HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-10-1989 Mintues
r
.
.
.
.
-";;-' ~'''''~'_~~~''':,. ';o~J:~"~~:_~",,:-~;;~r:1'iit~--:"f-:,:r~';;F~:~tf ~,":':"~il{~ :./ f";l'ii l"V"~i,:'{'{/'if(~
~1l'f'.l_;:'
City of San Bernardino, California
May 10, 1989
This is the time and place set for an Adjourned Regular
Meeting of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
Bernardino at their Adjourned Regular Meeting held at 9:10 a.m.,
Monday, May 8, 1989, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300
North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
The City Clerk has caused to be posted the Order of
Adjournment of said meeting held at 9:10 a.m., Monday, May 8,
1989, and has on file in the Office of the City Clerk an
affidavit of said posting together with a copy of said Order
which was posted at 10:30 a.m., Tuesday, May 9, 1989, in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San
Bernardino, California.
The Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Mayor
Council of the City of San Bernardino was called
Mayor Wilcox at 1:15 p.m., Wednesday, May 10,
Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D"
Bernardino, California.
and Common
to order by
1989, in the
Street, San
ROLL CALL
Roll Call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Lang with the
following being present: Mayor Wilcox; Council Members Estrada,
Flores, Maudsley, Minor, Miller; Deputy City Attorney Empeno,
Deputy City Clerk Lang, Acting City Administrator Robbins.
Absent: Council Members Reilly, Pope-Ludlam.
INVOCATION
The Invocation was given by Executive Assistant to the Mayor
Richard Bennecke.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Pro Tempore
Estrada.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no comments from the public.
GENERAL PLAN ADOPTION - CONTINUED ITEMS
Discussion was held regarding the amount of
for consideration at this Council Meeting and
Continued Items.
material planned
Agenda Item 1c,
(lc)
1
5/10/89
.
.
.
;g,;;
.
'~,"'7.:~:~, ":i!,'~-'-;'~-"1\I:':"~''iI::~llV"~;;f'-:S:
....", :~~~-- - '-;-'-~,- -- --";~F---'-c'-Y:--':------~'=C-}\,
Council Member Maudsley made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Estrada and unanimously carried, that Agenda Item 1c,
Continued Items, be continued to the Council Meeting scheduled
for 1:00 p.m., Wednesday, May 17, 1989, in the Council Chambers
of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
GENERAL PLAN ADOPTION - CHAPTER 1, COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT - SUBSECTION 1.0, LAND USE
This is the time and place set for consideration of the
Planning Commission's recommendations on Chapter 1, Community
Development, Subsection 1.0, of the Draft General Plan, regarding
land use. The Planning Commission's recommendations are based
upon the original draft text, which was submitted for review to
the Mayor and Common Council, to the Planning Commission and has
been available to the public. (la)
Discussion ensued regarding the format of this meeting. It
was pointed out for the information of the audience that the text
of the land use element is scheduled for consideration at this
time. Final action on the text will happen at a later time, as
changes may be suggested during review of the land use map. The
land use map is scheduled for discussion at 9:00 a.m., Saturday,
May 13, 1989, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D"
Street, San Bernardino, California.
In a memorandum dated April 10, 1989, the Planning
Department provided a "Summary of Land Use Designation Changes
from the Interim Policy Document", as recommended by the Planning
Commission.
Woody Tescher, consultant from Envicom, explained Table 3,
entitled "General Plan Land Use Categories", on page 42 of the
Planning Commission's recommended changes on the Draft General
Plan.
He presented Table 4, entitled "Estimated General Plan
Buildout Changes From Existing Use", on page 49 of the Planning
Commission's recommended changes on the Draft General Plan. He
explained that the information on Table 4 is the net effect of
the General Plan on the land. It includes the City and its
sphere of influence, and the development of vacant lands,
intensification of development and recycling of land to another
use.
Woody Tescher, consultant from Envicom, gave an overview of
the following twelve issues pertaining to the goals, objectives
and pOlicies of the City for land use and urban design:
2
5/10/89
.
.
.
.
''';'''';1J:'&:~':IC''''"_':\'!;~"''~:;5_~;<J,<,,,;Jr:j,~I::<i::'
. '''l:;;',;."., ~",I~-<;i~'
'-",-1
1. What types and amounts of land use should be
accommodated in the City?
2. How should land uses be distributed throughout the City?
3. What should be the functional role, uses permitted, and
physical form and character of the City's land use
districts?
4. What should be the future role and character of Norton
Air Force Base?
5. What should be the future role and character of the
railroad yards?
6. How should buildings in the City be maintained?
7. What should be the physical and visual quality of
development?
8. How should development be linked with the provision of
supporting infrastructure?
9. How should development be related to the City's
environmental resources and hazards?
10. What should be the relationship of land use development
to pUblic safety?
11. What lands should be annexed to the City and what should
be their priority.
12. How should the pUblic continue to participate in land
use decisions?
Mr. Tescher continued his
describing the Implementation Programs
by the City to implement the go~ls,
standards of the land use element.
overview presentation
which shall be carried
objectives, policies
by
out
and
Vince Bautista, Senior Planner, presented the Planning
Commission's recommendation to combine Tables 1 and 2 on pages 19
and 21, concerning existing land uses.
Discussion ensued regarding the manner in which the
information on Tables 1 and 2 was combined into one table as
recommended by the Planning commission. A typographical error
was corrected on the recommended Table 1, changing the amount of
acres for single family land use from 10,466 to 19,466, which
resulted in the adjustment of the totals quoted in Table 1.
It was
original two
Plan, instead
the general consensus of the Council that the
tables concerning land uses be used in the General
of the recommended combined Table 1.
3
5/10/89
.
.
.
,!S~,. .~.' ,. .
t~C ',","-~~;-.'
v.-::t,:?JiJfj",i'",:? -.p ;:"'"T4. ":~;~r;~~',"'~><o ~:"~-,i~.:Ji::(,~-,~,"":~TT'-:- ~:.3;:,r':<_'~'l>Jfjr;---i{1"l-'~,
Woody Tescher, consultant, answered
assurance for the City that senior citizen
turned into apartment units. He referred
1.12.11, regarding the requirement that
submitted, with a corresponding reduction in
if the project is not occupied by seniors.
questions regarding
projects will not be
to page 69, Policy
a conversion plan be
the number of units
Henry Empeno, Deputy City Attorney, explained the
Conditional Use Permit and Certificate of Occupancy processes.
Brad Kilger,
regarding Policy
units to standard
Planning Director, provided further information
1.12.11, concerning the conversion of senior
units.
Consultant Tescher answered questions regarding the setting
of age qualifications for occupants of senior housing.
Senior Planner Bautista continued the overview of the
Planning Commission's recommendations.
Woody Tescher answered questions, explaining the flexibility
provided by the Planning Commission's recommendation of the
addition of POlicy 1.7.20 on page 64, concerning specific plans
and overlay districts.
Senior Planner Bautista provided the Planning Commission's
recommendations concerning the Hillside Management Residential
designation.
Planning Director Kilger pointed out that a map has been
drawn depicting the boundaries of the Hillside Management Overlay
District.
He provided clarification regarding Policy 1.14.11, stating
that under the proposed alternative of turning property
designated MH into a Hillside Management Overlay District,
boundary lines will be more flexible. He explained that at the
time of development, developers will provide a slope map defining
areas that have less than a 15% slope, which will be reverted to
the underlying zone district density.
Planning Director Kilger answered questions regarding the
recommended addition of Policy 1.14.15, and stated that the
Conditional Use Permit process would not result in too much of an
increased workload.
4
5/10/89
(t
.
.
.
. .~~ -",;.--~-. ,""
":"
~~-.'f '
,~,~~1'~ -i\.';';~':,-",.~_
,J'-"7",;-':~~-
,;; "'T-~~~-~-~-7
He answered questions regarding the recommended change to
Policy 1.16.13a on page 81, reducing the minimum contiguous area
of two acres to one acre being committed to residential use, so
that the minimum requirement would not make residential use
prohibitive in the downtown area.
Woody Tescher, consultant, answered questions concerning
policies 6.8.2 - 6.8.6, addressing parking provisions.
It was agreed that the subject of signage, Policy 1.17.37 on
page 86, would be discussed at a later time.
Discussion ensued and the Council agreed that POlicy 1.17.38
on page 86 should be amended to provide for public and Planning
Commission review of a specific or development plan for the Tri-
City/Commercenter area.
Senior Planner Bautista answered questions, stating that
Hospitality Lane is included in the boundaries of the Tri-City
Commercenter area, where drive-thrus are not permitted.
Consultant Tescher answered questions regarding the
development of hospitals in earthquake fault zones.
RECESS MEETING
At 3:00 p.m., Mayor Wilcox called for a 15 minute recess.
RECONVENE MEETING
At 3:20 p.m., Mayor Wilcox called
Meeting to order in the Council Chambers
"D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
the Adjourned Regular
of City Hall, 300 North
ROLL CALL
Roll Call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Lang with the
following being present: Mayor Wilcox; Council Members Estrada,
Flores, Maudsley, Minor, Miller; Deputy City Attorney Empeno,
Deputy City Clerk Lang, Acting City Administrator Robbins.
Absent: Council Members Reilly, Pope-Ludlam.
Senior Planner Bautista resumed his overview of the Planning
Commission's recommendations on Chapter 1, Community Development,
Subsection 1.0, Land Uses.
Discussion ensued regarding
concerning permitted uses in
Since the words "and offices"
permitted in the designation.
the wording of Policy 1.30.10
Commercial Heavy designations.
are omitted, offices will be
5
5/10/89
.
.
.
.
""~.
.!" .:~'~t:n~_~..~i2ff,r~.-:iii:.}"':~'!"";--'~ ~, '--?i-~,W~};,:;:;~~~~----'-;Tl----"'-~
Consultant Tescher answered questions regarding adequate
security for parking structures that are not readily visible.
Discussion ensued
regarding the review of
The reuse of Norton Air
regarding POlicy 1.37.14
proposals for the reuse of
Force Base was discussed.
on page 115
public sites.
Council Member Maudsley made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Minor and unanimously carried, that Policy 1.37.14 on Page
115 of Chapter 1, Subsection 1.0 of the Planning Commission's
recommendations on the Draft General Plan, be omitted.
Senior Planner Bautista continued his overview of the
Planning Commission's recommendations.
Discussion followed concerning Policy 1.45.1, page 120,
regarding billboards.
Deputy City Attorney
1.45.1, 1.45.2 and 1.45.10
billboards.
Empeno pointed out that Policies
contain a procedure for control of
Woody Tescher, consultant, answered questions regarding the
intent of the billboard policies.
Planning Director Kilger requested direction from the Mayor
and Common Council in order for billboard pOlicies to be
formulated with their intent.
Discussion ensued regarding the regulation and/or
prohibition of billboards and the issue of removing a business
from the community if billboards are prohibited. The policy as
recommended by the Planning Commission would not eliminate the
business. As old signs are abandoned, they would be handled by
code enforcement personnel and new signs would be prohibited.
Consultant Tescher pointed out that Policy
121 establishes design standards for the
billboards. (Discussion ensued later regarding
Page 7)
1.45.3 on page
replacement of
billboards - see
Planning Director Kilger answered questions regarding
Implementation Program 11.9, Architectural Design Review, on page
135. He stated that it is a recommendation, not a mandate, that
one or more architects be retained on City staff at all times.
He explained that the architects could be on staff full or part
time, or as consultants on an as needed basis.
6
5/10/89
"
.
.
.
.i'
.
'/;j"'(7f
~"i" ..,.,
~~J.'~0~':C'i.."".''':t''i;' -;"'f,'
~'. ,:;i,:i'i..'''
Woody Tescher, consultant, explained that the Planning
Commission's original question was, "Should the City have an
Architectural Design Commission?". They felt it is not necessary
at this time and Implementation Program 11.9 was formulated to
address the City's needs.
Planning Director Kilger pointed out that the Development
Code will include design guidelines.
Jim Richardson, Deputy City Administrator/Development,
suggested that the requirement that architects be retained at all
times could lead to a problem and theoretically could hold up a
development application.
Discussion ensued, but no recommendation of a change was
made at this time.
Jim Richardson, Deputy City Administrator/Development,
stated that state law permits the City to purchase billboards.
He suggested that research be conducted concerning the
possibility that the City would be Obligated to purchase
billboards that it determines should be taken down.
Senior Planner Bautista identified
changes by City staff and the pUblic that
the Planning commission's recommendations
the following suggested
have been given since
were written.
Density - gross acres vs. net acres - The recommendation was
made that throughout the land use element, wherever reference is
made to gross or net acreage, that the reference be changed to
simply read "acre", which implies the gross acreage.
Open Space - Discussion of this subject was deferred to the
meeting scheduled for Wednesday, May 17, 1989. A handout
entitled, "Overview of Land Use and Urban Design Policy" was
provided to the Mayor and Common Council, as a clarification of
what is considered open space.
CH, C02 and RU Designations - A handout will be given to the
Mayor and Common Council before these land use designations are
reviewed on May 17, 1989.
Senior Congregate Care Facilities
decision concerning the type of use
the downtown area was pointed out.
- The need for a policy
and density requirement in
7
5/10/89
.
.
.
,
Discussion ensued regarding refining the standards for
senior congregate care facilities and the use of the new St.
Bernardine Hospital facility as criteria for future developments.
Ken Henderson, Director of Community Development, answered
questions, stating that the St. Bernardine Hospital project
consists of 154 units on 1.21 acres. He spoke regarding
standards for a new project in the downtown area.
Planning Director Kilger requested initial direction
concerning senior congregate care facilities in order to prepare
a proposal for the May 17, 1989, meeting.
Discussion ensued regarding the need for senior congregate
care facilities, their possible location and size.
RECESS MEETING
At 4:45 p.m., Mayor Wilcox called for a ten minute recess.
RECONVENE MEETING
At 5:05 p.m., Mayor Wilcox called
Meeting to order in the Council Chambers
"D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
the Adjourned Regular
of City Hall, 300 North
ROLL CALL
Roll Call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Lang with the
following being present: Mayor Wilcox; Council Members Estrada,
Flores, Maudsley, Minor, Miller; Deputy City Attorney Empeno,
Deputy City Clerk Lang, Acting City Administrator Robbins.
Absent: Council Members Reilly, Pope-Ludlam.
James Wirth, 1980 N. Sierra Way, spoke before the Mayor and
Common Council and provided a four-page letter concerning zoning
of land in the Inner City. He proposed that the following policy
be added to the text of the General Plan:
"Any lot within the area designated as San Ber-
nardino's Inner City, a section of the city bounded
on the north by Highland Avenue, on the south by
Fifth Street, on the west by Interstate 215 and on
the east by Sierra Way inclusive, shall be given a
maximum allowance of 5% for the purposes of meeting
minimum lot size requirements for uses permitted
under the land use designation the lot has been
given; provided that any development proposal
approved for said lot shall contain no variance to
any city building or development code requirements."
8
5/10/89
.
.
.
~'
i~
David Mlynarski, Monnig Development, Inc., spoke regarding
staff's handout depicting gross and net acreage calculations. He
stated he is not concerned with the definition of an acr~, but is
concerned with the utilization of land and lot sizes. He
suggested that land use calculations be made before deductions
are made for streets and dedications, and that 3.4 - 3.5 would be
a more appropriate density.
Courtney Buse, 3808 N. Osbun Road, read from a four-page
handout entitled, "Suggested Revisions to City of San Bernardino
General Plan".
David Schulze of the San Bernardino Valley Board of
Realtors, spoke in favor of Policy 1.25.10, regarding the reuse
of the railroad station building and development of adjacent
properties between Second Street and Viaduct Blvd. He suggested
that Policy 1.30.10, regarding permitted uses in a Commercial
Heavy zone, be amended to include retail service and office
commercial uses. He agreed that it should not include
neighborhood commercial uses.
Mr. Schulze requested that zoning in the area
Mill Street on the north, the 1-215 Freeway on
Inland Center Drive on the south, accommodate
expansion of existing businesses.
bounded by
the west and
the possible
Mr. Schulze stated that he conducted a
who feel that provisions should be made in
application of the granny flat law.
poll of area realtors
the General Plan for
Planning Director Kilger stated that he would look into the
requests of Mr. Schulze.
John Stubblefield of Stubblefield Enterprises, read into the
record a letter dated May 10, 1989, to Mayor Wilcox from Attorney
Darlene Fischer Phillips of Hill, Farrer & Burrill, who repre-
sents Mr. Stubblefield. The letter discussed the following
issues:
1. The Draft Plan does not provide for sufficient housing
to meet the City's obligation under State law;
2. The Draft Plan does not make adequate provision for
moderate and low income housing;
3. The Draft Plan Hillside Management Policies and
Standards are based upon inadequate analytical data;
4. The Hillside Management Standards Ignore Social and
Economic Realities;
9
5/10/89
.
.
.
5. The seismic safety setback requirements are unduly
restrictive;
6. The Process by which the MH policies have been derived
is defective.
The letter urged the Mayor and Common Council to consider
the serious repercussions that the proposed housing and land use
pOlicies will have on the City's housing supply for years to come
and particularly to re-examine the premises and data underlying
the current MH policies, refer them back to the Planning
Commission and staff for further analysis and demand adequate and
sensible recommendations from the consultant and staff before
taking action.
Deputy City Attorney Empeno stated
Mayor and Common Council with copies of
letter and the City Attorney's response
just submitted by Mr. Stubblefield
response to it.
that he will provide the
the Planning Commission's
to it, and of the letter
and the City Attorney's
Ken A. Miller, Flood Control Engineer with the
Transportation/Flood Control Department of the County of San
Bernardino Environmental Public Works Agency, and David Lewis,
Real Property Agent with the Engineering Contract Services
Department of the County of San Bernardino, presented a letter
dated May 10, 1989, with eleven pages of attachments, addressed
to Mayor Wilcox from Ken Miller. The letter expressed concern
regarding the designation and zoning of 62 acres located west of
Auto Plaza Drive and north of Fairway Drive.
The following proposed text changes to the San Bernardino
City Draft General Plan were expressed in Mr. Miller's letter:
1. Objective 1.18 - Provide for the continuing development
of the San Bernardino Auto Plaza as the principal center
of new car dealerships, serving local residents and
adjacent communities and promote other compatible
regionally oriented retail and office uses.
2. Policy 1.18.10 In addition, allow commercial
region-serving retail uses and commercial office uses
westerly of Auto Plaza Drive in accordance with their
respective "density/intensity and height", and
"development and design" guidelines.
10
5/10/89
.
.
.
r
~:.
3. A Policy 1.18.32 be included - Require a traffic study
prior to the approval of development westerly of Auto
Plaza Drive which is five acres or more in size or the
subdivision of property which creates buildable parcels
of five acres or less in size. This requirement may be
waived if a Specific Plan is approved that addresses
traffic issues.
Discussion ensued regarding the land use designation given
this parcel of land.
Senior Planner Bautista answered questions, stating that a
traffic study has not been completed for this area. The area is
presently designated CR-4, for automobile sales and related uses.
Planning Director Kilger answered questions regarding
studies on auto sale designations.
Discussion was held concerning mitigation measures for any
traffic problems at this prime location.
Senior Planner Bautista explained the history behind the
zoning designation on the property.
Discussion followed concerning the original intent of using
this land for auto related businesses and encouraging dealerships
to relocate into this centralized area.
Planning Director Kilger suggested that the CR-4 designation
be expanded to include additional uses and stated he would get
further information regarding absorption of this property by the
Redevelopment Agency, traffic information and flood control
problems on the west portion of the land.
Inez Wirth, 1908 N. Sierra Way, requested that her son, who
spoke earlier in the meeting, be allowed to use her speaking time
allotment, as she is having problems with her hearing aid.
Deputy
prerogative
granted.
City Attorney Empeno stated that it is the
of the chair as to whether Mrs. Wirth's request be
Don Townsend of the Northwest Project Area Committee spoke
regarding Table 3, "General Plan Land Use Categories". He
expressed concern regarding the CG-2 designation on the Mt.
Vernon corridor north of Baseline, as this zoning does not allow
light industrial.
11
5/10/89
.
.
.
., ~'i,
Planning Director Kilger answered questions concerning land
uses in the MU and CG-2 designations, and the reasoning behind
the Mt. Vernon corridor being designated as CG-2, which includes
multi-family residential.
Mr. Townsend described current light industrial uses on Mt.
Vernon Avenue. He requested that Mt. Vernon Avenue north of
Baseline be designated MU and that Baseline Avenue be designated
CG-l.
James Wirth, 1908 N. Sierra Way, was permitted to speak on
behalf of his mother, Inez Wirth. He suggested a change in
POlicy 1.12.11 to safeguard against senior citizen complexes
being converted into mUlti-family use. He proposed that POlicy
1.12.11 be amended to read as follows:
Permit the development of senior citizen and congregate
care housing to a maximum density of 14 units per net acre
and height of two stories provided that a marketing and
financing analysis is conducted which determines long-term
feasibility for any project of 20 units or greater; and in
every case, a plan is prepared for the conversion of seniors
units to standard units, with a corresponding reduction in
the number of units, if the project is not occupied by
qualified seniors; and all Code requirements are met. (11.1)
Mr. Wirth referred to a letter dated May 10, 1989, from
Council Member Reilly to Planning Director Kilger, to which was
attached a copy of Mr. Wirth's letter as introduced earlier in
the meeting, regarding lot sizes of less that 7,200 square feet.
In the letter, Council Member Reilly recommended that a statement
be made in the text of the general plan and the development code
that all legal lots of record may be built upon within the City
of San Bernardino, not just the Central City area.
After the meeting, on May 12, 1989, Mr. Wirth provided the
City Clerk's Office with a "Bullet Summary of Oral Presentation"
with an itemized description of his suggestions.
Lois Willis, 1338 N. "E" Street, presented a petition
bearing approximately 20 names of residents and business owners
of the 1300 block of North "D" Street. They are requesting that
the proposed zone change of their one block area on North "D"
Street to RU, be changed to Commercial/Office in order to
coincide with the proposed zoning of the neighboring area on
North "D" Street.
12
5/10/89
.
.
.
~
..~
In a letter dated April 27, 1989, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Willis
of 3155 N. Sepulveda Avenue, (Lois Willis) requested that the
proposed spot zoning of RU in the 1300 block of North "D" Street
be eliminated and that "D" Street be uniformly zoned Commercial/
Office from below Baseline to Highland Avenue.
Planning Director Kilger stated that information will be
available for review by the Mayor and Common Council at the
meeting scheduled for Saturday, May 13, 1989, concerning land
use.
ADJOURNMENT
At 6:35 p.m., Council Member Miller made a motion, seconded
by Council Member Minor and unanimously carried, that the meeting
adjourn to Saturday, May 13, 1989, at 9:00 a.m., in the Council
Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino,
California.
No. of Items: 2
~,~~
Deputy City Clerk
No. of Hours: 5
13
5/10/89