Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAR96-1.pdfCITY OF DLAMOND �4 CODEMJNY Y DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMIENT DabRec'd 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 Fee $ (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 Receipt# VARIANCE APPLICATION 13y 1teccnrd O? mer ZAPHP Name - (Last name first) �— Address 1852g E._C ,. vmm- City 11335try, CA zip— 31748�_�.. _. Phone( ) M-912-381.2 Applicant ofammix (Last name first) Applicant's Agent NOTE: It is iho upplicant's responsibility to notify the Commtmity Development Director in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this can. (Attach scpatate sheet i if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors of corporations.) Consent: I iej*ly that I am the owner of the herein described property and permit the applicant to f e this request. Signed _ _ _ _ Date mac? (All record owners) Oxist=ie Smith, ManrP Q:ai So. CaL, Inc. as agate fcr TCEP H PcqRrties iWilt VHItKe Certificadoi,, a, the undersigned, hereby certify underpenaby of perjury that the information herein provided is correct to the hest ojmy knowledge. Printed Name Signed,-____ _ Location between (Applicant or Agent) (Applicant or Agent) T ,Street address or tract and lot number) (street) Zoning ____ Project Size (gross acres) Previous Cases Present Use of Site Date and (Street) HNM�_ Project Density R.. Use applied for • E "% JUN 18 P 2 :1 g Variance Case No. 96-1 -Burden of Proof Question A 1-3 The University of Phoenix is requesting one additional sign that is in total compliance with all sign criteria for the area except for the restriction on multiple signs for the same user on the same elevation. An additional sign in no way adversely affects the health, peace, comfort or welfare of anyone in the area nor is an additional sign detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of any other properties in the vicinity. Furthermore a sign that is in f ffl compliance with all design criteria does not jeopardize, endanger of constitute any menace to public health, safety or welfare. Question B. The building is constructed on lots 8 & 9 of Gateway Corporate Center, which was approved for a total of 6 sign in designated locations in the original sign program. The building currently has 3 signs in place and the proposed sign by the University of Phoenix will replace one of these existing signs. There are no size or shape restrictions which would preclude the proper installation of this sign. Question C 1-2 The building was built in 1989 and all necessary improvements and facilities are in place. '96 JUN 18 n 2 :20 Question D. The design of the building contains an offset of 12 feet on either end of the building whereby the glass face of the building extends out 12 feet and blocks visibility of the entrances to the building and visibility of approved sign locations. This offset in essence creates a separate elevation with separate entrances on each end of the building. The University of Phoenix has two departments with different functions at each end of the building and also occupies space on both the first and second floors of the building. The additional sign is needed to direct visitors to the entrance closest to the administrative offices on the south end. This entrance is not visible from the north entrance due to the offset of the building. Furthermore, the Owner of the building and the Gateway Corporate Center Sign Plan do not allow signage on the other elevations of the building nor will they allow signs on the glass section of the wall on the elevation facing Valley Vista Drive. This fact prohibits the University of Phoenix from placing the additional sign on a portion of the building that we occupy. Therefore, because of the design limitations and the restrictions placed by the Owner, the only means available to satisfy the sign requirements of the University of Phoenix is to place an additional sign at the opposite side of the glass wall section to ensure visibility from both ends of the parking lot. This is the only location approved by both the building Owner and the Gateway Corporate Center sign plan. '96 ,SUN 18 P ? :20 Question E. The University of Phoenix occupies nearly 35% of the building and attracts in excess of 200 visitors per day. The additional sign will facilitate the flow of traffic that may be restricted by the limitations that the design of the building places on the visibility of the existing signs. The existing sign that will be replaced (ReMax Realty) belongs to a former tenant of the building that occupied the same space in the building that the University of Phoenix presently has their administrative offices. This sign location has been designated by the Owner to serve the offices on the east side of the building which do not front on the west side, where all approved sign locations are designated. The building to the north of the subject building at 1360 Valley Vista Drive has two signs for the same occupant of that project, which is Bryan A. Stirrat & Associates. These signs are located on two different elevations of the building, however the building has a flat face and visibility from the same elevation is not a problem. As stated in D above, the design of the subject building is such that two signs on the same elevation are not necessarily visible from the driveway entrances to the property thus creating difficulty for our visitors to find the appropriate entrance. (question F. The granting of a variance for an additional code compliant sign for the University of Phoenix in a location that has been approved for a sign, on an elevation that is set apart by a major structural offset and that is replacing an existing sign of a former occupant of the building that may not be in compliance does not present any detriment to the public welfare or is in any way injurious to other properties in the lAcinigl. As stated above the building at 1360 Valley Vista Drive has two signs for the same use and has not been deemed to be a detriment or injurious to others. 3., Are there any major trees on the site, including oak trees? YES NO If yes, type and number:/;- 4. Will any natural watercourses, surface flow patterns, etc., be changed through project development?: YES aN If yes, explain: 5. Grading: Will the project require grading? YES Cr) If yes, how many cubic yards? Will it be balanced on -site? YES NO If not balanced, where will dirt be obtained or deposited? 6. Are there any identifiable landslides or other major geologic hazards on the property (including uncompacted fill)? YES CNO') If yes, explain: 7. Is the property located within a high fire hazard area (hillsides with moderately dense vegetation)? YES CN:O�) Distance to nearest fire station: 8. Noise: Existing noise sources at site: l) Noise to be generated by project: Fumes: Odors generated by project: �— Could toxic fumes be generated? r / 9.. What energy -conserving designs or material will be used? s .y� ' S �Jjil +sV u s a L- - -- Amu R t Yrs i9 ' ram``,, r • ti� x a � 1 ,r i C CA i t try ifs { f bb� Y IWVAL 1 F r P ; t t �j � a 11 ,4 C n fI h i S �. Alf R q� Y III{] f f .fJ I. • e {kt .7 'i " kn .y44. s 3F. Is ul I s f 1 3a h`4 f 7ty { E OR h t i Eileen R. Ansari Mayor Robert S. Huff Mayor Pro Tem Clair W. Harmony Council Member Carol Herrera Council Member Gary H. Werner Council Member 41 City of Diamond Bar 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 • Diamond Bar, CA 917654177 (909) 860-2489 • Fax: (909) 861-3117 Internet: http://www.ci.diamond-bar.ca.us Certified Mail October 3, 1996 Mr. Robert McNichols University of Phoenix 4615 E. Elwood Phoenix, Arizonia 85072 Re: Variance No. 96-1 located at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Dear Mr. McNichols: The referenced project was approved on October 1, 1996. Enclosed is the approved certified resolution for your records and Affidavit of Acceptance for the resolution. Please sign the affidavit, have it notarized, and return it to the Planning Division. If you have any questions, please contact me at (909) 396- 5676. q 'cerely, J f/ Lugistan la ner cc: Trammell Crow Recycled paper v Eileen R. Ansari Mayor Robert S. Huff Mayor Pro Tern Clair W. Harmony Council Member Carol Herrera Council Member Gary H. Werner Council Member City of Diamond Bar 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 • Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177 (909) 860-2489 • Fax: (909) 861-3117 Internet: hftp://www.ci.diamond-bar.ca.us Certified Mail October 3, 1996 Trammell Crow 18529 E. Gale Avenue Industry, CA 91748 Re: Variance No. 96-1 located at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 The referenced project was approved on October 1, 1996. Enclosed is the approved certified resolution for your records and Affidavit of Acceptance for the resolution. Please sign the affidavit, have it notarized, and return it to the Planning Division. If you have any questions, please contact.me at (909) 396- 5676. sincerely, n J u Assista P ranner cc: University of Phoenix Recycled paper 06 September 17, 1996 Mr. Don Schad Planning Commission City of Diamond Bar 21660 Fast Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Dear Don; m you arc aware, the City Council in their meeting tonight, overturned a denial of variance recomniend::d by the Planning Corntnissiots re:Tha `t nivcrsity of Phoenix request for additional sin�rrfic. They did so in spite. of thi presentation of facts made by the Stan of the City of Diamond Bar. Some of thc;ir re.asorL-i for dosn; so were, as tollorv,: From one Council XLmber... l really think the axistin� sign ordin n" is vagw; oil thus subject and is very hard to understand. (The: existing sign ordinance was part of an 18 ECIIpS@ month project cnacwd 5 years ago :aid was approved by the Council :vicmGcr nutking the; Information 'mTet''cnt), from another.... I really don't think it makes much ellMicncer if we have another sign on the building. and still another..._ Shouldn't they o; ; �xmpt from .��y St@f1'iS regulations since they arc a t,lnicetsity�'? First let me point out, the'Univei ity of Phocni\ lots approlimaWly 1000 students, a handful of w hi;;h residc; in Diamond Bar. They contribute nothing to our revers—cie Gas., and they expect and trill receiva all tfre safety and h;altl-L that, all, withir, tha City boundaries, would rcquirc. �Itd the City will foot the bill. 1859 Morning Canyon Road In the Planning Commission he:ttings, staff mach:; a complete and prokssioval presentation and provided r;xt;Cllent pouus quid rufurcnces in illustrating the read for careful consideration in our discussion of appro+,:al or denial of the raquCAWd vaiian(;Z.. Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Their expenl.ie and int;Tpr:.tatiows of the 4*,istirtg si rgc requirements allowed as to make a Pair and aduluate decision. '11c applicant's whole purpose for requesting the eucption appe arcd to hinge on th;; fact that their students, college level, were not intelligent enoti,b to know where the 'Unir:crsity Was located. Wul :as a Commission, arc Tel: (909) 620-2887 bound to approve a variance haled on the hardship that would be iniposW *opon the applicant if the relief regLwstt d was not available;. . Evidently the City Council does. not feel that the guidance of pr4tssional Aaffinembr;rg runstituttcs a reason for upholding a recornmend.ation from ilia Planning C`ommiSSion. A?e 171a) 3Zs-18°s as Commit40nzc3 ltay.,:, diit}' te, maintain the iris mtS' of the existing ordimanci;s and W not mak-c exception with the sea tment "its no bi- deal". Fax: (909) 396-0111 I would appreciate your tltnuglrts on the above. Yours very truly. Alike Goldi;nb,:rg CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present., the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, d information presented are true and correct to the best of may know edge I P"Kjj4Mjjjjj 711- —PWfbe. )MzU 141944 NMI 9406941 ate W'PwV W- 'w - &5Aure For: UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX Apollo Development Corporation Apollo Press Institute for Professional Development University of Phoenix, Inc. Western International University September 11, 1996 Mayor Eileen R. Ansari City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177 Re: Transcript of Planning Commission - University of Phoenix variance Dear Mayor Ansari: Thank you for taking time from your busy schedule to meet with Bob Burney and myself concerning the variance request for an additional sign for the University of Phoenix campus in Diamond Bar. As we discussed, enclosed is a revised copy of the transcript of the Planning Commission meeting of July 22, 1996. You may distribute copies to the other City Council members as you deem necessary. We will contact you to make an appointment to review this issue prior to the September 17 Council Meeting. Thank you again for your time and we look forward to a mutually satisfactory resolution to the variance question. Sincerely, Robert M. McNichols, President APOLLO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Enclosure: 1 Transcript cc: Bob Burney APOLLO GROUP, INC., 4615 East Elwood Street P.O. Box 52069 Phoenix, Arizona 85072-2069 602 966-5394 Fax 602 929-7386 �O � " . ARAN -; ££ bpi.,. ;lR JRRO�f..J'�.§S`(13 'NAL CORPORATION 16530 VENTURA BOULEVARD SUITE11204 '96 J���&VvI 617ZIORNIA 91436 TEL (818) 995-1663 • FAX (818) 995-1805 August 23, 1996 Mr. Jim DeStefano, Community Development Director City of Diamond Bar 21660 Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Re: Request for Extension of Hearing on Appeal/University of Phoenix Dear Mr. DeStefano: Following our recent conversation concerning the above -referenced appeal, I checked with University officials and discovered that the University's primary witness is traveling on business for the University on September 3, 1996 and will not be available that entire week. He has been away already, more than a week, and cannot possibly return in time to testify. His testimony is essential to the University's presentation. You and I discussed during our recent conversation the possibility of continuing the current hearing from September 3 to the next available date, which I believe you indicated to me was September 17. You confirmed you would have no objection for such an extension. After discussion today with Marilyn Ortiz, I write this letter to request an extension to September 17, 1996 or other date at or near that time to enable University officials to be present and testify. Please advise at your earliest opportunity. Very truly yours, ROBERT M. ARAN RMA/ams cc: Mayor Eileen Ansari & Council Members City Clerk, Lynda Burgess University of Phoenix i Eileen R. Ansari Mayor Robert S. Huff Mayor Pro Tem Clair W. Harmony Council Member Carol Herrera Council Member Gary H. Werner Council Member s City of Diamond Bar 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 • Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177 (909) 860-2489 - Fax: (909) 861-3117 Internet: http://www.ci.diamond-bar.ca.us Certified Mail July 23, 1996 Mr. Robert McNichols University of Phoenix 4615 E. Elwood Phoenix, Arizonia 85072 Re: Variance No. 96-1 located at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Dear Mr. McNichols: The above mentioned project was denied on July 22, 1996. Enclosed is the approved certified resolution for your records. If you have any questions, please contact me at (909) 396- 5676. Sincerely, an J . � g P7'�� Assistant Planner 0 Eileen R. Ansari Mayor Robert S. Huff Mayor Pro Tern Clair W. Harmony Council Member Carol Herrera Council Member Gary H. Werner Council Member City of Diamond Bar 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 • Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177 (909) 860-2489 • Fax: (909) 861-3117 Internet: http://www.ci.diamond-bar.ca.us Certified Mail July 23, 1996 Trammell Crow 18529 E. Gale Avenue Industry, CA 91748 Re: Variance No. 96-1 located at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 The above mentioned project was denied on July 22, 1996. Enclosed is the approved certified resolution for your records. If you have any questions, please contact me at (909) 396- 5676. S' cerely, Ann J. 5LU? Assistant Planner cc: University of Phoenix Damon 1765-4177 ae 100 Diamond Rar' CA 9 21660 E• Copley rive, Sup 86 13117 Fax. (909) • ona bar.ca.us (949) 860'2489ci,diam Intern et: http'�r'W� June 51 1996 a Mitchell Ms • Mar vices Dr ive GIS 5120 CO Pa k� Cp' g1�02 dw in 1 for Bal ce No • 96 valley Re: located at 1370 Dear This today is a Eileen R. Ansari Mayor Robed S, Huff Mayor Pro'Tern Clair W • Harmony Council Member Carol Herrera Council Member Gary H• Werner Council Mernber iX signage phoen CA 'university of Diamond Bar Vista conversati ng f lrm our poh ene The f o13-owl Ms • i5 to con er enced ab ed . ce ec ref cuss dinance corn ns di q the proe ncerns d`ls ty� s sign or shall hln re teratlon °f th inane • .T a) ss Busln building wlt and re s Sign Or£ollowin, tions of or conduct rs that 1• City lires the those P°r located St appeaan are; req mited to ine55 3's er wal tion is in occupy be . S-adh bsi9n per • osI s loca x does n° ould he] wh one wall wall sl of phoeni scaler w cat t, e5 dl the P the° Uri v or plan' acati cation t -real it es t t that a flu e apple The . Y r°A th e Ivere fY tills rie o ter wail' for relief f sign for Variance reques osed is a c the ied t me is • proof •'Proof s b ;ttare req onlB,rden °Widen of �� and ��the spE APpli�at,,Ojer_ BQuestion specify . tics 2• tills P tion. please acte or r the applicaaequatelY - tional c ration to r answer stance or o oq aphY pplicabcenter • ci Zeum sil t gener aYyCorP . -necessary 5 ings) not. Gat v riance licant15 by PI ropertie ow this the av- ossessed an( eYTI-aln Lion of is P vicinity a reserva right will° r°7ecti s variancemaa p t is P a be -prop ro er within State l findings Stant1atE pur suant that ceto rta' should 5f the f it re(I s of inclosed is a copy B endings - E Mitchell: I Eileen R. Ansari Mayor Robert S. Huff Mayor Pro Tem Clair W. Harmony Council Member Carol Herrera Council Member Gary H. Werner Council Member City of Diamond Bar 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 • Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177 (909) 860-2489 • Fax: (909) 861-3117 Internet: http://www.ci.diamond-bar.ca.us June 5, 1996 Ms. Maria Mitchell GIS Services 5120 Commerce Drive Baldwin Park, CA 91702 Re: Variance No. 96-1 for University of Phoenix signage located at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA Dear Ms. Mitchell: This correspondence is to confirm our phone conversation today regarding the project referenced above. The following is a reiteration of the concerns discussed. 1. City's Sign Ordinance. The City's sign ordinance requires the following: a) Business signs shall be limited to those portions of a building within which such business is located or conducted; and b) one wall sign per outer wall. It appears that the proposed wall sign's location is in an area that the University of Phoenix does not occupy. However, a floor plan, drawn to scale, would help verify this. The application also indicates two sign for one outer wall. The City realizes that the variance request is for relief from these two requirements. 2. Application/Burden of Proof. Enclosed is a copy of this project's Burden of Proof submitted with the application. Question "D" and "E" are not .answered adequately. Please specify the special circumstance or exceptional characteristics (i.e. size, shape, topography, location or surround- ings), not generally applicable to other properties in Gateway Corporate Center. Also, explain how this variance is necessary for the preservation of the applicant's substantial property right which is possessed by property owners within this project's vicinity and zone. Pursuant to State law, a Variance approval requires that certain findings to be made. The Burden of Proof should substantiate these findings. Enclosed is a copy of the findings. Recycled paper 0 3. Initial Study Questionaire/Environmental Information. A copy of this portion of the application is enclosed. Question 1115" states the number of employees is 200. Please clarify. Question 1117" states hours of operation are 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. What are the days of operation? 4. Plans. The plans do not indicate the building frontage (in lineal feet) occupied by the University of Phoenix. This measurement is required because sign face area calculations are based on lineal feet of those portions of a building within which such business is located or conducted. S. Colors/Materials Board. Please submit a colors/ materials board (size 82" X 1111) for the proposed sign. 6. Gateway Corporate Center Architectural Approval. An approval sent to the City dated February 15, 1996 indicates the sign's dimensions are 9k inches high by 20 feet long. The plan delineates the sign's dimensions as 19k inches by 20 feet long. Please clarify. As stated in our phone conversation, as the application stands today, staff could not recommend Variance approval to the Planning Commission. Recommending approval would con- stitute a grant of special privilege. If the applicant desires to continue processing this Variance application, the above mentioned concerns must be addressed. Please do not hesitate to call for assistance. I can be reached at (909) 396-5676. Sincerely, A J. u Assistant Planner cc: Robert McNichols, Apollo Development/University of Phoenix Christie Smite, TCEP II Properties Joint Ventures m Cl! tD 0 C.) Cl d rn " ^ Cdo ' w ai N • y a) � o 0 m SO. Cd y •.= 47 0oo toox •o�'> +', a m O Fr = o w 43 oow a' o m m o� cd M ,, +' o 4O 4� � O N vquo ,C c 4d aaoiU�, �+ US ccdd 4' N• O �,a G •,.ate a ,S N O •��-o� �R$ d A+ U} ) o cd opb y � �"idoo o aoio3 �W .. .� °'�.e �cd 5 , O o C's ' cad u N cd t~tQ 41 c's ¢,.� H c o .a E a�i x ECdo g •yam." u •�" o .Q .� � m '� 03 O� m m m O cd GL > OOO ; , �, `. T I1 L_-A W 'vpco yy poi ai m U-J N COC`ci CLvO +' C3 %1 z> c° i- cdoo> �'rh U W M >>> ^ C Z A �.0 E.0 b GI 00 -0 � >, = IS - 0 oar U cd m k u 1-4 Z0goo0 O to m � by o 0 eG ' ai y o to Q ryo+°x �...U5 Z S~ �•�� � oN� jq CVj u U a 1 41 ~ O O�ua)t�C/2O O o 0 be O C2 w NO o. Q.a' aui•�w°O' m w s; N Cl) cd -'" o ccdd 3 d to►wm msam N O .N .0 O y0 y 4"J N.�p'yOUyO L2�;, z co a Q m at N C o ((l V _j >~ ai An J > u �o Q .c 'cd Cd CO)'a > Z o .O a o j u W cd cc tr. 'r-CZ5 Lu Z N m N N .j - o U MW.Q� 04 N Q a) .Cod � Z7 'C m w O .po at +° ,�, y o t`n4i�o4mia C bo .0� a s. ax 4z) cis d Cd � '3r � � aai o 'm o m ►w, Off. GL a� •p C) J ; FO.. O O M cd 0 V d 0) ❑ C* m � at C* W Q O u > 'a t3aoo2 cq W a W a� I cd .3u W Q o o m Ix 'd V f; J •y cd '��„ aa) W Q > •>1 a�0a;,=cl I LLR.o 0 'e o z w }}O 9 2 O i. •Cd CDQ) u .0 p F• f~ aS "cps 1W- k +'O> > 4) 'a > V W C at ^C cd N cd„LU �cdSo o a^ Q � C Q > ai 4) Or c m) Oco CO d 3 � 0 4) +' � 500 O to c ja) c.m� 3c 0 , LL Z u �—d Q o 14 a) d' V'"' U. m p m GL O tin, •� 0 co m> cd O `h' Cl tL1 cC L y th r N x > O y o £ ON Lo cn00 co w yN o cm (z cli 0000 is CD r- IDCf GLQ y i:> c ."o.� OC-'..Q cd � a)i W r. > ..� � O N •� �' ..0 � ^� vyi o m � c� G FO+ v 'OC .0 A` a3 u y s. ai aT u u m o so. U m '� `> H w T3 N u .c 'C " o y u u rsn = bo ca 3 ss �r "' s~ sy. c :; �^ O 3 ¢• o s~ cd 4) cd~�o cd .0 N 4;)N 00 ' ov O N hoo W�o� crc�•'d �w y A� ►, u��� O tis = y m cd >°O ,o C sr o m y y cad Las Cl cl z u m N = O.,o *� w -" (� > d o s, Cd y y > y y co y at .� S; y Z Ci Cl ti ci y v ti o s. m „ y •� s~ 4) O at h W O aS Z N cd m °' •,^� f• • ., at N p •O N >C .0 4) d) 0 m � GL o � '� w C m 6i y � bq O — � � s. sy. X V 4.) N y m W ,•••� x 4) u bA �_, N R.••O i~ aui o = u U2 .O �' O *ti Z N O G N m U. Z C Q m O 's "o o y C' r� U. w w W Cd Cmi m cj 3~ p p Q o 0 tn� �� o�.�; o..,�_o� yc>NN I �. cd a► o >>)e�j W •� .� O y o 4mi d J~ .C�-' o . L2' Y .y bAo .�i ' • J y co o 4 ¢o� ��>caa }'0 ao� �r~��, c)y:~s~�; t7y �� Qucd c.� o �;^N Z � a >'o o u� o N o� cod o� u �z y o �N Z'0�, 6i C, �o O O O i+ +-, LL 'Q y y> .., s~ �«+ U TS � zs' y ..� tr y v W C bq y m >n V •� i O O u m s~ .0 m O O 3 � O O ai L ^-� Q 4) -C ^' O cd >~ m O t poQ Q -Cj Z•� 3+'' cd r o� m0 OLL Q.o y�N = o o Qw� K'r^. r ai ce o � p W +' u u vi ' m 5~ cd N o cd v as cd .. o Oat {l u m-C O.Cw u w Cd � .� u.v.0 Cc•� N Qo OH o� J >.r92 U ,,U o y u bAbA m 0— ? yN m ¢ y id s0 y s~ �> > N Ww W.G mGpy atN ai y a CC n.y � y•� � at y �`, o at y O y 'C LL bb U 4) N � k d s.. O �. (!j p, $ 'u o• > •F N °'*-� I o _I y o y 0 ^' �, „�':~ 3-Ceo ¢� ?O V o °' iN C� m s., Z OLQ Z" y m 0 4) u c;''„ m O O Z Z >> O N Z W S `) .Z ,O y 0 p ,V W O .0 o o e) boy O y O o N o z, O r+; �-' s, C) O m +y° � 4 O s. +> .� s~ .0 y u m C) 'C s, y Q cl T Q ZS O O aS �� r- Q Q� V C m m i > ~ S Q v U U 4) C ... bA O 4) > >�� Q •O � •- O Q G1 4) O ', y _ cd 4) y 0 m > ... cd "� - U ?. U cd �:,, •- U u t. U L:..Q +� at w bq J m er J• " y Q .� O ., 3 4l t� _j .O J t3 O r C O C a: 0 .� u >o .� �° u N d G cd co O U d O ,- J� pJ O m; y .0 C) lz Q d m yy�,.o m a) �, '� < y G. u 'C N cod C'r Q •^• . ..0 p Q_ O y y u c O u o, m Q •� Q u ,c'n a o Cd U. �' �-' cd �.O. ^S =+ >, i0. cd cd O SO, cd t�. y � Cd c�'.. m O "' O. c7 •` C) O 'S, `� ..O O• u 4) y w •� O rn O .0 E..i of .O ¢, „O S:'..0 y +' O oC f1" O Cy •" ^p N G `)O tU O d O H u0i C ►�, i N >co cj+� m bA m cz :~ H H� s~`r' c? E eo a) m+' c� o o Sao �`x z, m mat )cj cc O co ..� .G u cd y .� cd aF'i „ .., cp, bIL)Cn u O o O a; u s O y Via, in cd� 3 d+^� �qto -C Cp;,� U O yN cn u cn•� o o u �n cn o G N S.. N 4� • V C h i. R+ o V C C) r '�'' O N ni N V �L). °" N y =_,^ y Q N {O >, Cd O N O O 4) 0 0 ,r ,�, w cd y y y ai y t2. py X O ij N .. d •� .� to .O V Co w N U.. w y y y ' in m o -,-� " '�i .O t�i > Vi at �. 3 �. y N a! Z VARIANCE &E-BURDEN OF PROOF kn addition to the information required in the application, the applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission, the following facts: A. That the requested use at the location proposed will not: 1. Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare or persons residing or working in the surrounding area, or 2. Be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site, or 3. Jeopardize, endanger or other wise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare. AN ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE HEALTH,. PEACE, COMFORT OR WELFARE OF PERSONS RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE SURROUNDING AREA, OR WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE USE, ENJOYMENT OR VALUATION OF PROPERTY OR OTHER PERSONS LOCATED IN THE VICINITY OF THE SITE, NOR WILL IT JEOPARDIZE, ENDANGER OR OTHERWISE CONSTITUTE A MENACE TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE. B. That the proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this Ordinance, or as is otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area. THE EXISTING SITE.IS ADEQUATE IN SIZE AND SHAPE. C. That the proposed site is adequately served: 1. By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of traffic such use would generate, and 2. By other public or private service facilities as are required. THE EXISTING SITE IS ADEQUATELY SERVED BY HIGHWAYS OR STREETS OF SUFFICIENT WIDTH AND BY OTHER PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SERVICE FACILITIES AS ARE REQUIRED. That there are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property involved, such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which are not generally applicable to other properties in the same vicinity and under identical zoning classification. THERE ARE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY INVOLVED. �v That such variance is necessary fbT& preservation of a substantial property right aLthe applicant such as that possessed by owners of othRipoperty in the same vicinity and zone. SUCH VARIANCE IS NECESSARY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF A SUBSTANTIAL PROPERTY RIGHT OF THE APPLICANT. F. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to other property or improvements in the same vicinity and zone. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR BE INJURIOUS TO OTHER PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE SAME VICINITY AND ZONE. 20. Do your operations require any pressurized tanks? YES NO 0 0 If yes, explain 21. Identify any flammable, reactive or explosive materials to be located on -site. 22. Will delivery or shipment trucks travel through residential areas to reach the nearest highway?. YES CNO;1 If yes, explain g4 aA G V 0� 41 coo (5 a.. LO The University of Phoenix, Inc. Institute for Professional Development, Inc. Apollo Development Corporation AFOLLO Apollo Press, Inc. February 28, 1996 ., rn Mr. James Desteffano City of Diamond Bar, Director of Planning & Safetyn =' 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 100 Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177 Dear Mr. Desteffano: It is our desire to avoid the cumbersome and time consuming process of obtaining a variance for a sign permit for the University of Phoenix at 1370 Valley Vista Drive in Diamond Bar therefore, we are requesting an administrative review of the situation to determine if a solution is available which would be satisfactory to the City and the University. As we understand the position of the Planning Department, a sign permit is not being issued because: 1) the current sign code only allows one sign per multi -use commercial building, and 2) the current sign code allows only one sign "per use per outer wall". Please consider the following information with regards to the aforementioned multi -use limitation: The University of Phoenix has been a tenant in the building at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, which is on lots 8 & 9 of Gateway Corporate Center, since January 1991. As indicated in the attached letter from Diamond Bar Business Associates dated August 10, 1989, the original developer of this building, Cabot Cabot & Forbes, received approval for six signs on the building. The stipulation being that each sign could be a maximum of 20 feet long and 3 feet high. The attached Exhibit H-1 indicates the six approved locations for signs on this building and shows the location of the existing University of Phoenix sign. 2. The following signs are presently installed on the building; the north sign for the University of Phoenix, a sign for Kleinfelder (another current tenant), and a sign of Remax a former tenant who vacated the building in 1994 but left their sign. The Remax sign is non -conforming because it exceeds the 3 foot high limitation of the approved sign plan. The University of Phoenix is proposing to remove the Remax sign and replace it with a University of Phoenix sign identical to our original sign and in full compliance with the size restrictions of the Gateway Corporate Center approved sign plan. APOLLO GROUP, INC. 4615 East Elwood Street P.O. Box 52069 Phoenix, Arizona85072-2069 602966-5394 3. Trammell Crow, the owner of the building, has granted permission for the University of Phoenix to remove the non -conforming Remax sign and to install the University of Phoenix sign in the Remax location by the Fourth Amendment to its Lease dated July 19, 1995. 4. The Architectural Committee for the Gateway Corporate Center has also indicated its approval of the additional sign for the University of Phoenix as indicated in the enclosed letter from Sandy Kopelow of Zelman Development. 5. There are several other buildings in the Gateway Corporate Center which have existing multiple tenant signs and duplicate signs for individual tenants. The buildings I am referencing to are located at 1330, 1350 and 1360 Valley Vista Drive. Please refer to the attached photos. Based on the foregoing information it appears that we are not requesting any new precedent since this building has been approved for multiple signs since it was built in 1989, and we will be removing the existing non -conforming sign and replace it with one that conforms to the approved sign plan. In addressing the need for an additional sign for the University of Phoenix, please consider the following information: 1. The University of Phoenix occupies 28,259 square feet of the 84,081 square foot building, which is 33.6% of the total building. The Landlord an allocation of signage for the University which represents one third of the total signage in the building's approved sign plan. 2. The building is designed with four separate and distinct entrances which provide front and rear access to each of the north and south wings of the building. The University of Phoenix occupies space in the extreme south portion of the center section of the ground floor as well as nearly the entire north half of the second floor. These areas are separate, both physically and functionally, as the southern most ground floor space is the location of administrative offices for the University and is usually the first contact for new visitors to this location. The administrative office area would be identified with the new sign that we are requesting. The remainder of the area occupied by the University in the northern section of the first and second floors contains the student resource center and most of the vocational rooms. There is clearly a need for both signs to help direct pedestrian and vehicular traffic flow to the appropriate entrance and reduce the confusion of the new or occasional visitor. Please refer to the attached floor plan and photos. 3. During the past several years as a tenant in this building, all of our offices and vocational room space was located in the north end of the building. Since our expansion of administrative offices to the south end in 1994 and since our expansion of area in the north wing of the building in late 1995, we have realized the need for additional directional signage to refer a visitor approaching the building from the south who cannot see the existing University of Phoenix sign on the north until they are past the south entrance. A sign above the south building entrance would allow our staff to direct first time visitors to the administrative offices and assist them in parking at the most convenient entrance. The University of Phoenix proceeded with plans for an additional sign for this location based on the following factors. 1. The practical and functional need for additional signage to improve the traffic flow of the visitors to the building. 2. The Landlord granted approval based on the level of occupancy of the building by its major tenant. 3. The University of Phoenix, the Landlord and the sign manufacturer were all proceeding on the basis that the sign was in compliance with the existing sign plan for the building and with Gateway Corporate Center design guidelines, and preliminary review and approval had been given by City of Diamond Bar staff. In light the foregoing information and effort to avoid any unnecessary delay, we request that the application for the sign permit for the additional sign be approved. If there is an applicable supplemental administrative review fee, the University of Phoenix will pay these costs as part of the permitting process. Should you have any questions or wish to further discuss this request or other information contained in this letter, I would be happy to meet with you in person or by telephone at your convenience. Please do not hesitate to call. APOLLO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION RMM\bb GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER ASSOCIATION 1661 HANOVER ROAD • CITY OF INDUSTRY, CALIFORNIA 91748 • FAX (818) 913-6169 • TELEPHONE (818) 913-0030 February 15, 1996 Mr. Bob Burney MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT 12120 North Seventy -Sixth Place Scottsdale, Arizona 85260 RE: ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE REVIEW EXTERIOR BUILDING SIGNAGE UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX 1370 SOUTH VALLEY VISTA DRIVE DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Burney: via fax (602) 443-0758 and regular mail The Architectural Committee has received an 81/2" x 14" sign drawing, prepared by "FLuORESCO% dated November 22, 1995, submitted for review and approval for conformance with the Gateway Corporate Center Design Guidelines. The sign consists of the words "UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX" on one line 91/2 inches high x 20 feet long, constructed of black aluminum reverse pan channel letters with white neon "halo" internal illumination. The proposed sign will be identical to the existing University of Phoenix sign,and thus the University of Phoenix will have two of the six signs permitted for this building in our sign interpretation letter of August 10, 1989. The Architectural Committee approves the sign as submitted. Please obtain approval from the City of Diamond Bar and the building owner, Trammel Crow Realty Advisors, prior to installation. Enclosed are two approved stamped copies of the sign drawing, dated February 14, 1996. Very truly yours, THE ARCHITEC AaWrcKorD616w, A.I.A., Member cc: Ben Reiling Byron Ptnrlr—t 0 The City Council shall: r (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, Robert McNichols, University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, Az 85072 and Trammell Crow, 18529 E. Gale Avenue, Industry, CA 91748. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 1st day of October, 1996 X Mayor I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was"passed, adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond -Bar held on the 1st day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS Werner, MPT/Huff, M/Ansari NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS Harmony, Herrera ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS None ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS None STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 1 96 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 1. LYNDA BURGESS, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER pErtiALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE ST AI-F.. OF C:ALIFORNJA 1-11E FORGOING TO BE .A 'J'RUE AND CORPECT COPY OF THE pR';(3VAL AS SAME AI'PF.!,RS ON FILE IN MY i]i�i''zC:L• Wr)NESS IidNEREO ,.1 HAVE HEREUNTO SET h3Y 'r1A` I) AND AFFIXED T�i� �F�L OF THE CITY G i)IA O ' Ait, TIiiS----- DAY Ol , 19 0 LYNDA BURGESS, CITY CLERK BY— Demdy Attest Ci y Clerk of the City .of Diamond Bar 5 96-70 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: October 1, 1996 REPORT DATE: September 22, 1996 FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director TITLE: Resolution No. 9,6-XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REVERSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION OF DENIAL AND APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 96-1, A REQUEST TO INSTALL A SECOND WALL SIGN ON THE NORTHERLY FACADE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER AT 1370 VALLEY VISTA DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. SUMMARY: The applicant, University of Phoenix, requested a variance from the City's Sign Ordinance to install a second wall sign on the northerly facade of a commercial building. On September 17, 1996, the City Council conducted and concluded a public hearing on this matter. At the September 17, 1996 hearing, the City Council directed staff to prepare a resolution approving Variance No. 96-1. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution 96-XX. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Public Hearing Notification X Resolution(s) Bid Specification (on file in City Ordinance(s) Clerk's office) Agreement(s) Other: EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: N/A SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been X Yes _ No reviewed by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority vote? X Yes _ No 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? X Yes _ No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? Yes X No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD: C errence L. Belang r Frank M. Usher JJAes DeStefano City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Develo ment Director CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE'CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REVERSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION OF DENIAL AND APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 96-1, A REQUEST TO INSTALL A SECOND WALL SIGN ON THE NORTHERLY FACADE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER AT 1370 VALLEY VISTA DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. A. RECITALS. 1. The applicant, University of Phoenix, has filed an application appealing the Planning Commission's denial of Variance No. 96-1 located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, as described above in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance shall be referred to as the "Applica- tion". 2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State of California. Thereafter, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 14 (1990), thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County Code contain the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, including the subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar. 3. On July 25, 1995, the City of Diamond Bar adopted its General Plan. Action was taken on the subject application as to the consistency with the General Plan. It has been determined that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on July 22, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. At that time, the Commission denied the applicant's request for a second wall sign. 5. On July 25, 1996, the applicant filed an appeal requesting the City Council's consideration of the Variance request. 6. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar on September 3, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. Due to the applicant's request, the public 1 B. 0 hearing was continued to September 17, 1996 and concluded on September 17, 1996. 7. Notification of the public hearing for this project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on August 13, 1996. Twenty-five property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project site were notified by mail on August 12, 1996. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The City Council hereby determines that the project identified above in this Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15311 (a) of Article 19 of Chapter 3, Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this City Council hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to a 5.94 gross acre site developed with an 84,000 square foot, two story, multi -tenant commercial office building. The project site is located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, California. (b) The project involves the removal of the existing ReMax wall sign and the installation of a 32.5 square foot University of Phoenix wall sign. (c) The project site is zoned Commercial -Manufacturing - Billboard Exclusion -Unilateral Contract (C-M-BE- U/C). It has a General Plan land use designation of Professional Office (OP). (d) Generally, the following zones and uses surround the project site: to the north is the Orange (57) and Pomona (60) Freeway interchange; to the south and east is the C-M-BE-U/C Zone; and to the west is the Orange Freeway and the C-M-BE-U/C Zone. (e) There are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which are not generally applicable to other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. I 0 0 The proposed wall sign will be located on the northerly facade of a commercial office building. The office building has a lineal frontage of 432, feet and setback approximately 99.83 feet for the public right-of-way. It's designed in a manner that creates a facade with varying planes, thereby giving the appearance of separate elevation. The varying planes, excessive lineal frontage and substantial setback impedes the view of the building's main entrances and the existing University of Phoenix wall sign when traveling northeast on Valley Vista Drive. The referenced special circumstances and exceptional site and building characteristics are not generally applicable to other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning. (f) The Variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right of the applicant such as possessed by owners of other properties in the same vicinity and zone. Pursuant to the Sign Ordinance, Gateway Corporate Center Guidelines and Gateway Corporate Center Unilateral Contract, the applicant has the right to install signage that gives visitors clear direction to and on the project site. However, the building's design interferes with the right to have visible signs, a right enjoyed by owners and tenants of commercial office buildings in the same vicinity and - zone. The granting of the Variance preserves and ensures this right. (g) The strict application of zoning regulations including the City's Sign Ordinance, as they apply to the property, will result in practical diffi- culties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose of such regulations and standards. In this case, the strict literal interpretation of the City's Sign Ordinance would result in practical difficulties because without adequate signage, visitors will have difficulties finding the project site which would be in conflict with the purpose of the City's Sign Ordinance. (h) The granting of the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare, or injurious to other property in the same vicinity and zone. The proposed wall sign will facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic as visitors to the project site seek direction to the building area occupied by the applicant, thereby decreasing confusion when approaching and on the site. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth above, the City Council hereby reverses the Planning 3 • 9 Commission's decision of denial and approves this Application subject to the following conditions: (a) The project shall substantially conform to site plan, elevation and colors/materials board collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" dated October 1, 1996, as submitted to and approved by the City council. (b) The subject site shall be maintained in a condition which is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to ensure that the waste contractor utilized has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. (c) The wall sign shall comply with the Gateway Corporate Center's guidelines and the standards setforth within the Gateway Corporate Center's Unilateral Contract. (d) Any surface irregularities as a result of the removal and installation of any signs shall be repaired (i.e. filing of holes, resurfacing and painting to match existing building's finish). (e) The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City's Planning and Zoning and Building and Safety Divisions and the Public Works Department. (f) This grant shall be valid for one (1) year and shall be exercised (i.e. construction shall be commenced) within that period or this grant shall expire. (g) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed, within fifteen (15) days of approval of this grant, at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department, their affidavit stating that they are aware of and accept all the conditions of this grant. Further, this grant shall not be effective until the permittee pays all remaining City processing fees. 4 i to 9 The City Council shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, Robert McNichols, University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, Az 85032 and Trammell Crow, 18529 E. Gale Avenue, Industry, CA 91748. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 1st day of October, 1996 Mayor I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council'of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 1st day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: Attest: City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar 5 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: September 17, 1996 REPORT DATE: August 6, 1996 FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director TITLE: Appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Variance No. 96-1 SUMMARY: The applicant, University of Phoenix, is requesting a variance from the City's Sign Ordinance Section 110. D. 1. in order to install a second wall sign on the northerly facade of a commercial building located at 1370 Valley Vista Drive. On July 22, 1996, the Planning Commission denied the applicant's request. The applicant is appealing the Commission's decision to the City Council. Originally, the City Council public hearing was scheduled for September 3, 1996. Due to the applicant's request, the public hearing was continued to September 17, 1996. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council sustain the Planning Commission's decision. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report X Resolution(s) _ Ordinances(s) Agreement(s) Other EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: N/A _ Public Hearing Notification — Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed X Yes _ No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? X Yes _ No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? X Yes _ No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVID Y: Terren L. Belange rank . Usher es DeStefano City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Devel pment Director The City Council shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, Robert McNichols, University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, Az 85072 and Trammell Crow, 18529 E. Gale Avenue, Industry, CA 91748. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this ist day of October, 1996 Mayor I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond -Bar held on the 1st day of October, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS Werner, MPT/Huff, M/Ansari. NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS Harmony, Herrera ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS None ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS None STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 96 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR I, LYNDA BURGESS, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER ?FNAI;TY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF'THE SVATF. OF CALIFORNIA TIIE FORGOING TO BE A FULL, 'TRUE AND CORRFCT COPY OF THE 01X{ :INAL AS SAME APPw.wRS ON FILE IN_MY I`i 13'I'P tiI:SS ;N l'i',R1E0 �,• i HAVE HEREUNTO SET NjY HAND AND AFFIXED Tic -• / y�FAL OF THE CITY O DIr 0 AH TiIIS �L—.— DAY OF — LYNDA BURGESS, CITY CLERK BY Deifatty. Attest Ci y Clerk o �the� City of Diamond Bar 5 96-70 CITY FLNG., FLOG., � Universi y of Phoenix WALL FACE5 & 5TAND-OFF RETURN5 PRIMED 0 ° o ° REQUIRED. AND PAINTED- 0 o° 0 GLA55 0 0 0 TUBE 0° o 5UPPORT5 °o P-K HOU51NG5 O o FLEXIBLE 4500 WHITE CONDUIT NEON TUBE — ° O° ° INSTALLAITON ° ° 0 0 30 M.A.TRANSFORMER BOLTS WALL ° o ° ° CONTAINED WITHIN ANCHOO RS A5 ° o U-L APPROVED 60X REQUIRED. o O WITH D15CONNECT 0 0 5WITCH. 5ECTI®N THKU TYPICAL' HALO' ILLUMINATE® LETTERSET° FD-1003-96 dMOG3G�C�0O jj . „�. SIGNAL JET BLACK 41-306 CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: September 17, 1996 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Variance No. 96-1 ISSUE STATEMENT: Shall the City Council sustain the Planning Commission's Variance denial for a second wall sign? RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council sustain the Planning Commission's decision. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: N/A SUMMARY: The applicant, University of Phoenix, is requesting a variance from the City's Sign Ordinance Section 110. D. 1. in order to install a second wall sign on the northerly facade of a commercial building located at 1370 Valley Vista Drive. On July 22, 1996, the Planning Commission denied the applicant's request. The applicant is appeal- ing the Commission's decision to the City Council. Originally, the City Council public hearing was scheduled for September 3, 1996. Due to the applicant's request, the public hearing was continued to September 17, 1996. BACKGROUND: The project site is located at 1370 Valley Vista Drive within a commercial development identified as Gateway Corporate Center. It has a General Plan land use designation of Professional Office (OP). It is within the Commercial -Manufacturing -Billboard Exclusion -Unilateral Contract (C-M-BE-U/C) Zone. Generally, the following zones and uses surround the project site: to the north is the Orange (57) and Pomona (60) Freeway interchange; to the south and east is the C-M-BE-U/C Zone; and to the west is the Orange Freeway and the C-M-BE-U/C Zone. The project site is approximately 5.94 gross acres. It is developed with An 84,000 square foot, two story, multi -tenant commercial office 1 • building. The buildingresently contains seven tenants. The University of Phoenix occupies portions of the first and second floors (see Exhibit "A") which equals 33.6% of the building. The occupied space is utilized for administrative office, book store, resource center, vocational rooms and classrooms. Currently, the University of Phoenix has one wall sign (located on the building's northerly facing facade) with a 32.5 square foot sign face area. The City permitted this sign in September 1990. Two other wall signs exist (Kleinfelder and ReMax) on the northerly facade. ANALYSIS: The City's Sign Ordinance (adopted 1991) permits wall signs for individual uses by the following standards: 1. Wall Signs For Multi -Use Buildings or Commercial Centers. The maximum area is 1.25 square feet per one lineal foot of frontage, to a maximum 125 square feet per street level uses. For uses not located at street level which are visible from the street, courtyard, or public parking area, the maximum area is one (1) square foot per one lineal foot of frontage per use, to a maximum of 125 square foot. The maximum number is one per outer wall per use. No permit shall be issued for a wall sign in a multi -use building or commercial center in which more than one sign is proposed without the Planning Commission's review and approval; 2. Location of Wall Signs. Business signs shall be limited to those portions of a building within which such business is located or conducted; According to the Sign Ordinance's referenced standards, the applicant is allowed one wall sign, per outer wall, located on a portion of the building which it occupies. Currently, the applicant's existing wall sign complies with the City's Sign Ordinance. However, the applicant's request for a second wall sign, 32.5 square feet, to be located approximately 27 feet above ground level on the northerly facade and matching the existing wall sign, deviates from the Sign Ordinance's standards referenced above in items 1. and 2. As such, the second wall sign's installation requires a Variance approval by the Planning Commission. The subject building's frontage facing Valley Vista Drive is approx- imately 432 lineal feet with two recessed entrances separated by 24 lineal feet of a glass block projection. Additionally, the project site has two points of ingress and egress, approximately 444 feet apart, adjacent to Valley Vista Drive. The applicant believes that this building's design, which creates a 12 foot deep glass block projection (on the northerly facade), impedes visibility to the building's entrances and the existing wall sign. The applicant feels that this project creates separate elevations, with separate entrances for each end of the building. Furthermore, the applicant states that the University of Phoenix has two departments with different functions at each end of the building. The resource center is at the building's east end where the existing wall sign is located. Classrooms are in the middle of the building. Administrative offices are at the building's west end. Therefore, the applicant feels a second wall sign is needed to direct visitors to the administrative office's closest entrance on the building's west end. 4#e applicant also states that the property owner will not allow wall signs on the building's other facades. Therefore, because of the property owner's restrictions and according to the applicant, the building's design limitations, the only means available to satisfy the University of Phoenix's sign requirements is to place a second wall sign in the proposed location ensuring visibility from both ends of the parking lot. The applicant feels that the second wall sign will facility traffic flow restricted by the building's design. The Variance procedures is established to permit modification of development standards as they apply to particular uses when practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships, or results inconsistent with the general purposes of the City's Planning and Zoning Code develop through the strict literal interpretation and enforcement of Code. A Variance may be granted to permit the modification of several development standards including signs. Pursuant to the City's Sign Ordinance, building frontage is defined as "the lineal extent of a building or activity which has frontage on either a public right-of-way or parking area. The length of the building facing the public right-of-way or parking lot shall be used to determine the amount of permitted signage." This definition does not make a distinction between varying planes on the same frontage and the lineal extent of the building. The projection creates separate planes on the building's frontage, but not separate frontages. The City understands the University of Phoenix's need to identify the location of its different departments and functions for site visitors. However, an additional wall sign located approximately 27 feet above ground level, with the proposed copy, will not fulfill this need. Staff believes that appropriate signage closer to eye level would be an appropriated solution to the applicant's stated problem. Staff has visited the project site utilized by site visitors. The most Grand Avenue and Brea Canyon Road a points, the subject building is not exits, traveling Golden Springs Dri Gateway Corporate Center at Copley Dr to the project site. Approaching the existing wall sign's visibility. and traveled routes mostly likely likely utilized freeway exits are t Golden Springs Drive. At these visible. From any of the freeway ve will allow a visitor to enter ive or Gateway Center Drive leading site from this direction allows the While the second wall sign may allow freeway visibility, it does not fulfill the applicant's stated reasons for wanting a second wall sign. Staff finds that due to the northeast access approach (which is the most likely approach) to the site, the exiting wall sign is visible. However, upon entering the site and when on the site, directional signage closer to eye level and an improved interior directory would probably better serve the applicant's needs for more identification. The City's Sign Code offers the following types of signs for this purpose: 1. Freestanding Monument Sian with a maximum height of six feet and a maximum sign face area of 16 square feet; if the sign is located on property with frontage on a public right-of-way in excess of 65 feet in width (Valley Vista Drive's right-of-way at the project site is 66 feet wide) , the maximum sign face area is 24 square feet; one per frontage along a public street is permitted; 2. Incidental Sign with a maximum area of one square feet, window or wall mound and one per use; and 3. Nameplate/Address Sian with a maximum area of four square feet, wall mounted, two per building and may be illuminated with lighting no greater than 25 watts. The freestanding monument sign could be located at either driveway approach. The incidental and nameplate signs could be strategically located on the building's exterior walls. Additionally, the interior directory could be more specific as to the locations of the different departments and functions of the University of Phoenix. Furthermore, the alternative suggested signage would facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow more than a wall sign two stories above ground level. Staff has spoken with Sandford Kopelow, a member of Gateway Corporate Center's architectural committee. He stated that the committee would probably approve a monument sign and incidental/directional signs for the University of Phoenix site providing the signs comply with the City's standards. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: The University of Phoenix caters to long-term students. As such, the Planning Commission believes the proposed additional wail sign is not essential. The Commission feels that signage is needed which directs new students to the appropriate University of Phoenix departments and functions. The Commission concurs with staff's alternative signage recommendations which would directionally assist newer students. Additionally, according to the Commission, the Variance approval would be setting a precedence for other buildings in the area. The Planning Commission believes that approving the Variance would constitute a grant of special privilege. There are not exceptional characteristics applicable to the site that strict application of the Sign Ordinance deprives the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the area. Additionally, the public health and safety would best be served with signage closer to eye level than 27 feet above ground level. After considering all the researching the City's codes, review, staff feels denial o this case, the strict literal not result in inconsistencies NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: information presented by the applicant, field survey and the Planning Commission's f the Variance request is appropriate. In interpretation of the Sign Ordinance does with the general purpose of the Ordinance. Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on August 13, 1996. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 25 property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project site on August 12, 1996. t PREPARED BY: An Lu u Assi tan P1 6n4 Attachments: 1. Draft City Council Resolution sustaining the Planning Commission's denial; 2. Planning Commission Resolution of Denial No. 96-11; 3. Planning Commission minutes of July 22, 1996; 4. Correspondences date July 23, 1996 from Apollo Education Corporation requesting the appeal; 5. variance application; 6. University of Phoenix Exhibit "A"; 7. Photographs; and 8. Correspondence dated August 23, 1996 from Robert M. Aran requesting a continuance. 0 • CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SUSTAINING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF VARIANCE NO. 96-11 A REQUEST TO INSTALL A SECOND WALL SIGN ON THE NORTHERLY FACADE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER AT 1370 VALLEY VISTA DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. A. RECITALS. 1. The applicant, University of Phoenix, has filed an application appealing the Planning Commission's denial of Variance No. 96-1 located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, as described above in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance shall be referred to as the "Applica- tion". 2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State of California. Thereafter, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 14 (1990), thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County Code contain the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, including the subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar. 3. On July 25, 1995, the City of Diamond Bar adopted its General Plan. Action was taken on the subject application as to the consistency with the General Plan. It has been determined that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on July 22, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. At that time, the Commission denied the applicant's request for a second wall sign. 5. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar on September 3, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. Due to the applicant's request, the public hearing was continued to September 17, 1996. 6. Notification of the public hearing for this project has 1 9 • been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on August 13, 1996. Twenty-five property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project site were notified by mail on August 12, 1996. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this City Council hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to a 5.94 gross acres site developed with an 84,000 square foot, two story, multi -tenant commercial office building. acres (1.23 net acres). The project site is located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, California. (b) The project site is zoned Commercial -Manufacturing - Billboard Exclusion -Unilateral Contract (C-M-BE- U/C). It has a General Plan land use designation of Professional Office (OP). (c) Generally, the following zones and uses surround the project site: to the north is the Orange (57) and Pomona (60) Freeway interchange; to the south and east is the C-M-BE-U/C Zone; and to the west is the Orange Freeway and the C-M-BE-U/C Zone. (d) The proposed Variance is a request to install a second wall sign with a sign face area of 32.5 square feet. Its installation location is approximately 27 feet above ground level, on the subject office building's northerly facade. (e) There are no special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which are not generally applicable to other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. Other properties in the vicinity, under identical zoning classification have the same or similar lot configuration and topography. Additionally these properties have buildings with a similar architectural style as the subject building. (f) The Variance is not necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right of the applicant such as possessed by owners of other properties in 2 CH*F DIAMOND BAR 4 Casa# COMIIIIMY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Dad Reed f 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 Fee $ (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 Receipt#{ U VARIANCE APPLICATION By Record Owner Name � -,(-C, rn t'K lJ cow (Last name first) Address City ::C„ rX cc l C zip �1 17 q i' � ` Phone( ) �) - 3 d I })Applicant (� -a r t `�� �1- Phone( �) � (0 6 -.s ,-� I !f FAx ("') 92-C1 -%39(o (rZS _Sc.r v , e- e s Applicant's Agent En Jcl p.I 1 M.a c (Last name fast) _S la.v C OVA D� C/ a- Phone( ) & f V NOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Community Development Director in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this case. (Attach separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors of corporations.) Consent: I certify that I am the owner of the herein described property and permit the applicant to file this request. Signed SEE ATTACHED Date (All record owners) Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify underpenah:y of perjury that the information herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. Printed N C' �� 1v i b A plicant or Agent s Sign Date Appli t or Aln {�. Location U n t ✓e 4-s� P k z e ri 7� (,� ds �� D k q� 1J`Y (Street address or tract and lot number) between and Street) _ (Street) Zoning —2 1A -�q HNM It IN Project Size (gross acres) -�-�,,� C���c�t(q Project Density Previous Cases Present Use of Site I- L�P_ Use applied for . �, c _ wN p VARIANCE CASE -BURDEN OF PROOF In addition to the information required in the application, the applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission, the following facts: A. That the requested use at the location proposed will not: 1. Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare or persons residing or working in the surrounding area, or 2. Be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site, or 3. Jeopardize, endanger or other wise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare. AN ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE HEALTH,. PEACE, COMFORT OR WELFARE OF PERSONS RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE SURROUNDING AREA, OR WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE USE, ENJOYMENT OR VALUATION OF PROPERTY OR OTHER PERSONS LOCATED IN THE VICINITY OF THE SITE, NOR WILL IT JEOPARDIZE, ENDANGER OR OTHERWISE CONSTITUTE A MENACE TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE. B. That the proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this Ordinance, or as is otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area. THE EXISTING SITE.IS ADEQUATE IN SIZE AND SHAPE. C. That the proposed site is adequately served: 1. By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of traffic such use would generate, and 2. By other public or private service facilities as are required. THE EXISTING SITE IS ADEQUATELY SERVED BY HIGHWAYS OR STREETS OF SUFFICIENT WIDTH AND BY OTHER PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SERVICE FACILITIES AS ARE REQUIRED. t1) That there are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property involved, such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which are not generally applicable to other properties in the same vicinity and under identical zoning classification. THERE ARE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY INVOLVED. E ) That such variance is nesary for the preservation of a substantial prk right of the applicant such `J as that possessed by owners of other property in the same vicinity and zone. SUCH VARIANCE IS NECESSARY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF A SUBSTANTIAL PROPERTY RIGHT OF THE APPLICANT. F. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to other property or improvements in the same vicinity and zone. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR BE INJURIOUS TO OTHER PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE SAME VICINITY AND ZONE. • Staff Use Project No. INITIAL STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE A. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Applicant (Owner): Project Representative: NAME NAME d �1 s�, Q� ADDRE S ADDRESS PHONE # PHONE # 1. Action requested and project description- Aya vkk (�D,Cyv-,A— C^�G1 ck�J.nc�IPP SfG,h iaC (1 C p eJ C 2. Street location of project: Jta !?J1 Vc s p -T, 3a. Present use of site: LC e 3b. Previous use of site or structures: 4. Please list all previous cases N (if any) related to this project: 5. G Other related permit/approvals required. Specify type and granting agency._= a Are you planning future phases of this project? Y N If yes, explain: I�,) 7. Project Area: 8 9 Number of floors: Present zoning:_ Covered by structures, paving: Landscaping, open space: Total Area: B. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION 1. Environmental Setting —Project Site a. Existing use/structures MJyl Tg—, , - t c e b. Topography/slopes �-,., �. q J e ca eA *c. Vegetation L . -- { 2 *d. Animals *e. Watercourses f. Cultural/historical resources %�- g. Other (y/ fi-- 2. Environmental Setting — Surrounding Area a. Existing uses structures (types, densities): QC� Oe D C k b. Topography/slopes *c. Vegetation lV *d. Animals . *e. Watercourses f. Cultural/historical resources (% g. Other Staff Use 0 Project No. INITIAL STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE A. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Applicant (Owner): Project Representative: rl NAME � 12v u4V, , " br ADDRESS �k 14 NAME ADDRESS PHONE # PHONE # 1. Action requested and project p +roject descrition: n'r w, A- n F-fi- G rX n ClS� cD 2�� Z. Street location of project: 13 :2 �h. VC s p 3a. Present use of site: M P L4, is t 3b. Previous use of site or structures: V/ A- 4. Please list all previous cases �/ (if any) related to this project: 5. Other related permit/approvals required. Specify type and granting agency. 14 F Are you planning future phases of this project? Y If yes, explain: K) �- 7. Project Area: Covered by structures, paving: Landscaping, open space: Total Area: S. Number of floors: 9. Present zoning: v A. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 96-70 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REVERSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION OF DENIAL AND APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 96-1, A REQUEST TO INSTALL A SECOND WALL SIGN ON THE NORTHERLY FACADE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER AT 1370 VALLEY VISTA DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. RECITALS. 1. The applicant, University of Phoenix, has filed an application appealing the Planning Commission's denial of Variance No. 96-1 located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, as described above in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance shall be referred to as the "Applica- tion". 2. -On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State of California. Thereafter, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 14 (1990), thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County Code contain the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, including the subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar. 3. On July 25, 1995, the City of Diamond Bar adopted its General Plan. Action was taken on the subject application as to the consistency,with the General Plan. It has been determined that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on July 22, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. At that time, the Commission denied the applicant's request for a second wall sign. 5. On July 25, 1996, the applicant filed an appeal requesting the City Council's consideration of the Variance request. 6. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar on September 3, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the .Application. Due to the applicant's request, the public 1 The pr'Sposed wall sign will be located on the northerly facade of a commercial office building. The office building has a lineal frontage of 432 feet and setback approximately 99.83 feet for the public right-of-way. It's designed in a manner that creates a facade with varying planes, thereby giving the appearance of separate elevation. The varying planes, excessive lineal frontage and substantial setback impedes the view of the building's main entrances and the existing University of Phoenix wall sign when traveling northeast on Valley•Vista Drive. The referenced special circumstances and exceptional site and building characteristics are not generally applicable to other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning. (f) The Variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right of the applicant such as possessed by owners of other properties in the same vicinity and zone. Pursuant to the Sign Ordinance, Gateway Corporate Center Guidelines and Gateway Corporate Center Unilateral Contract, the applicant has the right to install signage that gives visitors clear direction to and on the project site. However, the building's design interferes with the right to have visible signs, a right enjoyed by owners and tenants of commercial office buildings in the same vicinity and zone. The granting of the Variance preserves and ensures this right. (g) The strict application of zoning regulations including the City's Sign'Ordinance, as they apply to the property, will result in practical diffi- culties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose of such regulations and standards. In this case, the strict literal interpretation of the City's Sign Ordinance would result in practical difficulties because without adequate signage, visitors will have difficulties finding the project site which would be in conflict.with the purpose of the City's Sign Ordinance. (h) The granting of the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare, or injurious to other property in the same vicinity and zone. The proposed wall sign will facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic as visitors to the project site seek direction to the building area occupied by the applicant, thereby decreasing confusion when approaching and on the site. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth above, the City Council hereby reverses the Planning 3 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 96-70 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REVERSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION OF DENIAL AND APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 96-1, A REQUEST TO INSTALL A SECOND WALL SIGN ON THE NORTHERLY FACADE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER AT 1370 VALLEY VISTA DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. A. RECITALS. 1. The applicant, University of Phoenix, has filed an application appealing the Planning Commission's denial of Variance No. 96-1 located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, as described above in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance shall be referred to as the "Applica- tion". 2. -On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State of California. Thereafter, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 14 (1990), thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County Code contain the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, including the subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar. 3. On July 25, 1995, the City of Diamond Bar adopted its General Plan. Action was taken on the subject application as to the consistency with the General Plan. It has been determined that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on July 22, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. At that time, the Commission denied the applicant's request for a second wall sign. 5. On July 25, 1996, the applicant filed an appeal requesting the City Council's consideration of the Variance request. 6. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar on September 3, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. Due to the applicant's request, the public 1 oc -7n The proposed wall sign will be located on the 1 northerlyfacade cade of a commercial office building. The office building has a lineal frontage of 432 feet and setback approximately 99.83 feet for the public right-of-way. It's designed in a manner that creates a facade with varying planes, thereby giving the appearance of separate elevation. The varying planes, excessive lineal frontage and substantial setback impedes the view of the building's main entrances and the existing University of Phoenix wall sign when traveling northeast on Valley•Vista Drive. The referenced special circumstances and exceptional site and building characteristics are not generally applicable to other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning. (f) The Variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right of the applicant such as possessed by owners of other properties in the same vicinity and zone. Pursuant to the Sign Ordinance, Gateway Corporate Center Guidelines and Gateway Corporate Center Unilateral Contract, the applicant has the right to install signage that gives visitors clear direction to and on the project site. However, the building's design interferes with the right to have visible signs, a right enjoyed by owners and tenants of commercial office buildings in the same vicinity and zone. The granting of the Variance preserves and ensures this right. (g) The strict application of zoning regulations including the City's Sign Ordinance, as they apply to the property, will result in practical diffi- culties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose of such regulations and standards. In this case, the strict literal interpretation of the City's Sign Ordinance would result in practical difficulties because without adequate signage, visitors will have difficulties finding the project site which would be in conflict with the purpose of the City's Sign Ordinance. (h) The granting of the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare, or injurious to other property in the same vicinity and zone. The proposed wall sign will facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic as visitors to the project site seek direction to the building area occupied by the applicant, thereby decreasing confusion when approaching and on the site. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth above, the City Council hereby reverses the Planning 3 Commission's decision of denial and approves this Application subject to the following conditions: (a) The project shall substantially conform to site plan, elevation and colors/materials board collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" dated October 1, 1996, as submitted to and approved by the City Council. (b) The subject site shall be maintained in a condition which is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection; transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to ensure that the waste contractor utilized has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. (c) The.wall sign shall comply with the Gateway Corporate Center's guidelines and the standards setforth within the Gateway Corporate Center's Unilateral Contract. (d) Any surface irregularities as a result of the removal and installation of any signs shall be repaired (i.e. filing of holes, resurfacing and painting to match existing building's finish). (e) The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City's Planning and Zoning and Building and Safety Divisions and the Public Works Department. (f) This grant shall be valid for one (1) year and shall be exercised (i.e. construction shall be commenced) within that period or this grant shall expire. (g) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed, within fifteen (15) days of approval of this grant, at the.City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department, their affidavit stating that they are aware of and accept all the conditions of this ,grant. Further, this grant shall not be effective until the permittee pays all remaining City processing fees. 4 B. hearing was continued to September 17, 1996 and concluded on September 17, 1996. 7. Notification of the public hearing for this project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on August 13, 1996. Twenty-five property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project site were notified by mail on August 12, 1996. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The City Council hereby determines that the project identified above in this Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15311 (a) of Article 19 of Chapter 3, Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this City Council hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to a 5.94 gross acre site developed with an 84,000 square foot, two story, multi -tenant commercial office building. The project site is located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, California. (b) The project involves the removal of the existing ReMax wall sign and the installation of a 32.5 square foot University of Phoenix wall sign. (c) The project site is'zoned Commercial -Manufacturing -- Billboard Exclusion -Unilateral Contract,(C-M-BE- U/C). It has a General Plan land use designation of Professional Office (OP). (d) Generally, the following zones and uses surround the project site: to the north is the Orange (57) and Pomona (60) Freeway interchange; to the south and east is the C-M-BE-U/C Zone; and to the -west is the Orange Freeway and the C-M-BE-U/C Zone. (e) There are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which are not generally applicable to other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. 0 0 Commission's decision of denial and approves this Application subject to the following conditions: (a) The project shall substantially conform to site plan, elevation and colors/materials board collectively labeled as Exhibit "A" dated October 1, " 1996, as submitted to and approved by the City Council. (b) The subject site shall be maintained in a condition which is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection; transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to ensure that the waste contractor utilized has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. (c) The.wall sign shall comply with the Gateway Corporate Center's guidelines and the'standards setforth within the Gateway Corporate Center's Unilateral Contract. (d) Any surface irregularities as a result of the removal and installation of any signs shall be repaired (i.e. filing of holes, resurfacing and painting to match existing building's finish). (e) The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City's Planning and Zoning and Building and safety Divisions and the Public Works Department. (f) This grant shall be valid for one (1) year and shall be exercised (i.e. construction shall be commenced) within that period or this grant shall expire. (g) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed, within fifteen (15) days of approval of this grant, at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department, their affidavit stating that they are aware of and accept all the conditions of this grant. Further, this grant shall not be effective until the permittee pays all remaining City processing fees. 4 B. hearing was continued to September 17, 1996 and -concluded on September 17, 1996. 7. Notification of the public hearing for this project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on August 13, 1996. Twenty-five property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project site were notified by mail on August 12, 1996. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The City Council hereby determines that the project identified above in this Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15311 (a) of Article 19 of Chapter 3, Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this City Council hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to a 5.94 gross acre site developed with an 84,000 square foot, two story, multi -tenant commercial office building. The project site is located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, California. (b) The project involves the removal of the existing ReMax wall sign and the installation of a 32.5 square foot University of Phoenix wall sign. (c) The project site is'zoned Commercial -Manufacturing -- Billboard Exclusion -Unilateral Contract,(C-M-BE- U/C). It has a General Plan land use designation of Professional Office (OP). (d) Generally, the following zones and uses surround the project site: to the north is the Orange (57) and Pomona (60) Freeway interchange; to the south and east is the C-M-BE-U/C Zone; and to the -west is the Orange Freeway and the.C-M-BE-U/C Zone. (e) There are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which are not generally applicable to other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. 10. Water andloer service:0 Domestic Public ' ) Water i("S ewers / Does service exist at site? ( Y ) N / Y / N If yes, do purveyors have capacity to meet demand of project and all other approved. projects? �YY/}N (:Yl) N If domestic water or public sewers are not available, how will these services be provided? Residential Projects: ) I� 11. Number and type of units: 12. Schools: What school district(s) serves the property? Are existing school facilities adequate to meet project needs? YES NO If not, what provisions will be made for additional classrooms? Non -Residential projects: 13. Distance to nearest residential use or sensitive use (school, hospital, etc.) Ala M,1 p 14. Number and floor area of buildings: 15. Number of employees and shifts: b��00 16. Maximum employees per shift: 17. Operating hours: c ►� 18. Identify any: End products r\ 0—.-- Waste products r-'L> - C Means of disposal 19. Do project operations store or produce hazardous substances such as oil, pesticides, chemicals, paints, or radioactive ' Is? YES NO If yes, explain 20. Do your operations regAbany pressurized tanks? • YES CNO If yes, explain 21. Identify any flammable, reactive or explosive materials to be located on -site. 22. Will delivery or shipment trucks travel through residential areas to reach the nearest highway? YES NO If yes, explain 10. Water and sewer service • - Domestic 1 0'tb1sicater Does service exist at site? Y N OYN If yes, do purveyors have capacity to meet demand of project and all other approved ,_ projects? Y)N/(:Y� ) N If domestic water or public sewers are not available, how will these services be provided? Residential Projects: 11. Number and type of units:` d l 12. Schools: What school district(s) serves the property? - Are existing school facilities adequate to meet project needs? YES NO If not, what provisions will be made for additional classrooms? Non -Residential projects: 13. Distance to nearest residential use or sensitive use (school, hospital, etc.) \ %a ry\ 14. Number and floor area of buildings: �f e)e)y S. 15. Number of employees and shifts: �oo P 16. Maximum employees per shift: 17. Operating hours: ao�z- C ev\ 18. Identify any: End products r\ Waste products n;)- C Means of disposal t,% C�- 19. Do project operations_use,,store or produce hazardous substances such as oil, pesticides, chemicals, paints, or radioactiv=NO s? YES Ifyes, explain • 0 INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING INITIAL STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE TO THE APPLICANT: The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a review of your proposed project for possible environmental impacts. This Initial Study process is intended to determine the type of environmental documentation necessary to have your project considered by the City. The Initial Study consists of a completed questionnaire and other material which you must provide and an analysis of potential impacts prepared by staff --often with the input from reviewing agencies with special expertise. This process can be expedited with your cooperation. The project file must include the following exhibits, which you must provide (check boxes are provided for your use): 1. Initial Study Questionnaire —In completing this questionnaire, all questions should be answered as completely as possible (attach extra pages if necessary). If requesting a land division, it should be anticipated that future development will take place, and the questionnaire completed accordingly. Preliminary grading and/or development concepts should be submitted, even if no immediate construction is anticipated. 2. Development Plan with Contours showing: a) the location and layout of the proposed development or possible pad location; b) native vegetation —including the location, spread, health and circumference (measured 4 1/2 feet above ground level) of any oak trees; and c) existing and proposed landscaping. 3. Vicinity Map of appropriate scale showing the subject property in relation to nearby streets and other significant physical features. Street maps (such as Thomas Guide) in urban areas or U.S.G.S. Quad Sheets in rural areas should be used. (Quad Sheets area available at many map stores or from the Department of the interior Geologic Survey, 300 North Los Angeles Street, Room 7638, Los Angeles --this is the Federal Building in Los Angeles civic center.) 4. Photographs of the site, pad locations and surrounding area. An index map keyed to the photographs should be provided, showing the location and direction of each photograph. S. Generalized land use map of appropriate scale for the project site and surrounding properties, with uses clearly labeled. Be certain that the project number(s) is on all material (e.g. maps, photographs, questionnaire). FAILURE TO SUBMIT ALL REQUESTED MATERIALS AND TO PROVIDE COMPLETE QUESTIONNAIRE INFORMATION CAN RESULT IN DELAYS IN PROCESSING YOUR CASE. It should also be noted that addifiW environmental material/ data may be requi&xfore project processing can begin and a public hearing meetheduled. The results of the staffs enviroreview (Initial Study) will be sent to you as soon as possible. AT THE TIME THE INITIAL STUDY IS COMPLETED, YOU WILL ALSO BE INFORMED OF ANY ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEES REQUIRED. Questions regarding the Initial Study should be directed to the Diamond Bar Planning Division. Domestic Water Source �_ Company/District C, w„OJ Method of Sewage Disposal S C � e -( Sanitation District Grading of Lots by Applicant? YES NO '/, Amount (Show necessary grading design on site plan or tent. map) f y �— LEGAL DESCRIPTION (All ownership comprising the proposed lots/project). If petitioning for zone change, attach legal description of exterior boundaries of area subject to the change.) PLEASE SEE BELOW. Project Site: c s �— i v\- Gross Area o. of Lots Area devoted to : Structures Residential project: Proposed Density Open Space and Gross Area Units/Acres Number and types of Units Residential Parking: Type Required Total Required LEGAL DESCRIPTION: No. of floors Provided Total Provided Lots 8 and 9 of Tract 39679 City od Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California as per map recorded in the Book No. 1083 Pages 14 - 21 inclusive of maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said county as amended by a Certification of Correction recorded January 24, 1989, as Instrument No. 89-123719, official records. rl 27 '95 10:27 ?'701313 a ab 2a H 3LP A accr w ro � v x v O W N t. C N M �� °_. A tri _ C1 -� c� C) 7C -qi N c3 C< 7 4 A W $ of M M I r• a�ww. 0 z FL-LiJRESCJ '5I61,4 mom w ��eee �eee�lawn N 2=6IS.. 11 �InI41 101 Kr' RUNw 16 in �crMo��wwrd • `�� • INNI NO MOM w 0 P.3/3 �s C0 t 0 ~Jl IN. Sl \171�iSh�.2ii 6U6iM•iG`�1�,z .1 • i 11106 ; Eiji, 9 ` • esy�f av 7u+FlA'V�,ri[1�eA�4 �17 i y�Yi).KAti�!i"lw � 1.?yyt'�gqtqq'•qt'etijE ��yy��pp YI.LfCA�# a%%bi; Mk r Mi.�..r• ltW'�r= �1 �•�• U-lw � .. �..�soP•':i� Q u *....�v imm . .s+� the same vicinity and zone. Pursuant to the Sign Ordinance, the applicant does have the right to install one wall sign per outer wall per frontage which is the same right that other property owner possess within the same vicinity and zone. However, the applicant desires to install a second wall sign, thereby having two wall signs per outer wall per frontage. Therefore, granting the Variance would be giving additional property rights not possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zone. (g) The strict application of zoning regulations including the City's Sign Ordinance, as they apply to the property, will not result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose of such regulations and standards. In this case, the strict literal interpretation of the City's Sign Ordinance does not result in inconsistencies with the Ordinance's general purpose because the general purpose includes aesthetic concerns and protection against the undue proliferation of signs. This application will result in unnecessary proliferation of signage for one facility. Additionally, the Sign Ordinance's strict application does not result is practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship because the applicant can utilize alternative signage pursuant to the Sign Ordinance to accomplish its identification goals. (h) The granting of the Variance will be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare, or injurious to other property in the same vicinity and zone in that the proposed sign is not located at eye level. It will be 27 feet above ground level. Signage at that height does not facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic but may create an unsafe condition as drivers and pedes- trians seek directional signage/use identification at eye level. 3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the City Council hereby denies the Application. The City Council shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, Robert McNichols, University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, Az 85072. 0 PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 17th day of September, 1996 Mayor I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 17th day of September, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Attest: City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar 4 0 0 MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 22, 1996 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Goldenberg called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner Schad. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Goldenberg, Vice Chairman Ruzicka, Commissioners Fong, McManus and Schad. Also Present: Community Development Director James DeStefano; Senior Planner Catherine Johnson; Assistant Planner Ann Lungu, and Recording Secretary Carol Dennis \\MATTERS FIkOM THE AUDANCE CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Minutes of Jul \ VC/R�z icka made the minutes of objec 'ons, the LD BUSI ESS - Non NE BUSINES - None PUBLIC HEARING: /PUBLIC 8, 1996. S - motion, secokded by C/Sc une 24, 1996 as presen )�tion-was so o dered. to a rove Wi hout 1. Variance No. 96-1 (pursuant to Code Section 22.56, Part 2), is a request to install a second wall sign, approximately 32.5 square feet in area, on the north side of a building which the applicant occupies. Project Address: 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar 0 July 22, 1996 Property owner: Applicant: Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION Trammell Crow, 18529 E. Gale Avenue, Industry, CA 91748 University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, AZ 85072 AstP/Lungu read the staff report into the record. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Variance No. 96-1 and approve attached resolution of denial. Chair/Goldenberg opened the public hearing. Applicant Robert McNichols, University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, AZ 85072, explained that the University is a for -profit business operating in commercial lease space throughout the United States. He stressed that signage is important to the business. He requested the Commission grant a variance to the 1989 Master Sign Plan allowing installation of a second wall sign approved by the building owner. He pointed out that because the University occupies two-thirds of the building, it is entitled to two-thirds of the signage. Mr. McNichols responded to VC/Ruzicka that the University of Phoenix is a State accredited university. VC/Ruzicka asked how additional signage will benefit long term students. Mr. McNichols responded that the University is a commercial business providing convenience to adult students. VC/Ruzicka asked Mr. McNichols what he believes is the University's property right under the approved signage plan. Mr. McNichols responded that in his opinion, it is the University's right to have its pro-rata share of signage on the building. The property right states that the business must obtain the landlord's approval to place a second sign on the building in place of the existing Re -Max sign. The approved sign plan does not designate pro-rata rights. Mr. McNichols referred the Commission to the Trammel Crow Realty Advisors December 27, 1995 approval and the Gateway Corporate Center Association Architectural Committee February 15, 1996 approval. Mr. McNichols responded to C/McManus that the purpose of the second sign is to assist people in locating the business. AstP/Lungu responded to C/McManus that the Gateway Corporate Center Architectural Committee would consider a modest monument sign behind the property line. July 22, 1996 Page 3 Planning Commission Mr. McNichols responded to C/Schad that Diamond Bar permitted the original sign. Craig Clute, 21217 Fountain Springs Road stated his concern that granting the variance may negate a new tenant's ability to obtain signage. He suggested a monument sign and directory would more appropriately assist the public in locating the business. Chair/Goldenberg closed the public hearing. C/Schad stated that if this site enhances future students' ability to locate the university, he would favor consideration of a second sign. VC/Ruzicka indicated to C/Schad Mr. McNichols confirmation that students are long term and would not experience difficulty in locating the campus over an 18 month period. In this instance, the Planning Commission is being asked to set a precedent for changing the Sign Ordinance. He stated he favors staffs' recommendations for assisting students rather than granting a signage variance. VC/Ruzicka made a motion, seconded by C/McManus to deny Variance No. 96-1 and approve the resolution of denial. The motion was approved 4-1 with the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING VC/Ruzicka Objectives meeting. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: SION ITEMS: VC/Ruzicka, McManus, Fong, Chair/Goldenberg Schad None None equested that discussion of City $ agendized for e August 12, 1 96 \INFORMATIONAL I�EMS: Council's oals an Planning Co ission CW/DeStefano indicated staff ask the Developm nt Code Consul ant to ove the Tree dinance to the top of the p 'ority. The ty Att�ney has advis that as a res It of a new L s Angeles Cou ty Adul Ordinance, th City will need to consider a endments to i s curre t Adult Use Or 'nance. DD/DeS efano stated otices of the onday, Augus 26 Planning 0kmmissi n hosted Devel pment Code Publ'c Workshop w 1 be • ROBM-T."M. ARAN I ..1 - .. 'A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 16530 VENTURA BOULEVARD 1 SUITE 204 & '96 AIJGNZoA 7A5f 0RNIA 91436 TEL 1618) 995-1663 • FAX (818) 995-1805 August 23, 1996 Mr. Jim DeStefano, Community Development Director City of Diamond Bar . 21660 Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Re: Request for Extension of Hearing on Appeal/University of Phoenix Dear Mr. DeStefano: Following our recent conversation concerning the above -referenced appeal, I checked with University officials and discovered that the University's primary witness is traveling on business for the University on September 3, 1996 and will not be available that entire week. He has been away already more than a week, and cannot possibly return in time to testify. His testimony is essential to the University's presentation. You and I discussed during our recent conversation the possibility of continuing the current hearing from September 3 to the next available date, which I believe you indicated to me was September 17. You confirmed you would have no objection for such an extension. After discussion today with Marilyn Ortiz, I write this letter to request an extension to September 17, 1996 or other date at or near that time to enable University officials to be present and testify. Please advise at your earliest opportunity. Very truly yours, ROBERT M. ARAN RMA/ams cc: Mayor Eileen Ansari & Council Members City Clerk, Lynda Burgess University of Phoenix If . 0 July 23, 1996 Lynda Burgess City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Re: Appeal of denial of Request for Variance No. 96.1 Dear Ms Bur ess• 400,10 Education Coroorct on ^e University of Phoenix. Inc The Institute for Professional DQveioC^^e Apollo Development Corpora~or Apollo Press, Inc. ;L-� g The University of Phoenix wishes to appeal the denial of it's request for variance which occurred at the July 22; 1996 Diamond Bar Planning. Commission meeting.. Please register this appeal for the first available City Council agenda and please send all notices and correspondence to: Robert M. McNichols, President Apollo development Corporation Authorized Agent for The University of Phoenix 4615 East Elwood Street P.O. Box 52069 Phoenix, AZ 85072-2069 (602) 966-5394 Sincerely, " a Robert M. McNichols, President APOLLO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION RMM\bb i - • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DENYING VARIANCE NO. 96-11 A REQUEST TO INSTALL A SECOND WALL SIGN -ON THE NORTHERLY FACADE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER AT 1370 VALLEY VISTA DRIVE (LOTS 8 AND 9, TRACT 39670), DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. A. RECITALS. 1. The property owners, Trammell Crow and applicant, University of Phoenix, have filed an application for Variance No. 96-1 located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, as described above in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance shall be referred to as the "Applica- tion". 2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State of California. Thereafter, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 14 (1990), thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and .22 of the Los Angeles County Code contain the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, including the subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar. 3. On July 25, 1995, the City of Diamond Bar adopted its General Plan. Action was taken on the subject application as to the consistency with the General Plan. It has been determined that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on July 22, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. 5. Notification of the public hearing for this project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley -Daily Bulletin newspapers on July 11, 1996. Twenty-five property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project site were notified by mail on July 9, 1996. 1 B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to a 5.94 gross acres site developed with an 84,000 square foot, two story, multi -tenant commercial office building. acres (1.23 net acres). The project site is located within Gateway. Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, California. (b) The project site is zoned Commercial -Manufacturing - Billboard Exclusion -Unilateral Contract (C-M-BE- U/C). It has a General Plan land use designation of Professional Office (OP). (c) Generally, the following zones and uses surround the project site: to the north is the Orange (57) and Pomona (60) Freeway interchange; to the south and .East is the C-M-BE-U/C Zone; and to the west is the Orange Freeway and the C-M-BE-U/C Zone. (d) The proposed Variance is a request to install a second wall sign with a sign face area of 32.5 square feet. Its installation location is approximately 27 feet above ground level, on the subject office building's northerly facade. (e) There are no special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property. The strict application of the code does not deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. Other properties in the vicinity, under identical zoning classification have the same or similar lot configuration and topography. Additionally these properties have buildings with a similar architectural style as the subject building. ,(f) The Variance's approval will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. The applicant is creating its own hardship by not utilizing other types of signage offered by the City sign ordinance which would be an appropriate solution to the applicant's stated problem. (g) The strict application of zoning regulations including the City's Sign Ordinance, as they apply to the property, will not result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose of such regulations and standards. In this case, the strict literal interpretation of the City's Sign Ordinance does not result in inconsistencies with the.Ordinance's general purpose; nor does it create uncessary hardship because the applicant can utilize alternative signage, offered in the Sign Ordinance, to accomplish its identification goals as stated in the submitted project application. (h) The Variance's approval may be materially detri- mental to the public health, safety,'or general welfare, or to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity. The applicant's intent is to provide signage that will facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow on site. The second wall sign's proposed location is not at eye level. It will be 27 feet above ground level. Signage at that height does not facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic but may create an unsafe condition as drivers and pedes- trians seek directional signage/use identification at eye level. 3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby denies the Application. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, Robert McNichols, University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, Az 85072; Trammell Crow, 18529 E. Gale Avenue, Industry, CA 91748. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JULY, 1996, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY : ZLZ Mike iGoldenberg/, Chairman I, James DeStefano, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of July, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: Goldenberg, Ruzicka, McManus, Fong NOES Schad ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: DeStefa'�o, Secretary 4 cm- &IAMOND BAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 VARIANCE APPLICATION Record Owner Name (t l,ec�eu (Last namefirst) C Address City„ -k (� 4 Phone( Applicant ,al� (�-00 lbt C`ff e fi e.n.>r V� P1a 2 � Phone( �) ! % 6 -; S 3 1 Dace Reed 5 'D ? Fee $ O Receipt# U a d By (,TS -. ar v i c e Applicant's Agent n=l & e I l (1 et Ic, g (Last name first) C/ Phony NOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Community Development Director in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this case. . (Attach separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors of corporations.) Consent. I certify that I am the owner. of the herein described property and permit the applicant to file this request. Signed SEE ATTACHED (All record owners) Date Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. Printed N e t l (A plicant o Agent Signl(Afy Date ppli t or A n Location uri t ✓e between - rh.t, IV, V1.,", or tract and lot number) (Street) Zoning LAAiuLSj 1�3�� � Project Size (gross acres) (. istt�n C. \a-t%UProject Density Previous Cases �! Present Use of Site L�& L F_ M LA Use applied for C, a ,,.,� e Domestic Water Source EL I,-,, _ Company/District Method of Sewage Disposal S � , ) 4- �( Sanitation District Grading of Lots by Applicant? YES NO �1, Amount (Show necessary grading design on site plan or tent. map) I V LEGAL DESCRIPTION (All.ow6ership comprising the proposed lots/project). If petitioning for zone change, attach legal description of exterior boundaries of area subject to the change.) PLEASE SEE BELOW. Project Site: c -%� �—+%rk- Gross Area o. of Lots Area devoted to : Structures Open Space Residential project: Proposed Density and Gross Area No. of floors Units/Acres Number and types of Units Residential Parking: Type N r • -. Total Required LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Provided Total Provided Lots 8 and 9 of Tract 39679 City od Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California as per map recorded in the Book No. 1083 Pages 14 — 21 inclusive of maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said county as amended by a Certification of Correction recorded January 24, 1989, as Instrument No. 89-123719, official records. CITY OF MMOND BAR CRW4 1I9d--" ..,� 1 CONEWJNTTI'Y DEVELOPMXNT DEPARTMENT DabRec'd 21660 E. Copley Drive Suits 190 Fee $ (909)396-5676 Frut (909)861-3117 Receipt# VARIANCE APPLICATION By _ P.ec;nrd 4�.�Ttcr luP II Pr pe ties Name : (Lase! name •rst)� Address 18529 E_Q .A _ City Irldy� Z-'P_ 9174f3 Phone( )�81$-312-3612 Applicant Qni Hof HxMix (Last name first) Applicant's Agent !; s :a �. �IK• .�ue�. may!. • •yam No ./ f•tnr_••- aw • / 0 '21• NOTE: It is fha rrplicant's responsibility to notify the Community Development Director in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this case. (.Attach senazate sheet; if necessary, including names, addresses, end aignuvres of m rrbers of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors of corporations.) Consent: I ,artVy that I am the owner of the herein described property and permit the applicant to file this request. Signed (I" L LCILU---� — - _ Date Zt (All record owners) Christie gN,th, TtameU C cw Sc). C 7ai , Inc. as agat fcrr 7.lUP II Pcqatii , Joint Venture Cerdficatio«::, the u.-sciern'gned, hereby terfy under penalty of perjury thvt the information herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. Printed Name Signed_ -- Location between (Applicant or Agent) (Applicant or Agent) (Street address or tract and lot number) (Street) Zoning _____.._ Project Size (gross acres) Previous Cases Date M. Project Deasity (Street) Present Use of Site Use applied for VARIANCE CASE -BURDEN OF PROOF ' In addition to the information required in the application, the applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission, the following facts: A. That the requested use at the location proposed will not: 1. Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare or persons residing or worldng in the surrounding area, or 2. Be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site, or 3. Jeopardize, endanger or other wise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare. AN ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE HEALTH,. PEACE, COMFORT OR WELFARE OF PERSONS RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE SURROUNDING AREA, OR WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE USE, ENJOYMENT OR VALUATION OF PROPERTY OR OTHER PERSONS LOCATED IN THE VICINITY OF THE SITE, NOR WILL IT JEOPARDIZE, ENDANGER OR OTHERWISE CONSTITUTE A MENACE TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE. B. That the proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this Ordinance, or as is otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area. . THE EXISTING SITE.IS ADEQUATE IN SIZE AND SHAPE. C. That the proposed site is adequately served: 1. By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of traffic such use would generate, and 2. By other public or private service facilities as are required. THE EXISTING SITE IS ADEQUATELY SERVED BY HIGHWAYS OR STREETS OF SUFFICIENT WIDTH AND BY OTHER PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SERVICE FACILITIES AS ARE REQUIRED. V That there are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property involved, such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which are not generally applicable to other properties in the same vicinity and under identical zoning classification. THERE ARE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY INVOLVED. E. That such variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial pro, ..y right of the applicant such as that possessed by owners of other property in the same vicinity and zone. ' SUCH VARIANCE IS NECESSARY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF A SUBSTANTIAL PROPERTY RIGHT OF THE APPLICANT. F. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to other property or improvements in the same vicinity and zone. THE GRANTING OE THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR BE INJURIOUS TO OTHER PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE SAME VICINITY AND ZONE. J Lr: rLDG., '90' JUN 18 P 2 :19 Variance Case No. 96-1 -Burden of Proof Question A 1-3 The University of Phoenix is requesting one additional sign that is in total compliance with all sign criteria for the area except for the restriction on multiple signs for the same user on the same elevation. An additional sign in no way adversely affects the health, peace, comfort or welfare of anyone in the area nor is an additional sign detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of any other properties in the vicinity. Furthermore a sign that is in full compliance with all design criteria does not jeopardize, endanger of constitute any menace to public health, safety or welfare. Question B. The building is -constructed on lots 8 & 9 of Gateway Corporate Center, which was approved for a total of 6 sign in designated locations in the original sign program. The building currently has 3 signs in place and the proposed sign by the University of Phoenix will replace one of these existing signs. There are no size or shape restrictions which would preclude the proper installation of this sign. Question C 1-2 The building was built in 1989 and all necessary improvements and facilities are in place. *96 JUN 18 P 2 :20 Question D. The design of the building contains an offset of 12 feet on either end of the building whereby the glass face of the building extends out 12 feet and blocks visibility of the entrances to the building and visibility of approved sign locations. This offset in essence creates a separate elevation with separate entrances on each end of the building. The University of Phoenix has two departments with different functions at each end of the building and also occupies space on both the first and second floors of the building. The additional sign is needed to direct visitors to the entrance closest to the administrative offices on the south end. This entrance is not visible from the north entrance due to the offset of the building. Furthermore, the Owner of the building and the Gateway Corporate Center Sign Plan do not allow signage on the other elevations of the building nor will they allow signs on the glass section of the wall on the elevation facing Valley Vista Drive. This fact prohibits the University of Phoenix from placing the additional sign on a portion of the building that we occupy. Therefore, because of the design limitations and the restrictions placed by the Owner, the only means available to satisfy the sign requirements of the University of Phoenix is to place an additional sign at the opposite side of the glass wall section to ensure visibility from both ends of the parking lot. This is the only location approved by both the building Owner and the Gateway Corporate Center sign plan. '96 JUN 18 ? 2 *20 QueAiotl E. The University of Phoenix occupies nearly 35% of the building and attracts in excess of 200 visitors per day. The additional sign will facilitate the flow of traffic that may be restricted by the limitations that the design of the building places on the visibility of the existing signs. The existing sign that will be replaced (ReMax Realty) belongs to a former tenant of the building that occupied the same space in the building that the University of Phoenix presently has their administrative offices. This sign location has been designated by the Owner to serve the offices on the east side of the building which do not front on the west side, where all approved sign locations are designated. The building to the north of the subject building at 1360 Valley Vista Drive has two signs for the same occupant of that project, which is Bryan A. Stirrat & Associates. These signs are located on two different elevations of the building, however the building has a flat face and visibility from the same elevation is not a problem. As stated in D above, the design of the subject building is such that two signs on the same elevation axe not necessarily visible from the driveway entrances to the property thus creating difficulty for our visitors to find the appropriate entrance. Question F. The granting of a variance for an additional code compliant sign for the University of Phoenix in a location that has been approved for a sign, on an elevation that is set apart by a major structural offset and that is replacing an existing sign of a former occupant of the building that may not be in compliance does not present any detriment to the public welfare or is in any way injurious to other properties in the vicinity. As stated above the building at 1360 Valley Vista Drive has two signs for the same use and has not been deemed to be a detriment or injurious to others. INITIAL STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE A. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Applicant (Owner): Project Representative: NAME �r ADDRE S PHONE # 1. Action requested and NAME ADDRESS PHONE # description: Ci r& • Staff Use Project No. 2. Street location of project: a, D -y' 3 a. Present use of site: �.� c S �, �� 1� 1+�.�� P \ u 3b. Previous use of site or structures: 4. Please list all previous cases (if any) related to this project: 5. Other related permitlapprovals required. Specify type and granting agency. I a 1 Are you planning future phases of this project? Y N} If yes, explain: N t- 7. Project Area: Covered by structures, paving: Landscaping, open space: Total Area: 8. Number of floors: 9. Present zoning:_ 10. Water and sewer serviTY PDblicSe Does service exist at site? OYN If yes, do -purveyors have capacity to meet demand of project and all other approved projects? N If domestic water or public sewers are not -available, how wilt these services be provided? Residential Projects: 11. Number and type of units: l�✓ l ►� l 12. Schools: What school district(s) serves the property? Are existing school facilities adequate to meet project needs? YES NO If not, what provisions will be made for additional classrooms? Non -Residential projects: 13. Distance to nearest residential use or sensitive use (school, hospital, etc.) Ala m,l � 14. Number and floor area of buildings: 15. Number of employees and shifts: �) Oc) ,{% G� pin 16. Maximum employees per shift: 17. Operating hours: a �� 18. Identify any: End products r\ c� P Waste products roc)-+ k- Means of disposal k2 19. Do project operations use,,store or produce hazardous substances such as oil, pesticides, chemicals, paints, or radioactive ls? YES NO If yes, explain 1. B. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION 0 Environmental Setting —Project Site (�r a. Existing use/structures b. Topographylslopes , , L t r2- d e�" e4 *c. Vegetation \ k— ::Lc Q .e *d. Animals *e. f. 9. Watercourses I Cultural/historical resources�— Other 2. Environmental Setting — Surrounding Area a. Existing uses structures (types, densities): b. Topography/slopes *c. Vegetation N, *d. Animals *e. Watercourses f. Cultural/historical resources ( g. Other tj "' .. 20. Do your operations require any pressurized tanks? YES (ZO If yes, explain 21. Identify any flammable, reactive or explosive materials to be located on -site. 22. Will delivery or shipment trucks travel through residential areas to reach the nearest highway? . YES NO If yes, explain t -- 3. Are there any major trees on the site, including oak trees? YES NO_) / If yes, type and number. 4. Will any natural watercourses, surface flow patterns, etc., be changed through project development?: YES (Zo) If yes, explain: 5. Grading: Will the project require grading? YES If yes, how many cubic yards? Will it be balanced on -site? YES NO V If not balanced, where will dirt be obtained or deposited? 6. Are there any identifiable landslides or -other major geologic hazards on the property (including uncompacted fill"' YES CNO) If yes, explain: 7. Is the property located within a high fire hazard area (hillsides with moderately dense vegetation)? YES CNO Distance to nearest fire station: 8. Noise: IInn Existing noise sources at site: Noise to be generated by project: Fumes: Odors generated by project: -- Could toxic fumes be generated? 9.. What energy -conserving designs or material will be used? i n CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, d information presented are true e and correct to the best of MY ow edge and 7"1 'WIX M I a ( UFA MAMW 60wwwr) ate Si For: UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX - CITY OF 01A'10} PLING.. 8L0G.. E;;:,:;. rif Universy of Phoenix WALL FACE5 & STAND-OFF RETURN5 PRIMED o ° 0 CLIPS AS AND PAINTED O ° REQUIRED. o° o 0 GLASS o 0 TUBE o ° o 5UPPORT5 ° ° P-K HOU51NGS 0 0 ° o FLEXIBLE 4500 WHITE ° °° CONDUIT NEON TUBE — ° 0° IN57ALLATION/ 30 M.A. ° TRAN5FORMER BOLTS IN WALL ° o ° ° CONTAINED WITHIN ANCHORS AS ° ° ° U-L APPROVED BOX REQUIRED. ° O WITH 015CONNECT O ° o SWITCH. SECTION THRU TYPICAL "HALO' ILLUMINATE® LETTERSET SIGNAL JET BLACK 41-306 FD-1003-96 MOG?C�C�O EXH131T��n.�9� at- s}yt h{ ii� 77 _ 1" �,'" � SAY � Y � K• , � c 4 Y c {+ • �' ice' _ 5 � IL y� .. ♦7 . - + _ s ` i E tt . ♦� 1 4 �sl F� - r Cf s xzlw nn ~ tU �` 1. �J L.: ' CITY O� 01Aik-COS' AR PL14G., FLOG.. E, ,. '96 JUN 18 P4J j:2,Universiof WALL FACES & 51, STAND-OFF RETURNS PRIMED �l o ° o CLIPS AS AND PAINTED 0o REQUIRED. o° GLASS 0 o 0 TUBE oo o SUPPORTS ° P-K HOUSINGS 0 o FLEXIBLE 4500 W.. n g CONDUIT NEON TUBE _ ° o° ° IN57NLLATION ° ° 30 M.A. TRANSFORMER 13OLT5 IN WALL ° o ° ° o ° CONTAINED WITHIN ANCHORS A5 o U-L APPROVED 60X REQUIRED. 0 0 WITH DISCONNECT 0 o SWITCH. 5ECTI®N THRU TYPICAL 9 HALO' ILLUMINATE® LETTER5ET FO-1003-96 dMOO G3[��C�OO SIGNAL JET BLACK 41-306 EXHP3IT_a__�&z�y� I)Lt�III Il BAR, bL"NOTICE OF PUBLIC City of Diamond Bar, 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (909) 396-5676 TO: Property Owners within a 500 foot radius of subject site FROM: City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to State law, that a public hearing will be held by the City Council to determine whether or not the subject request shall be approved under the provisions of State law and the City of Diamond Bar Zoning Code as follows: DATE AND TIME OF HEARING: Tuesday, September 3, 1996 7:00 P.M. PLACE OF HEARING: South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 SUBJECT: Appeal of Variance No. 96-1 REQUEST: Variance No. 96-1, (pursuant Chapter 22.60 - Part 5), is a request appealing the Planning Commission's decision of denial for a second wall sign, approximately 32.5 square feet in area, on the north side of a building which the applicant occupies. PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 OWNER: Trammell Crow, 18529 E. Gale Ave., Industry, CA 91748 APPLICANT: University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, Az. 85072 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that this project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to § 15311(a). AREA MAP: North Subject Site (not to scale) Published in: San Gabriel Valley Tribune: August 13, 1996 Inland Valley Daily Bulletin: August 13, 1996 If you are unable to attend the public hearing, but wish to send written comments, please write to the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department at the address given below. To preview case materials or for further information on this subject please contact the Community Development Department at (909) 396-5676. If you challenge this application and project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. CASE MATERIALS are available for review between the hours of 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., at the Community Development Dept., 21660 Copley Dr., Ste. 190, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 0 -LEGALS- from Marilyn Ortiz, Diamond Bar Planning (909) 396-5676 PLEASE ADVERTISE ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 13,1996 NOTICE OF PIIBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN BY THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR that the City Council will conduct a public hearing on the following item to determine whether or not the subject request shall be approved under the provisions of State law and the City of Diamond Bar's Zoning Code: Variance No. 96-1, (pursuant Chapter 22.60 - Part 5), is a request appealing the Planning Commission's decision of denial for a second wall sign, approximately 32.5 square feet in area, on the north side of a building which the applicant occupies. PROJECT ADDRESS: 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Trammell Crow, 18529 E. Gale Ave., Industry, CA 91748 APPLICANT: University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, Az. 85072 Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that this project is Categorically Exempt, pursuant to § 15311 (a). I,f you are unable to attend the public hearing, but wish to send written comments, please write to the Diamond Bar Community Development Department at the address given below. You may also obtain additional information concerning this case by phoning (909) 396-5676. If you challenge this application and project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. TIME OF HEARING: 7:00 p.m. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Tuesday, September 3, 1996 LOCATION: South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium 21865 E. Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California 91765 CASE MATERIALS: Are available for review between 8:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department, 21660 Copley Drive, Suite 190, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. • NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING City of Diamond Bar, 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (909) 396-5676 0: Property Owners within a 500 foot radius of subject site ROM: Community Development Dept., City of Diamond Bar OTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to State Law, that a public hearing will be held by the Planning Commission to determine hether or not the subject request(s) shall be approved under the provisions of State Law and the City of Diamond Bar Zoning Code follows: ATE AND TIME OF HEARING: Monday, July 22, 1996 7:00 p.m. LACE OF HEARING: SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Auditorium 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 JBJECT: Variance No. %-1 EQUEST: Variance No. 96-1, (pursuant to Code Section 22.56, Part 2), is a request to install a second wall sign, approximately 32.5 square feet in area, on the north side of a building which the applicant occupies tOJECT ADDRESS: 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PPLICANT: University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, Az. 85072 tOPERTY OWNER: Trammell Crow, 18529 E. Gale Ave., Industry, CA 91748 4VVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the terms of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has termined that this project Categorically Exempt, pursuant to § 15311 (a). AREA MAP: North Subject Site (— to -ak) bushed in: n Gabriel Valley Tribune: July 11, 1996 ,and Valley Daily Bulletin: July 11, 1996 you are unable to attend the public hearing, but wish to send ritten comments, please write to the City of Diamond Bar )mmunity Development Department at the address given below. To -eview case materials or for further information on this subject ease contact the Community Development Department at (909) )6-5676. P you challenge this application and project in court, you may e limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised t the public hearing described in this notice, or in written 3rrespondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or rior to, the public hearing. kSE MATERIALS are available for review between the hours of i. m. and 3 p.m., at the Community Development Dept., 21660 pley Dr., Ste. 190, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (Space below for use of Coy Clerk only) SAN GABRIEL VALLEY TRIBUNE 1210 N . Azusa Canyon Road West Covina, CA 91790 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Los Angeles I am a citizen of the United States, and a resident of the county aforesaid, I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above-entited matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of SAN GABRIEL VALLEY TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general circulation printed and published daily in the City of West Covina, County of Los Angeles, and which newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, State of California, on the date of September 10, 1957, Case Number 684891. The notice, of which the annexed is a true printed copy, has been published in each regular and entired issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to wit: 7/11/96 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at West Covina, LA Co. California this _11day of 7 rr,Y , 19 gjE— o signature 11 A 1/ Proof of Publication of • • - PROOF OF PUBLICATION (201 S.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, County of Los Angeles I, Nancy Paisley do hereby declare that I am a citizen oft, the United States; I am over the age of eighteen years, 4- and not a party to or interested in the below -entitled %�U/ matter. I am the Legal Advertising Clerk of the INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN (Formerly the Progress Bulletin) A newspaper of general circulation, published daily in the City of Pomona, County of Los Angeles, State of California, and which has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, State of California, under the date of June 15, 1945, Decree No. Pomo C-606; that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to wit: July 11, 1996 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated: July 11, 1996 ?Signature Proof of Publication of: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NOTICE: IS HEREBY iIVEN sty T}tE city OF IIAMOND BAR that the tanning Commission will on'duct ffi public iWarthq on he fell Item to4kiar. wine whether or .slot ;thy ubtect request shoo be im�pproved under the provio "of g,gr�ate law and the illy of Diamo" Bar's zon. n crde: a7Esrsce No. gli of to Code Sectl2.35�� art 2) is a request ,ta instant Xsecond wall sign, appproxi. nately 32.$ square. icet in yea, on the north old* of a uilding which the applicant aw, IN 7 1 / 0-, PROPERTY OWNER: Tram- mel Crow, 18529 E. Galo Ave., Industry, CA 91748 APPLICANT: University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, AZ 85072 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the provisions. of the Cali- fornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has determined that this project is Categorical lIy Exempt, pur- suant to § ISA I (a). If you are unable to attend the public hearing, but wish to . send written comments, please write to the Diamond Bar Community Development Department at the address given below. You may also obtain additional Information concerning this case by phoning (909) 396-3676. If you challenge this application and pro*t In court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or 1n written cor. respondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the p�boIt hearing. TIME OF MEETING: 7:00 p.m. DATE OF PUSLIC HEARING: Monclm July 22, 1996 LOCATION: south Coast Air Quality Management District 4uditorium1 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California 91765 CASE MATERIALS: Are avail- able for review between 8:00 s.m. and 3:00 pp.rn., at the Gty of Diamond. Bar C9m- 'nunity Development Depart. nent, 21660 Copley Drive, Suite 190, Diamond Bar, CA Pub: 7/11/19"96 0301343� WFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANS . h -11a1" 11 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF DIAMOND BAR '96 GOT 2 7":18 VARIANCE NO. 96-1 [I] [WE] the undersigned state: [I am] [We are] the owner of the real property described in the above -numbered Variance. [I am] [We are] aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said Variance No. 96-1 . [I] (We] certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. (Where the owner and applicant are not the same, both must sign) Type or Print Applicant Name's dl/t'� iI�d lY� �iTd-i Address isr ew i &Z-&" City, State `.ef .` / S' atur/,Mfkd* Owner Name Address City, State Signature This signature must be acknowledged by a notary public. Attach appropriate acknowledgements. STATE OF ARIZONA ) )ss. County of Maricopa ) On this /5 — day of 46tQ , 1996, before me, the undersigned Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared A m known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument as G�j-,�of THE UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX, an Arizona corporation, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same on behalf of said Corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official stamp the day and year of this certificate first above written. Notary Public for Arizona Mp191■I�8�MY600 Printed Name: Barbara Bausch F11 My Commission Expires: d PE in i City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMNIISSION Staff Report AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 6.1 REPORT DATE: July 5, 1996 MEETING DATE: July 22, 1996 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Variance No. 96-1 APPLICATION REQUEST: A Variance to install a second wall sign on the northerly facade of a commercial building. PROPERTY LOCATION: 1370 Valley Vista Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Trammell Crow 18529 E. Gale Avenue Industry, CA 91748 APPLICANT: Robert McNichols University of Phoenix 4615 E. Elwood Phoenix, AZ 85072 BACKGROUND: The property owner, Trammell Crow and applicant, University of Phoenix are requesting a Variance approval (pursuant to Code Section 22.56, Part 2) to install a second wall sign on the northerly facade of a commercial building which the applicant occupies. The project site is located at 1370 Valley Vista Drive (Lot 8 and 9, Tract 39679) within a commercial development identified as Gateway Corporate Center. It has a General Plan land use designation of Professional Office (OP). It is within Commercial -Manufacturing-Billboard Exclusion -Unilateral Contract(C-M-BE-U/C) Zone. Generally, the following zones and uses surround the project site: to the north is the Orange (57) and Pomona (60) Freeway interchange; to the south and East is the C-M-BE-U/C Zone; and to the west is the Orange Freeway and the C-M-BE-U/C Zone. 1 project site has two points of ingress and egress, approximately 444 feet apart, adjacent to Valley Vista Drive. The applicant believes that this building's design, which creates a 12 foot deep glass block projection (on the northerly facade), impedes visibility to the building's entrances and the existing wall sign. The applicant feels that this project creates separate elevations, with separate entrances for each end of the building. Furthermore, the applicant states that the University of Phoenix has two departments with different functions at each end of the building. The resource center is at the building's east end where the existing wall sign is located. Classrooms are in the middle of the building. Administrative offices are at.the building's west end. Therefore, the applicant feels a second wall sign is needed to direct visitors to the administrative office's closest entrance on the building's west end. The applicant also states that the property owner will not allow wall signs on the building's other facades. Therefore, because of the property owner's restrictions and according to the applicant, the building's design limitations, the only means available to satisfy the University of Phoenix's sign requirements is to place a second wall sign in the proposed location ensuring visibility from both ends of the parking lot. The applicant feels that the second wall sign will facility traffic flow restricted by the building's design. The Variance procedures is established to permit modification of development standards as they apply to particular uses when practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships, or results inconsistent with the general purposes of the City's Planning and Zoning Code develop through the strict literal interpretation and enforcement of Code. A Variance may be granted to permit the modification of several development standards including signs. Pursuant to the City's Sign Ordinance, building frontage is defined as "the lineal extent of a building or activity which has frontage on either a public right-of-way or parking area. The length of the building facing the public right-of-way or parking lot shall be used to determine the amount of permitted signage." This definition does not make a distinction between varying planes on the same frontage and the lineal extent of the building. The projection creates separate planes on the building's frontage, but not separate frontages. The City understands the University of Phoenix's need to identify the location of its different departments and functions for site visitors. However, an additional wall sign located approximately 27 feet above ground level, with the proposed copy, will not fulfill this need. Staff believes that appropriate signage closer to eye level would be an appropriated solution to the applicant's stated problem. Staff has visited the project site and traveled routes mostly likely utilized by site visitors. The most likely utilized freeway exits are Grand Avenue and Brea Canyon Road at Golden Springs Drive. At these points, the subject building is not visible. From any of the freeway exits, traveling Golden Springs Drive will allow 3 • 0 above ground level. The City's Sign Ordinance states that when more than one wall sign is proposed for a multi -use building, is subject to the Planning Commission's review and approval. If the Planning Commission finds it appropriated to approve this second wall sign, a Planned Sign Program must be presented to the Commission for review and approval. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15311 (a). NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on July 11, 1996. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 25 property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project site on July 9, 1996. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Variance No. 96- 1. REQUIRED VARIANCE FINDINGS: 1. That because of special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property, the strict application of the code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification; and 2. That the adjustment authorized will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated; and 3. That strict application of zoning regulations as they apply to such property will result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose of such regulations and standards; and 4. That such adjustment will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity. 5 • 0 A. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DENYING VARIANCE NO. 96-1, A REQUEST TO INSTALL A SECOND WALL SIGN ON THE NORTHERLY FACADE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER AT 1370 VALLEY VISTA DRIVE (LOTS 8 AND 9, TRACT 39670) AT 1729 DERRINGER LANE (LOT 6, TRACT 24046), DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. RECITALS. 1. The property owners, Trammell Crow and applicant, University of Phoenix, have filed an application for Variance No. 96-1 located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, as described above in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance shall be referred to as the "Applica- tion". 2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State of California. Thereafter, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 14 (1990), thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County Code contain the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, including the subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar. 3. -On July 25, 1995, the City of Diamond Bar adopted its General Plan. Action was taken on the subject application as to the consistency with the General Plan. It has been determined that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on July 22, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. 5. Notification of the public hearing for this project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on July 11, 1996. Twenty-five property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project site were notified by mail on July 9, 1996. M 0 404p, e (g) The strict application of zoning regulations'.y including the City's Sign Ordinance, as they apply to the property, will not result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose of such regulations and standards. In this case, the strict literal interpretation of the City's Sign Ordinance does not result in inconsistencies with the Ordinance's general purpose; nor does it create uncessary hardship because the applicant can utilize alternative signage, offered in the Sign Ordinance, to accomplish its identification goals as stated in the submitted project application. (h) The Variance's approval may be materially detri- mental to the public health, safety, or general welfare, or to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity. The applicant's intent is to provide signage that will facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow on site. The second wall sign's proposed location is not at eye level. It will be 27 feet above ground level. Signage at that height does not facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic but may create an unsafe condition as drivers and pedes- trians seek directional signage/use identification at eye level. 3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby denies the Application. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, Robert McNichols, University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, Az 85072; Trammell Crow, 18529 E. Gale Avenue, Industry, CA 91748. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JULY, 1996, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY: Mike Goldenberg, Chairman 3 crryff DIAMOND BAR case# " q 6 -1 COMMMITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Dad Rec'd S 2- 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 Fee $ 40( (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 Receipt# 0,A d VARIANCE APPLICATION By Record Owner Name (Last name first) CC Address S � L- city 't -Jc �4 c k zip il 7 Phone( Applicant K �) , C�AS Q 7"n eA Phone( �) ! b 6 -S 3 7 V G-zS Sac v i c e s Applicant's Agent _ Fn,-i-�e 11 Ma\,C)�, Gast name first) s 1Ay C v,4ecce- N- 6u C9 I W a - Phone( ) & / V NOTE: It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Community Development Director in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this case. (Attach separate sheet, if necessary, including names, addresses, and signatures of members of partnerships, joint ventures, and directors of corporations.) Consent: I certify that I am the owner of the herein described property and permit the applicant to file this request. Signed SEE ATTACHED (All record owners) Date Certification: I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information herein provided is correct to the best of my knowledge. Printed N e �� t t (A plicant o Agent a Sign Date Appli t or Aln Location U address or tract and lot number) between and 1 q w� Street) LV _ (Street) Zoning s ��v�� l�l�t T HNM `'1 jot !1_t r fl f q Project Size (gross acres) ��-t-� `1��dC��1{ Project Density Previous Cases Present Use of Site J}1-1 L-e, M ',4 1 �~ + Z� a Use applied for . C CA ,nn P •. I c�N.� � .... ,..._... .... ...-. ..._ ... .... ........�..c.-�--.........._._........----�...—�.--ter.-.:..'.. ...._. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Caself i%&Ar,� CO'ADIUNY Y DEVELOPINXNT DEPARTMENT Date Reed 21660 E. Copley Drive Suite 190 Fee $ (909)396-5676 Fax (909)861-3117 Re =iptli VARIANCE APPLICATION 13 _ Record Qwger 1CIPP n Prrx-ties Name ,'3birt-V (Las! name first}� Address 18529 E_ le Aya.a- City Y� 91748 Zip — Applicant Applicant's Agent lhi. � PYQMJix _air 7n 4mir.nT= swaQ�3 (Last name 8nt) (Last name .first) -405-Eft ELymL met-._.. 512n amm=e p!!jx, AZ Ralr3ain Pads, CA 85072_2069 1706 Phone( )!81"12-38]2 Phone( ) 602-%6-5394 _ Phone( ) 83B.j NOTE: It is tho rf plicar is responnibility to notify the Community Development Director in writing of any change of the principals involved during the processing of this case. (Attach senaiatc she'd; if necessary, including names, addresses, s.nd signatures of limbers of partnerships, joint ventures, and directory of corporations.) Consent. I ceaVy that I am the owner of the herein described property and permit the applicant to file this request. Signed_. _ _Date 12� (All record owners) c ? ri st-i a smith, Ttammeu cav So. Cal., Inc- as agent Rr Tap n Prcpertie s Joint venture Certification. b, the u-utersigned, hereby certVy underpenalty of perjury that the 14ormation herein provided is corms to the best of my knowledge. Printed Name S i gned_ _ -- - Location between (Applicant or Agent) (Applicant or Agent) (street address or tract and lot number) (street} Zoning-___________ Project Size(gross acres) _ Previous Cases Present Use of Site Date Date and 1N Project Density (Strcot) Use appEod for - That such variance is netry for the preservation of a substantial pro* right of the applicant such as that possessed by owners of other property in the same vicinity and zone. 11 SUCH VARIANCE IS NECESSARY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF A SUBSTANTIAL PROPERTY RIGHT OF THE APPLICANT. F. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to other property or improvements in the same vicinity and zone. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR BE INJURIOUS TO OTHER PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE SAME VICINITY AND ZONE. r Lief .. BL0G., E-';,;,. '96 JUN 18 ° 2 :20 Question D. The design of the building contains an offset of 12 feet on either end of the building whereby the glass face of the building extends out 12 feet and blocks visibility of the entrances to the building and visibility of approved sign locations. This offset in essence creates a separate elevation with separate entrances on each end of the building. The University of Phoenix has two departments with different functions at each end of the building and also occupies space on both the first and second floors of the building. The additional sign is needed to direct visitors to the entrance closest to the administrative offices on the south end. This entrance is not visible from the north entrance due to the offset of the building. Furthermore, the Owner of the building and the Gateway Corporate Center Sign Plan do not allow signage on the other elevations of the building nor will they allow signs on the glass section of the wall on the elevation facing Valley Vista Drive. This fact prohibits the University of Phoenix from placing the additional sign on a portion of the building that we occupy. Therefore, because of the design limitations and the restrictions placed by the Owner, the only means available to satisfy the sign requirements of the University of Phoenix is to place an additional sign at the opposite side of the glass wall section to ensure visibility from both ends of the parking lot. This is the only location approved by both the building Owner and the Gateway Corporate Center sign plan. ' Staff Use Project No. WIT AL STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE A. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Applicant (Owner): Project Representative: NAME J U 4i ADDRE S 1. 2. 3a 3b 4. 5 PHONE # NAME ADDRESS PHONE # Action requested and project description: r� I n n A Street location of project: 17J Present use of site: Previous use of site or structures:_ NI/ 4-- J Please list all previous cases (if any) related to this project: Other related permit/approvals required. Specify type and granting agency. I 6. Are you planning future phases of this project? Y N If yes, explain: N 7. Project Area: Covered by structures, paving: Landscaping, open space: Total Area: 8. Number of floors: 9. Present zoning: B. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION ' 1. Environmental Setting —Project Site a. Existing use/structures nn u �t �y.�nGi a� ter c-.,o b. Topography/slopes ,, e�a g4 *c. Vegetation T v L544-y- - - C2.0 *d. Animals *e. Watercourses f. Cultural/historical resources 10 �— g. Other 2. Environmental Setting — Surrounding Area a. Existing uses structures (types, densities): r b. Topography/slopes f_\ *c. Vegetation *d. Animals *e. Watercourses {�� �- f. Culturallhistorical resources( g. Other % Are there any major trees on the site, including oak trees? YES NO If yes, type and number: j f �- 4. Will any natural watercourses, surface flow patterns, etc., be changed through project development?: YES (Zo) If yes, explain: 5. Grading: Will the project require grading? YES NO ' If yes, how many cubic yards? Will it be balanced on -site? YES NO V v If not balanced, where will dirt be obtained or deposited? 6. Are there any identifiable landslides or other major geologic hazards on the property (including uncompacted fill)? YES CNO') If yes, explain: 7. Is the property located within a high fire hazard area (hillsides with moderately dense vegetation)? YES (7NO") Distance to nearest fire station: 8. Noise: Existing noise sources at site: l v 1 Y Noise to be generated by project: Fumes: Odors generated by project: ,/-- Could toxic fumes be generated? JJJ 9.. What energy -conserving designs or material will be used? R r� i7 •1 GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER ASSOCIATION 1661 HANOVER ROAD • CITY OF INDUSTRY, CALIFORNIA 91748 • FAX (818) 913-6169 • TELEPHONE (818) 913-0030 February 15, 1996 Mr. Bob Burney MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT 12120 North Seventy -Sixth Place Scottsdale, Arizona 85260 RE. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE REVIEW EXTERIOR BUILDING SIGNAGE UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX 1370 SOUTH VALLEY VISTA DRIVE DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Burney: via fax (602) 443-0758 and regular mail The Architectural Committee has received an 81/2" x 14" sign drawing, prepared by "FLUORESCO", dated November 22, 1995, submitted for review and approval for conformance with the Gateway Corporate Center Design Guidelines. The sign consists of the words "UNIVERSTTY OF PHOENIX" on one line 91/Y inches high x 20 feet long, constructed of black aluminum reverse pan channel letters with white neon "halo" internal illumination. The proposed sign will be identical to the existing University of Phoenix sign,and thus the University of Phoenix will have two of the six signs permitted for this building in our sign interpretation letter of August 10, 1989. The Architectural Committee approves the sign as submitted. Please obtain approval from the City of Diamond Bar and the building owner, Trammel Crow Realty Advisors, prior to installation. Enclosed are two approved stamped copies of the sign drawing, dated February 14, 1996. Very truly yours, THE ARCH= , A.I.A., Member cc: Ben Reiling Byron Pinckert, Member Carol Truman, Trammel Crow Reality Advisors v yh 1•�l s� PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DENYING VARIANCE NO. 96-1, A REQUEST TO INSTALL A SECOND WALL SIGN ON THE NORTHERLY FACADE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER AT 1370 VALLEY VISTA DRIVE (LOTS 8 AND 9, TRACT 39670), DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA. A. RECITALS. 1. The property owners, Trammell Crow and applicant, University of Phoenix, have filed an application for Variance No. 96-1 located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, as described above in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance shall be referred to as the "Applica- tion". t 2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State of California. Thereafter, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 14 (1990), thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and .22 of the Los Angeles County Code contain the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, including the subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar. 3. On July 25, 1995, the City of Diamond Bar adopted its General Plan. Action was taken on the subject application as to the consistency with the General Plan. It has been determined that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on July 22, 1996 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. 5. Notification of the public hearing for this project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on July 11, 1996. Twenty-five property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project site were notified by mail on July 9, 1996. 1 r I, `James DeStefano, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of July, 1996, by the following vote: ATTEST: AYES: Goldenberg, Ruzicka, McManus, Fong NOES: Schad ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None DeStefakio, Secretary (g) The strict application of zoning regulations including the City's Sign Ordinance, as they apply, to the property, will not result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose of such regulations and standards. In this case, the strict literal interpretation of the City's Sign Ordinance does not result in inconsistencies with the Ordinance's general purpose; nor does it create uncessary hardship because the applicant can utilize alternative signage, offered in the Sign Ordinance, to accomplish its identification goals as stated in the submitted project application. (h) The Variance's approval may be materially detri- mental to the public health, safety, -or general welfare, or to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity. The applicant's intent is to provide signage that will facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow on site. The second wall sign's proposed location is not at eye level. It will be 27 feet above ground level. Signage at that height does not facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic but may create an unsafe condition as drivers and pedes- trians seek directional signage/use identification at eye level. 3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby denies the Application. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, Robert McNichols, University of Phoenix, 4615 E. Elwood, Phoenix, Az 85072; Trammell Crow, 18529 E. Gale Avenue, Industry, CA 91748. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JULY, 1996, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSI7 THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY:. , Z / Mike (Goldenbercf/. Chairman B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is. found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to a 5.94 gross acres site developed with an 84,000 square foot, two story, multi -tenant commercial office building. acres (1.23 net acres). The project site is located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, California. (b) The project site is zoned Commercial -Manufacturing - Billboard Exclusion -Unilateral Contract (C-M-BE- U/C). It has a General Plan land use designation of Professional Office (OP). (c) Generally, the following zones and uses surround the project site: to the north is the Orange (57) and Pomona (60) Freeway interchange; to the south and .East is the C-M-BE-U/C Zone; and to the west is the Orange Freeway and the C-M-BE-U/C Zone. (d) The proposed Variance is a request to install a second wall sign with a sign face area of 32.5 square feet. Its installation location is approximately 27 feet above ground level, on the subject office building's northerly facade. (e) There are no special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property. The strict application of the code does not deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. Other properties in the vicinity, under identical zoning classification have the same or similar lot configuration and topography. Additionally these properties have buildings with a similar architectural style as the subject building. (f) The Variance's approval will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. The applicant is creating its own hardship by not utilizing other types of signage offered by the City Sign Ordinance which would be an appropriate solution to the. applicant's stated problem. •,�'1 - � � .� to i . P F 'VA 95 10:27 :-',70131fl\ FULA M M. 'T T c r-4 rn m v 0 ;11 ID ID Z "I . . . ?- A q, q rn 0 z V). VA M m 5, UNIVERSIrY OF PHOENIX giAMOND EiAR. CA RESCO42,U NOTED Gn Moan su..i P---. A-- -0 1 V22 OF i HE-ET-1 FO-8442.95 ♦ r CERTIFICATION: T hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, d information presented are 1 true and correct to the best of my ow edge and be ' 10100 0 AA-111JA A '9 a AM- te Si For: UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX 21. Identify any flammable, reactive or explosive materials to be located on -site. 01 �= 22. Will delivery or shipment trucks travel through residential areas to reach the nearest highway9. YES NO If yes, explain 10. Water and sewer service: , DomesticrblicWater ers l Does service exist at site? If yes, do purveyors have capacity to meet demand of project and all other approved projects? 60 CY ) N If domestic water or public sewers are not available, how will these services be provided? Residential Projects: 11. Number and type of units: 06— 12. Schools: What school districts) serves the property?— UA— Are existing school facilities adequate to meet project needs? YES NO If not, what provisions will be made for additional classrooms? Non -Residential projects: 13. Distance to nearest residential use or sensitive use (school, hospital, etc.) Va r-y\* ,1.P 14. Number and floor area of buildings: 15. Number of employees and shifts: d�� �y G r- P 16. Maximum employees per shift: 17. Operating hours: , z 18. Identify any: End products C-� Waste products r\c)— Means of disposal c_ 19. Do project operations use,ystore or produce hazardous substances such as oil, pesticides, chemicals, paints, or radioactive Is? YES N� . If yes, explain . n�� ", �� �G., _C,G., EIu n L f=,. *96 JUN 18 P 2 :20 Quesdoft E. The University of Phoenix occupies nearly 35% of the building and attracts in excess of 200 visitors per day. The additional sign will facilitate the flow of traffic that may be restricted by the limitations that the design of the building places on the visibility of the existing signs. The existing sign that will be replaced (ReMax Realty) belongs to a former tenant of the building that occupied the same space in the building that the University of Phoenix presently has their administrative offices. This sign location has been designated by the Owner to serve the offices on the east side of the building which do not front on the west side, where all approved sign locations are designated. The building to the north of the subject building at 1360 Valley Vista Drive has two signs for the same occupant of that project, which is Bryan A. Stirrat & Associates. These signs are located on two different elevations of the building, however the building has a flat face and visibility from the same elevation is not a problem. As stated in D above, the design of the subject building is such that two signs on the same elevation are not necessarily visible from the driveway entrances to the property. thus creating difficulty for our visitors to find the appropriate entrance. Question F. The granting of a variance for an additional code compliant sign for the University' of Phoenix in a location that has been approved for a sign, on an elevation that is set apart by a major structural offset and that is replacing an existing sign of a former occupant of the building that may not be in compliance does not present any detriment to the public welfare or is in any way injurious to other properties in the vicinity. As stated above the building at 1360 Valley Vista Drive has two signs for the same use and has not been deemed to be a detriment or injurious to others. PLH .. F..L0C.. c + t '96 JUN 18 P 2 :19 Variance Case No. 96-1 -Burden of Proof Question A 1-3 The University of Phoenix is requesting one additional sign that is in total compliance with all sign criteria for the area except for the restriction on multiple signs for the same user on the same elevation. An additional sign in no way adversely affects the health, peace, comfort or welfare of anyone in the area nor is an additional sign detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of any other properties in the vicinity. Furthermore a sign that is in full compliance with all design criteria does not jeopardize, endanger of constitute any menace to public health, safety or welfare. Question B. The building is constructed on lots 8 & 9 of Gateway Corporate Center, which was approved for a total of 6 sign in designated locations in the original sign program. The building currently has 3 signs in place and the proposed sign by the University of Phoenix will replace one of these existing signs. There are no size or shape restrictions which would preclude the proper installation of this sign. Question C 1-2 The building was built in 1989 and all necessary improvements and facilities are in place. VARIANCE CASE -BURDEN OF PROOF It In addition to the information required in the application, the applicant shall substantiate to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission, the following facts: A. That the requested use at the location proposed will not: 1. Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare or persons residing or working in the surrounding area, or 2. Be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site, or 3. Jeopardize, endanger or other wise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare. AN ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE HEALTH, PEACE, COMFORT OR WELFARE OF PERSONS RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE SURROUNDING AREA, OR WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE USE, ENJOYMENT OR VALUATION OF PROPERTY OR OTHER PERSONS LOCATED IN THE VICINITY OF THE SITE, NOR WILL IT JEOPARDIZE, ENDANGER OR OTHERWISE CONSTITUTE A MENACE TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE. B. That the proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this Ordinance, or as is otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area. THE EXISTING SITE.IS ADEQUATE IN SIZE AND SHAPE. C. That the proposed site is adequately served:. 1. By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of traffic such use would generate, and 2. By other public or private service facilities as are required. THE EXISTING SITE IS ADEQUATELY SERVED BY HIGHWAYS OR STREETS OF SUFFICIENT WIDTH AND BY OTHER PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SERVICE FACILITIES AS ARE REQUIRED. That there are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property involved, such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which are not generally applicable to other properties in the same vicinity and under identical zoning classification. THERE ARE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY INVOLVED. Domestic Water Source E1t1.5s-% Company/District Method of Sewage Disposal S Z �l z -4- Sanitation District �r Grading of Lots by Applicant? YES NO Amount (Show necessary grading design on site plan or tent. map) LEGAL DESCRIPTION (All ownership comprising the proposed lots/project). If petitioning for zone change, attach legal description of exterior boundaries of area subject to the change.) PLEASE SEE BELOW. Project Site: c -'.T', "V Gross Area o. of Lots Area devoted to : Structures Open Space Residential project: and Gross Area No. of floors Proposed Density Units/Acres Number and types of Units Residential Parking: Type Required Provided Total Required - Total Provided LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 8 and 9 of Tract 39679 City od Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California as per map recorded in the Book No. 1083 Pages 14 - 21 inclusive of maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said county as amended by a Certification of Correction recorded January 24, 1989, as Instrument No. 89-123719, official records. r I, James De5tefano, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certi` that the.foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopte by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of July, 1996, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN.: ATTEST: James DeStefano, Secretary 4 B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: (a) The project relates to a 5.94 gross acres site developed with an 84,000 square foot, two story, multi -tenant commercial office building. acres (1.23 net acres). The project site is located within Gateway Corporate Center at 1370 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, California. (b) The project site is zoned Commercial -Manufacturing - Billboard Exclusion -Unilateral Contract (C-M-BE- U/C). It has a General Plan land use designation of Professional Office (OP). (c) Generally, the following zones and uses surround the project site: to the north is the Orange (57) and Pomona (60) Freeway interchange; to the south and East is the C-M-BE-U/C Zone; and to the west is the Orange Freeway and the C-M-BE-U/C Zone. (d) The proposed Variance is a request to install a second wall sign with a sign face area of 32.5 square feet. Its installation location is approximately 27 feet above ground level, on the subject office building's northerly facade. (e) There are no special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the property. The strict application of the code does not deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. Other properties in the vicinity, under identical zoning classification have the same or similar lot configuration and topography. Additionally these properties have buildings with a similar architectural style as the subject building. (f) The Variance's approval will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. The applicant is creating its own hardship by not utilizing other types of signage offered by the City Sign Ordinance which would be an appropriate solution to the applicant's stated problem. n Prepared by: A J. u u A n s /*stant Planner Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution of Denial; 2. Exhibit "A" - site plan, elevations, and sign plan and materials board dated July 22, 1996; 3. Application; 4. Gateway Corporate Center's architectural committee approval dated February 15, 1996; and 5. Site photographs. 11 a visitor to enter Gateway Corporate Center at Copley Drive or Gateway Center Drive leading to the project site. Approaching the site from this direction allows the existing wall sign's visibility. While the second wall sign may allow freeway visibility, it does not fulfill the applicant's stated reasons for wanting a second wall sign. Staff finds that due to the northeast access approach (which is the most likely approach) to the site, the exiting wall sign is visible. However, upon entering the site and when on the site, directional signage closer to eye level and an improved interior directory would probably better serve the applicant's needs for more identification. The City's Sign Code offers the following types of signs for this purpose: 1. Freestanding Monument Sign with a maximum height of six feet and a maximum sign face area of 16 square feet. If the sign is located on property with frontage on a public right-of-way in excess of 65 feet in width (Valley Vista Drive's right-of-way at the project site is 66 feet wide) , the maximum sign face area is 24 square feet. One per frontage along a public street is permitted; 2. Incidental Sign with a maximum area of one square feet, window or wall mounted and one per use; and 3. Nameplate/Address Sign with a maximum area of four square feet, wall mounted, two per building and may be illuminated with lighting no greater than 25 watts. The freestanding monument sign could be located at either driveway approach. The incidental sign and nameplate signs could be strategically located on the building's exterior walls. Additionally, the interior directory could be more specific as to the locations of the different departments and functions of the University of Phoenix. Furthermore, the alternative suggested signage would facilitate vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow more than a wall sign two stories above ground level. Staff has spoken with Sandford Kopelow, a member of Gateway Corporate Center's architectural committee. He state that the committee would probably approve a monument sign and incidental/ directional signs for the University of Phoenix site. After considering all the information presented by the applicant, researching the City's codes and field survey, staff feels denial of the variance request is appropriate. In this case, the strict literal interpretation of the Sign Ordinance does not result in inconsistencies with the general purpose of the Ordinance. Staff believes that approving the Variance would constitute a grant of special privilege. There are not exceptional characteristics applicable to the site that strict application of the Sign Ordinance deprives the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the area. Additionally, the public health and safety would best be served with signage closer to eye level than 27 feet 4 • The project site is approximately 5.94 gross acres. It is developed with an 84,000 square foot, two story, multi -tenant commercial office building. The building presently contains seven tenants. The University of Phoenix occupies portions of the first and second floors ( see Exhibit "A") which equals 33.6% of the building. The occupied space is utilized for administrative office, book store, resource center, vocational rooms and classrooms. Currently, the University of Phoenix has one wall sign (located on the building's northerly facing facade) with a 32.5 square foot sign face area. The City permitted this sign in September 1990. Two other wall signs exist (Kleinfelder and ReMax) on the northerly facade. ANALYSIS: The City's Sign Ordinance (adopted 1991) permits wall signs for individual uses by the following standards: 1. Wall Signs For Multi -Use Buildings or Commercial Centers. The maximum area is 1.25 square feet per one lineal foot of frontage, to a maximum 125 square feet per street level uses. For uses not located at street level which are visible from the street, courtyard, or public parking area, the maximum area is one (1) square foot per one lineal foot of frontage per use, to a maximum of 125 square foot. The maximum number is one per outer wall per use. No permit shall be issued for a wall sign in a multi -use building or commercial center in which more than one sign is proposed without the Planning Commission's review and approval; 2. Location of Wall Signs. Business signs shall be limited to those portions of a building within which such business is located or conducted; According to the Sign ordinance's referenced standards, the applicant is allowed one wall sign, per outer wall, located on a portion of the building which it occupies. Currently, the applicant's existing wall sign complies with the City's Sign Ordinance. The University of Phoenix is requesting a second wall sign, 32.5 square feet which matches the existing wall sign. Additionally, this request includes locating the sign on a portion of the building not occupied by the applicant. This request deviates from the Sign Ordinance's standards, as referenced above in items number 1. and 2. As such, the second wall sign's installation requires a Variance approval by the Planning Commission. The subject building's frontage facing Valley Vista Drive is approximately 432 lineal feet with two recessed entrances separated by 24 lineal feet of a glass block projection. Additionally, the 2 REMOVE AND.SCRAP AN EXISTING INTERNALLY ICLUMINATED'REMAX' LETTERSET. TNSTALL ONE HALO LIT EXISTING HALO ILLUMINATED LETTERSET IDENTICALTO EXISTING --'N LETTERSET TO REMAIN _TTERSET ON RIGHT SIDE. (PROPERTY LINE SQUARE FOOTAGE DESCRIPTION ALLOWABLE: 263.75 SQ. FT. PROPOSED: 65.00 SQ. FT. REVISED 4/5/96 LENGTH OF SLUG. 47'-D' TENANT �4- to,`(f SPACE N�YFI i IU E L( [ SPACE FIRST FLOOR PLAN REVISED 6/11/96 s I V�b�P V EXHI3IT NORTH 1 0 it B pg 09 o g rj X 'a g8 LL O v O &e CE x ~ w O m=Z a x .r--126'-4-1 /2" ANDSCRAP AN EXISTING INTERN INTERNALLY ILTUNIINATED'RE-MAX LFTT TI Lc TTI PROF LINE 432'-0" H9� LENGTH OF BLDG. nc ^ I SQUARE FOOTAGE DESCRIPTION ALLOWABLE: 263.75 SQ. FT. PROPOSED: 65.00 SQ. FT. SECOND FLOOR PLAN REVISED 4/5/96 �z REVISED 6/11/96 TENANTiF DIAP,OI:u NORTH tl X Lu Q LLO o U S a o: p w p m z 4p w } C, p fi€ to w aIs i Z Q �r " n B B . !E ii W y.SH� =01 7 L� 1, 1 :a M IVzol r w ir•:: C LLJ DD MEDICAL SUITE OFFICE ARE \> \ 0 7,780 LEASESPACE 5, 062 LEASESPACEJ \ ' (1/250) = 15.2 SPACES REQUIRED (1/400)'- 12.7 SPACES x UI 1, " / • Q • a4Y�\ OFFICE AREA 5,584 LE ESPACE (1/400) = 14.0 3PACES REQUIRED ■ 4 kn ,nisAxAwc IIN� ��T 9, 920 LEASESPACE • r�• ND C- t &6 • Of}�LE (1/400) = 24.8 SPACES REQUIRED (� �%'T't IC[.S /'OZEb • OFFICE AREA \oa ul B - �7 =T—t — // / r ❑ SECOND FLOOR xco v w 0a,� (u > c/) L. LL O m c }O r' E F— cu W" Z o W w 4)) .,''.SAC• � r~ � ,n :Z PROJECT NO. llllr(:Gll DATE- 24 MAY 1`1-5 PROJECT ARCHITECT -jq-F 6tq:,4-lL"F- DRAWN BY: ■ CHECKED BY SHEET TITLE: REVISIONS: OFFICE AREA 9,920 LEASESPACE (1/400) = 24.8 SPACES REQUIRED c TOTAL } RRIRO REQUIREMENTS j �,G32 SF LEASESPACE @� (1/400) - 14..,g SPACES REQUIR£L, ■ 6,54>I SF LEASESPACE @ (1/250) - 22,>j SPACES REQUIRED IPI. �!u9 SF LEASESPACE @ (1/100)-1-4--P SPACES REQUIRED TOTAL REQUIRED-*11.¢SPACES TOTAL PROVIDED = 115 SPACES I PER EXISTING SITE PLAN - SHEET A-7) FIRST FLOORrPARKING RATIO'S USED A-5 i---