HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/22/1996n
Pam
7.00 P.M.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
. Auditorium
21865 East -Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California
Chairman
Vice Charrman
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Mike Goldenberg
Joe Ruzicka
Frankfin Fong
Joe McManus
♦tr Schad
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 If 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 drinking
in the Auditorium
The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper
and encourages you to do the same.
El
ECITY OF DIAMOND BAR
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Monday, July 22, 1996
Next Resolution No. 96-11
CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Mike Goldenberg, Vice Chairman Joe
Ruzicka, Franklin Fong, Joe McManus and Don Schad
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS:
This is the time and place for the general public to address the members of the Planning
Commission on any item that is within their jurisdiction, allowing the public an opportunity to
speak on non-public hearing and non -agenda items. Please complete a Speaker's Card for the
recording Secretary (Completion of this form is voluntary). There is a five minute maximum
time limit when addressing the Planning Commission.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR:
The following items listed on the consent calendar are considered routine and are approved
by a single motion. Consent calendar items may be removed from the agenda by request of
the Commission only:
3.1 Minutes of July 8, 1996
4. OLD BUSINESS: None
S. NEW BUSINESS: None
6. PUBLIC HEARING:
6.1 Variance No. 96-1, (pursuant to. Code Section 22.56, Part 2), is a request to install a
second wall sign, approximately 32.5 square feet in area, on the north side of a
building which the applicant occupies.
Project Address: 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Property Owner: Trammell Crow, 18529 E. Gale Ave., Industry, CA 91748
Applicant: University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, Az. 85072
Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that this project is
Categorically Exempt, pursuant to § 15311 (a).
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny VAR
96-1 and approve attached resolution of denial.
7. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
8. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: Verbal status on Development Code.
9. ADJOURNMENT: August 12, 1996
a
4)
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
JULY 81 1996
40;N
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Goldenberg called the meeting to order at 7:11 p.m. at the
South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley
Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner
Fong.
ROLL.CALL:
Present: Chairman Goldenberg, Vice Chairman Ruzicka,
Commissioners Fong, McManus and Schad.
Also Present: Community Development Director James
DeStefano; Assistant Planner Ann Lungu, and
Recording Secretary Carol Dennis
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes of June 24, 1996.
VC/Ruzicka -made a motion, seconded by C/McManus to
approve.the minutes of June 24, 1996 as presented.
C/Fong requested the following condition be added to the
minutes on Page 9, Paragraph 6, and to Condition (f),
Page 5 of the Resolution for, Variance No. 95-2: "The
proposed construction of the planned. development shall
not create a condition of geologic instability that will
adversely affect adjacent properties during construction
and the life of the development."
VC/Ruzicka amended the motion, C/McManus seconded the
amendment to approve the minutes of June 24, 1996 as
amended. The motion was approved 5-0.
OLD BUSINESS - None
NEW BUSINESS - None
PUBLIC HEARING:
1. Conditional Use, Permit No. 96-3, a revision to
Conditional use permit No. 1206 (1), (pursuant to Code
Section 22.56, Part 1), is a request to add 1,332 square
feet and interior remodeling to an.existing 2,691 square
foot restaurant. Additionally, this project includes
Development Review No. 96-2, (pursuant to Code Section
July 81 1996 Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
22.72.020), for architectural review of exterior changes,
landscaping and parking area.
Project Address: 225 Gentle Springs Lane, Diamond Bar
Property owners: C.K. Loo, 19101 E. Colima Road,
Rowland Heights, CA 91748
Simon Kwan and Kwong-Lim Kan, 225
Gentle Springs Lane, Diamond Bar.
Applicant: Eric Au, Pinewave, 21017 Commerce
Pointe Drive, Walnut, CA 91789
AstP/Lungu read the staff report into the record. Staff
recommends that the Planning commission approve
Conditional Use Permit No. 96-3, Development Review No.
96-2, Findings of Fact, and conditions as listed within
the resolution.
AstP/Lungu responded to VC/Ruzicka that although the City
does not enforce CC&Rls, the staff report suggests that
the applicant, for their benefit, contact the DBIA to
insure compliance. The parking lot lighting plan will be
approved and the lighting will be installed prior to
project's final approval and restaurant opening. The
wall will be repaired prior to final approval.
In response to C/Schad, AstP/Lunqu indicated the revised
restaurant seating has been reduced so that the available
43 parking spaces will accommodate the occupancy.
C/Schad recommended the applicant comply with the
national effort to limit light pollution by installing as
much indirect lighting as possible.
C/McManus asked for clarification of operating hours.
AstP/Lungu responded that the applicant has proposed days
and hours of operation to be Sunday through Saturday f rom
10:00 a.m. to 11:00 P.M.
Chair/Goldenberg declared the public hearing open.
Eric Au, Design Engineer for the project, stated he read
staff's report and concurs with the Conditions of
Approval. He requested the hours of operation be
corrected to read from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 Midnight.
Mr. Au responded to Chair/ Goldenberg that the project is
proposed to - be completed within 90 days of commencing
construction.
VC/Ruzicka made a motion, seconded by C/McManus to
approve Conditional Use Permit No. 96-3 and Development
Review No. 96-2, Findings of Fact, and conditions as
July 8, 1996 Page 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
listed with the resolution with the following amendment:
The hours of operation shall be from -10:00 a.m. to 12:00
Midnight. The motion was approved 5-0.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
C/McManus,thanked staff for their efforts.
VC/Ruzicka thanked staff for providing the commissioner's packet in
a timely manner prior to the July 4 holiday which gave the
Commissioners sufficient time to prepare for the public hearing.
He requested additional copies of the Walnut Valley Water District
information brochure. VC/Ruzicka stated that in his opinion, the
City of Walnut's formation of a Walnut Youth Advisory Commission is
a good approach for Diamond Bar to consider in its contemplation of
Ex -Officio Youth Members serving on City Commissions.
Chair/Goldenberg suggested the Commissioner's ride with the
Community Volunteer Patrol from time to time in order to become
-familiar with the City.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
CDDIDeStefano stated the City is currently reviewing its Property
Maintenance ordinance which has existed for approximately two
years. During the first four years of the City's existence,
approximately 500 complaints were filed per year. Since the
adoption of the City's Property Maintenance Ordinance, the City
receives about 650 per year. Ninety percent of all complaints are
resolved within 10 days of receipt. Only about one percent of
complaints go beyond 60 days and are referred to District
Attorney's Conference or court appearance.
CDD/DeStefano indicated the City Attorney has advised staff that
additional changes to the Planning Commission Manual will be
forthcoming due to Brown Act changes.
CDD/DeStefano advised the Commission that a revised Tice project
will be presented for consideration within the near future.
CDD/DeStefano stated that the Planning Commission recently approved
staff's recommendation for an Extension of Time on special
Equipment Marketing Association's (SEMA) two -lot Parcel Map. A
week prior to the approval, Governor Wilson signed Assembly Bill
No. 771 which automatically extended for one additional year parcel
maps that were active during a certain period of time. Therefore,
the action recommended by staff and approved by the Commission was
unnecessary. Staff will forward a letterof apology to the
applicant. The project will not be forwarded to the City Council.
Chair/Goldenberg stated that the letter of apology should be
forthcoming from the Governor's office.
July So 1996 Page 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
In response to C/McManus, CDD/DeStefano indicated an in-house
application is pending- --for---a 117 room- -Countryside--Suites Motel
project on the pad on the north side of Golden Springs Drive below
SCAQMD south of the SR 60 between Copley Drive and Gateway Center
Drive.
ADJOURNMENT:
At 7:50 p.m., there being no further business to come before the
Planning Commission, VC/Ruzicka moved, C/McManus seconded to
adjourn the meeting. There being no objections,. Chair/Goldenberg
adjourned the meeting to July 22, 1996.
Respectfully Submitted,
James DeStefano
Community Development Director
Attest:
Michael Goldenberg
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
6.1
July 5, 1996
July 22, 1996
Variance No. 96-1
A Variance to install a
second wall sign on the
northerly facade of a
commercial building.
1370, Valley Vista Drive
Diamond Barl, CA 91765
Trammell Crow
18529 E. Gale Avenue
Industry, CA 91748
Robert McNichols
University of Phoenix
4615 E. Elwood
Phoenix, AZ 85072
The property owner, Trammell Crow and applicant, University of
Phoenix are requesting, a Variance approval (pursuant to Code
Section 22.56, Part 2) to install a second wall sign on the
northerly facade of a commercial building which the applicant
occupies.
The project site is located at.1370 Valley, Vista Drive (Lot 8 and
9, Tract 39679) within a commercial development identified as
Gateway Corporate Center. It has a General Plan land use
designation of Professional office (OP). It is within commercial
-Manufacturing-BillboardExclusion-Unilateral Contract (C-M-BE-U/C)
Zone. Generally, the following zones and uses surround the project
site: to the north is the Orange (57) and Pomona (60) Freeway
interchange; to the south and East is the C-M-BE-U/C Zone; and to
the west is the Orange Freeway and the C-M-BE-U/C Zone.
11
The project site is approximately 5.94 gross acres. it is
developed with an 84,000 square foot, two story, multi -tenant
commercial office building. The building presently contains seven
tenants. The University of Phoenix occupies portions of the first
and second floors ( see Exhibit "All) which equals 33.6% of the
building. The occupied space is utilized for administrative
office, book store, resource 'center, vocational rooms and
classrooms.
Currently, the University of Phoenix has one wall sign (located on
the building's northerly facing facade) with a 32.5 square foot
sign face area. The City permitted this sign in September 1990.
Two other wall signs exist (Kleinfelder and ReMax) on the northerly
facade.
ANALYSIS:
The City's Sign Ordinance (adopted 1991) permits wall signs for
individual uses by the following standards:
1. Wall Sicfns For Multi -Use Buildings or Commercial Centers.
The maximum area is 1.25 square feet per one lineal foot
of frontage, to a maximum 125 square feet per street
level uses. For uses not located at street level which
are visible from the street, courtyard, or public parking
area, the maximum area is one (1) square foot per one
lineal foot of frontage per use, to a maximum of 125
square foot. The maximum number is one per outer wall
per use. No permit shall be issued for a wall sign in a
multi -use building or commercial center in which more
than one sign is proposed without the Planning
Commission's review and approval;
2. Location of Wall Signs. Business signs shall be limited
to those portions of a building within which such
business is located or conducted;
According to the Sign Ordinance's referenced standards, the
applicant is allowed one wall sign, per outer wall, ;located on a
portion of the building which it occupies. Currently, the
applicant's existing wall sign complies with the City's Sign
Ordinance.
The University of Phoenix is requesting a second wall sign, 32.5
square feet which matches the existing wall sign. Additionally,
this request includes locating the sign on a portion of the
building not occupied by the applicant. This request deviates from
the Sign Ordinance's standards, as referenced above in items number
1. and 2. As such, the second wall sign's installation requires a
Variance approval by the Planning Commission. -
The subject building's frontage facing Valley Vista Drive is
approximately 432 lineal feet with two recessed entrances separated
by 24 lineal feet of a glass block projection. Additionally, the
2
project site has two points of ingress and eqress, approximately
444. feet apart, adjacent to Valley Vista Drive. The applicant
believes that this building's design, which creates a 12 foot deep
glass block projection .(on the northerly facade), impedes
visibility to the building's entrances and the existing wall sign.
The applicant feels that this project creates separate elevations,
with separate entrances for each end of the building. Furthermore,
the applicant states that the University of Phoenix has two
departments with different functions ' at each end of the building.
The resource center is at the building's east end where the
existing wall sign is located. Classrooms are in the middle of the
building. Administrative offices are at.the building's west end.
Therefore, the applicant feels a second wall sign is needed to
direct visitors to the administrative office's closest entrance on
the building's west end. The applicant also states that the
property owner will not allow wall signs on the building's other
facades. Therefore, because of the property owner's restrictions
and according to the applicant, the building's design limitations,
the only means available to satisfy the University of Phoenixfs
sign requirements is to place a second wall sign in the proposed
location ensuring visibility from both ends of the parking lot.
The applicant feels that the second wall sign will facility traffic
flow restricted by the building's design.
The variance procedures is established to permit modification of
development standards as they apply to particular uses when
practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships, or results
inconsistent with the general purposes of the City's Planning and
Zoning Code develop through the strict literal interpretation and
enforcement of Code. A Variance may be granted to permit the
modification of several development standards including signs.
Pursuant to the City's Sign ordinance, building frontage is defined
as "the lineal extent of a building or activity which has frontage
on either a public right-of-way or parking area. The length of the
building facing the public right-of-way or, parking lot shall be
used - to determine the amount of permitted signage." This
definition does not make a distinction between varying planes on
the same frontage and the lineal extent of the building. The
projection creates separate planes on the building's frontage, but
not separate frontages..
The City understands the University of Phoenix's need to identify
the location of its different departments and functions for site
visitors. However, an additional wall:sign located approximately
27 feet above ground level, with the proposed copy, will not
fulfill this need. Staff believes that appropriate signage closer
to eye level would be an appropriated solution to the applicant's
stated problem.
Staff has visited the project site and traveled routes mostly
likely utilized by site visitors. The most likely utilized freeway
exits are Grand -Avenue and Brea Canyon Road at Golden Springs
Drive.. At these points, the subject building is not visible. From
any of the freeway exits, traveling Golden Springs Drive will allow
3
a visitor to enter Gateway Corporate Center at Copley Drive or
Gateway Center Drive leading to the project site. Approaching the
site from this direction allows the existing wall sign's
visibility.
While the second wall sign may allow freeway visibility, it does
not fulfill the applicant's stated reasons for -wanting a second
wall sign. Staff finds that due to the northeast access approach
(which is the most likely approach) to the site, the exiting wall
sign is visible. However, upon entering the site and when on the
site, directional signage closer to eye level and an improved
interior directory would probably better serve the applicant's
needs for more identification. ' The City's Sign Code offers the
following types of signs for this purpose:
1. Freestanding Monument Sign with a maximum height of six
feet and a maximum sign face area of 16 square feet. If
the sign is located on property with frontage on a public
right-of-way in excess of 65 feet in width (Valley Vista
Drive's right-of-way at the project site is 66 feet
wide) , the maximum sign face area is 24 square feet. one
per frontage along a public street is permitted;
2. Incidental Sign with a maximum area of one square feet,
window or wall mounted and one per use; and
3. Nameplate JAddress Sign with a maximum area of four square
feet, wall mounted, two per building and may be
illuminated with lighting no greater than 25 watts.
The freestanding monument sign could be located at either driveway
approach. The incidental sign. and nameplate signs could be
strategically located on the building's exterior walls.
Additionally, the interior directory could be more specific as to
the locations of the different departments and functions of the
University of Phoenix. Furthermore, the alternative suggested
signage would facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow more
than a wall sign two stories above ground level..
Staff has spoken with Sandford Kopelow, a member of Gateway
Corporate Center's architectural committee. He state that the
committee would probably approve ' a monument sign and incidental/
directional signs for the University of Phoenix site.
After considering all the information presented by the applicant,
researching the City's codes and field survey, staff feels denial
of the variance request is appropriate. In this case, the strict
literal interpretation of the Sign ordinance does not result in
inconsistencies with the general purpose of the ordinance. Staff
believes that approving the Variance would constitute a grant of
special privilege. There are not exceptional characteristics
applicable to the site that strict application of the Sign
ordinance deprives the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the area. Additionally,- the public health and safety
would best be served with signage closer to eye level than 27 feet
4
above ground level.
The City's Sign Ordinance states that when. more than one wall sign
is proposed for a multi -use building, is subject to the Planning
Commission's review and approval.* If the Planning Commission finds
it appropriated to approve this second wall sign, a Planned Sign
Program must be presented to the Commission for review and
approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
The environmental evaluation shows that, the proposed project is
categorically exempt pursuant to the guidelines of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15311 (a).
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin
and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on July 11, 1996. Public
hearing notices were mailed to approximately .25 property owners
within a 500 foot radius of the project site on July 9, 1996.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Variance No. 961.
-
REQUIRED VARIANCE FINDINGS:
1. That because of special circumstances or exceptional
characteristics applicable to the property, the strict
application of the code deprives such property of privileges
enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical,
zoning classification; and
2. That the adjustment authorized will not constitute a grant of
special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is
situated; and
3: That strict application of zoning regulations as they apply to
such property will result in practical difficulties or
unnecessary hardships inconsistent
nt with the general purpose of
such regulations and standards; and
4. That such adjustment will not be materially detrimental to the
public health, safety or general welfare, or to the use,
enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in
the vicinity.
5
8
Prepared by:
Ain J.ur OuAs /stant Planner
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution of Denial;
2. Exhibit "All - site plan, elevations, and sign plan and
materials board dated July 22, 1996;
3. Application;
4. Gateiway Corporate Center's architectural committee approval
dated February 15, 1996; and
5. Site photographs.
N.
A.
4,!
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 96 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR*DENYING VARIANCE NO. 96-1,
A REQUEST TO INSTALL A SECOND WALL SIGN ON THE
NORTHERLY FACADE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL
OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN GATEWAY
CORPORATE CENTER AT 1370 VALLEY VISTA DRIVE
(LOTS 8 AND 91 TRACT 39670) AT 1729 DERRINGER
LANE (LOT 61 TRACT 24046), DIAMOND BAR,
CALIFORNIA.
RECITALS.
1.. The property owners, Trammell Crow and applicant,
University of Phoenix, have filed an application for
Variance No. 96-1 located within Gateway Corporate Center
at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles
County, California, as described above in the title of
this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Variance shall be referred to as the "Applica-
tion".
2. On April 18,,1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal corporation of
the State of California. Thereafter, the City Council of
the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 14
(1990), thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as
the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and
22 of the Los Angeles County Code contain the Development
Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently
applicable to development applications, including the
subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar.
3. On July 25, 1995, the City of Diamond Bar adopted its
General Plan. Action was taken on the subject
application as to the consistency with the General Plan.
It has been determined that the proposed project is
consistent with the General Plan.
4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on
July 22, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on
the Application.
5. Notification of the public.hearing for this project has
been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland
Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on July 11, 1996. . .
Twenty-five property owners within a 500 foot radius of
the project site were notified by mail on July 9, 1996.
1
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:,
1. This Planning commission hereby specifically finds that
all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of
this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein,
this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows:
(a) The project relates to a 5.94 gross acres site
developed with an 84,000 square foot, two story,
multi -tenant commercial office building. acres
(1.23 net acres). The project site is located
within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista
Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
(b) The project site is zoned Commercial -Manufacturing -
Billboard Exclusion -Unilateral Contract (C-M-BE-
U/C). It has a General Plan land use designation of
Professional office (OP).
(c) Generally, the following zones and'uses surround the
project site: to the north is the orange (57) and
Pomona (60) Freeway interchange; to the south and
East is the C-M-BE-U/C Zone; and to the west is the
Orange Freeway and the C-M-BE-U/C Zone.
(d) The proposed Variance is a request to install a
second wall sign with a sign face area of 32.5
square feet. Its installation location is
approximately 27 feet above ground level, on the
subject office building's northerly fa cade.
(e) 'There are no special circumstances or exceptional
characteristics applicable to the property. The
strict application of the code does not deprive t ' he
subject property of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the vicinity and under identical
zoning classification. Other properties in the
vicinity, under identical zoning classification have
the same or similar lot configuration ' and
topography. Additionally these properties have
buildings with a similar architectural style as the
subject building.
(f) The Variance's approval will constitute a grant of
special privilege inconsistent with the limitations
upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in
which the property is situated. The applicant is
creating its own hardship by not utilizing other
types of signage offered by the City Sign Ordinance
which -would be an appropriate solution to the
applicant's stated problem.
I
I I
(g) The strict application of zoning regulations
including the City's Sign Ordinance, as they apply
to the property, will not result in practical
difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent
with the general purpose of such regulations and
standards. In this case, the strict literal '
interpretation of the City's Sign Ordinance does not
result in inconsistencies with the Ordinance's
general purpose; nor does it create uncessary
hardship because the applicant can utilize
alternative signage, offered in the Sign Ordinance,
to accomplish its identification goals as stated in
the submitted project application.
(h) The Variance's approval may be materially detri-
mental to the public health, safety, or general
welfare, or to the use, enjoyment or valuation of
property of other persons located in the vicinity.
The applicant's intent is to provide signage that
will facilitate vehicular and,pedestrian traffic
flow on site. The second wall sign's proposed
location is not at eye level. It will be 27 feet
above ground level. Signage at that height does not
facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic but may
create an unsafe condition as drivers and pedes-
trians seek directional signage/use identification
at eye level.
3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above,
the Planning Commission hereby denies the Application.
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, Robert McNichols,
University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, Az
85072; Trammell Crow,- 18529 E. Gale Avenue,
Industry, CA 91748.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JULY, 1996, BY THE
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
BY:
Mike Goldenberg, chairman
3
I, James DeStefano, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certi
that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopptel, I
by the Planning commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of July, 1996,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
. James DeStefano, Secretary
4
Record Owner
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190
(909)396-5676 Paz (909)861-3117
VARIANCE APPLICATION
Name I K C, VIA 111 1-1 C-0060
(Last name first)
Address s L
City'%„ k c -�c y C
f�
Phone( ) 51 ,),- 3 ,�? 1 ,�-
Applicant
ft_00lqyt rte cfi �M
�s22�n ,fir Y'C'�
PhotV) �l6 6 s 3
case,# _VA P� 1. q 6 —
DateRecd �5 a q (o
Fee $�(
Receipt#
By
CT 1-J .Sar v) 4 -
Applicant's Agent
metL*)-
L* )-
(Last name first)
S % 3, V \ M ecce. U s—
C/
Phone(
NOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Community Development Director in writing of any change
of the principals involved during the processing of this case. .
(Attach separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and
directors of corporations.)
Consent: I certify that I am the owner of the herein described property and permit the applicant to file this
request.
Signed SEE ATTACHED
(All record owners)
Date
Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify underpenalty ofperdury that the information herein provided is
correct to the best of my knowledge.
Printed N C C O
A*Ap
ant o*enSign Dai
Location Ck vi tae is 1ti d l p k d 2 VI, 5e t f Gam•/ I S i� Y� s 1 J 4 V- N`
(Street address or tract and lot number)
between and
street) _ LqC (Street)
e m` , C ` p ) -f—yi� /
zoning (' .tc, ��� vXC loin. l-dGL t �+i HNM �) �'� / C�� l r ' 13q(��
Project Sim (gross acres) f,4Ls�� `i].r�\eC�"1.t4 Project Density
Previous Cases
Present Use of Site___f�& 1 c �F_ M L4 1 , 12-,•t c� �t�
Use applied for C C, uvN e
Grading of Lots by Applicant': YIIS tvv tsmouM
(Show necessary grading design on site plan or tent. map)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (All ownership comprising the proposed lots/project). If petitioning for zone change,
attach legal description of exterior boundaries of area subject to the change:) - - -- -
PLEASE SEE BELOW.
Project Site•
Gross Area o. of Lots
Area devoted to : Structures
Residential project:
Proposed Density
Open Space
and
Gross Area
Units/Acres
Number and types of Units
Residential Parking: Type
Required
Total Required
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PAIRIM
..
Provided
Total Provided
Lots 8 and 9 of Tract 39679 City od Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles,
State of California as per map recorded in the Book No. 1083 Pages 14 - 21*
inclusive of maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said county as
amended by a Certification of Correction recorded January 24, 1989,.as
Instrument No. 89-123719, official records.
... ........
ZW
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Case,#-VQna .v u.•� �// —/ - -
coAcminry DFvEL6PmxNT DEPARTMENT DateReed
21660 B. Copley Drive Suite 190 Fee
(909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-311*7 Receipt#
vARIANCE APPLICATION By
I
- 1Zecord. 91Nqev
-TCEP.II avperties
Name
(Laski
Address -,L852!j—
lndusty, (11
•
Applicant
W -
Applicant's Agent
TMMIAMA
(Last name first)
NOTE: Itis 0 ha rlrPlicar,t'rl TASPonnbility to no . tify the Community DeveloP mentDirector in writing of any change
of the principals involved during the processing of this cm.
Igna.i turcs of mmibers of partnerships, joint ventures, and
(Attach seraratm shed.; if limcssary, including names, addresses, and s
directors of corporations.)
C . onsent: I I;C;-tVy that I am the owner'of the herein described property and perm . It the applicant to file this
request.
Signed _L__.XLPLL�—
Date.
(All record owners)
Cyistie Smith, naumall Q:0W SO. Cal_, Inc. as agat fcr ICP II xatian ;kArit Venture
Certjflcaflo2�.T, the undersigned, hereby certVy underpenalt ofpedury that the information herein provided Is
comet to the best of my knowledge.
Printed Name
(Applicant or Agent)
.Signed _ ___
(Applicant
igued(Applicant or Agent)
Location—
—
(Strect address or tract and lot number)
Zoning___
Project Size- (gross acres)
Previous Cases
Present Use of Site_.
Date
ite
Use applied for
Date
and
(street)
HNM
.—Project Density_
VARIANCE CASE BURDEN OF PROOF I#
In addition to the information required in the application, the applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the
Planning Commission, the following facts:
A. That the requested use at the location proposed will not:
1. Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare or persons residing -or worldng, 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 other wise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general
welfare.
AN ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE HEALTH,.
PEACE, COMFORT OR WELFARE OF PERSONS RESIDING OR WORKING IN
THE SURROUNDING AREA, OR WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE USE,
ENJOYMENT OR VALUATION OF PROPERTY OR OTHER PERSONS'LOCATED IN
THE VICINITY OF THE SITE, NOR WILL IT JEOPARDIZE, ENDANGER OR
OTHERWISE CONSTITUTE A MENACE TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR
GENERAL WELFARE.
B. 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 Ordinance, or as is
otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area.
THE EXISTING SITE.IS ADEQUATE IN SIZE AND SHAPE..
C. That the proposed site is adequately served:
1. By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to carry the kind and
quantity of traffic such use would generate, and
2. By other public or private service facilities as are required.
THE EXISTING SITE IS ADEQUATELY SERVED BY HIGHWAYS OR STREETS
OF SUFFICIENT WIDTH AND BY OTHER PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SERVICE
FACILITIES AS ARE REQUIRED.
That there are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property involved, such
as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which are not generally applicable to other properties
in the same vicinity and under identical zoning classification.
THERE ARE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY
INVOLVED.
That such variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property .right of the applicant such
as that possessed by owners of other property in the same vicinity and zone.
SUCH VARIANCE IS NECESSARY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF A
SUBSTANTIAL PROPERTY RIGHT OF THE APPLICANT.
F. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious
to other property or improvements in the same vicinity and zone.
THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO
THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR BE INJURIOUS TO OTHER PROPERTY OR
IMPROVEMENTS IN THE SAME VICINITY AND ZONE.
L L,
'96 JUN 18 P 2 :19
Variance Case No. 96-1 -Burden of Proof
Question .A.1-3
The University of Phoenix is requesting one additional sign that is in total
for the area except for the restriction on multiple
compliance with all sign criteria
sips for the same user on the same elevation' An additional
sign in no way
adversely affects the health, peace, comfort or welfare of anyone in the eanor Is
any Other
njoyment or valuation Of a
an additional sign detrimental to the use, e J - e with all
properties in the vicinity. Furthermore a sin that is in full compliance pub c
desliign criteria does not jeopardize, endanger of constitute. any menace to
health, safety or welfare.
Question B.
The lots 8 & 9 of Gateway Corporate Center, which was
, building is constructed on program.
approved for a total of 6 sign in designated locations in the Original sign
e and the proposed sign by the University
The building currently has 3 signs in plansigns. There are no size Or shape
of Phoenix will -replace one- of these existing
would preclude the proper installation of this sign.
restrictions which i .
Question C 1-2
The boding was built in 1989 and all necessary improvements and facilities are in
place.
CIT
ibir 1--i W r. il 't
F L ING3., EL
'96 JUN 18 P 2 :20
Question D.
The design of the building contains an offset of 12 feet on either end of the
building whereby the glass face Of the building'extends out 12 feet andblocks
visibility of the entrances to,the building and visibility of approved sign locations.
This offset in essence creates a separate elevation with separate entrances on each
end of the building.
The University of Phoenix has two departments with different fimction's at each end
of the building and also occupies space on both the first and second floors of the
building. The additional sign is needed to direct visitors to the entrance closest to
the administrative offices on the south end. This entrance is not visible from. the
north entrance due to the offset of the building.
Furthermore, the Owner of the building and the Gateway Corporate Center Sign
Plan do not allow signage on the other elevations of the building nor will they allow
signs on the glass section of the wall on the elevation facing Valley Vista Drive.
This fact prohibits the University of Phoenix from placing the additional sign on a
portion of the building that we occupy.
Therefore, because of the design limitations and the restrictions placed by the
Owner, the only means available to satisfy the sign requirements of the University
of Phoenix is to place an additional sign at the opposite side of the glass wall
section to ensure visibility from both ends of the parking lot. This is the only
location approved by both the building Owner and the Gateway Corporate Center
sign plan.
r{ T 1' 0 F 0 1 1� 1 IJ
PLHG., 131-0G.,
'96 JUN 18 P 2 :20
Quesdon E.
z
The University of Phoenix occupies nearly 35% of the building and attracts in
excess of 200 visitors per day. The additional sign will facilitate the flow of traffic
that may be restricted by the limitations that the design of the building places on the
visibility of the existing signs.
The existing sign that will be replaced (RpMax Realty) belongs to a former tenant of
the building that occupied the same space in the building that* the University of
Phoenix presently has* their administrative offices. This sign location has been
designated by the Owner to serve the offices on the east side of the building which
do not front on the west side, where all approved sign locations are designated.
The building to the north of the subject building at 1360 Valley Vista Drive has two
signs- for the same occupant of that project, which is Bryan A. Stirrat & Associates.
These signs are located on two different elevations of the building, however the
building has a flat face and visibility from the same elevation is not a problem. As
stated in D above, the design of the subject building is such that two signs on the
same elevation are not necessarily visible from the driveway entrances to the
property. thus creating difficulty for our visitors to find the appropriate entrance.
Question F.
The granting of a variance for an additional code compliant sign for the University
of Phoenix in a location that has been approved for a sign, on an elevation that is
set apart by a major structural offset and that is replacing an existing sign of a
former occupant of the building that may not be in compliance does not present any
detriment to the public welfare or is in any way injurious to other properties in the
vicinity. As stated above the building at 1360 Valley Vista Drive has two signs for
the same use and has not been deemed to be a detriment or injurious to others.
Staff Use
ProjectNo.
_Ilt� rtto�J
RMAL STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
Project Applicant (Owner): Project Representative:
NAAML NAME
`2D U C, b r_
ADDRE S ADDRESS
PHONE # PHONE #
1. Action requested and project description:_ COY
► n n n ► .
2. Street location of project:_'>y}�
3a. Present use of site: c�(c s �. h tYt H' L+ �.� t P 9 'u ► tc t cL
3b. Previous use of site or structures: �f 4-
4. Please list all previous cases
(if any) related to this project:
S. Other related permit/approvals required.
Specify type and granting agency. I VN
6. Are you planning future phases of this project? Y O
If yes, explain:_ N �-
7. Project Area:
Covered by structures, paving:
Landscaping, open space:
Total Area:
8. Number of floors:
9. Present zoning:.
10. Water and sewer service:', •
• Domestic Public
Water Sewers
Does service exist at site?Y N O N
If yes, do purveyors have
capacity to meet demand of
project and all other approved
projects?e'� GY) N
If domestic water or public sewers are not available, how will these services be provided?
Residential Projects: ) �j�
11. Number and type of units: f�./ f V ---
12. Schools:
What school district(s) serves the property? —�---
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.)
rrn ,1
14. Number and floor area of buildings: _ _ ea oDo �-
15. Number of employees and shifts: �00
16. Maximum employees per shift:
17. Operating hours:_
18. Identify any: End products
Waste products r"' -
Means of disposal vJc)-^
19. Do project operations.use,•,store or produce hazardous substances such as oil, pesticides, chemicals, paints,
or radioactive Is?
YES NO
If yes, explain
B. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
1. Environmental Setting Project Site
a. Existing use/structures
b. Topography/slopes J eio' j Q&
*c. Vegetation
*d. Animals
*e. Watercourses f% f) ---
f. Cultural/historical resources
g. Other _ 9A-
2. Environmental Setting — Surrounding Area
a. Existing uses structures (types, densities): 0 -, LQ
b. Topography/slopes iv\i6` - VX %A -yC
*c. Vegetation
*d. Animals
*e. Watercourses
£ Cultural/historical resources ((�
g. Other
* Answers are not required if the area does not contain natural, undeveloped land.
21. Identify any flammable, reactive or explosive materials to_be_located-on-site. -
22. Will delivery or shipment trucks travel through residential areas to reach the nearest highway?.
YES NO
If yes, explain
Are there any major trees on the site, including oak trees?
FS)
NO
If yes, type and number:
M
4. Will any natural watercourses, surface flow patterns, etc., be changed through project.development?:
YES NO
If yes, explain:
5. Grading:
Will the project require grading? YES NO
If yes, how many cubic yards?
Will it be balanced on-site? YES NO V v/
If not balanced, where will dirt be obtained or deposited?
6. Are there any identifiable landslides or other major geologic hazards on the property (including
uncompacted fill)?
YES NO
If yes, explain•
7. Is the property located within a high fire bazard area (hillsides with moderately dense vegetation)?
YES CNO
Distance to nearest fire station:
8. Noise: fn
Existing noise sources at site:
Noise t4 be generated by project:
Fumes:
Odors generated by project:
Could toxic fumes be generated?
9.. What energy -conserving designs or material will be used?
i
0
RECEI`1.0
CITY Or 014M,ML, ;fit? -
rLI4G.. BLDG.. EIN
r
WALL
FACE5 &
5TAND-OFF
CLIP5 A5,..
RETURN5 PRIMED ° 0 °
°
REQUIRED
AND PAINTED o
o°
0
v O
GLA55 0 0
TUBE 0
SUPPORTS °0 0 °
P -K HOU5ING5
0 o
FLEXIBLE
° °° °
4500 WHITE =
CONDUIT
NEON TUBE _
° 00
° °50
°
M.A.
IN5TALLATION �
TRAN5FORMER
0 °
6OLT5 IN WALL °
CONTAINED WITHIN
0
ANCHOR5 A5 ° °
U -L APPROVED BOX
REQUIRED. 0 p
WITH P15CONNECT
0 v
5WITCH.
5ECTI®N THRU TYPICAL' HAL®'
ILLUMINATE® LETTERSET.
FD -1003-96
dM0G3C�C�O
ll°Ni1N0 • I/ON•
SIGNAL JET BLACK
41-306
EX 1 31T_ fL__1/72/9�,
WNW"
GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER ASSOCIATION
1661 HANOVER ROAD • CITY OF INDUSTRY, CALIFORNIA 91748 • FAX (818) 913.6169 • TELEPHONE (818) 913.0030
February 15, 1996 via fax (602) 443-0758
and regular mail
Mr. Bob Burney
MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT
12120 North Seventy -Sixth Place
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
RE. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE REVIEW
EXTERIOR BUILDING SIGNAGE
UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX
1370 SOUTH VALLEY VISTA DRIVE
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
Dear Mr. Burney:
The Architectural Committee has received an 81/z" x 14" sign drawing, prepared by
"FLUORESCO", dated November 22, 1995, submitted for review and approval for
conformance with the Gateway Corporate Center Design Guidelines.
The sign consists of the words "UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX" on one line 91/z inches high x 20
feet long, constructed of black aluminum reverse pan channel letters with white neon "halo"
internal illumination.
The proposed sign will be identical to the existing University of Phoenix sign,and thus the
University of Phoenix will have two of the six signs permitted for this building in our sign
interpretation letter of August 10, 1989.
The Architectural Committee approves the sign as submitted. Please obtain approval from
the City of Diamond Bar and the building owner, Trammel Crow Realty Advisors, prior
to installation. Enclosed are two approved stamped copies of the sign drawing, dated
February 14, 1996.
Very truly yours,
F111
LL: Dei! mening
Byron Pinckert, Member
Carol Truman, Trammel Crow Reality Advisors
ti 2? '95 1027 i',70131 1 PLUORE M TGA P.13(3 ns`
P
z
r
z
M
a,a, t./din ww(
P.o a•. jFodj
nom. �Nofv ajja
(L^OI i:J.FP67
(tA.+p (Q)O1 iH<til
arae c«f xu�. mf�.f
j�J �ro�a+NiuvO aLwo
fFA/) fdOjf .)6171)
DN
r
Vrn
YN
yy0, NOTO OM
iN 4~ir�N, y.� •µ«i J>1•rWM •P+,+A«
SHEET 1 OF i
EDr'
ME
ARLIN
�.
i� film
`-rnM �.
-i
mo
mmm;o0
z
Aw
'
— N192301 R
0
m ri
a2 Z'
�--I -C-y"�
Y
..
_
I0
/
li
bb N
D X
3
a
..,
o
momog ;
:0pm
71
1n
Co
SME
OF PHOENIX
Q
®
I
ox2701hSfinet
P.00. Box 270142
.D.s . :R>D C v
--� w— k� `�
_i oicz
Zr
O D
0030
I
v
mo
om o'
(520)623.7953
(FAX) (520) 884-0161
G7 t
SALESUAN
OES�DNEfl
c% _I
o ^i.J
p Wo
DM
M m
Phoenix, Arizona 85040
�,� 11122195
2�I
m
c
LM
(602) 276-0600
(,%1) (6.)47.
C) W rn
.
z
-
....aa°MDER
FD -8443-95
m
Z�
a
m_i
OV
Io
tY
<Oi
I
�fJ NI^
�m
w
I
�y
0
I
o 0
'ten',
.< ,/ a I
-
o 0
-q i
- �
tt�'
❑
_{
O m
m�
I
? a 4
"- i
I i
;u
m C
L
Z �
Z
EDr'
ME
ARLIN
�.
i� film
Y
..
_
I0
3
H
31
SME
OF PHOENIX
REVISED
EDr'
ME
ARLIN
�.
i� film
..
_
I0
3
H
31
SME
OF PHOENIX
REVISED
®
ox2701hSfinet
P.00. Box 270142
UNIVERSITY
. .
Tu=n, Admna 85726
LOCi1ON DIAMOND BAR, CA
(520)623.7953
(FAX) (520) 884-0161
6CAlE NOTED
SALESUAN
OES�DNEfl
4235 Eoor wood S.. -or
D. NOTO -
DM
Phoenix, Arizona 85040
�,� 11122195
(602) 276-0600
(,%1) (6.)47.
_
eas othengeo q�eclUd.
(,en9ornoa' p r P°b alry om eMrnu�i
.
iM .atLua7mmnD o 1LV v'IrttwRvw Lldrtx0.vwR RvelNn,m WTlA vnwvctvvew M1.�v,mvvR,vuMRUv v
«..ro..wmP�PRoaa.aRL�..a x m�Mi W
APPR-EDDY
SHEET 1 OF 1
....aa°MDER
FD -8443-95
✓{
M
- g
mi
m
mO �mmZO
i , m ((nn ai ch
14 6> v
I(n omZ, rn
D Z1 , I / oozo�t b
rn 3:;u
Fn
0 -n0i s�''9i-5"Ii4II-a -i p �y Z
W
M fT1 D^ ❑ } r : , f
Lrl cn
C) wrn
�o iCn G)
cn a277
. or
z - C m
Z42D
13
Z fm o
PA Ip G •.p N ❑< ❑ 1
p� I y ❑ ❑ NNNi Y. ❑ .. N J < 1 i
6 0 i I r --.SII 1r❑ _ m �. Z
_W G M. c
17.
c�RM'n'1y41i^, J k '� f-a)mb
'O �
®_ "--I _ •- _ o �r,'l�.'ii'�r�e-��, ���,,�IF< Sri' i r -` in ., i
��qq u Y_�T L CFyP T ❑ v Lo
i�+ ( � R1 w y`- J - a"�� 'Y'I�.�te�� '��5; i�r�'• w S '�-` .��i
o=� M ldjE 1
R u 5
ro 4S
c�
i • �� t�
❑ ❑Wo,Yy.,aq._ r-1rPj�isr oYyy$C'•-, _ IV S
--��fflltt PA t.Y d � � A-,"'' z ❑ r u t
cn0�
-D(-)m
!d1w I ilcerin
it. 1 m- s TT s tt"9s^ m C Z
Cl
• A -i3 59.22 A t(\) - ^r6-27• _'—_ — _— — __--= -.---.-.._-_ rn :7
rri
x ( l
2-4
0 14 . .
66 m
ti
ED
.. CF).
HANE
3131Ea0461n SImal - UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX -
(St
P.O. Box 27042 r CA —
�,I '� I Tupon, Arizona 85726 �aca�oa _
(620)623-7863 DIAMOND 8AR
® e � (FWQ (620) 684-0161 NO
4236 Ener waad Street D. NOTO DM .
;.•.. .. '. Phvenfz, Arizona 66040 °ATE 11/22/95
t (602j 276-0600
. ... (FAX?(8021470.1313 1 r nnp I,ma�to roromla.�naWraunfiav olnnlnwsa�q: dRad.
Ama2e*eewaewvnoronYou ncew AppnoVED DY _
"-Ho -..E.
n Ho -..E.
FD -8443-95
SHEET 1 OF 1
i wemai: oe°wrurveoTnu r.w Aurnn+: ''" w lenorw««eiarwrmmruraa.Peovoar r.
rmiAcinuroucc.rP+rcron.vnrPsnnarnnr«omA.evmounwaowvun*io'o-°eavNmarnra
