HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-Planning and Building
\,
,..;....
:)
_or.....
'-
C I T Y 0 F SAN B ERN A R DIN 0
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
8804-1505
TO:
Planning Commissioners
FROM:
Planning Department
SUBJECT:
Recommendation on Section 1 of the General Plan
DATE:
April 26, 1989
------------------------------------------------------------------
The following text and table should be inserted in the General Plan
(page 4) to replace the existing material:
"F. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS
The mayor and Council have adopted, through ordinance or resolu-
tion, various land use documents which bear a relationship to the
General Plan. Those documents fall into either of two groups: 1)
documents which are incorporated by reference into the Plan, 2)
documents superseded by the Plan. Table 35 lists the affected
documents and explains their status upon adoption of this Plan.
Some documents are incorporated by reference. Whenever incon-
sistencies occur between a document and the General Plan, or where
a document omits specific policy or text regarding any issue, then
the provisions of the General Plan will take precedence. In the
case of specific plans or overlay districts which have been, or will
hereinafter be adopted by the City, the Land Use Plan Map is to be
amended to reflect the locational boundaries of the area identified
by the numerical reference, e.g., "Specific Plan 82-1." In addi-
tion, when a new specific plan or overlay district would modify the
General Plan, an amendment to the General Plan would need to be
approved at the same time in order to maintain consistency."
The following is to be added to the General Plan Land Use Element
as Policy 1.7.20:
"Allow for the consideration and adoption of specific plans and
overlay districts which modify the use, intensities and/or develop-
ment guidelines stipulated in this Plan, anywhere in the City. If
such specific plan or overlay district is to be adopted, the General
Plan shall be amended to maintain consistency."
C4 MEMOGPpl
~
~+",....,
.
/"
"-
r,
.....I
--
EXHIBIT "A"
TABLE 35
Title Incorporated --
of by
Document Reference Suoerceded Comments
General Plan To be certified May,
EIR 0 1989 and updated as
needed.
Technical 0 Published Feb., 1988.
Background To be updated as need-
Reoort ed.
Development 0
Code Not vet adonted.
Interim 0 Published May,1988.
Policy Doc-
ument
General Plan 0 Published 1964. Various
amendments.
State College 0 published 1964. Various
Area Plan amendments.
Highland Areal 0 Published 1976. Various
Plan amendments
Verdemont 0 0 Published 1986. Section
Area Plan (portion) (portion) V "Standards" pp. 95-
156 incorporated bY-
reference. Balance is
suoerceded. -
Highland 0
Hills Spec-
ific Plan
Central City 0
South Over-
lav District
Redevelop- 0 Various Plans adopted
ment Plans from 1958 to 1986.
General Plan supercedes
redevelopment plans
where land uses or dev-
elopment guidelines are
inconsistent.
C4 MEMOGPRECO
.1'--'
'"~,
~
~
~
MEETING OF APRIL 26, 1989
Invocation given by Valerie Pope-Ludlam.
Pledge of Allegiance led by Norine Mi Iler.
Item I. (Motion #1 entered).
Item I I. (Motion #2 entered).
I t em I I I. Ge n era I P I an.
The Planning Director explained the process by which the Mayor
and Common Counci I would be presented the General Plan Draft by
staff for consideration and adoption.
The Senior Planner, Vince Bautista, presented the schedule of
meet ings to the Mayor and Common Counci I. He further introduced
the strikeout/underl ine version of Chapters 1 through 4 of the
General Plan Draft, the adopted staff recommendations, and the
minutes from the Planning Commission meeting of April 3,1989.
Brad Ki I ger presented an overv i ew of the genera I organ i zat i on of the
General Plan Draft text. He stated staff would present the
strikeout/underline version with the Planning Commission's
recommendations.
(Mayor Wi Icox then explained the publ ic testimony procedure and
outlined how the G.P. proceedings would be conducted.)
Deputy City Attorney Impeno recommended to the Mayor to announce
for the benefit of the pUblic when public comments would be
heard. He further suggested that Item 3 on the agenda be
interupted and opportuni ty for publ ic comments be made at that
time.
Publ ic Comments- There were no comments from members of the
pub I i c.
Brad Ki I ger presented the I nt roduct i on sect ion of the Genera I
Plan Draft text in strikeout/underline version with emphasis on
clarification of language regarding the development of
implementation programs.
City Deputy Attorney Impeno commented that his office had
reviewed the language with the consultant and staff. He
recommended that the language be placed in at the introductory
portion of the General Plan based on arguments possibly made in
the future challenging some of the implementation programs.
,<" .,
.-.-
--
....,;
Planning Director Kilger presented ItemF, page40f theG.P. text
and recommended that it be continued to May l&th, when the Land
Use portion of the General Plan would be discussed.
Motion #3 entered.
Ki Iger requested that the Mayor and Counci I consider Item d, page
3, relative to the Implementation Program language.
Discussion ensued regarding the language recommended by staff to
be i nc I uded in the I nt roductory sect i on of the Genera I PI an text
relative to implementation programs.
Consul tant Tescher advised that the language would give the City
the flexibility, on an annual basis, to mold their programs based on
resources available and give them the ability to prioritize.
MOTION #4 ENTERED.
Consultant Tescher: The chapter that you are considering today
is Chapter 3, entitled Environmental Resources. It's divided
into four constituent subsections or elements. The first of
these, Section 1&.&, entitled Natural Resource~ and there are
three subsections to that. The first is Section A, Biological
Resources. Its goals, objectives and policies in this section
provide for the establ ishment and maintenance of a comprehensive
database regarding the environmental resources that are contained
in the City. That database is provided in order to provide you a
basis to review projects as to their abi I ity to maintain and
protect what are significant resources. The second component of
that section deals with policy for the establishment of
compatible land use practices in the areas in which the most
sensitive environmental resources occur. As a part of the
implementat ion of that pol icy is the establ ishment of something
entitled a biological resource management area. These are
essentially the foothills of the community as well as the
drainages, particularly the Santa Ana River, Lytle Creek, and
ajon Creek areas. This particular subsection of policy
establishes standards for development and criteria for development
review in such areas based upon the importance and the
sensitivity of the species that are located within that area.
The third policy subsection of Biological Resources deals with
specific pOlicies for the preservation of the most significant
species. One of the corridors, which on that graphic are the
darkest areas that you see. This is in the foothi II areas, they
are the canyon bottoms in which you have the densest amount of
vegetation, where there may be perennial streams or whatever the
state classifies as having the most signi ficant habitat. they
are the most sensitive of the mountain areas.
The second section of Natural Resources is entitled Mineral
Resources and deals with two principal issues: the maintenance
of information by the city regarding the locations and the
characteristics of the significant mineral resources, the
development of guidelines and extractions of those areas,
2
/'
'.......
"-'
'-
........"
essentially siting and deferring to the requirements of Mining
and Reclamation Act as the guidelines by which development should
proceed. The third subsection deals with Climate and Air
Quality. This issue is being driven by recent Southern
Cal ifornia Association of Governments of South Coast Management
District actions in establishing a regional air quality plan.
The General Plan that you are considering suggests that the city
implement the recommendations as they pertain to the City of San
Bernardino over time. The second major component of the air and
Quality section is the establishment of policy by which the city
can encourage the reduction of automobile traffic which is the
major source of pollutants through such things as improving job
housing balance in the community, by doing such other actions as
continuing public transit programs, and so forth. The last
section, section 11.~ is entitled Energy and Water Conservation.
Valerie Ross, senior planner, presented information
regarding Subsection A, Biological Resources, highlighting
recommendations made by the Planning Commission and clarifications
in text.
Motion #5 entered.
Valerie Ross gave information regarding Subsection B,
Mineral Resources, stating that the Planning Commission did not
recommend any changes to the text of the document. She
indicated policies highlighted for clarification and pOlicies
added and deleted.
Motion #6 entered.
Planner Ross gave present ion of Subsection C, CI imate and Air
Quality, indicating the recommendations by the Planning
Commission and clarifications in goals, pOlicies and objectives
statements.
Ross answered questions regarding Implementation Program 1~.15,
stating the city is mandated by the state to include the calculations
prior to approving a building permit and that the building code readily
includes requirements and standards; therefore an ordinance is
not required.
Ross answered questions regarding Air Quality, stating the city is
not specifically required to maintain technical data regarding
air quality. She indicated the measures included in the
general plan proposed to help clean-up the air quality in the
c i t y.
Ki I ger stated that the city wou I d coord i nate wi th the county to
update technical information regarding air quality.
Consultant answered questions regarding the city developing
techniques to improve air qual ity stating that car-pool ing and other
means for emission control would be encouraged.
3
'-
r'
/',.,...
-
-
-...'"
/
Discussion ensued regarding the implementation programs and
pol icies recommended to regulate the cl imate and air qual ity in
the city, focusing on vehicular air emissions and residential
development control.
Counci I and staff discussed making mandatory statements regarding
improving air quality and transportation for the city.
Motion # 7 entered.
Evelyn Alexander, 148~ East Verde, San Bernardino, member of the
CAC, spoke as an individual and CAC. She stated concern over the
repetitive use of the word "consider" in the implementation
programs and pol icies. She stated that the CAC was concerned
that the wording should be changed to "study" or something other
than cons i der.
Discussion ensued by staff and Council regarding the
clarification of terminology used in the implementation and
pol icy statements.
Motion #8 entered.
Staff and council further discussed clarification of language
used in Subsection C, specifically items U.24, U.28 and 1~.31.
Planning Director Kilger explained the language in Item 1&.31
concerning establishing a bicycle route in the City.
Motion #9 entered.
Meeting adjourned to 1:3~ p.m.
Meeting reconvened at 1:4~ p.m.
Planning Director Kilger introduced Chapter 3, Environmental
Resources, Subsection 11.~ Energy and Water Conservation stating
that the Planning Commission recommended no changes to text.
Planner Ross presented the goals, objectives and policies with
clarification in language, revisions, and general background information
City Clerk Clark answered questions regarding contaminated waste.
She stated that there are preventative measures establ ished by the city
through the certificate of occupancy process to enforce
businesses to comply to standards and regulations governed by the
Code Enforcement department.
Discussion ensued regarding penalties imposed for violations of
disposal of toxic chemicals and the degradation and setimentation in
water ways throughout the city.
Bernie (?) (from the Water department?) stated that the state,
4
. ,
'-'
--
...........
under Proposition 65 controls al I toxics, either surface or ground water
sources, and that can be used for citing purposes. He stated that EPA
would stand in on large contaminated surfaces and would issue
citations to the owners of the property. He stated that the city
did not have an ordinance to impose penalties on violators.
Counci I discussed the city's position regarding the hazardous
waste element at Norton Air Force Base.
Consultant Tescher stated that there is a directive and pOlicy
for the preparation of a specific plan regarding Norton Air Force
in the land use pOlicy statements. It is a joint operation
initiated and sponsored by the city which addresses different impacts,
including within the boundaries of the physical land of Norton
Air Force Base. He stated the pOlicy provision clearly gives the city
the latitude to negotiate in a pro-active way.
Planner Ross answered questions regarding Energy and
Conservation, specifically a proposed new policy 11.3a, which
requires that existing multi-family, commercial and industrial
uses i nsta II energy ef f i c i ent fixtures pr i or to the issuance of a
certificate of occupancy.
Discussion ensued regarding the expense in requl ring significant
building modifications in existing multi-family buildings.
Jim? (representat ive from bui Iding and safety) stated that the
city could be held responsible for the energy conservation
measures and recommended there be a I imitation on how far the
city could go in requiring retrofitting and modifications. He
stated this measure would make it more difficult for owners to
obtain a certificate of occupancy.
Bernie? (water department) answered questions regarding giving
owners rebates for water conservation improvements. He stated
that such a rebate wou I d depend upon the ava i lab i I i ty of state
and federal funds. He further stated that the only rebate would
be in lower water and sewerage bills.
Motion #1& entered.
Consultant Tescher suggested amending policies 1.1.2 and
establ ishing new pol icy to correspond with the revision of
Section 11.3a.
Motion #11 entered.
Planner Ross answered questions regarding POlicy 11.1.6,
relative to incorporating solar energy systems.
Deputy City Attorney Impeno commented that the provision
stipulated under the proposed policy is a concept currently used
in other cities. He stated that the implementation program
proposed appeared too broad and should be discussed with the
Development Code for review.
5
. ,
\-
-
-
Discussion ensued regarding revIsing the language in Pol icies
11.1.5 and 11.1.6 to specifically identify the requirements for
developing design techniques for the purpose of energy
efficiency.
Motion #12 entered.
Consultant Tescher introduced a new policy, relative to the
Envi ronmental Impact Report. He stated there had been some
comments from the state regarding reclaimed water and it was
suggested that a pol icy statement be included in the General
Plan under the Water and Conservation section.
Bernie (water department) suggested changes in pol icy language
based on the current existence of a program for the use of
reclaimed water.
Motion #13 entered.
***Shauna, in listen i ng to the tape, I'll have to assume that the
changes suggested by Bernie were incorporated into the pol icy.
It was not read back for clarification so here it is again with
the changes:
111.19 Continue to work with the San Bernardino Municipal
Water Department to expand a program for the use of reclaimed
water for landscape irrigation and other non-contact uses.
**I1.1.14a (remains the same.)
Motion #14 entered.
ADJOURNED.
6
,
,
I'
"-'
.f '''_
" ~
''-'
I' (1) Overview of Plan Policy
'- (2) Goals
The ultimate purpose of an effort stated in a way that is general in nature and
immeasurable.
(3) Objectives
A measurable goal.
(4) Policies
A specific statement guiding action and implying clear commitment.
d. Implementation Programs
Actions, procedures, or techniques that carry out the general plan policy through
implementing a standard (a specific, often quantified guideline defining the relationship
between two or more variables).
The programs contained in the City of San Bernardino Draft General Plan encompass a
broad ran~e of actions which are defined to implement the policies of each element.
r- These include:
'-
ill Programs which are currently being implemented by the City and will be continued:
ill Modifications of existing programs. with little or no fiscal impact on the City:
ill Proposed new programs which can be implemented with little or no budget expen-
ditures by the City: and
ill Proposed new programs which will require additional City budget expenditures
(e.g.. additional studies/plans and personnel).
Of these. some are mandated by the state law (e.2.. zoning. CEOA review. and housin~
programs). Others account for plan policies which. while they may be contained in a
state-mandated element. are not necessarily mandated actions by the City. Unless oth-
erwise required by state law. each and every implementation program listed in this
General Plan is not to be construed as mandatory but only directory for the City in ac-
complishing the goals. objectives and policies of this General Plan.
Within one year of the date of the adoption of this General Plan. the City shall establish
and approve a comprehensive stratesy to implement the programs contained in this
plan. This should include:
'--
3
'-
r-
'-
r'
-
, .
.
"'"-'.
--
....",
..../
'-'
ill Feasibility of the program:
ill Alternative programs:
ill The identification of priority programs:
(4) Responsibility for implementation:
ill Timing/Schedule for implementation:
.!2L Costs of implementation: and
ill Revenue sources.
The timing of implementation shall account for mandatoIY requirements of the state.
funding availability. and defined priorities as established by the Mayor and Council.
One or more policies are defined for every objective. Every policy has a corresponding
implementation program.
D. RELATIONSHIP AMONG GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS
As a comprehensive strategy for the management of a city's diverse physical, economic,
and social resources, there is a high level of interrelationship among the topics and ele-
ments of the General Plan. The Land Use and Urban Design Element provides for the
types, density/intensity, design, and distribution of development. The Housing
Element provides for the manner in which existing housing will be conserved and new
housing will be produced, in context of the areas permitted for development by the
Land Use Element. The Economic Development Element provides for the manner in
which the uses accommodated by the Land Use Element will be attracted to the City
and maintained at a high level of productivity over time. The Urban Design for Public
Open Spaces Element provides for the type and design of open spaces which are the
linkages between private and public buildings. The Circulation and Utilities Elements
identify the types of and specify the means by which public infrastructure will be pro-
vided to support the uses accommodated by the Land Use Element. The Public
Facilities and Services and Parks and Recreation Elements define the range of services
needed to support the City's residents, businesses, and visitors. The Environmental
Resources Element (Natural Resources and Energy and Water Conservation) define pol-
icy for the protection of significant resources in context of new land use development.
The Environmental Hazards Element (Geologic and Seismic, Hazardous Materials and
Uses, Noise, Wind and Fire, and Flooding) provides for the protection of humans and
uses from the adverse effects of natural and man-caused hazards.
E. MONITORING AND UPDATE OF THE GENERAL PLAN
The State recommends that the short-term portions of the General Plan be reviewed
annually and revised as necessary to reflect the availability of new implementation
tools, changes in funding sources, and the results of monitoring the effectiveness of past
decisions. The City's Planning Commission is required to report annually to the Mayor
and Common Council on the status of the Plan and progress made in its
implementation. The Housing Element must be reviewed and updated at least every
five years. The State also recommends that the entire plan be thoroughly reviewed at
4