Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout70-Planning & Building /:C;Y ~y OF SAN BERNARINO~/l[REQ~T FOR COUNCIL A~ION Planning Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Extension of Time for Conditional Use Permit 86-26 and Tentative Tract 13365 Mayor and Council Meeting of December 18. 1989. 2:00 D.m. ,.rom: Dept: Larry E. Reed Director of Planning and Building Subject: Date: December 4, 1989 Synopsis of Previous Council action: On November 7, 1989, the Planning extension of time for approval of and Tentative Tract No. 13365, by Commission voted to deny a. Conditional Use Permit No. a 4 to 3 vote. gne:;year 8i5 - !>6 l._) (- ~.CJ .-, No previous Council action. , --l ';'-"1;. ...'.,-, Recommended motion: M_ CJ That the public hearing be closed; that the appeal be upheld; that, the one-year extension of time be approved for CUP 86-26 and TT 11365, sub- ject to the Findings of Fact, Conditions of Approval and Standard Requirements contained in the November 7, 1989 Planning Commission staff report. (Supports appellant's request.) or . That the public hearing be closed; that the appeal be denied; and, that CUP 86-26 and TT 13365 be allowed to expire based on the Findings of Fact contained in the'Statement of Official Planning Commission Action (Exhibit B). (Supports Planning Commission action.) ~ dt~~ r-- W I Signature Contact person: Larry E. Reed Phone: 384-5071 Staff Report Ward: 4 Supporting data attached: FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: n/a' Source: (Acct. No.) (Acct. Descrictionl Finance : .ouncil Notes: 75-0262 Agenda Item No. '70 cttv OF SAN BERNARrAO - REQUAT FOR COUNCIL ACtbN STAFF REPORT . Subject: Appeal of Planning commission Denial of Extension of Time for Approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 86-26 and Tentative Tract No. 13365 Mqyor and Council Meeting of December 18, 1989 REQUEST The applicant, Darwin K. Pearson, is-appealing the den~al of an extension of..time request for approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 86-26 and Tentative Tract No. 13365 by the Planning Commission. The applicant requests that the Mayor and Council reconsider the denial and approve the extension of time. BACKGROUND . This proposed project is a development of 42 condominium units on 3.05 acres located on the east side of Del Rosa Avenue about 314 feet north of Marshall Boulevard. This project was originally approved on September 16, 1986, prior to the adoption of the Interim Policy Document and the General Plan. A Negative Declaration was adopted for the project at_that time. The General Plan designates the project site RM, Medium Residential, or fourteen units per acre. The proposed project has a density of 13.2 units per acre and is consistent with the General Plan. The applicant submitted an incomplete set of construction plans for Technica~ Building Code Review on June 30, 1988 (lacked struc- tural calculations, roof truss plan, and other structural details). The applicant failed to provide the missing plans and the Technical Plan Check application expired on January 30, 1989. The-applicant will need to resubmit construction plans, including plan check fees prior to obtaining the required building permits. At the November 7, 1989 meeting, the Planning Commission, by a 4 to 3 vote, denied the one-year.extension of time ~equest for the project. The Commission was very concerned that a condominium project in this area would promote the conditions necessary for blight to occur. They thought that the units may be purchased by investors, and that these "absentee landlords" and renters would not take care of the units in an appropriate manner. The Commission also expressed concerns over the applicant's financial capability to construct the project and the market potential for condominiums. (See Roy Nierman's letter, Exhibit C.) . The applicant; in his appeal letter, has provided a history of the causes for the delays-in the development of the project, a record of his development experience, a market analysis and tne present finan- cial situation of the project's financing. The problem of potential future blight was not addressed by the applicant, except by showing examples of the high quality of architecture that his project was proposing to provide. (See Exhibit A, Applicant's Letter of Appeal with Attachments). 75.0264 . . . . . . . Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Extension of Time for CUP 86-26 and TT 13365 Mayor and Council Meeting of 12/18/89 Page 3 Options Available to the Mayor and Council The Mayor and Council may: 1. Deny the appeal and deny Conditional Use Permit No. 86-26 and Tentative Tract No. 13365, based on the Findings of Fact contained in the Statement' of Official Planning Commission Action. (Supports Planning Commission decision.) or 2. Uphold the appea~ and approve Conditional Use Permit No. 86-26 and Tentative Tract No. 13365, based on the Findings of Fact and Conditions of Approval contained in the Novem- ber 7, 1989 Planning Commission staff report. (Supports the appellant's request.) RECOMMENDATION This is a difficult recommendation to make in view of the very strong Planning Commission concerns, but because of the project's compliance with the General Plan"staff is continuing to recommend approval of' the project. Staff' hopes the applicant builds high quality develop- ment and targets the development to the owner-occupied portion of the housing market. Prepared by: John E. Montgomery, AICP Principal,Planner for Larry E. Reed, Director of Planning and Building Exhibit A - Letter of Appeal to the Mayor and Council with Attachments B - Statement of Official Planning Commission Action ' C - Roy Nierman's Letter to the Mayor and Council D - Public Hearing Notice E - November 7, 1989 Planning Commission Staff Report 12/4/89 mkf . . . . eXHIBIT . A . Oarwin K. Pearson 1249 1/2 W. Balboa Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca 92661 (714) 673-5712 November 16, 1989 City of San Bernardino 300 North '0' Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Attn: City Clerk Re: Required notification to appeal the denial for an Extension of Time associated Permit 86-26 and Tentative Tract 13365. Planning commission's with Conditional Use Honorable Mayor and Council Members: On November 7, 1989. the Planning Commission voted to deny our request for a one-year extension of time under the authority of San Bernardino Municipal Code Section 19.83.140 and 19.83.300. We respectfully request through this appeal that their decision be overturned based upon the merits of the project and the many positive aspects to the surrounding areas, the people, and the City of San Bernardino. Enclosed please find a marketing report prepared by Builder Sales Corp. which reflects a positive feasibility assessment of the project. In the report they have taken into account the immediate area, the lack of affordable housing in the Southern California new home sales communities. and other condominium projects which were completed in the San Bernardino area. It should be noted that the construction of this project will be of high quality and result in pride of ownership. I have worked with a developer on three previous projects which were designed by the architect selected for this project. The projects are located in Grand Terrace, Rialto and Newport Beach (see enclosed photographs). While the sale prices varied greatly between these units, the quality of design and construction did not. The units in Rialto were completed in Apri19f 1984 and are currently selling in the high 70's to mid 80's. Yet~ after 5 years the project still reflects pride of ownership as do the other two projects. This is the type of project which we are trying to acheive. Special attention should be given to the immediate area of the project also. It is next to a boarded up strip center and and older apartment complex with many unsightly characteristics. Just 1 . . . . . north of the si te is another boarded up commercial property. Testimony was given on November 7, 1989 by area residents and merchants that any more competition (specifically an ARCO Mini- Mart) would be bad for the area. This project will add 42 families, directly effecting the commercial atmosphere in a very positive manner. The project will be fully enclosed, landscaped, with decorative wrought iron fencing along the front with limited access via a 2 lane bridge over the flood control channel. This will keep the less desirables from trafficing through the project while at the same time provide an uplift for the community. . At the Planning Commission meeting on November 7, 1989 there was some concern expressed regarding our financial condition and our ability to successfully complete this project. This project has had many ups and downs over the last three years including the building moratorium. The moratorium resulted in our being in escrow on the property for over 2 years and the original developers/partners sold their interest to me in the form of secured notes at close of escrow. While in escrow, interest on the unpaid balance and principal pay-downs were required so that the escrow would not be canceled. Up front development costs to date have totaled approximately $125,000, including engineering and bridge design, soils testing, traffic study, hydrology study of the flood control channel, plan check fees, architecture and legal costs.This does not include the cost of the. land. This money is essentially wasted as a result of the planning commission denial. In addition, as of August 1989 we now own the property free and clear which had been a necessary condition for the construction financing. The first half of 1989 I had a construction loan out for a custom condominium project in Newport Beach which is now completed. This along with taking in two venture capital partners will ensure the financing for the project. Our loan packages were recently submitted, the drawings have been approved and our bonding company is set to issue the required bonds with a set aside letter from the bank. ThE1 project, being completely bid through the Dodge Room in San Bernardino in June of this year, giving very accurate construction costs, and my prior experience in this field will provide for a successful project. (See summary of experience attached) Further consideration for the City as a benefit for granting an extension of time will be the added value to the tax roles of the Ci ty along with the permit and building fees which exceed $330,000, as delineated below: Street light energy fee , Building permit (including traffic fee) School fee Municipal Water District fee Sewer capacity expansion fees Sewer connection fees (EVMWD) $ 473 81,417 60,684 62,000 94,920 31,226 $330,720 . 2 . . . . . A very important aspect in our request for the extension of time is due to delays incurred which were not in our control which included: Moratorium on building - All processing of drawings were halted during the one year freeze. While we were given a one year extension commensurate with the moratorium we experienced long delays in plan checking by the City (up to 6 months for a single plan check) which I assume was due to the enormous work load resulting from lifting the moratorium. . New agreements between the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water District and the East Valley Municipal Water District - Midway through our plan checking, the two districts changed the jurisdictional areas for providing water service which effected our project. Now the City was to furnish water. This required a new water system design because we were to use cluster meters vs. individually metered units as our Conditions of Approval had called for previously (for the benifit of the City). We also had to design and furnish blanket easements vs. line easements to facilitate drawing approval. This change in jurisdiction caused a minimum of 3 months delay due to meetings, design and drawing approval in addition to added development costs. Del Rosa Flood Control Channel - The property for the project is behind an existing flood control channel. The San Bernardino County Flood Control District has mandated that we dedicate a 30 foot wide strip of land, along the complete frontage of the property for future use of the channel. This cut the project from a possible 48 units as priginally desiged down to 42 units. Also it has meant that another completely separate agency had to review and approve all our drawings. Further, because of the moritorium the design review process for the Flood Control District had to be done twice, prior to the City completing their plan checks. In summation, we feel that we were unjustifiably denied an extension of time for the project. We have diligently tried to meet all reqirements, changes, and conditions. We have worked through extenuating circumstances associated with this project to the point of being ready to begin. construction only to be denied the opportunity to build the project or to even have a project at this time. We are not a big development company but are young, able individuals who have invested a great deal of effort, money . 3 .- . . . . . . and time in a project which we feel will benefit the city of San Bernardino and in particular the immediate area greatly. Again we respectfully request that our appeal to overturn the Planning commission's denial be granted. verl truly yours, _fJ~/ kl~, Darwin K. Pearson - cc: Mr. Harry Kerames, Owner Mr. Alan J. Parnigoni, Owner Mr. Bud Roberts, Sierra Engineering enclosures 4 . . . . . . . November 6. 1989 Mr. Darwin Pearson THE DARWIN PEARSON COMPANY 1249 1/2 West Balboa Blvd. Newport Beach. CA 92663 RE: 42 Condos In San Bernardino. Del Rosa and Marshall Ave. Dear Mr. Pearson: This letter serves as our positive feasibility assessment of the property described above. This favorable contention Is based upon the fact that the proposed project has the potential to satisfy a lack of affordable housing In the Southern Cal lfornIa new home sa I es communi ty. A physical Inspection of the sIte, along with an analysIs of the attached new home market In the Immediate area were performed to accumulate support data. AREA OVERVIEW The site Is located In an established neighborhood. wIthin a short walking dIstance from the local elementary. Intermediate and hIgh school. It Is also conveniently located close to shopp I ng. recreat Ion and freeway access. The Immediate area exudes a degree of pride of ownership. (fj) BUILDERS SALES CORP. 2101 East Fourth Street. Suite 170-5. Santa Ana, CA 92705 . (714) 834-0303 . . . . . . . Mr. Darwin Pearson November 6. 1989 Page 2-2-2 San Bernardino Is the typical Southern California suburb In that 1 t has Its !;lood areas and bad areas. The subJect property Is situated on the north side of town. In one o.f the more desirable neighborhoods. This site Is considered an asset to development. Its location on Del Rosa Is also an advantage. due to the the fact Del Rosa Is a minor traffic lane In this area. MARKET OVERVIEW Accordl ng to the Rea I Estate Research Counc II *. Southern California realized a. 20-30% Increase In home prices (average price Just under $250.000) during the second quarter of 1989. San Bernardino County experienced an Incr-ease In housing pr-Ices of an aver-age of 23%. This Is the first time that average rates of appr-eclatlon have exceeded 20% In San Ber-nar-dlno County. These Incr-eases have pr-Iced a large percentage of the population out of the new home market. even In previously affordable areas such as San Bernardino. * Real Estate Resear-ch Council. Cal Poly Pomona. June 1989 . . . . ~ Mr. Darwin Pearson November 6. 1989 Page 3-3-3 There are only a few new home projects that have base prices starting under $100,000, most of which are In San Bernardino County. Base prIces are typically the most Important element of the first-tIme buyer's purchase decisIon. Down payment and loan qualificatIon are the two Inhibiting factors affecting their purchase. Due to the fact that most first-tIme buyers have only about $7,000 to $B.OOO to work with. It Is more and more common to see co-borrowers helping wi th the down. ~ There Is legislation currently awaiting President Bush's approval that will Increase the FHA loan limit from $101.250 to $124.875. This will open up new alternatives for first-time buyers wIth Income levels over $40,000 per year, '. .' . . ", . but the lower Income fami lies stili requIre product well under $100,000. Due to this lack of affordable homes. there Is very little competitive data available In the Immediate area of the subject site. We have Included Information from three projects that were deemed some degree of competition to Del Rosa Meadows. ~ . . . . ~ M~. Da~wln Pea~son Novembe~ 6. 1989 Page 4-4-4 PINE RIDGE VILLAS ~ This townhome/condo p~oJect Is located on Vlcto~la and Lynwood I n San Be~na~dl no. The I ast seven un I ts we~e so I d by a local ~esale agent ove~ the last six months. The p~oJect was o~lglnally built In 1981. which was a difficult time fo~ ~eal estate In gene~al. and an even wo~se period fo~ attached p~oduct In San Be~na~dlno. The builder went bank~upt and an Individual bought the ~emalnlng units and ~ented them on an option to buy p~og~am. The p~o.iect Is secu~lty gated. with attached ga~ages and app~oxlmately 1000 squa~e foot unl fs. The last few unl ts sold at $72.500 <$72.50 pe~ squa~e foot>. CENTURY HOMES La Paz at Clma~~on Ranch Is cur~ently preselllng In San Be~nardlno. They sta~ted taking ~ese~vatlons In October and have 19 ~eservatlons at p~esent. P~oduct ranges In size from 1068 to 1957 square feet.-on small lots. and Is priced f~om $99.990 to $142.990. These base p~lces will climb above the $100.000 with thel~ next phase ~elease. ~ . . . . . . . Mr. Darwin Pearson November 6. 1989 Page 5-5-5 HIGHLAND VILLAGE Located on Riverside Avenue in Rialto. is a townhome proJect that has been on-line since July 1988. Product ranges from 1090 to 1385 square feet, wi th 2 car garages. Of the 94 un i ts planned for the deve I opment , on I y 15 rema I n to be sold. This proJect has garnered an average sales rate of 1.1 units per week. This figure Is deceptively low, because of delays In construction that closed the proJect for an extended period. Base prices start at $78,500 and top out at $100,000 (approx. $72.00 per square foot). According to a local resale agent, properly priced condo/ townhome product sales are strong. Trends indicate that a 2 bedroom unit needs to be priced under $90,000, while a 3 bedroom unit is averaged priced at $105,000. The more competitively priced. the quicker the sale. RECOMMENDATIONS Taking the above Information into perspective, we recommend that development of Del Rosa Meadows definitely be pursued. .' . Mr. Darw 1 n Pearson November 6. 1989 Page 6-6-6 . . . The 42 unIts should be released In 3 phases of 14 units each. ThIs enables the project to gaIn some sales momentum wI th lower prIces and stili maxImIze prof 1 ts. Bull ders Sales Corp. was provIded with the square footage of the single floorplan. however a floorplan revIew was not performed. We suggest the followIng prIcIng strategy: PLAN 1 SO.FT. 930 . LEVEL/BED/BATH GARAGE RECOMMENDED PRICE/VALUE PH. I PH. II PH. I I I (11/89 values) 2/2/2 1/2 2 $78.990 $80 .990 $82.990 ($84.93) ($87.08) ($89.23) In today's housing Industry there are several very important archItectural detaIls that have ~irtuallY been standardized. Some of the more important product enhancements are as follows: . .' . . . . M~. Da~wIn Pea~son Novembe~ 6. 1989 Page 7-7-7 Volume ceIlings Deslgne~ wIndows (cle~esto~y/sunbu~st> Recessed bullet/canned lIghtIng In kitchen Mlc~owave oven T~ash compacto~s Ga~age doo~ opene~s. In addItion. we ~ecommend that the kitchen cabinets be ve~y good qualIty. All cabInets can be paInt g~ade, p~efe~ably . whIte, If the qualIty Is the~e. It Is also Impo~tant that all bath~ooms have some d~awe~ space. especIally the maste~. It Is also ve~y desl~able to have an Info~mal eatIng a~ea on ha~d su~face. If p~oduct 1 s de livered accordl ng to these pa~ameters. an antIcIpated sales ~ate of 1.5 to 2.0 units per week can be anticipated. It Is also necessary to build Into your proJect p~oforma an "Insurance" ma~gin of one to two points to be used for Incentives. buydowns or bonuses. Sales rates a~e most often affected by escalating Inte~est ~ates and unstable economic facto~s. . .' . . . . Mr. Darwin PearSon November 6. 1989 Pa~e 8-8-8- To achieve this sales rate an extensive on-site and off-site marketlnp/merchandlslng plan will also be required. This campaign should Include a complete model complex/sales office, first-rate brochure and carefully planned advertisIng and slgnage program. Mr. Pearson. thank you for the opportunl ty to subml t this marketing report to you. Should you have any questions, or require futher Information. please do not hesitate to . contact us. Sincerely. BUILDERS SALES CORP. )t7~r~ Melanie Y.. Brig~s Vice President of Marketing " . . . . . . . . DARWIN K. PEARSON Summary of Experience Qualifications: Registered Professional Engineer, State of California License Number C33428 Hold California Contractors License in the following two classifications: (A) - General Engineering (B) - General Building Construction Manageaent, Project Development General Partner/Builder 42 Unit Condominium Project, San Bernardino, CA (Scheduled to start November 1989) $2,800,000 Owner/Builder 2 Unit CUstom Condominium Project, Newport Beach, CA Completed May 1989. $715,000 Owner/Builder 18 Unit Apartment Complex, Hesperia, CA Completed September 1986. $662,000 Client - Morgan Development, Inc., Orange, CA - (714) 921-2590 Provided Construction Management services including OD site supervision, engineering and architectural drawing review, as well as processing all documents and drawings through municipal agencies, commissions, boards and building departments. Completed Contracts: 60 House Tract, Riverside, CA 17 House Tract, Lake Elsinore, 15 House Tract, Lake Elsinore, 11 House Tract, Norco, CA 15 House Tract, Norco, CA 3/88 - CA - 7/87- CA - 10/87 - - 12/86 - - 11/85 - $6,100,000 $2,300,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,900,000 Page 1 of 3 . . . . . . . DARlIIN K. PEARSON Subcontracted On-Site and Off-Site waterline, sewer system. and storm drainage systems for the following projects: 11 House Tract, Norco, CA 15 House Tract, Norco, CA 41 Townhouses, Rialto, CA 17 Townhouses, Newport Beach, CA 4/86 - $81,000 5/85 - $66,000 3/84 - $92,000 - 12/83 - $44,000 Client - Herbert & Boghosion, Inc., Laguna Beach, CA - (714) 497-2184 Provided supervision and various subcontracted trade work. Tenant Improvement work requires fast tract construction principles and critical scheduling between the trades, Owner furnished portions of the work, non-standard work hours, necessary work restrictions associated with this type of construction, Building Departments and required inspections. petries Store, San Bernardino,CA - 10/87 - $71,000 X'tras Store, San Bernardino, CA - 11/87 - $83,000 Electronics Boutique, Glendale, CA - 5/87 - $78,000 Sizes Unlimited Store Conversions, Merced, Fresno, Clovis, Visalia, Bakersfield, CA 3/85 - $96,000 Williams-Sonoma Stores - Supervision only Cupertino, CA 7/84 - $ 8,000 San Francisco, CA - 9/84 - $ 8,000 Lynn's Hallmark Store, Orange, CA - 10/84 - $22,000 Steve P. Rados, Inc., Engineering Contractors, Santa Ana, CA 7/79 - 9/83: Project Engineer Responsibilities included the following: Construction Scheduling, directing subcontracted work, estimating, material take off and ordering, shop drawing review, shoring design and super~ision, preparation of monthly pay estimates, change order negotiations, claims, cost reports. Page 2 of 3 .e, . . . e . e DARI'IN K. PEARSON Design Development Group, Inc., Cheshire, CT 6/78 - 9/78: Civil Engineer Responsibilities included survey work, i.e" property line, topographic, subdivision layout; septic design and structural analysis. Francis T. Zappone Realty, Waterbury, CT 5/74 - 6/78: Part-time, Assistant to the Co-Designerl Construction Superintendent. Assisted in building apartment complex of 254 townehouses. shopping plaza, houses and built-in swimming pools. Helped in surveying and layout., minor estimating. Worked many aspects of building, i.e., pouring foundations, framing, trim, repairs, through completion of projects. Education: Stanford University Stanford, California 1978 - 1979 Master of Science, Civil Engineering - Construction Engineering and Management: Emphasis of study concerned the management of people, DOney, and equipment to accomplish engineering construction completely and profitably. SUbjects included costs and estimates; equipment and methods; planning, scheduling and control; administration; human resource management; work improvement; labor relations; equipment replacement policy, and computer applications. University of Connecticut Storrs, Connecticut 1973 - 1978 Bachelor of Science, Civil Engineering. Emphasis of study on analysis and design of statically determinate and indeterminate structures in structural steel and reinforced concrete; soil engineering and foundation design; surveying; hydraulics and environmental applications. Page 3 of 3 . . . . . EXHIBIT B ( . . City of San Bernardino STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ==~OJECT ~:::mber : Extension of Time for Tentative Tract No. 13365 and Conditional Use Permit No. 86-26 ;'..?pl icant: Darwin K. Pearson ACTION Meeting Date: X November 7, 1989 Denied Extension of Time Based upon Following Findings of Fact the F:NDINGS OF FACT Tentative Tract The tract is consistent with the General Plan adopted by the Mayor and council on June 2, 1989, in that the proposal meets all the . requirements of the RM, Residential Medium, land use designation with respect to size, dimension, and density. 2 . The proposed tract abuts upon a dedicated . street; that street being Del Rosa Avenue. The main entry point on Del Rosa will provide adequate ingress/egress for the proposed project. 1. 3. The proposed tract is consistent with the provisions of Title 18 and the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California. conditional Use Permit 1. The proposal is consistent with by the Mayor and Common council proposed use as a Planned Development is permitted a~ a with a Conditional Use Permit. the General Plan adopted on June 2, 1989; the Residential Condominium medium residential use 2. The proposal is not compatible with the adjoining residential land uses consisting primarily of apartments to the north and west, and single-family dwellings to the east, in that condominiums have more potential for blight because of absentee landowners and the greater tendency for the occurrence of crime than a lower density, single-family development. 3. The site is of sufficient size, shape, and area to accommodate the proposed 42-unit condominium complex. .. . , . . . . ( . city of San Bernardino STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Extension of Time for Conditional Use Permit No. 88-26 Page 2 4. Access, circulation, and parking for the proposed project is adequate. Access for entry and egress will be via the main entry point on Del Rosa Avenue. Circulation is provided throughout the site for tenants, guests and emergency vehicles via a circular drive surrounding the complex. Eighty-four tenant parking spaces are provided as required, and 34 guest parking spaces are required (25 guest spaces in excess of the number required by code). 5. The granting of an Extension of Time will be detrimental to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the city of San Bernardino, in that condo- miniums have more potential for blight because of absentee landowners and the greater tendency for the occurrence of crime than a lower density, single-family development. YQn Ayes: Nays: Abstain: Absent: Clemensen, Cole, Stone None None Sharp Corona, Lindseth, Lopez, Nierman, I, hereby, certify that this Statement of accurately reflects the final determination Commission of the city of San Bernardino. 4~ r'~~€-/ Sign ure ~ Official Action of the Planning ",(1:7// ,::t1 /c7 Date I Larry E. Reed, Director of Planning and Building Name and Title cc: Project Applicant Project Property Owner Building and Safety Department Engineering Division Case File mkf PCAGENDA: PCACTIONA . . EXHIBIT C . . CERTIFIED SPECIAUST trAMILY LAW . CAL eD. 01 UGA&. ~T1DN LAW OrJl'lca or ROY H. NIERMAN 1714l...-1'''' ('7141 1124.3783 A PROFESSIONAL CO~RATION 1U7 IIt18Il'Q'8B CENTER DRIV1C. 8UlT'& 18 1IA.%'i' BatHARDINO. CALD'QRNlA .... November 27, 1989 oo~@~~w~rn DEe 01 1989 - CITY PLANNiiJG DEPARTMEf'1 SAN BERNARDINO, CA Mayor Bob Holcomb city Hall 300 North "0" street San Bernardino, CA Dear Mayor Holcomb: I wish to bring to your attention two items heard by the Planning Commission on November 7, 1989 that I am sure will be appealed.. The first item is Conditional Use Permit #89-20 which is a request to construct an A.M. P.M. Mini Market on the corner of Date Street and Del Rosa Avenue. . This matter first came before the 'Planning Commission in October 1989 and was continued to November 1989 so that the applicant could provide the Planning Commission with a marketing study concerning the effect this A.M. P.M. Mini Market would have on the existing gas stations, mini markets and liquor stores. The applicant failed to provide a marketing study and the representative of ARCO Products refused to allow the Planning Commission to have a copy of their marketing study. There were at least seven business owners in the audience who objected to an additional mini market, liquor store or gas station in the area. There are presently five gas stations on the corners of Del Rosa and Date Street or Date Place. There are nine stores selling off site alcohol within a six block area. There are seven existing mini mar~ets within a six block area of the proposed development. In that area we have already had one Circle K Store close and a Safeway Market close. Recently, one of the liquor stores was forced to sell or face bankruptcy. . . . . .. . . . Mayor Bob Holcomb November 27, 1989 Page Two It was felt by a majority of the Planning Commission (four to three vote) that the addition of another gas station, mini market and alcohol sales to the area would be detrimental to the neighborhood and would result in an over supply of competition to the area which is going to result in one or more stores closing and creating additional blight in the area. We have two people who have purchased either an existing liquor store or an existing gas station in the past four months and those operations are presently marginal. The installation of another twenty-four hour store in this area is also going to substantially increase the traffic off of the interstate freeway. For those reasons the Planning Commission felt we should not have another mini market, gas station or alcohol sales in that area. The planning staff recommended approval of this project and the Commissioners voted four to three to deny the proposed proj ect. . ~ second item which was heard on November 7, 1989 which I believe will be appealed is Conditional Use Permit '86-26 on tentative track '13365. The applicant, Darwin K. Pearson, was requesting a one year extension of time for tentative track '13365 and Conditional Use Permit '86-26 to construct a forty-two unit condominium project on the corner of Del Rosa Avenue and Marshall Boulevard. The Planning Commission unanimously denied the extension of time based on the following reasons. 1. After almost two years of attempting to have the applicant remove a burned out deserted house, the City had to remove the house at a cost of almost $17,000.00 to the City. 2. The project is proposed as a condominium with individual ownership. condominiums have notoriously not sold well in the San Bernardino area and the size and location of these condominiums would make them less than acceptable as owner I . . . .e. e e . Mayor Bob Holcomb November 27, 1989 Page Three occupied condominiums. It was the feeling of the Planning commission that these condominiums would be sold to absentee landlords who would then rent them out to tenants and in the end we would have a project similar to that on sterling and Highland. It was the feeling of the Planning Commission that we would rather see the construction of an apartment complex that is individually owned so there could be uniform control over all tenants rather than having forty-two condominiums owned by forty-two absent landlords. It was the feeling of the Planning commission that to install a condominium project in that area would be completely incompatible with the neighborhood and would result in absentee landlord ownership of some forty-two separate units. I very seldom write concerning any items decided by the Planning Commission but I feel most strongly that the Planning Commission took the right action in both of these matters and I am equally certain that both of these items will be appealed to the Mayor and Common Council. If I can answer any individual questions for you I will be happy to do so. Yours truly, ROY H. NIERMAN RHN:mw cc: Larry Reed . . . . . . . EXHIBIT D Public Hearinq Notice A notice of the appeal hearinq was sent to the property owners within 500 feet of the subject property and the applicant at least ten days prior to the hearinq, as per Municipal Code Section 19.81.020. A copy of this notice is attached. . . . . . . . OFFICIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL APPEAL OF roIDITIOOAL USE ~ NO. 86-26 AND TENrATIVE TRACT 13365 r ~ THIS IS TO INFORM YOU THAT THE FOllOWING ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCil BY awlicant '- ...... SUBJECT: Conditional Use Pel:mit No. 86-26 and WARD :# Tentative Tract 13365 4 PROPERTY lOCATION: Located on the east side of IJeI R>sa Avenue approximately 314 feet oorth of Marshall Boulevard. PROPOSAl:To extend approval ti1le limit by one year for Conditional Use Pel:mit 86-26 and Tentative Tract 13365 for the cxmstruction of 42 oomaniniums. I PUBLIC HEARING lOCATION: SAN BERNARDINO CITY HALL COUNCil CHAMBERS 300 NORTH "0" STREET SAN BERNARDINO, CA. 92418 '- C HEARING DATE AND TIME: December 18, 1989, 2:00 p.re. ) A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL IS ON FILE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT CITY HALL. IF YOU WOULD LIKE FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN PERSON OR BY PHONING (714) 384-5057. THANK YOU. ,II, 1184 .., . .XHIBIT E . . MEMORANDUM .. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - To Planning Commission From Planning Department Date November 7, 1989 Subject CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86-26 TENTATIVE TRACT 13365 EXTENSION OF TIME Approved Date Agenda Item APPLICANT: Nos. .10 & 11 Darwin K. Pearson Del Rosa Meadows 1249 1/2 W. Balboa Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92661 OWNER: Darwin K. Pearson Harry Kerames Alan J Parnigoni 1249 1/2 W. Balboa Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92661 1. REOUEST . The applicant is requesting a one-year extension of time for Tentative Tract 13365 and Conditional Use Permit 86-26 to construct a 42 unit condominiuDi project under the authority of San Bernardino Municipal Code Section 19.83.140 and 19.83.300. 2. LOCATION The project site consists of 3.05 acres located on the east side of Del Rosa Avenue approximately 314 feet north of Marshall Boulevard. 3. ANALYSIS The proposal was approved prior to the adoption of the Interim Policy Document (IPD). The findings of consistency of the project were based upon conformance with Titles 18 and 19 of the Municipal Code and East San Bernardino-Highland General Plan, and its compliance with the then existing PRD- 14, Planned Residential Development, zone districts's permitted uses. SUbsequent to project approval on september 16, General Plan was adopted by the Mayor and common General Plan designates the project site RM, Medium. 1986, the Council. The Residential . The proposed 42-unit condominium Planned Residential Development is a permitted use with a Conditional Use Permit under San Bernardino Municipal Code Chapter 19.83, Interim Urgency Zoning Ordinance, and Attachment "B-1", Table of Permissible Uses. r"I,.'E .t ~ ..... .. ..,~-.~ f,'" .., ~.r"'...') ./ ,. :a.:!~}~~' ~"_.J. . . i . . . . . TENTATIVE TRACT 13356 (EXTENSION OF TIME) NOVEMBER 7, 1989 PAGE 2 Per Section 19.83.140, Extensions of Time, "no extension of time application may be approved unless a written finding is made by the City that the development project is consistent with the General Plan ..." The proposal was reviewed by staff and is consistent with the Municipal Code and General Plan (Attachment "A"). 4. CONCLUSION The proposed 42-unit Condominium Planned Residential Develop- ment is consistent with the Municipal Code and General Plan. 5. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the request for an Extension of Time for Tentative Tract 13365 "and conditional Use Permit 86-26 subject to the following Findings of Fact (Attachment "B"), conditions of Approval" and Standard Requirements (Attachment "C" and "0"). Respectfully s ~~ Michael R. Finn Planner I ATTACHMENTS: "A" - Municipal Code and General Plan Conformance "B" - Findings of "Fact "C" - Conditions of Approval "0" - Standard Requirements "E" - Original Staff Report (9/16/86) "F" - Location Map with current Land Use Designations PC: TT133650 . . . . ATTACHMENT n A" . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT . CASE TT 13365 . . OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE " ,,/7/RQ 3 MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE Ca.tegory proposal Municipal Code General plan Permitted Use Condominiums Yes Yes Height 2 stories 3 stories or 42 ft. 3 stories or 42 ft. Setbacks Interior 50ft. plus 5 ft. plus N/A 1.33 ft./15 1 ft./15 ft continuous wall continuous wall 69.25 ft. from 25 ft. on N/A , Del Rosa Ave. major arterial (25 ft. from flood channel) 381 ft. 60 ft. min. N/A 363.75 ft. 100 ft. min. N/A 29% 50% N/A 2 bedroom 2 bedroom N/A 926 sq. ft. 650 sq. ft. or more or more 13.2 units/acre 14 units/acre 14/units/acre Front Lot width Lot Depth Lot coverage Unit Size Density Parking Unit 2, both covered 2, 1 covered N/A N/A Guest 4/5 units 1/5 units . (. . . ATTACHMENT liB" .. ." r CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE TT 13365 FINDINGS of FACT '" AGENDA ITEM II HEARING OATS 1 /7/89 PAGE 4 TENTATIVE TRACT 13365 1. The tract is consistent with the General Plan adopted by the Mayor and Council on June 2, 1989, in that the proposal meets all the requirements of the RM, Residential Medium Land Use Designation with respect to size, dimension, and density. 2. The proposed tract abuts upon a dedicated street; that street being Del Rosa Avenue. The main entry point on Del "Rosa will provide adequate ingress/egress for the proposed project. 3. The proposed tract is consistent with the provisions of Title 18 and the Subdivision Map Act of the State of california. . CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86-26 1. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan adopted by the Mayor and C01IIIIIon Council on June 2, 1989; the proposed use as a Planned Residential Condominium Development is permitted as a medium residential use with a conditional Use Permit. 2. The proposal is compatible with the adjoining residential land uses consisting primarily of apartments to the north and west, and single-family dwellings to the east. " 3. The site 1s of sufficient size, shape, and area to accommodate the proposed 42-unit condominium complex. 4. Access, circulation, and parking for the proposed project is adequate. Access for entry and egress will be via the main entry point on Del Rosa Avenue. circulation is provided thrQughout the site for tenants, ~ests and emergency vehicles via a circular drive surrounding the complex. Eighty-four tenant parking spaces are provided as required, and 34 quest parking spaces are required (25 quest spaces in excess of the number required by code). 5. The granting of an conditions of approval not be detrimental to general welfare of the Bernardino. Extension of Time under the and standard requirements will the peace, health, safety, and citizens of the City of San . pc: TT13365F . . . . ATTACHMENT "c" . ...... . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE TT 13365 CONDITIONS 11 11/7/89 " AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 2. x The 4 parking spaces at the main entry/egress point on Del Rosa Avenue fronting the 15 foot flood control access strip shall be deleted for both safety and aesthetics. All Conditions of Approval and Standard Requirements of the original approval of Tentative Tract 13365 and Conditional .Use Permit 86~26 shall apply, with the exception of the Planning Department's Conditions and Requirements which are superceded by the attached. 1. x . . . . . -- . . . .-., CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE TT 13365 CONDITIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 11 11/7/89 . I; STANDARD CONDITIONS 3. x Minor modifications to the plan shall be subject to approval by the Director of planning. An increase of more than 10 percent of the square footage or a significant change in the approved concept shall be subject to (planning commission and Development Review committee) review and approval. Construction shall be in substantial conformance with the Plans approved by the Development Review committee, planning commission or Director of planning. The developer is to submit a complete master landscape and irrigation plan (4 copies) for the entire development to the Engineering Department with the reqUired fee for approval, the landscape plans will be forwarded to the Parks, Recreation, and community Services and the planning Department for review and approval. (Note: the issuance of a building permit, by the Department of Building and Safety of the city of San Bernardino, does HQI waive these requirements/conditions.) No grading permits will be issued prior to approval of landscape plans. . The design shall include, but not be limited to the following: 4. x Street .trees shall be planted on 35 foot center spacing unless otherwise indicated by the Department of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services. The Parks Department shall determine the varieties and locations prior to planting. A minimum of 25% of the trees shall be 24" box specimens. Trees are to be inspected by a Park Division representative Drior to planting. Planters shall be enflosed with concrete curbing. The setbacks from the north ____ , south ---- , east ____ , west ____ property line shall be bermed at a maximum 3:1 slope and shall be planted with a tall fescue type turfqrass. A Landscape buffer zone shall be installed between facilities and street. .. . . . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE TT 13365 CONDITIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 11 11/7/89 5. . 6 x The landscape and irrigation plans shall comply with the "Procedure and Policy for Landscape and Irrigation" (available from the Parks Department)._ subject to the conditions of the Department of.parks and Recreation (attached). y Trees, shrubs and groundcover of a type and quality generally consistent or compatible with that characterizing single- family homes shall be provided in the front yard and that portion of th side yards which are visible from the street. All landscaped areas must .be provided with. an automatic irrigation system adequate to insure their viability. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Parks and Recreation Department. . At all times the business will be operated in a manner which does not produce obnoxious noise, vibration, odor, dust, smoke, glare, or other nuisance. A sign program for the multi-tenant commercial/industrial center shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. In the event that this approval is legally challenged, the city will promptly notify the applicant of any claim or action and will cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. Once notified, the applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents. and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of San Bernardino. The applicant further agrees to reimburse the City of any costs and attorneys' fees which the City may be . required by a court to pay Asa result of such action, but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligation under this condition. PCAGENDA:STNDCONDITIONS 10/19/89 . . . . . ~nD" . , CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO STANDARD REQUIREMENTS ""'l '" CASE TT 13365 CUP 86-2b AGENDA ITEM 11 HEARING DATE 11/7 / 8 9 PAGE - 8 - .. 1. x 'T. ~ Extension of Time for TT 13365 and conditional Use Pemi.t 86-26 shall be in ettect for a period of ~ months from the date ot approval by the Planning commission and/or Planning Department. However, it the final map has not been tiled with the County Recorder's Office at the end of the 12 month time period, the approval shall expire. Additional time may be approved by the Planning Commission upon written request of the applicant it made 30 days prior to expiration of the -11- month time period. Expiration Date: Novanber 7, 1990 COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR P.R.D. 2. x a. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC & R's) shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to final approval ot the tract maps. The CC & R's shall include liability insurance and methods ot maintaining the open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, and exterior ot all buildings. The CC & R's shall also include a statement that no radio trequency antenna shall be included within the complex except for central antenna systems. . . b. No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been tormed with- the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufticient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity - shall operate under recorded CC & R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and tlexibility of assessments to meet changing costs ot maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC 'R's shall permit entorcement by the City of provisions required by the City as conditions to approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the Commission prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. Every owner ot a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and taci1ities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an c. lo... ~ I'U s.y . . ( . . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CASE Tl' 13365 CUP 86-26 AGENDA ITEM 11 HEARING DATE 1l/7/'r PAGE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS ~ """ association, owning the common areas and 'facilities. d. Maintenance for all landscaped and open areas, including ~arkways, shall be provided for in the CC & R's. e. The CC & R's shall contain wording prohibiting the storage or parking of trailers, boats, campers, motor homes, and similar vehicles outside of the specified common areas. 3 x PARKING: a. This development shall be required to maintain a minimum of 93 parking spaces. b. . 4. . x All parking and driving aisles shall be surfaced with two inches of AC over a suitable base or equivalent as approved by the city Engineer. parking spaces shall be striped, and have wheel stops installed at least three feet from any building, wall, fence, property line, or walkway. Whenever ,an off-street parking area is adjacent 'to or across an alley from property zoned residential, a solid decorative wall six feet in height shall be erected and maintained along the property line so as to separate the parking area physically from the residentially zoned property, provided such wall shall be three feet in height when located within the required front or street side yard setback. Where no front or street side yard is required, such wall shall be three feet in height when located within ten feet of the street line. Said wall shall be located on the north ~, south _, east _, west ' or peripheral ____ property lines. d. Whenever an off-street parking area is 'located across the street from property zoned for residential uses, a solid decorative wall or equivalent landscaped berm not less than three feet in height shall be erected and maintained along the street side of the' lot not closer to the street than the required depth of the yard in the adjoining residential area. No fence or wall located in the front setback shall obscure the required front setback landscaping. said wall shall be located on the north ____, south _, east ----, west ____, or peripheral _ property lines. c. All parking areas and vehicle storage areas shall be lighted. during hours of darkness for security and protection. Recreational vehicle storage areas shall be screened by at least ~ I'.) aky . . . . .' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ST ANDARD REQUIREMENTS " CASE 'rl' 13365 CUP 86-26 AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE ~ 11 " 17(~<1 5 x 6 x 7 x 8. x . 9 x 10. x 11. x . lo.. " a six-foot hiqh decorative wall with screened qates. There shall be provided for each unit, within the qarage or carport, or other specifically desiqnated area, a loft or other usable storaqe area with a minimum of 150 cubic feet in addition .to standard utility storage. Traffic bumps provided on the interior private roads shall be subject to the City Traffic Enqineer's approval. A commercial-type drive approach, as shown on Standard Drawing No. 204 or equivalent, shall be constructed at each entrance to the development. Location and design shall be subject to approval of the Enqineerinq Division. Prior to issuance of any buildinq permit, access riqhts shall be qranted to the City for the purpose of allowing access over the private drives within the project for all necessary City vehicles including fire, police, and refuse disposal vehicles, and any other emerqency vehicles. The documents coverinq this. matter shall be prepared by the owner and approved by the Planninq Department. All refuse storaqe areas are to be enclosed with a decorative wall. Location, size, type and desiqn of wall are subject to the approval of the Planning Department and Division of Public Services Superintendent. Energy and noise insulation shall comply with all state and local requirements. LANDSCAPING: a. Four (4) copies of a master landscape plan shall be submitted to the Enqineerinq Division for review and approval. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following: . b. 1) Size, type, and location of plant material proposed. 2) Irriqation plan. 3) Such other alternate plants, materials and design concepts as may be proposed. 4) Erosion control plans. Tree varieties and exact locations will be determined prior ~ '.'5 Ily . . . . """ . r CITY - OF SAN BERNARDINO STANDARD REQUIREMENTS .... CASE TT 13365 CUP 86-26 AGENDA ITEM 11 HEARING DATE 1l/7/R9 PAGE 11 ~ ~ . 12 x 1 x , "" Perimeter walls and walls required along the rear of all double frontage lots shall be designed and constructed to incorporate. design features such as tree planter wells, variable setback, decorative masonry, columns, or other such features to provide visual and physical relief along the wall face. The developer shall obtain Planning Department approval of the visual or engineering design of the proposed wall. When graded slopes occur within or between individual lots, the slope face shall be a part of the downhill lot. -Exceptions to this requirement must be approved by the City Engineer. staged as required by the City amount of bare soil exposed to Grading and revegetation shall be Engineer in order to reduce the precipitation. compliance with all recommendations of the Geology Report shall be required (if applicable). _ Any clubhouse, swimming pool, spa, putting green, picnic areas or other amenities shall be installed in the manner indicated on the approved site plan. During construction the city Engineer may require a fence around all or a portion of the periphery of the tract site to minimize wind and debris damage to adjacent properties. The type of. fencing shall be approved by the City Engineer to assure adequate project site maintenance, clean-up and dust control. ~ 1..' ..., .' . . . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO r 14 . CASETl' 13365 CUP 86-26 AGENDA ITEM 11 HEARING DATE 11/7/89 PAGE 12 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS . . 15 16 17 ..... x. No roof-mounted equipment shall be placed on any buildinq unless screened as specifically approved by the Planninq Department (except for solar collection panels). Within 75 feet of any sinqle-family residential district, the maximum heiqht of any buildinq shall not exceed one-story or 20 feet unless the commission determines that due to unusual topoqraphical or other features, such restrictive heiqht is not practical. x x installed underqround subject to Planninq Department and the ~ity .A11 utility lines shall be exceptions approved by the Enqineer. No certificate of occupancy shall with these Standard Requirements the San Bernardino Municipal. Code. be issued prior to compliance as well as all provisions of x csjj5-9-88 DOC:PCAGENDA DOCUMENTS. 1 \.. . . ~ 1"5 IQ . . ATTACHMENT "En . . . 'C:ITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT "'" SUMMARY AGENOA ITEM HEARING OATE WARD 3 Ill] F.IP.F. 4 APPLICANT, eve opmen t Newport Blvd. ,#10' Newport Beach, CA 92663 OWNER. Edith Faye Boon' 3462 Del R0sa Avenue San B~rnardino, CA 92404 ~ Tentative Tract No. 13365 & 5 Conditional Use Permit ;'0. 86-26 The request is in the PRD-14. per acre. to establish a 44 unit condominium subdivision Planned Rc:sidential Development zone, 14 units it; 'W I::> !O 'w :0: :'1' !ISubject property is a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land con- ~ !sisting of approximately 3.85 acres having a ftontage of 381 ! 0: I ',feet on the east side of Del Rosa Avenue and being located , <l i approximately 355.45 feet north of the centerline of ! i !Xanhail Boulevard. I (j :" {'---, ( EXISTING I i'RC"~RTY I I LAND USE i------ . ; Subject il Single-Faro. Res. . ;;or.th ': Apartments So_th ,I Vacant Eas t .: Single-Fao. Res. " West : i Apartmeno:s :1 .\ \__ __. i '.... :~~;.~.~'; ;EISMI; '--__ __ p:..~~..:~ ZONE r--'-'---' I ...l:ilooj Flnf \ ,'~Z..4l::' :':NE . ZONING PRD-14 PRD-14 PRD-14 County R-l PRD-14 -[JYES) FLOOD HAZARD !KJ NO ZONE DYES '\ ~;JRT NOISE / GQ NO j l-..:~SH ZONE . I....~r ; oJ I i l2 ~CT I < I'! ~PPClCABLE t t- . I 'f.;CIl:; ... (!) ! I i ~;!!; i I 0 EXEMPT 100 :\ !c::z. l~~ Ji o POTENTIAL SIGNIF1~NT E.FECTS WI TH MITIGATING MEASURES NO E.I.R, DEI R. REQUIRED BUT NO S'GNIFICANT EFFECTS \"Tn MITIGATING MEASJRES o 'i'G'lIFICANT EFFECTS S~E ATTACHED E.R. C. ""NUTES ~SO SlGNIFIC:':\,;" Er:FECT3 h-:'V 1981 "lEvIS!D .lUL'f 1t12 SKY GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Res. 8-14 'du/se Res. 8-14 dulae Res. 8-7 dulae Res, 4-7 dulae Res. 8~14 du/ae DYES OZONE A Gel NO OZONE B !X!VES SEWERS 0 NO oVES KJNO , ~ REDEVELOPMENT J PRQJECT ARE^ oVES ~NO Z I 0 i I !;i Ll.0 ~ffi t!:IE I fI) :IE o (,) W 0: IXI APPROVAL C\1 CONDITIONS 0 DENIAL 0 CONTINUANCE TO j 1 I ) . . . . ' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT" .... ::NVIRONMENTAl. REVIEW COMMITT:::: NEGATIVE DECLARATION. . roo G " CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CLERK OF THE BOARD OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE SUPERVISORS 300 NORTH ",1' STREET, 3rd FL.OOR 175 WEST 5th STREET SAN BERNARDINO, CA. 9241B SAN BERNARDINO, CA. 92415 THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CAkIFORNIA2~EVi~5D THE PROJECT DESCRIBED BEl-OW AT IT'S MEETING OF . ugust:. AND FOUND THAT ON THE BASIS OF THE INITIAL STUOY THE PROJEc:r WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. PROJECT NAME: Tent:at:ive Tract No. 13365 and Condit:ional Use Permit: No. 86-26 I ?ROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION: To establish a 44 unit: condominium development: on a sit:e of approxi- mately 3.9 acres in the PRD-14. Planned Residential Development: zone locate~ on the east: side of Del Rosa Avenue approximately 314 feet north of Marshall &oulevard. MITIGATION MEASURES. IF ANY, TO AVOID POTENTlAL.L.Y SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS: . '- -- => .., . '- -, .,.- .' .=~ ." "'"":! . . , ~ '"":~ .. . - - - ~ ':' . o..~: -= ~ - - ~ .- .- . .n' - ...:: o. .. . - c:> ENVIRONMENTAl. REVIEW COMMITTEE, CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO .~.C.K~ ("'~l 383-!lO57 SECRETAaYVALERIE C. ROSS. Assistant Planner' DATE .. TEI.EPHONE 10... . . at. FOR" co ...y I..' . . . . . ' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT" . . ENVIRONMENTAl. REVIEW COMMITTEE \.NOTICE OF DETERMINATION~ ',--- ,,--.. " SECRETARY FOR RESOURCES 01411 NINTH STREET, ROOM 1311 :Ii CITY OF SAN BERNAROINO SACRAMENTO, CA. 95BI.4 0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMIT'rEE 0 a: 300 NORTH 0 STREET, 311I FLOOR ~ ... CLERK OF THE BOARO OF SUPERVISORS SAN BERNAROINo, CA. 92418 GO 175 WEST 51~ STREET '--" '--" SAN BERNAROINO, CA. 92415 ( PROJEC'r NAME' Teneaeive Trace No. 13365 and Co~~ie~~~~~ Use Permie PROJECT OESCRIPTION AND LOCATION: To eseab1ish a 44 unie condominium develop- mene on a siee of approximaeely 3.9 acres in ehe PRD-14, Planned Resideneial Develop- mene zone locaeed on ehe ease side or Del Rosa Avenue approximaeely 314 feee noreh of Marshall Boulevard. _. - - ., ... ., .- ~:::. = ..:> ~ " . -~ ."-. - - .- :;.: .... - =- 0 . - :":.'- ": -'7. "... ~::; >~- - ,,, - -, THIS IS TO AOYISE THAT THE CITY Of' SAN BERNARDINO HAS MADE THE FOlJ.OWING DET~MIIiiJION-..' REGARDING THE PROJECT DE:;CRIBED ABOVE: I. THE PROJECT HAS BEEN CDAPPIlOVED. oDE"IIO. 2. THE PROJECT OWILL. GilWIu.. NOT, HAVE A SIGNIFICAHT El'l'ECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. . 3. DAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT WAS PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE PROVIS.lONS OF CEOA. CD A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS PREPARED IIOR THIS PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CEOA. A copy OF THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW IN THE PI.ANNING DEPARTMENT, CITY HALL, 300 NORTIl ~o' STllEET, SAN BERNARDINO, CA. 92814. 'l A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OWAS. ggWAS NOT, ADOPT ED FOR THIS PROJECT. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO . , .. I61tW-iC. R.~ (7141 3B3.5057 SECRETARY V AI..ElUE C. ROSS, Assiseane.P1axuN!- Roc....d "" FHi", lELEPHOHE ....1 .J ... I ...., 'II ..., rftc. ,()ItJII E . .. ( CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE 17 NO. 13365 & OBSE ~~~IONS cut' 1m. llb-lb R AGENDA ITEM .3 . HEARING DATE 9/16/86 \.. PAGE 2 . . 1. The applicant is proposing to develop a 42 unit condominium project on approximately 3.31 acres located on the east side of Del Rosa Avenue between Eureka and Marshall Avenues in the PRO, Planned Residential Development at 14 units per acre. 2. 3. .. . The General Plan per acre. The density of 12.68 General Plan. designates the site for 8 to 14 units proposed development will have a net units per acre in conformity with the Access to the site will be via a single 32 foot wide driveway approach centrally located in the project site.' After gaining entry into the site, the driveway splits to form a loop diive system so that ingress/egress. will be from the same driveway entry approach. The loop internal street system will maintain a minimum. of 24 feet throughout. . A total of 118 parking spaces (84 covered, 34 open) being proposed on site is 13 more than the minimum number required by code. 5. The units will be two story over tuck-under parking. To the east of the site is existing single-family develop- ment within the R-1-7200, Single-Family Residential zone. The planned Residential Development zone requires that when adjacent to a single-family development that a restricted height area be established within 75 feet of the adjacent single-family development. The submitted site plan indicates that the project is maintaining the required 75 foot single story restriction by placing all the units adjacent to the east property line to the west of the 75 foot line. 4. 6. Between the curb face of Del Rosa Avenue and the buildings is a flood control channel owned and maintained by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. Comments have been received by the Flood Control District, a copy of those comments are attached for the Commission's review. To summarize those comments and recommendations, the manner in which the developer has decided to build the units has opted for deep footings with reinforcement rather than meeting a 50 foot setback .from the ultimate right-of-way as stated in recommendation number three from the letter from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. I . . . . \. . . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT """ CASE TT NO. 13365 & OBSER\/ATIONS CUP NO. 86-26 YK._ ~~i~?:GI1~E 9/1~/86 PAGE 1 7. The submitted site plan indicates that 25.4\ of usable site is devoted to common open space in both passive and active recreational areas. For active recreational amenities the developer will be providing a cabana, pool, spa and laundry room. The passive areas will consist of planted open space greater than 15 feet in width between structures. 8. Perimeter fencing will be required to be placed on the north, so~th and east property line. The fencing would need to be a solid decorative fence material such as split-face block, etc. The San Bernardino County Flood Control District has recommended a chain link fence adjacent to the flood control channel. Rather than a chain link fence, Staff is recommendihg a combination pilaster and wrought iron fence. A wrought iron fence will meet the need of the San Bernardino Flood Control District and will be aesthetically enhancing to the project. A condition is attached in regards to the fencing material. The floor plans submitted with the development proposal indicat~ that all units will have two bedrooms each. Forty of the units will consist of 926 square feet and two units will be for the handicapped, consisting of 930 square feet each. The elevations submitted indicate that the exterior building materials will consist of stucco and wood siding. No exact type of roofing material is indicated, therefore, Staff would recommend that a color board be submitted prior to issuance of the building permit indicating all exterior building materials. The Environmental Review Committee, at their regularly scheduled meeting of August 28, 1986, recommended that a negative declaration be adopted for the proposed 42 unit condominium project. 9. 10. 11. . . . . ~-~ . , ( . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT FINDINGS of FACT CASE TT NO rtr'P Nn AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE: PAGE "nn' .. Slh_")&:' 3 1"'16'6li . I. ' Findings nf Fact fnr T~ntativ~ Tract Nn. 13365 1. The site consists of approximately 3.31 acres, which exceeds the m1n1mum development requirement for a one lot subdivision in the Planned Residential Development zone. 2. The tract exceeds the Subdivision Ordinance Act. minimum requirement of the City's and the States Subdivision Map 3. The _ tract will have frontage on a dedicated Del Rosa Avenue. The main entry point on Del provide adequate ingress/egress for the project. The proposed project does not exceed the maximum-density permitted under the PRD-14 units per acre zone and is consistent with the provisions contained in the East San Bernardino-Highland General Plan allowing for 6-14 units per net acre for residential development. street, Rosa will proposed 4. FinninQ~ nf Fa~~ fnr Cnnn;tinnAl Us~ P~rmit Nn. 86-26 1. The proposed project consists of a density of 12.68 units per acre conforms to the goals and objectives of the East San Bernardino-Highland General Plan, which allows the subject property a designation of 8-14 units per net acre. 2. The proposed project will not adversely impact the adjoining land uses, growth or development of the area. 3. The site is sufficient in area and size to accommodate the proposed 42 unit condominium project. 4. Sufficient access for ingress/egress is provided on site. Adequate circulation'. is provided throughout the site for tenants, visitors and emergency. vehicles. There are 118 parking spaces provided on site, 13 spaces more than what is required for a condominium. Traffic generated by the project will be adequately handled by Del Rosa Avenue. s. The proposed approval will project along with the conditions of not be detrimental to the peace, health, . . . ( ,. , ( . . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING. DEPARTMENT ~ASE TT NO. 13365 & FINDINGS f ~A'CT CUP NO 86-26 o rM :;~~~ I~~E C//{n/Rn PAGE ~ . safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of San Bernardino. RF.COM~IENDATION Based upon the observations and findings of fact contained herein, Staff recommends the following: . A) The Negative Declaration be issued for the proposal as recommended by the Environmental Review Committee. B) as spec if ied . the current per acre. The project be approved for 42 units, by existing zoning of PRD-14 and General Plan designation of 8-14 units Respectfully Submitted, E . . . . . . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE TT NO. 13365 & CONDITIONS AGEND~~;E~;U' IH,;lb HEARING DATE' ':!/lb/bb PA E b 1. The north, south and east property lines shall consist of a solid decorative wall. The west property line shall maintain an open fence material such as pilaster and wrought iron, which is acceptable to the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, 'a color board displaying the type of exterior building materials shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. 3. The recommendation of the San Bernardino County Flood Control district for mitigation measures shall be adhered to and other pertinent requirements of the City Engineer for mitigation of potential flood damage. DIARTMENT OF TRANf"'lOR~TION/ FLOOD CONTROL/AIRPORTS . ( COUNTY OF SAN BERNA!O ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY '1:i,,\\\ll//I~V ......~t~"" ~ ~ -- -- --;::... -=:- ,.~ ~- /11'/'II\\\h July 28, 1986 MICHAEL G. WALKER Director "Ell' ThIrd 51tH' . Son Bamardlno. CA 92415-0835 . 17141387.2800 . . . FUe: 2-507/1.00 2~r~ @ ~ r~ \~1 ~. rn JUl 30 1986 City of San Bernardino Planning Department 300 North nD" Street CITY PLI..." ... :_"' ,~;'.i MENT SAN BERNARDINO. CA , Attention: Mr. Greg Gage/ Re: Zone 2, Del Rosa Channel - Tentative Tract 13365 and. CUP No. 86-26 Gentlemen: Reference is made to your transmittal received on June 23, 1986 with accompanying letter from the developer, a site plan, and architect's plan, requesting the District's review and comments. The. site is located on the east side of Del Rosa Channel, between Marshall Boulevard and Eureka Street, in the northeast portion of the City of San Bernardino. The west side of ':ohe proposed development abuts Del Rosa Channel, a major flood carrying facility serving to outlet Daley Canyon flows as well as Del Rosa and vicinity drainage. The existing channel is of interim construction and is not considered adequate to withstand major flood flows. Therefore, in our opinion, the site is subject to infrequent flood hazard by reasons of overflow, erosion and debris deposition until such time as permanent channel and debris retention facilities are provided, Our recommendations and comments are as follows: 1. An additional 15 foot wide strip of land adjacent to the existing Del Rosa Channel Flood Control District right-of-way sl\a11. be dedicated to the District in fee title to make a total of 35 feet of right-of-way for ':ohe ultimate channel facUity. The right-of-way is also needed for maintenance of the existing interim channel. The District will prepar.e appropriate documentation for the dedication of the fee and easement rights-of-way for the grantor's signatu~e upon the developer providing the District with a current t1 tle report Showing ownerships of record, The documentation should be signed by all parties prior to the recordation of the tract. 2. A 15 foot wide easement adjacent to the 35 foot fee right-of-way shall be granted to the District for maintenance of. the ultimate channel facUity. This easement shall not have buildings, trees or other obstacles placed in it which may obstruct access. . . ~ . . ( , . . Letter to the City of San Bernardino July 28, 1986 Page 2 3. A 50-foot build ing setback shall be established from the new fee right-of-way line. The building setback may be reduced if the following factors are incorporated into the structure design: a) Deep footings are utilized for any portion of the foundations which lie within 50 feet of the channel. b) The depth of the footings are a minimum 2 feet below the flowline of the channel. c) The design and reinforcement of this section of the foundations will be such that total erosion of the soil, from the storm drain to the base of the foundations, would not affect the stability of that foundation or building. q. Six foot chain link fencing or other District approved barrier shall be placed along the new fee right-of-way line. The barrier shall be removable for maintenance of the ultimate channel facility. 5. The proposed bridiing of the channel shall be designed to convey ultimate channel design flows, and aligned to meet ultimate channel construction. 6. A permit will be required to outlet any drainage, or to make any encroachment onto Flood Control District right-of-way, and at that time the proposal will be reviewed by the District's Field Engineering Division with respect to specific requirements. A minimum of six weeks processing time should be allowed. 7. Portions of the site may be subject to excessive street flows and accumulated drainage from the north. It is therefore recommended that a separate report be obtained from the City Engineer's Office with respect to local and on-site drainage conditions. 8. In addition to the drainage requirements stated herein, other "on-site" or "off-site" improvements may be required which cannot be determined from tentative plans at this time and would have to be reviewed after more COlllplete improvement plans and profiles have been submitted to this office. . . . . /. Letter to the City of San Bernardino July 28, 1986 Page 3 . . Should you have any further questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact the undersigned at (714) 387-2515. RWC:SA:mjs cc: Morgan Development, Inc. (Max Horgan) Very truly yours, :zl1'(.b e-c.~. ROBERT W. CORCHERO, Chief Water Resources Division . ( . . ( ( . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ST ANDARD REQUIREMENTS \.. CASE TT NO. ("Ut) rqO AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE --- 13365 and 66 76 ~ 9.'H.'S6 7 ~ ""'" RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TT IF 13365 & 1 CUP # 86-26 shall be in effect for a period of 24 months from the date of approval by the Planning Commission and/or Planning Department. However, if no development has been initiated at the end of the 24..month time period the approval shall expire. Additional time may be approved by the P1an~tg Commission upon request of the applicant prior to expira- tion of the _-month time period. Expiration Date: September 16. 1988. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR P.R.D. -L- . . a. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to final approval of the tract maps. The CC & R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining the open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, and exterior of all buildings. The CC&R's shall also include a statement that no radio frequency antenna shall be included within the complex except for central antenna systems. b. No lot or dwelling unit In the development shall be sold unless a cor- poration, association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest In the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be suffi ci ent to meet the expenses of such entl ty, and wi th authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include .compu1sory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City of provisions required by tne City as conditions to approval. The developer shall submit evi- dence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the Commi ssi on pri or to making any such sale. This conditi on shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. c. Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the com- mon areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association, owning the common areas and facilities. d. Maintenance for all landscaped and open areas, including parkways, shall be provided for in the.CC&R's. e. The CC&R's shall contain wording prohibiting the storage or parking of trailers, boats, campers, motor homes, and similar vehicles outside of the specified common areas. . ~ """ SA "OR" .. Pdt I OF' $ ...., .. . . ( ( . . ." CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ST ANDARD REQUIREMENTS 10.. CASE TT NO. 13365 and CUP NO Rfi-?fi AGENDA ITEM 3 HEARING DATE q /lli / RIi 'PAGE A ~ "'" , --1L- PARKING: a. This development shall be required to maintain a minimum 'oflOS parking spaces. b. All parking and driving aisles shall be surfaced with two Inches of.AC over a suitable base or equivalent as approved by the City Engineer. Parking spaces shall be striped and have lIdleel stops installed at least three feet from any building. wall. fence, property line, or walkway. c. Whenever an off-street parking area Is adjacent to or across an alley from property zoned residential, a solid decorative wall six feet in height shall be erected and maintained along the property line so as to separate the parking area physically from the residentially zoned pro- perty. provided such wall shall be three feet in height Rtlenlocated . within the required front or street side yard setback. Where no front or street side yard Is required, such wall sh.all be three feet In height when located within ten feet of the street line. Said wall shall be located on the north " south . east . west . or perl ph era 1_____ property llne~ ----- ----- ~ d. Whenever an off-street parking area is located across'the street from property zoned for residential uses, a solid decorative wall or equiva- lent landscaped berm not less than three feet in height shall be erected and maintained along the street side of the lot not closer to the street than the required depth of the yard in the adjoining resi- dential area. No fence or wall located in the front setback shall obscure the required front setback landscaping. Said wall shall be located on the north ., south , east , west , or peripheral_____ property lines. ----- ----- ----- All parking areas and vehicle storage areas shall be lighted during hours of darkness for security and protection. Recreational vehicle storage areas shall be screened by at least a six-foot high decorative wall with screened gates. --2-- There shall be provided for each unit, within the garage or carport, or other speci'flcally designated area, 'a..loft or other usable storage area with a minimum of 150 cubic feet In addition to standard utility storage. . 4 -.b- ..:L . "- MAT .. Traffl c bumps provided on the I nteri or private roads shall be subject to the City Traffic Engineer's approval. A COlTlnercl a I-type drl ve approach, as shown on Standard Drawl ng No. 204 or equivalent, shall be constructed at each entrance to the development. Location and design shall be subject to approval of the Engineering Division. ~ ... 'O'UI A Pi" 2 0' , /- ( . . ( ( . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CASE TT NO. 13365 and CUP NO. 86-26 AGENDA ITEM 3 HEARING DATE 9/16/86 PAGE q ST ANDARDREQUIREMENTS ..... , -B- Prior to Issuance of any building permit, access rights shall be granted to the Ci ty for the purpose of allowi ng access over the pri vate dri ves wi thi n the project for all necessary City vehicles including fire, police, and refuse disposal vehicles, and any other emergency vehicles. The documents covering this matter shall be prepared by the owner and approved by the Planning Department. -5L-- All refuse storage areas are to be enclosed with a decorative wall. Location, size, type and design of wall are subject to the approval of the Planning Department and Division of Public Services Superintendent. -lO- Energy and noi se I nsul atl on shall comply with all state and local reQul re- ments. --U- LANDSCAPl NG: a. Three cOjjles of a master landscape plan shall -be submitted to the Planning Department/ Park and Recreation Department for review and approval. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1) Size, type, and location of plant material proposed. 2) Irrigation plan. 3) Such other alternate plants, materials and design concepts as may be proposed. ( . 4) orosion control plans. b. Tree varieties and exact locations will be determined prior to planting oy the Director of the Park and Recreation Department or his/her designee. A minimum number of one-inch caliper/15 gallon, multibranched trees shall be planted within the parkway for each of the following types of lots, as per the City'S specifications: 1) Cul-de-sac lot, -- one tree; 2) !nterlor lot -- two trees; 3) Corner lot -- three trees. It.. c. To protect against damage by erosion and negative visual impact, sur- faces of all cut slopes more than five feet in height and fill slopes more than three feet in height shall be protected by planting with grass or ground cover plants. Slopes exceeding 15 feet in vertical height shall also be planted with shrubs, spaced at not to exceed ten ~ . t.tl fORM A ,aGl , Of 5 M.." .. . . . . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO STANDARD REQUIREMENTS lito... "" CASE IT NO. 13365 and (.;Ul' NU..Hb-26 AGENDA ITEM 3 HEARING DATE ~/16/86 PAGE 1 0 ~ "" , The developer shall obtain Planning Department approval of the visual or engineering. design of the proposed wall. When graded slopes occur within or between individual lots, the slope face shall be a part of the downhill lot. Exceptions to this requirement must be approved by the City Engineer. Grading and revegetation shall be staged as required by the City Engineer in order to reduce the amount of bare soil exposed to precipitation. Compliance with all recommendations of the Geology Report shall be required (if applicable). -12- Any clubhouse, swimming pool, spa, putting green, picnic areas or other amenities shall De installed In the manner indicated on the approved site pl an. . -1L ...li.- -12... -1L 17 . "" MAT .. During construction the City Engineer may require a fence. around all or a portion of the periphery of the tract site to minimize wind and debris damage to adjacent pr.opertles. The type of fencing Shall be approved by the City Engineer to assure adequate project site maintenance; clean-up and dust control. No roof-mounted equipment shall be placed on any building unless screened as specifically approved by the Planning Department (except for solar collection panels). Within 75 feet of any single-family residential district, the maximum height of any building shall not exceed one-story or 20 feet unless the Commission deternrines that due to unusual topographical or other features, such restrictive height is not practical. All utility lines shall be installed underground subject to exceptions. approved by the Planning Department and the City Engineer. No certificate of occupancy Shall be Issued prior to compliance with these Standard Require~ents as well as all provisions of the San Bernardino Municipal Code. ~ S.R. FQlltM A ,..IE 5 C6 II . . . ( . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REQUIREMENTS CASE NO,:"'''' III" 13365 & CUP NO. 86- STANDARD MEETING DATE: PAGE NQ: a/'k/R~ . . 11 ""I , 'ENGINEERING DIVISION Project Description: Tent. Tract No. 13365 & C.U.P. No. 44 Uni~ondomlnTum Easts1de JOsa-iOrth of Marshall Date: 9-3-86 Prepared By: MWG Page 1 of 86-26 of Del -- Rev 1ewed 8y: 8 pages Owner/Applicant: Morgan Development, ~ NOTE TO APPLICANT: Where separate Englneerlng plans are required. the applicant is responsible for submitting the Engineering plans directly to the Engineering Division. They may be submitted prior to submittal of Building Plans, . STANDARD 'REQUIREMENTS 18. Payment of all applicable Engineering fees. Engineering Division for schedule of fees. 19. Submittal of a grading/drainage plan, conforming to all requirements of Title 15 of the Municipal Code, including submittal of a satisfactory soils investigation containing recommendations for grading. prior to issuance of a grading or building permit. Contact 20. All drainage from the development shall be directed to an approved public drainage facility. If not feasible. proper drainage facilities and easements shall be provided'to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 21. Design and construction of all public utilities to serve the si te in accordance wi th Ci ty Code. Ci ty Standards and requirements of the serving utility. . \. ..J ....IIIC" 1_" ..y . . .. . . . . ~ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO STANDARD REQUIREMENTS CASE NO.: TT NO. 13365 & CUP NO. 86-;~ ME~ DATE: 11.'19/66 PAGE NO: Ii ..... ENGINEERING DIVISION Project Description: Tent. Tract No. 13365 & C.U.P. No. 86-26. 44 UnltCOndomlnlum EastsT'Oe of Del Rosa NOrth of Marshall - - Date: 9-3-86 Prepared by: MWG Page 2 of 8 Reviewed by: pages 22. Dedication of sufficient right-of-way along adjacent streets to provide the ultimate master-planned width or as determined by the City Engineer. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS Grading: 23. The site/plot/grading and drainage plan submiteed for a building permit shall contain sufficient ground' elevations (both existing and proposed), building pad and finished floor elevations, grade slopes, and gradients to define the amount of grading to be done and the means of draining the site. 24. If more than l' of fill or 2' of cut is proposed, the site/plot grading and drainage plan shall be signed byaregistered Civil Engineer and a grading permit will be required. 25. If m 0 r e t h a n 5,000 cub icy a r d s 0 f ear t h w 0 r k is proposed, a grading bond will be required arid the grading shall be supervised in accordance with Section 7014 (c) of the Uniform Building Code. . 26.Slope planting with an irrigation system to prevent erosion shall be provided. as specified by the City Engineer. '. . 27.Dust and erosion control measures shall be maintained at all times during construction. lo.... ~ ....ltCH illS ..y . . . . . r CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ST ANDARD REQUIREMENTS """'I CASE NO.!1''T' Nn 13365 & CUP NO. 86-26 MEETING DATE: Q" I'./RI'. PAGE NO: 13 \... ""' r Engineering Division Project Description: Tent. Tract No. 13365 &C.U.P. No. 86-26. 44 Unitcondomlnlum Eastslde of Del 1ro saN'Or th 0 f 'Marstii'll Date: 9-3-86 Prepared by: MWG Re.viewed by:_ Page 1 of ~ pages. Utfli ties . 28. Each Unit shall be provided with separate water and sewer facil i ti es so it can be served by the Ci ty or the agency provldin~ such services in the area. 29. A sewer backflow prevention device is required for any Units with building finished floors lower than the nearest upstream manhole rim of the serving sewer main. 30. Sewer main extensions required to serve the site shall be constructed at the developer's expense~ 31. Sewers within private streets wfll not be maintained by the City but shall be constructed to City standards and inspected under a City Public Works inspection permit. 32. util i ty services shall be placed underground and easements provided as required. 33'. All existing overhead utilities shall'be placed underground in accordance with Section 18.40.380 of the City Code and snall be so indicated upon the Improvement plans. 34. A private on-site sewer main plan conforming to City Standards shall be submitted for approval of the Ci ty Engineer. This plan can be conbined with the Water Plan, If practical. . .. .J IIIA.CM I'" .lly . . . . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO STANDARD REQUIREMENTS CASE NO: TT NO. 13365 & CUP NO. 86-26 MEcrro.G DATE: 9/16i86 PAGE NO: 14 ENGINEERING DIVISION Project Description: Tent. Tract No. 13365 & C.U.P. No. 86=2"6. 44 Unlt Condominium !iStside ofOilRoas NortiiOl' Marshall. - --:- - - Date: 9-3-86 Prepared By: MWG Reviewed by:___ Page i of ! pages . Drainage and Flood Control: 35. All necessary drainage and flood control measures shall be subject to the requirements of the City Engineer, which may be based in part on the recommendations of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. The developer's Engineer shall furnish all necessary data relating to drainage and flood control. 36 . The de vel o.P men t is 1 0 cat e d . wit h i n a Z 0 neB 0 nth e Federal Insurance Rate Maps; therefore, all building pads shall be raised above the surrounding area as approved by the Ci ty Engi neer. . 37. Proper facilities for disposing of spring water from known'sources or if discovered during construction shall be provided to protect proposed building foundations. 38. Required dedications to the San Bernardino County Flood Control District shall be completed prior to final map recording. Street Improvements ~ Dedications 39 . All pub 1 i cst r e e t s w f t.h i n and a d j ace n t tot he development shall be improved to include combination curb and gutter, paving, and appurtenances as required by the City Engineer.Sidewalk and street lights will not be requi red. . \.. ..."CM Itl' Ilily . . . . '" , . STANDARD \... CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CASE NO: TT NO 13365 & CUP NO. 86-26 ME~ DATE: 9/16/86 PAGE NO: 15 REQUIREMENTS , "" ENGINEERING DIVISION Project Description: Tent. Tract No. 13365 & C.U.P. No.86-26. 44 Unit:!ondominTum Eastside of Oel lOsa-NOrth of Marshall -- --- Date: 9-3-86 . Prepared by: MWG Reviewed by: Page]. of ! pages - 40. All entrances to private streets from public streets shall be identified by a private street name sign, 'textured pavements. driveway approaches. or as approved by the City Engineer. . 41. The structural s e c t i on for all streets shall be designed and submitted to the City Engineer for approval using a TI assigned by the City Engineer and an R value obtained on the subgrade after rough grading by a recogni zed soil s testing lab. All, streets shall have a minimum AC thickne~s of 2-1/2 inches. 42. All driveway approaches shall be constructed to City standards or as may be approved by the City Engineer. 43. Street signs and other regulatory signs shall be installed at the developer's expense as required by the City Engineer. 44. Curb returns and corresponding property line returns shall be provided at the intersection(s) (20-foot radius for most streets). . 45. The h and i cap ram p s s hall be con s t r u c t e d at the intersection(s) and the necessary right-of-way, dedicated to accommodate the ramp as required by the City Engineer. This will be required if an intersection type entry is proposed. . ~ \. ....eM I..' .., . . . ( . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO STANDARD REQUIREMENTS CASE NO.: ....:tT 'J" 13365 & CUP NO. 86-26 MEETN3 DATE: 9/16/86 PAGE NO: 16 . , ENGINEERING DIVISION Project Description.: Tent. Tract No. 13365 & C.U.P. No. 86-26. ~Un1t condomln1um-ristslde of Del IOsa-iOrth of Marshall ----- "l5'ite: 9- 3-!b . Prepared by: MWG Reviewed by: Page! of ! pages . - 46. For the streets listed below, dedication of adequate street right-of-way (R.W.) to provide the distance from street centerline to property line and placement of the curb line (C.L.) in relation to the street centerline shall be as follows (for the streets marked *. the existing improvements shall be removed and replaced to the dimensions noted): . Street !!!!!!. Del Rosa Avenue ~ (ft.) 41.25 (Exist.) hh (f-t.) Remove & Rep.l ace ex is ti ng A.C curb with 8" pce curb & gutter per Std. 47. The two existing wood bridges over Del Rosa Channel sha 11 be removed and the Channel restored per requirements of the Flood Control District. 48. Construct guard rail along the Eastside of Del Rosa Avenue and landscape area between curb and Channel in accordance with requirements of the Parks Department and City Engineer. 49. Project identification Si9n shall ~ be located within street right-of-way. ( . lo.. ,UItCH .,., ..y . . . . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ST ANDARD REQUIREMENTS CASE NO: TT NO. 13365 & CUP NO. 86-26 MEETING DATE: 9/16/86 PAGE NO: 17 , ENGINEERING DIVISION Project Description: Tent. Tract No. 13365 & C.U.P. .No. 86-26. lrUn1t Coiidom1n1um""TIsts1de of Del lOsa-NOrth of Marshall ----- "Date: 9-3-86 Prepared by: MWG Reviewed by:____ Page I of ! pages 50. A tra ffic study will be requi red to determi ne traffi c signal needs at Marshall and Del Rosa Avenue and to determine possible re-striping needs (Left turn pocket, ri ght turn pocket, etc.) on Del Rosa Avenue. If mitigations are determined to be needed by the Traffic study as approved by the City's Traffic Engineer, these shall be installed as part of the required pUblic i mprovemen ts. . 51. If a signal is determined to be needed within 5 years the developer shall pa'y a traffic signal participation fee in the amount of $7.00 per trip based on 5.2 trips per Condominium Unit (total fee . $1,601.60). 52. The proposed bridge over Del Rosa Channel shall be subject to design approval by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District and the City Engineer. Mapping: 53. A final map based upon a field survey will be required. Improvement Completion: 54. Street, sewer, and drainage improvement plans for the entire project shall be completed, subject to the approval of the City Engineer, prior to the Te'cordation of the final map. 55. If the final improvements are not completed prior to recordation of ~he map, an improvement security accompanied by an agreement executed by the developer and the City will be required. . ... ~ .....eM 1111 Iky . . . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ST ANDARD REQUIREMENTS CASE NO: TT NO. 13365 & CUP ~10. .86-26 UE~ DATE: 9/16/86 PAGE NO: 18 . ENGINEERING DIVISION Project Description: Tent. Tract No. 13365 & C.U.P. No. 86-26. ~Unit condominium-rists1de of Del Tcisifrorth of Marshall - - ]&ti: 9-3-" Prepared by: MWG Reviewed by:____ Page ! of ! pages Required Engineering Permits 56. Grading permi t Constructi on permi t for on-si te improvement (except buildings - See Building and Safety). Construction permit for off-site improvements. Applicable Engineering I!!! ; 57. . Plan Check and Inspection fees for grading. Plan Check and Inspection fees for on-site improvements (except building - See Building and Safety). Plan Check and Inspection fee for off-site improvements. Street Light energy fee. Traffic Signal participation fee (if applicable). . \.. ~ a...ltCM "" .ay . . . ~ I I . -. . ( I: cF ~ ~ ~ 6 ~ ~. ~-_J.o E-I:.--R"O &A ~.S!! I .. ill I .. 'V .. ,.. ..~ > .. z ~- z . . ! !!! < " _____ _______ __1.___ " I - ( i C.". CD ~ ~:D\. .. to I' i i(J). ' t tiD) ( . .. ! ,\. ~ I::::. : ~ [(0 ~' I ~ ',\\ . i 'WI I ,.. :Io.r t -, 0 "- ~ ~ I ~~ ~ ,"' ...n ,.:- ..1 : ;;,'''' _..'11 iri U I /" f.i[- ,. . , ". I \ . I I III .. ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN J _ N. WAlPS, INC. "'''''1''. ......... It.... .... .......... ...., """,,,t.' "t-tl.. . 0" n , o " z n ~ -I c: > r- CIl ::j J ~ r- \" +-' -. ,.. l' "-----.~ ~ Z N ; Q.,'f-.===----'-J, i I ......---..... P I . CD I r----:;:::;.- - ~ -i \ ---' I r\ i ,-- I' \ . .:0;' 'f' , r:O I: i i : tU'J . ~ Q) ~ f t, i;' :; ~'ii: ~t~,l . I.,., ,I ;: iQ) I;: . Ul .:; &II ! I _1:0-. ; ::'iO I' ~~J : : =!n.c 7::'< MeR' :: "I !ii(J) Ii " : .~ . ! ei e e ~ ... . z Iii: il i z :' . . , , , e [: L , I 1,1 ReSA - II i'II'.! illl;~'lllii.I'1 IIIII ,!I~ Iii: II Illi . I: .lii=IIIIII'.' illl!;II!;!III!li~li.iili!il~ 1111!li!l~illlll;III!!!~~ ; liilll ~I; I .11.1 .I'lili 41! ! 11"1 Ijllt-Illi IIII !! ! ;Iil ,=lli".olll! I ll~ 'II I I I I; I. I " I 1'. l "-JtNut 0.. .. s ~ ~ .L! . - , . I' ; ..' .. - ( . . . ! 1111: ul~=lnlmH iHH iF il::hll:l Iii:: It; -Eli it; "!I!', . ! it'. 1!'U ! i I - I-!": !, i.u i Iti i I i .!I'~ Et~:..: '1_' III ~ :::rf'i;' ...i .t,- : " Ole 'I' ... I ;;,... : ii; ( ..... .. - ... . .-. ... ... - ~C"r......:.r.,...... ,.. - ,r.; . ' ! . , \, I~"" -, .\ ..:, _I. ...... I ,r"..." I;' l' f: t.r.......l............, I UJ~~ ., '. '.. \ i2" Cr .t,. " , , U l.. , . I . ,..... I I I ! ~ I ,.;.---- . '. ! . ~_I; .' . 1I'lr !II, \ J'" I .. I CONCEPTUAL SITE !"LAN . I I; I t.: " " ,. - ,/ ~ \ (" - . ~ I E-l , , , : : - . , " . ,i . - , " . I \ I I'"" .. i .. "I' I' '- ,-..:...._; .../ " -- \, ~_~I~~:~C. I! \ !:lilj': .::::t:::'., tlrl .,......,.....,..... . I' ( I' , . . L . -lC 0(" "0;1 c;'" co ~;!. ,. z r-O 0 ~ !'" m 6 .- i z z l:l ... "0 r- .. ,. ~ z .. ~ a: z C. . . ~ (1) , .. - I~ ,.:0 I" to ren . rim n~S: · 1(1) .. -0) I[ .. .. .. I rQ. l ~ 10 I : t~ I ~ .. I · Icn I I " , '" . . 1'1 I _1'LOOlI I III TYPICAL 81. tIINQ PLAN -.. I\. WATDS, IMC. -.-.-...- .,....- ....... .... ...."......- I . . . . . ~ lii ~ i ~ N ... N ... :e ~ . Q. (I) - - , '" J~ B ~.AI :0 i i(/) . IQ) : f t'1IS: II! t~ ~ ['II' ! ~Q) ~Q. 10 , I~ :: l(/) . I'" I ,'" ~ ( .. j~.:j. ;~"'~~i'; ~- --~C-:l\. <.~":: '-, .,. . Ii .,~- ~l~~ 21J\.'2:t~1 !j\~ ----l......!i.l .~ ,"c..I;"Cc-7:1-:,.-\. ~-. ~'L;''-:'~''-ri-\. E WCS&,~:' ;-~:~:il t11f ~l;"~ !.t~'~ ~l':'n .;1 -- . ~r\.'" ~. r"'.., t,.ff.rl Il'~': ~'::J r,l '_,,'" 7"'-f-.-- ,\1' \.c~ ~ t~~W~~' L I~l::~~i' . l.'",~ "'" '.', ~~~~~.\ .~- '-. ~-'./\\ ~\~~ : ~.. i \ ./ ) / CONCS"T\JAL ~AT1ONS ,jOHN H. WATDI8. INC. MCIfta..... . ........ ..r e. ..ftY4....- ...... ... ....' .... tn.. WY-.... . ( \ \ \ ( , , , I . . q.._( . ... ,. :D .. > .. :e m .. .. m .. m < ,. .. o z / . 1.~:. i(E/ ..~ 'l~ I ,...... ., . ~ I..... , " .~.'. , . ~ii . I !if tE- j ,. I ....r ;:;. 1 . I .I~:J, ~.\. I '.\ 1~i1''':iyl 'j ~-...J ,I. '., '.".-~~ . .;:) IF' \..~.. Ie....; ., J:;::,=! ~..bl' ~I' w... '. .- ~- ~. '''',.. /~I ..., ;. ......J - u lSr ft '~' /11 .*~.~.. I' ....!=' . -- !, .... ,~ . . :;1 -. (. .- ..;. I '!' . ":";'! ~ fi J f.l -:! "/, Ii \ ,..::. t::' !! .~-.!: I . .....a II. !t- E It:~ 11 ~"~::I€~ ~i ~"'=I ~t I 19 lliF:" _.' 1!!;\ll::-.- . '~t=i.~~~~~, '-" l, ~'. .t'; ''; '" ~~- .~/. '., ~ I..':' I Z ~~l ~~ 1 .. . , . ;t~~~ .:- ?r;.:~ -" :.: ", ,,,,~:: u 1(;.", Eg~Q. ,.. -QI>, : :;. . .. o c .. ,. m .. m < ,. .. o z .. , I ~ ' ... ,. :D .. > .. :e In .. .. m r- In < ,. .. i - ... ,. it .. ~ .. i! ~ - ,r ELEVATIONS-~ -- SENIOR CONGREGATE HOUSING '. ( ( - . . "]zz . , i I i i ! ~ . i I i . i . 5"<.' S t,.. .':1:'_., .J.. ~~; ',; ~:1..L I~ I :.':. _.. _.. / .__ _' _I - :-..:.-....'=- .-:--;.-._.- I '/ / / . -...., \ I "( /' ",'" !: /' I / ' '\. ('" I' I >,(1/ / / (./. ,'" , /- '/: '" I ( ",/ .. .__ ~ // /"') \-.......----- ; 0/ /1 /",'" ",-l;.-~/ ~. ./ // /--:V .__-- /" / / ".- / ./ / ,nn .../ / / "'1 / ./ . / ., . , / '.I' ",""T 1/ I I I /'. ..../ :.:.:. .', D s; - : -'~4"'_3' .: _... _....:......- ....- ~ ~I -Ft...~.. -~'.~.~;-~l .r~:",,-l' t .~~ ~ ~Il--- . . . .'" ..., ~:::::.j'~ . /"". :::::-. , ~_.;I~" it?-__~ ...,e,..a :,.:'o~;--r ~ i!Z:-~";~ -."..:-...,..'t:a;:;..____'-...:.._..._ - Jl~ ct... I~: . ..... ,", ".; " I i' !';"." Jt' I' i I i , I I J I , i' . ! . . " ~ I ! , 1 I , . . ... . : ( . l 1.1 ~~ . :ii tj; >1 " "5 I 0" j .:. . HI ! !~i . 1;1 .. UlI ./ . ( I . i i ~ ii' o _,, :...~'!! p-, , t. ... 11 ". ..c...\ 'I .! ....~.~;i,~r ~i ! . i'" .. !::~~ . ....!-.:: ~ --'I.. ;..:; ... I.~.;!= ?~ i: .~::... ....~ .r- \;; ~ 1_ .ca.. ~! .< " .!.. !'.'i II " ... ..:1 - ...... . U. n' H . . . ., . "''':' !:i; I"" / " ,. , / .oth..l II J.. ! I i , I- C ~ t 4Z' . I-I-q Z ! i dI !.;. I- <l: L a:~ .... '. ; . ..~ , " . ., ,. . ~ , , 10' . ! " l i : ! i , ~ . I~ . ( . . ATTACHMENT "F" ( t . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT OC 0 CASE CUP86-26 -TT 13365 L ^:TI N Extension of Tim", '"' HEARING OATE 11-7-89 AGENDA ITEM # 11 . ...~ .. ~ ~ ..,. .. . I ". ~. I I r<.H\ . "....,.. . " "..~