reflectivity in the parking lots. AP/Lungu stated that the ordinance specifically indicates the number of trees, and only the planter areas are calculated in terms of percentages. In response to C/Fong, AP/Lungu explained that staff determined that 8% landscaping would be appropriate for the City based upon the percentage used in other cities, what is currently utilized Diamond Bar, and what- is suggested in the General Plan. C/Schad suggested that landscaping be increased to not less than 20% of the total paved area of the parking lot to add more beauty to the parking areas. April 11, 1994 Page 6 AP/Lungu, in response, to Acting Chair/Plunki stated that the percentage: used by other cities surveyed ranged from 2% to 10 %. CDD/DeStefano suggested that the Planning Commission receive the entirety of the presentation, providing input with respect to each of the components. Then provide direction to staff with appropriate amendments to the ordinance. C/Flamenbaum expressed his desire to seek consensus.and provide direction on each component as it is reviewed. He then stated that he feels 20%, is not appropriate because it is too prohibitive. He stated that the 5 gallon shrubs should be eliminated, and the number- of trees should be increased, requiring them to be indigenous and/or drought tolerant. C/Fong inquired if the ordinance allows some creativity on the part of the landscape architect. AP/Lungu stated that the landscape architect is allowed some creativity in terms of the amount of landscaping used above the minimum requirement, the variety of trees, and so forth. CDD/DeStefano stated that the purpose of the report is to respond to the Planning Commission's direction in reviewing the parking standards of the community, which will lead to a specific zoning ordinance amendment with specific changes to the zoning code. He suggested that the Planning Commission may prefer to provide staff with some general direction regarding the Parking Standards, understanding that the specifics will be debated when the zoning ordinance comes back before the Commission for review. The Planning Commission concurred that a higher percentage of. landscaping is desired, with more trees than bushes, using 2411 box trees about every 5 spaces, and with trees that are indigenous and drought tolerant. 0 Compact Parking ., a. To allow for flexibility 'within the parking standards, if a new commercial development can not meet the number of parking spaces' required, consider utilizing compact parking spaces for .employee only. b. Utilize compact parking for businesses which, incur long-term stays. C'. Dimensions for compact parking spaces shall be eight (8) feet wide and sixteen (16) feet long., April 11, 1994 Page 7 C/Flamenbaum suggested that the compact parking definition be increased to 9 feet wide and 16 feet long. C/Fong inquired what percentage of compact parking is allowed by the County.. AP/Lungu stated that the LA County Code allows the City up to 40% for compact parking. She stated that the cities surveyed range for 20% to 40% for compact parking. CDD/DeStefano stated that staff will come back with a specific recommendation upon further investigation. However, the percentage allowed for compact parking most likely will depend upon the type of use, such office, retail, manufacturing, etc. C/Schad concurred with the 9 foot width and• 16 foot length on the dimensions for compact,.parking. Acting Chair/Plunk stated that she would prefer to see dimensions for compact parking spaces to*be no less than 8.5 feet wide and larger than 16 feet wide. 0 Standard Parking a. Nine (9) feet wide and eighteen (18) feet long C/Fong and C/Schad concurred with the suggested minimum dimensions. Acting Chair/Plunk suggested a minimum of 19 feet in length. 0 Churches, Temples, Other Places Of Worship a. One (1) parking space for every three (3) fixed seats within the sanctuary area or for every 35 square feet of seating area where there are no fixed seats. b. Eighteen (18.) linealinches of bench shall 'equal one (1) fixed seat. c. occupant load determined pursuant to Uniform Building Code. P/Schad indicated his desire for further input from some of the larger churches before making a decision. He pointed out that the larger vehicle, that can hold more family members, is usually taken to church. The Planning Commission concurred that more information is needed to make a final determination. However, if the information gathered. confirms the 'recommendation, then the Commission would concur with the recommendation as stated. April ill 1994 Page 8 C/Fong suggested that staff contact a church planning architect to gather information. -Chair/-Plunk -noted that the requirements for churches, etc. seems the same as the requirements for entertainment and assembly. The Planning Commission concurred to use the same standard for each use. 0 Commercial Uses/Professional Offices. a. One (1) parking space for every 250 square feet of gross floor area. CDD/DeStefano-pointed 'out -that the parking problems for commercial /professional uses, as well as medical uses, are the two. biggest problem areas in the City.He noted that shopping centers with high occupancy rates having parking ratios of 1 for every 250 square feet of gross floor area don't seem to have a problem. C/Flamenbaum suggested that five (5) parking spaces for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, as is used by the Intercommunity Hospital, may be more appropriate. He noted that professional uses in a center could also include medical uses. Therefore, one should not really differentiate between the two uses for parking requirements. C/Fong concurred with staff's recommended requirements for both commercial uses, professional office and medical uses. C/Schad, noting the parking 'problems in the centers throughout the City, concurred with C/Flamehbaum's suggested requirements.. Acting Chair/Plunk concurred that professional and medical uses are interchangeable,* and should have the same parking considerations. She stated that the parking requirements for.medical uses should be five (5) spaces per doctor. C/Flamenbaum suggested that the parking ratio be determined on floor space rather than the number of physicians in attendance. 0 Medical Uses a. One (1) parking space for every 200 square feet of gross floor area - b. In no case -shall there be less than five (5) spaces. per doctor. April 11, 1994 Page 9 The Planning Commission concurred with the recommended. requirements, understanding that the floor ratio is preferred over the number of physicians in attendance in determining the parking requirements. 0 Dining a. one (1) parking space per three (3) persons based on occupant load determined by the Uniform Building Code. b. One (1) parking space per 35 square, feet of gross floor area with no fixed seats. C. Eighteen (18) lineal inches. of bench shall be considered as one (1) fixed seat.'. The: Planning Commission concurred with the recommended requirements. 0 Entertainment, Assembly The Planning Commission concurred that the parking requirements for entertainment and assembly should be the same as the parking requirements for churches, temples, etc. 0 General Retail/Services a. one (1) parking space for- each 250 square feet of gross floor area. CDD/DeStefano, in response to C/Flamenbaum, stated that new developments in existing centers would need to comply with the current code in place at the time they apply for the project. C/Flamenbaum, noting that there is room for in -fill in many of the existing centers, expressed concern that changing the number of required parking spaces in existing commercial. centers may result in the loss of the proposed business. He then suggested that it may be appropriate to require parking lots to be designed with relatively easy ingress and egress. CDD/DeStefano explained that all new projects will require, at minimum, a design review approval by the Planning Commission, allowing the Commission to address concerns regarding circulation. There was concurrence among the Planning commissioners that the recommended standard is acceptable. Acting Chair/Plunk suggested that copies of. the parking standards be sent to the Chamber of Commerce and other organizations that may possibly be affected. April ill 1994 Acting Chair/Plunk requested staff to investigate the affects of a grandfathering clause for in -fill structures at existing- centers.. 0 Warehousing a. one (1) parking space per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. b. One (1) parking space per 250 square feet of gross floor area utilized for office or sales area. 0 Transportation Demand & Trip Reduction Measures AP/Lungu' noted that the recommended standards, as indicated., on. page 6 and. 7 of the staff report, are measures recommended by the Planning Commission to the City Council for adoption. 0 Shared Parking Agreements 1. Shared parking agreement may' be allowed with a Conditional Use Permit C/Flamenbaum requested a report on how well current shared parking agreements in the City, and other communities, are doing. 0 Parking Acquisition fund AP/Lungu stated that since the City currently does not have a "down -town' area, it may not be appropriate to incorporate this provision in a parking ordinance. The Planning Commission concurred. 0 Residential Development 1. Single-family a. Two (2) garage. 2. Two-family a. TWO (2) garage. standard parking spaces within a standard parking spaces within a C/Flamenbaum suggested that the garage space for single- family residential be increased to a minimum size of 12 feet by 18 feet, thus allowing more area for storage as well as parking. Acting Chair/Plunk suggested that driveways be required to be constructed long enough to accommodate 2 cars on the driveway. April 11, 1994 Page 11 3. Bachelor/Efficiency/One, Two or More Bedroom Apartments a. one, covered standard parking spaces per dwelling unit for bachelor apartments; b. One and one-half (1 1/2) covered standard parking spaces per dwelling unit for efficiency or one bedroom apartments; C. One and one-half (1 1/2) covered standard parking spaces, plus one-half (1/2) uncovered parking spaces per dwelling unit for two (2) or more bedrooms. Acting Chair/Plunk expressed concern with allowing 1/2 spaces. She stated that the one and one-half (1 1/2) parking space,.requirement,for.eff.iciency or.one bedroom apartments is inadequate. 0 Senior Citizen Residential Development a. Efficiency/One Bedroom Apartments - one (1) standard parking space within a garage, plus one- half (1[2) space open guest parking per dwelling unit. b. Two Bedroom Apartments - two (2) standard parking spaces within a garage, plus one (1) open guest parking space per dwelling nit. C. Three or More Bedroom Apartments - a minimum of two (2) standard parking spaces within a garage, plus one (1) open guest parking space per dwelling unit or as approved by the Planning Commission. C/Schad requested staff to insert a statement indicating that ADA requirements will be met. Acting Chair/Plunk stated that she would prefer to see the parking standards for seniors higher than what was allowed for the Heritage Park Senior Apartments. CDD/DeStefano explained that the parking standards for senior dwellings depend upon the type of care the facility -is providing. He explained that, independent care facilities tend to have higher parking standards' because seniors are more active and mobile, as compared to congregate care type of living facilities, and so forth. He stated that Diamond Bar is likely to see independent care type facilities for the next several years. In response to C/Schad's concern, AP/Lunge stated that the parking standard for three or more bedroom senior apartments suggested by staff requires a separate guest parking.space, and -not tandem parking. April 11, 1994 Page 12 Acting Chair/Plunk noted that it was the consensus of 'the Commission to direct staff to formulate a specific zoning code amendment, incorporating the Planning Commission's comments, and be brought back at a future meeting for the Planning Commission's review. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 4. Reconsideration of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 CDD/DeStef ano reported that the City Council took formal action, at the April 5, 1994 meeting, to reconsider the City Council's action of December 1, 1992, which approved -a Resolution to deny WK47850 without prejudice- in order to meet a component of the Settlement Agreement *between the City and Diamond Bar Associates (DBA). He then stated that Bernie Mazur, the- senior' vice president of DBA, will provide a statement to the Planning Commission. Bernie Mazur, the senior vice president of DBA, 3480 Torrence Blvd. Ste. 301, Torrence, stated that his responsibility involves the oversight and supervision of the planning, engineering, and construction of their properties in the back portion of the Country Estates, which include tracts 47851, 48487, and VTM 47850. He - stated that, as part of the settlement agreement in reconsidering VTM 47850, there will be a joint session of the City Council and the Planning Commission to rehear VTM 47850, whereby *DBA will make available its professional and technical consultants to provide information and answer questions raised by the members of the Planning Commission 30 days prior to the joint session. He reported that construction of tracts 47851 and 48487, which is contiguous to proposed VTM 47850, is currently underway. He stated that the construction of tracts 47851 & 48487, which are similar in area, density, topography, and geologic features to VTM 47851, provides a unique opportunity for the -Commission to view . the * ground preparation, earthwork techniques, and remedial geologic measures which are being employed in the development of these properties, as well as be able to gain an impression on the size and view potential of the home sites being created as it relates to zoning, land use, and compatibility with the surrounding community. He stated, while the area has been under design for construction, the. plant material, to restore the hillsides and have been growing from native seed previously gathered from the site. He then invited the Commission and City staff to take a guided tour of the construction site, either individually or as a group, to view those phases of construction that are of interest, and to ask questions of the consultants on site. He stated that this phase of the construction, which involves ground preparation, earthwork techniques, and remedial geologic measures, is anticipated to be completed within 30 days. April 11, 1994 Page 13 C/Flamenbaum suggested that pertinent material relating to the proposed project be presented to the Planning Commission prior to the joint meeting, particularly since none• of the Commission members are familiar with the project. Bernie Mazur stated that review of the soils and geology report, recently resubmitted to the City for review by Layton & Associates, the City's consultants, will take approximately 60 days. He stated an additional 30 days will be required for staff to prepare conditions of approval, 1, and recommendations to be presented to the Planning Commission and the City council. C/Flamenbaum suggested that staff conduct a study session of the Planning Commission, prior to formal presentation of the project, to educate the Commission as to the nature of the project. CDD/DeStefano stated that staff will prepare, for the Commission within the next few working days, a summary package of information reviewing general information on all three projects regarding some of the issues,, the mitigation measures, and the conditions, to be used as. background information while visiting the current site under construction. He stated, that staff will also prepare a complete package of all the issues pertaining to VTM 47850 to prepare the Commission for the joint public hearing in the near future. C/Fong inquired if a geologist has. been on site, gathering much of the geological information, and properly mapping the geologic conditions as it is being exposed. osed. Bernie Mazur stated that Mr. Jim Evans, a,DBA geologist, Ms. St. Peters, a Layton & Associates geologist, a supervisory soils engineer, and two soils testing engineers, visit the site on a regular basis. He stated that a weekly report is prepared on their findings and submitted to the -City for review. He suggested that each Commissioner visit the. site to ask any questions from the engineers and geologists, and other professionals, at which time any request for geotechnical information will be provided. C/Fong requested to see some of the geological information being recorded out in the field. Bernie Mazur noted that soil ' s testing is done and certified by Harrington Geotechnical, which also does all of the lab work for on soils samples. He explained that Layton & Associates is responsible for overseeing any problems, and reviewing the weekly and final reports that must be submitted. I April lip 1994 Page 14 CDD/DeStef ano 1 per - direction of the Planning Commission, stated that staff will schedule a study session, prior to the joint session of the City Council and Planning Commissionk to help prepare the Planning Commission. It has beenstronglyrecommended that thd'_Pla__n__n___ind as soon as possible . . . g ommission a . lso visit the site ICA/Montgomery, in response -to Acting Chair/Plunk, explained that the Planning Commission. will be part of the. final decision in the jointsessionwith the City Council. C/Schad commended the efforts of DBA in boxing some of the prime tree specimens on site, and the gathering of the fruit and seeds to re-establish some of the vegetation in the disturbed areas. RECESS Acting Chair/Plunk recessed the meeting at 9:15 p.m. Acting Chair/Plunk reconvened the meeting at 9:27 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING $- Zone Code Amendment No. 94-1 AP/Searcy reported that Zone Code Amendment (ZCA) No. 94-1 is a request to amend certain provisions of the Diamond Bar Code pertaining to the City's Sign ordinance, and requesting an amendment, including but not limited to, the use of temporary signs including banners and inflatable signs. He stated that the City Council approved the final extension of Interim Ordinance No. 2B (1992), on June 15, 1993, thus extending the life of the ordinance originally adopted June 2, 1992. He stated that there is no opportunity for the City to extend this interim ordinance, which expires July 7, 1994, in its present form. He then reviewed staff's analysis of the use of the interim ordinance,. as. outlined in the staff report. It is recommended that the Planning Commission direct staff to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council to amend the City Sign Code to include the Temporary Sign section as amended., Additionally, staff recommends that the Planning Commission direct staff to bring the Sign Code in its entirety back to the Commission to address additional concerns. He then reviewed the following recommended changes' to the temporary sign ordinance: Section 108 b.(9), letters a -h, Section F to read that the total number of available days for temporary signage would be increased from.60 to 90 days; and section 108 a. to add. part. (6), the free, standing monument sign section relating to 6 foot 24 square, foot. sign, or April 11, 1994 Page 15 individual commercial users, be removed from the plan sign program section 110 d. (1) and moved to part 6, 108 (a). C/Schad, noting that many temporary signs are more offensive than permanent signs, suggested that there be some provision addressing the aesthetic appearances of.temporary signs. Acting Chair/Plunk declared the public hearing opened. There being no one wishing to speak, Acting Chair/Plunk declared the public hearing closed. Moved by C/Flamenbaum, seconded by C/Schad and carried unanimously to.adopt the Resolution recommending approval.to the CityCouncil to amend the City Sign Code to include the Temporary Sign section as amended. C/FlamenbaUm requested that a table of contents/index be included in the Sign Ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS 6. Future Planning Commission Agenda Items CDD/DeStefano reviewed the listing, of future major Planning Commission agenda items, as presented in the memorandum to the Planning Commission for information purposes only. INFORMATIONAL.ITEMS 7. Verbal Presentation on the.Status of the South Pointe Master Plan I CDD/DeStefano reported that staff, per -the direction of the City Council, established a public hearing on May 2, 1994 for further consideration of the South Pointe'Master.Plan project by the City Council with the Planning Commission. He stated that the purpose of the public hearing is to receive the latest information from the developers and all the interested parties. with the possibility of looking at alternatives to I the project. ICA/Montgomery explained that a proposal has been submitted•on the exchange of properties which are, to some extent, subject to open space restrictions and park dedications. Therefore, the proposal must go before the Planning Commission prior to City Council review. Acting Chair/Plunk questioned how a proposal never considered by the City Council following Planning Commission deliberation can be - brought -back. to the Planning Commission for reconsideration. April 11® 1994 Page 16 ICA/Montgomery explained that the Code requires the removal of any open space restrictions or park dedications to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. He stated that the proposal being presented has been substantially changed from theoriginalproposal. C/Flamenbaum 'inquired of the purpose of conducting a joint. public hearing. CDD/DeStefano stated that staff was directed, today of the City .Council's desire for a joint public hearing. He stated that staff will have further information at the next Planning Commission meeting. ICA/Montgomery stated that. joint meetings of the City, council and the Planning Commission, and sometimes with other commissions, are common in many cities to handle a project at one time with the same set of facts. He noted that the most immediate way to get a decision is to meet jointly. a. Verbal Presentation on the Status of the Unionvide's TT 51169 CDD/DeStefano reported that the Unionwide project, which is a 20 acre, 13 unit project in The Country, should be brought before the Planning Commission in July 1994. He stated that a verbal presentation on its status will be given at a later date. . PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS C/Fong requested an update regarding his suggestion of adding I a supplement to the grading ordinance. CDD/DeStefano stated that staff has requested a copy of the grading ordinance from various cities, which will, upon receipt, be given to the City Engineer for review to. determine if there is a need for refinement of the current tools being utilized by the city. Staff will be presenting a report to the Planning Commission in the near future regarding the grading ordinance, as well as a report on Chair/Meyers' request regarding consideration of the City of Scottsdale's sign ordinance for possible inclusion, as appropriate, into our own sign ordinance. In response to Acting Chair/Plunk, CDD/DeSte*fano stated that the extension of the General Plan expires October 31, 1994. He stated that, should the Planning Commission not have the document for review by July 1994, staff would recommend that the City Council direct staff to file for another extension. Acting Chair/Plunk expressed concern that the Planning Commission may be inadvertently asked by Council, Members. to accept GPAC's document as presented. April 11, 1994 Page 17 ICA/Montgomery stated that a predetermination by either Planning - Commissioners or Council Members is inappropriate. C/Flamenbaum, concerned that erosion continues on the slope behind the hospital project near the intersection of Grand Ave./Golden Springs, suggested that the Planning Commission may want to consider revocation of their CUP. CDD/DeStefano stated that staff will consult with the City Engineer to determine the progress of the remediation needed -for the project. He s ' tated that if it is concluded that the hospital is not responding appropriately, staff will send out a final notice and determine if a revocation discussion at the Commission level is necessary. C/Schad stressed the importance of a Tree Ordinance in the City of Diamond Bar to maintain the natural characteristics of the City. He stated that the following five trees need be preserved: the Coastal Oak; the Black Walnut; the California sycamore; the Pepper; and the Arollo Willow. He then inquired if a previous ruling of the City Council can cause an ordinance to -be brought back without a great deal of review. ICA/Montgomery stated that any ordinance can be amended by three votes. of the City Council,. unless the ordinance was voter *approved. 0103010 Z_4_Z_JJK0:*K111 h There being no further business to conduct, Acting Chair/Plunk adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m. Respectfully,, James DeStefano Secretary Attest: David Meyer chairman City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 2 REPORT DATE: April 15, 1994 MEETING DATE: April 25, 1994, CASE/FILE NUMBER: Planned Sign Program No. 94-4 APPLICATION REQUEST: A request for approval of a Planned Sign Program for a'commercial shopping center. PROPERTY LOCATION: Country Hills Towne Center 2801 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. PROPERTY OWNER: Landsing Pacific Fund 155 Bovet Road #101 San Mateo, CA 94402 APPLICANT: Jacqueline Wolfe Real Estate Marketing/ Management 901 W. Civic Ctr. Dr. #340 Santa Ana, CA 92703 BACKGROUND: The property owner, Landsing Pacific Fund, and the applicant, Jacquelind Wolfe is requesting approval of Planned Sign Program No. 94-4 for an existing commercial shopping center identified as the County kills Towne Center located at 2801 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard. A majority of the uses within the shopping center are retail with a few restaurants. The major tenants are Alpha Beta, Thrifty Drugs 0 a few restaurants. The major tenants are Alpha Beta, Thrifty Drugs and Krikorian Cinema. Pursuant to Parcel Map No. 18722, the project site consists of 15 parcels. It is approximately 17.7 acres with 174,187 square feet devoted to structures. The project site is located within a Restricted Business -(C-1) 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 north and west is Single Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 7,500 Square Feet (R-1-7,500) Zone; to the south is Residential Planned Development -15 Units Per Acre (RPD -15U) Zone; to the' east is Single Family Residential Zone - Minimum Lot Size 20,000 Square Feet (R-1-20,000) 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. ANALYSIS: Country Hills Towne Center has three tenant types that are defined within the proposed planned sign program as follows: 1. "Malor Tenant" shall mean an anchor type tenant such as a market, drug, home improvement or department store or "chain" type retailer (usually in excess of 10,000 square feet in space size). 2. "Free Standing "Pad" Tenant" shall hall mean a tenant of any building not attached - to the shopping center's main buildings, (as note on site plan marked Exhibit "All dated April 25, 1994) and is usually located adjacent to the roadway. 3. "In -Line Tenant" includes occupant of a building adjoining major tenant space (usually less than 4,000 square feet per space size). The following is a comparison of the proposed Planned Sign Pro- gram and the City's Sign Ordinance. 2 CITY'S SIGN ORDINANCE STANDARDS FREESTANDING MONUMENT SIGNS FOR COMMERCIAL CENTERS: Max. Area: 72 sq. ft. Max. Height: 6 ft. Max Number: 1 per frontage along public street. * Special conditions: shall not count toward maximum sign area otherwisepermi itted. , Zone: commercial. WALL SIGNS: Max..Area: 1.25 sq. ft. per 1 lineal ft. of frontage, t ' o max. 125 sq. ft. per use. Sign shall not exceed 80% of building frontage; Max. Number: 1per 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. 3 PROPOSED PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM FREESTANDING MONUMENT SIGN: Future: Free standing monu- ment signs for individual parcels. Max. Area: 24 sq. ft. Max. Height: 6 ft. Max. Number: 1 -per frontage along public street. Building Identification Sign: Max. Area: 1.25 sq. ft. for each lineal foot of frontage not to exceed 75% of front- age. Primary Location: Main entrance of store front, in sign band area, as indicated in Exhibit "All of Planned Sign Program. Secondary Location: Side or rear building elevation. Major Tenants: Signs for accessory uses to identify specific products and depart- ments (i.e. deli, liquor, bakery) shall count toward max..sign face area pursuant to City of Diamond Bar Sign Ordinance. Location: 1 wall sign per tenant for eachprimary elevation. one wall sign per tenant on a secondary ele- vation facing public right- of-way. CANOPY AND AWNING SIGNS: UNDER CANOPY SIGNS: Max. Area: Limited to letters Max. Area: 3 ft. x 1 ft. or numbers no greater than 7 with 3 in. radius corners. in. in height designating business name or address. Max. Copy Area: 6 in. x 28 in., centered. Max. Number: 1 per use Zone: Commercial. Max. Number: 1 per use. Location: Aligned with exist- ing. Copy: designating business name and/or logo. HOURS OF OPERATION/INCIDENT- INTERIOR WINDOW STORE IDENTI- IAL SIGNS• FICATION SIGN• Max. Area: 1 sq. ft. Max. Area: 144 sq. in. with Configuration: Wall.or a max. height of 311 for lettering. window. Location: Entrance to busi- ness. Copy: Store name, business hours phone number, emergency information. Max. Number.: 1 per tenant. Temporary signs: Purpose: Advertising special events. Temporary Signs: Purpose: Prior.to installation of permanent signs. Type:. Windblown.devices - streamers, pennants, banners, Time:' Max. 30 days. Also as tethered balloons, inflatable permitted by City of Diamond .devices. Bar Sign Ordinance. Max. Sign Area For Banners; 1 sq. ft. of signage per lineal foot of property frontage. Max. Number: 4 permits for any single business within a calendar year with the cumu- lative total of display days not to exceed 60 days. Max. Height: Tethered balloons & inflatable devices shall not exceed 60 ft. from arade. Shall require written con- sent of landlord prior to installation. The proposed Planned Sign Program submitted by the applicant complies with the City's Sign Ordinance. A free standing pylon sign, identifying the shopping center, three major tenants, and current cinemas, exists at the project site. The sigh is 35 feet high and 18 feet wide with a sign face area of 261 square feet. It is situated in the landscaped median of the main entrance. The pylon sign was permitted by Los Angeles County Regional Planning in 1988. The proposed Planned Sign Program utilizes internally illuminated channel letters on a raceway. The letter styles chosen are Helvetica Medium and Folio Extra Bold. The color palette consists of Green (2108), Orange (#2119), Yellow (#2016), Red (# 2793), Blue, (#2114), and White (#7328). The color palette and letter styles chosen are consistent with existing signage. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The 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 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 9 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: A Planned Sign Program review by the Planning Commission does not require a public hearing. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Planned Sign Program No. 94-4, Findings of Fact, and conditions as listed within the attached resolution. Prepared by: Attachments: Draft Resolution of Approval Exhibit "All - Written criteria, April 25, 1994 Application Photographs 5 51 Elevations, and Site Plan dated RESOLUTION NO. 94 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND -BAR APPROVING PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM NO. 94-4 AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION (SECTION 15301, Class 1),, AN. APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM FOR AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER IDENTIFIED AS COUNTRY HILLS TOWNE CENTER LOCATED AT 2801 SOUTH DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD (TRACT 18722, LOTS 1 THROUGH 15). A. Recitals 1. The property* owner, Landsing Pacific Fund and the applicant., Jacqueline Wolfe of Real Estate Marketing/Management have filed an application 'for Planned Sign Program No. 94-4 for an existing commercial shopping center identified as Country Hills Towne Center located at ' 2801 South Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, as described in the title of this. Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolu- tion, the subject Planned Sign Program application is referred to as "Application". 2. On April 18, 1989, thea City of Diamond Bar was establishedas 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 Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, including. the. subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar. 3. 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 . April 25, 1994 conducted a meeting on said Application. 1 5. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolu- tion have occurred. B. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, it is f ound, determined and resolved by the Planning-PoMmission,of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: I., 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 project as proposed by the Application, and conditioned for approval herein, will have the potential of 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 15 parcels of approximately 17.7 acres -developed with a commercial shopping.. The project site is within the Restricted Business (c-1) Zone with a contemplated draft General Plan land use designation Of General Commercial (C). The project site is located at 2801 South Diamond Bar Boulevard, City of Diamond Bar, California. (b) Generally, the following zones surround the project site: to the north and west is Single Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 7,500 Square 2 Feet (R-1-7,500) Zone; to the south is Residential Planned Development -15 Units Per Acre (RPD -15U) Zone; to the east, is Single Family Residential - Minimum Lot Size 20,000 Square Feet (R-1-20,000) Zones. (c) The project site is adequately served by Diamond Bar Boulevard, Fountain Springs Lane, and Cold Springs Lane. (d) The proposed 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 April 25, 1994, collectively labeled Exhibit "All as submitted to and approved by the Planning commission. (b) 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 approval of this 3 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. (c) The Applicant shall comply with Planning and Zoning, Building and . Safety, and Engineering requirements. (d) 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. (h) 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 to, Landsing Pacific Fund, 155 Bovet Road, #101, San Mateo'CA 94402 and Jacqueline Wolfe, Real Estate Market ingManagement, 901 W. Civic Center Drive', #340, Santa Ana, CA -927013. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 1994, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. 19M David Meyer, Chairman 4 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 25th day of April, 1994, by the following vote: AYES: [COMMISSIONERS:] NOES: [COMMISSIONERS:] ABSENT: [COMMISSIONERS:] ABSTAIN: [COMMISSIONERS:] James DeStefano, Secretary 5 COUNTRY HILLS TOWNE CENTER MASTER SIGN PROGRAM City of DIAMOND BAR Planning? De0artment t'. cast@511file da -'Le:-- a p p c an t 01 2801 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard Diamond Bar, California April 1, 1994 TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose II. Definition Sign Prohibitions IV• Sign Specifications V• Application for Tenant Sign Approval V1. Installation of Signs VII. Abandonment of Signs VIII. Hours of Illumination Address: Country Hills Towne Center 2801 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard Tenant Mailing Address: 2751-2843 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard 21323-21385 Cold Springs Lane Potential Development: 3 pads. Legal Description: Attached. Effective .Date: March 1, 1994 1 I. PURPOSE The purpose and intent of this Sign Criteria is to provide comprehensive guidelines and criteria for signage at the Shopping Center. This comprehensive sign program shall conform to the Sign Ordinance of the City of Diamond Bar. Notwithstanding the foregoing, all signs must be approved by Landlord to prior fabrication, installation, or submission to the City of Diamond Bar. II. DEFINITIONS %= A. TYPE OF TENANTS IN SHOPPING CENTER 1. "Major Tenant" shall mean anchor type tenants such as a market, drug, home improvement or department store, or "chain" type retailer (usually in excess of ten thousand (10,000) square feet in size). 2. "Free Standing -."Pad" Tenant" shall mean tenants of any building not attached to the Shopping Center's main buildings, as noted on the approved site plan. The "pad" sites are designated on the approved site plan and are usually located adjacent to the roadways. __-• "In -Line Tenant" includes occupants of buildings adjoining Major Tenant spaces (usually less than four thousand (4,000) square feet per space). ::... _ :., ... , , - • . � "' B TYPES OF SIGNS 1. "Center Identification Sign" shall mean the existing "pylon" type sign as defined and r_:.. permitted by the Los Angeles Regional Planning Commission - 1988. r 2. "Monument Sign" shall mean a free standing sign located adjacent to, or in front of a free standing "pad" building, typically on one of the major streets bordering the Shopping Center. Specifications for a Monument Sign are set forth in Paragraph ,y IVC. 3. "Building Identification Sign" shall mean the shop owners (or "pad" tenants when applicable) principal identification sign designed in accordance with the specifications 7: set forth in Paragraph IVA. 4 { 4. "Under Canopy Pedestrian Walkway Sign" shall mean the sign located above the pedestrian walkway area under the canopy identifying Tenants' Demised Premises. rx The Under Canopy Pedestrian Walkway Sign shall be designed in accordance with Y°msµ the specifications set forth in Paragraph IVB. i 5. "Net Sien Area" shall mean the designated area on the building face where Tenant's main sign shall be located. This area will vary depending on Tenant's store size, as defined in Paragraph IVA6, and applicable city codes. K.�shape, r" C. SIGN CRITERIA FOR DIFFERENT TENANT TYPES 1. Maior Tenant: A. Allowable Signs: (i) Building Identification Sign. This sign shall be located on the store fascia and shall be used to identify the Major Tenant. (ii) Signs for Accessory Uses. These signs shall allow the Major Tenant to identify specific products and departments within the store such as: liquor, deli, bakery, lumber, paint, etc. Location shall be determined by Tenant and approved by Landlord. These signs shall count toward the maximum sign area permitted by the City of Diamond Bar sign ordinance. (iii) Size of Signs. Sign size shall comply with the City of Diamond Bar sign ordinance and shall be agreed upon by Landlord and Tenant. (iv) Promotion Signs. Temporary promotion type signs shall be permitted on a short term basis, shall comply with the City of Diamond Bar sign ordinance and be approved by Landlord prior to installation. 1 2. Free Standing "Pad" Tenant: A. Allowable Signs: (i) Building Identification Signs. These signs shall allow Tenant to properly identify name, products or corporate logos on the building facade. Sign size and design shall comply with the City of Diamond Bar sign ordinance and shall be approved by Landlord. (ii) Free Standing Monument Sign. Each Monument Sign shall use a consistent sign base design. The size and shape of the sign cabinet and sign "copy" shall comply with the City of Diamond Bar sign ordinance and be approved by Landlord prior to installation. (iii) All additional signage such as drive -up indications, logos, directional signs and product reader boards shall comply with the City of Diamond Bar sign ordinance and be submitted to Landlord for its approval prior to installation. (iv) All signs shall be integrated into building and site architecture. 3. In -Line Tenant Signs A. Required Signs: (i) Building Identification Sign. This sign shall be located on Tenant's building fascia and constructed according to criteria defined in Paragraph IV. No more than one (1) wall sign per Tenant shall be permitted for each primary elevation of leasable Tenant space. In addition, no more than one (1) wall sign per Tenant shall be permitted on a secondary elevation which faces a public right-of- way. (Primary location is defined as the main entrance of the Tenant's storefront. Secondary location is defined as the side or rear building elevation that faces S. Diamond Bar Blvd., Cold Springs Lane or Fountain Springs Lane). a. Sign Size. Signs shall be individual channel letters constructed according to Criteria in Paragraph IV. b. Sign Color. The background color of the sign face and color of the letters shall be standardized color, as specified in Paragraph IV. (ii) Under Canopy Pedestrian Walkway Sign. This sign shall be located under the canopy area in front of each store as indicated in Paragraph IV. "Copy", letter style, and colors shall be selected by Tenant and' approved by Landlord. Only one sign shall be permitted per use. B. Permitted Signs: (i) Interior Window Store Identification Sign(s). Tenant may also be permitted to place upon the entrance to its Demised Premises (mounted to the interior of the.storefront glass) a sign(s) of not more than one hundred forty-four (144) -square inches of lettering, which lettering shall not exceed three (3) inches in height. This sign(s) may only indicate store name, hours of business, emergency telephone, etc. Number and letter type of face shall be Helvetica Medium or such other type as approved by Landlord, and shall be subject to Landlord's approval prior to installation. III. SIGN PROHIBITIONS A. The following sign types are prohibited: 1. Flashing, moving, rotating, blinking or other animated signs. 2. Exposed electrical tubing, raceway, conduits, conductors, transformers or "cross-over". 3. Projections above or below the designated Net Sign Area. 4. Roof mounted signs. 5. Signs emitting any type of noise. 6. Signs not in conformance to the approved Net Sign Area. 7. Signs placed on windows, except as noted herein. 8. Signs installed, relocated or maintained that prevent fire access. 9. Signs that are obscene, indecent, unlawful or immoral in nature. B. Any sign that does not conform to the specific criteria in the permitted sign classification, as noted above, shall be removed at Tenant's expense. IV. SIGN SPECIFICATIONS A.. Building Identification Signs 1. All electrical signs shall be fabricated by an approved U.L. Sign Company according to approved U.L. specifications. A label shall be affixed to the side of -the sign in a clearly visible location. 2. The Sign Company shall be fully licensed with the City and State and shall have full Workmen's Compensation Insurance. 3. All signs and raceways shall be centered vertically and horizontally on the sign band area above the tenant's storefront. 4. All building identification signs shall be individual internally illuminated signs only. Sign cabinets, boxes or cans shall not be permitted. 5. A Tenant's building identification sign shall have a maximum area of 1.25 square feet for each lineal foot of the Tenant's store frontage. Signs shall not exceed 75% of the frontage. 6. Maximum letter and raceway height shall be 24". Corporate logos, a maximum height of 24", may be permitted on a case by case basis and shall count toward maximum sign area. 7. All channel letters and raceways shall be 22 GA sheet metal with welded seams filled and buffed prior to painting. Fabricated full welded aluminum letters will be permitted provided they adhere to specifications as outlined for metal channel letters. Channelume, Channel Classic and LET -R edge type letters will not be permitted due to rapid deterioration factor. 8. Letter face shall be 3/16" thick, flat surface, opaque colored plexiglas. Painted, black/white or clear plexiglas will not be. permitted. Letter face shall be fastened to letters by means of 1" trim cap. Letter returns shall be 5" deep, primed and painted. 9. Letters will be illuminated internally by means of 30 milliamp neon and installed in accordance with U.L. specifications. 10. All cabinets, containers, transformers and other equipment shall be concealed. No exposed lamps, tubing, raceways, crossovers, or conduits shall be permitted. 11. Approved colors are: White #7328 Yellow #20.16 Red #2793 Blue #2114 Green #2108 Orange #2119 3 4 12. Approved lettering styles are: Helvetica Medium Folio Extra Bold Additional lettering styles must be approved by Landlord. B. Under Canopy Pedestrian Walkwav Sign 1. Under canopy signs shall be 12" x 36" of clearheart redwood, 3' x V x 2" with 3" radius corners.. 2. Lettering must designate store name; shall be raised and sandblasted. Logos will be permitted with Landlord's prior permission: Maximum copy area 6"x 28", centered. Letters or logo to be painted landlord approved colors. ' = 3. Border to be 11/z" wide with 3/4" x Ih" deep grove. Groove to be 3/4" from edge and painted an accent color. 4. Sign to be hung a maximum 24" from canopy ceiling with two (2) 3/4" eyebolts fastened to chains painted black and aligned with existing signs. Only one sign shall be permitted per use. C. Free Standing Monument Sign for Pads 13 - 19. Final design and copy per Landlord's approval. 1. Maximum Area: 24 square feet. _ 2. Maximum Height: 6 feet. z t 3. Maximum Number: One (1) sign per parcel along public street. 4. Design shall be compatible with the architectural design of the shopping center. 5. Sign shall include address numbering a minimum 6" high pursuant to fire department 1 _ requirements. ,er . ?, V. APPLICATION FOR TENANT SIGN APPROVAL ••,1r ,r.,_ ,,... .3 A. Within fifteen (15) days of execution of this Lease, Tenant shall submit to Landlord four (4) copies of its sign layout/drawings using a legible scale (such as one-quarter inch (1/4") scale) for Landlord's written approval prior to sign fabrication. Drawings shall indicate location, _ size, layout, design and color of proposed signs, including all lettering and/or graphics. _ Drawings shall also show a side view of lettering indicating construction methods, neon tubing sizes, colors, voltages and intensity, and mounting procedures. B. All drawings submitted by Tenant and returned by Landlord marked "Disapproved" or "Approved as Noted" must be re -submitted to Landlord as set forth in Subparagraph A above ` with the required corrections. C. Following receipt of Landlord's written approval, Tenant shall submit approved sign drawings to the applicable governmental authority or agency having jurisdiction over the shopping center for approval and issuance of the appropriate permit authorizing installation of the signs. Tenant shall pay for the costs of obtaining the required permits. D. Signs built and/or installed without Landlord's and the appropriate governmental agency's approval or contrary to corrections made by Landlord or such governmental agency, shall be altered to conform to these standards at Tenant's expense. If Tenant's sign has not been brought into conformance within fifteen (15) days after written notice from Landlord, then Landlord shall have the'right to correct said sign and bill and receive reimbursement from Tenant for the expense. E.. Approval or disapproval of Tenant's sign drawing, based upon code conformance, aesthetics and design shall remain the sole right of Landlord. 4 VI. INSTALLATION OF SIGNS A. Tenant shall pay for the design, construction, installation, and maintenance of all signs, including without limitation, sign permits, final connection, transformers, and all other labor and materials. Landlord will provide primary electrical service stubbed to the approved Net Sign Area. B. Tenant shall pay for the maintenance of all signs. C. It is the responsibility of Tenant's sign company to verify all conduit and transformers, locations and service, -prior to fabrication and installation of sign. Tenant is responsible for the cost of the electrical hookup of its sign. D. All signs shall carry the "U.L." label and be installed in accordance with local build;ng codes, including "P -K" housing for all illuminated signs. E. The location of all signs shall be in accordance with the Detail Sheet, attached. F. All penetrations of the building structure required for sign installation shall be sealed in a water -tight condition and shall be patched to match the adjacent finish. G. All signs must be installed and operating prior to *Tenant's opening for business, unless prior written authorization is given by Landlord. H. The use of temporary signs by Tenant prior to installation of -Tenant's permanent signs or for promotional purposes shall require the prior written consent of Landlord. Specifications and use of temporary signs must comply with the City of Diamond Bar sign ordinance. VII. ABANDONMENT OF SIGN Any Tenant signs remaining at the Shopping Center within thirty (30) days after Tenant's vacating the Demised Premises shall become the property of Landlord, unless previous arrangements have been agreed upon by Landlord and Tenant. VIII. HOURS FOR SIGN ILLUMINATION Tenant shall be required to illuminate its main building sign(s) concurrent with the illumination time periods established for Major Tenants of the Shopping Center or as otherwise designated by Landlord from time to time. JCW/rj 4/18/94 5 1 Lo D r<v r4 L < 8 urJ ED OR L_j 8 8. Lli LL 0 m z W V) < 0 7- Lli Z tbl� .ryou R'. w ttyy `z OW oS NOV ?S�2=JCW�O LLOJJW�yCC�� SeNuf<aN� 66 alzW4 uu er:mmmmo�moo 0701 s owads w7=R-0.4 a W J CC �: �a I� O W r Jz W � c F � I OCL^ U I \ ..-----.-•�-•..�-'•.�,' �I � � W '. \ I 1/ LLJ O 1� Li 0 Z 0 v ja:?k 9/ -nob' Cff Y OF DLAINIOND BAR Case#. E�� I> DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING Filed Z:f Z�q� 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 Fee $ 500 Deposit (714)396-5676 Fax (714)861-3117 Receipt / Y--,Fr-3 REQUEST FOR PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM[ REVIEW B Record owner(s) Applicant Applicant's Agent Name Landsing Pacific FundCountry Hills , Inc. Towne -Center Ja�quqlin,- Wolfp (Last name first) Address155Bovet Rd. #101 2801 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. c/o Real Estate Ma*rketing/Mgtt. City San Mateo, CA Diamond Bar, CA 901 W. civic Center Drive #340 Zip 94402 91765 Santa Ana, Ca 92703 Phone(415) 513-5252 (909) 869-7835 (714) 953-4040 Certification: 1, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty Of perjury that the information he -rein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. Printed Name Jacqueline Wolfe (Applicant or Agent) Signed Date 3/5/94 (Applicant or Agenty Location- 2801 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. (Street address or tract and lot nunber) ZoningC-1 —HNM List number, size and type of sign(s) requested. (Example: 2 —81 x 91 Freestanding, double faced signs - 6 ft.high 1 - 3' x 241 Wall sign) None a . t this time. Master Sign Program for an existing ShODDing rt--nt-t-r. Monument *-signs are, already. in place This program will appy to "PW tenant signage installed after this date. Length of lot frontage(s), if freestanding or roof sign(s) 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 Landsing Pacific Fund. Inc. by Jacqueline Wolfe, Pate 3/5/94 (all record owners) Agent of Owner IJ CENTER IDENTIFICATION SIGN PYLON SIGN OVERALL SIZE: .18' X 30' COUNTRY HILLS: 18'.X 516" ALPHA BETA: 12' X 4'5/8" THRIFTY:12' x 4'5/8" KRIKORIAN: 12' X 5'6" LOCATED AT MAIN ENTRANCE i { Y�14TED t� 2. LA PETITE ACADEMY 3A. OLAN MILLS 3B. JENNY CRAIG 30. UPSCALE MAIL 3E. MAGICUTS . 3F. MERLE NORMAN 3G. REALTY EXECUTIVES 4. VACANT 5. ALPHA BETA 6A. VACANT 68. VACANT 6C. MANAGEMENT. OFFICE 6D. DIAMOND BAR CLEANED _ - A.P. y I 1 I KRIKORIAN ril 11111 FUTURE CINEMA 5 RETAIL I I;y � ( 175' a Q In u z `- FUTURE I '� ETAIL 3 ti 3D .. _ I I O U CARE 315 iGER KING T GE TER / I 3A I N.A.P. FUTURE I RESTAURANT N.A.P. �' I N.A.P. - - - - � I Ii + i O,OUN 0 60 120 180 SCALE IN FEET Pile r��i we by on and is ready for gni Pile r i we by`� on and is reedy for destruction by City Clerk