HomeMy WebLinkAbout35-Planning and Building
~ II
I
.....
.....
.
Cl'"ijdt SAN BERN.QDlNO - REQUEST FOI COUNCIL ACTION
From: Larry E. Reed, Assistant Director
Dept: Planning and Building Services
Date: September 3, 1991
Subject: Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of
Variance No. 91-05
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of
September 16, 1991 2:00 p.m.
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
On August 6, 1991, the Planning Commission denied Variance No. 91-05 by a 4 to 1
vote with one abstention.
"
Recommended motion:
That the hearing be closed; and that the Mayor and Common Council deny the
appeal of Variance No. 91-05 based on the Findings of Fact contained in
Attachment F. (Supports staff recommendation).
OR
That the hearing be closed; and that the Mayor and Common Council uphold
the appeal and approve Variance No. 91-05 sUbject to attached Findings of
Fact (Attachment B) and Conditions of Approval (Attachment C). (Supports
appellant's request).
OR
That the hearing be closed; and that the Mayor and Common Council continue
Variance No. 91-05 indefinitely to pursue alternative signage methods.
(Mayor and Common Council alternate recommendation).
./ r---/ ~
kd-Z->"? '_ _ /-<.,--e.f
Larry P Reed Signature Assistant Director
Contect person:
Larry E. Reed
Phone:
384-5357
6
Supporting data attached:
Staff Report
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. Descriotionl
Finance:
Council Notes:
a.~
.L.
CI.tY:OF SAN BERNODINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
'. ~
STAFF REPORT
Subject
Appeal of the planning Commission denial of Variance No.
91-05, requesting approval to permit the erection of a
728 square foot, 110-foot high, two-sided pole sign in
the State College Business Park whereas the Development
Code permits a 125 square foot, 25-foot high monument
sign. .
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of September 16, 1991
REOUEST
The applicant, Quiel Bros., is appealing the denial of Variance No.
91-05 by the Planning Cominission. The applicant requests the Mayor
and Common Council approve a variance from Development Code Section.
19.22.150 which permits one 125 square feet center identification
(freeway adjacent) sign that is either a monument or pole sign with
decorative covers at a maximum height of 25 feet, with 22 feet
maximum sign area or copy height and monument or supporting
structure to consist of an area equal to the sign face or copy area
and of Code Section 19.14.030(6) which allows one 125 square foot
sign with a maximum overall installed sign height shall be 25 feet,
with a maximum sign face height of 22 feet when a parcel has more
than 300 feet of freeway frontage.
The applicant's request is to permit the erection of a 728 square
foot, 110-foot high, two-sided pole sign in the State college
Business Park.
BACKGROUND
The application for Variance No. 91-05 was submitted to the city
on April 22, 1991. The initial variance request proposed a 75-
foot high sign, but the application was subsequently amended to
propose a 110-foot high pole sign after a flag test was condupted
for the proposed site. .
On August 6, 1991, the Planning commission held a properly noticed
public hearing on Variance No. 91-05. During the public hearing
the following people spoke in support of the variance: Charles
Schultz, an attorney representing ProWestern Development Company,
Mark Boen, ProWestern Development Company and Gary Quiel, the
project applicant. The basis of the request is to permit a sign-
that will provide identification for future speculative fast food
restaurants, gas stations, and other service related land uses.
75.0264
o
o
'>
variance No. 91-05
Mayor and Common Council Meeting
september 16, 1991
Page 2
One gentleman, Mr. Don strimpe1, spoke in opposition of the
proposed pole sign. He expressed his concern that the
representatives for the variance had mislead the Commission. He
explained that there are more eateries that can be reached within
a five minute time period for the business park employees including
Ramada Inn, papa's Pantry, and Taco Bell in addition to those along
Kendall Drive. He further stated that he feels that southbound on
1-215 that the sign height of 110 feet will be prohibitive and will
probably block the views of other businesses in the area. He
suggested wall signs on future building would be more visible and
more advantageous to prospective business owners. He described the
area as a neighborhood community type development in which he
speculated that between eighty to eighty-five percent of the
patronage into that area is from nearby residences and is not
pulled from the highway. He feels that the business park has
attracted a good number of good businesses without having a big
sign.
Based on the discussion and in agreement with the staff
recommendation, a motion for denial was made and seconded, and then
carried by a 4 to 1 vote with one abstention of the six
commissioners in attendance (see Attachment "0").
On August 7, 1991, the applicant, Quiel Bros., submitted an appeal
of the Planning Commission's decision of denial (see Attachment
"A") .
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OPTIONS
The Mayor and Common Council may deny the appeal and deny Variance
No. 91-05.
OR
The Mayor and Common Council may uphold the appeal and approve
Variance No. 91-05 subject to the attached Findings of Fact
(Attachment "B") and Conditions of Approval (Attachment "C").
OR
The Mayor and Common Council can continue Variance No. 91-05
indefinitely to pursue alternate signage methods.
o
o
,
variance No. 91-05
Mayor and Common Council Meeting
September 16, 1991
Page 3
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Mayor and Common Council uphold the
decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal and deny
Variance No. 91-05.
Prepared by:
patti Nahill, Associate Planner
for Larry E. Reed, Assistant Director of Planning
and Building Services
Attachments:
A - Letter of Appeal to Mayor and Common Council
B - Findings of Fact for approval
C - Conditions of Approval
o - Statement of Official Planning Commission
Action
E - Official Notice of Public Hearing before the
Mayor and Common Council
F - Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated
August 6, 1991
o
o
,
SIGNS BY ~ ~
Q-r.f.ee
272 SOUTH I STREET, SAN BERNARDINO, CALIF. 92410
PH. 714-885-4476 FAX 714-888-2239
August 7, 1991
Mayor and Common Council
CITY OF SAN BERNAROINO
300 No. "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA
Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:
We appeal to you the decision of denial for Variance 91-05 by
the Planning Commission on August 6, 1991. We would like to have
this scheduled to be heard at your earliest convenience.
Thank you,
Gary
Vice
GQ:gz
.' ~
{. ....
( . " ~..
'.J" ',::'1
- ....,~
-w ::,: C~ & m
C/r\, OF
OC"A/l~ SAN BEF!
IIU /WE/Y., (11' Pi.1IA,/lOlIJO
IlClIt'lG SEo. II,NNING .
~"CES ..
SALES. SERVICE. LEASING. MAINTENANCE. CRANE SERVICE. NEON
Colli. c:oro..-. Lic:onM No. 2173005
llTTll(,UM~I.lT II
'" :::c
m
- c-;
m
~ -;::
39 .'
:=
~ -,
-
-0
.i::>. -,
- CT1
I..<.l "
.
. CITY OF SAN BERN INO PLANNING
) AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE VAR NO. 91-05
FINDINGS OF FACT
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE 9-16-91
PAGE
,.
1. There are special circumstances applicable to the property,
including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings,
the strict application of this Development Code deprives such
property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the
vicinity and under identical land use district classification.
The general topography of the surrounding area to the south
prevents adequate display of motorist information allowed by
the Development Code at a lower height.
2. The granting of the sign variance is necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right
possessed by other property in the same vicinity and land use
district and denied to the property for which the variance is
sought in that due to the freeway grade at the university
Parkway exit, a sign at twenty-five feet not visible to north
bound traffic and therefore a variance is necessary.
3. The granting the variance will not be materially detrimental
to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to the
property or improvements in such vicinity and land use
district in which the property is located in that the proposed
sign will be structurally designed to withstand wind hazards.
4. The granting of a variance to allow a 110-foot high sign does
not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the
limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and land use
district in which the property is located in that the variance
will allow for the consolidation of signs at an identified
entry point of the city.
5. The granting the variance does not allow a use or activity
which is otherwise expressly authorized by the regulations
governing the subject parcel in that center identification
(freeway adjacent) signs are permitted for parcels with 300
feet or more frontage on a freeway.
6. That granting the Variance will be consistent with General
Plan Policy 1. 45.9 in that the City shall allow for the
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.
~
Pl.AN-I.OI PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-101
!Il:nll:..=:.::ru..:1L
ATTACHMENT B
,
VAR NO. 91-05
,
-
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
..
"""l
CONDITIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
9-16-91
r
4.
5.
6.
~._-....._.._-.- --
~
~.lC,~
1.
Construction shall be in substantial conformance with the
plan approved by the Planning Commission or Mayor and
Common Council. Minor modification to the plan shall be
subject to approval by the Director through a minor
modification permit process. Any modification which
exceeds 10% of the following allowable measurable
design/site considerations shall require the refiling of
the original application and a subsequent hearing by the
appropriate hearing review authority if applicable.
2.
within one year of variance approval, commencement of
construction shall have occurred or the permit/approval
shall become null and void. In addition, if after
commencement of construction, work is discontinued for
a period of one year, then the permit/approval shall
become null and void on September 16, 1992.
3.
The review authority may, upon application being filed
30 days prior to the expiration date and for good cause,
grant one time extension not to exceed 12 months. The
review authority shall ensure that the project complies
with all current Development Code provisions.
In the event that this approval is legally challenged,
the City will promptly notify the applicant of any claim
or action and will cooperate fully in the defense of the
matter. Once notified, the applicant agrees to defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless the city, its officers,
agents and employees from any claim, action or proceeding
against the City of San Bernardino. The applicant
further agrees to reimburse the City of any costs and
attorneys' fees which the City may be required by a court
to pay as a result of such action, but such participation
shall not relieve applicant of his or her obligation
under this condition.
The developer shall obtain a permit from the California
Department of Transportation Highway Outdoor Advertising
Branch in Sacramento prior to the issuance of building
permits. A copy of the approved permit shall be provided
to the Planning and Building Services Department for
inclusion in the case file.
No future individual business identification monument or
pole signs shall be allowed for the subject parcels or
any future subdivision of the property currently
identified as 266-361-34, 266-361-60, 266-361-78 and 266-
361-92.
.....
PLAN-I.OI PAGE 1 OF , 14-10)
ATTACHMENT C
.r __
,
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
~
.....
VAR NO. 91-05
CONDITIONS
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
9-17-91
7. The six individual 49 square foot business identification
signs shall be limited to nationally recognized logos.
8. The variance shall become null and void if General Plan
Amendment No. 91-09 is not approved for Commercial
General land uses.
9. The variance may be revoked or modified by the Commission
if anyone of the following findings can be made:
a. That circumstances have changed so that 1 or more of the
findings contained in section 19.72.050 can no longer be
made, and the grantee has not substantially exercised the
rights granted by the variance;
b. That the variance was obtained by misrepresentation or
fraud;
c. That the improvement authorized pursuant to the variance
had ceased or was suspended for 6 or more consecutive
calendar months;
d. That 1 or more of the conditions of the variance have not
been met, and the grantee has not substantially exercised
the rights granted by the variance;
e. That the improvement authorized pursuant to the variance
is in violation of any statute, ordinance, law, or
regulation; and
f.
That the improvement permitted
detrimental to the public health,
constitutes a nuisance.
by the variance is
safety, or welfare or
CfT'fCl'''~
----
....
...j
PL.AN-I.IlI PAGE 1 OF 1 14-10}
o
o
,
city of San Bernardino
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
PROJECT
Number: Variance No. 91-05
Applicant: Quiel Bros. Sign Co.
Owner: Roger and Vivine Wang
Meeting Date: August 6, 1991
X Denied
YQn
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
Cole, Lopez, ortega, Stone
Sharp
Jordan
Clemensen, Lindseth, Valles
I, hereby, certify that this Statement of
accurately reflects the final determination
Commission of the City of San Bernardino.
~ ~/J
Slgna~e
Official Action
of the Planning
AU' 3,tjl11
Date
Larrv E. Reed. Assistant Director of Plannina & Buildina
Services
Name and Title
cc: Project Property Owner
Project Applicant
Building Division
Engineering Division
Case File
PCAGENDA:
PCACTION
ATTACHMENT D
81
.~ -
.. Jj ~
-
--
> CITY OF SAN BERNA DINO PLANNING AND BUILDING RVICES DEPARTMENT
OFFICIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY
OF SAN BERNARDINO MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
(SUBJECT:
APPEAL OF VARIA"CE NO.
PROPERTY LOCATION:
91-05
)u
Subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of about
27 acres located at the northeast, northwest, southeast and southwest corners
of Campeau Way and Hallmark Parkway.
PROPOSAL:
"
The applicant requests approval of a Variance of Code Section 19.22.150 and -
19.14.030 to construct a 110 foot high, 6-tenant pole sign in the CG-1,
Commercial Office and OIP, Office Industrial Park, General Plan land use
designation.
PUBLIC HEARING LOCATION:
SAN BERNARDINO CITY HAll.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
300 NORTH "D"STREET
SAN BERNARDINO. CA 92418
HEARING DATE AND TIME:
Monday. September 16. 1991 2:00 p.m.
,........cIRCJIIlIIDft 01_......... aft'" 1ft IN........ MIl...... s.wa.
o.o.nment..Clff' ......lIyOIMOUllI....Iudher~.....hloraaaMIPfICII'IO..
puDIIC ntenn!I. ~contaCI......... _........ SeMceI D -~._"......."
<<Dr pfIDnInlJ t11'"314-5057.
The...,.... ConwnonCourlCllil...... your~. II you........
toafterld.JClU...,......_CIlIrRl'MrIIS..taw:lralor..~IO_.......
the ~ MIl..... s.w.. 0 ~ ..._4. SIn e.nwono c..,... 300 Nonft "0"
StrwI. SIn........... c.-...12411.
o.c..or.OI1tte """""~..,,,*~"""1'IIOlM9L Con-
dlbOMl uw Pwrrna. AewIew aI ...... T...,. Trc ~ ... v.....-ca. "'*"
aDPUleCllOme...,. _Comnw:InCounc:ll. ~....Mayar and Cori'ImonCourlCll
mull" fNIOe.............. IN""" 01 me...... ana mull De IUDmltIed 10"
QlY c.... ...Wllfl................... httRn08ySoI"~ 1"""'"
P",* -.-... T......,. T,......I.
a.n... .....""._4._.._... ""J_4._..I..IO"~Code"__
caIy' De tOl'WMIId to .. Yayar ... Cornman eounc:. tor 1lnIlI KIlDfl.
If you Cf\IIeftII............... ot... Meyor _CommonCounotlftc:ourl. you
"'.y.."""ItlCIIIO.........OfIlYthOM......yOUOl'S1OfMON....'........guDlIChHnnI
oncnDlIG'"""'nDICII.OI'"__._..lC6~IO...Cdy........ew-
at. or pnarlO. 1M puDIc '-WIg.
_,M _..... -..bI _ wtlI tw ~ hflllMd M '- ""---
IlIIIIlIl.
:-,.~.... !!E_""'"
:f"I'Ibl._'...K_voCl$
:t1.AN.9.07 ;lAGE 1 ~F 1 ,6-90J
ATTACHMENT E
JlI
.Il
-
-
,.
.
-
-
""'I
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
SUMMARY
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
WARD
7
8-6-91
6
,.~ """'l1lI
APPLICANT: Quiel Bros. Si~n
W 272 South "I" treet
rn San Bernardino, CA 92410
< Variance No. 91-05 OWNER: Roger & Vivine Wang
CJ 40 S. Atlantic Blvd., Ste
Monterey Park, CA 91754
"--"
-."
The applicant requests a variance of Development Code
ffi Sections 19.22.150 and 19.14.030 (6) to permit the
erection of a 728 square foot, 110-foot high, two-sided
pole sign in the State College Business Park.
:=
0 The 27 acre subject property consists of four separate
W
a: irregularly-shaped parcels located at the northwest,
- northeast, southwest and southeast corners of Hallmark
<
W Parkway and Campeau Drive.
a: -
<
'--'" .J
/ EXISTING .......
GENERAL PLAN
PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION
Subject Vacant CG-l & OIP Commercial General &
Office Industrial Par~
North 1-215 and Vacant IL Industrial Light
South Commercial CG-l Commercial General
East Commercial & 1-215 CG-l Commercial General
West Industrial & Vacant IL & OIP Industrial Light &
\.. Office Industrial Par~
r GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC DYES C FLOOD HAZARD 0 YES 0 ZONE A ) ( SEWERS: IKIKYES )
I HAZARD ZONE: KKNO o NO
\.. ZONE: XKI NO 0 ZONE B
r HIGH FIRE DYES AIRPORT NOISEI 0 ) ( XIXI YES
I YES REDEVELOPMENT
HAZARD ZONE: ~ NO CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA:
\.. '" xlXI NO o NO
r- r -
/ -."
..J o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z 0 APPROVAL
~ APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH 0
MmGATlNG MEASURES -
zrn NO EJ.R. ~ 0 CONDITIONS
WCJ 11.0
:Ez !Xb@<EMPT o EJ.R. REQUIRED BUT NO u.Z XX DENIAL
Z- Class 11 SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS <W
00 WITH MITIGATING liil
a:~ MEASURES o CONTINUANCE TO
-II.
> o NO SIGNIFICANT o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 0
Z CJ
W EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. W
\.. .J MINUTES a:
\.. '--
-- ....
202
ll/T'I CJF _ IMMAAIIN)
---
PlAN-8.D2 PAGE 1 OF t (4-90)
ATTACH~lENT F
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING.
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE VAR 91-05
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM 7
HEARING DATE 8-6-91
PAGE 2
~ REOUEST
The applicant requests a variance of Development Code Sections
19.22.150 and 19.14.030(6) to permit the erection of a 728 square
foot, ltO-foot hiqh, two-sided pole siqn in the State Colleqe
Business Park.
SITE LOCATION
The 27 acre subject property consists of four separate irreqularly-
shaped parcels located at the northwest, northeast. southwest and
southeast corners of Hallmark Parkway and Campeau Drive. The
parcels on the west side of Hallmark Parkway are currently
desiqnated OIP. Office Industrial Park and the parcels to the east
are desiqnated CG-l, Commercial General. The pole siqn as proposed
is to be placed on the property located at the southeast corner
which has the CG-l desiqnation (see Attachment "G", Location Map). .
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT STATUS
The variance application is cateqorically exempt per Section 15311.
Class 11 of the California Environmental Quality Act.
ANALYSIS
Variance Request
The applicant is requestinq a variance of Development Code Sections
19.14.030(6) and 19.22.150 to permit the erection of a 728 square
foot, 110-foot hiqh. structural steel pipe pole siqn on a property
located within the State Colleqe Business Park adjacent to
Interstate 215.
Siqn Desiqn
The overall heiqht of the pylon siqn is 110 feet. The pole siqn
supports a business siqn panel which has been desiqned to provide
identification for six different tenant spaces each of which
measures 49 square feet (see Attachment "E". Elevation). The
supportinq poles are to be constructed of structural steel and
painted with a Navajo White Medium color. Decor caps are proposed
to be placed at 5 feet, 28 feet and 55 feet with the actual siqn
panel beqinninq at the 82-foot level. The dimensions of the
business park siqn panel are 28 feet hiqh by a span of 26 feet for
a total of 728 square feet per face. The applicant has indicated
that the individual tenant spaces are for the followinq type of
future uses: fast food establishments. restaurants. and a service
station.
PLAN-I.OI PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-80)
~~.~.Jrd
-
"
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE VAR 91-0S
OBSERV A TIO'NS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
7
8-6-91
3
.....
, Development Code Requirements
Development Code Section 19.14 deals with the Freeway Corridor
'(FC) Overlay District. The purpose of the overlay district is to
provide special design guidelines/standards which address the
siting and design of non-residential structures within the
immediate viewshed of motorists traveling the I-10 and I-21S
freeway corridors and State Highway 30 and its connecting seqrnent
to the I-21S. Section 19.14.030 enumerates eight separate
development standard subsections of the FC OVerlay District.
Subsection Number 6 pertains specifically to freeway adjacent
signs.
The development standards state that freeway adjacent signs are
limited to identifying the complex, major anchor tenant, structure,
or company occupying the site. The signs are permitted on parcels
with more than 300 feet of freeway frontage in addition to other.
signs allowed. Site identification along a freeway frontage will
be limited to monument-type signs developed for freeway visibility.
The signs are to be located within the individual building site in
the landscaped setback running parallel to the freeway. The sign
is to be perpendicular to the freeway with the location about
midway between side property lines.
The maximum overall installed sign height shall be 25 feet, with a
maximum sign face height of 22 feet. The monument or supporting
structure shall consist of an area equal to the sign face or copy
area. The maximum height of the sign panel shall be 7 feet, the
maximum width shall be 25 feet, and a total sign area shall not
exceed 125 square feet per face. If the site grade is
substantially lower than the freeway grade, or there is substantial
existing landscaping which prevents adequate sign visibility, the
allowable sign area of 125 square feet may be added to the maximum
permissible wall sign area in accordance with Chapter 19.22 (Sign
RegUlations) .
Development Code Section 19.22.150 - Sign Regulations identifies in
Table 22.01 each of the signs permitted in each of the land use
districts. The applicant is proposing to place the pole sign on
property designated CG-1, Commercial General. Subsection "CO lists
the signs permitted in the CG, Commercial District for multiple
tenant sites (see Attachment "D", Table 22.01 excerpt). Center
Identification (freeway adjacent) Signs are referenced under letter
Of". The type of sign permitted is either a monument or pole sign
with decorative cover. The maximum number permitted is one double
face sign per center where the total sign area does not exceed 125
square feet per face. The maximum height allowed is 25 feet, with
22 feet maximum siqn area or copy height and monument or supporting
structure to consist of an area equal to the sign face or copy
area. Illumination is allowed and the sign may be placed within a
landscaped setback area.
PJ.AN.8.QI PAGE t OF 1 (4-00)
CfJYOf_~
---
-
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
VAR 91-05
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
7
8-6-91
4
~ General Plan Policies
The General Plan identifies the 1-215 Freeway at Shandin Hills as
a major entry node of City and the portion of 1-215 from the Colton
Interchanqe to Devore is classified as a major path which is one of
the principal vehicular corridors that traverse the City. The
General Plan states in Policy 1.45.6 that the City shall prohibit
the development of pole siqns at key entries to the City (as
identified in the Urban Desiqn for Public Spaces Policy 5.1. 2) .
General Plan Policy 1.45.8 states that the City shall prohibit the
use of oversize, flashinq, animated or qarishly colored siqns which
dominate the buildinq, architecture, and/or district in which they
are located.
Variance Requirements
The qrantinq or approval of a variance must clearly identify that.
there are special circumstances applicable to the property, that
the strict application of the Development Code deprives such
property of privileqes enjoyed by other property in the vicinity
and under identical land use district classification. It must be
demonstrated that the variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property riqht of the applicant.
The qrantinq of the variance must also be shown to not be
materially detrimental or injurious to neiqhborinq property owners
within the subject parcel's surroundinq area and land use district
in which the property is located. That qrantinq the Variance does
not constitute a special privileqe inconsistent with the
limitations upon other properties nor does it allow a use or
activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the
requlations qoverninq the subject parcel. The qrantinq of the
variance must not be inconsistent with the General Plan.
Applicant's Response
The applicant as required has provided a written response for the
variance findinqs of fact to demonstrate the need for the variance
(see Attachment "CO). The request for the variance is based on the
applicant's claim that the siqn will serve two functions:
1) As a monument siqn qivinq the State Colleqe Business Park the
appropr iate identification to benefit all the present and
future tenants; and,
2 )
The necessary identification to fulfill the requirements to
attract the much need additional services, i.e. qas and fast
food, to support the increasinq needs of a larqe business
park.
....
~
~~.....
Pf.AN.8.08 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-10)
J . .
'.
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE VAR 91-05
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
7
8-6-91
5
.....
'The applicant indicates that as the subject site is 25 to 30 feet
below freeway qrade that the siqn must be 110 feet hiqh to be easy
to read and provide safe response time to exit the freeway for
northbound traffic.
They feel that because there are two other existinq larqe multi-
tenant identification siqns that they should be allowed to erect a
multi-tenant siqn. It is their contention that their proposed siqn
is in better taste and will be more architecturally compatible with
the surroundinq area. Further, they think that the variance does
not constitute a special privileqe inconsistent with the
limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and land use
district as there are the two existinq siqns at the intersection of
1-215 and University Parkway.
The applicant does not believe that
the Development Code as the six
smaller than the existinq sizes
vicinity.
the entire siqn is contrary to
individual tenant spaces are
used by others in the same
The applicant cites that the proposal is consistent with General
Plan Policy 1.45.9 which allows for the consideration of siqns of
visually distinctive desiqn and merit which may differ from
prescribed limits of size, materials, and other characteristics,
provided that they are well inteqrated with the buildinq and site,
do not adversely impact adjacent uses, and are not intended solely
to increase siqn size.
Staff's Response
The Development Code states in Section 19.72.060 - Precedents that
the qrantinq of a prior variance is not admissible for the qrantinq
of a new variance.
Unusual topoqraphy was taken into consideration in the Development
Code by providinq the fOllowinq stipulation for freeway corridor
siqns:
If the site qrade is substantially lower than the freeway
qrade. or there is substantial existinq landscapinq which
prevents adequate siqn visibility, the allowable siqn
area of 125 square feet may be added to the maximum
permissible wall siqn area.
The proposed siqn is visible to the southbound traffic at the
required twenty-five feet and a lID-foot hiqh siqn would be
detrimental to surroundinq residential property enjoyment because
of neqative visual impacts. It is a matter of judqement, as well
as a function of speed. whether or not the siqns will be readable
from a movinq northbound vehicle in time to use the University
~parkway off-ramp.
Pl..NH.D8 PAGE 1 OF 1 (..00)
CIT'l'OI-" --.0
---
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE VAR 91-05
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
7
8-6-91
6
....
, The subject site is located within the FC Overlay District and is
subject to the requltements of the Development Code. Special
design standards were developed to address the siting and design of
signs. within the immediate viewshed of motorists traveling the I-
215 freeway corridor. Site identification along a freeway frontage
was limited to monument-type signs developed for freeway
visibility. The granting of a variance to allow a 110-foot high
pole sign would constitute a special privilege inconsistent with
the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and land use
district in which the property is located.
The maximum permissible sign height within the FC Overlay District
was determined to be 25 feet. The proposed pole sign heiqht at 110
feet is 85 feet higher than the 25 feet permitted. The sign base
is to consist of an area equal to the sign face or copy area. The
maximum height of the sign panel shall be 7 feet, the maximum width
shall be 25 feet, and a total sign area shall not exceed 125 square _
feet per face. The applicant's proposed sign spans 26 feet in
width and is 728 square feet which is 603 square feet greater than
the 125 square feet allowed per sign face.
The granting the variance could be materially detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to the property or
improvements in such vicinity in which the property is located in
that the proposed sign will be located in an area of high wind and
could be susceptible to breakage.
The granting of the variance will be inconsistent with the General
Plan Policies 1.45.6 and 1.45.8 in that it shall be the policy of
the City to prohibit the development of pole signs at key entries
to the City and to prohibit the use of oversize, flashing, animated
or qarishly colored signs which dominate the building, design, and/
or district in which they are located.
Although as the applicant cites, General Plan Policy 1.45.9 allows
for the consideration of signs of visually distinctive design and
merit which may differ from prescribed limits of size, materials,
and other characteristics it further stipulates that the sign shall
be well inteqrated with the building and site, it does not
adversely impact adjacent uses, and is not intended solely to
increase sign size. The proposed 110-foot high sign is not
integrated with any buildings or with the site as all subject
parcels are currently vacant. Originally, the applicant proposed
a 75-foot high sign, but when a flag test was conducted their
proposed sign was difficult to see under the existing Shell/Jack in
the Box sign. The project proponent determined at that time to
raise the sign over the existing sign by an additional 35 feet
which resulted in the current proposal of 110 feet. The State
College Business Park is identified by an existing monument sign at
University and Hallmark Parkways which benefits all the present and
.... future tenants of the park. ..
PL.AN-8.OB PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-80)
at'f'0I"'~
---
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE VAR 91-05
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
7
8-6-91
7
~ COMMENTS RECEIVED
...
The California Department of Transportation has indicated
outdoor advertising visible from the interstate and
highways within an incorporated city must obtain a permit
Highway Outdoor Advertising Branch in Sacramento.
that all
primary
from the
CONCLUSION
The granting of a prior variance is not admissible for the granting
of a new variance. The property on which the sign is to be placed
is located within the Freeway Corridor Overlay District and is
therefore subject to all applicable requirements and design
standards. The applicant's proposal is inconsistent with the
Development Code provisions and the General Plan. Current monument
signage exists which identifies the State College Business Park at
the entry point of Hallmark Parkway and University Parkway. The_
sign height at ll0-feet has the potential to compromise public
health, safety, and welfare as it is located within a high wind
hazard area.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission:
DENY Variance No. 91-05 subject to the attached Findings of
Fact (Attachment "B").
RZ:Atf?-Z/d,
~arr ~. Reed
Assistant Director of Planning and Building Services
'Po:ttt., lfJoJUsi
Patti Nahill
Associate Planner
ATTACHMENTS
A - Municipal Code and General Plan Conformance
B Findings of Fact
C Applicant's Response to Findings
D Table 22.01 Excerpt
E Elevation
F Site Plan
G Location Map
...
...
~~.~
PL,AN.U8 PAGE 1 OF 1 ('-90)
..
Attachment "A"
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE VAR 91-05
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
7
8-6-91
8
,..-
DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
""'Ill
Cateaorv
Proposal
Development
Code
General Plan
Proposed
Use
Center Id
Siqn
CG-l and OIP
Center Id
Siqn
CG-l and alP
Type
A pylon
siqn
Monument or
pole siqn
with
decorative
cover
Policy
1.45.6
Maximum
Number
One double
face siqn
One double
face siqn
N/A
Maximum 728 square 125 square Policy
Siqn Area feet per feet per 1.45.8
face face
Maximum 28 feet by 7 feet by Policy
Siqn Panel 26 feet wide 25 feet wide 1.45.8
Maximum 110 feet 25 feet Policy
Siqri Heiqht hiqh hiqh 1.45.8
...
~~.~
PLAN-IJ)I PAGE 1 OF , (<HO)
A>:>:achmen>: i':6 I.
^ n
,... . """"I
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE VAR 91-05
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
AGENDA ITEM 7
FINDINGS OF FACT HEARING DATE 8-6-91
PAGE 9
""""I
1. There are no special circumstances applicable to the property,
including size. shape. topography, location or surroundings,
the strict application of this Development Code deprives such
property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the
vicinity and under identical land use district classification.
The general topography of the surrounding area to the south
prevents adequate display of motorist information allowed by
the Code at a lower height. However, this circumstance is
applicable to all properties in this vicinity in that all
businesses are equally affected and there is no substantial
right granted to one business over another as a result of the
denial of this sign variance under the provisions of the
Development Code.
2. The granting of the sign variance is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right
possessed by other property in the same vicinity and land use
district and denied to the property for which the variance is
sought. The Development Code states in Section 19.72.060 -
that the granting of a prior Variance is not admissible for
the granting of a new Variance.
.3. The granting the variance could be materially detrimental to
the public health, safety, or welfare. or injurious to the
property or improvements in such vicinity and land use
district in which the property is located in that the proposed
sign will be located in an area of high wind and could be
susceptible to breakage. The proposed sign is visible to the
southbound traffic at the required twenty-five feet and a 110
foot high sign will be detrimental to surrounding residential
property enjoyment because of negative visual impacts.
4. The granting of a variance to allow a liD-foot high sign does
constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the
limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and land use
district in which the property is located in that the purpose
of the Freeway Corridor Overlay District is to provide special
design guidelines/standards which address the siting and
design of signs within the immediate viewshed of motorists
traveling the 1-215 freeway corridor and the maximum
permissible sign height is 25 feet.
~~.~:::..
PUH.a.OI PAGE 1 OF 1 14-10)
"
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
VAR 91-05
FINDINGS OF FACT
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
7
8-6-91
10
,.
""'l
5.
The qrantinq the'variance does allow a use or activity which
is otherwise expressly authorized by the requlations qoverninq
the subject parcel in that Table 22.01 of the Development Code
specificallY states that the type of siqn permitted is either
a monument or pole siqn with decorative cover. The maximum
number permitted is one double face siqn per center where the
total siqn area does not exceed 125 square feet.
6.
That qrantinq the Variance will be inconsistent with General
Plan Policies 1.45.6 and 1.45.8 in that the City shall
prohibit the development of pole siqns at key entries to the
City and the City shall prohibit the use of oversize,
flashinq, animated or garishlY colored siqns which dominate
the bUildinq, architecture, and/or district in which they are
located.
~.=n=:==
...
PL.AN-I.08 PAGE 10F1 (4-80)
".
o
ATTACHMENT (; .
4/26/91
o
.
QUESTION A
ANSWER: The sign we are requesting will serve two primary functions:
1) as a monument sign giving the State College Business Park the
appropriate identification to benefit all the present and future
tenants, and 2) the necessary identification to fulfill the requirements
to attract the much needed additional services, i.e., gas and food, to
support the increasing. needs of a business park of the magnitude.
The property is approximately 30 feet below freeway grade with an off
ramp for each direction of travel. When traveling north bound prior
to approaching the University Avenue off ramp. There is a continual
uphill grade which, when coupled with the 30 foot depression of the
property on the down hill side of the grade, creates an unusual
situation. In order to provide the necessary signage under these
conditions, that will be easy to read and provide the required safe
response time for customers to exit the freeway, the sign must be
110 feet in height.
QUESTION B
ANSWER: Currently there are two other large multi-tenant identi-
fication signs existing. We feel the design of out sign proposed
is in much better taste and will be more architecturally compatibl~
with the surrounding area, and enable us to enjoy the visual
identification as our neighboring businesses.
QUESTION C
ANSWER: I believe this answer is part of A & B above. We have
designed a sign that we feel is in good taste with the surrounding
area and will also provide sufficient judgement time to allow for
a safe exit from the freeway.
QUESTION D
ANSWER: We are requesting only the rights that have been given
to the two other existing freeway signs at this intersection.
QUESTION E
ANSWER: We feel there should be no conflict to this proposal
because we are only requesting to provide proper identification
for the various on site freeway orientated businesess. The
individual sign sizes to be used on this monument are smaller
~h2n rh~ ~xi~tina sizes used by others in the same vicinity.
QUESTION F
ANSWER: This v~riance is consistent with policy 1.45.9 of the
~enetral ~lan wh~ch allows for "consideration of signs of visually
"l~S ~nct~ve design and mer"t h" h d"
f " " ~ w ~c may ~ffer from prescribed limits
~ s~z~i ~ater~als, a~d other characteristics, provided that they
.re we ~nt~rgated w~th the surrounding area. There is no adverse
~mpact"to ad~a7ent uses. The proposed sign differs from the
prescr~bed"l~m~~s of size, however it is not intended to solely
~ncrease s~gn s~ze.
.
I
...
lI!
~
o
~
III
B
l&I
fI)
-= j
-= Q
... Z
; ~
f:i ~
III fI)
..I Z
lD 0 .
~ _ :l
S !
j .
~
III
= !
~ I
- c
fI) .
I
i
1
I
I
11 1 I .
111-=111;.1 I-I ~ ill J J J
!1:1~~~l)I!. baa ~I. l I I
:I)fl~;I)iilll~l III : ~ ~
JlliJ l I, J 1}
lilli II II 1 IiI
II I I I
II II II . JI
o I'
i ~i ll) J
f:;!fl Wi!
f!U t'juld
ft1illllHlIl
12 1 I c.1J1J
~. . u
I
I
I
1
II
'I
f
b
I
!nl
_. ..,,,'-..' .....
50 ~ II
~~ I; iI II it ~r
Ii till .~II itl!i )
II 1!I;ij~fl ifi;1 I
Ji
. Is
'1 ]1
t il
~ i .51
II !I
nl Ii
U1 H
hj
III
in I I
)I!l ; :b
lil 11_!t 'I
'III Ifill li~ )1)
II If I) JII.')l
illlla I: Ijl
ail 1"1
it. lloi
t~l 'I~~
!il Jili
I
a
I
l' I
il !
J} ,
i 1
i'llIall
d II!
!tll~1 .
1ll.U.t:
I
..
l
..
!!!
-
.
~
JI "C
II . i
!.t ~
IIi I
Iii
1
1
i
J
.
Ii
III
H~
,
i
!
-,
,
. u
,; ..
...
,
-----
'/ --
-,.~
n
.
fal
lr:, ~I
11111 ;:
zUI1
! 1'1 I
i " I
1:1;:1 !
. ,
-[1
r1
7""
mUll I
!ff~f:. I
'f"ol
. tti I
II'" I
:'Iiil I
glii~ I
:'~111 I
!I'II' I
lint! I
'1"1:
~ ;u.
~t!~J
.nUi
UUil
I!~ i!!
-il ' ' I
~ I ; !
. ., I
1.. : : I
I~' '
"" ; l .
~It i II I -
::: 1 I i
, . .
: I I
, I '
i I I
, I'
: ,I
fl~ : i II' I
, =i . ! I
i; I i III
~ i1~_' JI.~ II~ l ~m \
~ 'il . ~I rt ... ~ ·
~~.:t"'I.....~;r '~ -
...._.~':\l...... 1\1\ I
,. I :::'j I
".: :~
.d I B ~ J ~ -
i!I.~~ H~;
.:~ ~ '!'~~~
I!! ~A ~!....' ~
': ~ r H :,
-' l".; ~H
~;! 11~nf ~~l
~oI 'I~;!l:l"\
~ : !~ i ~~
i
~..
1 I
Ii
~
i
"r . ~~ i
_. ~~....~;r.
/~ 8'~" i
srAlE co~ ~ PARK I )"
. .fl~t.
.tf<lOl~"~
)~~.;,."
j~~
;p/
Attachment
....../
--
--
nll...J...~'
.....J- .'
, .--
~ ......
~ ~..
i ..J.- ~
_.
...-
"E"
"1' )t.:c.j
. I
."
1"'\
w'
~
1
..,' ~~1' ~,
, 1 I
1lI!il!.il!!r .-...~;1111'.....
........... .'
L . r
.
II
-
..
'.-- -
~-~
. -.c:t:..
l.: -~
~ . I
I
~
-
~
"
0
, .'1:
I"::
i..:L
/'^'
Jc ...,J.t~.l
....." .
"....
~ ~'.
.' "~~.l 'C/4>.\
-.; t I
-:;:
I
!
~
y
,A'
.~::
.:JJIIlfft~
/ ~" .- ,..--v
-r~~~ .
~.-~,441 0'
J ~. '~pf- ;..
. -.~~-"
JfT"SI
. ~
==".~ ~
: atI8 .~5i6J
o~b'-/!c'
-- ,.,-
( J"q 1
~ 1/" 1
I '
l' ::
It;
__-:: ~ -=..; _:.-1 :
\...., ~!\ __ iv~...l\! ."'\
,WI' "",~ ..,..... .".:...
._-
~..-
~;,.~."
AttaC!lJ.l\eIlI.. r
.
1
. e
o
j
I
I
I
~ '"
l~ ~i' l~
Il~ I
J I~ -
!! .
: ~ ~ ~ i:=
~ ~ ~ ~ 1 In
~ ')" : I!I
~ \tI ~ . 1
(l~ ~ ~ 111
~ I ~: ji!
~ I ~ ~ !
~.~
~1~",~31
, S J ~... ~ 1 ~~
lJ~i~1 'i\ J
J
J
~
I~
~
~
Jt.
1
~
1 ~
~
I
i
l
~.. .
,
} I
J
.....
li~lr
Ii~
:fi ~~ .llld
I !1.iR
11I~
l I I ~q'B.
!
.... .- t I ~ fi~
!
I
! Jlfill
~ ~l
u . I i
.. ..
i ! i I~!
8 ~
.. IIJI!
_IIO&~" ~DI
.'
-, : 11:.1!
... II
-
-
---
..
ATTACHMENT "G"
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE Variance No. 91-05
LOCATION
HEARING DATE 8-6-91
\~
l
~
~.=.===
r
AGENDA
ITEM #
7
..
....
G
PLAH-l.11 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-00)
,-,
-
(jj3~~~1?/
I~I
fg ~ 8
b !!t I
z m
Ii) :II
n
111 ji:
c: r-
b
z
Ii)
en
ii
-
~
-::-
\'
,i
DEVil CREEK CHANNEL
. I
..._~
o
'< '"
. 0>
,
n
o
b '"
. "
~
LEXINGTON WAY
i ·
, ,
I.
,
I.
I i ,---- 8
I ' 8 8/",
---~-p:0--~
1- -- U. i I
I ! ~L_ ----1
I '-- IF I
II d!ii~~ci
I, '~~. I
;!!;g;;z
<,
I 8 8&-------l!l
D
":::>:::::::::::>.
, :;':->>'-""""
CJ
D
D
.
j
.
~
!
a
~
,
~
I ~rg;
I
I
> I
,;
go
(f)
~ I
~ '[
~
"
II
II
hi
I. I
I
II
II
II
~I'
II
II.
b
.'"
.,.,
n
~
m
:II
Ol
iiI
:;:
~~
'"
$!
;;t
~8
::I 1=
f!5
..
::I all
.. C
.. '"
Q,-
-z
::I c:
o '"
;:
=
SARATOGA WAY'
"
:;i )00 m
---<> n
"
;,
"
..
.
~"
"
..
o
'0>
n
~
.
o
>
~
~
I
C
~
m
o
"
m
~
~
o
" .
.. .
0- "
)00 (0) )00 <0
n n
....,.,.
...'.',."....'.........i..........."."..,...
",-.:.:.:. ....
. \i(::::::::;::
.
.
.
~
~
..
0",
~O>
.", c--
:.... v,
~ "\.
,
'\ ':..
~-
0'-
o~....
,,~
"
m
:Jl
o
~
1
l \ ' ~
-t ,". ~ :::-
~
~
,
-
'l,"'If;
tC
I
n~
m;
[OCII
'>>"11
,nl-
'-"-~r
...
1_
" -
mllll
1\l~1
fl1hl
I'll'
,'JI
11"'
,.!'l!
'.111111'
'III
~\,\h
11111
~
t
i
~
I~
I
, -
fJi
, ( -;
{t '
.~ (A
~l I}J ~ a ! ~ I! \
~~t~~~ t Ii ->
"\ .~
~ i I! -
J; ! ~
r" ~ l+.~lilI
rl! t;J ~~~I~
Irk;~h
I; f hI!
~f I~I ~ i~l
~l . ~ I ~ ~ ~
~ ::::::::: r~
....
.-/,.,..
,-F
.,
,0
~ "'
I!;
. -,
4 ~:>
""',l'~jf~
"'
J
~~. 1 I
~ ,-.
.
-- "~_2-'---!~l-~""-f-~~'~":";" ,J i
. I l/l' ~"ef1'~ ~
!;; - t ,r:.'~^' 8
~ I ...,:;::,," A
;/:Sall '\.. ~~'"
Bernardino
, STATI COLLEGE BUSINESS PARK .
r p"'~!rf
" . ,ff",#,eP:"'''
C.i::J J{'l9:1,I""':.. "':i""'~
I ~ ~r:~~~
I' I~rf~:;;r'" -ff'
" r~~~~
fJ'#';~
"~
- -
.... '--
" "'-
" ,-
~
-
('-
mJ~
I~.~)~ IL ~~&;
~J\
,
,
~
-....;
"'
Jo,
Irev/~,.A
.1' 1/1'1/119' ~
tll'llj" ()tIfJf- -
(-~/Zb~v^'1J'>< f"Ft'"
~~~.,. .-:
(;1/1/lr:f 1& dlfptf-- "
I;4ttlp,ldl"
",
H
,.....
...
.'CM:t P# irIoN fi~
~%Alt!!b',../!o'
<>--~
/.
( 6>\ ~
'\>;0 ~
, 11 :
'. I,,, i
, ':.\ a
G
A
".'-'. .
....- ..----..
~ -- .....- --
STATE COLLEGE BUSINESS PARK .
o 0
EXISTING BUSINESSES: NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES
Mini-Storage 3
University Service Center 10
(Project recently completed -
units currently for rent or sale)
J & V Foam Products 15
New Farm Credit 20
Color Tile 25
General Foam Plastics Corp. 25
Greenleaf Development Project 30
(Project currently completed -
units currently for rent)
United States Post Office 43
Doan Products 50
(Three Shifts)
Prime Line 70
Culligan Water Softening 21
cumberland 100
C & M Fine Pack 250
Southland Corporation 740
Hotel, Gas Station & Other Services 37
TOTAL AS OF 07-25-91 1,439
BUSINESSES UNDER DEVELOPMENT: NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES
Shears on Lehman Hutton Mortgage 450
(Projected Operational date 11-15-91)
The Sun Company 120
(Projected operational date 1992)
L & N Uniform Supply 200
(Projected operational date 1992)
INS 150
(Projected operation date 1992)
TOTAL 2,359
PROJECTED NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES UPON NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES
COMPLETION OF TOTAL BUILD-OUT:
4,000 +/-
-
- .
-
-
.. ,~
',. ;'.j-.-: -
" -
~~- 7'--~.'"
.
o
(GM).
FINE PACK. INC.
o
Al.lgl.l..t 1..$. 1991
~ Valarie Pope-Ludlam
Coun~ilwoman. Sixth Ward
City Ot San Blrnardlne
Coun~ i 1 Off ice
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Dear Ms Pope-Ludlam:
We at C'M Fine Pack are very enthulii...tic about the many ax,iting ~hanges we have
heard are taking plOlce within ths State Col1ese Business Park. To be more
splicifiq the best news is the addi tional food eshbl ishments that a!'1i comins
to our park.
As yeu may know. our company eonli.e.. of approximately 200 emploYlili!s. It has
alw.ys blllan commen knowllidge among our employees as well as other companie~
located within tha State College Busine... Park that there is a definite bhortage
of food Istablishmlints.
We have a150 heard that the new owners of the park are procI!ssing a monument 5ig~
large enough to assist business associatls in locating our p~'k, a.. well a5 give
the park the appropriate identity.
We know that you IUPPOt.t the posi tive growth that thll park is c'_lrrently
experienCIng_ Additionally. we are confident that you appreciate our need for
ade9uate food ~ervice~ necessary in a business p~rk of this 5i21i.
Thank you fer your as.istanc. and understanding;
.~
Steve Palko
eel Mark C. Boen
State College Business Park
Prowastern Development Company
....162 Georgia Blvd., san aemardino. CA 92407
Tel.: 714-S8C> 1781. 880-1821
FAX: (71....) 887-880S
-~
41
_ J
-
-
.
o
o
.
.
~,.1ES POST,,\-
O.~..
.. m
... ~
_ C
Z -
j ~ ~
.-.
.. . .. .... ..
United States
Postal Service
Mr. Tom Minor
Councilman, Fifth Ward
city of San "Bernardino
Council Office
300 North "0" street
San Berpardino, CA 92418
Dear Mr. Minor:
We were happy to hear the good news that Shears on Lehman Hutton and
The Sun Company had chosen to ~ relocate. to the state College
Busi~ess Park. They were pleased to know that the park had a Post
Office readily at hand to assist them with their postal needs.
It has been brought to our attention that within the state College
Business Park, we will soon have more food services, as well as an
additional gas station. Our Post Office provides employment for
approximately 40 employees and each of us enthusiastically welcomes
these additional services.
We had also heard that a monument sign for the park was being
processed through the city. This would immensely help customers
who are trying to find the state College Business Park from
Interstate 215.
On behalf of myself and my staff, we appreciate your interest in
making this park a more enjoyable place to work.
Sincerely,
~ ~~~~-'
\:)'~ohn Pietrop la "
MANAGER~STATION OPERATION
fl9RTHPARX STA
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407-9998
cc: Mark C. Boen
state CollegeB~siness Park
Prowestern Oeve~opment Company
."
-
- ,J..
w.
AI L
-
u
II The Sun
..NoD..... 0
... 1&. RaIl..... CA I:M01
(71.) ......
o
BROOKS JOHNSON
PRESIDENT AND PUBUSHER
vIce PRESIDENT - GANNETT WEST
NEWSPAPER GROUP
May ,20, 1991
IlJr. Tom Minor
Councilman, Fifth Ward
City of San Bernardino
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Dear Tom:
As you are aware, the Council recently approved the zoning change
needed for The Sun to go forward with plans to build our $50
million production facility in State College Business Park.
Because our operation will run 3 shifts/day, 7 days/week, our
employees would welcome the increased availability of restaurants
and retail services in the park. Since newspapering is by nature
a deadline business, the close proximity of food services to our
plant is essential.
I am also delighted to learn that a monument sign for the park is
being processed. Frankly, with the existing terrain it's a little
hard to find the park right now. We're proud to be there and would
like our customers to know where we are.
Sincerely,
6 ~ - ~.L
~
Brooks Johnson
BJ:dh
cc: Mark Boen /'
e)
eN'1lD
.WOII8011_~
---
L~=~,
SHEARSrn
LEHMAN .
HlJTI'(N
MRfGAGE
I..
o
dhearson Lehman H~ Mortgage Corpol8tion
._d___n:.
....---11.
May 16, 1991
Mr. Tom Minor
Councilman, Fifth Ward
City of San Bernardino
Council Office
300 North 'D' Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Dear Mr. Minor:
We are looking forward to moving into our new facility at
State College Business Park this year. To date, everything
appears to be progressing well at the city pertaining to
our approvals.
As I Suggested to the Mayor last month, we certainly hope
that there will soon be more food services available as well
as an additional gas station in the park. Considering the
fact that we will have well over 300 employees on site and
their lunch break is forty-five minutes in length, it is
imperative that these additional services are provided as
soon as possible.
I was very pleased to see that the proposed sign for the
park will also serve as a monument sign to identify the
State College Business Park and will give the park the
presence and prestige it deserves.
I appreciate your assistance in achieving the above.
RSG/ljm
/
Mark C. Boen
State College Business Park
Prowestern Development Company
cc:
1201 E.Highland Ave. Suite 0, San Bernardino. CA 92404 . P.O. Box 1201, San Bernardino. CA 92402 . (714) 886-7811
-
-
M.
-
..
PitlME-LINf>
PRODUCTS COMPANY
POST OFFICE BOX 2637
SAN BI:'RNAROINO, CALIFORNIA 92406
(714) BH7-8118
o
May 2'1. 1991
Mr. Tom Minor
Councilman. Fifth Ward
City of San Bernardino
Council Office
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino. CA 92'118
Dear Mr. Minor.
We are pleased to hear that the State College Business Park
is finally securing additional restaurants as well as
another service station. We employ approximately 70
employees and the current number of food services are not
adequate.
It has also been brought to my attention that the owners are
attempting to secure a monument sign for the park. I feel
this will certainly assist people attempting to locate the
park as well as give the State College Business Park some
identity.
We at Prime Line are pleased that you encourage the positive
growth of the park as well as assisting the tenants within
the park by providing the additional services that are.
needed.
Thank yOU for your support and interest.
Sincerely. . /J
\d;,~ ~PA;4-C-
George Sutphen
Vice President
cc. Mark C. Boen
State College Business Park
Prowestern Development Company
-
J
o 0
DOANE
PRODUCTS COMPANY
2765 LEXINGTON WAY
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407
(714) 887-8131
PRIVATE LABEL
PET FOOD
May 23, 1991
Mr. Mark C. Boen
Prowestern Development Company
9121 Haven Avenue, Suite 200
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Dear Mr. Boen:
It is my understanding that you have recently purchased the State College
Business Park. I have heard from other tenants within the park that you
are working on attracting more eating establishments. These additional
services would be greatly appreciated by all of us.
If there is anything that we at Doane Products Company can do to assist
you in your efforts, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
AL/dl
GENERAL 0FF1CE: P. 0. ICIC 171 . JCIPUN. MISSOUfI .... . PHONE 417-124-11.
PLAH1'S: JOPUN. MISSOURI . TRACY. CAUFORNIA . MUSCAl1NE. ONA . MANASSAS. VIAGIHIA . SAN IEANAADINO. CALFC)RNIA . ~. AI...A8AMA . TEWI..E. TEXAS
~el "TWenty Partnero
A California General Partnership
.
.
May 23, 1991
16<>72 Milliken Avenue
Irvine. Cdlifurnia 92714
(714) llo3-95S1
FAX: (714) 86.3-1064
Ms. Valerie Pope-Ludlam
Councilwoman, Ward 6
City of San Bernardino
Council Office
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Dear Ms. Pope-Ludlam:
We are pleased with the relationship we have established with
the City of San Bernardino while working with the Shearson
Lehman Button people and relocating them to our building in
State College Business Park. We are also very interested in
purchasing additional land in the State College Business Park
for future development.
As you may know, I had previously expressed my concern about the
critical need for additional food establishments, as well as
other retail support services within the park. These services
are inadequate today and will become more critical as the park
continues to develop. The recent addition of the Sun, as well
as Shearson Lehman Button is certainly a major benefit to the
State College Business Park as well as the City of San
Bernardino.
The park appears to be experiencing a very favorable change from
a mere secondary location industrial related park to a more
significant business/industrial park.
I am aware of the fact that the current owners have applied to
the City for a sign that will serve both as a monument sign for
the park, as well as accommodating the necessary signage for the
additional food and gas services. I have heard that you are
very supportive of the positive changes that are occurring in
the park and if there is anything that we can do to assist your
efforts, we would be pleased to do so.
Sincerely,
~~9S
General Partner
cc: Mark C. Boen
State College Business Park
Prowestern:Development Company
Ogden 51.
City of
San BemanJino
,~
~
Blvd.
"'OOTHru (21') FWY
42nd 51.
.
1M) f'll~
.
.
.
c:> ,,~WY
R1VfIl$'D~ \~... ..
6 Miles to .
InferstafelO N
\
A Development of:
Prowestern Development Company
9121 Haven Avenue, Suite 200
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
For further information, call:
(714) 945-9366
(714) 945-2195 (Fax)
ThI information Ibovt has... ablliMll from _n:allllimd,.,.. WbltWl dlIlIDt.... itS.UICY...1IM notVlrifild it lIllI....lIll gIlIDIlteI. ....Illly or,.....,tlltion Ibout it It iI YIUr~y to inlIIIpendenlly conn ih
_ICY IlllI ~ A~y pra;.etionl. opinionI'............OI' ntilllltallllll.. for u.....lllIIy IIllIdollOt,..... tht cwrlllllI' fulIn ~ ofttltPfGIIIrtY. n.wllutoftlil tr-.ctiDIIlllyGll ......11II1.... 01"" lltlan.
wtichllhoulll...~byylNttu,linlncWnIeplIdvilora.Youlllllylllll'~IIhlMdCOllduct.AJefII.inl6IpIndInIirwatiptillloftlllllflllllft'ladltlnninlla'....lItisflCtiantt.IIUitIbit'of....proptrt'for'lNt.....