HomeMy WebLinkAbout41-Planning & Building
CITOOF SAN BERNARDIO - REQUEO" FOR COUNCIL AC-Q)N
From: Larry E. Reed, Director Subject: Appeal of the Denial of Variance No. 90-13
Dept: Planning and &1ilding Services
Deu: January 8, 1991
l~yor and O:mron Council Meeting of
Wednesday, January 23, 1991, 2:00 p.m.
Synopsis of Previous Council action: On December 11, 1990, the Planning Ccmni.ssion by
a 6 to 0 vote denied Variance No. 90-13.
No previous Council action:
~ ~
, ::\
Recommended motion: '!hat the hearing be closed; and, that the appeal be denied and
Variance No. 90-13 be denied based on the Findings of Fact a:mtained
in Exhibit" 4 .. . (Supports Staff recamendation and Planning
Ccmni.ssion action.)
OR
'!hat the hearing be closed; that the appeal be upheld and Variance
No. 90-13 be approved in concept; and that Staff be directed to
prepare appropriate Findings of Fact for consideration at the next
regularly scheduled Council Ireeting. (SUpports Applicant I s request.)
~ .r- h.L
Signature
Larry E.
Contact person:
Larry E. Reed
Phone: 384-5057
Supporting data attached: Staff Rep:>rt
Ward:
3
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. Descriotion)
Finance:
Council Notes:
75-0262
Anpnrf~ It.gm Nn
1.)/
CITOOF SAN BERNARDIO - REQUEO" FOR COUNCIL AC~N
STAFF REPQRT
Subject: Appeal of the Denial of Variance No. 90-13
by the Planning Commission
Mayor and Common Council Meeting,
Wednesday, January 23, 1991
REOUEST
The applicant, Quiel Brothers, is appealing
Variance No. 90-13 by the Planning Commission.
requests that the Mayor and Council reconsider
approve Variance No. 90-13.
the denial of
The applicant
the denial and
BACKGROUND
Variance No. 90-13 is a request to remove an existing 40 foot
tall, 220 square foot freestanding sign and install two 25
foot tall, 150 square foot freestanding signs. The subject
property is located at 955 and 965 South "E" Street. Munici-
pal Code Section 19.60.210 (E) allows for one freestanding
sign twenty-five feet high and a maximum of 75 square feet
per face'of sign area. Thus the variance request is to
double both the number and sign area allowed by code.
The Planning Commission's staff report
analyzed the request and could find no
the variance findings (See Exhibit
Commission denied the request by a 6 to
of December 11, 1990
justification to make
"4".) The Planning
o vote.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL OPTIONS
The Mayor
variance or
request.
and Council may deny the appeal
uphold the appeal and approve
and deny, the
the variance
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission's
action of denial of Variance No. 90-13.
Prepared by: John Montgomery, AICP
Principal Planner
For Larry E. Reed, Director
Planning and Building Services
Exhibits: 1 - Letter of Appeal to the Mayor and Council
2 - Statement of Official Planning Commission's
Action
3 - Public Hearing Notice
4 - December 11, 1990, Planning commission Staff
Report
jdas
M&CCAGENDA
VARNO.90-13APP
5-0264
o
o
o
o
?E(:~-
, --
';J l= t ~ t: I' 1.- ~-. . ., .. . '.
-.. '.
. SIGNS BY ~
-CQ..-:::.ee
aJJSOOTFI ~srRM.:MN BERNARDINO. CALIF. ~10 ';-. 14 p ~ :43
, PH. 714 885 H76 FAX 714-888-2239 ,w .- -
December 14, 1990
Ci ty Counci 1
City of San Bernardino
300 North "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Re: Variance No. 90-13
Dear City Council:
On behalf of our c 1 i ent "I n 1 and Pl aza" we hereby appeal to you the
decision of denial by the Planning Commission on December 11,1990
for the following reasons.
In an effort to enhance the property and provide an incentive to
attract tenants to occupy the vacant store spaces we are proposing
to remove the existing 40 foot tall; 220 square foot sign and install
two individual 25 foot tall; 150 square foot signs. We feel that the
two signs proposed will be more architecurely compatible with the
building and the reduced height will be more consistent with the
General Plan. Another reason for this request is to allow for a
total sign face area of 300 square foot as opposed to 220 square foot
that is presently existing. This will allow for more tenant
identification on the street signs and therefore provide a major
incentive for future tenants.
The proposed sign face area is still reduced from the allowed sign area
of neighboring stores to the north and south.
Please call if we may be of any help answering questions.
Respectfully yours,
QUIEL BROS.
ELEC SIGN SERVICE
GQ/kw
CC: Sam Watson
1585 Sunland Lane
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
SALES. SERVICE. LEASING. MAINTENANCE. CRANE SERVICE. NEON
CoIN. eo......... ~ No. 217.M5
Exhibit "1"
o
o
o
o
City of San Bernardino
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
PROJECT
Number: Variance No. 90-13
Applicant: Quiel Bros. Electric Sign Service
OWner: Sam Watson
Meeting Date: December 11, 1990
x
Denied based upon the Attached Findings of
Fact (Attachment B).
YQ:n;
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
Clemensen, Cole, Lindseth, Lopez, Sharp, Stone
None
None
Corona, Jordan
I, hereby,
accurately
Commission
certify that this Statement of
reflects the final determination
o the City of San Bernardino.
Official Action
of the Planning
Larrv E. Reed. Director of Plannina & Buildina Services
Name and Title
cc: Proje~t Property OWner
Project Applicant
Building Division
Engineering Division
Case File
PCAGENDA:
PCACTION
Exhibit "2"
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
SUMMARY
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
WARD
5
12111/90
3
P'"~ , 'APPLICANT: Quiel Bros. Electric Sign Co
ILl 272 South "I" Street
(I) VARIANCE NO. 90-13 San Bernardino. CA 92410
e OWNER: Inland Plaza. Sam Watson & Hele C
(.) 1585 Sunland Lane
Costa tlesa. CA 92626
r".
~ The applicant requests a variance from Municipal Code Section 19.60.210(E)
ILl which permits one free standing sign per multi tenant center with a maximum
~ of seventy-five square feet per face, to allow for the placement of two
0 free standing signs with 150 square feet of face area per sign.
ILl
a:: The subject property is located at 955 and 965 South "E" Street.
-
e
ILl
a::
e
"-' .
r EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
PROPERTY lAND LISE ZONING DESIGNATION
Subject Commercial CG-l Commercial General
North Commercial CG-l Commercial General
South Commercial CG-l Commercial General
East Orange Show Grounds PCR Public Commercial Recre
ation
West Commercial . Fast Food
"- REstaurants Central City South Commercial. south
VV'
GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC DyES FLOOD HAZARD 0 YES o ZONE A ( SEWERS: 00 YES )
HAZARD ZONE: Xl NO ZONE: 00 NO o ZONE B o NO
( HIGH FIRE 0 YES AIRPORT NOISE! o YES ( REDEVELOPMENT ~ YES ......
HAZARD ZONE: XJ I CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA:
NO ~ NO o NO
r---. r
-I o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z 0 APPROVAL
e APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH 0
MmGATlNG MEASURES -
!Z(I) I- 0
NOE.I.R. e CONDITIONS
ILICJ 11.0
=:Z Yl EXEMPT o E.l.R. REQUIRED BUT NO II.Z IX] DENIAL
Z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS elLl
OQ WITH MITIGATING ~I
a::iE MEASURES 0 CONTINUANCE TO
-II. 0
> o NO SIGNIFICANT o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
Z fd
ILl EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C.
MINUTES a::
"- \..
....- -
hase
an Clf _ I!fIWIDN)
---
Pl,AN-I.G2 PAGE' OF 1 (..-DO)
ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
VAR NO. 90-13
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
5
12/11/90
7
o
,...
""'l
....
FINDINGS OF FACT
1.
There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
or conditions applicable to the property involved, or to
the intended use of the property, which do not apply
generally to other property in the same zoning district
in that the surrounding properties within the CG-l land
use designation must comply with. current code
requirements in order to replace any non-conforming
signs.
The granting of this variance is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property
right of the applicant in that existing land use stan-
dards sufficiently address the business's needs for
adequate on site advertising.
~r~3."~oIi
2.
3.
The granting of this variance will me materially detri-
mental to the public welfare and be injurious to
property and improvements in the land use district in
which the property is located in that excessive signage
undermine the goals for the overall character of "E"
Street and the City's goal to create a more attractive
community.
4.
The granting of the variance
objectives of the General Plan
the General Plan to limit the
in private development.
will be contrary to the
in that it is a policy of
number and size of signs
ftlAN..I.D8 PAGE10F1 (oioCIO)
o
o
o
o
OFFICIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE'THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
APPEAL OF Variance No. 90-13. Denial
I...
r
THIS IS TO INFORM YOU THAT THE FOLLOWING ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL BY n1i~' RTnlC:: 'F.1Fl'l"'+,..;('! ~;nn ~r'tT;~
r
SUBJECT: Variance No. 90-13 WARD -#
3
.J
PROPERTY
LOCATION : 955 and 965 South "E" Street
\..
PROPOSAL: 'lb rE!lIDIIe an existing 40 foot tall, 220 square foot
f:reestanding sign and install t\\O 25 foot tall, 150
square foot f:reestanding signs.
PUBLIC HEARING LOCATION: SAN BERNARDINO CITY HALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
300 NORTH "ON STREET
SAN BERNARDINO, CA. 92418
I HEARING DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, January 22, 1990, 2:00 p.m.
\..
A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PII0POSAL IS ON FlLE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT CITY
HALL. IF 'IOU WOULD LIKE FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THIS PltOPOSAL PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC
HEARING, PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN PERSON OR BY PHONING
(714) 384-5057.
THANK YOU.
'-
EKhibit "3"
J'" ..... Illy
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
SUMMARY
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
WARD
5
12/11/90
3
"~ r APPLICANT: Quiel Bros. Electric Sign Co
W 272 South "1" Street
tn VARIANCE NO. 90-13 San Bernardino, CA 92410
< OWNER: Inland Plaza, Sam Watson & HelEr ~ hase
U 1585 Sunland Lane
\. \. Costa ~lesa, CA 92626
...
f3
:;)
0
W
II:
-
<
W
II:
<
'-' \.
The applicant requests a variance from Municipal Code Section 19.60.210(E)
which permits one free standing sign per multi tenant center with a maximum
of seventy-five square feet per face, to allow for the placement of two
free standing signs with 150 square feet of face area per sign.
The subject property is located at 955 and 965 South "E" Street.
PROPERTY
Subject
North
South
East
EXISTING
LAND USE
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
Orange Show Grounds
West
\.
ZONING
CG-1
CG-1
CG-1
PCR
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION
Commercial General
Commercial General
Commercial General
Public Commercial Recre-
ation
Commercial , Fast Food
REstaurants Central City South Commercial, south
vv",.. v, V'".1
~ ( SEWERS:
GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC 0 YES
\. HAZARD ZONE: ~ NO
...., I FLOOD HAZARD 0 YES 0 ZONE A
) \. ZONE: 00 NO 0 ZONE B
(HIGH FIRE 0 YES
: HAZARD ZONE: !J NO
-
..J
j!
Ztn
WCl
:2Z
Z-
OQ
11:;
-II.
>
Z
W
~ "-- \..
CITY OF _ .-....0
CEIfflW.M1NnNG.IIMCES
o NOT
APPLICABLE
G EXEMPT
o NO SIGNIFICANT
EFFECTS
I
AIRPORT NOISE!
CRASH ZONE:
o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT
EFFECTS WITH
MITIGATING MEASURES
NO E.I.R.
o E.l.R. REQUIRED BUT NO
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
WITH MITIGATING
MEASURES
o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
SEE ATTACHED E.R.C.
MINUTES
Exhibit "4"
o YES
(jQ NO
,r---.,
Z
o
~
II.Q
II.Z
<W
til
o
fd
II:
L\.
fXJ YES)
o NO .
REDEVELOPMENT Yl YES
PROJECT AREA:
o NO
o APPROVAL
o CONDITIONS
IXJ DENIAL
o CONTINUANCE TO
.."j
PLAN-om PAGE' OF 1 (4".90)
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
OBSERVATIONS
CASE
AGENDA ITEM .
HEARING DATE
PAGE
VAR NO. 90-13
5
12/11/90
2
~
.,
REOUEST
The applicant requests a variance from Municipal Code Section
19.60.2l0(E) to establish two free standing signs with a face
area of 150 square feet each in a multi tenant retail center.
The Municipal Code allows multi tenant centers one wall sign
per each tenant in additiona to one 25-foot high free stand-
ing sign with a maximum of 75-square feet per face area.
SITE LOCATION
The subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of
approximately 2.64 acres located at 955 and 965 South "E"
Street, generally situated on the east side of "E" Street
approximately 3,960 feet south of the centerline of Mill
street.
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
The proposed signage is not consistent with Section
19.60.2l0(E) of the Municipal Code. The request is also
inconsistent with the several Policies of the General Plan
(~o~ic;:y. 1. 45, 1. 45. 5, 1. 45. 6, 1. 45. 8) which require
mlnlmlzlng the number, size, and placement of signs in
private development; require that private signage be limited
to the purposes of building, business, and/or tenant and
address identification; prohibits the development of pole
signs at the key entries to the City and in key activity
districts; and prohibits the use of oversize, flashing,
animated, or garnishly colored signs which dominate the
building architecture, and/or district in which they are
located.
Futhermore, the proposed variance is not consistent with the
objective of the General Plan (1.45) which is the insure that
private signage is well integrated into architectural and
site design and minimized within land use district to reduce
visual clutter and blight.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT (CEOAl
The proposal is categorically exempt from the requirements of
CEQA under Section 153l1(a).
..
...j
CllVOF.....~
CENI'IW.-.wa~
PI..AN-8.DB PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90)
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
OBSERVATIONS
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
VAR NO. 90-13
5
12/11/90
3
r
.,
BACKGROUND
The subject site consists of a retail center with one 40-foot
high, 220 square foot nonconforming sign. The site is
designated CG-l, Commercial General. In addition, this site
is located within the Central city Redevelopment Project
area.
VARIANCE REOUEST
The applicant proposes to remove the existing 40-foot high,
220 square foot (per face) nonconforming sign and replace it
with two signs of 150 square feet (per face) each. Total
signage would, therefore, be increased from a total of 440
square feet to a total of 600 square feet. The request for
the variance is based on the applicant's claim that the
current sign standard of 75 square feet per face is not
sufficient to provide adequate advertising for the tenants.
They also make reference to the existing nonconformihg signs
on adjacent parcels.
staffs analysis does not support the applicants findings
(Attachment C). The current code requirement of one 25-foot
high, 75 square foot per face free standing sign per multi
tenant center is applicable to all businesses applying for a
sign permit in the CG-l land use designation. Other
businesses in the CG-l land use designation have been able to
comply with these code requirements without suffering
hardship. To grant this variance would result in a precedent
for allowing additional signage to other locations.
In accordance with state law, the following findings must be
made in order to establish the ~ for a variance:
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;
B. That granting the variance is necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial pro-
perty right possessed by other property in the same
vicinity and land use district and denied to the
property for which the Variance is sought;
ClTVOl'_~
CEN1JW.PIIINnNOIEA\IICU
~
PLAN-e.oe PAGE' OF 1 (4-90)
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
VAR NO. 90-13
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
5
12/11/90
4
.,
C. That granting the Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the pUblic health, safety, or
welfare, or injurious to the property or improve-
ments in such vicinity and land use district in
which the property is located;
D. That granting the Variance does not constitute a
special privilege inconsistent with the limitation
upon other properties in the vicinity and land use
district in which such property is located;
E. That granting the Variance will not be inconsistent
with the General Plan.
In our professional judgement, staff cannot make the neces-
sary findings to support the variance (Attachment B). There
are no special circumstances applicable to this property. The
site is a 2.64 acre retail center with no special
topographical features, shape, or location. The strict
application of this code does not deprive such property of
privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and
under identical land use district classification in that the
applicant is not obligated to remove the existing
nonconforming sign and may, therefore, enjoy an oversized
sign as do other surrounding properties which have non
conforming signs.
In addition, staff feels that the existing sign standards
sufficiently address the business need for adequate on site
advertising. Furthermore, excessive signage is contrary to
the Policies and Objectives of the General Plan which calls
for limiting the number and site of signs in private develop-
ment.
The Design Guidelines Section of the General Plan (Page 5-20)
points out that when original signage is present in older
commercial districts and it is maintained in good working
order, signage can add to the integrity of a commercial
district. On the other hand, when s1gnage is updated or
modernized, the result can be unsightly. Often this occurs
when the number and size of onsite signs is unregulated. "E"
Street, south of Mill, is cited in this Section of the
General Plan as an example of a problemed area due to
cluttered signage. To allow additional signage would there
fore only add to an already problemed area.
...
PLAN-8.D8 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4.gQ)
CIlVOF_~
ClJfflW.I'AlffJ\NO.....,.czs
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
VAR NO. 90-13
5
1?/11/QO
~
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
r-
CONCLUSION
The requested variance is contrary to the Policies and
Objectives of the General Plan. It is the policy of the
General Plan to minimize the number, size, and placement of
signs in private development. The General Plan's objective
is to minimize signage to reduce visual clutter and blight.
In addition, there are no extraordinary or exceptional
circumstances; therefore, staff can not make the findings to
establish a NEED for a variance.
"E" Street is a significant corridor linking Inland Center
Mall with Central city Mall. To permit additional signage
would undermine the goals for the overall character of "E"
Street and the City's goal to create a more attractive
community. If this variance is not granted, the applicant
has two choices. They may continue using the existing non-
conforming sign or they may comply with current sign stan-
dards and replace the oversized nonconforming sign with a 25-
foot high sign with 75 square feet of face area per side.
Staff does not support the replacement of one nonconforming
sign with two nonconforming signs.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the above-noted observations and the attached
Findings of Fact, staff recommends that the PlanningCommis-
sion deny Variance No. 90-13.
Respectfully Submitted,
bc~
Planning and Building Services
_&'#4:--c:PZb&~'
Edalia Olivo-Gomez
Associate Planner
Attachments:
A - Municipal Code & General Plan Conformance
B Findings of Fact
C Applicant's response to Findings
o Site Plan and Sign Plans
E Location Map
...
PLAN.8.Q8 PAGE 1 OF 1 ,...go)
ClTYOf......~
CEtrmW.-...a_""'K:h
ATTACHMENT
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
OBSERVATIONS
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
VAR NO. 90-13
5
12/11/90
6
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
Cateqorv
Proposal
Municpal
Code
General
Plan
Permitted Use
Two free-
standing signs
in excess of
of required
square footage
Variance reqeusted
One free-standing
sign per multi
tenant center
Conso-
lidation
Multi
tenant
signage
ClTYOF_~
----
...
....
P1.AN-8.Q8 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90)
0'
ATTACHMENT B
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
VAR NO. 90-13
FINDINGS OF FACT
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
5
12111/90
7
1. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
or conditions applicable to the property involved, or to
the intended use of the property, which do not apply
generally to other property in the same zoning district
in that the surrounding properties within the CG-1 land
use designation must comply with current code
requirements in order to replace any non-conforming
signs.
2. The granting of this variance is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property
right of the applicant in that existing land use stan-
dards sufficiently address the business's needs for
adequate on site advertising.
3. The granting of this variance will me materially detri-
mental to the public welfare and be injurious to
property and improvements in the land use district in
which the property is located in that excessive signage
undermine the goals for the overall character of "E"
Street and the City's goal to create a more attractive
community.
4 .
The granting of the variance
objectives of the General Plan
the General Plan to limit the
in private development.
will be contrary to the
in that it is a policy of
number and size of signs
'"
~
C/TYC7_~
--........
PlAN-U6 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90)
~ .
ATOHMENT
c
o
.
ALL APPLICATIONS FORA VARIANCE MUSTlNCLUDEA WRITTEN RESPONSE TO EACH OFTHE FOLLOWING
ITEMS IN ORDER TO CLEARLY ESTABLISH THE ~ FOR THE VARIANCE. PLEASE ANSWER ALL ITEMS
DIRECTLY ON THIS SHEET.
A. There are special circumstances applicable to the propeny, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, the slrid application of this Code deprives such propeny of privileges enjoyed by other propeny in
the vicinity and under identical land use district c1assKication;
Currently the ordinance will allow for only one double face sign 75
sq. ft. at 25' o.a.h. This size of siqn is not sufficient to orovide
adeouate advertising fnr thp tpmmts. Plp"sp t"kp intn r-nn"ir!pr"tinn
thp c:.;7P nf c:iiJnc: Ilccn hy thp npiCJhhnT"c nn Q~,...h ~iriCl tn irle'n+ifJ'
a sinale occuoant.
B. That granting the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial propeny right
pessessed by other propeny in the same vicin~y and land use dislrid and denied to the propeny for which the
Variance is sought;
The neighbors on each side and across the street have siqns much
larger than code allows and much hiqher. Our reauest of 25' overall
heiaht is consistpnt with ~nr!p.
C. That granting the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public hea~h, safely, or weWare, or injurious
to the propeny or improvements in such vicinity and land use district in which the propeny is located;
In our opinion the removal of the existina sian that is 40' ovprall
heiaht and 220 so. ft. anti tn ;n"t,,]] twn inr!i\lir!""l "i9n" ?S' +,,11
and only 150 sq. ft. of face area each. Will provide for a more
appealing and much easier siqn to read.
CITY OfF .. IENMRDH:l
tENTFW.PRN'I1NClIlERIo'lCO
PlAN-4.03 PAGE. 01= 6 (2-90)
. '
o
o
o
.
0, That granting the Variance does not const~ute a special /)rivilege inconsistent w~h the Jim~tions upon other
properties in the vicinity and land use district in which such property is located;
We only wish the same rights that have been granted to our neighbors.
E. That granting the Variance does not allow a use or activ~y which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the
regulations governing the subject parcel;
NO
F. That granting the Variance will not be inconsistent w~h the General Plan.
We feel that our reauest is to make us more consistent with the
r.pnp~~l Pl~n hy plimin~t~ng thp ~ing'p l~~gp ~;~n pyi~t;ng ~nrl
installing two smaller more appealing signs.
cnYClF''''''~
CEtlT1W.. MNTlNaIlElMCU
F'lAN.4.03 PAGE 5 OF 6
(2-90)
ATTACHMENT D
0-
0
f' ,~
1:' r ~
....
~
, I' :....J
I L
I ~
~
~
.!.
(
..10'_
---t
\\\,
l'
, ">~
-. .-+- ,~~
~~
4-;
,......
trJ
f ~
I~! ~
~
-,
~
J -, " "..
-.
1 -.
( -,
-.
-.
-.
-,
,
.
I
111
!h
';J
I '.
i .
, ~
I .
.
Cl
lil
"--.~I
' -- - ---:f-~'::-. ,~
- - - ~~-i;---""""" ...,: R
-----t,~.f------ ... . .., I,~
- "-~ ';'1
!, 'il-
i: I
8 i i ,I~
I'
ill
I I~ I i~ ~_
~!i":!I..: @"t," ~ i, ~ -
l'ill~!rl '.. ~ ~ ~ .: :; ,
'Ill ... t .. """.
U'! ~ l~, i> ~,~ '
'!!I{! "~"::- ~" ,
"II' I . I, "\.
it~I,I", I ~~~,
J:II,., "1....., ,
~~rll ~, _ ~ ~ ~~I .
~I,!,I ;, , ~ l:1 _ I
1111.' '-: i ~ r
I-I H' i, ~ ~
to \.. 2 J: ].
.." ~ :~.\ ;:::" ~
.t ..... ~.. Z
. '.: " ." !!I
" ...- i\ .1
. ;; ~
~
I
\,,'\ ..
,
" "
; i ~
, \\~
"
, ,"
........ ~..
Jl~
,. "
"
'I
o
, ,
:;; ~ .1\
i ~ ~
,
'"0-
",
~
-E iff -i{~--
~-"',-
-
-
l ~ i~1
,
,..
~
........
I~)
~
Il.
\11
~
~
~
l
~
,
,
i
,
I
.
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ,
CASE VAR NO. 90-13
,. AGENDA .,
ITEM #
5
LOCATION
HEARING DATE 12/11/90
..
T
t.
I
I --:::
.... ~ I . ...
,et ---,
,.
II
N
ClTY<:#lWrIlEfWN1>>lO
CEfmW.PIWf1'IJ<<IIEl'MCU
PLAN-S.ll PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90)