The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About36-Planning and Building CITY -OF SAN BERIORDINO - REQUEST OR COUNCIL ACTION From: Al Boughey, Director De~: Planning & Building Services DMe: January 27, 1992 . . Appeal of Planning Commission's Subject. denial of Variance No. 91-06 Mayor and Common Council February 3, 1992 Synopsis of Previous Council action: On January 21, 1992 the Mayor and Common Council upheld the appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Variance No. 91-06 and approved Variance No. 91-06 in concept, referring the item back to staff to develop positive findings and conditions of approval. Recommended motion: That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor and Common Council uphold the appeal and approve Variance No. 91-06 subject to the attached Findings of Fact (Exhibit A) and Conditions of Approval (Exhibit B). Al Boughey Contact person: Al Bouqhev Phone: 384-5357 Supporting data Mtached: Staff Report Ward: 1 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount:l\T/" Source: (Acct. No.1 (Acct. Descriotion1 Finance: Council Notes: . u_~_ ..__ .._ _~.t:: C~TY .OF SAN BER~RDINO - REQUEST ~R COUNCIL ACTION .,,,' .~ STAFF REPORT subject: Appeal of the Planning Commission denial of Variance No. 91-06, requesting approval of a variance from Development Code Section 19.22.150(C)(1)(d) to construct a 65-foot tall pole sign with 85 square feet of sign area per face. Mayor and Common Council Meeting of February 3, 1992 BACKGROUND On January 21, 1992, the Mayor and Common Council upheld the applicant I s appeal and approved Variance No. 91-06 in concept, referring the matter back to staff to develop Conditions of Approval and positive Findings of Fact. A stipulation of the Mayor and Common Council's approval was that all other signs on the subject property shall be brought into conformance with current Development Code Standards. In order to make positive findings, the approved sign must be consistent with General Plan Policy No. -1.45.6, which prohibits pole signs in the downtown area. To ensure General Plan consistency, staff has proposed a condition of approval to require a decorative pole cover to conceal the structural steel support of the sign. The applicant has agreed to comply with this condition. Recommended Findings of Fact have been included as Exhibit A. Recommended Conditions of Approval have been included as Exhibit B. RECOMMENDATION That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor and Common Council uphold the appeal and approve Variance No. 91-06 subject to the attached Findings of Fact (Exhibit A) and Conditions of Approval (Exhibit B). Exhibits: A - Findings of Fact B - Conditions of Approval 5.0264 !!L . FINDINGS OF FACT CASE VAR 91-06 AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE 2-3-92 PAGE 3 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Findings of Fact in support of granting Variance 91-06 pursuant SBMC Section 19.72.050, to install a 65-foot tall freeway oriented sign with 85 square feet of sign area per face at the Super 8 Motel, 777 W. Sixth st., San Bernardino. 1. There are special circumstances applicable to this property, including topography, location and surroundings, such that the strict application of the Development Code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicini ty and under an identical land use district classification because this property and use is located at a key intersection of the City which is one of three freeway off-ramps providing access to downtown, and the only point of access for both north and southbound traffic. All four corners of this intersection as well as all of downtown are located in the identical land use district classification o~ CR-2 (Commercial Regional-Downtown). This is the only entrance to downtown where all the uses at the key intersection are screened from view by existing landscaping and physical freeway construction. . It is also the only downtown freeway off-ramp point at which all of the existing uses are specifically oriented to the freeway traveling public. 2. Granting the requested 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 because each of the other three uses located at this intersection have existing freeway oriented, freestanding signs which advertise their presence to the traveling public. 3. Granting this 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 because the installation of the proposed identification sign will allow the traveling public on the freeway to make appropriate lane changes and prudent exiting decisions in a safe and timely manner. The size and height of the proposed sign is similar to that of the other freeway oriented signs at this Off-ramp intersection. The sign will not be adverse to other properties in the vicinity and same land use district since it will not be normally visible at street level. The property owner will reduce existing street level signage on the subject property at such time as this sign is installed. 4. Granting this variance does not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and land use district in which such property is ... !l,';.&~ PLAN-I.o& PAGE, 01' , (4-tO) CITY OF SAN BER RDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE AR 91-06 AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 2-3-92 4 FINDINGS OF FACT ,.. 5. 6. '" located because as described above, all the other properties located at this intersection already enjoy the benefits of freestanding, freeway-oriented pole signs of similar height and size. Granting this variance does not allow a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject parcel because the existing hotel is a permitted use in the CR-2 district and it is allowed to have a sign to advertise its presence. This action will only grant a variance to the size and height of the permitted sign. Granting this variance will not be inconsistent with the General Plan. This variance is specifically consistent with General Plan Policy 1.3.8 providing for needs of short term visitors. On page 4-19, the General Plan specifically acknowledges the need for more hotel/motel rooms in the City which would encourage the support and retention of existing quality facilities at certain locations which are accessible to freeway traffic. This variance is also specifically consistent with General Plan Policy 1.45.6 which prohibits pole signs in the downtown area. Conditions to the variance require that the sign support structure have a decorative cover. .... P\.AN-i.Cl8 PAQE,OF, (4-00) CITY 0# .. .......-0 --- b. <Il . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE VAR 91-06 CONDITIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE '-1-Q' Ii r 1. A decorative pole cover, compatible with the materials and architecture of the primary structure, shall be installed to conceal the structural steel pole support members of the sign approved under Variance No. 91-06. 2. Within six (6) months after the approval of this application, all other signs on the subject property that are not in conformance with Chapter 19.22 of the San Bernardino Development Code shall be abated or brought into conformance with said Chapter, including any amendments that are adopted within this six (6) month period. 3. Prior to installation of the sign approved under Variance No. 91-06, as well as any other proposed sign that is subject to a permit pursuant to Development Code Chapter 19.22, a Sign- Permit application or applications shall be submitted to, and a permit or permits issued by, the Department of Planning and Building Services. Sign plans shall be consistent with the conceptual plans approved under variance No. 91-06, as well as the conditions contained herein 3. within one (1) year after approval, commencement of construction shall have occurred or the approval shall become null and void. In addition, if after commencement of construction, work is discontinued for a periOd of one year, then the approval shall become null and void. Expiration Date: February 3, 1993 4. 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 the applicant of his or her obligation under this condition. ... &1lnlt.=. 101 := PLAN-8.D8 PAGE 1 OF 1 (..QQ)