Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-18-1988 Minutes ~l~Y of San Bernardino. CalIfornia . May 18, 1988 ThlS lS the tlme and place set for an Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Common Councll ot the Clty of San Bernardino at thelr Regular Meeting held Monday, May 16, 1983, and recessed to Tuesday, May 17. 1988, at 9:04 a.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall, ~OO North "D" Street, San Bernardino, Californla. The Clty Clerk has caused to be posted the Notlce of Adjournment of said meetlng held Tuesday, May 17, 1938, and has on flle ln the Offlce of tne Clty Clerk an affldavlt of said postlng together wlth a copy of sald Notlce WhlCh was posted at 1:00 p.m., on Tuesday, May 17, 1988 I In the '.~~ouncll Chambers of City Hall. 3UG North "D!! Street, Sa~ Bernardino, CalifornIa_ . The Adjourned Regular Councll of the Clty of San at _ is p.m., Wednesday, Chambers of City Hall, Eernardlno, CalIfornIa. Meeting of the Bernardlno was May 18 I 19 G J ! 300 North Mayor and Common called to order 1n the Coune l.L liD" Street.. San INVOCl'.TION The Invoca.tlon Executive ASSIstant to 1,..ras q1 ven the Mayor. by Rlchard Eennec].:e, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Alleglance was led by Mayor Pro Tempore Jess. Flores. R(ILIJ CALL Roll Call was taken by the Clty Clerk wlth the following being present- Mayor Wilcox; Council Members: Estrada, Reilly. Flores, MaudE.ley! MITh:.:C,. Pope-Ludl.~m, Mlller: Clty Attorney Penman Clty Clerk Clark, Deputy :ity Adml:listrator P()bblns. Absent: None. PUBLIC COMMENTf. There wer9 no public c()mments under the PllbllC comments portion of the agenda. GENERAL PLAN REVISION - FINAL PUBLIC HEAPING - LAND USE ALTERNATIVES AND INTERIM POLICY DOSUMENT This 18 the tlme and place set for the flnal pub1le nearlIlg on the land use alterna~lvss and on the InterIm . - 1 - 5/18/8b POlICY Document, WhlCh are part of the first phase of the general plan reVlSlon process. . The Mayor opened the publlC hearlng. Les Dabrltz, Execuclve Dlrector of the San Bernardino Area Chamber of Commerce, ~ead a letter from Chamber Presldent Gil Snyder regardlng the land use alternatives and the Interlm POIICY Document. The letter stated th6t this process has resulted In the clty havlng to maKe premature land use declsions mostly because the technical background documents were six months late. There are many unanswered questions and the 1nterim plannlng documents w1ll face substantlal changes because of the .ack of necessary informat1on. The letter also requested that the Mayor [,ake 1t very 01ea1' to the general publlC that plann1ng documents and land use alternatlves ~nd not flnal documents. and Council the lnterlm are Inter:i.i1i . Glorla Anderson, representlng the League of ;.Jemen ~oters of San Bernardlno. read a statement saYlng that ..and use declslons should protect the overall environment and be concerned with the quallty of life. She spoke egarding the adverse effects of growth and the need to ~educe the Job and housin9 imbalances. She also opposed l:lgh density houslng, especially in the downtown areas, and buildlng in hazard areas. Debble UbnosKe of P and D Technolog1es and ~epresentin9 Inland Action, spoke regard1ng a letter from :nland Action dated May 11, 198n, statIng a concern that 'he Highland and Verdemont Area Plans. along with certa1n 'edevelopment plans, are not be1ng considered 1n the ,.evelopment of a new general plan. Ed Jacobsen, a member of the Local Government ':ommlttee of the San Bernardino Valley Board of Realtors, Jresented concerns about ens general plan process and .ledged the support of the Board for contlrw.ed cooperation In preparation of the new plan. Dennls Mart1n, the developer of a multl-fam1ly ~roJect on the west slde of Waterman between Welr and _ommercial, staced that ln August 1984 he was granted a :ev1sed CUP, CUP 84-60. In August 1987 he requested an ~xtenslon due to the moratorium. In September he was :nformed by the Planning Department that the extenslOll could not proceed until the preferred land use !lternat1ves were selected, but that the City Attorney had rendered an opin1on that the proJect would recelve an iutomatic tlme extenslon. In ~ll Alternatlves Ai B, -, . " S/lG/E38 . E, ~nG F the land use alternatIve has not changed from that WhlCh existed when CUP S4-~O was granted. ThlS delay tas cost hlffi $35,000 a month to walt. Now he was told Lnder the current oplnlon of the City Attorneyls OffIce t~at hlS condltlonal use permlt has explred. Therefore, t9 would have to start the CUP process allover agaln. Mr. MartIn recommended conform to the new land use be released immediately or commlttee be adopted. that proJects that totally plan b9 recommended to OFR to that a fast rack or exemptlon City Attorney Penman responded to Mr. Martln and offered hlm an opportunlty to see the documentation that shows thlS declsion was part of the court order. He stated that only tentatlve maps are automatlcally extended tut that he would talk to Plannlng and OFR regardlng grandfathering prOV1Slons. . W. R. Holcomb. 505 North Arrowhead Avenue. spoke on behalf of property owners of flve acres on Tippecanoe on the east slde adjacent to the Santa Ana wash. He stated he has had no response and no dlalogue from Plannlng on his requests that this parcel be deslgnated for hea7Y ~ndustry. He also explained why heavy industry is better for a city: hlgher taxes. hlgher wages, etc. He talked regardlng the speciflcs of the property and explalned why he felt that these five acres are ldeal for heav~ lndustry. Mr. Holcomb also complalned that Plannlng never been able te artlculate one good reason property is not recommended f()r heavy industry. sU,ff has why thIS The Mayor asked staff fer a response. Plannlng Dlrector Slraeusa seated that the Flannlng Department has no obJectlon to carrYlng the heavy lndustrial ln that area over to the flve acres as leng ~3 it does not abut any reSIdentIal. DaVId LeWIS, repreEenclng SaIl Bernardino County Flood ;ontrol Dlstrlct, requested that flood control property located adjacent to the ~uto ,:eIlter be retaIned 1n tne ~ommerclal deslgnatlon set forth ln Alternatlve E. He 3tated that Planning staffls recommendatlons at the first public hearing came as a surprise as they were opposite frGm the CAe's ~nd P1211111ng CommIssIon's recommendatIon. Mr. LeW1S dlstrlbuted a document from Leighten and .'.ssoclates, elititled: "Update Report ef Fault Investlgatlen for Existlng Recharge BaSlns between Orange Show Road and r,.larm Creek" CIty c.'t San Bernardino'l. Ht-~ . - J - ~;/18/8b I L . explained the report and stated that the llllet3 ~o the channel come from tne Auto Center Drlve facility and from a channel that will be resolved through the development review process. He added that hIS Information wi~l be confirmed by Mike Walker, DIrector oi TransportatIon and Flood Control, for addltlonal support. Mr. Lewis presented a map showing the relatlonshlp of the channel to the surrounding uses. Ann Siracusa, PlannIng Director, stated that staff wanted to be sure the detalled envlronmental work was done prior to the change to a commerclal designatlon Slnce the envlronmental work on the plan ltself will not be as detaIled as it needs to be. Slle recommended thIS renlain In flood plaln management untll completion of the envlrOllmental work. . Council Member Estrad~ requested the record show the receipt of a letter dated May 17, 1988, from Trl Clty Corporate Center, 485 Carnegie Drlve, San Bernardino. The letter stated that Trl-Cltj"S overall master plan has always been a mixed use plan showlng hotel, restaurant, research and development, retall and office uses, and seated that it lS extremely crltical and necessary that the zonlng for Tri-City Corporate Center have enough fleXlbllity to allow the contlnued maturaClon of the mlxed use concept. ~he Planning Director suggested set aside until all testlmony has :lme, the Plannlng Department wlll forth with their recommendatlons. that thlS request be been heard at which be prepared ~o come Ruth Greenwood, 1391 Andreas, owner of property across the street from Seccombe Lake, questloned why thlS property lS being recommended for hlgh denslty reSidentIal. As she purchased this property deSIgnated commerCIal, sne l"equested that It remain that way. Jess Jacquet, 1773 West 20th Street. Presldent of the 20th Street Homeowners ASSOclation, recommended chat :ti8 Mayor and Council deslgnate areas wlthln the growth pattern for" schools 30 that the property would not 116ve to te condemned at a later date. Larry Claunch 248B Third Avenue. Muscoy, obJected to a proposed houslng development ln the area and requested ~ore upscale housing for the Muscoy area. Mr. James Carr. :alifornla, owner of J.M.C. Tract 13274 referred to 7101 Cambria Circle, Orange, Development and the bUllder of by Larry Claunch, stated he . , - ~ - 5/18/88 . appeared before the Council on Aprll 26 a~ which tlme the flannlng staff recommended an RS deslgnatlon and the Councll adopted It. On April 23, 1988, he went to the ~oratoriuffi Exemptlun Comffilttee and found to h1S surpC1se t~at a group of homeowners was present to appeal the frO]ect. Several lssues were raised by surrounding Iroperty owners. Mr. Carr addressed each of the lssues and explained tow the tract met all the requlrements of the City. Also, l.e has rece1ved a letter from the school distrlct statlng tue dlstr1ct can support the proJect. He added that all ~ots in the project are larger than the 200 units to the [outh and the lots are 7900 square feet. Th1S lS not a lustom home area. It 1S for econoffilcally priced hous1ng. Mr. Carr stated he made agreements with the Clty to lrovide an overslzed sewer line to serVlce the area to the Lorth and he w1ll be putting lt ln, but this is the flfth time thlS project has been before ehe Planning Department bnd City Councll. It has been approved and reapproved for 1~-1-7200 and meets and exceeds the design standards for the City. He stated he does not buy the argument that ~_ingle famlly houses are not compatlble with single famlly Louses, especlally Slnce hlS. proJect has larger lots. . John Nuslal. 15010 Avenue of SClence, SUlte 105 San Liego. was present to represent Henry Bickler and the Eawley famlly who are t.he owners of property Just north of ~handin Hills Golf Course. He requested that a parcel of vacant land at the northern end of Bond Street be ~edesignated with PRD standards Wh1Ch would permit the clusterlng of UlutS. He requested that a 46 Ulllt "up lex-type proJect, approved In 1980, be approved for ~esubmittal. The previous map explred because of J:on-r'lc"iBl.Opment. Mr. Musial spoke regarding the benefits of the a luxury development. mltlgatlon of a dra1nage a secondary emergency access co the north, and a that would be conslstent wlth what was approved ~'roJect. : problem! 1.3nd use prlor, The Planning ~lrectQr stated that staff has no problem with the request. Susan Bemis, 4 Upper Newport representing Tarnutzer Compan1es, property at the sc~~heast corner c.OEd. Plaza, Newport Bs~ch, spoke regarding their of Highland and Del . - :.J 5/18188 . Ms. Bemls explalned the development hlstory of the property and requested that lt be deslgnated commerclal to allow the development or a SlX to eight theatre complex. Sne spoke regarding her contacts wlth Planning staff WhlCh g3ve her all the information for a commercial project and on the day before she was to go for development review called her and told her that the proJect was belng recommended for a medium reSIdentIal deSIgnatIon. She urged the Council to retaIn commercial zuning as she has a slgned lease with a theatre operator and the resldential WIll not penci~ out. Dr. Judith Rymer, 2405 Shasta Drive, San BernardIno, representing Cal State San Bernardino! spoke regarding the development preferences of the University, illcluding slngle family development, a mOVle theatre, and professional offIces. She spo~e regarding the need to follow an overlay zone for the Universlty Area and stated tnat additlonal apartments, convenlence stores or a rast food restaurant wlll not enhance the area. She obJected to plans for a fast food restaurant at the southeast corner of Kendall and University Drive as the entrance to the campus is not approprlate for a fast food restaurant and suggested that an upscale restaurant or coffee shop be put In, ~n lts place. . David Henck, 26210 Clrcle Drlve, Lake Arrowhead, stated that he is the owner of the property at 40th and Johnson WhlCh has received a flood control recommendation and does not understand the reason for this, Ann Siracusa, Plannlng Dlrector, stated that thlS correctIon had been missed on the map ~nd the change would be made. Kirk S. Garvin; 370 West Sixth Street, Suite 215 and B1Shop in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SaInts, spoke regardIng church property. The church has a :riangular parcel on the south side of Northpark WhlCh was crlglnally deslgnated 83. He stated the church plans a $3,000,000 facility on that parcel and is concerned about tIle :olllng designati(~~. The Planning Dlrector stated that all churches requlre a conditional use permit but are permItted ln any zone distrlct. W. R. Holcomb, 505 North Arrowhead dlstrlbuted a parcel map shOWIng a parcel west parcel owned by the church mentioned by Mr. Garvin ~e stated he agreed WIth the Council that there many apartments in the Unlverslty area but the Avenue, of the above. are too Councll . 5/18/88 . needed to look at the issue of good planning. The parcel In questlon is presently zoned R3 but has a recommended interIm land use desIgnatIon of RI. He stated that thlS 15 a small slIver of land; too small for an RI development. Mr. Holcomb requested that the Plannlng staff be requlred to artlculate thelr reasons for downzonlng thlS parcel to R1 and support thelr reasons with necessary findlngs. Mr. Valdean Watson, 2295 Mesqulte Drlve, spoke 1n support of the church proposed on the south slde of North Park Boulevard and requested the Councll give this parcel the zone that would facllltate ltS development as a church. Dorlan Johnson, Block Bros. and Marlborough Levelopment Corporatlon 2029 Century Park E, #1550, Los Angeles, spoke regardlng a four acre parcel at the northwest corner of Bond and Llttle Mountaln Drive. Gpposlte the golf course, west of existing multIfamIly residentlal, and contiguous to an Rl development, . Mr. Johnson stated that this parcel has been designated RL under the current land use alternatlve which IS less dense than the existIng residentIal to the north. Orlglnally this parcel was developed for a commerclal use and requested that a commerclal designatlon for office use be considered for that property, which would make lt conslstent wlth the use across the street. He added that the owner of the golf course concurred that commerc1al ~ould be the prefererltial use for that property. Plannlng Dlrector Slracusa stated this property has teen designated RL throughout the General Plan reVIsion process, but that thlS particular reques~ was not discussed specifically by the CAe c1r the ':ommlSS1()n. Steve Pleasant, eM EngineerIng, 225 E. AIrport Dr"lVe, San Bernardino, was present to represent the owne~~ 0f property on the northwest corner of Kendall Drlve and Unlverslty Parkway. He stated he supported the land use deslgnatlon of MU as set forth on the present map and stated that as he embraced the concerns of the University that the development proposed wlll include upscale office, commerclal and restaurant uses desired by the University. Mr. Pleasant answered quest lonE of the regarding the amount of gr~dlng to be done on the snd stated that the commerclal wlll be elevated a Council property few feet . 7 - 5/18/88 . and set back to elImInate the gradIng of the hill. The hill provides a nice backdrop for the development. Parklng will be screened and the hill WIll not be graded. Joy Kolstad, 1542 Indian Trail, San Bernardino, a nember of the San Bernardino Valley Homeowners Coalition, spoke in oppositIon to: the Ilmit on the amount of time glven to her. the surplus of apartment units in the City of San Bernardlno, the adverse effects of poorly managed growth in the City, the deterioration of public serVlces, impacts on traffic clrculation, lack of responsible fiscal il:anagement, and the lac,: of a Cl ty library in the State College area. Ms. Kolstad also stated that the Interim ~olicies were hurriedly put together without suffIcIent tIme for reVlew. Ms. Kolstad gave a lengthy presentation about her perceptions of problems within the PlannIng Department concerning the processing of applications. She explained the deflnltions of "deemed complete" and "deemed :.nccmplete" . She ':lave statistics on the number ()f cpplications in the Planning Department that have been deemed complete without thorough review by the Planning ] epartment. . Planning Director Siracusa responded to the charges ~ade by Joy Kolstad, stating that there are proJects subJect to the permIt streamlining act and others are not. Ehe said that 25 proJects out of the 89 listed by Ms. rols-tad are not subject to the lIdeemed complete" issue. The Planning DIrector explained the state law on "deemed complete", Deeming something complete under "the [tate law means the PlannIng Department cannot compel a I:eveloper to give additlonal information for the <oppllcatlon other than InformatIon that is required by I~EQA. It also starts the clock ticking and gives Planning a certain amount of time to process a proJect Wlth a negatIve declaratIon. Flnal action must be taken within six months from the date a proJect is deemed complete. For a project with an EIR. it's ~welve months. The Plannlng Dlrector added that in most cases the developers voluntarily extend the timing by agreeing to provlde additIonal information requested by Planning. The Planning Director also stated that in lOOKIUS Into the complaint from Ms. Kolstad, she did flnd a number of projects for which the ~o days had lapsed without ?lanning sendIng a letter notifying complete or incomplete ind added that her staff has been spoken to on thIS ];,atter. As of this. date there are 50 proJects whIch are :eemed complete but she stated she could not tell the . - 8 - :)/18/88 . Council how many many were deemed they needed. of those had lapsed the 30 days and how complete because Planning had everything The Plannlng Director answered questions. RECESS MEETING At 7:35 p.m., Mayor Wilcox ordered a ten minute recess. RECONVENE MEETING At 8:00 p.m., the AdJourned Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Council of the City of San Bernardino reconvened in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. ROLL CALL Roll Call was taken by the City Clerk with the followlng being present: Mayor Wilcox; Council Members reilly, Flores, Maudsley, Mlnor, Pope-Ludlam, Miller; City Clerk Clark, Deputy City Admlnlstrator Robbins. Absent: Council Member Estrada, City Attorney Penman. Norma Archie, 1902 West 15th Street, Flanning CommlSSloner Gome: of the First for reconsideration on project 87-64 for three story apartments in the Sixth Ward. questioned why Ward is asking constructlon of . Mayor Wilcox suggested ~rom the First Ward was not held over for her return. that as present, the Council Member that this matter be Planning Director SIracusa stated that Commlssioner (~omez had requested a reconsideration on the proJect and .t was voted down, but the applicant had appealed the vroJect to the Council. The proJect will be before the (.ouneil on June 20. 1988. Jeff Blakkolb, 820 Vista Drive; San Bernardino, was present to represent hlmself and four neighbors. He suggested that the hillslde management p~an be enlarged to hlS area to prevent h1gh density hous1ng on Little Mountaln, COUNCIL MEMBER ESTRADA CITY ATTORNEY PENMAN RETURN At 8:08 p.m., Council Member Estrada and Clty Attorney Penman returned to the Council Table. Johnnie Johnson, ~o represent Pauline desterly part of the adjacent to Devore. 2736 Lakeslde, Orange; was present Faut who owns 148 acres 1n the Verdemont Area. The property 1S . - 9 - 5/18/88 . Mr. Johnson stated he is aware of the improvement needs for the area and requested that the entire 148 3cres te deslgnated the same as on the Verdemont Plan so that t:1E econOffilCS of the development would support the i;nprovements. Frank Tracadas, 4150 North liE" Street, 3an Bernardino. spoke about the piece of property on the north slde of Kendall. Just east of ?"tlm. and south of Cable Creek. Mr. Tracadas stated that because the property lS long and narrow lt is not feaslble for RE and requested RM or F;TJ. Charles Schultz of Reld and Hellyer, 599 North Arrowhead. spoke regarding the Cable Lakes property WhlCh is bounded by 1-215, Little League Drive, Cable LaKes channel and the bluffs. He stated that the property has Pes-7 zoning (per the Verdemont Plan). He stated that lt was his understanding that the Councll acted recently to change the proposed Interlm Policy Plan from MFP floodplain management, to RS wlth a speciflc plan and that the speclfic plan process be followed prlor to the development of the property. . Mr. Schultz stated that they have received approval of the tentative tract on and the condltional use permit, and that they believe that they have the right to proceed wlth development. He added that the problems wlth traffic and flooding are addressed ln the conditions of the CUP and that in order to make a project in the area profltable and acceptable, substantial flood control channels must be P'-1t In. Hr. Schultz asked the Mayor to grandfathering policy in would permit this project to clarlfy whether the the Interlm POI1CY proceed. proposed Document Planning Director Siracusa stated that the way the glau~~.therlng policles are presently written, if a project has an active condltional use permit. a reVlew of plans approval, or tentative tract and lt is still wlthln lts active perlod. then lt would be permltted to develop under the rules that were in effect on April ~~ :988. Under the condltions of OPR and as of Aprll 22, 1988. north of the 1l1inell tracts of lO,dOO or grea+.::er were permitted to develop. Clty Attorney Penman stated that the grandfatherlng lS a suggestion by staff that he has some legal concerns about and he would like co talk to the people at OPR and get back to the Councll on that issue. . - 10 - 5/18/88 ,---- . Attorney Schultz presented further concerns about a Planning Depar~ment recommendation that a consultant be trred to do a specific plan for rnfrastructure and Jmprovements in ~he Verdemont area. He felt that this Ihould be under~aken at thrs ~ime. but as part of the 1inal general plan. The cost of hiring a consultant would 2dd further frnancial impact to development of the area, bnd an additional consultant would place a tremendous burden on the City of San Bernardrno. John Lrghtburn. P. O. Box 1622. San Bernardino ~2402, was present to represent Chuck King and Associates relatrve to two preces of property. one adjacent to Lrttle League Drrve, above Palm, and the other on Kendall bt Pine Street. He expressed his concern that the new map shows the frrst parcel at RL which would not allow them to have a viable proJect, and the other parcel on Kendall at ~S. He stated that it was hrs understanding from the May :2, IS88, meetrng, that RU was berng approved for the two ~arcels he represents. Mr. Lightburn stated that the property was originally ~oned in the Verdemont plan as Res 14 after a great deal (;f public iIlput. He added that it seemed to be the wisdom ,f the people involved at that trme that Res 14 would provide the proper buffer next to the freeway. . Mr. Lrghtburn stated they supported the comprehensrve public improvement plan recommended for the area, and Explained at length why he felt that his property. which Las a great deal of frontage, should be given an RU ,'esrgnatron. The City Clerk responded to a request that the matron wf May 12. 1988, be clarrfied as rt pertarns to the ~arcels represented by Mr. Llghtburn. The matron took 45 mrnutes as it covered the entire Verdemont area. The lilotlon concerning the two parcels owned by Mr. Kin9 was pot clear because although the maker. Councrl Member ~strada stated that the property should be RD, the other Flembers of the Council responded with "no apartments". with that response those parcels were not addressed again, so the final decision was unclear. Planning staff and the consultant answered questions ~egarding the feasibility of developing the parcel RS or ~L. The Planning Director stated that staff needs to take 2nother look at the parcels and come back to the Councrl ~ith a final recommendation. Members of the Council explarned rotrng for May 12. 1988, concernIng these ard that RS was their preference for both wha t the~/ parcels. parcelE. it/ere Most . - 11 - 5/18/88 . John Lightburn requested RU wIth a PRD requirement. He rSlterated that RS would nOL be economically feasible and the PPD would still provIde for detached single family housIng. The CouncIl discussed a PRD deSIgnatIon for thIS property. David Mlynarski. 501 North Placentla, Fullerton, was present to represent MDI Corporatlol,. He addressed page 12 of the Interim Polley Document which sets forth the grandfather policy, and recommended that the cutoff date in the grandfather policy be changed from April 22, 1988, tJ June 11, 1988. WhICh IS the date that OPR wIll approve cr disapprove the InterIm Policy Document. The Planning Director stated that the April 22 date w~s chosen because it was the fIrst hearIng date and that would stop a rush from developers who would submit theIr frojects to PlannIng and pressure Planning to deem them complete out of order. That date is strIctly arbitrary and the June 11th date would also be a leg1tImate date. . Mr. MlynarsKI also presented concerns about the proposed Infrastructure plan. With the changes in staff and land use designations, it has been difficult to develop thIS area. He added he would like to work with CIty staff on the improvement plan If he could be directed to someone on City staff to carry this program forward. Mr. Mlynarsk1 stated he 1nterpreted the motIon of May 12, 1988, as Council Member Estrada directlng staff to take the Verdemont plan, absent any apartments. and provide an overlay represellting the current land use designations which the staff and consultant are USIng In lieu of existing land use designation. He added he dC)9S not believe that staff correctly interpreted the motion. as evidenced by the map on the wall which shows incorrect deSIgnations. He has a project that was deemed consistent with the Verdemont plan, but the map on the wall IS not conSIstent WIth the Verdemont plan. Plannlng Director Siracusa concurred that the illap was Incorrect and stated that in rechecking the map there is an area that should show go from 14,400 to 20 000 sq feet and the legend needs to be corrected. PUBLIC HEARING LIMITATION - ONE AND ONE-HALF MINUTE The Mayor and Councll discussed the procedure for the rest of the meetIng and the tIme constraints that they face 1n terms of mee~lng the deadlIne fer submittlng the document to OPR. . - l~ ~ 5/18/82 . Mayor Wilcox suggested ~hat as many of were heard before, that the time limlt for reduced from five minutes to one ffilnute cae-half minutes. the speakers speakers be or one and COUNCIL MEMBER POPE-LUDLAM EXCUSED Council Member Pope-Ludlam left the Council Table. Councll Member Mlller made a Councll Member Reilly, that the time set at one and one-half minutes. motlon, seconded by limit for speakers be The Council asked the audlence how they felt about the time llmlt. Helen Kopczynski stated that she felt that those who have no new information should be limited, but as she has new information she wanted the full five minutes. The motion carrled by the following vote: Councll Members Estrada. Rellly, Flores. Maudsley. N~es: Council Member Minor. Absent: Councll Pope-Ludlam. Ayes: Miller. Member . Glen Gipson, 6495 Palm Avenue, spoke regarding the Citizens Advlsory Committee which met as often as four times per week and took as much tlme as they felt necessary to corne up wlth the RE land use deslgnatlons In the Verdemont area. He seated that the area is not vacant land, but includes h~mes on one acre parcels. On about 730 acres, there are 125 homes complete and four under construction. Helen Kopczynski, 3150 Cable Canyon. stated that the Councll's action of May 12. 1988. relntroduclng the Verdemont Area Plan was a travesty. She complalned that the recommendations of the CAC and Planning Commission were ignored and stated that she would record the lllegalities In the Verdemont plan that did not meet environmental impact requirements. Ms. Kopczynskl gave a lengthy presentation of her concerns about the general plan revlsion process and flaws In the Verdemont Area Plan. City Attorney Penman responded to Ms. Kopczyns~l's complalnts about the process. He stated that there has been a lot of confusion about the Interlm Policy Document. It lS a draft of the general plan accord1ng to OPR and it 1S not subject to CEQA by law. The Government Code . - 13 - 5/18/88 . provides for the Director of OPR to give extensions based upon terms and the Interlm POI1CY Document is a term :mposed on the Clty. The EIR wlll be part of the final ~;eneral plan process. James White. P. O. Box 10129 Newport Beach, owner of Sunflower Propertles. stated that he has lost over S500.000 by having hlS property conflscated by the City of San Bernardlno and he has no way to recover it. He stated he has contributed a lot of easements to the City for new I'ine Avenue and without his partlcipation it would not ,'xist. He also requested that since he has not been given enough time to explain his case. that the Council recelve hnd return any calls made to them by him during the upcoming weekend. Sara Regan, 924 Oceanfront, Balboa. representing Jordan Miller, construction lender on the project ffientioned by James White, gave the costs of making the necessary improvements for new Pine. The property is not llense enough to support single family development nor lS ~t economically feasible to provide the improvements hithout the multiple family ~oning. She added that the 1111 at the back of the property screens the proposed .:partments from existlng single family residential. . Ms. Regan questioned the grandfathering provisions of ~he Interim Policy Document. Clty Attorney Penman stated he did not have an answer :0 her speciflc questions wlthout checking with OPR. David Burdlck, owner of property on Mill Street ~etween Arrowhead and Waterman Avenue, and recommended XU ..r CH at least 300 feet back from Mill Street. The Planning Director stated thlS ~Ieen restudied by staff and she recommendations for this meeting, recommending heavy commercial for part an area that has has handwritten She Wlll be of this area. Sharon Smith, 6260 Palm Avenue, stated she dld not concur with all homeowners who want one acre lots and the ?ecple surrounding her have no objections to 10r800 square foot lots but the intention of the people around them is to sell at least one-half acre lots because developlng thelr indlvldual parcels into four or three lS not feasible. She added that the cost of pavlng a Clty street is a big hardship on an acre lot and pointed out :he need to be able sell off a one-half acre and they have ~o reason to plow weeds. People ride horses down their Lots and there is no reason to clean up after o~her ~eoplets horses. . - 14 - 5/18/88 . Arnold Stubblefield 2258 Bradford Avenue, Highland. s~ated he was present at ~hlS meeting because it was hlS vnderstanding that the standards for development of the tillsides would be decided at thlS flnal hearlng. He also requested that the Council adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation for Mountaln Shadows as set forth on Alternatlve Map D. The Mayor explained to Mr. Stubblefleld that due to the amount of publlC testimony the Council wlll be unable to complete the adoption of the standards at this meeting. The Council discussed whether or not the public hearing portion of the meeting should be closed. Clty Attorney Penman explained thelr optlons. At 9:26 p.m.. Council Member Miller made a motlon. seconded by Councll Member Escrada and unanimously carried. that the public hearing be closed. The Mayor and Council dlscussed the need to hold additional meetings in order to take action area by areal and whether or not to stay and complete those actlons or to recess to another date. It was agreed to take 3 short recess and come back to complete the actlons. . RECESS MEETING At 9:40 p.m.. Mayor Wilcox called for a flfteen rnnute recess. RECONVENE MEETING At 9:55 p.m., the Adjourned Regular Mayor and Common Council of the Clty of reconvened ln the Council Chambers of Clty "D" Street, San Bernardlno, California. Meeting of the San Bernardlno Hall, 300 North ROLL CALL R01~ ~qll was taken by the Clty Clerk with the followlng belng present: Mayor wilcox; Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Flores. Maudsley, Mlnor, Pope-Ludlam, Miller; City Attorney Penman Clty Clerk Clark. Deputy City Administrator Robbins. Absent: None. TRI CITY COMMERCENTER MU DESIGNATION, SOUTHPOINTE RD, AND IH ON EAST SIDE OF TIPPECANOE (Area 1) Council Member Estrada made a motion, seconded c:- :ouncil Member Miller and unanlmously carrled, that the MU for the Tri City Commercenter Area lnclude llght lndustrial, offlce commercial, and general commerclal; . - 15 - S/le/BS . that in the Southpolnte area, ~he portlon deslgnated RM be changed to RU but with the 5000 square foot mlnlmum lot Slze; and that the IH on the east side of TIppecanoe edjacent to the Santa Ana Wash, be apprcved. WATERMAN AVENUE FRONTAGES UP TO RIALTO - SIERRA WAY. ARROWHEAD AVENUE, BOUNDED ON SOUTH BY MILL STREET AND NORTH BY RIALTO AVENUE - MI] ON FRONTAGES, IL IN BALANCE (Area No.2) The Planning Director presented her recommend3tiaI1S for the areas along South Waterman up to Pialto Avenue. She recommended that the frontages along Waterman Avenue from the Santa Ana wash to Fifth Street be MI] WIth IL, CG, and CO with a caveat that there needs to be deep setbacks. heavy landscaping along Waterman and llmltations on types cf commerclal and amount of commercial allowed, in or'det" to avold strip centers. The PlannIng DIrector answered questIons of the Councrl regardlng the adult-only commerclal users wlthln this area and stated thc)se would be restricted to heavy commercIal under the policies. . Woody regarding could be adult-only Tescher of Envicom also answered questlons adult businesses. He stated their locatlons controlled by settlng distances between bUSInesses and other types of bUSInesses. The Plannlng Dlrector pOlnted out that ultimately each city has to have a zone for adult-only buslnesses. The Council expressed concerns about the concentratlon of adult-only buslnesses in one area of the City. The PlannIng DIrector recommended the implementation Gf an overlay district for the airport landing zone. The slde of Planning reflects PlannIng Director stated that along the Mill Street west of Waterman to Sierra Way. staff is recommending heavy commercial what IS developed there. north the WhICh On the south sIde of Mill Street. west of Watennan to Arrowhead, the staff is recommendlng heavy commerclal back from the MU along Waterman. The Planning Director answered questions regardIng :he recommendations for the Waterman, Mill area. She recommended heavy commercial for Sierra Way and Arrowhead between Mill and Rialto for the interim, but stated the area needs a block by block analysls. . - 16 - 5/18/88 Mayor Wilcox questioned this recommendation. . The Planning Director explained her recommendation \h1Ch 1S based on the ffilX of light industrial and heavy (offimerclal users in the area. The area is so mixed it is ~ difficult area to label. The only alternat1ve to this ~s to deslgnate the entire area MU. The Council expressed concerns about having such a ~arge area designated MU. The Planning Director suggested taking the MU down the frontages and designating the balance IL. After discussion, Council Member Estrada made a notion, seconded by Council Member Reilly and unanimously carried, to designate MU along the frontages (both sldes) cf Sierra Way and Arrowhead Avenue, between Rialto Avenue "nd Mill Street and the balance of that "rea north of Mlll above the heavy commercial on Mill) lS to remain IL. The I,U includes IL, ':8; and CH. . FLOOD CONTROL PROPERTY NEAR AUTO PLAZA (Area 2) Council Member Flores made a mot1on, seconded by Council Member Reilly and unan1mously carried, that the ?lood Control District property adjacent to the auto center (near Orange Show Road) be designated CG if there "re no significant environmental impacts. KING STREET. GIOVANOLA STREET. "K" STREET Council Member Flores made a motion, seconded by ~ouncil Member Re1lly and unanimously carried, that the ,ittle finger of land which is designated IL be cut off to I.ake a straight Ilne and the little finger north of the ~lley be designated CG like the rest of the area and south ,f the alley be designated RS. SOUTH OF RIALTO AVENUE, BORDERED BY FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL ON EAST AND RAILROAD TRACKS ON WEST - MOBILE HOME PARK, BELLEVIEW AND CONGRESS - RU Council Member Flores made a motion, seconded by .ounc1l Member Reilly and unanlmously carried. that the 00rtion that is south of Rialto Avenue bordered by a flood :ontrol channel on the east and the ra1lroad tracks on the 1est. south to Walnut, remain IH for the wrecking yard on ~alnut, and that the rest of the area be des1gnated IL .xcept as follows: east from the wrecking yard, designate :he existlng mob1le home park RU and the balance of the ~xisting residential RS (near Belleview and Congress "treets). . - 17 - 5/1(;/'38 . RESIDENTIAL AREA NORTH OF MILL, EAST OF RANCHO FROM CHESTNUT TO MACY STREET Council Member Flores made a motion, seconded by Councll Member Maudsley and unanimously carried, that the the area north of Mill, east of Rancho from Chestnut to Macy where there are slngle famlly resldences that go torth on Macy and east on Chestnut for about three or four lots, be designated RS to conform to the eXlsting residentlal, and the balance remain as designated: RU. EAST SIDE OF "D" STREET FROM EIGHTH STREET NORTH TO SOUTH LINE OF CG ALONG BASE LINE MU AT SEVENTH AND PERSHING, ARROWHEAD TO "D" STREET COUDCll Member Rellly made a motion, seconded by Councll Member Estrada and unanlmously carried, that the east side of "D" Street from Eighth Street north to the south 11ne of the proposed CG along Base Line Street be changed from RS to CG to reflect eXlsting commercial uses 1n an area that is presently 95% commercial; and that the MU designatlon be extended to include the following property, (RS to MU): beginning at the lntersectlon of 7th Street and Pershing Avenue to the south line of 8th Street, thence west to the west line of Arrowhead Avenue, thence north 200+ feet, then west to the east (rearl property 11nes. of those lots facing "D" Street. . WABASH AND GILBERT AT PARKSIDE TC") CHC Council Member Rellly made a motlon, seconded by Council Member Maudsley and unanimously carr1ed, that the west one-half of the south half of the block between Wabash and Gilbert bounded on the west by Parkslde be changed from from RS to CHC except those slngle family lots facing Wabash are to remain R3 (existing use: Senior C1tizen Congregate Care); and the east one-half of the south half of the block between Wabash and Gilbert be changed from RS to RM except those single family lots faclng onto Wabash and Pepper Tree Lane are to rBmaln RS. eA1sting use: newly constructed large apartment complex) MEADOWBROOK AREA RMH DESIGNATION (Area 3) Planning Director Siracusa spoke regarding a parcel in Area No. 3 an tIle corner of Waterman and Rialto Avenues, eAtendlng from Meadowbrook, which 1S designated on the commlssion's plan as RMH and stated there has been a lot of concern expressed about having higher denslty apartments in that area. She stated that she does not have a recommendation but she is concerned about the deslgnatlon 1n that area. After discussion the Planning Dlrector recommended RMH on the existing high rises and RU for the periphery. . - 18 - 5/18/t5S . Council councll Member ,;xlstlng high ~he balance be Member Estrada made a motlon, seconded Reilly and unanin1c)usly carried, that denslty resldentlal be designated RMH deslgnated RU. by the but ADJOURN MEETING At 10:40 p.m., Councll Member Pope-Ludlam made a motion, seconded by Council Member Flores and unanimously carried, that the meeting adjourn to Monday, May 23, 1988, at 9:00 a.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 Horth "D" St.reet, San Bernardino, California. ~p7.d/~ /' City Clerk . :10 Items: I No Hours: 5hrs40min . - 19 - 5/18/88