HomeMy WebLinkAbout33- Planning and Building Services CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
From: Al Boughey, Director Subject: Appeal of the Planning Commission's
Denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 96-02
and Variance No. 96-03; Carwash Addition
Dept: Planning & Building Services GNA L to the Shell Gasoline Station at 1930 South
W
r
' ate m n a Avenue
e e
Date: July 27, 1996 MCC Date: August 5, 1996
Synopsis of Previous Council Action:
July 15, 1996 The Mayor and Common Council continued this item to the August 5, 1996 meeting
pending staff's review of a revised site plan.
Recommended Motion:
That the Mayor and Common Council close the public hearing, deny the appeal and uphold the Planning
Commission's denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 96-02 and Variance No. 96-03, based on the Findings
of Fact in Exhibit B, Exhibit 3, Attachment "D".
-,C1111
1
1 B®o ey 1
Contact person: Al Boughey Phone: 384-5357
Supporting data attached: Staff Report Ward: 3
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A
Source: (Acct. No.) N/A
(Acct. Description)
Finance:
Council Notes:
Agenda Item No.
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 96-02 AND VARIANCE NO. 96-03
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF
August 5, 1996
PROPERTY OWNER APPLICANT
Shell Oil Company A & S Engineering Services
3200 Inland Empire Boulevard 207 West Alameda, #202
Ontario, CA 91761 Burbank, California 91502
REQUEST/LOCATION
The applicant is appealing the Planning Commission's denial of their project applications. The
project is a request to approve a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) under the authority of Code
Section 19.06.020, Table 06.01, to permit a 900 square foot self-serve carwash addition to an
existing Shell Gas Station which was previously developed with pump islands and a 476 square
foot food mart in the CR-3, Commercial Regional land use designation. The project includes
requests to vary from Development Code §19.06.030(1)(A), Table 06.02 and §19.24.060(5) to
reduce the 10 foot side and rear yard setbacks to 0 feet and to reduce a 24 foot, two-way drive-
aisle to 12 feet (in front of the carwash structure) to accommodate the placement of a vacuum
unit and the carwash structure.
The 0.577 acre subject site is a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land located at 1930 South
Waterman Avenue, on the northwest corner of Hospitality Land and Waterman Avenue. (See
Exhibit B, Exhibit 1 - Site Location Map)
BACKGROUND
On July 15, 1996, the appeal was heard by the Mayor and Common Council. The appellant
brought a revised site plan to the meeting and as a result, the item was continued to the August
1, 1996 meeting to allow for staff review of the revised plan.
Additional background information and an analysis of the project proposal are contained in the
Exhibit B, Mayor and Common Council Staff Report (July 15, 1996) and Exhibit B, Exhibit 3 -
Planning Commission Staff Report (June 4, 1996).
IN
ff
of
x II
n,
[Enl
i.
6*,i UA
IN
o CL
M,,11!.TO-06N 00,P31 1 d
saw
IM
V
,r
E� --------- --
-------------
tl
-------------
-------------
Z
YO
41Y
---——————————————— ———————____I
I ---d �
Tj
EXHIBIT A
H-KV-1 Ail-IVIMSOH
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
From: Al Boughey, Director ' ct: Appeal of the Planning Commission's
Denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 96-02
ORIdiikw and Variance No. 96-03; Carwash Addition
Dept: Planning & Building Services to the Shell Gasoline Station at 1930 South
Waterman Avenue
Date: May 27, 1996 MCC Date: July 15, 1996
Synopsis of Previous Council Action:
None
Recommended Motion:
That the Mayor and Common Council close the public hearing, deny the appeal and uphold the Planning
Commission's denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 96-02 and Variance No. 96-03, based on the Findings
of Fact in Attachment "D" of Exhibit 4.
Al Bcug
Contact person: Al Boughey Phone: 384-5357
Supporting data attached: Staff Report Ward: 3
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A
Source: (Acct. No.) N/A
(Acct. Description)
Finance:
Council Notes: �j
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 96-02 AND VARIANCE NO. 96-03
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF
July 15, 1996
PROPERTY OWNER APPLICANT
Shell Oil Company A & S Engineering Services
3200 Inland Empire Boulevard 207 West Alameda, #202
Ontario, CA 91761 Burbank, California 91502
REQUEST/LOCATION
The applicant is appealing the Planning Commission's denial of their project applications. The
project is a request to approve a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) under the authority of Code
Section 19.06.020, Table 06.01, to permit a 900 square foot self-serve carwash addition to an
existing Shell Gas Station which was previously developed with pump islands and a 476 square
foot food mart in the CR-3, Commercial Regional land use designation. The project includes
requests to vary from Development Code §19.06.030(1)(A), Table 06.02 and §19.24.060(5) to
reduce the 10 foot side and rear yard setbacks to 0 feet and to reduce a 24 foot, two-way drive-
aisle to 12 feet (in front of the carwash structure) to accommodate the placement of a vacuum
unit and the carwash structure.
The 0.577 acre subject site is a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land located at 1930 South
Waterman Avenue, on the northwest corner of Hospitality Land and Waterman Avenue. (See
Exhibit 1, Site Location Map and Exhibit 2, Site Plan)
BACKGROUND
The Shell Service Station was originally approved by the Planning Commission on April 6,
1982. On February 7, 1984, the service station was given approval by the Planning Commission
to expand services by adding a food market. In January of 1990, the applicant submitted a
conditional use permit (CUP No. 90-02) application to add a carwash and storage building to
the site. The Planning Commission found that the proposed carwash was not compatible with
the character of the adjacent "corporate park" uses. The application was subsequently denied
on August 7, 1990, with the Mayor and Common Council upholding the denial on October 15,
1990.
Appeal of the Planning Commission's Denial
of CUP No. 96-02 and VAR No. 96-03
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of
July 15, 1996
Page 3
On February 4, 1994, CUP No. 94-05 was submitted to the Department of Planning and
Building Services requesting approval of a carwash and storage building. The proposal for CUP
No. 94-05 was fundamentally the same as was denied in 1990. CUP No. 94-05 was denied
without prejudice by the Planning Commission on October 17, 1996 because the proposal was
not compatible with the character of the adjacent "corporate park" uses.
CUP No. 96-02 was submitted to the City on February 20, 1996. The application was reviewed
by the Development/Environmental Review Committee (D/ERC). It was determined at that
meeting that a variance was required because the applicant proposed to reduce the minimum side
and rear setback areas and to reduce two, two-way drive-aisles. VAR No. 96-03 was submitted
on April 4, 1996.
The D/ERC subsequently reviewed the project applications on March 28, 1996, April 4, 1996
and May 2, 1996. On May 2, 1996, the committee determined that proposal was not in
compliance with the Development Code or consistent with the General Plan. The D/ERC
subsequently cleared the item to Planning Commission with a recommendation for denial.
On June 4, 1996, the Planning Commission voted 5 to 2 to deny Conditional Use Permit No.
96-02 and Variance No. 96-03. The Planning Commission recommendation and action are
summarized below.
Additional background information and an analysis of the project proposal are contained in the
June 4, 1996 Planning Commission Staff Report (Exhibit 4).
APPEAL ISSUES
The Application For Appeal (see Exhibit 4)identifies several appeal issues which are
summarized, as follows:
• The applicant feels that the project meets or exceeds all of the development
requirements applicable to the project proposal.
• The applicant does not feel that the proposed carwash will create on-site
circulation problems.
• The proposed carwash will provide additional ancillary services to the community
and business professionals in the area.
Appeal of the Planning Commission's Denial
of CUP No. 96-02 and VAR No. 96-03
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of
July 15, 1996
Page 4
KEY ISSUES
There are several key issues identified as follows:
• The proposed carwash use is not permitted as a primary use in the CR-3,
Commercial Regional district but may be considered as an ancillary use through
a CUP application. Although a carwash may be permitted as an ancillary use to
the service station, staff does not feel that it is consistent with General Plan
Policy 1.17.10 which describes the intent of the CR-3 district to permit region-
serving uses such as corporate and professional offices and other uses that will
enhance the corporate office park setting.
• The proposed carwash use and building (a metal building with stones panels) are
not compatible with the uses in the surrounding area which are characterized high
quality hotels/motels, multi-story office buildings and restaurants.
The General Plan identifies the Waterman Avenue I-10 On/Off-Ramps as a major
entry node to the City which also serves as a major access to the TriCity and
Club areas along and around Hospitality Lane.
• The addition of the proposed carwash structure and associated vacuum unit and
parking space will reduce the amount of space available for on-site circulation.
In particular, the circulation on the north end of the site (in the vicinity of the
proposed carwash structure) could become bottle necked during peak business
hours. Cars exiting the carwash potentially could come into conflict with cars
entering and exiting the site from the existing eastern driveway (located 45 feet
from the carwash exit).
The site plan (Exhibit 2) shows the location of the parking space for the vacuum
pad to the south of the vacuum unit. From a convenience standpoint, it is likely
that most people will bypass the proposed parking space (located just south of the
vacuum unit) in favor of parking next to the vacuum unit. When this occurs,
circulation on the west side of the site will be constrained.
• The addition of the carwash to the gasoline station site will result in overcrowding
and overintensification of the site.
Appeal of the Planning Commission's Denial
of CUP No. 96-02 and VAR No. 96-03
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of
July 15, 1996
Page 5
o Because there are no special or unusual circumstances about the site (size, shape,
topography, etc.), the granting of the variance will constitute a special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and land use
district.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Pursuant to Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act, environmental
documentation is not required in situations where denial of the application is sought. However,
an Initial Study was prepared by staff and reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee
(ERC). The proposed Negative Declaration was advertised and the public review period began
on April 11, 1996 and ended on May 1, 1996. No comments were received.
COMMENTS RECEIVED
No comments received.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
As noted, the Planning Commission voted to deny Conditional Use Permit No. 96-02 and
Variance No. 96-03 at their meeting on June 4, 1996. [Vote: 5 ayes (Gonzalez, Locket,
Schuiling, Stone and Traver); 2 nay (Quiel and Thrasher); 0 abstain; and, 2 absent (Enciso and
Strimpel.)]
During the public hearing, the Planning Commission discussed the project at length and in
general, concurred with staff that the site cannot accommodate the addition of the proposed
carwash and that the project would result in overintensification of the site. In addition, the
Planning Commission felt that the proposed carwash use is not appropriate in the CR-3 district
and specifically, at that location within proximity to the Waterman Avenue I-10 On/Off-Ramps.
Appeal of the Planning Commission's Denial
of CUP No. 96-02 and VAR No. 96-03
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of
July 15, 1996
Page 6
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council:
Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's denial of Conditional Use Permit
No. 96-02 and Variance No. 96-03 based on the Findings of Fact (Exhibit 4, Attachment
D).
Prepared by: Deborah Woldruff, Associate Planner
for Al Boughey, Director
Planning and Building Services
Exhibit 1: Site Location Map
Exhibit 2: Site Plan
Exhibit 3: Planning Commission Staff Report (June 4, 1996)
Attachments:
A. Location Map (not included - see Exhibit 1)
B. Site Plan (not included - see Exhibit 2)
C. General Plan/Development Code Conformance Table
D. Findings of Fact (CUP & VAR)
Exhibit 4: Application For Appeal (06/18/96)
FDate F SAN BERNAR( JO EXHIBIT 1
RAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION Adopted 6-2-89
l—q3 CUP No. 96-02/VAR No. 96-03 Panel No. _
DR. .3vYYM
00
a r V 1 o
T
V.X s
A . 13 AfR�OR °
= J
• - / M AUTr -+ lM. MO r ALITr LN.
Mr
CLUO STEFL t• e � ,.
3
r J
CENTER U
RfvERW000 Tr CO-rrlgal 11` ...
AiMIl7I00D 3T � � T R O .f 0+
C90LFY ►CACMIOOp ST
FMK
�. r
- ;: p cf
CIT
�i
c�
tpN
o'P
EXHIBIT 2 r
d
a :�C °�If s s ,
I
vi
5 S z3x z
R
9zY" N
rn 1O
9 1 z
oil
\ i
V l � \M)I.CGgN .00'9St Td
i
v ------- --- $ W:
e .� — q55d / �i �� j ---■ ■ 1 i�
1. LEV; it
�R
: I
�� EXHIBIT 3
SUMMARY CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION
--------------
CASE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 96-02 AGENDA ITEM: 2
AND VARIANCE NO. 96-03 HEARING DATE: 6/4/96
WARD: 3
APPLICANT: OWNER:
A & S ENGINEERING SHELL OIL COMPANY
207 W. Alameda 3281 Guasti Road, Suite 480
Burbank, CA 91502 Ontario, CA 91761
REQUEST/LOCATION - A request to locate an 18' x 50' self service car wash and storage structure
and vacuum unit at an existing Shell gasoline station. Variances are requested to reduce the side and
rear setbacks and to reduce 2 two-way drive aisles to accommodate the proposed additions. Located
at 1930 South Waterman Avenue in the CR-3, Commercial Regional, land use district.
EXISTING LAND USE
PROPERTY LAND USE DESIGNATION
SUBJECT Gas Station CR-3, Commercial Regional
NORTH Motel CR-3, Commercial Regional
SOUTH Gas Station CR-3, Commercial Regional
EAST Vacant Land CR-3, Commercial Regional
WEST Motel CR-3, Commercial Regional
GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC YES ❑ FLOOD HAZARD YES ❑ SEWERS: YES ■
HAZARD ZONE: NO ■ ZONE: NO ■ NO ❑
HIGH FIRE HAZARD YES ❑ AIRPORT YES ❑ REDEVELOPMENT YES ■
ZONE: NO ■ NOISE/CRASH NO ■ PROJECT AREA: NO ❑
ZONE:
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
■ Not Applicable ❑ E.I.R. w/ Significant ❑ APPROVAL
❑ Exempt Effects
• No Significant ❑ CONDITIONS
Effects ❑ Significant Effects,
• Potential Effects, See Attached E.R.C. ■ DENIAL
Mitigating Minutes
Measures, ❑ CONTINUANCE
No E.I.R. TO:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 96-02
& VARIANCE NO. 96-03
AGENDA ITEM: 2
HEARING DATE: June 4, 1996
Page 2
REQUEST
The applicant is requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 96-02 to locate a 900
square foot (18' x 50') self-serve carwash and storage structure and an associated vacuum unit
as an ancillary use at an existing Shell Gasoline Station. The station currently has three pump
islands, a 476 square foot foodmart and restrooms. The carwash structure is proposed to be
located at the north end of the subject site, approximately 45 feet from the east property line and
25 feet from the northernmost pump island. The vacuum unit is proposed to be placed on the
west side of the site, approximately 27 feet from the south property line.
The applicant is also requesting approval of Variance (VAR) No. 96-03 to reduce the side and
rear yard setbacks to accommodate the placement of the carwash and to reduce two, two-way
drive aisles to accommodate the proposed additions.
LOCATION
The 0.58 acre site is located on the northwest corner of Hospitality Lane and Waterman Avenue
at 1930 South Waterman Avenue in the Commercial Regional, CR-3, land use district. (See
Attachment A, Location Map).
BACKGROUND
The Shell Service Station was originally approved by the Planning Commission on April 6,
1982. On February 7; 1984, the service station was given approval by the Planning Commission
to expand services by adding a food market. In January of 1990, the applicant submitted a
conditional use permit (CUP No. 90-02) application to add a carwash and storage building to
the site. The Planning Commission found that the proposed carwash was not compatible with
the character of the adjacent "corporate park" uses. The application was subsequently denied
on August 7, 1990, with the Mayor and Common Council upholding the denial on October 15,
1990.
On February 4, 1994, CUP No. 94-05 was submitted to the Department of Planning and
Building Services requesting approval of a carwash and storage building. The proposal for CUP
No. 94-05 was fundamentally the same as was denied in 1990. CUP No. 94-05 was denied
without prejudice by the Planning Commission on October 17, 1996 because the proposal was
not compatible with the character of the adjacent "corporate park" uses.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 96-02
& VARIANCE NO. 96-03
AGENDA ITEM: 2
HEARING DATE: June 4, 1996
Page 4
(ERC). The proposed Negative Declaration was advertised and the public review period began
on April 11, 1996 and ended on May 1, 1996. No comments were received.
ANALYSIS
Land Use/Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses
Carwash uses are not permitted in the CR-3 land use district due to the fact that they are
considered incompatible with the high quality commercial and hotel/motel uses and corporate
office park setting in the surrounding area.
Development surrounding the site and along Hospitality Lane to the west is characterized by high
quality hotels/motels, multi-story office buildings, and restaurants. The Waterman Avenue off-
ramp from the I-10 Freeway is located less than one eighth of a mile to the south of the project
site. The General Plan identifies this off-ramp as a major entry node which serves as a major
access to the Hospitality district as well as for the entire city. As such, it is important that
development in this key area of the city maintain a high quality appearance and compatibility
with surrounding land uses. The proposed carwash, a metal building with stonex panels which
would be visible from both Hospitality Lane and Waterman Avenue, is not characteristic of the
high quality hotels/motels, restaurants and corporate office buildings found in the area and along
Hospitality Lane. Therefore, the proposed carwash use and building is not compatible with the
surrounding area.
Site Design/Circulation
The 0.58 acre site currently has a 476 square foot foodmart building (with a single rest room)
and three pump islands. The proposal includes encroachments into the side and rear setback
areas and a reduction of a two-way drive aisles, the site is somewhat constrained with regard
to circulation. The addition of the proposed carwash and vacuum unit will only increase the
number of structures on-site and encroachments and reduce an additional two-way drive aisle,
thus decreasing the amount of area devoted to circulation and rendering the site too intense for
safe and proper operation. This could negatively impact the ability of future patrons to utilize
the gas station.
The proposed carwash and vacuum unit are required to maintain 10 foot setbacks from the north
and west property lines (rear and side setback requirements for the CR-3 land use district). The
applicant is requesting variances to reduce the side and rear setbacks to accommodate placement
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 96-02
& VARIANCE NO. 96-03
AGENDA ITEM: 2
HEARING DATE: June 4, 1996
Page 3
CUP No. 96-02 was submitted to the City on February 20, 1996. The application was reviewed
by the Development/Environmental Review Committee (D/ERC). It was determined at that
meeting that a variance was required because the applicant proposed to reduce the minimum side
and rear setback areas and to reduce two, two-way drive-aisles. VAR No. 96-03 was submitted
on April 4, 1996.
The D/ERC subsequently reviewed the project applications on March 28, 1996, April 4, 1996
and May 2, 1996. On May 2, 1996, the committee determined that proposal was not in
compliance with the Development Code or consistent with the General Plan. The D/ERC
subsequently cleared the item to Planning Commission with a recommendation for denial.
DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
Staff s review of CUP 96-02 indicates that it is not in conformance with provisions of the
Development Code and General Plan. (See Attachment C, General Plan and Development Code
Conformance Table). The proposed use is not permitted in the CR-3 district and therefore, in
conflict with the following General Plan Policy:
1.17.10 Permit a diversity of region-serving uses including corporate and professional
offices, retail commercial entertainment (theaters, nightclubs, etc.), financial
establishments, restaurants (excluding drive-thrus in the Tri-City/Commercenter
area only), hotels/motels, warehouse/promotional retail, supporting retail and
services, and similar uses in areas designated as "Commercial Regional-Tri-
City/Commercenter and Club area (CR-3) (I1.1).
The requests to vary from the minimum side and rear setbacks and drive aisle widths are not in
conformance with the provisions in Development Code §19.72.010. This section specifies the
conditions under which a variance can be granted and stipulates that the granting of a variance
shall not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in
the vicinity and land use district. A more detailed discussion is contained in the Analysis section
of this Staff Report.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) STATUS
Pursuant to Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act, environmental
documentation is not required in situations where denial of the application is sought. However,
an Initial Study was prepared by staff and reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 96-02
& VARIANCE NO. 96-03
AGENDA ITEM: 2
HEARING DATE: June 4, 1996
Page 5
of the vacuum unit about 3 feet from the west property line and the carwash structure adjacent
to the north property line.
The inclusion of the proposed carwash/storage structure and vacuum unit on-site will reduce the
north and west two-way drive aisles from 24 feet to 12 feet and 15 feet, respectively. Of most
concern is the reduction of the north drive aisle which will result in approximately 12 feet
between the proposed addition and the concrete slab on which vehicles taking fuel would be
parked. Compounding this situation is the fact that cars exiting the proposed carwash could
potentially come into conflict with cars entering and exiting the site from the existing eastern
driveway, which is only 45 feet from the carwash exit. The circulation on the north end of the
site could become bottle necked during peak business hours.
The reduction of the west drive aisle will result in approximately 15 feet between the proposed
concrete pad for the vacuum unit and the existing foodmart building. Because the vacuum unit
will not be in continuous use, this is of less concern than the reduction of the north drive aisle.
However, this area could also become bottle necked during peak business hours.
Noise
The project site is in proximity to a noise sensitive land use which exists to the immediate north
and west of the project site (the existing Super 8 Motel). A noise study, prepared by Acoustical
Analysis Associates, Inc. (November 4, 1994), was submitted for a previous car wash proposal
on the site. An Addendum that updates the 1994 study was submitted for this proposal, CUP
No. 96-02, (Acoustical Analysis Associates, Inc., March 4, 1996).
The analysis in the 1994 study indicates that the existing noise levels on-site and in the area
exceed 65 CNEL, the City's standard. The noise levels from the car wash will contribute
additional noise at the northern and western property lines which will impact the noise sensitive
land use to the north and west, the Super 8 Motel. The noise impact along the northern property
line will be generated by the car wash facility which includes dryers/blowers. This impact can
be mitigated to below a level of significance by the addition of an eight (8) foot wall along the
property line in proximity to the carwash building. The height of the wall will gradually be
reduced to six (6) feet as it extends towards the east and west property lines. The noise impact
along the western property line will be generated by a vacuum cleaning unit. This impact will
be mitigated by the existing six (6) foot wall that is located on the property line.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 96-02
& VARIANCE NO. 96-03
AGENDA ITEM: 2
HEARING DATE: June 4, 1996
Page 6
Aesthetics
As indicated, an eight (8) foot wall is required in proximity to the carwash building to mitigate
the associated noise impacts. The height of the wall will gradually be reduced to six (6) feet as
it extends towards the east and west property lines. The wall will result in a visual impact along
the Waterman Avenue corridor. The visual impact of the wall emphasizes the over
intensification of the site and the related issue of compatibility.
Landscaping
The reconfiguration of the site design proposes to increase the landscaping percentage on-site
to about 18.2% which exceeds the amount required by the Development Code.
COMMENTS RECEIVED
The consensus of the D/ERC is that the proposed carwash is too intense for the constrained site
and that it is not compatible with the surrounding Waterman Avenue and Hospitality Lane
corridors. No other comments have been received on the project or the environmental
document.
CONCLUSION
Carwashes are not permitted in the CR-3 land use designation because they are considered to
be incompatible with the high quality commercial and hotel/motel uses in the surrounding area.
The proposed ancillary carwash at the existing service station at 1930 South Waterman Avenue
is incompatible with the surrounding Waterman Avenue and Hospitality Lane corridors. The
project site is too constrained for the proposed use to function safely and efficiently on-site.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 96-02
& VARIANCE NO. 96-03
AGENDA ITEM: 2
. HEARING DATE: June 4, 1996
Page 7
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Conditional Use Permit 96-02 and
Variance No. 96-03, based on Findings of Fact Attachment D.
Respectfully submi ,
AL OUG AICP
Direc
DEBORAH WOLDRUFF
ssociate Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Location Map
B. Site Plan
C. General Plan/Development Code Conformance Table
D. Findings of Fact (CUP & VAR)
ATTACHMENT "C"
DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
Development General
Category Proposal Code Plan
Permitted Use Ancillary CR-3, Not CR-3, Not
Carwash Permitted Permitted
Lot Size 25,167 s.f. 15,000 s.f. minimum N/A
Setbacks:
Front Minimum 10' Minimum 10' N/A
Street Side Minimum 10' Minimum 10' N/A
Interior Side *Proposed 3' Minimum 10' N/A
Rear *Proposed 0' Minimum 10' N/A
Structure Height 14' Maximum 52' Maximum N/A
Drive Aisles
West *Proposed 12' 24' Minimum N/A
North *Proposed 15' 24' Minimum N/A
Parking: 17 Spaces 14 Spaces N/A
Indicated Required for
the site
Landscaping 18.2% of Parking 15% of Parking N/A
Area Area
NOTE: * Variances are requested to reduce the side and rear setback areas and to reduce
two, two-way drive aisles, as shown.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 96-02
& VARIANCE NO. 96-03
AGENDA ITEM: 2
HEARING DATE: June 4, 1996
Page 11
ATTACHMENT D
FINDINGS OF FACT
A. Conditional Use Permit No. 96-02
1. The proposed use is not permitted within the CR-3, Commercial Regional land use
district, does not comply with all of the provisions of the Development Code regarding
setbacks and circulation efficiency and will impair the integrity and character of the
district.
2. The proposed use is not consistent with the General Plan in that it does not meet all
applicable goals, objectives and policies that are set forth, specifically General Plan
Policy 1.17.10 which identifies the type and range of regional-serving uses permitted in
the CR-3, Commercial Regional land use district.
3. The approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 96-02 is in compliance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act in that, pursuant to Section
15270 of CEQA, environmental documentation is not required in situations where denial
of the application is sought.
4. There will be no potential significant negative impacts upon environmental quality and
natural resources, and any potential environmental negative impacts of the self-serve
carwash use and the associated vacuum unit could be mitigated by the site design and the
Conditions of Approval and Standard Requirements imposed on the project.
5. The location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed carwash use are not
compatible with the existing uses within the general area in which the proposed use is
to be located and will create additional noise (on-site), traffic or other conditions or
situations that may be objectionable or detrimental to other permitted uses in the vicinity
or adverse to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City, in
that the self-serve carwash use and metal and stone building design are incompatible with
the surrounding area.
6. The subject site is not physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being
proposed, in that its design, site configuration and use create a constrained and
potentially dangerous circulation design.
r
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 96-02
& VARIANCE NO. 96-03
AGENDA ITEM: 2
HEARING DATE: June 4, 1996
Page 12
7. There are adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public utilities and
services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and
safety, in that the proposed use would be located on an existing site that is presently
serviced by utilities.
B. Variance No. 96-03
1. There are no special circumstances applicable to the property, with respect to size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings such that the strict application of the Development
Code deprives the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the
vicinity and under the identical land use district in that the property exceeds the minimum
lot size for the CR-3 district and is devoid of unique topographic features and is of a
uniform shape.
2. The granting of the request to vary the minimum side and rear setbacks and drive aisle
widths is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right
possessed by other property in the same vicinity and land use district and denied to the
property for which the variances are sought in that the proposed ancillary carwash use
is not permitted in the zone and will result in an over-intensification of the gasoline
service station site.
3. The granting of the Variance will be materially detrimental to the public health, safety,
or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and land use
district in which the property is located in that varying the minimum side and rear
setbacks and drive aisle widths will result in an over-intensification of the site and
interfere with site circulation.
4. The granting of a Variance constitutes a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations
upon other commercial sites in the vicinity and land use district in which the property is
located in that varying the minimum side and rear setbacks and drive aisle widths are
intended solely to accommodate the establishment of an ancillary use that is not a use
permitted in the CR-3 district.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 96-02
& VARIANCE NO. 96-03
AGENDA ITEM: 2
HEARING DATE: June 4, 1996
Page 13
5. The granting of the Variance(s) will allow a use or activity which is not otherwise
expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject parcel in that the ancillary
carwash use is not permitted in the CR-3, Commercial General land use designation
pursuant to General Plan Policies 1.17.10 through 1.17.12 and Section 19.06.020, Table
06.01, Item (B)(5) of the Development Code.
6. The granting of the Variance(s) will be inconsistent with the General Plan in that it does
not meet the intent of the CR-3, Commercial Regional land use designation, pursuant to
General Plan Policy 1.17.10, to permit a diversity of region-serving uses such as
including corporate and professional offices in the TriCity, Commercenter and Club
areas.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO EXHIBIT 4
PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
3W North -D'SYrrd,3r+d Floor, Saw Berwardiwo, CA 92418
Pliooe (9109)384-SQ67 Far/9109)384-5155
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
OF A DIRECTOR DETERMINATION, DEVELOPMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
COMMITTEE DETERMINATION OR PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINATION
Appellant's Name, Address & Shell Oil Company
Phone
3200 Inland Empire Building
Ontario, CA 91764 (909) 484-3802
Contact Person, Address & Ahmad Ghaderi / Tony Lee (818) 842-3644
Phone
A&S Engineering
207 W. Alameda Ave # 203 , Burbank CA 91602
Pursuant to Section 19.52.100 of the Development (Municipal) Code, all appeal must be filed on a
City application form within 15 days following the final date of action, accompanied by the
appropriate fee.
Appeals are normally scheduled for a determination by the Planning Commission or Mayor and
Common Council within 30 days of the filing date of the appeal. You will be notified, in writing,
of the specific date and time.
Date Appeal Filed Received by
Receipt No. a 51 Receipt Amount V, &-0
Appeal Application
Page 2
The following information must be completed:
Specific action being appealed and date of that action
See Attached.
Specific grounds for the appeal
See Attached.
Action sought
See Attached.
Additional information
See Attached.
Signature of Appellant Date
Soros
A & S ENGINEERING INC.
gE� PLANNING • ENGINEERING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
207 W. AUWEDA AVE., SM 203•BURBANK, CA 91502•PHONE 818-842-3644•FAX 818-842-3760
JUNE 18, 1996
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: SHELL OIL CO.
RE: SHELL OIL CO.
1930 S. WATERMAN
SAN BERNARDINO, CA.
PROPOSED CARWASH
APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: 96-02
APPEAL OF VARIANCE NO. : 96-03
A. SPECIFIC ACTION BEING APPEALED AND DATE OF THAT ACTION:
SHELL OIL IS APPEALING PLANNING COMMISSIONS DENIAL
DECISION OF JUNE 4TH, 1996.
B. SPECIFIC GROUNDS FOR THE APPEAL
THE PROPOSED PROJECT MEETS OR EXCEEDS ALL DEVELOPMENT
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED CARWASH BUILDING.
PROPOSED CARWASH WILL NOT CREATE ON-SITE CIRCULATION
PROBLEMS, IN FACT IT WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL ANCILLARY
SERVICES TO THE COMMUNITY AND BUSINESS PROFESSIONALS THAT
RESIDE OR WORK IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA.
C. ACTION SOUGHT
WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF OUR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND VARIANCE APPLICATION, FOR THE
PROPOSED CARWASH.
D. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: PRESENTATION WILL BE MADE AT THE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
AGAIN WE THANK THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR
CONSIDERATION OF OUR REQUEST.
49 QUAIL COURT, STE. 303, • WALNUT CREEK, CA. 94596 • PHONE: 510-933-0578 •FAX: 510-933-0588
N am ° ° ° gym
W E N ag o
a p ., N m w
rc Q O Li U N
3Atl NtlNl131.tlM 8 _ N Sn O m cu m p z p °� U U
p z i i o N a % m Q vmim 2 H aN O m > p v 3
S c m v3 mm Z w
1 'tw 13sNns ¢ Z
of
�+ o
m enx7 ¢ 2 W O U
F ? N O
to
m om= N
N O 0 OU
C N
Dq oWi. a z
N
CJ
C3 as
wI�
C-7°Oz �
y nd W 5 v
E gip `
OCR �o afnb�m M.
CC y V
• C E � a Q' ��Y>.
TOM XO"3MONOD
9N0'1 A97L9 M3N -M MOM IMMOD 'f1VM)p0'>e 31�lONOD
9NOn M.9 M3N ONOI p-ZY)L9 A9N
D-.OS .0-99 F-.ZY t-AL
300 Manna u3d TNM mu M31/
.0-.L9 -SM 1Hwddn9/HbYMM 0-•99 M3N
'° NI.�L.!e0D6N mega 'Td
I N� A nnn
r- uuu
Ak
I
I II I k
I
M L
II
II \
II
N 3 �� S 1 • • I II N
u i 75 1 a� ��_--- m--a— ---- II ZOb 1
= II
-- o
I _
m
AVTW OW-01
pw
o I �� 1 • ® V0 \I I I Q
I —
fl ------------� fl n: ZI
� I j (�(l y /
L D.tz I\ • • p IY,
M07'MJ 900,01 /
fl W I
II �
--� its 'I
H
e
a
i xtib�MN C—__•
a Y
j M �Yn:w wYW^.+f� 36�FFMYn, � '' a; cy1
a K'
Y ----__----------- _
�V
y — -------_ __ __ .9N '£►i 'd _
I
s
b 1FAl AtlM7Miw'ONM.�"797(3 NPoAU(m'DNOD.e-.09 Tsm Atl93AQw'DNOD J-dS'1SOC3
.B-9l 1�.fil
'81' 'SI J97C3
ON
1
8
,i — — — — — — - - --- -------
H.[VV I A7I rlVJ IdSOH J
9A10'4d-tCi1VM
OD OM
N g ^ m °
- � 000 _
a � `O
W Z 1 K� S m
S F- ap�od�LLti \ I gN I b 7'm n o"x i .m o ?m Y�ZZ d Zn N 1aU 0
--i Z O S; l.:::I U 3AV O O
L, oJ Dd Z r N �:, 3 qO d❑
`v
Q O
"m LzNfK ? m rQ- < ,' c i
IF
ax
U o S w n o m e '�o i� a j a s d
F- m rl o m W a Z b
U g NA smo W o U
n 7 S 3 w 9 0 3 m II
ri-
7 N
Q �• N m h\- Z Q } O
-O M F O V Q LO m
S O
O�JJ
N o
3 ut b
�n
N
I
z
cn
Y 3
s �
'THM XD"3BUONOO
OHM.09X.9 M314 TNM Home 3MONOO Iwm XDUM 30HON00
_ ONm A9%.9 M3N ONm.0-t/'X.9 M3N
10-05 11'99 y-.tr 3-•LL
_ 3W7 ONIONIB Md TNM 3HU NUN V
.9-.LS V lHOdd(IS/NSVMM.0,09 M3N —�
'° M f 1.40 06N
.00-99t -1'd
• � tl�� u.•a.�{.,,.�,...*».,,.axwn:a�N`!�•=-•mar..,..
ro b q L I'
A - nnn L.
I II
.mil
i
a;
3 y $ [I `J;� 3 I
luuu
— II h9
!. NUT"OOObI /
\ __
i------------_� it I
! / I
I ,
x I • • I Y li
NvTM1D OOObt / I O
v •� S \ -----------� 9 O W I
t�rlk
z
I
p,y 1 r
m
9-ar
f
—— —— M.9►.9Z.69N .00'£r t 'l-d
b ---- A-AL AVMaNW'ONOO.0--&£-IMX3 NWM300i'ON00,0-.OS 151X3 "Noma'JN00 p-JS'15IK3
� 0 'IOO 'd91O
9-.1'L S-•FI
"751 =___ 'El_.tSOa
.1- 11-AIL im I
0 IQ�It1�.i2�{9D¢i—'•N71150C3 ClSOC3-„I
• A-.CC ��� A-•0:::LLL LLL IY—.OI
– - - - - ---- LqNVTT rkl—FlVLLIdSOII
JMTl,d-dliVM