The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About28-Planning and Building .i.. 'W. . .... ... ~ CITY OF SAN BERN()1DINO - REQUEST lOR COUNCIL ACTION From: Al Boughey, Director Subject: Appeal of denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 and Variance Nq. 91-08 Dept: Planning & Building Services Date: December 5, 1991 , Mayor and Common Council Meeting December 16, 1991 Synopsis of Previous Council action: None Recommended motion: The Mayor and Common Council may deny the appeal and deny Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 and Variance No. 91-08. OR The Mayor and Common Council may continue the item, and direct staff to prepare an amendment to the Development Code to revise the distance criteria for establishments with off-site sales of alcohol (19.06.030) (2) (B) and also to revise the distance criteria for establishment of convenience stores (19.06.030 (2) (F)). ure Contact penon: Al Bouqhey Phone: 384-5357 Supporting data attachad: Staff Report Ward: 6 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source: (ACCT. NO.) (ACCT. DESCRIPTION) Finance: Council Notel: Ananrf!a Ita....... 1\1.... olcf .u & - - CITY OF SAN BER~DINO - REQUEST OR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT , Subject: Appeal of Planning Commission denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28, and Variance No. 91-08, requesting approval of the Conditional Use Permit to permit the sales of beer and wine for off-site consumption and a variance from Development Code section 19.06.030 permitting a convenience store to be constructed on less than the minimum lot size, and a variance from Code section 19.26 to permit a reduction in loading space requirements. Mayor and Common Council Meeting of December 16, 1991 REOUEST The owners, Mr. and Mrs Kensie Wooten, are appealing the denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 and Variance 91-08 by the Planning Commission. Under the authority of Development Code section 19.06.020 the applicant, Value Homes, is requesting to construct 2,000 sq. ft. of office & retail space including a convenience store with off-site sales of beer & wine. Concurrently, under the authority of section 19.72.030, the owner requests a variance from Code Section 19.06.030 requiring convenience stores to be constructed on 10,000 sq.ft., and a variance from the Code Section 19.26 which established standards of 15 ft. in width and 50 ft. in length for commercial loading space. The project proposes a loading space of 10 ft. in width and 15 ft. in length. The subject property consists of a 6,250 sq. ft., rectangular shaped parcel, located on the south side of Baseline Street, between Mt. Vernon Avenue and Garner Street, also described as 1255 West Baseline. The land use designation of the site is CG-2, Commercial General, General Plan land use. ANALYSIS The subject property is within 255 ft. from a religious institution and within 100 ft. of residentially used property. Municipal Code standards specify that development of new convenience stores comply with the minimum standards therein, in addition to conditions imposed by the Commission. The standards restrict proposals for alcohol sales within 500 feet of any religious institution, school or public park, and within 100 ft. of any property designated for residential use or used for residential purposes. The subject property does not meet the 75-0264 Mayor and Common C~ci1 Meeting December 16, ~91 . Page 2 \.I U -~.._---'-'.._..... '-'.......... -'-~~""""" .'V. ;;...-.::..0 0; lIa.L.J..a~.L(.';t;; J.IjO. :;!..I.-U6 minimum standards as described in the Municipal Code. Code section 19.06.030 (2)(B) regulates structures subject to an off-site "ABC" license with regard to review by the Police Department who. shall determine if a proposed location meets Municipal Code distance criteria or the location is in such close proximity to another similar use to cause oversaturation of the neighborhood. The determination of saturation levels and undue concentration of licensed premises is then reviewed by the Planning Division and included in Staff's report to the Planning Commission. with regard to Variances, Chapter 19.72 of the Development Code makes reference to the appropriate application of variances. The Code states that the power to grant variances does not extend to use regulations. BACKGROUND On May 11, 1991, the application for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 and Variance No. 91-08 was submitted, and on August 9, 1991, the application was deemed complete and accepted for processing. On November 6, 1991, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 and Variance No. 91-08. The hearing began with a presentation of Staff's analysis and recommendation. Staff described how the necessary findings could not be made because convenience stores are not permitted within 1,000 ft. of existing licensed outlets, and because establishments proposing alcohol sales are not permitted within 500 ft. of a religious institution, and 100 feet of a residentially used property. Staff described how the project was initially submitted as Reviewof Plans No. 91-13, on March 27, 1991. The proposal did not contain an application including sales of alcohol for off-site consumption at that time. An interm ordinance, MC 770, was adopted by the Mayor and Common Council, concerning the urgency of regulating the oversaturation of convenience stores. The ordinance was adopted March 12, 1991 and became effective April 12, 1991, prior to Review of Plans No. 91-13 being accepted as complete (Refer to Planning commission report for more complete discussion). commissioners Stone and Cole spoke in favor of the CUP and Variance because they felt it would help the area. Mr. Kensie Wooten, property owner, spoke in favor. several area residents objected. In addition to the owner, two persons in favor of the proposal and four opposition spoke at the Planning commission meeting Planning Commission Minutes attached as an eXhibit). However, property persons in (Refer to Mr. Empeno, was not in Deputy City Attorney, advised that compliance with the Development Code the application and in addition, .1 - .- ~ - JIll - ...-..- -~.......- ........'-"~~........... .....,,:;,;,;.. .. ~......~........... ~~v. ~~-~o ~ var~ance December 16, C)r1 1<0. ':I1-U8 Mayor and Common CO.~ ci1 Meeting 'Page 3 V there were no findings for approval. Plannina Commission Action The public hea~ing was closed and discussion of a motion to approve the conditional use permit followed. Mr. Empeno advised that the approval of the conditional use permit would be of questionable validity, and thus subject to appeal on validity. He stated that making findings for approval would be in direct conflict with the Code. Commissioner Cole made a motion Commissioner stone seconded it. Commissioner Valles made a motion the conditonal use permit. There to approve with conditions. The motion was not carried. to approve the variance and deny was no second. Based on the discussion and in agreement with the staff recommendation, commissioner Romero made a motion to deny both variance and conditional use permit. Commissioner Oretego seconded it. The vote was carried with Commissioners Jordan, Lopez, Ortega, Romero voting to deny and Commissioners Cole, Stone, and Valles voting to approve. On November 14, 1991, the property owner filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Conditional Use Permit 91-28, and Variance No. 91-08 with the city of San Bernardino (Exhibit A). Mayor and Common 'Page 4 Council o Meeting of December Ie> 1991 MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OPTIONS The Mayor and Common Council may deny the appeal and deny Conditional Use.permit No. 91-28 and Variance No. 91-08. OR The Mayor and Common Council may continue the item, and direct Staff to prepare an amendment to the Development Code to revise the distance criteria for establishments with off-site sales of alcohol (19.06.030 (2) (B) and also to revise the distance criteria for establishment of convenience stores (19.06.030 (2)(F)). RECOMMENDATION staff recommends that and deny Conditional based on the Findings the Mayor and Common Use Permit No. 91-28 of Fact contained in Council deny the appeal and Variance No. 91-08 Exhibit D. Prepared by: Denise s. Moonier Assistant Planner for Al Boughey, AICP Director of Planning and Building Services Exhibits: A - Letter of Appeal B - Statement of Planning Commission Action C - Official Notice of Public Hearing before the Mayor and Common Council D - November 6, 1991 Planning Commission Minutes E - Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated November 6, 1991 o o November 10, 1991 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO 300 north "D" street, San Bernardino, California 92418 Department of planning and building services Att. Al Boughey Director RE: Conditional use permit no. 91/28 variance no.9l/08 Appeal of planning commissions' denial Dear Mr.Boughey: I would like to appeal the decision of the planning commission. I have attached a short summary of my situation. My appeal is based upon circumstances as depicted in the summary. I have enclosed a check for $106.00 - AS per a telephone conversation with one of your staff this date. - ---..... ~ " c,l [? rn r----..... c. '. '"'.." '. I ~ \. \. ,./ ~ :1 nl i ..... \ ;1 ;';~: ;:. ;~ \~ L::J ' Uu '-~, ;~t 1 1991 U rO) :e \ 1'\ I ld - ,--.. ~ \ ~ \ \;; I ',S:;1 ,-, ~ -'. ' .-~~ ;..;./~'~~:.:~:,~".:g ~~ - ';G __," "....- ( ':.:~ _~~~~~;;~?~~~t~~~il;'i;g ~~ C;..:.' - .-. l _.....::: ':'~', J'e.;..;) EXHIBIT "A" L o o GOODEVEN"NG ~ADIES AND GENGLEMEN lAM KENZIE WOOTEN J RESIDE AT 1588 WESTERN AVE WITHIN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO. lAM THE OWNER OF THE PROPoSED BUSINESS SITE. THESE COMMENTS ARE REFERENCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-28 AND VARIANCE NO.91-08. I HAVE RESIDED WITHIN 'rillS COMMUNITY FOR 36 YEARS. I SERVED THE PEOPLE OF THIS COMMUNITY FOR 23 YEARS AS A POLICE OFFICER; 2YEARS WITH THE SAN BERNARDINO POLICE DEPT. AND:d YEARS WITH THE CALIFORNIA HWY PATROL. DURING MY LAW ENFORCEMENT CAREER I MOONLIGHTED IN VARIOUS MINI MKTS WITHIN THIS CITY. WORKING IN A MANAGERIAL CAPACITY. UPON MY RETIREMENT IN 1989 I APPROACHED THE SAN BONO PLANNING DEPT. TO ASCERTAIN THE FEASIBILITY OF BUILDING A CONVIENCE STORE ON THE AFORE DESCRIBED SITE. RESPONDING TO THE DEPTIS VERBAL DIRECTIONS I PROCEEDED TO TAKE THE APPROPRIATE STEPS IN OBTAINING A APPLICATION. ALL OF MY EFFORTS AND ACTIVITIES REF THIS THIS PROJECT WERE MADE AT THE DIRECTION OF VARIOUS DEPT. EMPLOYEES. THE INITIAL SIX MONTHS I WAS ADVISED TO AWAIT THE DEMOLISHION OF SOME AJOINING PROPERTY. AFTER NUMEROUS DELAYS AND RED TAPE, I SOUGHT THE ASSISTANCE OF THE 6 WARD COUNCIL PERSON, MRS LUDLAM. IN MAY OF 1991 I WAS ADVISED THAT MY APPLICATION HAD BEEN ACCEPTED. I WAS ALSO ADVISED IN MAY OF 1991 THAT AS OF MARCH 1991 THE CODES AND ORDINANCES, AS THEY RELATE TO THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF CONVIENCE STORES, HAD BEEN AMMENDED Pt'm:nl/lii'!t'~a~~ o o MY PROJECT WAS NO LONGER IN CONFORMANCE. BEING TWO YEARS INTO THE PROJECT AND HAVING SPENT A GREAT DEAL OF MONEY, I, RESPONDING TO THE DIREC~ION OF THE PLANNING DEPT. APPLIED FOR A VARIANCE. IN RESPONDING TO THE DEPTARTMENTS DESIRES THE PLANS,AT ADDITIONAL EXPENCE, WERE REDRAWN. THE CILMINATION OF APPROXIMATELY 3 YEARS OF EFFORT ARE EXHIBITED HERE BEFORE YOU. IT IS MY CONTENTION THAT THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT WILL NOT IMPAR THE INTEGRITY AND CHARACTER OF THE AREA. MY PRIMARY OBJECTIVE IS NOT A LIQUOR STORE. I NEED THE BEER AND WINE LICENCE TO MAKE MY STORE COMPETITIVE. AS IS EXHIBITED DY TIlE DECLINING MARKET FOR SUCH ITEMS, THE BEER AND WINE WILL BE OFFERED ONLY AS A CONVIENCE TO MY CUSTOMERS. IN COMMENTING ON THE FINDINGS OF STAFF------REFERENCE THE THE SUMMARY-----I QUESTION TIlE VALIDITY OF THE POLICE DEPTIS STATISTICAL INFORMATION AS IT ADDRESSES ALCOHOL RELATED CRIMES IN THE AREA. OF 122 INCUDENTS OFFERED AS EXAMPLES ONLY 12 ARE DEFINED IN THE CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE AS BEING RELATED TO ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION. 20 OF THE ARRESTS WERE INFACT ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE CITY. ALL OF THE EXAMPLES OF COMMERCIAL BURGLARIES (5) DEPICTED IN THE REPORT WERE BURGULARIES COMMITED AT THE PROPOSED PROJECT SITE. IN THIS INSTANCE I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE POLICE DEPT. THE BUILDING,DUE TO ITS DETERIORATEING CONDITION, IS ATTRACTING THE WRONG ELEMENT. (14) OF THE ARRESTS ARE DRIVING RELATED OFFENCES. (7) OF WHICH WERE DRUNK DRIVING. TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE TRAVERSING AND RESIDING IN THIS AREA; THESE ARREST FIGUERS SEEM MINIMAL. o o THE STAFFS COMMENTS REFERENCE THE CHURCHS ARE ALSO QUESTIONABLE NEITHER CHURCH WAS IN EXJSTANCE AT THE TIME OF MY INITIAL , APPLICATION. GALILEE MISSION BAPTIST CHURCH STILL DOES NOT EXIST IN CLOSING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT ALTHOUGH MY PROJECT IS NOT IN COMPLETE CONFORMANCE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. THE MAJORITY OF BUSINESSES IN THIS COMMUNITY DO NOT CONFORM TO DEVELOPEMENT CODE STANDARDS. OF TIlE (~) BUSINESSES LIS1'ED IN THE SAME PROXIMITY OF MY PROJECT (3) HAVE NO ON CITE LOADING OR PARKING CAPABILITIES. I CONTEND THAT MY FACILITY WILL RE A MODERN. WELL DESIGNED AND FUNCTIONAL INHANCEMENT TO 'l'HE AREA. MY PROPOSED USe: OF A MARKET WITH SALES Of REER AND WINE FOR OFf-CITE CONSUMPTION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND IS A PERMITED LAND USE. THANK YOU o o city of San Bernardino STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION PROJECT Number: Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 and variance No. 91-08 Applicant: Value Homes Owner: Mr. & Mrs. Kensie Wooten Meeting Date: November 6, 1991 X Denied Based Upon Findings of Fact (Attachment B). VOTE Ayes: Nays: Abstain: Absent: Jordan, Lopez, Ortega, Romero Cole, Stone Valles None Clemensen, Lindseth I, hereby, certify that this Statement of Official Action accurately reflects the final determination of the Planning Commission of the City of San Bernardino. tor of Plann' & Buildin Services cc: Project property Owner Project Applicant Building Division Engineering Division Case File PCAGENDA: PCACTION EXHIBIT "B" ~ - - CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ~ """'I SUMMARY AGENDA ITEM 6 HEARING DATE 11-6-91 WARD 6 - ~r"'\ / Homes APPLICANT' Value . 22345 Barton Road III CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Grand Terrace, CA 92324 ~ NO. 91-28 and OWNER: Mr. & Mrs. Kensie Wooton C.J VARIANCE NO. 91-08 1588 Western Avenue San Bernardino, CA 92411 '-..../ / Under authority of Development Code Section 19.06.020 to i3 construct 2,000 sq. ft. of office & retail space including a convenience store with off-site sales of beer & wine, on ::I 6.250 sq. ft. Concurrently, under the authority of Section 0 19.72.030, the applicant requests a variance from Code Section III 19.06.030 requiring convenience stores to be constructed on a: - 10,000 sq. ft. and a variance from Code Section 19.26 which < established standards to regulate off-street loading & delivery III Subject property is a rectangularly shaped parcel, located on a: < the south side of Baseline Street, between ~1t. Vernon Avenue & Garner Street, also described as 1255 West Baseline. \.....) / EXISTING GENERAL PLAN PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION Subject Commercial CG-2 Commercial General North Commercial CG-2 Commercial General South Residential RS Residential Suburban East Residential CG-2 Commercial General West Vacant CG-2 Commercial General \. .J / ( ) GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC DYES FLOOD HAZARD 0 YES o ZONE A SEWERS: XiXj YES HAZARD ZONE: xx NO \. ZONE: )geNO OZONE B o NO HIGH FIRE o YES AIRPORT NOISE! o YES ~ ( REDEVELOPMENT XQtiXYES HAZARD ZONE: ~ NO CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA: \. IDCNO o NO - --.... ~ r ... o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z 0 APPROVAL j! APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH 0 MmGATlNG MEASURES - I- 0 Z(I) NOE.I.R. < CONDITIONS 1110 II.Q ~Z o EXEMPT o HR. REOUIRED BUT NO II.Z U DENIAL Z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS <Ill OQ WITH MITIGATING ~~ a:~ MEASURES ~ 0 CONTINUANCE TO -II. ~ ~ NO SIGNIFICANT o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 0 C.J III EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. III .J MINUTES a: ) \. ...- on 01 .... ......-.0 --- pLAN-1m PillE 1 01= t (UO) ~ ~ .... -- CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT -- CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 6 11-6-91 16 FINDINGS OF FACT AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE ... ~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The proposed use is conditionally permitted within the subject land use district, however, it does not comply with all of the applicable prov~s~ons of this Development Code in that the lot area does not meet the minimum standards for convenience stores, minimum standards for loading and delivery area, and for minimum distance between religious institutions, residential uses and existing convenience markets with sales of alcohol. 2. The proposed building would not impair character of the land use district be located in that it is architecturally the built environment. the integrity and in which it is to compatible with 3. The subject site is not physically suitable for the type and intensity of land use being proposed in that the site is too small for the intensity of a convenience store. 4. The proposed use is compatible with the land uses presently on the subject property in that the present use is commercial. 5. The proposed use would not be compatible with existing and future land uses within the general area in which the proposed use is to be located in that the general area is oversaturated with licensed outlets for sales of alcohol and in that there is residential land use within 100 ft. 6. The proposed use is not compatible in scale, mass, coverage density and intensity with all adjacent land uses in the site is too small and the loading area is adjacent to a residentially used property. 7. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilties, however, there are not adequate provisions for public services which address the crime problems associated with convenience stores, and may be detrimental to public health and safety. 8. There will be adequate provisions the subject proposal in that the access from a public street. for public access to serve site would have one drive .. .... c:m'tJllIoIIfII~ -- PLAN.8.o& PAGE 1 OF 1 t"-eo) CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 FINDINGS OF FACT AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 6 11-6-91 17 ~ ~ 9. There will be a harmful effect upon desirable neighborhood characteristics in that the sales of alcohol is associated within loitering, drinking in public, and other reported activities. 10. The Development Code does not require a market study for the proposed use of a convenience market. 11. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan in that the convenience market is a permitted use, subject to the property development standards and approval of a CUP in the CG-2 land use designation. 12. There will not be significant harmful effects upon environ- mental quality and natural resources in that an Initial study was permformed and a Negative Declaration was prepared. 13. The enviromental impacts were not significant and do not require mitigation. 14. The proposed location, size, design, and operationg charac- teristics of the proposed use would be detrimental based on the above Findings, to the public interests, health, safety, convenience, and welfare of the City. .... ClT'fCl'..............., --- PlAN-U& PAGE 1 OF 1 1'-00) ~ - .., CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT 6 AGENDA ITEM FINDINGS OF FACT HEARING DATE 11-6-91 PAGE 18 ~ .., VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT 1. There are no special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the Development Code does not deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical land use district classification. 2. That granting the Variance preservation and enjoyment of possessed by other property in district. is not necessary for the a substantial property right the same vicinity and land use 3. That granting the Variance will be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to property or improvements in such vicinity and land district in that the site is too small for the proposed and the area is oversaturated with properties licensed the sales of alcohol. the use use for 4. That granting of this variance request constitutes a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity in which the subject property is located in that all other such properties, except those of legal nonconforming status, are subject to limitations that are no less stringent than those place upon the subject property. 5. That granting the Variance does allow a use which is not authorized by the Development Code Standards for convenience stores. 6. That granting of this variance request General Plan, in that the proposed use subject to approval of a Conditional Use will be consistent is a permitted use, Permit. .. CJT'f'CIJ""~ --- PLAN-8.06 PAGE 1 OF 1 "..go) CITY OF SAN BERNAR 0 PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING COMMISSION SUBJECT: APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-28 & VARIANCE NO. 91-08 (W,:"' J PROPERTY LOCATION: Subject property is a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consistinq of about .151 acres havinq a frontaqe of about 50 feet on the south side of Baseline Street and beinq located about 300 feet east of the centerline of Mt. Vernon Avenue and further described as beinq located at 1255 West Baseline Street. PROPOSAL: The applicant requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit under authority of Code Section 19.06.020 to permit construction of office/retail space includinq a convenience store with off-site sales of beer and wine and the applicant requests a Variance of Code section 19.06.030 (2) (F) to construct the convenience store with less than the minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet required for new construction of convenience stores in CG-2, Commercial General General Plan land use desiqnation. PUBLIC HEARING LOCATION: SAN BERNARDINO CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 NORTH "0" STREET SAN BERNARDINO. CA 92418 BASELIE STREET ~- n-, . . . . HEARING DATE AND TIME: Monday, December 16, 1991 2:00 A__...._...lII............OIlllIlollllng_ t.r L,_lI.ca,HII. ..........................................."" pubic................,....,............. - b._olin ~ "'.,....... C71<Ol_IOI7. 1M ........ CcmnIIIIon II ....... yaur _ '.. I you .. UftIIbIt . IIIIt'IcL ,...,....................Ia__al.ln....................tD1tle PIIlMing and .... .... - r ..._4. SIn 8ImIrdIno CIIr HIlI. 30D NortIl 1)- _"'_~.,'. __............~..._-...IlulIiIng.........Con- dtionII1 UII ~ ..... aI p... T....... TrIeI .... and v..... unlIu ~ to tile ..... and Ccud. ....lOthe Mayor MIl CouncIl nut be "... il _._.._...._.OIlll......_.....ClIVClor._ wtItI the...... _wItlIn -. .. aI trledeall6an (IIn"" tar PaRlII........ T_T__~ Zone cNnga GennI,.., Am...d.._.... ArnIndrnIntlO1hIUunlcipIi ColM wIIIl&tOfIWiCIIr be ~ 10 ""..... Md CouncIlotfIMI..... "you.................ctlDn allM AInIing c-......~.In CDUft. you !Ny be IirIiIed to,.... ..,... iII.- you 01'..... 11M fIiIId. the putIIC NMtlg OIICtIbIiilthilftCllka..lnwrllln~dIIINrMI..tMCllrPllnnIngav.iDn ..."'...........-- INfAIifttIAl tadrnww &II ~ "- wll M.1MIv Ifftbd IIl!I ..... mift._ ~ . I L ~ 'II". ...... ~~..:-.::=- PLAN.t.Gil PAGE 1 OF 1 (,.10) FXHT'RTrr "rn - o CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO o PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 6, 1991 INDEX .... Planning Director's Report General Plan Amendment No. 91-11 General Plan Amendment No. 91-15 Variance No. 91-11 Tentative Tract No. 15222 Tentative Tract No. 14209 - Extension of Time Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 and Variance No. 91-08 Parcel Map No. 14139 Page 1 2 2 3 3 3 4 6 EXHIBIT "0" - city of San Berna~no Planninq Commissi"'Meetinq Minutes November 6, 1991 paqe 4 o Washinqton Avenue and Palm AVenue havinq a frontaqe of about 1,413.98 feet on the south side of Washinqton Avenue and a frontaqe of 71~ feet on the west side of Palm Avenue. The applicant requests. an extension of time to establish a 41 lot sinqle family subdivision in the RL, Residential Low, General Plan land use desiqnation. OWner: Stateland Development Applicant: Sierra Enqineerinq ~~: 5 Previous Neqative Declaration; staff recommends approval This item was considered on the Consent Calendar and adopted previous Neqative Declaration and approved request to expire on September 19, 1992 based upon Findinqs of Fact contained in staff reported dated November 6, 1991 and subject to Conditions of Approval and Standard Requirements listed therein. ITEM NO.6 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-28 AND VARIANCE NO. 91-08 subject property is a rectanqularly-shaped parcel of land consistinq of about .151 acres havinq a frontaqe of 50 feet on the south side of Baseline Street and beinq located about 300 feet east of the centerline of Mount Vernon Avenue and further described as beinq located at 1255 West Baseline Street. The applicant requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit under authority of Code Section 19.06.020 to permit construction of office/retail space includinq a convenience store with off-site sales of beer and wine and requests approval of a Variance of Code Section 19.06.030(2) (F) to construct the convenience store with less than the minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet required for new construction of convenience stores in the CG-2, commercial General, General Plan use desiqnation. Owner: Mr. and Mrs. Wooten Applicant: Value Homes Ward: 6 Receive comments formally from Public or Planninq Commission. Denise Moonier, Assistant Planner, presented a summary of the project. Ms. Moonier provided staff's recommendation of denial. She stated that the neiqhborhood, accordinq to staff's findinqs, was already saturated with liquor stores and had a hiqh crime rate and did not comply with the Development Code. Commissioner denied. He enhance the Cole objected to havinq this said that a store sellinq beer quality of the neiqhborhood. item (Item 6) and wine would Mr. Kenzie Wooten, the Bernardino was opposed to sellinq beer and wine in owner, 1588 Western Avenue, San the denial. He felt that a market his neiqhborhood would improve the - City of San Berna~no Planning CommissillfMeeting Minutes November 6, 1991 Page 5 o . area because it was a business. Mr. carl Dean, 1255 W. Baseline (owner of property in question), was in support of Mr. wooten. He stated there was not a high crime rate at the time when the application was made. Mr. Peter favor. He problems. A. Mercudante, Baseline and Mt. Vernon, spoke in said he was directly across the street and had no commissioner Lopez asked if there was anyone else in favor of this item. He then asked for those who were opposed. John Hernandez, 1248 W. Orange st., was opposed. He stated there were too many drug, crack houses, and wine and beer places. Ms. Lupe Moranga, 1263 W. Orange st. stated that she did not want anymore wine and beer stores. Mr. Jim Rodriguez, 1256 W. Orange St., stated that there was already too much crime and robbings. He said he was almost shot approximately three Wednesdays ago. Commissioner Valles asked Mr. Rodriquez if the problem was liquor. Mr. Rodriquez stated it was. Norma Garcia, 1207 W. Baseline, says there are over 150 people at her church. There are a lot of robberies. There is grafitti on walls. There is also a lot of vandalizing. Mr. wooten responded by saying the facility would be modern and well lighted. Mr. Empeno advised that the application was not in compliance with the Development Code and in addition, there were no findings for approval. The public hearing was closed and Commissioner Cole made a motion to approve with conditions. Commissioner Stone seconded it. Motion was not carried. There was discussion. Commissioner Valles made a motion to approve the variance and deny the conditional use permit. There was no second. Commissioner Romero made a motion to deny both variance and conditional use permit. Commissioner Oretega seconded it. The vote was carried with Commissioners Jordan, Lopez, Ortega, Romero voting to deny and commissioners Cole, Stone, and Valles voting to approve. Vice Chairperson Lopez stated that the decision of the City of San Berna~no Planning Commissi"'Meeting Minutes November 6, 1991 Page 6 o planning Commission was final unless appealed to the Mayor and Common Council, in writing, within 15 days of Planning Commission act~on. ITEM NO.7 PARCEL MAP NO. 14139 - Subject property is a rectangularly- shaped parcel of land consisting of about .717 acres located at the northeast corner of Mountain Avenue and Lynwood Drive. The proposal is to create 4 parcels for single-family lots in the RS, Residential Suburban, General Plan land use designation. Owner: Applicant: Ward: Exempt; staff George and Patricia Denny Carlson 7 recommends approval Hicks This item was considered on the Consent Calendar and request approved based upon Findings of Fact contained in staff report dated November 6, 1991 and subject to Conditions of Approval and Standard Requirements listed therein. Henry Empeno, Deputy city Attorney, advised the Commissioners that Fred Wilson, Assistant City Administrator has been the Hearings Officer for revocation hearings. Mr. Wilson is requesting that the Planning Commission authorize Peggy Ducey, Assistant to the City Administrator, to also act as a Hearings Officer to help handle these proceedings. Mr. Empeno reviewed her biography. Commissioner Lopez made a motion to approve. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried. W ~ CJ t) W :;) o W a: - c W a: c CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 6 HEARING DATE 11-6-91 WARD 6 SUMMARY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-28 and VARIANCE NO. 91-08 APPLICANT' Value Homes . 22345 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 OWNER: Mr. & Mrs. Kensie Wooton 1588 Western Avenue San Bernardino, CA 92411 Under authority of Development Code Section 19.06.020 to construct 2,000 sq. ft. of office & retail space including a convenience store with off-site sales of beer & wine, on 6.250 sq. ft. Concurrently, under the authority of Section 19.72.030, the applicant requests a variance from Code Section 19.06.030 requiring convenience stores to be constructed on 10,000 sq. ft. and a variance from Code Section 19.26 which established standards to regulate off-street loading & delivery Subject property is a rectangularly shaped parcel, located on the south side of Baseline Street, between Mt. Vernon Avenue & Garner Street, also described as 1255 West Baseline. EXISTING LAND USE Commercial Commercial Residential Residential Vacant GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Commercial General Commercial General Residential Suburban Commercial General Commercial General PROPERTY Subject North South East West ZONING CG-2 CG-2 RS CG-2 CG-2 GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC 0 YES HAZARD ZONE: XX NO FLOOD HAZARD 0 YES o ZONE A ( SEWERS: ~ YES ) ZONE: KkNO OZONE B o NO AIRPORT NOtSEi o YES REDEVELOPMENT X~ES CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA: ~NO o NO o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z 0 APPROVAL EFFECTS WITH 0 MITlGATlNG MEASURES - NOE.I.R. !C 0 CONDITIONS 11.0 o E.l.R. REQUIRED BUT NO II.Z n DENIAL SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS CW WITH MITIGATING t):E MEASURES :E 0 CONTINUANCE TO o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 0 CJ SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. W MINUTES a: PLAN...D2 PAGE 1 OF 1 (".go) --------- .._It HIGH FIRE 0 YES HAZARD ZONE: ~ NO ...I 0 NOT C APPUCABLE !Zcn WCJ :E Z 0 EXEMPT Z- OO a: II -II. ~ NO SIGNIFICANT W EFFECTS ClTfClf_~ --- CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 91-28/ VAR 91-08 6 11-6-91 2 OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE r """'I REOUEST The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit under authority of Development Code section 19.06.020 and Table 06.01 (List of Permitted Uses) to establish a convenience store including the off-site sales of beer and wine. The project is located on a site of 6,250 square feet. Concurrently, under the authority of Development Code section 19.72.030, the applicant is requesting a a variance from Development Code Section 19.06.030 (2) (f) requiring convenience stores to be constructed on a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet, and a variance from Development Code Section 19.26 which established standards to regulate off-street loading and delivery. SITE LOCATION The project site is a rectangularly shaped parcel, located on the south side of Baseline Street between Mt. Vernon Avenue and Garner Avenue and further described as 1255 West Baseline in the CG-2,Commercial General , General Plan land use designation. DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE The proposal is consistent with the Development Code with regard to setbacks, height, parking and landscaping (See Attachment A). The use is a permitted use subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The proposal is not consistent with the Development Code regarding the following items: the proposed site does not meet minimum lot size standards of 10,000 square feet for the construction of a convenience store ; the proposed site does not meet minimum off-street loading standards for delivery ; the proposed location is less than 1000 feet from an existing or previously approved convenience store; less than 500 feet from a religious institution; less than 100 feet from a property used for residential purposes; and is in close proximity to other like and similar uses to cause oversaturation. atv01''''~ --- PLAN-8.D8 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90) CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE b 11-6-91 3 r """'I CEOA STATUS The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act and further includes the proposed demolition of two buildings located on the property. Pursuant to Section 1, Chapter 15.37 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code, the project CUP 91-28, is subject to compliance with procedures for demolition. The project is required to undergo review by the Historical Preservation Task Force. In compliance with the Urgency Historic structure Demolition Ordinance (MC 694), the applicant submitted a Historical Resources Evaluation Report to the Planning Division. Written by the consulting firm of Management Sciences Applications, Inc., the report is on record in the Planning Division. Of the two buildings on the property one is a primary single family residential building that has been converted to office use and the second is the detached garage. The primary residential building is a single story, rectangular shaped building of wood construction in a Craftsman style. Basically, the report concluded that due to the extensive alteration of the facade and the fact that the building was moved to this site in 1944, this particular building is not eligible for any designation under the criteria set forth in the National Register of Historic Places. As the project is subject to the california Environmental Quality Act, an Initial Study was prepared and reviewed at the meeting of September 9, 1991, of the Environmental Review Committee. The ERC recommended a Negative Declaration to the planning commission. The Initial Study was available for public comment from september 6, 1991 through September 27, 1991 and no public comments were received. Although assessment towards the undergo the Task Force-. Management Sciences Applications, Inc, in their report recommend that no further action be taken building, the proposal to remove the buildings must scheduled review on October 23, 1991 by the Historic ~.=.~~ .. PlAN.8.Q8 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90) , CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 6 11-6-91 4 ~ BACKGROUND City records indicate that a proposal to construct 2,500 square feet of retail/office space at 1255 W. Baseline was previously filed as Review of Plans 91-13, on March 27, 1991. This proposal did not request a permit for off-site sales of alcohol. The project proposal included the demolition of a structure and pursuant to section 1, Chapter 15.37 of the San Bernardino Municipal code, the project RP 91-13 was subject to compliance with procedures for demolition. RP 91-13 was required to undergo review by the Historic Preservation Task Force, prior to final approval by the Environmental Review committee and the Development Review Committee. The property owners representative, Value Homes, was notified of the City's requirements, including requirements for deeming the application Incomplete within 30 days of filing with the city. On April 12, 1991 pursuant to Municipal Code guidelines, the Finance Department informed and directed Staff to discontinue processing the project due to unpaid fees. On April 12, 1991 Staff telephoned the property owners representative, Value Homes, and advised them of the circumstances regarding the fees necessary for continuing the project. At that time the representative communicated to Staff to deem the application withdrawn and close the case. RP 91-13 was deemed Withdrawn on April 12, 1991. The property owners and their representative subsequently contacted Staff in order to determine if the application could be revised and new fees submitted in order to develop a project for this site. Staff met with the property owners and Mr. Paul Weiler, their representative. Staff advised the property owners of Ordinance No. 770 which had been adopted by the Mayor and Common Council on March 12, 1991 and provided them copies of Ordinance MC-770. There was an interm ordinance, MC 770, adopted at the request of the Mayor and Council, prior to the Development Code because of the urgency of regulating the oversaturation of convenience stores in the City. On March 12, 1991, the Mayor and Council voted to regulate convenience stores, identifying 10,000 square feet as the minimum lot size allowable. The ordinance was adopted March 12, 1991 and became effective April 12, 1991, prior to the project being reviewed for 30 days and deemed Incomplete. ..... QTYOfSNI~ ClIfflW.~1EfMCU PI.AN.8.08 PAGE' OF , (4-90) ~ 41. '~ ~. .. .J... u. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 6 11-6-91 S r- "" After reviewing the site characteristics, staff determined the necessary revisions and fees for developing the site with a convenience store, which included a new application for the sales of beer and wine for off-site consumption and a request for a variance to permit construction of a convenience store on a parcel size of less than 10,000 square feet. This was re-submitted on May 11. 1991, as Conditional Use Permit 91-28 and Variance 91-08. The applicant met with the city's Development Review committee on May 30, 1991, who requested a revised site plan and that a Historical Resources Report be submitted. The case was deemed Incomplete on May 30, 1991. A revised site plan recieved on Development Review committee, Resources Evaluation Report was 1991. The report was reviewed Complete August 9, 1991. June 18, 1991, as required by the and submittal of the Historical received by the City on August 6, for accuracy and the case deemed ANALYSIS PROPOSED USE The intent of the Commercial General land use designation is to provide goods/services which include general retail, restaurants and convenience stores. The proposed use of a market with sales of beer and wine for off-site consumption is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and is a permitted land use subject to the property development standards of the the Development Code and with approval of a Conditional Use Permit. COMPATIBILITY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD The proposed site is located on the south between Mount Vernon and Garner Avenues. Mt. Vernon Elementary School, at 1271 N. 3/10's of a mile away. side of Baseline Street The nearest school is Mt. Vernon, is located The nearest religious Church is 54 feet away Iglesia Church of God site. institution, the Galilee Mission Baptist at 1239 West Baseline Street Road, and the Penticostal, is 255 feet from the project The subject property is 3/10's of a mile from 10 th Street Park and next door to a residence at 1247 W. Baseline Street. To the south are residential land uses, to the east are commercial uses and to the north are commercial uses. ... ... QT'f'01'_~ --- PlAN.8.08 PAGE 1 OF 1 1~-9D) - ~ ~ - , - ... .. 4> -^- - CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 6 OBSERV A TIONS HEARING DATE 11-6-91 PAGE 6 CRIME The site of the proposed market is located within census tract 47, and crime reporting district SCl19. For the reporting period of 1987 reported crimes were 150 per cent above the average crime statistics for the entire city. According to the San Bernardino Police Department investigation, the subject property is located in and around a high crime area. High numbers of violent crimes occur and the majority of suspects are under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs. The 1987 crime statistics reported 171 II Arrests. Of the Part II Arrests, 14 were directly alcohol related. Part I Crimes and 247 Part per cent, or 33 arrests The 90 day statistics reported from 10-1-90 through contain 61 Part I Crimes reported and 62 Part II Arrests, per cent of the arrests being directly related to consumption. 1-24-91 with 24 alcohol To summerize the crime statistics, the 90 day stats indicate a substantial increase from 1987 in overall crimes reported and an increase from 1987 in the percentage of Part II Arrests which are directly alcohol related. CONCENTRATION OF ALCOHOL ESTABLISHMENTS The concentration of existing outlets for off-site sales, five existing outlets, equals the saturation level of five, as determined by the Police Department. If Conditional Use Permit 91-28 is approved the concentration of alcohol outlets will exceed the saturation level. Their investigation reported evidence that there are four other locations within 1,000 feet of the site. The nearest locations are listed as : Budget King, 1150 W. Baseline street Catoes, 1127 W. Baseline Street Pete's Liquor store, 1101 N.Mt Vernon Jimbo's Market, 1395 W. Baseline Street 685 feet from site 964 feet from site 823 feet from site 944 feet from site &~~; .. ..01 PLAN.8.D8 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4.gQ) .. JJ - ~ ... rs .. ~ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 6 11-6-91 7 OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE ... ,. The number of existing on-site sales is five. The saturation level from the Police Department is set at six outlets for the census tract. The nearest location with on-site sales of alcohol is the Arrowhead Elks Lodge, 2/10's of a mile away at 1073 N. Mt. Vernon. COMMENTS RECIEVED Area Residents The Police contacted six residents in the immediate vicinity of the proposed site. Of the six, five had no objections. The resident at 1247 West Baseline street, Cora Mattews advised the Investigator that she is intending to move and has no opinion about the proposed business. Police Department The Police Department's report stated the following concerns: the lot is too small for the building and offstreet parking; the area is saturated with stores which sell alcoholic beverages; in one block there are three stores that sell beer and wine; and the area is a documented high crime district. Development Review Committee Conditional Use Permit 91-28, and Variance 91-09 was reviewed at the September 26, 1991 meeting of the Development Review Committee. The DRC voted to recommend denial of Conditional Use Permit 91-28 and Variance 91-09 to the Planning Commission. ABC COMMENTS On October 10, 1991, Staff contacted an Inspector Department of Alcohol Beverage Control regarding the convenience market. The Inspector advised Staff applicant has not applied for an ABC off-premise license for the proposed that the yet. Additionaly, because the site is located within 100 feet of a residence, ABC rule 61.4 (proximity to residences) may apply to this site. An ABC license may be denied by ABC per this rule if they determine issuance of a license is detrimental to residents. ... ClTYOI"~ C1!NnW. PlIWfIWG....cH PLAN-8.D8 PAGE 1 OF 1 (..00) Ji lL - CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 9l-28/VAR 91-08 OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 6 11-6-91 8 r- ANALYSIS variance Request The applicant is requesting a variance 19.06.030 Land Use District Specific ience Stores, to permit construction 6,250 square feet site located at 1255 of Development Code Section Standards (2) (F.l) Conven- of a convenience market on West Baseline street. Concurrently, the applicant is Development Code Section 19.26. Muncipal standards which regulate for commercial establishments. requesting a variance from This section identifies the off-street loading and delivery Site Characteristics The subject property is a rectangularly shaped parcel having a frontage of approximately 50 feet on Baseline Street and a depth of 132 feet. The parcel is relatively flat with no unusual topography, and surrounded by similarly sized lots having businesses or older single family residences. Project Characteristics The parcel would be developed to the rear of the site. The required off-street parking property. with a two-story structure situated plans show one driveway, and eight, spaces along the west side of the The plans propose construction of store on the ground floor and 550 the second floor. a 1,450 square foot convenience square feet of office space on There would be a loading space, 10 feet in width by 20 feet in depth on the east side of the structure located between the east wall of the structure and the easterly property line. Development Code Standards Code section 19.06.030 Land Use District Specific Standards (2) (F) permits convenience stores, of gross floor area less than 5,000 square feet subject to Conditional Use Permit review, and constructed and operated under specific development standards, with the requirement that the minimum site area shall be 10,000 square feet. Chapter 19.26, Section loading space not less and 14 feet of vertical 19.26.040 Design Standards (2) require than 15 feet in width, 50 feet in length, clearance. ... PLAN.8.08 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-iO) ClTYCF.....lIIeJIWIDH) --...... LIl - - CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 OBSERV A liONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 6 11-6-91 9 ~ Mandatory variance Findings section 65906 of the California specific parameters under which a Section 19.72.050 of the Development provisions into the mandatory findings make prior to granting a variance. Government Code identifies variance may be granted. Code incorporates these that the commission must Pursuant to the Development Code, there must be special circumstances applicable to the property that cause the strict application of the Code to deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under the same land use district classification. In a written response intended to establish the need for a variance (Attachment Cl, the applicant holds that due to the size and the difficulty of increasing the size, the property owner is denied full commercial development that the surrounding property owners enjoy. The applicant feels that the surrounding property is allowed to be developed for commercial use and the subject property is restricted only due to its size. Further, the applicant states that the property was originally a residential district, that has been changed to a commercial district and that the project has been planned by the applicant for over one year. The granting of a variance must be found to not create a detriment to the public health, safety or welfare. The applicant responded that the granting of this variance will not be a detriment to the community. Instead, the applicant writes that the property can be developed in a way that will meet all existing zoning and planning requirements. The City may not grant a variance if it constitutes a special privilege that is not consistent with the limitations placed upon other properties in the vicinity. The applicant writes that there would be no special privilege with regard to parking, landscaping and other planning requirements and that the use of the property as a store/retail building had been anticipated by the owner since its purchase. Finally, the granting of a variance does not allow a use or activity which ~s not otherwise expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject parcel. The applicant writes that the stated property would be used for purposes expressly allowed under the existing zoning and consistent with the General Plan. ern 0# .,.. 88IoWIIlM) ClI!NTMI.~1EfMCU PLAN.8.oe PAGE 1 OF 1 (....90) JI - CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 6 11-6-91 10 """" staff's Findings 1. Special Circumstances The applicant feels that special circumstances exist for the granting of a variance from the development standards restricting minimum lot size and dimensions of loading and delivery areas. Staff examined the Assessor's Map Book to determine the similarity of lot size and dimensions of subject property as compared with lot size and dimensions of other properties in the surrounding block area. The surrounding properties on the sUbject's block and across Baseline all have similar lot sizes and dimensions. The property is identical to others on the block and in the vicinity. There are no special circumstances applicable to this property including size, shape, topograhpy, location and surroundings that would place it at a direct disadvantage with other properties in the vicinity and identical land use if the Development Code standards were applied. Secondly, the applicant holds that special circumstances apply because of zoning re-classification. Staff's response to the aspect of zone classification, is that the subject property has been commercial for many years~ specifically C-3, before the adoption of the General Plan ~n 1989. City land use maps document that the block in which the subject property is situated, along Baseline was zoned C-3. A check of City documents indicated that the property has not been recently re-zoned, nor subject to a new zoning land use classification. Subject to Conditional Use Permit discretionary review procedures and specific development standards under the old Title 19, Municipal Code, the property has remained a commercial land use classification through the adoption of the General Plan of June 1989. The CUP review procedures facilitate a discretionary approval for land uses whose approval may result in adverse impacts on neighborhood residents or encroach upon future development and may be only granted by the Commission when Findings have been made. A decision to grant a CUP based on the necessary Findings (with respect to ensuring a site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of development) has not changed from the old Title 19 Municipal Code to the new Development Code. ClTYOI'.....~ --- .. PLAN.8.Q8 PAGE 1 OF 1 1'-90) '" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT - CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-0R ., 6 11-6-91 1 1 ...oil OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE ..... For example, the old Title 19, Section 19.78.050 required that we address that the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare. Additionally, Title 19, Section 19.78.050 also required introduction of alcoholic beverage sales at the proposed will not create an adverse impact on the surrounding pattern nor will a parking congestion be generated. Therefore, Staff cannot concur that special circumstances exist because under the old Title 19, the project would have been subject to CUP review procedures and based on Findings necessary to be made for project approval. A review of the location, design, configuation, and potential impact of the proposed use would have been conducted. that the location traffic To summarize the issues addressed in this section, it is Staff's determination that special circumstances do not exist because of a re-classification of land use, zoning changes, or speculative anticipation. 2. Necessity For the Preservation of a Property Right The property has been zoned commercial for many ye~rs, and its owners had the opportunity to construct a conven1ence market onsite previously. Additionally, the property may be developed for any number of permitted uses; such as general retail, office, or food service uses. Loading restrictions may vary according to proposed land use. However, every other property owner in the vicinity is subject to the same standards for convenience stores. The regulations in regard to the subject property are due to the size of the lot, and to its location in proximity to other convenience stores and other premises which are licensed by ABC for the sales of alcohol beverages. The regulations on the subject property are also due to the location in proximity to religious institutions, and residences. Other properties in the vicinity and land use district would be subject to the Municipal Code restrictions if the other properties filed an application for a new a convenience store project. The Findings cannot be made that application of necessary for the preservation of property rights lot area or loading area. a variance is with regard to .... ...oil QTVCl'SNt~ CEIfflW.-""ICIllMCU Pl.AN-8.08 PAGE 1 OF 1 (.4-90) ~ n t"\ ...., CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-0R 6 11-6-91 12 , CONDITIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE , 3. Health, safety and General Welfare A convenience store would be subject to frequent stops for deliveries of beer, wine, food and other goods. Both cars and trucks require sufficient room for driving, parking and backing up. Due to the small nature of the site, there may be some traffic impacts between vehicles as it is the nature of convenience store parking lots to be busy. The parcel may be subject to the impacts of vehicles because of frequent, small trips of short duration. During peak day and evening periods of purchasing there may be localized traffic impacts associated with the blocking of the drive aisle on the property. The project cannot be developed in a way that will meet all existing zoning and planning requirements and not be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare in that the location of the property is within an environment that is a high crime area, oversaturated with like and similiar uses and results in an undue concentration of off-site alcohol outlets. The site is also in proximity to churches, schools, and residential uses. The project proposes putting a 10 by 20 loading area on the east side of the site, next to a single family residence. Locating a loading area within a few feet of a residence may cause impacts on the adjacent property. other uses , for example, medical or professional offices, may not have delivery trucks with food and beverages unloading next door to a residence. All things considered, a larger loading area, situated farther from a residential property would be more compatible with the area. staff does not concur that the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety,or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and land use district in which it is located. 4. special Privilege While a number of other businesses have sites that do not conform to Development Code standards, and while the applicant would not have any special privilege with regards to having the required number of parking spaces, landscaping and setbacks, other properties in the vicinity and in the land use district are subject to the same Municipal Code requirements as the applicant. Staff holds that the granting of the variance does constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and land use district. cm'0I'....~ --- to. ~ PLAN.8.D51 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90) OBSERVATIONS CASE AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE CUP NO. 91-28/ VAR NO. 91-08 6 11-6-91 13 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ~ 5. General Plan Consistency The proposal General land Plan. is consistent with the intent of the Commercial use designation as described in the City's General CONCLUSION It is the intent of the Development Code to prevent the oversaturation of convenience stores, as they are associated with high crime statistics and other activities troublesome to local residents. Comments from area residents, ABC inspectors, the Police Department and the Development Review Committee have been incorporated in the analysis, and conclusions are based on these Attachments as evidence which supports or does not support the applications for the Conditional Use Permit, and Variances. The site does not conform to the Development Code size, loading area, and compatibility to other land the project location being in proximity to similar residential land use, and religious institutions. The Development Code states that parcels are to provide adequate space to meet the needs of commercial development including off-street parking and loading, to minimize congestion, and to ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses. with regard to uses, based on and like uses, It is difficult to make Findings for approving the Conditional Use permit and a Variance for this parcel. The project does not conform to the Development Code with regard to lot size based on proposed use. The project does not conform to Development Code Section 19.06.030 (2), which addresses property development standards and regulates establishments which require the issuance of an "ABC" license, that they shall not be located in such close proximity to another similar use as to cause oversaturation of the neighborhood. .... PI.AN-8.D8 PAGe 1 OF 1 jA.iOj CITY Of' SMI IEIIIWGN) --- r n CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 6 11-6-91 14 OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE ~ lo.. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28, and Variance No. 91-08 based on the Findings of Fact. (Attachment B). Respectfully submitted, :f~ ()R~~,J~sftfitant Director Planning and Building S~ices Ailh<. 5- ~JYL-, ~:S. Moon~r Assistant Planner Attachments: A - Development Code Conformance Table B - Findings of Fact C - Variance written response D - Initial study E - Police Report F - Site plan, Floor plan and Elevations G - Location Map ... .... ~~~ PLAN.8.DB PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90) 1"'\ ~ - ..... CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT .. OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 6 11-6-91 15 ..... DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE ~ Cateaorv Permitted Use Height Setbacks front side rear Lot Coverage Proposal Development Code General Plan Marketj Office Subject to: convenience store stand. & approved CUP Permitted Subject CUP 2 stories 2 storiesj 30 ft. 2 stories 10 ft. 10 ft. NjA 5 ft.j4 ft. 0 ft. N/A Oft. 0 ft. N/A 25.6 % 50 % N/A 8 8 N/A Parking DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 19.06.030 (2) (b.f.) (Convenience Store Development Standards) Site area 6,250 sq. ft. 10,000 sq. ft. N/A Direct frontage from public street Driveways Proximity: to existing convenience stores to Religious Institutions to housing to schools YES YES N/A 1 1 N/A N/A 4 stores o stores within 1000 ft. within 1000 ft. 2 within 500 ft. o within 500 ft. N/A 2 within 100 ft. o within 100 ft. N/A 1 within 3j10 's of mile o within 500 ft. N/A ... CllYOI-~~ --- PlAN-8.DB PAGE' 01= 1 (".gol n ('\ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 6 11-6-91 16 FINDINGS OF FACT AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The proposed use is conditionally permitted within the subject land use district, however, it does not comply with all of the applicable prov1s1ons of this Development Code in that the lot area does not meet the minimum standards for convenience stores, minimum standards for loading and delivery area, and for minimum distance between religious institutions, residential uses and existing convenience markets with sales of alcohol. 2. The proposed building would not impair character of the land use district be located in that it is architecturally the built environment. the integrity and in which it is to compatible with 3. The subject site is not physically suitable for the type and intensity of land use being proposed in that the site is too small for the intensity of a convenience store. 4. The proposed use is compatible with the land uses presently on the subject property in that the present use is commercial. 5. The proposed use would not be compatible with existing and future land uses within the general area in which the proposed use is to be located in that the general area is oversaturated with licensed outlets for sales of alcohol and in that there is residential land use within 100 ft. 6. The proposed use is not compatible in scale, mass, coverage density and intensity with all adjacent land uses in the site is too small and the loading area is adjacent to a residentially used property. 7. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilties, however, there are not adequate provisions for public services which address the crime problems associated with convenience stores, and may be detrimental to public health and safety. 8. There will be adequate provisions the subject proposal in that the access from a public street. for public access to serve site would have one drive .... ~ ern CF _ ........, --- PlAN-8.os PAGE 1 OF 1 (4.!ilO) 9. There will be a harmful effect upon desirable neighborhood characteristics in that the sales of alcohol is associated within loitering, drinking in public, and other reported activities. 10. The Development Code does not require a market study for the proposed use of a convenience market. 11. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan in that the convenience market is a permitted use, subject to the property development standards and approval of a CUP in the CG-2 land use designation. 12. There will not be significant harmful effects upon environ- mental quality and natural resources in that an Initial study was permformed and a Negative Declaration was prepared. 13. The enviromental impacts were not significant and do not require mitigation. 14. The proposed location, size, design, and operationg charac- teristics of the proposed use would be detrimental based on the above Findings, to the public interests, health, safety, convenience, and welfare of the city. .... ~~~ P\.AN-B.D6 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4.go) n ("\ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08 6 11-6-91 18 FINDINGS OF FACT AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE ,. VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT 1. There are no special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the Development Code does not deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical land use district classification. 2. That granting the Variance preservation and enjoyment of possessed by other property in district. is not necessary for the a substantial property right the same vicinity and land use 3. That granting the variance will be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to property or improvements in such vicinity and land district in that the site is too small for the proposed and the area is oversaturated with properties licensed the sales of alcohol. the use use for 4. That granting of this variance request constitutes a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity in which the subject property is located in that all other such properties, except those of legal nonconforming status, are subject to limitations that are no less stringent than those place upon the subject property. 5. That granting the Variance does allow a use which is not authorized by the Development Code Standards for convenience stores. 6. That granting of this variance request General Plan, in that the proposed use subject to approval of a Conditional Use will be consistent is a permitted use, Permit. II. ClTYOFSNrI""""" CffrfmAI.-..nNG.RWlCU PLAN-8.Cl6 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90) :~, '~~".. CITY OF SAN BERNAQINO PLANNING AND BUILDINuORVICES DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FOR oj ~ VARIANCE NO. Ot \ -(j iJ ~~ ~ .... - I' I / ...... OWNER: A'""~..F ~ &/' ~'f tId?~ ADDRESS:/Sd.e ~ ~}IIF. &4" ~I?~/U~a ,-TELEPHONE(7/,~) 2.$-35"3'" APPLICANT: t#ltAr ~e.$' ADDRESS: ~2:?~S- Uf~ k #$~ &~~&"f. TELEPHONE: ~ - DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE: GENERAL LOCATION: #4/# ~ ~#~ ~/# uJ'~ ~ /~.e-U.4".c .J"~~ #/;r ~p / ~~A#~ :sr /~W ~~ #. /sy-t'7/- t7.?- ) '" I ZONING DESIGNATION...... I GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION ~-Z CY-t GEOLOGIC / 0 YES SEISMIC HAZARD ZONE: ,.g: NO ;5- YES o NO IrHIGH FIRE ',0 YES HAZARD ZONE: _ '- AS-NO CEWERS: ~J OZONE B -, ~ITTALS: ...::\ L.g...APPUCATION. (9.A.ETTER OF CERTIFICATION (NOTARIZED). Jl LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION (NOTARIZED) "'p SITE PLAN (16 COPIES. FOLDED TO 8-112" X 11"). o WRITTEN RESPONSE TO FINDINGS. 0 CHECK FOR $215.00 MADE PAYABLE TO SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT (IF APPLICABLE). ~ PREUMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION FORM. . - .....,..., ~ 8-112" X 11" TRANSPARENCY. CJ,.l.-""UMMED LABELS (2 SETS). , ~ ..2'\":lu "\Ll SUPLEMENTAL APPUCATlON. c ~ FT. PROPERTY OWNER'S MAP. "'_ ~ PREUMINARY TITLE REPORT (WITHIN LAST 6 MONTHS). ~ FLOOR PLANS & ELEVATIONS (IF APPLICABLE). PLOT PLAN CHECKLIST. ~.e.Q.. , "F.D P. ct.l - l '3 SIGNATURE OF LEGAL OWNER (S) ...uor APPUCANT DATE: DATE: DATE: r;:./s/ ., / t;:./ 8')'1 J DATE APPUCATION RECEIVED: ,"DATE APPUCAT10N ACCEPTED: (0 APPROVED E.R.C./ D. R. C. MEETING P.C. MEETING o DENIED ) '" M / C.C. MEETING .~ ~.::. ToI-= PI.N+4.03 PAGE 1 OF' (2-10) .::: \:~. ~ 11 ,__ > ''''; ~ o CI AlLAPPLICATlONS FORA VARIANCE MUST INCLUDE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO EACHOFTHE FOllOWING ITEMS IN ORDER TO CLEARL V ESTABLISH THE tiEm FOR THE VARIANCE. PLEASE ANSWER ALl ITEMS DIRECll.V ON THIS SHEET. A. TMN.....p.a.. cin:umstances applicabl. 10 th. property, including siz., shape, lllpOgraphy, location or SUIlIlU/Idingl; the alrIcl eppration 01 this Code depriv.s such property 01 privileges .njoyed by oth.r property in the Yicinity and u".!l.r id.nticalland us. district dass~ication; 4r /'?/ /7Z/,Gr (1?'2G" ,/'~>zlAr ~~/'lCPkff p ~.r H/??/rY,"7Zl /4"?~ ,:t:VF ~JJZE 1,J"" .7:Z/r~ ,~~ Y') /TIt( ~.//~~ ,R/LL &npn~;I;I-? (:Jp/r~JIII'~r /7k'P,r ,7R'E cf'##~~U-t::"M:(~ , J~ ~ ~~~ ~~. ~/r.lf IA'/~ 7Z7 ;WE~"'" "12/r / ( / / / / 7/~ /~ 4/1.l'lf "/#~Q~L/y ,., ~~~ ~~/E ~/~ /S f?~ Cf/~k"b 7Z'.4- ~~~... ~,? / / ZUE. ~Lr U~!"o/"',VAK ~./ /P ~ ,~.-.....~ <f-W,...r5 . , " ;' ~I-- 4Yp...-. .vr 1/~ / .(/' #.t'4/ &J;tJ:/~ Ifj~ u!iY' .d~~ ~M".v(' '~Md'11J. " . . / B. That granting the Variance is necessary lor the preservation and enjoyment 01 a substantial property right possessed by oth.r property in the same vicinity and land use district and denied 10 the property lor which the Variance is sought; ,?/IE c.fP/~t/'(/b/.U9 /~P..~/ ~ Z"4</e:l?a;;;- ~ ,<5 .#~et:? 7Z? ~ ~~..c,~ ~a- ,a,.......AO?;-~~ , / d(,,~ .ZZi'r M:1:?/Yr h/~4V~ /14"'/~ ff ~~ ~/~ .hl:/E,~ /7.!" ..PZc 0S-~~~~) .F~ ~~ .,pec/e-~/",,6M ///. '?:t/E ,~e-- V~ C. That granting the v...iance will not be materially detrimental to the public h.alth, salmy, or wen are, or injurious 10 the property or improvements in such vicinity and land use district in which the property is located; .7:V#' H$tY4- #~~.6C7 ,~ ~4V .&:r ~dt~ &' H" V""" /'1%%~ h4'U M~') ,#& .6r/;,77.-<Y~ C~A'4' ./ ,d.Ae'L//.L./y ,pP:p14N€'#?.P7.p- h/-f7'Z/ /'7Z/~ .51'~~1/C/ (!P" ~T a?ZE: PLNoW.D3 PAGE" OF' i2-<<J) ~.c:,== ~ o o O. 1MI granting the Vonce does not constitute. spea" privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other pnIp8ItlM in ~ vicinity and land un distric:l in which such property is located; 'We- I~~/ r VaY4.? ~ ~J"~ ;./~ ~G' ~.. ~(.u.f ,I #~Ud/.-...;?"" ,,~~rl-' e--....../~_~.r:-. .If'pL? ~//L#:? U~ .'v##F .;J1~c? ~~~L- /~~K~ ...-&"# ,~E,gHne?J' /~ ,,~~,.a::?-v"~ ~4'?,r.?.!r ~~ ~7':lV~ ,dl9L/A#R? ~d?b'~~,/'T / W 1Y<tJr ~ ,J'Z/~ ,~h(I'~ ,IJ1U 1'1 f#~ ~/'"' AW~b/~~ /d~ A"'~..v' ~?7~s~ -- 1Y /tX/E ~U~ $,(/Ce.r...r /V-N?.4/AV~ E. That granting the Variance does not allow a use or activity which is not otherwin expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject parcel; "WE ,.'?~.&? IJJM.e?~?y L4/.4h Air ~ n:ve.- / ~ /~, / ~4..f~ ~4' #//~/A? ty#~ 7X/~ / / PX/y-/~& .a,-u'#--;"'?: F. That granting the Variance will not be inconsistent with the General Plan. ?Z/~ ~~ /' //7 Pj~ N'A~ ~ /' " /~ J1'7'/.&- ,.(."'~....~ 1~ !1',/ / , CI1"f' ClI'''--'' ......... Ir_ ...oil Pl.NU.o:J PAGE50FI (2-1Qt ~ r"\ - CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT INITIAL STUDY ~ ..... Initial study tor Environmental Impacts tor CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-28 VARIANCE 91-08 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed construction of a 2033 square foot office and retail space includinq a prop~sal for off-site sales of beer and wine while vary~nq the minimum lot size required for a convenience store. Project site. is .151 acres located on the south side of Baseline between Mt. Vernon and Garner Avenue in the CG-2, Commercial General land use desiqnation. Auqust 23, 1991 Prepared for: Mr. and Mrs. Wooton 1588 Western Avenue San Bernardino, Ca 92411 .. . Prepared by: Denise S. Moonier . Assistant. Planner City of San Bernardino Planninq and Buildinq Services Department 300 North "0" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 ~~.;:m Io.c PL,AN.I.o7 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-10) r o I""'l - CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST .. A. BACKGROUND ~ll-~~~ VAkIAl\r P: e~~ .cr cti"D33 ~"'F'I, OF ~'\. / np::::'F\G2"" ~AC ,J;:< , I~( l I t>\N.(,~~ / ' ~ \ ;:.~ 'k. r XF'" S-m;- SA.. L ~ en=:- "'P""* J..."R, ;:\.JIlI.I~) LOcalion:~\\L~ VA);l::YIt-l(1 ~ l"\1t-itMIMi\. 1 /:5\"'5\~ ~Xl~..~n. <;:;'r-w=- .G:.r ~S5 \,J- ~~l~~ sr, EnvironmentaIConstr~ntsArea~~ ~~:~ ~~ ~~~ I>> G 5 . ~ \~ General Plan Designation: 6b....,< \. C2:Mtj~;c;r lA \ ~~y C:1l!.N~ ( Zoning Designation: C .n '1 ~ \A \ Application Number: ~ -- Project Description: 10 ql-l>~ ~~\ B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explain answers, where appropriate, on a separate attached sheet. 1. Earth R.sources Will the proposal resun in: Yes No Maybe >( X X )( a, Earth movement (cut ancllor fill) 0110,000 cubic yards or more? b. Development and/or grading on a slope greater than 15% natural grade? c. Development wtthin the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone as defined in Section 12.0 - Geologic & Seismic, Figure 47, of the Cnr's General Plan? d. Modffication of any unique geologic or physical feature? e. Development wtthin areas defined for high potential for water or wind erosion as identffied in Section 12.0- Geologic & Seismic, Figure 53, of the enr's General Plan? )( -t. f. Modffication of a channel, creek or river? ~.&:n..o_1.J PLAN-l.os PAGE 101='_ (ll-go) l"") r\ g. Development within an area subject to landslides, mudslides, liquefaction or other similar hazards as identWied in Section 12.0. Geologic & Seismic, Figures 48, 52 and 53 01 the City's General Plan? h. Other?- 2. Air Aaources: Will the proposal resu~ in: a. Substantial air emissions or an effact upon ambient air qual~y as defined by AOMD? b. The creation of obj8clionable odors? c. Development w~hin a high wind hazard area as identWied in S8clion 15.0. Wind & Fire, Figura 59, of the City's General Plan? 3. Wster Resources: Will the proposal resu~ in: a. Changes in absorption rales, drainage pallems, or the rate and amount of surface runoff due to impermeable surfaces? b. Changes in the course or flow of flood waters? c. Discharge into surface waters or any a~eration of surface water quality? d. Change in the quantity or quality of ground water? e. Exposure 01 people or property to llood hazards as iden1Wiad in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Aood Insurance ~ate Map, Community Panel Number 0602811XJJl) -~, and S8clion 16.0. Flooding, Figura 62, 01 the City's General Plan? I. Other? 4. Biological Resources: Could the proposal rasu~ in: a. Development within the Biologiclll Resources Management Overlay, as idantWied in S8c1ion 10.0 . Natural Rasourcaa, Figura 41, of the City's General Plan? b. Change in the number of any unique, rare or endangered spacies of plants or their hab~a1 including stands of lra8S? c. Change in the number of any unique, rare or endangered spacias of animals or their hab~a1? d. Removal of viable, mature treas? (6. or greater) e. Other? 5. Nolaa: Could the proposal resu~ in: L Development 01 housing, health care lacil~ias, schools, libraries, religious lacil~ias or other "noise. ..ns~ive uses in areas where existing or luture noise Iavels exceed an Ldn of 65 dB(A) exterior and an Ldn of 45 dB(A) intarior as identWiad in S8clion 14.0. Noise, Figuras14-6 and 14-13 of the City's General Plan? t. Ves No x .x >< ~ x ~ .k k ....r -t ..{ -\' .{' -t 1" -t A Maybe ~ :.:.c.:== PlAN-IlII PAGE20F_ ("-IO) o c ~ b. Development of new or expension of existing industrial, commercial or other uses which generate noise levels on are.. containing housing, schools, heanh care facilities or other sens~ive uses above an Ldn of 65 dB(A) exterior or an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior? c. Other? - I. Land Use: Will the proposal resun in: a. A change in the land use as designated on the General Plan? b. Development wnhin an Airport District as identKied in the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Report and the Land Use Zoning District Map? c. Development wnhin Foothill Fire Zones A & B, or C as identKied on the Land Use Zoning District Map? d. Other? 7. Man-Made Hezards: Will the project: a. Use, store, transport or dispose of hazardous or toxic materials (including but not limned to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? b. Involve the release of hazardous substances? c. Expose people to the potential heanh/safety hazards? d. Other? 8. Housing: Will the proposal: a. Remove existing housing or create a demand for add~ionaJ housing? b. Other? I. TranlpOrUltlon I CIrculation: Could the proposal, in comparison wnh the Circulation Plan.. identKied in Section 6.0 . Circulation of the City's General Plan, resun in: a. An incre..e in traffic that is greater than the land use designated on the G_raJ Plan? b. Use of existing, or demand for n_, perking fecilftiealstruclures? c. Impact upon existing public transportation systems? d. Afteration of present pattems of circulation? e. Impaclto rail or air traffic? f. Increased safety hazards to vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? g. A disjointed pattem of roadway improvements? h. SignKicant increase in traffic volumes on the roadways or intersections? i. Other? ~~..r~...... Yes No x.. ~ }. k . ) )( ---L- -\: )( X -t X x ~ >( J( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - Maybe PLAN-1.06 PAGE 30F _ (11.101 0 .Q. ~ 10. Public Servlcu: Will the proposal impact the following Ves No Maybe beyond the C8plIbilhy to provide adequate levels of service? a. Fire protection? J( b. Police protection? { e. Schools (i.... allendanee, boundaries, overload, etc.)? ( d. Parks or other recreational facilhies? '" e. Medical aid? >( f. Solid Waste? )( g. Other? )( 11. Utllltl.a: Will the proposal: a. Impact the following beyond the eapabilhy to provide adequate levels of service or require the construction of new facilhies? 1. Natural gas? X 2. EI8Clrichy? -t 3. Wat.r? 0%" 4. Sewer? ~ 5. Other? I( b. Rasu. in a disjointed pallern of Ulilhy extensions? ~ e. Requireth. construction of new facilhies? K 1 Z. Aeathetlca: L Could the proposal rnu. in the obstruction of any .\' scanic view? b. Will the visual impacl of the project be d81rimental )< to the surrounding ..a? c. Other? V 13. CUftural Ra8OUrcea: Could the proposal resu. in: L The a.eration or destruction of a prehistoric or hislDric archaeological she by developmant whhin an archuoIogical sanshive area as identified in Section >< 3.0. HislDricaI, Figure 8, of the Chy's General Plan? b. Allenstion or dastruclion of a historical she, structure or object as listed in the Chy's Historic Resources X Reconnaissance Survey? c. Other? l(' 10.- ~,~..r ~: o o r 14. MandatQry Flndlnga 01 SlgnHlc:8nce (Section 15065) Tha C81l1Ornia Environmental Quality Ad Slates that ~ any of the lollowing can be answered yes or maybe, the project may have a sign~icant eHect on the environment and an Environmental Impact Report shall be prepared. Yes No Maybe a. Ooes the project have the potential to degrade the quality 01 the environment, substantially reduce the hab_at 01 a lish or wilcllne species, cause a lish or wildlne population to drop below sen sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce tha number or reslriclthe range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or aliminata important examples 01 the major periods of Cal~ornia history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potenlialto achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively briel, delinnive period 01 lime while long-term impacts will endure well into the luture.) J( )( c. Does the project have impacts which are individually Jim_ad, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the lOlal of those impacts on the environment is sign~icanl) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, e_her directly or indirectly? 1" ~ C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Allach sheels as necessary.) .. ~.a=..!!J_ r- o 1"'\ ..... D. DETERMINA nON On the basis 01 this in~ial study. G2fThe proposed project COULD NOT have a signfficant ellect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARA- TION will be prepared. O The proposed project could have a signfficant ellect on the environment. atthough there will not be a signfficant effect in this case because the m~igation measures described above have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE OECLARATION will be prepared. o The proposed project MAY have a signfficant eIIect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE CITY OF SAN BERNAROINO. CALIFORNIA ':;;1I,.rrtwr~,.,uer ,h,NGII'1H.- ~A.C~ Name and Title . ~~4 Date: ,!~hl ( ... &~~...as PLAN-I.GI PAGE_OF_ {11-1Ol o o INITIAL STUDY FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-28 AND VARIANCE 91-08 1. 0 INTRODUCTION This report is provided by the City of San Bernardino as an Initial Study for CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-28/VARIANCE 91-08. Section 2.0 provides a description of the project and site characteristics. As stated in Section 15063 Quality Act guidelines, the to of the purposes California Environmental of an Initial Study are 1. Provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration; 2. Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for Negative Declaration; 3. Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is required, by: (A) Focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant, (B) Identify the effects determined not to be significant, and (C) Explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not be significant. 4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project; 5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the finding in a Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment; 6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRs; 7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. - o o INITIAL STUDY FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-28jVAR 91-08 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant's request is to construct 2,033 square feet of office and retail space in a two story commercial structure. The proposal includes a request to permit the sale of beer and wine for off-site consumption. Variance 91-08 requests a variance from the Development Code Section 19.06.030; Land Use Development Standards, which permits the development of convenience stores on a minimum site area of 10,000 square feet. 2.1 project site Characteristics The project site is a rectangularly shaped parcel consisting of .151 acres (6,577.5 square feet) and further described as Assessor Parcel No. 139-071-06, and having a frontage of 50 feet on the south side of Baseline between Mount Vernon and Garner Avenues. The subject property is further described as 1255 West Baseline Street. The project site is designated CG-2,Commercial General, land use designation, and the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan, subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Additionally, the site is developed with an older residential structure which has been converted to commercial office space. 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT f 3.1 Environmental setting The project site is not located in any known areas subject to environmental hazards as identified in the City's General Plan. 3 . 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Cultural Resources 13.b. The structure on the property was built over fifty (50) years ago and as such, the building must be evaluated for potential historical significance as part of the review for a removal of the structure and construction of the project. This evaluation is in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city's Urgency Historic Structure Demolition Ordinance (MC-694). o o INITIAL STUDY FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-28/VAR 91-08 . The applicant nas submitted an Historical Resources Evaluation Report prepared by Management Sciences Application, Inc. (MSAI). A copy of this report, which is dated July 1991 and was filed with the City's Planning Division August 6, 1991, has been attached to the Initial Study. In MSAI's report it was noted that there are two buildings on the property: a primary single family residential building which has been converted to office use and a separate detached garage. Records indicate that the building was moved onto the site in 1944. Prior to 1944, the property was owned by the Sun Company of San Bernardino and the lot was vacant. The primary residential structure is dated circa 1920's. The Craftsman architectural style has been heavily modified. MSAI Consultants hold, that, due to an addition of a commercial facade and other modifications, the structure has lost all architectural significance. In summary, since the existing structures have historic significance under National, State no significant, adverse impacts would result the buildings. no architectural or or local criteria from the removal of .. . . . . . . . . . o o , . ~ ... Historic Assessment Report On 1255 West Baseline Street San Bernardino, California July, 1991 Prepared by Management Sciences Applications, Inc. 123 East Ninth Street, Suite 309 Upland, California, 91786 (714) 981-0894 . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. r . . . . II II II . II o o PROJECf METHODOWGY AND BACKGROUND On May 17, 1991, Management Sciences Applications, Inc., (MSAI) was contacted by Kenzie Wooten regarding the preparation of an Historic Resources Assessment regardinJ the property located at 1255 West Baseline Street in San Bernardino, Califorma. - On July 8, 1991, MSAI prepared photographs of the building, documenting all sides of the property, as well as the settmg of the building. . On July 22, 1991, MSAI conducted a review of the San Bernardino County Assessor Lot BOoks located at the San Bernardino County Archives. Lot Assessor Book Number 123 for the period 1942 to 1947 and Book Number 88 for the period 1936 to 1941 were researched. Additional research was conducted at the Building Department of the City of San Bernardino. The building permit records for the subject property were reviewed to determine type and extent of alterations and additions made to the subject building. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING The subject property is located at 1255 West Baseline Street Road, on the south side of Baseline Street, approximately 300 feet east of the intersection of Baseline Street and Mount Vernon Avenue. The surroundin~ properties consist of mixed residential and commercial use, with commercial bemg the predominant land use. The property has the following legal description: Hockaday Park Subdivision, Lot 6, Tract 2349 as per plat recorded in Book 33 of Maps, Page 82 of said County." It is further identified as San Bernardino County Assessor Parcel Number 139-071- 06. There are two buildings located on the property. These consist of a primary single family residential buifding that has been converted to office use and a separate detached garage. The primary residential building is a single story, rectangular shap'ed building of wood construction in a Craftsmen style. The facade of the building has been heavily modified through the addition of a commercial store front, consisting of a stucco parapet and flat wall. Two commercial type fixed sash windows are located on either side of the symmetrical facade. Roof is side gable with composite rolled paper. Siding on the balance of the building is wood clapboard. The stucco siding continues half way down the west side of the building. Windows are a mix of single fixed sash and one over one double hung. A small addition appears at the rear of the building, consisting of a single story with shed roof, covered with stucco siding. Foundation material on the building is poured concrete. The garage is located immediately to the rear of the building, and consists of a rectangular shaped building with flat roof. Two large sliding doors are present in the front. It appears that this building was built in the 19405. Some landscaping is present along the foundation of the main building, and the entire front yard consists of concrete driveway and parking. 1 II II I . II II II . . o o SIGNIFICANCE OF BUILDING f \ According to the records researched at both the San Bernardino County Archives and the City of San Bernardino Building Department, the building was moved onto the site in 1944. Building records show that It was owned by Peter Mercadante who received building permit number 19070 to "Place and Repair Dwelling" on this lot. Prior to 1944, the property was owned by The Sun Company of San Bernardino, and the assessment records show that this particular lot was vacant. Mercadante applied for the permit on July 10, 1944 and the work was completed on September 15, 1944. It appears that the garage is added at approximately the same time; however no separate records were found to support this. The building has been heavily modified through the addition of the commercial facade and the separate rear addition, and has lost all architectural significance. Only slight remnants remain that indicate that the building was of the Craftsman styhng. These remnants include the attic vents located in the gable ends and the general configuration of the principal mass of the building. The building appears to have been built in the 19205; however any association to its previous owners was destroyed through the course of the move. No information was discovered during the course of research that identified the previous location of the building. In 1946, Peter Mercadante sold the property to Carl E. and Catherine E. Gann. In 1947 it was sold to John B. and Marion P. Maare. No further research was conducted forward from this date. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS . I , I I I I I I This building would only be eligible for designation under Criteria C of the National Register of Historic Places as an example of a particular style or the work of a master. However, due to the extensive alteration of the facade and the fact that the building was moved to this site in 1944, this particular building is not eligible for any designation under the criteria set forth in the National Register of Historic Places. Many examples in much better shape exist of the Craftsman styling within the City of San Bernardino and the surrounding communities. This determination extends also to any designations that miiht be made by the City of San Bernardino under the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance. This building has neither architectural or historic significance under National, State or local criteria. The building lost its integrity of site by being moved from its original construction location to the current site in 1944. It lost its integrity of construction and architecture by the conversion of the building to commercial use through the application of the commercial facade on a residential building. It therefore should not be protected by historical landmark designation. We therefore recommend no further action be taken towards the building. 2 I o I ~ I I I I I I I I , I I ; I I I I Bibliography o .1 o o Bibliography San Bernardino County Assessor Lot Book, Volume 88, Page 12, Line 21, Covering the ~riod 1942 to 1947, San Bernardino County Archives, San Bernardino, California . San Bernardino County Assessor Lot Book. Volume 123, Page 12, Line 21, Covering the p'eriod 1936 to 1941, San Bernardino County Archives, San Bernardino, California Buildi~ermit File. 1255 West Baseline Road, Permit Number 19070, Building panment, City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino. California. .1- .1 I I I I I . . . ( . I I ! i I I I I I I o o Field and Research Notes and Sources .1 I . I I I I I I .. I I I I II 111 111 . {'v' ',\ \J -., , L ;, ,..I. ,., 0- Prep"r ('(1 for: " I / I ,\. :' ' I I ~ I ~ j '. ! r 1 " I I " , '! I 1', --, ) L I) '- L M 7: Lit _. 1101: COMP AN)' . . ..' Ii! I ~ . llr-quE'5ted By: R"p: . . . . . . > > > ',',.-oN {,' /) I ;\tf OIlMA 1/ ();~ < < < ) > ) . . Owner Name: ~'!OOII ~.I \/I! Situs ^,jdr(:5<;: "'., '!\(; ':1'\ ft.;J I I i nQ A,j,jre:;:-.: , ! 1" Lea~ I 0(: t", (. : 0/ 1111 II ,"",: I ..' I Co ,,', i I Exemotion: Improvement Value: L;Jn.j V;J I u(:: Total Assessed V;)I: . ~~!q\^HDI"() '.)?"i~1 I :'::^\ III H'\MWI\(). ,I . U ~1?11 'I . PClrCf" 'IIumt,('r: Zoninq: Cily Ce..1!): O~:n {- r :. h I r- 1 y p ( Y->.ar BUilt: UnIts: Poo I: tl':f' CO(lfo: ~'e"tllt ~~s: l ti--:t S;)le rliH: . .: -, I c. fL... r e: P r I i';C: tI / Typ,,: "I' I i I' r ' , ~ I I I .., Square Fe"I: Lot Silf": "'1:,' I",. L 0 I SQ f I: ., Bc:droom:;: BOlths (r . H): Tolal Rooms: . . 1~~1 ProA.v. ":.tll,~': Amounl: . . . . j' . . . . -.",.. , "._11 I., i'. <<< . Lender 1S1 TrtJ:: De{'o: Other I ";:HI$: Price p"r Sofl: . . . . . . . . . . . > > > I A \ 1/\/ iJI;'>IA 1/ V \ < < < . . "=" i:' l;",' ,,-/ Annual T,tx: Improvement %: Tax Rate- Area: , i" 't, '1- , , . <: .~ '1 . . . , " i' l'lil ! ...! ~, ! I" 'f.J I n I",~i',-\', I _ ; i, __ . ('.-" ! ,1',1 -". . ! "':"" I .. t ~) ,-- . II . .. . .. . . . , . . . . , . . . , ~ . .. . l .. . . , . " . .. . , .. :t , , -t .. "' .. .. .. .. .. .. , . 'lI ... .. ... .. . . r.. .. 11 11 11 ." .. .. , . .. . .. i 11 11 .,. .. .. .. , .. 11 .. '. Ord.r No. I , - "CO~D '" e",rt'W ~I~rclhllfll ~ "" ,..", 1I'Cllll jtM' ""ICIAl.IIICM'I,' Lo.n No,wOU'" ''" ~ .. -- ~ \ "" ftI.S "' I. n , ~lIli- - IAN '1IlMAIIOI"O WHEr~ AECOADl:D MAIL TO: I'" II \_ 1..1. .. ...... _.. l~ u .. O.'U'. IU. II. ....U.. I.. .. .......1... a. 'I'll I..ACI ""OVI \H'I UN.,.OfII "'co"n""" "'" II I , ~ . . . . . I I MA'L .AI ITATlMINT TOI "- .. ...... /11'."1 /_"-6"/-'~ DOClII\IIN7AIIY '"ANI'I" TAl' n<....................... "- c,.......... 1M nMltdtiflINHI., .J'.!1~nl""-; """..,... I'" . e.......... M If'l. IfNI"",,,,,,, fit "'''' .... hiM Of ''''''''''''If'"' .. ""'........111',...,.... QUITCLAIM DECO ......."'. Of D",.",., fit Au~nt d.t.,,,,.,,,,,,, I.. _ ,."" fit... . ran A ...LUADLE CONSIDERATION. IIcelpt oIw1llCh I. h.r.by .cknowledged. aull. t. -.... c..lt.. - ... ""II'. I. _. .......n. .... .11. do h.1IlIy AEMI!lt. RELEASE mD FOREVER QUITCLAIM 10 1_', -,..... '"".. L. _,_. ...... .. 1111.. .. J"', ,_" 'h. r"1 prolN'''y In .he Clly "' I. 1o".,.IIl. . lIl.t. 0' Cllllc.rnlll, d'IC'lbn~ .. '~unly 01 I. """".In" LeI I, t".. "It. .. ,., ,I.. '".or... III ..... U ., ...,., "I' II, ,...,.. ., .... CoIB'" ...... ..........I'.!. I H' I ~U"M~IA . COUNTY 0. -..... ........... .. Oft .... ~- a I'" _. -...... -...-. -IT_........ _ ...... ....alM.Nf~___ ___ - ..e..h_ t. - ...._&.M.&...J~_ '-- -...-..--. .........'..... ..... .,.... "1M'.' '........... "'~~..,. .............. .... ..,..,...,.... fIe_.. ..,.,. ...,.... Ie !hlI ~lIII ...~". ~.. ............. L..: \e/iI'M'-", eue...AII.... MM W,fN'" r., ....... ':M __I.... ) I ,... I __~ r7l.;J"..._ .. - - -_. S; (lOrll.""'"IALg . '-II'IiIIL .I~lfta --~ . ...,.~CXAIfiITY .., c:... ...... 'I. \W , . . 1 ., ., \ .. . ) ./ J . .' f I . . 1 1 I / ! , r ~ J I ~ j 1 .i I 1 I I 1 I I tc' al.. i~ ..:1 I'.,a. 'll :.... :" p -.. --.. ...-. .... .,. I .!tit . -. .... :-~ "I -.. o I ; 0.6' . .. - '. 0_'---' - AVENUE . ". , .- 00 e ;; - . -,00 ... . no ,.. J.' _.78 ,,_ . - - i~ e i ~ a .. ... t;) .. o ~ ~ . I ~ - .. .. z !i! - .. : ~ () I: .. @ :: - ~ - , ---~-- -----"\.-- (f' :: I " () - .. tl - ----..t----- ------- I!l ~ .. !: . . ---~ <>> : I @ I> .. .. @ 0 (!) @ " <i - . ~ . @ G> ... () i ... G> ~ ~ 1 @ & ~ @ . .. . , ~ @ t 1 i f - . . It I. ,. ;al I 'I ;. -- at ! .. . fif .. : li:io -" -. ill f~ ... €> I . . ~..'t:-GMNE" . . II @ (5) ;; . @ .. @ ~ i .. <3 . .. : @ ~ . . <i . @ <P . - @ - - . @ I @ .. . @. I..' ,....... ,...~ I ---+._- $7Il(fT @ I ... a, I...... It <J lJ .,.....,...... I .,...,-.,. .. .e~1. ()I>~ i5 #. · · ~ .(1 ':1# . . a ~.. ~--i--- S :A. <t .. ~ a (j _ . ... ~'----./-.~.. e= <>> r . - .- IGl . '. IN.... :~ I~' -t. e @ ..!..~. ~ -!. ~ -& ,.J';' ;, I!> - - - -- - OJ, CI . ..... e t'D; . ~ eo ~ " C!>- - . ...... e. - .. - ~ , := a (i) is @ @ ... : "'e ': II ~I. @-. - ..' .. -~ .. ~ G .. . .. .-t- . . '~- @ ~ . @ ; .. .. - ~ 8 ~, .. . ~ ... ' .::-~ S ~~~. ~.1"'; .. .. . I t (~. ..." I.. '1 - ..-k...!,. "L. -, i I - .. -<I> ~ . I @j ----7--" . - . #.' ,.. N' . .~.. . ,run -'.---l I j -~-. -t-.- . . , "', . ~ .. '" ,.. i '" 'V~ ~o. g~ "'.... . , -. , ~--1 .~ ~-- . i ; . -. . ~ ~ lei : /---- . J. .... ,.. .... ...~ ... I ~ . .. - ~.~ Otr....;: @ f; r~ II il . . " ~ i II ~r CD ~ 1 8. i "' ~ . :--- Si'f !I f' ::0 rl s i . o ~ , II - .. II II II II ~ ~ ~ ..... .... ...... - o - o Year owner Land I.Dr Vine Aere Bk/Jl(! 1948 194.7 JIJ/ffJ;' I .~,_, /I. "''''''''/'''111. "I ('~~ .r.c",*, ~.9" /IJIJO ';1"3-/2- ;11 19-U "'$We" $IN II ~ A Itl/AI'f>D...-rf / f. -~" POD 11945 '1"" ,11"0 1944 1943 - 1942 !, 1941 . - 1:"-,, . .. I 1940 - 1939 - 1938 - 1937 - 1936 - 1935 1934 1933 1932 1931 1930 1929 1928 1927 1926 1925 1924 1923 1922 1921 1920 1919 1918 1917 1916 - 1915 1914 1913 1912 1911 1910 1909 1908 1907 1906 1905 1904 1903 1902 1901 1900 1899 1898 1897 1896 1895 . . I I I I I - .. ~III . - H . . Hoa..../J.ll<1 PI'IlL /'v19 "31 ~ G'J.. i11/1cr :l14~ 0 SAJ,J A.,';AJI.,u),,.)O (:,'1'1 C()/3E 701 A S SirS JOIl. eU)/(.. /111(,,) p- 17(,.,) l3,.s~ (./ Nt' , ~ I-i- f'fflt MI"~OI.1)1Wrf 0lAAJtL Pck6 4 {JJ,.,2. ~~I.K, ~,. I] i.l'6 Ahtlr JJ6. /1010 1.1.4" (.)0 1f" . '.',.W ~l."4~~ I. '1-l./1{ tmtrIL 7. ..l1-1/lI C....A.1!IfI) t:J-IS~4 I!" ~J. o . ~ - .,.,,- ; ...-'-," j _'If:~''-:'''-" o '- J '+- ..... ,.... " ~ .;;..........., - ". ........ " -'2..... .- .. -~ '- "--- ---.., '............ ~ '. ---- ~ /- .L.. """ "- CAUl nEON - f.?fAL f ',{Alf ~~-:I ':~ ---- "~At..~.~.Sii.J\- ~",. . "-- "- " ...;:..:..::; - - - o y ~- .~ ~ ....: -- ::---.. ~ '. ~ t.. _ .. .. - .... - ~ _. '. .....--.;., .,,~ 1''''' Lrr1rt' -,.. i ~/I'!III ..,..-- ""'-1".,> I ) ~, :-1 1_1 -- c:..........,~2- --.........H.. mMf.-_ . --6'''- - l,j '- . . ....,. \. 1 ,jI. .~~...... '. -- .......,.. -,r.. --........c...._1'I'." 1-.-....'.",-6"_ ~_nJ ,.....,--. If-... .. ~# ~.... " p' ~~..- --., -.,.-_. ..........~...~ -- .-,.,,-, J.r..~ a"-,;:", ~_... ......,...,,., ...... ................-. . I I I I ~I 'f'NI I I I ... ..,. '. ~ . , , , C-_ _::> - , ~ l .' ..'t . ..t .'- - , ill - ,. --- -0 -- .- .' dC)r' ,'. ~~ .~" .0 I I', =-'-':1/1T -;'.~ , *" J _I I i I... 1 "ITE PtAN ELEVATIONS ._~......: -- --- ..~_.w V4LUE HOMES '......... ,.. SIII_1 ~CA. r"'~ _..." o o ~ ~ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE AGENDA TEM# LOCATION HEARING DATE .. ... u~ .1 'nr i . - · il ~..- IiH!!t= ...... ~ ~. I V ' ',. .....f.... .. ~c: =;;;;;1{ IT1IIIITOOII ~ ,TO'; ~ ;r I ~'~-~r }:~ ~:~ , = .. ~ !.fa- --10 l;;t c;;;;] - .., . , ' "L .T ,.:"'" " .~ I ': ;~ I GJ 0 I.. I _ . ~.. - I ! ~.... I ~ ill 1- - y ~ ,11- : 111 :..~:u ..~ i~1 ~ ~ ~I... . .:j.~ ! ~ eN:; lJll - I." ~-Jl.. ~ . = . if --, . 1 3 ;=, I --.J'T ~ i~ ~ ~ ; I.J · ~l3['~r I (I, :J"H2 \;ft , . -...J ---- - ~"'-- . ~ 'V~ J T ...It "'....r. IU!l!IS ". .:it ~ -, ~ A.M . 6i J ",.. ,) l. ~, .-J /_ "... '.- d,~ ~ ~~J-l~ 11 f 'IlVJ,_ r ~~ c-"---i I l U! pf l~l ~ ~ ': ,I ilf; I~ . 1 '~I .. ~! .,~. ..':1 '- D~n,; ~ . or :e ~~ /'ff' ,. l~ '- ~ _ __ u~ .~ ; NORTH 'I IT ~ lIfL'J ".e ~J:W:Z no! '[I,.,t E 'II DCU II ~u . -'~il~1 F.~: ':-~nID' n~ F='rjr \ I d .,mUI ~J I' ,-'" II JL~! lIJ-1L -t-:' ... .... = E .... ~ \V , ~ ClT'O '7 ~..........., u__SlIIhfIUS ~LAN-8.11 ?AGc.: OF 1 ~.s.9CI1 Attachmer "E" APPLICATION FOR ONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOlQ.COHOL IEVUAGE LICENSES LOCA'I'10111 1255 W. Baseline Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 Variance 91-08 Reporting District SC119 Part 1 Crimes Persons 52 171 30% Property CencuS Tract On Sale A/6 47 E/5 E/5 Off Sale A/5 General Vicinity Distance To Nearestl School Mt. Vernon Elementary School 1271 N. Mt. Vernon Church Galilee Mission Baptist Church 1239-41 W. Baseline Iglesia Church of God Pentecostal Park 10th Street Park ABC On Sale Licensed Premises Arrowhead Elks Lodge 1073 N. Mt. Vernon ABC Off Sale Licensed Premises See attached Distance of Parking Lot to Residence 1247 W. Baseline Distance of Building to Residence 1247 W. Baseline ('IR/D Average +150% Part II Arrests 247 Alcohol Related 33 14% 90 day stats (10-1-90 1-24/91 Part I - 61 Part II - 62 Persons - 11 - 18% Alcohol related - 15 - 24% Dis tance .3 ';4' 2'\'\' .3 .2 Property line to propart7 line Property line to property line o ABC Off Sale Licensed Premises: Budget King, 1150 W. Baseline Catoes, 1127 W. BAseline Pete's Liquor Store, 1101 N. Mt. Vernon Jimbo's Market, 1395 W. Baseline o 685' 964' 823' 944' o o CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #91-28 VARIANCE #91-08 INVESTIGATION: I (CSR R. HARPS) was assigned to investigate Conditional Use Permit #91- 28, which had been submitted for 1255 W. Baseline in San Bernardino. The nature of this project is to construct 2,500 square feet of office/convenience market with sales of beer and wine for off-site con- sumption. The Variance requests to vary the required minimum lot size for convenience stores. San Bernardino Municipal Code Chapter 19.23 regulates convenience stores. This regulation applies to convenience stores of less than 5,000 square feet of retail sales floor area. Section A of this Municipal Code says that the minimum site area shall be 10,000 square feet for a convenience store. Section D of this same Municipal Code says, "No convenience store shall be located less than 1,000 feet from an existing or previously ap- proved convenience store or an existing elementary, junior high school or high school as measured from the nearest distance from one property line to another." According to the site plan elevations for the proposed project, the building area is 2,000 square feet. This figure includes the area for the second floor office area which would not be considered part of the retail space. The site plan elevations also list the site's area as be- ing 6,250 square feet. COMMENTS FROM AREA RESIDENTS: Det. Diaz and I contacted residents in the immediate vicinity of the pro- posed site. 1247 W. Baseline. Cora Mathews says she has lived there three and a half years and is going to be moving.. She said she really does not care what goes in at the proposed site. 1271 W. Baseline. Tony Macias, Sr. says he has no concerns with the pro- posed convenience store. He said he hopes there will be no problems. 1208 W. Baseline, Rafaela Trujillo said she does not think there will be any problems. 1271 W. Orange Street, Melvin Johnson said he just moved in and does not feel a. convenience store will cause any problems and, in fact, may in- crease the security of the area. 1263 W. Orange Street, Lupe Marada said she does not approve of having the convenience store. She said there is a liquor store just around the corner and they do not need it. She also said there are enough bums and prostitutes that hang around the area and hide in the bushes. She con- tinued saying it may cause problems for a nearby restaurant with the peo- ple loitering around. 1255 W. Orange Street, Mary Lou Levi said she has no Objections to the o o CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT .91-28 VARIANCE .91-08 PAGE 2 convenience store. 1248 W. Orange Street. 1256 W. Orange Street. no answer. AREA COMMANDER COMMENTS: A notification form regarding the proposed project was sent to Area Com- mander Lt. Curtis. I later received a response from Sgt. Ron Schwenka. Sgt. Schwenka viewed the proposed site and had the following concerns. 1 - The lot is too small for the building and off street parking. 2 - The area as a whole is saturated with stores that sell alcoholic bev- erages. 3 - In just a one block area. there are three stores that sell beer and wine. 4 - In and around the high crime area. vast majority of and/or drugs. area of Baseline and Mt. Vernon is well known as a Alot of acts of violence occur in the area and the the suspects are under the influence of alcohol ABC CONSIDERATIONS: It should be noted that ABC rule 61.4 (proximity to residences) may apply to this site. An ABC license may be denied by ABC per this rule. ABC rule 61.4 (proximity to residences) says. "No original issuance of a re- tail license or premise to premise transfer of a retail license shall be approved for premises at which either of the following conditions exist: A) The premises are located within 100' of a residence. and B) The park- ing lot or parking area which is maintained for the benefit of patrons of the premises or operated in conjunction with the premises is located within 100' of a residence." The proposed site. 1255 W. Baseline. is property line to property line to the residence located at 1247 W. Baseline. The proposed site is located within reporting district SC1l9 which has crime statistics 150 percent above the average for reporting districts in San Bernardino. Fourteen percent of the Part II arrests in this district are alcohol related and in the 90 day stats. this increased to 24 per- cent. The proposed site is located within census tract 47. According to ABC o o CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT '91-28 VARIANCE '91-08 PAGE 3 records, in this census tract there are five existing on-sale licenses and six are allowed. There are also five existing off-sale licenses with five allowed. There are four existing convenience stores less than 1,000' from the pro- posed site. This development falls under San Bernardino Municipal Code 19.23 which regulates cons truct ion and operation of convenience stores. This code says no convenience store shall be located less than 1,000' from an existing convenience store. POLICE DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: This development does not meet the requirements in San Bernardino Munici- pal Code 19.23 in regards to convenience stores. There are four existing convenience stores less than 1,000' minimum from the proposed site and it does not meet the minimum lot size requirement. The proposed site is located within reporting district SC1l9 which has crime statistics 150 percent above the average for reporting districts in San Bernardino. Fourteen percent of the Part II arrests in this district are alcohol related and in the 90 day stats, this increased to 24 per- cent. . CITY OF SAN CERNARDINO - OEMORANDUM To Lt. Curtis From R. HARPS, CSR II 8-2-91 Subject ~~ ^tlt'L.L\.:Al'lUN CUP 91-28 Variance 91-08 Date Approved Date We received a notice on the listed Alcoholic Beverage license and request your input prior to approving or protesting the application. Please return this form to the Vice Detail with your comments no later than 8-7-91 . If we do not receive a response by this date, it will be considered that you do not wish to have any input. Address: 1255 W. Baseline Applicant: Kensie & Brenda Uooton Type of license: to construct 2,500 sq. ft. of office/convenience market t:1..'t:h salt:::i uf beeL aud ..1ut. \"g.,... to yay) re~li1Yea lB.in. lot size comments: T have viewed the above listed address and have the following Your rnnt"prnC:i 1) The lnt is too small for the building and off street parking. ?) The area as a whole is saturated with stores that sell alcoholic beverages. "I) Tn jll<:t II nne block area there are three stores that sell beer and wine. 4) Tn and around the area of Baseline and Mt. Vernon is well known as a high crime area. Alot of acts of violence occur in the area and a vast majority re under By: r. Ron Schwenka, Sgt. ~ GEf<X PAGE ::0 0001 CALT 06/:3'/91 12: 5'1 T901-24-91 MAJOR CRIMES Itl RD SC119~5SS/SC426 F~O~ 10-01-90 RD SC 119 NAT-<:ALL: 187R RCOS:OOOOOl RD SC 119 NAT-<:ALL: 211"'~ RCDS:OOOOOl RD se 119 NAT-<:ALL: 211S:,0( RCDS:OOOOOl RD se 11 9 NAT-<:ALL: 245 ReDs: 000001 RD se 119 NAT-<:ALL: 245R RCDS:000005 RD se 119 NAT-<:ALL: 246R RCDS:000002 RD se 11 9 NAT-<:ALL: 459CR RCDS:000006 RD se 119 NAT-<:ALL: 459R RCDS:000003 RD se 119 NAT-<:ALL: 459RR RCDS:000015 RD se 119 NAT-<:ALL: 459V ReDs: 000001 RD se 119 NAT-<:ALL: 459\'tt RCDS:000005 RD se 119 NAT-<:ALL: 487R RCDS:000004 RD se 119 NAT-<:ALL: GTAR RCDS:000009 RD 5e 119 NAT-<:ALL: GTAREC RCDS:000007 RD se 119 ReDs: 000061 RD SC426 NAT-<:ALL: 211-10eSl RCDS:OOOOOl RD 5e426 NAT-<:ALL: 211R RCDS: 0,:)0001 RD se426 NAT-<:ALL: 211Sf'.R ReDS: 000002 RD 5e426 NAT-<:ALL: 245~ ReDs: 000001 flD 5e426 NAT-<:ALL: 459CR ReDs: 000002 RD 5C426 NAT-<:ALL: 45911 ReDS: 000001 RD 5e426 NAT-<:ALL: 4S9RR ReDs: 000007 RD 5e 4~6 NAT-<:ALL: 4S9V ReDs: 000001 RD 5e426 NAT-<:ALL: 459\'1'1 ReDs: 000002 RD 5e4~6 NAT-<:ALL: 487R RCDS:000002 RD se426 NAT-<:ALL: GTA ReDS: 000001 RD 5e426 NAT-<:ALL: GTAII ReDS: 0,:)0008 RD 5e4~6 NAT-<:ALL: GTAREC ReDs: 000001 RD se426 ReDs: 000030 RD BeSS5 NAT-<:ALL: 2111.>( ReDS: 000006 RD 5e555 NAT-<:ALL: 2115 ReDs: 000001 RD 5e 55S NAT-<:ALL: 211S:'.~ ReDs: 000004 RD SeS:l5 NAT-<:ALL: 245R RCDS:000003 RD 5e555 NAT-<:ALL: 261R RCOS:000002 RD 5eSS5 NAT-<:ALL: 459CR RCOS:000005 RD 5e5'55 NAT-<:ALL: 459RIi ReDs: 000003 RD seS5S NAT-<:ALL: 4S9V RCDS:OOOOOl RD 5eS55 NAT-<:ALL: 45'1\'1'1 RCDS:000007 RD se 555 NAT-<:ALL: 487R ReoS:OOOOOl RD se 555 NAT-<:ALL: GTA RCDS:000001 RD se55:; NAT-<:ALL: GTAR ReD5:000009 RD se 555 NAT-<:ALL: GTAREr. RCDS:OOOO03 RD 5e 555 ReDS: 000046 GRAND TOTAL RCDS:000137 ~A~M Ob(~d/91 1~:51 o ARRESTS LISTEI! S'( ROO ...:::'1< }l, r'A(,;l:. ;<) CJCJ02 DR NAh;.. CHAR GE Ii!\ TE Lac INVL CHA~OE 900051560 .JOH~!SON. ROSCOE VC12500(A 11/0~/9.) l./ II ASEI II,;" ST IN P ARR 900055365 CR')Z. ALE.JANDRO VC 12500 C A l~/Ol/';>.j 9"0 :~ L ST ARR 900054729 BELt.EDWARD LEE VC14601 CA 11/27/Y0 l./ 9TH ST I:~ .J ST ARR 900058703 .JACI\SON.STEPHEN VC 14601. 1 12/27/9,) IJ 11 TH ST IN I1T VE ARR 900048704 BRINS. TERRY LO VC23152AB 10/:D/90 BASEUI.:;. ST/N GARN ARR 900051173 GILPATRICK. JOHN VC23152AB 11/0-1/90 1067 IJ TEl-;"LE ST ARR 900055375 DIAZ, JUAN PLASC VC23152AB 12/01/90 l./ BASEl IW" ST IDAV ARR 900056566 PASILLAS. RAUL F VC23152AB 12/09/90 1000 IJ 11TH ST ARR 900057525 CASTILLO.ROSALI VC23152AB 1.2/15/90 lJ 9TH ST m J ST ARR 900047932 ROCRIGUEZ.APOLO WI300 10/15/90 466 U 4TH ST OTH 900059603 DEL LA GARZA. VA WI300 1:;>>/~9/90 1033 IJ 9TH ST OTH 910002501 RUI1HO. ANTHONY L WT PC-F 01/15/91 PERRIS ST/I0TH ST ARR 900059838 LUVA.ROGELIO .J WT VC-11 12/31/90 900 IJ L ST ARR AR-RD SC 119 RCDS: 0.:>0062 910001636 RABON. TRAVIS TY PC148.9 01/10/91 :2~68 CE:JCVIEVE ARR 900051470 ALA!1tLIA. EYNER PC211 11/0~/90 2656 CE:JEVIEVE ST ARR PC245CA)1 910001636 GREHJ. TR INCE LE PC211 01110/91 :2~6S CE: JEv I EVE ST ARR VCI0S51 CA 245(10)1 910000029 .JOH~.:SON. TONY PC245CA)2 01/01/91 260 IJ 23RD ST ARR 900048794 BERI)eE, HUGH THO PC488 10/20/90 464 IJ 23RD ST ARR 900046259 CLEVeLAND. ALLIE PC647CF) l'J/O'l/90 2Q46 CEIJEV IEIIE ST ARR 900046429 REA!1. SHEL TON EL PC647CF) 10/05/90 ~~25 IJ (1T VIEW AV CIT 900048347 REA!1. SHELDON EL PC647CF) 10/17/90 :/::195 IJ :1TrJ V I EW AV ARR 900052495 ROI.;e:t'lO, .JASON AL VCI0851 CA 11/12190 200 IJ HIGHLAND AV ARR VC28'::>O 900054926 VASQ'JEZ, MARIO E VCI0851 CA 11129/90 2aO IJ 23RD ST lI4 ARR VC23152AB HS11550 900056412 900055191 900056553 AR-RD SOTO,SANDRA BALLARD. AL C CHAllt:.Z.GACIA SC426 VCI0851 CA VC23152AB SA VC23152AB 910002796 FELD!~AUS.CATHY PClle 900054625 .JO:,:FS. .JOHN EI1ER PC148 900047535 BOYu.KENNETH MO PC166.4 900047786 BOYD. KENNETH MO PC166.4 900048663 BOYD.KENNETH MO PC166.4 900047633 WALSTON. DAVID 11 PC242 900053020 BOLIN. HOWARD LE PC242 900057671 BEN.Jt~IN.YVES PC273.5 900046323 WIC~'~N.DAVID E VCI0851(A 900048009 FI:,::I:;..GAN. TERRAN WT VC-11 AR-RD SC555 GRAND TOTAL 12;25/90 11/3'J/90 12;09/90 5TH ~.'O 200 ST/ROBERDS ST IJ HIQ: fi AND AV IJ HIG:i! AND AV 01/17/91 2~75 ST~EIE RD 11/27/90 5~0 E CARCLIN~ ST 10/1;Z/~0 263.1 S CCroPER LA 10/14/~v 263.1 S CO?PER LA 10/19;90 263.1 S COP~ER LA 10/13/90 2!505 S IJATERM.4N 11/15/90 2590 ST~~E ST 3 12/16/~0 3~8 E IJIEI< RD 1')/05/90 5-10 E IHEH RD 10/16190 315 E CAROLINE ST ARR ARR ARR RCDS: 0.:>0015 ARR WllO~eO(A ARR liCIT CIT ARR ARR ARR ARR ARR ARR RCDS:0000I0 RCDS:000087 GEflX M PAGE ~,o 0001 o CABM 06/2a/91 16: 5'1 0 ARRESTS LISTEn BY RD DR NAh;.- CHARGE 910004030 LOI<~I L. JENNIFER 900046537 ALVriADO.PAULA T 900046914 GALBALDON,ROBER 900052295 LOPEZ. SYLVIA 900046312 HAflILTON, GILDA BP4149 BW WT-MIS BW WT-MIS BW WT-MIS HS11350 900054260 LA~FS.LEONARD L HSl1350 900051153 PET~RS,ROBERT W HSl1377 900051290 DIAZ.RUBEN HS11377 900054093 RAI~Ga. SAUL HS11377 900046620 PORTILLAS.DONAV HSl1378 900052058 LINA~ES.DANIEL HSl1378 900054099 LI:.!A~ES, DANIEL HS11378 900048672 CALVIN. JOSE MIL HS11378. 5 900048672 CERVANTEZ, RUBEN HSl1378. 5 900046620 HERf'!ANDEZ. PETE HS11550 900046620 MOS~UEDA.JESUS HS11550 900046620 VALI:I~ZUELA. JOSE HS11550 900048720 PEREZ. DAVID HS11550 900048720 AMA~O.AISHA HS11550 900049155 TAC~F.GEORGE GE HSl1550 900053105 WHIT~.SMITH HSl1550 900053156 FLORES. JOHNNY R HS11550 900055335 MATA.RAMON HSl1550 900058553 GOfUALES, DIANE HSl1550 900058571 CARRION. CHRISTI HSl1550 900057164 REY.OILBERT EDW PC12020 900047206 PEREZ. JOSE JESU PC12025 900053663 TACU::. GEORGE GE PC273. 5 900050027 GARCIA, JESUS BA PC381 900050517 GARCIA, JESUS BA PC381 900047961 ROD~IGUEX.CARLO PC415 910004029 MCEA~HRON~TONYA PC417(A)1 900049864 RICH'~DSON.LOIS PC451(B) 900046905 GABAIDON.ROBERT PC459 900045794 MENoOZA,MARCOS PC647(F) 900046612 SAtllANA. EUSEBIO PC647(F) 900046933 JOH!\!SON. JUANITA PC647(F) 900047687 SMITH,THOMAS EA PC647(F) 900048722 TAO!E,GEORGE PC647(F) 900054298 RUIZ.PAUL PC647(F) 900055375 CERVANTEZ,RUBEN PC647(F) 900056084 MARTINEZ. RUDY R PC647(F) 900056566 MOSG~JEDA.DAVID PC647(F) 900059627 ROSErmERG. JACGU VCI0851 (A 910001192 WRIOHT.CARMINE VCI0851(A to!; T~ LOC INVL CHARGE , 01i2-,/91 1,)/06/9'; 10/09/90 11/11/90 10105/90 1131 11 ;:a 108'1 108,' 1000 JLR ARR ARR ARR ARR H.'-.RR I:s ST lJ OLIVE ST II 10TH ST 112 W 10TH ST l~ L ST 11/25/'>0 900 IJ 91 H ST ARR 11/03/9J W eASELI~;.- ST/N PE ARR 11/0~/90 110~ ~ L ST ARR 11/",3/90 1081 II 10TH ST ARR 1':>107/90 108'! IJ 10TH ST ARR 11/09/90 1081 W 10TH ST ARR 11/23/90 1100 ~ L ST ARR 10/19/9.; lJ BASELIW" ST IN PARR 10/19/90 IJ BASELIf..;. ST /N PARR 1':>/07/90 108-l II 10TH ST ARR D/07/90 108-1 II 10TH ST ARR 1.')/07/9.') 108'1 i.1 10TH ST ARR 10/20/9~ 10TH ST/L ST ARR 10/2;)190 1100 U 10TH ST ARR 10/",3/90 W 10TH ST IN L ST ARR 11/1'/90 120-:> II 11TH ST ARR 11/16/90 lOCO II TEi~;-LE ST ARR 12/01/90 W BASEl I~;. ST/N PE CIT 12/21/9:> W 11TH ST IN L ST ARR 12/21/90 BASEl 11\,;. ST/L ST ARR 12/12/90 lJ EASELIl"l- ST /N G ARR 10/11/90 940 N L ST CIT 11/23/90 103,1 II 10TH ST ARR 10/",8/90 1140 II 9TH ST ARR 10/30/90 900 l~ L ST ARR 10/15/90 II BASEL II.,;. ST /N PARR 01/24/91 1131 H~~RIS ST OTH 10/26/90 9TH/FE"RIS ST ARR 10109/90 10B1 II 10lH ST jU/ ARR 10/01/90 1180 I~ OR"NGE ST ARR 10/09/90 II 10TH ST IN MT VE ARR 10/09/90 1006 II TEM;-LE ST ARR 10/13/90 W 11TH ST /GA~NER ARR 10/20/90 1100 II 10TH ST ARR 11/25/90 W BASEl I~~ ST/GARN CIT 12/01/90 W BASEl Il';~ ST IDAV ARR 12/06/90 103t t~ L SI ARR 12n'1/90 1000 II 11TH ST ARR 12/;;:9/90 200 IJ Htli:.i! AND AV ARR 01/08/91 l1CO (J 9TH ST ARR BW WI-MIS vc~aoo. 1 HS11364 VC23152AB HS11550 HS 11550 PC3'.')56 HS11550 SP4149 VC12500(A HS11377 PC12031 HSl1550 PC3.:>56 .J.. o o Lues PAGE NO.OOOl **,., ~DR:1255 H BASELINE 25025 INRR 06/26/91 10:25 LOCAT I OtJ I t-W:-, I R"'" RESPOt..J:3E ,.,,.::~ ST CITY:SBO MAP:690 t.lL. I : 1. 7::111 RO: sellS' . F'D:E:.::!(:..,:- 03/13/91 02/.05/"91 02/26/89 12/15/85 01/21/85 *** INGI DENT SUt1t1ARI ES :~*,., COMMERCIAL BURGLARY REPORT COMt1ERC I AL BURGLAR( F;EF'ORT COMMERCIAL BURGLARY REPORT PC459 PC459 910012073 910006154 890009195 :=:501565:::6 :'::5000 :::1(1 20 LOC LOC LOC LOC Loe *** CAS INOUIRY RESPONSE *** RPT-NO 890009195 CAS-CD BURC CPN Ft1-0ATE 02/25. E:9 Ft1-TIME u~:o LOCATIOt.J OF E'.)ENT 1255 ,.J E:ASELHIE S:T RPT-NO 910006154 CAS-CD BURC CPN FM-DATE 02/04/91 FM-TIME 1700 LOCATION OF EVENT 1255 W 8ASELINE ST RPT-NO 910012073 CAS-CD 8URe CPN FM-DATE Ol 12/91 FM-TIME l~GU LOCATION OF EVENT 1255 W 8ASELINE ST OKNO San 8eYn~r~ino RMS NO MORE DA-~ ~0~ ~OCATION il . I:: ;=: o 0 CITY OF San Bernardino DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDINQ SERVICES LARRy E DIRECTOR R E E 0 April 12, 1991 Steven Stiemsma Value lkIIEs 22365 Barton IGld Grand Terrace, CA 92324 RE: Review of Plans ~b. 91-13 Dear Sirs: 0Jr records show that Review of Plans ~. 91-13 was filed with the Departrrent of Planning and Building Services on March 27, 1991. H:Jwever, the project llUlst be cleaned Withdrawn because the check suhni.tted to the City of San Bernardino has been returned unpaid. Any further action regarding this project will require a resuhni.tted application with payrrent of fees in the fOIIll of a cashiers check. '!he City will process a refund for Check No. 2975 and this will be mailed under separate cover. If you have any questions, please call Mr. Paul Dukes, available in the City's Finance DepartIrent. S~ly, / / ~ ./)>1""'~. l >~ /J. 1,/"'; . se s. MJor6.er Assistant Planner cc: Kensie and Brenda Vb:lton 1588 Western Avenue San Bernardino, CA 92411 Paul Dukes City of San Bernardino Finance DepartIrent Sandra Paulsen senior planner JOO NORTH D STREET SAN BERNARDINO CALIFORNIA 92418-0001 (714)31..107115057 iss DSM/das , - ", #21 o 0 CITY OF San Bernardino DEPARTMENT 0' PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES LARR Y E OiR::7:J;:j R E E D May 30, 1991 Mr. Paul wieler Value Homes 22365 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 " RE: Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28/Variance No. 91-08/To construct a 2,033 square foot Office/convenience market with beer and wine sales on the south side of Baseline between Mt. Vernon and Garner, while varying the minimum lot size. Dear Mr. wieler: Pursuant to Section 65943 of the California Government Code, the above referenced application is hereby deemed incomplete. The following additional data must be submitted before your application ~ay be processed: 1. Historical Resources Evaluation Report. Please assemble all of the requested information and forward it to the Planning and Building Services Department with the attached "Project Reactivation Request." Once these materials are submitted and the application is deemed complete; an Initial Study will be prepared and scheduled for review by the Environmental Review Committee. 3 ::> 0 \t 8 R l' '"I C A L ;:;:l q f\l . A 'J ST~Ee.T. SAN BE~",iARD:NIJ } 2 4' 3 . :) 0 01 (114) '14_501115051 PRIDE ~ 9ESS \ o () Mr. Paul Wieler May 30, 1991 Page 2 If the information is not received by this depa~ent within six months ot the date of this letter, the file will be deemed abandoned. Ariy action after that time will require filing a new application. Please forward the requested information as it becomes available. If you have any questions, please contact Denise Moonier at (714) 384-5057. Sincerely, ~~;f;~ AICP principal Planner cc: Kensie and Brenda Wooton 1588 Western Ave. San Bernardino, CA " lat INCCUP91-28 o 0 CITY OF San Bernardino DEPARTMENT OF PLANNINQ 4~D BUILDINQ SERVICIS LARR Y E. REED o : r:4 :: c .. ~ ~ May 30, 1991 Value Homes 22365 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 RE: Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28/Variance No. 91-08/To construct a 2,033 square foot office/convenience market with beer and wine sales on ~e south side of Baseline between Mt. Vernon and Garner, ..,hile varying the minimum lot size. Dear'Mr. wieler: On June 3, 1991, the city's new Development Code will become effective. Any projects not deemed complete by that date are subject to the new code. The development standards specified by the new Code have been modified from those currently in place. In many cases, these modifications may result in a project redesign to proposals not deemed complete before June 3, 1991. A review of the above referenced project file reveals that a letter was sent to you deeming your application incomplete on May 30, 1991. If the additional required items specified in that incomplete letter are not received by this office before June 3, 1991, you project will be subject to the requirements of the new Development Code. Should you have any questions, please contact me at (714) 384-5057. sincerely, - ..--...., l / o //, ,;euv-; h";:.r~ ~i--.....-'/ ~enise Moonier I Assistant Planner lat DEVCODE , PRIDE -I ~s 3JO ~:)i=I':'H :: ST~::=T $A"l BEqNAFlOtNQ .:ALI;:O~NIA. ~2J,la )')01 (1141:a'4~501'15057 ';".~IY 0\-' .61\." .Jeffl.J.. ._u._ . - .. J'.h' --- ... .1.._... PRO~ECT 9.EACTIV A TIO~~E~UEST ~4~' (gat.) I P1annlnt Depa~t..nt CITY 0' SAM .~DIHO. 300 North -D- street san Bernardino, California 92411 It.. DENl;tMOQN IloR (N'.. ~mD*'\ ()s.lir~+ '?\-Ol.~\A~ ~\..o'i (Ca.. HulUl.l') , ,lanner Attn: o..r DENISE MOONIER, On May 30, 1991 . _'I appUoa\loR (Date) was deemed incomplete by your departm.nt due to In.de~.t. intormation documented .s follow.. 1. HISTORICAL RESOURCES JVALUATION REPORT . . 2. 3. enclo..d pl.... flnd all of the r.qu..tad lteme. It 1. .Y under.tanding that if this inforaation i. SUfficient, my ca.. til. will be d....d compl.t. and the project will b. reactivated. If you n..d additional PAULA. WIEL~~ ( Na..) 714-783-3530 ~on. Huab.r) infoJ:'\l&tion. pl.... eont.c~ at . sinc.rely, . :c...reaotlvlt..ca.. ~~:- vJ~ r PAUL A. WIELER VICE PRESIDENT VALUE HOMES , i""'~._,-_,...,......'" I .,. ..-.. I ~.., I .....""..,...,."......1..,....,.' ?T ..-~ ...,t"\l T;- r'lI,- "'1"1," . o o . C I T Y O'F San Bernardino DIP...,.....T 0' PLANNIIIG AND IUILDIIIG SIRYICIS AL BOUGHEY,AICP DIRECTOR August 9, 1991 Attn: Paul Wieler Value Homes 22365 Barton Road, suite 210 Grand Terrace, CA 92324 " RE: Conditional Use Permit No. 91-2B and Variance No. 91-08 To construct 2,000 sq. ft. of teatil/office space including a proposal for off-site sales of beer and wine while varying the minimum lot size required for convenience market site is on the south side of Baseline between Mt. vErnon/Garner streets in the CG-2, Genreal Plan land use designation. Dear Sirs: The above referenced application is hereby deemed complete and is accepted for filing by the City of San Bernardino Planning Department effective this date. This acceptance applies only to the specific project as defined by: Your preliminary application received May 11, 1991 and supplementary information received August 6, 1991, Historical Resources Evaluation Report and project plan received June 18, 1991. Pursuant to the Chapter 4.5, Section 65950 of the California Government Code, the City of San Bernardino has six months from the date of this letter to take final action on your proposed project, including any appeal periods. You are requested to advise the planner processing your project at once if you modify any aspect of your project while it is being processed. This acceptance of your application notwithstanding, the city reserves the right to determine whether any subsequent project revision or combination of modifications (such as a change in the project concept, scope, height, floor area, uses, parking requirements, circulation pattern, points of ingress and egress, location, etc.) represent a potential for environmental impacts or are significant in any other respect. 3QO NJ'RTH CA.LIFORNIA O' S T R E e T 32418-0001 SAN BERNARDINO. 171.. SI._,171/50,7 PRIDE -I OESS : Paul Wieler August 9, 1991 page 2 o o A significant change in the project or a series of cumulative changes MAY necessitate the filinq of a new application or an amended application which will be subject to a staff review for completeness and acceptance.' Should this be required, the new or amended application shall be subject to new processinq time limits as established in the California Government Code, Section 95950. If you should have any questions or concerns please call Denise Moonier at (714) 384-5057. Sincerely, ~o~ AICP ~c~pal Planner " cc: Mr. & Mrs. Wooton 1588 Western Avenue San Bernardino, CA 92411 JM:das deemdcompleteb , , --