Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/11/1991AGENDA CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PLANNING COMMISSION WALNUT VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD MEETING ROOM 880 SOUTH LEMON STREET DIAMOND BAR, CA 91789 February 11, 1991 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Grothe, MacBride, Lin, Vice Chair- man Harmony, Chairman Schey 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. Generally, items to be discussed are those which do not appear on this agenda. NIOR&O41 yduq_v"AUDYA 13 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: n 1. Minutes of the 57atty aX 281 1991, Meeting OLD BUSINESS: (No Items) NEW BUSINESS: I 2. Reorganization 3. Ecological Concept Plan for Tonner Canyon PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: 4. Zoning Code Amendment No. ZCA 91-2 A City initiated request to amend certain provisions of City Ordinance No. 15 (1990), and No. 15-A (1990), and, as appro- priate, certain provisions of Title 22 of the Los Angeles County Code, pertaining to land uses permitted within the Commercial -Manufacturing (C -M) Zoning Districts within the City. (Continued from January 28, 1991). PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page Two February 11, 1991 5. Conditional Use Permit No. 90-0128 A request for a Conditional Use Permit to place a fully au- tomated videomatic kiosk. Applicant: Standard Brands Paint Store Location: 1139 South Diamond Bar Boulevard. (Continued from January 28, 1991). 6. Conditional Use Permit No. 90-0127 A request to complete in two phases, the addition of twenty- nine pads for the placement of mobile homes. The 19.5 acre site is currently developed with 118 pads and is known com- monly as Diamond Bar Estates. The site is surrounded by industrial uses and multiple family residences. Applicant: McDermott Engineering Location: 2121.7 East Washington (Continued from January 14, 1991). 7. Zoning Code Amendment No. ZCA 91-1 A City -initiated request to -amend certain provisions of Ti- tle 22 of the Los Angeles County Code, as heretofore adopted by the City of Diamond Bar, pertaining to signs. (ZCA 91-1) (Continued from January 28, 1991). 8. Development Agreement No. DA 91-1 A request for a Development Agreement for Gateway Corporate Center located South of the 57 (Orange Freeway) and off Gol- den Springs Drive. The Development Agreement will allow office and commercial development within the Corporate Cen- ter. The Development Agreement will decrease development density and restrict land uses to office and commercial de- velopment. All ordinances in effect at the time of adoption of the Development Agreement will serve as the development standard. Applicant: Zelman Development Company on behalf of Dia- mond Bar Business Association Location: Gateway Corporate Center (Continued from January 28, 1991). PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Page Three February 11, 1991 9. Conditional Use Permit No. 90-0125 A request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a two floor office building, approximately 6,400 square feet in size, with fifteen subterranean parking stalls. The subject site is located east of Diamond Bar Boulevard and westerly of Sunset Crossing Road at Navajo Spring Road. The subject site is in a Commercial Manufacturing (CM) zone and is sur- rounded by commercial/office and residential development. Applicant: Fred Janz Location: 556 North Diamond Bar Boulevard 10. Zoning Code Amendment No. ZCA 91-3 Consideration of an ordinance to establish notice procedures for public hearings to be processed pursuant to Title 22 of the Los Angeles County Code, as heretofore adopted by the City of Diamond Bar. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 11. Staff a. Review of Development Code b. General Plan Status a Report Presentation scheduled for City Council Meeting of February 19, 1991 12. Planning Commissioners ADJOURNMENT: CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 28, 1991 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Schey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Walnut Valley School District Board Meeting Room, 880 South Lemon Street, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chairman Harmony. ROLL CALL: Commissioner Grothe, Commissioner Lin, Commissioner Draft Sign MacBride, Vice Chairman Harmony, and Chairman Ordinance Schey. Also present were Planning Director James DeStefano, Assoc. Planner Robert Searcy, Deputy City Attorney Bill Curley, City Engineer Sid Mousavi, Planning Technician Ann Lungu, and Contract Secretary Liz Myers. CONSENT CALENDAR: Chair/Schey requested, because of his absence at the last meeting, that the Minutes of January 14, 1991 be pulled from the Consent Calendar. Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/Lin and CARRIED to approve the Minutes of January 14, 1991. AYES: Commissioner Lin, Commissioner Grothe, Commissioner MacBride, and Vice Chairman Harmony. NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Chairman Schey PUBLIC HEARING Staff reported the Manning Commission reviewed the ITEMS: latest Draft Sign Code package at the last meeting of January 14, 1991. The Ordinance included a Draft Sign discussion of non -conforming signs and sign Ordinance abatement language. Staff mailed out copies of the document to over sixty (60) organizations. There has been relatively little input, at staff level, regarding the extensive policies and details of the Ordinance. The changes and clarifications made by the Planning Commission have been highlighted in a hand written format in order to have them stand out within the new Sign Ordinance. A memorandum has been prepared on the issue of specific signage program for fuel, food, and lodging uses adjacent to the freeway. In a separate freestanding memo, from Irwin Kaplan, there is a discussion regarding a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for freeway -oriented signage, and the type of criteria utilized to examine whether the sign is appropriate or not. He suggested limiting it to lodging only, in an attempt not to have an additional overlay of large January 28, 1991 Page 2 fast food signs and gas station signs adjacent to the freeway. Staff recommended the Planning Commission consider the changes to the Draft Ordinance and discuss the remaining outstanding issues. It.is hoped any outstanding issues can be resolved and, at the next meeting, adopt a resolution recommending approval of the Sign Ordinance to be forwarded to the City Council. VC/Harmony stated the language on page 5, section G, of the ordinance, needs some additional work. He stated that "arabic numerals" was the correct designation. In regards to Mr. Kaplan's memorandum, section 4, item b.2 and b.4, he inquired to the type of sign, "in lieu of", is referring to. James DeStefano, Planning Director, responded, as an example, "in lieu of a permitted freestanding sign" could mean granting an additional wall sign to be seen from the freeway, in lieu of a monument, low scale, or tall free standing sign out on the street, which would normally be permitted. VC/Harmony asked if it permitted a tall free standing sign. James DeStefano stated the discussion in the memo is not specifically clear but, based upon the new ordinance, it could only be six (6) feet. Chair/Schey noted, in context of the memo, that it is suggested that someone might be eligible for a freestanding freeway sign, through a CUP. If they chose to have a wall sign instead, it would be limited to the same name, and logo combination they would have Had on a freestanding sign. DeStefano agreed and added, sub section 4, allows for an additional wall signage in lieu of the freestanding sign. VC/Harmony stated what is really being said, subject to approval of pole signs and free standing signs, is that they will give up something they don't have in order to have the wall sign. The CUP would have to be approved in order to*give it up. He believed this to be a wrong characterization. VC/Harmony stated his difficulty in dealing with the definitions and criteria for the CUP. They are not tough enough, and if they were too tough then they would be too mechanical. He would prefer to leave out the concept of the CUP, and let it go with a variance. January 28, 1991 Page 3 C/MacBride stated, in reference to Mr. Kaplan's memo, he had difficulty disassociating lodging signs from fuel and food signs. Freeway traffic is bound up with lodging, food, and fuel. If the conditions, stated in the memo, are applied to lodging, there needs to be more discussion because food and fuel are so strongly related to the traveler. It is important to be alert to the needs of those businesses which are freeway oriented. There are businesses that ought to be recognized and visible, in terms of commercial activity, from the access control facilities. The community wants a conservative and highly restricted sign ordinance. However, the Commission needs to respect both sides of the issue and come up with a balance that is proper, appropriate, and effective. C/Grothe stated he is somewhat opposed to the Sign Ordinance because it is the most restrictive of any other city sign ordinance within a ten (10) mile radius. These are the cities our businesses will have to compete with. C/Lin pointed out that Diamond Bar is now urban developed and travelers expect food and lodging to exist on every freeway off ramp. The lodging may not be available everywhere and therefore, there might be a need for the freeway signs for lodging. Our intent, from the beginning, was to eliminate or reduce, as much las possible, the amount of freestanding or pole signage. However, from the merchants point of view, we do need to discuss some kind of balance for them in the Sign Ordinance. Chair/Schey maintained, if the Commission is somewhat opposed to the concept of freeway signs but acknowledged the fact there are times when they are appropriate, he would leave it as a variance situation placing the burden on the applicant to convince the Commission that a freeway sign is warranted. A variance is preferable over the CUP because signs would not be approved unless there is a particular circumstance that makes it exceptionally warranted in a particular situation. The Public Hearing was declared open. Joe Murphy, minister of the Congregational Church located at 1048 Canyon Spring Lane, stated he is still awaiting approval to replace the existing 15 foot by to foot sign with two (2) small 2(1/2) foot tall signs. He pointed out churches have a need to be visible to survive and flourish within the community. The existing restriction of 24 square feet would be inadequate to give them visibility. January 28, 1991 Page 4 He beseeched the Commission _ to consider an exception for churches. The Public Hearing was declared closed. VC/Harmony requested staff to review the regulations relating to churches, and/or any special provisions available. James DeStefano explained that Dr. Murphy obtained a CUP several years ago from Los Angeles County. One of the provisions of the CUP required that additional signage be reviewed by the Planning Commission. The basic issue is one of fulfilling the conditions of the original use permit, as well as a desire for additional signage that is above and beyond what the present code will allow, and the proposed code would allow. Larry Smith, residing at 22536 Ridgeline, a member of the Church and in charge of the remodeling, clarified they are not requesting a sign in addition to the sign they already have. They are looking to replacing the sign with two (2) concrete monument sign on both sides of the driveway on Diamond Bar Blvd. Each sign would be approximately 25 square feet, with eight (8) aluminum letters, on the face, with the Church name. Dr. Murphy informeddthe Commission the Church is in a residential zone area, therefore, under the existing code, they would only be allowed signage with a total a sixteen (16) square feet for a Church almost a city block long. C/MacBride inquired if there is a process within the structdre whereby this example could be approached on a variance, a CUP, or another procedure. James DeStefano explained.the process would be one of a variance. The application, in this example, would come into the staff, be checked by the criteria, be denied, and then the applicant could come to the Commission with a variance request. Various criteria would have to be met in order to justify the approval of a variance. The criteria would include issues dealing with topography, size and shape of the property, site distance, and location of the signs. The tests would be significantly stronger. Approving a variance gives policy direction to staff which, in essence, sets a precedent in a general sense. VC/Harmony declared he would like to discuss the January 28, 1991 Page 5 CUP, with Mr. Kaplan, more extensively. James DeStefano specified the memo was prepared from the discussion, of the last meeting, in regards to signs adjacent to the freeways. If the philosophy of the memorandum is accepted, it would be turned into strict standards to be put into the final ordinance. The CUP process discussed in the memo does not apply itself to the issues being discussed in regards to the Church situation. Chair/Schey noted the Commission does not seem to have any opposition to the various changes made to the text of the Ordinance. The main issue seems to be if freeway signs should be granted the ability to be approved through a CUP and; if, in certain types and categories of signs, the Commission should allow a CUP process to be implemented. The Commission needs to decide what particular type of signs should be reviewed under the CUP process. C/MacBride stated the category of Civic Organizations and Institutional signs should be in the parameters of the CUP. C/Grothe would like monument signs to be considered. He also stated there ought to be more flexibility in regards to the square footage of signs in relation to larger buildings. 10 Motion was made by C/MacBride, seconded by VC/Harmony and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to direct staff to implement the changes in the text that were lined in pursuant to the last hearing; arrange a hearing that Mr. Kaplan could attend to discuss his memorandum; look into the potential implementation of the CUP11process and what standards it might require for insertion into the four (4) categories outlined: 1. freeway signs. 2. civic organizations and institutions. 3. monument signs. 4. signs on buildings over three (3) stories; and to continue the hearing to the next meeting of February 11, 1991. TT 47722/ Staff reported the application is for the approval CUP 89-338/ of a tentative tract map to develop thirteen (13) EIR 91-1 single family custom homes on a nineteen acre site. The previous submittal was for a tentative map to develop sixteen homes on the same nineteen acres. The original submitted project was denied without prejudice by the Planning Commission on October 24, 1990. Since that time, the developer has worked very hard with the City staff towards the creation of the project that is before the Commission. The proposed project has been adjusted to meet several January 28, 1991 Page 6 concerns of the City as follows: 1. It has a substantial adherence to "land form" grading. 2. It saves all existing oak trees. 3. The original project density has been reduced by sixteen percent. 4. The overall grading has been reduced from about 204,000 cubic yards to about 170,000 cubic yards of dirt movement. 5. The bulk of the crib walls on the perimeters of the project have been removed with the exception of a crib wall necessary at the drive entrance adjacent to Derringer Lane, and another crib wall that may be required for the drainage debris basin at the most northerly portion of the site. 6. The relocation of the gas line has been diminished as well as the subsequent earth movements. 7. The proposed lots will range from 1/2 acre to 3.4 acres. The average lot size is one and half acres. The pads of each of the lots will range from .2 acres to .4 acres in size. The homes proposed to be constructed are in the range of about 5,000 to 10,000 square feet. 8. The developer has located the developable building envelops. o£ the specific pads. This allows siting on the homes so they are not as massive from afar, and allows review on an independent bAsis for conformance with that building envelop. 9. Hunsaker and Assoc. was the engineer hired by the applicant and Horste Schor was suggested to the applicant to consult with by the City staff. 10. The project now incorporates a much softer concepti of development with one long cul-de- sac reduced 250 feet from the previous proposal. A secondary emergency fire access from lot 8 through to Bronze Knoll Road has been added. 11. After all the grading, the terrain is,put back into a configuration that respects the natural environment. 12. The landscape plan incorporates revegetation, whereby the vegetation will be species from within the general environment, as well as species new to the environment but very compatible. More trees will be incorporated than originally existed. 13. The EIR concerns have been mitigated as far as staff is concerned. The blue line stream is indeed off the site. James DeStefano stated, in regards to the project's January 28, 1991 Page 7 appearance from afar, the developer submitted a computer enhanced graphic image of the project, including three (3) sets of slides, in.graphic illustration, showing the existing setting, and the proposed project from afar. James DeStefano presented the slides to the Commission. James DeStefano stated, in staff's opinion, the project has been significantly improved from the prior submittal. Staff feels that the proposed project now conforms with the philosophy of the Hillside Ordinance and is appropriately designed for the site. Staff has articulated sixty (60) conditions on different issues important to make sure the development approval clearly expressed what the Hillside Ordinance says, and what is wished for future hillside subdivisions. Staff recommended the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution which approves the Environmental Impact report (EIR 91-1), CUP 89-338 for hillside management review and Tentative Tract Map 47722, with the attached findings of fact, and the listed conditions. The Public Hearing was declared open. Frank Piermarini, applicant, commended staff personnel for their professional and considerate manner. He verbally reviewed the list of previous concerns, as stated in the staff report, that have been mitigated. He stated the custom homes will be color coordinated to blend into the natural terrain. The landscape will be maintained until each home is sold. The pads will be left unlandscaped until the completion of each home. The grading of offsites will take approximately three (3) td four (4) months, assuming a minimum of problems arise. The plan for the entire project will be out in about two and one half years after the grading is complete. He stated he felt confident of conforming to Diamond Bar's criteria. The project will be an enhancement to the City. Lex Williman, a planner with Hunsaker and Assoc., presented a map of the proposed tract. He pointed out there are no straight lines and stated that undulation is the key to "land form" grading. There are variable slopes of 3 to 1, 2 to 1, 1(1/2) to 1. The 1(1/2) to 1 are the side slopes between the various pads which will be hidden by the units as constructed. All of the slopes around the edge are a minimum of 2 to 1, and some up to 3(1/2) to 1. Adjacent to the existing units, there is a basin that a butts the Piermarini property to these units. Two options are being proposed: 1. Fill January 28, 1991 Page 8 the hole, connect to the drainage, eliminate any crib wall, and come up from the slope undulating around onto the project. 2. Leave the properties alone, create a crib wall no higher than the existing pads and come up from there creating an undulating slope. He stated there is a clustering of trees around swales to conform to natural terrain. Chair/Schey inquired if the applicant was comfortable that the drainage situation is such that if the sump is filled, the drainage could adequately be taken away without any danger of inundation to the rear of those homes. Lex Williman responded the preliminary investigation indicated there is no problem. There has not been a complete hydrology study. There is a storm drain existing at the bottom of the hill which would connect into that pipe, eliminate the catch basin, and pick the drainage up elsewhere. The Public Hearing was declared open for those in favor of the project. Jack Wolf, residing on Ridgeline, commended Frank Piermarini and his projects. He stated the Country is willing to have his projects as part of theirs. The hillside would remain intact and the project would actually enhance the area. Chair/Schey requested speakers for those in opposition to the project. Pat Brazer, residing at 23497 Coyote Springs, commended the Piermarini developments but stated the development would obstruct the view from his home. He stated the development would look like a postage stamp on the hillside and would be at odds with the surroundings; the crib walls are ugly; the pads are too small for the size of the homes; the cutting will affect the existing homes; and the removal of the gas line can be very dangerous. He suggested the original recommendation of two (2) or three (3) homes would be ideal. Dennis O'Donnell, residing at 23550 Coyote Springs, stated his apprehension that the homes may come down into his backyard. He is concerned about the drainage situation and concerned about the impacts on the natural hillside. Claudia Huff, residing at 1641 Fire Hallow, stated the project is fundamentally too intense. Since there are very few hills left in Diamond Bar, this January 28, 1991 Page 9 hillside should be well guarded. She inquired if there will be regrading, and if so would the existing residents be looking across space to the crib walls. The property is zoned for two (2) homes. The grading. does not sound like a vast improvement. She asked the Commission to reconsider the amount of homes to be allowed in the particular area. Frank Piermarini responded the property is zoned R- 1-10,000, and 30 to 50 smaller homes could be built if so desired. The pads are as big as two (2) of the existing lots, in most cases. There will be no visual crib walls. Trees will be planted that will not block the view. Chair/Schey inquired if the access for the grading will be taken entirely off of the applicants site. Frank Piermarini affirmed they will not be on anyone's property, with the exception of three (3) lots. If the owners of these lots preferred not to see the crib walls, the lots can be flattened out with their permission. Chair/Schey received affirmation from Frank Piermarini that the light green shading on the presented map is all natural terrain. Chair Schey inquire)a of City Engineer, Sid Mousavi, if the approval of the grading plan normally required a full geotechnical report to be done, and if the recommendation of the report would be implemented in the grading plan. Sid Mousavi responded that that is the normal process of the grading plan. Lex Williman, in response to Chair/Schey's concerns, stated there are a series of ditches that have been constructed and there will be additional ditches made for the storm drains. In response to relocating the gas line, he stated Southern California Gas (SCG) will do all the work. The portion that is being relocated will be constructed to the new line either adjacent or over the old line while the old line is live. At some point, they will shut down the old line, tie in the new, and probably slur in the abandoned line. Grading will occur over the top of the line before it is relocated and in the presence of representatives from the SCG. VC/Harmony inquired how much time will lapse from the time it will take to complete grading and to January 28, 1991 Page 10 landscape the slopes. Frank Piermarini explained that grading will take between 3(1/2) to 4 months. As soon as the grading is completed, we will landscape all the slopes, but not the pads. The vegetation will be growing while we are building. Lex Williman stated, in regards to VC/Harmony's concern, that a preliminary hydrology study has been done taking into consideration the permeability of the street and the houses. In every case it goes up three (3) to four (4) CFS, which is very small. The additional run off can be handled. James DeStefano stated there is a condition within the document which calls for a complete hydrology study to be submitted to the City. It would be subjected to review and approval by the City Engineer. VC/Harmony stated he wants a provision to eliminate the construction of tennis courts. He finds them visually ugly and they tends to add more run off than it's permeability. Frank Piermarini stated he would not object to a condition of no tennis courts. VC/Harmony noted that the grading appeared steep at the end of the cul-de-sac. He inquired of it's length. Lex Williman responded that there is a vertical curve that has a transition from the steep portion of the stre6t, which is 150, down to a 3% portion into the cul-de-sac. The grade varies within the points. VC/Harmony pointed out that going up steep grading is not a problem in regards to fire access. However, there must be sufficient turn around points and maneuverability for the fire equipment. Frank Piermarini stated the cul-de-sac will be connected to the existing ones in the Country. He pointed out there is also an additional five (5) feet of grassy area, giving a 50 foot radius, that will be grassed off and is driveable. C/Grothe asserted he would like a condition stating any home exceeding 5,000 square feet must have an additional five (5) foot set back on each side. January 28, 1991 Page 11 Chair/Schey stated he would like a condition prohibiting any retaining walls that would interfere with any of the land form grading or extend beyond the designated pad areas. VC/Harmony requested staff to go over the concept of the Interim Ordinance in regards to the three (3) houses on different elevations, which he assumes will contour to the hillside, and the concept of building on a ridgeline as opposed to off a ridgeline. James DeStefano stated there are only three (3)' lots that have breaks of about five (5) feet in the levels of the pad. It was done specifically to break up the massing of the homes. This project, with the varying pads, and the landscaping all around the pads, will create a softer ridgeline appearance. The prominent ridgeline feature will be a mixing of various landscaping, pads and building materials to be utilized in the homes. C/Lin questioned the negotiating process in the Condition of Approval concerning the street or area lighting plan. James DeStefano explained there are engineering conditions and planning conditions. The planning condition states that lighting fixtures adjacent to the interior prope^tty lines would be approved by the Director of Planning as to type and height of fixtures. The purpose was to allow some illumination but not creating a glowing hillside because of lighting intensity. Chair/Schey would like the wording "orientation of the lights"Madded to the condition. Sid Mousavi explained the engineering condition is to minimizes the night time visibility problem. VC/Harmony inquired if wildlife would be able to migrate through the properties. Piermarini assured the Commission that the wildlife would be able to roam free. Chair/Schey stated he is impressed by the significant efforts made by Mr. Piermarini. He is comfortable with the existing Conditions of Approval as they have been adjusted. Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by VC/Harmony and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the resolution subject to the conditions and findings made by January 28, 1991 Page 12 staff, to also include the amended conditions of: #4 - to add to the beginning of the second sentence to read "Fenced details, tree staking...". #6 - to add ...shall be approved by the Director of Planning as to type, orientation," and height.". Add a new condition 923 - "Tennis courts would be allowed, with a maximum 6 foot wall, and no lighting. If the lot is by itself without a house structure, the wall of the tennis court could go to 8 feet high.". Add a new condition #24 - "Dwelling units in excess of 5,000 square feet of gross floor area shall have minimum side yard setbacks of ten (10) feet and fifteen (15) feet from the edge of the property line.". In addition, crib walls should be allowed if all reasonable efforts have been made to implement the preferred option (either filling the hole in the catch basin or leaving it alone) to the satisfaction of the staff. Ann Lundu reported the environmental evaluation shows that the proposed use does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment in the long term or short term. The proposed use will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. On the basis of this initial study, the staff finds that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Negative Declaration and CUP 90-0128 with the Findings of Fact and conditions listed. Chair/Schey called a recess at 10:10 p.m. The meeting was called to order at 10:20 p.m. CUP 90-0128 Ann Lundu, Planning Technician, reported that the Automated applicant, Video Kiosk Corporation, is requesting a Videomatic Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to construct a fully Kiosk automated video kiosk in the parking lot of Standard Brands Paint Store. The kiosk is a fully automated video store, open 24 hours a day, and will not contain any employees. The kiosk will occupy two (2) par)ving spaces. More than adequate parking will remain for both the existing commercial shopping center, as well as the proposed kiosk. The video kiosk dispenses the video by robot through credit card authorization. Regular service, of this kiosk, will be done twice a week by the owner, Standard Brands Paint. If the computer fails, a message is sent directly to the main office of Video Kiosk Corporation. The main office has technicians which are on duty 24 hours a day to service the computer. Ann Lundu reported the environmental evaluation shows that the proposed use does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment in the long term or short term. The proposed use will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. On the basis of this initial study, the staff finds that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Negative Declaration and CUP 90-0128 with the Findings of Fact and conditions listed. January 28, 1991 Page 13 Rudy Figueroa, Project Manager, office located at 3002 Locust Ct., Ontario, stated he is waiting for the final approval of the exact location of the kiosk. He asked the Commission to offer them the flexibility to relocate the kiosk, with the Planning Department's approval. He stated he has read the agreement and will comply with all of the conditions if the project is approved. He displayed an artist's rendition of the kiosk appearance. The two different sizes of the kiosk are 8(1/2) feet by 10 feet and 8(1/2) feet by 15 feet. The glass is a bronze tint, not totally opaque. It is fully automated and operates through robotics. The kiosk hold the top hits and can hold approximately 1,300 movies at a time. VC/Harmony asked how much traffic it will generate. Rudy Figueroa stated the traffic study conducted in the County of Orange did not show any trip generation information within the traffic engineering manual. He explained they haven't had enough experience with the six (6) kiosks to give adequate information. There is an estimate of seventy (70) trips over a twenty four (24) hour period. C/MacBride inquired who determines the menu of each kiosk. He asked if there are problems with vandalism. Rudy Figueroa asserted the parent company assist each franchisee in determining the movie selections. The franchisee has the final decision. However, "adult movies" are not allowed and anyone who violates that agreement is subject to losing their franchise. They are unaware of any vandalism problem. VC/Harmony asked if the interior is lighted at night. He remarked that the whole building looks like a sign. It can be in violation of the sign ordinance which states that an area of greater than 25% cannot be visible through the window. Rudy Figueroa confirmed the building is lighted on the interior. He stated his awareness that signs are not part of tonight's approval and that a new sign ordinance is in progress: Chair/Schey suggested, if the project is deemed to be an acceptable use, the applicant can find some way to accommodate the sign ordinance. January 28, 1991 Page 14 VC/Harmony stated there should be a traffic study included as well. Rudy Figueroa stated they will abide by the sign ordinance. The Public Hearing was declared open. Dan Buffington, residing at 2605 Indian Creek, inquired if there is adequate parking. Ann Lundu replied there is sufficient parking to accommodate the kiosk. Bill Valeo, residing at 157 Cottonwood Cove, is concerned about vandalism, the deterioration of the building, the rental of pornography, and the display of explicit posters. The Public Hearing was declared closed. VC/Harmony pointed out that it is not known what the traffic generation is, nor what the requirements are that apply to this particular usage. Robert Searcy, Assoc. Planner, responded one consideration of the trip generated by this use is that it would be considered as an off peak hour use. The traffic- generation would not coincide with the generation of the normal commercial center. C/Grothe inquired how many parking spaces are being allotted for this project. Ann Lungu r'bsponded a handicap and two (2) other spaces must be provided. C/Grothe remarked that there needs to be more landscaping. He pointed out that architecturally the kiosk does not match the center and something needs to be altered to tie it in. The signage on the top needs to conform to the sign ordinance. He stated he considers the titles on the inside of the building as more of a display of the product, as in a display window. VC/Harmony concurred the building is not architecturally compatible with the center. It is subjected to vandalism and crime. He maintained the structure as a whole is a sign. The City is trying to avoid this kind of visual pollution. Rudy Figueroa stated there is not sufficient data January 28, 1991 Page 15 to base a traffic study on; the Sign Ordinance will be adhered to; they will accept a condition requiring a land use restriction to prevent pornography; and landscaping will be done. He stated he would like the original plan approved as presented. Chair/Schey stated the project is not a particularly good use for the property and opposes small buildings being piece mealed throughout the City. Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/MacBride and CARRIED to continue the project to the next regularly scheduled meeting with direction to the applicant to work with staff to submit a revised plan indicating a landscape plan, a revision to the architectural design and work up a program whereby they would be in conformance with the proposed Sign Ordinance. AYES: C/Lin, C/MacBride, and C/Grothe NAYS: VC/Harmony and Chair/Schey ZCA 91-2 James DeStefano corrected the case number to zone C -M Zone change amendment ZCA 91-2. Robert Searcy reported in October of 1990, the City Council adopted an Interim Ordinance amending the list of permitted and conditionally permitted uses within the CM zrone. The City Council is increasingly concerned with the City's financial future and adopted the Interim Ordinance in order to provide the necessary study time to review the most advantageous and appropriate land uses for the CM zone. In light of the ever expanding fiscal constraints placed on local municipalities, the City Council directed the planning staff to research land use controls to maximize the City's financial future via sales tax generating properties. It was felt that an Interim Ordinance used to provide supplemental controls for the increasing development pressure on the remaining commercial properties, would be appropriate. The impetus of the CM zone ordinance is the outgrowth of concern for orderly planning and use of the City's limited land and resources. They have been involved in economic development discussions to address the long term economic objectives of the City. As a result, the Interim Ordinance was initiated in order not to preempt current planning procedures and policies. The Interim Ordinance was deemed an appropriate land use control mechanism that would allow an orderly planning process to continue in a manner consistent with the primary purposes of the CM zone, without the need to impose January 28, 1991 Page 16 a complete development moratorium. For the City of Diamond Bar, the impact is far felt and long reaching. The City currently possesses five areas zoned C -M. This zone represents the greatest potential for new commercial development throughout the City. As a result of these concerns, the City Council adopted Emergency Ordinance No. 15 (1990) on October 16, 1990. This ordinance effectively removed all non -revenue producing land uses ( with the exception of accessory uses) from the CM zone as a mechanism to grant additional land use controls in the period preceding the forthcoming General Plan. The duration of this emergency ordinance extended for a period of 45 days. As a result, the City Council met again on November 13, 1990 to extend the Ordinance to the 16th of October, 1991. The City Council can, if necessity dictates, reevaluate this ordinance and extend it for an additional time period, not to exceed two years, as provided in California Government Code section 65858 (a). After surveying 10 surrounding communities, four cities were found to expressly prohibit the development of churches in commercial zones. The remainder of the cities have instituted a review and permitting procedure, by which church projects must be submitted for a discretionary review and public hearing, in order to receive a Conditional Use Ppermit (CUP) within commercial zones. Currently, as a result of public testimony presented at the public hearing, the Council directed staff to provide the Planning Commission the opportunity to investigate the appropriateness for reintroducing the Church use into the CM zone. Chair/ Schey 11 asked how the amendment would affect the development agreement for the Gateway Corporation. Robert Searcy responded, to his understanding, the development agreement supersedes all zoning unless otherwise stated. Bill Curley, Deputy City Attorney, stated the uses and utilization of that particular site is crafted by contract. Chair/Schey question if the Council's intent of the amendment is to limit the uses within the zone to those uses that will generate sales tax or transient occupancy tax. Robert Searcy concurred, and explained the City of Diamond Bar is at a point where correct land use January 28, 1991 Page 17 planning be implement to guarantee the viability of the City. James DeStefano stated when the City Council adopted the urgency ordinance in" October, they stripped out all service oriented commercial. The focus was to concentrate on retail sales tax and freeway oriented commercial, to look at all the remaining freeway oriented frontage, which is principally Gateway and the property on Grand and Golden Springs. The purpose was to determine the highest and best use of the acreage, match the land use needs, as well as the fiscal and economic needs, and combine all through the zoning code and/or the general plan process. At the November Hearing, to extend the Interim Ordinance, the City Council directed staff to bring the matter to the Planning Commission to specifically look at Churches within the Commercial Manufacturing (CM) zone. The issue should be examined in a city-wide setting, rather than the development of a specific church at a specific location, and decide if a specific church use is something desirable in a CM zone wherever a CM zone exists in the City. Chair/Schey inquired what zone presently allows for churches. James DeStefano replied all the churches presently in Diamond Bar are in residential zones but are permitted in commercial and industrial zones as well. The Public Hearing was declared open. Dan Buffington asserted the importance that the City realizbs that the fiscalization of land use will become more and, more important. It is important Diamond Bar hold on to their limited amount of commercial areas for their revenue production. Randy Hurtle, residing at 2503 Terrywood, Hacienda Heights, employed by Majestic Realty Co. is representing a Church interested in purchasing a piece of property zoned for CM. He stated, to his understanding, the City Council discussed at great lengths on how to accommodate the possible purchase of a property zoned CM, for the use of a church. The final decision was to approve the Interim Ordinance but allow staff to initiate an amendment to allow church uses in CM zoned property. It is not being proposed that land use controls not be accomplished in the City. However, the Planning Commission should review each church on it's own January 28, 1991 Page 18 merits, allow church uses in a CM zone piece of property, with a CUP to be issued by the Planning Commission. Bill Valeo stated, in his opinion, the Council accepted the Church's proposal to buy the property. It was sent to the Planning Commission for an amendment for a CUP for the building. The property is currently vacant. The Church has a book store which last year generated taxes, from the sale of the books, of approximately one million dollars a year. The Church has approximately 5,000 members which will generate revenue throughout the City. Scott Brooks, attorney with Downey Savings, present owner of the property, stated the minutes from the City Council clearly indicates the Council directed staff to prepare an amendment, to the particular ordinance, to review for the possibility of allowing a church, and/or related uses, to be put into the CM zone. Downey Savings is not selling the entire parcel, which is approximately 20 acres. The Church is planning on buying 13 acres. The property is undeveloped, except for the one vacant building. The intent is to help the City in it's need for creating and getting revenue. However, the directive from staff has been somewhat misaligned. Maurice MacCallistL-'r, president of Downey Savings and Loan, stated the people are allowed to buy the property for a church. They have had trouble getting retail people to develop the land. The building is worth 11 million dollars and should not sit vacant. Brent Covanf residing at Rodando Beach, stated the need for a larger building to house the members of their Church. The Public Hearing was declared closed. VC/Harmony inquired what the sales generation of the book store is, and the type of paritioners involved with it. Bernard Grant, works at Calvary Chapel in West Covina, stated there is a Radio Ministry. The book store services Christian books, literatures, and tapes. There is an International Ministry as well. The book store made an estimate of one million dollars in revenues this past year, which is sales taxable. There is approximately 5,000 members, excluding the children. January 28, 1991 Page 19 Chair/Schey noted the issue is not the particular property or the ownership of the property, but the CM zone. A church does not have to be permitted in every zone, but that's not to say this building couldn't be used for a church based on a change of zone. If a CM zone is not an appropriate zone, then maybe a change of zone is appropriate. C/Grothe specified he is unclear as to what was the exact directive from the City Council. He inquired if the directive is to make a CUP or a zone change on one specific project, or to tie a zoning issue to a specific project. James DeStefano stated the Council adopted the Interim Ordinance in November. It was directed that this issue be brought back specifically to the Planning Commission for further consideration. The purpose tonight is to make a recommendation to the City Council as to whether or not the Interim Ordinance adopted should remain as is, or should be amended, and the manner it should be amended. The County ordinance permitted churches and a variety of other service related uses. The bulk of those were eliminated, as well as the bulk of uses permitted with a CUP. VC/Harmony indicated one of the options the Commission could recommend is to allow a review process on a case 174y case basis. James DeStefano concurred and stated if the Commission believes the use is appropriate for the zone, then should it have a CUP attached to it. The purpose of the Interim Ordinance was to allow time to review specific uses. It VC/Harmony stated his agreement with the concept of restricting uses for economic development purposes, but not when it comes to a church, especially on that will bring in revenue. It should be reviewable. Chair/Schey stated a blanket prohibition of services does not seem to be the appropriate means of achieving the end results desired. Many service cases are adjunct to a commercially revenue producing project. C/MacBride requested a reading from the document stating the exact direction from City Council. James DeStefano read directly from the minutes of the November 13, 1990 indicating that the City Council adopted the ordinance and they directed January 28, 1991 Page 20 staff to draft a zoning ordinance amendment, for review at the earliest opportunity by the Planning Commission, to allow for a CUP process to allow churches and related uses. Chair/Schey questioned if the Council wanted to direct staff to draft a CUP provision for churches. It is Council's Emergency Interim Ordinance so why is the Planning Commission being called upon to review the issue. James DeStefano explained the Council found it important to adopt and extend the Interim ordinance for commercial manufacturing issues. At the same it was decided that it was important for the issue of churches within the CM zone be discussed further. The issue was referred to the Planning Commission, and the discussions and conclusions are to be brought back to the Council for final their consideration. C/MacBride noted that there are different interpretations of the minutes, as written. Chair/Schey asked if the Planning Commission has before them a CUP process amendment to a resolution. James DeStefano stated that the Commission has, before them, an orMnance adopted by the Council in November, and a report from staff suggesting it is left status quo. If the Commission feels churches should be permitted within the zone, then staff should so be directed, and the decision will be forwarded, with the minutes of the meeting, to the City Council. I£ the Commission believes churches should be permitted with a CUP, with a review at the Commission level, then that decision will be informed to the Council. The Council will discussed the issue based upon the Commission's recommendation. VC/Harmony suggested the Commission develop a CUP process, to be forwarded to the Council, as was requested. C/Grothe stated his interpretation of the minutes are asking staff to draft an amendment to the ordinance to allow churches in an area with a CUP. Staff should draft an amendment and bring it back to the next meeting to be voted upon by the Commission. James DeStefano emphasized that staff could only come back with standards for all churches on a CUP. January 28, 1991 Page 21 The process would take a considerable amount of time. Chair/Schey noted that staff has interpreted the minutes differently than the Commission has interpreted the minutes. He stated the issue should be deferred until there is a further reading from Council as to what the exact direction is. C/Lin summarized that if the Commission responds in favor of continuing the Emergency Interim Ordinance, then we would consider to introduce the CUP for church use because it would be excluded in this zone. C/MacBride stated the Council wants a CUP process, to allow churches and related use as an exception. He complimented staff on their broader vision of determining the request to consider the inclusion or exclusion of the church land use. However, staff went far beyond the Council's stated position. The Council wants a CUP process, and a decision that allows churches as an exception to the stated ordinance. James DeStefano contended there is not a need, from a staff standpoint, to do a great deal of research on all of the. potential church problems in all of the potential CM zones within the City. It appears the Commission is asking for standards to give to the City Council. Chair/Schey stated, for the purposes of the Emergency Interim Ordinance, the Commission is looking for a procedure by which a property could be looked at as far as applicability for a church within a CMIzone. James DeStefano stated, if the direction of the Commission is to say that churches should be permissible with a CUP, the message sent to the City Council states when the specific application comes in, then the impacts can be addressed in regards to that use, at that location. Chair/Schey reiterated that the Council has asked the staff to generate the process for the Commission to review and make a recommendation. James DeStefano clarified that all staff would be doing is telling the City Council that a church use may be permissible with approval of a use permit. Chair/Schey maintained that the Commission is directing staff exactly as the Council had January 28, 1991 Page 22 requested. Motion was made by VC/Harmony, seconded by C/MacBride and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to direct staff to generate a draft CUP provision, without standards, for the Emergency Interim Ordinance that would create a method by which churches as a use would be permitted within the revised CM zone, to be placed on the next regular meeting agenda. Development Staff recommended a continuance. Agreement (DA -2) The Public Hearing was declared open. VC/Harmony requested staff to prepare an answer on, in regards to Zelman's decision that they could not commit those properties no longer owned, the affects on the total trip budget concept. Motion was made by C/MacBride, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the matter until the next regular meeting of February 11, 1991. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Chair/Schey requested the subject on the reorganization of the Commission be placed on the agenda. James DeStefano handed the Commission, as per the Planning Commission's request, an internal guide projecting tentative forthcoming issues to be heard by the Planning Commission. He stated the guide may serve useful, to the Planning Commission, to give some idea as to where things are going in the next couple of months. ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/MacBride and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at 12:20 a.m. David Schey Chairman Attest: James DeStefano Secretary/Planning Commission City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report TO: , Chairman and Planning Commissioners FROM: James DeStefano, Director of Plan&W SUBJECT: Agenda Item Number 2 - Reorganization DATE: February 8, 1991 On January 24, 1990, the Planning Commission elected Commissioner Schey to serve as its first Chairman. It was determined that the position of Chairman would be for a period of one (1) year and that the Commission would decide on rotation at a later date. In October, 1990, Ordinance No. 25B was adopted by the City Coun- cil. The Ordinance requires a reorganization of the Commission each July. This matter is being brought before the Commission at the request of Chairman Schey for Commission discussion and action as neces- sary. m \pis ORDINANCE NO. 25 (1989) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING A PLANNING COMMISSION. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does ordain as follows: Section 1. Chapters 2.108 and 3.48 of the Los Angeles County Code, as heretofore adopted by this City Council, hereby are repealed. Section 2. Planning Commission Created. There is hereby created a Planning Commission. Section 3. Composition. The Planning Commission shall be composed of five members appointed in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 5 hereof. Section 4. Powers and Duties. .. The Planning Commission shall have power to do and perform such acts and carry out and put into effect such plans and programs as are provided by and pursuant to the provisions of the State Planning Act, California Government Code Sections 65100, et seq., and shall serve as the Advisory Agency to the City Council regarding subdivisions and parcel maps. Notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary set forth in the Los Angeles County Code as heretofore adopted by this City Council, the Planning Commission shall act in an advisory 1 capacity to the City Council with respect to any and all applications for conditional use permits and variances. Section 5. Organization and terms of office; filling of vacancies in office; officers; meetings. Each member of the Planning Commission shall be appointed by one member of the City Council, provided that should a member of the City Council fail to make an appointment within thirty days of the vacancy in question being created a majority of the City Council shall appoint to fill the vacancy. If a vacancy occurs other than by expiration of a term, it shall be filled within thirty days by appointment for the unexpired portion of the term by the Council Member who appointed or had the opportunity to appoint the commissioner whose position has been vacated or the Council Member serving the unexpired portion of the term of that person. If that Council Member fails to appoint within that thirty -day period, a majority of the City Council shall appoint to fill the vacancy. If the vacancy is effected by the removal process specified in this Section, the person so removed may not i be appointed to fill the vacancy. The terms of office of the Planning Commission shall be two-year terms commencing on July 1st of even numbered years and expiring on June 30th of even numbered years; provided, however, that the terms of office of persons initially appointed to the Planning Commission shall expire June 30, 1992. Any member of the Planning Commission may be removed without cause during his or her term of office by a four-fifths K vote of the City Council, provided that no such member may be removed during the initial three months of any term of office for which he or she is appointed. The Planning Commission annually shall elect a chairman from among its appointed members for a term of one year, and may create and fill such other offices as it may determine and shall hold regular meetings at least once a month and other meetings at such additional times are are deemed necessary. Section 6. Compensation; travel expenses. (a) Each member of the Planning Commission shall be paid a fixed sum for each commission meeting such commissioner attends. The sum to be paid to each commissioner for each such meeting attended by such commissioner shall be established by resolution of the City Council. (b) The City Council may, from time to time, provide such sums as the City Council deems reasonable, in its sole discretion, for travel expenses, meals, lodging and related expenses necessarily incurred by Planning Commissioners incidental to the performI ance of their official duties, including attendance at seminars, conferences or training courses approved by the City Council. Said expenses may be advanced to Commissioners or otherwise paid to them in accordance with policies established by the City Council. Section 7. References .to Commission. Wherever in the Los Angeles County Code, as heretofore adopted by this City Council, reference is made to the "Planning 3 Commission," "Regional Planning Commission" or "hearing officer", the same shall be deemed to refer to the Planning Commission as established by this Ordinance. Section 8. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of the ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted in three (3) public places within the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the provisions of Resolution 89-6. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 19th day of September 1989. Mayor I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 5th"' day of September , 1989, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 19th day of September 1989, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Forbing, Miller, Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Horcher and Mayor Papen NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None t � ATTEST: City Clerk City of Diamond Bar N\1011%PLNGCCM\DB 1AR 4 NO. 25A (1989) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING SECTION 4 OF ORDINANCE NO. 25 (1989) PERTAINING TO THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does ordain as follows: Section 1. Section 4 of Ordinance No. 25 (1989), as heretofore adopted, hereby is amended to read, in words and figures, as follows: "Section 4. Powers and Duties. "The Planning Commission shall have power to do and perform such acts and carry out and put into effect such plans and programs as are provided by and pursuant to the provisions of the State Planning Act, California Government Code Sections 65100, et segs, and shall serve as the Advisory Agency to the City Council regarding subdivisions and non-residential parcel maps." Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of I this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted in three (3) public places within the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the provisions of Resolution 89-6. I&S01F ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 1 3rd day of April Mayor ' I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 20th day of March 1990, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 3rd day of April , 1990, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Horcher, , Forbing , Miller, Mayor Pro -Tem Werner, Mayor Papen NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ATTEST: J� C1Gl��t .t p2 City C erk, City of iamond Bar q S\1012\ORDPLAN\DB 1.3B 2 ORDINANCE NO. 25B(1989) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 25(1989) AND 25A(1989) CONCERNING THE PLANNING COMMISSION. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does ordain as follows: Section 1. Ordinance Nos. 25(1989) and 25A(1989) hereby are amended to read, in words and figures, as follows: Section 2. Planning Commission Created. There is hereby created a Planning Commission. Section 3. Composition. The Planning Commission shall be composed of five members, each of whom shall be a resident of the City of Diamond Bar, and appointed in accordance" with the procedures set forth in Section 5 hereof. Section 4. Powers and Duties. The Planning Commission shall have power to do and perform such acts and carry out and put into effect such plans and programs as are provided by and pursuant to the provisions of the State Planning Act, California Government Code Sections 65100, et seq., and shall serve as the Advisory Agency to the City Council regarding subdivisions and non-residential parcel maps. 1 Section S. Organization and terms of office; filling of vacancies in office; officers; meetings. (a) Each member of the Planning Commission shall be appointed by one member of the City Council, provided that should a member of the City Council fail to make an appointment within thirty days of the vacancy in question being created a majority of the City Council shall appoint to fill the vacancy. (b) If a vacancy occurs other than by expiration of a term, it shall be filled within thirty days by appointment for the unexpired portion of the term by the Council Member who appointed or had the opportunity to appoint the commissioner whose position has been vacated or the Council Member serving the unexpired portion of the term of that person. If that Council Member fails to appoint within that thirty -day period, a majority of the City Council shall appoint to fill the vacancy. If the vacancy is effected by the removal process specified in this Section, the person so removed may not be appointed to fill the vacancy. I (c) Notwithstanding any other term or provision of this Ordinance, each of the Planning Commissioners shall be deemed to have resigned from his or her position on the Commission ninety (g0) calendar days after the succession of any person, whether by election, reelection or appointment, to the office of the Council Member who appointed, or had the opportunity to appoint, such Commissioner and that Commission 2 position shall thereupon be deemed vacant and available for appointment for the otherwise unexpired term, if any. (d) If a member of the Planning Commission is absent from three (3) consecutive regular meetings or from more than fifty percent (50%) of the regular meetings thereof in any one (1) year period, the office of said Commissioner shall thereupon be deemed vacant and the secretary to the Commission shall immediately inform the City Council thereof. (e) Any member of the Planning Commission may be removed without cause during his or her term of office by a four-fifths vote of the City Council, provided that no such member may be removed during the initial three months of any term of office for which he or she is appointed. (f) The terms of office of the Planning Commission shall be two-year terms commencing on July ist of even numbered years and expiring on June 30th of even numbered years; provided, however, that the terms of office of persons initially appointed to the Planning Commission shall expire June 30, 1992. I (g) The Planning Commission shall, at its first regular meeting in July of each calendar year, elect a chairman from among its appointed members for a term of one year, and may create and fill such other offices as it may determine and shall hold regular meetings at least once a month and other meetings at such additional times are are deemed necessary. (h) The Director of Planning, or his or her designee, shall be the Secretary to the Commission. 3 Section 6. Compensation; travel expenses. (a) Each member of the Planning Commission shall be paid a fixed sum for each commission meeting such commissioner attends. The sum to be paid to each commissioner for each such meeting attended by such commissioner shall be established by resolution of the City Council. (b) The City Council may, from time to time, provide such sums as the City Council deems reasonable, in its sole discretion, for travel expenses, meals, lodging and related l expenses necessarily incurred by Planning Commissioners incidental to the performance of their official duties, including attendance at seminars, conferences or training courses approved by the City Council. Said expenses may be advanced to Commissioners or otherwise paid to them in accordance with policies established by the City Council. section 7. References to Commission. Wherever in the Los Angeles County Code, as heretofore adopted by this City Council, reference is made to the "Planning I Commission," "Regional Planning Commission" or "hearing officer", the same shall be deemed to refer to the Planning Commission as established by this Ordinance. section 8. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of the ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted in three (3) public places within the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the provisions of Resolution 89-6. 4 ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 16th day of October , 1990. I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of thel City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 2nd day of October 1990 and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 16th day of October, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Horcher, Papen, Kim, Mayor Pro Tem Forbing and Mayor Werner NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ATTEST*iC ' ierk City of Diamond Bar N\1011\PC25B\DB6.1 5 City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report TO: Chairman and Planning Commissioners FROM: James DeStefano, Director of Plan SUBJECT: Agenda Item No. 3 Ecological Concept Plan for Tonner Ca yon DATE: February 8, 1991 The Significant Ecological Area Technical Advisory Committee (SEATAC) discussed the need for an Ecological Concept Plan for Tonner Canyon at their January 19th and February 4th meetings. Attached is a memorandum prepared by Irwin Kaplan for your review. This information is being provided to you for advisory purposes and to solicit any comments the Commission may have. \pis m INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: James DeStefano, Director of Planning FROM: �� Irwin'M. Kaplan, City Planner, Emeritus SUBJECT: Ecological Concept Plan for Tonner Canyon DATE: February 7, 1991 At the SEATAC (Significant Ecological Area Technical Advisory Com- mittee) Meeting of January 19, 1991, there was discussion of the need for an "Ecological Concept Plan" for the entire Tonner Can- yon. The purpose would be to provide a context for evaluation of the proposed tentative tract maps, 47850, 47851, 48487 and 46485, which would occupy only a small part of the canyon. Ideally, the "Concept Plan" would provide guidelines for the location, type, and intensity of development which can be absorbed into the Can- yon, while still maintaining the integrity of those features which make the canyon unique. Once these guidelines are prepared, the City would be better able to evaluate how the proposed residential developments would fit into the larger SEA. The City would also have an additional basis to evaluate future projects, such as the proposed golf courses and the Tonner Canyon Highway alternative. (Although EIRs have been prepared for these projects, their primary concerns are the pro- posed development projects and not the canyon as a whole.) At the SEATAC Meeting, the developers expressed support for the idea and reasonable. offered to underwrite the cost of such a study, if the costs were Since time is of the essence, such a concept plan will be general- ized, so that it is likely to serve more as a guide than a defini- tive plan. Upon completion of the concept plan, the City could decide if it wished to purs6e it in greater depth. A proposal has been prepared by Ecotectonics, which has been dis- tributed to both the SEATAC and the developers for comment. A copy of the proposal is attached for your information. The proposal has been accepted in principle by both the SEATAC and the developers' representatives who were present at the February 3 SEATAC Meeting. Two areas of concern were raised at the meeting relative to the scope of the proposed study. 1. The study area should be expanded beyond the limits of Tonner Canyon to include areas which are ecologically associated or interdependent with Tonner Canyon. Memorandum to James DeStefano February 8, 1991 Page Two 2. The recommendations of the study should not be so spe- cific that, paraphrasing one of the developer represen- tatives, we don't end up paying for a study to put us out of business. Both these comments will be reflected in a revised scope. This information should be provided to the Commission for advisory purposes, as well as to solicit any comments this Commission may wish to offer. IMK:pjs Ecotectonic Systems -10558 Eastborne Avenue. Suite #4, Los Angeles, CA 90024 Contact: Alan L. Crutchfield - (213) 470 1148 Proposal to the City of Diamond Bar Ecological Concept Plan for Tonner Canyon Ecotectonic Systems proposes to develop an Ecological Concept Plan for Tonner Canyon. The purpose of the Plan is to guide development in order to retain, and as far as possible enhance, the biological, geological, esthetic and cultural resources. The Plan will assist developers and public agencies in protecting the resources of Tonner Canyon as development progresses. Ecotectonic Systems will: 1. Gather existing scientific studies,pf the biota of Tonner Canyon and neighboring areas and prepare an analytical summary; 2. Gather and summarize all relevant draft and final EIR's, current development proposals, special studies, development standards, ordinances, etc. that apply to Tonner Canyon and adjacent areas in Los Angeles,an Bernadino, and Orange Counties; 3. Consult with the SEATAC committee and interested developers to receive early input on development of the Plan. 4. Make site visits as needed, but not less than two site visits for each core member of Ecotectonics staff; 5. Locate and comment on examples from other Southern California jurisdictions of studies and proposals comparable to the Ecological Concept Plan; 6. Prepare a series of maps of the canyon showing ecological and geological constraints, existing and proposed land uses, and other relevant factors; 4:ZC page one of two 7. Utilizing existing available development proposals and studies as reference points, prepare maps and specific recommendations for standards for location of types and intensity of development, grading and roads in order to preserve the aesthetic and ecological resources of the canyon. These standards will be intended to guide, not forbid development; 8. Compile the information from items 1-7 (above) in a final report (the Ecological Concept Plan) with appropriate graphics; 9. After the Ecological Concept Plan is prepared, recommend any additional studies that are needed to complete the biological, cultural, hydrological and geological inventories. We will conduct the studies so recommended at extra cost. The Ecological Concept Plan will be suFmitted in draft form to the City of Diamond Bar not more than twenty calendar days following signing of the contract. The final Plan will be submitted not less than seven calendar days after Ecotectonic Systems receives the City of Diamond Bar's oral or written comments on the draft. The opportunity to refine the draft document with the use of an additional two weeks will be appreciated by Ecotectonics. If Diamond Bar staff so requests, Ecotectonics will submit preliminary draft documents, but the time taken for review of such drafts by the City's staff will be added to the time allowed Ecotectonics to complete the contracted task. Ecotectonic Systems will do everything possible to deliver both draft and final documents ahead of schedule. Cost for the Plan is $24,000.00, $4,0,00.00 to be paid upon signing of the contract, with the remaining $20,000.00 to be paid within 30 days after submission of final report. for Ecotectonic Systems Alan L. Crutchfield - CEO Date: 2/x/97 page two of two REPORT DATE: MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: APPLICATION REQUEST: PROPERTY LOCATION: aZT63 i2)i1µ4R016)�121,* APPLICANT: BACKGROUND: City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION - Staff Report February 7, 1991 February 11, 1991 CUP 90-0128 To place a fully automated videomatic kiosk in the parking lot of Standard Brands Paint Store. 1139 South Diamond Bar Boulevard Standard Brands Paint 4300 West 190th Street Torrance, CA 90508 Video Kiosk Corporation Rudy E. Figueroa, Project Manager 2002 Locust Court Ontario, CA 91761 The public hearing for this application was continued from January 28, 1991. Folowing the direction of the Planning Commission, Video Kiosk Corporation has re -designed the video kiosk to be compatible with the architecture of the existing shopping center. APPLICATION ANALYSIS: The proposed video kiosk is fully automated, dispensing the videos by robot through a credit card authorization. The video -dispensing machines will be enclosed in a structure which is 18' X 19.5' equalling 351 square feet in area. The height will be 1312". This structure, including landscaped planters will occupy three parking spaces. The materials used for the exterior of this structure are barrel type concrete red tiles for the roof, exterior cement plaster for the walls, and aluminum anodized door and window frames. The style of the archi- tecture and materials used will blend with what is existing in the shopping center of the proposed location. Site plan (Exhibit "B") in- dicates the new proposed location of the video kiosk on the Standard Brands Paint parcel. Agenda Item February 11, 1991 Page Two Findings of Fact: 1. The proposed conditional use is in substantial compliance with the Community Plan. 2. The proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the health or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed conditional use will not have an adverse impact on ad- jacent or adjoining residential and commercial uses. It will not be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment, or valuation of prop- erty of other persons located in the vicinity of the proposed pro- ject. 4. The site for the proposed project is adequately served by Grand Ave- nue and Diamond Bar Boulevard. 5. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size (1.29 acres) and shape to accommodate the development of the proposed use. This commercial shopping center has good visibility, easy access, and adequate parking for the proposed project. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed use does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment in the long term or short term. Also, the proposed use will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. On the basis of this initial study the staff finds that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. RECOMMENDATIONS: d Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve CUP 90-0128 with the proposed changes in this staff report with the findings of facts and conditions listed. AJL:pjs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Proposed Site Plan Exhibit "B" - New Proposed Site Plan Exhibit "C" - New Proposed Elevations RESOLUTION NO. PC 91-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUESTING APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PER- MIT 90-0128, AN APPLICATION TO ALLOW A FULLY AUTOMATED VIDEO KIOSK AT 1139 SOUTH DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD ON THE STANDARD BRANDS PAINT STORE PARCEL - PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP 16890, MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF A. Recitals. 1. Rudy Figueroa, on behalf of Video Kiosk Corporation and Stan- dard Brands Paint has filed an application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) located at 1139 South Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, Ca., as described in the title of this resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit application is referred to as "the Application." 2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State of Califor- nia. On said date, pursuant to the requirements of the Cali- fornia Government Code Section 57376, Title 21 and 22, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted it Ordinance No. 1, thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar.Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County Code contains the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, including the subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar. 3. Because of its recent incorporation, the City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Pl�`an. Accordingly, action was taken on the subject Application, as to consistency to the General Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of California Gov- ernment Code Section 65360. 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, on January 28, 1991, conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said Ap- plication and concluded said public hearing on that date. 5. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above -referenced January 28, 1991, public hearing, and continued to February 11, 1991, hearing and oral testimony provided at the hearing, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The Application applies to property presently zoned C -3 - BE, north side of Diamond Bar Blvd, located at 1139 Dia- mond Bar Boulevard, City of Diamond Bar, California. (b) Generally, the property to the north and west of the sub- ject site is zoned R-3-8,000 25U, south of the subject site is zoned C -3 -BE, east of the subject site is zoned C- 3 -BE and R-3-8,000 25U. (c) The property is in compliance with the commercial category of the Community Plan. (d) The conditional use will not adversely affect the health or welfare of persons residing or working in the surround- ing area. (e) The conditional use will not have an adverse impact on adjacent or adjoining residential and commercial uses. It will not be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment, or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity. (f) The nature, condition, and size of the site has been con- sidered. The site is adequate to accommodate the use. (g) The project will not have a significant effect on the en- vironment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. (h) Notification to the public hearing for this project has been made. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence and conclusions set forth herein above, and conditions set forth below in this Resolu- tion, presented to the Commission on January 28, 1991, public hearing as set forth above, this Commission, in conformance with the terms and provisichs of California Government Code Section 65360, hereby finds and concludes as follows:_ (a) The approval shall be exercised within a period of one year, (b) This project shall be developed in substantial conformance with plans which have been submitted for this case, (c) All on-site utility services shall be installed under- ground, (d) During construction, the site shall be maintained in such a way as to prevent spillage or building materials from the public right-of-way, (e) Any work to be done within the City right-of-way requires prior approval from the Engineering Department of the City of Diamond Bar. The appropriate permits are to be obtain- ed and all construction is to be per City specifications. (f) The applicant shall provide handicap access and one handi- cap parking space, a landscape plan, irrigation plan and a lighting plan to the City for review and approval before building permits can be issued, (g) Applicant shall supply two trash cans, one to be located inside the video kiosk and one to be located outside the video kiosk. (h) Applicant shall maintain and service the kiosk structure in such a manner which would keep the structure as attrac- tive as when constructed. (i) Applicant shall submit plans for signage to the Planning Department in the City of Diamond Bar for approval. (j) Security measures shall be created that will meet the ap- proval of the Walnut Valley Sheriff's Department and the City of Diamond Bar. (k) Applicant shall sign a written statement stating that he has read, understands, and agrees to the conditions of the granting of CUP 90-0128, Based upon the findings and conditions set forth, the Commis- sion during the above -referenced January 28, 1991, public hear- ing and February 11, 1991, public hearing, and upon the specif- ic findings of fact set forth in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, above, the Commission hereby approves this CUP 90-0128. 5. An initial study has been prepared for CUP 90-0128 pursuant to § 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. 6. The Planning Commission Secretary is hereby directed to: (a) Certify the adoption of this Resolution, and, (b) Forthwith transmit a copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, return receipt requested to Videomatic Kiosk Corpo- ration and Standard Brands Paint at the address listed in records of the City of Diamond Bar. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 11th day of February, 1991. r I, James DeStefano, Secretary to the City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of , 1991, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAINED: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: Secretary to the Planning Commission NEGATIVE DECLARATION CUP 90-0128 Applicant: Video Kiosk Corporation Rudy E. Figueroa, Project Manager Proposal: To place a structure to house a 24 hour fully automated videomatic kiosk in the parking lot of Standard Brands Paint Store Location: 1139 South Diamond Bar Boulevard General location is the northeast corner of Grand and Diamond Bar. Boulevard. Environmental Findings: The proposed project, as determined by the Planning Department in the City of Diamond Bar, will not have a significant effect on the environment. This conclusion is based on the attached environmental checklist and the staff report for the subject CUP. AJL:pjs 9 O C of Ee { e t - 4� e + � a Qr - 8 nn' g9SS A- So'—Ni < A, > v. > 0 0 O O m 0 o o o P sgo.� Hit 3p1 3 gf i x r a? @E i F v r t (i Videoideo usk,Cooration OI" i 0 91)61 r M -„ �k 1 I rC }\1AVj } J 4' C of Ee { e t - 4� e + � a Qr - 8 nn' g9SS A- So'—Ni < A, > v. > 0 0 O O m 0 o o o P sgo.� Hit 3p1 3 gf i x r a? @E i F v r t (i Videoideo usk,Cooration OI" i 0 91)61 ) FL [. . ;•i!, . AJC J! . , f\\ � � \ /Fi' l� ! |»a \ /Fi' 7o,,f-ration t_,1 w FIE- 7'~ . 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 R, February 4, 1991 February 11, 1991 CUP 90-0127 Environmental Assessment and Condi- tional Use Permit to expand an exist- ing mobile home park by 29 lots in two phases, for a total of 147 lots on a 19.5 acre site. 21217 East Washington Diamond Bar Estates 303 North Placentia, Suite F Fullerton, CA 92631 McDermott Engineering 303 North Placentia, Suite E Fullerton, CA 92631 A public hearing for this application was held at the January 28, 1991 Planning Commission meeting. The alanning Commission, after opening the public hearing and receiving testimony, continued the public hear- ing to February 11, 1991, at the request of the applicant. Additional information was requested by the staff to address various concerns raised prior to and at the public hearing. At the present time the applicant is preparing the information requested which will be forth- coming. Therefore the applicant has requested a continuance of the public hear- ing to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. Staff acknowledges the applicant's request for the continuance as being necessary and reasonable but staff recommends that the continuance be at least thirty days so as to provide adequate staff review and comment opportunities. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Open the public hearing and accept all testimony; and 2. Continue the public hearing to March 11, 1991. RLS:pjs McDERMOTT ENGINEERING CML ENGINEERING • LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING FEBRUARY 4, 1991 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 21660 E. COPLEY DRIVE SUITE 100, PLANNING DEPARTMENT DIAMOND BAR, CA. 91766-4177 ATTENTION: MR. ROB SEARCY PLANNER RE: CUP 90-0127 DEAR MR. SEARCY; tvy -6 fieg WE HEREBY REQUEST THAT OUR PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED FOR THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 1991 BE CONTINUED UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING IN ORDER FOR US TO COMPLETE THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL ME AT THE NUMBER BELOW. VERY TRULY YOURS, McDERMOTT ENGINEERING, INC. BURT MAZELOW -- ORANGE COUNTY OFFICE 303 N. Placentia Avenue • Suite E • Fullerton, California 92631 . 714-572-0376 FAX 714-572-0378 RANCHO CALIFORNIA OFFICE 18075 La Ventana • Murrieta, California 92632 • 714-677-7992 mk +-0 i-�& Kathleen Pepper, Board Member Diamond Bar Estates Homeowners Assoc. 21217 E. Washington St., Space 113 Walnut, CA 91789 February 5, 1991 Mr. Robert Searcy City of Diamond Bar Planning Dept. 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 139RUG il=lal Dear Mr. Searcy: C On February 2, 1991, Mr. Simonian met with the President of our Homeowners Association to discuss the issues raised regarding the completion of additional home sites at Diamond Bar Estates. The questions raised in our survey to park residents were addressed by Mr. Simonian, and the results of the meeting were very positive. (See enclosed Board Meeting minutes). We still have one issue which concerns us, the sound barrier. Mr. Simonian said that the current barrier is not only adequate, but better than a block wall. His plan is to move the existing barrier back, not to replace it. Our only request to the Planning Department and Commission is that the sound barrier provided meets with the code requirements as interpreted by the City of Diamond Bar. The majority of residents at Diamond Bar Estates clearly expressed their desire to have their park completed as originally designed. Of the 118 residences polled, 92 responded to our survey. Of those who responded, only 2 were against the addition of the. sites. The residents of Diamond Bar Estates feel that the completion of the park will enhance home values, and make some of the long awaited additional improvements possible such as R.V. park- ing and security gates. Thank you for your interest in this matter. Our Board President, Tom Pepper will be in atten- dance at the next Planning Commission meeting on February 11, 1991. Yours Very Truly, Kathleen Pepper KP/kp Enclosures MINUTES Board Meeting - February 3, 1991 Meeting was called to order at 8:30 AM by the President, Tom Pepper. Roll was called by acting secretary, Kathy Pepper. Those in attendance were: Tom Pepper, Kevin Beau- bien, Jerry Oakley, Jane Carnahan, Leah Chamberlain, Ditty Cruz, Kay Doner, Kathy Pepper, Phil Simpson, Rita Stine, Don Shorman, Earl Chaney, Ruth Comilliac and Duane Chamberlain. Minutes of the January 20 meeting were read and approved as corrected with the addition of Rita Stine to those in attendance. The Treasurer's report was given by Jerry Oakley. Cash on hand January 31, 1991 was $891.34. Leah Chamberlain, Steering Committee Chairperson reported on the calendar of events for the year. Planned events to include: Bingo - 1 a month beginning February 23 St. Patrick's Dinner - March 16 at 5:30 PM Raffle and Potluck - April 27 at 5:30 PM Bakery Cart Sale - June 15 4th of July Celebration to include BBQ, Game Booths, Jukebox, etc. Christmas Boutique and Salad Luncheon - November 9 Christmas Tree Trimming Party - December 14 Additional suggestions were made, ie 50's Party, Octoberfest. No firm dates yet from Elinor on the Pan- cake Breakfasts, as of now they are on hold. The Board presented Don Shorman with a plaque in appreciation for his service as President in 1990. Kathy Pepper reported on the results of the "Site Survey". The majority of residents are in favor of the additions and final completion of the park. The major concern of residents was an adequate sound bar- rier and assurance that all facilities will be adequate for all residents. Other issues raised were unrelated to the issue of expansion. Tom Pepper reported on his meeting with Richard Simorrian, Earl, and Shirley Chaney. Mr. Simonian asked that all requests for improvements to the park be submitted in writing to management. improve- ments will be done as funds become available. Earl was given the go ahead by Simonian to secure the kitchen area by placing a cover over the pass through and locking the kitchen door. No date for completion was given. The Clubhouse will be painted in April. Eight (8) trash bins will be provided by park completion, with 3 times weekly pick up scheduled. Code only requires 6 bins. Regarding locked fire access gates, Mr. Simonian indicated he would unlock them if we wanted. It was suggested by Rita Stine that keys be issued to 2 residents living closest to the gates for use in an emer- gency. (Rita and Cliff Caldwell were suggested as key holders). It was decided that the Board would look at the gate issue again when Washington Street is completed and traffic gets heavier. Mr. Simonian said that the current sound barrier will stay and is more effective than a block wall. Earl agreed with this statement, based on his experience at another park. This will ultimately be decided by the Planning Commission. A promise was made that R.V. parking will go in when Phase H is completed. Until then access along that side of the park must remain open. Security gates will be installed at park expense when Phase 11 is completed if residents want them. Regarding lighting, Simonian asked "What do you want?" Ditty Cruz will work on the answer. Park rules and regulations will be enforced if notice in writing is given to management regarding the infraction. Shirley Chaney has offered to give $175 in prize money for our "Spring Clean -Up" campaign for 1st, 2nd and 3rd place prizes. An extra dumpster will also be provided during that week. Don Shorman reported that the park directory is at the printer with the first run to be completed in a week. Cost will be $250. Motion was made and seconded to ask for donations from residents to offset the cost of $2.00 each. The updated By -Laws were reviewed and changes discussed. A motion was made and seconded to adopt the new By -Laws as amended. The following Committee appointments were made by President, Tom Pepper: Jane Carnahan Leah Chamberlain Ditty Cruz Kay Doner Carol Meyer Kathy Pepper Phil Simpson Rita Stine Social, Welcome/Hospitality Steering, Ways & Means Sergeant -At -Arms Recognition Parliamentarian Historian Announcement Sign Newsletter Editor/Publisher Motion was made and seconded to accept appointments as made. Phil Simpson has ordered additional letters for the entrance sign. Approximate cost $34.00. Motion was made and seconded to reimburse Phil for the letters. Motion was made and seconded to authorize expenditure of $65.00 to install a light for the park flag- pole. Motion was made and seconded to purchase a "Yellow Ribbon" flag for the park pole at a cost of $42.00. Flag will be purchased as soon as they are available. Tom Pepper requested that all items for the newsletter be submitted to Rita Stine within 5 days of Board meetings. Meeting was adjourned at 9:45 AM. 2 William T. Pepper, President Diamond Bar Estates Homeowners Assoc. 21217 E. Washington St., Space 113 Walnut, CA 91789 February 5, 1991 Mr. Richard Simonian, President & CEO Santiago Corporation 1108 West Seventeenth Street Santa Ana, CA 92706 Dear Mr. Simonian: Thank you for taking the time to meet with me on Saturday, February 2, 1991, regarding the completion of our park. The meeting was both informative and productive. After talking with you and management, I am looking forward to seeing the park take shape as the final phases of development are completed. Thank you for your approval to secure our kitchen facilities as this will enable us to store the supplies we need safely. The painting of the Clubhouse will greatly improve the surroundings for our social events this year. We have named a committee to study the lighting in the park and will keep management informed of the requested improvements/additions. All residents will be informed of the time table for the R.V. storage and security gates in our February newsletter, as well as the number of trash bins that will be available upon completion of the park. Our Park Improvement and Safety committee will be issuing written complaints to Earl and Shirley regarding the problem spaces in the park. The Board was encouraged to have Earl in attendance at their meeting on Sunday. The Conti- nental Breakfast afterward was well -attended and very much appreciated, As a representative of the residents of Diamond Bar Estates, I am hopeful that we can move for- ward to solve any problems which may arise in the future in a spirit of cooperation. Once again, thank you for your time. Yours Very Truly, William T. Pepper WTP/kp cc: M/M Chaney Managers D.B.E. R. Searcy Diamond Bar Planning Dept. City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report TO: Chairman and Planning Commissioners ny FROM: James DeStefano, Director of Planni� SUBJECT: Agenda Item No. 7 - Zone Change Amendment ZCA 91-1 DATE: February 8, 1991 In response to the comments and direction of the Planning Commis- sion, staff is providing the following information: 1. Text Changes All draft changes contained within the text previously sub- mitted to the Commission have been incorporated. 2. Freeway Oriented Signage Memorandum Mr. Kaplan will be available at the hearing to discuss his memorandum on this subject. An additional copy of the memo- randum is attached for your review.. . 3. Church Signage/Civic Organizations We have reviewed the regulations for such signage and recom- mend changes as reflected on page 21 of the attached Draft Sign Ordinance. 4. Signs on buildings over three (3) stories in height - Please refer to section 108.D.1 on page 18 and section 108.D.6 on page 20. I \Pis INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commissioners VIA: James DeStefano, Director of Planning FROM: Irwin M. Kaplan, City Planner SUBJECT: Refinement of Proposed Sign Code DATE: January 25, 1991 At the meeting of January 14, the Planning Commission expressed interest in a sign code provision which would address such prob- lems as has been experienced by the Ramada Inn which is.adjacent to, but virtually invisible from the freeway. The Commission also reiterated its intent that any such provision should not be spe- cial purpose zoning to solve the problem of the Ramada Inn. (The "variance" procedure was felt to be inappropriate, since a free- way -oriented sign for the Ramada Inn might be construed as a grant of a privilege not available to others). In addition, the Commission specified that any provision for free- way oriented signage should be tightly drawn, since the Commis- sion's purpose is to discourage signage along the freeways. With this in mind, the following guidelines are suggested: 1. Limit Freestanding Signage Only to Places of Lodging. Obviously, if more businesses are eligible for such signage, more freestanding signs can be expected. Traditionally, where freeway signage is permitted, food, fuel and lodging are the uses eligible for signage. As proposed, only hotels and motels would be eligible for freestanding signs. 2. Limit Other Freeway OiNiented Signs to Wall Signs on Restau- rants and Fuel Service. Such signs would be permitted only for uses which adjoin freeway rights-of-way and would be generally subject to the regulations of the Planned Sign Program. In other words, the main departure from the code as proposed, would be to permit signs on properties adjoining freeway rights-of-way to adver- tise only food and fuel, if the front entrance faced a direc- tion other than the freeway. Such signs would also be per- mitted for hotels and motels in lieu of freestanding signs. 3. Require All Such Signs to be Subject to a CUP. A) Guidelines, rather than specific standards, are proposed for freestanding signs for places of lodging. These Memorandum January 25, 1991 Page Two 4. would address such issues as location, size, architec- tural treatment, etc., and require that the Commission make findings in order to approve such requests. In other words, if the findings cannot be made, it would be incumbent upon the Commission to deny the request. B) The standards of the Planned Sign Program would apply to wall signs for food and fuel service, but additional flexibility is proposed in the application of these standards. The purpose would be to give the Commission the opportunity to evaluate each situation on the mer- its. As would be the case for freestanding signs, find- ings of consistency with the intent of the ordinance would be needed in order to approve the request. A) Freestanding Signs for Places.of Lodging 1) Signs shall reflect the architecture of the prin- cipal building which is being advertised, 2) The size and the height of the sign shall be dic- tated by the minimum size and height required to be visible and realable for a distance generally not to exceed 1,500 feet from the location of the sign in the direction of the freeway, based upon the attached schedule (Exhibit "A") a) If, in order to be visible from more than one direct.Qn along the freeway, the size and/or height) of the sign will be substantially greater than would be needed to be visible from one direction, the Commission may not approve signage which would be visible from more than one direction. b) If the configuration, elevation or geometry of the freeway will restrict visibility of the proposed sign to less than 1,500 feet, the height and size of such sign will be re- duced'accordingly. C) Information on freestanding signs shall be limited to the name and logo of the facility to be advertised. Memorandum January 25, 1991 Page Three 3) Such signs shall be limited to one per site. 4) The Commission may permit additional text or height than might otherwise be permitted, if sign- age is integrated into the overall design of the principal building in lieu of a freestanding sign. 5) Freestanding signs shall be located on the site in a manner clearly designed to be visible primarily from the freeway, with the support structure for said freestanding sign to be located and con- structed in a manner which will minimize visibili- ty from other surrounding public rights-of-way and public areas. B. Wall signs adjoining freeways 1) An additional sign may be permitted on a building, inorder to advertise food, fuel and lodging on a building wall which does not contain the front entrance, but which adjoins and is visible from the freeway. 2) Information shall be limited to the name and logo of the advertised business, unless such wall sign is in lieu of a permitted freestanding sign. 3) The number of suchwwall signs shall be limited to one per eligible use, subject to the size limita- tions of this section. 4) one additional sign may be granted, if it is in lieu of a permitted freestanding sign. C. The Commission shiall deny an application for a sign if: 1) It is deemed to violate the intent of this sec- tion, or 2) Specific findings cannot be made in support of each of the guidelines enumerated herein. jY4 115 ifi "AfI Viewing Distance Sign readership for various character heights at different speeds. N CV O O co Farthest Distance that the sign will be readable 1/4 1/3 1/2 6/10 mile mile mile mile haracter Height, Character Reading Viewing Exposure in Seconds Height in Distance 20MPH 30MPH 40MPH 50MPH 60MPH Inches In Feet (29.3) (44.0) (58.7) (73.3) (88.0) 18 900 30.7 20.5 15.3 12.3 10.2 24 1200 41.0 27.3 20.4 16.4 13.6 30 1500 51.2 34:1 25.6 20.5 17.0 36 1800 16il.4 40.9 30.7 24.5 20.5 42 2100 71.7 47.7 35.7 28.6 23.9 48 2400 81.9 54.5 40.0 32.7 27.3 .60 3000 102.4 68.2 51.1 40.9 34.1 NOTATIONS: 1. The general rule of 50 feet of distance for each inch of character height was developed for 3M Co. by Dr. Lauer in a series of studies 25-30 years ago. If the sign is directly in view, the distance applies. If there is considerable set=back from the road, the distance would be the hypotenuse. 2. The feet traveled per second is indicated in the parenthesis. 3. The data in the 3-7 columns is viewing exposure in seconds for moving vehicles. IC 9.0 - 9/87 SIGN ORDINANCE SECTION 100. PURPOSE AND INTENT. The purpose and intent of the draft Sign Ordinance is as follows: A. To encourage the use of modest signs with due regard for the needs of the business community. B. To encourage signs which are harmonious with other existing signs. C. To assure an appropriate level of review prior to approval of sign permits. D. To bring existing signs, as much as is feasible, into compliance with the provisions of the Sign Ordinance. SECTION 102. A. PERMITS; REQUIRED PERMITS; PERMIT ISSUER. 1. Permits are„pequired for all signs except those specifically exempted from the permit requirements by this Sign Ordinance. 2. Permits may be issued by the Planning Director, or his/her designee, for all signs listed in (Section 106) of this Ordinance (Basic Sign Program), subject to those conditions listed in Section 102 D (Guidelines) of this Ordinance. 3. Permits may be issued by the Planning Director, or his designee, upon direction from the Planning Commission or City Council for any sign(s) listed within (Section 108) (Planned Sign category). 1 B. APPLICATION FOR PERMITS Applications for sign permits shall be made upon forms provided by the Planning Director, or his designee, and shall contain, or have attached thereto, the following information and material: 1. The name, address, and telephone number of the owner of the property on which the sign(s) are to be located. 2. The name, address, and telephone number of the applicant (owner of the sign). 3. The name, address, and telephone number of the sign contractor, if any. 4. The location of the building, structure or lot to which or upon which the sign or other advertising structure is to be attached or elected. 5. Three (3) copies of a plan and elevations showing the: a. Sign(s) height, size, proposed colors, type style, elevation above final grade level, proposed location on the premises of the sign structure, its relationship to adjacent signs, buildings or structures, the method of illumination and the colors and materials proposed to be used. b. Structural details and calculations signed by a person competent and qualified to prepare such information. The Planning Director or his/her designee may, in their sole discretion, waive such requirement. 2 6. Photographs showing the premises and adjacent property at the time of making the application. 7. Such other information as the Planning Director, or his/her designee, shall deem reasonable and necessary to ensure safety of construction and compliance with this and all other ordinances of the City. C. REVIEW OF SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION; APPEAL PROCESS 1. In consideration of the issuance of a sign permit, the factors noted below shall be utilized by the Planning Director, or his/her designee, as guidelines for determining that a submitted sign proposal furthers the intent and purpose established by this Ordinance. 2. An appeal from a decision of the Planning Director relative to the application of the review guidelines contained herein shall be made to the Planning Commission. Such appeal shall be filed with the Secretary of the Commission in writing within ten (10) days after the date of mailing of notification to the Applicant by the Planning Director or his/her designee that any submitted sign proposal has been denied or modifications are required to effect conformance with the guidelines. An appeal from the Planning Commission decision may be made to the City Council if such appeal is filed in writing within ten (10) days after the date of mailing of notification of the Planning Commission action. 3 D. GUIDELINES: In determining the consistency of each proposed sign with the purposes of this Ordinance, the following guidelines shall be applied: 1. That the proposed sign will be legible to the intended audience under normal viewing conditions, based on its proposed location and the design of its visual element. 2. That the proposed sign will not obscure from view or detract from existing signs, based on its location, shape, color and other similar considerations. 3. That the proposed sign will be in harmony with adjacent properties and surroundings, based on the size, shape, height, color, placement, and the proximity of such proposed sign to adjacent properties and surroundings. 4. That the proposed structure, sign or display will be designed, constructed and located so that it will not constitute a hazard to the public. 5. That the proposed sign is not designed to have the advertising thereon maintained primarily to be viewed from a freeway, unless specifically provided for under the terms of this Ordinance. E. FEES The appropriate fee, as determined by resolution of the City Council, shall be collected by the Planning Director, or his designee, upon application for any sign permit or appeal thereof. 4 SECTION 104. GENERAL REGULATIONS A. No freestanding sign shall be located less than 25 linear feet from an adjoining property line, except that a sign may be located no less than 10 feet from the ultimate street right-of-way. B. Signs shall be constructed of fire resistant material. Where glass or plastic are used, these materials shall be shatter -resistant. C. The Director of Planning may approve minor alterations of signs approved within a planned sign program. D. Sign materials and colors shall be consistent with building materials attached or adjacent to signs. E. No sign shall be placed on or over a public right-of-way unless permission has been granted by the City Council or the Council's designee. F. Sign copy in non Latin/Roman letters, symbols, numerals, or alphabet characters must contain thereon a generic description written in English of the nature of such business or I use. Such translation shall be visible from the nearest public street. G. Business signs shall be limited to those portions of a building within which such business is located or conducted. SECTION 106. DEFINITIONS A. Advertising device: Any balloon, flag, pennant, banner, propeller, oscillating, rotating, pulsating or stationary light or other contrivance (except lawfully permitted signs) used 5 to attract attention. (See "Sign".) B. Advertising display: Any device, contrivance, statue or structure (other than a sign) used as a display, regardless of size and shape, for the purpose of attracting attention. C. Advertising structure, outdoor: 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. D. Alteration: Any change of copy, sign face, color, size, shape, illumination, position, location, construction or supporting structure of any sign. E. Area of a sign: The total exterior surface of a sign within the single continuous perimeter of not more than eight (8) straight lines enclosipg the extreme limits of writing, representation, emblem or any figure of similar character, together with any material or color forming any integral part of the display in the case of a sign designed with more than one exterior surface, the area shall be computed as including only the maximum single display surface which is visible from any ground position at one time. Unless otherwise specified, the supports, uprights or structure on which any sign is supported shall not be included in determining the sign area unless such supports, uprights or structure are designed in such a manner as to form an integral background of the display. 5 F. Attached sign: Any sign which is permanently affixed to a building, including wall signs. G. Attraction board: A changeable copy on premise wall or freestanding sign which contains messages related to upcoming events at restaurants, movie theatres, or similar uses. H. Awning sign: A sign attached to or written upon an awning, canopy or marquee. I. Banner sign: Any sign hung either with or without frames, possessing written communication applied to non -rigid paper, plastic, non -rigid material or fabric of any kind, and capable of being viewed from any public right-of-way, parking area, or neighboring property. J. Building frontage: The lineal extent of a building or activity which has frontage on either a public right-of-way or parking area. Tie length of the building facing the public right-of-way or parking lot shall be used to determine the amount of signage permitted. K. Building identification sign: A sign attached to a building which designates the name and/or address of a business or organization. L. Business sign: A sign displaying information pertaining to goods or services offered or produced by the business located on the property but not including advertising devices/displays. M. Canopy sign: Any sign which is not illuminated, which is attached to the underside of a projecting canopy 7 protruding over a private or public sidewalk or right-of-way. (See "Awning sign".) N. Changeable copy sign: Any sign designed and intended to have an easily and readily changeable copy. (See "Attraction board".) O. Civic organizations sign: A sign which has copy limited to organization name, address, and civic, patriotic or religious events conducted on the property. P. Commercial center: Any site containing two (2) or more commercial activities, for which signage is proposed. Q. Condominium, subdivision or rental community sign (permanence: A wall or freestanding sign which has copy limited to the name of the condominium, subdivision or rental community, including apartments, located on the property. R. Construction s_gno: A temporary sign which states the name of the future site occupant and/or the name, address and/or phone numbers of related construction, architectural, and financial firms. S. Electronic I message board sign: A sign with a fixed or changing display composed of a series of lights, but not including time and temperature displays. T. Entrance/Exit signs: A sign which has copy limited to the words "Entrance" or "Exit" and is located at commercial driveways or mounted at building entrances or exits. U. Flag: An advertising device, but not including national flags or flags of political subdivisions. 0 V. Flashing or animated sign: A sign intermittently emitting light, or which has any illumination which is not maintained in constant intensity, color or pattern, including electronic reader boards, except time and temperature displays. W. Freestanding sign: Any sign permanently or temporarily attached to the ground which does not have a building as its structural support. X. Grade level: Ground elevation at the closest point of the adjacent building or curb level of the adjacent right-of-way, whichever is closer to the location of the sign. Y. Grand opening sign: An on premise sign advertising the opening of a new business. Z. Government offices and quasi -official signs: A sign displaying information pertaining to services offered by City, County, State or other official governmental agencies. AA. Height of a sign: The vertical distance measured from (average) grade (lowest point of elevation) level along the base of the sign structure, to the highest point of the structure. i BB. Hours of operation sign: A wall or window sign designating hours of opening and closing. CC. Illuminated sign: A sign which has characters, letters, figures, designs or outline backlighted or internally illuminated by electric lights or luminous tubes. DD. Incidental sign: A wall or window sign indicating type of credit card accepted, trade affiliation, etc. 4 EE. Institutional sign: A sign which has copy limited to the name/address of an institution located on the property, i.e., a hospital, school, library or other public facility. FF. Liquidation sign: An on premise sign advertising a one time only clearance, liquidation or going out of business sale. GG. Logo: A name, symbol, or trademark of a company, - business, or organization. HH. Menu board: A changeable copy wall or freestanding sign limited to a listing of food sold on premises, including prices. II. Monument sign: A low profile freestanding sign which may be internally or externally illuminated, erected with its base on the ground and which is designed to incorporate design and building materials which complement the architectural theme of the buildings of the premises. JJ. Nameplate: A wall mounted sign of no more than four (4) square feet identifying the building name or address, or the name of the owner of the premises. KK Nonconforming sign: A sign which complied with all applicable regulations at the time it was installed, but which is now in conflict with the provisions of this chapter. LL. Outdoor advertising sign: A sign, including billboards, or the sign structure on which it is to be placed, the purpose of which is to advertise products or services that are not produced, stored, serviced or sold on the property upon which the sign or structure is located, but not including travel direction or bus/bench shelter signs in public rights-of-way. MM. Portable sign: A sign not securely attached or fixed to the ground or to a permanent structure; or upon a vehicle or trailer used as a stationary advertising display, the primary purpose of which is to serve as a base, platform, or support for the sign, or to which the sign is otherwise affixed or attached. NN. Pole sign: A freestanding sign supported by one or more uprights. 00. Political sign: A temporary sign conveying a message relating to a political issue, candidate, upcoming election or ballot issue. PP. Price sign: A sign limited to the name or identification of items or produpts for sale on the premises, and the price of said items or products. QQ. Projecting sign: A sign which projects more than twelve (12) inches from a building and is dependent upon such building for its support.I RR. Real estate sign: A temporary sign indicating that the premises on which the sign is located is for sale, lease or rent. SS. Roof sign: An attached sign constructed upon or over a roof, or placed so as to extend above the visible roof line. pop TT. Sian: Any device used for visual communication or attraction, including any announcement, declaration, demonstration, display, illustration, insignia, or symbol used to advertise or promote the interests of any person, together with all parts, materials, frame and background thereof. UU. Sian copy: Any word, letter, number, figure, design or other symbolic representation incorporated into or depicted upon a sign. W. Sian face: The area or display surface used for the message. sign. WW. Sian structure: Any structure which supports any XX. Site: one or more parcels of land identified by the assessor's records where an integrated building development has been approved or proposed. She site shall include all parcels of land contained within or a part of the development application. An integrated building development shall include all parcels served by common access ways, driveway, parking and landscaping. i YY. Special event sign: A temporary sign which conveys a message related to a civic, patriotic or religious event. ZZ. Subdivision/model home sign: A sign which identifies a subdivision for sale, and which is located on the property being advertised. 12 AAA. Temporary Holiday Lighting or Window Trimming: Low intensity lighting consisting of continuous bulbs which may flash or blink used to commemorate a patriotic civic or religious event, or decorative trim surrounding the window. BBB. Temporary sign: Any sign displayed for a limited period of time and capable of being viewed from any public right-of-way, parking area, or neighboring property. CCC. Wall sign: Any sign which is attached, erected, or painted on the exterior wall of a building including the parapet, with the display surface of the sign parallel to the building wall, and which does not project more than twelve (12) inches from the building. DDD. Window sign: Any sign posted, placed or affixed in or on any window visible from the exterior of the structure through a window. SECTION 106. BASIC SIGN PROGRAM. The following signs may be approved by the Planning Director or his/her designee. A. Permanent:I 1. Wall signs for individual uses: Max. Area: 1 sq. ft. per 1 lineal foot frontage, to a maximum 100 sq. ft. per use. Max. Number: 1 per outer wall Special Conditions: No permit shall be issued for a wall sign in a multi -use 1407 building or commercial center in which more than one sign is proposed without Planning Commission review and approval. Zone: Commercial 2. Canopy and awning signs: Max. Area: Limited to letters or numbers no greater than 7 inches in height designating business name or address. Max. Number: 1 per use Zone: Commercial B. Temporary: 1. Commercial Real Estate Sign: Max. Area: 24 sq. ft. Configuratio,p: Wall or Freestanding Max. Number 1 per site Max. Freestanding Height: 6 ft. Special Conditions: Permit valid for one year after permit issuance, may be renewed. Zone: Commercial 2. Construction Sign: Max. Area: 24 sq. ft. Configuration: Wall or Freestanding Max. Number: 1 per site Max. Freestanding Height: 6 ft. 14 Special Conditions: Permit for sign issued after construction permit is issued; sign must be removed upon issuance of occupancy permit. Zone: All 3. Subdivision/Model Home Sales Signs Max. Area: 16 sq. ft. Configuration: Wall or Freestanding Max. Number: 1 per entrance Max. Freestanding Height: 4 ft. Special Conditions: Permit valid for six months, renewable. Zone: Any 4. Grand Opening Sign: Max. Area: . 16 sq. ft. Configuration: Wall or Window Max. Number: 2 per use. Special Conditions: Permit valid for 30 days Zone:I Commercial 5. Liquidation Sale Sign Max. Area: 16 sq. ft. Configuration: Wall or Window Max. Number: 2 per use Special Conditions: Permit valid for 30 days Zone: Commercial 0407 6. Special Event: Max. Area: 24 sq. ft. Configuration: Wall, Window or Portable Max. Number: 1 per use Special Conditions: Must be removed within ten days following special event. Permit issued not more than 60 days prior to event. Zone: Commercial 7. Temporary Holiday Lighting: Max. Area: As may be deemed to be Configuration: suitable at the discretion Max. Number: of the Planning Director special Conditions: Must be removed within 30 days after permit issuance. Maximum intensity of.25 watts. Trim not to exceed 7" in height or width. Zone: All 8. Temporary Searchlight Permit: Max. Area: N/A Configuration: N/A Max. Number: 1 Searchlight per property special Conditions: A temporary searchlight permit may be used for special events such as, but not limited to, Grand Openings and Premier showings. Such permits may be granted for a maximum period of ten days. M The ten days may be consecutive or may occur within a 30 day period. Permit shall be granted one time per year. Zone: Commercial SECTION 108. PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM The following signs must be approved by the Planning Commission: A. Sign illumination shall be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. No lighting shall interfere with traffic or regulatory lighting in color or intensity, nor create confusion for motorists or pedestrians in travel. 2. The intensity of lighting and the hours of operation shall be restricted for sign lighting visible from, directed toward or reflecting upgn residential properties. 3. Lighting shall be consistent with existing conforming commercial and/or residential properties. B. For single use buildings with 200 feet or more of frontage, a Planned Sign Program may be approved which exceeds the maximum aggregate sign area up to a limit of 200 sq. ft., provided that: 1. No single wall sign so approved exceeds 100 sq. ft., and no freestanding sign exceeds 24 sq. ft., except as stated by the provisions of this Ordinance. 2. Any two signs placed on the same frontage which taken together exceed 100 sq. ft. shall be separated by no NWJ less than one-half the length of the building frontage. C. No planned sign program shall be approved which allows any combination of signs which exceed an overall maximum of 100 sq. ft. per use, except as stated by the provisions of this ordinance. D. Standards: 1. Freestanding Monument: Max. Area: 24 sq. ft. Max. Number: 1 per frontage in excess of 99 ft. for structures less than 4 stories 1 per frontage for structures 4 stories or greater Max. Height: 6 feet Zone: Commercial 2. Window Signs: Max. Area: 25 percent of contiguous window area Max. Number: 2 per use Zone: Commercial 3. Wall Signs for multi -use buildings or commercial centers: Max. Area: 1 sq. ft. per 1 lineal foot of frontage per establishment to a maximum of 100 sq. ft. per street level uses plus 1 sq. ft. per 1 lineal foot of frontage per W establishment up to a maximum of 100 sq. ft. for uses not located at street level which are visible from the street, courtyard, or public parking area and which are individually accessible directly from the outside, such as along a common balcony or walkway. Max. Number: 1 per use per outer wall Location: Same as Basic Sign Program Special Conditions: Sign on rear wall may not exceed 100 sq. ft. maximum. Businesses with frontages less than 25 feet may be approved for sign area up to 25 sq. ft. Zone: Cormercial An additional sign may be permitted on a wall other than the wall which contains the front entrance, provided said wall faces a public right-of-way. Such signs may not be erected on walls visible from adjoining freeway rights-of-way, with the exception of signs for restaurants serving food primarily for on-site consumption, automobile service stations dispensing fuel, and places of lodging. 19 4. Freestanding Monument Signs for commercial centers: Max. Area: 72 sq. ft. Max. Height: 6 feet Max. Number: 1 sign per entrance Special Conditions: Shall not be counted toward maximum sign area otherwise permitted. Zone: Commercial 5. Government flags over 12 sq. ft. in area or 6 ft. in height: Max. Area: Determined by Planning Commission Max. Height: 35 feet Max. Number: Determined by Planning Commission Zone: All 6. Building I.D. Sigji: Max. Area: 36 sq. ft. Max. Height: Must be mounted at a height no less than 25 ft. Max. Number: 1 per building Special Conditions: (a) Signs mounted at a building level higher than 45 feet may be no larger than 2% of the vertical exterior wall upon which the sign is located; (b) Up to 4 Building I.D. Signs may be approved for buildings when such signs are mounted at a building height greater than 75 feet, limited to one sign per 20 building side; (c) Up to two Building I.D. Signs may be approved when signs are mounted higher than 45 ft.; (d) Building I.D. Signs larger than 36 sq. ft. may not be used on properties containing freestanding signs; (e) Building I.D. Signs shall not be counted towards maximum sign area; and (f) Building I.D. Signs are allowed only on buildings the heights of which are no less than 45 feet. 7oZone: Commercial G KVYrGh Civic Organization Signs/InstitutionalASigns: a. Freestanding Monument: ClAI Max. Area: 24 sq. £t. in-QQNwi&Fs zones Max. Height: 6 -h -,feet Max. Number: 1 per frontage along public streets Zone: All Special Conditions: Copy may be changeable. Sign must not be located within fifty feet of any residential use. 21 0 b. Wall Signs: Max. Area: 1 sq. ft. sign area per 1 linear foot frontage, to a maximum of 100 sq. ft. in commercial zones. 1 sq. ft. sign area per 1 linear foot frontage, to a maximum of 50 sq. feet in residential zones. Max. Number: 1 per frontage on public streets. Zone: All Special Conditions: Copy may be changeable. Must not be located within fifty feet of any residential use. Condominium, Subdivision or Rental Community Sign (Permanent): Max. Area: 16wsq. ft. Max. Height: 4 ft. Configuration: Wall or freestanding monument Max. Number: 1 per frontage in excess of 200 ft. I Zone: All Special Conditions: Must not be located within fifty feet of any residential use which is not part of the condominium project, subdivision or rental community located on the property. Height is to be measured from ground level along the base of the sign structure to the top of the sign area. 22 9. Attraction or Menu Board: Max. Area: 24 sq. ft. Max. Height: 6 ft. in commercial zones Configuration: Freestanding monument Max. Number: 1 per frontage along public streets in excess of 99 feet Wall Signs: Max. Area: 1 sq. ft. sign area per 1 ft. frontage along a public street to a maximum of 100 sq. ft. Max. Number: 1 per use, except theatre marquees Location: Same as Basic Sign Program Special Conditions: Theatre marquees shall be determined by Planning Commission. 10. Freeway Oriented Signs: (See attached memo) SECTION 110. EXEMPT SIGNS A. Government required traffic and directional signs. B. Official City monument signs located at City limits. Such signs shall be submitted for an advisory architectural review by Planning Commission prior to sign installation. C. Monument signs on City park grounds or at City facilities. Such signs shall be submitted for an advisory architectural review by Planning Commission prior to sign installation. 23 D. Entrance/Exit Signs (wall or window): Area: 1 sq. ft. Configuration: Wall or window Number: 1 per entrance plus 1 per exit special Conditions: Must be consistent in color, background and lettering with other signs on the property. E. Real Estate Signs: Area: 6 sq. ft. Height: 8 ft. Configuration: Freestanding, window (one window sign allowed per ground level lease space) Number: 1 per property Special Conditions: Removed upon sale, lease or rent of property. May not be used in conjunction with commercial real estate signs. F. Nameplate/Address Sign: Area: 4 sq. ft. Configuration: Wall Number: 2 per building Special Conditions: May be illuminated with lighting no greater than 25 watts. G. Hours of Operation: Area: 1 sq. ft. Configuration: Wall or window 24 Number: 1 per use H. Incidental Sign: Area: 1 sq. ft. Configuration: Wall or window Number: 1 per use I. Security Protection: Area: 1 sq. ft. Height: 1 ft. Configuration: Wall or freestanding Number: 1 per property Special Conditions: May utilize pole uprights. J. No Trespassing Sign: Area: 2 sq. ft. Height; 2 ft. Configuration: Wall or freestanding Number: 1 per property Special Conditions: May utilize pole uprights. K. Flags: i Area: 12 sq. ft. per flag Height: 6 ft. Number: 2 per property Special Conditions: Must represent government body or unit and may be pole mounted. L. Warning Signs as required by Federal, State or City regulations: Area: 4 sq. ft. KU Height: 4 ft. Configuration: Wall or freestanding Special Conditions: May use pole uprights. M. Signs located within the interior of buildings or the interior of malls, when such signs are incapable of being viewed from the outside of said building or mall. SECTION 112. NON -CONFORMING SIGNS A. INTENT OF PROVISIONS. It is the intent of this Section to recognize that the eventual elimination of certain existing signs that are not in conformity with the provisions of this Section is necessary to insure that the City of Diamond Bar maintains the highest level of visual esthetics and community benefits. B. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS. The following requirements shall apply to all advertising displays which satisfy any of the criteria set forth hereinunder. A non -conforming advertising display shall be an advertising display which is not in conformity with the provisions of this Title. All non -conforming advertising displays may be required to be removed, without compensation, by the City if they satisfy any of the following criteria: 1. Any advertising display originally erected or installed without first complying with all ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of its construction and erection or use. ►M. 2. Any advertising display which was lawfully erected and whose use has ceased, or the structure upon which the display has been abandoned by its owner, for a period of not less than ninety (90) days. The costs incurred in removing an abandoned display may be charged to the legal owner. Abandoned advertising displays shall mean,.for purposes of this Subsection, any display remaining in place or not maintained for a period of ninety (90) calendar days which no longer advertises or identifies and on-going business, product, or service available on the business premise where the display is located. 3. Any advertising display which has been more than fifty percent (50%) destroyed, and the destruction is other than facial copy replacement, and the display cannot be repaired within thirty (30) days of the date of its destruction. 4. Any advertising display whose owner seeks relocation thereof and actually relocates the advertising display. 5. Any advertising display for which there is an agreement between the advertising display owner and the City or County, for its removal as of any specific date. 6. Any advertising display which is temporary. 7. Any advertising display which is or may become a danger to the public or is unsafe. traffic hazard. 8. Any advertising display which constitutes a 27 Any on -premises advertising display which does not meet any of the above-described criteria with respect to type and location shall be permitted to remain for fifteen (15) years from the effective date of the adoption of this ordinance. C. NEW PERMITS. The City shall not deny, refuse to issue or condition the issuance of a business license or a permit to construct a new legal on -premises advertising display upon the removal, conformance, repair, modification or abatement of any other on -premises advertising display on the same real property where the business is to be or has been maintained if both of the following apply: 1. The other display is located within the same commercial complex which is zoned for commercial occupancy or use, but at a different business location from that for which the permit or license is sought. 2. The other display is not owned or controlled by the permit applicant, and the permit applicant is not the agent of the person who owns orIcontrols the other display. D. ALTERATION OF NON -CONFORMING ADVERTISING DISPLAYS. During the fifteen (15) year period during which a non -conforming legally in-place, on -premises advertising display may continue to be used, the City shall not deny, refuse to issue, or condition the issuance of a permit for modification or alteration to the display upon change of ownership of any existing business if the modification or alteration does not M include a structural change in the display and does not increase the extent of the non-conformance. E. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES; HEIGHT OR SIZE OF ON-SITE ADVERTISING DISPLAYS. No on -premises advertising display shall be required to be removed on the sole inexclusive basis of its height or size if special topographic circumstances would result in a material impairment of visibility of the display or the owner's or user's ability to adequately and effectively continue to communicate to the public through the use of the display. The owner or user may maintain the advertising display at the business premises and at a location necessary for continued public visibility at the height or size at which the display was previously erected pursuant to all applicable codes, regulations and permits. Such signs shall be deemed to be in cgnformance with this Title. F. ON -PREMISES ADVERTISING DISPLAY ABATEMENT. The City Council may declare, by resolution, as public nuisances and abate all illegal on -premises advertising displays located within its jurisdiction. For purposes of this Section, illegal on -premise advertising displays shall be those described in Subsection B, above. The resolution shall describe the property upon which or in front of which the nuisance exists by giving its lot and block number according to the County Assessor's map and street address, if known. Any number of parcels of private property may be included in one resolution. 29 1. Notice of Hearing. Prior to the adoption of the resolution by the City Council, the City Clerk shall send not less than a ten (10) days' written notice to all persons owning property described in the proposed resolution. The notice shall be mailed to each person on whom the described property is assessed on the last equalized assessment roll available on the date the notice is prepared. The notice shall state the date, time and place of the hearing and generally describe the purpose of the hearing and the nature of the illegality of the display. 2. Posting of Notice. After adoption of the resolution, the enforcement officer shall cause notices to be conspicuously posted on or in front of the property on or in front of which the display exists. (a) Form of notice. Notice shall be substantially in the following fgrm: NOTICE TO REMOVE ILLEGAL ADVERTISING DISPLAY Notice is hereby given that on the day of 19_, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted a resolution declaring a resolution that an illegal advertising display is located on or in front of this property which constitutes a public nuisance and must be abated by the removal of the illegal display. Otherwise, it will be removed, and the nuisance abated by the City. The cost of removal will be assessed upon the property from or in front of which the display is removed and will constitute a lien upon W the property until paid. Reference is hereby made to the resolution for further particulars. A copy of this resolution is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. All property owners having any objection to the proposed removal of the display are hereby notified to attend a meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar to be held on at a.m./p.m. at ( location ), when their objections will be heard and given due consideration. Dated this day of , Title City of Diamond Bar (b) This notice shall be posted at least ten (10) days prior to the time for hearing objections by the City Council of the City of Diamond BaT. (c) Written Notice of Proposed Abatement. In addition to posting notice of the resolution and notice of the meeting when objections will be heard, the City Council shall direct the City Clerk to mail written notice of the proposed abatement to all persons owning property described in the resolution. The Clerk shall cause the written notice to be mailed to each person on whom the described property is assessed 31 in the last equalized assessment roll available on the date the resolution was adopted by the legislative body. The City Clerk shall confirm with the County Assessor the names and addresses of all the persons owning property described in the resolution. The addresses of the owners shown on the assessment roll is conclusively deemed to be the proper address for the purpose of mailing the notice. If the County of Los Angeles poses any charges upon the City for the actual costs of furnishing the list, the City shall reimburse the County, and such costs shall be a part of the cost of abatement assessed against the property owner. The notices mailed by the City Clerk shall be mailed at least ten (10) days prior to the time for hearing objections by the City Council. The notices mailed by the Clerk shall be substantially in the fo.Vm of the form of notice set forth hereinabove. G. HEARING; CONTINUANCES; OBJECTIONS; FINALITY OF DECISION; ORDER TO ABATE. At the time stated in the notices, the City Council shall hear and consider all objections to the proposed removal of the on -premises advertising display. It may continue the hearing from time to time. By motion or resolution at the conclusion of the hearing, the legislative body shall allow or overrule any objections. At that time, the legislative body acquires jurisdiction to proceed and perform the work of removal.. 32 The decision of the legislative body is final. If objections have not been made, or after the City Council has disposed of those made, the Council shall order the enforcement officer to abate the nuisance by having the display removed. The order shall be made by motion or resolution. H. ENTRY UPON PRIVATE PROPERTY. The enforcement officer may enter private property to abate the nuisance. COSTS. I. REMOVAL BY OWNER; SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AND LIEN FOR Before the enforcement officer takes action, the property owner may remove the illegal on -premises advertising display at the owner's own cost and expense. Notwithstanding such action, in any matter in which an order to abate has been issued, the City Council may, by„motion or resolution, further order that a special assessment and lien shall be limited to the costs incurred by the City in enforcing abatement upon the property, including investigation, boundary determination, measurement, clerical, and other related costs. J. COST OF ABATEMENT, ITEMIZATION. 1. The enforcement officer shall keep an account of the cost of abatement of an illegal on -premises advertising display in front of or on each separate parcel of property where the work is done. He or she shall submit to the City Council, for confirmation, an itemized written report showing that cost. 33 2. A copy of the report shall be posted at least three (3) days prior to its submission to the City Council, on or near the City Council chambers door, with notice of the time of submission. 3. At the time fixed for receiving considering the report, the City Council shall hear it with any objections of the property owners liable to be assessed for the abatement. The City Council may modify the report if it is deemed necessary. The City Council shall then confirm the report by motion or resolution. K. ABATEMENT BY CONTRACT. The nuisance may, in the sole discretion of the City Council, be abated by performance on a contract awarded by the City Council on the basis of competitive bids let to the lowest responsible bidder. The contractor performing the contract shall keep an itemized account and submit such itemized written report for each separate parcel of property acquired by Subsection J, above. L. COST OF ABATEMENT; SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AND LIEN. 1. Cost of abatement in front of or upon each parcel of property, and the cost incurred by the City in enforcing abatement upon the parcel or parcels, including investigation, bond redetermination, measurement, clerical, and other related costs, are a special assessment against that parcel. After the assessment is made and confirmed, a lien attaches on the parcel upon recordation of the order confirming 0V the assessment in the office of the Los Angeles County Recorder. In the event any real property to which a lien would attach has been transferred or conveyed to a bona fide purchaser for value, or if the lien of a bona fide incumbrancer for value has been created and attaches thereon, prior to the date on which the first installment of the assessment would become delinquent, the lien which would otherwise be imposed by this Section shall not attach to the real property and the costs of abatement and the costs of enforcing abatement, as confirmed, relating to the property shall be transferred to the unsecured roll for collection. 2. Upon confirmation of the report, a copy shall be given to the County Assessor and Tax Collector, who shall add the amount of the assessment to the next regular tax bill levied against the parcel for municipal„purposes. 3. The City shall file a certified copy of the report with the County Assessor, Tax Collector and County Auditor on or before August 10th of each calendar year. The description of the parcels reported shall be those used for the same parcels on the Los Angeles County Assessor's Map Books for the current year. 4. The City shall request the County Auditor to enter each assessment on the County tax roll office at the parcel of land. The City Shall further request the County Auditor to collect the amount of the assessment at the time and in the 35 manner of ordinary municipal taxes. Any delinquencies in the amount due are subject to the same penalties and procedures of foreclosure provided for ordinary municipal taxes. The City Council may determine that, in lieu of collecting the entire assessment at the time and in the manner of ordinary municipal taxes, incremental assessment of Fifty Dollars ($50.00) or more may be made in annual installments, not to exceed five (5) installments, and collected one installment at a time at the time and in the manner of ordinary municipal taxes in successive years. The amount of any delinquent installment shall be subject to the same penalties and procedures for foreclosure and sale provided for ordinary municipal taxes. The payment of assessments so deferred shall bear interest on the unpaid balance at a rate to be determined by the City Council, but not to exceed six percent (6%) per annum. The City acknowledges that the County Tax Collector, at his or her own discretion, may collect assessments without reference to the general taxes by issuing separate bills and receipts for the assessments. It is acknowledged that the lien of assessment has the priority of the taxes with which it is collected, and further, that all laws relating to levy, collection and enforcement of County taxes apply to these special assessments. M. ISSUANCE OF RECEIPTS FOR ABATEMENT COSTS. The enforcement officer may receive the amount due on the abatement costs and issue receipts at any time after the confirmation of the report and until ten (10) days before a copy is given to the Assessor and Tax Collector or, where a certified copy is filed with the County Auditor, until August 1st following the confirmation of the report. N. REFUND OF ASSESSMENTS. The City Council may order a refund of all or part of an assessment pursuant to this Title if it finds that all or part of the assessment has been erroneously levied. An assessment, or part thereof, shall not be refunded unless a claim is filed with the City Clerk on or before November 1 after the assessment has become due and payable. The claim shall be verified by the person who paid the assessment or by the person's guardian, conservator, executor or administrator. N\1011\SIGNORD\DB 6.6 37 City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report TO: Chairman and Planning Commissioners FROM: James DeStefano, Director of Plannli SUBJECT: Agenda Item No. 8 -Development Agreement DA 91-1 DATE: February 8, 1991 The Zelman Development Company, has been working with the City staff toward the creation of a Development Agreement for several months. The Agreement is currently under review and is not yet ready for public hearing. As a result, staff recommends that this City -ini- tiated application be continued. We cannot, at this time, establish a specific date and therfore we will we will re -advertise (post, publish and notice) the next pub- lic hearing on this project. \pjs City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 9 REPORT DATE: February 7, 1991 MEETING DATE: February 11, 1991 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit 90-0125 APPLICATION REQUEST: The application is for an environmen- tal determination and conditional use permit to construct a two (2) story office building approximately 6,400 square feet in size on a 2.76 acre site located in a Commercial Manufac- turing (C -M) zone. PROPERTY LOCATION: 23475 Sunset Crossing Diamond Bar, California 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Fred and Norma Janz 2683 Shady Ridge Diamond Bar, California 91765 APPLICANT: Ed and Shirley Jaworsky 3344 Paloma La Verne, California 91750 BACKGROUND: This application has been submitted to the City to be processed in co- ordination with a lot line adjustment application. As a result of the review related to that application, the applicant has requested addi- tional time to meet with staff to discuss other possible alternatives. As a result, the applicant has submitted a request for a continuance of the public hearing to the February 25, 1991, public hearing. IONS: 1. Open the public hearing and accept all testimony; and 2. Continue the public hearing to March 11, 1991. RLS:pjs FRED JANZ REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS 556 N. Diamond Bar Blvd., Suite 301, Diamond Bar, CA 91 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 6 FEB O 7 1991® February 07, 1991 PLANNUG DEPT. To whom it may concern, Please reschedule my Public Hearing from February 11, 1991 to February 25, 1991. If you have any questions please contact me at (714) 861-3733. Sincere_ Fred P. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: REPORT DATE: MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: APPLICATION REQUEST: PROPERTY LOCATION: PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report 10 February 8, 1991 February 11, 1991 ZCA91-3 Establishment of procedures for Pub- lic Hearings to be noticed N/A N/A City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the commission continue this item pending further staff review and analysis. Y \srk City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report TO: Chairman and Planning Commissioners FROM: James DeStefano, Director of Plan SUBJECT: Agenda Item Number 11.- Review of Development Code DATE: February 8, 1991 A second draft of the Development Code has been prepared by our consultant, The Planning Network, with input from the City staff. It is now, therefore, appropriate to discuss and schedule a series of meetings to review the document. I would like to discuss the review process with the Commission and proceed accordingly. \pis J Agenda Item No. llb (Staff report to be presented at the meeting). d