The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About47-Planning & Building Services CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: Michael E. Hays, Director Subject: General Plan Amendment No. 97-03 - To amend the General Plan land use designation from RS, Residential Suburban, to RU-l, Residential Urban, for 25 parcels located between Julia and Cluster Streets on the north and south and Dorothy and Allen Streets on the east and west. Dept: Planning & Building Services . ORIGINAL Date: June 24, 1997 MCC Date: July 7, 1997 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: N/A JUN 2 6 1997 Recommended Motion: That the Mayor and Common Council deny General Plan Amendment No. 97-03, based on the Findings of Fact (Exhibit 3). LO;:~ Mic Hays Contact person: Michael Hays Phone: 384-5357 Supporting data attached: Staff R~rt Ward: 1 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/ A Source: (Acet. No.) N/A (Acct. Descrintion) Finance: Council Notes: Agenda Item No. 'f 7 7/7/q7 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 97-03 MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 7,1997 OWNER/APPLICANT: VARIOUS/CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REOUEST/LOCATION The request is to amend the general plan land use designation of a City block consisting of 25 parcels of land from RS, Residential Suburban, to RU-l, Residential Urban. The project area is generally located between Julia and Cluster Streets on the north and south and Dorothy and Allen Streets on the east and west (Refer to Exhibit 1, General Plan Land Use & Location Map). KEY POINTS * The proposed amendment would change the status of existing multi-family residential units in the direct vicinity from "legally nonconforming uses" to "permitted uses" to encourage their maintenance and rehabilitation. However, only nine (9) of the twenty- five (25) parcels of land within the project area contain multi-family residential land uses. Thirteen (13) parcels contain single-family residences and the remaining three (3) parcels are vacant. * The RU-l district allows 8.0 units per gross acre compared to 4.5 units allowed by the existing RS district. Theoretically, under the existing RS designation, eighteen (18) additional units could be added to the project area if second dwelling units were approved for all single-family lots. Under the RU-l designation, the potential number of additional units could be as many as forty-eight (48). * The proposed amendment is inconsistent with the General Plan. It conflicts with General Plan Goal IG(g) which states that the City shall provide distinctive and compatible residential neighborhoods. The neighborhood in which the site is located consists primarily of detached, single-family residences. Changing the land use district to a multi-family designation would be inconsistent with this goal. In addition, it is the General Plan's objective to "promote the development of single-family detached units in a high quality suburban setting" (General Plan Objective 1.11). General Plan Amendment No. 97-03 Mayor and Common Council Meeting July 7, 1997 Page 2 of 3 ANALYSIS The site consists of 25 parcels of which nine (9) contain multi-family land uses. Staff originally showed the site as having 12 multi-family land uses. Due to mailbox centralization by the Post Office, three single-family residences were shown as triplexes. The General Plan Amendment proposal map has since been amended to show nine (9) multi-family parcels. Single and multi-family residences exist south, north, and east of the project area. The railroad tracks and the City Yard are located directly to the west across Sierra Way. The nearest multi- family land use district (RU-l) is located approximately 600 feet to the north along the northside of Rialto Avenue (Refer to Exhibit I, General Plan Land Use Designation and Location Map). COMMENTS RECEIVED Several comments were made in opposition to this request from the public at the Planning Commission meeting of May 20, 1997. The comments came from property owners located within the proposed project area as well as the surrounding neighborhood. The primary concern centered on the continued deterioration of the neighborhood due to unmaintained apartment complexes and high crime. The property owners indicated a desire to maintain the existing single-family parcels and eventually eliminate the nonconforming multi-family structures. Staff previously recommended approval of this General Plan Amendment request. However, based on concerns raised by the public and the Planning Commission discussion, Staff recommends that the General Plan Amendment not be approved. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION This project is exempt from CEQA as a general rule [Section 15601(b)(3)]. No new development is being proposed. Staff completed an Environmental Impact Checklist and all items were marked "No". PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At their May 20, 1997 meeting, the Planning Commission considered comments from the public and voted to recommend denial of General Plan Amendment No. 97-03 to the Mayor and Common Council. The vote was unanimous: 8 ayes (Gonzalez, Hamilton, Lockett, Quiel, Reilly, Schuiling, Suarez & Trasher), 0 nays, 0 abstentions, and 1 absent (Enciso). General Plan Amendment No. 97-03 Mayor and Common Council Meeting July 7, 1997 Page 3 of 3 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council: 1. Deny General Plan Amendment No. 97-03 based on the Findings of Fact (Exhibit 3). Prepared by: GUSTAVa J. RaMO, Assistant Planner for MICHAEL HAYS, Director of Planning & Building Services EXHIBITS: 1 2 3 General Plan Land Use & Location Map General Plan Amendment Proposal Map GP A Findings of Fact ;;.;~-~ EXHIBIT 1 r' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT LAND USE DESIGNATION CASE GPA-97-Qa ~ AND LOCATION MAP HEARING DATE AGENDA ITEM # . , COUll T"I "-0.... CUTIIl ~ i I - f r_"'I!!:::::! " .. . .1 .. N =:;.a:.,=._l::= P\.ANoLl1 PAGE tOFt (4-801 EXHIBIT 2 .... ~ Ii SFR ~ j;: d' . ::0 e . + )..'3'31:1)..5 ~... ~"'tl . 0 -r"<>;- w ~7S" (I)" " .. ..... @ ~ e SFR ~ ::r- , 2 SFR's ... iii ~(I) I ~. .., Ill- ::r- 0 2.?,s' ~ r- c: ~ SFR @ e 19-UNrr ::r: Ill- 1Il .., :: ... Q ;;: . -::r: :0 ....Q - - b.... ~SFR ~ ... 8 19-UNIT 0 0 (')b CID <$I +<? ~ ~(') III ., ~ 'to .. G 0 @ .. ... e y'f9 ~!Jl 3 SFR's P !\)~ 8-UNT.@ ... @ SFR !Xl CD I\) ~I\) !Xl~ -'lll <: SFR @ ... ... G SFR I\)~ '" 0 '" (JICXl or- - -'0 (t dl ri- ~ Ci":z en '"" '" ~ 0 . 3 :: V @ .. ... @ SFR ~ 0-'" .., .. .. 0 '1 ... .... '" '" lIlm :r- o 0 III '" .. '" ... ... ... ... .. ... 1Ii " -i .. CD ... .. '" III '" ... :0 ~~ @ @ 1 @ @ -i IT! .., Ii @ @ @ @~ :0 IT! ; .~ ~ ~ ~ ~,'1 IT! r .< ~ IT! :II ji .s.s 0 :II :II IIItll:b ...~ ss so oorn , , :;, 0 rn , ,.... +~ STREET-~u+---- tll rn --- "':- ALLEN .._rn 3 <.NO Q O')~ a. @) -. 11 s: :;'OQ DUP - DUPlEX Q~~ C) TRI - . TRFLEX 21\) :;,<>1 QUAD - QUADPLEX -< D PROPOSED AMENDMENT AREA V VN;AIlf FROM RS TO RU-1 SFR - SNa.E-FAMIY REsmENcE (jj ~~N S 01 I N::N .... r\) +1- ;)~ ~!!.... "ow .... i; UI ..0 . ~~ - - .. ., '" y GPA-97-03 PROPOSAL MAP .. SIERRA l:\ WAY EXHIBIT 3 FINDINGS OF FACT FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 97-03 1. The proposed amendment is internally inconsistent with the General Plan in that it conflicts with General Plan Goal I G(g) which states that the City shall provide distinctive and compatible residential neighborhoods. The neighborhood in which the site is located consists primarily of detached, single-family residences. Changing the land use district to a multi-family designation would be inconsistent with this goal. In addition, it is the General Plan's objective to "promote the development of single-family detached units in a high quality suburban setting" (General Plan Objective 1.11). 2. The proposed amendment would be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City in that the proposed land use designation is inconsistent with the General Plan and has the potential to substantially increase the number of residential units on the site, thus potentially impacting circulation as well as other public services. 3. The proposed amendment would be detrimental to the balance of land uses within the City in that the intention of the General Plan to eventually convert this area into single- family and amortize existing legal nonconforming multi-family land uses would be eliminated. 4. The subject site is physically suitable for the requested RU-lland use designation in that some of the proposed general plan amendment area is presently occupied by multi-family residential land uses. However, the existing multi-family development may not conform to current development requirements pertaining to unit size, open space, and other development code requirements, and additional public services may be impacted due to the potential increase in number of residential units.