HomeMy WebLinkAbout66-Planning & Building
~
STY OF SAN BERNARtlNO t'REQ&ST FOR COUNCIL A!rION
Larry E. Reed Variance No. 89-3 and
.rom: Director of Planning and Building Subject: Review of Plans No. 89-49
Oept: Planning Mayor and Council Meeting of
December 18, 1989, 2:00 p.m.
Oete: December 5, 1989
Synopsis of Previous Council action: -
-On May 16, 1989, the Planning Commission, by a 6 to 0 vote, denied
Variance No. 89-3.
-On June 19, October 16 and November 20, 1989, the Mayor and Council
continued the hearing on the appeal. The final continuance was to
December 18, 1989.
..
, I;'
Recommended motion: , -.:-."
. C,)
,
r'-J
That the hearing be closed; that RP 89-49 be approved subject to -~
Findings of Fact, Conditions of Approval and Standard Requirement'e;'
contained in Exhibit D; that Variance 89-3 be denied subject to. -'--
M..
Findings of Fact. contained in Exhibit C; and, that the Negative
Declaration be adopted.
"'J
.. ,
or
That the hearing be closed; that RP 89-49 be approved subject to
. the Findings of Fact, Conditions of Approval and Standard Require-
ments contained in Exhibit D; that Variance 89-3 be approved subject
to Findings of Fact contained in Exhibit B for six months from this
date of approval; and, that the Negative Declaration be adopted.
(Supports staff and applicant's request. )
~ ,try c~J
S ignatu re
Contact person: Larry E. Reed Phone: 384-5071
Supporting data anached: Staff Report Ward: 3
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: n/a.
Source: (Acct. No.)
IAcct. Descriotionl
Finance:
.council Notes:
75.0262 Agenda Item NO.~
------
Gttv OF SAN BERNARrAO - REQUAT FOR COUNCIL AC~N
.
STAFF REPORT
Subject: Appeal of Planning commission Denial of Variance
No. 89-3 for Review of Plans No. 89-49
Mayor and Council Meeting of December 18, 1989
REOUEST
The applicant, Econolodge, is appealing the denial of Vari-
ance No. 89-3 by the Planning Commission. The applicant
requests that the Mayor and Council reconsider the denial and
temporarily approve the variance for six months, and approve
Review of Plans No. 89-49.
BACKGROUND
(See staff report for Review of Plans No. 89-49 - Exhibit D.)
OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
The Mayor and Council may approve Review of Plans No. 89-49
with a temporary six month approval of Variance No. 89-3,
based on the Findings of Fact contained in Attachment B, or
may approve Review of Plans No. 89-49 with a denial of
Variance No. 89-3, per findings in Exhibit C.
.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of
Review of Plans No. 89-49 subject to Findings of Fact,
Conditions of Approval and Standard Requirements contained in
Exhibit D. Even though the Planning Commission is recommend-
ing denial of the variance, staff, at this time, is recom-
mending approval of Variance No. 89-3 based upon Findings of
Fact contained in Exhibit B; and, the adoption of the
Negative Declaration.
Prepared by:
John Montgomery, AICP, Principal Planner
for Larry E. Reed, Director of Planning and
Building
Exhibit
A - Letter of Appeal to the Mayor and Council
B - Findings of Fact for Variance No. 89-3 for
Approval
C - Findings of Fact for Variance No. 89-3 for
Denial contained in the Statement of Official
Planning commission Action of May 16, 1989
D - Review of Plans No. 89-49 Staff Report
mkf
M&CCAGENDA:VAR893
.
75-0264
.cono
Lodge,
. EXHIBIT A .
.
"~....,a",-- ...
:'\". -, - -
.
May 30, 1989
'E9 rif' 31 F:?:!5
Mayor and Common Council
City of San Bernardino
300 North "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Re: Variance ~o. 89-3
Please accept this as our appeal of the City Planning
Commission's decision of May 16th, 1989 regarding Item No. 11,
Variance No. 89-3.
We are appealing this decision for the following reasons:
.
1. Approximately 82\ of the subject property is located
within the San Jacinto Fault Zone, where for health and
safety reasons, no structures can be built.
2. At the present time. property owners to the north are
allowed to park automobiles on dirt shoulders located on
the east side of Camino Real.
3. Oust presently originating from the subject property,
will be mitigated by surfacing with a non-toxic and non-
corrosive slag. All surfacing materials will be compacted
to a minimum relative compaction of 95%.
4. Long term plan is to pave and stripe this area once
business is built up.
Thank you for your anticipated courtesy.
Sincerely.
v~
V.K. Shah
General :-'.anager
c
r-
I ; ~
j --.
!
--
MAY
n -
.) 1
~cn3
.. .
C~--I ~;...~:~'::'. .......!'
.
ECOno l.Oage Conference Center
662 Fairway :)nve 011-10 end 1-215
Orange ShOW Road. EXll on 1.215
San 2ernaralno. CA 92408
714 d25-7750
1-aOO.55-:-:0NO NationwIde Reservallons
S:iil :.: ..~: ~ or
-
,.oJ......
.cono
Lodge.
.
.
.
.
May 10, 1989
APPEAL TO All CCM1lTI'EE MEMBERS AND COL1NCIL ~ERS OF THE em OF SAN
BERNARDmJ. TO APPROVE APPLICATION FOR VARIA.'lCE # 89-3.
The city of San 3er:-.ardino is loosing visitors and bJsiness clientele
...me stay in hotels to Riverside. Rec1lands and Fontana. We have
explored a ;:'f!'.l type of clientele and have found a vast =ket with
long-haul tr..lckers delivering goods to the Inland Eiqlire area.
He have the ?otential to INCREASE TAX RE:\IDl'L'ES FOR mE CITI by
providing trUCk parking facilities at our hotel by using the pro-
posed site 'Nhich we have owned since purchasing the hotel in 1984; the
property is and ".las a part of the hotel. We are anpealing to all
the members of t.'1.e approval comnittee to consider our application
and approve it.
.
The hotel eqlloys 40 people on a year around basis and prochJces a
payroll of substantial nut:bers which in turn is spent in our camunity.
The hotel occupancy tax at our hotel is now approx1mately $80,000 per
year and will i..1.crease significantly with our ability to acc:amdate
additional tr..tckers.
It 'Hill be ::ore difficult for our hotel to create new business Wen
Norton Air Force Base is closed. The new Visitors and Convention
Bureau is t::yi."lg to increase our business. trying to give reasons
and justify 'Nhy these people must stay in San Bernardir.o and spend
their m:mey in our local econcmy.
There is no hotel:"'"1 San Bernardino that has this size of valuable
land to acc=date :.."-:e truck parking for guests staying at the t>.otel.
We feel we ;:.eed to be per.nitted to proceed with our plans to develope
the parking lot.
.
:cono Lodge Conference Centsr
668 Falrwoy Drive at I.~O ana 1.215
Orange ShOW Road. EXit on 1.215
San Bernaraino. CA 92408
7~4 825.7750
1.8CC.55.ECONO Nationwide Reservations
~cono
Lodge.
.
.
.
.
We feel we can increase our share of the market to attract lIDre
traffic to our hotel since we have easy-on, easy-off exit/entry
points due to our advantagious location at the intersection of
1-10 and 1-215, which are I:'.ain .arterials connecting east and west
on 1-10, and north and south on 1-215.
By doing so we have a potential to increase our business by 20%
and create mre jobs and also keep our facility open and in operation,
and not have to close down our facility due to financial problems
and/or difficulties. We 100Uld like to sustain our business and be
part of a growing econany and help the city collect lIDre tax revenues.
This hotel has also been able to serve the local market by providing
an economy budget lUKUIy property with meeting and banquet facilities,
an enterta..inl'.ent 10Ul1ge, and a ham for the famms radio stations
ImC1 and KDL"O.
.
We will very much appreciate your approval on a conditional basis
as submitted currently.
I hope you will approve our application and help us survive!
May I count on your support?
Sincerly Yours.
vt(~
V. K. Shah
General Manager
.
Eccno Lodge Confe'ence Center
668 Fairway Drive at 1.10 ana 1-215
Orange Show Rood. Exit on 1.215
Son Bernardino. CA 92403
714 825.7750
1-800-55'oCONO Nationwide Reservotlons
.
~
.
.XHIBIT B .
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE variance 89-3
.
.
FINDINGS of FACT
'\..
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE 12-18-89
PAGE
1
x
2
x
3
x
x
5
x
There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the property involved, or to
the intended use of the property, which do not apply
generally to other property in the same zoning district
and neighborhood in that the proposed use is an experiment
of feasibility in relation to a motel.
The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment
of a substantial property right of the applicant in that
the feasibility experiment will demonstrate the viability
of building a parking lot for semi-trucks so that the driver
can make use of the facilities provided by the motel.
The granting of the variance will not be materially detri-
mental to the public welfare or injurious to property
and improvements in the zoning district and neighborhood
in which the property is located, in that increased dust
levels will not impact air quality and traffic safety.
The granting of such variance will not be contrary to the
objectives of the General Plan, in that the public health
and safety and the aesthetics of a City "gateway" and
Redevelopment area will not be adversely impacted.
The land use project identified in Variance No. 89-3
and Review of Plans No. 89-49 is consistent with the
General Plan adopted by the Mayor and Council on
June 2, 1989, in that the area is designated CG-l,
General Commercial, and the parking lot is a permitted
use in that designation.
.
.
.
.
(
. EXHIBIT C .
City of San Bernardino
.
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
PROJECT
Number:
VARIANCE 89-3
Applicant:
ACTION
M.P. Rama for the JHM Inland Empire Inc.
Meeting Date: May 16, 1989
Approved Adoption
Request Subject to
Fact, Conditions
Requirements.
of Negative Declaration and
the Following Findings of
of Approval and Standard
X
Denied.
Other.
FINDINGS OF FACT
There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
or conditions applicable to the property involved, or to
the intended use of the property, which do not apply
generally to other property in the same zoning district
and neighborhood in that the property is flat and of
adequate length, width and area to develop a parking lot
which meets San Bernardino Municipal Code requirements.
2. The variance is not necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right of the appli-
cant in that all other properties are subject to the
same restrictions and there is nothing unique to this
property which renders the restrictions unequitable. The
property can be used for a parking lot if provided with
appropriate improvements.
1.
3. The granting of the variance will be materially detri-
mental to the public welfare or injurious to property
and improvements in the zoning district and neighborhood
in which the property is located, in that increase dust
levels will impact air quality and traffic safety and,
the potential for groundwater contamination would
increase.
4. The granting of such variance will be contrary to the
objectives of the General Plan, in that the public
health and safety and the aesthetics of a City "gateway"
and redevelopment area would be adversely im~acted.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
City of San Berr .10 I .
STATEMENT OF OFF~~IAL PLANNING COMMISSION A~_~ON
Variance 89-3
Page 2
5. The Planning Department has investigated whether the
land use project identified in Variance NO. 89-3.
Application is consistent with the land use designations
and policies in the Preferred Land Use Alternative Map
and the Interim Policy Document. The proposed land use
project by the Mayor and Common Council on May 23, 1988,
amended on June 6, 1988, and approved by the State
Office of Planning Research on June 9, 1988, in that the
Document and Map designates the proposed site for CG,
commerical General use(s) which includes parking lots.
YQTI;
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
Brown, Corona, Lindseth, Lopez, Nierman, Stone
None
Cole
Sharp
I, hereby, certify that this Statement of Official Action
accurately reflects the final determination of the Planning
Commission of the City of San Bernardino.
cf.~!.$. -7 ~~
Brad L. Kilger, Director of Planning
Name and Title
cc: Project Property Owner
project Applicant
Building and Safety Dept.
Engineering Division
/nmg
PCAGENDA:
PCACTIONB
.
. EXHIBIT D
.
.
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUMMARY
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE , 7_1 R_RQ
WARD
tIJ REVIEW OF PLANS NO. 89-49
en
ex
o
APPLICANT' V . K. Shah
668 Fairway Drive
San Bernardino, CA
CWNER, JHM Inland Empire Inc.
880 S. Pleasantburg Dr.
Greenville, South Carolin
t;
tIJ
:)
o
l&I
a:
...
ex
tIJ
a:
ex
To construct an anxillary parking lot adjacent ot an existing
motel to accommodate large commercial trucks and trailers. The
2.15 acre site is located north of the motel at 668 Fairway
Drive.
.
PROPERTY
Subject
North
Sou th
East
West
EXISTING
LAND USE
Vacant
Vacant Com.
City of Colton
Vacant
Freeway
ZONING
CG-l
CG-l
unknown
CG-l
Freeway
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION
General Commercial
General Commercial
Unknown
General Commercial
Freeway
GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC ~YES FLOOD HAZARD DYES OZONE A ( SEWERS BVES )
HAZARD ZONE DNO ZONE IiilNO OZONE B ONO
HIii'>! FIRE DVES AIRPORT NOISE I DVES REDEVELOPMENT DYES
HAZARD ZONE f]NO CRASH ZONE !j;JNO PROJECT AREA ~NO
...I o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z f] APPROVAL
0
ex APPLICABLE E FFE CTS -
... WITH MITIGATING tt f] CONDITIONS
Zen MEASURES NO E.I.R.
tlJe!) o EXEMPT o E.I.R. REOUIRED BUT NO 11.0 0 DENIAL
2Z II.ffi
Z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ~2
00 WITH MITIGATING 0 CONTINUANCE TO
a:Z MEASURES en2
. >ii: 0
l::J NO o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 0
Z tIJ
tIJ SIGNIFICANT SEE ATTACHED E. R. C. a:
.. EFFE CTS MINUTES
NOli 1911 REVISED JULY 1912
SKY
.CITY OF SAN BE~ARDINO.- MEMORANDUIf
Subject
REVIEW OF PLANS NO. 89-49
From Planning Department
Date December 18, 1989
.
To
Mayor and Common Council
Approved
Date
REQUEST
Review of Plans No. 89-49 is to construct an ancillary parking lot on
2.15 acres for big rig trucks at Econolodge, 668 Fairway Drive (see
Attachment "E", Site Plan). In conjunction with this application is
Variance 89-3 in which the applicant requests a six-month time period
to asphalt the parking lot. The site is in an area designated CG-l,
General Commercial, on the General Plan (see Attachment "F", Location
map) .
BACKGROUND
.
On April 7, 1989, Variance No. 89-3 was submitted to the City. The
request at that time was to allow big rig parking on a 2.15 acre dirt
parcel adjacent to the motel. On April 20, 1989, the Development
Review Committee reviewed.the plot plan and recommended denial to
the Planning Commission. Under state law, projects that will be
denied require no environmental review, so the project was scheduled
for Planning Commission without going to the Environmental Review
Committee.
On May 31, 1989, the Planning Commission denied the Variance. That
decision was appealed to the Mayor and Common Council and scheduled
for August 21, 1989 meeting. On August 14, 1989, Review of Plans 89-49
was submitted to Planning.
On August 21, 1989, the Mayor and Common Council continued the Variance
request to October 6, 1989, so the Review of Plans could be reviewed.
The Review of Plans went to the Development Review Committee several
times while Engineering problems were worked out.
On November 16, 1989, the site plan design was recommended for approval
to the Mayor and Common Council by the Development Review Committee,
however, the recommendation includes requiring paving now which is not
in support of the Variance request.
That same day the Environmental Review Commitee recommended a Negative
Declaration be adopted for the Review of Plans (see Attachment "D",
Initial Study).
.
;
w~ _ ..~ _'. r
.--,
~:..!L' ';~~_'<<1;:'::'~
-;r";;;;.....i
.
Ci ty of San Bernardino .. ·
Memorandum to the Mayor and Common Council Meeting, December 18, 1989
Subject: Review of Plans No. 89-49
Page 2
.
ANALYSIS
The subject site is located in the Alquist priolo Special Studies
Zone. The San Jacinto fault has been identified as traversing the
parcel in a northwest trend. When the required setbacks from the
faults are met, there is very little area left for any structures.
A parking lot is an appropriate land use on this site.
The parking lot layout has been redesigned to the satisfaction of the
City Engineering and Traffic Engineer. Drive aisle width and parking
configuration provide adequate circulation. Access is from Camino
Real via a 36 foot driveway, or from Fairway Drive.
The propsed parking lot is in compliance with applicable codes
relative to landscaping, curbing aisle width and stall width and
depth. The exception to code compliance is the proposal to use slag.
The phased development approach is to install all improvements in
Phase I except the asphalt which would be Phase II.
. CONCLUSION
The proposed parking.lot is a preferable land use at the subject
location. With the exception of the slag, the parking lot is in
compliance with all applicable codes. The Development Review
Committee has recommended approval of the site plan, but denial of
the phased construction. There is a proposed Negative Declaration.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Mayor and Common Council:
1. Approve Review of Plans No. 89-49 subject to Findings of Fact
(Attachment "A"), Conditions of Approval (Attachment "B"), and
Standard Requirements (Attachment "C"); and
2. Adopt the Negative Declaration.
Respectfully submitted,
Larry Reed, Director
Planning and Building and Safety
.
Sandra Paulsen
Senior Planner
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
City of San Bernardino
Memorandum to the Mayor and Common Council Meeting, December 18, 1989
Subject: Review of Plans No. 89-49
Page 3
ATTACHMENTS:
A- Findings of Fact
B- Conditions of Approval
c- Standard Requirements
D- Initial Study
E- Site Plan
F- Location Map
.
REV I EW ~ PLANS
ATTACHMENT "A"
NO. -e 89-49 .
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CONN[TTEE
MANDATORY FlNDIIlGS
Dlte
11-22-89
.
.
APPROVAL - FINDINGS
YES NO
SEE SEE
PLAN ATTACHED
1. The develo~nt plans co~ly with all provi-
stons of Sin Bernardino Municipal Code.
Untfo~ Codes included into the San Bernardino
Municipal Code and Standard Requirements
established by the City. fiD 0 0
[]
Conditions
of Approval
2. Buildings, structures and development, and
use thereof shall be compatible with and not
detrt lllenta 1 to each other. and sha 11 1i kewi 5e
be compatible with an not detrimental to the
zone within which such project shall be
established, so that property values may be
preserved and orderly development of land in
the surroundi ng are.. Illy be assured. Ii] 0 0 0
3. If the Development Review C...ittee cannot
make the required findings in the affirmative,
the Development Review Committee may deny the
application for development. fiD 0 0 0
A. Complies with provisions of the S.B.M.C. fiD 0 0 lKl
B. Complies with uniform codes incorporated
Into the S.B.M.C. (Building, Fire, etc.). El 0 0 0
Conditions
of Approval
C. Complies with San Bernardino standard
requirements.
IKJ 0 0 0
D. Buildings, structures. development and
use are compatible with and not
detrimental to:
.
1. Each othl!r.
IKJ 0 0 0
lKl 0 0 0
IKJ 0 0 0
IKJ 0 0 0
z. Surround;ng neighborhood.
3. Zone in whiCh established.
E. Will preserve property values.
F. Will assure orderly deYelop~nt of the
land.
liJ 0 0 0
G. Neighboring uses and structures will
be protected against noise vibratton
and other offensive. objectionable
conditions.
IKJ 0 0 0
H. Lighting is arranged so that light is
reflected away from adjoining properties. ~ 0 0 0
I. Signs are in conforma.ce with the S.B.M.C. liJ 0 0 0
J. Design wi 11 assure pedestrian safety. !iJ 0 0 0
~. Design w;11 provide safe and efficient
traffic flow. lKl 0 0 0
L.
The Parking lot
the General Plan adopted by
1989, in that the area is
~nn +h~ ~nmm~r~i~' lnr
is consistent with
the Mayor and Council on Jun. 2
designated CG-l, General tommercial,
i~ ~ pprmi+t~d use.
K5 RPBlllNKP3&4
.
I
.
.
.
.
. ATTACHMENT ".
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE RP89-49
CONDITIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE 12-18-89
PAGE
STANDARD CONDITIONS
1.
Minor modifications to the plan shall be subject to approval
by the Director of Planning. An increase of more than 10
percent of the square footage or a significant change in the
approved concept shall be subject to
. review and approval.
in substantial conformance with the
Development Review Committee, Planning
of Planning.
"
Construction shall be
Plans, approved by the
Commission or Director
2
The developer is to submit a complete master landscape and
irrigation plan (4 copies) for the entire development to the
Engineering Department with the required fee for approval,
the landscape plans will be forwarded to the Parks,
Recreation, and Community Services and the Planning
Department for review and approval. (Note: the issuance of a
building permit, by the Department of Building and Safety of
the City of San Bernardino, does HQr waive these
requirements/conditions.) No grading permits will be issued
prior to approval of landscape plans.
The design shall include, but not be limited to the
following:
lC
x
Street trees shall be planted on 35 foot center
spacing unless otherwise indicated by the Department
of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services. The
Parks Department shall determine the varieties and
locations prior to planting. A minimum of 25% of the
trees shall be 24" box specimens. Trees are to be
inspected by a Park Division representative prior to
planting.
x
Planters shall be enclosed with concrete curbing.
The setbacks from the north ____ , south ____ ,
east ~ , west ____ property line shall be bermed
at a maximum 3:1 slope and shall be planted with a
tall fescue type turfgrass.
A Landscape buffer zone shall be installed between'
facilities and street.
x
.
.
.
3
4
.
---
.
.
.
r
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE RPRQ-4Q
CONDITIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE 1 ?-l R-RQ
PAGE
The landscape and irrigation plans shall comply with
the "Procedure and Policy for Landscape and
Irrigation" (available from the Parks Department).
Subject to the Conditions of the Department of Parks and
Recreation (attached).
x
Trees, shrubs and groundcover of a type and quality generally
consistent or compatible with that characterizing sing1e-
family homes shall be provided in the front yard and that
portion of th side yards which are visible from the street.
All landscaped areas must be provided with an automatic
irrigation system adequate to insure their viability. The
landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Parks
and Recreation Department.
x
At all times. the business will be operated in a
does not produce obnoxious noise, vibration,
smoke, glare, or other nuisance.
manner which
odor, dust,
A sign program for the multi-tenant commercial/industrial
center shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to
issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
x
In the event that this approval is legally challenged, the
City will promptly notify the applicant of any claim or
action and will cooperate fully in the defense of the matter.
Once notified, the applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and
hold harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees
from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of San
Bernardino. The applicant further agrees to reimburse the
city of any costs and attorneys' fees which the City may be
required by a court to pay as a result of such action, but
such participation shall not relieve applicant of his
obligation under this condition.
PCAGENDA:STNDCONDITIONS
10/19/89
.J
.
.
.
.
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE RPB9-49
CONDITIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE l2~lB-B9
PAGE
"""
5
x
Other than directional signage necessary to insure
safe circulation, there shall be no additional
commercial signage permitted on this parcel.
6
x
Reciprocal access agreement between the parcels
shall be recorded or a lot line adjustment to
combine the parcels shall be required.
.
.
..
"ACHMENT "C"
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
REQUIREMENTS
CASE RP89-49
STANDARD
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
1~-18-89
"""II
COMMERCIAL. INDUSTRIAL
1
x
Review of Plans No. 89-49 shall be in effect for a
period of 12 months from the date of approval. However, if no
development has been initiated at the end of the 12 month
period, the application shall expire. Additional time may be
approved upon request of the applicant prior to expiration of
the 12-month period. Expiration Date: 12-18-90
2
x
PARKING:
.
a. This development shall be required to maintain a m~n~mum of
50 standard off-street parking spaces and 14 spaces
for large commercial semitrucks and trailers.
b. All parking and driving aisles shall be surfaced with two
inches of AC over a suitable base or equivalent as approved
by the City Engineer. Parking spaces shall be striped and
have wheel stops installed at least three feet from any
building, wall, fence, property line, or walkway.
Whenever an off-street parking area is adjacent to or
across an alley from property zoned residential, a solid
decorative wall six feet in height shall be erected and
maintained along the property line so as to separate the
parking area physically from the residentially zoned
property provided such wall shall be three feet in height
when located within the required front or street side yard
setback. Where no front or street side yard is required,
such wall shall be three feet in height when located within
ten feet of the street line.
c.
d. Whenever an off-street parking area is located across the
street from property zoned for residential uses, a solid
decorative wall or equivalent landscape berm not less than
three feet in height shall be erected and maintained along
the street side of the lot not closer to the street than
the required depth of the yard in the adjoining residential
area. No fence or ~all located in the front setback shall
obscure the required front setback landscaping.
REFUSE ENCLOSURES:
.
Whenever refuse bins are located within or adjacent to a parking
area used by the public, they shall be enclosed by a decorative
wall six feet in height along the rear and sides and screened
gate(s) six feet in height along the front. The enclosure shall
not be placed within the required front or street side yard
...
~
"., oky
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
. STANDARD REQUIREMENTS
.
.
.
CASE
RP89-4'l
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE l/-1R-R'l
PAGE
3
x
\..
""
setback area. Exact location and
to be determined by the Planning
Public Services Superintendent.
size of refuse enclosures are
Department and Division of
WALLS:
a.
six-foot high solid decorative walls shall be
the north ____, south ____, east , and
peripheral ____ property lines. (Only those
"X" or check mark apply).
required on
west or
markedWith
LANDSCAPING:
The intent and purpose of this section is to prevent trees and
other landscaping from damaging public improvements.
a. Street trees must be installed at a minimum of 30 feet on
center. Varieties and exact location shall be determined
by the Director of Parks and Recreation.
b.
All required setbacks abutting a public right-of-way shall
be landscaped (except for walks and driveways which bisect
or encroach upon the required landscape area).
c.
Four (4) copies of a landscape
material specifications) shall
Engineering Division for review and
plan (including
be submitted to
approval.
plant
the
d. All required landscaping shall be protected from parking
areas and shall be provided with automatic sprinkler
facilities which shall be maintained. in an operative
condition.
e. Interior planting shall be required and maintained equal to
at least five percent or ten percent of the open surfaced
parking area excluding the area of landscaping strip
required by subsection "b" and shall include at least one
tree for every five spaces or major fraction thereof.
Measurements shall be computed from the inside of perimeter
walls or setback lines.
f. The required setback(s) from the north , south, ,
east ~, west ____ property line shall be densely
landscaped with mature trees, shrubs, and groundcover. A
____ -foot landscaped earthen berm shall be erected and
maintained within the setback along the above indicated
property line.
~
"15 Iky
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
. STANDARD REQUIREMENTS
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
RP89-49
, ?-lS-e9
4
x
a.
ILLUMINATION:
All lighting
directed away
right-of-way.
fixtures in
from adjacent
the parking
properties
areas shall be
and the public
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT:
a. Air conditioning and vent ducts shall be directed away from
any adjacent residential uses, and all sides of the
building shall be free of any external vents and mechanical
equipment including, but not limited to, conduits and
ducts.
.
b. All building-supported mechanical equipment (including roof
equipment, ladders and air conditioning and vent ducts)
shall be enclosed within the building's primary
architectural elements; independent screening devices shall
not be permitted.
All ground-supported equipment such as transformers and air
conditioners shall be located within the building and/or in
underground vaults.
c.
All utility service
shall be painted to
they are located.
e. All existing overhead utility services and wiring shall be
relocated underground.
d.
boxes, connections and service lines
match the building exterior on which
5
x
f. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone,
water, sewer and Cable TV shall be provided for
underground, with easements provided as required, and
designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and
the utility provider. Telephone, Cable TV and/or security
systems shall be pre-wired in the structures.
Compliance with all recommendations of the Geology Report shall
be required (if applicable).
Grading and revegetation shall be staged as required by the City
Engineer in order to reduce the amount of bare soil exposed to
precipitation.
6 x
7
x
During construction, the City Engineer may require
around all or a portion of the periphery of the site to
wind and debris damage to adjacent properties. The
a fence
minimize
type of
.
....
...
.... ok,
'.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
. STANDARD REQUIREMENTS
CASE RP89-4'l
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
12-18-89
,.
~
fencing shall be approved by the City Engineer to assure
adequate project site maintenance, clean-up and dust control.
Within 75 feet
maximum height of
feet unless the
topographical or
practical.
of any single-family residential district, the
any building shall not exceed one story or 20
commission determines that due to unusual
other features, such restrictive height is not
8
x
No Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued prior to compliance
with these Standard Requirements as well as all provisions of
the San Bernardino Municipal Code.
9
x
SIGNS: See Conditions of Approval
All signs shall be in conformance with San Bernardino Municipal
Code Section 19.60. Three (3) copies of a plot plan and
elevation of the sign drawn to scale shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of
the sign permit from the Building and Safety Department.
.
a.
Monument-type signs shall not be located within the
required setback for the zoning district in which the sign
is located. The monument sign shall be located a minimum
of 5 feet from the property line. If the monument sign is
located within the setback, it shall not exceed an overall
height of three (3) feet.
b.
All freestanding
clearance between
the sign.
signs must have eight (8) feet of
average ground level and the bottom of
.
..
~
""' Illy
.
.
.
.
,.
RP89-49
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
ST ANDARD REQUIREMENTS
~ POLICE DEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS
,.
.
10
---X...-
.
~
MAY '84
Each building in the complex shall display street address numbers placed in
a prominent location as near the street as practical. Numbers shall be a
minimum of six (6) inches in height and a contrasting color to the
background.
All individual offices and buildings within the complex shall be clearly
identified by numbers, letters, or a combination thereof.
The exterior business walls shall be posted with Municipal Code
Section 9.52.070 relative to trespass.
The interior cashier/sales counter shall be located so it is visible from
the building exterior. The floor area inside the counter shall be elevated
a minimum of six (6) inches above the floor of the business.
Access Controls
An access control override device shall be provided for use by Police
Department personnel to gain immediate access.
Common walls shall be as sound proof as possible.
Lockable cold beverage (beer) cases shall be locked at 2:00 a.m.
A pre-set gas monitoring system that allows for prepayment of gasoline
shall be installed to reduce petty theft attempts.
A photo-electric beam across entry door which will audibly notify or ring
when customers enter the store shall be. installed.
Ice machines shall not be installed in front of store windows.
Utilization of outside intercom speakers is prohibited.
The placement of outside pUblic telephones shall be restricted to an area
immediately adjacent to the front door of the store.
There shall be a minimum of twenty (20) foot candles of illumination per
square foot of surface area adjacent to gas pumps.
Any display of light should take into account adequate positioning of fix-
tures in order that "stray" light does not affect adjoining property
owners.
Perimeter fencing or cross fencing to prevent criminal movement or acti-
vity shall be installed.
Reflective wall-mounted mirrors shall be installed to discourage
shoplifting.
The placement of machinery (compressor equipment) shall be away from resi-
dential areas to abate the intensity of noise.
~
I.R. FORM C
PAGE 4 Of II
.
.
.
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PUBLIC WORKS/ENGR.
. CASE RP89-49
STANDARD REQUIREMENTS
~ POLICE DEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
ll-Hj-tl~
11.
x
Open parking lots and carports shall be provided with a
maintained minimum of one (1) footcandle of light on the
parking surface during the hours of darkness. Lighting
devices shall be protected by weather and vandalism
resistant covers.
.
.
.
.
.
12
.
CITY OF SAN BER ~RDINO P
LlC WORKS/ENGR.
CASE RP89-49
STANDARD REQUIREMENTS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE 12-18-89
PAGE
PrQject Description: I?Ii'M-~" ~ P~/N(j- ur ~~c/('S .
/"0 CI'+7't/!!D ()IJ 7HtF NDiL1H tE {)P ':A 1LtA.IItY M. tAler (J c. /NO ~
Date: //-/~ Prepared By: HW6-Reviewed By:
Page ~ of pages
Appl i cant: ECoNo t..oD6F
NOTE TO APPLICANT: Where separate Engineering plans are required,
the appl1cant 1S responsible for submitting the Engineering plans
directly to the Engineering Division. They may be submitted prior
to submittal of Building Plans.
Drainaae and Flood Control
All necessary drainage and flood control measures shall be
subject to requirements of the City Engineer; which may be based
in part on the recommendations of the San Bernardino Flood
Control District. The developer's Engineer shall furnish all
necessary data relating to drainage and flood control.
A local drainage study will be required for the project. Any
drainage improvements, structures or storm drains needed to
mitigate downstream impacts or protect the development shall be
desi gned and constructed at the developer 0 s expense, and
right-of-way dedicated as necessary.
_ The development is located within Zone A on the Federal Insurance
Rate Maps; therefore, a Special Flood Hazard Area Permit issued
by the City Engineer shall be required.
_ The development is located within Zone B on the Federal Insurance
Rate Maps; therefore, all building pads shall be raised above the
surrounding area as approved by the City Engineer.
_Comprehensive storm drain Project No. is master planned in
the vicinity of your development. This drain shall be designed
and constructed by your project unless your Engineer can
conclusively show that the drain is not needed to protect your
development or mitigate downstream impacts.
-XAll drainage from the development
approved public drainage facility.
drainage facilities and easements
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
shall be
If not
sha 11 be
directed
feasible,
provided
to an
proper
to the
.
CITY OF SAN BE
ARDINO
IC WORKS/~
CASE RP89-49
STANDARD REQUIREMENTS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE' 12-18-89
PAGE
Project Description: /l~8'1-"'1
Date: IJ-IS~~ Prepared By: I1wG- Reviewed By:
Page ~ or ~ pages
Grading
13 -XIf more than l' of fill or 2' of cut is proposed, the site/plott
grading and drainage plan shall be signed by a Registered Civil
Engineer and a grading permit will be required. The grading plan
shall be prepared in strict accordance with the City's "Grading
Policies and Procedures" and the City's "Standard Drawings",
unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer in advance.
If more than 5,000 cubi c yards of earth~lork is proposed, a gr-adi ng
-bond will be required and the grading shall be supervised in
'accordance with Section 7012 (c) of the Uniform Building Code.
A liquefaction report is required for the site. This report must
-be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a grading permit.
Any grading requirements recommended by the approved liquefaction
report shall be incorporated in the grading plan.
.
.
14
~An on-site Improvement Plan is required for this project. Where
feasible, this plan shall be incorporated with the grading plan
and shall conform to all requirements of Section 15.04-167 of the
Municipal Code (See "Grading Policies and Procedures"). The
on-site Improvement Plan shall be approved by the City Engineer.
A reciprocal easement shall be recorded prior to grading plan
-approval if reciprocal drainage, access, sewer, and/or parking is
proposed to cross lot lines, or a lot line adjustment shall be
recorded to remove the interior lot lines.
15
~The project Landscape Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. Submit 4
copies to the Engineering Division for checking.
16 --1t.An on-site Lighting Plan for the project shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer. This plan can be incorporated with
the grading plan, or on-site improvement plan, if practical.
Utilities:
Design and construct all public utilities to serve the site in
-accordance with City Code, City Standards and requirements of the
serving utility, including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer
and cable TV.
,
.
.
.
CITY OF SAN BE
ARDINO P
LlC WORKS/ENGR.
CASE RP89-49
STANDARD REQUIREMENTS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
12-18-89
......
Pro ject Descr i pti on: ~p BIIf-4~
Date: II-/!;-r'i
Page ~ of ~ pages
Prepared By: /'1uJ(,. Reviewed By:
Each parcel shall be provided with separate water and sewer
----facilities so it can be served by the City or the agency providing
such services in the area.
Sewer main extensions required to serve the site shall be
----constructed at the Developer's expense. Sewer systems shall be
designed and constructed in accordance with the City's "Sewer
Policy and Procedures" and City Standard Drawings.
17 ---2LUtility services shall be placed underground and easements
provided as required.
All existing overhead utilities adjacent to or traversing the site
----on either side of the street shall be undergrounded in accordance
with Ordinance No. MC-6Dl (Subdivisions) or Resolution No. 88-65
(Non-subdivisions).
18
i.Existing utilities which interfere with new construction shall be
relocated at the Developer's expense as directed by the City
Engineer.
Sewers within private streets or private parking lots will not be
----maintained by the City but shall be designed and constructed to
City Standards and inspected under a City On-Site Construction
Permit. A private sewer plan designed by the Developer's Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer will be required. This plan can
be incorporated in the grading plan, where practical.
CITY OF SAN BER ARDINO P
Lie WORKS/ENGR.
CASE RP89-49
.
STANDARD REQUIREMENTS AGENDA ITEM 12-18-89
HEARING DATE
PAGE
Project Description: teI'8'--"'"
Date: I~'-!P- Prepared By: HuXY Reviewed By:
Page -k of pages
.
Street Improvement and Dedications:
All public streets within and adjacent to ~he development shall be
-improved to include combination curb and gutter, paving, handicap
ramps, street lights, sidewalks and appurtenances, including, but
not limited to, traffic signals, traffic signal modification,
relocation of public or private facilities which interfere with
new construction, striping, signing, pavement marking and markers,
and street name signing. All design and construction shall be
accomplished in accordance with the City of San Bernardino "Street
Improvement Policy" and City "Standard Drawings", unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer. Street lighting, when required,
shall be desi gned and constructed in accordance with the City's
"Street Lighting Policies and Procedures", Street lighting shall
be shown on street improvement plans except where otherwise
approved by the City Engineer.
For the streets listed below, dedication of adequate street
-right-of-way (R.W.) to provide the distance from street centerline
to property line and placement of the curb line (C.L.) in relation
to the street centerline shall be as follows:
Street Name
Right-of-Way (Ft.)
Curb Line (Ft,)
All rights of vehicular ingress/egress shall be dedicated from
-the following streets:
19 ---1S.. ])flll/~"'f AfP~Itc.H DNTO C/tmIAb ~.5'I~ $E- 3" "h~
/;Np SHIHA- Be "Type ff ,Pen ~ ~~.
20 ')( WI1>eN f5XI5TIN~ 7>lLtV6 /tPPP../icH (we.~'Y sloe) ro ~6'-
II-"'!) f!,euJCI'r'TE ro ~GN e.HrJ.I J:,Z/~ /H$LE. !?G(ANS71f!IICT
f'ett Sir:>. ZOlf,/ -ryf'e- E.
~ ---15...Ji.I~ ~I<. GVIP€ '51(j.NS (111te1::lAJ6S f'e1Z. '/lf2.c ftAN.
.
CITY OF SAN BE
ARDINO
IC WORKS/ENQfI.
CASE RP89-49
.
STANDARD REQUIREMENTS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
12-18-89
"project Deseri pti on: I?P K'-41
Date:~/-IS-g,
Page of b pages
Prepared By: f'1";(Y Rev i elled By:
Mapping
A Final/Parcel Map based upon field survey lIill be required.
All street names shall be subject to approval of the City
Engineer prior to Map approval.
Additional survey and map information including, but not limited
to, building setbacks, flooding and zones, seismic lines and
setbacks, geologic mapping and archeological sites shall be
filed \~ith the City Engineer in accordance with Ordinance No.
MC-592.
.
Improvement Completioo
Street, se~ler, and drainage improvement plans for the entire
project shall be completed, subject to the approval of the City
Engineer, prior to the recordation of the Final/Parcel Map.
If the required improvements are not completed prior to
recordatioo of the Final/Parcel Map. an improvement security
accompanied by an a9reemeot executed by the developer and the
City will be required.
If the required improvements are not completed prior to record-
ation of the Parcel Map, an improvement certificate shall be
pl aced upon the Map stati ng that they wi 11 be compl eted upon
development. Applicable to parcel maps consisting of less than
5 lots only.
Required Engineering Permits:
22 X Grading permit (if applicable).
23 X On-site improvements construction permit (except buildings - see
Building and Safety).
24 X Off-site improver.1ents construction permit.
.
.
.
30
.
.
CITY OF SAN BE
ARDINO
STANDARD REQUIREMENTS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
12-1B-B9
Project Description:
RP 8'-41
Date; /1- /,~r9
Page ~ of ~ pages
Prepared By: 11~ Reviewed By:
Applicable Engineering Fees:~
Plan check fee for Final/Parcel Map.
25
X Plan check and inspection fees for off-si te improvements.
X Plan check and inspection fees for on-site improvements (except
buildings; see Building and Safety) .
~ Plan check and inspection fees for grading (if permit required).
26
27
Bridge improvement fee in amount of $
Drainage fee. Exact amount of fee shall be determined by
Department of Building and Safety at time of application for
building permit.
28 X Landscape Plan Review Fee $ 65.00
Traffic System Fee of $ 12.54 per vehicle trip for City-wide
traffic mitigation. The total amount of the Traffic System Fee
shall be determined by the City Traffic Engineer at time of
application for building permit.
Street Light Energy
period of 4 years.
recording.
Fee to pay cost of street light energy for a
Exact amount to be determined prior to map
A Landscape Maintenance District shall be implemented to
maintain landscaping within the following areas:
29
X A f)fUttNP6€ E'''~7YleJT .!iI-f1r.L Be '/)eI>/CA7"E1> to "f1f€- Clry
overt tHE IJOllrHtUV />~ ()r ~ ~~ tor:
x: ~t$1iH(i... W~~~ fJ~ /I/3hN/)ONe; IF No U:N6ejt.N~.
;if. Pees ,If12.e- :s (,/!3J€c-T To CH /fHGE? WI Tit" v r No rIce .
.
, eTTACHMENT "E".
.
RP No. 89-49
.
l
.
.. & __II'" ..
.
-
1. _.ftUIIW___ra.._wr......
___f'lIIW___
l..-.:aua-naslall'IlCIDSMSJa.lEftAlBlMI
........ ..... ,.,.".......--
(~................. >>
1 ...."..__........,fl:nrllllllTlID.
4. UZIDll'to___.........
(~.__CIIf'lIIr........"
~ ....-
'to... ..
1
.
.
.TACHMENT "F".
.
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASERP 89-49
AGENDA
ITEM #
LOCATION
HEARING DATE 12-18-89
T
. : I 11[
STEEL
eft," . .' r
0
a
,,10(,'Nt IT. re.-s
1
. _... 11-
0
I MVPWOOO ST
w
. I
i
"
~EW:lQO ST
I . -, if r v I 00
~:\ ~yC
...
r
.
w):
Site..
.
.TTACHMENT "De
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY
Variance 89-3 and Review of Plans 89-49
To construct a 2.15 acre parking lot for trucks
and trailers in 3 phases
located on the northwest corner of Fairway Drive
and Camino Real at 668 Fairway Drive.
August 31, 1989
Prepared for:
V.X. Shah
Econo Lodge
668 Fairway Drive
San Bernardino, CA 92408
Prepared by:
Tricia D. Thrasher
Planning Department
300 North liD" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
.
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
.
.
INITIAL STUDY
Review of Plans 89-49 is to construct a 2.15 acre parking lot
for large trucks and trailers. The proposal is to construct
the lot in 3 phases. Phase one would include 15 truck stalls
(14 feet by 70 feet) and an exit drive surfaced with slag,
(Variance 89-3) and landscaping. Phase 2 consists of
resurfacing the phase one slagged area with asphalt. Phase 3
will involve the addition 73 standard parking spaces.
The project site is an undeveloped parcel of land surrounded
by commercial uses to the north and south, vacant land to the
west and Interstate 215 to the east. The site is relatively
level with grasses and weedy vegetation. The parcel is
located in the San Jacinto Fault Alquist-Priolo Special
Studies zone and the High Liquefaction Susceptibility area.
pc:
RP89-49IS
.
.
.
.
.
!
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
Application Number: Review of Plans 89-49 and Variance 89-3
Project Description: ib construct a 2.15 acre oarkincr lot in 1 ph''''''''
Location:
668 Fairwav Drive
Env i ronmental Const raints Areas: Liquefaction; Alquist-Priolo
General Plan Designation: CG-l, C'cImercial General
Zoning Designation: CG-l
B. ~FVIBONM~~ IMPACTS Explain answers, where appropriate, on a
separate attached sheet.
1. EaIth Resources Will the proposal result in:
Yes
a.
Earth movement
fill) of 10,000
more?
(cut and/or
cubic yards or
b. Development and/or grading on
a slope greater than 15%
natural grade?
c.
Development
Alquist-Priolo
Zone?
within the
Special Studies.
x
d. Modification of any unique
geologic or physical feature?
REVISED 12/87
No
Maybe
x
x
x
PAGE 1 OF 8
.
.
.
Yes
No
Maybe
.
e. Soil erosion on or off the
project site?
f. Modification of a channel,
creek or river?
x
x
g.
Development
subject
mudslides,
other similar
within an area
to landslides,
liauefaction or
hazards?
x
h. Other?
x
2.
AIR RESOURCES: Will the proposal
result in:--
."
~ . :
a.
Substantial
an effect
quality?
air
upon
emissions or
ambient air
x
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
x
.
c. Development within a high wind
hazard area?
x
3.
WATEB___RESOORCES:
proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate
and amount of surface runoff
due to impermeable surfaces?
will
the
x
b. Changes in the course or flow
of flood waters?
x
c. Discharge into surface waters
or any alteration of surface
water quality?
x
d. Change in the quantity or
quality of ground waters?
e. Exposure of people or property
to flood hazards?
f. Other?
x
x
X
.
REVISED 12/87
PAGE 2 OF 8
.\..
~
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 3 OF 8
"
r
Yes No Maybe
.
7. MAN-MADE BAjARP.!l: Will the
project:
a. Use, store, transport or
dispose of hazardous or toxic
materials <including but not
limited to oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)? X
b. Involve the release of
hazardous substances? X
c. Expose people to the potential
health/safety hazards? X
d. Other? X
8. HOUSING: Will the proposal:
a. Remove existing housing or
create a demand for additional
housing? X
. b. Other? X
9. i'RANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION: Could
the proposal result in:
a. An increase in traffic that is
greater than the land use
designated on the General
Plan? X
b. Use of existing, or demand for
new, parking facilitiesl
structures? X
c. Impact upon existing public
transportation.systems? X
d. Alteration of present patterns
of circulation? X
e. Impact to rail or air traffic? X
f. Increased safety hazards to
vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians? -- X
. REVISED 10/87 PAGE 4 OF 8
.
.
.
q.
A disjointed pattern of
roadway improvements?
h.
Other?
10. PUBLIC SERVICES Will the proposal
impact the following beyond the
capability to provide adequate
levels of service?
a.
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools (Le. attendance,
boundaries, overload, etc.)?
b.
c.
d.
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e.
Medical aid?
f.
Solid waste?
q.
Other?
11. Y!1LITIES: Will the proposal:
a. Impact the following beyond
the capability to provide
adequate levels of service or
require the construction of
new facilities?
REVISED 10/87
1. Natural qas?
2. Electricity?
3. Water?
4. Sewer?
5. Other?
b.
Result in a
pattern of
extensions?
disjointed
utility
c.
Require the construction of
new facilities?
Yes
No
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Maybe
PAGE 5 OF 8
.
.
.
.
12.
13.
14.
REVISED 10/87
AESTHETICS:
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?
CULTURAL RESOURCES:
proposal-result in:
Could the
a. The alteration or destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
'archaeological site?
b.
Adverse
impacts
historic
object?
c. Other?
physical or aesthetic
to a prehistoric or
site, structure or
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
Yes
No
Maybe
x
x
x
x
x
x
PAGE 6 OF8
.
"
.
.
r
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
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?
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
(Attach sheets as necessary.)
x
x
C.
.~
~
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 7 OF 8
.
.
.
.
ENVIRONMENT AL E~ALUA nON AND MrTlGA TION MEASlElES
.
l.e.
The proposed project results in development within
the San Jacinto Fault Alquisto-priolo Special
Studies zone boundaries. A geologic Report,
prepared by Horne Chance and Associates (June 24,
1980) in conjunction with Parcel Map 5706 and on
file with the Planning Department, locates a 115
foot wide fault zone that crosses the parcel
diagonally from the northwest to the southeast. the
Alquist-Priolo Special Studies zones Act of 1972
"prohibits the location of developments and
structures for human occupancy across the trace of
active faults..." (California Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42, revised 1988); This
project proposes a parking lot which doe not meet
the definition of a "structure for human
occupancy", therefore no significant impact will
result.
1.g. The project site is within a high liquefaction
susceptibility area, however since the project does
not involve construction, development or use of any
structures no significant impacts will result.
Possible dust control impacts will be removed
during phase one of the project through the use of
slag, parking lot grade which is watered and rolled
for compaction. In subsequent phases, dust control
will be continued through replacement of the slag
and paving of any expansion areas with asphalt.
Therefore no significant impac~s to air quality
will result from the proposed project. All unpaved
areas during Phases I and II shall be huydroseeded
and supplied with temporary irrigation.
2.a.
.
3.a. Paving an undeveloped area of land will decrease
absorption rates and increase runoff. However, the
area historically has high ground water and paving
less than 2 acres will not pose a significant
impact. The runoff will be directed to the public
street and into the City storm drain system and
therefore no significant impacts will occur.
3.d. The project site is in an area of high groundwater,
which can be as high as 3 feet below surface. The
site historically has problems with standing water
during wet times of the year. The use of slag,
which will be installed using parking lot grade,
watered and rolled for compaction, will provide
.
......
.
.
.
.
ENVIRONMENT AL E~ALUA TlON AND MITIGATION MEAMES
.
12.b.
temporary relief from the water pooling by
directing runoff into the storm drain system. It
will also present a barrier to groundwater
contamination from oil, gasoline or other truck and
automotive fluid leakage. Permanent protection
will be provided using asphalt paving in subsequent
phases.
The project will not have a significant impact on
the surrounding areas because the project meets the
required landscaped setbacks and will provide a
considerable amount of interior landscaping. The
Phase I slag surfacing will only be in place.for 6
months and then replaced with permanent asphalt
paving, therefore the possible visual impacts
resulting from use of slag as a surface will not be
significant.
pc:
RP89-49ISMM
.
.
......
.'
(
.
.
(
.
""""ill
DETERMINATION
~ On the basis of this initial study,
~The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
L:J 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
o
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
~
John E. M:>ntclclnerv. Princioal Planner
Name and Title
~?'. ~
S nature
/(-/6 --87
Date:
~\...
~
REVISED 12/87
PAGE 8 OF 8
.
.
.
.
.
.
.