HomeMy WebLinkAbout25- Planning & Building Services C3TY OF SAN BERN[ RDINO - REQUEST F R COUNCIL ACTION
From: Al Boughey, Director Subject: Appeal of the Planning Commission
denial of Variance No. 93-19
Dept: Planning & Building Services
multi-tenant sign at Waterman and
Date: January 27, 1994 Base Line Street.
MCC meeting of February 7, 1994
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
01/24/94 -- The Mayor and Common Council approved Variance No. 93-19
in concept and continued the matter until February 7, 1994.
Recommended motion:
That the hearing be closed, the appeal be upheld and Variance No. 93-19
be approved based on the Findings of Fact (Exhibit 3) .
A BOUG Y , ture
Contact person: Al Boughe_y Phone: 5357
Supporting data attached: Yes Ward: 2
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. Description)
Finance:
:ouncil Notes:
75-0262 Agenda Item No.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF DENIAL OF VARIANCE 93-19
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of February 7, 1994
REQUEST/LOCATION: The applicant, Stater Bros. Development, Inc., is appealing the
Planning Commission's denial of Variance No. 93-19, a request to construct a center
identification pylon sign with a lighted portion of 275 square feet (the letters and horizontal
accent bands) per face, 40 feet tall with 4 tenants identified.
The subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of about 16.96 acres
located at the northeast corner of Waterman Avenue and Base Line Street, having a frontage of
about 970 feet on the north side of Base Line Street and frontage of 634 feet on the east side of
Waterman Avenue. The proposed sign is located approximately 530 feet east of the centerline
of Waterman Avenue on the north side of Base Line Street. The project is in the CG-2,
Commercial General land use designation. (See Exhibit 1)
BACKGROUND:
• The proposal is for a 40 foot high pylon sign, approximately 474.5 square foot
(per face) aggregate sign face area, with four tenant spaces with no center
identification.
• The applicant agreed that the support members for the sign will have pole covers
that match the building exterior and that the existing sign adjacent to Waterman
Avenue will be retro-fitted with the same type of pole covering to maintain
consistency.
• On January 24, 1994 the Mayor and Common Council approved Variance 93-19
in concept, continued the matter for two weeks and directed Planning Staff to
draft positive findings and return to the Mayor and Common Council meeting on
February 7, 1994.
ENVIRONMENTAL: The proposal is categorically exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15311.
PAGE 1
Appeal of Denial of Variance 93-19
Mayor and Common Council meeting of
February 7, 1994
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council
approve Variance 93-19 based upon the Findings of Fact, Exhibit 3.
Prepared by: Jeffery S. Adams, Assistant Planner
For: Al Boughey, Director, Planning and Building Services
EXHIBITS: 1. Location Map
2. Site Plan, Elevations
3. Findings of Fact
doc:828
PAGE 2
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AGENDA
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ITEM #5
CASE VAR Nn_ 93-19
LOCATION HEARING DATE 2/7/94
-11 _ . F 2 LL 1
■ T
4ma �e
to MUM Nio,nr •, Go
O .vAks
SITE o.WrIT5 T
tA T
G
Fib
it
J
J
RM
BASELINE ST.
a
z
10 H
W I ,
0 Is NJ
1
T
Gr ar Sw Mwul060
(&MTIW/AMTINC WRMCE!
EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 3
5"RETURNS
•36"+_,I 22'-0"
I � I 14
18'-b"
I II I il � Ililil I I � , Illij I
I �r�
i i I i ! ! --♦ FAB.�,!N&7ALL NEW
T/r^1,,tKNG=ACEC
-ABiNET,S RUC JRE
"'I l I j ICI
—� DECKING BKGD TC
5E=A NNE--,WHITE.
! I I
_ _
j li —a 36"INT lLLUM.CFiANNE-
I I I WITH#275-0 RED FC;,UEDACn4.0
j I FACES FACESTCHAVE A 1
PORMED RETURN WITH A 'WDE
i
! BLACK b1WL O.L.BCI 8,HR BACK
ill III Ijl II II II it TRIM CAP
I I ICI IIII, IIIii � � I � � Ij � jliljil I I III I
i cam � i i i t I I l i
LETTERS TO BE"LL!b11NATED
WTH Dfl'IFAR RFC:NF(:N
r r � n .�-
- � i � �, W�H SELF�ChI�AIR��F".�Fi
--- _ _.-- -- PC)WFR FA:.!OR I RAN�T, OIRMFRS
rx22,-a yF INT !i aJM,STRIP
CABCNETSFAB FROIALUTAINUM
END VIEW - F'AINTFD N ACC WITH#278-(-CP
RED FORMED A'--,YLIC FACE S
HFI F)IN PIAff WTH AI UMINUM
-- -- R
RETAINERS rWNTEDBLAO(
\ CABIN ET$TOBE!i±UM!NATED
\ WITH CLrXZ RED NEON A5RECID
- \\ POWERFACiCia�7ANSE ORM ERS
C)I
FABRIC KING --
NI I
D/F!LLI gV,!NATED TENANT SICK'CABINETS
L i FAB.FRC M 3-T/MTL PAiNTEG MS#4290
GREY,PLEX FACE COLORS T.B.D.BY TENANT
TENANT
— = + 514T/MTL POLL COdLRS WTI I
[EX-COIL 1-149-IPNTD.TO
-- MIAT—�I BSLDIN-a
rS7JRVEYGFyL1111EL)PVYOG IO
ABR CATIONI
MANUFACTURE&INSTALL 1 DiF PYLO14 SIGN 114"=1'-0"
EXHIBIT 2 PAGE 4
Appeal of Denial of Variance 93-19
Mayor and Common Council meeting of
February 7, 1994
REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT
Variance No. 93-19
1. FINDING: There may be special circumstances applicable to the property, with respect
to topography, such that the strict application of the Development Code height
requirements deprives the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in
the vicinity and under the identical land use district classification.
FACT: There are special circumstances that would warrant the addition of a large
monument sign in that the site does not have maximum visibility to pedestrians and auto
traffic due to the substantial setback between the street and the building.
2. FINDING: The granting of this variance request to allow an large monument sign is
necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by
other properties in the vicinity and land use district and would otherwise be denied to the
property for which the variance is sought.
FACT: The applicant has demonstrated that the business is deprived of a right enjoyed
by others in the immediate area, by strictly conforming to the Development Code. The
building has a substantial setback from the street and the orientation of the building is to
the West, and is not easily identifiable from Baseline to the South, without a large
monument sign.
3. FINDING: The granting of this variance request 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.
FACT: The sign would be constructed in conformance with the Uniform Building Code,
Uniform Electrical Code and/or the Uniform Sign Code by a California state licensed
sign contractor. City Building and Safety Staff and shall verify that the sign has been
properly designed and installed to withstand the potential high wind conditions associated
with the area of the subject property.
4. FINDING: The granting of this variance request may not constitute a special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and land use district
in which the subject property is located.
FACT: Granting a variance to increase the size of the permitted sign would not
constitute a special privilege in that other buildings within a multi-tenant shopping center
are afforded the same considerations under Development Code Section pertaining to
signage and the ability to apply for a variance.
EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 5
Appeal of Denial of Variance 93-19
Mayor and Common Council meeting of
February 7, 1994
5. FINDING: The granting of this variance request would not allow a use that is not
otherwise expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject parcel.
FACT: The on-site identification of commercial uses is permitted by the Development
Code.
6. FINDING: The granting of this variance request will not be inconsistent with the
General Plan.
FACT: The General Plan addresses the need for signage adequate to identify businesses.
EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 6
CITY OF SAN BERN[ IDINO - REQUEST F R COUNCIL ACTION
From: Al Boughey, Director Subject: Appeal of the Planning Commission
denial of Variance No. 93-19 multi- '
De, Tanning & Building Services tenant sign at Waterman and Base
Line Street.
Date: December 29, 1993 MCC meeting of January 24, 1994
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
None
Recommended motion:
That the hearing be closed, the appeal be denied and Variance No.93-19 be
denied based on the Findings of Fact (Attachment "D" of Exhibit 1) .
IX 1'1 �ak
Z-130 HE ignature
Contact person: Al Boughey Phone: 5357
Supporting data attached: Yes Ward: 2
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount:_ N/A
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. Description)
Finance:
.or Notes•,: ✓ ��� r ,;
-5-0262 Agenda Item No 02-Ir
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF DENIAL OF VARIANCE 93-19
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of January 24, 1994
REQUEST/LOCATION: The applicant, Stater Bros. Development, Inc., is appealing the
Planning Commission's denial of Variance No. 93-19, a request to construct a center
identification pylon sign with a lighted portion of 275 square feet (the letters and horizontal
accent bands) per face, 40 feet tall with 4 tenants identified.
The subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of about 16.96 acres
located at the northeast corner of Waterman Avenue and Base Line Street, having a frontage of
about 970 feet on the north side of Base Line Street and frontage of 634 feet on the east side of
Waterman Avenue. The proposed sign is located approximately 530 feet east of the centerline
of Waterman Avenue on the north side of Base Line Street. The project is in the CG-2,
Commercial General land use designation. (See Exhibit 1)
KEY ISSUES: The key issues are as follows:
• The proposal is for a 40 foot high pylon sign (Dev. Code permits 20 ft.), 474.5
square foot (per face) aggregate sign face area (Dev. Code permits 75 sq. ft.),
with four tenant spaces (instead of the three allowed by code) with no center
identification. The support members for the sign are two steel I-Beams, painted
grey with no other enhancement.
• There is an existing, non-conforming pylon sign adjacent to Waterman Avenue
similar to the proposed sign.
• The sign as proposed exceeds all standards of the Development Code regarding
signs, and is reminiscent in terms of size and design of a billboard.
• A monument sign that conforms to the requirements of the Code would be clearly
visible and adequately serve the need for business identification along Base Line
Street.
• There are no special circumstances regarding topography, size, shape or location
(of the monument sign) which would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed
by other property in the vicinity and under the same land use classification.
• The proposed sign is not compatible with the recently constructed Stater Bros.
market.
PAGE 1
Appeal of Denial of Variance 93-19
Mayor and Common Council meeting of
January 24, 1994
Please see the analysis and attachments contained in Exhibit 3, Staff Report to the Planning
Commission.
OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL: The Mayor and
Common Council may:
1. Deny the appeal and deny Variance 93-19; or
2. Continue the item, uphold the appeal, approve Variance No. 93-19 in
concept and direct staff to prepare positive findings.
ENVIRONMENTAL: The proposal is categorically exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15311.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission reviewed
Variance 93-19 on December 14, 1993, and voted 5-0 to deny Variance 93-19, based upon the
Findings of Fact (See Exhibit 3).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council;
Deny Variance 93-19 based upon the Findings of Fact contained in the Planning Commission
staff report.
Prepared by: Jeffery S. Adams, Assistant Planner
For: Al Boughey, Director, Planning and Building Services
EXHIBITS: 1. Location Map
2. Site Plan, Elevations
3. Planning Commission Staff Report
Attachments:
A - Leeafien Map (Included as Exhibit 1)
B - Site Plan, E4er (Included as Exhibit 2)
C - Development Code and General Plan Consistency
D - Findings of Fact (Staff)
E - Applicant's Findings of Fact
F - Conditions of Approval
4. Applicant's Letter of Appeal
doc:791
PAGE 2
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AGENDA
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ITEM #5
CASE VAR No_ 93-19
LOCATION HEARING DATE 12/14/93
F
: AIL ri r
T •V� "ot
.1 pit aii
A♦ T
r ,r G
&VANS II r
SITE r5 T
olurar
r
j I ►
T � �� •
BASELINE ST.
OR&AG _ uozff
> 1 t mono
IT-
W i
i
T
!Tapir
•
`y6
fEIRML►I.M1.19 gNNOF3
EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 3
5 RETURNS
36"+ • 22'-0"
18-6 -' • 308 sq. ft.
-_ -- ---.
.
li Ar
� I I I I I I •
I
i
r 1 i
O�
' /VI.
�- -
: �An if7J ASV-AA-- A.-
OATH kY7c' ;<M=-A:'.v
- F
I _
'aN 14
I III I I I I 7I ! w SE_-'7.'P.
END VIEW AN �A�Cw Ye7 n
RETAINERS9W.n,::n�X
`�A51NE*SiCFSEdc_'WA-[_
�I
� T-ABRIC KING
CV 1 yI
L-
TENANT
. 55 sq. ft
each
`� i-BEAMS
'na
A
♦ I BEAM
W14UFACTURE&INSTALL 1 D/F PYLON SIGN • 40 FEET TA L L
475.5 sq. ft.
EXHIBIT 2 • TOTAL AREA
PAGE 4
rsw.■��`40 - "USUVM lr 337.5 3t'R•73svg #
s•ow IANho rw'sou■uatY/lf # N
stWt� •w�����p d 11"W"I MIL 3111 Y'ilri■ ,
_ _ i I i ' ' i ' .•, _ j F Y Y V Y Y V II .e a Y V I
• r .=J - ■rV C 1 e '� e� I I I � [II_! 1 � t_ _ .; s i
i # I , Ir s� i, y �i�•. .• �i � � I i l
3 � � # � ! �I�i�,� i ICI 3 � � ! i•�- � TF ._ !i !t !.� Itd 8 F.A IIR tR tP.i 3 .'A i5 -..t
ji�7
r 9 6E _I" !;':t-a s e r r c e 6{
i ••� � i tl S ��7 �la I� rle �� I� � �y ,° }a [ .' �.° ��'_ I si_
I- - :I. Ar,' r Iii �9 111 -:e J - =li• i` •=.TO •" •i � ep1 I � I I lt ,
,�— Y` Yib b eiY 7 TI � Y�V -'j - r V• Yi :..1_ �rf r.° a r. f� I I I i r�Y
S 11`I` :iGl:�� it? G� i. I �� # •v iu:ir6 �- -EFs._lrt.�!t ';E4
- - - - - � �s�y �o��o�sil;,:°�„i?�, �er� ii ❑ o���❑��Iclaiol❑ ❑'� �
er �r jeeeGp 4e = _w ' P p ` ••�Ht - <.: #
9 `..-� is l• G�� c � l� YI'
R j -
• � 9
1
.. T------R-^ ------ --- ---1--AJ'f
° t
I .
'� -+. � v � iii � ❑pk�° � u . 1 t' � i \-;
- `-T----------±--- -----T--- -- --r
tl -��• _ ;r� !r 3� y�- �I � i/ _ '�”=00 --00-,-00-,-`'" � •F- ~i
( -ei a -__ .f �r II �F � - o r.".='%��••. .. �% �_ y ---i. -� � _-
;ti �!'i .i" �� - - r r
1_�P - •6e *_ -------------r
a
IL
IF
Q I Y=
i e
aa >
i- - ❑U ., .-. III
it
W
[<< � � o
I 9
y u ----
------ w
TV
OL
IE 'r
'"► 'n"�'�"" PAGE 5
- - EXHIBIT 2
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
AGENDA ITEM #5
SUMMARY HEARING DATE December 14, 1993
WARD 2
APPLICANT: Young Electric Sign Co.
1413 East Philadelphia
W
N Variance No. 93-19
Ontario, California 91761
Q OWNER: Stater Bros. Market
U 21700 Barton
Colton , California 92324
The applicant requests approval of a Variance of Development Code Section
19.22. 150 (Table 022.01) to establish a free-standing multi-tenant identi-
fication pole sign, larger than the allowable 75 square feet, higher than
W
LLJ
the 20 foot height limit and with four tenant names instead of the three
permitted by the Development Code.
WThe subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of
about 16.96 acres located at the northeast corner of Waterman Avenue and
Base Line Street, having a frontage of about 970 feet on the north side of
WBase Line Street and a frontage of about 634 feet on the east side of
QWaterman Avenue and further described as being located at 444 East Base Line.
The proposed sign is located approximately 530 feet east of the centerline of
Waterman Avenue on the north side of Base Line Street. The project is in the
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION
Subject Commercial Shopping Center CG-2 Commercial General
North Residential RS Residential Suburba
South Residential RM Residential Medium
East Commercial CG-2 Commercial General
West Residential RS Residential Suburban
GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC ❑ YES FLOOD HAZARD ❑ YES ❑ ZONE A SEWERS: C YES
HAZARD ZONE: t] NO ZONE: ® NO ❑ ZONE B ❑ NO
HIGH FIRE ❑ YES =CRASH NOISE/ ❑ YES =PROJECT OPMENT ❑ YES
HAZARD ZONE: 1 NO NE: AREA:
J NO IN NO
Q ❑ NOT ❑ POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z ❑ APPROVAL
APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH 0
F. MITIGATING MEASURES
Z y NO E.I.R. Q ❑ CONDITIONS
W a LL. 0
2 Z ® EXEMPT ❑ E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO W Z ® DENIAL
Z C SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS Q W
0 WITH MITIGATING E' M
Z MEASURES N ❑ CONTINUANCE TO
Z ❑ NO SIGNIFICANT ❑ SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 0
W EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. W
MINUTES Q
WTVOF &W�FIVO
CIEN"P"MKT"Q330GU EXHIBIT #3 PAGE 6
VARIANCE NO. 93-19
Agenda Item: #5
Hearing Date: 12-14-93
Page 7
REQUEST
The variance application requests approval of a free-standing business identification pole sign,
40 feet tall, having a primary sign face area of 308 square feet (STATER BROS.) and three
individual sign blanks for tenant identification (55 square feet each) bringing the total sign face
area up to 474.5 square feet per side.
LOCATION
The subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of about 16.96 acres
located at the northeast corner of Waterman Avenue and Base Line Street, having a frontage of
about 970 feet on the north side of Base line Street and frontage of 634 feet on the east side of
Waterman Avenue and further described as being located at 444 E. Base Line. The proposed
sign is located approximately 530 feet east of the centerline of Waterman Avenue on the north
side of Base Line Street. The project is in the CG-2, Commercial General land use designation.
(See Attachment A)
DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
The proposed sign is not in conformance with the Development Code, in that section 19.22.150
(Table 022.01) limits the size of a shopping center monument sign, for a center less than 25
acres, to a maximum of 75 square feet of sign area per monument face, 20 feet in height and
allows the identification of the center and/or up to three major tenants. (See Attachment C)
In addition, the proposed sign is not well integrated into the architectural design of the center
which is a stated objective of the General Plan.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT STATUS
The proposal is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15311.
BACKGROUND
Sign Permit No. 93-54 was approved for the Stater Bros. Market on May 28, 1993, which
allowed the refacing of an existing pole sign located just south of the middle entrance to the
shopping center on Waterman Avenue. The sign is located adjacent to the property line and is
40 feet in height and measures 14.5 feet by 22.5 feet (326.25 sq. ft.). The pole sign
acknowledged the Stater Bros. location since the existing store location is not particularly visible
from Waterman Avenue.
PAGE 7
VARIANCE NO. 93-19
Agenda Item:#5
Hearing Date: 12-14-93
Page 8
On August 17, 1993, Variance No. 93-13 was approved by the Planning Commission which
allowed an oversized wall sign to be installed on the Stater Bros. building. On October 1, 1993,
Variance No. 93-19 was submitted by Stater Bros. to the Planning and Building Services
Department requesting approval of a free-standing pole sign adjacent to Baseline Street.
ANALYSIS
Site and Area Characteristics
The site is part of an existing shopping center which is located on the northeast corner of
Waterman Avenue and Baseline Street. The current center has buildings oriented in an east-west
fashion and located along the northern edge of the site. The new Stater Bros. Market faces
westward toward Waterman Avenue.
The Stater Bros market is set back from Baseline approximately 190 feet, and oriented so that
the end of the building faces Baseline. There are no signs proposed for this elevation, which
will eventually be covered by a building for in-line tenant shops.
There are single-family residences to the north and east, directly adjacent to the shopping center.
There are multi-family units to the south of the project, across Baseline Street, and commercial
uses across Waterman Avenue to the west.
Proposal
The applicant requests approval of a Variance of Development Code Section 19.22.150 (Table
022.01)to establish a free-standing multi-tenant identification pole sign, larger than the allowable
75 square feet, higher than the 20 foot height limit, and with four tenant names instead of the
three permitted by the Development Code.
Evaluation of Request
The variance request is based primarily on the location of the building in relation to Baseline
Street. The Stater Bros market is located approximately 845 feet from, and faces toward
Waterman Avenue, and approximately 190 feet north of Baseline Street.
The Development Code allows a 20 foot high, double faced monument sign with a maximum
of 75 square feet of sign area per face for a multi-tenant shopping center less than 25 acres. The
monument sign may identify the name of the shopping center and/or up to three major tenants.
A minimum of 20% of the sign face shall be dedicated to the shopping center identification.
PAGE 8
VARIANCE NO. 93-19
Agenda Item: #5
Hearing Date: 12-14-93
Page 9
The proposal is for a 40 foot high (100% taller than code), 474.5 square foot aggregate sign face
area (600% larger than code), with four tenant spaces (instead of the three allowed by code) with
no center identification. The support members for the sign are two steel I-Beams, painted grey
with no other enhancement. The Stater Bros. portion of the sign is 308 square feet in total area.
The lighted portion is 275 square feet (the letters and horizontal accent bands) while the letter
area alone is 85.5 square feet.
The sign as proposed exceeds all standards of the Development Code regarding signs, and is
reminiscent in terms of size and design of a billboard. A monument sign that conforms to the
requirements of the Code would adequately serve the need for business identification along
Baseline Street.
The General Plan addresses the architectural design style and character of a building and requires
signs to be integrated into that design. There does not appear to have been any attempt to
integrate the sign into the design of the Stater Bros Market. The new Stater Bros. building has
been addressed architecturally by varying the wall planes and using materials that provide
different textures. The proposed pole sign is not consistent with the quality of the building, nor
compatible with its architecture.
Development Code Amendment 92-02 modified the Code standards to differentiate between
shopping centers which are less than 25 acres (small center) and those greater than 25 acres
(large center). The development standards for free standing signs in large centers changed to
allow a five foot increase in height and a 45 square foot increase in sign area.
The shopping center containing the Walmart store is a large center, and the free standing center
identification signs conform to the Development Code standards. Westside Plaza is a small
center which has a grocery store and various in-line tenants similar to the Stater Bros. site. The
signs for Westside Plaza also conform to the standards of the Development Code. The proposed
Stater Bros. sign is significantly beyond not only the standards for a small center, but for a large
center as well.
Staff does not concur with the applicant's Findings, which are included as Attachment "E".
CONCLUSION
The Findings of Fact submitted by the applicant demonstrate a need for a sign larger than the
maximum 75 square feet. Staff does not support the Findings made by the applicant for the
Variance request.
PAGE 9
VARIANCE NO. 93-19
Agenda Item: #5
Hearing Date: 12-14-93
Page 4
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Variance
No. 93-19 based on the Findings of Fact (Attachment D).
Respectfully submi wd,
Al ector
Planning and B ' Services
J
Jeffery S. Adams
Assistant Planner
Attachments: A - Location Map
B - Site Plan, Elevations
C - Development Code and General Plan Consistency
D - Findings of Fact (Staff)
E - Applicant's Findings of Fact
F - Conditions of Approval
PAGE 10
VARIANCE NO. 93-19
Agenda Item: 5
Hearing Date: 12-14-93
DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
VARIANCE NO. 93-19
CATEGORY PROPOSAL DEV. CODE GENERAL
PLAN
Use Free-Standing Sign Permitted N/A
Quantity One Two N/A
Height 40 feet 20 feet N/A
Number of Four Tenants Center Identification N/A
Tenants & Three Tenants
Text Area N/A
TOTAL 494.5 sq. ft. 75 sq. ft. per
face (Maximum)
Main Sign 308 sq. ft.
2nd Sign 55 sq. ft.
3rd. Sign 55 sq. ft.
4th Sign 55 sq. ft.
ATTACHMENT C
PAGE 11
VARIANCE NO. 93-19
Agenda Item: 5
Hearing Date: 12-14-93
FINDINGS OF FACT
Variance No. 93-19
1&2. FINDING: There may be special circumstances applicable to the property, with
respect to topography, such that the strict application of the Development Code height
requirements deprives the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties
in the vicinity and under the identical land use district classification, and this variance
request is necessary to preserve the enjoyment of those rights
FACT: There are no special circumstances which deprive the applicant of rights or
privileges enjoyed by others in that the Development Code allows a smaller less
conspicuous monument sign to be installed for business identification purposes.
3. FINDING: The granting of this variance request 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.
FACT: The sign, if permitted, would be constructed in conformance with the Uniform
Building Code, Uniform Electrical Code and/or the Uniform Sign Code by a
California state licensed sign contractor. City Building and Safety Staff shall verify
that the sign has been properly installed.
4. FINDING: The granting of this variance request may not constitute a special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and land
use district in which the subject property is located.
FACT: All other commercially designated properties within a multi-tenant shopping
center are afforded the same considerations allowing them to apply for a variance
under Development Code Section 19.72.030, for sign related concerns.
5. FINDING: The granting of this variance request would not allow a use that is not
otherwise expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject parcel.
FACT: The on-site identification of commercial uses is permitted by the
Development Code.
ATTACHMENT D PAGE 12
VARIANCE NO. 93-19
Agenda Item: 5
Hearing Date: 12-14-93
6. FINDING: The granting of this variance request will not be inconsistent with the
General Plan.
FACT: It is the objective of the General Plan (Objective 1.45) to ensure that private
signage is well integrated into architectural and site design and minimized with land
use districts to reduce visual clutter and blight. The proposed sign is not integrated
into the building architecture or design.
ATTACHMENT D PAGE 13
VARIANCE NO. 93-19
Agenda Item: 5
Hearing Date: 12-14-93
FINDING OF FACTS
(APPLICANT)
PAGE 14
ATTACHMENT E
ALLAPPLICATIONS FOR A VARIANCE MUST INCLUDE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO EACH OF THE FOLLOWING
ITEMS IN ORDER TO CLEARLY ESTABLISH THE NEM FOR THE VARIANCE. PLEASE ANSWER ALL ITEMS
DIRECTLY ON THIS SHEET.
A. There are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings,the strict application of this Code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in
the vicinity and under identical land use district classification;
setnacKs which are greater than others in
is Investing in excess of 5 million to improve this si e.
Adequate identification of the center and tenants is a
necessary element to insure the success of the businesses.
B. That granting the 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;
Other similar businesses in the city enjoy as much or more
signage than is being requested.
C. That granting the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public heahh, safety,or welfare,or injurious
to the property or improvements in such vicinity and land use district in which the property is located;
providing easy i en i ica ion ot businesses locateil
shopping center.
C*Kfvwrw nAGNOWA°s PLAN-4M (5-91)PAGE 15
D. That granting the 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 located;
Otners nave neen granted
signage and most existing signage in the area exceeds current
restrictions.
E. That granting the Variance does not allow a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the
regulations governing the subject parcel;
Signs are an allowable use in this zone.
F. That granting the Variance will not be inconsistent with the General Plan.
The granting of the variance is consistent with the general
plan Po /`d` /• `/S• in its objective to improve economic
4 i.vs• 9
conditions in the city and economic conditions in the city
and encourage economic investment in the city.
c[�wn°w wiw+w�a E�
PL A " )1)
PAGE 16
VARIANCE NO. 93-19
Agenda Item: 5
Hearing Date: 12-14-93
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VARIANCE NO. 93-19
1. 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 attorney's fees which the City may be required
by the court to pay as a result of such action, but such participation shall not
relieve the applicant of his obligation under this condition.
2. Within one year of development 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. Projects may be built
in phases if pre-approved by the review authority. If a project is built in pre-
approved phases, each subsequent phase shall have one year from the previous
phase's date of construction commencement to have occurred or the
permit/approval shall become null and void.
Project: Variance No. 93-19
Expiration Date: December 15, 1994
3. The applicant shall submit for approval, a sign permit application.
ATTACHMENT F
PAGE 17
• Stater Bros. Devellopment, inc.
21 700 Barton Road Colton, California 92324
=Znstr,ctan 909; 783-5005
Aeaa E^ate 5091 793-5002
°rocerc�Pvlgmt 9097 793-°CG:
Accccr.nng [BG91 '93-SG91
December 16 , 1993
Mayor Tom Minor and City Council
City of San Bernardino
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Re: Variance No. 9319
Dear Mayor Minor:
Please accept this letter as a formal appeal to the Planning Commission' s
denial of our Sign Variance Application during the Commission Meeting of Decem-
ber 14, 1993.
The Commission failed to recognize the uniqueness of this design condition,
the importance of uniform signage to the project' s long term viability, and
the value to the City of San Bernardino, which the success of this project
will provide.
I will appreciate the chance to address the Council at the earliest oppor-
tunity.
Sincerely,
Stater Bros. Development, Inc.
,,144,* 96; 1`4 0
Scott D. Limbacher
Director of Construction
SDL:rs
cc: Gayle Paden, Group Sr. Vice President
Walt Ford, Vice President of Real Estate
Brett Granlund, !oung Electric Sign Co.
PAGE 18
EXHIBIT 4