The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About34-Planning CITY OF SAN BERNARDIN6~T- REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 1m: Larry E. Peed, Director 1'_':-;...... , l~; -':, J i..... -';: 'r,d~. ~'l Plarining and Building SerViCes ~.=.G!=, - .\'-~ ',,~:~,_: C~;~. Subject: Appeal of the Planning Carmissioners I ":.: ; I L 'J Denial of Variance No. 89-8 Dept: Mayor and Camon Council rreeting February 5, 1990, 2:00 p.m. Date: January 24, 1990 Synopsis of Previous Council action: On January 9, 1990, the Planning Carmission by a 6 to 1 (1 absent) vote denied Variance 89-8. No previous Council Action. Recommended motion: 'Ihat the hearing be closed; that the appeal be denied; and, that Variance No. 89-8 be denied. (Supports Staff Pecamendation and Planning Carmission Action.) OR 'Ihat the hearing be closed; that the appeal be approved in concept; and, that this item be continued until the February 19, 1990, Council Meeting, so that staff can prepare the necessary Findings of Fact for approval of the Variance. (Supports Appellants Request.) ~r~ Larry E.~ Signature rf2 Contact person: Larry E. Reed Phone: 384-5357 Supporting data attached: ~t-""ff RP[Ylrt- Ward: 3 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source: (Acct. No,) (Acct. DescriPtion) Finance: ,. mcil Notes: 71i..O?62 Agenda Item No, 3 J./ CITY OF SAN BERN)(ADINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF VARIANCE NO. 89-8 TO CONSTRUCT A SECOND FREE- STANDING MONUMENT SIGN AT 228 WEST HOSPITALITY LANE. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 1990 REOUEST The applicant, The Sunset Group, is appealing the denial of Variance No. 89-8 by the Planning Commission. The applicant requests that the Mayor and Council reconsider the variance request and approve the variance to allow the construction of a second free-standing monument sign. BACKGROUND Variance No. 89-8, requesting a variance from Code Section 19.60.220 (C) to permit a second free-standing sign at 228 West Hospitality Lane, was denied by the Planning Commission with a 6 to 1 (I absent) vote on January 9, 1990. The sign code permits one free-standing sign per street frontage in addition to wall signage for each tenant. There is an existing free-standing sign located at the center. This monument sign was permitted in 1989. At that time the applicant was informed that only one monument, multi-tenant s~gn would be permitted. That sign was constructed with "The Good Earth" in large letters and "The Plaza" in small letters in 1989. BASIS FOR THE APPEAL The applicant is basing the appeal on General Plan Policy 1.45.9. This policy states: "Allow for consideration of signs of visually distinctive design and merit which may differ from prescribed limits of size, materials, and other characteristics, provided that they are well integrated with the building and site, do not adversely impact adjacent uses, and are not intended solely to increase sign size." 75-0264 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION - APPEAL OF VARIANCE 89-8 MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 1990 JANUARY 24, 1990 PAGE 3 ANALYSIS This policy was meant to provide direction in the drafting of the sign code portion of the Development Code to provide an alternative process for "visually distinctive" signs to be considered and approved, even if they exceeded the prescribed normal standards. These "distinctive" signs would have to be integrated into the building and site design, as well. Referring to this General Plan policy as a basis of approval for a variance is not appropriate. First, the sign policy was not meant to allow for an increase in the number of siqns~ it was meant to allow for a process for consideration of well deserved signs that have design characteristics that were outside of the normal prescribed regulations. The policy does not mention "number" as a consideration. Second, the sign policy applies to visually distinctive signs having some unforeseen characteristic of say material usage or shape that lends itself to a better than normal sign. The monument sign proposed in the variance is "normal" in all aspects. The applicant just desires another free-standing sign on Hospitality Lane for a new restaurant leasee (the Orient Express). Third, the required variance findings cannot be made. There are no special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, where the strict application of the Code would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under the same land use designation. In addition, the policy referred to was meant as direction for future sign review process drafting and not meant as justification for variances. CONCLUSION The required variance findings cannot be made. General Plan Policy 1.45.9 is not an appropriate basis for approval of the variance. The property is allowed to have one free-standing multi-tenant sign, not two. The existing free-standing sign could be modified to the extent necessary to provide adequate signage for the tenants in the commercial center. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION - APPEAL OF VARIANCE 89-8 MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 1990 JANUARY 24, 1990 ~GE 4 OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL The Mayor and Council may deny the appeal and deny Variance No. 89-8 or uphold the appeal and approve Variance No. 89-8 in concept. (If the second option is supported the item would need to be continued so that staff could prepare the necessary Findings of Fact.) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of appeal and denial of Variance No. 89-8. The Planning Commission denied Variance No. 89-8 by a 6 to 1 vote, with 1 absent on January 9, 1990. PREPARED BY: John Montgomery, AICP principal Planner For Lary E. Reed, Director Planning and Building Services Department ATTACHMENTS: A- Letter of Appeal to the Mayor and Council B- Statement of Official Planning Commission Action C- Public Hearing Notice D- January 9, 1990, Planning commission Staff Report nmg M&CC:VAR89-8APPEAL A TTACI-Il!l::::';'.l.' Var. 89-8 I' """\ " ,. lJ[J={]~ SUNSET @~@O:!J[P RECC!\::' .' \ .II. =C'~ '90 \l.~iN 17 A10 :12 January 11, 1990 Ms. Shauna Clark city Clerk CITY OF SA1f BERHARDIHO 300 North "0" street San Bernardino, California 92418 RE: Variance 89-8 Dear Ms. Clark: As applicant of the above captioned application, I wish to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission held on January 9, 1990, based upon section 1.45.9 of the General Plan Sign Policies which will allow for the approval of this variance. Please schedule the above application to be heard by the city council at the next earliest meeting. Our check representing the Vl"9ty ~ive Dollar (~5.00) Appeal Fee, is enclosed. 5~n~t If you should have any questions please do not hesitate to call me at (714) 381-4381. ~i:~lY, L~-Cvt~ ,~/ /~~ -- patricia Green Vice President THE SUNSET GROUP PG:rg Enclosure cc: Planning Department The Sunset Group 225 West Hospitality Lane, Suite 100 San Bernardino, California 92408 714 lR1 4lRl / FAX 714 Rlllll'l40 ATTACHMENT B city of San Bernardino STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION PROJECT Number: variance No. 89-8 Applicant: The Sunset Group for Simchowitz - M. #1 ACTION Meeting Date: January 9, 1990 x Denied Request Based Upon Findings of Fact. the Following FINDINGS OF FACT 1. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or its proposed second free-standing sign which would not also apply generally to other free-standing signs constructed in the surrounding areas. 2. The variance is not necessary for the preservation or enjoyment of a substantial property right in that, without such a variance, a modification of the existing free-standing sign could be made to allow the applicant to develop the property in a manner consistent with its land use designation and meet all signage standards. 3. The granting of the variance will be materially detri- mental to the public welfare and to the surrounding property owners by establishing a precedent of addi- tional free-standing signs beyond those allowed by Municipal Code. 4. The requested variance is inconsistent with tive of the City's General Plan Urgency guidelines regarding signage permitted in Regional Commercial, land use designation. the objec- Ordinance the CR-3, VOTE Nays: Abstain: Absent: Clemensen, Cole, Corona, Stone None None Lopez Jordan, Lindseth, Sharp, Ayes: City of San Berna~ _no SrATEMENT OF OFFICIAL PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Variance No. 89-8 Page 2 I, hereby, certify that this Statement of Official Action accurately reflects the final determination of the Planning Commission of the City of San Bernardino. d r:0/ Signa~e Larry E. Reed Director of Planning and Building Services Name and Title ~dY) If??' / Date cc: Project Applicant Project Property Owner Building and Safety Department Engineering Division Case File mkf PCAGENDA: PCACTIONA ATTACHMENT C r ...." OFFI'CIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL APPEAL OF Variance NO. 89-8 (r ...." '"" THIS IS TO INFORM YOU THAT THE FOLLOWING ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL BY the applicant. \-. r I '"" SUBJECT: Variance NO. 89-8 APPEAL WARD :# 3 ) \. ) r PROPERTY Located on the north side of West Hospitality Lane, LOCATION : east of Sunwest Court at 228 West Hospitality Lane. \-. ./ '"" PROPOSAL: To construct a second -standing monument sign for a commercial/retail center. (Code only allows one face-standing sign. ) \-. / '"" 1 PUBLIC HEARING LOCATION: SAN BERNARDINO CITY HALL COUNCI L CHAMBERS 300 NORTH "0" STREET SAN BERNARDINO, CA,92418 '- ./ / '"" HEARING DATE AND TIME: February 5, 1990, 2:00 p.m. / , A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL IS ON F'LE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT CITY HALL, IF YOU WOULD LIKE FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN PERSON OR BY PHONING (714 ) 384-5057. THANK YOU, '- '" '\.. jill, 1984 la, ATTACHMENT "0" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUMMARY ILl (I) cz CJ t; ILl ~ a &1.1 a: ..... cz ILl a: cz VARIANCE NO. 89-8 AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE WARD 10 1-9-90 3 APPLICANT The Sunset Group 225 W. Hospitality Lane, Ste#100 OWNER: San Bernardino, CA 92408 Simchowitz-M No.1 225 W. Hos italit PROPERTY Subject North South East West EXISTING LAND USE ComrJercial/Retail Commercial/Office Commercial Commercial Commercial/Office ZONING CR-3 CR-3 CR-3 CR-3 CR-3 o The applicant reauests a variance from Code Section 19.60.220(C) which permits o~e free-standing sign on a lot, to allow the placement of a second free-standing monument sign for a commer- cial/retail center. The subject property is located on the north side of West Hospitality Lane, east of Sunwest Court and consists of approximately 3.15 acre~ at 228 West Hospitality Lane. Gl YES ONO DYES GlNO HIGH FIRE HAZARD ZONE o NOT APPLICABLE Ui EXEMPT o NO SIGNIFICANT EFFE CTS NOV, 1981 REVISED JULY 1982 SKY ..J ~ Zen UJ(!) 2z Z- OO a:Z >~ Z ILl GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Commercial Regiona Commercial Regiona Commercial Regiona Commercial Regiona Commercial Regiona FLOOD HAZARD 0 YES ZONE Kl NO ( SEWERS ~ ~~S ) AIRPORT NOISE / CRASH ZONE o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WITH MITIGATING MEASURES NO E.I.R, o E,I.R, REQUIRED BUT NO SIGN IFICANT EFFECTS WITH MITIGATING MEASURES o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E,R C, MINUTES REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA ~YES ONO Z o fi a... 0 a...ffi ~2 0::1 o CJ ILl a: APPROVAL CONDITIONS DENIAL CONTINUANCE TO CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE VAR89-8 ~ OBSERVATIONS AGENlDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE r REOUEST .. The applicant requests a variance from Code section 19.60.220 (C) which permits one free-standing sign on a lot to allow the placement of a second free-standing monument sign for a commercial retail center. SITE LOCATION The subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of approximately 3.15 acres, located on the north side of West Hospitality Lane, east of Sunwest Court (see AttachUlent "0", Location Map). The property is developed with an existing commercial/retail center. MUNICIPAL CODE AND INTERIM POLICY DOCUMENT CONFORMANCE The proposed variance is inconsistent with the Municipal Code and the Interim Urgency Ordinance adopted by the Mayor and Common Council on June 2, 1989, for implementation and consistency with the new General Plan for the City of San Bernardino (see Attachment "A"). CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT STATUS The proposal is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (Section 15311 (a) Accessory structures). BACKGROUND , There is an existing commercial/retail center on the site with one existing free-standing sign. The subject property has a General Plan land use designation of CR-3, Commercial Regional, and is within the limits of the Southeast Industr- ial Park Redevelopment Project Area. ANALYSIS VARIANCE REOUEST The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the placement \. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE Var 89-8 ~ OBSERYATIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 1n 1-9-90 3 of a second free-standing sign on the subject property in addition to the one existing monument sign. MUNICIPAL CODE REOUIREMENTS Municipal Code prov~s~ons allow~ one free-standing sign per street frontage in addition to wall signage for each tenant in buildings or centers with two or more business tenants (Section 19.60.220 (E)). GENERAL PLAN POLICIES General Plan Land Use policies for region-service commercial require the consolidation of multi-tenant signage into well designed and distinctive signs. The design and development guidelines also foster the continuation and enhancement of streets cape improvement programs which pay particular attention to public signage and other amenities~ A modification of the existing free-standing sign could be made that would easily meet the requirements and intent of the municipal code and would be consistent with the General Plan policies. EXISTING SIGNAGE Earlier this year, the applicant requested a monument sign for the anchor tenants of The Plaza and The Good Earth Restaurant. At that time the applicant was informed that only one monument sign, a multi-tenant sign which displayed the name of the Center and the tenants therein would be permitted. That sign was constructed with "The Good Earth" in large letters and "The Plaza" in very small letters. The existing sign could be modified to include other tenants of The Plaza and in doing so comply with the Municipal Code and General Plan. COMMENTS No comments have been received as of this date of preparation of this staff report. VARIANCE REOUIREMENTS The granting or approval of a variance must clearly identify that there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved, or to the intended use of the property, which would otherwise cause \" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE Var89-8 OBSERVATIONS 10 1-9-90 4 AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE r undue hardship upon the owner or to the use of his property. It must be demonstrated that the granting of the variance will not set a precedent in any way for other land and unlike conditions. The variance must also show that such a permit will not be detriment~, to the interests of the public or injurious to neighboring property owners within the subject parcel's surrounding areas. CONCLUSION Neither the property owner nor the applicant has clearly shown any exceptional needs or extraordinary circumstances or conditions such as size, shape, topography or location or surroundings exist to warrant the second proposed monument sign. Further, the General Plan policies require the consolidation of multi-tenant signage within the zoning classification. The granting of the variance, as proposed, will result in a precedent being set for other land. The existing monument sign could be modified to the extent n~cessary and conform to code and General Plan policies. Other requests for additional signage along Hospitality Lane have been denied. RECOMMENDATION staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Variance NO. 89-8 based on the attached Findings of Fact (Attachment "B") . Respectfully submitted, 6:':~ector Planning and Building Services Department q/cM4.-. '1JcJill Patti Nahill Associate Planner ATTACHMENT: A- Municipal Code and General Plan Conformance B- Findings of Fact (See Statement of Official Acticn C- site Plan Attachment B) D- Sign Exhibit E- Location map \.. Attachment "A" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE Var 89-8 OBSERVATIONS .lU AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 1-9-90 ::> , "'\ MUNICIPAL CODE AND INTERIM POLICY DOCUMENT CONFORMANCE Category Permitted Use Proposal Municipal Code General Plan Second free- standing sign One free-standing sign per street frontage Consolidatia of Mul ti- tenant Signage Variance Requested r I 1 :..... .;>: ,;.-: ';".. ,;', -;'~~_(r':' ,........ . Attachment "C" Var89-8 AGENDA #10 I-Ie ar ing da te : . 1-9-90 <: ~ ~ cab COURT \: . '4iC; t . W;:'-.Z ..';" ~.~.~.-., ~6.~ ;\7~ j I' -,,,,\~., -.J .... Ai;' ."ff;t....,,.,. .~,l' .......(...1'..; ,,1(.," ..' ..... ,.. ......... .i... i', i;,~.,t,.."'~'~..0 ~......:~-G~..".:,.f..'i.j.'..ln.....,jf.~..!I..:-~ 'fl..lj/~' 1'111' ,i 'i 'I ~ IIII n il:lll~ 11111'1 ji 'I n fi ii fj.. ('PI'". ,~..~~~~:.f~.; ;,). J":'.:y:'~. :y';1,:', ;;I~I\l.il~ii HI! I, Illjl.' 1111 ~ ~IIJ~I,I!!, illllll,';'I'l U l:,i II, i,~ 1:111 It S r.U\~~~~rk~'~k:',I~ J ',IIlII,]~ff~'J?~t :~~ ~4; : ",I'.I'I',I.,I,I'IICJI:.,11 J ," 11/1 I"'I'.I!' ~ r.~';.<,~!',l"';"";"\'J.\ ,\'"'.:d,::" ,..'.." "~"I::' i,I., 'I . j.j'.u.;'r:"ilJ' ' Jirtir'" J .H :JP.'... ....:"'~~~~~,.....J ~~. ,:" .J'!.~!I.t...~ '~.","i :;.~ .. 111'11: If I,"IT. '1'11,1 :Ij', '1'1'1'1'1 'I Ii ",,', IljI'lll; :: ;qF,:,:~!~~;',{:;~~.~~>}f~<,~~,.:4ii' i,;. 5 j iI' Ii Ii Ni II!!' "I ii' 'I it -: I' .ir.:.....:~i~.;;~-i'::l',;' : '.,.. ,:. :. ;'. .;~.::,~,., .:. 2 / ~ ,.1 I': I!." '~ll~:", 1,"::1" .. 51 J,t T:./i,~':'".lli! ,,,"" 'f1i!j!lfl!.nr:. _. m :' '.' ':.. : " I ','~ , " ;",;' '::: .~:.>" ..I!:I ..~, ", 11-. f~ . I "I.r : , 'V ... ,j,'i'~'~;~;::lnH.'~iFI~'.il: :':~',,, ,\;,~. ~ \~:i~:~~;8\~.;\:; "':- .: ;": :,::j,~ )::..,.::i,~~. "1" SUit "IT .1,- .._._' ~ .. .... .... . ~ 'J\ ~ 1 <- ~ ~ cJ:) ~ ~ I I I~ I, (\ ~ I AttachmentlD" VAR89-8 AGENDA #10 Hearing date: 1-9-90 -- "'-.. '",- "------ I I I 1 .l T- ~i - J~ r,~,' "1n )t I' -t1' ~,~,'7' -- t8 . i~t- tl~ ~- !i i! ~ t to __ ~ 1 1 ~ ~ ~ i I' I ATTACHMENT E r' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT. "" r' AGENDA ...., ITEM # LOCATION CASE VAR8 9 - 8 HEARING DATE 1-9-90 10 .... ...,j .... ...,j II[ r \ , COOLE" 6 N