Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout40- Planning & Building Services CITY OF SAN BERN. WINO - REQUEST F R COUNCIL ACTION From: Al Boughey, Director Subject: Initiation of a Development Code Amend- ment to Permit Billboards G, Planning & Building Services Date: February 23, 1995 MCC Mtg. of 3/6/95 Synopsis of Previous Council action: 6/21/93 The MCC referred the issue of permitting billboards to LRC. 7/3/93 LRC referred the item back to MCC without a recommendation. 5/16/94 The MCC unanimously tabled a request to permit billboards. 1/12/95 The LRC discussed the billboard issue and referred to MCC without a recommendation. Recommended motion: That the Mayor and Common Council not consider permitting billboards 3 FEE 3U anywhere in the City and not direct staff to prepare an amendment to the Development Code. Al ughey Contact person: Al Boughey Phone: x5357 Supporting data attached: Staff Report Ward: Citywide FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source: (Acct. No.) (Acct. Description) Finance: C( Notes: 75-0262 Agenda Item No.— � � ys' - CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT Subject: Reconsideration of Initiation of a Development Code Amendment to permit billboards in the City. Mayor and Common Council Meeting of March 6, 1995 BACKGROUND The Development Code does not permit new billboards in the City. On June 21, 1993, the Council considered a request from Councilmember Pope-Ludlam for initiation of a Development Code Amendment to consider permitting billboards. The Mayor and Common Council referred the issue to the Legislative Review Committee for further study and review. On July 8, 1993, the LRC referred the item back to the Mayor and Common Council without a recommendation. On May 16, 1994, the Mayor and Common Council reviewed a request from staff to not consider permitting billboards in the City. The item was tabled. Just prior to the meeting, I submitted a newspaper article to the Mayor and Common Council regarding concerns with a billboard in the City, further supporting my recommendation. On September 12, 1994, Tom Flanagan, of Kunz Outdoor Advertising, submitted a letter to Councilmember Pope-Ludlam requesting a revision to the sign code to allow billboards. On December 7, 1994, Mr. Flanagan submitted another letter, with specific recommendations. On January 12, 1995, the LRC discussed billboards and after considerable discussion, for and against, the item was referred to the Mayor and Common Council without a recommendation. Staff's position has not changed. I feel that visual blight from billboards is still a major concern, and billboards contribute to this. Billboards generate minimal revenue for the City, and do not necessarily help local businesses. I suggest that the Mayor and Common Council focus on the main issue - whether or not to permit billboards. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council not consider permitting new billboards anywhere in the City, and not direct staff to initiate an amendment to the Development Code. MCC Request Mtg. Of 3/6/95 Page 2 Exhibits: 1 June 10, 1993 Memo to Councilmember Pope-Ludlam 2 June 21, 1993 Request for Council Action 3 May 2, 1994 Request for Council Action 4 May 13, 1994 Memo to Mayor and Common Council 5 September 12, 1994 Letter from Kunz Outdoor Advertising 6 December 7, 1994 Letter from Kunz Outdoor Advertising • r CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Planning and Building Services Department Memorandum TO: Mayor and moron Council 7 FROM: Al Boughe , Director, Planning and Building Services SUBJECT: Initiation of a Development Code Amendment to Permit Billboards DATE: June 10, 1993 COPIES: Shauna Clark, City Administrator; Rachel Clark, City Clerk ---------------------------------------------------------------- Councilwoman Pope-Ludlam has submitted a Request for Council Action to direct Planning staff to prepare an amendment to the Development Code to permit billboards in the City. I would like to recommend that the Council not support this request. Billboards or off-premise signs advertise a business, service, goods or events at locations other than where the sign is located. While billboards do generate revenue, the City would realize very little direct or indirect benefits. Direct revenue would consist of the fees collected by the City. The City collects a business registration fee of $.40 per square foot per billboard per year with a total of approximately $7000-$8000 collected for all billboards per year. Indirect revenue to the City would be very difficult to measure because the billboard could advertise a business, service, goods or events not located in the City. Of primary concern is the visual blight from billboards. Billboards are generally located adjacent to freeways or major arterials. The view from the freeway, and certain arterials, is one of the assets that the City enjoys. Frequently, owners of billboards request that vegetation be removed because it blocks the view of the billboard. This vegetation not only helps to screen unsightly views, it enhances the long range view of the mountains. Therefore, I recommend that the Council not consider permitting new billboards anywhere in the City and not direct staff to prepare an amendment to the Development Code. EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF SAW BERIrARMWO - REQUEST ("OR COUNCIL ACTION F, --n: Valerie Pope-Ludlam Subject: Initiation of a Development Code ¢� Amendment to permit billboards Councilmember, Ward 6 Mayor and Common Council Meeting Date: June 10, 1993 June 21, 1993 Synopsis of Previous Council action: None Recommended motion: That the Planning Division be directed to prepare a Development Code Amendment 0 to consider permitting billboards. r Signature Contact person. Valerie Pope-Ludlam Phone. 384-5378 Supporting data attached: Staff Report Ward: Citywide FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: NIA Source: (Acct. No.) (Acct. Description) Finance: 1,il Notes: 75-0262 Agenda Item No EXHIBIT 2 r CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTON SubAect: Initiation of a Development Code Amendment to permit billboards in the City. When the Development Code was adopted, new billboards (off-premise signs) were prohibited throughout the City. The advertising on the billboards helps to generate revenue for businesses which indirectly benefits the =ity. In addition, the City collects a business registration fee based on the square footage of the billboard. COSTS TO CITY Planning Division staff estimates that it will cost approximately $3000 for staff to complete an amendment including preparation of the text, environmental review and preparation of a staff report and ordinance. This amount does not include review by any other departments/divisions. RECOMMENDATION I recommend that staff be directed to prepare an amendment to the Development Code to consider permitting billboards in the City. Valerie Pope-Ludlam I CITY OF SAN BERM _RDINO - REQUEST i iR COUNCIL ACTION From: Al Boughey, Director Subject: Initiation of a Development Code Amendment to Permit Billboards Planning and Building Services Mayor and Common Council Meeting Date: April 14, 1994 May 2, 1994 Synopsis of Previous Council action: On June 21, 1993 Councilwoman Valerie Pope-Ludlam requested that Council consider directing staff to prepare a Development Code Amendment to allow billboards in the City. At that meeting, Mayor and Common Council forwarded that item to the -egislative Review Committee (LRC) . On July 8, 1993, LRC considered the pros and cons of allowing billboards and referred the item back to the full Council without a recommendation. Recommended motion: That Council not consider permitting new billboards anywhere in the City and not direct staff to prepare an amendment to the Development Code. w Al Bo ghey gnature Contact person: AlBoughey Phone: 384-5357 Supporting data attached: Yes Ward: rirywide FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source: (Acct. No.) (Acct. Description) Finance: Cr -cil Notes: 75.0262 Agenda Item No. EXHIBIT 3 . City of San Bernardino Department of Planning and Building Services TO: Mayor and Common Council FROM: Al Bough ",1 Director of Planning and Building Services SUBJECT: Billboards DATE: May 13, 1994 COPIES: Shauna Clark, City Administrator; Jim Penman, City Attorney ------------------------------------------------------------------- Attached is an article in the Redlands newspaper concerning an existing billboard in the City of San Bernardino. We have had a number of complaints concerning the advertising content over which we have no control. According to the article, the billboard is owned by Heywood Company Outdoor Advertising. Mr. Heywood attended the Legislative Review Committee meeting of last July in support of changing our Development Code to permit new billboards. On Monday's agenda, Agenda Item 30 is to direct staff to prepare an amendment to allow new billboard signs in the City. Staff's recommendation is to not consider allowing new billboards and not to direct staff to prepare an amendment to the Development Code. EXHIBIT 4 • OUR TOWN abitf tops Letter carriers r State"l list 'of court plan food n chadi ominees /Ab drive /A5 local iA blallbs fDqtljj #:tA1C1 Vol. 104 — No. 179 REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA-'­ THURSDAY, MAIL* 12, 1§94= Freeway billboard t them all Sign touting topless bar AftV; . angers neighbors By/USA SLAUGHTER , :Irr r!r[tnC LUT roc+, Staff Writer REDLANDS—A billboard on V. the westbound Interstate 10 has a few area residents muttering under ti t their breath as they drive to work, Zy =o to church,or in some cases,read the newspaper or wash the dishes. '"" The advertisement for an area topless bar looms over the Moun- � tain View Avenue entrance to they City of Loma Linda, peers into several windows at The Woodlands apartment complex, and greets r chushgoers as they approach Vic- toria Seventh-day Adventist `r Church. The Rev.Jim Cobrae at the Rock 1 lJ Christian Center said he is sick to .:.. death of the scantily clad women greeting him as he exits the freeway every day. The whole congregation is fed up."Cobrae said."I would love to put some clothes on those girls with the caption'I got saved at the Rock Christian Center,'but that billboard costs $2,000 a month." For Yeam.'that particular adver- tisement has featured alcohol or _ tobacco, tied Cobrae sad he is . ready to counter the vice given the funds to do iL "Someday.you will see a godly message on that billboard," he added. Loma Linda Mayor Bob Christ- Victoria Elementary School student T*Zy Lynn does her homework within sight of a bilboard RUOYA ma many residents es en s man said The advertisement Stands consider offensive. on San Bernardino city land, but Loma Linda residents did complain have no authority except to voice Her tenants are to their City Council at the last angry,especially Short of drawing the blinds and know what to say except that it's a meeting. our concerns." those whose windows look directly leaving them down,Ron L is at bad lace where onto the billboard. YM k people ca to get "It doesn't exactly speak well of Shirley Born manages The a low about how to protest his drunk and wreck then cars;" he our city having that at one of the Woodlands on Coulston Street and Ron and Carol Lynn live 'In children from the adult materials as added. •ain entrances,"Christman said.'I said she called the police to apartment five,and their 7-year-old Or play on apartment grounds Heywood Company Outdoor 'e written a letter to (San complain, only to hear that the daughter Tiffany has done her °r travel on the bus to Victoria Advertising, a San Bernardino nardino Mayor) Tom Minor, advertisement is"amoral issue,not homework in view of the advertise- Elementary School. firm,owns the billboard.Repeated I ..ad spoke to him yesterday,but we a legal issue." men[ for the last three months. "She asks about it, and I don't returned.the company were not Kunz OUTDOOR ADVERTISING 1831 COMMERCENTER EAST SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA 92408 (909)888-0018 (800)729-9119 FAX:(909)888-6588 September 12, 1994 Ms. Valerie Pope-Ludlam Councilwoman, Sixth District City of San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, California 92418 Subject: Sign Ordinance Dear Ms. Pope-Ludlam: We wish to take this opportunity to thank you for the generosity of your time when we met last week to discuss this issue which is so vital to our industry the commercial community of San Bernardino. As we discussed, Kunz Outdoor Advertising urges the City of San Bernardino to review and revise its current ordinance concerning advertising within the city. Responsible members of the outdoor advertising industry favor reasonable regulation and control of billboards. Working to find methods of controlling our industry has led some jurisdictions to phase our outdoor advertising within their boundaries. The City of San Bernardino has such an ordinance. As currently written, the city allows replacement only upon the parcel of the real property from which one or more billboards are removed. Furthermore, the city does not allow billboards adjacent to highways through the city. As structures are removed from lots to development or the expiration of leases, billboards will disappear and the opportunity for the commercial community to advertise to the traveling public will vanish. In reflecting upon appropriate regulation of the outdoor advertising industry, we urge the city the consider the following: 1. Section 5226 of the California Business and Professions Code states that outdoor advertising is a legitimate use of property adjacent to highways and that outdoor advertising is an integral part of the business community that should be allowed in business areas. EXHIBIT 5 September 12, 1994 Ms. Valerie Pope-Ludlam Councilwoman, Sixth District City of San Bernardino Page Two 2. Billboards are good for business. Seventy-five percent of billboard advertising is bought by small businesses, many of which rely solely upon billboards to attract customers. For instance, nearly seventy-one percent of the customers of hotels are influenced in their choice of lodging by billboards. Kunz, as a painted bulletin company, provides advertising almost exclusively to local businesses. 3. Outdoor advertising is the lease expensive form of advertising. As such, mom and pop businesses can afford to advertise in our medium where they may otherwise not be able to afford advertising at all. 4. Outdoor Advertising provides millions of dollars in free advertising to charitable organizations and public service campaigns annually. These organizations depend on billboards to deliver their message. 5. Many individuals receive important income by leasing a small portion of their real property to a billboard company for the placement of a sign structure. 6. Commercial speech, one form of which is billboard advertising, has beer. recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States on numerous occasions to be protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution. 7. Our industry has been, and continues to be regulated at all levels of government. Kunz support controls which enhance the scenic beauty of the communities in which we do business. Since the federal Highway Beautification Act was signed in 1965, nearly 700,000 billboards have been removed at nominal public expense. According to the Federal Highway Administration, the number of billboards along Interstate and Federal-aid primary highways has been reduced from 6.6 signs to only 1 sign per 2 miles. The efforts to remove inappropriate billboards have been a model of industry and government cooperation, being one of the least expensive pieces of environmental legislation passed in the history of this country. September 12, 1994 Ms. Valerie Pope-Ludlam Councilwoman, Sixth District City of San Bernardino Page Three 8. State and federal law limit outdoor advertising to commercial and industrial zones; areas where such signage is appropriate. 9. Numerous polls taken over the years evidence that billboards are useful to drivers, promote business, and are not opposed by the public. In summary, ours is a useful, responsible, and controlled medium, recognized as such by federal and state law. Kunz Outdoor Advertising submits that the City of San Bernardino should acknowledge that the regulated growth of our medium will contribute positively to the future of the commercial community of San Bernardino. We urge the city to revise its sign ordinance accordingly. To this end, we will make ourselves available, at your convenience, to meet with you or city staff to discuss revisions to the sign ordinance. Thank you for you kind consideration and cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, rh? Tom Flanagan KUNZ OUTDOOR ADVERTISING TF:js : Kunz OUTDOOR ADVERTISING 1831 COMMERCENTER EAST SAN BERNARDINO.CALIFORNIA 92408 December 7, 1994 (909)888-0018 (800) 729-9119 FAX(909)888-6588 Ms. Valerie Pope-Ludlam Council Woman, Sixth District City of San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Subject: Sign Ordinance Dear Ms. Pope-Ludlam: Enclosed please find our suggestions to amend section 19.22.080 of the sign ordinance and 19.14.030 Freeway Corridor Overlay District Currently, 19.22.080 allows only replacement of off site signs. That replacement is allowed only upon the real property from which one or more off premise signs must be removed. In addition, section 19.14.030 totally prohibits off premise signs from interstate freeways and state-, highways within the city. As structures are removed from lots due to development (W the expiration of lease agreements, off site signs will disappear and this important opportunity for the commercial community to advertise to the traveling public will vanish. As you can see, we are advocating a highly restrictive sign ordinance that will limit off premise sign growth while allowing the opportunity for future signs subject to stringent standards. We are also requesting amending 19.14.030 to extend limited off premise sign growth to freeways. We feel that limited regulated growth of our medium will contribute positively to the future of the commercial community of San Bernardino. We hope the city council will acknowledge this and move forward with these requested revisions. We will make ourselves available, at your convenience, to meet with you to discuss this matter fully. Thank you for your kind consideration and cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, 4 l� id*, Tom Flanagan Kunz Outdoor Advertising TF Js Enclosure f� EXHIBIT 6 r � 19.22.080 OFF-SITE SIGNS 1. OFF-SITE SIGN STANDARDS Off-site signs, as defined in Section 19.22.030, may be permitted with an administrative review subject to the following restrictions: A Zones permitted: Off-site signs shall be permitted only in the following zones provided a building permit has been obtained: CG-1, CG-2, CH, IL, IH, and IE zones. B. Sign area: Maximum of six hundred seventy-two square feet per face with a maximum of two faces. Back-to-back and 'Y'type displays shall be allowed. C. Height: Maximum of thirty-five feet above road grade adjacent to the sign. D. Setback. No portion of any off-site sign may be closer than ten feet to the public right-of-way. E. Spacing: No off-site sign shall be located within 750'from any other off-site sign on the same side of the street. F. No off-site sign shall be located so that its side edge is less than one hundred ten feet, or its front face or back face is less than five hundred feet, from any residential zoning district. G. No off-site sign shall be located within five hundred feet of any park, school, cemetery or church, regardless of zoning. H. No off-site signs shall be located on any building roof. FC (FREEWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY) DISTRICT 19.14.030 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The following development standards shall apply: 6. FREEWAY ADJACENT SIGNS Freeway adjacent signs are limited to identifying the complex major anchor tenant, structure, or company occupying the site. Freeway adjacent 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. These signs are to be located within the individual building site in the landscape setback running parallel to the freeway. The sign shall be perpendicular to the freeway. Location shall be approximately midway between side property lines. There shall be no more than 1 double-faced freeway sign on each structure site. The sign is limited to identifying the project, complex, or major tenant occupying the site. Projects over 5 acres in size with more than 1,000 feet of freeway frontage may be permitted 2 freeway adjacent signs at the discretion of the Commission. These signs shall not be placed closer than 600 feet to each other. All other regulations shall apply. Buildings, such as hotels and restaurants, fronting the freeway are entitled to have a freeway monument sign and a building sign visible from the freeway. 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 the 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). Freeway adjacent off premise signs permissible in accordance with Chapter 19.22 (Sign Regulations). Any tree in the landscaped buffer that is removed to accommodate the installation of any sign shall be replaced with a minimum 48 inch box tree. 7. PROHIBITED SIGNS A. A-Frame signs B. Roof signs C. Bench Signs D. Captive balloons E. Emitting sign F. Inflatable signs G. Portable sign H. Animated signs, except time/temperature devices and electronic message boards in CR-4 1. Paper, cloth, and plastic streamer signs J. Painted signs on primary walls K Pennants L Statures used for advertising M. Traffic sign replicas N. Vehicle signs 0. Directional signs which incorporate business logo or ID P. Permanent"come-on" signs (Sale Today!, Stop, Look, etc.) Direct and indirect lighting methods are allowed provided they are not harsh or unnecessarily bright. The use of can-type box signs with white or light colored translucent backlit panels are not permitted on any structures or as a freestanding sign. (Refer to the designs guidelines for signs in Chapter 19.22).