HomeMy WebLinkAbout32-Planning and Building
CITY OF SAN BI!RARDINO - RI!QUI!ST Q,R COUNCIL ACTION
From: Al Boughey, Director
Planning and Building Services
Dept:
Subject: Appeal of Planning Commission denial of
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39
Date:
April 10, 1992
Mayor and Common Council Meeting
April 20, 1992
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
On December 2, 1991, this item was continued to the Mayor and Common Council hearing of
January 6, 1992.
On January 6, 1992, this item was continued to the Mayor and Common Council hearing of
February 3, 1992.
On February 3, 1992, this item was continued to the Mayor and Common Council hearing of
February 17, 1992.
On February 17, 1992, this item was continued to the Mayor and Common Council hearing of
March 2, 1992.
On March 2, 1992, this item was continued to the Mayor and Common Council hearing of April 6,19'
On April 6, 1992, this item was continued to the Mayor and Common Council hearing of April
20, 1992.
Recommended motion:
That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor and Common Council deny the appeal and
deny Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 based on the Findings of Fact contained in
Exhibit D; or
That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor and Common Council approve Conditional
Use Permit No. 91-39 in concept and refer the matter back to staff to develop positive
Findings of Fact.
ature
Contact person:
Al Boughey
Phone:
384-5357
Supporting data attached:
Staff Report
Ward:
3
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source: (Acct. No.l
(Acct. DescriPtion)
Finance:
Council Notes:
:<!:L
. CITY OF SAN BERORDINO - REQUEST ())R COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
Subject: Appeal of the Planninq Commission denial of Conditional
Use Permit No. 91-39, requestinq approval to construct a
billboard on the same site that a billboard was removed
to facilitate the construction of a retail center.
Mayor and Common Council Meetinq of April 20, 1992
REOUEST
The applicant, Gannet outdoor Co., Inc., is appealinq the denial of
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 by the Planninq Commission. Under
the authority of Development Code section 19.22.080(1), the
appellant requests that the Mayor and Common Council approve a
conditional use permit to construct a billboard on the same site
that a billboard was removed to facilitate the construction of a
retail commercial center.'
The subject property is located on the west side of the 700 south
block of "E" Street, across from the Oranqe Show Fairqrounds. The
2.4 acre site is currently under construction for the development
of the "silo" retail shoppinq center. The site is located within
the CG-1, General Commercial, land use zoninq district.
BACKGROUND
On October 3, 1967, the city issued a buildinq permit to Pacific
Outdoor advertisinq to construct a billboard on the subj ect
property.
On March 7, 1991 Review of Plans No. 90-42 was approved to
construct a 35,000 square foot retail shoppinq center. The site
plan, as submitted to and approved by the Development Review
Committee, displaced an existinq billboard by proposinq a buildinq
pad in its location. Shortly after the approval of Review of Plans
No. 90-42, bui1dinq permits were issued, construction commenced and
the billboard was removed. On July 19, 1991, Gannet OUtdoor Co.,
Inc. submitted the application for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-
39, requestinq to relocate the siqn on the subject property.
On October 29, 1991, the Planninq Commission held a properly
noticed public hearinq on Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39. The
hearinq consisted entirely of a presentation of Staff's analysis
and recommendation; no other persons were present to speak in favor
or in opposition to the proposal. Staff's discussion primarily
focussed on the findinq that the proposal is out of scale and
incompatible with the commercial development on the property, as
well as with the commercial development occurrinq in the
75.02'.
"
o
o
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39
Appeal of Planning commission's Denial
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of March 2, 1992
PAae 2
surrounding area. Staff stated that the height and size of the
proposed billboard, 59 feet overall height and 672 square feet in
area, is a design appropriate only for high speed, limited access
highways, and is thus out of place on a city street, such as "E"
Street. Staff added that the sign, as proposed, will add. to the
visual congestion in the vicinity created by the large number of
nonconforming and abandoned pole signs.
Based on the discussion and in agreement with the staff
recommendation, a motion for denial was made and seconded by a
unanimous vote of the six attending Commissioners (Exhibit B).
On october 30, 1991, Ron Cipriani of Gannet Outdoor Advertising
contacted Staff and explained that a pressing commitment prevented
him from attending the hearing. He explained that he attempted to
contact the Planning Division on October 29 at approximately 4:45
p.m. to inquire about the possibility of a continuance, but the
phones were not being answered. Phones would not be answered at
that time of day because city Hall business hours end at 4:30 p.m.
Mr. Cipriani stated that it was his full intention to be present at
the Planning Commission hearing to go on record as actively
supporting his employers' interests.
on November 6, 1991, the applicant, Gannet outdoor Co., Inc.,
submitted an appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 (Exhibit A).
The appeal of Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 was originally
scheduled to be heard by the Mayor and Common Council on December
2, 1991. At the appellant's request, the item was continued to
January 6, 1992.
At the request of the Mayor, the hearing of the appeal was
continued to February 3, 1992, and staff was directed to pursue
negotiations with the appellant for the removal of two billboards
elsewhere in the City in exchange for the requested on-site
replacement. Staff's original understanding was that the appellant
was offering the removal of a billboard located on the south side
of Fifth street, adjacent to the Platt Building, as well as another
located on the site of a surface mining operation at the south side
of Fourth Street, east of Rancho Avenue.
A concern of staff prior to negotiating with the billboard company
was that a replacement billboard on the subject property should be
reduced in height and area from what was originally proposed (59
feet overall height, 672 square feet of sign area). simply r_oving
the other two billboards as an exchange is not viewed as adequate
mitigation against the impact of a full-sized replacement on the
subject property (see Exhibit D, pp. 3-4). However, when staff
,
o
o
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39
Appeal of Planning Commission's Denial
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of March 2, 1992
Paae :I
contacted Roberta Sponsler of Gannet Outdoor Co. to discuss the
issue, Ms. Sponsler indicated that a reduction in the size of the
billboard is not acceptable because a smaller sized billboard will
not generate adequate revenue. Hence, no compromise was reached.
The item was heard by the Mayor and Common Council on February 3,
1992 and was continued to February 17, 1992 with direction that
staff negotiate further with the appellant and provide visual data
on the signs offered by the appellant for removal.
After the February 3, 1992 Council meeting, staff conferred with
Ron Cipriani of Gannet, who indicated that staff's original
understanding of the billboards offered for removal was incorrect.
The actual locations of the two signs offered are as follows: the
northeast corner of Arrowhead Avenue and Hilda Avenue, near the
city yards; and a City-owned parcel east of the 4th and 5th Street
junction. The billboard at the northeast corner of Arrowhead and
Hilda was allegedly removed on January 16, 1992 (see copy of work
order, Exhibit E), so staff was unable to provide photographic
support.
On February 17, 1992, the item was continued to March 2, 1992 at
the request of the appellant and staff,
On March 2, 1992, the item was continued, at staff's request, to
April 6, 1992, to allow negotiations with the appellant to proceed.
on March 24, 1992, Planning and city Attorney staff met with Mr.
Cipriani and discussed the possibility of removing the Platt
Building sign and lowering the height of the proposed sign (in
addition to removing the sign at the 4th/5th Street junction) in
exchange for approving the installation of the proposed sign. Staff
and Mr. Cip=iani mutually agreed to request a continuance from
April 6, 1992 to April 20, 1992, so that Mr. Cipriani could confer
with his staff to determine whether Gannet would agree to accept
these two additional conditions.
On April 1, 1992, Mr. Cipriani contacted staff with the following
responses:
1. Gannett will not agree to remove the Platt Building billboard
without monetary compensation.
2. Gannett will not agree to lower the height of the proposed
sign because existing signs to the north and south of the
subject property would obscure visibility.
It should be noted that both the Platt Building sign and the
4th/5th street sign are single-sided signs, whereas the proposed
--~"""'C<,"'."'''''''_~
o 0
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39
Appeal of Planninq Commission's Denial
Mayor and Common Council Meetinq of March 2, 1992
Paae 4
billboard on South "E" Street is a double-sided sign. If this
Conditional Use Permit is approved, staff believes that both
existinq billboards should be removed, in addition to reducinq the
heiqht and area of the replacement billboard. As indicated
previously in this staff report, the appellant has stated that the
size proposed for the new billboard is not neqotial:lle. Please refer
to the table in Exhibit F for a comparison of the conditions of
approval proposed by the appellant with those proposed by staff.
Based on the context of the respective surroundinq areas, it is the
conclusion of staff that a double-sided billboard at the proposed
location would be a qreater detriment than the retention of the
existinq sinqle-sided sign at the 4th/5th Street junction without
further mitiqatinq factors.
OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
The Mayor and Common Council May deny the appeal and deny
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39.
OR
The Mayor and Common Council JUly continue the item, uphold the
appeal, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 in concept and
direct Staff to prepare findinqs.
RECOMMENDATION
It is the recommendation of Staff that the Mayor and Common Council
deny the appeal and deny Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 based on
the Findinqs of Fact contained in Exhibit D.
Prepared by:
Greqory S. Gubman
Assistant Planner
for Al Bouqhey, AICP
Director of Planninq and Buildinq services
D -
. Letter of Appeal
Statement of Planninq Commission Action
Official Notice of Public Hearinq before the
Mayor and Co_on Council
staff Report to the Planninq Commission dated
OCtober 29, 1991
Copy of Gannet work order indicatinq removal
date of bil1l:loard located at the northeast
corner of Arrowhead and Hilda Avenues
Exhibits:
A -
B -
C -
E -
CITY OF SAN BERN&DINO - REQUEST F~R COUNCIL ACTION
Al Boughey, Director
Appeal of Planning Commission denial
Subject: of Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39
tf:
Dept:
Planning & Building Services
Mayor and Common Council Meeting
March 2, 1992
Date: February 24, 1992
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
On December 2, 1991, this item was continued to the Mayor and Common Council hearing
of January 6, 1992.
On January 6, 1992, this item was continued to the Mayor and Common Council hearing
of February 3, 1992.
On February 3, 1992, this item was continued to the Mayor and Common Counci hearing
of February 17, 1992.
On February 17, 1992, this item was continued to the Mayor and Common Council hearing
of March 2, 1992.
Recommended motion:
That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor and Common Council deny the appeal
~\d deny Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 based on the Findings of Fact contained
~n Exhibit D; or
That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor and Common Council approve Conditional
Use Permit No. 91-39 in concept and refer the matter back to staff to develop positive
Findings of Fact.
j!/~~
~ /Signature /11'.
Al Boughey 6'1' (( f, .
Contact person:
Al Boughey
Phone:
384-5357
Supporting data attached: Staff Report
Ward:
3
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. Description)
Finance:
oneil Notes:
.4 .... ~..
il ~"
~'2~j
CITY OF SAN BERNADINO - AIEQUEST ~ COUNCIL ACTION
o
o
c
75-0264
STAFF REPORT
Subject:
Appeal of the Planning Commission denial of Conditional
Use Permit No. 91-39, requesting approval to construct a
billboard on the same site that a billboard was removed
to facilitate the construction of a retail center.
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of March 2, 1992
REOUEST
The applicant, Gannet Outdoor Co., Inc., is appealing the denial of
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 by the Planning commission. Under
the authority of Development Code Section 19.22.080(1), the
applicant requests that the Mayor and Common Council approve a
conditional use permit to construct a billboard on the same site
that a billboard was removed to facilitate the construction of a
retail commercial center.
The subject property is located on the west side of the 700 south
block of "E" Street, across from the Orange Show Fairgrounds. The
2.4 acre site is currently under construction for the development
of the "Silo" retail shopping center. The site is located within
the CG-1, General Commercial, land use zoning district.
BACKGROUND
On October 3, 1967, the City issued a building permit to Pacific
Outdoor advertising to construct a billboard on the subject
property.
On March 7, 1991 Review of Plans No. 90-42 was approved to
construct a 35,000 square foot retail shopping center. The site
plan, as submitted to and approved by the Development Review
Committee, displaced an existing billboard by proposing a building
pad in its location. Shortly after the approval of Review of Plans
No. 90-42, building permits were issued, construction commenced and
the billboard was removed. On July 19, 1991, Gannet Outdoor Co.,
Inc. submitted the application for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-
39, requesting to relocate the sign on the subject property.
On October 29, 1991, the Planning commission held a properly
noticed public hearing on Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39. The
hearing consisted entirely of a presentation of Staff's analysis
and recommendation; no other persons were present to speak in favor
or in opposition to the proposaL Staff's discussion primarily
focussed on the finding that the proposal is out of scale and
incompatible with the commercial development on the property, as
well as with the commercial development occurring in the
~_._-
o
o
o
o
o
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39
Appeal of Planning Commission's Denial
Mayor and co..on Council Meeting of March 2, 1992
Paae 2
surrounding area. staff stated that the height and size of the
proposed billboard, 59 feet overall height and 672 square feet in
area, is a design appropriate only for high speed, limited access
highways, and is thus out of place on a city street, such as "E"
street. staff added that the sign, as proposed, will add to the
visual congestion in the vicinity created by the large number of
nonconforming and abandoned pole signs.
sased on the discussion and in agreement with the staff
recommendation, a motion for denial was made and seconded by a
unanimous vote of the six attending Commissioners (Exhibit B).
On October 30, 1991, Ron Cipriani of Gannet Outdoor Advertising
contacted Staff and explained that a pressing commitment prevented
him from attending the hearing. He explained that he attempted to
contact the Planning Division on October 29 at approximately 4:45
p.m. to inquire about the possibility of a continuance, but the
phones were not being answered. Phones would not be answered at
that time of day because City Hall business hours end at 4:30 p...
Mr. cipriani stated that it was his full intention to be present at
the Planning Commission hearing to go on record as actively
supporting his employers' interests.
On November 6, 1991, the applicant, Gannet Outdoor Co., Inc.,
submitted an appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 (Exhibit A).
The appeal of Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 was originally
scheduled to be heard by the Mayor and Common Council on December
2, 1991. At the appellant's request, the item was continued to
January 6, 1992.
At the request of the Mayor, the hearing of the appeal was
continued to February 3, 1992, and staff was directed to pursue
negotiations with the appellant for the removal of two billboards
elsewhere in the City in exchange for the requested on-site
replacement. Staff's original understanding was that the applicant
was offering the removal of a billboard located on the south side
of Fifth street, adjacent to the Platt Building, as well as another
located on the site of a surface mining operation at the south side
of Fourth Street, east of Rancho Avenue.
A concern of staff prior to negotiating with the billboard company
was that a replacement billboard on the subject property should be
reduced in height and area from what was originally proposed (59
feet overall height, 672 square feet of sign area). Simply removing
the other two billboards as an exchange is not viewed as adequate
mitigation against the impact of a full-sized replacement on the
subject property (see Exhibit 0, pp. 3-4). However, when staff
Q
o
o
o
o
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39
Appeal of Pl~nning Commission's Denial
Mayor and Ccmmon Council Meeting of March 2, 1992
paae 3
contacted Roberta Sponsler of Gannet Outdoor Co. to discuss the
issue, Ms. Sponsler indicated that a reduction in the size of the
billboard is not acceptable because a smaller sized billboard will
not generate adequate revenue. Hence, no compromise was reached.
The item was heard by the Mayor and Common Council on February 3,
1992 and was continued to February 17, 1992 with direction that
staff provide visual data on the signs offered by the appellant for
removal.
After the Febr~ary 3, 1992 Council meeting, staff conferred with
Ron Cipriani of Gannet, who indicated that staff's original
understanding of the billboards offered for removal was incorrect.
The actual locations of the two signs offered are as follows: the
northeast corner of Arrowhead Avenue and Hilda Avenue, near the
city yards; and a City-owned parcel east of the Fourth and Fifth
Street divergence point. The billboard at the northeast corner of
Arrowhead and Hilda was allegedly removed on January 16, 1992 (see
copy of work order, Exhibit El, so staff was unable to provide
photographic support.
If this Conditional Use Permit is approved, staff believes that the
billboard on the Platt Building property should be removed as well,
in addition to reducing the height and area of the replacement
billboard. As indicated previously in this staff report, the
appellant has stated that the size proposed for the new billboard
is not negotiable. Please refer to the table in Exhibit F for a
comparison of the conditions of approval proposed by the appellant
with those proposed by staff.
At the request of the appellant and staff, the item was continued
to March 2, 1992.
OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
The Mayor and Common Council May deny the appeal and deny
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39.
OR
The Mayor and Common Council may continue the item, uphold the
appeal, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 in concept and
direct Staff to prepare findings.
RECOMMENDATION
It is the recommendation of Staff tha': the Mayor and Common Council
deny the appeal and deny Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 based on
the Findings of Fact contained in Exhibit D.
o
c
o
o
o
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39
Appeal of Planninq Commission's Denial
Mayor and Common Council Meetinq of March 2, 1992
Paae 4
Prepared by:
Exhibits:
Greqory S. Gubman
Assistant Planner
for Al Bouqhey, AICP
Director of Planninq and Buildinq Services
A -
B -
C -
D -
E -
Letter of Appeal
statement of Planninq Commission Action
Official Notice of Public Hearinq before the
Mayor and Common Council
staff Report to the Planninq commission dated
October 29, 1991
Copy of Gannet work order indicatinq removal
late of billboard located at the northeast
corner of Arrowhead and Hilda Avenues
o
~E1T OUIDOOR I
o
o
, ..., ,--
DE!,cI" --,' " .' :.
1\ .....
'91 :'0" -6 !\ 9 :l2
October 30, 1991
The Honorable W. R. Holcomb and
Common Council
City of San Bernardino
300 North "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92410
RE: Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39
o
Dear Mayor Holcomb and Council:
On Tuesday evening, October 29, 1991, the City of San
Bernardino's Planning Commission denied Gannett outdoor Advertis-
ing company's request to replace on the same site an outdoor
advertising structure. The location is on the west side of the
700 South block of "E" Street.
Mayor Holcomb, Gannett Outdoor Advertising is appealing that
decision to you and the Common Council. The Development Code
Section 19.22.080(1) permits the replacement of a billboard and
our request is consistent with the Development Code and General
Plan.
Your consideration of this matter is appreciated.
Sincerely,
/~~~.
L. Ronald Cipriani
Vice President
Public Affairs Department
LRC:lc
c
~~ AdrruWNi h
c~f.l~r:f:~Co,'nc'Of Southern California
'.I P,O. Box 3159 GMF
C3AflN1T Los Angeles. California 90051.1159
1731 Workman Street:
Los Angeles. Califorma 90031
(213)2227171
EXHIBIT "A"
>i.''''
o
o
o
-
o
o
City of San Bernardino
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
PROJECT
Number:
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39
Applicant:
Gannet Outdoor Advertising Co., Inc.
Owner:
The "E" Street Shopping Center
ACTION
Meeting Date: October 29, 1991
X Denied Based Upon Findings of Fact (Attachment B)
~
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 ity of San Bernardino.
Official Action
of the Planning
\L
Al Bouahev. Direc or of Plannina and Buildina Services
Name and Title
cc: Project Property Owner
Project Applicant
Building Division
Engineering Oivision
Case File
WP
pcaction
EXHIBIT "B"
.
o
o
~
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
OFFICIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY
OF SAN BERNARDINO MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
o
....
( SUBJECT: .
CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO.
91-39
)EJ
PROPERTY LOCATION:
Subject property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land
consisting of about 2.3 acres having a frontage of about
580.39 feet on the west side of "E" Street and being
located about 1,285 feet south of the centerline of Mill
Street.
PROPOSAL:
The applicant requests approval of a Conditional Use
Permit under authority of Code Section 19.22.080 (1)
to permit the replacement of an off-site billboard
sign in the CG-1, Commercial General, General Plan
land use designation.
c
PUBLIC HEARING LOCATION:
SAN BERNARDINO CITY HALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
300 NORTH "0" STREET
SAN BERNARDINO. CA 92418
HEARING DATE AND TIME:
Monday, December 2, 1991 2:00 p.
c
A........,...ot..l\ftIPIOIIIIilon..in............. ....s.w:..
t:'..,. ~._.lI.CIIr""'" .~................tIbout...~.......
puOIIc...............................,...s.rwc.C' ~ ..._4......
01 by pl1CJI'MlJ (71.) 3M-5C117.
The...,. MIl COnIIOnCcud ...........,..._ h d you........
lO_you...,.......__in...OIorift~ID........
the.......... 8uiIding s.rw:. r ~ ~._... SIn......CiIy... ......"0"
$net. s.n e.nwono. CaIiIDmII1241L
o-.on.of1tle PWIrwIgc:omn-...finllconcernng bUiIIIng mowingL c:..
diboneI us. Perma. ~ 01 IIfIN. r.... T.. .... InlI v...... ..... .
~101NMayor ItIltCornmonCounot. "-"'ION tMyor MdCommanCol.nCil
mull be !MOlt'" ...... ..... ....,..,.. OIINIPPIIIl and ..... be IUbrn.a ID..
City 0erk.....1tIe.....- tee......... dIyI olIN dIClIIOn 1_.....
P..-,.. and T.... TrKt......
a.n.r.I"" A.._......... A.._...._.t&. tD......... Code.......
~ be torwMted 10 IN Mayor'" Common Council tor..........,
Ifyou~.........ec:aonof....... ..CommonC0unc:i6inCllUlL JlllU
NYCleIimded1Of-'OonIf..._youor.".......,.......out*.....
OIIICr'lbedinttlllnolll>>.or........_.-.--....QI.!MMNd...CiIy......OiIiIiDn
at.orpnorlO,NpubliC~.
INiiwIual I~ ...... ~ ~ liIil lw cfnt!ltv Iim"*,, 1ft fhM """'--_
-.
':,.....,. ;'" M.....O'OOO
Cf;Nlll...._..T'tOG$VlVICE5
,.
-
W{LO
f'~.~cd:
w
.. '~OUII'S z;
.. -',,,IlDO,.-S;:
o
0::
0::
cd:
.,
.... 1,...
PLAN-t.07 PAGE 1 OF 1 16.901
o
~~ , .....
APPLICANT: Gannet Outdoor Advertising Co)
1731 Workman Street
W Los Angeles, CA 90031
~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-39 OWNER: The "E" Street Shopping Ctr.
(J Joint Venture
18980 Ventrua Blvd.
'-..-/ ,
~ ""\
... Under authority of Development Code Section 19.22.080(1), the applicant
ffi requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit to replace a billboard on the
::I same site that a billboard was removed to facilitate the construction of a
a reta il center.
W
a: The subject property is located on the west side of the 700 South block of
-
C "E" Street, across from the Orange Show Fairgrounds. The 2.4 acre site is
W currently under construction for the development of the "Silo" retail
a: shopping center. The site is located within the CG-l, General Commercial,
C land use zoning district.
I"J )
, EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION
Subject Retail Shopping Center
(Under Construction) CG-l Commercial General
North Commercial CG-l Commercial General
South Commercial CG-l Commercial General
East National Orange Show Fairgrounds PCR Public Commercial P.ecreatior
West Flood Control Channel PFC Public Flood Control
Inland Center Mall CR-l Commercial Regional
'-
( GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC DYES ( FLOOD HAZARD 0 YES 0 ZONE A ( SEWERS: ~ YES )
HAZARD ZONE: [] NO ZONE: 00 NO OZONE B o NO
'-
l 0 ) DYES r REDEVELOPMENT ;0 YES
HIGH FIRE YES AIRPORT NOISE! [
HAZARD ZONE: Il CRASH ZONE: ~"NO PROJECT AREA:
NO \.. o NO
r r-
...I o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z 0 APPROVAL
~ APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH 0
MmGATlNG MEASURES ~ 0
zen NOE.I.R. CONDITIONS
WCJ u.C
::EZ Dl EXEMPT o E.l.R. REQUIRED BUT NO u.Z ~ DENIAL
Z- SIGNIACANT EFFECTS CW
OC WITH MITIGATING til
a:ii MEASURES 0 CONTINUANCE TO
-II. 0
> o NO SIGNIFICANT
ffi o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS (J
EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. W
MINUTES ) a:
'- ./
- ---
c.
o
l;ITYOI_~
---
PLAN-ll.02 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-lilO)
'C'VUT'DTm IInll
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CUP NO. 91-39
"'I
o
OBSERVATIONS
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
5
10-29-91
2
...
"'I
REOUEST
Under the authority ot Development Code section 19.22.080(1), the
applicant requests approval ot a Conditional Use Permit to
construct a billboard on the same site that a billboard was removed
to facilitate the construction of a retail center.
SITE LOCATION
The subject property is located on the west side of the 700 south
bloCk of "E" Street, across from the Oranqe Show Fairqrounds. The
2.4 acre site is currently under construction for the development
of the "Silo" retail shoppinq center. The site is located within
the CG-1, General commercial, land use zoninq district.
DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
o
The proposed use, ie. the on-site replacement of a billboard, is
consistent with the Development Code and General Plan. Conditions
of approval shall ensure compliance with specific development
standards. Desiqn inconsisency with the General Plan will be
discussed separately in this staff report.
CEOA STATUS
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39 has been determined to be exempt
from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
under Article 19, section 15302.
BACKGROUND
On October 3, 1967, the City issued a buildinq permit to Pacific
Outdoor advertisinq to construct a billboard on the subject
property.
On March 7, 1991 Review of Plans No. 90-42 was approved to
construct a 35,000 square foot retail shoppinq center. The site
plan, as submitted to and approved by the Development Review
Committee, displaced the existinq billboard in that a buildinq pad
was proposed in its location. Shortly after the approval of Review
of Plans No. 90-42, buildinq permits were issued, construction
commenced and the billboard was removed.
c
On July 19, 1991, Gannet Outdoor Advertisinq submitted the
application for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-39, requestinq to
relocate the siqn on the subject property.
C1lVOFUIolI!lEl'lNAAllelD
OENIRo\LI'fIIrmMQ____
PLAN.8.08 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90)
0 0
I"
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CUP NO. 91-39
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 5
0 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 10-29-91
PAGE 3
Io.c ....
r: "'l
o
Q
ARALYS:rS
proposed Billboard Location
The applicant proposes to locate the sign near the south property
line of the site, abuttinq the south wall of retail buildinq "B"
(see Attachment C, Site Plan). The siqn is oriented perpendicular
to "En street, so that it is visible to northbound and southbound
traffic.
proposed Billboard Desiqn
The proposed sign is 59 feet in overall heiqht with a sign area of
672 square feet. The supportinq structure is a 45-foot monopole
with a diameter of four feet. The proposed sign face dimensions are
48 feet in lenqth by 14 feet in heiqht (see Attachment C,
Elevations).
Development Code standards
Section 19.22.080(1) of the Development Code allows the on-site
replacement of billboards, subject to the approval of a conditional
use permit. Hence, approval of this application is discretionary
in nature, as are the conditions of approval that the Planninq
Commission may impose on this project. Additionally, the Code
states that the Commission may impose a condition of approval
requirinq the removal of more than one billboard elsewhere in the
City that is owned by the same company that owns the billboard to
be replaced.
While the Development Code sets forth minimum requirements for the
replacement of billboards, the underlyinq intent is to accommodate
the continuation of a conforminq use by allowinq for the
replacement of a billboard structure that is in a deterioratinq,
unsafe or irreparable condition. The billboard in question was
removed as the result of property owners I business decision to
develop the site in such a manner that the siqn was displaced, and
its relocation was not a proposed component of the project. Thus,
it is the opinion of Staff that the City is not compelled to
approve this application.
~
~~
PLM-8.08 PAGE10Fl (4-101
.
....
0 0
P"
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CUP NO. 91-39
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 5
0 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 10-29-91
PAGE 4
P"
C~atibility of De.ign with Area
""l
.....
""l
o
The heiqht and size of the proposed billboard, 59 feet overall
heiqht and 672 square feet in area, is a desiqn appropriate only
for hiqh speed, limited access hiqhways. As such, the siqn is out
of scale and out of place on a city street, such as "E" street. The
billboard is also out of scale and incompatible with the desiqn of
the commercial development on the property, as well as with the
commercial development occurrinq in the surrounding area.
Additionally, the sign, as proposed, will add to the visual
congestion in the vicinity created by the large number of
nonconforming and abandoned pole signs.
staff's De.ign Reco..endations
General Plan Policy No. 1.45.3 states that the city shall:
"Establish design standards for billboards which improve their
visual character and compatibility with adjacent uses and
require that all billboards be upgraded to these standard.
within five years [as of June 2, 1989]."
Taking these General Plan provisions into account and followinq
quidelines published by the American Planning Association, as well
as desiqn standards contained in the Development Code, it is the
opinion of Staff that the billboard, if approved, should adhere to
the following specifications:
1. The overall heiqht shall not exceed 33 feet, with a maximum
sign face elevation of 30 feet:
2. The maximum area of the sign face shall be 300 square feet:
3. The maximum height of the sign face shall be 12 feet, the
maximum width shall be 30 feet:
4. The supportinq structure shall have a decorative cover: and
5. The overall desiqn of the billboard shall be architecturally
inteqrated and shall be compatible with the architecture of
the adjoining retail center.
However, on Auqust 15, 1991, Ron Cipriani, representative for the
project, indicated that Gannet Outdoor Advertising is not willing
to comply with these desiqn standards, nor would the billboard
cOllpany be willinq to r_ove other billboards in exchanqe for
4:> replacinq a billboard on the subject property.
CITY Cl' 11M .-....0
UfrfflW.__1EIMCU
pLAN-e.oa PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90)
0 0
...,
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CUP NO. 91-39
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 5
0
OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 10-29-91
to. PAGE 5
...,j
~. ...,
c~ent. aeoeive4
No cOlDlllents have been received as of the writinq of this staff
report.
Conolusion
The Development Code contains provisions to allow the on-site
replacement of billboards subject to the approval of a conditional
use permit. However, the General Plan requires billboard desiqn to
be compatible with adjacent uses, and it is Staff's opinion that
the proposed desiqn is incompatible and out of scale with those
uses. The City is not compelled to approve this application: the
property owners themselves chose to displace the previously
existinq billboard in order to develop the property for more
intensive uses. If this application is approved, however,
conditions should be imposed that ensure that the city's value.,
as expressed in the General Plan, are served.
aeoolDlllen4ation
o It is the recolDlllendation of Staff that the planninq cOlDlllission deny
Conditional Use permit No. 91-39 based on the attached Findinqs of
Fact. '
R];:~Z/ed'
~:~. Reed
...~ of Pl.~lng
Greqory S. Gubman
Assistant Planner
and Buildinq Services
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Development Code and General Plan consistency
B - Findinqs of Fact
C - site Plan and Elevations
D - Location Map
o
~.=.~.u~.:.:
to.
PL.AN.a.118 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-QD)
o
ATTACHMENT A
o
,
Q
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CUP NO. 91-39
OBSERVATIONS
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
:>
10-29-91
6
II.
....
,.
D-..LO--- COD. AlII) ClJlJlJlIIAL pt'.:av COIISJ:SHIICY
cateqory
DevelopaeDt
proposel Code aeDerel pleD
On-site Permitted Permitted
placement of
a billboard
59 ft. N/A N/A
672 sq. ft. 672 sq. ft. N/A
max.
0 10 ft. N/A
Use
Heiqht
Area
Setbacks
(leadinq
edqe to
p.l.)
c
o
~~
PLAN-I.08 PAGE 1 OF 1 14.QO)
----,,-.-~.
~
o
ATTACHMENT B
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
CUP NO. 91-39
o
FINDINGS OF FACT
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
5
10-29-91
7
....
r.
1. Pursuant to Development Code section 19.22.080(1), the
proposed use is conditionally permitted within the CG-1 land
use district, but does not comply with all of the applicable
provisions of the Development Code in that the setback, a.
measured horizontally from the leading edge of the sign face
to the front property line is less than ten feet.
2. The proposed use would impair the integrity and character of
the land use district in which it is to be located in that the
sign is out of scale and is architecturally incompatible with
the adjoining and surrounding structures.
o
4.
3. The subject site is physically suitable for the type aDlt
intensity of land use being proposed, as it is possible to
locate the sign on the subject property to meet setback
requir_ents and not interfere with approved circulation
patterns.
The proposed use is not compatible with the land u...
presently on the subject property in that the propo.ed
billboard dominates the buildings and architecture, and
compromises the image of. quality development on the subject
property.
5. The proposed use would not be compatible with existing and
future land uses within the general area in which the proposed
use is to be located in that the physical dominance of the
proposed use will lower the overall perception of quality in
the area.
6. The proposed use is not compatible in scale, mass, coverage
density and intensity with all adjacent land uses, in that the
scale and mass dominates those adjacent uses.
o
7. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation and public
utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would
not be detrimental to public health and safety in that the..
provisions have been met under the Conditions of Approval and
Standard Requirements for Review of Plans No. 90-42.
There will be adequate provisions for public access to serve
the subject proposal in that the proposed location of the
billboard will not interfere with driveways, parking spaces
or _ergency access routes.
8.
...
~.=.~=I
PlAN-8.D6 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-ao)
o
o
...
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
FINDINGS OF FACT
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
CUP NO. 91-39
5
10-29-91
8
o
r ...
9. There will be a harmful effect upon desirable neighborhood
characteristics in that the visual impact of the billboard
will undermine the image of quality development occurring in
the area
o
10. A market/feasibility study is not required by the General Plan
or Development Code for the type of use proposed.
11. The proposed use is not consistent with the General Plan in
that Policy No. 1.45.8 states that the City shall "prohibit
the use of oversize.. . signs which dominate the building,
architecture, and/or district in which they are located."
12. There will not be significant harmful effects upon
environmental quality and natural resources in that the
proposed use is exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act under Article 19, Section 15302.
13. The negative impacts of the proposed use cannot be mitigated
because the applicant is unwilling to mitigate those impacts
through the redesign of the billboard.
14. The proposed location, size, design and operating
characteristics of the proposed use would be detrimental to
the public interests, health, safety, convenience or welfare
of the City in that the design and size, as proposed, is out
of scale and incompatible with the commercial development and
traffic activity in the vicinity of the subject property.
o
...
~r=.~~
PI.AN-8.DB PAGE 1 OF 1 {4-90}
i
- , -,~.,.,... . ..~.. ~ ; f ," 1
- .~. r t,1 'I . ; ;-- ,', " ,.., -. " ,OJ: -.:ni' ; t -'~jt ~ f
.,. - I I mm'I'j'I'I'!'!"" - ., _ .; " J-- :J'
J~:+~'H."':-~~ '>~_,.~" - .......: ~ j ('- ll.11
"j _:; · 1 :~-~~~ -i:'-I-III'I.I.\-',1. '::? ': 1'7, 0 ~ I
j: ~ ,: ~ .1: - .1../_,- 'I /'1 Ji.i: : I
." I : I I. ...':';=:.' ..J ~
. t ~_ _'.~.' I _'1,
." ~ .... '> .-..'%.. C ~T"I~DU.;:-"':>!" .-..- In.
. .. ~ ~r''' '; - UJ I
.. "f:.....~I.........I.I.I... ~ I
;~ - '. --. 'li . "1-1-":+"1'" -j' ,-
~ J .., - '. -- I
....:..1......1.1..;..,..... b>...-.~,.... - I" . ------_--.1'
It I, .. ..._~ ......_ ___.._:_~.___ _ ~_..... _ . __ ...
.-! ---:-
""~i'~~;- '~=-'".::~=~""" --- --- .-..,..~.,.
~-
o
0-
I ~
I
~~j
. SIr
c.
-...
n ,,--
~ \
c
~ !
* t
~
.
'I
i
J,,.. ..",__.u"C'1:
.
. .
<J~ ~ ,
lu'" "-
~~ <
::::
~ ~
'=
~ '"
~
-
/
j
~I
~
i
N;';....
.~
,."
o
~
'" T7~
-- -,
+ ,VI
,.---
--.-
,- ..:::=.....-
.-0- .
. . ...~'1 ,
,
...,.............
'"C:'''
--'
I
I
I.
'I
I' .
o
M j l-M~hf...It:N r c
't
~
~
~
"
~ ,9
UI Q
?::..-
,~ ~
r
li_
'\.\\
~
\
~
cr
a..
::>
\)
>
1
~
?:
~
"71
~'
~
~
~
- z
...~
-~,
.- ."',.. .,..,.....-l~...
.~--
--~
z
I -
,r;
- i
~
i
;
.~
~
~
~-
~
z~
~'
~
~
!'
'-
~'\
~
i! ;
,
~-
h
5!
~-
~.
~.
lq
~
-...
-~
--. +,\9'1--
+-...
,<at-
~ ~-~f.T ..
"'ilq III I
illl!iilq;I!~
~:Ih~~!'=.._.~
h"..,_ _ .
~ :~'It- -~I.;~J,~
".:,', I d 11:_
.- f
-, ,
i f'
~ !l',
,'.,11
"I '
-:, f(r
.
~
!,
;~
"
'--,
.. lit
... I..
t ~!H
"
-rm
~;. :~
.,/;,
~J f
-t'1. &~ ,
7. ii\~ ~ ~ ~
o !::~ 2~ \Ie 0
- '~ 6' III \II Z z
t; t. -~ F ~ IS
:'-l. -.. - -.z '( tit
~ ~~~Iz~ ;& i
-1 ~4r;-"'~ ~~ ~
ul -<~~l~ 'i ~
~ 9'oc";r, ~
b:Z\'i~'~~~~'.
~ ~ ~"'~~~\ll9~ ~
,f ~ ~~ ~~C\Ci'
~' Ill.g \II~ ~ .
Z !>lllli!;;'l'o ~% ~ I
2 ~~-(cS:-i~~1
::r~:Z.,.'l) -I\J lS
~ I~rldi~~ ~
\..ll:i ItJ " ~
'=f ~ ~ ~
~ <_,--1L ~ ~
'i
f
~
>-
III': :.
i- f:.
iJ;1
I
li~
lis t
~~z
-.... >J
R~~
~'t" '
,~~~
.~,~. "
~ -
~~ - - '
r
..
;: ,1 'I! "I'
.,' ,I - ,,,. "I
i "I ,Ii 4 ' i h:i
,- 1\- ,10 i I ,I ,11,11,1
~ i m 1 .1' i . n!!r
~l' i f 1'lllll'II; ,,11
iii f R ~.
- ,
o
ATTACHMENT D
o
~
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
1"\ AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
W CASE CUP NO. 91-39
lo..- LOCATION HEARING DATE 10-29-91
"""'l ~
AGENDA
ITEM #
5
~,...:::~c...~ ., Ct. \
. _~: (, -.1'
~"'.........,..~...,
,;--:' ~;
J ! ,~1
o
~'''"II.DIII.~
o
0::
~~.~
o
~......
-'
I
., T
I II...! ,
z
~
...
II.
,
ct-iJ,
\
to:
li rJ
..
w
Z
~
Z
U
z
I r
T
z
o
..
-
Pl.M-I.ll PAGE 1 OF 1 14-lD)
CONSTRUCTION
(4:) ~ATE:01/16/92
o
o
DATA PROCESSING SYSTEM
TO:IQRTIN BERAS-LEASE-JIM AD1\MS-WINNIE MOK-STEVE COX
FROM: RANDI GRETEMAN
LEASE: 8900
LOCATION DESCRIPTION: ARROWHEAD & HILDA N/E, SAN BERNARDINO!
~
LOCATION *:5637
PANEL *: 1 FACING: S
ROOF:
I OLD : XX
POSTER :
\
NEW:
BULLETIN:
(e
TD.: XX
TO BE REBUILT:NO
LOCATION *:
PANEL *:
FACING:
GROUND : XX
MOVE:
RAISE:
BACK-UP:
REG: XX
NEW BUI.LD:
ILL. :
RE-HAB :
BUILD DATE : 2/23/65~
TAKE DOWN DATE: 1/16/92~
NEW LOOK CONV. :
ELECTRIC COMPLETE:
WALL:
TYPE BUILT PER CODE SBEET:20
HEIGHT: 17'
~.
,--~ ~
.. .:/\
v~/. \~j
-I.~ ' ~
.r;:" .. ,--
..;,." ~Il
,"'2" I:::..
. .<,.
.~
. ", '_'-' ,\ ,e
, ._...~....l I I'; .
b
SHOP ORDERI:
ELECTRIC CONV.:
PERMIT DATE:
T!PB ILLlJIIINATICII
M - 11
M - 48 ,/: 1t1'1?
HOLOPBANE POSTER V V
HOLOPBANE BULLETIN
EXHIBIT "E"
o
o
o
.
o
o
EDl:Bl:T "1'"
RBCOJOlDlDED BY PROPOSED BY
STAJ'J' APPELLAIlT
BBl:GllT 01' Bl:LLBOAIm 33 feet overall 59 feet overall
ADA 01' Sl:GN I'ACE 300 square feet 572 square feet
Sl:GNS TO BE RBHOVBD 1. Platt Building 1- Northeast corner
l:N EXCBAHGE J'OR property of Arrowhead
PROPOSED Bl:LLBOAIm (southeast Avenue and Hilda
corner of 5th Avenue (removed
and "E" Streets) on January 16,
1992, according
to appellant)
2. city property 2. City property
immediately east immediately east
of 4th & 5th of 4th & 5th
Street Street
convergence convergence
point point