HomeMy WebLinkAbout37-Planning and Building
~'1'~T"T"
CITY OF SAN BERIQRDINO - REQUEST OR COUNCIL ACTION
From: A 1 Boughey, Di rector
Dept: Planning and Building Services
Date: November 19, 1991
SubjeCt: Appeal of Variance No. 91-16
(Wal-Mart Signage)
Mayor and Common Council Meeting
December 2, 1991
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
On November 4, 1991, the Mayor and Common Council approved the Development
Agreement (D.A. No. 91-02) for the development of the (Wal-Mart) shopping
center by Gatlin-Doerken Development Corporation.
Recommended motion: That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor and Common Council
deny the appeal and deny the Variance requests for increases in height and area
of the center identification monument signs and freeway monument signs, for
trademarks and logos for nationally and regionally recognized tenants, and for
a palette of 5 colors and 4 more letter types, (supports staff recommendation
and Planning Commission's action.)
OR
That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor and Common Council approve
the Variance requests in concept and refer the matter back to st to
develop positive Findings of Fact, (supports appellant's reques .)
Al
Contact person:
Al Boughey
Phone:
384-5357
4
Supporting data attached: Staff Report
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source: IAcct. No.l
IAcct. DescriDtion)
Finance:
Council Notes:
^..."'.......I.. 1+......... 1\1...
,~7
~~~":!'"
,I
o
o
STAFF REPORT
Subject: Appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of six of
the eight variance requests of Variance No. 91-16 for
signage at a proposed multi-tenant shopping center at
the northwest corner of Highland Avenue and of Boulder
Avenue.
Mayor and Common Council Meeting
December 2, 1991
REOUEST
The applicant is appealing the Planning Commission's denial of
six of the variance requests of Variance No. 91-16.
Specifically, the appellant requests that the Mayor and Council
approve variance requests to allow secondary wall signage for two
major tenant retail spaces, pad tenant monument signs for
outlying tenant structures of less than 5,000 square feet, two
center identification monument signs in excess of the height and
area permitted by Code, one freeway monument sign in excess of
the height and area permissible by code, logos and trademarks on
wall signs for nationally or regionally recognized tenants, and
two more letter styles and colors than permitted by Code for a
proposed 310,283~ square foot multi-tenant shopping center, to be
constructed on 31.05 acres located on the north side of Highland
Avenue at the termination of Boulder Avenue, approximately 400
feet east of Denair Avenue in the CG-l, Commercial General land
use designation (See Exhibit A, Letters of Appeal.)
BACKGROUND
Variance No. 91-16 included eight requests for variance of
Development Code sign standards applicable to the proposed
shopping center. On October 29, 1991, the Planning Commission
approved two of the requests for variance and denied the other
eight.
The two requests that were approved were requests to allow wall
signs for major tenants in excess of the allowable area, and to
allow more than three major tenants on the shopping center
identification monument signs. The approval of the request for
additional wall sign area for the major tenants was based upon
the large distances (300+ feet) from 'Highland Avenue to the major
tenant buildings, and the grade difference between Highland
Avenue and the center (17 feet), which could make the wall signs
difficult to read from Highland. The approval of the request for
additional major tenants of the shopping center identification
signs limited the number of major tenants on the signs to a total
of four (the number of major tenants at the center). This
approval was based upon the larger size of the center (31.05
~.~~
o 0
acres) in relation to other comparable shopping centers located
within the City.
The denial of the remaining six requests was based 'upon the
findings that there were no special circumstances applicable to
the property, that the granting of these variances was not
necessary for the preservation of substantial property rights
possessed by other properties in the same vicinity, and that the
granting of these variance requests could constitute a special
privilege or advantage not afforded other similar shopping
centers in the land use district and vicinity.
On November 4, 1991, the Mayor and Common Council approved
Development Agreement No. 91-02 to govern the development of the
310,283~ square foot shopping center on the site. The
Development Agreement included the Conditions of Approval and
Standard Requirements for Variance No. 91-16 as an attachment.
However, since action by the Mayor and Common Council to deny or
uphold the appeal on Variance No. 91-16 will not change the
Conditions or standard Requirements of the variance, it will not
affect the contents or validity of the approved Development
Agreement.
ANALYSIS
secondary Wall Signs for Major Tenants 3 and 4
The appellant contends that staff is confused
secondary signage for Retail Spaces 3 and 4,
the secondary wall signs are not for second
secondary copy.
as to the need for
and indicates that
frontages, but for
Development Code Section 19.22.150, Table 22.01, SIGN REGULATIONS
BY LAND USE CATEGORY, does not include provisions for wall signs
for secondary copy for multi-tenant shopping centers located in
the CG-l land use district. Since no other centers in the
vicinity or the CG-l land use district are permitted secondary
copy, granting such a variance would constitute a special
privilege.
Monument Signs for Pad Tenants
In the staff report to the Planning Commission, staff points out
that the outlying pad buildings are not permitted monument signs.
Pursuant to Code Section 19.22.150, Table 22.01, one double face,
25 square foot per face monument sign is permitted for single
detached businesses in structures of not less than 5,000 square
feet. _The structures proposed for the outlying pads do not
exceed 4,500 square feet. Hence, the pad buildings are not
permitted monument signs. Staff also indicated that the tenants
of the pad buildings were allowed wall signs, which, given the
grade difference between Highland and the shopping center, should
make them quite visible.
o
o
The appellant feels that because of the size of the center and
length of the frontage along Highland Avenue (1,BOO~ feet), the
grade difference will put the floor of the pad buildings above
eye level with the wall signage facing the street where they will
not be easily readable to the majority of traffic.
There is 140+ feet between each of the pad buildings. If the
allowable wall signs are placed on both the east and west sides
of the pad buildings, facing traffic, they should be visible.
staff believes that the grade difference of the pads is an
advantage that will make the signs more visible. Other centers
in the vicinity or in the CG-1 district do not have this height
advantage and are not permitted monument signs for pad buildings
less than 5,000 square feet in size. Granting this variance
would constitute the granting of a special privilege for the pad
tenants.
Center Identification Honument Signs
Development Code Section 19.22.150, Table 22.01, permits one
double face center identification monument sign per street
frontage, 75 square feet in area per face, not to exceed a height
of 20 feet or the structure it identifies, whichever is less.
The shopping center height exceeds 20 feet, therefore 20 feet is
the maximum height permitted.
The appellant proposes two identification monument signs with a
height of 30 feet 9 inches with an area of 120 square feet per
face. The appellant believes that these signs should be seen
from a distance of 1/4 of a mile to be effective, giving the
automobile traffic on Highland and Boulder sufficient time to
make a proper and safe decision.
The grade difference will increase sign Visibility. The center
will have three entrances along Highland Avenue; one at Boulder
Avenue, one at the new extension of Piedmont Drive on the west
end of the center, and one entrance approximately half way
between the entrance at Boulder and the Piedmont extension.
Assuming the occupant of a vehicle travelling east sights a
center identification monument sign that conforms with Code
standards at the corner of Highland Avenue and the Piedmont
extension, he or she still has over 1,BOO feet of shopping center
frontage before it is too late to use the Boulder entrance. The
long frontage and two entrances east of the Piedmont extension
should provide ample opportunity to make a proper and safe
decision for entry to the center. The same argument can be made
for westbound vehicles spotting a monument sign that is in
conformance with Development Code sign standards at the Boulder
entrance along Highland Avenue. Granting this variance request
also would constitute the granting of a special privilege to the
shopping center.
o
o
Freeway Honument Sign
The applicant proposes a freeway sign 62 feet in height with an
area of 480+ square feet. Development Code Section 19.22.150,
Table 22.01, permits one double face monument or pole sign with
decorative cover with 125 square feet of area per face and a
maximum overall sign height of 25 feet. A minimum of 300 feet of
freeway frontage is required to warrant such a sign.
The appellant has noted that the freeway will be approximately 18
to 20 feet below the grade of Highland Avenue (the freeway will
pass beneath Highland Avenue) and has indicated that the sign
will be approximately 400 feet west of the freeway. The
appellant feels that given the speed of traffic on the freeway,
the number of tenant names on the sign (which the applicant feels
should be 5 instead of the 4 approved by the Planning
Commission), the height and area of the sign is warranted.
The property has almost exactly 300 feet of freeway frontage
(frontage along california Department of Transportation freeway
right-of-way). The reason that the sign is nearly 400 feet from
the freeway is because there is a freeway frontage road and
offramp area between the proposed southbound lanes and the site.
Traffic will be travelling the freeway at 55 miles per hour or
approximately 81 feet per second. With 300 feet of frontage,
vehicle exposure to the sign will be somewhat less than 4
seconds. However, the Highland Avenue overpass will likely block
the view of the freeway sign for northbound traffic until
vehicles are well past the Highland Avenue offramp, regardless of
sign height or area. The Highland Avenue offramp for southbound
traffic begins adjacent to the site. Given the hilly terrain to
the north of the shopping center, it is also likely that the sign
will not be visible to southbound traffic until it is to late to
use the southbound Highland Avenue offramp. Increases in height
and area will do very little to improve the freeway sign
visibility.
As noted in the Planning Commission Staff Report, there will be
approximately a 14 foot grade difference between Freeway 30 and
the grade level at the base of the sign. Given the grade
difference, a freeway sign constructed to Development Code
standards with a maximum height of 25 feet, a maximum sign face
height of 22 feet, and a maximum sign panel height of 7 feet,
will put the bottom of the sign panel 1 foot above freeway grade,
where it would be visible to freeway traffic. Thus, a larger
freeway sign is not warranted and would constitute a special
privilege.
Trademarks, Logos, Colors, and Letter styles
The applicant requests that business tenants with a nationally or
regionally recognized name be allowed to use their recognized
letter styles (trademarks) and logos on their wall signs. The
applicant has also requested the allowance of 2 additional letter
o
o
styles for the center for a total of 4 (only 2 are permitted by
Code) and a palette of 2 additional colors for a total of 5 (only
3 colors are permitted by Code.) The appellant's position is
that the shopping center is exceptionally large, ~nd although all
new shopping centers in CG-l land use designation are required to
meet this limitation, others in the vicinity (City of Highland)
are not required to comply with these restrictions. Difficulty
in leaSing to nationally or regionally recognized tenants is also
a concern of the appellant.
All new shopping centers located within the City of San
Bernardino, located in the vicinity of the proposed center and
the CG-l land use district, are subject to the same restrictions.
The four major tenants of the shopping center are allowed logo
signs by the Code. Approving the request for the logos and
trademarks, and the additional letter styles and colors would
also constitute the granting of a special right or privilege for
the center that other centers located in the same vicinity or
land use district within the City are not afforded.
CONCLUSION
Granting the 6 additional variance requests of Variance No. 91-16
would constitute the granting of a special privilege to the
applicant that other property owners in the vicinity and land use
district are not permitted.
OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
The Kayor and Council may deny the appeal and deny the 6
additional variance requests of Variance No. 91-16, or the Kayor
and Council may uphold the appeal and approve anyone, several or
all 6 or the following variance requests of Variance No. 91-16
in concept, referring the item back to staff to develop positive
Findings of Fact:
(1) To allow secondary wall signage for the two major tenant
retail spaces 3 and 4;
(2) To allow pad tenant monument signs for the outlying tenant
pad structures of less than 5,000 square feet;
(3) To allow two center identification monument signs in excess
of the height and area permitted by the Development Code;
(4) To allow one freeway monument sign in excess of the height
and area permitted by the Development Code;
(5) To allow logos and trademarks on wall signs for nationally
or regionally recognized tenants; and,
(6) To allow two more letter styles and colors than permitted by
Code.
o
o
RECOMMKNDA.TION
staff reco..ends that the Mayor and Council deny the appeal and
deny all 6 additional variance requests of Variance No. 91-16.
prepared by:
Michael R. Finn,
Associate Planner
for Al Boughey
DirectoT of Planning and Building Services
A - Letters of Appeal
B - Staff Report to the Planning Commission
C - Official Notice of Public Hearing before
the Mayor and Common Council
Exhibits
'0
Ib
City of San Bernardino
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
PROJECT
Number:
Variance No. ~1-16
Applicant:
Sierra Engineering
Owner:
William and Benita Buster
ACTION
Meeting Date: October 29, 1991
X Approved Request for 125 square foot primary
wall sign and 125 square foot secondary wall
sign for Retail Space NO.1, 125 square foot
primary wall signs for Retail Space Nos. "3 and
4, 185 square foot primary wall sign and two
125 square foot secondary wall signs for Retail
Space NO.7, Request for additional major
tenants on the center identification monument
signs, restricting the number of such major
tenants on the signs to the four ~ajor tenants
of the shopping center (Retail 1, 3, 4, and 7) ,
and Deny Requests for increases in the height
of the center identification monument signs and
freeway monument signs, for trademarks and
logos for nationally or regionally recognized
tenants, and a palette of 5 colors and 4 more
letter types Based Upon Findings of Fact
(Attachment B-2) and Subject to Conditions of
Approval (Attachment C-2)
CONDITIONS
This project was approved subject to the Cond::.tions of Approval
contained in Attachment C-2 with the addition of No. 8 to read:
8. Many of the Conditions of Approval and Standard
Requirements imposed upon this project state or imply
that the Developer is responsible for construction, which
the City will agree to construct for the Developer under
Development Agreement No. 91-02. However, these issues
are adequately addressed in Developr.gnt Agree::lent No. 91-
02. The Development Agreement shall supercede and
cc~trol anI inconsistent provision of the Conditions of
Approval and Standard Requirements imposed upon this
project upon adoption of Development Agreement No. 91-
02 by Resolution.
--,~
o
o
~
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
Clemensen, Jordan, Lindseth, Lopez, Romero, stone
None
None
Cole, ortega, Valles
I, hereby, certify that this Statement of
accurately reflects the final determination
commission of the City of San Bernardino.
Siqnfl~
Al Bouahev. Director of Plannina and Buildina Services
Name and Title
Official Action
of the Planning
II /J~l
Dat
cc: Project Property OWner
Project Applicant
Building Division
Engineering Division
Case File
WP
PCACTIONA
~...
~
o
o
October 31, 1991
MikeFiM
City of San Bernardino
Planning Department
Dear Mike,
We respectfully disqree with the Planning CommissiOllS decision of 10128191 for variance
91 - 16 and are formally Dclnng for an appeal to the city council as soon as possible. Our
taIOIlS are as foUows;
On page 164, paragraph 3. - Stafr is confused as to the need for secondary ~ig7Ulge for the
major lImaDts at buildings 3 & 4 because they have no IICOIld frontage.
Our position is that the need for secondary sipqe for major tenants is not for
second frontages, but for secondary copy, ie: " Radio Shack" might have "Computer
Stole" or a Drug Store might have " Ihr PbOlO" etc. These secondary signs are deemed
by most major retailers as vital and in most cases l~ e -, a significant pen:entage of their
business or of their customer draw.
Page 165 Paragraph 3. - Staff states that the pad buildings are not allowed to have
monument sians because the pad buildings are only 4500 sq.ft. and need to be SOOO sq.ft.
by city code to be allowed the monument signs. Staff also noted the grade difference as a
reason for disaI10wing the monument signs.
Our position is that because of the size of the center and the lenath of the iron..
(which is approximately 1800' OIl Highland Ave.), the grade difference will put the floor of
the pad buildings above eye level. tbc.Jore the wall sigDage would be at a height facing the
street where they will NOT be easily readable to the majority of the traffic. Therefore we
feel that there is a need for these monument signs at the Stnlet level so as to advertise the
Pad Tenants properly, as well as the fact that most pad tenants would not sicn a lease
unless theY-COuld have a monument sign. We believe that a good pan of the economic
viability of the center depends on the Pad Tenants being able to have monument signs.
Exhibit A
::C1 Q 1::...-1_.....1 0_. 1_,.___ , ____ .....__. __ ....._'"'___._ l"'\" .....or ,~...... f"'I"'~ ,...,..... ,-... ...... _~., ~ __ A _. ___ _ ~_...
o
o
Pqe2of3
October 31,1991
Appe8l Variance 91 - 16
Page 166 ParacraPh 4 - In reference to the Center Idendfic:adon Sips, staff Slates that the
grade difference will increase the visibility, and although they do acknowledge the fact that
the ctlItet bas a very 1011I &ontage, they suggest that we lower the sign and make it more of
a monnment sign with channellette'S.
We apee with staff that the center does have an extremely 1011I froIltage but these
sian should be able to be seen (rom a distance of approximately 1/4 mile to be effective
both as an identification for the center and 10 identify the main entrances, pvina the
automobile traffic on Highland A venue and Boulder sufficient time to make a proper and
safe decision. Given that. the distance reqWlemelit, the need b the DIIIDe of the c:eIIter OIl
the sip and the names of the four major tenants it is our belief that the size and height of
theIe signs are ipplOflaiam and imperative b the viability of the centa'.
Pase 167 ParaJraph 2 - Staff stares that the difference in grade for the Freeway Pylon Sian
Pellle.> the need for the additional beipt and area.
After Our ini1ialstudies of the topopaphic differences, notedly that the freeway
will be approximately 18' to 20' below grade at Higll1ancl Avenue and the sign will be
applO.olim..teIy 400' west of the freeway, the speed limit of the freeway, the number of
tenants 1Illme5 (which should be five, one each for the major teoants and at least one for a
. pBd restaurant) and the name of the center leada us to a conclusion that the area and size of
sip we are requestins is required for the piop.;. freeway identiflClltion of a multi-tenant
<:enter of this size.
Paae 167 Paragraph S . Staff states that all new shopping centers win be required to
comply with the new development code in reference 10 the nationally rec:ocnized tenants'
10101 and the limit of leIt<< styles and colors. although staff did I.'eCOJ4ize the fact that it
may make it easier 10 lease splICe in the center. -
Our position is that this is an exceptionally large center, and although it may be true
that all new <:alters will be required to meet this limitation, we are competing for tenants
with centers that are already existing and do not require these limits, as well as new centers
proposed directly across the street in the City of Highland. Most nationally or regionally
~7M tenants will not sign a lease unless they are a110wed their letter or 1010 style (i.e.
Hallmark, Trak Auto, Radio Shack, etc.). Therefore, it becomes an economic issue as
well.
o
o
Page 30f3
~1dlel31.1991
AppealofVariance91-16
Let me just close by restating that this is the laraest center of it's kind in the city of San
Bernadino (by ~uximately 300%). u well u probably the nicest looking, clue to the
amount of money and time this cIeYelopec bas put inlD making this center a landmark in the
City of San Bemardino. Given that. and retOg1Ii:rillg the topographic differences and the
proximity to the fnleway, we firmly believe that the sianage program that has been
submitted is the minimum that this center can properly exist with. Although we do
understand staffs problem with our requests in regards to the development c:ode, it is our
belief that the Development Code wu written with centllrs much smaller in mind.
o
o
;'1:1::'<.
.
.-" .
..~:.
DOERKEN PROPERTIES, INC.
':'01 <JCE...." PARK BLH'
-LITE 3><'
"':\ 'TA \.IO"C.-\. I... \ ""lJ.W:;
rEI. .2P, -t:;:,:'"~1
F-\\ :I~, ...::2.-;:;:;
November 1, 1991
Major W.R. Holcomb and Members of the Common Council
c/o Mr. AI Boughey, AICP
City of San Bernardino
300 North .0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Subject:
Appeal of Planning Commission Decision on Variance No. 91-16
Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council:
On October 29, 1991 at a regularly scheduled meeting of the City of San Bernardino
Planning Commission, Variance No. 91-16 was approved with findings offact, and subject
to conditions and as recommended by staff as follows:
1. Grant the variance requests for the 125 square foot primary wall sign and
125 square foot secondary wall sign for Retail Space No.1, the 125 square
foot primary wall signs for Retail Space Nos. 3 and 4, the 185 square foot
primary wall sign and two 125 square foot secondary wall signs for Retail
Space No.7, subject to the attached Findings of Fact (Attachment "B-2"),
Conditions of Approval (Attachment "C-2").
2. Grant the variance request for additional major tenants on the center
identification monument signs, restricting the number of such major tenants
on the signs to the four major tenants of the shopping center (Retail 1, 3,
4 and 7), subject to the attached Findings of Fact (Attachment "B-2"),
Conditions of Approval (Attachment 'C-2").
3. Deny the variance requests for the increases in height of the center
identification monument signs and freeway monument signs, for trademarks
and logos for nationally or regionally recognized tenants, and for a palette
of 5 colors and 4 more letter types based on the attached Findings of Fact
(Attachment "B-2").
'Mayor W.R. Holcomb an9
Members of the Common Council
November 1, 1991
Page 2
o
Although as stated in staff's recommendation there is sufficient justification to allow a
variance from certain requirements of the Development Code, the "items' requested as
stated in staff's recommendation #3 are equally important towards providing the overall
sign program desired by the tenants of this project. This is not meant to state any
disregard for the requirements of the City's development code; however, to put into
perspective the significance of "proper" (as defined by tenants and nationally recognized
commercial franchises) exposure and/or recognition which is necessary to attract and
maintain a stable commercial center of this magnitude.
We believe that in review of the staff report submitted to the planning commission, and
being given the opportunity to discuss the circumstances with the Mayor and Council, a
clear understanding of the issues will be provided for your consideration of our request.
The action which is being requested is to approve the sign program for the shopping
center as submitted with the findings of fact and subject to the conditions as stated.
Due to the detailed report and analysis provided by City staff, we did not feel it necessary
to expand the issue any further with this written request for your consideration on this
matter.
Thank you for the time taken with this correspondence and the opportunity to publicly
address the Mayor and Council.
Respectfully submitted,
~ cM#1-
Philip E. Adams
Vice President
PEA:pms
;;.,~
~ CITY OF SAN BER,:R,INO PLANNING ,,-
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8
SUMMARY HEARING DATE 10-29-91
WARD 4
...
,
/-.. ....
- APPUCANT.Sierra Engineering
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT .25864 Business Ctr Dr. , St
W Redlands, CA 92374
~ NO. 91-26 AND VARIANCE OWNER: William and Benita Buster
CJ No. 91-16 AND DEVELOPMENT 1399 Colton Avenue
AGREEMENT NO. 91-02 Redlands, CA 92373
\...../ )
A Conditional Use Permit to construct a multi-family
to- shopping center with 310,283 square feet of retail space
fa and four restaurants (one of more of which may include
:) a drive-thru) totalling 18,000 square feet.
0 A Variance of Development Code Sections 19.22.150 and
W 19.22.040(D) concerning sign development standards.
II:
- A Development Agreement to govern the development of
C the shopping center.
W
II: Located on the north side of Highland Avenue at the
C termination of Boulder Avenue approximately 400 feet
east of Denair Avenue.
r EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION
South Vacant CG-l Commercial General
North Vacant/Sinqle-Family Residential Medium/
Residential/Mobile RWRS/RU-l Residential Suburban/
Home Park Residential Urban
South Single-Family Residential R-l(City of Highland) Residential Low Density
East Vacant RS/PFC Residential Suburbanl
Public Flood Control
West Vacant/Multi-Family CG-l/RH/RS Commercial General/
and Sinqle-Family Residential Hiqh/
\.. Residential Suburban
JOC YES r I( )
GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC I FLOOD HAZARD 0 YES o ZONE A SEWERS: Xm YES
\.. HAZARD ZONE: o NO \.. ZONE: JOCNO OZONE B o NO
( XX YES ) r 0 ) ( DYES
HIGH FIRE AIRPORT NOISE! YES REDEVELOPMENT
HAZARD ZONE: 0 NO CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA:
\.. KKNO KKNO
- ,.--
..I o NOT U POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z U APPROVAL
j! APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH 0
MmGATlNG MEASURES -
zrn NOE.l.R. ~ U CONDITIONS
WCJ - 1I.C1
~z o EXEMPT o E.l.R. REQUIRED BUT NO II.Z 0 DENIAL
Z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS CW
OCl WITH MITIGATING t;~
a:!: MEASURES ~ 0 CONTINUANCE TO
-II.
> o NO SIGNIFICANT o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
Z CJ
W EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. W
MINUTES II:
'-- '--
F
=:.=..c ".I::i
Pl..NM.D2 PAGE 1 OF 1 ('-10)
EXHIBIT B
"'."""~
CITY OF SAN BERN DINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
OBSERVATIONS
DA 91-02
8
1 n-2q-q1
161
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
~
...
VARIANCE NO. 91-16
REOUEST
The applicant is requesting a variance of Development code
Sections 19.22.150 and 19.22.040(2)(0), to allow wall signs for
major tenants in excess of the allowable area and number, sign
colors and letter styles in excess of the allowable number, two
center identification monument signs in excess of the allowable
height and area, each identifying five tenants, a freeway sign in
excess of the allowable height and area, and one monument sign
for each pad tenant. The applicant is also requesting that
trademarks and logos be permitted on wall signs for tenants with
nationally or regionally recognized trademarks or logos.
SITE LOCATION
The site consists of 31.05 ares located on the north side of
Highland Avenue at the termination of Boulder Avenue,
approximately 400 feet east of Denair Avenue in the CO-1,
commercial General land use designation. A 310,283!. square foot
multi-tenant commercial shopping center with four 4,500 square
foot restaurants has been proposed for the site.
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLA~~fOBJ1~~C~
The proposed signs are not in conformance with the Development
Code as shown in Attachment "A-2". The General Plan does not
address sign development standards.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT STATUS
The requested variance is
provisions of the california
to Section 15311(a) (Class 11
categorically exempt
Environmental Quality
exempt ion) .
from the
Act pursuant
.....
~~.1: l':I
PLAN-l.oe PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-10)
CITY OF SAN BERNA DINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
UP 9l-26/VAR 91-16
DA 91-02
8
10-29-91
162
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
BACKGROUND
Variance No. 91-16 is one of five applications submitted to the
City concerning the design and construction of a large multi-
tenant shopping center on the north side of Highland Avenue, at
the termination of Boulder Avenue. This application is a request
to vary Development Code sign regulations, which the applicant
feels are too restrictive for a shopping center 30+ acres in
size.
Two previous applications concerning the center, General Plan
Amendment No. 91-05, a request to realign the proposed Piedmont
Drive in the Circulation Element of the General Plan, and Parcel
Map No. 13892, a request to establish the final lot
configurations for the commercial shopping center and adjust the
Residential Medium/Commercial General land use boundary
traversing the northern portion of the site, were heard by the
Planning Commission on October 8, 1991 and approved. The
remaining applications are Conditional Use Permit No. 91-26, an
application to construct the shopping center, and Development
Agreement No. 91-02, an agreement to govern the development of
the shopping center. Of note is that this Variance Application,
the Conditional Use Permit, the Parcel Map application, and the
Development Agreement are contingent upon the approval of General
Plan Amendment No. 91-05 by the Mayor and Council.
ANALYSIS
Site and Area Characteristics
The irregularly shaped site is comprised of 31.05 acres and
slopes to the south at approximately 3 to 5 percent. With the
exception of one single-family residential structure located in
the southwest portion of the site fronting Highland Avenue, the
site is vacant and char~cterized by weedy vegetation, shrubs, and
grasses.
The site is bordered on the south by Highland Avenue, and on the
east by state Highway 330. Ad10ining land uses include a mobile
home park and single-family homes to the north, single- and
multi-family development to the west, and Single-family homes
across Highland Avenue to the south in the City of Highland.
....
.j
~====
PLAN-8.Cl1 p. 1 OF 1 (...go)
~/'.:-"',,,";""'."<",- "
.
CITY OF SAN BERN INO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
OBSERVATIONS
CASE
P 91-26/VAR 91-16
DA 91-02
8
10-29-91
163
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
The applicant has proposed to construct a 3l0,283~ square foot
commercial shopping center and four 4,500 square foot restaurants
on the site. The buildings comprising the center are 260+ feet
from Highland Avenue. This distance is expected to increase by
nearly 40 feet vhen the California Department of Transportation
(CalTrans) completes the realignment of Highland Avenue, vacating
approximately 4 acres of land adjacent to the site on the south.
Ca1Trans is expected to complete the construction of Freevay 30
vithin the next five years. The center is expected to have over
360 feet of freevay frontage upon completion of Freevay 30.
Wall Signs
The applicant is requesting tvo 125 square foot vall signs for
Retail Space No.1 (Mervyn's), one 125 square foot vall sign for
Retail Space Nos. 3 (Ross Dress for Less) and 4 (to be
~etermined), and one 185 square foot'vall sign and tvo 75 square
foot vall signs for Retail Space No.7 (Wal-mart). The placement
of the vall signs for Retail No. 1 viII be as shovn in Attachment
"F-2". The vall signs for Retail Space Nos. 3 and 4 viII be on
the south elevation facing the parking lot. The 185 square foot
vall sign for Retail Space No. 7 viII be as shovn on Attachment
"F-2", on the south elevation facing the parking lot. The tvo 75
square foot signs for Retail Space No. 7 viII be placed on the
east elevation and viII face the east parking area and Freevay
30. All other tenant vall signs are to conform to the standards
specified by the Development Code.
Pursuant to Development Code Section 19.22.150, Table 22.01, Sign
Regulations by Land Use Category, tenants of multi-tenant
shopping centers are entitled to one single face vall sign per
building or parking lot frontage, vith a maximum of 2 vall signs
per business. The allovable area of a primary vall sign is based
upon 1.5 square feet of sign for each lineal foot of building
frontage on a street, not to exceed 75 square feet. The
allovable area of a secondary vall sign is based upon 1.5 square
feet of sign for each lineal foot of building frontage on a
secondary street or parking lot, not to exceed 50 square feet.
Based upon these standards, Retail 1, 3, 4, and 7 are each
permitted a primary vall sign 75 square feet in area, and Retail
1 and 7 are each permitted a secondary vall sign 50 square feet
in area (See Attachment "E-2"l.
~
PLAN-I.Q8 PAGE 1 OF , (4-10)
=net&'- ~ -~
CITY OF SAN BERNA DINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
OBSERVATIONS
CASE C 9l-26/VAR 91-16
DA 91-02
AGENDA ITEM 8
HEARING DATE 10-29-91
PAGE 164
The applicant's request is based upon the argument that this
shopping center, comprised of 31.05 acres, is larger than any
other multi-tenant shopping center in San Bernardino. The site
of the center has a frontage of approximately 1,800 feet along
Highland Avenue, will have a frontage of approximately 620 feet
along the realigned section of Piedmont on the west side of the
site, and nearly 720 feet of freeway frontage along Freeway 30,
once it is completed. The applicant also cites a significant
grade difference between the shopping center and Highland Avenue,
which he believes will make the wall signs of the major tenants
difficult to see (Attachment "0-2").
staff completed an informal survey of shopping centers both
existing and proposed in the city of San Bernardino. Two
shopping centers were found to be the most comparable to this
particular shopping center. The most comparable was the shopping
center located on the northeast corner of Highland Avenue and
Sterling Avenue, comprised of 12.12 acres. The next most
comparable center was the new West Side Plaza located at the
northeast corner of Base Line Street and Medical Center Drive,
comprised of 9.78 acres. The applicant is therefore correct in
his assertion that this is larger than other shopping centers in
that the site of this shopping center is nearly three times the
size of either of the other comparable shopping centers. There
will be a 17 foot grade difference between the shopping center
and Highland Avenue which could hinder the ability to see the
wall signs of major tenants. However, this grade difference
should improve the visibility of monument signs placed along
Highland Avenue. Of significance, however, is the fact that the
retail buildings for the major tenants are nearly 300 feet or
more from Highland Avenue. A 75 square foot sign or 50 square
foot sign could be difficult to read at this distance, perhaps
warranting the larger wall signs for the major tenants.
One point of confusion, however, was why a secondary wall sign
was needed for Retail Spaces 3 and 4, when neither space had any
secondary street or parking lot frontage. staff could find no
need for the granting of secondary wall signs for these retail
tenant spaces.
..
~~._==
Pt,AN-I.DB PAGE 1 OF t ('-101
~
-
.
CITY OF SAN BERN INO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
CUP 9l-26/VAR 91-16
DA 91-02
R
10-29-91
11;';
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
r
~
Pad Tenant Monument Signs
The applicant is requesting monument signs for each of the pad
tenants, a feet in height with 40 square feet of sign area. Each
pad tenant monument sign would be placed along Highland Avenue as
shown in Attachment "H-2".
Pursuant to Development Code Section 19.22.150, Table 22.01, Sign
Regulations by Land Use Category, single businesses in a detached
structure of not less than 5,000 square feet are permitted a
business identification monument sign, 6 feet in height or 4 feet
above the top of an associated planter or landscape mound and 25
square feet in-area per sign face. The applicant's request is
again based on the size of the shopping center and the grade
differences (Attachment "0-2"1.
However, each of the pad buildings are 4,500 square feet in area
and are not permitted business identification monument signs
under the Development Code. Each pad will be located at the top
of the center grade, above Highland Avenue, where they will be
quite visible. Each pad tenant will be permitted a primary and
secondary wall sign based upon the Development Code, which should
be easily visible from Highland Avenue. Finally, should the
applicant increase the size of the buildings to 5,000 square feet
or more under a Type II Development Permit, each would be
warranted a business identification monument slqn sub1ect to the
Development Code Standards. The visibility of such monument
signs would be improved by the grade difference of the center
along Highland Avenue.
Center Identification Monument Signs
The applicant is requesting two center identification monument
signs approximately 30 feet in height with 120 square feet of
sign area. Each sign is to proposed to identify five tenants.
One monument sign is to be located at the northe.3st corner of
Highland Avenue and the Piedmont Drive realignment. The other
monument sign, a chevron design for increased visibility, is to
be located at the main entrance to the shopping center on the
north side of Highland Avenue, near the termination of Boulder
Avenue (Attachment "H-2"l.
~
~.=,~..=
PLAN-I.DI PAGE 10F , ("-to)
...,;;m.
OBSERVATIONS
CASE UP
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
91-26/VAR 91-16
DA 91-02
8
10-29-91
166
-CITY OF SAN BERN INO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
r
Pursuant to Development Code Section 19.22.150, Table 22.01, Sign
Regulations by Land Use Category, double face center
identification monument signs are permitted one per street
frontage. Allowable height is 20 feet with 75 square feet of
allowable sign area. The sign is to identify the center and may
include up to three major tenants.
The applicant has indicated that the signs are needed because of
the large size of the site and the long frontages along Highland
Avenue, and the grade difference between the center and Highland
Avenue (Attachment "0-2"),
It may be reasonable to assume that the number of major tenants
increase with the size of a shopping center. If this assumption
is reasonable, then the fact that this shopping center is nearly
three times the size of other comparable centers may imply that
it has more major tenants than other shopping centers. This
center has four major tenants. Restricting the center to the
display of only three major tenants on the business
identification monument signs may preclude this center from
enjoying the same advertising rights of other centers; other
centers with three or fewer major tenants can display all of
their major tenants on their monument sign(sl, whereas this
center must choose which three of the four major tenants it will
put on its monument sign, leaving one off the sign. Allowing
four major tenants, instead of the three permissible by Code, or
the five requested by the applicant may be warranted.
As for the height and area of the signs, the frontages along
Highland Avenue are long, however, the grade difference of the
center should improve sign visibility, offsetting any need for
increased height or area. By changing the de~ign of the monument
sign to a stucco base matching the center, and the use of channel
letters could also help to increase letter size and improve
visibility while complying with Development Code standards.
Freeway Sign
The dDDlicant proposes a freeway monument sign h2 feet in height
and with an area of 480 square feet. The sign is to be located
next adjacent to the eastern most property line on Pad E (See
Attachment "H-2"). The applicant cites center size and grade
differences as reasons for needing the larger freeway sign
(Attachment "0-2"1.
~
.oil
~~~
PLAN-B.DS PAGE' OF 1 I"<<ll
CITY OF SAN BERN~ INO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
CUP 91-26/VAR 91-16
DA.91-02
8
10-29-91
167
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
""l
Pursuant to Developm~nt Code S~ction 19.22.150, Table 22.01, Sign
Regulations by Land Use Category, and Development Code Section
19.14.030(6), freeway adjacent signs are permitted a maximum
height of 25 feet, with a maximum sign face height of 22 feet.
Maximum permissible area is 125 square feet, with a maximum
allowable sign panel height of 7 feet.
There will be approximately a 14 foot grade difference between
Freeway 30 and the base of the sign. Given the grade difference,
a freeway sign constructed to Development Code standards with a
maximum height of 25 feet, a maximum sign face height of 22 feet,
and maximum sign panel height, would put the base of the sign
panel 1 foot above freeway grade. Thus, a freeway sign in excess
of Development Code standards is not warranted.
Trademarks, Logos, Colors, and Letter Styles
The applicant is requesting that business tenants with a
nationally or regionally recognized name be allowed to use their
recognized letter styles (trademarks) and logos on their wall
signs. The applicant is also requesting the allowance of 4
letter types (styles) and a palette of 5 colors for all minor
tenants.
Development Code Section 19.22.040(2)(0) allows maior tenants to
accommodate national trademarks or logos on their signs.
However, minor tenants are not afforded this privilege by the
code. Section 19.22.040/2ICA) permits a maximum of 2 letter
types and a palette of 3 colors.
The applicant cites the size of the shoppina center and the grade
differences as reasons for needing this variance. Howev~r, all
new shopping centers must comply with thi~ Development Code
Section, regardless of size. Perhaps granting nationally or
regionally recognized tenants the privilege of having their logos
and trademarks at the center and/or allowing tenants a greater
selection of letter types and colors may make tenant spaces in
the center easier to lease. The increased numbers of sign colors
and styles may prOVide more variety for a large shopping center.
However, these reasons are not sufficient for to justify the
need of or granting such a variance.
~
~.I:r~
PL.AN-8.08 PAGE 1 OF , (4-tO)
~..~
CITY OF SAN BERNA INO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
91-02
R
lO-2Q-Ql
IIiR
,
OBSERVATIONS
DA
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
COMMENTS RECEIVED
No comments have been received as of the date of preparation of
this staff report.
CONCLUSION
The property is large, consisting of 31.05 acres, with an 1,800
foot frontage along Highland Avenue, a future 620 foot frontage
along the Piedmont Drive realignment on the west, and a 720 foot
frontage along future Freeway 30. The 17 foot grade difference
coupled with the large lineal distance of 300 feet or more
between the major, tenant building and Highland will make the
major tenant wall signs difficult to see. Retail Spaces 3 and 4
do not have secondary street or parking lot frontage, and are not
warranted secondary wall signs.
'The 17 foot grade difference will improve the visibility of any
center identification monument signs constructed in conformance
with the Devplopment Code, along Highland Avenue. The pad tenant
structures are not of sufficient size to warrant a business
identification monument sign, and are located adjacent to
Highland Avenue where the wall signs permissible by the
Development Code should provlde sufflcient visibility.
The 14 foot grade difference between future Freeway 30 and the
base of the proposed freeway sign does not provlde sufflclent
reason for granting a height or area variance for such a sign. A
freeway slgn In conformance with the speclfied Development Code
Standards will place the base of the sign face 1 foot above
freeway gr,lde.
The addition of trademarks and logos, a larger color palette and
a greater number of type styles for signs may increase the
leasabi1ity of tenant spaces in the center, and may increase
sign variety, which mayor may not be desirable. However, these
do not provide sufficient justification to grant a variance for
these items, since they do not preclude the applicant from a
property right that other centers may enjoy; all other new
centers are subject to the same requirements.
....
~~
PLAN-1.08 PAGE 1 OF 1 {~-ID1
.
OBSERVATIONS
CASE UP
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
91-2f'i/VIIP.
DA 91-02
8
10-29-91
169
q,-,f'i
CITY OF SAN BERN~ INO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
r-
RECOMMENDATION
staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
1. Grant the variance requests for the 125 square foot primary
wall sign and 125 square foot secondary wall sign for Retail
Space No.1, the 125 square foot primary wall signs for
Retail space Nos. 3 and 4, the 185 square foot primary wall
sign and two 125 square foot secondary wall signs for Retail
Space No.7, subject to the attached Findings of Fact
(Attachment "B-2"), Conditions of Approval (Attachment
"C-2" l.
2. Grant the variance request for additional major tenants on
the center identification monument signs, restricting the
number of such major tenants on the signs to the four major
tenants of the shopping center (Retail 1, 3, 4, and 7),
subject to the attached Findings of Fact (Attachment "B-2"),
Conditions of Approval (Attachment "C-2").
3. Deny the variance requests for the increases in height of
the center identification monument signs and freeway
monument signs, for trademarks and logos for nationally or
regionally recognized tenants, and for a palette of 5 colors
and 4 more letter types based on the attached Findings of
F~ct (Attachment "B-2").
Respectfully submitted,
d%Jt.,;-- /4~
L.:lrrlE.' Reed
~i~~lanning
Michael R. Finn
Associate Planner
and Building Services
~.t:.~: t7lId
..
..I
PLAN-I.OI p.oe, OF 1 (4-8Ol
..
.Jl
CASE P 91-26/VAR 91-16
DA 91-02
AGENDA ITEM 8
HEARING DATE 10-29-91
PAGE 170
CITY OF SAN BERNA INO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
OBSERV A liONS
~
"'III
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Att'lchment
Attachment
Attachment
A-2 - Municipal Code and General Plan Conformance
B-2 - Findings of Fact
C-2 - Conditions of Approval
D-2 - Applicant's Response to Findings
E-2 - Wall Signs Permitted by Development Code
F-2 - Shopping Center Elevations and Sign Placement
G-2 - Slqn Elevations, Colors, and Letter Styles
H-2 - Site Plan
I-2 - Location Map
aN ~ ... .......,
QJmW.Mn ll.~'-
PLAN.8.oe PAGE 1 OF I ('-90)
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
OBSERVATIONS
Attachment "A.
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
-16
DA 91-02
8
10-~19l
,
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
Cateqorv
Wall Signs
Reta tl 1
Primary
Secondary
Retatl 3 & 4
Primary
Secondary
Retail. 7
Pr imary
Secondary"
Logos and
Trademarks
Letter Types
Colors
Business
Identification
Monument Signs
Center
Identification
Monument Signs
Height'
Area
Freeway
Monument Sign
Height
prooosal
125 sq. ft.
125 sq. ft.
125 sq. ft.
75 sq. ft.
185 sq. ft.
75 sq. ft.
All Nationally/
Regionally
Recognized
Tenants
4 Letter Types
5 colors
Pad Tenants
4,500+ sq. ft.
28 feet
120 sq. ft.
62 feet with
50 feet max.
Sign Face Height
Genera 1
Plan
Municioal Code
75 sq. ft. N/A
50 sq. ft. N/A
75 sq. ft. N/A
50 sq. ft. N/A
75 sq. ft. N/A
50 sq. ft. N/"
Major Tenants N/A
Only
2 Letter Types
N/A
3 Colors
N/A
Pad Tenants
5,000+ sq. ft.
N/A
20 feet
75 sq. ft.
N/A
N/A
25 feet with
22 feet mdX.
Sign Face Height
N/"
Area 480 sq. ft. 125 sq. ft. N/A
.. Two secondary wall signs are proposed whereas only one
secondary wall sign is permitted by the Developm~n~ Code. -
l 2 Includes architectural portions above ~iqn f~ce.
~~L.~:.d
Pl.AH-8.D8 PAGE, OF 1 (4010)
-
~\..i-a'-U,al~u~ i:)-
CITY OF SAN BER DINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
FINDINGS OF FACT
AGENDA ITEM R
HEARING DATE 10-29-91
PAGE 172
r-
""""I
Wall Sian Area Variance Findinas
1.
2 .
...
~-===
That there are special circumstances applicable to the
property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surrounding, such that the strict application of this
Development Code deprives such property of privileges
enioyed by other property in the vicinity and under
identical land use district classification, in that the site
is large, being comprised of 31.05 acres, with a grade
difference of 17 feet between the shopping center and
Highland Avenue. The grade difference makes the wall signs
of the major tenants difficult to see. As a result of the
size of the site, there is over a 300 foot lineal distance
between the maior tenant buildings and Highland Avenue
making a 75 square foot wall sign difficult to see.
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,
in that without the variance, the property will not enjoy
the same advertising privilege afforded other business in
the same vicinity and land use district.
3.
That granting the Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or
injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity
and land use district in which the property is located, in
that the installation of wall siqns are subiect to the
uniform building codes and do not constitute a threat to
health, safety, or property values.
4 .
That granting the Variance does not constitute a 9pecial
privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and land use district in which
such property is located, in that other similar shopping
centers in the vicinity that are not as large and do not
have any grade differences that make it difficult for their
wall signs to be seen.
'" .
That granting the Variance does not allow a use or activity
which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the
regulations governing the parcel, in that wall signs are
permitted for tenants in the CG-I, Commercial General land
use designation.
6.
That granting the Variance will not be inconsistent with the
Gener,'!l PI,'!n, in th,lt the General Plan does not specify wal '.
sign area standards.
..,j
PLAN-a.m PAGE 1 OF 1 ('-80)
CITY OF SAN BERN DINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
FINDINGS OF FACT
CASE 91-26/VAR 91-16
DA 91-02
AGENDA ITEM 8
HEARING DATE 10-29-91
PAGE 173
r
4 .
5.
6 .
...
Variance Findinas for Four
Identification Monument Sian
Maior Tenants on
the Center
1.
That there are special circumstance~ applicable to the
property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surrounding, such that the strict application of this
Development Code deprives such property of privileges
enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under
identical land use district classification, in that the site
is large, being comprised of 31.05 acres. Such a large
center may be expected to attract more maior tenants than
other similar shopping centers.
2.
That granting the Variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of,~ subst,~ntial 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,
in that without the variance, the property will not enjoy
the same advertising privilege afforded other business in
the same vicinity and land use district, since other smaller
centers with 3 or fewer major tenants are able to gain sign
exposure for all of their major tenants, whereas this center
would not.
3 .
That granting the Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or
injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity
and land use district in which the property is located, in
that monument signs are subject to uniform building code
standards and do not constitute a threat to health, safety
or property values.
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, In that smaller tenants with three
or more maior tenants are able to place all of their maior
tenants on the center identification monument sian.
That granting the Variance does not allow a use or activity
which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the
regulations governing the parcel, in that center
identification monument signs including major tenant names
are permitted in the CG-l land use designation.
That granting the Variance will not be inconsistent with the
General Plan, in that the number of tenants allowed on. a
center identification monument sign is nnt specified by the
General Pl"1n.
~
PlAN-U8 PAGE, OF t (4-00)
~.=..n==
-
CITY OF SAN BERN DINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
P 9l-26/VAR 91-16
UA ~J.-u.!
FINDINGS OF FACT
AGENDA ITEM 8
HEARING DATE 10-29-91
PAGE 1 74
r
1. That there are no special circumstances applicable to the
property, including size, ~hape, topogrdphy, location or
surrounding, such that the strict application of this
. Development Code deprives such property of privileges
en10yed by other p~npp~ty in the vicinity and under
identical land use di~t~ict classification, in that the
grade difference improves visibility of monument signs along
Highland Avenue, dop~ not hinder the visibility of freeway
signs, and has no bearing on whether or not trademarks and
logos, or more colors or type styles should be made
available to tenants.
2. That granting the Variance is not 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, since the grade difference may give
monument sign at the center a height and visibility
advantage over monument signs at other centers. All other
centers are restricted to logos ana trademarks for major
tenants only, and a palette of 3 colors and 2 type styles.
3. That granting the Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or
injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity
and land use district in which the property is located, in
that the monument signs are subject to the uniform building
codes and do not constitute a threat to health, safety, or
property values. Logos, trademark~, color~, and letter
styles have not effect on public health, safety or welfare.
4. That granting the Variance would constitute a special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and land use district in which
such property is located, in that additional height
advantage would be given the center, and other centers would
not be afforded the same privileges of trademarks, logos,
and additional color or letter styles.
5. That granting the Variance does not allow a use or activity
which is not ntherwisp expressly i'll1thorized by the
regulations governing the parcel, in that monument signs,
colors and letter styles are permitted in the CG-1 land use
designation. Logos and trademarks are permitted for major
tenants.
6 .
That granting the Variance will not be inconsistent with the
General Plan, in that height and area standards for monument
signs, or the allowance of logos, trademdrks, colors or
letter types specified by the General Plan.
~
&1:.&'= 'ft "l!I
PI.AN-8.G1 PAGE' OF 1 (4-10)
-
Accacrunenc "C
CONDITIONS
CASE P 91-26/ VAR 91-16
DA 91-02
AGENDA ITEM 8
HEARING DATE 10-29-91
PAGE 175
CITY OF SAN BERNA DINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
l.
----------
C:onstruction shall be in substantial conformance
with the plants) approved b)' the Director.
Development Review Committee. Planning Commission
or Mayor and Common Council. Minor modification to
the planCs) shall be subject to approval hv the
Director throul1h a minor modification permit
process. Anv modification which exceeds 10% of the
followine allowable measurable design/site
considerations shall require the refi I ing of the
oriainal application and a subsequent hearing b)'
the appropriate hearina review authority if
applicable.
1. On-site circulation and parkina. loading and
landscaping;
2. Placement and/or height of walls. fences and
structures;
3. Reconfiauration of architectural features.
includina colors. and/or modification of
finished materials that do not alter or
compromise the previously approved theme; and.
... A reduction in density or intensit,. of a
development project.
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 preapproved bv
the review authority. If a project is built in
preapproved phases. each sUbsequent phase sha II
have one year from the previous phase's date of
construction commencement to the next phase's date
of construction commencement to have occurred or
the permit/approval shall become null and void.
Proj e c t : __V_a:_i_a!_c_e_!~_._.?!_-_1_6__________________.____.
Exp i ra t i on Da te: _ .as..~lu'_j),jLv~_1.9.P1II_e_~~_____
Agreement No. 91-02
.....
&::n:..: 0;; ti
PLAN-I.OI PAGE t OF , (4-10)
Page "1 of 7
CONDITIONS
CASE P 91-26/VAR 91-16
DA .~l-U;'!
AGENDA ITEM 8
HEARING DATE lU-;'!~-~l
PAGE 176
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
__1.:____.
The re\'iew authority may, upon application being
filed 30 days prior to the expiration date and for
good cause. grant one time extension not to exceed
12 months. The review authority shall ensure that
the project complies with all current Development
Code provisions.
4.
In the event that this approval is legallv
challenged. the City will promptly notify the
applicant of any claim or action and will cooperate
fully in the defense of the matter. Once notified,
the applicant agrees to defend, indemnifY. and hold
harmless the City, its officers. agents and
employees from any claim, action or proceeding
against the City of San Bernardino. The applicant
further agrees to reimburse the City of any costs
and attorneys' fees which the City mav be required
bv a court to pay as a result of such action. but
s~ch participation shall not relieve applicant of
his or her obligation under this condition.
-5_______
No vacant. relocated, altered, repaired or
hereafter erected structure shall be occupied or no
change of use of land or structure! s I shall be
inaugurated, or no new business commenced as
authorized bv this permit until a Certificate of
Occupancy has been issued b,' the Department. A
temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be issued hv
the Department subject to the conditions imposed on
the use. provided that a deposit is filed with the
Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of
the Certificate of Occupancy. The deoosit or
security shall guarantee the faithful performance
and completion of all terms. conditions and
performance standards imposed on the intended use
by this permit.
""
=:.=..c
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy. the landowner shall fi Ie a maintenance
agreement or covenant and easement to enter and
maintain. subject to the approval of the City
Attorney. The agreement or covenant and easement
to enter and maintain shall ensure that if the
landowner. or subsequent owner(s), fails to
maintain the required/installed site improvements,
the City will be able to file an appropriate
lien(s) against the property in order to accomplish
the required maintenance.
PlANo&aI PME 1 OF ,
l)~O'p :" nf 7
....01
!-
~-
CITY OF SAN BERNA INO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE UP
91-26/VAP ql-lI;
DA 91-02
8
10-29-91
177
CONDITIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
,
~
6.
The developer is to sub.it a complete master
landscape and irriaation plan (5 copies) for the
entire development to the Public Works Department
with the required fee for review. The landscape
plans will be forwarded to the Parks. Recreation.
and Community Services and the Plannina Division
for review. (Note: The issuance of a buildina
development Permit bv the Department of Plannina
and Bui ldina Services does not waive this
requirement.) No irading permit(s) will be issued
prior to - approval of landscape plans. The
landscape and irriaation plans shall comply with
the "Procedure and Policy for Landscape and
Irriaation" (available from the Parks Department).
and comply with all applicable provisions of
Chapter 19.28 (Landscapina Standards) of the
Development Code effective on the date of approval
of this permit. Trees are to be inspected b,' a
representative of the Parks Department prior to
plantina.
(The followina provision is applicable to sinale
family homes.) Trees. shrubs and around cover of a
type and quality aenerally consistent or compatible
with that characterizina sinale family homes shall
be provided in the front yard and that portion of
the side yards which are visible from the street.
All landscaped areas must be provided with an
automatic irriaation system adequate to insure
their viabi I ity. The landscape and irriaation
plans shall be reviewed as outlined above.
~
&\l.:. Cl "1Il.
...,j
PUNo&aI PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-10)
Page 3 of 7
CITY OF SAN BERNA INO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
P 91-26/VAR 91-16
DA 91-02
8
10-29-91
178
CONDITIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
I"
7.
This per.it or approval is subject to all the
appl icable provisions of the Develop.ent Code in
effect at the ti.e of approval. This includes
Chapter 19.20 - Property Development Standards. and
includes: dust and dirt control durina construction
and aradina activities; e.ission control of fu.es.
vapors. aases and ot her forms of air po 11 ut i on;
alare control; exterior 1 iahtina desian and
control; noise control; odor control; screenina;
sians. off-street parkina and off-street loadina;
and. vibration control. Screenina and sian
reaulations cOllpliance are i.portant considerations
to the developer because they will delay the
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy until they
are complied with. Any exterior structural
equip.ent. or utility transformers. boxes. ducts or
.eter cabinets shall be architecturally screened by
wall or structural ele.ent. blendina with the
buildina desian and include landscapina when on the
around. A sian proara. for all new commercial.
office and industrial centers of three or .ore
tenant spaces shall be approved by the Department
prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy.
This require.ent also includes any applicable Land
Use District Development Standards for residential.
com.ercial and industrial developments reaarding
minillu. lot area. .ini.uII lot depth and width.
.ini.um setbacks. .axi.u. heiaht. .axillum lot
coveraae. etc.
This development shall he required to maintain a
minimum of standard off-street Darki ng
spaces as sh';;;-o-n-the approved planls) on file.
...
&ll.l:.'='===
...,j
PiNI-&IlI P_ 1 OF 1 (..00)
Pal!e 5 of 7
Attacnment "D-2"
o
o
Variance findings for the size and number of wall
signs at the Highland Avenue Plaza, San Bernardino
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and
conditions that apply to the property, which do not apply to other
properties in the same zoning district and neighborhood in that the
property is larger than any other property in the same zoning
district by about 3000/0 consisting of 31.73 acres, with a frontage on
Highland Avenue of aprox. 1800 feet, aprox. 620 feet on the new road
to the west of the site and aprox. 720 feet on the new proposed
freeway. the difference in the elevations of Highland Avenue, and
the distance of the retail shops to the road will make visibility of
the wall signs of the major tenants difficult.
B. The granting of this variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant in
that without this variance, the property will not enjoy the same
advertising privilege afforded other businesses in the same land use
district.
C. The granting of this variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property and
improvements in the zoning district and neighborhood in that
structurally sound pylon signs do not constitute a threat to the
health, safety, or property values.
D. The granting of this variance will not be contrary to the
objectives of the general plan in that the General Plan defers to the
Municipal Code concerning requisite sign standards.
6618 Federal 80ulpvard . Lemon Grove. California 91945. 16191 286.SIGN 174461 FAX ~ 16191286.7498
-
o
o
TR' AL V All tNG.INC
Variance Findings for the size, number and height
. of the pylon -signs at the Highland Avenue Plaza
San Bernardino, California
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and
conditions that apply to the property, which do not apply to other
properties in the same zoning district and neighborhood in that the
property is larger than any other property in the same zoning
district by about 300% consisting of 31.73 acres, with a frontage on
Highland Avenue of aprox. 1800 feet, aprox. 620 feet on the new road
to the west of the site and aprox. 720 feet on the new proposed
freeway. the difference in the elevations of Highland Avenue, the
freeway and the retail buildings will make it difficult for the pylon
signs to be seen both from Highland Avenue and .the freeway.
B. The granting of this variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant in
that without this variance, the property will not enjoy the same
advertising privilege afforded other businesses in the same land use
district.
C. The granting of this variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property and
improvements in the zoning district and neighborhood in that
structurally sound pylon signs do not constitute a threat to the
health, safety, or property values.
D. The granting of this variance will not be contrary to the
objectives of the general plan in that the General Plan defers to the
Municipal Code concerning requisite sign standards.
6618 Federal80ulpvard . Lemon Grove. California 91945. (619) 286-SIGN 174461 FAX # (619) 286-7498
o
o
Variance Findings for the allowance of logos and
additional letter styles for businesses with a
nationally or regionally recognized name at the
Highland Avenue Plaza, San Bernardino, California
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and
conditions that apply to the property, which do not apply to other
properties in the same zoning district and neighborhood in that the
property is larger than any other property in the same zoning
district by about 300% consisting of 31.73 acres, with a frontage on
Highland Avenue of aprox. 1800 feet, aprox. 620 feet on the new road
to the west of the site and aprox. 720 feet on the new proposed
freeway. the difference in the elevations of Highland Avenue, the
freeway and the retail buildings will make visibility of the site
difficult.
B. The granting of this variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant in
that without this variance, the property will not enjoy the same
advertising privilege or the ability to lease space to businesses
with a national or regional sign program afforded other businesses
in the same land use district.
C. The granting of this variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property and
improvements in the zoning district and neighborhood in that
structurally sound pylon signs do not constitute a threat to the
health, safety, or property values.
D. The granting of this variance will not be contrary to the
objectives of the general plan in that the General Plan defers to the
Municipal Code concerning requisite sign standards.
6618 Federal Boul"vard . Lemon Grove. California 91945. 161912B6-SIGN 174461 FAX # 16191286-7498
'!!m9.m.
Retail 1
Primary
Secondary
Reta il 3
Primary
Secondary
Retail 4
Primary
Secondary
Reta il 7
Primary
Secondary
o
o
Area
ProDosed
125 square feet
125 square feet
125 square feet
7S square feet
125 square feet
75 square feet
185 square feet
75 square feet
Note: The applicant has requested a second secondary wall sign
for a total of three wall signs where only two are permitted.
ATTACHMENT "E-2"
Wall Signs
Linpal Frnnt,'1ae
Dev. Code
Allowable Area
310 feet
215 feet
75 square feet
50 square feet.
160 feet
o feet
75 square feet
o square feet
140 feet
o feet
75 square feet
o square feet
508 feet
290 feet
75 square feet
50 sqnare fe..t
--.' ,.' ~
QYO.l.0HU", LSYlleft
,.~ '....Il....~..
SlI:iNNV1d " S.LJlLIH:)lIV
di
[JJ
ONla~\tN~38 N\tS - lIZ'
SN\t1d )l"1\tM3CIS
"3^\t aN\t1H~tl - S.NA~3W D
SNOI.1\t^313 lfOIl:I3.1X3
... ... .. . .... .
n If''' -. t .,".. 11
- .. ~ .... .
~
. ./.-
I~';:
~
ja....
'~
-I-
i, ...~
'\'::I
" .,
J
I- ~
..
1
fit
.
IG-
I
I,.#-
I '
~
\
~
-;~
~~ t'
:.~
'=/
-'-,.~\
-....
-I
::\
-]
:~
-;/.;
i
"1
- ,
.~ I
.,
c
---j
-j~
-~I
-. !
I
,; I
a
:. i
1
Ii
i
--~
'---;"':J j'
.-/
, i
'0.'
..
,
" :; I
it
o .
, .
.
i
!
I
I
- i
ii
--PI
':,NJ
~-
, ....-
.
i
.. ..
n ..
.. ..
~ ~
~ r
,
" ~
.~.
, .,
,,' ,-
~.
~ ,
.
"'"
-
'..
; .~
" ,~
I
I ,..
I
J ~]
,
;- j \
"
1'" ,~
/ " ,~
.. ,j
;-, i-' .~ ~- I
' ' ;;j
-I , './ :1
, ;
r :
I , i I
j II-I II
I I ,- II
I II .
" - ~I
'j --
I .,
,. ~i
.
[W r-r-' ~I
tL.:...L
...
il i
i.1I
I',
[ I.
- i
I
....
..,P. .~
::l
~
~':'i i:
, I!
: Ii
. ']- ;1:7 i
,. a!
;
*
..
...,
r;J
-
c:r
~
:!
()
o
i:
'!'
~
II@
.
~
~..
.~
~..
, '
.~,
i
.
-J II
-,
A
I I \.2;1
i s ,~
I':'"
. ""
.
!
.
.
e
----'
C'
....k
I
,
!
I
:1
"
!
i
1
1
,
I
1
!
i
1
!
.,..)
.Ii
11
Ii
.
i
I
~I
~I
=1
~I
i;
,i
d
.
I,
!
z
<
1!
i
o
I
.
'T' -, ::==. -. .
I'~~'.
'. '
,. I !,,~ : -::
" ' -
. - I ..-
I i ---J!~ ..
i ~p! f!j
, '
I:
~I
",~ J
.. ,
! I
I
Q"
. , .
.,..
.
!
.
~.
, ,.;:'
1 ~. ,=
I I =...:.... -
L..-...l :;:' !
..___. c
= '_0"
.
.
,-'
-"
..~
~.
-'
.--'
~
,-'
~
---
..-
/
/
/
.
.
i
~'
~'
, ..
I
~I
~
-.
:Ul :t' ~ I!
! I!II!'
.. '
C ,'I'
. !I
rpl
Ii ' I
:: '~ir
l:' .
il' I .il
":' il!
~
,;
I';
.,.
a
n
. '
"
. I:
,;
~
~
~
~ i!
tl:!!:1l .!
~ II
~II
@ I
~ II~
, .
== .
= .
"t=:' t:I
'~ c.
e! -;
=- I
.
:'
!
I
~I
<
>
=1
=1
~!
-'
Vl:
I
!
'I
.1
il
I
~
,i
~
,
-
.i
i
;j
cr'
~
(j
i
,
"
;j
Ii
! ,,'
- "
(f) I I:
~I :1
~1
<
>
~
...
.0
I . I
J
--"
. ~ -
-
"G-2"
Attachment c:>
t
2
1
. I! I! I! I! II!
I I ! II II :: 'I
! '1111 -;'1 Ii II !j .
! 1!lm!iim,;1I Il!ih I!
~ !l-lllj.!II!! ill ,;; Iii II
~ n~hl~III~llil ;I!I!! Iii III
~ U~l!I" .~~.. ~=.~..
=- ,...
\
.,
,
.
I I .
.
!
III
j t
JJI"lJ
11,1)
: J I I
;
~
I
I
.....
o
I I I
1
!
~
I
1
C1~
ll.QjN
O'O~::
Z]~~
~">e:
-'~ :J ::-
~ ~N'lii ':-
11 =-> ~=
· i7:i~ a.:
r....;>C"
[ U,,> C ..0
(I W E In
C=>_....
Ul-~ M
IDCI):='N
<All:~","
~:u:
Q.1:I.c..
i.8>"!f
._:11 r
....;0
r-'N"O
":J ~> crm
~ ~>< It-
~CJ~.i:g
~!h~Je~
il Z!h-i'N
J:OU)"fili
~5.~
~
i
l
l
A.1II~J!
O~~-
zj M~
.. c iI.
&ofJ>e-.
~ ..IN :ill";:,
~ ~ .,.
-.>- '" :-
->< I 0
t-:C~o.o-
'l~>t~
~ ~~.!'S.
I \...~:
.., eIl._ (III
IDQl..ll ..
<OJ!w.
IIID
-'"
.MIO
::'Ilt
.a...
~'~fi
~ ~i i~
It ~~:
, E~ !e:
il -I
f ~ Ii
/
~. I I"! 51! ,1
I.:i ~ I :; ~h sf
Ill. II ii .!1111I I
I.lill!!i,,:,lll!i 'I
~ !M~!'llil!i:'I!, i.
m IHi~ill!;i=~,isulh~ I~
.. ...c....c;... Ij" "II t
~ ~UUi ::~~Il!i!!l; ~ '!
z I cl!lh nO.UI. glS II
~ ili~I~;!glil~~l!l~i"I"~i lit
~ iUmihlimll~ il ili
i ... .
Jl .
3
.
.
t J ,
i
,
/' J
n~ i
j J2
III
jJ
: I A J i
\
.1
I
I
I ! I
t . I
('. !
ill s i
II! J .
m J f
--- I
I
= I
J-. !K ,
e I
Iii
fi !
t
J
.~C'::-;;"';"'-
f~ I:
f
( t
it-r
lIlt
~t51
dl~
.0
.!i. I..
t
p
_n.__ _ .__-.
'"
.-.----.. 0 ---..
-"______u. __
-[Ir-=-.------
1
1
t!
"'li~ -T
..'1--t ..1I-t ..1;...,
""~
r
~
L
. ,
C:i
,
-
,.
.
~
---.-.-t
I rrl.
.. -
m
IHH
f!L~t
~
@
. "41
"
Ii
} 1 I
i
.
.
'f
I I
~
~ .
nw
I ~ i i
t I I Ii
I
~
i
.. f.
I
I I I I
It I
. I
ill J i
mJL
I I
I
I R!
a I
I i I.
I fi!
t
,
r
0 ~
} Ii I
- - J
.. --_..
.--...-t
i
[ / ~I I ,
J
. 1
I
J1lr
j
~ I , j I;
~
~
I ..
.. ~
.~
.
I
~.
,
./ ~
;
~ I.
I I!
It '. I I
i I
II J :
" .mr m J I
.
I
I
llHt I I '
J , , I .. I
o 61 t!; t I I.
ti !
I
,
-:-'--
. I
(:!i
!
.
o
1
o
,
I::!i
,
.
~l
~l t
~ .,
I
"
-1
I
C]
u
~!
"
I I
, Ii:
~I t I J ! l
,. Jlfl~
~ ! . Ii t
I ~ I I Ir
! , .
~ I ~ i
t @ I
.. I
.
~
.
;
. I
I I!
It I !
. I .
ill I :
m J I
.
I
~ I
I_ il !
J · I
& I.
s .fi!
I
,
· i 1
11 f
jJH~
l!l.lt
1
-g
~
(1_____"_ . _n. t
o
II
,
~
'i
11
~ @
t---- n
o
~ c
~
,i
1 I
.
ii
,
I
j
.3
N
,
-
0-
n.
:l
U
)tU"'11
E III I
~f' . i list
\"Y"I. I .. I aI
~:i~
I
I!
I
-~ il
n:
c
~ I
IlIlI
i .
= ~I,
C ! Ill'
~ ~I
3i:
C
...!i
i I
-
...
-
o
o
-
.
I
.
."
lUll '" tl
........... !!II
HHIIIIII" .!lIi I
'I"!II!' ....
I. ..- I
. '.I,c,.,,'.l
";;;11"11;' I.
II.' · .. I, r
HI I r
'~......... I
ill!" II!" !
I . ..,. I ..' .
; II1I I' . ... .
I
,i
~
t:-:. .
-'II! "
c~ I ..............
s~ / "\
...~ \
~ltl
......
Ul III .
o Ul J
~ )
t
I
~
..
Ii
lEe
~i
::t
...
\ .,
I,
I
I.
,
, , --..
\~: !i ~il
It Ii
"
, I
, I
I I
~. ~ . .
1-=====:1
.-.-.-.-.-.
'\
,
I
u
u
. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINcO..ANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
o
AGENDA
ITEM'
LOCA liON
CUP 91-26/VAR 91-
DA 91-02
HEARING DATE 10-29-91
8
I(lA-1
61ft.
......
o
..
lll:oll:.ll: 11
PLANoI.l1 PAGE, OF , I'"
r\
t""\
-
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
OFFICIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY
OF SAN BERNARDINO MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
(SUBJECT:
, VARIANCE NO. 91-16
)LJ
PROPERTY LOCATION:
Subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land
consisting of about 31 acres having a frontage of about
2,396 feet on the north side of Highland Avenue, west of
State Highway 330 and being located about 400 feet east
of the centerline of Oenair Avenue.
PROPOSAL:
The applicant requests approval of a Variance Exception of
Code Sections, 19.22.150, 19.22.040(2) (D) to allow wall
signs for major tenants in excess of the allowable area
and number, free-standing signs in excess of the allowable
height, logos and trademarks for nationally and regionally
recognized tenants, and a larger palette of sign colors and
letter types than allowed by code.
PUBLIC HEARING LOCATION:
SAN BERNARDINO CITY HALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
300 NORTH '0' STREET
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92418
HEARING DATE AND TIME:
l10nday, December 2, 1991 2:00 p.m
.............................on........................SIrvaI
C _ a.._4.CiIyoHIII..,...,..____........IIlIOuI_DrOIIOUlonor....
puDIIC...... __.....,................ s.mc. r UI.... '" person
or _ .....17,.. 311-saI7.
The.,.... ec..-. CaIftiI.,..-. your Ii- --'you.........
IO......'OUIMY.......-........ In__ 01 or lftOllPOlClDf'llOlfteP'ODOll' to
thII PWwwlg.........s.r... Cl;l. L._4. .............ecy..... 3OONorItl "0*
snaSln~.~_I'.
a.c-.OftN....... ComlMIIan ...... CDnCIIftWII DulIding mow'IOI. Con-
dIIIOIIIIUM PermIIs. ....,... Of PtanI. T..... Trc .... IN v....... unIeU
.........m....,...sCommon eo-oI. ~1O"'w.yor...Common CouncIl
mull....... '"..... .......;r-..- or IN -._...... belUDmlfted 10 IN
CIty Clerk""" IN....,.. 1M WlltIIn l-.n oars Of IN 0KIII0fl (Ie" days tor
PIfClil....... T.,..,. TrIICI....l.
Gerw-' PIM A.._4._'~'" 110.._41._._10 IhIIIIw'ICIIIII Colle WlllIUtOmaII"
QItp De......1O N ~ ifill Common CounoIlarllnll ac:DDn.
.,ouCft8llenge...,.....8CIlOftot...Ma,or ...eommonCourDlftClU't. you
mey.. WftIIedIO'..... onay1ftDM1IIUft you 0I1D'NDftI'" rMed .""JlUDIIC nunng
dlllcnDedlft....noea.OI'Ift..,...,_._.a......IONCiIy.......OMIIOn
at. orpnor10.... DUtllIC......,..
INtnnrlu:lllHbrntItN "'" atMMa _ _I M _.....1Mfl fft tn.. ___
......
~.... 'C ;... ~f-..o1OOC
';E"'''''.....'''OCiy.voCl'
.1.,\-1
Pl.AN-t.07 PAye. I OF 1 ,6.:MJl
EXHIBIT C