HomeMy WebLinkAbout42-Planning Department
Cll
OF SAN BERNARDI, D-
~r
REQUE, r FOR COUNCIL ACt 3N
From:
Michael W. Loehr
Interim Director of Planning
Su~Kt: Appeal of Review of Plans *88-60
Dept: Planning
Mayor and Council Meeting of
September 19, 1988, 2:00 p
Da~: August 31, 1988
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
No previous Council action.
On June 2, 1988, the Development Review Committee denied Review of
Plans No. 88-60 due to noncompliance with the applicable zoning
setback, parking and circulation requirements.
On August 16, 1988, the Planning commission unanimously denied the
applicant's Appeal of Review of Plans No. 88-60.
Recommended motion:
That the Mayor and Council deny the Appeal and deny Review of Plans
No. 88-60.
/jn~JJtV .dL
Signature
Michael W. Loehr
Contact person:
Michael W. Loehr
Phone: 5357
Supporting data attached: Staff Report
Ward:
1
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: N / A
Source: (Acct. No,)
(Acct. Description)
Finance:
Council Notes:
75.0262
Agenda Item No. ~4I-
CIT\ OF SAN BERNARDI~ - REQUES.. FOR COUNCIL ACTI,-,.
STAFF REPORT
Subject: Appeal of Review of plans No. 88-60
Mayor & Common Council Meeting - September 19, 1988, 2:00 P.M.
REQUEST
The applicant, Michael Palmer & Associates representing M.S. Partner-
ship, is appealing the denial of Review of Plans No. 88-60 by the
Development Review Committee and the Planning Commission on appeal.
BACKGROUND
Review of Plans No. 88-60, requesting approval to construct a 4,612
square foot multi-tenant retail building at the northeast corner of
Waterman Avenue and Hospitality Lane, was denied by the Development
Review Committee on June 2, 1988. The denial was based on failure
to meet setback requirements, insufficient parking and dangerous
circulation both on and off-site. On August 16, 1988, the Planning
Commission unanimously denied the applicant's Appeal of Development
Review Committee's denial.
The subject parcel was created as the result of condemnation pro-
cedures commenced by the City on July 18, 1985. The City condemned
land adjacent to and south of this site to construct the westerly
extension of Hospitality Lane to connect with Waterman Avenue.
On March 12, 1987, Court Case No. 228191 concluded with a judgment
that the City pay the property owner a total of $418,000.00. This
payment included the fair market value of the land occupied by
Hospitality Lane, severance damage for the triangular-shaped parcel
in question.
The parcel is unbuildable due to a 100 foot setback along the flood
control channel, the 30 foot setback along Hospitality Lane estab-
lished by Rancon Development (Tentative Tract No. 12034) and the
50 foot structural, 20 foot landscaping setbacks along Waterman
Avenue established by the Interim Policy Document. The attached
memo from the Public Works Department addresses the driveway access
problems to the parcel and indicates "that any driveway there would
totally disrupt travel through the intersection for all directions."
CONCLUSION
The City paid severance damage for this parcel because the severed,
remaining triangularly-shaped parcel is unbuildable. The various
setback requirements cannot be met. Driveway access would cause
severe traffic flow disruption at the corner of Hospitality Lane
and Waterman Avenue.
75-0264
CIT~ OF SAN BI!RNARDltN - RI!QUI!S'I FOR COUNCIL ACTluN
STAFF REPORT
subject: Appeal of Review of Plans No. 88-60
Mayor & Common Council Meeting - september 19, 1988, 2:00 P.M.
MAYOR & COMMON COUNCIL OPTIONS
The Mayor and Council may deny the Appeal and deny Review of Plans
No. 88-60, or uphold the Appeal and approve Review of Plans No.
88-60.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Mayor and Council deny the Appeal and deny
Review of Plans No. 88-60.
prepared by: John E. Montgomery, AICP, Principal Planner
for Michael W. Loehr, Interim Director of Planning
JM:cms
Attachments: "A" - Letter of Appeal
"B" - Public Works Department Memo
"C" _ Planning Commission Staff Report
75-0264
AT'J'z\'CHMENT "A"
~C("':'\.:-- ': ,. .
t \l. ...,... -
..... -~.
.~..
....p "::" ".- "1' /'.2
tiJ ...~J L'J ~l.'-
August 11, 1988
;: - ..,
:i
. .' t
; i'
, ! I ,
! :.J I
LJ
Honorable Mayor and Members of
the Ci t Y Council
City of San Bernardino
Civic Center
c/o City Clerks Office
300 North 'D' Street
San Bernardino, Callfornia 92418-0001
" 'i" ,-, ~ ~,.;pi~
,l .I.l :..J \.J-'I..
c .. . .t;. ... -: .:. : ....-..:.;..:~~;.~T
c.....'.!r:-p ;~...~:~.~, C:\
~".'..J ........".l..._ .I.~ I
Re:
M.S. Partnership Commercial Retail Center
located at the Northeast corner of
Waterman Avenue & HospitaUty Lane
,.
At a meeting of the San Bernardino Planning Commission held on 8/16/88,
our petition for construction of a 4621 square foot commercial retail
center, located in the C-3A zone, was denied. Tbe basis for denial was
setback requirements.
Please accept tbis letter as our formal request to the City Council
for appeal for Plans 88A-H.~ Please Inform Margie Thomas, of our
office, regarding the bearing date and time.
Respectfully submit ted,
MICHEAL PAL
J
MICHEAL PALMER
PRINCIPAL
MEP:ms
cc: M.S. Partnership
G. Dowd
T. Fuller
<<~01>€J.J.bUW'\ A+T^c..H~
'1\4 s C r,. '( o-r SA t-.(r) E..R.N ~~ D l f\l 0 QLAN"-l i t\J.&
J>E.~AR-"ME:.NT i~ 5TlLL 'i2EQ\.)lgl.~<r
a.. \ DO' SE.T tsAc: K F ~\,N'\ SAoJ
-n tvlo-tE:o CR.S.~.d( t \JEi.~ \r\DUG \-\.
~"E. APPL\C~NT \-\AS SOBM'TTED
.
DeA~'1\\6~ ~ 1)oc..o\llllEI\i..T~loN
SA, lS~i' N.G- -"REGlJle~d\ E..NTS 0;:-
-rt4E" FLOOD CON.TQ.C9L V(~r~\c::.T.
\1-\E CtT'( STATES i\1A\ l"1-\E
S\JBJ E..c...T ~'TL:: \~ LJNB\J\LDA~Lt;"
J)VE. \0 Srz..E .T\1c A:YPL\C,ANT
1SE.L'€U~ -rf\-f" ,HE S\TE \ 'S
No. UNBU\LbA~LE (~ T~C;-
1 GO'S ~,-- 8AGt< R'E Q \) \ Q,Efl'~ f\l T
(S RE.M.f)vSP.
~ ~
I.
'..... .......
c:
~,,-
In
. {'-I
c: ~
~ C:
u..;
~ ~
Q::
A :OJ)~klD\J M
B/~~ jee
~A~ K.
au
.~
f'I\.'?A
ATTACHMENT liB"
T-be,,,,t A R.y
~ ,-:-. f-;: :. ,\:r ::
:1' :"1.'1 \, ,~ :: !~ \.~ -;
\J ~ ,_J - -
St1
AUG 1 5 1988
-tDO
C I T Y
o F SAN B ERN A R DIN 0
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
8808-602
f\1!
IlJ
i..-'"
TO:
JOHN MONTGOMERY, Planninq Department
.... -,...- ~"''''''E:\I''l
('HY ?lANNI~~~ u::.,;. ;",1,01 1'1
.. SAN BEnNl\iml~O, C;\
FROM: GENE R. KLATT, Assistant City Enqineer
SUBJECT: Access control and Flood control Setback - Waterman
at Hospitality
DATE:
Auqust 12, 1988
(7530)
COPIES:
Mike Grubbs, File No. RP-88-52
-------------------------------------------------------------
You had requested information on the access control require-
ments and the flood zone setback for the northeast corner of
Waterman Ave. at Hospitality Lane.
The 100-foot setback from the San Timoteo Creek is based on
this area being shown as Flood Zone A on the most recent Firm
Maps. Municipal Code Section 15.72 establishes construction
control in Zone A areas and the 100-foot setback has long
been used by the City as a reasonable mitigation measure. It
is used extensively alonq San Timoteo Creek in the area west
of Waterman and for the Tri-City Development on the east side
of Waterman Ave. With respect to this parcel, the Department
has always indicated that the 100-foot setback would not be
necessary if full channel improvements were installed to the
river to provide protection to the property and remove it
from the Zone A designation.
As for access control (not permittinq driveways), Waterman
Ave. is a major north south arterial with an anticipated ADT
of 60,000 vehicles per day. The intersection at Hospitality
is a difficult intersection now and will be more difficult in
the future. Intersection and street capacity would be
drastically reduced if access to driveways was permitted in
this area. The entire frontage to the Santa Ana River Bridge
is so controlled to allow for the required capacity. This
particular parcel is so close to the intersection that any
driveway there would totally disrupt travel through the
intersection for all directions. This area has been studied
in no less than four traffic engineering studies and all have
reached the same conclusions. That is, the intersection is
operatinq or will operate at level of service F and measures
need to be taken to provide additional capacity.
As a further note, in court proceedings on the compensation
to the owner of this parcel, the property owner's attorney
established that this parcel was unbuildable to the court in
order to establish just compensation. It seems that if the
court has already deemed this parcel unbuildable and ordered
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: 8808-602
Access Control and Flood control Setback
Hospitality
August 12, 1988
Page 2
Waterman at
payment based on this, it should be evident that it is indeed
unbuildable, for the present.
Should you have additional questions or need more informa-
tion, please contact me.
Cordially,
ROGER G. HARDGRAVE,
Oirecto~ of PUblic Works/City Engineer
/~j;;'~t'"
GENE R. KLATT
Assistant City Engineer
GRK/ckc
ATTACHMENT "C"
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUMMARY
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
WARD
2
8/16/88
1
tn
LIJ
:;:)
o
...,
a:
,
<t
LIJ
\~
LIJ
(f)
<t
o
APPLICANT: Michael Palmer &. Assoc.
3403 Hancock Street
San Diego, CA 92110
OWNER: M. S. Partnership
1634 Adams Avenue
Orange, CA 92667
REVIEW OF PLANS NO. 88-60
The applicant requests approval to construct a 4,612 square
foot multi-tenant retail center.
The subject site is lcc~ted at the northeast corner of
Hospitality Lare and Waterman Avenue on a 21,240 square
foot parcel in the C-3A zone.
( EXISTING IPD
PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION
Subject I Vacant C-3A MU-2
INorth CO C-M MU-2
\South Vacant C-M MU-2
East Flood Cont.Channel C-M MU-2
:West conunercial C-3A MU-2
Llque ac lon 6Zkv E S 5a YES OZONE A KXYES
GEOLOGIC / SEISMIC FLOOD HAZARD
HAZARD ZONE DNO ZONE DNO OZONE B DNO
HIGH FIRE DVES AIRPORT NOISE / DYES fiVES
HAZARD ZONE ~O CRASH ZONE >(ENO DNO
rD o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z 0 APPROVAL
APPLICABLE EFFECTS 0
WITH MITIGATING - 0
Z en I MEASURES NO E.I.R. ti CONDITIONS
LlJe!) o EXEMPT DEI R REQUIRED BUT NO ~O G1
2Z ~ffi DENIAL
z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
00 WITH MITIGATING ~2 0 CONTI NUANCE
a:Z MEASURES 02 TO
\~iL 0
oNO o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS (,.)
LIJ SIGNIFICANT SEE ATTACHED E. R. C. &aJ
EFFECTS MINUTES a::
NOV 1981 REVISED JUL'f' ...2
SKY
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE RP 88-60
OBSERVATIONS
AGENOA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
2
8/16/88
2
""'IiI
r
1 . REOUEST
The applicant requests the planning Commission to
reverse the decision of the Development Review Committee
to deny Review of Plans No. 88-60. The proposal is to
construct a 4,612 square foot multi-tenant retail
building on a 21,240 square foot parcel located in the
C-3A zone. The site is designated MU-2 on the Interim
Policy Document Map (see Attachment "B", Letter of
Appeal).
2. LOCATION
The triangularly-shaped parcel is locate.1 on the
northeast corner of Waterman Avenue and hvspitality
Lane. It is bounded on the northeasterly side by a
flood control channel. (See Attachment "G", Location
Map. )
3. MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
The proposed project is inconsistent with the Municipal
Code as shown in Attachment "A". The proposed project
is inconsistent with Policy #19 of the Interim Policy
Document as shown in Attachment "A". However, the
proposed land use is consistent with the Interim Policy
Document Map.
4 . CEOA STATUS
The proposed project is categorically exempt from the
requirements of CEQA, Section 15300.1.
5. BACKGROUND
The subject parcel was created as the result of
condemnation procedures commenced by the city on July
18, 1985. The city condemned land adjacent to and south
of this site to construct the westerly extension of
Hospitality Lane to connect with Waterman Avenue. Prior
to the City's action, this parcel, and the land used to
construct Hospitality Lane, were included as a portion
of the larger lot which is now the southeast corner of
Waterman Avenue and Hospitality Lane. (See Attachment
"0", Air Photo.)
j
\..
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(.;ASE RP 88-60
OBSERVATIONS
AGENOA ITEM
HEARING OATE
PAGE
2
8/16/88
3
, On March 12, 1987, court case number 228191 concluded
with a judgment that the city pay the property owner a
total of $418,000.00. This payment included the fair
market value of the land occupied by Hospitality Lane,
severance damage for the triangularly-shaped parcel in
question, and interest. It is important to note the
City paid severance damage for this parcel due to the
creation of an unbuildable parcel. The parcel is
unbuildable due to a 100 foot setback along the flood
control channel, the 30 foot setback along Hospitality
Lane established by Rancon Development (TT #12034) and
the "substantial" (determined to be 50 feet structural
with 20 feet of landscaping) along Waterman Avenue as
established by the Interim Policy Document (see
Attachment "E", Buildable Area). On March 19, 1987, thE::
City paid the prescribed $418,000.00 to Pinky Brier, the
property owner.
subsequently, the property went into escrow with M.S.
partnership. On May 17, 1988, an application was
submitted to the Planning Department for Review of Plans
No. 88-52. The proposal was to construct a 5,250
square foot retail center at the site.
On June 2,
Development
failure to
parking and
1988, the application was denied by the
Review Committee. The denial was based on
meet setback requirements, insufficient
dangerous circulation both on and off-site.
On June 7, 1988, the applicants submitted an application
for Review of Plans No. 88-60 which is the subject of
this appeal. The proposed building area had been
reduced, however, setback and landscape requirements had
not been met, circulation was inadequate and parking was
not met. (See Attachment "F", site Plan.) On June 23,
1988, Review of Plans No. 88-60 was denied by the
Development Review Committee (See Attachment "G", Denial
Letter.) On July 5, 1988, a letter of appeal of the DRC
decision was delivered to the Planning Department.
Although the letter of appeal exceeded the alotted ten
day appeal period, the appeal was accepted due to City
Hall closure for the Fourth of July Holiday. (Attach. "B")
6. ANALYSIS
The proposed project, 4,612 square feet of retail space
requires 19 parking spaces by Code. Parking shown on
the plan included 18 spaces. However, ten of those
spaces are located in the required landscaped setback
~
\...
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNIN~EDE~~~!!v1ENT
OBSERVATIONS
AGENOA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
2
8/16/88
4
r
along Waterman. Ingress/egress to the site is provided
by a 25 foot two-way driveway on Hospitality Lane
adjacent to the flood control channel. Due to the
elevation of the Hospitality Lane bridge over the flood
control channel, entering and exiting the parcel could
be dangerous. In addition, the Engineering Department
spoke of plans for a landscaped median in Hospitality
Lane which eventually would prohibit left turns into and
out of the site.
""""II
proposed internal circulation throughout the site is via
a 15 foot wide, one-way drive aisle. The refuse
enclosure, located at the northerly end of the drive
aisle is unserviceable by the Refuse Department. This
is due to the fact that the refuse trucks cannot
negotiate the tight radius turn created by the 15 feet
drive aisle.
This drive aisle however, which is situated in the first
15 feet of the property abutting Waterman, is virtually
eliminated when setback requirements are imposed. The
project shows no interior landscaped setback along
Waterman. When the City constructed the Hospitality
Lane Bridge, channel improvements imposed equalled what
the Engineering Department required for this site, and
all sites which abut the channel. That setback is 100
feet structural, or total improvement of the channel.
The site plan shows a 30 foot building setback from the
unimproved channel.
When Rancon Realty developed Tri-City Corporate Center,
the recorded Tract #12034 indicated 30 foot minimum
setbacks throughout. Tri-City redevelopment project
requires 20 foot from curbface setbacks. The Interim
Policy document, adopted by the City Council on May 23,
1988, amended June 6, 1988, and approved by the state
June 9, 1988 designates the site MU-2. This mixed use
allows general commercial, commercial office and light
industrial uses. compatible zones include C-2, C-3, C-
3A, C-M, M-1 and M-1A. Policy #19 of the Interim
Document states:
"Setbacks on Waterman Avenue from
Avenue shall be substantial
landscaped."
I-10 to Rialto
and heavily
"Substantial" has been interpreted to be the most
restrictive compatible zone requirements, those of the
M-1A district. The requirements include a 50 feet from
~
\..
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE RP 88-60
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM 2
HEARING DATE R / 1 ~ /88
PAGE
,.
property line structural
which must be landscaped.
setback, the first 20 feet of
This requirement is ignored.
""""II
7 . CONCLUSION
The appeal is based on the fact that when city setback
requirements are met, the parcel is unbuildable.
The proposed project was denied because setback
requirements of the City deem the parcel unbuildable.
The city has paid severance damage to the property owner
because the subject parcel was severed from the larger
parcel when the Hospitality Lane extension was
constructed. The city paid that severance damage
because the severed, remaining, triangularly-shaped
parcel is unbuildable.
8. PLANNING COMMISSION OPTIONS
The Planning commission may:
1. Uphold the appeal and approve Review of Plans NO.
88-60; or
2. Deny the appeal and deny Review of Plans No. 88-60.
9. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the Planning Commission deny the
appeal and deny Review of Plans No. 88-60.
Respectfully submitted,
MICHAEL W. LOEHR
Interim Director of Planning
-
,/ .; .-:-:>
dz~ d-u ~~krr-
Sandra Paulsen
Senior planner
SP:cms
~
\.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE . RP 88-60
OBSERVATIONS
AGENOA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
2
8/16/88
6
""
r
Attachment "A" Municipal Code & General Plan Conformance
Attachment "B" Letter of Appeal
Attachment "c" Air Photo
Attachment "0" Buildable Area
Attachment "E" site Plan
Attachment "F" Denial Letter, Issue 1.0.
Attachment "G" Location Map
pcagenda.rp88600
8/2/88
~
\..
l\ttachment "A"
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(,ASE RP 88-60
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM 2
HEARING DATE 8/16/88
PAGE 7
'"
r
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFO~~NCE
U!TERUt POLIC'!
CATEGORY PROPOSAL MUNICIPAL CODZ DOCUlJiENT
Land Use Retail General Commercial IL, CG, CO, CR
setback Tri City
(Waterman) 0 5 ' 30' (TT 12 0 3 4 ) 50' Structural
20' Landscaped
(Hospitality) 20 5 ' 30' 30'
(Flood Control) 30 100'
Parking 18 19 N/A
~
Attachment liB
----
-- ....--
- - .... ....
----.... ....
-- .... ....
-.... .... ....
-.... ........
~-
-.I.F. Devldean A.eaclet:... Inc.
ENGINEERING PLANNING SURVEYING ARCHITECTURE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
July 5, 1988
Planning Commission
R. Ann Siracusa A.I.C.P.
Director of Planning
RE: Application 88A-60, Appeal of Development Review Committee
Action of June 23, 1988
Dear Ms. Siracusa:
On behalf of
the June 23,
Committee on
notification
our client please accept this letter of appeal of
1988 action of denial by the Development Review
the above mentioned application. Please provide
as to scheduled date of nearing by your Commission.
Our appeal is based on our position that the setback requirements
of the City are unduly restrictive and render the site
undevelopable.
If you have any questions, please call me at 714-686-0844 or John
Rumsey at 619-291-0224.
Thank you for your time and consideration on this matter.
Sincerely,
"'"
-46~
Tom G. Nievez
project Manager
fI....:.
..' J
:~''''
..
oJ
\ [.',' ;" 1.1 f: '.,n r~l ~_."'"
I;J '. '\' !'j ,." I
! :', !; '.i
TGN:czh
j' !l
. . ~ I
- -
-,$ 198B
cc: John Rumsey
~: ~ .:
;~ ','- I ~
,Ii .!)!J
11 cf)(; <; ~"'I 'J! '''''if) ,\ ," Sllllr, "0
( 'Irln (",:' lJ,lj;J..\
,,':, ~::'i,;f)H?
71-0RIJ ~ 10"",
P.tlm ijfo .j.r1 ( /. t
Ib19\l.lo -,1>'1
FAX 619 ~'~l!i\'l. I
:. 'I
lie"
achment
Boundary of 1
Original Parce
Boundary of
. Severed Parcel
.
.
.. '
.... - ,.
- .. A-. . ---~:::f: .___:.". ~~_......
,. ~-~--?-~~~: ~=:-.~:: . h.~~ ~ _.' ._
!f>. - --:=:::!---.. -_...a. -"'.........
.... ~'~"'~~ -.:"~
...
rAcmmNT "0"
Q
'I. ~
~ '1'.
,
'- '\
\/\
,
-'4
- - - -~O' ;UI<&>IN6 5/ir 6A~r LIN~
C LANDSC J:1PE : .5A~G A5 rK. J~ 034)""
"
I~!J. 4~
- C )>>f 'E~ftII~ ~.
30' 4M/J.PIN6- SET
,f &I1~N FlfPf Cv~~ ,&;AC(i
I
i
\
,
,
,
\
,
,
,
\
,
,
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
~ \
~ \
.. \
'4 \
\
~ \
... (;)
,/ '"
" .
,.' ~
\
\
\
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, /
~~"O /
/
./
----- --- -- - --- - --- ------ - - - ----"""
~
~
\J
t
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I~
.>
I~
.It
I~
I>
i2
i~
I
I
~.
i. :x
~
z ~
8
. 0
I 9
I 0 ~
...
.
I III
~
co
co
>
I
a-.
o
-
-~.-'-
1"f ~'-'
'~'-' -
~.
-.-
.-'
.-
ATTACHMENT
"E"
_~__ k. _ rACHMENT "F"
-,-'.: .~'~>
~ ,. '. ........;--..
i..,,::, ,~, ,-:--..-;., ..~. .,.-:\
'-' .. ' .... .","
. .....-- * ,~,
__- _ _ ~-- .:_:'r....~ ," ~'~ \
. .. ' .' ..,., \_. C I T Y 0 F
'.- . '............. '.:'~ ..,' -. .' ;;.
~::: -~-'~:~,'~;{)' San n.e:rnardl-no
~.:~~~':y U
~".
PLANNING DIPAIlTIIINT
R ANN SIRACUSA. A.I C.P
OIR:;CTOR OF P~AI'4I'4II'4G
June 30, 1988
Michael Palmer & Associates
Attn: John Rumsey
3403 Hancock Street
San Diego, CA 92110
RE: Review of Plans No. 88A-60
Dear Mr. Rumsey:
On June 23, 1988, the above Review of Plans application was reviewed by the
Development Review Committee. The following action was taken.
x
Denied based on the following:
See attached Issue Identification Form.
If the item was continued. it will be rescheduled for Development Review
Committee when a revised plan and/or additional information items have
been submitted to the Planning Department.
If you have any questions. contact this office at (714) 384-5057.
Sincerely,
~~
Sandra Paulsen
Senior Planner
Attachment
SP / lj
cc: ~S Partnership
1634 Adams Avenue
Orange. CA 9260J
cc: Elliot Shaw
22400 Barton Rd., Suite 20a
Grand Terrace, CA 923~
!) : .'
SAN BERNAROINQ
71.13...101'
'. I) ;> ~ ...
; ) 'I 'j
J
3 ':" ::) : = l'
. .
"
. .
.ISSUE IDENTIFICATION.. FORM
.' . I
. . . I
. REVIEW OF PLANS No. q~A--w
The following issues were addressed at the Development Review Committee meeting
of 1...../;) 3 / g1and are intended to assist the applicant in preparing an amended site
~I .
plan.
ISSUES:
1. Site Plan lay-out I Building Orientation:
2. Elevations:
3. Spth;lrk~: . 3D' fL -to ke ~
~ . ~t-TM-
6{er~/;;~;t J<<e-r#:L :9f~: ~~;
4. Lot Coverage:
5. Circulation: (\. cr ~~( ~.~f) ~ w4.
Sdb ~ .e e.-t. ~. ~.a-~S ~-
. -~ ~ OY\... _
. .
AUG. .... Ik,
D KC. fORM E
,.AGE I OF ..
. I
7. Hand~ed. Parking & Access: ~ ~ /a.L 1'1- I
-M... ~. ~-: '6~'~.
~ UTI tl.ti...
8. \.andscaping: _}~ 9?' rp,
~(d-.I l3
.
I~-r~ ~
~
"
9. Walls & Screening:
~
10. Refuse Container Location & Access: ~~ h~
~ ~~~ ~ ut I-S rt~
~el6 1111f"~4.~'~
~~ d-:
(H:a~j;-((
11. Geology & Liquefaction:
12. Grading:
13.
AUG. 'I. ,..,
luce. fOR" E
PAOE Z Of 4
. I
,
,
"
14. Fire:
V-;PJ
15. ~ater & Sewer: ~
~ 16. ,Schools: ~ ~ ~
~~
11. Police:
18. Building & Safety: ~ /tL> ~
19.
Redevelopment Area: :rri e-i-\-'" - lYt~ ~ ~
.t.h-i~ h~'-'~ . J -- ,
,
1/4
I
20. San Bernardino State College:
21. Flood Control District / Hazard:
~ d4' .A.lg(.
jtJtJ' r ~ w,dr,(
"-
Aut. '14 ,~,
.
D.".C. fORM E
PAGE , of ..
22: Airport Landuse Distric:t:
23. Other:
I, as applicant or designated representative for the above referenced project,
acknowledge receipt of this form.
Signature
Applicant
Date
AUG. '84 '~r
OR.Co fORM [
PAGE 4 Of 4
"0"
CoM C.M CoM
C'3A
3
C-3A
I I' A ... LM
C-3A
e-3A
iA
..-
..
iTATE
~ CoM
,
..
...
c o~
Go.1 )
+==:-
-_...~
C.M
CoM
e'3A
.,
It
e-M C-M
e-M CoM
,.-..
.'0"
C-r
e-M
e-M
e.M
C-3A
c
INTERSTATE @
tC-3A\ IT ~
e.M
C.M
CoM
M-I
.. -I
IECENtD-Cl1 Y CLERl'
-Ii .. ,,.
Sept'Unb~R~ 28, ''/988
70: HonoRabLe ~a~oR and ~embeR~ 01 the C~t~ Counc~
0/ San Bemand ~o
C~v~c CenteR
C/O C~t~ CLen.iM Oll~ce
300 NORth 'f) I StReet
San BemaRd~o, CA 92418-0001
(818) 291-2240
Rt.: fYLS f>aRtne.Mh~p CommeRcW Reta~ CenteR
Located at the NORth~t CORneR 01
fJ/atell./nOJl. Avenue and Ho~p~taL~t~ Lane
At a me.et~9- oj the San BeRnaRd~o f>Lann~'} Commi.M~on held on 8/16/88,
OUR pet~t~on I~R co~tRuct~on 01 a 4621 ~~uaRe loot cammeRcW Reta~
centen., Locat'ed ~ the C-3A Jone, lLJClA. den(.ed. The bMU Ion. the den~aL
~ ~etback n.~u~Rement~.
OUIl 1~1lITl. appealed the decu~on to the C~t!f Counc~ and n.ecei..ved a he.aR~<J.
date 01 Septemben. 19th, 1988. At thu me.et~9- the C~t~ Counc~ cont~ued
OUIl CMe to the meet~9- 01 Octobell 3Rd, 1988.
rpL~e co~Uell thu Letten. MOUn. 10nmaL Il~uut to conti..nue OUR he.aR-
~9- to the me.et~9- 01 OctobeR 17th, 1988 to Q1..Low oun. I~n.m to betteR
pllepalle oun. pRuentat~on to ~ou M eLevat~o~, aRch~tectun.aL n.endeR~~
and. a tn.alli..c ~tud~ that we aRe pllepaR~9- wUL not be Re.ad~ lOR the
meet~9- of OctobeR 3n.d, 1988.
Thank ~ou lOR ~OUn. co~Uen.at~on.
e.ct/uilg .w.bmi.ttul, )
.~&~
'A/fJlS B. BOLTON
/fJICHlAL f>AL/fa cf ASSOCIATCS
frO: ~
CC: ~.S. PARTNWHIF
fi. f)(JjJf)
~f>A
T. RJ LLt.'R