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