HomeMy WebLinkAbout63-Planning
Dept:
Planning
Director Subject:
.lC'D.-ADMIN. OFF.'
,J(;7 iiAR 12 PM 2: 49
REQUEOr FOR COUNC~
Appeal of Denial of Extension of
Time for Tentative Tract No.
12756 and Conditional Use Permit
No. 84-37
'CI,c OF SAN BERNARDIO:>> -
From:
David Anderson
Acting Planning
Date:
March 11, 1987
Mayor and Council Meeting of
March 23, 1987, 2:00 p.m.
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
Previous Planning Commission action:
At the meeting of the Planning Commission on February 17, 1987, the
following action was taken:
The request for an extension of time for Tentative Tract NO. 12756
and Conditional Use Permit No. 84-37 was unanimously denied based
upon inconsistency with Ordinance No. MC-573 (regarding two'means
of standard access) and the development standards adopted through
the Verdemont Area Plan.
Recommended motion:
That the hearing on the appeal be closed and the decision of the
Planning Commission be affirmed, modified or rejected.
~dL'
Signature David Anderson
Contact person:
David Anderson
Phone:
3R3-'>O"7
5
Supporting lIata attached:
Staff Report
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
Source:
Finance:
Council Notes:
Agenda Item No
~~.
o
IR .R&.R....N&
o
o
CIVIL . ENVIRON~ENTAL ENGINEERING
A..e<<:.AT..
LAND PLANNING AND "'-''''~YINa
I."
--- .....-, ....._ 1 :.,
. :.. .:...; ';l
February 26, 1987
00 m@[gDwrn [[)
FEB 27 1987
City Clerk
City of San Bernardino
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418-0121
Re: Tentative Tract No.12756
This letter is intended to appeal the action of the Planning
Commission at their meeting of February 17, 1987, at which time they
denied our request to delay the hearing for 30 days and denied our
request to grant a one-year extension to Tentative Tract Map No.12756.
CITY PLANNINil DEPAf1TWT
SAN BERNARDINO. CA
The basis for this appeal is as follows:
1. We were informed by Planning only a short time before the
hearing that there would be a problem obtaining a one-year
tentative tract map extension. It was not an unreasonable
request to delay the hearing until we could determine all
the facts and the proper course of action.
2. The denial of the extension was made without due process of
law in that the applicant was not granted an opportunity to
speak to the motion of the request for extension prior to
action being taken thereon.
3. The denial of the extension was arbitrary and not supported
by fact in that the tract is consistent with Ordinance
MC-573 and with the Verdemont Area Plan in the extent con-
sistency is required by law, especially in terms of access
and minimum floor area and design of the proposed dwellings.
4. Approval of the adjoining Tenative Tract No. 13172 was
essential to make the Tentative Tract 12756 project/phase
feasible, buildable and marketable, because of the extensive
off-site improvements which were required including Frontage
Road improvements, Frontage Road extension costs and nearly
a mil e of Cab 1 e Creek f1 ood cont ro 1 1 evee. The appro v a 1 was
finally received in August of 1986. This created an un-
avoidable delay in finalizing the Tentative Tract No.12756
because of the "tie" between these two tracts.
225 E. Airport Dr. . P.O. Box 8087, San Bernardino, California 92412 . Phone (714) 884-8804 or (714)825-9562
550 Well Via.. Way . Melro18 Center . Vis.., California 92083 . Phone (714) 758-3680
r
-'
o
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
February 26, 1987
Page Two
pc ",,- . .
'. :.:~ ')7 P 1 ','1'/.
.. j . _.. 1- L.
Therefore. we respectfully request. that the Mayor and Common Council
consider this appeal at the next scheduled meeting.
Respectfully Submitted.
On behalf of CC San Bernardino, Inc.
~~*~JC~~
Melinda Dewey ()
Controller
MD:nr
(SP2-26 )
t-
,-'
o
o
o
ERN ARDIN 0 300 NORlll"O" STREET. SAN BERNAROINO. CALIFORNIA 82418
EVL VN WILCOX
Mav...
Member, of Ihe Common Council
Either Elt'Ha. . . . . . . . . . . . . I'lr.. Ward
Jack RelUV. . . . . . . . . . . . . .lIcoftd Ward
Ralph HerMMU . . . . . . . . . . . Third W.rd
Slav. Mark,' ............. P'ourtbWalCl
Go'donQuMI....... ...... P'IUIIWar.
o.n Fru", . ... . . . . . . .. . . S'.'hWard
Jack Strick I., . . . . . . . . . . . .sevln'lI Ward
February 19, 1987
Cable Lake Associates
3931 MacArthur Boulevard, 1113
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Dear Sir or Madame:
At the meeting of the Planning Commission on February 17,
1987, the following action was taken:
The request for an extension of time for Tentative Tract No.
12756 and Conditional Use Permit No. 84-37, which permitted
the establishment of a 114 unit single-family detached
subdivision on substandard size lots and with a common
recreational facility in the PRD-7U Planned Residential zone
at seven units per acre on approximately 20 acres having a
frontage of approximately 1,568 feet on the north side of
Frontage Road and being located approximately 1,100 feet
westerly of the centerline of Little League Drive, was denied
based upon inconsistency with Ordinance No. MC-573 (requiring
two means of standard access) and the development standards
adopted through the Verdemont Area Plan.
According to the San Bernardino Municipal Code, Section
18.20.120., the following applies to the filing of a tenta-.
tive tract map:
.The decision of the Commission shall be final unless appeal-
ed to the Mayor and Common Council in writing. The written
appeal shall be submitted to the office of the City Clerk
within ten days from the date of the meeting..
1"'l~tl' INmO~IlESS
~".'. -,A
~f'
J-.
'-
r--.
o
o
:)
Cable Lake Associates
February 19, 1987
Page 2
If no appeal is filed pursuant to the previously mentioned
provisions of the San Bernardino Municipal Code, the action
of the Commission shall be final.
sin;2/tZ'?
DAVID ANDERSON
Acting Planning Director
mkf
CCI Building and Safety Dept.
Engineering Division
/'......,
-
CITY OF SAI ~
~ BE~NARDINOO -' MEMORANDU~
,!
To
Youn Kim
"
From
David Anderson. Acting
Planning Director
March 10, 1987
Subject
Expiration date of Tentative Tract 12756
Date
Approvad
Date
Please be advised that the expiration date of Tentative Tract 12756 is
April 1, 1987 based on City Council action on an appeal dated April 1,
1985 which included modification to conditions of approval.
/p~~
DAVID ANDERSON
Acting Planning Director
DA:cj
c.ry .. r...OQ
-
~
~ITY OF SAN ~ER~ARDINO ~ MEMORANDU~
To Planning Commission
From Planning Department
Subject Extension of Time for Tentative Tract Date February 17. 1987
No. 12756 & Conditional Use Permit No. 84-37
Approved T'I'F.M NO 10 lJARn 'i
Date
OWNER/APPLICANT:
Cable Lake Associates
3931 MacArthur Blvd., 1113
Newport Beach, CA 92660
The applicant is requesting an extension of time for
Tentative Tract No. 12756 and Conditional Use Permit No. 84-
37 which were approved by the Planning Commission on March 6,
1985. The project was to establish a 120 lot single family
development in the Planned Residential Development district
at 7 units per acre. The site is located on the north side
of Frontage Road, approximately 1,568 feet west of Little
League Dr ive.
Recent legislative actions
have made changes in the
the project as originally
follows:
1.) On January 5, 1987, the Mayor and Common Council
revised Section 18.40.160 of the San Bernardino
Municipal Code to provide exemption requirements
from the two standard access route requirements.
(Ordinance No. MC-573 is attached for the
Commissions review)
by the Mayor and Common Council
development standards that effect
proposed. The changes are as
2.> In November of 1986 the Mayor and Common Council
adopted the Verdemont Area Plan. The Verdemont
Area Plan makes specific development criteria for
on-site and off~site requirements. For instance,
for Planned Residential Developments (such as Cable
Lakes) the minimum requirements for common open
space shall provide a minimum of 30\ with amenities
required. The minimum lot size for a single family
Planned Residential Development is to be 6,000
square feet and the minimum unit size is to be
1,000 square feet.
A review of the previously approved site plan indicates
nonconformance to the minimum standards for Planned Residen-
tial Development as recently adopted by the Verdemont Area
Plan. In as much as the original project provided 18\ common
open space versus the 30\ required today, the original
project had minimum lot sizes of 4,000 square feet whereas
today the minimum lot size required is 6,000 square feet.
The original project had a minimum unit size of 800 square
feet and today the minimum is 1,000 square feet. In
elr., ON rHI:alO:v.
#-...
-'
.--
o
o
o
Tentative Tract No. 12756 ,
Conditional Use Permit NO. 84-37,
Extension of Time
Planning Commission Meeting
February 17, 1987
Page 2
addition, the original common open space did not provide any
amenities, however, the Verdemont Area Plan would require a
minimum of three types of amenities.
The City has the option to extend a tentative tract map at
the request of the applicant. If during the initial two year
term of approval, the map has not been recorded, the City may
deny a request for extension of time based on nonconformance
to the requirements of todays development standards.
Summary
In the case of Tentative Tract Map No. 12756,
development standards have changed since the
approval. These are as follows:
several
original
APPROVED
REQUIRED
TODAY
30'7.. 3 Amenities
6,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
Two Standard Means
of Access
Open Space
Min. Lot Size
Min. Floor Area
Access
18%, No Amenities
4,000 sq. ft.
800 sq. ft.
One Standard
Means of Access
RECOMMENDAT1.QB
Based on the inconsistency with Ordinance No. MC-573
(requiring two means of standard access) and the Development
Standards adopted through the Verdemont Area Plan, Staff
recommends denial of the requested extension of time for
Tentative Tract Map No. 12756 and Conditional Use Permit No.
84-37.
Respectfully SUbmitted,
.
'4-.
I
,
.
I
t
i
.
~
I
I
.
I
o
o
o
o
Planned Residential Developments
3. Common, useable open space areas
shall not include the following.
Rights-of-way.
Vehicle parking areas and
accessways.
Areas between walls of
adjacent structures where
such walls are less than 15
feet apart.
Slope areas of more than 3:1
grade.
Pront yard setbacks.
Patios and private yards.
GENERAL
Open Space
1.
2.
Amenities
4.
and multiple
Residential
provide 30'
space to be
and active
All single family
family Planned
Developments shall
common, useable open
used for passive
recreational uses.
include
areas
in
Useable open space shall
only those open space
greater than 15 feet
dimension.
.
.
.
.
.
.
All single family and multiple
family Planned Residential
Developments shall provide
recreational amenities within the
site including a swimming pool,
spa, clUbhouse, tot lot with play
equipment or court game
facilities such as tennis or
racquetball. The type of
amenities shall be determined by
the Planning Commission and shall
be provided according to the
following:
Units
0-9
10-50
51-100
101-200
201-300
301-400
Etc.
Amenities
o
1
2
3
4
5
11?
o
o
o
Streets
5.
Private streets shall be
permitted when there is a
homeowner's association estab-
lished to maintain them. The
,
streets shall be a minimum of 28
feet wide to allow parking on
one side of the street.
J" MIN.
~ ,
SINGLE FAMILY
Lot Size
1.
Small lot and zero lot line
subdivisions shall have a
minimum lot size of 6,000 square
feet.
6000 _ MIW-
1'--1-' -JjT'-'r
JdiL-p i
I I
Unit Size
2.
Single family homes
and zero lot line
shall have a minimum
1,000 square feet,
patios and garages.
in small lot
subdivisions
unit size of
exclusive of
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Unit Size
1.
Multiple family units within
Planned Residential Developments
shall conform to the unit sizes
established for apartment
projects.
113
o
,
!
.i
,
, ,
i
II
I
:i
II,
'Jr
.1,
,
"
I
,
0 ~ 0 0 0
€Ji 10
'.
t I
I 5 ! ..
. . ..
.. ..
:I ; I I! I
! i i ; i .
. ! .
. I ~ U I I
Iii ~ .
0 .
0 I : ~ i
0
....-.
'.
h
; 1 I
. I
, .
.....
'\.
"
..
"..
~
~~~~
~~/
~
~~~.;
~(fj;~cf .
!~~~~
.'
'"
z
c
.....
A.
Z
o
-
...
c
...
::)
(,)
E
-
U
o
o
o
o
Table: 4 Circulation Plan Roadway Classifications
Classification Right-of-Way Roadway Lanes
Freeway 200 + feet Varies Varies
Divided Major Arterial 100-120 feet 82 feet 4-6
}'faj or Arterial 100 feet 76 + feet 4-6
Minor Arterial 88 feet 64 + feet 4
Collector
Residential 60 feet 40 feet 2
Industrial 60 feet 40 feet 2
Local
Continuous 60 feet 36 feet 2
Non-continuous 50 feet 36 feet 2
Hillside 44 feet 36 feet 2
30
o
t)
II)
.....
('II
...
d
z
~
(J
c
a:
~
w
>
-
~
~
z
w
~
l
I.~
,f
t/
o
o
,-
~
~A\~
,..-! ~\\ \""-1'n:
~ '~\:~M '.
~\':~~t\~j~~ I
\: ~.... J.>' _______ \ ;'(. . I
~A 1~",~1 .
/~: " 1.--+ I
, 'r\~ .\"-'l \~ ! '
,~ :\'..J' . ' I
l ,<, \~0~).~ \ ~)j I I
J',' r.") ./ I ~ "w
. "j' f-~==- I'~ ;-;:1;,
. ~ ~ j ~lY 1) t ~-! '
. J/'Ct I --0.- .. :d:l: I
)' ~1 " .. '
t '\, ., I ::;5~'(i '
tf~ ", e; I .:r, :
'r:>-,' l.... 1. ..J
. ~1 / ~'".~ "" 1 7:~
q....{' .-- "~
'~1 / I ';;..~ '---.A, \1 :
Ii5it / ~ .7 t.{]: \
~~ r--' \.
. ''ifi/ / fs:;)/ - \ "'\""~"::
j~1 p r,=j: l <<' ,
. f'l "'17 . ~
fI:.~ .N'..J ''- r- {'''ft,
'0 1m)"/. ,- J\..J '\:~ \.,s:; ~ '
. . I ~ ~ .-'.. . '..:
J';N /~r. ..!. ,"- '1=-'" ~ ~-f '
" ilY".:.: lli4 ~ r"
"- ,1j, t:;::I /," . rr:l ' I
, ?r;;i)j'/~~." - .:.--- .: \
A''-.I..' 'f;1-. m. I~' I'
~ .J:j~{;)1:' ~I ~;i ~ ~l, ~I ~ !8i':'
.):Ij ~ ~.:;;::. · ,
":',:t X~ 0"])1-/,: 'J . ~{,.~ ~ I ; I
. /#1 ~ .;, '",~ ' :D' ~
~~' i~ .
~-1r . · ~E;~:i~'.;I1i ;f)---- ~".;, ~
f'~,,--- h'V~:I ./{, ~' 'j: ~'11
.
. ..--./
;
o
~
,
:Ir
EI at
~'13
:11
:1
ill
:h
:1
!I
:1
'0 '
,
.-"\ 0
o . --
o
AGENDA "'I
ITEM #
F' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANN'ti'TB~~&~1;t'~tt.& F~
LOCATION CASE ~~/gO"l~r~~/
'"' I HEARING DATE 2/17/87
10
~
~ ....01
"CI"'.
~ ~
~
"
'.......
"
\\
"'"
, I
'0 ...."...1.
'.
-....,
R-I-2Y2ACRES
".
111.1 .l.'.(~ il"....
-.....
'\
--
...
,"
(.
\~\
);:/