HomeMy WebLinkAbout21-Planning
CITY OF SAN BERN~DINO - REQUEST FO~ COUNCIL ACTION
From:
tarry E. Reed, Director
Planning and Building Services
August 15, 1990
General Plan 1\IIerXIment No. 90-5
Subject: 'Ib change the land use designation fn:m
RH to CG-1, 00-1 and RS and fn:m RS to
RH on 6.66 acres located between East Date
Place and Pumalo st. and East of Del lbsa
Avenue.
Dept:
DlIt.:
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
Mayor and O:mron Council Meeting of
September 5, 1990, 2:00 p.m.
The site, and surrounding area, was designated RH, Residential High with the
adoption of the General Plan on June 2, 1989.
At their meeting of July 24, 1990 the Planning Camri.ssion reocmnended the adoption
of a Negative Declaration and adbption of Alternative 2 to change the General Plan
land use plan as shown on Exhibit B of the Initial Study.
-- ::.."J
I;' :~1
'-~:;;.
, ,
~:: ci
r.:-"/.
"-
I .~
Recommended motion:
"".
, ."
. ,~ . ~-
Adopt resolution..
r ,) (~)
., '.,
~,'t
c.~
4
tarry E. Reed
.r:- ~~/
Signature
Contact person: Larry E. ReedIVa1erie C. lbss
Phone:
5357
Supporting date attached: !'lhf'f' RPnnrt-
Ward:
..-
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount:
NIT;.
Source: (Acct. No.!
(Acct. DescriDtionl
Finance:
Council Notes:
75.0262
Agenda Item No
~I
CI1'Y OF SAN BERNA~INO - REQUEST FO~COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment No. 90-05
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of
September 5, 1990
REOUEST
This is an applicant-initiated amendment to change the land
use designation from RH, Residential High to CG-l, Commercial
General on a 0.92 acre site which contains an auto repair
garage. The site is located on the south side of East Date
Place approximately 750 feet east of Del Rosa Avenue (See
Exhibit A of the Initial Study).
BACKGROUND
The applicants' site and the surrounding area was designated
RH, Residential High upon adoption of the General Plan on
June 2, 1989. The land uses, besides the applicant's site
consist of a post office with parking (designated RH), Kaiser
Medical Facility (designated RH), 2 single-family residences
(designated RH) and ~~lti-family residences (designated RS). .
Staff expanded the area of the amendment and evaluated two
alternatives to the applicant's proposal. Alternative 2,
Exhibit B of the Initial Study, proposes land use designa-
tions as follows: the post office, its parking and the
applicant's site as CG-l, Commercial General, the Kaiser
~ Medical Facility as CO-l, Commercial Office: the two single-
\ family residences as RS., Residential Suburban and the multi-
family residences as RH, Residential High. .
()
r--'
,I
Alternative 2 incorporates the applicants' request and
recognizes that the existing land uses are not likely to
change in the near future. It also recognizes that the City
may not want additional high density housing in this area if
an existing commercial office use were to cease. Alternative
2 precludes the removal of two single-family residences for
replacement with apartments which could be an encroachment
into the single-family neighborhood.
Alternative 3, Exhibit C of the Initial Study is the same as
Alternative 2 except that the medical facility is designated
as CG-l, commercial General instead of CO-l, Commercial
Office.
..
75--0264
o
o
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-05
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 20, 1990
PAGE 2
That area being proposed to change from RB, Residential
Suburban to RB, Residential High is outside the City boundary
but within the city's Sphere of Influence. This is
equivalent to pre-zoning in the event of future annexation.
ENVIRONMENTAL
The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the Initial Study
prepared for the applicants' proposed amendment and staff's
two alternatives and recommended a Negative Declaration.
COMMENTS
A letter dated July 16, 1990 was received from Mr. Vance
Furukawa,of Kaiser Permanente, owner of the medical facility,
supporting Alternative 2 for the General Plan Amendment.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission unanimously recommended adoption of
the Negative Declaration and approval of Alternative 2 at a
noticed public hearing on July 24, 1990.
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OPTIONS
1. The Mayor and Common Council may adopt the Negative
Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment No.
90-05, Alternative 2, based on the Findings in the
resolution.
2. The Mayor and Common Council may adopt the Negative
Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment No.
90-05 as per Alternatives 1 or 3.
3. The Mayor and Common Council may deny General Plan
Amendment No. 90-05.
o 0
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-05
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 20, 1990
PAGE 3
Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council
resolution, copy attached, which adopts the
~- Declaration and approves General Plan Amendment No.
per Alternative 2.
adopt the
Neqative
90-05 as
John R. Burke, Assistant Planner
for Larry E. Reed, Director
Department of Planninq and Buildinq Services
Attachment 1: Staff Report to Planninq Commission, July 24,
1990
Prepared by:
Attachment A: Initial Study
Exhibit A: Alternative 1,
Proposed by Applicant
Exhibit B: Alternative 2, Staff
Proposed
Exhibit C: Alternative 3, Staff
Proposed
Exhibit D: Land Use Desiqnations
Exhibit E: Land Uses
Attachment B: Location Map
Attachment 2: Resolution
Attachment A-I and A-2: Location Maps
Attachment B-1 to B-9: Leqal Descriptions
ke/8/1/90
M&CCAGENDA:
GPA90-05
o 0
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUMMARY
PROPERTY
.
.
ILl
:l
u
t;
ILl
::)
o
lLI
a::
"
cr
ILl
a::
cr
Subject
North
South
East
West
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
WAR
7
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.
90-05
APPLICANT: e y ees
1681 E. Date Place
San Bernardino, CA 92404
OWNER: SAME
l"':!' - 100\ 9
To change the land use designation from RH, Residential
High to CG-1, Commercial General on a 0.92 acre site on the
south side of E. Date Place east of Del ~osa Avenue.
Staff has proposed two alternatives which include the
applicants' site and addi tional lands in the surrounding area.
EXISTING
LAND USE
ZONING
DESIGNATION
RH
Auto Garage
SR 30 Freeway
Residential
Medical Clinic
Post Office
RH
RH
RH
GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC DYES FLOOD HAZARD DYES OZONE A ( alYES )
HAZARD ZONE [)NO ZONE IllfNO OZONE 8 SEWERS ONO
HIGH FIRE DYES AIRPORT NOISE I DYES REDEVELOPMENT DYES
HAZARD ZONE [1NO CRASH ZONE I!D NO PROJECT AREA 129 NO
~ o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z 13 APPROVAL
APPLICABLE EFFECTS 0
WITH MITIGATING - 0
Zen MEASURES NO E.I.R. tc CONDITIONS
ILI(D o EXEMPT o E.I.R. REOUIRED BUT NO ...0 0
2Z ...~ DENIAL
Z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
00 I!:.
a:Z WITH MITIGATING 0 CONTINUANCE TO
MEASURES en:'
>ii: IXI NO o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 0
Z ~
ILl SIGNIFICANT SEE ATTACHED E It. C.
EFFECTS MINUTES a:
NOV. .1.1 UVIIID ~ULY .... IATTACHMENT J
SKY 1
A t"'\
CITY OF SAN BERNARDlNO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE GPA 90-5
.....
o BSERYATIO NS
AGENDA ITEM . 7
HEARING DATE 7/1 nt90
PAG~ ?
,.
REOUEST
The applicants' request is to chanqe the land use desiqnation
from RB, Residential Hiqh to CG-l, Commercial General on a
0.92 acre site which contains an auto repair qaraqe (see
Exhibit A of the Initial study). staff has proposed two
alternatives both of which include the applicants' site and
additional lands in the surroundinq aren (see Exhibits Band
C of the Initial Study).
LOCATION
The applicants' proposed amendment site and staff's alterna-
tives are located between East Date Place and Pumalo Street
and east of Del Rosa Avenue (see Location Map, Attachment B).
BACKGROUND
~rior to the adoption of the General Plan on June 2, 1989,
the applicants' site was zoned C-3A, Limited General
Commercial. The site, and some of the surroundinq area, was
desiqnated RB, Residential Hiqh with adoption of the General
Plan. At that time the auto repair qaraqe was in use and the
RB desiqnation made the use non-conforminq. Included in the
RB area is a post office located west of the site, and the
Kaiser Medical Clinic located east of the site. The RB
desiqnation also includes two sinqle-family residences east
of the medical clinic.
~
The mUlti-family residences south of the medical clinic,
which are in the county, but within the City's sphere of
influence, were desiqnated RS, Residential suburban at the
time of General Plan adoption.
Staff has proposed two alternatives so as to address the land
use inconsistencies that exist in the area of the applicants'
proposal. A~ternativ. 2 proposes to chanqe the desiqnation
to CG-1, Commercial General for the applicants' site and the
post office, to desiqnate the medical clinic as CO-1,
Commercial Office, to desiqnate the two sinqle-family
residences as RS, Residential Suburban and to include the
multi-family residences in the RB, Residential Hiqh
desiqnation. Alternative 3 is the same as the above except
that the medical clinic is included with the CG-1, Commercial
General desiqnation.
~ a
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE GPA 90-5
.......
OBSERYATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
7
7/10/90
T
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
Municipal Code:
The post office, auto repair qaraqe, medical clinic and
apartments are subject to the conditions of Chapter 19.66. of
the Municipal Code in that structure vacancy for over 180
days will require development consistent with the underlyinq
land use desiqnation which in this case would be the RB,
Residential Hiqh desiqnation for the post office, qaraqe, and
medical clinic and RB, Residential Suburban for the
apartments. Also, structure damaqe of fifty percent or more
of the reasonable replacement cost will require development
consistent with the RB, Residential Hiqh desiqnation for the
post office, qaraqe and medical clinic.
, '
General Plan:
This proposal or the alternatives will chanqe the General
Plan Land Use Plan.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT (CEOA) STATUS
The General Plan Amendment is subject to CEQA. The
Environment Review Committee reviewed the applicants'
proposal and the alternatives proposed by staff on April 19,
1990 and determined that none would have an impact on the
environment and a Neqative Declaration was recommended.
A public review period was held from April 26, 1990 throuqh
May 16, 1990 to consider/review the Initial Study (Attachment
A). and the proposed Neqative Declaration.
COMMENTS RECEIVED
No comments have been received.
ANALYSIS
Site Characteristics
The automotive qaraqe site, Alternative 1, is comprised of
two parcels of land containinq a residence and the qaraqe. To
the west of the qaraqe is the post office with parkinq in the
front for the public and to the rear for postal vehicles.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE GPA 90-5
.....
OBSERYATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
7
7110/90
Immediately west of the post office is a storm drain and to'
its west are the commercial properties that front on Del Rosa
Avenue. East of the qaraqe is the medical clinic and east of
it are sinqle-family residences. South of the clinic are
apartments which extend to Pumalo street and west of them is
an area of sinqle-family homes. East Date Place and Pumalo
streets converqe where they meet Sterlinq Avenue. North of
East Date Place is the SR30 freeway. South of Pumalo street
are mUlti-family residences.
General Plan Policies
The RB, Residential Hiqh desiqnation permits the development
of multi-family residences to a density of 36 dwellinq units
per acre.
The objectives of the City in
Residential Hiqh density use is to:
"Promote the development of hiqh-quality. mUlti-family
townhomes, condominimums and apartments which convey a
distinctive residential neiqhborhood character and are
inteqrated with their settinq.1I (General Plan
Objective 1.13).
desiqnatinq
areas
for
, .
The post office, automotive repair qaraqe and the medical
clinic are non-conforminq uses. The qaraqe is older and
could transition to residential but it is unlikely that the
post office or the clinic will revert to residential in the
foreseeable future. As a result, a mUlti-family project
between two commercial/offices uses on this small of a parcel
would not be part of a residential neiqhborhood.
.
Staff examined the amendment site and the surroundinq areas
to determine the applicability of includinq the larqer area
in the amendment. It was determined that the larqer area
should be addressed and staff proposed two alternatives.
Alternative 2. proposes to chanqe the post office and the
applicants' site to CG-1, Commercial General the medical
clinic to CO-1, Commercial Office, the two sinqle-family
residences to RB, Residential Suburban and the mUlti-family
residences to RB, Residential Hiqh.
These activities are in keepinq with General Plan POlicy 1.
19.10 for community servinq commercial (CG-1) uses. The
Policy states that the permitted uses are:
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
. " ".." " CASE GPA 90-5
OBSERYATIONS
o
AGENDA ITEM " 7
HEARING DATE 7/10/90
PAGE "
"... a diversity of cOllllDunity serving retail and service
uses ... entertainment uses, and professional and
financial offices in areas desiqnated as 'Commercial
General' (CG-1)."
Such desiqnation also permits" ...
dealerships and auto-related retail
(General Plan Policy 1.19.11).
It is also the policy of the City to:
"Permit a diversity of administrative and professional
offices, supportinq retail commercial uses, and medical
facilities in areas designated as "Commercial Offices"
(CO-1)." (General Plan Policy 1.28.10).
new arid
and service
used
uses
. . .
car
"
The CO-1, Commercial Office desiqnation permits uses that are
less intense than those allowed in the CG-1, Commercial
~eneral desiqnation and this would tend to retain the medical
clinic as a professional building. This is in keeping with
General Plan Objective 1.28 which is to:
"Provide for the continued use, expansion and new
development of administrative and professional offices
and supporting retail uses in proximity to major
transportation corridors and ensure their compatibility
with adjacent residential and commercial uses.:
Alternative 3 is the same as Alternative 2 except that the
medical clinic is included in the CG-1, Commercial General
desiqnation with the post office and garage. This
alternative propos.s a larqe area of CG-l, Commercial General
contiguous with a residential neighborhood. The residential
area is almost surrounded by commercial activities i.e. along
Del Rosa, Highland, and Sterling Avenues. The amount of
commercial." activity is ample to support the area. It is not
the intent of;the City to impose more commercial desiqnations
at the expense of residential desiqnations.
If in the future the single-family residential designation
does not remain viable then CO-1, Commercial Office or a
higher density residential could be considered. It would be
premature to desiqnate the area as such at this time.
~ .
CITY OF SAN B RNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE GPA 90-5
. ......
OBSERYATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAG
7.
7/10/90
The two. residential units to the east of the clinic are part.
of an established and well maintained neighborhood and should
be included with the RB, Residential Suburban designated land
adjacent to them.
The General Plan supports this idea in that Policy 1.1.1 is
to:
"Designate land currently developed with housing for
continued residential, unless conversion to another use
is provided by the policies of this Plan."
In addition Objective 1.8 is to:
"Provide lands to accommodate housing units which meet
the diverse economic and social needs of the residents;
locating development to
:,--
a.
retain the scale and
residential neighborhoods;
character
"
of
existing
. . .
Leaving this area designated for multi-family could encourage
transition to the higher density for these two parcels, which
could, in turn, lead to requests from other adjacent property
owners.
The mUlti-family units located south of
and north of Pumalo Street are within
Suburban designation, but probably will
as single-family. Policy 1.7.10 would
"Allow for the reconstruction of residential buildings
destroyed by a catastrophe to their pre-existing
density in residential zones wherein the permitted
density is less than the pre-existing building."
the medical clinic
the RB, Residential
never be redeveloped
Traffic and Circulation
East Date Place is a collector street. The post office and
the medical clinic are activities that generate high Average
Daily Traffic (ADT) counts. In the event that future
development changed these uses then the traffic generated by
such future uses could be of a lesser traffic volume than now
exists. CUrrently East Date Place carries approximately
7,000 ADTs. This amendment will not change the circulation
patterns in the area.
-
.
~ n
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE GPA 90-5
.......
OBSERY~TIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
I
7/10/9U
"7
CONCLUSIONS
Alternative 2, which incorporates Alternative 1, the
applicants' assigns the CO-l, Commercial Office designation
to the medical clinic. The uses permitted in the CO-l
designation are compatible with the adjacent residential
neighborhood. The CO-l designation would preclude the
expansion of additional retail commercial uses along East
Date Place as could happen with Alterative 3.
The uses permitted under the CG-l, Commercial General
~esignation can be provided in the areas already designated
as such along Highland and Del Rosa Avenues and the proposed
CG-l at East Date Place and Del Rosa Avenue. Additional land
designated for general commercial uses is not required at
this time and could lead to encroachment into the residential
neighborhood.
FINDINGS
The proposed land use designations for Alternative 2 will
change the General Plan Land Use Plan and is not in conflict
with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan.
The auto repair garage, the post office and the medical
clinic will be in conformance with the General Plan. The
multi-family residences and the two single-family residences
and the two single-family residences will be consistent with
the adjacent land use designation.
The proposed amendment will
interest, health, safety,
City.
not be detrimental to the public
convenience, or welfare of the
The amendment proposes to redesignate 4.41 acres from
residential to commercial. Although no housing stock is
affected as all of the area is developed, this alternative
will r_ove ,the 4.41 acres from the city-wide acreage
assigned for residential use and adds it to the acreage set
aside for commercial uses.
Alternative 2 is physically suitable for the requested land
use designations. A change in future land uses has been
determined to cause no adverse environmental impacts.
All public services are available to the proposed amendment
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE GPA 90-5
..'....
OBSERYATIONS
AGENDA ITEM 1
HEARING DATE 7/10/90
PAG~ 8
area. Any future development permissible under the proposed
designation would not impact on such services.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make a
recommendation to the Mayor and Common Council that:
1. A Negative Declaration be adopted in accordance
with Section 21080.1 of the CEQA for Alternative 2.
2. The General Plan Land Use Map be changed from RB,
Residential High to CG-1, Commercial General, CO-1,
Commercial Office and RB, Residential Suburban and
from RB, Residential Suburban to RB, Residential
High as shown on Alternative 2, on Exhibit B of the
Initial study. ~
Respectfully submitted,
'i -~ /
~2,. - ~
Lar E. Reed, Director
Pla ning and Building Services
A.V/fi--L .
John R. Burke
Assistant Planner
/ke
Attachment: A - Initial Study
B - Location Map
6/29/90
PCAGENDA:
GPA90-50
o
o
r
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PL.ANNN3 DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY
Initial Study for Environmental Impacts
for General Plan Amendment No. 90-5
Pro1ect Oescrilltion: To chanqe the land 'use desiqnation
from RH. Residential Hiqh to CG-I, Commercial General on
0.92 acres. Qr to chanqe 2.50 acres from RH to CG-l and
1.93 acres from RH to CO-I. Commercial Office and 0.49
acres from RH to RS. Residential Suburban and 1.74 acres
from RS to RH. Or to chanqe 4.43 acres from RH to RS and
1.74 acres from RS to RH.
Pro1ect Location: On the south side of East Date Place
east, of Del Rosa Avenue.
Date: February 28, 1990
~DDlicant(s) Name and Address:
Harrell and Betty Oees
1681 E. Date Place
San Bernardino. CA 92404
PreDared by:
Name: John R. Burke
~@: Assistant Planner
City of San Bernardino
Department of Planninq and Buildinq Services
300 N. "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
"-
ATTACHMENT A
INlrIAL SrUDY for G~90-5 c:>
I.IrIAL STUDY for GPA 90-5
1.0 INrRODUCTION
rhi8 report i8 provided by the City of San Bernardino a8
an Initial Study for General Plan Amendment No. 90-5 to
"chanqe the land U8e de8iqnation from RH. Re8idential Hiqh
to CG-l, Commercial General on 0.92 acre of land on the
south 8ide of East Date Place approximate I y 750 feet east
of Del R08a Avenue. Two alternative8 have been prop08ed
by staff.
As stated in Section 15063 of
Environmental Quality Act qUideline8,
Initial Study are to:
the California
the purposes of an
1. Provide the Lead Aqency with information to use as
the basis for decidinq whether to prepare an EIR or
Neqative Declaration:
2. Enable an applicant or Lead Aqency to modify a
project, mitiqatinq adverse impacts before an EIR is~'
prepared, thereby enablinq the project to qualify for" ~
Neqative Declaration,
3. Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is
required, by,
(A) Focusinq the EIR on the effects determined to
be siqnificant,
(B) Identify the effects determined not to be
siqnificant, and
(C) Explaininq the reasons for determininq that
potentially siqnificant effects would not be
siqn1ficant.
4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the
desiqn of a project,
5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the
findinq in a Neqative Declaration that a project will not
have a 8iqnificant effect on the environment:
6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRs:
7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be
used with the project.
INITIAL STUDY for G~90-5
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
o
The proposed amendment request, Alternative 1 as shown on
Exhibit A, is to amend the City's Oeneral Plan Land Use
Map from RH, Residential Hiqh to CO-l. commercial, Oeneral
on 0.92 acre of land on the south side of East Date Place
approximately 750 feet east of Del Rosa Avenue. The site
is comprised of Assessor Parcel Numbers 272-212-53 and
54. Staff has analy~ed the request and also the area
adjacent to the requested amendment site and proposed
Alternatives 2 and 3.
Al ternative 2. Exhibit B. is to chanqe the land use
desiqnations from RH to CO-l on 2.50 acres (APNs 272-212-
46.48.53 and 54). from RH to CO-l. Commercial Office. on
1.93 acres (APN 272-212-63). from RH to RS. Residential
Suburban, on 0.49 acres (APNs 272-351-04.09.14 and 15).
and from RS to RH on 1.74 acres (APNs 272-212-04.05,06
and 07). This last area is in the County of San
Bernardino but is within the sphere of influence of the
City.
Alternative 3. Exhibit C. is to chanqe the land use
designations from RH toCG-l on 4.43 acres (APNs 272-212-'j:
46.48.53 and 63). from RH to RS on 0.49 acres (APNs 272-:'
351-04.09,14 and 15). and from RS to RH on 1.74 acres
(APNs 272~212-04. 05. 06 and 07).
Alternatives 2 and 3 comprise 6.66 acres each.
2.1 AMENDMENT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA CHARACTERISTICS
a. Amendment Site
The site is
0.92 acre.
contains an
desiqnation
comprised of two parcels of land totallinq
The land fronts on East Date Place and
auto repair qaraqe. The current land use
is RH.
b. Adjacent Area
The two parcels of land to the west and southwest of the
amen~ent site contain a post office with parkinq. South
of the parkinq lot is an area of sinqle family
residences. To the east of the site is a medical clinic.
and to the east of the cl inic is an area containinq
sinqle family residences. The post office. medical
clinic and two of the sinqle family residences are
designated RH. South of the clinic is an area of multi-
INITIAL STUDY for G4:)90-5
o
familY housinq and to the east of it are sinqle family.
residences. The multi-familY and sinqle family housinq
are desiqnated RS.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
3.1 Environmental Settinq
The amendment site is roughly rectangular in shape. flat
and developed and fronts on East Date Place. The area
addressed in Alternatives 2 and 3 is also flat. irregular
in shape and is developed. There are no biological
resource or seismic concerns for any of the al ternati ves.
1" p
-
, en T OF SAN BEANAFf6INO "'"
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
.. ~
, ...,
A. BACIGROY!m
Application Number: W~'- /~ ,4;n~l>.I?1~A/r Ad,. 9.t:1-s-
Project Description: P;CMIMJ<.'J! ""' r'''~.d' ~ ~ USL ^"'~~N.q,.,Ao.I
htl'm J(JI..., a-I I!JAI ,p,?:z. ..vA"'.s. ,!JUt' oS 7V~ .JT;J~~ ..M:>.Ao>~<'I ~~nl4!'.s
7l> ~ 7JIt'I U/N/JUV ZI4~.I<_~.r .Hf",," RI'I I(J 70 t1P-<. .RSjAH.
Location: t:Jv ~ ...Qlv 7A' .s;~ LJ' "Gw-,- lwr~ /J04oY A"AI..rr 47,1t. ~
. ,
KIUA .4rb/u,l
Environmental Constraints Areas: Ale"A./,.,..
.
General Plan Designation: 12/1 ,;- /<s
Zoning Designation: /'I/n
.
B. I~B~JHrAL~PACTS Explain answers, where appropriate, on a
separate attached sheet.
1. ~I.th Resources Will the proposal result in:
Yes No Maybe
a. Ea,rth movement (cut and/or
filll of 10,000 cubic yards or
more? X
b. Development and/or grading on
a" slope greater tha,n 15'
na,tura,l grade? X
c. Development within the
Alquist-Priolo Special Studies
Zone? X
d. Modification of any unique
geologic or physica,l fea,ture? )(
\. ~
REVISED 12/87
PAGEl OF 8
o
o
Mayblf
"Ill
,.
e. Soil erosion on or off the
project site?
f. Modification of a channel,
creek or river?
g.
Development
subject
mudsl ides,
other similar
within an area
to landslides,
liquefaction ,or
hazards?
h.
Other?
2. ~IS_mQ2~: Will the proposal
result in:
a.
air
upon
emissions or
ambient air
Substantial
an effect
quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
c. Development within a high wind
hazard area?
3.
W~B___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?
b. Changes in the course or flow
of floctd waters?
c. D;scharge into surface waters
or any alteration of surface
water quality?
d. Change in the quantity or
quality of ground waters?
e. Exposure of people or property
to flood hazards?
f. Other?
ll..
REVISED 12/87
Yes
No
x
.X
x
X
,
x
x
/x
x
X
I
x
,
x
x
X
.
~
PAGE 2 OF 8
n
Q
Maybe
""
,
4.
BIOLOGICAL...EJ~~$I
proposal result in:
Could the
a.
Change
unique,
species
habitat
trees? .
Change
unique,
species
habitat?
in the number of any
rare or endangered
of plants or their
including stands of
b.
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.
~-~:
result in:
Will the
proposal
a. A change in the land use as
designated on the General X
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
x
-+-
X
I
x-
I
x
X
x
x
.
,x
X
~
REVISED .10/87
PAGE 3 OF 8
^
Maybe
....,
,.
7.
Will
the
MAN-MADE BAnFP~:
project:
a. Use, store, transport or
dispose of hazardous or toxic
materials (including but not
limited to oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)?
b. Involve the release
hazardous substances?
of
c. Expose people to the potential
health/safety hazards?
d. Other?
8.
HQYSING: Will the proposal:
a. Remove existing housing or
create a demand for additional
housing?
b. Other?
9. 1E6~I>QFTATIQ!:!ill~ATION: Could
the proposal result in:
a. An increase in traffic that is
greater than the land use
designated on the General
Plan?
b. Use of existing, or demand for
new, parking facilities/
structures?
c. . Impact upon existing public
trAnsportation .systems?
d. Alteration of present patterns
of circulation?
e. Impact to rail or air traffic?
f. Increased safety hazards to
vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
"""
REVISED 10/87
Yes
No
x
,X
X
x
X
)(
I
x
x
,
X
x
x
x
~
PAGE 4 OF 8
.
\..
r
^-
-
g.
A disjointed pattern of
roadway improvements?
Other?
h.
10. ~~C SERVICES Will the proposal
impact the following beyond the
capability to provide adequate
levels of service?
a.
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools (i.e. attendance,
boundaries, overload, etc.)?
b.
c.
d.
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e. Medical aid?
f. Solid waste?
g. Other?
11. ~LITIES: 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?
2. Electricity?
3. Water?
4: Sewer?
5. Other?
b.
Result in a
pattern of
extensions?
disjointed
utility
c.
Require the construction of
new facilities?
REVISED 10/87
t"'\
-
Yes
No
)(
X
X-
x:
x
X
)(
X
X
X
X
X
)(
'X
>(
)(
Maybe
.....
~
PAGE 5 OF 8
n
o
Maybe
,
12. AESTBETI~:
a. Could the proposal result in
the obstruction of any scenic
view?
b. will the visual impact of the
project be detrimental to the
surrounding area?
c. Other?
13.
~Y~~~~--F~QURCES:
proposal result in:
a. The alteration or destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Could the
b.
c.
Adverse
impacts
historic
object?
Other?
physical or aesthetic
to a prehistoric or
site, structure or
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
Yes
x
X
'X
X
No
"""'ill
x
y.
. .
"
....
PAGE 6 OF8
,
o
o
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
)(
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. )
d. Does the project have
environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
:> ~
)(
x
C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
(Attach sheets as necessary.)
.!cll A,..rA~" SNL~r.r
\...
~
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 7 OF 8
o
o
INITIAL STUDY for GPA 90-5
3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
3.2.1 The parcels in all three alternatives are developed and
. Earth Resources, Air Resources and Noise will not be
impacted by a chanqe in the land use desiqnation.
Potential redevelopment of the parcels to other uses
permitted in the CG-l. Commercial General or CO-I,
Commercial Office desiqnations are not anticipated to
create adverse impacts. Specific projects would be
reviewed to ensure consistency with General Plan qoals,
objectives and policies.
3.2.2 Water Resources
3.e.
Alternatives 2 and 3 abut a storm drain on the west side
of the post office. The drain is sufficient to contain
water from the 100 year flood. , .
3.2.3
Land Use
6.a.
All of the three alternatives will chanqe the General
Plan land use desiqnation.
3.2.4
Han-Hade Hazards
7.a.
The existinq auto repair faCility on the amendment site
involves the use, storaqe and disposal of potentially
toxic substances includinq oil, radiator fluid and
cleaninq solvents. The owners are required to maintain
compliance with the established requlations of the County
of San Bernardino Department of Environmental Health.
If the General Plan is not amended, the auto repair
facility could continue as a nonconforminq use as lonq as
it. is. not vacated for a period of 180 days. The use of
potentially hazardous substances, in this case, is not a
function of the desiqnation.
Al ternatives 2 and 3 will allow future development in the
commercial areas that could qenerate unwanted waste
products. Project specific desiqn and conditions of
project approval would alleviate potential land use
incompatibilities which could resul t from the approval of .
either alternative.
o
o
INITIAL STUDY for GPA 90-5
3.2.5
3.2.6
Housinq
S.a.
Alternative 1 will not affect existinq housinq in that
the site is developed commercially. It will remove 0.92
acres from the overall RH desiqnated lands.
Alternatives 2 and 3 will remove 4.92 acres from RH and
add 4.43 acres of it to CG-l and/or CO-l and 0.49 acres
to RS. Also. 1. 74 acres will be removed from RS and
added to RH. However, the desiqnations reflect existing
uses and no vacant land has been redesignated.
The residential land use to commerciaJ land use ratio is
not significantly affected. Additional housing demand of
significance is not anticipated as a result of the
commercial designations proposed in all three
alternatives.
'.) ~
Transportation/Circulation
9.a.
Transportation and circulation will not be affected by
. the changes to the land use designations from
Alternatives 1, 2 or 3. The Averaqe Daily Traffic (ADT)
for East Date Place. which is a collector street, is
7,000 and it is capable of handlinq an ADT of up to
15.000.
The three current commercial uses (post office, auto
repair and medical clinic) are hiqh traffic generators so
future redevelopment would not significantly increase the
traffic load. The safety hazard potential for vehicles.
bicycles or pedestrians is not affected by any of the
alternatives.
Desiqnatinq the multi-family residential area from RS to
RH will not affect the present or future traffic
circu~ation as the land is currently developed as multi-
family.
r
^
n
"'"
D. DETERMI~71QlJ
On the basis of this initial study,
rv1 The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
~ environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
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.
o
D
The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
"'- 7:;;1() IfnNT~dY/ ,4,AI~/t9L /f"'KH6C
Name and Title
.if::. /: ~.
Date: &Wt.. 1'1 1'17 t'
""'-
~
REVISED 12/87
PAGE 8 OF 8
CITY SAN BERNA DINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-5
TITLE
ALTERNATIVE 1. PROPOSED BY APPLICANT
~ @ ~ .. ~ I I
,,~ ;.:. ~... . (Ii?) ~
.. F'-t.... ~ -::-1 j
~ I ... ~ 11 9
_ . "', 9 CC
'. -1$ '1 :E ,;:'\ ·
l . r.&\ I ,=>- \:.I ..
\.!II a," Ii
'. ' '.t ' ' Ii:. or- iL.
.,..". ~ I .-
. ,.. .-.. ':' (!J
I rri-!' U, .)J'
I I" .,
I. Q ..
,
(. t ':_~ .~ .:.. " :'.J
..
",. ..J,JIUI ,,": .
~
k:'
~
.,
,; (;1 ~) 10 : '" I'(;/'~
i I ~ ;
. I: ! ~I .
.. .. . I" .. ..'
'I 'I' .
~ (i-, 3
.. i ..
.
- . ~ l
.. 1::'.
-.
;' . .i ... ~.
: I · I : , ~.
'en
a::
~
~(!)
~~ ~
I.!'
r"
"I@
(i)
-IJ
! --"''''''-1-'.'
= . .' w@)",'
.. ,,' ......
_.: "..,
..-
1 % VJ.100,H:)
~
.
'.'
@.I:
I
I
I
. : II';
G....:
_t I I @~ @.
I ~ I
, l- I
II ~ I
or- I Q r
I ..~. . ..~" :
I I". ,,..' ~
CJ -",,~'3nN3^
" ~
: U " -""
I. . . ....
;-.......,. ~.'I l- i)
.. J :'t JI .... '(i)
, I ....
I . I. @ ~
J ~
'.. : .i ,
. , ..
.
.
"
,~
Ie
~
~
.. .. e>
c c
g ~l:
EXHIBIT --A--
. ..0
.,
I
..... I:~'
. _..._..~-
!~-
,~- :z:
I a::
..
c
\~I ....
..
\-, ~
.
-....- - - -;; .
CITY F SAN BERNARDINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. ~-5
TITLE
~
. . . J .
IS a 1;' ~ I
-I
490 1(;) I A ,c;J'..J
.. ~ - .. . .
'..u... .11: ".
~ ..i I " I .1 j
. . · L ....
vi
~(!)
;
: I;
,
~;
..:~ %
I a:
c:J
ul
o
-,
%,
a:
I 'tn
.. --p'.- a:
; ,-
. ~r,
<!.
'y
. ~
~;)I .
. ......_.I~...
:; .. .
.:". ',.",. ...@) '.: ,.
-.' ....,
, .,,,...,
. : II':
Ci t".:
-' I
I !R\U
, I \lIII~
I ~ I !
.. q I
IQ
I..~ ... "
@
.." .....
~
~
.I. ....,...
@ el
:I
a:
~
~
@.)
..:.
. ~ ~ (!)
>> 0...
EXHIBIT ....B
.~
l... ;&j'
.'0
".
_i::
I ~
; ~:') 9
_......~-
~~~
.~-%
I a:
..
.
\..., ..
..
\-,1 ~
.. .
-....--. -i-
@...
II ~ ;; .;<!)
Ii @3
ao:.. I...
t. I .. ~
-- .,'. c:J
! . r~.i'l' ~ JT
CITY 6>F SAN BERN:lRDINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-5
---
TITLE AL TERNA TIVE 3. STAFF PROPOSED
;
IU""" aw
" .IS
....
~
i
..,
; I; ; j ~.
-1
~
.
'-. ~' "1::
. ;.'0 -
. ~,~
~:~:
.
I ~
... ~.; ~
.~_..~~-
I a:
..
..
{,''II1 ...
..
,
,
l-. ~
'. .
-....--- -i-
: f; ..
l
. : I f;
Ci I.....:
-' :.1 @~
I ~ I ~
.. .q I
I Q .
p '''~ ... .'
I
~
U
@
@
...
@@I
~
U
.. ..
- , "
'8 "IA"
: Trot i:C ;
:! I.. ~
I, .:(1 ...
;'l :
. I
~(l?) I I
-::-1 i
@ ~ 9
.q
~ -
@ I=~ @ ~
... .t.' l....-.l
I ..
--" .... ....
.....,... W'
I r~'il' U1 jT
I I . ~ ., "
. .-
,'. .
~
~
~
@ 9 a
a:
@ ~ ;; .. e>
..
~ !> '. ..
,..., ".
~
~
~ (!
I. EXHIBIT C
CITY SAN BERN DINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-5
TITLE
~
. I '1 ., . J -
.!Gr,S .~~~
-I
il' ~ i 1:.
. I i &
~
:~)
f
: I,
, .
0'. ; I..i
... ,'J
.nl: .
C1J '" 1('1-"
: ~ i
. ;1
. .. I :' .'
:411- c.&)- (I). .
~ .' , ......
.... '!'ol:, ....,.:
, .. r-,.
uaus ,... -.'., . .~.. ..:,,'"
~ ,. "ON'. , .
.t 2 .\1 4"-
,(-) ...... ~ . .
...... .., -..1':. -0'
"'=.; I ... . .. \;.I-
i.j,:. .:,
'(I)
a::
.-
...
fl~ .
~,
("
. cJ
~\ ,
! '-'-'II!>
: .. ..' ~,,'
" '\.',
,
.... ',~'
@=...._~-
.~- :z:
I a::
.
~
.
-. .
.
_.
........
"
..
Ii) :;:
.-...,.
@
<;l
:z:'<D
a::
(~i
..
..
['VI...
..
.
\-. ~
.
-....- - - -i -
..
~
I;@
: I ,',
a I..f-:
-' I f JJ;\u
, I ''I>>Ii
I ~ I ....
~ ~ I
I Q .
,.. I ..~. .
~~ -~ ~.3nN3^
... "
(J
@ @... <!l
j ,..
@. @ @ @ 0 ~. ~
~ ... .. - . (!'
.. - ..
~ - ..
<i> ,=:loo @ ~ .
..... (L" l
: .t ' ...
. ... I -
~ --.. .-
~ .. .. :"',.. .. CJ
i) ~ ~ fi';'1 ' (J '>T
'@ a:: ~ I 1\_1
~ ~ . Q
@ .. ..
li .. ..
.. ! ~) :: I! EXHIBIT D
CITY F SAN BERN DINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-5
TITLE --I.A.t!O USES
: I:
...
@j
~
. ~
...
ls!
I 30NiA
J~ff ;:
~ ~tl.~ q
All." L l
'I " "'" ; , ! ~
.;.., S s;., l ~
-
':< .. "
"" :
~.
t;
. -
.
.... - ..,
...'
, . "
, ,-
~ ...,
.;~ '0
"W;. '.
...4': ....,.:
.. 6)-"
I,IV'
" . .
III ....:
.~t". ! ; e! ":-
'-, I'll
..
..:l
...
!
~
'"
Z
...
01
'"
,00
.
f~ .
I!I
'V
. cD
(il
. , .
Jill
! "--roo;'
~. '.- .. .~\.
" "..
1 ~
6
.
\~)
~ -~ --..~
.-- - :II
I ':'
...
~
::>
:Ill ..
.
~,;
.~~:
'I
.-'
",
,
. ,
~ @
~ e
...
Q
;j
_. .
,
-.
..-
..
, .
.
.
.
.-, ..
..
I
GIS
1-. ~
.
I:lIoUO J.SOcJ - ~- - - -i -
1':\' ~,,@ ~
\e:I ~ ......
. ~-
@ <S 'IYI:>>malO:I . '\;:' ~
~(t
l
.
.
.
)
~
...
ls!
I ,
n
~ ~I ,
I.
...
. ..i
r
: ,.r~.(~'''~ ff
'IYI:llI3IINO:I , Jt'IINY.i-IJ.'IlIII allXDI I~
I.~ t--J ~...; ", ~ ~ ..., /......l
I . I - ~): I t. (0 EX H I BIT E
I
'.
'. :
. I
CITY SAN BERN DINO.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-5
TITLE lOCATION MAP
;[
.
Jr
" T ~:
...
,
. .
---:"t
.
I I
~
I
.
I
I .
I
I 9 BI
t
1
-AYI.-
-:t - -
+
J .....~1.
. ~
3 ~ ~
_'!l1L ~
J. ATTACHMENT B
o
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING THE
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADOPTING
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-05 TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF
THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Recitals
(a) The General Plan for the City of San Bernardino
was adopted by the Mayor and Common Council by Resolution
9
10
11
12
13
14
15 Mayor and Common Council.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
No. 89-159 on June 2, 1989.
(b)
General
Plan Amendment No. 90-05 to the General
Plan of the City of
San Bernardino was considered
by the
Planninq
Commission
a
noticed
on July
24, 1990 after
public
hearinq,
Planninq
commission's
and
the
recommendation
considered
of approval
has
been
by the
(c) An
Initial
on
February 28,
Study was prepared
1990
and reviewed by
Committee
the Environmental Review
and
Planninq
who both
determined that
commission
the
General
Plan Amendment
would
No.
90-05
not
have
a
--
environment
siqnificant
effect
the
and
therefore,
on
recommended that a Neqative Declaration be adopted.
(d) The proposed Neqative
Declaration received a
21
day public review period
from April 26, 1990 throuqh May
relative
16,
1990 and
all
comments
thereto
have been
reviewed
Planninq
Mayor and
California
Commission and
by the
the
Common
Council
the
in
compliance
with
1111
II/I
1.
o
o
1
2
3
4
6
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
26
26
27
28
Environmental Quality Act and local regulations.
(e) The Mayor and Common Council held a noticed
public hearing and fully reviewed and considered proposed
General Plan Amendment No. 90-05 and the Planning
Department Staff Report on September 5, 1990.
(f) The adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 90-05
is deemed in the interest of the orderly development of
the City and is consistent with the goals, objectives and
policies of the existing General Plan.
SECTION 2. Neaative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND AND DETERMINED
by the Mayor and Common Council that the proposed
amendment to the General Plan of the City of San
Bernardino will have no significant effect on the
environment, and the Negative Declaration heretofore
prepared by the Environmental Review Committee as to the
effect of this proposed amendment is hereby ratified,
affirmed and adopted.
SECTION 3. Findinas
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common
Council of the City of San Bernardino that:
A. The change of designation from RH, Residential High to
CG-1, Commercial General, CO-1, commercial Office and
RS, Residential Suburban and from RS, Residential
Suburban to RH, Residential High for the proposed
amendment will change the land use map only and are not
lIlt
lIlt
2.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~
21
~
~
~
~
~
27
~
o
o
B.
in conflict with the Objectives and Policies of the
General Plan.
The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the
public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare
of the city.
All public services are available to the study area. Any
development permissable under the CG-I, CO-I, RS and RH
designations proposed by this 'amendment would not impact
on such services.
The proposed amendment is to redesignate 6.66 acres of
land and the balance of land uses within the City will
not be affected since the entire site is developed. No
housing stock will be affected and future housing
development would be unlikely to occur.
,The amendment site is physically suitable for the
requested land use designation. Anticipated future land
use has been analyzed in the Initial study and it has
been determined that project specific mitigation
measures will be sufficient to eliminate any
environmental impacts.
The area being changed from RS, Residential Suburban to
RH, Residential High lies in the County of San
Bernardino but within the Sphere of Influence of the
City.
IIII
IIII
IIII
IIII
IIII
C.
D.
E.
F.
3.
o
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SECTION 4. Amendment
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common
Council that:
(A) The Land Use Plan of the General Plan of the City of
San Bernardino is amended by changing approximately 2.50
acres from RH, Residential High to CG-1, Commercial General
(APNs 272-212-46, 48, 43,44), 1.93 acres from RH, Residential
High to CO-1, Commercial Office (APN 272-212-63), 1.74 acres
from RS, Residential Suburban to RH,- Residential High (APNs
272-212-04, 05, 06, 07), and 0.49 acres from RH, Residential
High to RS, Residential Suburban" (APNs 272-351-04, 09, 14,
15) .
General Plan Amendment No. 90-05 and its location is outlined
on the maps entitled Attachments A-1 and A-2, and is more
specifically described in the legal descriptions entitled
Attachments B-1 to B-9, copies of which are attached and
incorporated herein by reference.
(B) General Plan Amendment No. 90-05 shall become
effective immediately upon adoption of this resolution.
SECTION 5. Man Notation. This resolution and the
amendment affected by it shall be noted on such appropriate
General Plan maps as have been previously adopted and
approved by the Mayor and Common Council and which are on
file in the office of the City Clerk.
IIII
1111
1111
II I /
4.
o
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SECTION 6. Notice of Determination. The Planning
Department is hereby directed to file a Notice of
Determination with the County Clerk of the County of San
Bernardino certifying the City's compliance with CEQA in
preparing the Negative Declaration.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly
adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held on the
day of , 1990 by the following
vote, to wit:
Council Members
ESTRADA
REILLY
FLORES
MAUDSLEY
MINOR
POPE-LUDLAM
MILLER
~
NAYES
ABSTAIN
City Clerk
fill
fill
fill
fill
fill
fill
5.
...
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLOTION...ADOPTING
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
AMENDMENT NO. 90-05 TO
SAN BERNARDINO.
o
THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF
AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN
THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF
The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this
day of
, 1990.
Approved as to
form and legal content:
JAMES F. PENMAN,
City Attorney ~
By'~ 1 4<--
W.R. Holcomb, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
6.
.-II =' I
O~TE 51:--i- -; DA TE--a
- "4P=k' .' .
#.a ~ -----;:-:.. I'.
w ". !
=>
~~ ~ .
~F
:>" ,
"it
I .
r<
~<II -
I '
i
For, 174
1.2E 4C: A
~\
,,' --3f\\ ,
i Po~2 q,t; ~'
'e!!; '"' ~r.
~ .' -'07046 1'2;" ,
o - ~ 1009 ~
~~, ~ @ . @ : -~'b
_ ~! _ u \f~ "! __
-, . PVMALo-T--
,
.
" 2~ @ ~
@
'Of. '7 .'
Por. Lot I @8LK.9 .
.
~ '6
, I .
" ~'
.... .
.
.---.,
... Co .
\1;;1 :
---/
""';"'~
r
J.
CITY OF SArAERNARDINO GPA 90Q LOCATION
No,,,. !):-i1Inal Acreage.
".. !)l': !'"t Cent."
San Bernardino City
Salt Bernardino Unified 2 72 -21
Tox Rate Area.
107046,107025,7003,7000
7125
FruJ.. RH 7fI C6.-' FQoIl'l tZH ..." CD-I
@
'.'4AC
J
,.'.200'
l
r
.
./'-
1@
....
,
I
- .. ~)/\Tf:~ --- ,-----
. ,
,.
@
.'
c;
!I~.:
@
~O'
@@
,":-. J'
".
_lit" f1If
(~
'-'
hOI1
RS
TO
"II
,.,
... ....
· " 5 STREET
.21
~
~
. EoUEomrr ..'
....C.F-C.D:.
.
Pore.' Map No. 5985, P.M. 57/67
- . -. .. - - - - -
A-1
304 CITY OF SAN BE~RDINO
@
GPA 90-5 L~ATION '.272 - 35
TalC Rote Area . ~.
107046,7009 .
a
, ~)'~' . l
.; r..," sr, I
".'~ i . I :00
"
"
I
~
-D,-;:'iTE: ,;-
- ~--.
Sl<:;/'.
~
,~
I
,. Yj f:'
J -<- /1
/7;--11:;;.-
,'2J)
'-/
FRIIn
1</1 to
P..S
:5
FA/)IfI
/ RII'tf)
RS
i
I : ' -
:: 6
; IC.",.q.,'
, 'Q)
\
), CD \.
, ~-
/ C35D ''',
7
I~ 814
.'
r:
r);.
8 ~
,('>
d'?'
@
Note-Assessor's SII<. a Lot
Numt)/Ilr<: C:h"'wn in r;...",~
Assessors Mop
Book 272 Page 35
c,..~ n.........._...:_... _... .
A-2
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-5
RH TO CG-l
PARCEL NUMBER
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
272-212-46
The land referred to herein is situated in the County of
San Bernardino, State of California, and is described as
follows:
That portion of Lots 1 and 2, Block 14, Orange Grove Tract,
in the City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino,
State of California, as per Map recorded in Book II, Page
14 of Maps, Records of said County, together with the South-
erly 11.25 feet of Date Street as vacated by Resolution of
the Board of Supervisors recorded in Book "A", Page 244 of
Road Records, described as a whole as follows:
Commencing at the Northwest corner of Lot I, Block 14,
being the intersection of the center line of Del Rosa Avenue
and the center line of Date Street; thence North 89 degrees
58 minutes 00 seconds East along the center line of Date Street,
352 feet to the true point of beginning; thence continuing North
89 degrees 58 minutes 00 seconds East 129.34 feet; thence South
o degrees 09 minutes 30 seconds East 371.25 feet; thence North
89 de9rees 58 minutes 00 seconds East 90.66 feet to the North-
east corner of land conveyed to Jack W. McCabe and wife by
Deed recorded February 13, 1969 in Book 7180, Page 642 of
Official Records of said County, thence South 0 degrees 09
minutes 30 seconds East 130.73 feet more of less to the
Southeast corner of said McCabe property; thence West 220
feet to the Southwest corner of said McCabe property; thence
North 0 degrees 09 minutes 30 seconds West 501.98 feet more
or less to the true point of beginning.
Except therefrom any portion of the above described property
lying within Date Street as now established.
272-212-48
An easement for ingress and egress over that portion of
Lot 2, Block 14, Orange Grove Tract, in the City of
San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of
California, as per Map recorded in Book II, Page 14 of Maps,
in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, together
with the Southerly 11.25 feet of Date Street as vacated by
Resolution of the Board of Supervisors recorded in Book A,
Page 244 of Road Records, described as a whole as follows:
Beginning at the Northwest corner of Lot I, Block 14, bein9
the intersection of the centerline of Del Rosa Avenue and
the centerline of Date Street, as shown on said Map; thence
B-1
o
o
North 89 degrees 58 minutes 00 seconds East along the center-
line of said Date Street; 481.34 feet to the true point of
beginning; thence continuing North 89 degrees 58 minutes
00 seconds East 15 feet; thence South 0 degrees 09 minutes
30 seconds East 281 feet; thence South 89 degrees 58 minutes
00 seconds West 15 feet; thence North 0 degrees 09 minutes
30 seconds West 281 feet to the true point of beginning.
Except therefrom any portion of the above described property
lying within Date Street, as now established.
Excepting from Parcels 1 and 2 above those portions thereof
which lie Northerly of the following described line:
Beginning at the intersection of the centerline of Date Street
60 feet wide, shown on Map of Orange Grove Tract, recorded
in Book II, Page 14 of Maps, in the Office of the County
Recorder of said County, as 82.5 feet wide, and the center
line of Del Rosa Avenue (shown on said Map as Mountain Avenue),
82.5 feet wide; thence along said centerline of Date Street,
North 89 degrees 37 minutes 18 seconds East 381.46 feet;
thence South 0 degrees 22 minutes 42 seconds East 30.00 feet
to the South line of said Date Street 60 feet wide; thence
Easterly along a 418 foot radius curve concave Southerly and
being tangent to said South line, through an angle of 23
degrees 48 minutes 07 seconds an arc distance of 173.65 feet;
thence tangent to said curve, South 66 degrees 34 minutes
35 seconds East 360.31 feet, more or less, to the East line
of Lot 2 in Block 14 of said tract.
272-212-53
The following described real property in the state of California,
county of San Bernardino
All that portion of Lot 2, Block 14, Orange Grove Tract,
West Highland, as per plat recorded in Book 11 of Maps, page
14, records of said County, described as follows:
Beginning at a point 586 feet and 8 inches East of the inter-
section of the centerline of Date Street and Mountain Avenue,
as shown on said Map; thence West on the centerline of Date
Street, 80 feet; thence South 371 feet 3 inches; thence East
80 feet; thence North 371 feet, 3 inches to the point of
beginning.
The following described real property in the state of California,
county of San Bernardino:
Also that portion of Lot 2, described as follows:
Beginning at a point 586 feet and 8 inches East of the North-
west corner of Lot 1 in Block 14; thence West along the North
line of Lot 2, 80 feet to the true point of beginning; thence
South along the Westerly line of the property deeded to
Roseneil Irene Rothrock by deed dated June 3, 1939, and recorded
September 29, 1939, in Book 1388 of Official Records, Page 94,
272-212-54
~2
o
o
records of said County, a distance of 371 feet, 3 inches;
thence West 37 feet, 4 inches; thence North and parallel
with the West line of said property deeded to Roseneil
Irene Rieger 371 feet, 3 inches to the North line of Lot 2;
thence East along the North line of Lot 2, 37 feet 4 inches
to the true point of beginning.
Excepting therefrom any portions of the above described
property lying within the lines of Date Street, as nowestab-
lished.
~3
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-5
RH TO CO-1
PARCEL NUMBER
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
272-212-63
The following described real property in County of
San Bernardino, State of California:
That portion of Lot 2, Block 14, Orange Grove Tract, as per
plat recorded in book 111 of maps, page 14 records of said
county, more particularly described as follows:
The north 58.05 feet of the following parcel: Beginning at
the southeast corner of Lot 2, said point being in the center
line of Pumalo Street; thence north on the east line of said
Lot 2, 283 feet to the true point of beginning; thence con-
tinuing north along said lot line, 270.25 feet, more or less
to the northeast corner of the land described in the deed to
John P. Brockman, et ux, recorded October 20, 1926 in book
148 of Official Records, page 290, Office of the Recorder,
County of San Bernardino, California; thence west along the
north line of the lane conveyed to said Brockman, 8B feet
to the northwest corner thereof; thence south, parallel to
the east line of said Lot 2, 270.25 feet, more or less, to
the point of intersection with a line drawn parallel to the
centerline of Pumalo Street and which passes through the
true point of beginning; thence east along said line 88 feet
to the true point of beginning.
~4
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-5
RH TO RS
PARCEL NUMBER
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
272-351-04
All that real property situated in the County of San Bernardino,
State of California, described as follows:
Lot 4 and that portion of Lot 3 of Tract No. 5304, as shown
by Map on file in Book 63, page 89 of Maps, Records of
San Bernardino County California, described as follows:
272-351-09
Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Lot 3; thence
along the Westerly line of said Lot, North 00 33'11" West
49.02 feet to Southwesterly line of that certain street,
shown as South Date Frontage Road, 60 feet wide, on Detail
Map of Relinquishment on file State Highway Map Book II,
page 65 (Sheet 3 of 6 Sheets), in said Recorder's office;
thence along said Southwesterly line. South 660 34' 35"
East 118.73 feet to the Easterly line of said Lot; thence
along said Easterly line South 00 31' 28" East 0.73 feet
to the Southerly line of said Lot 3; thence along said
Southerly line South 890 25' 22" West 108.49 feet to the
Point of Beginning.
Improved real property located at 2691 Chiquita Lane,
San Bernardino, California, specifically described as
follows:
Lot 9, Tract No. 5304, as per plat recorded in Book 63 of
Maps, page 89, records of San Bernardino County, California.
272-351-14
Improved real property located at 2691 Chiquita Lane,
San Bernardino, California, specifically described as
follows:
That portion of Lot 10, Tract 10, No: 5304, as per plat
recorded in Book 63 of Maps, Page 89, records of said
County, Southerly of the following described line:
Beginning at a point on the Westerly line of Lot 10, said
point being North 0' 31' 28" West, 31.08 feet from the
Southwesterly corner of said Lot; thence North 61' 03' 32"
East, 21.47 feet; thence South 66' 34' 35" East, 81.44 feet;
thence Southeasterly along a tangent cruve concave South-
westerly and having a radius of 4968 feet through an angle
of 0' 11' 36" a distance of 16.76 feet to the Easterly line
of said Lot.
B-S
o
o
272-351-15
Portion of Lot 3 of Tract No. 5304, in the City of
San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California,
as shown by Map on file in Book 63, page 89, of Maps, Records
of San Bernardino County, California, described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Lot 3; thence along
the Westerly line of said Lot, North 00 33' 11" West 49.02
feet to Southwesterly line of that certain Street, shown as
South Date Frontage Road, 60 feet wide, on Detail Map of
Relinquishment on file State Highway Map Book 11, Page 65
(Sheet 3 of 6 Sheets), in said Recorder's office; thence
along said Southwesterly line. South 660 34' 35" East
118.73 feet to the Easterly line of said Lot; thence along
said Easterly line South 00 31' 28" east 0.73 feet to the
Southerly line of said Lot 3; thence along said Southerly
line South 8go 25' 22" West 108.49 feet to the Point of
Beginning.
B-6
o
o
the center line of Mountain Avenue, also known as Del Rosa Avenue,
with the centerline of Puma10 Street, as shown on the Map of
Orange Grove Tract, West Highlands; thence North 263.5 feet.
NOTE: Book 4 of Miscellaneous Records, page 163, shows
certified copy of an Order of the Board of Supervisors
reducing Puma10 Street from the East line of Del Rosa Avenue
to the West line of Sterling Avenue to the width of 40 feet.
212-212-06
The real property in the County of San Bernardino, State of
California, described as follows:
PARCEL NO. 1
That portion of Lot 2, Block 14 of Orange Grove Tract, West
Highlands, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California,
as per plat recorded in Book 11 of Maps, "page 14, records of
said County, described as follows:
Commencing at a point 352 feet East of the intersection of the
center line of Mountain Avenue, with the center line of Puma10
Street, as shown on said map, said point being on the East
line of Land of Charles Pe11 by deed recorded in Book 580 of
Deeds, page 289; thence North along the East line of Pe11
land and extended North 618 feet 9 inches to the Southwest
corner of the land of Jose E. Lopez, by deed recorded in
Book 486 of Deeds, page 42; thence East along the South line
of the land of said Lopez, and the South line of the land of
Jose M. Taffo11a, by deed recorded in Book 492 of Deeds, page
154, 352 feet to the West line of the land of Samuel E11iss,
by deed recorded in Book 540 of Deeds, page 124; thence South
along the West line of the land of said E11iss and its Southerly
prolongation 305.45 feet to the true point of beginning; thence
East 88 feet to the West line of the land of Annie E. Dodge by
deed recorded in Book 634 of Deeds, page 361; thence South along
the West line of said Dodge land 50 feet to a point 263.5 feet
North of the center line of Puma10 Street; thence West 220 feet;
thence North 50 feet; thence East along the South line of the
land conveyed to George B. Alloway and wife, by deed recorded
in Book 1491 of Official Records, page 361, 132 feet to the
point of beginning.
PARCEL NO. 2
An easement for road purposes 20 feet wide, 10 feet on each side
of the following described center line:
Beginning at a point 572 feet East of the intersection of the
center line of Mountain Avenue, also known as Del Rosa Avenue,
with the center line of Puma10 Street, as shown on the Map of
Orange Grove Tract, West Highlands, in the County of
San Bernardino, State of California, as per plat recorded in
Book 11 of maps, page 14; thence North 313.5 feet; thence East
220 feet.
B-7
o
o
Excepting therefrom any portion lying within Parcel No. 1
described herein.
In Book 4, page 163 of Miscellaneous Records, appears a
certified copy of an Order of the Board of Supervisors
reducing Pumalo Street from the East line of Del Rosa Avenue,
to the West line of Sterling Avenue to the width of 40 feet.
272-212-07
The real property in the County of San Bernardino, State
of California, described as follows:
PARCEL NO. 1
That portion of Lot 2, Block 14 of Orange Grove Tract West
Highlands in the County of San Bernardino, State of California,
as per plat recorded in Book 11 of Maps, page 14, records of
said County, described as follows:
Commencing at a point 352 feet East of the intersection of
the center line of Mountain Avenue, with the center line of
Pumalo Street, as shown on said map, said point being on the
East line of land of Charles Pe11, by deed recorded in Book 580
of Deeds, page 289; thence North along the East line of Pe11
land and extended North 618 feet g inches to the Southwest
corner of the land of Jose E. Lopez by deed recorded 'in Book
486 of Deeds, page 42; thence East along the South line of
the land of said Lopez, and the South line of the land of
Jose M. Taffo11a, by deed recorded in book 492 of Deeds, page
154, 352 feet to the West line of the land of Samuel E11iss,
by deed recorded in Book 540 of Deed, page 124, thence South
along the West line of the land of said Ellis, 123 feet 9 inches,
to the true point of beginning; thence East along the South
line of the land of said E11iss 88 feet to the West line of
the land of Annie E. Dodge, by deed recorded in Book 634 of
Deeds, page 361; thence South along the West line of the
land of said Dodge 181.5 feet to a point 313.5 feet North
of the center line of Pumalo Street; thence West 100 feet;
thence North 181.5 feet to a point due West of the point of
beginning; thence East 12 feet to the point of beginning.
PARCEL NO. 2
An easement for road purposes 20 feet wide, 10 feet on each
side of the following described center line:
Beginning at a point 572 feet East of the intersection of the
center line of Mountain Avenue, also known as Del Rosa Avenue,
with the center line of Puma10 Street, as shown on the Map of
Orange Grove Tract, West Highlands, in Book 11 of Maps, page
14; thence North 313.5 feet; thence East 120 feet: Excepting
therefrom any portion lying within Parcel No. 1 described
above.
B-8
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-5
RS TO RH
PARCEL NUMBER
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
272-212-04
The real property in the County of San Bernardino, State of
Claifornia, described as:
That portion of Lot 2, Block 14 Orange Grove Tract, West
Highlands, in the County of San Bernardino, State of
California, as per plat recorded in Book 11 of Maps, page
14, records of said County, described as follows:
Beginning at a point 572 feet East of the intersection of
the center line of Mountain Avenue (now Del Rosa Avenue)
with the center line of Pumalo Street, as shown on said Map
by Deed recorded in Book 5BO, of Deeds, page 289; thence
North 263.5 feet thence East 220 feet to a point 88 feet
West of the East line of said Lot 2; thence South 263.5
feet; thence West 200 feet to the point of beginning.
Excepting therefrom the Westerly 100 feet thereof.
NOTE: Book 4 of Miscellaneous Records, page 163, appears
a certified copy of an order of the Board of Supervisors
reducing Pumalo Street from the East line of Del Rosa Avenue
to the West line of Sterling Avenue to the width of 40 feet.
272-212-05
The real property in the Unicorporated Area of San Bernardino
County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as
the Westerly 100 feet of the following described property:
That portion of Lot 2, Block 14, Orange Grove Tract, West
Highlands, as per plat recorded in Book 11 of Maps, page
14, records of said County, described as follows:
Commencing at a point 572 feet East of the intersection of
the center line of Mountain Avenue (now Del Rosa Avenue)
with the center line of Pumalo Street as shown on said Map
by Deed recorded in Book 580 of Deeds, page 289; thence
North 263.5 feet; thence East 220 feet to a point 88 feet
West of the East line of said Lot 2; thence South 263.5 feet;
thence West 220 feet to the point of beginning.
Together win an easement for road purposes 20 feet wide,
10 feet on each side of the following described center
lines;~
Beginning at a point 572 feet East of the intersection of
~9