HomeMy WebLinkAbout41-City Attorney
.
.
I ~ I I
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
RFCEI'it" r"-", :-:! '0"
'92 FER 25 ~10 :C4
JAMES F. PENMAN
City Attorney
February 25, 1992
Opinion No. 92-05
TO: Mayor and Common Council
RE: Conditional Use Permit 91-28 and Variance 91-08
for 1255 West Baseline, Mr. & Mrs. Kenzie Wooten
ISSUE
What options are available to the Mayor & Council on the
appeal from the Planning Commission's denial of Conditional Use
Permit [CUP] 91-28 and Variance 91-08 to construct a convenience
store with off-site sales of beer and wine?
?
CONCLUSION
Based upon the facts underlying this appeal, the Mayor and
Council have only the following two options permitted by law:
(1) The Mayor and Council may deny the appeal and deny CUP
91-28 and Variance 91-08; or
(2) The Mayor and Council may continue the hearing and direct
staff to process an amendment to the Development Code to revise the
distance criteria for convenience stores [Section 19.06.030(2)(F)]
and for establishments with off-site sales of alcoholic beverages
[Section 19.06.030(2)(B)].
The Mayor and Council cannot approve CUP 91-28 or Variance 91-
08 at this time because the applications are inconsistent with the
Development Code.
III
III
CITY HALL
300 NORTH '0' STREET. SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418
(714) 384-5355
(i)
,:';:".4
II II
.
.
To Mayor and Common Council
Re Conditional Use Permit 91-28 and Variance 91-08
for 1255 West Baseline, Mr. & Mrs. Kenzie Wooten
Page: 2
FACTS
(Taken from Planning Department Files and Staff Report
and discussions with Value Homes
and Planning Department staff)
The applicant requests a CUP to establish a convenience store
at 1255 West Baseline Street, which would include off-site sales of
beer and wine. The applicant also requests a Variance from
Development Code Section 19.06.030(2)(F) which requires a 10,000
square foot minimum lot size for convenience stores and a Variance
from Development Code Section 19.26.040 which establishes standards
for off-street loading spaces.
The project is proposed for a 6,250 square foot site which is
located 255 feet from a community church, the Iglesia Church of God
Pentecostal, at 1207 West Baseline Street. The subject property is
also located next door to an existing residence at 1247 West
Baseline Street, and within 1,000 feet of four existing outlets for
off-site sales of alcoholic beverages.
On March 27, 1991, the property owners, Kenzie and Brenda
Wooten, initially submitted through their agent, Steven J. Stiemsma
of Value Homes, an application filed as Review of Plans 91-13 to
construct 2,500 square feet of retail/office space on the subject
property. [A copy of Application for Review of Plans 91-13 is
attached as Exhibit 1.] Although the Application Supplement states
that the business will involve the sale of pre-packaged food and
beverage as a "convenience store", this application did not request
a permit for off-site sales of alcoholic beverages. Also on March
27, 1991, Steven J. Stiemsma submitted three checks which totaled
$1,460.00 for processing fees for Review of Plans 91-13. [A copy of
Miscellaneous Cash Receipt dated March 27, 1991 is attached as
Exhibit 2.] Two of the three checks which Mr. Stiemsma presented
on March 27, 1991 were dated September 7, 1990. These two checks
referenced the "Wooten Job plan review". [A copy of the two checks
is attached as Exhibit 3.] On or about April 3, 1991, the bank
stamped these two checks "Account Closed" and returned them to the
City Treasurer's office. On April 12, 1991, pursuant to Municipal
Code Section 3.10.010, the Finance Department informed and directed
the Planning Department to discontinue processing the project due
to unpaid fees. On April 12, 1991 the Planning Department
telephoned Value Homes, advised them of the circumstances and the
fees necessary for continuing the project, and advised them that a
Historical Resources Evaluation Report was needed if they planned
to demolish a structure constructed prior to 1941. At that time,
Value Homes requested that the Planning Department deem the
HE/ses/CUP91-28.opn
2
II 'I'
.
.
To : Mayor and Common Council
Re : Conditional Use Permit 91-28 and Variance 91-08
for 1255 West Baseline, Mr. & Mrs. Kenzie Wooten
Page: 3
application withdrawn and close the case. The Planning Department
deemed Review of Plans 91-13 withdrawn on April 12, 1991. [See
attached Exhibit 4, a copy of a letter from the Planning Department
to Steven J. Stiemsma of Value Homes dated April 12, 1991, which
shows a copy sent to Kenzie and Brenda Wooten.]
The property owners and their representative subsequently
contacted the Planning Department to determine if the application
could be revised and new fees submitted in order to develop a
project for this site. The Planning Department met with the
property owners and their representative, Paul Weiler of Value
Homes, and advised them that Ordinance MC-770, effective April 12,
1991, required a 10,000 square foot minimum lot size for
convenience stores. After reviewing the site characteristics, the
Planning Department determined that the applicant needed to submit
fees and a new application for the off-site sale of beer and wine
and an application for a variance to permit construction of a
convenience store on a parcel less than 10,000 square feet in size.
On May 11, 1991 the applicant submitted CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-
08.
On May 30, 1991, the Development Review Committee met with the
applicant and requested that he submit a revised site plan and a
Historical Resources Evaluation Report pursuant to Ordinance MC-694
because the project proposed to demolish a structure which was
believed to have been constructed prior to 1941. On May 30, 1991,
the Planning Department sent a letter to Value Homes with a copy
sent to Kenzie and Brenda Wooten, informing them that their
applications for CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-08 were incomplete
because a Historical Resources Evaluation Report was not submitted.
[A copy of this May 30, 1991, letter is attached as Exhibit 5.]
Also on May 30, 1991, the Planning Department sent a letter to
Value Homes informing them that the City's new Development Code
would become effective on June 3, 1991 and that CUP 91-28 and
Variance 91-08 would be subject to the new Development Code if the
project applications were not completed by that date. [A copy of
this May 30, 1991 letter is attached as Exhibit 6.]
The Planning Department received the applicant's revised site
plan on June 18, 1991. The applicant submitted the Historical
Resources Evaluation Report to the Planning Department on August 6,
1991 [A copy of the submittal letter dated August 6, 1991 from
Value Homes is attached as Exhibit 7.] The Planning Department
deemed the applications for CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-08 complete
on August 9, 1991. [A copy of the "deemed complete" letter which
was mailed to Value Homes and a copy sent to Kenzie and Brenda
Wooten is attached as Exhibit 8.]
HE/ses/CUP91-26.opn
3
liT!'
.
.
To : Mayor and Common Council
Re Conditional Use Permit 91-28 and Variance 91-08
for 1255 West Baseline, Mr. & Mrs. Kenzie Wooten
Page: 4
On November 6, 1991, the Planning Commission held a noticed
public hearing on CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-08. The applicant,
Kenzie Wooten, and Carl Dean and Peter A. Mecudante spoke in
support of the application. Three neighboring residents on Orange
Street: John Hernandez, Lupe Moranga and Jim Rodriguez opposed the
application. Norma Garcia, representing over 150 people at her
church, the Iglesia Church of God Pentecostal at 1207 W. Baseline,
also spoke in opposition to the application. The Planning
Commission voted 4-3 to deny CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-08.
ANALYSIS
Development Code Section 19.06.030(2)(B) prohibits businesses
which require a California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
license from locating within 500 feet of any religious institution
and 100 feet of any residence, among other requirements.
Development Code Section 19.06.030 (2) (F) prohibits convenience
stores from locating within 1,000 feet from an existing convenience
store, among other requirements.
CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-08 do not comply with these
ordinances in the Development Code because the proposed site is
located next door to an existing residence, within 255 feet of an
existing church, and within 1,000 feet of four existing convenience
stores. Development Code Section 19.36.050(1) requires that the
proposed use comply with all applicable provisions of the
Development Code. A variance under Development Code Chapter 19.72
cannot be granted to these applications to avoid these distance
regulations because Section 19.72.030 prescribes that variances may
be granted only for specified requirements which do not include
these distance regulations.
The Development Code became effective June 3, 1991. The
applications for CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-08 were deemed complete
on August 6, 1991. Thus, pursuant to Development Code Section
19.02.070(7), these applications cannot be approved unless they
comply with the Development Code.
A review of the evidence has shown that the City has processed
these applications in a timely manner. The applicant's failure to
complete all application requirements prior to the effective date
of the Development Code was not due to any transgressions by City
staff.
HE/ses/CUP91-28.opn
4
~-- ----.-..
I ~ II'
.
.
To : Mayor and Common Council
Re : Conditional Use Permit 91-28 and Variance 91-08
for 1255 West Baseline, Mr. & Mrs. Kenzie Wooten
Page: 5
Upon receipt of the applicant's checks for Review Of Plans 91-
13, the City promptly attempted to negotiate them. The City
informed the applicant within a reasonable time that the checks
were returned by the bank. Apparently the checks "bounced" because
the applicant's representative "sat" on the checks for more than
six months before presenting them to the City.
In conclusion, these applications for CUP 91-28 and Variance
91-08 cannot be granted unless the distance requirements in the
Development Code for convenience stores and ABC licensed businesses
are amended.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
HENRY EMPENO, JR.,
Deputy City Attorney
Concur:
JAMES F. PENMAN
,J-.-
cc: W.R. Holcomb, Mayor
Council Members
Rachel Krasney, City Clerk
David C. Kennedy, City Treasurer
Shauna Clark, City Administrator
All Department Heads
HE/ses/CUP91-28.opn
5
PLANNING AND BUILDING SE
APPLICATION FOR
REVIEW OF PLANS
CITY OF SAN BERNARD
OWNER' ,'. . ., '''' .
, ,I t v'JiZ ,; ,y;.t c,Q( .. '. -."',
ADDRESS: /c:~..:! '///~~~.. -1'".
--' ,". ~7 ? c::.. y.......,..;<..r /-/" '2:~
?
fi/ ,/7, . ~r'
-.-J?M'N;!'- --~/-./i'/, ,-,f.-l
TELEPHONE' /""'/ J 4'4'~"_ '-',' '?,
"'~ .. v - - /
"
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: 2:.'?'r::';~
II II'
ES DEPARTMENT
CtJ.-/~
..
APPLICANT:' .'44E,1/~",,"->;
ADDRESS /5;: t',,(/ /11'/" i//j;l/
.~. .G.-~;1rvK'#-/< (,.4
TELEPHONE' }'IIJ /&:;' -%Jc
c~~ %".?7~~
,I /'.1-
N('."'<'/ 0 /,nj /' ~:./4r:Y::vo ("/1/:"7/"''',
r- . 0. /.., J ,:C:>C;- t"r
:jdf/;.7-:/,[ ,,;~-,~.,,~ /fr Ih.uc;' /' /'?
X/ c..?A"4.v~
GENERAL LOCATION:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO,: /-'/j'- {'/"'I, (t/
ZONING DESIGNATION
r::6-f!
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
/" ..~
/ /-/ - /~
FLOOD 0 YES 0 ZONE A
HAZARD
ZONE: NO 0 ZONE B
::g" NO
AIRPORT NOISEI = YES
CRASH ZONE:
,-
.,;,/ -
GEOLOGIC 1 0 YES
SEISMIC
HAZARD ZONE:
HIGH FIRE 0 YES
HAZARD ZONE:
NO
REDEVELOPMENT ,.!i:fYES
PR ECT AREA:
~~. C NO
SEWERS: ~YES
r NO
SUBMITTALS:
~ W APPLICATION (ONE COPY). " !if PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION
'l!1( SITE PLANS, FLOOR PLANS & ELEVATIONS fJ I "tJ CHECK FOR $21500 MADE PAYABLE TO SAN BERNARDINO
\ (16 COPIES EACH, ALL FOLDED), \ COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT (IF APPLICABLE)
~ ONE COLORED ELEVATION AND MATERIALS BOARD',\ ,0'" CHECKLIST SIGNED AND DATED
, \
'1!ir PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT \J~ SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION
(WITHIN LAST 6 MONTHS), "'-. -/
'\J ~ 8-112 X 11 TRANSPARENCY (SITE PLAN,
LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION BUILDING ELEVATIONS AND FLOOR PLAN,
(NOTARIZED).
-"":SIGNATURE OF
LEGAL OWNER (S)
and/or
APPLICANT
t&-dh ~
:/ 1 . ...-roo
"/'.';," //,~ ( .. ;(
DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED:
ASSIGNED APPLICATION NO.:
DA:TE .APPLICATION ACCEPTED:
ClTVOf-_8Ii1lJllAlllDN)
CE"""""'- ~NQ.l'MCU
- '"'
.::' wi'
..;1-1 ..
<f I
DATE:
DATE:
DATE:
" IV I "iJ
E.R.C.I
D. R. C. MEETING
o APPROVED
- DENIED
PlAN.2.03 PAGE 1 OF J (2-90)
8OI8IT ~'.~ I.. 0
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
II II
-.
LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION
TO: CllY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
(TEL. NO.):
~A~/" / ~~..9 . d~.//
~ ~ /
~R . .~v~
1 g~S;~"'"
FROM: (NAME):
(ADDRESS):
RE: APPLICATION NUMBER(S):
Tl-iIS LETTER SHALL SERVE TO NOTIFY YOU AND VERIFY Tl-iAT I/WE AM/ARE THE LEGAL
OWNER(Sl OF Tl-iE PROPERlY DESCRIBED IN THE ATTACHED APPLICATlON AND DO HEREBY
AUTl-iORIZE:
(NAME):
(ADDRESS):
(TEL. NO.): 1 '1~
TO FILE AND REPRESENT MY/OUR INTEREST IN THE ABOVE REFERENCED APPLICAITO!'l(S).
I/WE AM/ARE THE LEGAL OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERlY: HAVE READ THE FOREGOING LETTER
OF AUTl-iORIZATION AND KNOWTl-iE CONTENTS THEROF; AND DO HERESY CERTIFY THATTHE
SAME IS TRUE OF MY/OUR OWN KNOWLEDGE. VWE C"':RTIFY (OR DECLARE) UNDER PENALTY
OF PERJURY UNDER Tl-iE LAWS OF Tl-iE STATE C,- ':ALlFORNIA THAT THE INFORMATION
CONTAINED IN Tl-iE ABOVE REFERENCED.A~L1CATl.9NtS) IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
. ~_ A _ &, A
SIGNATURE(S) OFLEGALOWNER(S):~'7~ I. rt.-f~ ;';' /<+, '~'f
/;#1 ( P /1/ XI (1tG -:' 9~T\ /
;f~ DAiE
DAiE
SUBS7RIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME Tl-iIS .L..JCb' DAY OF -/):.~ c (,-/
19L.
'1
,~:~ ~. jcLr-..J-S'~-
NQT ARY~J8LIC
OFFICIAL SEAL
BETTY E. SCHMElZEl
NOTARY PI.IlUC. CoIl.fOR!M
SAN BEllNAROIllO cOl.M'l
MV CCIIml. EIIlim AllI. 6. 1993
. <:n"'""? -_ .-..,
~_n....Slr.IIM<.lS
:I'J.N.5.C7 ~.IG~' c;:' 4-~\
.TV OF SAN BERN_DINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION FORM
,
(PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS SHALL INCLUOE ATTACHMENT 'A1
""'"
A. GENERAL lNFORMATIOB
APPLICATION NUMB~R
1. Applicant/Developer 2. Contact person for
s-r 2 I f"" ~. f\v'-:J . environmental
~p</ J ..t/7L7Y"py;4 (~Z
Nfl Nallle
~.LI$ P"t:?VFJ"
Firm Firlll
/3::0 hi h/ WAV
Street Address Street Address
~ ~Pl'N/I#i7#Jt7 &.
City State Zip City State Zi~~
(f/f( C!t1? - Ot!'J?/ Telephone Numbe r
Te ephone Number
3.
Address/General Location of Project (~W r.P~ ~~
e~~
4.
5.
Assessor I S Parcel Number (sl /31J(}'l/- CJ(/
Description of Project &-t7P df.~ ~~ P'.4./~~~
6.
Will any permits
the city?
be required ~Olll agencies other
yes ~ no
than
If yes, list the permits and responsible agencYI
"'"
~
REVISEO 10/87
PAGE 1 a: 5
II II
,
B. P~JEC1. SUtt4 SO 1< 132.. I
1. Site Ana. (:?b:J..o,1-square
.
feet, ,I ') /
"'"
2. Bu.1lding lJeigbt: feet 3. NUllber ot
4. Building Area. r tf"(x:) square feet
5. Parking a.quind.'-A- spac..
e!
6. Parking Provided: (? spaces
acr...
rloors. '2
It oft-site parking is proposed, please explain.
7.
Will project be built in pba.es?
yea / no
a. It yes, how many units/square feet per phase?
b. Total units, square feet?
C. LAND_l1~~
Subject Property: ;}c/f11~'i /.B.\/I2#V~E At:7~ t/hIt:)#tJ k! 4-.~~
Existing:
/0 ) ""
North (, i~ A1/HHSU~/_
South /2.!;r/~/if/
East 6;:X/{/7,i/'f Att~.
West F>(/~OA/; V~(" (~~//)
D. f~J~~~_SITE
Pr~osed:
C~H;?~/~<:::
YHi~1/~/
a~.w~/P;t/
?
~~~M-J':.
1. Indicate any unique existing topographic features.
Fl~ .I?Y/{r/k/f M:v.r,e- t/J"~ Hr ,!qz>',cE E ~
2. Will the project modify existing natural features? Explain.
M
3. If applicable, estimate cubic yards of grading involved
in project:
Cut-
Pill-
4. Maximum height and grad. ot natural slope.: /~~
\...
~
REVISED 10/81
PA<EZOF5
II Fl'
5. Maximum .ght and grade ot constr~ 8J.opeSI 4~
6. Methods used to prevent soil erosion in prOject are.
during construction and atter developmenta
GAlMf? ~
E. FLORA AllJ2... n.lllib
1. List types ot vegetation and tree. in project are.a ~~
2.
List types ot wildlife tound in project areaa
~~
P. ~'CH~~9~~C~~HISTORICAL
i.
1. Is there any known archaeological or historical si9nit1~ance
of the site area or ~ithin 1/2 mile from the proposed site?
If so, explain: &t!.
G. HUMAN_9~FErL PQTEll'l'-IMo
1.
Will the project increase
project area? Explain.
~sting noise
levels
in the
2. will the project use, store or dispose of potentially
hazardous materials such as loxic substances, flammables
or explOSives? Explain ~
3. Will the project increase the amounts of dust, ash, smoke or
odor during construction or atter development? Explain.
H. l6~l~_AND SERVI~ILIMPACTS
1.
Location of nearest Pire Stationa 9TJI Sr /5kK"
/A ~ /Ni ~{/#/ ~
Distance from project sitel/!; ~
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 3 OF 5
------..--l-T.-,-rc
Location. nearest police Station:~ff <Jr / ~ tlJirr ~
Di.tance trom project site: 2 - pJi H?/C4S
Location and name. ot nearests scbools: ,J(~ /~... ~~ v_,_
Scbool district: :Ji~Jf' ~/~~ ~I>>C.
Distance from project site: ;~ -/~ ~/~~
Location and nam_ ot nearest parkl: h/,09~ #......A::'" ~ sr
/h -7 ~/~v
Distance trom project site: ~_~ ~/~~
Location and name ot nearest library:
Distance trom project site: ~ ~~~
6. . J.ce sewer trunk lines available within 200 teet ot project lite?
~ yes ____ no It no, how far?
2. .
3.
4.
s.
7.
Sewer capacity rights purchased? _ yes _ no
number._.
i .
:..~
8. Art/Water trunk lines available within 200 feet ot project site?
~ yes ____ no
I. MITIGA119~ MEASURES
(Attach additional sheets if necessaryl
Describe type and anticipated effect of any measurel proposed to
mitigate or eliminate potentially signiticant adverse environmental
impacts:
.J.I. AHj/.A1Ue ~~..(;/~.8"~ /~~.r- ~M(/A2
REVISED 10117
PAGE 4 OF 5
J. An~~HMEN'l'S .
r I'll
.
Ye. No
V-
V-
V-
I.----
~
V-
--
1. GeologY/Soils Report
2. Liquefaction Report
3. Traffic Report
4. Nois. Analysis
5. Drainag_ Study
6. Prel imina.~y Grading Plan
K. CE:Rj'Jrl~P.1J9!!
i ,
.,... .
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and 1n
the attached exhibits present the data and information required
for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that
the facts, statements, and information preseneed are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
f"- ~-~p
oU'f /'
~'l~ ~ ~~~
. TITLE
.- FlEVISED 10/87
PAGE 5 OF 5
I r II'
CITY OF SAN BERN
INO PLANNING AND BUILDING RVICES DEPARTMENT
APPLICATION SUPPLEMENT
APPLICATION #
1. List names and addresses of all principles, including owner, operator, applicant, etc. (Add pages ~
necessary) .
,./~~, /~L/,*" ~~/~ ,~/7<:J/YA- -/SZJ 4/;r~L.k/~ Il-'~o
AvA/Bz,.,' &v?/E j,-C~ - /<J~t1 J{/~ 4v4f( k~-,~, b
2. Describe the actual type of business proposed, particularly any features unique to this type of business
or operation.
~.-'"(~~ ~("r;J,~//
3. List all types of materials, all chemicals, and all equipment used in the business, particularly hazardous
materials and equipment which might generate light, odor, noise, dust, vibration, etc.
~A/~
4. Do any oHfl"ese materials or chemicals require CalOsha Materials Safety Data Sheets? Yes .
No ~ . If so, please identify. '
...
PlAN.6.04 PAGE 1 OF 2 (4.90)
&~~~~~
I II!
,
.
. 5. Describe hours of operation. 13:tZ' #".., - ~:aJ ~
7:.m ,;..." /?' 'C/o
f -- ;::;1h?
CF.r;ce
~
6. Total anticipated nurrber of employees
.f f~g
,z' ~?U
7. Totalnumberofemployeesons~eatanyonetime :2 ~c
?' ~?c..,-
8.
Does the business involve the sale of any food or beverages?
If so. please describe in detail.
/"
{A7-<.,1 'Lii/CE ~ - --fl.LL
>is-
I
.e.
9. Does the County require a Business Plan? Yes
NO~
10. Govemment Code Section 65962.5 requires the Planning Department to make available to applicants
the most current list of "Iden@ed Hazardous Waste S~es" from the state Office of Planning and
Research.
All applicants must sign the following statement in order to deem the application complete.
"I, -~4!'ii'/ d ..f/7~mij . certify that I have reviewed the list of
"Identified Hazardous Waste Sites" from the state Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and have
determined ite' this application~1 ~n that lis!."
Name Date ,f.!.lfr
Title
~~~
PLAN.6.04 PAGE 2 OF 2 (4-90)
, 4.
05
/6
~.
V": 1 0
11.
, 12.
CITY OF'SAN BERNA
1I
NO PLANNING AND BUILDING S
VICES DEPARTMENT
REVIEW OF PLANS CHECKLIST
Preliminary grading and method of draining the sIte.
~3
~.
.~.
Driveways: a) show all points of ingress and egress: b)
show conflict points such as other driveways, streets or
alleys wilhin 300 feet of proposed driveway (can be on a ~~16.
separate plan); c) must show palh of travel across
driveway ,,-\1.... Vof' '1,,--..lA'1 ~w.o.'1 4P,f\-' 17.
Handtcapped p8J'i(ing. ramps. signs and pavement ' 18.
marKings.
. 7.
PSrXing layout showing sizes and location of each stall,
backout areas and driving aisles.
Wheel curb and/or minimum 25 foot landscape divider.
09
.,..120
.~
~.
~3
yM'
. T Tj e plans shall contain the following information in a legend;
VI.. Square footage or gross and net acreage of property. 9,0. .
0. Square footage of building or addition.
o
vi 4. Lot coverage (0/0).
./5
The following dems shall be shown and labeled on the submitted plot plan. Distinguish between existing (dashed lines)
and proposed (solid lines) and show sufficient dimenSions to define all Items. Plans should be drawn to scale by a
quamied individual such as an Archrtect, Engineer or Licensed Building Designer.
/1. Property lines and dimensions.
./ 2. Building and structure footpnnts.
,yt 3
/6
/7
/8
Loading zones.
Dimensions and nature of all easements.
Location map (vicinity map)
Location of water/sewer mains.
Ultimate Right of Way (infonmation available from
Engineering Department.)
-
Square footage of landscaping, existing and proposed
With dimensions and percent of landscaping.
Parking required, parking provided (covered and
uncovered).
Type of building construc1ion.
Automatic sprinklers in building, (yes or no).
-
Zoning district.
c.c:;.-2,-
~lP 11
0'2
~.
Frontage streets: name, centerline, curbline. nght..of.
way. Improvements and utility poles.
Location, height and composition of walls and fences.
location of refuse enclosures with wall height and type
of materials.
Outside storage area.
Location and method of lighting (hooding devtces). 0 V
Location of fire hydrants. 0 J
Yard and spaces between buildings or between property
lines and buildings.
Setback distances: a) zoning; b) earthquake; c) flood
control.
Sidewalk and interior walks induding ramps and curb
ramps.
Landscaping; building setbacks, parkway and required
percent of parking lots.
Concrete header separating all paved vehicular areas
from landscapIng.
North arrow and scale.
Building occupancy.
Number of employees (if known).
Square footage of seating (if applicable).
Nature of business.
Assessor's parcel number, legal description and
address.
./14.. Name, address, and phone number of plan preparer
and applicant.
15. Liquefaction Zone (Yes or No).
-
I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE INCLUDED ALL OF THE ITEMS LISTED ABOVE AND UNDERSTAND
THAT MISSING ITEMS WILL RESULT IN THE DELAY OF THE PROCESSING OF MY APPLICATION.
>/ ~L/~
x.;.~~~ :?~~
&~~~
- - J'?"Y- r
aATE
PLAN.2.C3 PAGE 3 OF 3 (2-90)
I
t-
L"
-
~
M
.
:.
&
t-
A-
W
U
W
II:
o X
z en
Q .:(
a:: U
<( en
z ;:)
ffi 0
CD W
Z Z
<( .:(
en ~
... ~
o w
U
> en
I- -
U 2
~
.,\
I
I
:; I, ! :.1
. ,
~i lI'l,
r-i ''<,
.-{)I
I
i
v"\
_"I
'"
>J
_1
!
,
r ~ -:- I
r- r- -;- j~1
- - N~
:r~,...7-
r- ("'\ ,~,
~ ~j ~
~-J ~I
\.Jj -:>1
: ~
-tl I ."\1
~ I ,I
.~~1 ;
1 ~\ -
. ~I
~
~
~
~
.
":1-
u
ci
~
~
E
e I
~ I
~ ,~ I
~ ~ I
~-Q,
:\~
I-
l-
It-
..
,.
:J
-1
~I
-
." '"
~
- c:
- ..
u
~ ~~
-'
] 0""1
"0 0
Q "Z
Vi '1
""7 ~ ...
t- ~ ~
...J ~
III i-
..l
~ 1.1. ,~
~ 0 p
~
~ S
..l
-
w
~I
-
o
c:
:;
en
..
.::.
I-
...
o
...
... - --
EX;{m;r
-..
(l
')\
o
Co
....,.
::r-
-
I
K~
....
'>
]
~.! 1 ~
.." .
.,.,1 "'1
, ::i C\
~ 1 -
~ 0
~ I
~
31 c
i ,0 I ~
o
.. _-""', .4- - ,.,.;, ).
r:t
...
'I.
'J
'..
,...
~
CJ
...
'<
.!l
,
...
~
i
'1 .~ 2.
'""
-.
,
j
j
1
1
i
2 t
g 1
~ I
. ,
~ .J
z 1
i i
~ 1
~ .
3 '
. j
" 1
C ,I
~ j
:;
Q
~ 1
I '
l 1
~ J
~ 1
i 1
~ I
~ 1
i '1
q
j
1T1T
~-
.,
.
!
r-
. ~-'''''''.-~-'
.,
.' i ' \ . " '
, .c' . .
. \' \ / ,\!, \
.,' ".':; I. I, r
.\ ,'/'
...' \\ j \ \ '
,.'. )' \
',) :J
.. \t.,
J . ~, ','< t,'
't' ,\ .\,
=;.;. "
0:.
-
0':
U1,"
... '.
U1'
~ ',;' ~ I . I I.... .
". " ~. ."
\ I I I
,'. \ ;1
\ .', \ \
\
,
,\ .
.
,
-.
..
-
n.I
n.I
o
o
o
IT','
IT',
.-. (
\ r..
.'~,",'.,'
/ / ~ ~ 1 ~ ;
j. /,\ 1 ,'.'
r= ~:~, ,
z8~"
l:D i -. ~.
m, C.
~I:~
~ :-':(")
S!~O~
zmZ~
o::E en
~~-4~
>~:D.J
.,c:C
~ mn
~~ ao:::! li'j
/ "'001
~Zc;l
~(")~
,~~
~, .' \. .
,.' I )', \" I
i:: \'. /; I"
".\4 J,{~~
. ,; (:' "
, '.\.1 j \
:1
,
,
1
'i
1
-
..
o
n.I
r
.D
" U1
, :
, '
,..- . ,',,'.
o 1'_
Q' ~;':
~ 1.,>'1':
.~'~ ,,,,:,c 'J
WI ~. ') -
o ....,;.
~ I~~~ ~
I .", [;'
...' ~ \.:")
Irs! ri
I--,,:,z .,
rl" '~
c_' :~
.
.
o
,0
,,0
l~
~~
~ -.
G:~
~ ~,
... I i
~ I ~
~ I..~
.
....
o
Ul
....
Ul
I
I
~
-
cpo
81
:::
'"
III
_ . . . ~ . , . .. ..-J
EXHIB!T
~;..; 3
I! 11'
.
r- .-..,.,
r' . ..--- - .
~ ~NOO(t :/t/~' ;~'?/'
I
,
~ ..
.'
,.- .
,
~ j!.
. " ", '-, : ~ ~ .
\. ,~'. \ . f
'-;~. ,':;~;:'.';,;; '..\\ i
;. ~ 1 i :'.. ;'. ':l.') {~
" ."
"I ,",
:
".-,
"
"
~,
i i
'..=
, .
'.' .,
','
;-)
, 0
[
.- -,
,''--1:
;..j ,." '. '.
.,...., '. .', ',' ,t"
\-; 1 ' \n~ ' .
- - , ~'I J.
(_'j '.' I",:..:
_d 10--.......
~ tt:tC!: <1:....
,:~' e~ 1:'0.$,.
. -.~~ 2m ,~:::I
'~st:= 1:'1,.1
. N~~ (:()
~33 0:::::-
...::::3 ,,-'
~~ ~';
.~ &.-~""~~ i
~........~';:-,:\ "\ '3 ') ~.,,;.,.~;;:>~.
~~. ,"0\ :._.,.,~;;".r;"r- .
.".,.- _.. J4;,J ... '
~c"'" :",.;I.;,J"
r_.-...~-:6'
*!=::OE;:;t..Lf,ES!;;,'~ ~ '_';) ~FCC.E"':')"lS;:~:: .w
..
~
.
\
;'
.,
~J
I
1
I
,
,
I
:
'0
" .
I,' \
0,
'. . ,;o-')'7"."";""'}'"<1
...__..' ' ',.1 ,.",. ~(.
I '/. . ',,' :'1 t. I,' /
')\: ,\, - . \' \~
\,' \ I.. \ I )'. \ \
,I. ',,- I' I, /'"
\ ~ I ~ ... ~ . .
....\'.'. ,\ I
r:' . ',-' .
r"
, ,< . / \
. .' ;
',",':'
, . .
= , i ..
I .o' ..
O' it; \
~ \ \ . ...
... , I ,
01.':'
111 " ,
.... , \ ,
IJ'l! ': I , ,
=', ,
..
-
..
..
n.I
n.I
0
0
0
IT'
IT'
..
i
!~i; ~h~
G :I [_.
N '/It
E Slil.,
. ,
GS f~
::L -'"
II '"
.. ."'~':'.\' ! ~I
o .... . t ;
n.I
r f~~
.LI r-~'
111
.
.
o
a
~
U1
a
..
,
,
.
.
a
a
a
a
..
a
a
a
a
a
.
.
~d~
"...<
m%
:om
o
..
.,;:.-;
t'.;,...
~'-" .::
,....~
,",-. I ~
~ "
~
...:'1
.~~
.-
.c..d
.,
.~
<>
<,
:i
..
o
o
r-
r-
:.
:u
C/l
---
.
-
'"
.;,
'"
::>
'"
l;:l
~
o
CIl
~
CTl
-':'~."~~
.
r ~NOOR(J~7iJ~;~~"- ,
~
l
DEPOSIT TO Cp.l:~,T 0' .
00 ..O! WRl!;l~A;rF8,;'~M1J.~o.w,~HIS liNE
~c.sn-I-.f'ort"Nj.lt i~.';,'r..j~I"~''''SE *
, . CII.t.. '.'
I,
i
~
r
I
J
,'j
i -j .
12
n 'J
i;
,.
oc
!~ !
I.. i
"
~i1
i, 1
Jo -i ~ i
,,,
. l
, .
,
'""--
,
~
i
MAR28 i991
I! II'
CENTRAL CAS~::~,~;~':'. .'
Clfi Of SAlt ctl:Ii~'~'.:':?:,.
:BOARD OF,WATER ~o,.\~.k ,",...J
..., to'
".. ", .
".",7'\ .
,
I
1 "
1
,
.j
"
,
"
'.
.,
,,'
,',
.' ~. :
_.
I
'e/1
'f)
c;i
1J
~
')' *
"'O:'U~
~8)o1J"
cz.
m, C
1D;c:)o
Z...
>, 0
~~o~
zmzv.:
~ ; ~~~
/') .. ~ C
~'N m n
~.. < ~)..~
:0.
:_~ ~ 6
"I . r 0
'~I~
,p"
r~-.J
'-'J
I ~)
:..(~
. ;
.--#" .....,~.. v_....." ,~,;'....~a. V\rv'".... '--~
...... ~".r .'..-, ~ ....""I....:....~~..~~
,.... -.., .. ", '1f\" '1--'
.~~ ~~.;...~..~:j;.~:'.-l~;-.~.~::' . -'"';
. ,..,;...~~ , ~ It .........~. ..'....."A...........-.. ..... _,
, .
"'''''1::>1''--
(;1:1<:00.....
.....<:"~ <::>
("\)--i=>
* '"
~1~3
:;.;::;3
~
o
,..
<!)
<0
8
N
'"
...
.~
.':'
0-
<(
. -.. ---
. FEDEQ.3,;
IL__, .
,
~~
....j~
~~
.....~
'=':;o(;J
r")
1::1::'
",;..,
'::;"1
, "
.":"1
I::;:J
(0
,";'"
I,.,'
-'. ':~"'CFS FEe . ~
1
\
I
1 f
,
I
I
.
..;'
i
-' ' "
~ ;-:-c::.. ; "-
/-;- ~ "'. ",'\
(: - '. , \
-I ~~' _ \'::.
= t-. ~. _.. .'
"6 -';1 -
-I' --.............;,,- -.... :::
" ~-"..',,-
':.,..;... -~'".:...'l,(
\" .... - -,',-' . ...
1\,'::-< .
'. " .,.'.- "'_.)..' ...,~
'"
. .J;!) \..... .
I! 'I
.r, 0 c
San Bernardino
.
D!~'~TMIHf 0' P~A"NING AND IU1~OING SE~vICES
'- J, q ~ '.
: =l:::': ~
~
April 12, 1991
Steven Stiemsma
Value Hares
22365 Barton !bad
Grand Terrace, CA 92324
RE: Review of Plans :b. 91-13
Dear Sirs:
CUr records show that Peview of Plans :;0. 91-13 was filed with
the Departrrent of PlilI'.nL'1g and Building Services on March 27,
1991. fbwever, the ?roject ::1Ust be deerred Withdrawn because
the check sul::r:litted to the City of San Bernardino has been
returned unpaid. Any further action regarding this project
will require a resul:rnitted application with payn-ent of fees
L, tb.e fo~ of a cashiers check.
~e City ',rill process a refund for O1eck :b. 29iS and this will
be ;nailed under separate cover.
If you have any questions, please call :'Jr. Paul Dukes, available
ill the City I s Finance Depart:rrent.
Sincerely,
, /
f:. ,I I_?"_
1'/( ,_ I,'
/ _ ~;vx- // /
'se S. M:lortier
Assistant Planner
cc:
Kensie and Brenda I'b:lton
1588 Western Avenue
San Bernardino, CA 92411
-'
Paul Dukes
City of San Bernardino Finance Departrrent
Sandra Paulsen
Senior Planner
;;; . -
:
:5.:. ",
:! ~ =l " .:. ~: ,,-
PRIDE .I
1;7ESS
;:)&"V das
. .
~ 2
(1'4) 31.-50115051
fXWB1T
...;.; 4
...
~n :Bernardino ·
II II'
OE.......T......r OF
:: ~ ~ .
1Il.....HN."'a AHa eUILOIHG SEAVICES
~ ~ ::. ~
L .),~ =l "
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 mini~um
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 JOUr
application ~ay be processed:
1. Historical Resources Evaluation Report.
Please assemble all of the requested info~ation and forJard
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 ReVlew Co~~~ttee.
" -
J ~. 3::::".l, ~ :
(11.11314.5011 5051
PRIDE j
....IN PRCGRESS
~~
E"":J'T
;\. i.' . ~
t..~ ~
..,;
-.
II 'I
Mr. Paul Wieler .
May 30", 1991
Page 2
.
If the information is not received by ~~is depart~ent within
six months of the date of this letter, the file will be
deemed abandoned. Any 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,
~~::o~:a;~ AICP
Principal Planner
cc: Kensie and Brenda Wooton
1588 Western Ave.
San Bernardino, CA
"
lat
INCCUP91-28
II II'
." OF .
San l)ernardino
OE"&lItT"'N' 0...
"L4.....t"'G "".0 aUIl.JING Sl!R'IIC!S
_ :.. ;=t =1 .~
~ :: .: - : 'I
:; - - ....
May 30, 1991
Value Homes
22365 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92324
RE: Conditional Use ?e~it No. 91-28/Variance No. 91-08/To
construct a 2,033 square foot Office/convenience maTket
with beer and wine sales on ~e south side of Baseline
between Mt. Vernon and Garner, while 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,
c--
. '/',Y.:..' ~ . /,
/~ ~ /.-- '- -
--
Oenise Moonier
Assistant Planner
/
~;:..u;
- -
lat
DEVCODE
" ::l.....
:l = ~ '; .:. ;;,::; 'I
PRIDE .J
... IN PROGRESS
~;fI
, "
17 1 .. I J i 4 . 5 0 7" 5 0 5 7'
E'" ....'T
';'j,
'111'- ,
' -
...
PRO~ECT iEACTIV A TION~EQUE s.F
8' ~~,
(oate)l/
Plann1n9 Depart.ant
CITY or SAN IIRNARDINO,
JOO Horth -0- Street
San Bernardino, Calitornia 92411
Attn:
nE"[<;~ ','0-','=:>
'..I ;'i __..l......'
(Ha..
~ii'10l>.L'" \
(c:a.. NUmilar)
'!annat'
R..
()s.1I"~+ ql-Ol.g~\A~ a.1. Pca'
our CErUSE :.IOON[:K,
On :'1: v 30, 1?? ~ , .'1 appUcaUol\
(04~')
was d.emad incomplete by your d.partment due to in.d. ate
information documented a. tollow.:
1 uI<;T'R'I-.\' :=~' ,J;-=- C'''' "TI'J'I REPORT
. ,. ...... I.. ~"L ,,_ ... _ ,,-,,-) '- j ,.."..........f"'I I "
2.
3 .
&nclo.~d pl.... find all of ene r.qu..t.d it.me. It i. .Y
underatandin9 tnat if thi. information i. .utti~l.nt, my c~..
tile will b. d.emed complete and the project will be
reactivated.
,
,
It you ne.d additional
P.\UL ~. '.~I:~~i/
(Naill') "'C'
714-783-3530
~n. Nu.b.r)
intormation,
plea.a
contact
at
.
sincerely,
lema.reactivate.ca..
~I ,/',' --~- i/V-~
, ,,~--
"
PAUL A.~[ELEK
VICE PRESIDE~n
'IALUE HOrlES
\.
EXI'lln1T
. . l.:.Ji
7
. '-~
----...,--_.......,-. --
........,........"......,..........
.,...-.... ....,.." ...-
",.- -'-'
1 r un
.r T 0 F .
San .Bernardino
a.'ART...T 0' 'L.....INa .ND 1.'LDINa
S'''VICES
AL BOUGHEv,AICP
OlllecrOR
August 9, 1991
Attn: Paul Wieler
Value Homes
22J65 Barton Road, Suite 210
Grand Terrace, CA 92J24
"
RE: Conditional Use Pe~it ~o. 91-28 and Variance ~o. 91-08
~o co~struct 2,000 sq. ft. of teatil/office space
~n71ud~ng a,proposal for off-site sales of beer and wine
wh~le ,vary~ng the minimum lot size required for
conven~ence market site is on the south side of Baseline
bet*een ~t. vErnon/Garner Streets in the CG-2 Genreal
Plan land use designation. '
Dear Sirs:
~he above referen7e~ application is hereby deemed complete and
~s accepted for f~l~ng ~y the City o~ San Bernardino Planning
Department effect~ve th~s date. Th~s acceptance applies only
to the specific project as defined by:
Your preliminary application received May II, 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.
J J J '4 J =t ~ ....
': .J, . ' ;:: J ;:j ~
You are requested to advise the planner processing your
project at once if you modify any aspect of your projec~ wh~le
it is being processed. This acceptance of your appl~cat~on
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, ~ocat~on, etc.
represent a potential for environmental ~mpacts or are
signifi::ant in any other respect. PRIDE, ./
"OESS
,
'3 p ~ ;:: :: ~
.
} 2 ~
: J J 1
s ~ 'I 3:: ~ 11,1 '" ~ ;) I "l ,J
(1 1 . I 3'..507 1 I , 0 , 1
EXWBlT
-, a
...
.~'J.g'J.S~ 3 I
, .~ ~ .
_:J '1 _
page 2
.
.
A significant change in the project or a series of cumulative
changes MAY necessitate the filing 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 processing
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
"
.'
, I
.r
.
.
c
Value Custom Homes
February 27, 1992
Hr. Henry Empeno
Office of City Attorney
City of San Bernardino,
300 North D Street
San Bernardino, CA. 92418
RE: Conditional Use Permit 91028/Variance 91-08
Dear Hr. Empeno:
c
Pursuant to our recent telephone conversation regarding the
above case, ~e ~re enclosing herewith the information we have
to support odr contention that this case should not be
required to be processed under the City's new Development
Code of June 3, 1992, but should be -Grandfathered- to
proceed with processing under the Development Code prior to
June 3, 1992. As you may recall from our conversation, the
difficulty arose when a check was presented to the Planning
Department from a bank account that had been closed. Our
designer was not sware of this. All Company accounts had
been moved to the Bank of San Bernardino.
Copies of the following items are enclosed:
1. A note to Hr. Paul Wieler regarding reinstatement of
the application after talking with Denise Hoonier, Planner.
All paperwork was deatroyed before we were notified of the
prOblem with the check.
2. Hiscellaneous Cssh receipt and receipt for Cashier's
check in the amount of $1,675 for fees due dated Hay 9, 1991,
as per our instructions from the City Planning Dept. to get
the application back on track.
3. Letter to Kenzie Wooten and Brenda Wooten, dated Hay
9, 1991, from John Hontgomery indicating the application had
been filed (please note, this date is before 6/3/91), and
that a preliminary review was scheduled for 5/30/91).
4. Letter of Certification, which was top page of
application package which was submitted on 5/8/91 to City
Planning Department.
o
22365 Barton Road, 1210
Grand Terrace, CA 92324
(714) 7B3.3530
license 1179304
-#y;
I' 11
.
.
("
....
Value Custom Homes
Page Two of Two
c
5. Letter dated Hay 30, 1991, from Denise Hoonier
stating a letter had been sent to us on Kay 30, 1991,
requesting further information to make application complete.
Please note that this letter was received by our office on
June 3, 1991. (It would have been very difficult to complete
the application by June 3rd since a letter vas sent out Kay
30th stating the new code would become effective June 3rd,
and was not received by us until June 3rd. NO written notice
was given previously that there was a deadline of June 3rd).
6. Letter dated Kay 30, 1991, from John Kontgomery
stating a Historial Resources Evaluation Report needed. No
mention of June 3rd Code change. This letter was also
received on June 3rd.
7. proieit Reactivation Request regarding Historical
Report - tbe final requirement for completion of tbe
application.
It is our feeling tbat tbe application sbould be processed
and approved based on tbe original dates of tbe application.
Tbere was bardly enougb time to obtain tbe final item, a
historical report, between Kay 30th and June 3rd -
particularly since tbe requirement was not made known to us
until June 3rd when we received our mail.
We bope you will give serious consideration to our request
for processing this application under the City Code as it was
prior to June 3, 1992.
Sincerely,
~P-~~'
Paul A. W1eler
o
PAW/bes
22365 Barton Road,I210
Grand Terrace, CA 92324
(714) 783-3530
License '179304
.
--'
,""
!
'11/1
t?~ ~ --
:k ~ uJ~~
c'
. ;. /, ,()J t:,:s rill ~~
;2. ~ ~ ~
~.
". a~~~ ...
(~-- /lJA. .t~~' ~
tr?'-A-) ~ ''*'''''''''''''-'7
~ ~ r-~..og ~
-I.~ C>H "-
p:_ -_ - lJ..}..-u..,L'.k-
0... ~ /F. rJ:e,.;=~
/lw...<d ~ aJ!- ~.
-
~- to"'ll~ 4 wu..l~'
~ 90~5..5 ~
~ lJ~ O-i~ ~ .
~.
C)
,
OJ
,1'
I i II
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
MISCELLANEOUS CASH RECEIPT
64113<1
_OUNT
t.111
Yl/l
71~-111-
., 0 c""
~S- -:>
BV
TOTAL
&/~~!
C~Dl$TAIBUTION: Whit. - CUitomef; C.n,ry - e.shl.r. Pink - O.p.rtment. Gcwdenroct - Oept. Numeric Control
'PI qr~,ii;;;;&~~~-' ;~~~IP;'~~E:~:;O'R YO~~ R~~~~'D~ - -
7?,-3r.e>::) J<::LVJti77fi ' 71(.1 N2
(21tt..-d ~ 10 ~G;I-<!~SHIER'S CHECK .-
~C/.o;;. 7/
PA-DA CONS'lUCTION CO, INC. MAY 8 91
044073
ecr&'-
PAYABLE TO
".CITY o~~~~~[L~
':' .,' ""'l' .':"' '::i'~';' if' O' "O'-tlf"'
; .-.... , "'1 . .~
,
..1,675.00"
/-/ -
/(j 7/
..
mBANK of
SAI't BERNARDINO
_ Well Second Su...
r' Son Ilemordino. (A 9240 I
. "
.0.
.. '--..
o
@
('
C-
,
)
I! II
.-
:-Il\'t' 1.} 1991
.
CITY 0'
San Bernardino
......'MI..' 0' '..A....IlI. AM. IUILD... I..VIC.I
5/9/1/
, . ' ~
~/JSI.L {3~.u1Nl tJ#.7itl
15,-1' /4/6.n-01 ;9{€.
S~ l3u4l~/),1I1J . C'I/
,
RE: ell~ 1/~H V~ 9/~'1
I .
7: Cllfnr"u: <(: ~ 5D~ 1 #~"e/&"""",e.,tt: ~kt ",;11
b~ tlA'/ ,.j'~e 'foor/~S' (M tLl' $I,," S"~ ..f &u~/,,;~ IJd_
/Iff. lie,."." (111" Qlfr"er J ",J.,1~ o'lf':~/~' tit" r~l"'iot!/ N';',;"t/II'r 1.-1 "/~C.
Dear: /J1R., al-Y. 41'.70/1/ ~ _ ~ .:Jf.K- ~ b - ew.--..-
Your referenced was filed with the Planning
Division on . A preliminary review of
the project as a discussion item on
Thursday, , at the Development Review
Committee me t ~ meeting begins at 9!oO ~.m. in the
Jrd floor con room of City Hall, J.QQ-North "0- street,
San Bernardino, CA. It is highly recommended that you or
your representative attend thi. meeting, to further your
understanding of issues that may arise and the review process
itself.
If you need further information please contact ~~
n1oDN'~ , your assigned planner, at (714) 384-5057,
extension "'" 3;J;Jf - .
Sincerely,
~.~
~o" NORTH 00 STREET.
::Al.IFORNIA .;>>.18.0001
yJt ;..
f) (J)
Css
SAN aEANARDINO
(7'.. J..-.I',I.I.7
;/
(
c'
C)
~
I i I'
......,. J(9.....I1 I III.. "'. \.. I
I ~l _
CITY OF SAN BF:&-;;OINO PlANNING AND BUILD. SERVICES DEPARTMENT
-
. LETrER OF CERTIFICATION
....
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
)SS
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
I. A'2V'pe- ft,/;,rrJ// ~~f14. ".~eaY CERnFY THAT ATTACHED UST CON-
TAINS THE NAMes AND ADDResses OF AU. PERSONS TO WHOM AU. PROPERTY IS ASSESSED
AS THEY APPEAR ON THE LATEST AVAIV9LE ASSESSMENT ROU. OF THE COUNTY OF SAN
BERNARDINO WITHIN THE AREA DESCRIBED AND FOR A DISTANCE OF FIVE HUNDRED (500)
FEET FROM THE EXTERIOR BOUNDARIES OF PROPERTY LEGAU. Y DESCRJ8ED AS:
iI<~~N; ~__ Ub. /J9- ()?/.O~
- ~
:)rW~.i7r ';;J,~~~::/:_~~./;</ .~....
'?~
uwe CERnFY (OR DECLARE UNDER PENALlY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF
CAUl'O...... THAT,... fOREGOING IS TRue AND ~'
DATE: .s / ~ /1"1 (SIGNED)l<:;; /~
/ .
SU~RlaeOANDSWORNTOaEFORE...eTHIS~ DAYOF ~
1111-. '
~~l. /d-.~ -
NOTARY sue aErt'I . SCHNlel.Z6.(.
OFFICIAL SEAL
8mY l SCIIMEIltI
flOrAII'( PUBlIC. CAlSCRIM
SAN ~.. CDLtdY
.., COmno. lrIm.... "IKI
. ~~w ftt fo.r- ~
f.iAD ~ ~
v;' ~ ~ ~/g/'11
(f)
<
~'l
r::.:. -
.AQI . 011 , c....
.~
e-
II Ii
.JUN 3 ISJI
'-.........
CITY OF
(
San
ernardino
DE'ARTMENT 0' 'LANNING
LARRY E. REED
D IRECTOA
SERVICI'
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 the south side of Baseline
between Mt. Vernon and Garner, while varyinq the minimum
lot size.
Dear Mr. wieier:'
C';
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 redesiqn 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 deeminq 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,
.C::::>~ /
o ~
enise Moonier
Assistant Planner
(G)
0-
..
lat
DEVCODE
3QO NORTH 0' STREET, SAN BERNARDINO.
CAl.IFORNIA 824'8-0001 tl1411...I071/10.'
PRIDE -I
~
-=-
II I'
,
JL'. }91
--=---
/' ,
CITY OF
(, I 11
~ I ~ I.l. -t;c.
(fR-.....,.J ..t2H'~
~
'j;;; ~ ~
~~ ~~i
IJ'14-' (, / / 1
San Bernardino
DEPARTMENT Of 'LANNING AND IUILDI_G aEfIIYIC
LARRY E REED
c IAECTOR
6f.S
May 30, 1991
RE:
'114-
~"
,it
V
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.
92324
Mr. Paul wiel'er
Value Homes
22365 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA
c
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 may 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.
(G)
c)
300 NO'RTH 0> stREET. SAN BERNARDINO.
CAL.lfORNIA 92"8-0001 (71.)"..6071/1017
~
f
(
c;'
II ,:
.~.
.-
Mr. Paul Wieler
May 30, 1991
Page 2
If the information is not received by this department within
six months of the date of this letter, the file will be
deemed abandoned. Any action after that time will require
filinq 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,
~~t;:;~~ AICP
Principal Planner
cc: Kensie an4.Brenda wooton
1588 Western 'Ave.
San Bernardino, CA
lat
IMCCUP91-28
. .
..... f" -"
II I.
PAOJEC", ~EAC""IV A TIC" ftE9UEST
.
~~~I
'(~t.)1
'lannin9 Depart..nt
CITY or 8>>1 IUHARDIHO.
~oo Nortb .D. .tr..t
au Bernardino, C&lUornl. t24l1
our
DEN . I R , ,lann.r
(.....
~rnON.\ CX..~-+ 'l\-o.g~IA~ '\l..O'i'
(eaa. lI\lual')
DENISE MOONIER,
Attn.
a..
(
On May 30. 1991 , _'I .,pUoaUOA
1Date)
wa. d....4 lnco~pl.t. by your d.partaent due to lnad.~at.
informatlon d~u..nt'd .. follow..
.
HISJOgJCAL RESOURCES_~VALUATION RfPORT
1.
-
2.
3.
enclQ.~d pl.... f1nd 811 of the requ..t.d 1te~.. It 1. ay
und.r.t.nd1n~ that 1f thl. lnformatlon 1. aUfflclent, my ca..
tl1a wl1l b. d....d ~Q.pl.t. and the pro~.ct wl1l b.
nagtlVlte4.
If yo~ n.ed additional
PAUL A. WlELtll
(H...) .
714-783-3530
~on. "\laber)
lnfonation,
pl....
contact
at
,
Sincer.ly, .
,ca..r.aotlvate.ca..
~-
, " po- vJ.A<~'
PAUL A. WIELER
VICE PRESIDENT 7
VALUE HOMES .
l)
"'W'Il' "".........
,..,.._,....,..".....I..~t .,."
.....1'..,..,_I'~,.,.I'f' ,,,.~'" ..",.... ,,~ ,.",.....,..,.
~i T~. OF SAN BER~DINO - REQUEST WR COUNCIL ACTION
Appeal of Planning Commission
From: Al Boughey, Director Subject: denial of Conditional Use Permit No.
91-28 and Variance No. 91-08
Dept: Planning & Building Services
t1ayor and Common Council Meeting
Date: February 15, 1992 March 2, 1992
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
February 3, 1992- Mayor and Common Council continued to a date certain in order
to renotice.
January 21, 1992 - Mayor and Common Council continued appeal, and directed City
Attorney to return with a written legal opinion listing options available to
Council.
December 16, 1991 - Mayor and Common Council continued appeal, and directed staff
to prepare alternatives, and return in 30 days with recommendations.
November 6, 1991 - Planning Commission deny Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 and
Variance No. 91-08.
Recommended motion:
Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council deny the appeal and deny
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 and Variance No. 91-0 E based on the Findings
of Fact contained in the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated
November 6, 1991.
, t!
~~~"
Al Bough ~
Al Boughey
Contact person:
. Staff Report
Supporting data attached:
384-5357
Phone:
Ward:
6
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. DescriPtion)
Finance:
Council Notes:
75-0262
Agenda Item No. '/ /
li1'
C.1YV:.OF SAN BER~DINO - REQUEST ~ 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 March 2, 1992
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.
BACKGROUND
At the meeting of the Mayor and Common Council on January 21,
1992, the appeal was continued until such time as the City
Attorney could return with a written legal opinion listing the
options available to the Council. The Mayor and Common Council
continued this item to March 2, 1992 (Attachment A).
See the attachments for a more complete discussion of the previous
Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council actions.
75.0264
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28/Variance No. 91-08
Mayor and Common CeCil Meeting, March 2, 19~
,Page 2 ~
RECOMMENDATION
staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council deny the appeal
and deny Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 antl Variance No 91-08
based on the Findings of Fact contained in the Staff Report to the
Planning Commission dated November 6, 1991:
~D
staff recommends that the distance standards for convenience
stores not be amended and the Variance section not be amended to
include reductions to the distance requirements for convenience
stores.
Prepared by:
Denise s. Moonier
Assistant Planner
for Al Boughey, AICP
Director of Planning and Building Services
Attachment:
1 - Legal Opinion, City Attorney's Office
2 - Mayor and Common Council staff
Report dated January 9,1992,
Att. A - Convenience store matrix
3 - Mayor and Common Council Staff
Report dated December 5, 1991
Exhibit A - Letter of Appeal
B - statement of Planning
Commission Action
C - Official Notice of PUblic
Hearing
D - November 6, 1991 Planning
Commission minutes
E - Staff Report to Planning
commission dated
November 6, 1991
>
-
-
I r-1"
.
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
JAMES F. PENMAN
City Attorney
February 25, 1992
Opinion No. 92-05
TO: Mayor and Common Council
RE: Conditional Use Permit 91-28 and Variance 91-08
for 1255 West Baseline, Mr. & Mrs. Kenzie Wooten
ISSUE
What options are available to the Mayor & Council on the
appeal from the Planning Commission's denial of Conditional Use
Permit [CUP] 91-28 and Variance 91-08 to construct a convenience
store with off-site sales of beer and wine?
CONCLUSION
Based upon the facts underlying this appeal, the Mayor and
Council have only the following two options permitted by law:
(1) The Mayor and Council may deny the appeal and deny CUP
91-28 and Variance 91-08; or
(2) The Mayor and Council may continue the hearing and direct
staff to process an amendment to the Development Code to revise the
distance criteria for convenience stores [Section 19.06.030(2)(F)]
and for establishments with off-site sales of alcoholic beverages
[Section 19.06.030(2)(B)].
The Mayor and Council cannot approve CUP 91-28 or Variance 91-
08 at this time because the applications are inconsistent with the
Development Code.
III
III
CITY HALL
300 NORTH '0' STREET. SAN BERNARDINO. CALIFORNIA 92418
(714) 384-5355
A.,..,.A l"'MtnJ r ,
.
.
To : Mayor ~d Common Council
Re : Conditional Use Permit 91-28 ~d Vari~ce 91-08
for 1255 West Baseline, Mr. & Mrs. Kenzie Wooten
Page: 2
FACTS
(Taken from Planning Department Files and Staff Report
and discussions with Value Homes
and Planning Department staff)
The applicant requests a CUP to establish a convenience store
at 1255 West Baseline Street, which would include off-site sales of
beer and wine. The applicant also requests a Variance from
Development Code Section 19.06.030(2)(F) which requires a 10,000
square foot minimum lot size for convenience stores and a Variance
from Development Code Section 19.26.040 which establishes standards
for off-street loading spaces.
The project is proposed for a 6,250 square foot site which is
located 255 feet from a community church, the Iglesia Church of God
Pentecostal, at 1207 West Baseline Street. The subject property is
also located next door to an existing residence at 1247 West
Baseline Street, and within 1,000 feet of four existing outlets for
off-site sales of alcoholic beverages.
On March 27, 1991, the property owners, Kenzie and Brenda
Wooten, initially submitted through their agent, Steven J. Stiemsma
of Value Homes, an application filed as Review of Plans 91-13 to
construct 2,500 square feet of retail/office space on the subject
property. [A copy of Application for Review of Plans 91-13 is
attached ~s Exhibit 1.] Although the Application Supplement states
that the business will involve the sale of pre-paCkaged food and
beverage as a "convenience store", this application did not request
a permit for off-site sales of alcoholic beverages. Also on March
27, 1991, Steven J. Stiemsma submitted three checks which totaled
$1,460.00 for processing fees for Review of Plans 91-13. [A copy of
Miscellaneous Cash Receipt dated March 27, 1991 is attached as
Exhibit 2.] Two of the three checks which Mr. Stiemsma presented
on March 27, 1991 were dated September 7, 1990. These two checks
referenced the "Wooten Job plan review". [A copy of the two checks
is attached as Exhibit" 3.] On or about April 3, 1991, the bank
stamped these two checks "Account Closed" and returned them to the
City Treasurer's office. On April 12, 1991, pursuant to Municipal
Code Section 3.10.010, the Finance Department informed and directed
the Planning Department to discontinue processing the project due
to unpaid fees. On April 12, 1991 the Planning Department
telephoned Value Homes, advised them of the circumstances and the
fees necessary for continuing the project, and advised them that a
Historical Resources Evaluation Report was needed if they planned
to demolish a structure constructed prior to 1941. At that time,
Value Homes requested that the Planning Department deem the
HE/oeo/CUP91-28.opn
2
.
.
To Mayor and Common Council
Re : Condi~iona1 Use Permi~ 91-28 and Variance 91-08
for 1255 Wes~ Baseline, Mr. & Mrs. Kenzie Woo~en
Page: 3
application withdrawn and close the case. The Planning Department
deemed Review of Plans 91-13 withdrawn on April 12, 1991. [See
attached Exhibit 4, a copy of a letter from the Planning Department
to Steven J. Stiemsma of Value Homes dated April 12, 1991, which
shows a copy sent to Kenzie and Brenda Wooten.]
The property owners and their representative subsequently
contacted the Planning Department to determine if the application
could be revised and new fees submitted in order to develop a
project for this site. The Planning Department met with the
property owners and their representative, Paul Weiler of Value
Homes, and advised them that Ordinance MC-770, effective April 12,
1991, required a 10,000 square foot minimum lot size for
convenience stores. After reviewing the site characteristics, the
Planning Department determined that the applicant needed to submit
fees and a new application for the off-site sale of beer and wine
and an application for a variance to permit construction of a
convenience store on a parcel less than 10,000 square feet in size.
On May 11, 1991 the applicant submitted CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-
08.
On May 30, 1991, the Development Review Committee met with the
applicant and requested that he submit a revised site plan and a
Historical Resources Evaluation Report pursuant to Ordinance MC-694
because the project proposed to demolish a structure which was
believed to have been constructed prior to 1941. On May 30, 1991,
the Planning Department sent a letter to Value Homes with a copy
sent to Kenzie and Brenda Wooten, informing them that their
applications for CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-08 were incomplete
because a Historical Resources Evaluation Report was not submitted.
[A copy of this May 30, 1991, letter is attached as Exhibit 5.]
Also on May 30, 1991, the Planning Department sent a letter to
Value Homes informing them that the City's new Development Code
would become effective on June 3, 1991 and that CUP 91-28 and
Variance 91-08 would be subject to the new Development Code if the
project applications were not completed by that date. [A copy of
this May 30, 1991 letter is attached as Exhibit 6.]
The Planning Department received the applicant's revised site
plan on June 18, 1991. The applicant submitted the Historical
Resources Evaluation Report to the Planning Department on August 6,
1991 [A copy of the submittal letter dated August 6, 1991 from
Value Homes is attached as Exhibit 7.] The Planning Department
deemed the applications for CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-08 complete
on August 9, 1991. [A copy of the "deemed complete" letter which
was mailed to Value Homes and a copy sent to Kenzie and Brenda
Wooten is attached as Exhibit 8.]
HE/ses/CUP91-28.opn
3
II l'
.
.
To Mayor and Common Council
Re : Conditional Use Permit 91-28 and Variance 91-08
for 1255 West Baseline, Mr. & Mrs. Kenzie Wooten
Page: 4
On November 6, 1991, the Planning Commission held a noticed
public hearing on CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-08. The applicant,
Kenzie Wooten, and Carl Dean and Peter A. Mecudante spoke in
support of the application. Three neighboring residents on Orange
Street: John Hernandez, Lupe Moranga and Jim Rodriguez opposed the
application. Norma Garcia, representing over 150 people at her
church, the Iglesia Church of God Pentecostal at 1207 W. Baseline,
also spoke in opposition to the application. The Planning
Commission voted 4-3 to deny CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-08.
ANALYSIS
Development Code Section 19.06.030(2)(B) prohibits businesses
which require a California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
license from locating within 500 feet of any religious institution
and 100 feet of any residence, among other requirements.
Development Code Section 19.06.030 ( 2 ) ( F) prohibits convenience
stores from locating within 1,000 feet from an existing convenience
store, among other requirements.
CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-08 do not comply with these
ordinances in the Development Code because the proposed site is
located next door to an existing residence, within 255 feet of an
existing church, and within 1,000 feet of four existing convenience
stores. Development Code Section 19.36.050(1) requires that the
proposed use comply with all applicable provisions of the
Development Code. A variance under Development Code Chapter 19.72
cannot be granted to these applications to avoid these distance
regulations because Section 19.72.030 prescribes that variances may
be granted only for specified requirements which do not include
these distance regulations.
The Development Code became effective June 3, 1991. The
applications for CUP 91-28 and Variance 91-08 were deemed complete
on August 6, 1991. Thus, pursuant to Development Code Section
19.02.070(7), these applications cannot be approved unless they
comply with the Development Code.
A review of the evidence has shown that the City has processed
these applications in a timely manner. The applicant's failure to
complete all application requirements prior to the effective date
of the Development Code was not due to any transgressions by City
staff.
HE/8es/CUP91-28.opn
4
I r- I :
.
.
To : Mayor and Co_on Council
Re : Conditional Use Permit 91-28 and Variance 91-08
for 1255 West Baseline, Mr. & Mrs. Kenzie Wooten
Page: 5
Upon receipt of the applicant's checks for Review Of Plans 91-
13, the City promptly attempted to negotiate them. The City
informed the applicant within a reasonable time that the checks
were returned by the bank. Apparently the checks "bounced" because
the applicant's representative "sat" on the checks for more than
six months before presenting them to the City.
In conclusion, these applications for CUP 91-28 and Variance
91-08 cannot be granted unless the distance requirements in the
Development Code for convenience stores and ABC licensed businesses
are amended.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
HENRY EMPENO, JR.,
Deputy City Attorney
Concur:
JAMES F. PENMAN
:'
I: J
.....,...."" /. c-;,.;. ,J"""-
ty Attorney
cc: W.R. Holcomb, Mayor
Council Members
Rachel Krasney, City Clerk
David C. Kennedy, City Treasurer
Shauna Clark, City Administrator
All Department Heads
HE/ses/CUP91-28.opn
5
PLANNING AND BUILDING SE
APPLICATION FOR
REVIEW OF PLANS
ZONING DESIGNATION GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION GEOLOGIC i DYES
CG-f! /" .'~ SEISMIC
,,/-/-. ." HAZARD ZONE:
FLOOD 0 YES ::: ZONE A AIRPORT NOISE! _ YES REDEVELOPMENT !rYES
HAZARD CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA:
ZONE: NO C ZONE B ::::g"NO = NO
I"
CITY OF SAN BERNAR
OWNER: ,rL~/~ ., ..5/:(..;ttJI( .. ......-.....
ADDRESS: /~<.!.:!. .//_~~~~.. /(...
_....,,7 ... '- V~~}(..r /-(.,.~.
?
~/ .;;~~, ;:/:;...A//:'", ~ ~;...
TELEPHONE' ;;-'/ /. f?:..4':.:.::'~' j.
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: :!'..:~Z"C' ;~
GENERAL LOCATION:
1/ ,,'
,1'0('"...'" '/~j
,... .
_Jd7~7.~i.r .;~-:'C.'"..;.-./
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: I:/)'- :.~'.7, -"/,
- -
II \
ES DEPARTMENT
GU'-/~
APPLICANT:' .'44':= ,1/....""'->!J
ADDRESS I~ t. ;</. 11;;< i-1'&;// .
..J:...v ,C;....w'.4r~/A/..-:. c..4
/"'/..11 .--7-......., n_",.
TELEPHONE! /I'~ / /~U -.....v,-"r'
_ ~4F ....r.;q~~
--
I' .J'z,,~,;t"7":,(;:7.:vO ("/t./:'?.... '"
. -.),,/."1' ..~- t"r
~r /~.v0</ ~. .....-?
/ c..?....."A.""'~
,-
-"'/ .
HIGH FIRE
HAZARD ZONE:
= YES
NO
SEWERS: ~YES
- NO
SUBMITTALS:
;: ~ APPUCATION (ONE COPY). '. ~ PREUMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION.
, ,
~ SITE PLANS. FLOOR PLANS & ELEVATIONS /J I "tJ CHECK FOR $215.00 MADE PAYABLE TO SAN BERNARDINO
\ (16 COPIES EACH, ALL FOLDED). \ COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT (IF APPLICABLE)
-e ONE COLORED ELEVATION AND MATERIALS BOARO:,. "~CHECKUST SIGNED AND DATED.
. \
iir PREUMINARY TITLE REPORT IJi! SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION.
(WITHIN LAST 6 MONTHS). " -./
\.JL!!' 8.1/2 X l' TRANSPARENCY (SITE PLAN.
LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION BUILDING ELEVATIONS AND FLOOR PLAN
(NOTARIZED).
"SIGNATURE OF
LEGAL OWNER (S)
and/or
APPLICANT
-R1?;:~
DATE APPUCATION RECEIVED:
ASSIGNED APPUCATION NO.:
D~TE APPUCATION ACCEPTED:
~~;.;i
- --.,
;,. 1..//' '" I
.rl.. f
:l. 'V'""'/I
DATE:
DATE:
DATE:
E.R.C./
D. R C. MEETING
- APPROVED
- DENIED
PI.AN.2.03 PAGE 1 OJ:' 3 (2.1101
EXII8IT ,~;;; 1..
1,1:
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDI
LANNING AND BUILDING SERV ES DEPARTMENT
LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION
TO: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
(TEL. NO.):
.'&Ae.-..e- ,/ k~ +//
~R~ ~v~
~ ~-,!9' -~? /~
FROM: (NAME):
(ADDRESS):
RE: APPLICATION NUMBER(S):
THIS LET'iER SHALL. SERVE TO NOTIFY YOU AND VERIFY THAT IIWE AM/ARE THE LEGAL
OWNER(Sl OF THE PROPE.=lTY DESCRIBED IN THE ATIACHED APPUCATlON AND DO HERESY
AUTHORIZE:
(NAME):
(ADDRESS):
(TEL. NO.): 1~
TO FILE AND REPRESENT MY/CUR INTEREST IN THE ABOVE REFE;:iENCEO APPLICAITC!'l(S).
I/WE AM/ARE THE LEGAL OWNER(S) OF SAID PRCPERTY: HAVE READ THE FOREGOING LETTER
OF AUTHORIZATION AND KNOW THE CONTENTS THEROF: AND DO HERBY CERTIFY THAi THE
SAME IS TRUE OF MY/OUR OWN KNOWLEDGE. 1IWE:-~RTIF'f (OR DECLARE) UNDER PEl',jAL TV
OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE C.- ;AUFORNIA THAi THE INFORMATICN
CONTAINED IN THE ABCVE REFERENCED ~WUC1NtS) IS 1UE AND CCRRECT.
SIGNAiURE:S)OFLEGALOWNER(S):~~1!U7 ~ _ /<+ "~I
r1/f1 P :(/ ~>{; t 1-~ r;:: . Q~' \ I
OAiS
OAiE
SUBc:17RIBED AND SWCRN TO BEFORE ME THIS 4Cf:::' DAY OF-/):"!L/1 C 1,,--,
19-,--.
.,
7. c
,<.; '4:f--'-, C.
NC.l ARY~..JeL;C
"
!cl~'>'J..{__
..I
OFFICIAL SEAL
BETTY E. SCHMElZEl
NOTM'f MUC . CALf_
SNl~cwm
III COImL Ell... Au,. 6. Ut3
'" ... "- ..-..,
......_ncMl~1
:I:.AA_:.:7 =.&Gi. :;;:. ...;CI1
, .
_TY OF SAN BERN.DINO "
PLANNING OEPARTM T
PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION FORM
\... ~
r (PUBLIC WOAKS PAOJECTS SHALL INCLUDE ATTACHMENT 'A1 """
A. GENERAL 1 NFORMAWB APPLICATION NOMB!R
1. Applicant/Developer 2. Contact person for
s-rall""":.~ . environmental
~J5</ J ..!776'Y..0'~ (~L
Nfl Name
'{4j~ ,L/~.F..r
Firm Firm
/$CD // hT W~
Street Address Street Address
c..Cw ~/1JeJ7#/t) &.
City State Zip City State ZiS!~
(~<< ~!!I/ - ~.!'1'/ Telephone Number
Te ephone Number
3. Address/General Location of Project ~,)%/ ~~ ~W-<1(6'"
e'~ ~
4. Assessor's Parcel Number(s) .'3,,~ 1'J'7/ - t/lj
5. Description of Project ~~ c!f/'7. ~~1I'L ~?JI~~
6. Will any permits be reqUi~Om agencies other than
the city? yes no
If yes, list the permits and responsible agency:
\.. ~
AEVISED 10/87
PAOE 1 a: 5
.
feet, ,/ ') /
II l'
~
B. PROJEC,:'. gl~ .-'"07<)32..'+1
1. Site Areal ;" b -o.? square
~
2. 8u11d1nq Se1qhtl feet 3. Nullbe r ot
4. 8u11d1nq Ar.al 2t~~~ square teet
5. Park1nq Requiredl'~ space.
d
6. Parking Provided: /' spaces
acres.
Plooral .:z
It off-site parking is propoaed, please explainl
7.
Will project be built in phases?
ye. V no
a. If yes, how many units/square teet per pha.e?
b. Total units, square feet?
C. ~_Y~l
Subject Property: ~/f1'Uf 1J!.Jit('MN/~E h7~ UJ"~AU"' ~ 4>~~~
North
South
Existing:
/.,kr) ...
~.----r;T ~J1;~M/_
/2.!; l'/ht?;o /if /.
&'x'~J7,(/7 Z~.
F</S77-t./; i/~'" h~Hk'//)
/ l
Pr~osed:
C~.Ao?~/"""<:::
East
-P~~~/
al.iv"'~/.4:z/
?
~"--~~/..
West
D. E~J~~~_SITE
1. Indicate any unique existing topographic features.
r:o/ EY/{r7i/f .lrl:PfF p.J"6J,I!t- ,!~~E r r'---
2. Will the project modify existing natural features? Explain.
;<j;
3. If applicable, estimate cubic yards of grading involved
in project:
Cut- Pill-
4. Maximum heiqht and grad. of natural slop.sl / f&"r
'" ~
REVISEO 10/87 PAGE 2 OF 5
5. Muimum .9ht and grad. of construed 8J.OP..' 4~
6.
M.tbod. u..d to pr.v.nt .011
during con.truct1on .nd .fter
5Af$ ~
.ro.1on in
d.velopm.ntl
project
.re.
E. FLORA A~l~~
1. List typ.. of veg.tation and trees in project ar.a, ~~
2.
List type. of wildlife found in proj.ct ar..,
~~
P. ~J~JP~~C~LLHISTORICAL
i .
1. Is th.re any known archa.ological or hi.torical si9nitt~ance
of the site area or ~ithin 1/2 mil. froll the propos.d sit.?
If so, expl &in I &&!.
G. HUMAN_~6f..E1I....lmllnM
1.
Will the project increase
project area? Explain.
~Stin9 noise
lev.ls
in the
2. Will the proj.ct u.., .tore or dispose of pot.ntially
hazardous mat.rials such as loxic substance., fl&lDlD&bl..
or explosives? Explain ~
3. Will the proj.ct incr.... the amounts of dust, ash, saok. or
odor during con.truction or aft.r d.v.lopm.nt? Explain.
B. lbW.Jn_AND SERVI'LIMPACTS
1.
Location of n.arest Pir. Stationl 9rJl 0/ / .ffk.K"
/A ~ ftN/ IIh'v#;r ~
Distanc. from project S1t.,/:r; ....
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 3 OF 5
II \1
2.
Locatio~ n.ar..t Polic.
Di.t.nc. froll proj.ct .it..
Loc.tion .nd n.... of ne.r..t. school.. .JP'~ /.w.:f'A- ~; ""'_hr
School distr 1ct. /i - J.~' ..w/.t~ ~.:.
St.tion.e'n <Jr
2-?Ji ~~
I~."e /Ji;r ~
J.
Distanc. froll proj.ct .it.. ,# -,~ /tW.e'.F
4. Location and nUle of n..r.st park.. Ed/.N~ .#.AlI!',(:' ~ $/
/~ .7 ~.T~v
Distanc. froll project sit.. ~.~ ~/~~
s. Loc.tion and nUl. of n..re.t libr.ry.
Distance froll proj.ct site. ~~.t~
6. . J.c. sewer trunk lin.. av.ilabl. within 200 feet of project .ite?
~ yes ____ no If no, how f.r?
7.
Sewer capacity rights purcha.ed? _ ye. _ no
numb.r._.
; .
:~
8. Art/Water trunk line. available within 200 f.et of project .it.?
--1.:::::" ye. ____ no
I. MITICATI9~~EASURES
(Attach additional .heets if n.c....ryl
De.cribe
mitigate
impacts:
type and anticipat.d eff.ct of any mea.ur.s propo..d to
or eliminate pot.ntially significant adv.rse environm.ntal
.~ ~~.E ~~U'-"l{~ /~ -~ ~'e A.:.
REVISED 10117
PAGE. OF 5
J. An~'HMENTS . .
Ye. No
1. Geology/Soil. aeport V'
2. Liquefaction a_port ~
3. Traffic Report V
4. Noiae Analysis V
5. Drainage Study ~
6. P rel iminuy Grading Plan V-
--
,. . ~Jr]:~1'119B
i .
. .
I hereby certify that the statementa furnished above and in
the attached exhibits present the data and information required
for this initial evaluation to the beat of my ability, and that
the facta, statements, and information pre.ented are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
( ~d"~~A
"/
~- {?--?,p
out ./
Foa:
~1" ~~~
. TITLE
.- REVISED 10/87
PAGE 5 OF 5
II 1
CITY OF SAN BERN
INO PLANNING AND BUILDIN
RVICES DEPARTMENT
APPLICATION SUPPLEMENT
APPLICATION #
~
"'II
1. List names and addresses of all principles. including owner, operator, applicant, etc. (Add pages ~
necessary) .
_~~, ,~//AJIf" ~L:( /~ .~h:f"~A- -/J:2?4/'7r~ck.~~~
~
AvuBt-,- rU0/7/~ j,(~2;(/ - /<)~t1 Jt/~~/ 4v~ k-~~~""".. p
2. Describe the adual type of business proposed, particularly any features unique to this type of business
or operation.
~.-''C~~ 1"7'/~ J,~//
3. List all types of materials, all chemicals, and all equipment used in the business, particularly hazardous
materials and equipment which might generate light. odor. noise, dust, vibration, etc.
~A./~
4. Do any ~ese materials or chemicals require CalOsha Materials Safety Data Sheets? Yes .
No ~ . If so. please identify. '
r.""':~~
...
PLAN.6.cM PAGE I OF 2 (..QOI
II I'
.
5. Describe hours of operation.
.
"'-'to NoH - ~.m ~
7:.a; /II-#? - /::;7.'(/0 KI....,
CF&:Cc
,
-lIZIcZe-
6. Total anticipated number of employees
4 f~p
-::? ~?t;'"'
7. Total number of employees on site at anyone time
2'
~ n"ur
i
?' ~rc,,=-
8.
Does the business involve the sale of any food or beverages?
If so, please describe in detail.
/'
~.I/ 'S/?F ~ - ~.!.L-
fu
I
.e.
9. Does the County require a Business Plan? Yes
NoL
, O. Govemment Code Section 65962.5 requires the Planning Depanment to make available to applicants
the most current list of "Identified Hazardous Waste Sites" from the state Office of Planning and
Research.
All applicants must sign the following statement in order to deem the application complete.
"', -~~/ d j?.t7~Aw7 ,cenity that I have reviewed the list of
"Identified Hazardous Waste Sites" from the state Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and have
determined ite' this application~1 ~n that list."
Name I Date 1r-<{9-ft
Title
c:rn0l"~
---
Pl.AN-I.o. PAGE 2 OF 2 {..lOl
. 4.
/5
/6
;:.
~10
II.
,'CITY OF SAN BERNA
II I
o PLANNING AND BUILDING S
ICES DEPARTMENT
REVIEW OF PLANS CHECKLIST
Preliminary grading and melllod of draining the Slle
.,/13
~.
.~.
Dri_s: a) show all points of Ingress and egress: b)
show conflic1 points sucri as _r driveways. s.reets or
alleys Wllllin 300 feel of proposed dnveway (can be on a ~\t.16.
_18 plan); c) mUSI sheM palll of travel across
driveway. 1-\,.... ~4 / 'L-....A'1 ~A"i 411ft.' 17.
Handicapped pat1<ing. ramps. signs and pavement
manungs.
Part<ing layout shOWIng sIZes and location 01 each srall.
bKkout areas and Cnving alstes.
. 7.
Wheel curb and/or minimum 25 fool landscape dlVlder.
. '8.
09
.,120
.~
vf.
~3
Frontage streets: name. centerline. curbline. nght..ofw
way. Improvements and Utility poles.
Location, height and composition of walls and fences.
Location of refuse enclosures w,tI'I wall height and type
of matenats.
Outside slorage area.
Location and melllod oflighung (hoodlng devIC8S). 0 V
LocatIOn of fira hydrants. 0 J
Vard and spaoes between buildings or between properlY
lines and bul6dlngs.
Setbacl< distances: a) zoning; b) e_quake; c) ftood
control.
Sidewalk and interior walks Including ramps and curtl
ramps.
Landscaping: building satbacks. parilwey and required
percent of parillng 101s.
Concrete header separating all paved vehicular areas
from landscaping.
~ Nom arrow and scale.
Tpe plans shall conlain the following information In a legend;
Vj. Square footage or grass and nel_ge of propeny. 9.
0. Square footage of building or addition. 10.
o
vi 4. LOlcoveoage<%).
/5
The following rtems shall be shown and labeled on Ihe submitted plol plan. Distinguish between eXisting (dashed lines)
and "roposed (solid lines) and show sufficient dimenSions to define all Items. Plans should be crawn to scale by a
aualdled IndIVidual such as an ArcMect. Engineer or Licensed Building DeSigner.
I,. Propertt lines and dimensions.
./ 2. BuUding and stnJcture footPrints.
,/3
./6
/7
/8
Loading zones.
Dimensions and nature of aU _sements.
Location map (vicinity m-c)
Location of wa..,Jsewer mains.
. 12. U_ RighI of W., (in"""'alion a..ilable from
Engineering Department)
-
Square footage of landscaping. elisting and proposed
W1\tr dimenSIons and percent of landscaping.
ParI<ing required. pMcing prDVided (coV8fed and
uncoV8fed).
Type of building conStlUC1ion.
/Wlllmatic IIlrinlders in building. (yes... no).
-
Zoning distncl.
c.c;.-2-
Ii/P 11
0'2
~.
Building occupancy.
Number of employees (if known).
Square footage of seating (iI applicable).
Nawre of business
Assessor's parcel number. legal descnption and
address.
.;14.. Name. address. and phone number of plan preparer
and -cplican!.
. 15. Liquefaction Zone (Ves Dr No).
-
I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE INCLUDED ALL OF THE ITEMS LISTED ABOVE AND UNDERSTAND
THAT MISSING ITEMS WILL RESULT IN THE DELAY OF THE PROCESSING OF MY APPLICATION.
>/ ~'/'//5 /
-3-27-7'/ ~~
/00'" ' TU:::~J"
0" CI' .... ......-0
CI......~---=-
,..J'~ ~
~...
P\.AN.2.0:l PAGE:I OF 3
12.101
w.
w.
1
i
I ), c
'j I ;, · "
- ' ,'" 1)\
r- lI~: -:;>: If) 0
L" , 1"""' -" -,
.... _~ i ~
...., !"('v J
~ v \. :r 1
.
,. -, ~ - ,
. '" ,
I
- ,.. I \ I
- I j' I
.. 1 ,j
"
II) t _ 1 -1 It ... f ,
r! ~i' c I
-i~ I ... c l
-I '\- II'I ' , 0 . ,
u j
I , -, I ... ~
- -NlII\ 1 i ,
:r :r ,... 7" '.J . J
r-r( z 1
'" i
\ 0
~ ~ \ --,~ \ Q ,
- C I I
- ., '8
;. ~ ! .
I j\ 0 ,
..
~I n~ 0 I
ell ~I CI I
- ~i V
\..Ii! C .,
-I ~ \t- o 1
\ I I ~ j
~' .\ .,,, i" 0
- ,. I ..
~ , .. 0"'1 -" d 0
\ . , .....1 1 Q j
I .. I C\ I ,
:;, ~' '0 Q 1 'Xi 3! ~ I
-, ' ~\ c 1\ .
... "Z ~ i
-! . '"
Cl. ~~ ~ \r 0
- ~ VI .... !
w ~ ,~ .
0 .... , VI u
- - ... \
w .1 ::ftl .- .., ~ ;~ ,- J
... ~
lC 71 ,..-i :;
.el ~ '.J ~ .
:z: \l'l i- ~ . 1
0 ~ , '.. u
z en ~ .I .. :;
is c ~ Q, 'J.. \l - ! E 1
0 ~ ',lJ ~ ...... "2 ~
a:: - 0 j":' i! ~ 1 .
< en . ~ u
Z = -:t. ~ S ... CI I
a:: I.l ~ - ! 1
0 r'. '>
W ~ .
cl .::! - W
CD W 001 ..l , \ ~ .
...
z ~ el - '< '2 J ,
z E ~ z .~
< c 0 1 Jl ... S!
~ 1 I - C 1 j
Ul ~ . 1 0 --- ., ~
~ .... i i v E :> l
.... "0 C "
w I = -
0 ., . =
0 > \ I Ul .. ...
> en ., '0; Co ..
I ., . ., > 5
~ - ... ~ i .&: 0 . 0 III
..
U ~ 0 a:: ~ .... 0
O. J
, .- __,.....,..J
~. -.. ..... ~.... ..- . r - ...
EXHlQ;r ,~- 2. -
-.
-.-.-
r - . ,-,... ..:.......
.
. '..
.,
.....
~ l c' ... \
" \ I . \. \
.' 'l" \ " "
. ,,' I. '. '
., ';
\ ~ . ". ' ~ .. .
I' ; )}' .'
., \ I', 'J '. \
J " I :;
. ..' .\. \, .;
- '.
Ln .
-.
..
-
".
'"
0
0
0
!... ~.
~.
- -
;;,
0
'"
r
~
Ln
-
-
=;
.. "
0:.
-
0':
Ln.... .
I I
I. \. "
,
., .
. .
o
OR:':
~. ~'::
.." \ ~";
0" .....-
'i. ~~~i
II ~~.
I ....'':
I :::;:
iCS":~
I ( <:.~;
IA~ .-;.
ci iA~' :{
'10 C'_ .,
,.0
l~
I~
~ '0
j.-:
...,
:. c
\ ,..
". I\.. .'::a', :.
:'-./;/..'l/ ~ :11'::
;. . '. . ,.....
. :-,:'t.I,~ji'~'{
, ..,,'." Z cs."', "
0...... IDi"
m. CI
~ I: :.
> ....
:JJ' 'n'
2:!:O~~
zm
o:l;Z
. en"
C> ~ -...
>m::aCl'l
zc:~
..c:
~ mn,J\
_0 -l "'
:r!6Oi
sZz;l
:::n~
. . ~~
'., :\-'
,.' I):",
".\ /.
. ',""
!'t -~. .'.'.}J.\~"
~'I~";(\:;:-'
~~; _ 6
~I\ lip C/(
~ I ~ ~ ....
en I",~ l!i tit
I
,
.-. .....
..........~
EXHIn1r
"" .
.,- 3
11 1
~ .- - . - --..-.
~~NOO(!~IkI.~;~.?;.~
I .
,
"
~
~ ...
I . Qa'OSIT 'TO CI'.EClT q; ,
~. '00 NOT .WRIT~\1X..l<R~;\5U:lE.J ~'. . .
I 0'. "CITV<nr: ~)te~.~~'~ LINE
\ : .
MAR 2 8 1991\
CENTRAL CASHIERltlG.:"
CITY OF S,\,' BERNAaOINO' '.
;O~RD OF WATER CO"./dISSlO_
'J
i'
I
,
1
.' ,,!.
';:; ;'6};; " ';':
,
.
\
; .
'.i
.'
:
.,
.
'.
~.
id
. .
'.' .;
~.i
.- -,
:~1':..
;.''';
. ,", :.'.\'
\"'" .
. 't, .
" . " ~"...'.
~l ...:_ t::1:)'
. l ""'~ .::::."
;~. e~ 1:".4."
'. '._! :im ,r.:~l
. :st= 1:'I.J
-~51! 1"1'"
'~"''''lI:,:::::.
. 53 ..,
-4
........
~-,
'-~ '
.ct
~ ;; '~....
o co ~ .'
-~..,..~.
.Q\ ,.. .j ')~ .
~~~''''':03 '.) ~~-'~'
~o}.-_,,,~~
.",..r~~J~'
r- -~
*FEOE;::'Lff~E...:c '~::::'F~C.;::~.:'~::tS~~' ..
1..1,'
, .
..
..J
r' ",-"
./
'.
, ..
.')" i .\
\.' :"l..
,I'. I,
\ ( ! ~ ..
I' ~. I
.... '.\
I
,
I
\ I'
j ...:,..
, .
.' .~.;..:
.'. .
O' ~(: \
',',.
...., t I
0/.',
LI1 'I,
"'\\"'- ."
IJ"1! :.','
~'..
.
.
o f'~;:
o (,."e
,....'
~N~.~:
o c.,;,
~ ~.~:
-
... ,
-,-
..
. ~
"
.
-.
o
o
o
o
..
o
o
o
o
o
.-.
.
IT'~T-
.
ENC~(1~~ 5?;~;'-~' ...
.......
......':"
. ... . '''-')-'',-'{r\...r~l
:__.._' . I ,\ oj....: ,(,
~
f'l' .
" : '" (i {l'.
. . '. 1 \ \
II)" ; \
,. .'. I'.
'. ,
I
I;
i
.\
. ,
:?
-
<>
.,
:-,
,-
o
o
...
...
>
~
(II
ga~
....<
1ft",
....
..
...
)
. .~
,I ')
.1'1
I. ,
I: .
H
n 1
..
I H .~
; ji t
! "
I .
1
I
)
I
I
.1
./
,
;
EPoSIT TO Cp.t::,T 0'
tl _ ''"I L"'ER
CC HCT WR . AiI',RS.. j?qioI.Bl,i:OJ/OoTHIS LINE
::!E~;:'=lJ~ - J,l.t'''.'~'I:J;.Ii.:'\'-l~E.
'i
,
"
.
I.
r
~
r .
I
MAR281991
. . " ,.....1..::;
CENTRAL C"'S~:::'~":' ,
rv Of "'j EE..,.~.....J,.
Cll' '?"" I'I'~' -.' .... 'r-~
~OARD OF.W~TER c~,..~.~'. I."'"
'~ .'.....1."
'.'
.'.
.' ~. .
,.
,- 4.. &. .......... LII'__" ^ ,""'.:.... _.. ""',.... ""-........
'" ~..,..~.., ..,~......~..~.~~
\ G -~ i ~ ':: :y~~.1 :)W;" _~.
"'l .OJ.....~. ...~ ". _...; ..,,_._......""'" _
a:
:i:
::.
N
l!f
'""'
o
CJ1
'""'
en
;;' 'ifi~r~
"" ~Si. b
-. .. ~ .'
,. ~..-
o ! 21. .d"
o . .
o ".1-
~ l~;
ct .
~ ..:1
~ .,::.:.\ '. i ~'
! -..
r r~-
~ b
C
f;
E';
~
i
'11\
'f)
C;;
1J
~
'J' ~
....-".,
........V"
z 8....
.. .
:::'"0
III~.
z ..
... n
~~o~
Zlftzv.:
, 9 ~ fn~:I>
() .. -l
=-- ~:II
,ef,~~
~"'..-
"0
~z
:::n
, 0
I .
M r
.~'~
.". ,
.r,
,":..J
~....
, .j
, .(<
. ,
. ..""'"
~:.~_..~.
. .
. '.......... . ~ll' ,,,,__,- .................._....
...
o
-
<0
<0
~
N
C\l
..
'.'1
.'::'
0..
<(
. -.
.-
.FEDfIU,;
..._ ._0.
I.' J
...=_ 1:1:;.
,...~~ ,0';".
eSlI::;:J
.,:0;:' ""'1
.;:.,,:t I..:..
""!.:9~ ':'I,J
=~~O(;:. 1"'''1
~-~ ,::;::,
?,;i:; '....
~OI"OO
...;::;3
.:: = ~.C F S ,E ': ._
1
I
I
I
I
j i
-'
,.
II 11
..,7,. \"
.' - 0= .
San l)ernardino
OE''''''''IIIIN1 0' ItI.ANNINQ ANO IUII"OING Stlll'lICIS
- .:.. ::;
~ .
=
- - - - - ~
April 12, 1991
Steven StiE!lllSl1il
Value Hares
22365 Barton Paad
Grand '1'errace, CA 92324
RE: Review of Plans :10. 91-lJ
Dear Sirs:
CUr records show ti'.at ?e'liew 0: ?lans :;0. 91-13 was filed with
t:le Depart::ent of Pl3r'.I'.i.-.g a",o Building Services on March 27,
1991. ~ver, t..'-.e pro:ec<: ~st be Ceerred Withdrawn because
t.'1e cl:eck sumi~teci to t:-~ City of San ?ernardi..."lO has teen
returr.ed ~.pai.c!. ;;'''1y ~'-.€:r =.ttion regardir.g t.'1is project
wl.ll reqw..re a resui:r.litted a?9licacion with :-aiT.'e!1t of fees
i."1 ':.':e :00 0: a caSIll.ers c::eck.
~ City will process a ref1..lOO for C;eck :;0. 29;3 =.nd this will
be :;;ailed under separate cover.
r: you have ar,y questions, please call :'!r. Paul Dukes, available
i."1 the City's Finance Depart:rrent.
Si."1oe;-ely, '/
i: I ','-.
i.", ;;.,x;/. '/ 'I
. se S. M:lortier
Assistant Planner
cc:
Kensie and Brenda tomton
1588 Western Avenue
San llerr1ardiro, CA 92411
.:
Paul Dukes
City of San Berna...'"di.'1O Fi."1al'Ce Departmant
Sandra Paulsen
Senior Planner
.:. =;;"..l.;;:
-
"
PR/OE J
~RESS
:s.'1/c!as
I. .
- .
17 1 . I 3. . . 507 1 5051
E1(L!'B'T
. t.. J
fill;..; 4
...
I I ,~
.:. =
~n Bernardino ·
DE....'..'", 0'
1- .:. .;j
~,
..I....".".ING AHO IUII.Ol"'G 5E".,,:!!
=l _ _ ...
.
May 30, 1991
Mr. Paul Wieler
Value Komes
22365 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92324
"
RE: Conditional Use Permit No. 91-2B/Variance No. 91-0B/To
construct a 2,033 square foot Office/convenience market
w1th beer and ~lne sales on the south side of Baseline
between Mt. Vernon and Garner, while varying the mini~~~
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 jour
application ~ay be processed:
1. Hist~rical Resources Evaluation Report.
Please assemble all of the requested information and forJard
it to the Planninq and Buildinq Services Oepart~ent 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 Co~~ttee.
, -
. _. 3 -: ;;: ., ~ :: :
: 1 . a 1 1...5 a 1 1 SO S ,
PRIDE j
1;7ESS
., -
E".r:JIT
"Ii." .,
7<'~ ,
...
...
Mr. Paul Wieler
,May 30, 1991
, Page 2
.
.
If the information is not received by ~~is depar~~ent within
six months of the date of this letter, th9 file will be
deemed abandoned. Any 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,
~~:~~~~~~ AICP
Principal Planner
cc: Kensie and Brenda Wooton
1588 Western Ave.
San Bernardino, CA
"
lat
INCCUP91-28
-
II 1
~n'
~. .
Bernardino
01.....IIIT..'"1 011 ......l..NING &-'0 'UII.~llllQ S("VICES
- .:. ~
.:;,
~ - - ....
~ :: .: - : ~
May 30, 1991
Value Homes
22365 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92324
RE: Conditional Use ?e~it No. 91-28/Variance No. 91-08/To
construc~ a 2,033 square foo~ office/convenience market
with beer and Mine sales on ~e south side of Baseline
bet~een Mt. Vernon and Garner, _hile varyinq the minimum
lot size.
Dear Mr. Wieler:
On June 3, 1991, the City'S new Development Code will become
effective. Any projects no~ 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 ~ny cases, these
modifications may result in a project redesiqn 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 deeminq 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 Developmen~ Code.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at (714)
384-5057.
Sincerely,
. '/0 ,.".. ....
/' /,,"~-
-~
-
c--
~. /,
/
~;~<..h
- -
cenis. Moonier
Assistant Planner
lat
DEVCODE
'.
.. ",
::: =.::";:..:l:- 'I
PRIDE ,J
.. IN PROGRESS
~;!
,7 , <I ) " . .. . 50'1" 1 so, 'I"
E'''''''''T
...,J.
'11II-- ,
. -
-
-
I I I:
it:A\'; II V A IIUNit:~UEST
J.
L
PHUJECI
~~~'
(cate) I
Plann1n9 C.part.ent
cln or SAM IIJUfARDIKO,
JOO North -D- Street
San B.rnardino, Calitornia 92411
Attn:
R..
~E~n'~ '.~:~'; ~::~
(N...)
CO\Cii1O).,LA. \
(ca.. N\lmilel')
,
Planner
()s...~+ ql-,1.9~'A~ a,\-o'i
Cear DE'HSE >!DDNI::;,
On :.1=v 30. ;?~~
, .Y .ppUe.~lon
due to inade~ate
(DaU)
w.. de.med incomplete by your department
intormation documented a. tollow.:
1.
2.
~T,T~R'T-~ ---- ----
. . '_ _...L ~-'__~~:)
~':~~w~TrJ~J RE?QRT
3.
tnclo..d pl.... f1nd .11 ot the requ..t.d 1tem.. It 1. .Y
under.tand1n; that 1t th1. 1ntoraat1on 1. sutticient, my ca..
t1le will be deemed coaplete and the project wlll be
react! va ted.
I
It you ~ ne.d additional
,':':';L ~. '.~I::~:.
(Na..)
714-783-3530
~hon. Nuaber)
inforaation,
plea.e
contact
at
.
S1ncerelY,
:cal.raactivat..ea..
~
/' .
. I <, <- P-
-
PAUL A.... E~E:;
V ICE ?RE5 rJE~'H
'IALUE '!G.1ES
/-
//V-~
"Ylll" iT
t. ,m;;.
7
....
-.------..
.. .-. -_.
......, ,__, of_"_'~'
.,.. ".-. -.~. ...... "'.- --.
I! l'
.T1OF .
San Bernardino
AL BOUG!"tE'!",AICF'
DllllEcrOR
DI'AIITIII.T 0' PLA""'Na .... IUI.".o
IIRVICE.
AUgust 9, 1991
Attn: Paul Wieler
Value Homes
22365 Barton Road, Suite 210
Grand Terrace, CA 92J24
"
RE:
Conditional Use Per:it No. 91-28 and Variance No. 91-08
~o co~struct 2,000 sq. ft. of teatil/office space
ln~lud1ng a,proposal for off-site sales of beer and wine
.h1le ,varylng tne ~inimum lot size required for
convenlence ~arket site is on the south side of Baseline
between ~t. vErnon/Garner Streets in the CG-2 Genreal
Plan land use designation. '
Dear Sirs:
~he above referen~e~ application is hereby deemed complete and
1S accepted for f1llng by the City of San Bernardino Planning
Depart~ent effective this date. This acceptance applies only
to the specific project as defined by:
Your preliminary application received May 11,
supplementary information received August
Historical Resources Evaluation Report and
received June 18, 1991.
1991 and
6, 1991,
project plan
Pursuant to the Chapter 4.5, Section 65950 of ~~e 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 ~odify 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, ~irculation
pattern, points of ingress and, egress, ~ocat;on, etc.)
represent a potential for env1ronmental lmpac~s ~r are
signifi=ant in any other respect.
: .l _
;;: J ~ ..,
.
J .! ~ . "
: ; 1
') 4'" _3 5: lit 'I '" lit :l ' 'Ij ~
1714' J,..,.71diOI7
PRIDE, J
OES5
l , ,
~4 :: ~ . ...
,
i . ~ ;: ;: .
I:'Vl~!"IT
..AI..IJ I
-, 6
A
II l'
page 2
.
.
A significant change in the project or a series of cumulative
changes MAY necessitate the filing 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 processing
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,
Cf6o~~;;: AICP
~~c~pal Planner
"
cc: Mr. & Mrs. Wooton
1588 Western Avenue
San Bernardino, CA 92411
J'M:das
deemdcompleteb
:CIT:Y OF SAN BE___RDINO -
REQUES.,.R COUNCIL ACTION
From: Al Boughey,Director
Subject:
Appeal of denial of Conditional
Use Permit No. 91-28 and Variance
No. 91-08
Dept:
Planning & Building Services
Date:
January 9, 1992
Mayor and Common Council Meeting
January 21, 1992
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
December 16, 1991 That Mayor and Common Council continue the
appeal, and direct staff to prepare alternative
approaches other than Code Amendments, and return
in thirty days with recommendations.
Racommended motion:
Staff recommends that the distance standards for convenience
stores not be amended and that the Variance section not be
amended to include reductions to the distance requirements
for convenience stores; and
"
Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council deny
the appeal and deny Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 and
Variance No. 91-08 based on the Findings of Fact contained
in the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated November
6, 1991.
ture
Al
Contact person: Al Boughey
Supporting date attllChed: Staff Report
Phone: 384-5357
Ward:
6
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: N / A
Source: (Acct. No.!
(Acct. DescriDtion)
Finance:
Council Notes:
15-0262
Attachment 2
Agenda Item No
II 1 I
,
,
-caTV OF SAN BER"DINO - REQUEST eR 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 January 21, 1992
BACKGROUND
At the meeting of December 16, 1991, Council directed staff to
prepare alternative approaches other than code amendments to allow
for approval of this project, and return in thirty days with
recommendations (refer to Mayor and Common Council Staff Report
dated December 16, 1991 for background discussion of the
specific project).
ANALYSIS
A matrix was developed by staff to show areas of concern for a
convenience store with lor without alcohol at this location.
Based on this information, the only options identified for
project approval would be amending the Development Code to
revise or delete the distance requirements, or amending the Code
to expand the Variance section.
The minimum lot size and minimum loading area issues could be
resolved by variance.
OPTIONS
OPTION I: Development Code Amendment to Distance Requirements
The Development Code minimum standards were established because of
health and safety concerns. Basically, a concensus was
developed during the Development Code workshops, that minimum
standards should be set in order to improve current concerns
associated with the detrimental effects of premises which are
licensed for the off-site sales of alcohol. Public concerns
frequently include vandalism, crime, deterioration of
neighborhoods and the sales of alcohol to minors. Therefore,
because there are minimum standards set, the code draws a line, or
75.0264
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28/Variance No. 91-08
Mayor and Common Qllpcil Meeting January 21, .2
-Page 2 ,.,
II Ii
a setpoint, which the City relies on as reasonable standards that
hopefully, reduce potential impacts. with these given standards
staff can not make the necessary findings that a proposal would
not have detrimental impacts on the surrounding neighborhood.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recomends that the distance standards regarding the location
of convenience stores not be amended.
OPTION II: Development Code Amendment to the Variance section
If the Variance section of the Code were to be amended to allow
for a reduction in distance standards, it would be difficult, with
the minimum distance standards to make the findings that the
granting of a variance would not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare.
The Development Code addresses various concerns in the granting of
a variance. The burden of proof to establish the evidence in
support of the findings is the responsibility of the applicant.
Findings for the granting of a variance may be made when there are
special circumstances applicable to the property, including size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings, or that the strict
application of the code deprives such property of privileges
enjoyed by other property under identical district classification.
The previous staff report outlined why there were no
circumstances with regard to the physical characteristics
subject property. These findings would not be altered
they are not affected by the distance standards.
special
of the
because
Another concern in the granting of a variance is that it is
necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right possiessed by other property and denied to the
subject property. The findings in this circumstances would not be
made, due to the ability of the property owner to continue to use
and develop the property with alternative proposals.
The granting of a variance in these circumstances
undeniably, constitute a special privilege inconsistent
limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and
district in which such property is located.
would,
with the
land use
Other variance findings are concerned with the consistency of the
project with the General Plan land use designation and would not
be affected by distance requirements.
These concerns with findings would be true for other similar
proposals and not just this specific proposal.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Variance section of the Development Code
not be amended.
~onaLtLOna~ use ~ermLt ~o. ~~-~b/VarLance ~o. ~~-Ub
Mayor and Common CWCil Meeting January 21, ~2
Page 3 .
-1 r r
RECOMMENDATION
staff recommends that the distance standards for convenience
stores not be amended and the the Variance section not be amended
to include reductions to the distance requirements for convenience
stores;
AND
Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council deny the appeal
and deny Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 and Variance No 91-08
based on the Findings of Fact contained in the Staff Report to the
Planning commission dated November 6, 1991.
Prepared by:
Denise S. Moonier
Assistant Planner
for Al Boughey, AICP
Director of Planning and Building Services
Attachment:
A - Convenience store Matrix
B - Mayor and Common Council Staff
Report and backup dated December 16, 1991
l
CATEGORY
Co~tional Use Permit NO. 91~
~ance No. 91-08 .,
CONVENIENCE STORES WITH ALCOHOL SALES
DEV. CODE 19.060.030
(2) (b.) (F.)
MC-770
II l'
INTERIM URGENCY
ORDINANCE
(MC-660) *
Permitted
Use
Subject to distance
standard/approved findings
C.U.P.
Subject to
MC-nO/
P.C. Findings
Subject to
C.U.P. section
19.26.020/
P.C. Findings
proximity
To Does not meet standards Does not meet No distance
Existing 4 stores within 1000 ft. V standards V standards
Stores 4 stores
within 1000 ft.
To Does not meet standards V No distance No distance
Religious 1 church within 500 ft. standards standards
Instit-
ution
To Resid- Does not meet standards No distance No distances
ential 2 within 100 ft. V standards standards
Uses required to required to
erect block erect block
wall wall
4
To
Schools
Site Area
Parking/
Landscaping
j
j
~
Frontage on
a major street
on secondary
street
.
.
,
Lighting
.
.
Meets distance requirements
o within 500 ft.
Does not meet standard
requires 10,000 sq. ft.
v
Meets parking requirements
Meets landscaping require-
ments
Meets standards
Meets standard requirements
Meets distance
o within 1000
ft.
Does not meet
stan~ard V
requ~res
10,000 sq. ft.
Defers to
19.56 Section
of Old Title
19
Meets
standards
Meets
standards
No distance
standards
No minimum
lot area
Meets minimum
parking require-
ments Title 19,
19.56.050(A)
Meets standard
requirements
Meets standard
requirements
Attachment "An
Public
Restrooms
I
Trash
Enclosure
Loading Area
saturation
levels for
premises
which are
licensed for
off-site
sales of
alcohol
II I'
. Conditional Use Per~ NO. 91-28
Variance No. 91......
CONVENIENCE STORES WITH ALCOHOL SALES
CONTINUED
Meets standards
Meets ~tandard requirements
Does not meet standards ~
No standards
Findings mayor may not be
made by P.C.
* Referenced Title 19 of Municipal Code
Meets
standards
Meets
standards
No standards
No standards
Meets standard
requirements
Meets standard
requirements
Meets Code
Title 19
19.58.010
Findings
for undue
concentration
as determined
by P.C.
CATEGORY
Permitted
Use
Proximity
To Existing
stores
II 1
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28
. Variance No. 91-08 .
CONVENIENCE STORES WITHOUT ALCOHOL SALES
DEV. CODE MC-770
MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 19
Subject to Subject to
distance standards MC-770
Does not meet . /
standards v
To Religious No distance
Institutions standards
To Residen-
tial Uses
To Schools
Site Area
Meets distance
requirements
Meets distance
standards
Does not meet V
standard
requires 10,000
sq. ft.
D.R.C. approval (ROP)
Does not meet No distance standards
standards 4
stores within
1000 ft. V
No distance
standards
No distance standards
No distance
standards
requires a
block wall
No distance standards
requires a block wall
Meets distance No standards
standards
Does not meet No standards
standard V No minimum lot area
requires
10,000 sq. ft.
II l'
.
CITY OF SAN BERIFDINO - REQUEST.R COUNCIL ACTION
. .
From: Al Boughey, Director
Dept: Planning & Building Services
Date: December 5, 1991
Subject:
Appeal of denial of Conditional Us'
Permit No. 91-28 and Variance No.
91-08
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
Contlct pinon:
Al Bouqhey
Phonl: 384-5357
Supporting dlltelttlChed: Staff Report
Ward:
6
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
SourcI: (ACCT. NO.)
(ACCT. DESCRIPTION)
Flnanel:
Council Notl.:
Attachment "1=\"
H.Dn'
Attachment 3
Aqenda Item No.
II I'
CITY OF SAN BERItRDINO - REQUEST .R 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
15-0264
Appeal of conditio_use Permit
Mayor and Common C il Meeting
.Page 2
I! l'
No. 91-28 & V~ance No. 91-08
December 16, .1
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,
rtppeai OL
Mayor and
Page 3
~onQ~~~Onal Use Perm~t
Common C"'Cil Meeting
No. 91-28 & Variance
December 16, "'1
II I;
No. 91-08
there were no findings for approval.
Plannina commission Action
The public hearing 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 to approve with conditions.
Commissioner stone seconded it. The motion was not carried.
Commissioner Valles made a motion to approve the variance and deny
the conditonal use permit. There 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).
I! \:
....l:"'t"--- ~-
Mayor and
J?age 4
Common
C_Cil 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
II \:
e
.
November 10, 1991
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
300 north "D" street, San Bernardino, California 9241S
Department of planning and building services
Att. Al Boughey
Director
RE: Conditional use permit no. 91/2S variance no.91/0S
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.
~ p (rU IS. Ii \'17 ffi fi1\
l~-<. ::J:\:1 I' II U I.J ~
L~ "~~ ~ : 1991
~ ,""" \ID
r \ ,-.., "
llio Th ~ Th \.'1 is U
'1S!;1
- NO\}
s ),,,. o;:::...Nt...RD',..10
~~T::i~C~~\L}.~~S~G &
R 1 Wooten
roject owner
. .' .--:: ~}~t~ BERNA.RDiNO
l' ~). ...t. ~ II.
._"._,... ,.~-':~'n or: ?LANNIN\J CL
c~:-.- - .. :~'''~ '~~RV!CE.3
(....,........,..u ;)...
EXHIBIT "A"
TT,'~
.
~
GOODEVENXNG LADIES AND GENGLEMEN
lAM KENZIE WOOTEN
I 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 THIS 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 ~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 BDNO PLANNING DEPT. TO ASCERTAIN THE
FEASIBILITY OF BUILDING A CONVIENCE STORE ON THE AFORE
DESCRIBED SITE. RESPONDING TO THE DEPT/S 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
P!~:n'i/~~~~
II I"~
,
e
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 DIRECTION 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 BY THE
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 THE VALIDITY OF THE POLICE DEPT/S
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.
-~
.
.
THE STAFFS COMMENTS REFERENCE THE CHURCHS ARE ALSO QUESTIONABLE
NEITHER CHURCH WAS IN EXISTANCE 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 TillS COMMUNITY DO NOT CONFORM TO DEVELOPEMENT
CODE STANDARDS. OF THE I~) BUSINESSES LISTED IN THE SAME
PROXIMITY OF MY PROJECT (3) HAVE NO ON CITE LOADING OR
PARKING CAPABILITIES.
I CONTEND THAT MY FACILITY WILL BE A MODERN. WELL DESIGNED AND
FUNCTIONAL INHANCEMENT TO THE AREA. MY PROPOSED USE OF
A MARKET WITH SALES OF nEER AND WINE FOR OFF-CITE CONSUMPTION
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND IS ^ PERMITED
LAND USE.
THANK YOU
rUT'
.
.
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) .
YQn;
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
Jordan, Lopez, ortega, Romero
Cole, Stone Valles
None
C1emensen, 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.
Al Bouahev. Di ector of Plannina & Buildina Services
Name and Title
cc: Project Property OWner
Project Applicant
Building Division
Engineering Division
Case File
PCAGENDA:
PCACTION
EXHIBIT "B"
Hill
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
SUMMARY
AGENDA ITEM 6
HEARING DATE 11-6-13 1
WARD 6
,.. ........... r rAPPLICANT' Value Homes -.,,""""1
. 22345 Barton Road
III CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Grand Terrace, CA 92324
en NO. 91-28 and Mr. & Mrs. Kensie Wooton
< OWNER:
(.) VARIANCE NO. 91-08 1588 Western Avenue
San Bernardino, CA 92411
"-" '\..
,-.., "'
Under authority of Development Code Section 19.06.020 to
ti construct 2,000 sq. ft. of office & retail space including
III a convenience store with off-site sales of beer & wine, on
:) 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
II:
- 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
II:
< the south side of Baseline Street, between Mt. Vernon Avenue
& Garner Street, also described as 1255 West Baseline.
"-"
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING OFSIGNATION
Subject COllllllercial CG-2 COllllllercial General
North Commercial CG-2 COllllllercial General
South Residential RS Residential Suburban
East Residential CG-2 COllllllercial General
West Vacant CG-2 COllllllercial General
( GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC DYES ) ( FLOOD HAZARD D YES D ZONE A )( SEWERS: ~ YES )
HAZARD ZONE: xx NO ZONE: jQ{NO D ZONE B o NO
( HIGH FIRE DYES ) AIRPORT NOISE! D YES L REDEVELOPMENT XQgKves
HAZARD ZONE: ft NO CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA:
DNO o NO
,,-- -
... o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z 0 APPROVAL
< APPUCABLE EFFECTS WITH . 0
MmGATlNG MEASURES -
~en NO E.l.R. ~ 0 CONDITIONS
1IIc:l u.Q
~Z o EXEMPT o E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO u.Z U DENIAL
Z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS <III
OQ WITH MITIGATING til
II:~ MEASURES o CONTINUANCE TO
-u.
> ~ NO SIGNIFICANT o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 0
Z (.)
III EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. III
MINUTES II:
- -
II"" CII' ... -....c
........."'-€I .fl.4l
PLAH-l.02 PAGE' OJ: 1 1....ecJ)
IT T:
rl.t:.Lacnmen'L "b"
~
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
16
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 provisions 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
G"'f1I....~
---
...,j
PL,AN.I.l)6 PAGE 1 OF 1 14<<1)
..
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.
Cft'r CII' ... -......0
---
PlAN-l.D6 PAGE 1 OF 1 (~40)
T 1:
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
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.
"-
...011
emo01&ilfr1~
---
PLAN-I.D6 PAGE 1 OF , (4-10)
I I l'
l
CITY OF SAN BERNA INO PLANNING AND BUILDING RVICES 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
(WA:O' J
PROPERTY LOCATION:
Subject property is a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land
consisting of about .151 acres having a frontage of about 50 feet
on the south side of Baseline Street and being located about 300
feet east of the centerline of Mt. Vernon Avenue and further
described as being located at 1255 West Baseline Street.
PROPOSAL:
The applicant requests approval of a Conditional Ose Permit under
authority of Coc1e Section 19.06.020 to permit construction of
office/retail space inclUding a convenience store with off-site
sales of beer and wine and the applicant requests a Variance of
Coc1e 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 P an land us. designation.
. .
PUBLIC HEARING LOCATION:
SAN BERNARDINO CITY HALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
300 NORTH "0" STREET
SAN BERNARDINO. CA 92418
HEARING DATE AND TIME:
Monday, December 16, 1991 2:00
.__...._......n..,..._...._
-. ..-...ca,......,.-....................................
.................... ..,...,............ - ~._1I1l'1....
...,_l7Wl-.
1M ...... a......~. .. ....... ,.... _ - ~'''' _ __ .
.....,....,.........._Ift.......In_............
...... 1M IuiIIIIIlI .... - ..._.4. 11ft ........ CIJ HIlI. _ Nanh 00-
-...._~..,..
0IlaIII0nI at.. ........c......~._tInII..... buiIdInItnMtgi. C.
.... UIlI ....... ........ III PIInI. T...... T.. ... _ v.w-. ....
_."__CouncI._."____..._n
......................__ _"'_."Cllyaortl-.
-..-...---....-""'-...---
T_T__~
z....... ca.... PIIn ...._4._...... Am...16._4 ...u.... eo.
..-...-...---...--
....._..__....-._n.........._
...-............--.....---..._'-"11
dIIc:rIlIIdillNl......In__.-.,40...._.....IO..CIIJ......DMIiDn
.............---..
INtIlIiltIIIlI ...--., _ -.fta ...... _ M.1II8hf ~ Il!l fIlM fIIifwIM _
-.
:;.:e. ~
PLAN-IJM PAGE 1 OF , (4010)
EXHIBIT "(',,
I I 11
~
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
-
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 6, 1991
INDEX
Page
Planning Director's Report 1
General Plan Amendment No. 91-11 2
General Plan Amendment No. 91-15 2
Variance No. 91-11 3
Tentative Tract No. 15222 3
Tentative Tract No. 14209 - Extension of Time 3
Conditional Use Permit No. 91-28 and 4
Variance No. 91-08
Parcel Map No. 14139 6
EXHIBIT "0"
II 1
/
!
City of San Bern~no
Planning commiss'" Meeting Minutes
November 6, 1991
Page 4
I
Washington Avenue and Palm AVenue having a frontage of about
1,413.98 feet on the south side of Washington Avenue and a
frontage of 710 feet on the west side of Palm Avenue. The
applicant requests an extension of time to establish a 41 lot
single family subdivision in the RL, Residential Low, General
Plan land use designation.
owner: Stateland Development
Applicant: Sierra Engineering
Ward: 5
Previous Negative Declaration: staff recommends approval
This item was considered on the Consent Calendar and adopted
previous Negative Declaration and approved request to expire
on September 19, 1992 based upon Findings 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 rectangularly-shaped parcel of land
consisting of about .151 acres having a frontage of 50 feet
on the south side of Baseline Street and being located about
300 feet east of the centerline of Mount Vernon Avenue and
further described as being 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 including 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 designation.
owner: Mr. and Mrs. Wooten
Applicant: Value Homes
Ward: 6
Receive comments formally from Public or Planning Commission.
Denise Moonier, Assistant Planner, presented a summary of the
project. Ms. Moonier provided staff's recommendation of
denial. She stated that the neighborhood, according to
staff's findings, was already saturated with liquor stores
and had a high crime rate and did not comply with the
Development Code.
Commissioner
denied. He
enhance the
Cole objected to having this
said that a store selling beer
quality of the neighborhood.
item (Item 6)
and wine would
Mr. Kenzie Wooten, the
Bernardino was opposed to
selling beer and wine in
owner, 1588 Western Avenue, San
the denial. He felt that a market
his neighborhood would improve the
City of San Bern~o
_Planning commissi~eeting Minutes
November 6, 1991
Page 5
~
area becau.. 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.
Commissioner Lopez asked if there was anyone else in favor of
this item. He then asked for those who were opposed.
A. Mercudante, Baseline and Mt. Vernon, spoke in
said he was directly across the street and had no
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 Rodriquez, 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
~ity of San Bern~no
. Planning commiss~eeting Minutes
November 6, 1991
Page 6
-
Planning Commission was final unless appealed to the Mayor
and Common Council, in writing, within 15 days of Planning
Commission action.
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 RB, 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.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
AGENDA ITEM 6
HEARING DATE 11-6-91
WARD 6
SUMMARY
- I I r:
~~ .,
rAPPLICANT' Value Homes
. 22345 Barton Road
W CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Grand Terrace, CA 92324
~ NO. 91-28 and OWNER: Mr. & Mrs. Kensie Wooton
(,) VARIANCE NO. 91-08 1588 Western Avenue
San Bernardino, CA 92411
\....../ .J
Under authority of Development Code Section 19.06.020 to
ti construct 2,000 sq. ft. of office & retail space including
W a convenience store with off-site sales of beer & wine, on
::) 6.250 sq. ft. Concurrently, under the authority of Section
0 19.72.030, the applicant requests a variance from Code Section
W 19.06.030 requiring convenience stores to be constructed on
a:
- 10,000 sq. ft. and a variance from Code Section 19.26 which
C established standards to regulate off-street loading & delivery
W Subject property is a rectangularly shaped parcel, located on
a:
c the south side of Baseline Street, between Mt. Vernon Avenue
& Garner Street, also described as 1255 West Baseline.
'-.J \.
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
\.
r ( )
I GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC DYES FLOOD HAZARD 0 YES 0 ZONE A SEWERS: m YES
HAZARD ZONE: XkNO \.. ZONE: KkNO o ZONE B o NO
r HIGH FIRE o YES )( AIRPORT NOISE! o YES \ r REDEVELOPMENT XQgXves
I HAZARD ZONE: ft NO CRASH ZONE: I PROJECT AREA: 1
I!tP{NO \.. o NO
-
...., r
... o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z 0 APPROVAl
j! APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH 0
MmGATlNG MEASURES -
~ 0
zen NO E.I.R. C CONDITIONS
WCJ II.Cl
:&z o EXEMPT o E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO II.Z U DENiAl
Z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS CW
OCl WITH MITIGATING til
a:i; MEASURES 0 CONTINUANCE TO
-II. 0
> ~ NO SIGNIFICANT o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
Z fd
W EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C.
MINUTES 0
\.. .J -"
c:rnOJ"~
---
PLAN-I.D2 PAGE' OF 1 (4-10)
.-..---- ..-"
II 1:
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
~
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,Commercia1 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.
~
..
Cft't~...~
---
PlAN.UII PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-10)
r-- --- -
II 1
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
o
11-6-91
3
r
~
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
~
cm'CI'....~
---
PlAN-8.08 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-10)
I.
, 1
1
,
I I r'
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
r'
~
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.
~
CrT"P'0#_~
---
PLAN-8.08 PAGE' OF 1 (44))
i
1
i
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
lj
,.
.,
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.
ANALYSIS
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
.
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.
..
cnvCll'_~
---
PL,AN.8.08 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-10)
II l'
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
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.
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.
Part I Crimes and 247 Part
per cent, or 33 arrests
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
ClTYOI''''''~
---
..
.j
PL,AN-8.D8 PAGE 1 OF 1 ' (..-DOl
I I I'T
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
7
~
..,
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 proposed site. Of the six, five
resident at 1247 West Baseline street,
Investigator that she is intending to
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.
the immediate vicinity of
had no objections. The
Cora Mattews advised the
move and has no opinion
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.
crtYOI'IM~
---
...
--oil
PlAN.8.oB PAGE 1 OF 1 ,...go)
r
II I'
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
8
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.1) 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.
...
cm'CJf....~
ClNnW.-...o.1MCU
--01
PLAN-I.DI PAGE 1 OF 1 (o4-iO)
II 1'1
. .
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
o
11-6-91
9
r
"""'l
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 el, 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 is 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 elf' ..,. ........-0
---
PLAN.8ll8 PAGe 1 OF 1 (440)
~,
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
P"
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 in 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.
ClT'rfll-MN~
----
..
....
PLAN-8.08 PAGE' OF 1 (4-SlO)
II I '
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
6
ll-b-91
1 1
"'l
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
determination that
re-classification
anticipation.
2. Necessity For the Preservation of a Property Right
issues addressed in this section, it is Staff's
special circumstances do not exist because of a
of land use, zoning changes, or speculative
The property has been zoned commercial for many years, and its
owners had the opportunity to construct a conven~ence 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
ClfYClf_...........,
--.......
....
~
PI.AN-8.08 PAGE' OF 1 (4-1O)
I
II I '
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 9]-OR
CONDITIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
6
11-6-91
12
,
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.
~
I
em' f;, IIIIIN I!MMDICI
---
PLAN-8.Di PAGE 1 OF 1 (4<<))
II 1 ,I
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
CUP NO. 91-28/
VAR NO. 91-08
6
11-6-91
13
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
,
~
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.
with regard to
uses, based on
and like uses,
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.
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.
l.
cnvCll'...".~
--.......
PLAN-8.D8 PAGE 1 OF 1 ("-90)
II j:'
CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
6
11-6-91
14
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
r
""""ll
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,
~~~R~~itant Director
Planning and Building S~ices
Aif~ 5 ;Jj~
6:::s: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
....
en'l'0f'.....1II'ItWDND
---
PI.AN.8.a8 PAGE' OF 1 (..eD)
1\ttacnment 11AlI
II I"
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
15
r
DEVELOPMENTC'ODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
"I
Cateaorv
Permitted Use
Height
Setbacks
front
side
rear
Lot Coverage
Procosal
DeveI ocment
Code
General
Plan
Market/
Office
Subject to:
Convenience
Store Stand. &
approved CUP
Permitted
Subject
CUP
2 stories
2 stories/
30 ft.
2 stories
10 ft.
5 ft./4 ft.
Oft.
10 ft.
Oft.
Oft.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
25.6 %
50 %
Parking 8 8 N/A
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
~
CITY 01' ... -...-,
---
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
3/10 's
of mile
o within
500 ft.
N/A
PLAN-.lIB PAGE, OF 1 14-80)
5.
6.
7.
8.
ClTYOI'_~
---
iH;~acnmen~
lIB"
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08
AGENDA ITEM 6
HEARING DATE
PAGE 1
FINDINGS OF FACT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS OF FACT
1.
The proposed use is conditionally permitted within the
subject land use district, however, it does not comflY with
all of the applicable provisions of this Developme t Code
in that the lot area does not meet the minimum stand rds for
convenience stores, minimum standards for load ng and
delivery area, and for minimum distance between rfligioUS
institutions, residential uses and existing con enience
markets with sales of alcohol.
The proposed building would not impair the integritj and
character of the land use district in which it is to
be located in that it is architecturally compatible w th
the built environment.
The subject site is not physically suitable for the tfPe
and intensity of land use being proposed in that the ite
is too small for the intensity of a convenience store
2.
3.
4.
The proposed use is compatible with the land uses
presently on the subject property in that the present
use is commercial.
The proposed use would not be compatible with exi
and future land uses within the general area in
the proposed use is to be located in that the general
oversaturated with licensed outlets for sales of alc
in that there is residential land use within 100 ft.
The proposed use is not compatible in scale, mass, co erage
density and intensity with all adjacent land uses in ~he site
is too small and the loading area is adjacent to a '
residentially used property.
There are adequate provisions for water, sanitat~"on, and
public utilties, however, there are not adequate pr visions
for public services which address the crime roblems
associated with convenience stores, and may be det imental
to public health and safety. .
There will be adequate prov~s~ons for public access tJ serve
the subject proposal in that the site would have o~e drive
access from a public street.
PLAN.. PAG/; 1 OF 1 '4-10)
I I 1: I
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE CUP 91-28/VAR 91-08
6
11-6-91
17
FINDINGS OF FACT
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
.,
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 perm formed 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.
~~-=
PLAN-8.D6 PAGE 1 OF 1 (~
II I I
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
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 ~f this variance request
General Plan, 1n that the proposed use
subject to approval of a Conditional Use
will be consistent
is a permitted use,
Permit.
ern ClI' 8M .-....0
---
p~,~ PAGE10Fl (~