HomeMy WebLinkAbout16-Planning
.
CITQOF SAN BERNARDI to - REQUEO FOR COUNCIL ACON
From:
Frank A. Schuma
Planning Director
Subject:
Appeal of Conditional Use
Permit No. 85-20
Mayor and Council Meeting of
June 17, 1985, 9:00 a.m.
Dept:
Planning
Date: June 5, 1985
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
Previous Planning Commission action:
At the meeting of the Planning Commission on May 15, 1985, the
following action was taken:
The application for Conditional Use Permit No. 85-20 was denied.
Vote: 5-3, 1 absent.
Recommeno:led motion:
That the hearing on the appeal be closed and the decision of the
Planning Commission be affirmed, modified or rejected.
-
Signatu re
Frank A. Schuma
Phone:
383-5057
3
Contact person: ___,_
Frank A. Schuma
Supporting data attached: __
Yes, Staff Report
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
Source:
Finance:
Council Notes:
75-0262
Agenda Item No.
It.
o
w. R..Idendrix Engine~ng
2>5 N'D"' Street\,)uite 218 . Son SerV,no. CA 92401
(714J 381-5483
::>
Nay 17, 1985
RECEIVEi)-C!T'( SLER}:
'85 I1AY 17 P4:lO
Shauna Clark
City Clerk
300 N. "D" st.
San Bernardino, CA. 9240l
Re: Appeal Planning Commission Decision.
Dear Shauna
.
On Nay 15, 1985 The Planning Commission voted 4 to 3 to deny
conditional use permit 85-20.,
The Planning cOI!lI!lission rendered a deci.sion vs a continuance per
rey client's request, because of a preliminary .General Plan Study
to change the zone classification of the subject property from
C3-A to #esidential.
~le feel that this is an unreasonable ~.one for this particu1:al~
parcel because the property fronts it Gtate high.,ay on the north
and is adjacent to the Southern Paciftc Railroad tracks on the
west. We have met with property owners in the area and they
were for our commercial use. Furthermore we also met with
George Boon of Caltrans and his concerns of ingress and egress
were,gliviated by our proposed use under the C3-A zone.
Therefore on behalf of my clients I am requesting that the Mayor
and council hear the item before them at the next convenient date.
Respectfully Submitted
r
F ,', I
Vr ~ ~
" (
HENDRIX ENGINEERING & ASSOC.
Wayne R. Hendrix P.E.
WH/cla
.
Civil EnQineering . Land PlanninQ · Traffic Studies. Water/Sanitary EnQineerinQ
.
o
o
o
,:)
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO JOONORTH"O"STREET,SANBERNAROINO,CALlFORNIA 92418
W.R. "BOB" HOLCOMB
Mayor
Members of the Common Council
P:obert A. C.staneda . . . . . . . . . First Ward
JAck Reilly............. .SecondW.rd
Raiph Hernandez. . . . . . . . . . . Third Ward
Steve Marks. . . . . . . . . . . _ . Fourth Ward
Gordon Qui.! . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fifth W.rd
Dan Frazier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sixth Ward
Jack Strickler . . . . . . . . . . . .se~nth Ward
May 28, 1985
W. R. Hendrix Engineering
255 North "DR street, Suite 218
San Bernardino, CA 92401
Dear Sir or Madame:
At the meeting of the Planning Commission on May 15, 1985,
the following action was taken:
The application for Conditional Use Permit No. 85-20, to
permit a 59,210 square foot mini-space storage facility in
the C-3A Limited General Commercial zone on 2.53 acres having
a frontage of approximately 200 feet on the south side of
Foothill Boulevard and being located approximately 140 feet
west of the centerline of Macy Street, was denied based upon
findings of fact contained in the staff report dated May 8,
1985.
According to the San Bernardino
19.78.070., the following applies to
tional use permit:
Municipal Code, Section
the filing of a condi-
RThe decision of the Commission shall be final unless appeal-
ed in writing to the Mayor and Common Council. The written
appeal shall be submitted to the office of the City Clerk
within ten days from the date of the Commission's decision.
The Common Council, after receipt of the appeal, shall
o
o
w. R. Hendrix Engineering
May 28, 1985
Page 2
o
o
conduct a public hearing and may either approve, modify or
reject the decision of the Planning Commission."
If no appeal is filed pursuant to the above provisions of the
San Bernardino Municipal Code, the action of the Commission
shall be final.
Respectfully,
~) J O.3--L
FRANK A. SCHUMA
Planning Director
mkf
cc: Building and Safety Dept.
Engineering Division
William and Sara Schwager
2904 Bonniebrook Drive
Akron, OH 44313
.
o
o
o
:>
~ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT '"
SUMMARY
'\..
l&J
~
o
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
WARD
21
~-R-R"
1
~
EXISTING
LAND USE
APPLICANT W . R. Hendrix Engineering
255 North "D" Street, Ste. 218
San Bernardino, CA 92401
OWNER, William and Sara Sanchez
2904 Bonniebrook Drive
Conditional Use Permit No. 85-20
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
Single-Family Residences
Railroad/Ccmnercial
ZONING
C-3A
C-3A
C-3A
R-1-7200
C-3A
GEOLOGIC / SEISMIC
HAZARD ZONE
Subject property is an rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting
of approximately 2.53 acres having a frontage of approximately 200 feet on
the south side of Foothill Blvd. and being located approximately 140 feet
west of the centerline of Macy Street. The applicant requests approval
of a conditional use permit under authority of Code Section 19.28.020.E.
to permit a 59,210 square foot mini-space storage facility in the C-3A,
Limited General Ccmnercial Zone.
~
l&J
:)
CJ
...
a:
......
<Z
l&J
a:
<Z
PROPERTY
Subject
North
South
East
West
HIGH FIRE
HAZARD ZONE
-l
<I
~
Zen
1&lC!)
2Z
Z-
OO
a:Z
:;ii:
Z
I&l
o NOT
APPLICABLE
o EXEMPT
iaNO
SIGNIFICANT
EFFECTS
NOV. I,a, REVilED .JULY'.."
...
DYES
lO!lNO
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION
General Ccmnercial
General Ccmnercial
General Ccmnercial
Med. Low Dens. 4- 7 clu/ ac
General Ccmnercial
( SEWERS ~ ~~S )
DYES
xx NO
FLOOD HAZARO DYES OZONE A
ZONE XlNO OZONE B
AIRPORT NOISE / 0 YES
CRASH ZONE fiNO
o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT
EFFECTS
WITH MITIGATING
MEASURES NO E,I.R.
DE I.R, REQUIRED BUT NO
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
WITH MITIGATING
MEASURES
o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
SEE ATTACHED E, R. C,
MINUTES
z
o
ti
1&.0
I&.ffi
~2
(1)2
o
o
l&J
a:
REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA
DYES
24ii) NO
o APPROVAL
o CONDITIONS
~ DENIAL
o CONTINUANCE TO
.
o
o
o
:>
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE CllP 85-20
OBSERVATIONS
71
~-R-R'i
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
1. The applicant is requesting to construct a 59,210 square foot
mini-space storage facility in the C-3A, Limited General
Commercial Zone. The 2.53 acre parcel is located on the south
side of Foothill Blvd" west of Macy Street.
2. The mini-space storage facility consists of six separate struc-
tures totaling approximately 500 units. A 400-square foot office
and a 1200-sQuare foot manager's residence are provided in the
front of the property facing Foothill Blvd. A small parking area
containing ten parking stalls is also provided with a 24-foot
access to Foothill Blvd. If approved, the project should be rede-
signed to require twelve parking stalls as required by City Code.
The Fire Department would require 24 feet of drive aisle width
between all structures to accommodate fire truck access and tur-
naround access. On-site hydrants would also be required. In order
to increase the compatibility with the adjacent single-family
residences easterly, the 6-foot setback on the side property line
should be increased to 10 feet to function as a buffer., The above
requirements could potentially reduce the total square footage of
the storage buildings.
3. Ten feet of landscaping is provided along Foothill Blvd. which
exceeds the five-foot minimum setback area. However, the 1970
square feet of interior landscaping provided does not meet the
current 5% requirement which includes all paved drive aisles. 450
square feet additional area needs to be provided. In addition,
the entire perimeter should be screened by a block wall rather
than chain link fencing. Decorative wrought iron fencing should
be provided along Foothill to improve the aesthetic appearance of
the project. The Engineering Department indicated that Court
Street need not be continued or a cul-de-sac installed because
there are no properties which need access from an extension. The
parcel located westerly of the subject parcel is Southern Pacific
Railroad right-of-way which has access from Highland Avenue.
4, The elevations submitted with the site plan indicate a bleak
smooth finish exterior especially on the rear elevations. Some
type of visual relief such as split-face block design would
enhance the compati bi li ty of the use wi th adjacent development.
If the Commission were to approve this conditional use permit
request, a condition should be added to require that revised
detaifled elevations indicating a non-gray split-face block
building exteriors be submitted to the Planning Department for
review and approval, In addition, the landscaping plans should
include extensive landscaping in all setbacks to include sizeable
specimen trees and exterior mounding.
. .
o
o
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE r.llP H'i-?O
OBSERVATIONS
?l
'i H-R'i
o
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
5, The 2.5 acre parcel is located in an area which is the easterly
boundryof strip commercial zoning on Foothill Blvd. Actual com-
mercial development in Foothill Blvd. adjacent to the property
remains vacant on both sides. It is estimated that this commer-
cially zoned area is only 50% built out at this time. To the east
on the same side of Macy Street there is a portion of a single-
family tract which extends further easterly to Terrace Street
zoned R-1-7200. Planning Staff is concerned that the addition of
an industrial-type use would not be compatible with the existing
single-family residences easterly. The extension of an
industrial-type use between single-family uses and potential com-
mercial uses is not a natural progression of land uses and is
contrary to planning principles and practices and the goals and
objectives of the General Plan to separate incompatible uses. In
addition, the mini-storage facility is not the type of use which
would be a service to the surrounding neighborhoods. The larger
parcel size could support a retail use which would utilize an area
in which there is a significant economic disinvestment.
Therefore, the addition of a mini-storage facility in this loca-
tion has the potential to further devaluate adjacent property
values in an area which is already economically unstable and
underproductive. Approval of the project would not stimulate pri-
vate investment opportunities in the area by providing a disincen-
tive to development of surrounding areas to uses which would not
benefit the community.
6. Foothill Blvd. is a 120-foot full width major highway capable of
carrying large volumes of traffic. The high visibility and access
that the site's location on Foothill Blvd, provides renders it
more suitable for retail or office commercial development. The
low traffic industrial nature of a mini-storage facility would be
more appropriate in areas of a similar nature. Therefore, the
proposal would underutilize a site more suitable for other types
of development.
7. The General Plan designation for the property and surrounding pro-
perties adjacent to Foothill Blvd. is General Commercial. The
adjacent single-family residential area has a land use designation
of Medium-Low Density Residential (4-7 units per acre). The pro-
perty is located within the study area of General Plan Amendment
No. 85-2, requested by the Planning Commission earlier this year
to study approximately 795 acres bounded by Eucalyptus Avenue on
the west, Rialto Avenue on the south, Etiwanda Avenue on the north
and Rialto Avenue on the east. As part of the study, Staff will
be examining various land use alternatives for the area as a whole
lwhich could potentially change the current commercial land use
designation to an alternative designation. It is anticipated that
.
o
o
o
C)
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
OBSERVATIONS
CASE ("JTP Rt;_?n
AGENDA ITEM ?l
HEARING DATE 'i-R-R'i
PAGE l...
the General Plan Amendment will be heard at the June 4, 1985
Commission meeting. Therefore, the Commission may wish to defer a
decision on the subject proposal until an appropriate land use
designation is selected for the site. However, even if the
Commission determines that a Commercial designation is the most
appropriate use of the property, it is the opinion of Planning
Staff that the current request for a mini-storage facility is not
within the parameters of the type of commercial use most
appropriate for the area.
8, On April 11, 1985, the Environmental Review Committee issued a
Negative Declaration determining that the project would not create
a significant environmental impact. There are no environmental
hazards associated with the site.
.
o
o
o
:>
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE r.T1P R'i ?O
FINDINGS of FACT
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
?1
5-R-85
c
1. The request for a mini-storage facility is not compatible with
adjacent single-family development.
2. The proposed use would not benefit the community relative to other
types of commercial uses.
3. The proposal is within the boundaries of a General Plan Amendment
currently under study which could potentially change the existing
General Plan land uses designation of the site thereby effecting
the future development of the entire area.
4. The development of the property to a mini-storage facility repre-
sents an underutilization of the site which could potentially
effect surrounding properties in the area
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Negative Declaration and denial of
Conditional Use Permit No. 85-20 based on the observations and fin-
dings of fact contained in the staff report.
Respectfully submitted,
F RANK A. SCH UMA
Planning Director
~ ()~
J N~~MERON
Associate Planner
. ,
0 0 0
1l~~ Ue~
__..t
.
;t n __w
~ _~Il U ._- <::J
~ . ~\" i c;>
. i i
... ~
. .. . . .
.
~ .
. III
j- :
I,L
..11
~I.
I
,
,
. .
. I
. .
I
~Uts e
llm\ ~
"~l- i II
}"i . e
hiU,
u.; I . ~
I 1 ~ C
lltt. . e!1 ~ . I C!!6
.... ) . . . I ~
r 1 ~ ~ .
Itl' @
II.' \ ., .
. l!!t
"'s
. l!!t
S
.
c;>
e
c;> .
====
-~
-.--
I~ ~~e,*,
, '!illmt mIl
It 'i It
t . t
q!1 Ft!J' !1;nUttrJ~t UI
litt 't ilhh*l t~ ,~
, ,t ~,.~II:llt,l;l It
ut' lIt t'i
J . ~Iii"i'ii:
.'lI!ltl.t
,...._- ~
- 'ifll
~~
I,
I
,I
'I
I
i
i
1-
I
I
.
!
,
,
,
I' "" I
.' .
I tot ,
. '
~.F ~AND€1i5
""''''flC'' ""'N'-_E"
,..", ... '11& 'f L. ".,,,...,,,A .
~
" .'
.' 't'
SIT€ PLAN
1ULJ1WC CLClATIOtJS
I
.k:~ -~-
. ............-
.
'-.-
,
) "
[<-1 ...
~
R-j R-I R-I
1'-1 "1>-1 fl-I
R-I
"0"
..;
,.
..
"'
>
R..I ~ R-I
R-3 ..
...
C.3.\ C- 3A ... C-3A
4
"
R-I
..
..
-'
II:
-
F;)I)7 r1 f'._l BLVD.
~r ~-~I~' r.~=- ------c. 3A
~'~""'1-r-
." 11'1"___ ___.____
R-I J i PRO. '."'00
l'::"l L_~~~, .1 ',::~
... 1 1 I ,__
C--3tl,
""'-----.
~
b:E~
~.
C-M
~:
.V~"
M'.I
I!:I
R-j." 3000
'';-3A
C-3A
v
R-2.
CoM
C-3A