HomeMy WebLinkAbout36-Development Services ORIGINAL
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO-REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
From: James G. Funk, Director Subject: Appeal of Planning Commission's denial of
Dept: Development Services Development Permit I No. 05-81 to re-use an
existing vacant building as a coin operated laundry
facility located at 4399 N. Sierra Way in the CG-1,
Commercial General land use district.
Date: November 15, 2005 MCC Date: December 5, 2005
Synopsis of Previous Council Action:
None
Recommended Motion:
That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor and Common Council deny the appeal and uphold
the Planning Commission's denial Development Permit I No. 05-81 based upon the Findings of
Fact.
James G. Funk
Contact person: Ben Steckler, Associate Planner Phone: 384-5057
Supporting data attached: Staff Report Ward(s): 4
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. Description)
I
Finance:
Council Notes:
Agenda Item No. _ 1'
I�-� 5 05
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: Appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Development Permit No.
05-081
Appellant:
In Woo Lee
5072 Cadiz Circle
La Palma, CA 90623
(714) 827-4541
BACKGROUND:
Mr. & Mrs. Lee are appealing the Planning Commission's denial of Development Permit I No.
05-081 to re-use of an existing vacant building as a coin operated laundry facility. The project
site is located located at 4399 N. Sierra Way in the CG-1, Commercial General land use
district (Exhibit 1).
On August 5, 2005 Planning approved Development Permit I No. 05-081 to reuse an existing
structure as a coin operated laundry facility. On August 17, 2005 Mary Cox, representing the
Wildwood Park Neighborhood Association filed an application of appeal in regards to
Development Permit I No. 05-081, citing safety and compatibility as concerns.
At their meeting of October 18, 2005, the Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 to 1 to deny
Appeal No. 05-20 thereby denying Development Permit No. 05-081. Commissioners Brown,
Durr, Enciso, Heasley, and Sauerbrun voted to deny the Appeal and Development Permit,
Commissioner Powell abstained, and Commissioners Conte, and Morris were absent. The
Planning Commission determined that Finding of Fact number 8 could not be made in support
of the requested coin laundry facility. The Finding of Fact as determined by the Planning
Commission reads as follows:
The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the
proposed development would be detrimental to the public interest, health,
safety, convenience, or welfare in that the design and operating
characteristics are potentially hazardous to the public safety. The design of
the structure fully encloses the operating area of the laundry facility, placing
patrons in jeopardy due to limited visibility from the adjacent streets.
On October 28, 2005, Planning staff received an appeal application (Appeal No. 05-24). The
appellants' grounds for the appeal are that (1) evidence does not support the finding of fact; (2)
findings of fact do not support the decision; (3) Planning Commission abused its discretion in
overturning the decision of the Director of the Planning Division; and (4) new evidence. The
new evidence referred to is listed in the `additional information' section of the application,
which identifies that Mr. Lee is willing to install a 16 camera surveillance system, add
windows to the exterior walls, install a silent alarm, and add exterior lighting. These
concessions are in direct relation to the issues identified by the Planning Commission, in an
attempt to make the existing structure safer for the proposed use.
Staff is not sure what the appellant means when they state that the " (1) Evidence does not
justify the findings of fact" and/or "(2) Findings of fact do not support the decision." The
Planning Commission determination was made based upon personal observations of site
conditions and with Finding of Fact number 8 read into the record as included above. Thus the
evidence they saw on their site visits supported their decision, and the Finding of Fact
identified was made and read into the record, clearly in support of their decision.
The Planning Commission is the appeal authority when reviewing a determination by either the
Director or the Development Review Committee, as identified by Development Code Section
19.52.090. Finally, although staff agrees that the concessions offered could make the structure
and use more safe, however, it is not clear that they would make the structure safe enough for
the proposed use based on the application provided.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
None. The appellants submitted appeal fees.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council close the public hearing, deny the appeal
and uphold the Planning Commission's denial of Development Permit I No. 05-81 to re-use an
existing vacant building as a coin operated laundry facility based on the Findings of Fact as
determined by the Planning Commission.
EXHIBITS:
1 Location Map
2 Planning Commission Staff Report Dated October 18, 2005
3 Application for Appeal No. 05-24
i
EXHIBIT 1
FF[HEARING NARDINO PROJECT: Appeal N (DPI No
P - LAND USE DISTRICTS
0/18/05 NORTH
J
j t -1 , '-"" - x - -
*4 1 X�7
v06 v it
M /
Lelf,
T. Q
°� a 44th Street
I � wt-Ow000
\ , 4o T
s�Nau 10 sa+°RA
- a RAIL RALSTON
Y W�
39 9 to f 3
AVERY ST
u
CT k �y
J
V wi
s 1 qG j°°I
L _
a
9 ENNINC
Q
GJ •� N o r N D A D BERNARD WW
EXHIBIT 2
SUMMARY CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION
CASE: Development Permit I No. 05-081 (Appeal No. 05-20)
AGENDA ITEM: 3
HEARING DATE: October 18, 2005
WARD: 4
APPELANT(S): APPLICANT:
Mary Cox In Woo Lee
Wildwood Park Neighborhood Ass. 5072 Cadiz Circle
PO Box 512 La Palma, CA 90623
Patton, CA 92369-0512 (714) 827-4541
(909) 886-3673
REQUEST/LOCATION:
An appeal of the Director's approval for the re-use of an existing vacant building as a
coin operated laundry facility. The project site is located at 4399 N. Sierra Way in the
CG-1, Commercial General land use district.
CONSTRAINTS/OVERLAYS:
NONE
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS:
❑ Not Applicable
® Exempt; Section 15301 - Existing facilities
❑ No Significant Effects
❑ Previous Mitigated Negative Declaration
❑ Potential Effects, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting
Plan
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
❑ Approval
❑ Conditions
® Denial
❑ Continuance to:
Development Permit No. 05-081/Appeal #05-20
Hearing Date October 18, 2005
Page 2
APPELLANT'S GROUNDS FOR APPEAL
Appeal of the Director's approval for the re-use of an existing vacant building as a coin
operated laundry facility located at 4399 N. Sierra Way (see Attachment A).
The appellant's grounds for appeal is that the proposed use will attract loiterers who
may be either criminal, or homeless people, and that there is an over concentration of
this type of business in the area (see Attachment B).
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Development Permit I No. 05-081 was submitted on May 6, 2005 to establish a new coin
operated laundry facility in an existing vacant structure. The San Bernardino
Development Code § 19.06.020, Table 06-01 allows for self-serve laundry facilities in the
CG-1, Commercial General land use district. Re-use of an existing building with a
permitted use is a Director determination (Development Code Section 19.31, Table
31.01). The Development Code does not require any specific standards of development
for the proposed use, nor does it contain any location restrictions (as related to over
concentration). Thus, the general requirements of the Development Code were
considered when reviewing the proposed project.
Presented with an application to establish a use that is allowed by the Development
Code and an existing structure that was proposed for re-occupancy, staff found that the
proposed use was consistent with the Development Code. Staff understands the
concerns of Wildwood Park Neighborhood Association, however staff believes that the
use isn't necessarily the problem, which is most likely to be related to management
practices. The Conditions of Approval were drafted in accordance with all applicable
Development Code requirements and DPI No. 05-081 was approved (see Attachment C).
COMMENTS RECEIVED
Mr. Richard B. Andrade submitted a comment letter on October 7, 2005 as the attorney
for the Development Permit proponent (Mr. & Mrs. Lee). In this response Mr. Andrade
addresses the concerns brought about by the appellant, and expresses the applicant's
beliefs that the proposed use is the best possible use for the project site. Many of the
comments related to San Bernardino County statistics do not appear to be applicable to
the project or the appeal (see Attachment D).
Development Permit No. 05-081/Appeal #05-20
Hearing Date October 18, 2005
Page 3
CONCLUSION
Based on the City's records staff found no facts and/or data to support the appellant's
grounds for the appeal.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission close the public hearing, deny the
appeal and uphold the Director's Determination that the coin operated laundry facility
may be established, based upon the supporting data contained in this staff report.
Respectfully Submitted,
P4,j, JT---
James Funk
Director, Development Services
/-�--� i
Ben Steckler
Associate Planner
Attachment A Location Map
Attachment B Appeal Application
Attachment C Development Permit I No. 05-081 Approval
Attachment D Letter of response to the appeal dated October 7, 2005.
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PROJECT: Appeal No. 05-20
PLANNING DIVISION (DPI No. 05-081)
LOCATION MAP - LAND USE DISTRICTS
HEARING DATE: 10/18/05 NORTH
Ju
1
Vk -t ;
rE
of a
p441h Street
I � w..ow000
41 it
40 TH
RALf RALSTON
W
39 3ltA
ST
w
J
d /
O �oil CT W
V � J
y c H >
a W u Y
J 3/
L /
Q4 NocnMiaC
v •� t o r n it o eERNAno wtir
ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Development Services Department, Planning Division
300 North "E" Street, 3`° Floor
San Bernardino. CA 92418
Sall BernaP I Phone (909084-5057 • (909) 384-5080
Web address: wwA,.sbcitv.ora
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF THE (check one)
• Development Services Director
• Xevelopment/Environmental Review Committee
EK Planning Commission
Case number(s): 045 `""
Project address: 4399 North Sierra way, San Bernardino
Appellant's name: Wildwood Park Neighborhood Association
Appellant's address: P. 0. Box 512, Patton CA 92369-0512
Appellant's phone: None
Appellant's e-mail address: None
Contact person's name: Mary Cox
Contact person's address: 219 E. 44th Street, San Bernardino CA
Contact person's phone: (909) 886-3673
Contact person's e-mail address: NONE
Pursuant to Section 19.52.100 of the Development Code, an appeal must be filed on a City application form
within 15 days following the final date of action, accompanied by the appropriate appeal filing fee.
Appeals are normally scheduled for a determination by the Planning Commission or Mayor and Common
Council within 30 days of the filing date of the appeal. You will be notified, in writing, of the specific date and
time of the appeal hearing.
OFFICE USE ONLY
Date appeal filed: '� D
Received by:
:-A*RERNAR O
SERXo Tges
IiCDA OTIIAC�IIY
REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR AN APPEAL
Specific action being appealed and the date of that action: DPI #05-081, dtd Aug 5, 2005
COIN LAUNDRY FACILITY AT 4399 North Sierra Way, San Bernardino
Specific grounds for the appeal: This permit allows the COIN LAUNDRY to be located next door
to one of the WORST APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARIES.
Two blocks away, a coin laundry had continuous gunshots to their windows, there
was loitering and intimidation of clients, etc.
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP is concerned about the criminal, loitering and homeless
ACTIVITIES THIS BUSINESS WOULD ATTRACT. Two other coin laundry facilities already
exist in the area, and we are concerned about an excessive concentration of such
businesses in our neighborhood.
Action sought: RESCIND THE APPROVAL Provide a business that is useful. NOT subject to
crime and not appealing to loitering, drug pushers, drug users, prostitutes,
homeless and the like. PROVIDE A BUSINESS THAT WOULD BE AN ASSET TO THE NE OD
AND BUSINESSES THAT SURROUND IT.
Additional information: Many months ago, the Contact Person coordinated with SBPD Northern
District (Lt Boom) and was assured they would not sign off when the papers came or
_ coordination (THE PAPERS WERE APPROVED BY HIS BOSS WE UNDERSTAND).
Then the Contact Person called Valerie Ross and verbally was assured that
before plans were let the Wildwood Park Neighborhood Assn would be able to voice our
concerns (THAT DID NOT HAPPEN! ) _
The Neighborhood Assn knows of at least one robbery of clients, at gunpoint,
during 0;" time the Beauty Shop was at the location The perpetrators were from
the Apartment Complexes.
The Design being considered will give easy access to the clients tor the
criminal element to again do their business at this location. Possibly they may
even shoot the windows from this facility as well.
Signature of appellant: /�� �/��� Date: �7
f 0.5
2 11/04
ATTACHMENT C
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
300 North"D"Street•San Bernardino •CA 92418-0001
Planning &Building 909.384.5057•Fax:909.384.5080
San Bernar IN Works/Engineering 909.384.5111•Fax:909.384.5155
www.sbcity.org
5M
August 5, 2005
In Woo Lee
5072 Cadiz Circle
La Palma, CA 90623
RE: Development Permit Type I No. 05-081 - 4399 N. Sierra Way
(APN: 0154-222-28-0000)
Dear In Woo Lee;
Planning staff has approved Development Permit I (DPI) No. 05-081, a request to
establish a coin laundry, based on the Findings of Fact in the Development Code
19.44.060 and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval and Standard
Requirements.
The decision of the Planning staff is final unless a written appeal is filed, with the
appropriate fee, within 15 days of the Planning staff's action, pursuant to Section
19.52.100 of the Municipal (Development) Code.
Please contact me at (909) 384-5057 if you have any questions or concerns regarding the
approval of DPI No. 05-081.
ely,
Ben Steckler,
Associate Planner
Enc. Conditions of Approval
Cc: Address File
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -
DPI No. 05-081
Super Coin Laundry
4399 N. Sierra Way
1. This Development Permit I is an approval to establish a coin operated laundry
located at 4399 N. Sierra Way. The laundry facility shall be operated between the
hours of 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM Monday through Saturday and 8:00 AM and 8:00 PM
Sundays.
2. Within two years 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. However, approval of the
Development Permit does not authorize commencement of construction. All
necessary permits must be obtained prior to commencement of specified
construction activities included in the Conditions of Approval.
Expiration Date: August 5, 2007
3. The review authority may grant a one-time extension, for good cause, not to exceed
12 months. The applicant must file an application, the processing fees, and all
required submittal items, 30 days prior to the expiration date. The review authority
shall ensure that the project complies with all Development Code provisions in
effect at the time of the requested extension.
4. In the event this approval is legally challenged, the City will promptly notify the
applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and will cooperate fully in the defense
of this matter. Once notified, the applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold
harmless the City of San Bernardino (City), the Economic Development Agency of
the City of San Bernardino (EDA), any departments, agencies, divisions, boards or
commission of either the City or EDA as well as predecessors, successors, assigns,
agents, directors, elected officials, officers, employees, representatives and attorneys
of either the City or EDA from any claim, action or proceeding against any of the
foregoing persons or entities. The applicant further agrees to reimburse the City for
any costs and attorneys' fees which the City may be required by a court to pay as a
result of such action, but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his or her
obligation under this condition.
The costs, salaries, and expenses of the City_ Attorney and employees of his office
shall be considered as "attorneys fees" for the purpose of this condition.
Conditions of Approval DPI No.05-081
issuing this permit, this condition shall remain in
ion for ss ,
As part of the consideration g p
effect if this Development Permit is rescinded or revoked, whether or not at the
request of applicant.
5. The approval is subject to all the applicable provisions of the Development Code
in
effect at the time of approval. This includes Chapter 19.20 - Property Development
Standards, and includes: dust and dirt control during construction and grading
activities (as applicable); emission control of fumes, vapors, gas and other forms of
air pollution; glare control; exterior lighting design and control; noise control; odor
control; screening; signs; off-street parking and off-street loading; and vibration
control.
6. Signs are not approved as part of this permit. Signs painted on the outside of the
building are prohibited. Signage for the facility must be submitted for review and be
approved by Planning Staff under a separate sign permit application prior to
commencement of use.
7. No painted window signs,roof signs, permanent sale or come-on signs will be
permitted at this site per SBMC § 19.22.060.
8. Any/all existing signage on-site shall be brought into compliance with the current
Development Code requirements.
9. If public pay phones are installed on the site, they must be located inside the building
and fixed for outgoing calls only.
10. The project shall comply with all applicable requirements of Public Works, the
Building Division, the Police Department,Water Department, Public Services
Department, Refuse Division, and the City Clerks Office, Business Registration
Division.
11. The project shall comply with all applicable requirements of other outside agencies (i.e.
San Bernardino County Health Department,San Bernardino Department of
Environmental Health Services, and the California Board of Equalization) as
applicable.
12. All graffiti must be removed within 24 hours of its occurrence. The management
shall take a photograph of the graffiti and provide it to the Police Department before
removing the graffiti.
13. All exterior lighting shall be energy efficient with the ability to lower or reduce usage
when the facility is closed. Signage may be required to be turned-off when the facility
is closed.
2
Conditions of Approval DPI No.05-081
14. Submittal requirements for permit applications (building, site improvements,
landscaping, etc.) to Building Plan Check and/or Public Works/Engineering shall
include all Conditions of Approval and Standard Requirements issued with the
Planning approval.
15. No "entertainment" is allowed at this location.
16. No exterior loudspeakers are approved in conjunction with this use.
17. The proposed patio shall be treated with a solid clear fencing and vegetation (as
described below) to screen the use from the adjacent residential use. The screening
wall shall be constructed to a height between 5'-6' and shall span along the northern
and eastern boundaries, allowing for an opening to meet accessibility requirements.
18. Chairs (and any other furniture, planters, etc) placed on patio shall be:
a) Arranged to allow for accessibility at all times; and
b) Maintained, repaired, or replaced so as to always appear to be in good
conditions (like new).
19. Chairs (and any other furniture, excluding planters and clear fencing) placed on
patio shall be taken into the structure and stored overnight.
20. No outdoor storage of any materials shall be allowed on-site.
21. The existing structure shall be repaired (as needed) and repainted (with the colors
and painting scheme subject to approval of the project planner prior to
commencement of use.
22. Plans submitted to Building and Safety, Public Works, and other departments shall
include all provisions of the Site Plan Checklist (as attached). All structures onsite shall
be indicated accurately and properly dimensioned.
23. The entire parking lot shall be resurfaced and restriped according to Public Works
requirements and Development Code standards. This shall include but not be limited
to curbing, lighting, landscaping, circulation, etc.
24. Noise from facility shall not exceed 65 dBA as measured at the property line of
adjacent residential land use district.
3
Conditions of Approval DPI No.05-081
25. Landscaping
and irrigation shall be upgraded to meet current Development Code
standards as follows:
a) Full setback landscaping along Sierra Way and 44th Street
b) 15% of entire parking area shall be landscaped and irrigated.
c) 1 tree per four parking stalls
d) Landscaping in pots/planters placed inside of the clear solid safety
fence along the proposed outdoor patio (as described on item
number 17 above).
26. Planters used in outdoor patio area shall be large enough to hold plants,but small
enough so that people on the patio can be seen (at all times) from the adjacent public
rights-of-way (44th Street and the Alley).
27. This permit or approval is subject to the attached conditions or requirements of the
following City Departments or Divisions:
a. Fire Department
b. Building and Safety
28. All conditions of approval shall be met prior to establishment of use.
44th Street
Oa�
Doom d
Clear Fence
Planters (Typ.)
Path of Travel _
hairs/benches
NOR H
Outdoor Patio Detail
N.T.S.
Note:
The patio configuration does not have to match this diagram exactly, this is a
sample of how it can be ddne to meet all Conditions of Approval above.
4
City of San Bernardino
STANDARD REQUIREMENTS
Development Services/Plan Check Division
LSan i Qernar no
w
Property- address: yS9q • S�av c, W e.
DRC/CUP DPI No. o5 .0$ DATE: �w(Ll
NOTE ; NO PLANS WILL BE ACCEPTED FOR
PLAN CHECK WITHOUT CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL IMPRINTED ON PLAN SHEETS.
Submit 6 sets of plans, minimum size 18" x 24", drawn to scale. If plan check is for
expeditious review, submit 6 sets. The plans shall include (if applicable):
a. site plan (include address & assessors parcel number)
b. foundation plan
C. floor plan (label use of all areas)
d. elevations
e. electrical, mechanical,& plumbing plans
f. detail sheets (structural)
g. cross section details
h. show compliance with Title 24/Accessibility (disabled access)
i. a plan check deposit fee will be required upon submittal of plans.
Call Development Services (plan check) 909-384-5071 for amount.
1. The title sheet of the plans must specify the occupancy classification, type of construction, if
the building has sprinklers, & the current applicable codes.
2. The person who prepares them must sign the plans. Also, provide the address & phone
number of that person. Some types of occupancies require that the plans are prepared,
stamped, and signed by an architect, engineer, or other person licensed by the State of
California.
3. For structures that must include an engineers design, provide 2 sets of stamped/wet signed
calculations prepared by a licensed arch itect/engineer.
4. Provide 2 sets of Title 2�/Energy compliance forms and calculations. Some compliance
forms are required to be printed on the plans.
300 N `D' Street San Bernardino CA 92418
909-384-5071 Office 909-384-5080 Fax
5. Submit grading, site, and/or landscape plans to Public Works/En
ineering for plan check
approval and permits. For more information, phone 909-384-5111.
6. Fire sprinkler plans, fires suppression system plans, etc., shall be submitted to the Fire
Department for plan check approval and permits. For information, phone 909-384-5388.
7. Signs require a separate submittal to the Planning Division for plan check approval and
permits. For information, phone 909-384-5057.
8. Restaurants, food preparation facilities, and some health related occupancies will require
clearances and approved plans from San Bernardino County Health Department. For
information, phone 909-387-3043.
9. Occupancies that include restaurants, car washes, automotive repair/auto body, dentist
offices, food preparation facilities or processing plants, etc. may require approvals and
permits from San Bernardino Water Reclamation. For information, phone 909-384-5141.
10. An air quality permit may be required. Contact South Coast Air Quality Management
Division for information, phone 909-396-2000.
11. State of California Business & Professions Code/Contractors License Law requires that
permits can be issued to licensed contractors or owner-builders (that are doing the work).
Contractors must provide their State license number, a city business registration, and
workers compensation policy carrier & policy number. Owner-builders must provide
proof of ownership.
NOTE: PLAN CHECK TIME ON THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS IS APPROXIMATELY 4-6
WEEKS FOR 1ST CORRECTIONS. EXPEDITIOUS REVIEW IS APPROXIMATELY 10 WORKING
DAYS. THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS IS NOT THE BUILDING PLAN CHECK AND
DOES NOT IMPLY THAT THE DESIGN AS SUBMITTED WILL BE APPROVED WITHOUT
CORRECTIONS.
Comments:
300 N `D' Street San Bernardino CA 92418
909-384-5071 Office 909-384-5080 Fax
ATTACHMENT D
ANDRADE & ASSOCIATES
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
CONSTRUCTION LAWYERS
RICHARD B.ANDRADEt JEFFREY CORPORATE CENTRE RONALD G.HOLBERT*
5510 TRAeuco ROAD NATALIA D.SmmH
IRVINE,CALIFORNIA 926205705 SHERRY A.ROSHAN
tJD/CALIFORNIA LICENSED GENERAL CONTRACTOR TELEPHONE(949)553-1951 SCOTT KRON
*JD/LICENSED IN NEVADA&CALIFORNIA FACSIMILE(949)553-0655
"'PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER CA,CO.Ur,OR.WA, E-MAIL' ANDRADE @AALAWS.COM OF COUNSEL
NM&AZ AZZAM D.SAADt***
October 7, 2005
Via Personal Delivery
City of San Bernardino
Development Services Department, Planning/Building Division /a�
300 North"D"Street LE &o(�
San Bernardino,CA 92418
i
Matter Appeal#05-20 7r 1` 2005
Our client Mr. &Mrs. Woo Lee L"'Ty()F
Our File No. 25021-001 �;L0 q EN ES RV/CE$
Re Response to Appeal RTMENT
Dear Planning Commission Members:
Please allow me to introduce myself as counsel for Mr. & Mrs. Woo Lee, the owners of the
property which is the subject of the above-mentioned appeal. This letter will provide you with a response
to the Wildwood Park Neighborhood Association's(hereinafter referred to as"WPNA")appeal from the
decision of the Planning Commission approving a Coin Laundry facility to be located at 4399 North Sierra
Way, San Bernardino,CA 92418.
The appeal by WPNA asserts that an operation of a coin laundry facility at a site next to an
apartment complex will attract criminal,loitering and homeless activities. The WPNA,however,offers no
evidence to support its claim and in fact those instances cited are cited inaccurately and are clearly taken
out of context.
As will be demonstrated,the operation of a coin laundry facility is the best possible use of the
property,will provided needed tax revenue for the City,and will not attract criminal,loitering or homeless
activity. For these reasons,the appeal should be denied.
Best Possible Use
At the beginning of 2005, San Bernardino drafted and implemented a general plan. San
Bernardino designated the Land Use Element in this plan to function as a guide to planners,the general
public, and decision makers as to the ultimate pattern of development. This plan designates general site
development standards and the distribution,location,and extent of land uses,such as housing,business,
and industry. In particular,the Land Use Element establishes the primary basis for consistency with the
San Bernardino's development,code. Title 19 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code. The coin laundry
facility approved by the Planning Commission in this case has been determined to meet these standards.
The approved facility falls within the commercial general district which is intended to provide for the
continued use, and enhancement of retail, personal services, and related commercial uses to service the
needs of the residents. Thi„ facility is the best possible use for this community.
ANDRADE & ASSOCIATES
October 7, 2005
Page 2
Coin Laundry Facility.
Contrary to the position of the WPNA, the operation of a coin laundry facility would actually
benefit the community. A coin laundry facility is exactly the type of business WPNA describes as
desirable. The coin laundry market consists of 89 million customers throughout the U.S. Coin Laundry
Association, Coin Laundry:An Industry Overview, at http:lA vww.4hb.com/0430coinlaundry.html. Clean
clothes are considered a necessity of modern life. A coin laundry facility would provide a basic health
service and necessity to the community. What's more,a coin laundry facility is exceptionally beneficial to
renter-occupied densely populated areas. Statistics establish that 31%of the population of San Bernardino
is renters. San Bernardino County, CA — county housing, home & apartment costs, at
http:1Avww.epodunk.com. Of this 31%, 17%of the renters in San Bernardino County are single mothers.
Robert Bernstein, Statistical Brief, Bureau of the Census, (1994).
Additionally, the renter-occupied housing in the area lacks adequate laundry facilities for its
current renters. The WPNA incorrectly states that two coin laundry facilities exist in the area. However,
the WPNA faits to advise the Commission that one of the facilities referenced, the "Suds Your Duds"
facility has closed down and no longer in operation. I am attaching photographs taken recently that clearly
shows that the "Suds Your Duds" coin laundry has ceased operations, leaving only one coin operated
facility to service the densely populated neighborhood. Not only will the proposed coin laundry facility
serve the community's needs but also it will replace the"Suds Your Duds"Coin Laundry that is no longer
open for business.
Thus,a coin laundry facility would in fact be an asset to the community of San Bernardino.
Criminal Activity.
The WPNA asserts that the operation of a coin-operated laundry will promote criminal activity in
the neighborhood such as drug pushers, drug users, prostitutes,homeless and the like. In support of its
appeal,the WPNA cites to an incident where a coin laundry operated two blocks away from the proposed
location,had continuous gunshots to its windows.
However,unaware of the actual circumstances,the WPNA has made the incorrect assumption that
the type of business was &.e cause for the criminal activity. In reality, the incident the WPNA cites
occurred due to the business owner's confrontation with a trespasser and not because the business was a
coin laundry facility. Unbeknownst to the owner,the trespasser was a member of a gang who retaliated
against the owner by shooting out the windows of the business (in the middle of the night while the
business was closed)as wet!as intimidating the coin laundry owner's customers in an effort to discourage
business. If not for the owner's confrontation, none of these crimes would have occurred. The incident
cited to by the WPNA was an isolated incident only.
The WPNA's claim that the business will attract criminal activity such as loitering is also
inaccurate. Unlike the other coin laundry facilities cited to by the WPNA,the Lee's will have an employee
on site for all hours that the facility is open for business. In this manner, any criminal activity will be
immediately reported to the police for appropriate handling.
The WPNA's reference to a robbery that occurred at the beauty Solon previously operated at the
location at issue is also misplaced. Simply because a prior criminal act occurred at this location,does not
mean that further criminal activities will occur. In the same manner,the fact that the perpetrators resided
in the apartment complex adjacent to the instant location is also of no consequence. Accepting this sort of
ANDRADE & ASSOCIATES
October 7, 2005
Page 3
misguided logic would amount to accepting the proposition that all renters are criminals. This simply is
not the case. Simply because a large apartment complex exists adjacent to the location by itself does not
mean criminal activity is more likely to occur. In fact, in 2000, only 932 or 1% of all arrests in San
Bernardino County were arrests for robbery. Id. By 2003,those arrested for robbery dropped below 1%.
Id. The statistical data clearly shows that there is no correlation between the robbery at the beauty solon
and the likelihood of further robberies at a coin laundry business.
Finally,the WPNA has provided no evidence in support of their claim that a coin laundry facility
attracts drug use, drug sales, and prostitution. Contrary to the assertions of the WPNA, statistics
maintained by the FBI, show such a claim is simply untrue and unsupportable. Of the 87,706 arrests in
San Bernardino County in 2000, only 19% were for drug violations. Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Uniform Crime Report, (2000). In addition, less than I% or 313 arrests were made for prostitution and
commercial vice. Id. These statistics establish that drug violations,prostitution,and commercial vice are
least likely to occur in San Bernardino County regardless of the particular location or type of business
operated. The WPNA's claim that a coin laundry facility will attract undesirables is completely
unsupported by the statistics recorded in the Uniform Crime Report.
This is particularly true in light of the San Bernardino Police Department's(SBPD)decision not to
respond to the inquiry of the Planning Commission prior to the approval of the operation of a coin laundry
facility. During the approval process, the SBPD was given an opportunity to provide input on the
proposed use of the facility. The SBPD did not provide any facts that would establish that they believed
that the operation of a coin laundry would result in an increase in criminal activities at the location.
REQUEST TO AFFIRM APPROVAL
Based on the facts of this appeal,WPNA's claims,and the likelihood of providing an asset to the
community of San Bernardino, we request that the Planning Commission affirm its reasoned decision
approving a coin laundry facility to be located at 4399 North Sierra Way.
Sincerely,
AND DE& SO IATES
By.
Ric and B. Andrade
Attorneys for Mr. & Mrs. Lee
RBA:lam
Enclosures
GA)ATATee,In Woo-250211City of SB Planning Dept-0021Response Letter to Planning Board-(rba).doc
cc: Mr. &Mrs. Lee
LW
On October 28, 2005, f-fGsoi-ved an appeal application(Appeal No. 05-24). The
appellants' grounds for the appeal are that (1) evidence does not support the finding of fact; (2)
findings of fact do not support the decision; (3) Planning Commission abused its discretion in
overturning the decision of the Director of the Planning Division; and (4)new evidence. The
new evidence referred to is listed in the `additional information' section of the application, which
r system,identifies that Mr. Lee is willing to install a 16 camera surveillance add windows to the
exterior walls, install a silent alarm, and add exterior lighting. These concessions are in direct
relation to the issues identified by the Planning Commission, in an attempt to make the existing
structure safer for the proposed use.
Staff is not sure what the appellant means when they state that the " (1) Evidence does not justify
the findings of fact" and/or"(2)Findings of fact do not support the decision." The Planning
Commission determination was made based upon personal observations of site conditions and
with Finding of Fact number 8 read into the record as included above. Thus the evidence they
saw on their site visits supported their decision, and the Finding of Fact identified was made and
read into the record,-@4@&4y in support of their decision.
The Planning Commission is the appeal authority when reviewing a determination by either the
Director or the Development Review Committee, as identified by Development Code Section
19.52.090. Finally, although staff agrees that the concessions offered could make the structure
and use more safe,U@wowr, it is not clear that they would make the structure safe enough for the
proposed use based on the application provided.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
None. The appellants submitted appeal fees.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council close the public hearing, deny the appeal
and uphold the Planning Commission's denial of Development Permit I No. 05-81 to re-use an
existing vacant building as a coin operated laundry facility based on the Findings of Fact as
determined by the Planning Commission.
EXHIBITS:
1 Location Map
2 Planning Commission Staff Report Dated October 18, 2005
3 Application for Appeal No. 05-24
EXHIBIT 3
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Development Services Department, Planning Division
300 North "E" Street, 3rd Floor
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Sal) Bernar 1110 Phone (909) 384-5057 • (909) 384-5080
Web address: www.sbcity.org
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF THE (check one)
❑ Development Services Director
❑ Development/Environmental Review Committee
RJ Planning Commission
Case number(s): DPI 05-081 / peal # 05-20 �S •,��
Project address: 4399 North Sierra Way, San Bernardino, CA 92369
Appellant's name: In Woo Lee
Appellant's address: 7353 Ellena West #88, Pancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Appellant's phone: 714-328-9576
Appellant's e-mail address: n/a
Contact person's name: Scott A. Kron, Esq.
Contact person's address: 5510 Trabuco Rd., Irvine CA 92620
Contact person's phone: 949-553-1951
Contact person's e-mail address: skron @aalaws.ccm
Pursuant to Section 19.52.100 of the Development Code, an appeal must be filed on a City application form
within 15 days following the final date of action, accompanied by the appropriate appeal filing fee.
Appeals are normally scheduled for a determination by the Planning Commission or Mayor and Common
Council within 30 days of the filing date of the appeal. You will be notified, in writing, of the specific date and
time of the appeal hearing.
OFFICE USE ONLY
Date appeal filed: L C - �
Received by: ) �{ �%`�. 5 A Z Z2
1 11/04
REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR AN APPEAL
Specific action being appealed and the date of that action: Planning Commission's granting of appeal
No 05-20, and overturning the Director of the T)PVP1 onmPnf SPrvi ces T)P=artmp-nt., Pl anni i2q
Division's approval of Development Permit I No. 05-081 dated dated October 18, 2005.
Specific grounds for the appeal: (1) Evidence does not justify findings of fact.
(2) Findings of fact do not support the decision.
(3) Planning Commission abused its discretion in overturning decision of the Director _
of the Planning Division.
(4) New evidence
Act on sought: Re-instatement of the Director of Development Services Department, Planning
Division's approval of Development Permit I No. 05-031 and reversal of Planning
Commission's decision to grant appeal
Additional information: Since decision on r ndPrPd hZ P1 nni nq Commi GSi on prey owner, Tn Who
Lee, has taken into consideration suggestions Planning Commission members gave in order
to have pPrmi t app rnyed_ mr, TP-e i s wi 1 1 i ng and ahl P to i nGta 11 a 1 6 I anre
system; additional outside lighting; store front glass doors; silent emergency alert
system; n1 par wi ncdcx c: with nn Siqn Aqp,I pj-tari nq, nr Cn--ari nq- and Pxt-prirl thin ulall
adjacent to the alley.
Signature of appellant. Date: !0 127 D5
2 11/04
r
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
RACHEL G.CLARK,C.M.C.-CrrY CLERK
300 North"D"Street•San Bernardino•CA 92418-0001
909.384.5002•Fax: 909.384.5158
www.sbcity.org
San Bernar ono
SM
December 7, 2005
In Woo Lee
5072 Cadiz Circle
La Palma, CA 90623
Dear Mr. Lee:
At the meeting of the Mayor and Common Council held on December 5, 2005, the following
action was taken relative to an appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Development
Permit I No. 05-81, to reuse an existing vacant building as a coin operated laundry facility at
4399 N. Sierra Way in the CG-1, Commercial General, land use district.
The Mayor and Common Council continued the matter to the Council/
Commission meeting of December 19, 2005, at 6 p.m.
If we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact the City Clerk's office.
Sincerely,
Rachel G. Clark
City Clerk
RGC:lls
cc: Development Services
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
ADOPTED SHARED VALUES: Integrity•Accountability•Respect for Human Dignity•Honesty
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
RACHEL G.CLARK,C.M.C.-CITY CLERK
300 North"D"Street•San Bernardino•CA 92418-0001
909.384.5002•Fax: 909.384.5158
www.sbcity.org
San Bernar ino
SM
December 22, 2005
In Woo Lee
5072 Cadiz Circle
La Palma, CA 90623
Dear Mr. Lee:
At the meeting of the Mayor and Common Council held on December 19, 2005, the following
action was taken relative to an appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Development
Permit I No. 05-81, to reuse an existing vacant building as a coin operated laundry facility at
4399 N. Sierra Way in the CG-1, Commercial General, land use district.
The hearing was closed; and the Mayor and Common Council denied the appeal
and upheld the Planning Commission's denial of Development Permit I No.
05-81, based upon the Findings of Fact.
If we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact the City Clerk's office.
Sincerely,
Rachel G. Clark
City Clerk
RGC:Ils
pc: Development Services
Scott A. Kron, Attorney at Law, Andrade & Associates, 5510 Trabuco Road, Irvine,
CA 92620-5705
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
ADOPTED SHARED VALUES: Integrity•Accountability•Respect for Human Dignity•Honesty
^d +ntn Record at
,Oevcros mtg: � 'I`x '65
u!ILOWOOD PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
PETITION - AGAINST A COIN LAUNDRY AT, � item , �p
4399 SIERRA WAY (44th E SieAvca Way)
(' a z L AGAINST having a taundAomat at 44th £ Sie4Aa-ALau (WE HAVF 'T J0 07-fff Q c
WITHIN A COUPLE OF BLOCKS) . We are concerned beearvse o6 tit
WE APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- and they are BCy
us beeau�e o6 the SAFETY ISSUE. The Nail € HaiA Saton .thax "8f d��ieardino
ioca-tion pnev.io"ty had cti.ent�s robbed at gunpoint in bnoa.d day. ight.
The. accem<biti.ty ii S not conducive to good .secuAity and WC AS A NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP ARE TRYING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
We tJie undeA sii ned nm.ident6, JAom above 40th, SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- We don't want ano etc coon Yaundny
<n ouA ne-ighbon ood.
ktV,�E!AVVRESS
_ 14,ev
7
r/v ( 1�L�d--C�/L L Ila
s �ZZl
aV
�t 4 �° 3-S �c P PAL�y j C 4_ ` _ _o
Ll
- - -- = - ei
J(0l
% ivy
W7LD(JOOD PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
PETITION - AGAINST A COIN LAUNDRY AT
4399 SIERRA WAY (44th S Sienna Clay)
We ale AGAINST having a taundAomat at 44th E Sienna Gray (WE HAVE TWO OTHERS
WITHIN A COUPLE OF BLOCKS) . We are concerned beea"e ob the SAFETY ISSUE.
WE APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- and they aAe �suppoxti.ng
" becauze o6 the SAFETY ISSUE. The Nait 9 Have Saton that occupied the
Vocation pAev-ious-ey had cei.ent�s robbed at gunpoint in broad daytight.
?he ucce mib.i-Pity .cis not conducive to good secuAity and WE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP ARE TRYING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
b-'e tie undms-i ned Ae�s.idents, JAom above 40th, SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
GROU}' AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- We don't uJant ano ieA eo.in eaundny
,(.n our. ne ighboA ood. --
NAME;AUDRESS
-572 .5(M orq S� ✓ct.l 3e�rl crc✓i �fL 6
�ml ,-' r-O PJ G/ 4 ) S'–S–7-) r 77 9 2 0 Z—
_�� cZ-
y sue= ��4fb
&y,.,wc r z%( 3 6 l 5 Al_ �1> S?. J�,,, � � Z
:�kL gV-1a-
-`—i'Y y2 5,--
6/1
WILDWOOD PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
C TION
PETITION - AGAINST A COIN LAUNDRY AT
4399 SIERRA WAY (44th S Sienna Way)
We aie AGAINST having a ta.und4omat at 44th & Sie&Aa Clay (WE HAVE TWO 07HERS
WITHIN A COUPLE OF BLOCKS) . We are concerned because o6 .the SAFETY ISSUE.
WE APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- and they are .6appo4-ti.ng
t" becau,6e o6 the SAFETY ISSUE. The Nail S Haut Saton that occupied the
bca-tcurt previous-ey had ctient,s robbed at gunpoint in broad daytigl'id.
The ucces-s.tbit, ty is not conducive to good zecuAity and WE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP A,ZE TRYING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
We the unden�s-Lgned Ae6idents, Jnom above 40th, SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- We don't wnt another eon taundny
,cn our ne.ighbonhood.
NAME/ADDRESS
�; 0
_-( - �4� `f I S i<� Off✓} /V S(I q':-'10-7 ------
� _Q 331 LA9 4V4" 57,
Vj, 40
x
WILDGIOOD PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
PETITION - AGAINST A COIN LAUNDRY AT
4399 SIERRA WAY (44th E Sie&4a Way)
We a.Le AGAINST having a ta.und4omat at 44th S SieA4a Clay (WE HAVE TWO OTHERS
WrTHIN A COUPLE OF BLOCKS) . We cute eoncenned because ob .the SAFETY ISSUE.
WE APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- and they are 4uppoati.ng
u�56c -
� .2(lbe
o the SAFETY CTY ISSUE. The Na,c.e E Ha,cJC Sa,eon that occupied the
�oca-'cer2 pnev-iou�sty had cti.ent-s robbed at gunpoint in broad dayt ght.
The acc ez s.ibi&ty is not conducive to good zecuni-ty and WE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP ARE TRYING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
U!,)- the undeJt.si ned ,t&sident-s, 6Aom above 40th, SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- We don't want anolffeA coin .P_aandn
r
—�
1-n ou_L neTGhbonhood.
NAME 1DDRESS
rt
^F
f
r
I 0
— - 4[mv,, bo S
C � ic, a k1ce
WILDWOOD PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
PETITION - AGAINST A COIN LAUNDRY AT
4399 SIERRA WAY (44th 8 SieAAa, Way)
We ane AGAINST having a taundAomat at 44th S SierAa Clay (WE HAVE TWO OTHERS
WITHIN A COUPLE OF BLOCKS) . We ahe concerned beeau-6e of the SAFETY ISSUE.
WE APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- and they cute AuppoA -ng
us because o6 the SAFETY ISSUE. The Nait 9 HaiA Saton that occupied the
Xvca1ion previously had cti.entd Aobbed at gunpoint in broad dayfight.
a
The cres sib.i Uty .is not conducive to good 6ecuAity and WE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP ARE TRYING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
We the undm,6- fined Aes.idents, 6Aom above 40th, SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP A.ND THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- We an't uxtnt anothuL eon Yaiind
,n Oa,c riP—c hboAhood.
NAMEIIADDRESS
----_�,) %'-t^���. �f'7.w..t� ti �.�. c� 7/ •� J r�'` � i �2.r:�c.c�--i�-_-<z��Q QT Z `/c7 Y
g- r4 s t-
,l Lrl b9
2Y7
y
WILDWOOD PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
PETITION - AGAINST A COIN LAUNDRY AT
4399 SIERRA WAY (44th E SieAAa Way)
AGAINST having a -fa.undnomat at 44th S SieAAa Clay (WE HAVE TWO OTHERS
W17HIN A COUPLE OF BLOCKS) . We are concerned becau6e o6 the SAFETY ISSUE.
WE APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- and they aAe. 6upponting
u-3 because o6 the SAFETY ISSUE. The Nait & HaiA Saton that occupied the
4'oca-tko;i pnev-io".Ly had cti.ent.6 bobbed at gunpoint in broad daytigh.t.
The, acee m4l itity is not conducive to good 6ectLAity and WE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD
CROUP ARE TRYING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
We tJie undms.i ned Amidentz, JAom above 40th, SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- We don't want Fu o en eo.in &a ndn
;n ouA rie�ghbonhood.
k,ifiE;'ADDRESS
c"" 27 10
l�-'Uciv 1-zt�P,>5+
-Tolel�IA AA ail
_ r
4 7 E Ala "?° Sfi S ya`f 0 � -----
1
W 7 L VWO0D PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
PETITION - AGAINST A COIN LAUNDRY AT
4399 SIERRA WAY (44th 8 Sie"a Clay)
We a,-,e AGAINST having a �a.und!comat at 44th E SieAAa Way (WE HAVE TWO OTHERS
WITHIN A COUPLE OF BLOCKS) . We are concerned becau-6e o6 -the SAFETY ISSUE.
WE APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- and they ahe 'supporting
u�5 becauze ob the SAFETY ISSUE. The Nait € HaiA Saeon that occupied the
,eoca-t-Lon Pkevto"ty had cPients robbed at gunpoint in broad day. igh-t.
The accemtlif-gty is not conducive to good -seeuAity and WE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP ARE TRYING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
We the undenz-c ned residents, nom above 40th., SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- We don't want ano hen eon P_aundAg
cn our ne-cghbonhood.
_l,14ff!ADDRESS J
rr
- !2Q QN---//41i ldr- 444 FE -+P—
-7A- kj 8040 G,q
all,
y � - and S ��o
e,4 1�� �y Ma
r-
I
I
I
WILDWOOD PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
I
PETITION - AGAINST A COIN LAUNDRY AT
4399 SIERRA WAY (44th k S<enxa Way)
We a:e AGAINST having a taund4omat at 44th E SiViAa Way (WE HAVE TWO 07-HERS
(!)ITH!N A COUPLE OF BLOCKS) . We ah.e concerned beeau-6e o6 .the SAFETY ISSUE.
WE APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- and they aAe 5uppont_ ng
ups becauee 06 the SAFETY ISSUE. The Nait S Ha i4 Salon that occupied the
t'oca-t iOn pnevio"-ey had ey-ient-s robbed at gunpoint in bhoad daytight.
The is not conducive to good zecuAity and WE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP ARE TRYING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
We thc, undersigned A"identz, 640m above 40th, SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP A14D THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- We don't count anotiuL coin �aundny
_n ot�)c;e.ghboh ood.
NAME/AVORESS
r
X566 Al i���s�rN �✓��'�' 9��Or�T�
7 1E 46
WILDLUOOD PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
PETITION - AGAINST A COIN LAUNDRY AT
4399 SIERRA WAY (44th E S-i.eAAa Way)
We ate AGAINST having a ta.undAomat at 44th S SieeAAa Way (WE HAVE TWO OTHERS
WITHIN A COUPLE OF BLOCKS) . We cute coneenned because o6 the SAFETY ISSUE.
WE APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- and they ane suppoat.i.ng
u,3 b(,-ccucse o6 the SAFETY ISSUE. The Nait € Havc Saton that occupic d .the
4ocati�an pnev-io"-fy had ctientz nobbed at gunpoint in bnoad daytight.
l he aecersibittity is not conducive to good seeuAity and WE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP ARE TRYING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
({z the undeAs-i.gned )c"idents, Jnom above 40th, SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
C 1UUV_AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- We don't want anothu—L coin ZotmdAtj
n ou�c ne.ighbon ooct.
k-AJJFAVORESS
21.11 t "` C'_ .
Y t I v } &LC
7.
iy
WILDWOOD PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
PETITION - AGAINST A COIN LAUNDRY AT
4399 SIERRA WAY (44th E Sienna Way)
AGAINST" having a f=nd,%omat at 44th E S"i.e"a Way (WE HAVE TWO OTHERS
UITHIN A COUPLE OF BLOCKS) . We ahe concerned because o6 .the SAFETY ISSUE_.
WE APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- and they are �suppoAt,ing
u.s bvc,cui,6e o6 the SAFETY ISSUE. The Nat.L 9 Haivc Saeon that occupied -the
t ocat ion pnev-c"ty had ef-ients robbed at gunpoint in broad daytight.
The accesm-c'bitt'ty is not conducive to good 6ecuAity and WE AS A NEIGhBORHOOG
U"20U" Ai;E IRVING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
[:'e •tile. unden�si ned nesident-5, 6nom above 40th, SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- We don't m t another coin P_aundA�y
<n our nei hbon ood.
CAIL
fV
1;;1}.!Ei AI��RESS
c=Z�v2 z�L
1 -ti /-ZJ ,'r , �?Z
•
-- ` f!
r -------
-
WI LDLV
OUD PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
PETITION - AGAINST A COIN LAUNDRY AT
4399 SIERRA
WAY (44th € SieAvca Way)
We a,�zc, AGAINST having a ta.undAomat at 44th E Sie,"a Way (WE HAVE TWO OTHERS
UIITHIN A COUPLE OF BLOCKS) . We are concerned because o6 .the SAFETY ISSUE.
WE APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION --
-
and they are suppontcng
b�cau�se o6 -the SAFETY ISSUE. The Nail & HaiA Saeon that occup cd the.
ocat-oti pnevi.o"ty had cy-i.ent�s bobbed at gunpoint in broad daytigl2.t.
The uccz s.s�bi U ty is not conducive to good 6ecuuAity and WE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD
CROUP ARE TRYING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
R-e the_undens"L ned hesident-6, 6Aom above 40th, SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
GAUP �tND THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- we don't wnt anothuL coin Y�uiedAq
rt o�v=;sec Ebj hood. —
N,U�E,/ADDRESS
If V-ftcA
no
S; 13, Clzy()Lj
WILDWOOD PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
PETITION - AGAINST A COIN LAUNDRY AT
4399 SIERRA WAY (44th E SieAAa Clay)
We aie AGAINST having a ta.und4omat at 44th € SieAAa Way (WE HAVE TWO OTHERS
WITHIN A COUPLE OF BLOCKS) . We cute coneehned because o� the SAFETY ISSUE.
WE APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- and they ace suppoat.inq
u,3 because oA the SAFETY ISSUE. The Nail & Haivc Saton that occupied the
-e.oeation pnev-iousty had cti.ents nobbed at gunpoint in bnoad dayt fight.
The accessibitity Z6 not conducive to good decuAity and WE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP ARE TRYING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE.
We the undexs-igned nesident6, Jnom above 40th, SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
GROUP AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- We don't want anothut coin .Ycuindn
kn oun ne-ghbon ood.
NAME/ADDRESS
& L 4 n ,Bey/ iCao
6� /d CJk:ls Cif < 9P -
i
ry
j
Z
J
Z
IL
W � 1
Cl) Q
LL — yam.. v� s
C\I 1
LU S.
�-N
lo
<g
zp
P-e) 'Ilk
ST
V1,
� .
c
i*
C) r- ch v co ti oo rn o
r N L(•) CO I- OO Cc)) r r r r r r r r r r N
_ �-
��,
(�
Ic
LU
j /w
co
r�"
W '
LU
W I , r N
r
N M d LO O � 00 O O r N M d' U-)v co O) O
N 04 N N 04 N 04 04 N M M M M M M c7 M M M �t
R
w a
Q z
Z
v
J
z �-�
_ z
m
cn
LUv
Z 4
O
_ y
CL
✓✓/C./ r v .J C
1
b
M � '
1 -
!J
LL1
Q
J
Z � �
cn
k
00 w
LLJ
Z
E_
r,- {
C4 ;�i
LO
w V\ �rn
_ t� ✓J �
AN
m `
U) UO
Q w
V"
-
R( V
F-
LU
_
CL
W 4 _
CD
v
N M 'ct U') (D I- co 0) o N co d U) (0 1,- a0 o
00 00 co 00 00 OC) 00 00 co 0) 0) 0') 0) 0) CT) 0*) 01) m 0
i
UJI
'y
00
T5
V
LV _ -=
0 �
W
CL rJ
� � n
f �
i
A � 1
�v
r V
w l
z N
ccJ
'4) s
J
C13
LU
s
`v w
F--
a.
r\
W
Sz
�J �+
J
m f
is
t '
{
r n
v
P .
Z �
c ] co
�— Q
uj
w
CL -
zl o v
Go
N �
LLJ
o Z
3
J
L
VI
vi
W
CL
CE
y
C Qa b
J
e
1
o �1
w o
f4) TI
O
w z
z,
�� - -
Do
Cb
tv
rQ
/ r
Z J
Q �
Z
IL
co
CIO
Q o � 3 v vUr `'J
QQ
O �
Z
W
Ql-
-r
w �
Q -
00
rA
CJ e
� J
�-
N
Z
fn
v
to
Qw
(f)
W
M
O `n
r
Z
\ N
W
CL 1
L ui
zl
JA
�v l
V
F- }
C
cr-
.v J
Cf) ti ; v
ZUj
cr-
LU
I.
Z rj
W -
w �.
QI
r
N, a
w
t. � •mil
v ti
Z
v
S
cn 2 ,
.�
C13 v 7
uj
p
z �
OLLI
�
LI �J
Z •� }
�, y ✓ � Ile � ( � •/"�� ��.. 1 1, � ; `\, /'�` � ``�
N _ �
Now
C� ri Ol
C, CL Q
� � n
-7j
47
� s
s
LLI
F-
Z �
W
w \ u
� n
txv
U _
va
CIO w } ,�
O
w
1
ZI J
M
S
J
s
i
4�
C y
Cl
Z � v
D J
Q
J
J
1
ti �1
m
cn v
LU
O � kJ-1
Q
W
°>
AO
tIF
Ln M c�(` f (T`
rn m
m
At
w J `
Q � u
Q tJ V t f I
^T�
N vi S J
Q
.� .� 1
m w CIO
\Nj ✓
o �
Q
W
LU
O'
Z l
J
Q J Ilk
�(� 7a V �t
N
w NID
zJl
f�
Z a
Z U IV\ `� T
m � cL Z
Q w ~ MM 1
1 _
w
Z
O
W ,
CL ►- v
A;
LL]
Z
r � � C)
� v
VVV A J
� - a
1
13 Z E
Z �.
a vA � -
VN
_Z5
z
z
rr
cn o � '
(7 r
CD
W - � � j
Q �
w
LLJ
Lj
Z �
0
-
c
�-{� rr, M ct� r t � rn �✓l r(� c('z M Cpl n cr, r� *�
J
, l
V � I
ilk
W \J
Z ,
j'
J 3 -
i�
a
D 04
Js
Oj
m C5 1
Q � I - ✓�
CL
llq
O '
W 'J
z
C3
-s \j �- :�
r
1 ui
Z ' (J) ,
J 5
V.
M
m ��
J
0
o m
ui
Ll
z
N , l
N
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
300 North"D"Street•San Bernardino •CA 92418-0001
Planning&Building 909.384.5057•Fax:909.384.5080
Sao Berner in Public Works/Engineering 9093845111•Fax:909.384.5155
www.sbcity.org
August 5, 2005
In Woo Lee
5072 Cadiz Circle
La Palma, CA 90623
RE: Development Permit Type I No. 05-081 -4399 N. Sierra Way
(APN: 0154-222-28-0000)
Dear In Woo Lee;
Planning staff has approved Development Permit I (DPI) No. 05-081, a request to
establish a coin laundry, based on the Findings of Fact in the Development Code §
19.44.060 and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval and Standard
Requirements.
The decision of the Planning staff is final unless a written appeal is filed, with the
appropriate fee, within 15 days of the Planning staff's action, pursuant to Section
19.52.100 of the Municipal (Development) Code.
Please contact me at (909) 384-5057 if you have any questions or concerns regarding the
approval of DPI No. 05-081.
Ben Steckler,
Associate Planner
Enc. Conditions of Approval
Cc: Address File
lep 21 C5 01:28p Julian Kwon 562-802-8535 p•3
909394508D T-976 P.00�0 f�
yerw20-2005 12:15wn From-CITY OF SAN*A4M1R0 PLANNING DEPT •
or
CITY OF SAN SERNARD'NO
owkr#1169� meat, Planning Diwsian
DeyelopnseRt Services 1?ep 3DO i�lvrtb " SQee3rd Floor
San Bernardino,CA 92418
Phone(909) 384-5057 • (909)384-5080
Web address: www-sbC1ry.org
APPLjCATION FOR APPEAL
AppEAL QOM A DECISION OF THE{check one)
O Davelopment Services Director C3 Committee
E3 elopmenVF-U r'0nmenta!Raw'
1?lamung Coa mission
Case number(s): dam~d8
project address'
4399 North Sierra Wa Sat► Bernardino
Wilawood Park Neighborhood Association
Appellmt's name:
P- 0- Box 512, Patton CA 912369-0512 pppeuatlt's address:
Appellant's phone:
Appellant's e-mail address: Bore
Contact person, Y1B: Cox
Contact per�n's address' 214 B. 44th street. San Bernardi
Contact person's phone: <909) 686-3673
Contact pusoo's c-mail address- WOKE
must be filed ou a City aMb"Uc= form
pursugnt to Section 19.52.100 of the Development Code. an appeal state appeal Sling fee'
following the fmal date of action,accmpaaied by the approp
within I S days rand Gammon
Appeals are nonaally scheduled for a determination by the planning Coal nwriti or Mayo
Council widr'n 30 daYs of the filing date of the aPPW- You will be notified,in writing.of the specific due and
time of the appeal hearing.
i
OMCE USE ONLY
Date appeal.bled' �.�t JG 17
Rzeeived b- Cr.c---=-c+rN 8 0 1 uM&
L
t � AP,,AR.iM
one avir Tn-ANDRADF & ASSOCIATES Page 003
Sep 21 05 01:28p Julian Kwon 562-802-8535 p.2
5�0-20-1005 IZ:15Pm FFWCITY OF $9 16AW1110 PLAIN1116 IEaT
/0130410 • T-D76 P.001 1003 FZZO
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Development Services Department
PLANNINGABUUMI.N DIVISION
300 North"D" Street,San Bernardi", California 921418
Pkoae: (909) 384-5071 ■ Fax (909) 384-3080
Say B �av
FAX TRANS1V n TAL SHEET
DATE: / 1 2005
TO:
FAX
tr1O: CAPS ) 07-de '
PHONE NO:
PAGES:
0 ` (Indudiag Cover Sheet))
SU&MCT: Aampmk
Your Message Here... QS ot�t.✓
&4;CAXOIOV%
Umb 0"MM"ww=Coyer shwa-aw sea►UraswAN
..------ . .,..... n___ nn,)
Sall Berm 'Hll
MAYOR ,JUDITH VALLES
.F
a
�j-
F
v^F
Mu\
c. 'Inrnrd at 1
a Mtg:
Y Item _ Co
LILY it Saii dumdfdinu
EXHIBIT "A" - FLOOR PLAN
EXHIBIT "B" - PICTURE OF PROPERTY
ID EXHIBIT C - EMPTY BUSINESSES
SURROUNDING LOCATION
EXHIBIT "D" - ADDITIONAL SIGNATURES
TO PETITION
EXHIBIT "A"
t ..... i� 1lxfew 110tt5{M
[w `^lam'
u
U
x
m
7epre (34' AF,F,J �
�R-
A-1 loo&ng Wosher
Top Loadog 'Rnyher
T4P MP TW TOP , r TGP 7oP wr 1v1r YOr ToPr TOP TOP
lqw rauo rtvn raga t4MO rae raw L" raw raw
Front Lw&ng Wv.W
Front tmov�g'M'a�hel �,3¢,
G # Towe{3e A.FFj –
lip
r, t�
FLOOR PLAN (4)ENTRANG9
s.sam way.ST "o:'A N
AdpbL
EXHIBIT "B"
i
��.
�:
�:,.
,. ,.,.
� .
� ;
�..�> ,'
3�
_ . . . . . .
� »
. g. .
\
, A
� �< ^
.
£°
t�
1'
t ,
r;
r
;fJ
3�
i
�r g
1
A
�,.
.. � {Y
...
_ »: ...
^T
t:�`r ...�.._�:�..
131.:�a
5�3a�t
I4'iff_.Y.u".3�F
v'31
.�1
{ �i:
�:
I
{ ,. _
_rt
'�}',+.
Z�'.,�
EXHIBIT "C"
7 t ,
�t
r
-rte����►..�.�..��r�.-� .�� ���r��-t�,,,�..-�� �M '�'�"'__
tliI ��
rriiiirrri . , _ a _ rrr�rruraarr�w
�riirirrrtr r srtrrrrrrrrrawr���
+►tirrriirr ...... . -.arrrrnrrnrrt+.
�rrrrrirrrsirrrrrers��r,�rrrr�+. . _ • , �.•�
1111(1111 IINI-N-NIN�IIII 111111-
}
R
6.m
.I
"ImmlIR
(.(IMMI Rl IAI
f•
NQ PNRKWG FIRL LANE
+M 994.E
r .EASEL LFL�SE I
1
-- __
----
For Your Real E
Nun'ez Financia l state Needs
loans I Homes For Sale I Refinance I Nota
1
����spy•
EXHIBIT "D"
<V- � � .�
�, o d.
D
1 D
rS ,
V\
q
' m
In
Nz > cn
✓� 7-) 3 o D
CID
� I
o
w � (!' r
s cn
N L Z
Jo
I � I
v
N4.
T. CA
lz
� rn
n� U
� � z uj <z-
6-
o
m D
-
1 Sl N , En
q4y-� �
ro a re N •� C7
U _ A-T
N O
a r Z
mp
N o C
co Z
z O
z
Coon , a
zzj-
QL
/ m
Q
1
i
r Im
j
� p l
I rn
O
fo
�G
� � 2
a Z
Z
C
m
—�? �- w U o�o o o1 cop or
N
U
_ Z
D
P c
Go
r r� 1-7
A
N - Z
N (� � JI, O
Z m
° 1 D (n
v in
is-
i CIO � � p
S, z
CA
1-1 ;: D
o
D T
C "�
� � o
lu
t� > cl)
m
c Z
u �
Cf' Z
z
z
c
m
J t
I
i
I
� t
I . i