Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signs Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission votes 3–2 to recommend allowing one A-frame sign per business
Summary
The City of Big Bear Lake Planning Commission voted 3–2 to send a development-code amendment permitting one portable A-frame sign per business to the city council, with design, placement and enforcement conditions and a finding that the change is exempt from CEQA.
The City of Big Bear Lake Planning Commission on a 3–2 vote recommended that the City Council adopt a development-code amendment to allow portable A-frame (frame) signs as part of the temporary commercial signage rules.
Nathan Castillo, senior planner, described the proposal as a city-initiated amendment to section 17.12 intended to formally allow portable freestanding "A-frame" signs under defined standards. "Staff recommends that you hold a public hearing, take public testimony, and adopt the resolution recommending to the city council approval of this development code amendment and finding it exempt from CEQA," Castillo said during his presentation, citing the projects exemption under California Public Resources Code section 21065.
Under the amendment, businesses already in compliance with existing permanent-sign permits may place one portable freestanding A-frame sign on private property, subject to setbacks (typically one foot from the property line where appropriate, 10-foot side-yard setbacks in some situations), a 25-foot separation from the business entrance, prohibition inside public rights-of-way (including village streetscape easements), a requirement for a small contact label, no illumination, and material/appearance standards consistent with section 17.12.080. Staff said the change does not require a new permit for businesses with existing sign permits.
Commissioner Lisa Bist moved the resolution recommending council approval and to find the action CEQA-exempt; Vice Chair Michael Beveridge seconded. The clerk recorded the final tally as three in favor and two opposed and announced the measure as resolution number 2026-13 to be forwarded to the City Council for a noticed public hearing. "This motion was passed by a vote of 3 in favor and 2 against, making it resolution number 2026Dash13," the clerk read aloud after the roll call.
The measure will next appear on a noticed City Council agenda; the Planning Commissions action is a recommendation, and the council will hold a public hearing before making any final change to the municipal code.
