The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About5/26/1998V COUNTER COPY DO NO,r REMOVE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA May 26, 1998 7:00 P.M. South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California .Toe McManus Steven Tye .Toe Ruzlcka George Kuo Steve Nelson Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relatingto Division df the agenda items are on file in the Planning �P� of Communiry & Development Services, located at 21660 E Copley Drive, Suite 1-9aand are available for public inspection. If you have questions n g ardi ng an agenda item, please call (909) 3916-5676 during regular business hour. In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title 11 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1 City of Diamond Bar requires that an � the accomodation(sJ in order to communicate a City in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or ry public meeting must inform the Dept of Community & D�evr/opment Services at (9'09) 396-5676 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Please rt f rain from smdd4, canny or drinking in the Auditorium, TRc City of Dkmond Bar uses recycfed papa and mmm9es you to do the same. City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission MEETING RULES PUBLIC INPUT 7bc meetings of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission are open to the public. A member of the public may address the Commission on the subject of one or more agenda items and/or other items of which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission- A request to address Commission should be submitted in writing at the public hearing, to the Secretary of the Commission. As a general rule the opportunity for public comments will take place at the discretion of the Chair. However, in order to facilitate the meeting, persons who are interestod parties for an item may be requested to give their presentation at the time the item is called on the calendar. The Chair may limit individual public input to five minutes on any item; or the Chair may limit the total amount of time allocated for public testimony based on the number of people requesting to speak and the business of the Commission- individuals are requested to conduct themselves in a professional and buisinesslilm manner. Comments and questions are welcome so that all points of view are considered prior to the Commission making rocomm ndations to the staff and City Council. In accordance with Govermneat Code Section 54954.3(a) the Chair may f -om time to time dispense with public comment on items previously considered by the Commission. in accordance with State Law (Brown Act), all matters to be acted on by the Commission must be posted at least 72 hours prior to tht Commission meeting. In case of emergenct or when a subject matter arises subsequest to the posting of the agenda, upon makung certain findings, the Commission may act on item that is not on the posted agenda. INFORMATION RYLATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COAMSSIO Agendas for Diamond Bar Planning Commission meetings are prepared by the Planning Division of the Community and Development Services Department. Agendas are available 72 hours prior to the meeting at City Hall and the public library, and may be accessed by personal computer at the number below. Every meeting of the Planning Commission is recorded on cassette tapes and duplicate tapes are available for a nominal Charge. A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot access the public speaking area The service of the cordless microphone and sign language interprets services are available by giving notice at least three business days in advance of the meeting. Please telephone (909)396-5676 between 8:00a.m. and 5:OOp.m. Monday through Friday. Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Commission, Cassette Tapes of Meetings (909) 396-5676 Computer Access to Agendas (909) 860 -LINE General Agendas (909) 396-5676 email: inf ci.diamond-bar.ca.us PLANK NIG C014P&SSION - r CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Tuesday, May 26, 1998 AGENDA CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. Npd Resolution No. 98-14 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 1. ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Joe McManus Vice Steve Tye, Joe Ruzlcka, George Kuo, and SteveNelson ian Z• MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/pUBLIC COMME1VTg; This is the time and place for the general public to address the item that is within their jurisdiction, allowing the public an members of the Planning Commission on any agenda items. °moo t3' speak on non-public ��,aaa'r,,i,nwgw . — and fnr chs. .b..,.�a:-- -_ - -- ""�"'� and noII- 3. 4. 5. 7. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: CONSENT CALENDAR: Chairman 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: 4.1 Minutes of May 12, 1998 OLD BUSINESS: none NEW BUSINESS: none COM, WUED PUBLIC HEARING: _ 7.1 Variance No. 97-1 & Development Review No. 9"(pursuant to de Section 114. and 110.5) is a request for the installation of an off-site, freeway -oriented pole sign• Project Location: Pathfinder Road (southwest corner of Brea Canyon Road and Pathfinder) - Applicant: Robert Fiscus Associates, 1050 S. Santa Cruz, #2100, Anaheim, CA 928050 Property Owner: Denny's Restaurant, 21316 Pathfinder Road, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 May 26. 1998 - PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA 1 Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the terms of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that this project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15301. Continued from May 12, 1998. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission direct staff to prepare a tesolution of denial for Variance No. 97-1 and Development Review No. 98-6. 8. PUBLIC BEARING: none 9. PLANNING COMMMION COMMENTS: 10. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: CITY COUNCEL - Tuesday, June 2, 1998 - 6:30 p.m. - AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive SOLID WASTE TASK FORCE - Monday, June 8, 1998 - 6:30 p.m. - AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive. (room CC -3 & 5) PLANNING COMIVIISSION - Tuesday, June 9, 1998 - 7:00 P.M. - AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive OFF-SnM PARENG TASK FORCE - Wednesday, June 10, 1998 - 6:30 p.m. - AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive. (room CC -3 & 5) TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION - Thursday, June 11, 1998 - 7:00 P.M. - AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive. CPTy COUNCIL - Tuesday, June 16, 1998 - 6:30 p.m. - AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive PLANNING CoAfi%USSION - Tuesday, June 23, 1998 - 7:00 P.M. - AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive PARKS & RECREATION COMIVIISSION - Thursday, June 25, 1998 - 7:00 p.m. - AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive. 11. ADJOURNMENT: June 9, 1998 2 May 26, 1998 - PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA IP MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 12, 1998 CALL. TO ORDER.- Chairman RDER: Chairman McManus called the meeting to order at 7:08 Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, Califoronia. Coast Air Quality PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Kuo. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Joe McManus, Vice Chairman Steve Tye, and Commissioners George Kuo, Steve Nelson and Joe Ruzicka. Also Present: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager, George Wentz, Director of Public Works; Catherine Johnson, Senior Planner, and Ann Lungu, Associate Planner. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: Randy Nydo spoke about the SunCal project and explained why he does not believe the proposed project will result in a significant benefit to the city, He said he believes that the developer should be fairly compensated for their efforts. He asked that the Planning Commission consider recommending to the City Council that the city determine the fair market value of the property and the developer's anticipated profit, purchase the property from the developer and preserve the entire area as open space. He further recommended that the city procure funds for the purchase by means of a bond measure. Henry Porsand, 1008 Quiet Creek Lane, said he is concerned that an adequate cumulative impact analysis and adequate alternative project analysis was not done for the SunCal project. He asked what the; appeal period is in the event that the City Council approves the project. He also asked if an amendment to the City's General Plan's required in order to lift the deed restriction for the project. Ron Tehrani, 745 View Lane, concurred with Mr. Porsand's statements. He agrees that the EIR did not answer many issues such as traffic impacts, pollution impacts, tree replacement, etc. as well as, the significant benefit to the city for this project. He said the grading report is not correct because the developer does not have to go outside the boundaries of Lot 6 unless they want to add more units. The grading can be done vertically in order to reach competent material. He pointed out that there is a good potential for hillside failure in the future. MAY 12, 1998 PAGE 2 George Davidson, 23426 Wagon Trail Road, asked if there was ever a proposal submitted to the Planning Commission that contained the project within Lot 6. ed that on April 28, 1998, the planning Commission meeting public hearing DCM/DeStefano respond for the SunCal project included an alternative proposal which identified the proposed Project completely within the boundaries of Lot 6. He reminded the Commission that the public hearing for this matter was closed on April 28, 1998. Randy Nydo disagreed that the SunCal public hearing was closed on April 28, 1998. He said he believes all comments made today should be a part of the SunCal public hearing comments and remarks. DCM/DeStefano responded that the record clearly reflects that the SunCal project public hearing was closed at the April 28, 1998 Planning Commission meeting. The prior comments will be noted in these meemg minutes under public Comments and are not a part of the official record of the SunCal project- VC/Tye stated that he takes exception to disparaging remarks about staff and implications that members of the public are being prevented from speaking. This body has followed the proper procedure. He noted that on Page l 1 of the April 28, 1998 Planning Commission minutes it is clearly stated that Chair/McManus closed the SunCal public hearing. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As submitted. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Minutes of April 29,1998. C/Ruzicka moved, C/Kuo seconded, to approve the minutes of April 28, 1998 as presented. Motion carried 5-0 by Roll Call vote. OLD BUSINESS: 1, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 52267, Conditional Use Permit No. 98-03, Oak Tree Permit No. 98-01 and Environmental Impact Report No. 97-2, Volume I and II for V111M No. 52267. VTTM No. 52267 is proposed for 130 single-family detached residential dwelling units clustered on approximately 65 acres of a Lots will acre site. The development is proposed as a private, gated community range in size from 6,000 square feet to 26,000 square feet with an average lot size of 10,900 square feet. The gross proposed density is 0.4 dwelling units per acre with a net density of approximately 2.06 dwelling units per acre. Property Address: Generally located east of Diamond Bar Boulevard and north of Grand Avenue. ASAI' 12, 1998 PAGE 3 Property Owner: Diamond Hills Ranch Partnership, 550 W. Orangethorpe Avenue, Placentia, CA 92870 Applicant: Todd Kurtin, SunCal Companies 5109 E. LaPalma Avenue, Anaheim, CA DCM/DeStefano presented staffs report. He reported that he was handed correspondence from Sam Safarri tonight containing preprinted letters with different signatures addressing concerns that the project should not be approved. This is the same letter that was presented to the Planning Commission on prior occasions. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider the proposed resolution recommending approval to the City Council of V1TM No. 52267, Conditional Use Permit No. 98-03, Oak Tree Permit No. 98-1, and Mitigation Monitoring Program 97031005). and recommend certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 97-2 (SCH No. DCNVDeStefano confirmed C/Ruzicka's statement that approximately 380 acres will be dedicated to open space as a result of the proposed project. In addition, the project will include about 25 acres of landscaped perimeter area. C/Nelson said that although he agrees with Mr. Nydo, he believes that the community would not pass a bond measure to purchase the SunCal property. The community is more likely to pass a bond measure for purchase of ballfields. DCM/DeStefano explained to C/Nelson that if the project does not permit a secondary access road at lEghcrest Drive, residents would most likely exit the project at Diamond Bar Boulevard and Tin Drive, turn north and proceed to Goldrush Drive, proceed in an easterly direction on Goldrush Drive to Highcrest, with a left turn onto the small portion of Armitos Place and on to Pantera Drive. The park is situated at the corner of Bowc reek Drive and Pantera Drive and Pantera Elementary School will be located across the street from the park. DCM/DeStefano explained to C/Nelson that if the project permitted a secondary access road at lEghcrest Drive, the Diamond Bar Boulevard and Goldrush Drive Portions of the route would be eliminated. Staffs reason for recommending against the Highcrest Drive secondary access was the intrusion to the existing cul-de-sac neighborhood. The streets can handle the traffic capacity and there is some merit to the applicant's request. C/Ruzicka stated that this is the most thorough, exhaustive and protective resolution at he has read in some time. It incorporates the use of many professionals to insure tthhat if the work gets started, that it gets done properly in accordance with rules, regulations and law. Who pays for all of the professionals that will insure that the work proceeds properly? MAY 12, 1998 PAGE 4 A DCNM>Ste£ano responded that all projects are paid for by development fees that are paid for by the developer. These fees pay for staff and consultants who insure that the work progresses in accordance with the project conditions. In accordance with the city's philosophy, development pays for itself. I,ex Waknan, Hunsaker & Associates, asked that the Planning Commission consider a condition to allow the use of Ifighcrest Drive as a permanent secondary access road for the development. It is anticipated that only five percent of the traffic generated by the project will utilize the Ifighcrest Drive route for access to school and park facilities. Use of the secondary access road will relieve traffic on Diamond Bar Boulevard. Mr. Williman asked for consideration of the use of Highcrest Drive as an access to a "staging area" for equipment during the construction phase in order for the grading to begin at the upper portion of the project and continue down to the intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Tin Drive. The Tin Drive entrance into the project area from Diamond Bar Bouelvard is a 2:1 slope. He said he is concerned that creating a one-time move -on staging area adjacent to Diamond Bar Boulevard would place the. equipment considerably further from the construction site than the Ifighcrest Drive location. He asked that the condition remain aswritten with the addition of "unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer" in the event that the request is forthcoming. Mr. williman asked the Planning Commission to consider allowing the grading to begin prior to recordation of the Final Map. DPW/Wentz responded to C/Ruzicka that he favors writing the condition such that it does not "tie the city's hands" and allows some flexibility to make a determination be once the applicant's final grading proposal has been submitted. It may prove to more beneficial for the city to allow access for the staging area on Highcrest Drive or it may involve other types of problems or issues not yet determined. Mr. yVilliman confirmed to chair/McManus that if the Highcrest Drive access is permitted, the construction equipment will be removed from the site via Diamond Bar Boulevard. VC/Tye asked DCM/DeStefano to explain how Quimby Funds are generated. DCM/DeStefano responded that the city's formula contained with the City Code involves a calculation based upon the City's General Plan, statement that there ought to be five acres of parkland for every l,000 people that live in the city. (3persons per household times the number of dwelling units and the amount of money paid for the property by the developer to establish a market value which generates the amount of acres or contribution of funds for purchase of or enhancement of park Punter) The acreage calculation for this project equals 2.2. Since the city has nearby Park and the project involves a significant amount of open space dedication, the in MAI.' 12, 1998 PAGE 5 lieu contribution of money was deemed by staff to be more appropriate for this project. The $250,000 contribution to the City's Parks and Development Fund includes approximately $80,000 of Quimby Funds. C/Nelson stated that with respect to replacement of oak and walnut trees, he requested (as stated in the April 28, 1998 minutes) that the "strongest ib language" be used to insure that the trees are replaced rwithin the ci e i possss rlf Diamond JR . He pointed out that the resolution does not contain such language. He requested that language be incorporated to insure replacement of Agg= within the city limits of Diamond Bar. DCCM/DeStefano responded with the following suggested language for tree replacement: Add Condition No. 29 on Page 14 of the Tract Map Resolution and Condition No. 29 on Page 15 of the Conditional Use Permit Resolution to read as follows: "All mitigation measures related to implementation of the Biological Resources Management Plan required by the Mitigation Monitoring pro ram and EIR No. 97-2 shall occur within the city limits of Diamond Bar.g " The Commission concurred to accept the proposed language. C/Ruzicka moved, C/Nelson seconded, to recommend to the City Council, approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 52267, Conditional Use Permit No. 98-3, Oak Tree Permit No. 98-1, and Mitigation Monitoring Program, recommend certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 97-2 (SCH No. 97031005) with inclusion of Condition No. 29 to the Tract Map Resolution and to the Conditional Use Permit Resolution (language as recommended by staff ), and permit access to Highcrest Drive for the staging area as deemed appropriate by the City's Engineer. VC/Tye stated that his statement of April 28, 1998 reflects his understanding that the General Plan includes Lot 9 as a contribution to the city's open space which is included in the applicant's proposal. He asked what the specific benefit to the city would be if Lot 9 was not included in the proposal as suggested by the developer. Prior to the motion of April 28, 1998, he stated he was not comfortable considering the motion to recommend approval unless he understood the "significant benefit" to the city He said he does not understand, based upon what he has heard tonight, what the significant benefit is. He reiterated his concern that staffs memo seems to indicate that the applicant's contribution of $250,000 is over and above anything that is already generated by an act such as Quimby. He again asked "What is thero ect's significant benefit to the city? 1 ) DCM/DeStefano stated that from staffs perspective, it is the totality of the open space and the contribution toward the City's Parks and Acquisition Fund based upon the most recent project approval wherein removal of map and deed restrictions were contemplated. Within the prior approval, there was no opportunity for the city to obtain parkland. There was an additional cash contribution proposed to a Parks Development Fund. Based upon the city's history and the policy that was set by a MAY 12, 1998 PAGE 6 previous Planning Commission and City Council in coordination with the open space that is being proposed, staff believes that the obligation of "significant benefit to the city" has been met. Further, it is staffs view that the dwelling units proposed to be constructed outside the confines of Lot 6 and the proposed contribution are appropriate for removal of the map and deed restrictions. The ultimate decision with respect to "significant benefit to the city" rests with the planning Commission and City Council. DCM/DeStefano responded to Chair/McManus that the removal of map and deed restrictions allows for what staff believes to be a more appropriate configuration of this future neighborhood. Staff believes that a project should be developed along this ridgeline in accordance with the City's General Plan and that the most appropriate proposal is for the 130 unit project now before the Planning Commission. The proposed project incorporates features that pulls the project significantly away from Diamond Bar Boulevard which staff believes creates a better living environment for the people living within the project. The project incorporates fencing to enclose aPPro?°' 45 acres of the project with the balance remaining natural and allowing for the movement of wildlife. Motion was carried with the following Roll Call vote: Kuo, Nelson, Ruzicka, AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/McManus NOES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Tye ABSENT: COMMMISSIONERS: None RECESS: Chair/McManus recessed the meeting at 8:20 p. M. RECONVENE: Chair/McManus reconvened the meeting at 8:30 p.m. NEW BUSINESS: None CONTINUE D PUBLIC HEARING: 1, Conditional Use Permit No. 98-1 and Development Review No. 98-1 (pursuant to Code Sections 22 56, part 1 and 22.72.020A) is a request to construct and operate an unmanned Bank of America Automated Teller Machine in the Country MUs Towne Center, within an area between the existing Wherehouse Music store and the Diamond Bar Boulevard entrance to the center. Project Address: Country Bills Towne Center, Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Applicant: Bank of America, 600 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90017 MAY 12, 1998 PAGE 7 E Property Owner: M&H Realty Partners, 1721 W. Imperial Highway #G, La Habra, CA 90361 Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive and file the applicant's letter of withdrawal. The Commission concurred. PUBLIC HEARING: 1• Development Review No. 98-4 (pursuant to Code Section 22.28.210 and 22.72.020. A. 1), is a request for the construction of a 4,994 square foot, commercial unit on a vacant pad in an existing commercial center. one story Property Location: 21050 Golden Springs Drive (northeast corner of Golden Springs Road and Brea Canyon Road) Applicant: The Withee Malcolm Partnership, Architects, 1983 West 190th Street, Suite 200, Torrance, CA 90504 Property Owner: Diamond Creek Village Center, LLC, 2967 Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Suite G, Westlake Village, CA 91362 SP/Johnson presented staffs report. She stated that the city received two letters from residents who expressed concern that the permitted use not generate excess noise, etc. In addition, they expressed concern that trees be provided at the site to provide for screening their view of the project site. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review No. 98-4, subject to the Conditions of Approval and Findings of Fact contained within the resolution. C/Rurtcka asked if a request will come before the Planning Commission at the time a prospective tenant requests use of the facility? SP/Johnson responded that whether or not the request comes before the Planning Commission's determined by the proposed use. If the use is permitted by right of the City's Code, the applicant would go through a counter approval process for tenant's improvements. SP/Johnson explained to C/Nelson that the applicant has agreed to provide trees for screening the project site in accordance with the adjacent resident's requests and at the Planning Commission's direction, staff will add the appropriate language. SP/Johnson responded to VC/Tye that the trees would most likely be place on the applicant's property. Dan Withee said he read staffs report and concurs with the conditions of approval. He stated he believes the property owner is willing to supplement the trees on the MAY 12, 1998 PAGE 8 slope to screen the view of the project site. The project is proposed in order to complete the mall area. Mr. Withee said, in response to C/Ruzicka's question, that he is not aware of any prospective tenant for the site. He stated that it is fairly typically to construct a shell building for future occupancy. Most shopping centers are built out in a similar fashion. This type of project would most likely attract a clothing store, boutique or similar type of occupancy. VC/Tye said he is concerned about another vacant store front in Diamond Bar. W. Withee responded that the center seems to have no difficulty in finding tenants. Mr. Withee indicated to Chair/McManus that thebuilding will not be extended then ear the M depth of the adjacent buildings in order to p rovide additional parking of the building. Chair/McManus opened the public hearing. There was no one present who wished to speak on this item. Chair/McManus closed the public hearing. C/Nelson moved, C/Ruzicka seconded, to approve Development Review No. 98-4, subject to the Conditions of Approval and Findings of Fact contained within the resolution subject to the added Condition to plant trees determined to be suitable to screen the views between the existing residences and commercial development. The trees will be maintained by the owner of the property on which the trees are planted. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: CONMSSIONERS: NOES: CONNUSSIONERS: ABSENT: CONMSSIONERS: Kuo, Nelson, Ruzicka, VC/Tye, Chair/McManus None None 2, Variance 11 9) is and Development forthe installation of an off-site, freewaY-oriented pole suant to Code Section 114.a and 110.5) �s a req sign. Property Location: Pathfinder Road (southwest comer of Brea Canyon Road and Pathfinder Road) Applicant: Robert Fiscus Associates, 1050 S. Santa Cruz, 42100, Anaheim, CA 92805 MAY' 12, 1998 PAGE 9 Property Owner: Denny's Restaurant, 21316 Pathfinder Road, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 In accordance with a May 11, 1998 written request from the applicant, ff sta recommends that the Planning Commission continue this item to the May 26, 1 sta 98. Chair/McManus opened the public hearing. There was no one present who wished to speak on this item. C/Ruzicka moved, VC/Tye seconded to continue the matter to May 26, 1998. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMIISSIONER& Kuo, Nelso r, Ruzicka, VC/Tye, NOES:COM)VIISSIONERS: Chair/McManus ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None None PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: C/Nelson stated he appreciated Mr. Nydo's eloquent and polite presentation regarding SunCal project. He reiterated his belief that a bond measure to purchase the pr pe f the hopen space would not be passed by the Diamond Bar voters. He believes in open space but he does not believe that people will pay for it. He stated he believes the action that the Planning Commission took was the right thing to do. C/Ruzicka said that Mr. Nydo's presentation was a perfect example of how people can disagree without being disagreeable. Although Mr. Nydo made a rational and reasonable argument he Proposed to put the city hugely in debt to obtain 420 acres: The motion that was made and passed by the Commission gets 380 of those acres for the city without going into debt at all. C/Kuo said that the Planning Commission has deliberated for many months on the SunCal proposal. He said he does not believe it is reasonable to ask the citizens to buy back the land from the developer. He hopes that residents will offer more creative suggestions and support to the City Council and not treat the Council Members and staff as their enemies. City Commission has done its best to be fair to all parties involved in this matter. staff and the Planning ChairU6'Unus thanked staff and the Commissioners for their time and effort in consideration of the SunCal proposal. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: DCM/DeStefano stated that on Monday, May 18, 1998 the City Council will hold a special meeting because there will not be a quorum for the regular Tuesday, May 19, 1998 meeting. or adoption of the City's City Council will likely request staff On May 18 the to prepare final documents f MAY 12, 1998 PAGE 10 on June 2, 1998. He reported that Pantera Park is near completion with the grand Development COQ 1998. At its May 5, 1998 meeting, the City opening scheduled for the end of July/middle of August, Council approved draft of a Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Chino hills to examine potential uses of the 2700 acre Tres Hermanos Ranch area. DCM/DeStefano stated that the Wireless Telecommunications Ordinance will likely come before the planning Commission for review in June, 1998. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS as listed in the agenda. ADdOURNM ENT: C/Ruzicka moved, VC/Tye seconded, to adjourn the meeting to May 26, 1998. There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair/McManus adjourned the meeting at 9:12 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, James DeStefano Secretary to the Planning Commission Attest: Joe McManus Chairman AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: REPORT DATE: MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: APPLICATION REQUEST: City PLANNING 7.1 May 5, 1998 May 26, 1998 of Diamond Bar COMMISSION Staff Report Variance (VAR) 97-1 Development Review (DR) 98-6 A request for a variance from the Sign Ordinance for the installation of an off-site, freeway -oriented pole sign advertising a restaurant and a service station. PROPERTY LOCATION: 21324 Pathfinder Road (Chevron) (southwest of corner of Brea Canyon and Pathfinder Roads) and 21316 Pathfinder Road (Denny's) southwest of Chevron site,' adjacent to Orange s Freeway approach) %APPLICANT Robert' -Fiscus `Associates 2050 S Santa Cruz, #2100 F 3, Anaheim, CA 92805 PROPERTY OWNER•Denny's Restaurant'' 21316 Pathfinder Road Diamond Bar, ''CA 91765 SUMMARY are proposing an approximately 60' The applicant and the property owner pole sign for the purpose of providing freeway ortion. The Planning advertising for an an existing on-site restaurant andoff-site off-site signage as tprohibits the granting ofna Zoning Code does not perm variance for such use. Additionally, the Sign Ordinance prohibits pole signs and the proposed sign exceeds the height and area requirements astassbonheis d for commercially designated property. While the Planning ce for increased height and area, ff does not authorized to grant a varianimpact on support these increases because of the sign's potential surrounding properties. Because the current Code doesn't allow the granting of a variance for the . alternative would be for the applicant to proposed sign, the appropriatelicant has been advised of this request a Zoning Code Amendment. The app 1997 and February 2, alternative as described in letters dated Febraruy 5, 1998 (attached). Staff therefore eof denial for the at tPlanning the proposedprojecmmission direct staff to prepare a resolution BACKGROUND Ghafour Mohseni-Pour, the owner of Denny's Restaurant and Robert Fiscus. and Associates, representing Chevron Products, Inc. are requesting a variance from the Sign Ordinance (Section 114.a and 110'5)60 rthe feet tallw with installation a oan f off-site, freeway -oriented pole sign approximatelyis to area of 260 square feet. The purpose of the variance station request advertise their the existing restaurant and neighboring 9 businesses with a freeway -oriented sign. The project site is generally located at the south 35,714 rnsquare of Pfoot'nlot er T P 1 and Brea Canyon Roads. It is located on a developed with a 3,650 `square foot restaurant, which was f' pole by L.A. County in 1972. There is also 'an existing approximately 25' pole sign o the site which . is proposed to be removed. The site is located directly behind a 15,358 square foot, two-story office building located on 'a 24,829 square foot" site fronting-direci ori Pathfinder s Road• addresThe s oneSPathfi denot r Road. q frontage, although it has access and its Access to the site is from a 30' wide a d r the Chevron ss and egresst ton site. to s easement, tithe is located between the office building tans describes `the south. Please note that ,the site data contained on the p Chevron site. The subject site is the Denny's restaurant site because that is where the sign is proposed. The Chevron site, which is proposed tbejointly advertised, Canyon located Ro ds. directly on the southwest corner of PathfinderNo. 15951; approximately .52 This site is a square-shaped lot (Parcel Map area with gasoline acres in size. It contains a 1670 square foot canopy 2 pumps, and a 2,000 square foot structure housing service bays and the mini -mart. There are six standard parking spaces and one space for the handicapped on the site. The: gas station was approved by the County of Los Angeles in 1971, under Plot Plan (PP) 32253. In August 1995, Administrative Development Review (ADR 95-26 was approved, allowing minor interior and exterior remodeling. Currently, as approved under Sign Review (SR) 95-24 and SR 95-25 this site has an existing 6' monument sign located on the corner in a (landscape planter, wall signs on the fuel island canopies identifying Chevron and miscellaneous wall signs and decals identifying business services and fuel pricing. The General Plan designation for both sites is Commercial Office (CO and the zoning is Commercial Planned Development (CPD). Generally the following zones and uses surround the project site: to the north are single family residential homes with a zoning designation of Single Family Residential (R-1- 8,000); to the south are commercial and office uses located in the CPD zone; to the east is the Diamond Bar High School within the R-1-7,500 zone! and to the west is the Orange (57) Freeway. DEVIELOPMENT REVIEW Pursuant to the Development Review Ordinance, Section 22.72.020, an application for Development Review is required for any and all commercial, industrial, and institutional development which involves the issuance of a buil&ng permit for construction or reconstruction of a structure. Additionally, projects involving a substantial change or intensification of land use, such as the conversion of any existing building to a restaurant requires Development Review. The proposed sign is, new construction and is therefore subject to Development Review. ' PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed f 9 .. i' pro ect as a 'single, pole sign advertising"both Denny's and the Chevron station. It will be' located on the` berm 's westearl Y property,'` 10' -from the y property line which abuts the freeway right of way (the 57 Fwy northbound off -ramp at ' Pathfinder Road).The Chevron site is located on.. a separate lot to the northeast of the subject - ) _ propery . gThe Chevron property is located a pproximately 200 feet from the "'freewa ri ht-of-wa and has its frontage- on Pathfinder Road.' The °rproposed sign ' will be � 57'110' when measured from then adjacent finished grade. The current Sign Ordinance (Section 106) calculates sign height as "The vertical distance measured from grade level along the base of the sign structure to the highest point of the structure." 3 ota The current Ordinance defines sign area et8�of tnotl morer' thanrfeght f(8) sign within the single continuous pm straight lines enclosing the extreme limits getherwritingwith, anyrematerialn�oermcolor or any figure of similar character, 9 forming an integral part of the display." In compliance with this definition, the total sign area is proposed as approximately 260 square feet (257.37:). The sign will be internally illuminated wv✓hitefland slighting.cent tube blue opaque plastic. Chevron's sign will be constructed of red, ortin the sign faces will be with black lettering. The cabinet suPP g Denny's sign constructed of steel tubing painted a dark gray. The existing d cabinet and sign faces will be relocate opaque c eplaSticthwithr a yel ow'c hecke n structureboa d The Denny's sign faces are also g. The sign cabinet is constructed of steel background and red letterin ill members painted green. Both signs wa mounted on two, 10" or 12" square tube steel columns, painted dark gray. ANALYSIS State Law Law (Government Code Title 7, Division 1) State. Planning and Zoning Section .65906 states, "A -variance shall not be granted for a parcel o which is not otherwise expressly the property which authorizes a use or activity parcel of property. Dan authorized by the zone regulation governing Curtin in Curtin's California Land Use and Plannin Law (1998 edition), clarifies the intent of this law: is` not that the basic zoning provision is being changed The concept but that the property owner is allowed to use his property in a manner basically consistent with thar'establishedVher9property oulations wners th Sinon variations that will place him i parity the same zone. Variances are, in effect, constitutional safety valves application ,of a general < < to permit ; .administrative ., adjustments when app , que hardship. a } regulation would be, confiscatory, or produce urn t Current Code 14 A `lPro igns) rohibits: hibited S p ;;The . Sign ; Ordinance, Section „ -:bd on M_ advertising sign An off premises or outdoor or billboard Y business not on the private property for -_the purpose of advertising h the sign . is placed. property upon ..whic Section 106 defines outdoor advertising as: 4 A structure of any kind or character erected or maintained for the purpose of advertising a business, activity, service or product not sold or produced on the premises upon which said structure is placed. The proposed sign which would advertise the Chevron station located on a separate lot, is therefore considered outdoor advertising. The Planning and Zoning Code, Chapter 22.56 establishes variance procedures "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 this Title 22, develop through the strict literal interpretation and enforcement of such provisions." A variance may be granted - for sign . regulations other than outdoor advertising. Therefore, in compliance with the Code, a variance cannot be granted for the proposed sign. The primary issue regarding this sign is the Code's prohibition of outdoor advertising and the absence of administration relief allowing the Commission to grant a variance for this type of sign. In addition to this issue, if off-site signs were permitted by the current Sign Ordinance and proposed Development Code, a variance would still be necessary because the sign exceeds the height and area requirements. Further, pole signs are prohibited by both the current and regulations (a pole sign is defined as a signProposed uprights). supported by one or more The subject site is located within the Commercial Planned Development (CPD) and the restaurant is considered a freestanding commercial structure. According to Basic the Sign Program (Section 108) the restaurant is allowed to have the following signage: 1. One wall sign per outer wall, 'with- a total area not to exceed 1.25 square feet per lineal foot frontage; to '4"Imaximum 125 ' square feetr per use, Signs shall 'not exceed 80% of building frontage.3 ..the 2 3 , A' freestanding monument sign not to `'exceed 24 square feet in area or six feet in height e , There are also provisions, for cano g g ' - , by and, awnm s► ns,•' wrndows� signs � and government flags. 4 ; . An exception to the maximum 6'. sign height is provided for specific types of freeway -oriented signs as follows: a. Such signs are for the purpose of advertising lodging accommodations on-site. 5 nag for ch b, It can be demonstrated that I 'gthe a buildingu t elf reser accommodations cannot be located on manner which is visible to motorists traveling in either direction along the freeway. c, The highest point of a freestanding sign may not exceed twenty-five (25) feet above ramps)e1ast measuredu guardrail theofthe po point* freeway (excluding access nearest to the proposed signage. d. The maximum dimensions of the sign face of a freestanding sign shall be eight feet in height and sixteen feet in width. entified on the These provisions allow the sale of fora accommodations and fuel to are 'located contains sign "if the site upon which lodging lace of businesses engaged in the sale of food and fuel in addition to the p lodging" Proposed Code eria for The draft Development Code Section2 to 4 9 a�t establishes variations the from specific variances, allowing the Commission luding sign regulations, other than prohibited signs development standards inc. The required findings are based on stake la are rsign therefore u fundamentally Sections the same as the existing Code. T proposedrohibits off-site signs not 22.36.080.K & 22.36.080.N(Prohibited this Chapter, including billboards and specifically allowed by the provisions o outdoor advertising and pole mounted signs. Therefore, the proposed sign would not be permi tted ld , , noot have d the Development Code, end : the , Planning . Commission to ; grant a variance for oa prohibited sign. rauthority - s. Aesthetic Impacts he roposed sign, at approximately; 60', will =more, than double the, size of T tip ItJwill 'also be considerably taller„than any other the existing Denny s sign. , t _ office sign or structure , in the immediate vicinity. For example; the ewsting i 11, building on the :parcel in front of .the restaurant reaches a maximum height W of 38' to the top of the clock tower. ude. Examples of comparably sized structures in the s area the 70', the 60l' telecommunications monopole I TfaeedemP ray ucelluar pools, located on the at the high-school stadium. office site _included a -70' monopole. R Further, there are single family residences located to the north of the site on, the other side of Pathfinder Road, generally off of Fern Hollow, these residences are located in a hillly area, considerably above the grade level of the project site. The sign will be visible from the rear yards of these homes and because it is internally illuminated will be also be visible at night. Existing Freeway -Oriented Signs within the Cit Existing freeway -oriented signs within the City were generally approved by L.A. County and would not be permitted under the City's current or proposed regulations. These signs are considered "legal nonconforming". In compliance with the current sign ordinance, legally permitted non -conforming signs may be allowed to remain for 15 years from the adoption of the ordinance. The proposed Development Code also contains procedures for the amortization of legal non -conforming signs, which, once adopted, will supersede the existing provisions. There are serveral examples of County approved signs. The Chevron site at 210;35 Golden Springs Drive (northwest corner of Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road, south of 60 Fwy) includes a sign approximately 40 feet in height and 150 square feet in area. The permit for this sign was issued by L.A.. County on April 8, 1982 and was finaled on May 20, 1982. The 30 foot pole sign at .the Shell station at 3241 S. Brea Canyon Road, was approved by the County in 1979. The 60 foot pole sign located at the Arco station at 3302 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. (southwest corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Blvd.) was also approved by the County prior to the City's incorporation. The 60 foot freeway -oriented sign for the Best Western Hotel at 259 Gentle Spring Lane was approved by the City in 1991: `under CUP 91-11, in compliance with the Sign Ordinance's provisions for -freeway-oriented signs for Ic►dgmg. L Sin Regulations of Other 'Cities ;t In i�order` to assess the�'S applicant's" request yin the I" content '" of ,other local f a pordinances, „ numerous' t other 'local cities 1 were 'sur' - ed `re ardin 'i� ,s�--iiCl - t ixi ..:.,v _:. ..-,.*+ .. �,b 'f.•. x5i ��.,; Y a 9 g 'their regulations 'for off-site and pole mounted signage }xa £?► ?rn*-slrlw# Gr"� _ '. ;ter RiF yF !4 t�:?.`'ibrs �Y•� �a '*t� « '., Alhambra (June 1989) Section 23.50.020.C.1 Design Standards 1. ;The sign primarily identifies the: business, establishment, or type _of activity conducted on the same premises, or the product, service, or interest being offered for sale, rent, or leasethereon'.'"'g. Sign area' is not transferable' from any one street or building frontage to any other street or building frontage.' Arcadia (January 1988) Section 9262.43. Signs, General B. Permittedand Prohibited Signs: Signs of the type listed below which advertise a business 7 conducted on the premises on which the Rcated eal signs are prohibited except:, si estate n islosigns, deectionalpermite sig sli auxiliary signs. ns Brea (Amended April 1996) Section 'o2 al 2of 1 tempo tetion mporary signs, shall be f erected ' General A. All signs, except direct such signs. 22.28.40 upon the premises sought to be identified by Prohibited Signs K. Pole signs. Buena Park: (Amended April 1997) Section 19.904.050 Prohibited Signs: D. not including temporary signs which Off -premises signs (billboards) nt to The otherwise permitted. 19.912.080 Signs AdjaceshallNbe 30 feet, maximum height of a ground sign adjacent to a freeway a conditional use greater height may be authorized by except that a 9 greater height, the sign permit... As part of the conditional request fooss ble impact on surrounding height shall be balloon -tested for visibility and p properties and neighborhoods. lboards Calabasas: (March 1996) Section 17.30-050 al allowed by Prohibited Sections17.30.040167i130 040 and other off-site signs, except (Exempt Signs), or 17.30.080 (Off -Site Sign Regulations) Permits off-site. Freeay signs as follows: 1. Ventura Fre a C motorists Itwiththadvance Venranot cew of corridor .for the purpose of p services available at an upcoming freeway exchange, where approved by Cal Trans. 2. Highway -oriented businesses. For b vehicle esees providing) c)services with s r e to sign motorists (e.g. hotels/motels, restaurants, copy limited to company names and logos only 3. Civic event signs C. ined by the Planning Commission:.. Maximum sign area and height. Determ ecember 1993) Section 15.32.060 Prohibited signs: B. Off-site Industry (D signs; C. e e signs except as permitted for shopping centers. Montclair (1994) Section 9-7.402 Prohibited Signs (h) Off-site signs, 'except `Z � tional signs as provided temporary subdivision or direct for m this chapter. 91 _Section_,..19.22 060 Prohibited y Signs __G. ,,Off-site ;San -Bernardino ,(May 19 ) : t, '` Section '19 22 080, which' allows ermitted by �.; Le. or +billboard y, signs,, except as p _; , billboards , in specific t Tones, allows off +`site . the replacement of existing s residential subdivision directional signs } eta yam} .-FINDINGS {n order for thCommission to approve a variance, specific findings e Planning must order made in compliance with Code requirements. As previously stated in this report, it is not the purpose t frather arto allow iance to A p provisions for a specific change the basic zoning p minor variations so that the property owner is allowed to use his property 8 in the same manner as other owners in the same area, in the same zone and in the same circumstances. It could not be demonstrated that lack of freeway visibility is a hardship, since there are many other businesses in the City (including gas stations), that do not have freeway visibility. While recognizing the gas station's desire to increase business through more visible signage, particularly from the freeway, a gas station on any other site in the City would not be allowed to have a on or off-site freeway - oriented pole sign. Therefore, allowing the proposed pole sign under the current Code would not only be a Code violation, but would also be considered a `grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated." NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on April 23, 1998. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 105 property owners within a 500' radius of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider the information contained in the staff report and direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial of VAR 97-1 and DR 98-6. 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 That e i a .a grant of -special , g nconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the . vicinity and zone in which the property is situated; { 3-The',strict application ': of zoning regulations as the Y apply..to :'such property' will result in practical difficulties .f, .,. or ,unnecessary hardships','-', inconsistent with 'the "' general 1 purposes of such = standards; and regulations :-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 person located in the vicinity. E i REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FINDINGS: . the 1. The design and layout of the propose alpplaect is consistent guide) ne tof the applicable elements of the City 9en appropriate district, and any anatedd historic theme areae specialized area, such as des g specific plans, community plans, boulevards, or planned developments; 2 Approval of the design and layout of the proposed project is compatible with the characteristicus of o derlyattra surrounding ive development and will maintain the harmonio contemplated by Chapter 22.72 of Development Review Ordinance No. 5 (1990) and the City's General Plan; easona ly 3, The architectural design of the proposed f neighboring exostingr or futbre interfere with the use and enjoyment o development and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards; proj 4. The design of the proposed and eCvisit visiting public provide well as desirable its environment for its occupants neighbors through good aesthetic ,use of material texture and color that will remain aesthetically appealing and will retain a reasonably adequate level of maintenance. will not be detrimental to the public health, 5. The proposed project safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties °f improvements in the vicinity. PREPARED.. BY: , {Catherine Joh son, :Senior Planner r_ Po:; zb 10�u" �t '-< <,�r '„�' f l,� � � �'i# ,fir: � bs� 'r , . ��• ATTACHMENTS �' � f ##,, ••;; rr� t £.yr, ,� { _ �. . •.3 f;Grs 3G 3. '+li-,I�k'! ? '�Y, t "t`T�li•,q4"',1�l�lu 'Application Nt rflutt=h 17#"''a r2i5 1997 ands February, 2,,1998 ,g �} L licant, Dated February , t Letters to ..App " h •.x C.7 {tom j il. 4 ! t 9 ", ! t )it : e -. 10 Irl Y UY DUMOND BAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 VARIANCE APPLICATION Record Owner ( s ) ( SS A�F a c h e d) Applicant Name r,14ZL IN TiSA ((Last name first) — (H F V R n N IT S A (Last name first) AddressP•19- BOX 2833 P. 0. BOX 2833 City LA HABRA Phonc( )_ 694-7 1 0 1 562-• LA HABRA 90h -2833 Phone( ) 694-7 1 0 1 Case# Dab Rac'd Fee Receipt# By --L r Applicant's Agent GROVE TED (Last name first) 2050 S. Santa Cruz, 12100 ANAHEIM 92809 Phone( ) 714-938-6090 NOTE; It's the applicant's responsibility to notify. the Community Development Director is writing of any change of the princiipals involved during the processing of this case, g (Attach separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnen}upa, joint ventures directors of corporations.) and Consent: I certify that I am the owner of the herein described property requesand permit flee applicant !o this t. P Signed /t),fj (All j�� record owners) Date L �� Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby eertf u � correct to the best of my knowledge, y �tder penalty °fpeTlury that the Inj°rmation herein provided is Printed Name T F n r R (1 F (Applicant or Agent) Signed (Applicantor Agent) Date LAcation 21324 Pathfinder Road. Diamond Bar (Street address or tract and lot number) rti between ; O R A N [; F F w Y (5 7) (Street) and ;.RRRA CANYON DRIVE '} (Street) v Zoning__C - l HNM I ;i Project Size (gross acres) O 5 AC RR S Project Density v7 Previous Cases NONE Present Use of Site S E R V T C E STATION Use applied for INSTALLATION OF FREEWAY ORIENTED POLE THE SIGN WILL IDENTIFY THE TWO BUSINESSES IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE FREEWAY. Domestic Water Source --U a CDmpany/District N I& , Method of Sewage Disposal *' / A Sanitation District N / A Applicant? YES NO Amount Grading of Lots by (Show necessary grading design on site plan or tent. map) LEGAL DESCRIPTION (All ownership comprising the proposed lots/project). If petitioning for zone change, or boundaries of area subject to the change.) legal description of exteri Project Site., No. of Lots Gross Area 15' 85% Area devoted to : Structures Open Space and N / A Residential project: N / A — No. of floors Gross Area Proposed Density N / A Units/Acres Number and types of Units Residential Parldng: Type N / A Provided N / A Required N / A Total Provided Total Required e _ RECORD OWNERS: CHEVRON PRODUCTS, INC. 1300 SOUTH BEACH BLVD. LA HABRA, CA. 90632 ATTN: MARK URBAN DENNY'S RESTAURANT 2 13 16 PATHFINDER DIAMOND BAR, CA. 91765 ATTN: GHAFOUR MOHSENI-POUR r STs '„+ x�yt" W s' M 4. 4 °,,raT J°'. z ..• ` �. `' m --�� 'r 5, 'q, � F r t� �+ w,4�` w. �r �,x'�• � .? ✓ y � �' �" Y�kt. �'�YP' ��z � t f'_+��' F { i i� t_, 7 .� �F�Y. '� .��'`�i� � �r:A�, ��'�,•�,�r'�4 �'''�i+��.�'-'�'�.��ic�` '�`�3�¢ j..: � r �. rt: t rr � ,n,..'k'?',yX a� ;ff['r' 2' y dg*�• ltd ''j.'. sx:G-�k y .r.��1 r .{. fiM1s. .+. �.' ; T' -`L a y Yy, C 9 7 'S r' RFA December 16, 1996 City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Re: Variance Case Burden of Proof 1a. Approval of this variance will not adversely effect the health, peace, tendo welfare or persons in the surroundingarea in any wa rt or will be the addition of a pole sign. y The result of the variance lb- The installation of this pole sign will not be detrimental toyone else in the an Vicinity. The pole sign will not effect the existing office building nor the residents behind the service station. lc. The pole sign will not jeapardize, endanger or constitute a menace to theub "c health, safety or general welfare. The sign does not pose a threat to anyone or anything in the general vicinity of the site. 2. The proposed site will not be changed physically due to the installation of the sign. The area of the site in which the proposed sistagn pole size and shape to accommodate•any development features a pr scribed in thised is in Ordinance. ,This variance does not include the integration ofthe'said use z_ pout of the surrounding area. with any . a 3a The Orange Freeway (57) is immediately adjacent to the site / Pathfinder Road and the road itself is sufficient enough to The exit ramp to £r ;� a, traffic that the sign would attract to the station. cam' the increase in 3b. All public and private services required and currentl bem on the site will not change per the replacement of a new pole sign y the occupants 4• There are no. special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable property, similar to the other properties immediately adjacent to the freeway. reay o this However, numerous other properties similar to the properties involved, are allowed freeway pole signs (See attached photos). - 2050 SOUTH SANTA CRUZ, SUITE 2100 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92805 (714)938- 1 60nn FAX (714) 938-0105 for the preservation of a substantial property right of the necessary 5. This variance is �+ applicant. As was previously mentioned, other stations currently possess the right to display pole signs to identify their businesses. 6. The granting df this variance will increase business for the service station and restaurant. The addition of a pole sign will. not be materially detrimental to the public welfare nor will it be injurious to other properties or improvements in the vicinity. - . �f� n �� v a vw .rt. '� X. t is .�• �'� ..��, #'�EC'kl.-i � s � ;, ,�+ �L�iY.tLt��t`'��'`tr%1�33`aQ�'"tr �r "iit aes3C ' z r r x: ,� •r as+ .d�� '�-ww-.�t ,.��, � a ��.t•c. $L�+1 tf� "6;a�si; E� 3"f� _� .e -'i.6 .. •- 7-7 -''•`L�g'23-p3 &'A'I F„2 � XA<d F i •cVd+ s �.-'r "�' g �.: " .� i fy r, w-tA'c i' ,3. �'�rS#.�+�� i� �11ppC��y�, � �� ,,fix � r.,�}.yam rf�!:� *a • r4 �� ..... �. .. ..ice: .. .. �'• .. .: RPA December 16, 1996 City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Re: Variance for replacement of freeway pole sign for the Chevron Service Station at 21324 Pathfinder Road To Whom it May Concern, This letter serves as a request for a variance to remove an existing pole sign adjacent to the 57 Freeway and replace it with another pole sign. The existing sign presently recognizes the Denny's restaurant only. Chevron has offered to replace this sign with a new sign which will identify both businesses. Currently, there are numerous freeway signs representing competing businesses along the 57 freeway and 60 freeway in the City of Diamond Bar (see attached pictures). The additional exposure for these gas stations and restaurants has resulted in a decisive edge for the competing enterprises and has hurt the businesses for which this variance is being filed_ Without the exposure of this proposed sign, the service station and restaurant have been unable to compete with other companies which get most of their business from motorists on the freeway.. Attached are twelve (12) sets of site plans and sign details for the design review. The additional proposed sign is called out as Sign 1. If you have any questions, please contact - me at (7 14) 93 8-6090. f Y' Sincerely, J <'r Ted Grove Project Manager Enclosures. 2050 SOUTH SANTA CRUZ, SUITE 2100 • ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92805 (714) 938-6090 FAX(714)938-0105 dRft-AffO 49 amnommox rtte w