Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout57-Community Development CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST "'''R COUNCIL ACTION From: R. Ann Siracusa Director of Planning Planning Subject: Change of Zone No. 88-4 Dept: Mayor and Council Meeting 0 July 18, 1988, 2:00 p.m. Date: July 5, 1988 Synopsis of Previous Council action: Previous Planning Commission action: At the June 21, 1988 meeting of the Planning commi~sion, the Commission voted to recommend denial of Change of Zone No. 88-4. Vote: Unanimous (1 abstention, 2 absent). Recommended motion: That the Mayor and Council deny Change of Zone No. 88-4. vu~ Signature R. Ann Siracusa Supporting data attached: Staff Report Phone: 384-5057 Ward: 5 Contact person: R. Ann Siracusa FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: nil Source: (Acct. No.) (Acct. DescriPtion) Finance: Council Notes: .An<>nl'l", I~"'rn I\ln 51 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT Subject: Change of Zone No. 88-4 Mayor and Council Meeting of July 18, 1988 REQUEST The applicants requests a change of zone from C-l Neighbor- hood Commercial to C-2 Community Commercial for a parcel of 2.4 acres on the southeastern corner of Kendall Drive and University Parkway. Ii~Cl<~RQUND The June 13, 1988 staff report (Attachment A) to the Planning Commission provides the background and the analysis on the change of zone request. That report concluded the following: The size and shape of the site is adequate to accommodate the more intensive uses permitted within a C-2 Community Commercial zone. The change of zone is consistent with the letters from the State Office of Planning and Research. Impacts of traffic generated by the change of zone as well as circulation concerns could be addressed at the time of proposed development. The site has buffers from some of the surrounding uses and additional stan- dards relative to setbacks and building height which insure compatibility with the surrounding area. The staff's recommendation was for approval of the zone change. The Planning Commission considered this item at their June 21, 1988 meeting. The Commission voted by a unanimous vote, with one abstention and two absent, to recommend to the Mayor and Common Council denial of the petition request for the zone change. The concerns stated during that meeting were: * Traffic congestion would increase because of the more intense commercial uses that would be allowed (fast-food drive-through restaurants). * The desire to keep the College Area more "upscale" and not have drive-through restaurants, similar to the policy along Hospitality Lane. * The Planning Commission is losing credibility with the residents of the area because their desires for the area are not being followed. * The only reason to allow the zone change is to allow Change of Zone No. 88-4 Mayor and"Council Meeting of July 18, 1988 Page 2 drive-through restaurants in this area. The majority of the Planning Commission thought that drive-through restaurants were not appropriate for this area. CONCLU~I9N A planning policy decision needs to be made by the Mayor and Council regarding drive-through restaurants in the College Area. The Planning Commission and some residents would prefer that they not be allowed. MAYOR.A~P.~QV~~~~_9?~JONS Deny Change of Zone No. 88-4 or Approve Change of Zone No. 88-4, and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance changing the zone dis- trict, and to adopt the Negative Declaration. RF.CO~_~~l)~~~J: Q~ Planning Commission's recommendation: That the Mayor and Council deny Change of Zone No. 88-4. Prepared by: John Montgomery, Principal Planner for R. Ann Siracusa, Director of Planning Attachment A: Planning Commission Staff Report of June 21, 1988 with Initial Study mkf/7/5/88 M&CCAGENDA:CZ884 , r CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT"" SUMMARY \.. UJ ~ (,) AGENDA ITEM 6 HEARING DATE 6 /21/88 WARD 5 ~ APPUCANT: Dennis stafford 647 N. Main St. Ste. 2A Riverside, CA 92501 OWNER: University Square 647 N. Main St. Ste. 2A Riverside, CA 92501 Change of ~one No. 88-4 The applicant requests a change of zone from C-1, Neighborhood Commercial to C-2, Community Commercial. t; L&J :J o "" Q "- ex UJ 0:: <l The subject propert:. is located on the southeasterly corner of Kendall Drive and University Parkway and consists of approximately 2.4 acres. PROPERTY Subject North South East West EXISTING LAND USE ZONING Vacant Vacant/Multi-Family Single Family Single Family Multi-Family C-1 D & R-3-3000 R-1-7200 R-1-7200 R-3-300 GEOLOGIC / SEISMIC HAZARD ZONE HIGH FIRE HAZARD ZONE DYES x0<No ..J <( ... Zen L&Je!) 2Z Z- OO a:Z >u: Z UJ o NOT APPLICABLE o EXEMPT UNO SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS NOli 1981 REIIISED JUL.Y 1'12 ."tV GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Multi-Family Multi-Family Multi-Family Multi-Family Multi-Family OVES iaNO FLOOD HAZARD 0 YES OZONE A ZONE ~NO OZONE B ED YES SEWERS 0 NO AIRPORT NOISE / 0 YES CRASH ZONE ~ NO o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WITH MITIGATING MEASURES NO E.I.R. o E.I.R REQUIRED BUT NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WITH MITIGATING MEASURES o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E. R. C. MINUTES z o - ti 11.0 II.ffi i!:I 0:1 o (,) &aJ g: REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA GVES DNO IXb<: APPROVAL o CONDITIONS o DENIAL o CONTINUANCE TO '" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE CZ 88-4 OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM 6 HEARING DATE 6/21/88 PAGE ') ~ " 1. REOUEST The applicant is requesting approval to change the zone from C-l, Neighborhood Commercial to C-2, Community Commercial. 2. LOCATION The subject property is an approximately parcel, located on the southeasterly University Parkway and Kendall Drive. 2.4 acre corner of 3. MUNICIPALS:_QQS.A~Q. ~:E.~~~):.. ,PLAN CONFQRM!\~C~ The proposed project, Change of Zone No. 88-4, is consistent with the Interim Policy Doucment adopted on May 23, 1988, and amended on June 6, 1988. 4. CEOA STATUS An Initial Study was prepared by staff which addressed environmental concerns for the site (Attachment "A") . The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the Initial Study on May 5, 1988 and a Negative Declaration was recommended. The Initial Study was available for public review from May 12 to May 25. No comments were received. 5. BACKGR..9_UND Two applications for changes of zone from R-3-3000, Multi-Family Residential to C-1, Neighborhood Commercial have been approved for this site. Change of zone 86-29 which included most of the site was approved June 2, 1987, by the Mayor and Common Council. Change of zone 87-14 which included the area of street vacation and the two northwesterly parcels was approved March 7, 1988 by the Mayor and Common Council. A Lot Line Adjustment, 88-2, to delete interior lot lines and incorporate the vacated portion of State Street was approved February 5, 1988 by the Development Review Committee. Review of Plans 86-143, to construct a commercial center was submitted for the site. This project was held up by the moratorium. It is currently able to proceed and the applicant is revising site plans for Development Review. \.. ~ . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE CZ 88-4 OBSERVATIONS AGENOA ITEM 6 HEARING DATE 6/21/88 PAGE 1 6. ANALYSIS ~eneral Vicinit~ The site of the proposed change of zone is surrounded by residential uses. Single-Family Residential Uses are located to the east and Multi-Family is located to the northeast and to the west. Open space is located north of the site. An elementary school and church are located south of the site and California State University San Bernardino is located northerly. CompatibilJty with_Ule .Surround.ing Area The site currently has a commercial zone. An easement for high power lines to the west provides a buffer to the multi-family uses in that area and Kendall Drive, a State Highway, separate this use from the multi-family uses to the northeast. The proposed C-2, Community Commercial zone includes additional standards relative to setbacks and building height to insure compatibility. f.t.Q~~2-j,_qnd Use Altetnative This proposal is consistent with the preferred land use alternative which was adopted by the Council that designated the site as CG, Commercial General. Tr affl...9._9od C ircu),.atiQn Concerns of traffic and circulation for the site must be addressed at the time of proposed development when the type of traffic generated and point of ingress and egress are identified (see Initial Study, Attachment "A") . Implications of the Change ot Zone The change of zone to C-2, Community Commercial will allow more intense and diverse commercial uses than the existing C-l, Neighborhood Commercial. These uses would include used car sales, o~and off'site sale of alcohol ... CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE CZ 88-4 OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM h HEARING DATE hiLl IRR PAGE 4 , and fast-food restaurants, all of which require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Uses permitted in the C-2 zone include: Department Stores, Medical Laboratories, Dry Cleaning, Ice Storage Houses and Paint Stores. The front setback requirement is 5 feet in the C-2 zone, 5 feet less than the 10 foot required in the C-l zone. 7. ~OMMENTS RECEIVED The State Department of Transportation reviewed the proposed zone change. Their letter indicates that the traffic and drainage generated by the proposal does not appear to have a significant effect on the State Highway System. However, the cumulative impacts must be considered. They have requested any measures to mitigate the cumulative impact of traffic and drainage should be provided prior to or with development of this area. 8 . CONCLD..S1.Q}l The size and shape of the site is adequate to accommodate the more intensive uses permitted with a C- 2, Community Commercial zone. The change of zone is consistent with the letters from the State Office of Planning and Research. Impacts of traffic generated by the change of zone as well as circulation concerns should be addressed at the time of proposed development. The site has buffers from some of the surrounding uses and additional standards relative to setbacks and building height which insure compatibility with the surrounding area. 9. RECOMM~NOAT~Q~ It is recommended that the Planning Commission: 1. Approve the Negative Declaration, and1 2. Approve Change of Zone No. 88-4 \.. ~ . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE CZ 88-4 OBSERVATIONS AGENOA ITEM 6 HEARING DATE 6/21/88 PAGE c; r ~ Respectfully submitted, R. ANN SIRACUSA Director of Planning ~--,~ ) /j}L::~/~ ~ridi Paulsen Senior Planner SP:cms pcagenda cz9940 6/13/88 Attachment "A" - Initial Study Attachment "a" - Location Map .) \... " ATTACHMENT A PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Initial Study for Environmental Review CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 88-4 To change the zone on an approximately 2.4 acre site located at the southeasterly corner of Kendall Drive and University Parkway May 5, 1988 Prepared by: Mary Lanier Planning Department 300 North "0" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 (714) 384-5057 Prepared for: Dennis Stafford 647 N. Main Street, Suite 2A Riverside, CA 92501 .. Section 1.0 2.0 2.1 2.2 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.2.1 3.2.2 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 5.0 6.0 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . · . · Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . · · · Project Impacts ............. PROJECT DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . · · Location . . . . . . . . . . . . · . . · · Site and Project Characteristics . . . · · Existing Conditions .. . . . . · . . · · Project Characteristics ......... ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS ........ Environmental Setting .......... Environmental Effects .......... High Wind ................ General Plan Land Use .......... Traffic and Circulation . . . . . . · · . REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · . Appendix A - Environmental Impact Checklist ................ Appendix B - Site Map .. .... . . Appendix C - Location Map . . . . . . · · Page 1-1 2-1 2-1 2-1 3-1 3-1 3-1 3-1 3-1 4-1 4-1 4-1 4-1 4-1 4-2 5-1 6-1 6-2 6-10 6-11 ~ 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report is provided by the City of Bernardino as an Initial Study for Change of No. 88-4 to change the zone from C-l to C-2 at southeasterly corner of Kendall Drive University Parkway. San Zone the and As stated California Guidelines, to: in Section 15063 of the State of Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the purposes of an Initial Study are 1. Provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an EIR or a Negative Declaration. 2. Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby, enabling the project to qualify for a Negative Declaration. 3. Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is required by: a. Focusing the EIR on the determined to be significant. effects b. Identifying the effects determined not to be significant. c. Explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not be significant. 4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project. . 5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the finding in a Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 6. Eliminate unnecessary EIR's. 7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. 1-1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL STUDY - Change of Zone No. 88-4 C-1 to C-2 at SEC Kendall Drive and University Parkway May 5, 1988 2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2.1 Proposed Project To change the zone from C_1,Neighborhood Commercial to C-2, Community Commercial on an approximately 2.4 acre site located at the southeasterly corner of Kendall drive and University Parkway. 2.2 Impacts identified in the include: attached checklist 2.c. Development within a High Wind Hazard Area. 6.a. A change in the land use as designated on the General Plan. 9.a. An increase in traffic that is greater than the land use designated on the General Plan. 9.b. Use of existing, or demand for new, parking facilities/structures. 9.d. Alteration of circulation. present patterns of 2-1 . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL STUDY - Change of Zone No. 88-4 C-l to C-2 at SEC Rendall Drive and University Parkway May 5, 1988 3.1 LOCATION The proposed change of zone is located in the State College Redevelopment Ar~a at the southeasterly corner of Rendall drive and University Parkway. 3.2 Site and Project Characteristics 3.2.1 Existing Conditions The site is an irregularly shaped parcel consisting of approximately 2.4 acres. The site is currently vacant and has frontage on Rendall Drive, a State Highway, and Sheridan Road. It also includes a vacated section of State Street. The surrounding uses include single family residences, and multiple family residences. 3.2.2 Project Characteristics To change the zone from C-l, Neighborhood Commercial to C-2, Community Commercial. 3-1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL STUDY - Change of Zone No. 88-4 C-1 to C-2 at SEC Kendall Drive and University Parkway May 5, 1988 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4.1 Environmental Setting The site is vacant and irregularly shaped. site is relatively flat with sparse vegetation. is surrounded by single family homes apartments. The surrounding area has developed. The It and been 4.2 Environmental Effects The Environmental Checklist identifies six areas of potential concern. Each item checked wmaybeW or "yes" on the checklist is identified below and followed by a recommended mitigation measure. 4.2.1 High Wind 2. ~j.j:_J!e~ources: Will the proposal result in: c. Development within a high wind hazard area? The site of the proposed change of zone is located in a high wind hazard area. There would be no impact on this change of zone, however mitigation measures would be required at the time of development. 4.2.2 General Plan Land Use 6. ~d Use: Will the proposal result in: a. A change in the land use as designated on the General Plan? The proposal is consistent with the letters dated June 11, 1987, July 3, 1987 and August 18, 1987, January 20, 1988, February 5, 1988 and March 16, 1988 from the State Office of Planning and Research to the City of San Bernard which stipulate that w. . . land uses proposed during the period of the extension will be consistent with the purpose of the updated general plan provisions. . .w 4-1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL STUDY - Change of Zone No. 88-4 C-1 to C-2 at SEC Kendall Drive and University Parkway May 5, 1988 4.2.3 Traffic and Circulation 9. Transportation/Circulation: proposal result in: Could the a. An increase in traffic that is greater than the land use designated on the General Plan? The change of zone may have several impacts on existing transportation system. The first impact could be an increase of traffic, and the second impact could be the increase of traffic onto Sheridan into a residential neighborhood. The type and amount of traffic generated must be determined at the time of development for this site. According to the City Engineering Department, a traffic study would not be required for the change of zone, however the city does reserve the right to require one at the time of development. b. Use of existing or demand for new parking facilities/structures? The change of zone could increase demand for parking. Parking requirements would be dependent upon the use proposed and would be determined at the time of development. c. Alteration of circulation? present patterns of Access from Kendall onto the site is shown on the site map to be limited. This may impact the present circulation patterns of the area. This impact should be determined at the time of development when ingress and egress for the site is proposed. 4-2 . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL STUDY - Change of Zone No. 88-4 C-l to C-2 at SEC Kendall Drive and University Parkway May 5, 1988 5.0 REFERENCES Mr. Huston T. Carlyle, Jr. Director Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 (Letter of August 18, 1987) Persons Contacted: Michael Grubbs, Civil Engineering Association, City Public Works 5-1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL STUDY - Change of Zone No. 88-4 C-1 to C-2 at SEC Kendall Drive and University Parkway May 5, 1988 6.0 APPENDICES Appendix A - Environmental Impact Checklist Appendix B - Site Map Appendix C - Location Map csj/5-5-88 DOC:MISC ISCOZ884 6-1 APPENDIX - A ,. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT '"" ENVIRONMENT AL IMPACT CHECKLIST ~ ~ A. BACKGROpND Application Number: Change of Zone No. 88-4 Project Description: Chanqe zone from C-l to C-2 Location: Southeasterly corne~of_J:!.niversity Parkway and Kendall Drive. Environmental Constraints Areas: Hiqh Wind Hazard Area General Plan Designation: Res. Medium 8-14 dU/qc zoning Designation: C-1. Np-ighborhood Cnmmp-rr.i~l B. ~NVIBONM~HT~~-IMPACTS Explain answers, where appropriate, on a separate attached sheet. 1. Ea~tb ResQurces Will the proposal result in: Yes No Maybe a. Earth movement (cut and/or fill) of 10,000 cubic yards or more? X b. Development and/or grading on a slope greater than 15\ natural grade? X c. Development within the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone? x d. Modification of any unique geologic or physical feature? X PAGE 1 OF 8 REVISED 12/87 ML/csj 6-2 , . COZ 88-4 Yes No Maybe e. Soil erosion on or off the project site? x f. Modification of a channel, creek or river? x g. Development subject mudslides, other similar within an area to landslides, liquefaction or hazards? x x h. Other? 2. bIR_RESOURCES: Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial an effect quality? air upon emissions or ambient air x b. The creation of objectionable odors? x c. Development within a high wind hazard area? X 3. WbTEIL_ RESOURCES: proposal result in: Will the a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff due to impermeable surfaces? X b. Changes in the course or flow of flood waters? X c. Discharge into surface waters or any alteration of surface water quality? X d. Change in the quantity or quality of ground waters? e. Exposure of people or property to flood hazards? f. Other? X X y: REVISED 12/87 PAGE 2 OF 8 COZ 88-4 4. BIOLOGICbL R~SOURC~p: proposal result in: Could the a. Change unique, species habitat trees? in the number of any rare or endangered of plants or their including stands of b. Change unique, species habitat? in the number of any rare or endangered of animals or their c. Other? 5. NOISE: Could the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to exterior noise levels over 65 dB or interior noise levels over 45 dB? c. Other? 6. LAND_ USE: result in: Will the proposal a. A change in the land use as designated on the General Plan? b. Development within an Airport District? c. Development within "Greenbelt" Zone A,B, or C? d. Development within a high fire hazard zone? e. Other? Yes No Maybe x x x x x x x x x x x REVISED 10/87 PAGE 3 OF 8 .. COZ 88-4 Yes No Maybe 7. MAN-MADE HJ.~~~?: project: Will the a. Use, store, transport or dispose of hazardous or toxic materials (including but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? x b. Involve the release hazardous substances? of x c. Expose people to the potential health/safety hazards? x x d. Other? 8. HOUSING: Will the proposal: a. Remove existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? x x b. Other? 9. l'RA~SPORTATION/CIBCULATION: Could the proposal result in: a. An increase in traffic that is greater than the land use designated on the General Plan? x b. Use of existing, or demand for new, parking facilities/ structures? x c. Impact upon existing public transportation .systems? x d. Alteration of present patterns of circulation? x e. Impact to rail or air traffic? f. Increased safety hazards to vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? x x PAGE 4 OF 8 REVISED 10/87 . COZ 88-4 g. h. Yes No Maybe A disjointed pattern roadway improvements? of x Other? x 10. pUBLIC SERVICES Will the proposal impact the following beyond the capability to provide adequate levels of service? a. b. c. d. e. Fire protection? x Police protection? x Schools (i.e. attendance, boundaries, overload, etc.)? x Parks or other recreational facilities? x Medical aid? x f. Solid waste? x g. Other? x 11. UTILITIES: Will the proposal: a. Impact the following beyond the capability to provide adequate levels of service or require the construction of new facilities? 1. Natural gas? x 2. Electricity? x 3. Water? x 4. Sewer? x \ ~ 5. Other? x b. Result in a pattern of extensions? disjointed utility x c. Require the construction of new facilities? x REVISED 10/87 PAGE 5 OF 8 .. COZ 88-4 Ye3 No Maybe 12. AESTHETICS: a. Could the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic view? x b. Will the visual impact of the project be detrimental to the surrounding area? x c. Other? x 13. ~P~~U~~--FESQURCES: Could the proposal result in: a. The alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? X b. Adverse physical or aesthetic impacts to a prehistoric or historic site, structure or object? X c. Other? X 14. Mandatory Findings of Significance (Section 15065) The California Environmental Quality Act states that if any of the following can be answered yes or maybe, the project may have a significant effect on the environment and an Environmental Impact Report shall be prepared. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate REVISED 10/87 PAGE 6 OF 8 .... . CZ 88-4 ,. Yes No Maybe "'" important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future. ) x x c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) x d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Attach sheets as necessary.) ~ ~ REVISED 10/87 PAGE 7 OF 8 , . CZ 88-4 D. DETERMINA!JON On the basis of this initial study, [2J The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. D The proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, although there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described above have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. D The proposed project ~~Y have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ENVIRONME~'AL REVIEW COMMITTEE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 6!fYlf(O!I#~-m-/... ~eY/tnI C1JNMrrreB Name and Title JlI/JAip t. RNr- Signature Date: Al1 ~ /198 REVISED 12/87 PAGE 8 OF 8 APPENDIX - B O\~!;It. ~ \JtJ~~"" ~ME CD4., .J. M~'.J"or ... Z~ . . \ St,~oe.. ~ 9tSoa """'NII~' 111.II'" ~/" '-OI.JNO I/Z"IIONP"" AO~6F..fUNCI~. ,~.e..~.!.~ rA64ED c:..r~."" J /C.S.I'... .'7/,~~.11 C... "'.. +71."" '.1'. / : . /1 /,1 KENDALL t1 . - - ~t:= .(!~"~6 '60'" I..u_.. ""C. '"'''' rl.""!!,.41/44J _ " .. (S 611".16'/1.'. -.... I.e. N.. r1.117'- +.414/1) - -:!fS....IIA.II.: (~?"..C.) . . . /^' Nn-O'...'.w 1.I:~41^ .:. N(JN"A~~". \.~ I \ -- .0 I ... (1)\ I )S ~,..I': ~.'w li~ - · ) 31... 4:/~ N......-IV ~1cI, ~ ~I.:- .:>74t / . DRIVE . I..'. /I.' itA_.. - .;;.-:U. :M.... -:1.--- el I I I I I 1 { .1 . . I ~ ..,' '7.1 t' '1 .. I I (!) .rAr, D,. t:ALIF""'N"A PI""4JNIIA__.vr, 1ItIC"~1.D .TVNI/4 " ~ alIOoIt T4-4/. "'At;1 776. or',c:/A"- I12ICO~D. . 00 OIC,CAr"""" Dr APC"r/4NA, ./i'/tS.Nr-DF'-ltfIAY 6)' ~IlANr J;U;/lrD -'="'.&'~~ J":,'NI' /S''''~:z. BOo'C .1'7:1.7, PA&I'+~6,' , OFF/C/A"- I2I''::DR:D.$ . .3 , 't=j I I I I I I I 5 I I ",..-ZJl'.I.."1IV XN' "'''" "''''At:.r .1441., ~_~~"""L.. _ '" . R 0 A D "."IT 3/...1.... ".....,u, Jr. c.... ~..:&O._ Au_r_ _. A"'''U; .-a,w,..... "',a JIII&1NI C...If" .z.s./7tJ. ~ OC1'.~oM : ,"01'~ \ -, ,,.u.c.T It-.-M. "'^~ ,~,. .... S"'" ......0 un \ , 1C ..,., fN Mt} ~/fl'~ f'\.~ ~AT'f. 'E.T. ~~ \UIlcA'tEO CURVE OA fA i OCATION AN'U ItADIUS TANGEtfT LENGT 1I,z'IZ'SZ' sz.._' 71.e,' 1".1 .1$' tJ'-""",' '~OO' 2~. ",' 41.11.' I......... .&e.0. ' 11.0+' Jl.7.." ,,,-o,~. AO.OO' .z...,' "'A1&.' f-----... --- -- 6-10 C~eI8-~ 4-1-88 APPENDIX - C r CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANN~G DEPARTMENT ""'li , """"l AGENDA ITEM # LOCATION CASE CZ 88-4 HEARING DATE \... ...,j \... R -3 -3000 ~ SAN eERNAROINO STATE COL "0" 'T . I 17 PRO 14 u/oe Uo" R-I ..."" .: o .. . I .. - ..... M.IA R-I 6-11 . ATTAC!1MEl'~T "B" ~ , CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM # LOCATION CASE CZ 88-4 6 6/21/88 \.. \.. HEARING DATE ~ ~.. =800' SAN eERNAROINO STATE COL "0" 7 . I 17 PRO 1411/ac "0" R-I '."~ ... -'" ..-' M.IA " ",,---"--- R- , " . I 6-11