HomeMy WebLinkAbout45-Planning
!jtL~
.,
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST~-'FOR'COUNCIL ACTION
I..... _. ~.....) .,;...-"-
-.. '. .....
From: Larry E. Reed, Director
Subject: Appeal of Planning Conunission 's
Denial of Variance No. 89-8
Dept: Planning and Building Services
Mayor and Conunon Council Meeting
March 5, 1990, 2:00 p.m.
Date: February 21, 1990
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
On January 9, 1990, the Planning Conunission by a 6 to 1 (1 absent) vote
denied Variance No. 89-8.
On February 19, 1990, the Council continued the appeal to the March 5,
1990 Council meeting so that staff could present guidelines for multi-
tenant ~hopping centers along Hospitality Lane.
Recommended motion:
'!bat the hearing be closed; that the appeal be denied and, that Variance No.
89-8 be denied. (SUpport Staff Reccnnendation and Planning Camri.ssion Action.)
OR
'!bat the hearing be closed; that the appeal be approved; that a sign permit for
a nonummt sign as specified in the Variance application be approved subject
to the limitation that this norn.ment sign is the last free-standing sign allowed
for the '!he Plaza at 228 W. Hospitality Lane; and, that a finding be made that
the proposed norn.ment sign is a visually distinctive sign, and is therefore in
ccttpliance with the General Plan (SUpports Applicant I s request).
OR
'!hat the hearing be closed; and continued to the f' st Council neeting in July,
1990. \
~
Contact person: Larry Reed
Phone: 384-5357
Supporting data attached: Staff Revort
Ward:
3
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: N/A
Source: (Acct, No,)
(Acct. DescriPtion)
Finance:
Council Notes:
~'
75.0262
Agenda Item No
,/s
city OF SAN BER-"ARDINO - REQUEST ..OR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF
VARIANCE NO. 89-8 TO CONSTRUCT A SECOND FREE-
STANDING SIGN AT 228 WEST HOSPITALITY LANE.
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 19, 1990
BACKGROUND
On February 19, 1990, the Council continued the appeal to the
March 19, 1990 Council meeting so that staff could present
guidelines for multi-tenant shopping centers along
Hospitality Lane. The Preliminary Draft of the Development
Code presents sign regulations that would be applicable to
multi-tenant centers in the CR-3, Regional Commercial (Tri
City/Club) Land Use Designation. Those regulations are
attached for your review and provide for the following:
1. Monument signs would be allowed for individual
businesses in a center, if the business was
detached from the main center structure and
comprised an area larger than 5,000 square feet.
2. A monument sign would be allowed for center
identification and up to 3 major anchor tenants.
3. Individual businesses would be allowed wall, canopy
and permanent window signs as indicated.
The Development Code Sign Design Guidelines are also attached
for your review.
As proposed a second monument
under the proposed sign code
single business in the center.
sign would not be
unless there was a
allowed
detached
The draft sign code prov1s10ns
Planning commission and Council.
late Mayor early June.
The previous staff report (February 5, 1990) has the rest of
the needed background on this item. (See Exhibit B)
are being reviewed by the
Adoption is scheduled for
COMMENT:
Sign guidelines unique
would best be deferred
review and recommend.
asked to retain Urban
design option(s).
to the Hospitality Lane area
to allow an ad hoc group to
Sunwest and Rancon could be
Design Studio to do specific
~-~
75-0264
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION - DENIAL OF VARIANCE NO. 89-8
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 1990
FEBRUARY 21, 1990
PAGE 3
CONCLUSION AND OPTIONS
The options of the previous staff report can be considered.
In addition, because the sign code is under consideration in
the Development Code the appeal could be continued until
after the Code is adopted. (The first meeting in July should
be the most appropriate meeting to continue to.)
Prepared by:
John Montgomery, AICP
Principal Planner
for Larry E. Reed, Director
Planning and Building Services
Exhibits: A -
B -
Draft Development Code sign Regulations
February 5, 1990, Appeal Staff Report
/ke
M&CC:VARNO.89-8
EXHIBIT A
j
b~ il nffl .:
,t'
~I ~8
,r 11
Ii .l .Jii,'O ~J jl
1 I S,1 J Ii c j I 1~
'iI' ~_ .5i ~~ '-1
iij=-ii l1fii all
..I 8,..
j'll C!5"rl Jiii 'OE "1 '!c
liJht NIt r ::>:8
g ~j
..- .
fi'"
~ll' l~r;,.iJl '" ,9:
i~'J,!cJii ~ 11'11 !'1
:il,!Ir!<_'!~ ..liJ .. ~ cW.l
iii J:2 U
8 ! ;'
.~~ -= ~
"IS""
c 'Q. ~i
z 85 ..
i
::I .. ~!i~
;;! ~ ~8ci
> ,'11
I i .....j
a: ,....
0 '-~ l!!jt,
E '
~ l!.'~1 lfU
w c
~ 0 2'! l5
j 'j 51 J li
u ~~
w i -I-i 811~-
- en .88 j Ii!
- :;:) ~il
'c III
0 C
C,,) Z ~
- <
- .!
Q ..J
-
cD > ~~
- CD
w en l~
..J Z
CD 0 =- ~5
~ ::I
j: =- ii
< sc
..J c
:;:) =- 1 . ~
~ 'd
W c . =ia..!- "2' ' iil
a: 'li'~i.. s ,..1ojl ~l -; J
z =- a-oS) -Ol- .!!- 0:& .! &.-11
::I .. 0... -a...- i.
~ =- -; l!.= 2'...~-; l!.J I.. ~.el~ol = c
sc o ::>.!2'
en il.... -'
c ~ il) ~~ i ilti il~~; \lJ1~ ..
=- CD
- :i 8
8!N~ li_
s..;!! i. .b~
=- -&i.~~ Ii
::I c ls';
=- -:~j~ '!I
sc Q.:2l
C 8 i.~ ,! ~'i "j
=- <5_
... I
~ =- ~
S i ~
~ ~li
- -BE I
~ Cl!.
~- :::l
'"
- c
li'lL c .j c
~l -s .s
{o Ie iU IJ ilJ
-= lll~ ~I c'. -i '.
~ijj~ ~j c!!
<Ii iii J:2 U
;/1- 41 11~~I/'7tl
oS
"\ .-
..
,\
\\
It
"i~
'i\
1..
~
o
~
'4.
CJ
~
-:: (I)
. :)
!:
o e
g. -
""
~ ..J
C). ,..
~ ~
~ ~
~ 9
~ '4
5
~
ct.
a
en
\ ~ '1 \
'\'6" ai \
l.,;g~! ~\'
.\%"\\1 '\ ~~... \
ell'.8- ~"
#\11';\ ~ii \1...'
~\\a; 1i \\ \\
\rhtll~ 1~
1 iii!\\\ .~... \ ig!
iU\l1. 1 d~
..Ii" ~ · s:.
J
J J
~ ~\
" ~ II
i.lll }ii
.~ I
\!i l,~
~i~ ~! '
1!\ li\
it
.10
\\
\\
# l....'ft
'0 ,ei
\\1 ~\~
.~ \ c ~ '5 '
\1\ 1" ,i
~ ..,,'Ii"
:l i'll!
"
-It
~\
l-
;\
~
\
.-
..
'"
...
7.
'A
~
\
A
11
!~
~-6 .
~,\
ol..
\
\
\
\
~
..\
\\
~
i
.~
s\$
~l
..
...
..
'A
-
!.:
~~
j!
~l
At
\
\ ~
,\
~ii
~\\
-
It I _wJ"
SIGN DESIGN GUIDELINES. G19.16
G19.16.160 SIGN DESIGN GUIDELINES
1. GENERAL
The following design guidelines should be consulted prior to developing signs
for any project. .
A. Use a brief message - The fewer the words, the more effective the sign.
A sign with a brief, succinct message is simpler and fas~ to read, looks
cleaner and is more attractive.
B. Avoid hard-to-read, overly intricate typefaces - These typefaces are
difficult to read and reduce the sign's ability to communicate.
C. Avoid faddish and bizarre typefaces - Such typefaces may look good
today, but soon go out of style. The image conveyed may quickly become
that of a dated and unfashionable business.
D. Sign colors and materials - should be selected to contribute to legibility
and design integrity. Even the most carefully thought out sign may be un-
attractive and a poor communicator because of poor color selection. Day-
glo colors must be avoided.
E. Use significant contrast between the background and letter or
symbol colors - If there is little contrast between the brightness or hue of
the message of a sign and its background, it will be difficult to read.
F. Avoid too many different colors on a sign - Too many colors overwhelm
the basic function of communication. The colors compete with content for
the viewer's attention. limited use of the accent colors can increase
legibility, while large areas of competing colors tend to confuse and dis-
turb.
PREUMINARY DRAFI'
m.~8
1129/90
~ ---
SIGN DEsIGN GUIDELINES. G19.16
CANOPY
MONUMENT
ROOF
WALL
MULTI-TENANT
PROJECTING
b::::t:4t;};j;!;
'~.: :~!
. ,c...,
~. ,. . .
a..' - I
~=~::. ..~-~
:.:.:::.::~-i
UNDER MARQUEE
~
FREESTANDING
WINDOW
PREUMINARY DRAFI'
1/29190
m. 4flf
--
-
SIGN DESIGN GUIDELINES - G19.16
G. Place signs to indicate the location of access to a business - Signs
shQuld be placed at or near the entrance to a building or site to indicate
the most direct access to the business.
H. Place signs consistent with the proportions of scale of building
elements within the facade - Within a building facade, the sign may be
placed in different areas. A particular sign may fit well on a plain wall
area, but would overpower the finer scale and proportion of the lower
storefront. A sign which is appropriate near the buUding entry may look
tiny and out of place above the ground level.
I. Place wall signs to establish facade rhythm, scale and proportion
where such elements are weak. In many buildings that have a monolithic
or plain facade, signs can establish or continue appropriate design
rhythm, scale, and proportion.
J. Avoid signs with strange shapes - Signs that are unnecessarily narrow or
oddly shaped can restrict the legibility of the message. If an unusual
shape is not symbolic, it is probably confusing.
DO THIS
Employ a consistent sign pattern
DO THIS
Sign Is In scale and charact.r
wItIl buDding artIcuJallon.
DON'T DO THIS
Inconsistent sign pattems create
confusion. Signs within or above
roof area are prohibited.
DON'T DO THIS
Sign Is out of scale and
character wItIl buDdIng
PREUMINARYDRAFr
m-so
1/29/90
... --
-
---
-- ---
--
SIGN DESIGN GUIDELINES. G19.16
K Carefully consider the proportion of letter area to overall sign back-
ground area - H letters take up too much sign, they may be harder to
read. Large letters are not necessarily more legible than smaller ones. A
general rule is that letters should not appear to occupy more than 75% of
the sign panel area.
L. Consider interior neon signs - Neon signs lend themselves to creative
and exciting artistic expression. The use of neon signs inside a storefront
can be used to attract attention and create a special ambience.
M. Make signs smaller if they are oriented to pedestrians - The pedestrian-
oriented sign is usually read from a distance of 15 to 20 feet; the vehicle-
oriented sign is viewed from a much greater distance. The closer a sign's
viewing distance, the smaller that sign need be.
2. WALL OR FASCIA SIGNS
A. Building wall and fascia signs should be compatible with the predominant
visual elements of the building. Commercial centers, offices, and other
similar facilities are required to be part of a sign program in accordance
with the provisions of this Chapter.
B.
Where there is more than one sign, all signs must be complementary
to each other in the following ways:
.
1. Type of construction materials (cabinet, sign copy, supports, etc.)
2 Letter size and style of copy
3. Method used for supporting sign (wall or ground base)
4. Configuration of sign area
5. Shape to total sign and related components.
SIGN
Roof Mounted signs prohibited
m-SI
1/29/90
PREUMINARY DRAFT
--'
-
---
- -
SIGN DESIGN GUIDELINES - Gl9.16
BACIWT INDMDUAl. LETTERS
INTlRNAU.Y UT LETTIRS w\OPAQUe BACKGROUND
BOX. TYP! SIGN
C. The use of graphics consistent with the nature of the product to be
advertised is encouraged, i.e., hammer symbol for a hardware store, mor-
tar & pesta! for a drug store.
0, Direct and indirect lighting methods are allowed provided that they are not
harsh or unnecessarily bright The use of can-type box signs with trans-
lucent backlit panels are not allowed. Panels must be opaque if a can-type
sign is used and only the lettering should appear to be lighted.
E. The use of backlit individually cut letter signs is strongly encouraged.
F. The use of permanent sale or come-on signs is prohibited. The temporary
use of these signs is limited by the provisions of Section 19.16.070.
G. The identification of each building or store's address in 6 inch high numbers
over the main entry doorway or within 10 feet of the main entry is encouraged.
DO tHIS
. Sign occupies 20"1. of windoW area
DON'T DO tHIS
,.;.;:::::::=;:;::::::;::=;::;:::::;:;::;::;.;.
SAL~
;::.;.;.;.........................;.:......:.:.
Temporary plOfTlOtlonall1gnl
PREUMlNARY DIlAFI'
m- S2.
1129/90
,... -- -.-.
SIGN DESIGN GUIDELINES - G19.16
3. FREESTANDING SIGNS
A. F~tanding signs are intended to provide street addresses, and identifi-
cation for the freestanding building or commercial center development as
a whole and for up to three major tenants.
B. All tenant signs should be limited in size to the width of the architectural
features of the sign and shall be uniform in size and color.
C. A minimum of 10% of the sign area of freestanding signs for large multi-
story buildings or center developments should be devoted to identifica-
tion of the center or building by address or name. Strip developments
should display the range of store addresses for that development on their
freestanding sign.
D. Freestanding signs should be placed perpendicular to approaching vehicular
traffic.
E. Freestanding signs should be placed in raised planters whenever possible.
l"siGN]
~
LESS DESIRABLE SIGN
No landscaped base
DESIRABLE SIGN
Monument sign with landscaped base
Place sign perpendicular
to approaching traffic
in landscaped area.
PREUMlNARY DRAFI'
m-S3
1/29/90
SIGN DESIGN GUIDELINES. G19.16
F. Each monument sign should be located within a planted landscaped area
which is of a shape and design that will provide a compatible setting and
ground definition to the sign, incorporating the following ratio of
landscape area to total sign area:
1. Monument: Four (4) square feet of landscaped area for each
square foot of sign area (one side only). .
2. Directory: Two (2) square feet of landscaped area for each square
foot of sign area.
RECOMMENED
PERMI1TED
PROHIBITED
INDIImlAL/IUSINESS PARK SlGNAGE
U.. matedaIJ compcJIitH with development theme.
PREUMlNARY DRAFI'
m-54J
1/29/90
~I' Y ~.. ~AN 1:I&"'nl-
.WI"'" - nlio'CwliooiiJ. r.. ~ vv"'...~... H~ I .~
...
EXHIBIT B
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF
VARIANCE NO. 89-8 TO CONSTRUCT A SECOND FREE-
STANDING MONUMENT SIGN AT 228 WEST HOSPITALITY
LANE.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 1990
REOUEST
The applicant, The Sunset Group, is appealing the denial of
Variance No. 89-8 by the Planning Commission. The applicant
requests that the Mayor and Council reconsider the variance
request and approve the variance to allow the construction of
a'second free-standing monument sign.
BACKGROUND
Variance No. 89-8, requesting a variance from Code Section
19.60.220 (C) to permit a second free-standing sign at 228
West Hospitality Lane, was denied by the Planning Commission
with a 6 to 1 (1 absent) vote on January 9, 1990. The sign
code permits one free-standing sign per street frontage in
addition to wall signage for each tenant.
There is an existing free-standing sign located at the
center. This monument sign was permitted in 1989. At that
time the applicant was informed that only one monument,
multi-tenant sign would be permitted. That sign was
constructed with "The Good Earth" in large letters and "The
Plaza" in small letters in 1989.
BASIS FOR THE APPEAL
The applicant is basing the appeal on General Plan Policy
1.45.9. This policy states:
"Allow for consideration of signs of visually
distinctive design and merit which may differ from
prescribed limits of size, materials, and other
characteristics, provided that they are well integrated
with the building and site, do not adversely impact
adjacent uses, and are not intended solely to increase
sign size."
15.0264
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION - APPEAL OF V~IANCE 89-8
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 1990
JANUARY 24, 1990
PAGE ' 3
ANALYSIS
This policy was meant to provide direction in the drafting of
the sign code portion of the Development Code to provide an
alternative process for "visually distinctive" signs to be
considered and approved, even if they exceeded the prescribed,
normal standards. These "distinctive" signs would have to be
integrated into the building and site design, as well.
Referring to this General Plan policy as a basis of approval
for a variance is not appropriate.
First, the sign policy was not meant to allow for an increase
in the number of sians: it was meant to allow for a process
for consideration of well deserved signs that have design
characteristics that were outside of the normal prescribed
regulations. The policy does not mention "number" as a
consideration.
Second, the sign policy applies to visually distinctive signs
having some unforeseen characteristic of say material usage
or shape that lends itself to a better than normal sign. The
monument sign proposed in the variance is "normal" in all
aspects. The applicant just desires another free-standing
sign on Hospitality Lane for a new restaurant leasee (the
Orient Express).
Third, the required variance findings cannot be made. There
are no special circumstances applicable to the property,
including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings,
where the strict application of the Code would deprive the
property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the
vicinity and under the same land use designation. In
addition, the policy referred to was meant as direction for
future sign review process drafting and not meant as
justification for variances.
CONCLUSION
The required variance findings cannot be made. General Plan
Policy 1.45.9 is not an appropriate basis for approval of the
variance. The property is allowed to have one free-standing
multi-tenant sign, not two. The existing free-standing sign
could be modified to the extent necessary to provide adequate
signage for the tenants in the commercial center.
REQUEST FOR ~~JNCIL ACTION - APPEAL OF V~.!ANCE 89-8
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 1990
JANUARY 24, 1990
PAGE 4
OPTIONS AVAI~BLE TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
The Mayor and Council may deny
No. 89-8 QX uphold the appeal
in concept. (If the second
would need to be continued
necessary Findings of Fact.)
the appeal and deny Variance
and approve Variance No. 89-8
option is supported the item
so that staff could prepare the
RECOMMENDATION
staff recommends denial of appeal and
89-8. The Planning commission denied
6 to 1 vote, with 1 absent on January
denial
Variance
9, 1990.
of Variance No.
No. 89-8 by a
PREPARED BY:
John Montgomery, AICP
principal Planner
For Lary E. Reed, Director
Planning and Building Services Department
ATTACHMENTS:
A- Letter of Appeal to the Mayor and Council
B- Statement of Official Planning Commission
Action
C- Public Hearing Notice
D- January 9, 1990, Planning commission Staff
Report
nmg
M&CC:VAR89-8APPEAL
v ciL. 0:> - 0
LfI}{]~ SUNSET @OO@M~
RECEI\.-;:::'
-I' '. " :::+
'90 ,J.iN 17 A10:1 2
January 11, 1990
Ms. Shauna Clark
City Clerk
ern 0., SAIl RPDRDIHO
300 North "0" street
San Bernardino, California 92418
BE: Variance 89-8
Dear Ms. Clark:
As applicant of the above captioned application, I wish to appeal
the decision of the Planning Commission held on January 9, 1990,
based upon Section 1.45.9 of the General Plan Sign Policies which
will allow for the approval of this variance. Please schedule
the above application to be heard by the City Council at the next
earliest meeting. Our check representing theU~-~~y Five Dollar
(~5.00) Appeal Fee, is enclosed. sen~t
If you should have any questions please do not hesitate to call
me at (714) 381-4381.
~~lY,
L' ./.1:'.' A
iLc.... tt!.!. ,'-' / \.l.c..~
Patricia Green
Vice President
THE SUBSET GROUP
PG:rg
Enclosure
cc: Planning Department
The Sunset Group
225 West Hospitality Lane, Suite 100
San Bernardino; California 92408
714.381.4381/FAX 714.888.1940
--
n.L....n..................... 4.J
city of San Bernardino
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
PROJECT
Number:
- Variance No. 89-8
Applicant:
The Sunset Group for Simchowitz - M. #1
ACTION
Meeting Date: January 9, 1990
x
Denied Request Based Upon
Findings of Fact.
the Following
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
or conditions applicable to the property involved or its
proposed second free-standing sign which would not also
apply generally to other free-standing signs constructed
in the surrounding areas.
2. The variance is not necessary for the preservation or
enjoyment of a substantial property right in that,
without such a variance, a modification of the existing
free-standing sign could be made to allow the applicant
to develop the property in a manner consistent with its
land use designation and meet all signage standards.
3. The granting of the variance will be materially detri-
mental to the public welfare and to the surrounding
property owners by establishing a precedent of addi-
tional free-standing signs beyond those allowed by
Municipal Code.
4.
The requested variance is inconsistent with
tive of the City'S General Plan Urgency
guidelines regarding signage permitted in
Regional Commercial, land use designation.
the objec-
Ordinance
the CR-J,
YQn
Ayes:
Clemensen, Cole, Corona, Jordan, Lindseth,
Stone
None
None
Lopez
Sharp,
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
City of San Bernard. j
STATEMENT OF C rCIAL PLANNING COMMISSION
Variance No. 8~-8
Page 2
TION
I, hereby, certify that this statement of
accurately reflects the final determination
Commission of the City of San Bernardino.
s~erk/
Official Action
of the Planning
~ ~r) If~tJ
I Date
Larry E. Reed
Director of Planning and Building Services
Name and Title
cc: Project Applicant
Project Property Owner
.Building and Safety Department
Engineering Division
Case File
mkf
PCAGENDA:
PCACTIONA
~ -
ATTACHMENT C
Public Hearin9 Notice
A notice of the appeal hearin9 was sent to the property
owners within 500 feet of the subject property and the
applicant at least ten days prior to the hearing, as per
Municipal Code Section 19.81.020. A copy of this notice
is attached.
~ ~
~
OFFI'CIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
APPEAL OF
variance NO. 89-8
~
~
THIS IS TO INFORM YOU THAT THE FOLLOWING ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL BY the acclicant.
\..
-
[ l r
SUBJECT: Variance NO. 89-8 APPEAL WARD #
3
'"
r
PROPERTY Located on the north side of West Hospitality Lane,
LOCATION : east of Sunwest Court at 228 West Hospitality Lane.
"
r
PROPOSAL: To construct a second -standing monument sign
for a commercial/retail center. (Code only allows
one face-standing sign.)
PUBLIC HEARING LOCATION: SAN BERNARDINO CITY HALL
COUNCI L CHAMBERS
300 NORTH "0" STREET
SAN BERNARDINO, CA,92418
"
I HEARING DATE AND TIME: February 5, 1990, 2:00 p.m.
A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL IS ON FILE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT CITY
HALL. IF YOU WOULD LIKE F\JRTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC
HEARING, PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN PERSON OR BY. PHONING
(714) 384-5057.
THANK YOU.
\..
ill, .11. ...,
ll~ w. bu~r~~nu.~~
SUIft 100
SAIl BERNARDINO, CA 92
141-363-02
SAN BERRARDIHO CO.
PLOOD DISTRICT
ADDRESS HOT ON FILB
141-372-44
THE SIMCBOWITZ CORPORATION
225 W. HOSPITALITY LANE
SUITE 100
SAN BERRARDINO, CA 92408
141-372-40
HOS PLAZA ASSOCIATES
225 W. HOSPITALITY LANE
SUITE 100
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
141-372-33
HORSOR PARTNERS
225 W.HOSPITALITY LANE
SUITE 100
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
141-372-32
SIMNOR PARTNERS
225 W. HOSPITALITY LANE
SUITE 100
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
141-372-26,25
AMWEST ASSOCIATES
100 S. ANAHEIM BLVD.
SUITE 125
ANAHEIM, CA 92805
141-411-20,21
COMMERCENTER WEST ASSOC.
164 HOSPITALITY LANE
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
l41-411-19
PATHFINDER, LTD.
P.O. BOX 2025-101
TUSTIN, CA 92680
141-411-41 ,42
CLARENCE & CELIA TURNER
201 PAULARINO AVENUE
COSTA MESA, CA 92626
141-402-20
TRICITIES INVESTMENT CO.
19752 MACARTHUR BLVD.
SUITE 250
IRVINCB, CA 9~715
::i :t:; .LlIU
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92"8
~...- --
APPLICANT:
THE SORSET GROUP
225 W. HOSPITALITY LANE
SUITE 100
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
--
OFFICIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE .THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
APPEAL OF VARIANCE NO. 89-8
r ......
THIS IS TO INFORM YOU THAT THE FOLLOWING ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL BY The Acclicant (The Sunset Grouc)
'"
[ 1 '"
SUBJECT: VARIANCE NO. 89-8 APPEAL WARD :#
3
PROPERTY
LOCATION: Located on the north side of West Hospitality Lane, east
of Sunwest Court at 228 West Hospitality Lane.
.......
PROPOSAL: To construct a second free-standing monument sign for a
commercial/retail center. (Code only allows one free-
standing sign.)
r .......
PUBLIC HEARING LOCATION: SAN BERNARDINO CITY HALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
300 NORTH "0" STREET
SAN BERNARDINO, CA. 92418
'"
-..,
I HEARING DATE AND TIME: February 5, 1990, 2:00 p.m.
-..,
A DETAll.ED DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAl. IS ON Fll.E IN THE Pl.ANNING DEPARTMENT AT CITY
HALl.. IF YOU WOUI.D 1.IKE FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THIS PROPOSAl. PRIOR TO THE PUBl.lC
HEARING, PLEASE CONTACT THE Pl.ANNING DEPARTMENT IN PERSON OR BY PHONING
(714 ) 384-5057.
THANK YOU.
'"
.....
,., 1114 .a
ATTACHMENT "D"
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUMMARY
~
(I)
C
U
;
~
:)
o
..,
a::
"
c
~
a::
c
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
WARD
10
1-9-90
3
VARIANCE NO. 89-8
Sunset Group
Lane,
OWNER:
The applicant reauests a variance from Code section 19.60.220ICl
which permits o~e free-standing sign on a lot, to allow the
placement of a second free-standing monument sign for a commer-
cial/retail center.
The subject property is located on the north side of West
Hospitality Lane, east of Sunwest Court and consists of
approximately 3.lS acre~ at 228 West Hospitality Lane.
EXISTING
LAND USE
Comcercial/Retail
Commercial/Office
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial/Office
PROPERTY
Subject
North
South
East
West
ZONING
CR-3
CR-3
CR-3
CR-3
CR-3
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION
Commercial Regiona
Commercial Regiona
Commercial Regiona
Commercial Regiona
Commercial Regiona
CSYES FL.OOD HAZARD DYES OZONE A SEWERS lil YES
oNO ZONE KJNO OZONE B ONO
HIGH FIRE DYES AIRPORT NOISE I REDEVEL.OPMENT ~YES
HAZARD ZONE UlNO CRASH ZONE PROJECT AREA ONO
... o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z APPROVAL
~ APPLICABLE EFFECTS 0
WITH MITIGATING ti CONDITIONS
Zen MEASURES NO E.l.R.
"'e!) IJi EXEMPT o HR. REQUIRED BUT NO IL,O DENIAL
2Z IL.Z
Z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS '"
00 WITH MITIGATING ;!2 CONTINUANCE TO
a:Z MEASURES en2
>ii: 0
Z ONO o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS U
'" SIGNIFICANT SEE ATTACHED E.R. C. '"
EFFECTS MINUTES a:
NOV, "'1 IIIVIIID JUI.T 1111
IKT
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLAftfNING DEPARTMENT
~ ' CASE VAR89-8
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM lO
HEARING DATE l-9-90
PAGE
,
"'"
REOUEST
The applicant requests a variance from Code section 19.60.220
(C) which permits one free-standing sign on a lot to allow
the placement of a second free-standing monument sign for a
commercial retail center.
..
SITE LOCATION
The subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of
approximately 3.15 acres, located on the north side of West
Hospitality Lane, east of Sunwest Court (see Attachment liD",
Location Map). The property is developed with an existing
commercial/retail center.
MUNICIPAL CODE AND INTERIM POLICY DOCUMENT CONFORMANCE
The proposed variance is inconsistent with the Municipal Code
and the Interim Urgency Ordinance adopted by the Mayor and
Common Council on June 2, 1989, for implementation and
consistency with the new General Plan for the City of San
Bernardino (see Attachment "A").
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT STATUS
The proposal is categorically exempt from the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (Section 15311 (a)
Accessory Structures).
BACKGROUND
There is an existing commercial/retail center on the site
with one existing free-standing sign. The subject property
has a General Plan land use designation of CR-3, Commercial
Regional, and is within the limits of the Southeast Industr-
ial Park Redevelopment Project Area.
ANALYSIS
VARIANCE REOUEST
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the placement
....
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
· 'CASE
Var 89-8
o
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
In
l-9-90
of a second free-standing sign on the subject property in
addition to the one existing monument sign.
MUNICIPAL CODE REOUIREMENTS
Municipal Code provisions allow~ one free-standing sign per
street frontage in addition to wall signage for each tenant
in buildings or centers with two or more business tenants
(Section 19.60.220 (E)).
GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
General Plan Land Use Policies for region-service commercial
require the consolidation of multi-tenant signage into well
designed and distinctive signs. The design and development
guidelines also foster the continuation and enhancement of
streetscape improvement programs which pay particular
attention to public signage and other amenities~
A modification of the existing free-standing sign could be
made that would easily meet the requirements and intent c
the municipal code and would be consistent with the Genera
Plan policies.
EXISTING SIGNAGE
Earlier this year, the applicant requested a monument sign
for the anchor tenants of The Plaza and The Good Earth
Restaurant. At that time the applicant was informed that
only one monument sign, a multi-tenant sign which displayed
the name of the Center and the tenants therein would be
permitted. That sign was constructed with "The Good Earth"
in large letters and "The Plaza" in very small letters. The
existing sign could be modified to include other tenants of
The Plaza and in doing so comply with the Municipal Code and
General Plan.
COMMENTS
No comments have been received as of this date of preparation
of this staff report.
VARIANCE REOUIREMENTS
The granting or approval of a variance must clearly identify
that there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the property involved, or to the
intended use of the property, which would otherwise cause
~
r
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT ""'I
CASE Var89-8
OBSERVATIONS
lO
l-9-90
4
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
undue hardship upon the owner or to the use of his property.
It must be demonstrated that the granting of the variance
will not set a precedent in any way for other land and unlike
conditions. The variance must also show that such a permit
will not be Qetrimen~~. to the interests of the public or
injurious to neighboring property owners within the subject
parcel's surrounding areas.
""l
CONCLUSION
Neither the property owner nor the applicant has clearly
shown any exceptional needs or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions such as size, shape, topography or location or
surroundings exist to warrant the second proposed monument
sign. Further, the General Plan policies require the
consolidation of multi-tenant signage within the zoning
classification. The granting of the variance, as proposed,
will result in a precedent being set for other land. The
existing monument sign could be modified to the extent
n$cessary and conform to code and General Plan policies.
Other requests for additional signage along Hospitality Lane
have been denied.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning commission deny Variance
NO. 89-8 based on the attached Findings of Fact (Attachment
"B") .
Respectfully submitted,
6::~ector
Planning and Building Services Department
q/ont. '1\J~
Patti Nahill
Associate Planner
ATTACHMENT: A- Municipal Code and General Plan Conformance
B- Findings of Fact
C- Site Plan
D- Sign Exhibit
E- Location map
....
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE Var 89-8
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
J.U
1-9-90
:;)
MUNICIPAL CODE AND INTERIM POLICY DOCUMENT CONFORMANCE
Category
Permitted Use
Proposal
Second free-
standing sign
Municipal
Code
General
Plan
One free-standing
sign per street
frontage
Consolidatia
of Multi-
tenant
Signage
Variance Requested
....
Attachment "B"
P' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DE~l\l!fENT ~
CASE
FACT AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE 1-0-90
PAGE &.
FINDINGS of
""-
10
....
~
r
""-
1.
There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
or conditions applicable to the property involved or its
proposed second free-standing sign which would not also
apply generally to other free-standing signs constructed
in the surrounding areas.
2.
The variance is not necessary for the preservation or
enjoyment of a substantial property right in that,
without such a variance a modification of existing free-
standing sign could be made to allow the applicant to
develop the property in a manner consistent with its
land use designation and meet all signage standards.
The granting of the variance will be materially
detrimental to the public welfare and to the surrounding
property owners by establishing a precedent of
additional free-standings signs beyond those allowed by
Municipal Code.
3.
4.
The requested variance is inconsistent
objective of the City's General Plan Urgency
guidelines regarding signage permitted in
Regional Commercial, land use designation.
with the
Ordinance
the CR-3,
PCAGENDA:VAR89-8
/nm
NOV. 1110
....
<
~
~
.b
, ;
Attachment "C"
Var89-8
AGENDA no
Hearing date: 1-9-90
/." .'
...
I'
I
I
!
;
:':.'::':f'~ '~?';:::'i'" :;";'~I1.';: '.~:;i:;" .~. '.:
'.U.W..T cou.;'
.,..
.6..~
I'V~.
.
.
..... .
. ..,1...'.~..... _ '" .
, .
" 'I ,. ......,~t,.._'~-.I'..~..:... ..m....;.j.;_~-.l..,..........:.il...-....'..l....,""'f~....
..... .... ....... :...~. i', I"'..'U'..~.)~.~:. .e' ~~~:~:~€p..'~_~"rf'i~j::'n,.l,.:I'.~""'!I"'~I~~' ~I.I'J""""
i',lltrri.!II"~~lllln'g' ir.m111nlll 0:'1'1' n' r:il'P:ji'{'I.'iI'n: t~~~~~;: ;.)'I";':'~I:.::'~: :~1,~., ;;~II;L:~ ;:A~
! 1111..1,1 ~.~ IIII d till; III il UIIIII:l~ uril " i'~l:lil t ; f.l11~~~~t~i~;\';ll, IdIIIilM~t'It.,'r~. ~~lr4'\ e
1!l1 !-I!i 5+,!, 1..~:n~111' iI..! .1111 II I n 'I ij~: Pi r.~.:,.~t'l';:i.:...,; ;~.pJ 1'~;;'1"! i::', :.; 'c.:.... .,':..\ :; ;
III'H'II i '-j-lflbIiIIliDI 1"11""":. .. 'n"! 'IP.: =,~:,;!'~~~.{'\;:" '~'o,.r:;1', ," :"'~7,,<i,'4., =
Ilk j'!'-I'lq. 9l!~.~.., .I'I:~~ 11.':'l.ltIH= .~~:::~~~,~,:::~-}~::~:.:.,'t'f;:~'l;;~~;F"~F' t
en .I'I'! IJT I ij'II&:I'. 1'1- ~LI+ J 'p'/';;Ir ,}:,.:::~j:~ii'IT"'~'':'.o::'':;iil~'''I':?~i~~: I
::::; , . I' '.' I' r-..,'.' ,OJ, ' . ", . ~ .:,. .: ,; I" ~ III I I' . , '. .
m : '..' ..., .:'..~..._":..:... .'" ;1',,' ':L~":':":'." ,Iii '''.. . ' . ~, ,.1;.:
. -; '~'~"':';:';'I"I:"':I'~il{~'lii:' ". '. I :~;
... .u." ......... .llrr..i.I.1........,:.
!~~ .:~K.~}t~~~..;~ ~i ::::: .:,'; ;.::: :;;'fi,: ~):;.:~: L~
"
,.
.
z
..... it 'All'
THE"". P L A Z A.
~...T&dMaNT..~'L~
,,':::'n~':~' ,~~.L.a:
,.
j
.~
.1.-
..... oW
<
~
';)
,
~
~I'II"I r ~ t
~ 'I/!Ja t ;;
'f'llf!1 r @
'e I It
l.j!,lff .~
il:1m i
fJ~111 I
dill r r ~
m:i::
,
.j
4'1'
.'\ttachment"D"
VARS9-8
AGENDA no
Hearing date: 1-9-90
J~
tt
11'
~7~..". --
.
1 1 I
,
,j
I'
I ,.
I
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
AGENDA
ITEM *
LOCATION
CASE VAR89-8
HEARING DATE l-9-90
10
II[
r
I
!II
COOLlT
6
N