Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout63-Planning and Building r o ~a City of San Bernardino ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY ~ Agenc~ Admi~nisMablia • Deveopment Department • San Bernardino Downtown Main Street Inc. • Convention and Visitors Bureau • Economic Development Council April 15, 1991 TO: !lAYOR AND CONMON COIINCIL FROM: TIKOTHY C. STEINHAIIS, Administrator ~l~ Economic Development Agency ~,, Cond• i 'onq ~ l/Se heRmi I SUBJECT: CENTRAL CITY SODTH, LAND IISB PLAN (`CuP~ It is my understanding that the Comm-pn Council will be reviewing the Land Use Plan for the Central City South Area at its meeting on April 15, 1991, therefore, i present the following recommendations: The Plannin staff is currentl ro using that the area west of "G" g Y P P i Street be designated CCS-1 (General Commercial) and the area east of "E" Street be designated as CCS-2 (Regional Entertainment) see attached map. CCS-1 allows general commercial and regional entertainment, where as CCS-2 only allows regional entertainment, with commercial allowed only as a supporting use. The Redevelopment Agency/City ownes over 10 acres within the Central City South Area, and has the potential to acquire an additional 37 acres. If the acquisition of the additional acreage takes place the Redevelopment Agency would control over 548 of the 'total area. - Designating the entire property in the Central City South Area as CCS-1 - with a CUP would give the preferred fexibility to attract ~I developers. Restricting the use to CCS-2 would put unnecessary constraints on developers, as well as the Redevelopment Agency. I Since there is no developer currently proposing any regional entertainment uses, I recommed the Common Council consider designating the area east of "G" Street and west of "E" Street, CCS-1 (General ~ Commerc' 1 with a CUP requirement. 1 ~, 300 North D Street Fourth Floor • San Bernardino, California 92418 • (714) 384-5081 • FAX (714) 888-9413 ' O ~j CENTRAL CIT1~ SOUTH PLAN a [ r ~ ., ti i DESIGNATIONS : CCS-1, GENERAL COMMERCIAL ~CCS-2. REGIONAL ENTERTAgWv1ENT AND OFFICE CCS-3, SERVICE COMMERCIAL 'l~' ~ CCS-4, FLOOD CONTROL n FIGURE 2 s F (31 Ct~'Y t~F SAN BERIiQRDINO -REQUEST ~R COUNCIL ACTION Adoption of the Central City South Plan From: Larry E. Reed, Director Subject: which establishes land use designations and permitted uses for the area bounded peps; Planning and Building Services by I-215, Rialto Avenue, "E" Street and Inland Center Drive. Date: March 28, 1991 Mayor and Common Council Meeting of April 15 1991 2:00 ~ m Synoptic of Previous Council action: In January, 1987, the Mayor and Common Council adopted the Central City South Overlay District which established permitted uses and developemrtt guidelines for the area described above. On June 2, 1989, the Mayor and Common Council adopted the General Plan which incorporated, by reference, the Central City South Overlay District. On March 6, 1991, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Central City South Plan as per Attachment 2. That the hearing be closed; that the Negative Declaration and the Resolution with Exhibit "A", dated 2/19/91 be adopted. oz' That the hearing be closed; that the Negative Declaration and the Resolution with Exhibit "B", dated 3/6/91 be adopted. t~ arry .Reed Signature Director Contact person: arry F. Reed phone: 3Ra_5357 Supporting daq attaalrad: Staff R•nnrr Ward: 1 and 't FUNDING REnU1REMENTS: Amount: h/A Sours: iAcct No ) Acct Descriotiont Finana• Council Notes: Agenda Item No "~' 75.Ot62 Cf'~Y OF SAN BERN~DINO -REQUEST I(~jR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: Central City South Plan Mayor and Common Council Meeting of April 2, 1991 RFnUFST AND LOCATION To adopt the Central City South Plan, a revision of the Central City South Overlay District. The Central City South Plan includes the area bounded by I-215, Rialto Avenue, "E" Street and Inland Center Drive. The Central City South Plan establishes goals for the plan area and defines land use designations, development policies and permitted uses. Circulation and urban design policies are established and mitigation measures are identified. Specifically, the proposed land use designations are as follows: CCS-1, --t'emme~cial;_CC$-2 Regional Entertainment and Office4--~CC}Service Commercial;~'CCS-4, Flood Control. - -- -- - - Specific standards/guidelines pertaining to landscaping, parking, setbacks, signage, design, etc. have been incorporated in the draft Development Code. The permitted uses are repeated there also. BACKGROUND Staff recommended revisions to the Central City South Overlay District to clarify the intent and permitted uses. Based on input from a subcommittee of the Council and the Mayor and Development Department staff, the Overlay District document was revised and presented to the Planning Commission. Please refer to the Planning Commission staff report of February 19, 1991 for further discussion on the background and a discussion of the concerns with the Central City South Overlay District related to land use designations, previous zoning and nonconforming uses. Adoption of the Central City South Plan does not require an amendment to the General Plan. Table 1 of the General Plan, Relationship to Other Plans and Documents, is being amended to reflect the name change to Central City South Plan and the date of its adoption. This amendment is scheduled for the Mayor and Common Council meeting of April 1, 1991. 75-0264 4 . 4. Central City South Plan Mayor and Common Council Meeting of April 15, 1991 Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission did not concur with staff's proposal and recommended that the Mayor and Common Council modify the land use designations and boundaries. The Planning Commission felt that the CCS-1, General Commerical designation could include entertainment and office uses: They recommended that the CCS-1 designation include the bulk of the area between the freeway and "G" Street, Rialto Avenue and Mill Street. The Service Commercial designation locations were expanded along Mill Street. The General Commercial along "E" Street and the Regional Entertainment east of "G" Street were not changed. in addition, they recommended that all of the area south of Mill ~ Street (excluding flood control) be designated CCS-1 and that the Light Industrial designation be dropped. (Note: To reduce duplication and bulk the draft Central City South Plan is not included with the staff report to the Planning Commission but is included with the respective resolutions. The Planning Commission's proposed text changes are included on pages 6 and 7. The Planning Commission's recommended land use designations are shown on Figure 2-A and staff's recommended land use desig- nations are shown on Figure 2-B. These are included separately for ease of comparison.) ENVIRONMENTAL The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the Initial Study and recommended a Negative Declaration for staff's proposal. Staff determined that the proposal recommended by the Planning Commission was within the scope of the Initial Study prepared for staff's proposal and that no further analysis was required. MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OPTIONS 1. The Mayor and Common Council may adopt the Negative Declaration and approve the Central City South Plan as recommended by~the Planning Commission. 2. The Mayor and Common Council may adopt the Negative Declaration and approve the Central City South Plan as recommended by staff. 3. The Mayor and Common Council may select a different option, continue this item and direct staff to prepare a new resolution. Central City South Plan Mayor and Common Council Meeting of April 15, 1991 Page 3 Attachment 1: Memo to Planning Commission, March 6, 1991 ? Attachment A- Staff Report to Planning Commission, February 6, 1991 Attachment A - Central City South Plan (not included, see text) Attachment B - Initial Study Attachment B - Letter from John Lightburn Attachment C - Letter from William Jacobsen Attachment D - Letter from Development Dept. Attachment E - Letter from Michael P. Conway Attachment 2: Resolution - Planning Commission Recommendation Exhibit A - Central City South Plan (March 6, 1991) Attachment 3: Resolution - Staff Recommendation Exhibit A - Central City South Plan (February 19, 1991} SRCCS .CITY OF SAN QERNARDINO - QEMORANDUM To Planning Commission From Larry E. Reed, Director Planning & Building Svcs. Subject Central City South Plan Date March 6, 1991 Approved Item No. 1 Date OWNER Various APPLICANT City Of San Bernardino BACKGROUND The Central City South Plan was presented to the Planning Commission at their meeting of February 19, 1991. The Development Department requested a continuance to the Planning Commission meeting of March 6, 1991. The Planning Commission voted (4-2) to continue the item to March 6, 1991. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the Mayor and Common Council that a Negative Declaration be adopted in accordance with Section 21080.1 of CEQA and that the Central City South Plan be adopted based on the Findings in the staff report dated February 19, 1991. Resp ctfully submitt~ed,~ Larry .Reed, Director Planning and Building Services Valerie C. Ross Senior Planner Attachments: A - Staff Report to Planning Commission, February 19, 1991 B - Letter from John Lightburn C - Letter from William Jacobsen D - Letter from Development Department i -~ - ; may. A ff~ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 2 SUMMARY HEARING DATE - 9- 1 WARD 1 and 3 APPLICANT: City of San Bernardino W V CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN owNER: Various To adopt the Central City South Plan, a revision of the Central City South ~ Overlay District. The Central City South Plan will define permitted land W uses as follows: CCS-1, General Commercial; CCS-2, Regional Entertainment ~ and Office; CCS-3, Light Industrial; CCS-4, Flood Control; CCS-5, Service O Commercial. W ~ The Central City South Plan includes the areas bounded by the I-215 Free- W way, P.ialio Avenue, "E" Street and Inland Center Drive. a EXISTING GENERAL PLAN PROPERTY AND ,IC~~ ZQ~~ D I +NATION SEE STAFF REPORT GEOLOGIC /SEISMIC X~t YES FLOOD HAZARD IXI YES ~ ZONE A SEWERS: L~] YES HAZARD ZONE: ? NO ZONE: ? NO ? ZONE B ? NO HIGH FIRE ? YES AIRPORT NOISE) ? YES REDEVELOPMENT XlI YES HAZARp ZONE: ~ NO CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA: NO ? NO a ? NOT ? POTENTVIL SIGNIFCANT Z APPROVAL APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH Q `Z ~ NO E 4R G MEASURES Q ? CONDRIONS ~ 2 ? EXEMPT ? E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO W Z ? DENIAL Q ~ wITM T1~ ATEF SECTS ~ W ~ ~ MEASURES y ~ ? CONTINUANCE TO Z ~ NO SIGNIFICANT ? SIGNIFCANT EFFECTS (Qj W EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. W MINUTES ~ °M1imu i:na~"Y1°aQ PUW.9.p2 PIS 1 OF t N-tt71 . i • CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA REM OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 2 PROPOSAL To revise the Central City South Overlay district document to clarify the intent and permitted uses. The revised document is called the Central City South Plan. IACATION The Central City South Plan includes the area between the 2- 215 Freeway and °E° Street from Rialto Avenue to Inland Center Drive. Figure I of Attachment A shows the location and boundaries. BACKGROUND The Central City South Overlay District was adopted by ordinance on January 19, 1987 and C-M, Commercial Manufactur- ing zoning was adopted for the entire area. The previous zoning had been light and heavy industrial with a General of General Industrial. When the General Plan designation Plan was adopted on June 2, 1989, the C-M zoning designations were deleted and the General Plan land use designation became the zoning designations. The Central City South Overlay District was incorporated, by reference, into the General Plan, thereby keeping the land use designations shown in that document. Staff has had a difficult time interpreting the Central City South Overlay District and met with a subcommittee of the Council and Development Department staff to clarify the intent of the document. As a result of these meetings, the document was revised. On June il, 1990, the Mayor and Common Council held a public input meeting to hear concerns of the property owners in the area. Their concerns are included in the next section. CONCERNS Land Use Designations The land use designations in the Central City South Overlay District were not clearly explained. There is very little difference between the Com: Commercial Retail and S. Com: Service Commercial designations and the differences are not well defined. rur+.sne a--- - ~ • i..vm f . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE _ CC5 ovER~av AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT gGENDA ITEM 2 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 7-19.91 PAGE a There is also a concern with the W. Com: Wholesale Commer- cial and W.D.: Warehouse (or Wholesale) Distribution designations. The definition for Wholesale Commercial discusses wholesale distribution with no mention of commer- cial uses whereas the definition for Warehouse Distribution discusses wholesale and retail operations. There is a discrepancy between both the designations and the defini- tions. The definition for Wholesale Commercial leans toward limited light industrial uses even though that differs from the designation title. This would include uses such as the Sears or xarris warehouses (which are actually located in the Warehouse Distribution area south of Mill Street). The definition for Warehouse Distribution implies that uses such as Costco, Pace, etc., are permitted even though the retail uses differ from the designation title. Neither designations nor definitions appear to be consistent with the Development Goals which discuss in part, "...retail and entertainment uses which would attract local and regional patrons and...pedestrian-scaled environment...." The Central City South Overly district document divides the study area into development opportunity subareas. The area designated Wholesale Commercial is defined as the "Freeway parcels" subarea. This discussion includes retail office and institutional facilities as potential uses. This conflicts with the designations and definitions previously defined. The area south of Mill Street is within the "South of Mill Parcels" subarea, and includes wholesale Commercial, Ware- house Distribution and Commercial designations. The develop- ment opportunity subareas discussion includes the existing mix of wholesale and retail warehousing or an alternative of transforming the area into a wholesale commercial district related to the uses north of Mill Street. There seems to be little or no difference in the alternatives. This definition more closely fits the designations although wholesale commercial is still not defined. The development opportunity subarea guidelines discuss freeway-related uses aimed at a regional and subregional market including offices, hotels, entertainment and restau- rants. It further states that if these uses aren't market- able, then the uses for the adjacent area (the internal parcels, designated Commercial Retail) be permitted. These uses include commercial retail, wholesale commercial, design center and entertainment/restaurant. ~"~~~ PWI.~p PILE 1 OF 1 µ-90~ • ~ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA REM 2 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 4 The Central City South document states that no new indus- trial development will be allowed north of Mill Street. Uses that have outdoor storage will not be permitted in the study area. Also, it is stressed that future development in the Study Area will be predominantly commercial in nature. The development opportunity subarea guidelines for the south of Mill Parcels include uses which contribute to and are consistent with the dominant uses north of Mill Street. The text stresses that future development south of Mill Street will remain consistent with existing uses. The existing uses, in the area designated Warehouse Distribution, are warehouse and manufacturing uses. At this point, it is very unclear what the permitted uses are both north and south of Mill Street. It seems as though some general commercial uses and some warehousing uses are permit- ted north of Mill Street while south of Mill Street is basi- cally limited to certain warehouse uses. These ambiguities make it very difficult for staff to interpret and implement the Plan. Previous Zoning The Central City South Overlay District was adopted with C-M, Commercial Manufacturing zoning for the entire area. The C-M zone permitted the uses in the C-3A, Limited General Commer- cial, M-1, Light Industrial and M-1A, Limited Light Indus- trial districts. The C-3A zone permitted a wide range of commercial uses, very similar to the CG-1 General Plan designation. The M-1 zone permitted outside uses. 'The M-lA required all uses to be within fully enclosed structures. The C-M and M-1 zones permitted outdoor uses and outdoor storage which are specifically prohibited in the Central City South document. The C-M zone includes the uses permitted in the M-1 and M-lA zones, most of which were industrial. However, the Central City South document states that no new industrial uses would be permitted north of Mill STreet. This effectively limits permitted uses to those defined in the C-3A zone, which, as stated previously, is a commercial designation or zone. The areas of the document cited previously list certain commercial uses that are permitted in the Wholesale Commer- cial area, but these uses are nowhere near the full range of uses that were permitted in the C-3A zone. ~ wrm~ PINLB~B PAGE ~ OF 1 ~a.BO~ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 2 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 5 Nonconforming Uses Prior to the adoption of the General Plan on June 2, 1989, the Planner tended to permit uses based on zoning because the previous General Plan was so out of date and the Central City South Overlay District was difficult to understand. Very few projects have been submitted since the Overlay District was adopted, although interest has increased lately. There is a lot of concern with the property owners in the area as to what they can and can't do as far as new development and reuse. There are a lot of nonconforming uses located in the Commer- cial Retail and Wholesale Commercial areas north of Mill Street. These were developed under the old General Plan and previous zoning and became nonconforming with adoption of the Central City South Overlay District. The fact that the zoning was superseded by adoption of the General Plan is not a major concern because of the more limited uses actually permitted and the sometimes ambiguous policies in the Central City South Overlay District documents. CENTRaL CITY SOUTH PL•nN Land Use Originally, the Central City South Overlay District was adopted because it was recognized that the area was unique; it was located between the two malls and could provide a link, it was close to the downtown area, there was a large amount of vacant land and it had freeway visibility and access. None of that has changed and the appropriate goals were carried over to the Central City South Plan. How those goals are to be achieved, as far as permitted land uses, have changed. The Central City South Plan consists of five land use dis- tricts as defined in the Plan (Attachment 1) and shown on Figure 2 of that plan. The land use districts are: CCS-1 General Commercial; CCS-2 Regional Entertainment and Office; CCS-3 Light Industrial; CCS-4 Flood Control; and CCS-5 Service Commercial. d PUtF/DB PAGE 1 OF 1 I~~iO) CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 2 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 6 The CCs-1 General Commercial designation is very similar to the CG-l, Commercial General designation in the General Plan in that it permits a wide range of commercial uses. The CCS- 1, however, does not permit used car lots and auto repair uses, nor drive-thru restaurants or convenience stores. These uses were not felt to be consistent with the goal of attracting people to the area and creating a pedestrian environment. The CCS-1 designation is located along "E" Street, Inland Center Drive and "H" Street. The CCS-2 Regional Entertainment and Office designation makes up the bulk of the area between Rialto Avenue and Mill Street, excluding the commercial along "E" Street. This designation permits a range of recreational and entertainment uses as well as office uses. Outside recreational uses such as miniature golf courses are encouraged in this area. Supporting retail uses are also permitted. The combination of office uses and recreational/entertainment uses serve a variety of functions. Offices tend to be daytime, Monday through Friday uses, with little or no activity in the evening or on weekends. Recreational/enter- tainment uses, however, tend to have more activity during the evening hours and on weekends when people aren't working. San Bernardino has a limited amount of recreation/entertainment uses and people must go to other cities to enjoy them. Also, these uses help to provide a link between the two malls. If we can get people to the area, we will have a variety of things to keep them there. Successful development of this area should spillover to the adjacent areas, helping to revitalize them. The CCS-3 Light Industrial designation is the remainder of the area south of Mill Stzeet that isn't designated for commercial uses. This designation recognized the existing development, the majority of which are light industrial uses. Although some of the structures are older and were built under previous standards, they were felt to be viable uses and not likely to change in the near future. Some of the concerns with that area can be addressed through Code En- forcement efforts. The CCS-4 Flood Control designation recognizes that Lytle Creek Channel which intersects the area in a west to south- easterly direction from the freeway to Inland Center Drive. This designation permits open space uses in addition to flood control. PLAN•B-0B PALiE t OF t Is-0tn a ' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 7 The CCS-5 Service Commercial designation was added in response to various concerns. It recognizes the existing project at the northeast corner of "G" Street and Mill Street. This project was approved under industrial zoning just prior to the adoption of the Central City South Overlay District. The project was built for industrial type uses and is not really conducive to commercial uses. The buildings have very few windows and are essentially small warehouses with small office areas included. The CCS-5 designation permits limited manufacturing, ware- housing and service commercial (including auto repair) uses. All uses must be conducted within fully enclosed structures with no outside storage. Although the permitted uses won't necessarily support the Regional Entertainment and Office designated uses, they won't detract from them either because of this provision. CIRCULATION The Central City South Plan also includes a circulation plan that is based on the overall goals for the area. "G" Street exists and links Central City Mall and 2nd Street with Inland Center Mall at Inland Center Drive. "F" Street exists between 2nd Street and Ria lto Avenue and is proposed for Rialto Avenue southward and westward intersectin "G" Street g with a possible extension across Lytle Creek Channel. Another street is proposed to extend westward from "E" Street intersecting both the proposed to "F" Street and also "G" Street, over to the freeway and up and back over to "G" Street. South of Mill Street the street network is basically in place, although certain improvements may be needed. These existing streets, plus the existing and proposed streets north of Mill Street, will help to open up the interior of the area and improve the links to the adjacent areas. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY As stated previously, the Central City South Overlay District was incorporated by reference into the City's General Plan. As such, changes to the Overlay District, in the form of the Central City South Plan, are not changes to the General Plan itself. However, the proposed Central City South Plan should be consistent with the General Plan so that it doesn't conflict with, or work against, the overall goals established for the entire City. (The General Plan will be amended as a "clean-up" item to change the title to the Central City South Plan and to include the date of adoption). ~~y ,~Aq PWIJAY PAGE 1 OF 1 N-~1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA fTEM 2 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-9 PAGE 8 The General Plan listed a land use issue as the focus in the past on auto-related districts and corridors with little provision for pedestrian links. This issue was then identi- fied as an opportunity with future development. The Central City South area was identified in the General Plan as both a district and a corridor with a strong emphasis on pedestrian uses. The mix of uses proposed and the circu- lation plan are geared toward providing links, both auto- mobile and pedestrian. The intent of the Central City South Plan is to provide a regional mix of uses to attract people to the area. Goal l.G.a. of the General Plan addresses the revitalization, adaptive reuse and upgrade of deteriorated districts within the City. The Central City South Plan also addresses this through goals and land uses designations, recognizing that while there is a certain amount of vacant, undeveloped land, there is also the need for revitalization and upgrade. Because of the proximity to the downtown area and the "E" Street corridor and the links provided through the circula- tion plan, it is anticipated that development of this area will spillover to the surrounding areas. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEOA1 STATUS The proposed Central City South Plan is subject to CEQA. The City's Environmental Review Committee reviewed the Initial Study (Attachment B) on January 10, 1991 and determined that the proposed plan would not have an adverse impact on the environment and recommended adoption of a Negative Declara- tion. The public review period for the proposed Negative Declaration began on January, 1991 and ended on February 6, 1991. CONCLUSIONS The existing Central City South Overlay District is confusing to staff, property owners, and developers. The Central City South Plan clarifies the intent and better defines the permitted (and not permitted) uses. This will help to implement the goals and encourage development in the area. The Central City South Plan recognizes existing viable uses and includes them in the plan for the area. ~ PIMFBA! PAGE 1 OF 1 IK01 ~ A . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 2 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 9 The Central City South Overlay District created nonconforming uses which will still be nonconforming uses with adoption of the Central City South Plan. Those nonconforming uses are not consistent with the intent for the area. The Central City South Plan helps to implement the General Plan by creating a district with a mix of uses to attract people to the area through the uses permitted and the connec- tion to or links with adjacent areas. an o r wrew PUNi.OB PKIE I OF 1 (K71 amwwwne~ e ~ • CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 2 FINDINGS OF FACT HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 10 FINDINGS The proposed Central City South Plan is consistent with the goals established in the General Plan. The proposed Central City South Plan would not be detrimental safet convenience or to the public interest, health, y, welfare of the Cit . Y The proposed Central City South Plan does not change the balance of land uses within the City. The proposed Central City South Plan includes areas which are physically suitable for the permitted land uses and is w th surroundin desi ations. compatible i 4 9'n i ii I i>M~r~wim~ PL.NHD6 PI6E 1 OF 1 (s40) ` , . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 11 RECOAIISENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make a recom- mendation to the Mayor and Common Council that I 1. A Negative Declaration be adopted in accordance with Section 21080.1 of CEQA. 2. The Central City South Plan be adopted. Respectfully submi~tte~d~ i,~-~' ', '? Larry Reed, Director Planning and Building Services ~ Valerie C. Ross Senior Planner Attachment: A - Central City South Plan ~ Figure 1 Plan Boundaries Figure 2 Land Use Designations Attachment: B - Initial study SRCCSOVERLAY rtANi.a P~pE t oc t p-ao~ ATTACHMENT B CITY OF SAN BERN INO PLANNING AND BUILDING RVICES DEPARTMENT INITIAL STUDY Initial Study !or Environmental Impacts for CENTRsi. CITY SODTH OVER?aY DISTRICT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposal to revise and clarify the land use plan and development goals for the Central City South Study Area. PROJECT LOCATION: The Study area is bounded by Rialto Avenue on the north, Inland Center Drive on the south, "E" Street on the east and Interstate 215 on the west. January 2, 1991 Prepared for: City o! San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Prepared by: Gregory S. Gutman i Assistant Planner l City of San Bernardino Planning and Building Services Department 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 s°^~.°.~ :3 w~. vu~m n~ , of ~ ~.AO~ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND ApplicationNumher. Gf,,d~vvo.~ GTE( ~nrrr~ ~rz,,,g~ o,sr~~-r Project Descriptbn: P'¢c~~ae To '1i:z~~ tSts 6nlb l~ ov. A! -YIdC G~r.1T12p~t~f~4~( 5 ~~"r ' 'Ctto y lt~- Location: ~E-t~~~r~~ "~+Ra-'ten l~(~~t' ~w117 j~L.~,~ID !'~•ITEQ r~~.C ~ In ~ ~¢c 1 N " f-T bn17 It~TE-'P~1d.?F 'J ~~i ~ Environmentalt;onstreintsAreas: At ~i~ 'T2.9~.1,~• LC~O yED.e fwr~o P~ ~t/J ,~/.'t~IGrw it,~ General Plan Designation: ~1'(` et /' -(~I Gt^y o'T+-t Ell ~ a~( 'f~~l??? Zoning Desgnatbn: ~~~j~(g ~ w ~~M.~ ~n ~eoa~~~ tth ~t ~ ccs - Z t cGS -3~ c.c~ -+4 B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explain answers, where appropriate, on a separate attached sheet. Earth Raaouraa WII Me proposal resuh in: Yas No Maybe a. Earth movamem (cul and/or fill) of 10,000 cubic yards or moro? X b. Devebpmem ardor grading on a sbpe greater X Man 15% natural grade? e. pevebpmem within Me Alquist-Prioio Special Studies Zone as defined in Section 120 - Geobgb X & Seismic, Fgure 47, of Ms Ciry's General Plan? ' d. Modification of arty unique geologicor physical X feature? a. DevebpmeM within areas defined for high potential for waUr or wind erosion as identified in Seeaon 12.0 - Geologic 8 Seismic, Fpuro 53, of Me Chy's Generel X Plan? f. ModBieadon of a channel, seek or river? X P(µADB P16E t OF 10 (t t~v0~ a + b. DewbprneM of new or expansion of exiatiig industrial. Yes No Maybe wmmeroW or otMr uses which generate noise Iweb on aroas corrfaarirp bowing, schools. health care facilhies w other aensitiw uses attow an Idn of 65 d8(A) exterior or an ldn of 45 dB(A) iMerbr'i' o. Other? X 6. Land Use: WIN the propose! mule in: a A change in the land use as deaigruded on the General Plan? X b. DewbpmeM wkhin an Airport Distrbt as keMified in the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Report and the Lard Use Zoning District Map? X c. DwebpmeM within Foothill Flre Zones A ti 8, or C as X identified on the land Use Zoning District Map? d. Other? INPI[FGf a',FGrti' a1 hP-tcte. _ Pe wwl 7. Man-Made Hazards: Will the project: a Use, store, transpon or dispose of hazardous or toxic mffierials (including but not Ihnded m oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X b. InwNe the rolease of hazardous substances? o. Expose people to the potential heatth/safely hazards? X d. OtMr? IC a Housing: <Kq the proposal: a Remove existing housing or emte a demand for adddional housing? X b. Otfwr7 X Y. Ttanaportatfon / Circulation: Conk the proposal, in comparison with the Circulation Plan as kentifwd b Secrbn B.0 - Ciroulation of the Ciry's General Plan, mule in: a An incnsse in traffic that is greater than the land X use designated on the General Plan? b. Use of existing, or demand for new, perkrg faclliLes/stnrctures7 X o. Impact upon existing public transportation systems? X d. AMerffibn of present patrems of clrculetion? X e. ImpaG to rail or air traffic? X t. Increased safety hazards to whiles, bicyclaq or h, pedestrians? g. A disjointed pattern of roadway improvemeMa? X h. Significant increase in traffic wlumes on the roadways X or iMarsediorts? i. Other? 1C v °„:,'.$~i vi.w~.sa vrtt~soc IQ ,..-cm e s g. Dwabpment within an erne subject to landslides, Yes No Maybe mudeildee, Ifquefaetbn or other similar hazards as identifkd b Section 12.0 - Geobgb 6 Seismic, x Fguros 48, 52 and 53 of the City's General Plan? h. Other? ~ 2. Alr Reeourds: Will the propoaai rosuft in: a. Substantial air emissiora or an effeG upon ambient air quality as defined by AOMD? x b. The croation of objectionable odors? X e. Devebpment within a high wind hazard erne as identired in Sectbn 15.0 - Wind d Fire, Fgure 59, o! the City's X General Plan? 3. WaUr Reaourps: Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in absorptbn rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff due to X impermesbk surfaces? b. Changes in the course err fbw of food waters? X e. Discharge into surface waters or any aiteratbn X of surface water quality? d. Change in the quantity of quality of ground water? X a. Exposure of people or property to flood hazards as identitied in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rata Map, Community Panel Number 060281 oozo - A ,and Section 16.0 - Fboding, Fguro 62, of the Ciry's Generel Plan? f. Others X 4. Blologipl Reeouraea: Could the proposal result in: a. Dewbpmsnt within the Bidogical Resources Management Overlay, as identd'ied in Section 10.0 - Natural Resources, Fguro 41, of the City's X General Plan? b. Change in the number of arty unique, roro or endargerod species of pitons or their habitat including X stands of troes? o. Change in tM number of arty unique, taro w X endangered species of animals or•their habitat? d. Removal of viable, maturo trees? (6' or groaner) X e. OtMr7 X S. NofN: Could the proposal rosuit in: a. Dwebpmsnt of housing, fwakh pre facilties, schools. lilxaries, relgious facilities or otMr'noise' wneitiw uses in was whw existing or future rase lewb exiled an Ldn of 65 d8(A) exterior and an Ldn d 45 dB(A) interior as iderrtifwd in Section 14.0 -Noise. Fguros 146 and ~ 14-13 of the City's General Plan? ~~,,,~,~,~,~~ PWI.9D! P/RiE 20F1Q Itt•e>t f ~ 10. Pubec Servkes: wll the proposal impact the rolbwing Yes No Maybe beyond the capability b provide adpuab kwb d service? a. Fro protecton? X b. PoGoo protection? X e. Schools (i.e., aasndance, bourMarias, overload, etc.)? X d. Parks or other recreatbnal fadRties? X e. Medical aid? X t. Solid Waste? X g. Other? X 11. UtIIIWs: Will the proposal: a. Impact the folbwing beyond the capability to provide adequate Iwek of service or require the mnstNd'an d new facilities? ,. Natural gas? X 2. Electricity? 3. Water? X 4. Sewer? 5. Other? X b. Result in a dujointad psttam d rnauy extembna7 X ' c. Require the construction d new fadlities7 X 1Z Msthetks: - a. Couk1 the proposal rosuh in 1M obstruction d any X acsrtb VIeW7 b. wil the usual impact d the proJ.at be detrimemal to the surrounding aroa? a Other? X 13. WlWral Resources: Caukl tM proposal result in: a. The akeration or deslnaYion d a prehistoric or historic archaeobgial sits by dwsbpmera wYtltin an arottasdogitrel asnsitive area ss idsMilisd in Section 3.0 - Hs0oricaf, Fgure 8, of the City's Generel Plan? b. Alteration or destruction d a historical silo, stns:ttrre or object as I'aUd in the City's Historic Resources Reconnaissarnw Survey? X e. Other? X PUW9A8 PIIaE~OF.JQ (11.901 d Y 14. Mandatory Findinga of SlpnHkand (Section 15065) 71re Calilomla Environmental Oualiy Act states that fi any of the following can be answered yes or maybe, the project may haw a aignifidM effect on the environment and an Environmental Impact Repon shall be prepared. Yes No Maybe a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the erwironmeM, substantially redtrd the habitat of a fish or wildiifa species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop bebw seN suataineig Iswis, ~ threaten to eliminate a plats or animal community, redact the number or roatrid the ramp of a rare or endangerod plats or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history X or prohistory? b. Dda the project haw tM potential m achieve ahon- term, to the disadvantage of bng-term, emironmeMal goals? (A short-term impact on the environnwM is one which occurs in a rolativey brief, definidve period of lima while bng-term impacts will enduro well into x the future.) e. Does the project haw impacts which an i~dividualy limRad, but cumulatiwy considerable? (A project may impact on Iwo or more separate rosourds whsro the impact on each rosouroe o rekGwly small, but where ffro effect of the total of those impacts on the X emrironmeM is significant.) d. Dds the project haw ernironmeMal effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, X either directy or indirecty? C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MRIGATION MEASURES (Attach sheets as nedssary.) SF~c A77ACylEI~ ~,~~„~~ PINLYLb PN3E SOCIQ 1>>-~1 r ~ /s1 ~y/ Central City South Overlay District January 2, 1991 Page 6 C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALIIATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Earth Resources a. The Central City South Overlay District (CCSOD) was established in part to encourage development in an area that is blighted, underdeveloped and underutilized. The Study Area has been overlooked by developers in favor of the large areas of undeveloped land on the outskirts of the Study Area adjacent to the Z-10 and I-215 freeways. If the goals and objectives of the Central City South Plan succesfully provide the incentives for growth, individual development projects requiring 10,000 cubic yards of earth movement may be proposed. Specific mitigation measures will be addressed on an individual project basis. c. According to Figure 47 of the General Plan, a portion of the Study area may be located within an approximate fault location, based on Fife and Rodgers Special California Division of Mines and Geology Report (1974). The possible fault connects the Glen Helen Fault to the Loma Linda Fault. A geology report shall be prepared for each project Located within this questionable area. The report shall be reviewed and evaluated by the City Geologist, and the approval of the project shall be subject to compliance with the mitigation measures recommended by the report and by the City Geologist. f. Lytle Creek is a concrete lined flood control channel that traverses the Study area from the I-215 freeway to Inland Center Drive in a southeasterly direction. The channel and the adjacent right-of-way shall be designated CCS-4, Flood Control, by the Central City South Plan. No other use of the channel is permitted, although the right-of-way may be used for open space uses with the approval of the County Flood Control District. The same CCS-4 standards shall apply to all other flood control channels traversing the Study Area. g. According to Figure 48 of the General Plan, the Study Area is located within an area of high liquefaction susceptibility. A liquefaction report shall be prepared for any project within the Study Area that is found to be subject to Ordinance No. 676. 2. Air Resources a., b. The CCSOD identifies specific land uses that may result in air emissions and the creation of objectionable odors. Such land uses include gasoline stations, automobile repair garages, and land uses that involve the manufacture of rubber, plastics and non-explosive chemicals. These types of issues are addressed at the project specific stage and mitigation measures shall be required when necessary. 1 , Central City South Overlay District January 2, 1991 Page 7 3. Water Resources a. As development occurs in the area, impermeable surfaces, such as interior streets, sidewalks, driveways, building pads and parking lots would be constructed. As a result, absorption rates would be decreased, thereby increasing the amount of surface runoff. For all projects, drainage studies will be required if appropriate, and all necessary grading and other required drainage and flood control measures shall be subject to the requirements of the Public Works Department. b. The course and flow of flood waters in the Study Area will not be altered because the flood control channels traversing the study area are concrete lined and no other uses of the channels are permitted. c., d. As discussed in item no. 3a. of this section, development of . the Study Area would involve the construction of impermeable surfaces. Impermeable surfaces such as asphalt or concrete collect solid exhaust particulates and other air emission solids, as well as engine fluids, residue from automobile tires and other and other chemical pollutants. During periods of rain, surface pollutants are washed into the water ways. Cumulatively, such pollutants can change the quality of ground waters. The gaantity of ground water can also be affected because impermeable surfaces change water absorption rates. However, because the proposed revisions to the Central City South Plan permits land uses that are no more intense than those permitted by the original document--which was adopted by ordinance on January 19, 1987 and incorporated (by reference) by the General Plan on June 2, 1989--adoption of the revisions would not result in a change in surface and ground water quality that is significantly different than what was previously envisioned. e. The Lytle Creek flood control right-of way is identified as a 100-year flood plain (FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel Number 060281-0020 A, July 16, 1979). As previously discussed, the channel will be designated CCS-4 and may only be used for flood control purposes. All projects located adjacent to the flood control right-of-way shall be reviewed by and subject to the requirements of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. 4. Biological Resources b. According to Figure 40 of the General Plan, there are no known sensitive plant species within the CCSOD. However, this does not preclude their existence. If the site of a proposed project is discovered to contain uncommon plant varieties, a biological assesment shall be conducted to determine significance. Mitigation measures will be based on the results of such studies on an individual basis. . . ' © O Central City South Overlay District January 2, 1991 Page 8 d. Development of properties in the Study Area may require the removal of viable, mature trees. If the site of a proposed property is found to contain trees with trunks having a diameter of six inches or greater at the base, an arborist report shall be prepared prior to the preparation of initial Study. As mitigation, arborists reports typically recommend replacement, relocation and/or in situ preservation of mature, viable trees. Prior to the approval of any project wherein the subject property contains viable, mature trees, a Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be prepared and implemented to ensure that the developer compies with the requirements of the City regarding the replacement, relocation and/or in situ preservation of the trees. 5. Noise i b. Portions of the the proposed CCS-1, General Commercial, desig- nation are adjacent to the proposed CCS-3, Light Industrial, designation. Also, portions of CCS-5, Commercial-Industrial, are adjacent to CCS-2, Regional Entertainment and Office. Hence, adoption of the revised plan may result in the development or expansion of noise-generating industrial uses which could impact nearby schools, day care centers and health service facilities, which are permitted in CCS-1. To reduce the potential of creating incompatible uses, the following development standards are proposed for the CCSOD: 1. All uses in the Central City South Overlay District shall require a Conditional Use Permit and must be approved by the Mayor and Common Council upon recommendation of the Planning Commission. This process will provide the widest opportunity for the public to voice its concerns regarding potential impacts, as well as provide the City with broad powers to apply conditions of approval to address those concerns. If a project cannot be designed or conditioned to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area, the project must be denied. 2. All uses in CCS-3, including storage, shall be conducted within fully enclosed structures. 6. Land Use d. The adoption will indirectly result in a change in the land use designations originally recognized in the General Plan. The original Central City South Overlay District document and map was originally incorporated by reference into the General Plan on June 2, 1989 (Table 1, General Plan). This reference will need to be appropriately changed to reflect the CCSOD amendment. Prior to adoption of the amended document and map, the Council must find that the revisions are consistent with the General Plan. j Central City South Overlay District January 2, 1991 Page 9 7. Man-Made Hazards a.-c. The CCSOD identifies specific land uses, particularly in CCS-3 and CCS-5, that may involve the manufacture, use, storage and transport of toxic materials. Such materials include rubber, miscellaneous plastics, inks, engine fluids and pesticides. These types of issues are addressed at the project specific stage and mitigation measures shall be required when necessary. 8. Housing a. The Central City South Plan currently does not permit residen- tial land uses; nor does the revised Plan. Thus, there will be no increased potential impact generated by the removal of nonconforming residences to allow for the development or expansion of conforming uses. 9. Transportation/Circulation a., h. The proposed CCS-2, Regional Entertainment and Office, designa- tion can be reasonably expected to attract development that would serve a wide regional market. With the exception of the seasonal mountain resorts, there are relatively few regional entertainment draws between L.A./Orange and San Diego Counties. If the market is recognized, there could be severe traffic impacts to the Central City South area, as well as to the City at large. Road improvements have already been approved by the Mayor and Council on May 7, 1990 (Public Works Project No. 90-11) to extend Valley and "G" Streets, which would significantly improve circulation patterns in the Study Area. Additionally, Policy No. 6.1.1 of the General Plan requires the annual review "of the street system as part of the Capital Improvement Program to identify problems" and the "implementation of improvements as needed in a timely manner." In addition to reviewing aggregate impacts and trends in circulation patterns, project specific impacts will be reviewed and mitigated as development occurs. 12. Aesthetics b. Certain development proposals, such as gasoline stations and auto repair garages, may have a negative visual impact to the respective surrounding areas. The design of all projects in the CCSOD shall be subject to General Plan, Development Code and RDA development standards. Additionally, to ensure that projects do not create negative visual impacts, their designs shall be determined to be compatible with the overall character of development within their respective surrounding areas. ~SNTR~L CIbY SOUTH OV~~LAY D15THICT N r p w 9 m nl ~ O N ~ y ~ ~ 9 m m m m ~ H a -ti. ~~t ~ 'I: .'.I.• •M1 MI r PROPOSED DESIGNATIONS _ ;' '= ~'... CCS-1 GENERAL COMMERCIAL CCS-2 REGIONAL ENTERTAINMENT 8 OFFICE CCS-3 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL o ~ :' ";'~~:~ CCS-4 FLOOD i CONTROL s ~ Gc5-5 ~ Gor1NEe~~c.~-~aoosta~ r D. DETERMINATfON On the basis of this initial study, Q The proposed project COULD NOT have a signilroant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARA- TION will be prepared. The proposed project could have a signdieant effect on tfw environmenl, aRiwugh 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 pepared. The proposed project MAY have a significant affect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. i ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE ~ CIfY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA ~t~~a.,E~ P,~~ciiA~ ~~.,~~ Name and Trtk // ~ S ~ ~ ~GC ~~+°Ss1, Date: / - /0 - Q/ ~„~~„i„e~ PLANADI PiIOEjQ OF 10 (1t.YC) • ATTACHMENT B • © 0 n ~ y^-- - ,. Planning Commission _ = I J City of San Bernardino ~ FEB 0 7 1991 340 North D Street San Bernardino, Ca. 92418 February 7, 1991 ~+~}' ~_~+~.^.v,:~-,;,.~ E ~:._.'.ti r.:._i Deer Honorable Members, We ere writing you on behalf of our client, Mr. George Roberts, regarding the Central City South Overlay District. It is our understanding that the Planning Commission will be considering lend use changes in the Central City South Study Area on February 19, 1991. Currently, Mr. Roberts is in the process of establishing a retail fashion outlet at the former Unisource building, located of 787 West Mill Street. In conjunction with this project, Mr. Roberts is preparing a development plan and proposal for additional commercial retail uses, affecting properties adjacent to the Unisource site. The project boundries are: Mitt Street, an the North; Cresent Street, on the East; College Drive, on the South; and H Street, on the West. Please see enclosed project area site plan. The current General Plan land use designation for the area South of Mi11 Street and 'nest of the flood Control Channel is General Industrial. Based on our evaluation of the Brea, the properties adjacent to the 1-215 corridor would be better served by having acommercial/retail designation in order to maximize the highest and best use of the lend. Several Caitrans alternatives for widening 1-215 show a frontage rood along 1-215, between Inland Center Drive and Mill Street. A frontage road, if developed, will result in the taking of properties between 1-215 and H Street, thus, _ eliminating any future development potential. All things considered, we contend that the highest and best use of the properties identified in our plan would be commercial with a retail orientation. We believe this type of development will enhance the tax base, create more jobs, increase soles tax revenue and be more esthetically pleasing than industrial or warehouse types of development. Commercial and retail uses along I-215 and the frontage road would make an excellent buffer between the freeway end the existing industrial end warehouse uses: The type of development and uses proposed by Mr. Roberts would be consistent with and supportive of the following goals of the Central City South Study Areo Plen by: • Establishing the Study Area os a cohesive and functional mixed use district, A4°fd iu~e~! ~ R • ~ Page Two -Central City South Study Area 0 • Maximizing the growth potentiel of the Study Area, • Encouraging retail and entertainment uses which will attract local end regional patrons, • Creating a pedestrian scaled environment with high levels of amenities for workers, shoppers end visitors, • Encouraging and providing for efficient traffic movement, • Establishing a clear and unifying image, identity and theme, • Establishing high design standards, • Creating a highly landscaped, attractive and safe environment which will serve as a magnet for appropriate land uses, • Striking the best balance between current market forces and the overall development needs and potentiel of the Study Area. Therefore, we are requesting that the Planning Commission designate the properties indicated in our project area site plan to CCS-l, General Commercial. Very Sincerely, Jo n Lightbur P t Office Box 1622 n Bernardino, Ca., 92402 cc: George Roberts w v ~ ~ r Q r s T. t=~ 1.i ~--- - S ~ : i. l~ • ~ ~ , i 3 L~ • I i I r a ~ ~-- ~'O - - - Cl ~e 'mow _ p r w V I r ~ ' ' o ~ e -, ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ . RI t 'i 1 I i C ~ [' w ~ Q i ~ n ,~ i ~ , ~ ~ i -i a r C r r f C C N T !T. i ^ i Z ; ~ / I w Y pJ ~ a • w w • • • 0 ~j{ ~ > > _ G _ e _ w• r ~ r ~ i r ~ • 5 w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3~~ w: a n' a 'e e ~ ! 3 a • w e n•> 3 ~ g 3 ~ !a l i f r i 1~ S ~ a ? , a s ~ ~ ~ ~ Y t p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d '~ 9 ~ 9 '~ak vR LO?M119T Al6A ?LAN DC~?fAr.O J. PBAR;! ~ ~ +sY N~wN Y10.N~ for Ml. GBOR08 D. RW8R73 rota, uuraYnw A RCN 1 TrC7 .r .n«w.wr i uw www~Ylw0. G n. in..~~~~u~. ' ~ OREAL ESTATE SERVICES GO. aura a~o~cn souttvnxD, smxE zoo, tos nr~G~s, cn soo~e-3oa February 14 , 19 91 (z~a) 66o3S43 FA7((113) 661-sees Mr. Michael Lindseth, Chairman' Planning Commission ~ San Bernardino City Hall 300 North ^D^ Street Saa Bernardino, CA 92418 Subject: Opposition to Land Use Designation, Central City South i Plan ' Dear Sir: This letter is written because tha property i own at 740 So. nH~~ Street APN #0141-191-29, is located within the above subject Central City South Plan. I will be unable to attend this meeting because of a prior commitment. I would like this letter to serve as my notice that I am vigorously appose to the proposed Ccs-1 zoning and strongly request a CCS-3 designation. When I acquired this property I was specifically looking for property that had a C-M Zone which would allow Light Industrial uses. The above subject proposed revision and change in land use would change my property~s zoning designation from C-M to CCS-1 which would be General Commercial. This Proposed Plan is inconsistent since the property located on the opposite side of ~~H~~ Street are proposed to remain CCs-3 Light Industrial. When we constructed the building approximately eight (8) years ago, it was designed for use as light manufacturing, warehouse and business services in reliance on the current C-M light industrial zoning. The elevation of Interstate 15E at the rear of my property is approximately 20 feet below ground level. All the joining properties were developed during the same period I developed my property. The use designation for all the land fronting my both sides of i~H~~ Street in this area should continue to have the land use designation of CCS-3 Light Industrial. This would allow all property owners in this specific area to maintain the future consistent usage of their property. Re ectfully, ~~ia7n Jacobson - WJ:hl I) cc: Valerie Ross, Senior Planner f~T'IAGHMEUT G ATTACHMENT D ^ ~ C I~ O F S? II B B Y a A Y D I • DSVffi.OPlDIIIT DEPAYIIffiR !ffi~DYAlIDDM T0: Larry Geed, Director Planning & Buildiag Services FEOM: R8111'DZTB J. 88BDBYSOII, Szeentive Director Development Department SIIBJECT: CBDTYAL CITS 500 PL~II DATE: February 18, 1991 COPIES; Development Division Manager 8oeger Senior Project Manager Morales; File The Development Department is currently gathering additional information on proposed urea which may be helpful in your consideration of the Central City South Plan. t r ore re ested that en Febraa 19 1991 the Planning It is, he of , qu ry , , Commission coatinne their recommendations to the aezt regularly scheduled meeting. Thank you for your cooperation is this matter. N T.SIR~TH J. , Bzecntive Director Development t &JH:SMM:3630H ~1TTA~GIlMEa1t D ~5outhen~ Paoi~ Tronsportotion Con,peny 1200 Capaaa Ca~br Drrv~ • Sulq 100 • MonMrsy Park, CWfamw 91754.7805 • (213) 780.8900 REAL ESTATE III..~Y AS •/^~.V~I. TO San Bernardino - SSR t 2147 February 15, 1991 Planning Commission Planning & Building Services Department ' San Bernardino City Hall 300 North ^D' Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 i Re: Central City South Plan Dear Commissioners: I have reviewed the draft of the above-referenced plan with interest and enthusiasm. The goals, at first blush, appear to be well processed. I am pleased to provide my name and number, below, ! as Southern Pacific's real estate representative, should you have ~' any questions or comments regarding Southern Pacific's considerable 'i real estate holdings within the overlay area or throughout the county. i do have some concerns, however, regarding land use designations. It appears as the proposed land uae for the entirety of the San Bernardino yard area is CCA-2, regional entertainment and office. This does not aeem to offer the variety of uses proposed for other areas in the overlay area, and indeed may severely limit the target market for this property should the property become available for development in the future. I believe additional research is necessary to develop a more effective land use plan. Specifically, I believe a general commercial use along Rialto Avenue is more appropriate than the uae proposed. Additionally, infrastructure between "E" and "G"streets may provide the possibility of a more intense use. Consequently, at this time, I must object to the land use as proposed and believe further review could establish a more appropriated and desirable land use plan. Please feel free to call me to discuss this matter further, or to make an appointment to meet you at your offices. i ere r- chae P. Con Sales pager (213) 780-6905 MPC:gg1965 ATra~NH~N% E . ~ :'; . ~ ® O ~ R 1 Resolution No. 2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING THE s NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADOPTING THE CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN. 4 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE COMMON COUNCIL OF 5 THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLIAWS: 6 SECTION 1. Recitals ~ (a) The General Plan for the City of San Bernardino was 8 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council by Resolution No. 89- 9 159 on June 2, 1989. 10 (b) The Central City South Overlay District was 11 incorporated, by reference, into the General Plan. 12 (c) The Central City South Plan, a revision of the 13 Central City South Overlay District, establishes goals, land 14 use designations, development policies, permitted uses, 15 circulation policies, urban design policies and implementat- 16 ion measures for the area bounded by Interstate 215, Rialto 17 Avenue, "E" Street and Inland Center Drive. 18 (d) The Central City South Plan was considered by the 19 Planning Commission on March 6, 1991 at a noticed public ~ hearing, and the Planning Commission's recommendation of •ll approval has been considered by the Mayor and Common Council. ~ (e) An Initial Study was prepared on January 2, 1991 ~ and reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee and the ~ Planning Commission who both determined that the Central City ~ South Plan would not have a significant effect on the 26 environment and therefore, recommended that a Negative Z7 Declaration be adopted. 28 //// 1 . © C) w 1 (f) The proposed Negative Declaration received a 21 day 2 public review period from January 16, 1991 through February ~ 6, 1991 and all comments relative thereto have been reviewed 4 by the Planning Commission and the Mayor and Common Council 5 in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act 6 and local regulations. 7 (g) The Mayor and Common Council held a noticed public 8 hearing and fully reviewed and considered the proposed 9 Central City South Plan and the Planning Division Staff 10 Report on April 15, 1991. it (h) The adoption of the Central City South Plan is 12 deemed in the interest of the orderly development of the City 13 and is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of 14 the existing General Play. 15 SECTION 2. Negative Declaration I6 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND AND DETERMINED by 17 the Mayor and Common Council that the proposed Central City 18 South Plan will have no significant effect on the 19 environment, and the Negjative Declaration heretofore prepared ~ by the Environmental Review Committee as to the effect of 21 this proposed plan is hereby ratified, affirmed and adopted. ~ SECTION 3. Findings ~ BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council 24 of the City of San Bernardino that: ~ A. The Central City South Plan is not in conflict with the 26 goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan. 27 //// 28 //// ~ 4 Q w 1 B. The proposed Central City South Plan will not be 2 detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, ~ convenience, or welfare of the City. 4 C. The proposed Central City South Plan does not impact the 5 balance of land uses within the City. 6 D. The proposed Central City South Plan land use 7 designations are compatible with surrounding land use 8 designations. 9 E. The Central City South Plan includes areas which are 10 physically suitable for the proposed land use it designations and permitted uses. Anticipated future 12 land uses have been analyzed in the Initial Study and it 13 has been determined that project specific mitigation 14 measures will be sufficient to eliminate any 15 environmental impacts. 16 SECTION 4. CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PL•A1Q 17 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council 18 that: 19 A. The Mayor and Common Council does hereby adopt the ~ Central City South Plan. Said Central City South Plan 21 supercedes the Central City South Overlay District ~ adopted in 1987. Said Central City South Plan is on ~ file in the Office of the City Clerk and attached hereto ~ as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. 25 //// 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// 3 ? { 1 B. The Central City South Plan shall become effective 2 immediately upon adoption of this resolution. s SECTION 5. Man Notation 4 This resolution and the changes affected by it shall be 5 noted on such appropriate General Plan maps as have been 6 previously adopted and approved by the Mayor and Common 7 Council and which are on file in the office of the City 8 Clerk. 9 SECTION 6. Notice of Determination 10 The Planning Division is hereby directed to file a 11 Notice of Determination with the County Clerk of the County 22 of San Bernardino certifying the City's compliance with CEQA 13 in preparing the Negative Declaration. j 14 //// 15 //// 16 //// 17 //// 18 //// 19 //// 20 //// 21 //// 22 //// 23 //// 24 //// 25 //// 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// 4 - RESOLUTION.TCADOPTING THE NEGATIQ DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADOPTING THE CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN. 1 2 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly ~ adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San 4 Bernardino at a meeting therefore, held on the 5 day of , 1991, by the following vote, to 6 wit: 7 8 Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN 9 ESTRADA 10 REILLY 11 FLORES 12 MAUDSLEY 1~ MINOR 14 POPE-LUDLAM 15 MILLER 16 17 City Clerk 18 19 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this ~ day of , 1991. 21 22 ~ W. R. Holcomb, Mayor City of San Bernardino 24 Approved as to ~ form and legal content: 26 JAMES F. PENMAN, City ~ttorney 27 I' ~ 5 ATTACHMENT A _ ,., , ~::,:: ~ i J( CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN 2-19-91 0 CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN Puroose The City of San Bernardino has determined that realizing the potential of the Central City South Area requires planning controls unique to and specific to the area. The Central ' City South Plan was created to provide cohesive development within this area. The Central City South Plan establishes land use designations and circulation patterns and defines permitted land uses and development goals and policies. The Central City South Plan was adopted by resolution of the ' Mayor and Common Council. Figure 1 shows the boundaries of the areas included and the location of the Central City South Plan. ~ PLAN ELEMENTS i Land Use Plan Thia section defines allowable land uses for the area within the Central City South Plan area. The allowable uses are consistent with the overall goals, objectives and policies of the City's General Plan. The following designations apply to the Central City South Plan area as shown on Figure 2. CCS-l. General Commercial CCS-2. Regional Entertainment and Office CCS-3. Light Industrial CCS-4. Flood Control CCS-5. Service Commercial neveiooment Goals * A cohesive and functional mixed use district. * Retail and entertainment uses which would attract local and regional patrons. * A pedestrian scaled environment with high levels of amenities for workers, shoppers, and visitors. * Efficient traffic movement. * A clear and unifying image, identity and theme for the district. (1) CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN • 1 l l M w ~ l N 1 1 1 1 1 LOCATION AND 1 BOUNDARIES 1 \' 3 ~ FICIJRE' F (2) Q ~ P~,AN s~~-~,.~ AL c~T ~ J ~ GE~TR ~ .' a a, !c s .,:. ~ •,.:~. , pES`GNpT10NS ~ I i 1 GENERA- CCS- A- ENTEFiTA~N aNO T~A- y F~ V' CCS-`1, ~ CAI. CC$-5, gERv .~'~. 2 FIGt1RE s ~ (3) O * Development and design standards which wi21 give the City and private property owners/developers a tool to achieve the highest architectural, functional and amironmantal quality. * Removal of existing blighted uses. * A highly landscaped, attractive and safe environment which serves as a magnet for appropriate land uses. * An elficient and attractive system of landscaped streets and pedestrian paths which can serve a variety of uses and visually unily the area. * A site plan which allows !or prudent and phased development. * A balance between curnnt market forces and the overall development needs and potentials of the area. (4) w i . CCS-1 GENERAL COI~D~RCIAL obisctiva * Provide for the continued use and new development of impulse and destination retail and service uses along "E" Street, Inland Center Drive and "H" Street. policies * Permit general commercial uses including restaurants, personal services (banks, bookstores, salons/hair- stylinq), and similar facilities as shown on the following table, CCS-1 Psraittsd Uses. * All uses shall be conducted within fully enclosed structures. Outside seating !or restaurants shall be permitted. No outside storage areas shall be permitted. * Nsw and used car lots and auto repair and improvement uses shall not be permitted. ~ * Limited office uses shall be permitted where the office ~ use is confined to 25t of the first or ground floor level and up to 1001 of any floors above the first or ground floor level. * The floor area ratio shall bs 0.7 with a height not exceeding two stories or 30 feet. * Drive-thru restaurants :hall not be permitted. * Comeniance stores are not permitted. * The minimum lot size !or development shall be 10,000 gross square feet. * Non-permanent structures such as carts selling flowers or refreshments may ba permitted as part of a development project. (5) CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN Permitted Land Uses CCS-1 General Commercial Manufacturing * Commercial Printing Transportation * Railroad Transportation * Local and Suburban Transit and Interurban Highway Passenger Transportation * United States Postal Service * Pipelines, except Natural Gas * Arrangement of Passenger Transport * Communications * Electric, Gas and Sanitary Services ~ Retail Trade * General Merchandise Stores * Mini Malls * Gasoline service stations * Apparel and Accessory Stores * Home Furniture, Furnishings and Equipment Stores * Estinq Places, except Drive-ups and Drive-thrus * Drinking Places * Miscellaneous Retail, except Fuel Dealers Finance. Insurance and Real Estate * Depository Credit Institutions * Non Depository Credit Institutions * Security and Commodity Brokers, Dealers, Exchangers and Services * Insurance Carriers * Insurance Agents, Brokers and Service * Real Estate * Holding and other Investment Offices services * Hotels/Motels * Personal Services, except Laundry Cleaning and Garment Services * Business Services, except Heavy Construction Equipment Rental * Passenger Car Rental and Leasing * Parking * Miscellaneous Repair Services, except Welding * Movie Theaters and Video Tape Rentals * Amusement and Recreation Services (6) • '~ a * Health Services * Legal Services * Educational Services * Day Care Facilities (7 + Children) * Museums, Art Galleries * Membership Organizations * Engineering, Accounting, Research Management and Related Services * Miscellaneous Services Put~lic A inistration * Executive, Legislative and General Government * Police and Fire Protection * Public Finance, Taxation and Monetary Policy * Administration of Human Resource Programs * Administration of Environmental Quality and Housing Programs * Administration of Economic Programs * National Security and International Affairs ~ Other i * Antenna, Satellite and Vertical * Fences and Walls (7) © O . . CCS-2 REGIONAL ENTERTAINMENT AND OFFICE Obiective * Provide for the development of new public and private recreational/entertainment facilities. * Provide for the development of new office uses. gq icier * Permit the development of miniature golf courses, health club facilities, sports facilities, amusement parks, ' farmers mnrketa, bowling alleys, hotels and similar facilities as shown on the following table, CCS-2 Permitted Uses. ~ * Permit a diversity of administrative and professional olfices as shown on the following table, CCS-2..Permitted i Uses. * Outside activities (i.e. miniature golf courses, amuse- went parks, etc.) are permitted and encouraged. 'j * No outside storage is permitted. j * Supporting retail uses are permitted within the structure of the main recrsational/entertainment use. * The floor area ratio for recreational/entertainment uses shall be 1.0 with a height o! 4 stories not exceeding 52 feet. A greater height may be permitted through a Conditional Use Permit, pending the status of the project specific environmental review. * Supporting retail uses are permitted within the office structure. Such uses shall not exceed 25t of the first or ground floor level. * The floor area ratio for office uses shall be 1.0 with a height of 4 stories not exceeding 52 feet. Greater height may be permitted pending the status of the project specific environmental review. * The minimum lot size for development shall be 1 gross acre. * Non permanent structures such as carts selling flowers az refreshments may be permitted as part of a development project. - (8) ~ ~ a CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN Permitted Land Uses CCS-2 Regional Entertainment and Oflice T*ansDOrtation * Railroad Transportation * Local and Suburban Transit and Interurban Highway Passenger Transportation * United State Postal Service * Heliport or Helipad * Pipelines, sxcept Natural Gas * Arrangement or Passenger Transport a Services * Electric, Gas and Sanit ry Retaii Trade * Eating places, except Drive-ups and Drive-thrus * Drinking Places Finance Insurance and Real Estate * Depository Credit Unfon * Non depository Credit Unions * Security and Commodity Brokers Dealers, Exchangers and Services * Insurance Agents, Brokers and Service * Real Estate * Holding and other Imrestment offices services * Hotal/Motels * Personal Services, except Laundry Cleaning and Garment Servicss * Parking * Motion Pictures * Amusement and Recreation Services * Medical offices, except Clinics * Legal Sezvicss * Day Care (7 + Children) * Museums, Art Galleries, Botanical and Zoological Gardens * Enginasrinq, Accounting, Research, Management and Relatsd Sarvicss (9) ' ~ pyjbl; c Administration * Executive, Legislative and General Government * Justice, Public order and Safety, except Correctional Institutions * Public Finance, Taxation and Monetary Policy * Administration of Human Resource Programs * Administration of Environmental Quality and Housing Programs * Administration of Economic Programs * National Security and international Affairs Other * Antenna, Satellite and vertical * Fences and Walls (10) ' © 4 CCS-3 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL obiective * Rstain existing and provide !or the development of new light industrial uses. pslicies * Permit manufacturing, warehousing, research and develop- ment and other similar uses as shown on the following table, CCS-3 Permitted Uses. * Ail uses including storage, shall be conducted within fully enclosed structures. * Supporting retail uses may be permitted within the structure of the main use. Such usss shall not occupy more than 15t of the lirst or ground Moor level. * The maximum floor area ratio shall be 0.75 with a height not exceeding two stories or 50 fsst. * The minimum lot size for development shall be 20,000 gross square feet. (11) t 1 ` CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN Permitted Land Uses CCS-3 Light Industrial ~nufa urine * Food and Kindred Products, except Meat Packing Plants * Tobacco Products * Taxtila Mill Products * Apparel and other Finished Products made from Fabrics and similar Materials * Furniture and Fixtures * Paper and Allied Products * Printing, Publishing and Allied Industries * Commercial Printing * Chemicals and Allied Products, except Explosives * Rubber, Miscellaneous Plastics, except Tires and Innertubes * Leather and Leather Products, except Tanning and Finishing * Co~utar and Olfice Equipment * Electronic and other Electrical Components * Measuring, Analyzing and Controlling Instruments, Photographic, Medical and Optical Goods, watches and Clocks * Miscellaneous Manufacturing Industries, except Linoleum Manufacturing TransQortat on * Railroad Transportation * Local and Suburban Transit and Interurban Highway Passenger Transportation * United State Postal Service * Pipelines, except Natural Gas * Transportation Services * Communications * Electric, Gas and Sanitary Sarvice~ Wholesale Trade * wholesale Trade, Nondurable Goods * Wholesale Trade, Durable Goods Services * Parking * Day Cara Facilities (7 + Children) (12) Pubiic Administration * Police and Fire Protection Other * Antenna, Satellite and Vertical * Fsnces and Walls I (13) s CCS-4 FLOOD CONTROL Obiective + liaintain existing flood control facilities. Policies * Psrmit the maintenance of flood control facilities as required to pzotact the public's health, safety and welfare. + work with the Flood Control District to enhance the aesthetics of the flood control facilities. I (14) t a CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PIJ?N Permitted Land Uses CCS-4 Flood Control The flood control channals traversing the study area are concrete lined channels. No other uses o! the channels are permitted. The flood control right-of-way may be used for open space uses with the approval of tha County Flood Control District. I (15) CCS-5 SERVICE O OAB~~IERCIAL V obiective * Provide for the limited development of service commercial parks. Policies * Permit limited manufacturing, warehousing, research and development and other similar uses as shown on the following table, CCS-5 Permitted Uses, provided that no exterior structural alterations to existing buildings are required. * All uses, including storage, shall be conducted within fully enclosed structures. * The maximum floor area ratio shall be 0.75 with a height not exceeding two stories or 50 feet. * The minimum lot size for development shall be one gross acre. (16) ~ © CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN Permitted Land Uses CCS-5 Service Commercial Manufacturinc * Apparel and other Finished Products made from Fabrics and similar Materials * Furniture and Fixtures * Paper and Allied Products * Printing, Publishing and Allied Industries * Commerical Printing * Chemicals and Allied Products, except Explosives * Leather and Leather Products, except Tanning and ~ Finishing * Computer and office Equipment * Electronic and other Electrical Components * Measuring, Analyzing and Controlling Instruments, Photographic, Medical and Optical Goods, watches and Clocks i * Miscellaneous Manufacturing Industries, except Linoleum Manufacturing Transportation I * Railroad Transportation * Local and Suburban Transit and Interurban Highway Passenger Transportation * United States Postal Oftfce * Pipelines ~ Transportation Services * Communications * Electric, Gas and Sanitary services Wholesale Trade * Wholesale Trade, Nondurable Goods * wholesale Trade, Durable Goods Retail Trade * General Mazchandise Stores * Home Furniture, Furnishings and Equipment stores * Eating Places, except Drive-ups and Drive-thrus * Miscellaneous Retail, except Fuel Dealers (17) . p Q 4 , Services * Personal Services (Same As CCS-2) * Business Services, except Heavy Construction Equipment Rental * Automotive Repair Services and Parking, except Truck Rentals, RV's and Utflity Trailers Rentals and Impound Yards * Miscellaneous Repair Services, except Welding * Day Care Facilities (7 + Children) * Engineering, Accounting, Research Management and Related Services ~~i ; c Administration * Police and Fire Protection Other * Antenna, Satellite and Vertical * Fences and Walls ~I (18) ` ,,~RCQLATION © a * A comprehensive and efficient circulation pattern within the Central City South Plan area. Obiective * Link "E" Street to the Study Area interior. * Link Central City Mall and Inland Center Mall. Policies * Develop street linkages consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the Central City South Plan development goals. * Require dedication and improvement of streets concur- rently with project development. * Construction and/or improvement of streets shall be in accordance with City policies. * Rsquire parking in accordance with the standards in the Development Code. i * Provide direct pedestrian access from the parking lot to destination points. * Provide handicap facilities and access in accordance with State law. * Provide opportunities for public transportation lacili- ties (i.e. bua turnouts, covered bus stops, etc.) * Group uses to minimize curb cuts. * Parking areas shall be distributed among the front, side and rear of buildings or projects within CCS-1 (excluding "E" Street), CCS-2 and CCS-3 land use districts. * Parking areas shall be located to the side or rear of buildings in the CCS-i land use district along "E" Street. Parking shall not lront on "E" Street. * Minimize the number of curb cuts. * All access, parking areas, driveways, loading areas, etc., shall be paved. - (19) • ~ {TRBAN DESIGN Goal * An attractive and functional urban environment. Obiectives * Provision of pedestrian and vehicular amenities. ' * Removal of blight. * Provision of highly landscaped, attractive and safe environment. Policies * Require on-site and off-site landscaping in accordance with the standards in the City~s Development Code, which establish the minimum requirements. * Require that pedestrian amenities such as trees, plant- ; ings, paving, lighting, street furniture and public art be incorporated into public and private project design. * Permit individual creativity and variety in architec- tural styles while creating a cohesive development pattern. * Color elevations and a color board showing building materials are required with project submittal. * Buildings shall not have continuous, visually unbroken walls. The lront wall shall be sat back a minimum of four feet for every 60 feat o! continuous length. * Blank unbroken walls are not permitted. * Large plates of glass era not permitted. * Curtain walls are not permitted. * Flat roofs and half mansard roofs are not permitted. * All rooftop equipment shall be completely screened from view. * The following materials are not permitted: imitation "rock" work: imitation masonry; corrugated fiberglass; imitation wood siding; "rustic" materials (wood shakes or shingles, barn wood, board and batten, rough-sawn plywood, pesky cedar); imitation brick; New Orleans style wrought iron; plan concrete block; plastic lami- nate; and aluminum concrete tilt up is not permitted in CCS-1 and CCS-2. (20) • ~ Loading area©shall be screened from vi©. * Loading areas shall not be placed where they interfere with pedestrian access. * Awnings are encouraged and permitted except for those constructed o! metal. Awnings may project a maximum of 6 feet into the right-of-way with a minimum 8 foot clearance lrom the sidewalks. * Reflective or mirror glass finishes are not permitted. All loading must take place on-site within the rear or side yards. * Railroad access shall be screened from view. * Projects adjacent to the railroad tracks shall be screened from view and buffered. * Balconies are encouraged on upper levels and may extend 6 feet. * All utilities shall be placed underground in accordance with City codes. * All transformers, meters and other elements of the utility system shall bs completely screened lrom view. * All required landscaping shall be maintained and replaced, if required. * The owner or lessee o! any parcel shall be responsible !or malntaininq all structures in a safe and clean conditions fn accordance with City codes. The owner or lessee shall keep the property free from all trash and debris. (21) S~~IPLEI+IENTATION The Central City South Plan is incorporated, by reference, in the City's General Plan. As such, all projects within the Plan area must be consistent with the General Plan as well as the Central City South Plan itself. The following are the programs that shall be carried out to implement the goals, objectives and policies of this plan. * A Conditional Use Permit or Development Permit is required for all new buildings/uses unless specified differently in this document. The process and procedures are established in the City's Development Code. * Changes of permitted uses within previously approved existing stuctures shall be processed according to the normal review process for that use as defined in the Development Coda. * Nonconforming uses shall be subject to the provisions in the Development Code. * All projects era subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. The process and procedures for am?iron- mental review are established by resolution o! the City. * The development standards for landscaping, parking and loading, signs and setbacks shall bs as established in the Development Code. * An update to the previously prepared feasibility study for this area would ensure the most appropriate mix of uses has been identified and defined. The feasibility study would identify short and long term Heads of the area in relation to the whole City. * Preparation of a specific plan would reline the permit- ted uses in the Central City South Plan based on the feasibility study. A specific-plan would address the distribution, location and extent of land uses and infrastructure while indentifying the development standards and implementation measures including financing. While a specific plan must be consistent with the General Plan, it allows for flexibility not found in the Development Code. * The specific uses shall be as established in Table 16.01 of the Development Code, Commerical and Industrial Districts, List of Permitted Uses. /dasl/3/91 DOC:MISC CTRCITYSOOVERLY (22) ` a f ~LANNI~ GoMMisSiDN R~DMM~T1~A7ioN CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN ~ ~-~ ~ t a N N a .'.COL ~ CI N ~•, y H 'i %~ ~, r ~ ~ ~ t r ..l~i'i i i iir ~ • ~ ' • •i iir 'i iiiir ~~irrrrr rrrrrrr • r • • • • i'iir'ii . ~ r r r r r r' • r r r r I DESIGNATIONS •'.. ~,~:~:-'. QCCS-1, GENERAL COMMERC(Al C(NGUAD1Nb GGS•Z NSGS~ ~CCS-2, REGIONAL ENTERTAINMENT AND OFFICE ~' ••' CCS-3, SERVICE COMMERCIAL ::t CCS•4, FLDOD CONTROL z 0 n ~ ~ FIGURE 2 A 3- 6' `I I • ~'GOM M AT I Or\I AFF ~ ~ CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN ~ L a a s r Il p ~ w tot GS •,• Y L S ~ H t ~ r I j ~1, sill f I O O 00000040 0~0000~ 00000 °O O I~ ~~p 0000°~°~ 00 DESIGNATIONS pQ ccs-~, Gen~ERAL coMMERCInL ~(U~ CCS-2, REGIONAL ENTERTAN~NuENT AND OFFICE ®CCS-3. LICIT 1~lJSTRIAL ^%%- CCS-4, FLOOD CONTROL CCS-5, SERVICE COMMERCIAL s n i FIGURE 2 -B s (3) y-rq-~ ~ ` •CI~Y OF SAN ~ERNARDINO - QEMORANDUM To Planning Commission From Larry E. Reed, Director Planning & Building Svcs. Subject Central City South Plan Date March 6, 1991 Approved Item No. 1 Date OWNER Various APPLICANT City Of San Bernardino BACKGROUND The Central City South Plan was presented to the Planning Commission at their meeting of February 19, 1991. The Development Department requested a continuance to the Planning Commission meeting of March 6, 1991. The Planning Commission voted (4-2) to continue the item to March 6, 1991. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the Mayor and Common Council that a Negative Declaration be adopted in accordance with Section 21080.1 of CEQA and that the Central City South Plan be adopted based on the Findings in the staff report dated February 19, 1991. Resp ctfully submitted, /Cti'-1/ Larry .Reed, Director Planning and Building Services ~', %~ GGI.u.:~.c... ~"iY Valerie C. Ross Senior Planner Attachments: A - Staff Report to Planning Commission, February 19, 1991 B - Letter from John Lightburn C - Letter from William Jacobsen D - Letter from Development Department ~y - ,. r CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 2 SUMMARY HEARING DATE - -91 WARD 1 and 3 APPLICANT: City of San Bernardino W V CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN OWNER: Various To adopt the Central City South Plan, a revision of the Centrai City South f. Overlay District. The Central City South Plan will define permitted land W uses as follows: CCS-1, General Commercial; CCS-2, Regional Entertainment ~ and Office; CCS-3, Light Industrial; CCS-4, Flood Control; CCS-5, Service Q Commercial. W ~ The Central City South Plan includes the areas bounded by the I-215 Free- W way, P.ialto Avenue, "E" Street and Inland Center Drive. I ~ a ~ EXISTING GENERAL PLAN PROPERTY LAND USE ZQ,~~ DESIGNATION SEE STAFF REPORT GEOLOdC /SEISMIC lC~f YES FLOOD HAZARD ~I YES ZONE A SEWERS: ~ YES HAZARD ZONE: ? NO 20NE: ? NO ? ZONE B ~ NO HIGH FIRE ? YES AIRPORT NOISE/ O YES REDEVELOPMENT XlI YES HAZARD ZONE: ~ NO CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA: NO G NO ~ ? NOT ? POTENTIAL S16NIFICANT Z ~ APPROVAL APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH O ~ MITIGATING MEASURES ~ Z (y'j NO E.I.R. Q ? CONDITIONS Z_ ? EXEMPT ? E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO 1L Z ? DENIAL Q ~ WITH MITIG1ITINFFECTS ~ W Q ~ MEASURES N ~ ? CONTINUANCE TO Z ~ NO SIGNIFICANT ? SIGNIFCANT EFFECTS (~j W EFFECTS M NUTESACHED E.R.C. ~ ~~„y PWI-iA2 Pt1GE t Oi 1 (49p) r Q CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 2 PROPOSAL To revise the Central City South Overlay district document to clarify the intent and permitted uses. The revised document is called the Central City South Plan. LOCATION The Central City South Plan includes the area between the I- 215 Freeway and "E" Street from Rialto Avenue to Inland Center Drive. Figure I of Attachment A shows the location and boundaries. BACKGROUND The Central City South Overlay District was adopted by ordinance on January 19, 1987 and C-M, Commercial Manufactur- ing zoning was adopted for the entire area. The previous zoning had been light and heavy industrial with a General Plan designation of General Industrial. When the General Plan was adopted on June 2, 1989, the C-M zoning designations were deleted and the General Plan land use designation became the zoning designations. The Central City South Overlay District was incorporated, by reference, into the General Plan, thereby keeping the land use designations shown in that document. Staff has had a difficult time interpreting the Central City South Overlay District and met with a subcommittee of the Council and Development Department staff to clarify the intent of the document. As a result of these meetings, the document was revised. On June 11, 1990, the Mayor and Common Council held a public input meeting to hear concerns of the property owners in the area. Their concerns are included in the next section. CONCERNS Land Use Designations The land use designations in the Central City South Overlay District were not clearly explained. There is very little difference between the Com: Commercial Retail and S. Com: Service Commercial designations and the differences are not well defined. o Yx ~.~p PIXi•!IM PKiE 1 OF 1 µqo) eemwn.xmo~+ua t + ' CASE CCS OVERLAY CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 2 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-79-91 PAGE i There is also a concern with the W. Com: Wholesale Commer- cial and W.D.: Warehouse (or Wholesale} Distribution designations. The definition for Wholesale Commercial discusses wholesale distribution with no mention of commer- cial uses whereas the definition for Warehouse Distribution discusses wholesale and retail operations. There is a discrepancy between both the designations and the defini- tions. The definition for Wholesale Commercial leans toward limited light industrial uses even though that differs from the designation title. This would include uses such as the Sears i or Harris warehouses (which are actually located in the Warehouse Distribution area south of Mill Street). II The definition for Warehouse Distribution implies that uses such as Costco, Pace, etc., are permitted even though the retail uses differ from the designation title. ii Neither designations nor definitions appear to be consistent with the Development Goals which discuss in part, "...retail and entertainment uses which would attract local and regional patrons and...pedestrian-scaled environment...." The Central City South Overly district document divides the study area into development opportunity subareas. The area designated Wholesale Commercial is defined as the "Freeway parcels" subarea. This discussion includes retail office and institutional facilities as potential uses. This conflicts with the designations and definitions previously defined. The area south of Mill Street is within the "South of Mill Parcels" subarea, and includes wholesale Commercial, ware- house Distribution and Commercial designations. The develop- ment opportunity subareas discussion includes the existing mix of wholesale and retail warehousing or an alternative of transforming the area into a wholesale commercial district related to the uses north of Mill Street. There seems to be little or no difference in the alternatives. This definition more closely fits the designations although wholesale commercial is still not defined. The development opportunity subarea guidelines discuss freeway-related uses aimed at a regional and subregional market including offices, hotels, entertainment and restau- rants. It further states that if these uses aren't market- able, then the uses for the adjacent area (the internal parcels, designated Commercial Retail) be permitted. These uses include commercial retail, wholesale commercial, design center and entertainment/restaurant. m. a r arie.e PLIY~lL! P1WE ~ OF t H-~1 snr.w..~oa~s f f . , CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 2 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-I9-91 PAGE 4 The Central City South document states that no new indus- trial development will be allowed north of Mill Street. Uses that have outdoor storage will not be permitted in the study area. Also, it is stressed that future development in the Study Area will be predominantly commercial in nature. The development opportunity subarea guidelines for the south of Mill Parcels include uses which contribute to and are consistent with the dominant uses north of Mill Street. The text stresses that future development south of Mill Street will remain consistent with existing uses. The existing uses, in the area designated Warehouse Distribution, are warehouse and manufacturing uses. At this point, it is very unclear what the permitted uses are both north and south of Mill Street. Zt seems as though some general commercial uses and some warehousing uses are permit- ted north of Mill Street while south of Mill Street is basi- cally limited to certain warehouse uses. These ambiguities make it very difficult for staff to interpret and implement the Plan. Previous Zoning The Central City South Overlay District was adopted with C-M, Commercial Manufacturing zoning for the entire area. The C-M zone permitted the uses in the C-3A, Limited General Commer- cial, M-1, Light Industrial and M-lA, Limited Light Indus- trial districts. The C-3A zone permitted a wide range of commercial uses, very similar to the CG-1 General Plan designation. The M-1 zone permitted outside uses. The M-lA required all uses to be within fully enclosed structures. The C-M and M-1 zones permitted outdoor uses and outdoor storage which are specifically prohibited in the Central City South document. The C-M zone includes the uses permitted in the M-1 and M-lA zones, most of which were industrial. However, the Central City South document states that no new industrial uses would be permitted north of Mill STreet. This effectively limits permitted uses to those defined in the C-3A zone, which, as stated previously, is a commercial designation or zone. The areas of the document cited previously list certain commercial uses that are permitted in the Wholesale Commer- cial area, but these uses are nowhere near the full range of uses that were permitted in the C-3A zone. ~wr-nw~ PIAN•BAB PK.E 1 OF 1 (~AO~ o CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 2 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 5 Nonconforming Uses Prior to the adoption of the General Plan on June 2, 1989, the Planner tended to permit uses based on zoning because the previous General Plan was so out of date and the Central City South Overlay District was difficult to understand. Very few projects have been submitted since the Overlay District was adopted, although interest has increased lately. There is a lot of concern with the property owners in the area as to what they can and can't do as far as new development and reuse. There are a lot of nonconforming uses located in the Commer- i cial Retail and Wholesale Commercial areas north of Mill Street. These were developed under the old General Plan and i previous zoning and became nonconforming with adoption of the Central City South Overlay District. The fact that the zoning was superseded by adoption of the General Plan is not a major concern because of the more limited uses actually permitted and the sometimes ambiguous policies in the Central City South Overlay District documents. CENTRAL CITY SOUTH PLAN Land Use Originally, the Central City South Overlay District was adopted because it was recognized that the area was unique; it was located between the two malls and could provide a link, it was close to the downtown area, there was a large amount of vacant land and it had freeway visibility and access. None of that has changed and the appropriate goals were carried over to the Central City South Plan. How those goals are to be achieved, as far as permitted land uses, have changed. The Central City South Plan consists of five land use dis- tricts as defined in the Plan (Attachment 1) and shown on Figure 2 of that plan. The land use districts are: CCS-1 General Commercial; CCS-2 Regional Entertainment and Office; CCS-3 Light Industrial; CCS-4 Flood Control; and CCS-5 Service Commercial. m°~'ittww~wn+°wet1Owgi PIAN•!.M PN6E t OF t 1~ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 2 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-]9-91 PAGE fi The CCS-1 General Commercial designation is very similar to the CG-1, Commercial General designation in the General Plan in that it permits a wide range of commercial uses. The CCS- 1, however, does not permit used car lots and auto repair uses, nor drive-thru restaurants or convenience stores. These uses were not felt to be consistent with the goal of attracting people to the area and creating a pedestrian environment. The CCS-1 designation is located along "E" Street, Inland Center Drive and "H" Street. The CCS-2 Regional Entertainment and Office designation makes up the bulk of the area between Rialto Avenue and Mill Street, excluding the commercial along "E" Street. This designation permits a range of recreational and entertainment ~ uses as well as office uses. Outside recreational uses such as miniature golf courses are encouraged in this area. Supporting retail uses are also permitted. The combination of office uses and recreational/entertainment uses serve a variety of functions. Offices tend to be daytime, Monday through Friday uses, with little or no activity in the evening or on weekends. Recreational/enter- ~ tainment uses, however, tend to have more activity during the evening hours and on weekends when people aren't working. San Bernardino has a limited amount of recreation/entertainment uses and people must go to other cities to enjoy them. Also, these uses help to provide a link between the two malls. If we can get people to the area, we will have a variety of things to keep them there. Successful development of this area should spillover to the adjacent areas, helping to revitalize them. The CCS-3 Light Industrial designation is the remainder of the area south of Mill Street that isn't designated for commercial uses. This designation recognized the existing development, the majority of which are light industrial uses. Although some of the structures are older and were built under previous standards, they were felt to be viable uses and not likely to change in the near future. Some of the concerns with that area can be addressed through Code En- forcement efforts. The CCS-4 Flood Control designation recognizes that Lytle Creek Channel which intersects the area in a west to south- easterly direction from the freeway to Inland Center Drive. This designation permits open space uses in addition to flood control. GLAN•BAB GAGE 1 OF 1 I1A01 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT gGENDA ITEM OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 7 The CCS-5 Service Commercial designation was added in response to various concerns. It recognizes the existing project at the northeast corner of "G" Street and Mill Street. This project was approved under industrial zoning just prior to the adoption of the Central City South Overlay District. The project was built for industrial type uses and is not really conducive to commercial uses. The buildings have very few windows and are essentially small warehouses with small office areas included. The CCS-5 designation permits limited manufacturing, ware- housing and service commercial (including auto repair) uses. All uses must be conducted within fully enclosed structures with no outside storage. Although the permitted uses won't necessarily support the Regional Entertainment and Office . designated uses, they won't detract from them either because of this provision. CIRCULATION The Central City South Plan also includes a circulation plan that is based on the overall goals for the area. "G" Street exists and links Central City Mall and 2nd Street with Inland Center Mall at Inland Center Drive. "F" Street exists between 2nd Street and Rialto Avenue and is proposed for Rialto Avenue southward and westward intersecting "G" Street with a possible extension across Lytle Creek Channel. Another street is proposed to extend westward from "E" Street intersecting both the proposed to "F" Street and also "G" Street, over to the freeway and up and back over to "G" Street. South of Mill Street the street network is basically in place, although certain improvements may be needed. These existing streets, plus the existing and proposed streets north of Mill Street, will help to open up the interior of the area and improve the links to the adjacent areas. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY As stated previously, the Central City South Overlay District was incorporated by reference into the City's General Plan. As such, changes to the Overlay District, in the form of the Central City South Plan, are not changes to the General Plan itself. However, the proposed Central City South Plan should be consistent with the General Plan so that it doesn't conflict with, or work against, the overall goals established for the entire City. (The General Plan will be amended as a "clean-up" item to change the title to the Central City South Plan and to include the date of adoption). PWI•MB PILE 1 OF 1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 2 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 8 The General Plan listed a land use issue as the focus in the past on auto-related districts and corridors with little provision for pedestrian links. This issue was then identi- fied as an opportunity with future development. The Central City South area was identified in the General Plan as both a district and a corridor with a strong emphasis on pedestrian uses. The mix of uses proposed and the circu- lation plan are geared toward providing links, both auto- mobile and pedestrian. The intent of the Central City South Plan is to provide a regional mix of uses to attract people to the area. ~ Goal 1.G.a. of the General Plan addresses the revitalization, ~ adaptive reuse and upgrade of deteriorated districts within the City. The Central City South Plan also addresses this through goals and land uses designations, recognizing that while there is a certain amount of vacant, undeveloped land, there is also the need for revitalization and upgrade. Because of the proximity to the downtown area and the "E" Street corridor and the links provided through the circula- tion plan, it is anticipated that development of this area will spillover to the surrounding areas. ~ar.rFORNTA RNVIRONMENTAL• OLrnLrTV nrr rrFnn I TATUS The proposed Central City South Plan is subject to CEQA. The City's Environmental Review Committee reviewed the Initial Study (Attachment B) on January 10, 1991 and determined that the proposed plan would not have an adverse impact on the environment and recommended adoption of a Negative Declara- tion. The public review period for the proposed Negative Declaration began on January, 1991 and ended on February 6, 1991. CONCLUSIONS The existing Central City South Overlay District is confusing to staff, property owners, and developers. The Central City South Plan clarifies the intent and better defines the permitted (and not permitted) uses. This will help to implement the goals and encourage development in the area. The Central City South Plan recognizes existing viable uses and includes them in the plan for the area. PWI~LB PAGE t OF 1 N~1 r CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA REM 2 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-I9-91 PAGE 9 The Central City south Overlay District created nonconforming uses which will still be nonconforming uses with adogtion of the Central City South Plan. Those nonconforming uses are not consistent with the intent for the area. The Central City South Plan helps to implement the General Plan by creating a district with a mix of uses to attract people to the area through the uses permitted and the connec- tion to or links with adjacent areas. ~ PLAN•!AB PK.E 1 OF 1 49Ci CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 2 FINDINGS OF FACT HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 10 FINDINGS The proposed Central City South Plan is consistent with the goals established in the General Plan. The proposed Central City South Plan would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City. The proposed Central City South Plan does not change the balance of land uses within the City. The proposed Central City South Plan includes areas which are physically suitable for the permitted land uses and is compatible with surrounding designations. PWi~BDe PK.E 1 OF ~ (r-001 w r . , CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE CCS OVERLAY AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA REM OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-19-91 PAGE 11 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make a recom- mendation to the Mayor and Common Council that 1. A Negative Declaration be adopted in accordance with Section 21080.1 of CEQA. j 2. The Central City South Plan be adopted. Respectfully submits i Larry Reed, Director ~ Planning and Building Services ~ ~lL /~:'fl.L' l.' Jib L Valerie C. Ross Senior Planner Attachment: A - Central City South Plan Figure 1 Plan Boundaries Figure 2 Land Use Designations Attachment: B - Initial Study SRCCSOVERLAY PWLLW PILiE 1 OF 1 Nml ATTACHMENT B ` . CITY OF SAN BERNA INO PLANNING AND BUILDING VICES DEPARTMENT INITIAL STUDY Initial Study !or Environmental Impacts for CgNTR1T CITY SOOTfi OVERLAY DIS'!'P?CT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposal to revise and clarify the land use plan and development goals for the Central City South Study Area. PROJECT IAGTION: The Study area is bounded by Rialto Avenue on the north, Inland Center Drive on the south, ^E" Street on the east and Interstate 215 on the west. January 2, 1991 Prepared for: City of San Bernardino 300 North "D• Street San Bernardino, G 92418 Prepared by: Gregory S. Gubman Assistant Planner City of San Bernardino Planning and Building Services Department 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, G 92418 P~IN.Lp7 PMiE t Oi: ! 149q CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL. IMPACT CHECKLIST a. BacKGROUNn Application Number. GEFIT¢bt~ G t~( ~xx,L-j'..I ~~t .»e DtsY~[' T Project Description: t~¢cP~taen To '1~s~ ~ tS>s 6r.lb /~ At7• r~J -YLdC .Jc~t•1P l.l5g 'fir ~ al D 42T.+w --!T ~ Tr.r mss. r~r~,, ~ T~--~C]I1TaJ ~Zrjfl~ y way Location: ~ruJ!=~ 1''^~-'r^ ~~~4~_~1+~.1~ {"II.~ID rr.lrtrv r»Z~Jtt' ~h117 ~iFTM,J cJ a¢"crrert--r e,.17 tniT ~c~g-~ ~ ~c, Environmental Constraints Lucas: QL~allyf 'P'2~~~. l©O ytx~ F ~±-~o T a_.. N lfxMf t.~AEsn~-n ~l General Plan Designation: Cs~4-N ~~rr+.t f~t/ffit n.~/ l~~y(Q Zoning Desgnatbn: ~,LSTlnlb ~ W. CAM l God Gi_COMr, W n B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explain answers, where appropriate, on a separate attached sheet. 1. Earth Resouraa VAII the proposal rosuh in: Yes No Maybe a. Earth movement (cut and/or fill) d 10,000 cubic yards or moro? X b. Devebpmem and/or grading on a sbpe grouter than 15Y. natural grade? X c. Dwebpment within the Alquist-Priao Special Studies Zone as defined in Section 120 - Geobgb 6 Seismic, Figure 47, of tM City's General Plan? 7( ' d. Modification of arty unpw geobgic or physical feature? X a. Devebpmem within areas defined for high potential for water or wind erosion ae identified in Section 120 - Plan~b 8 Seismic. Fguro 53, of the City's General X f. Modification of a channel, seek or river? X iu'~nw~rii PW19D6 PAGE t OF 10 (t1-~ ~ l t b. Davebpment of new or expansion of existing industrial, Yes No Maybe commeroial or other uses which penense robe Iweb on areas oontakrirg housing, aehoob, heskh care fackkbs or other sertskiw uses above an Ldn of BS d8(A) exterior or an Ldn o145 d8(A) inbrior'i' X a Other? X & Land Use: wk the proposal reauk in: a A drange in the land use as desgnated on the General Pbn? X b. Devebpment within an Airport Dstrict as iderdkied'm the Air Installation Compatible Uw Zone (AICUZ) Repon and the Land Use Zoning District Map? X c. Dewbpmem within Foothill Fire Zones A & 8, or C as X idemkied on the Land Use Zoning District Map? ~/ d. OtMr? INVIt.~~.T £~fr~S od ~.r^• _ Y~ /~ 7. kAsnalAade Hazards: Will the project: a Use, store, transport or dispose of hazardous or toxic materiab (inducting but not limkad to oil, pesticides, chemieab or radiation)? X b. InwNe the rolease of hazardous substances? _ ; a Expose people to the potential heakh/safety hazards? X d. Others JC & Houshtg: Will the proposal: a Remove existing housing or create a demand for addkbnal housing? X b. Ott»r? 1C 9. Transportation / Cireuhtlon: Could the proposal. in comparison with the Cirouladon Plan as idenOfied in Secfion 6.0 - Cireutatbn of the City's General Plan, resrrk in: a An inaaase in traffic that b greaUr than the land X use designated on the Gerwrai Plan? b. Use of existing, or demand for new, parking faeilities/stnxtures? X C Impact upon existing public tranaportaion systems? X d. Akeration of present pettems of dreubtlon? X e. Impact to rail or a'v trattb? X f, Increased safety hazards to whbbs, bigdists a X pedestrians? g. A disjointed pattern of roadway improvemerds7 X h. Significant increase in traffic vohrmes on the roadways cr int.rsedicrrs? x i. aver? X ap1wn°w PLM40L6 PIKiE 90F~O_ ,. ~•en , g. Dwebpmem wkhin an era subject to Iandelides, Yas No Maybe mudskdes, Rquefaetion a other simkar hazards as idenWied in Seabn 12.0 - Geobgic 6 Seismic, Fguros 48, 52 and 53 of the Ciy's General Plan? h. Other? X 2 Air Resources: W111 the proposal resuk in: a. SubstantW air emissions or an effect upon ambient air qualky as defined by AOMD? X b. The croation of objectionable odors? J~ c. Dewbpmem wkhin a high wind hazard aroa as identkied in Section 15.0 -Wind 3 Fire, F'gure 59, of the City's y General Plan? I~ 3. Wabr Resourgs: Will the proposal resuk in: a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount ~ wrtace runoff due to impermeable surtaces? b. Changes in the course or fbw of tbod waters? X c. Discharge imo surtace waters or any akeration X of surface water quality? d. Charge in the quantity of quality of ground water? X e. Exposure of people or properly to flood hazards as identkied in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel Number 060281 oe2o . A ,and Section 16.0 - Flooding, Fguro 62, of the City's Generel Plan? /~ t. anen X 4. 8bbgkaf Resourpa: Could the proposal reauk in: a. Devabpmarrt wkhin the Biobgieal Resources Managemem Overlay. as iderltifled in Secton 10.0 - Natural Resources, Fguro 41, of the City's General Plan? X . b. Change in tM number of any unique, taro or endangered species of plains or their habkat inducting X stands of tress? c. Charge in the number of arty unique, taro or endangered species of animals or•their habitat? X d. Removal of viable, mature trees? (6' or greater) X a. Other? X 5. Nofp: Could the proposal real[ in: a. Dewbpmem of housing, heakh care facilities, schools, dbraries, rolpbus faekkiea or other noise' aenskive uses in areas when existirp or future noise kveh exceed an Ldn of 65 d8(A) exterior and an ldn of 45 dB(A) imerior as identlfiod in Secton 14.0 -Noise, Fguros 146 and X 1413 of the City's General Plan? °'iw°r,w,.~' ~ PUN~9A! PWE20F 1Q (it-90( 10. Pubec Sarvkaa: Wik the proposal impact tla folbwing Yes No Maybe beyond the eapabilky to provide adequaU levels of service? a. Fire protaetbnl X b. Pokoe protection? X a Schools (i.e., attendance, boundaries, overbad, etc.)? X d. Parks or other recreational faakties? x e. Medical aid? X f. Solid Waste? X g. Others X 11. l1tII1Ws: Will the proposal: a. Impact the folbwing beyond the capabAky to provide adequate kveb of serviu or require the constructbn of new taakties? 1. Natural gas? X 2. Ekdrbity? _ ~ 3. Water? X 4. Sewer? 5. Other? X b. Resuk in a disjointed pattern of utility extembns? X a Requiro the constnrction of raw faalities? X 12. Msthatkx: a Coukl the proposal rauk in 1M obstrta:tion of any X scenic view? b. wll the visual impact of the project be detrimental ~/ to the surrounding aroa? o. OtMr? X 13. Cukural Raaourcas: Could the propwal resole in: a Tta akeratbn or destruetbn of a prehirtoric or historb archaeobgical ske by dewbprrard within an aniraeological senaiWe area as idardilad in Seetbn 3.0 - Hisbriesl, Fquro 8, of tha Cky's General Plan? x b. Alteration or destnxttion of a historical site, awUUre or abject as listed in tM City's Hisbric Raouroes Heconnaissanoe Survey? e. Other? X ° Hove-sa. r~.oFJQ. n,.sm ? 7 14. Mandatory FMdinga of SlgnHkanq (Section 15()65) The Ca6tomia Environmental Ouffiiry Ad states that 8 any of the foAowing can be anserored yes or maybe, the projeG may haw a significant effect on tfw environment and an Environmental Impact Report shall be prepared. Yes No Maybe a. Does the project haw the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, aubffiantfally educe tfre habitat of a fish or wildl'de species, cause a fish or wild6h population to drop bebw sent sustaining levels, threaten to ebminffie a plats or animal commurtiy, ndtr~ the mrmbw w restrict the nurge of a rare or endangered pant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods N CalNomia history or prehistory? X b. Does the project have ttw potential ~ achieve short- term. tithe disadvantage of beg-tens. environmental goab? (A short-term impart on the ernironment is one which occurs in a relffiively brief, definitive period of time while beg-term impacts will endue well into X the future.) C Does fhe project have impacts which are individually limded, but eumulatlwly considerable? (A project may impact on two or moro aeparete rosouroes where the impact on each resource is relatively smap, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the ernironment is significant.) X d. Does the project have environmental efleets which will cause substantial adverse ellects on human beings, eitMr directly or indirectly? X Q DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATIt>~1 MEASURES (Attach sheets as necessary.) 5E£ ATT6CJdEa PIANAp PAaE SOPIQ (11~ ` 1 0 c ~ Central City South Overlay District January 2, 1991 Page 6 C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Earth Resources a. The Central City South Overlay District (CCSOD) was established in part to encourage development in an area that is blighted, underdeveloped and underutilized. The Study Area has been overlooked by developers in favor of the large areas of undeveloped land on the outskirts of the Study Area adjacent to the I-10 and I-215 freeways. If the goals and objectives of the Central City South Plan succesfully provide the incentives for growth, individual development projects requiring 10,000 cubic yards of earth movement may be proposed. Specific mitigation measures will be addressed on an individual project basis. c. According to Figure 47 of the General Plan, a portion of the Study area may be located within an approximate fault location, based on Fife and Rodgers Special California Division of Mines and Geology Report (1974). The possible fault connects the Glen Helen Fault to the Loma Linda Fault. A geology report shall be prepared for each project located within this questionable area. The report shall be reviewed and evaluated by the City Geologist, and the approval of the project shall be subject to compliance with the mitigation measures recommended by the report and by the City Geologist. f. Lytle Creek is a concrete lined flood control channel that traverses the Study area from the I-215 freeway to Inland Center Drive in a southeasterly direction. The channel and the adjacent right-of-way shall be designated CCS-4, Flood Control, by the Central City South Plan. No other use of the channel is permitted, although the right-of-way may be used for open space uses with the approval of the County Flood Control District. The same CCS-4 standards shall apply to all other flood control channels traversing the Study Area. g. According to Figure 48 of the General Plan, the Study Area is located within an area of high liquefaction susceptibility. A liquefaction report shall be prepared for any project within the Study Area that is found to be subject to Ordinance No. 676. 2. Air Resources a., b. The CCSOD identifies specific land uses that may result in air emissions and the creation of objectionable odors. Such land uses include gasoline stations, automobile repair garages, and land uses that involve the manufacture of rubber, plastics and non-explosive chemicals. These types of issues are addressed at the project specific stage and mitigation measures shall be required when necessary. ~1 o Central City South Overlay District January 2, 1991 Page 7 3. Water Resources a. As development occurs in the area, impermeable surfaces, such as interior streets, sidewalks, driveways, building pads and parking lots would be constructed. As a result, absorption rates would be decreased, thereby increasing the amount of surface runoff. For all projects, drainage studies will be required if appropriate, and all necessary grading and other required drainage and flood control measures shall be subject to the requirements of the Public Works Department. b. The course and flow of flood waters in the Study Area will not be altered because the flood control channels traversing the study area are concrete lined and no other uses of the channels are permitted. c., d. As discussed in item no. 3a. of this section, development of the Study Area would involve the construction of impermeable surfaces. Impermeable surfaces such as asphalt or concrete collect solid exhaust particulates and other air emission solids, as well as engine fluids, residue from automobile tires and other and other chemical pollutants. During periods of rain, surface pollutants are washed into the water ways. Cumulatively, such pollutants can change the quality of ground waters. The quantity of ground water can also be affected because impermeable surfaces change water absorption rates. However, because the proposed revisions to the Central City South Plan permits land uses that are no more intense than those permitted by the original document--which was adopted by ordinance on January 19, 1987 and incorporated (by reference) by the General Plan on June 2, 1989--adoption of the revisions would not result in a change in surface and ground water quality that is significantly different than what was previously envisioned. e. The Lytle Creek flood control right-of way is identified as a 100-year Plood plain (FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel Number 060281-0020 A, July 16, 1979). As previously discussed, the channel will be designated CCS-4 and may only be used for flood control purposes. All projects located adjacent to the flood control right-of-way shall be reviewed by and subject to the requirements of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. 4. Biological Resources b. According to Figure 40 of the General Plan, there are no known sensitive plant species within the CCSOD. However, this does not preclude their existence. IP the site of a proposed project is discovered to contain uncommon plant varieties, a biological assesment shall be conducted to determine significance. Mitigation measures will be based on the results of such studies on an individual basis. o o Central City South Overlay District January 2, 1991 Page 8 d. Development of properties in the Study Area may require the removal of viable, mature trees. If the site of a proposed property is found to contain trees with trunks having a diameter of six inches or greater at the base, an arborist report shall be prepared prior to the preparation of Initial Study. As mitigation, arborists reports typically recommend replacement, relocation and/or in situ preservation of mature, viable trees. Prior to the approval of any project wherein the subject property contains viable, mature trees, a Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be prepared and implemented to ensure that the developer compies with the requirements of the City regarding the replacement, relocation and/or in situ preservation of the trees. 5. Noise b. Portions of the the proposed CCS-1, General Commercial, desig- nation are adjacent to the proposed CCS-3, Light industrial, designation. Also, portions of CCS-5, Commercial-Industrial, are adjacent to CCS-2, Regional Entertainment and Office. Hence, adoption of the revised plan may result in the development or expansion of noise-generating industrial uses which could impact nearby schools, day care centers and health service facilities, which are permitted in CCS-1. To reduce the potential of creating incompatible uses, the following development standards are proposed for the CCSOD: 1. All uses in the Central City South Overlay District shall require a Conditional Use Permit and must be approved by the Mayor and Common Council upon recommendation of the Planning Commission. This process will provide the widest opportunity for the public to voice its concerns regarding potential impacts, as well as provide the City .with broad powers to apply conditions of approval to address those concerns. If a project cannot be designed or conditioned to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area, the project must be denied. 2. All uses in CCS-3, including storage, shall be conducted within fully enclosed structures. 6. Land Use d. The adoption will indirectly result in a change in the land use designations originally recognized in the General Plan. The original Central City South Overlay District document and map was originally incorporated by reference into the General Plan on June 2, 1989 (Table 1, General Plan). This reference will need to be appropriately changed to reflect the CCSOD amendment. Prior to adoption of the amended document and map, the Council must find that the revisions are consistent with the General Plan. . . Q 4 Central City South Overlay District January 2, 1991 Page 9 7. Man-Made Hazards a.-c. The CCSOD identifies specific land uses, particularly in CCS-3 and CCS-5, that may involve the manufacture, use, storage and transport of toxic materials. Such materials include rubber, miscellaneous plastics, inks, engine fluids and pesticides. These types of issues are addressed at the project specific stage and mitigation measures shall be required when necessary. 8. Housing a. The Central City South Plan currently does not permit residen- tial land uses; nor does the revised Plan. Thus, there will be no increased potential impact generated by the removal of nonconforming residences to allow for the development or expansion of conforming uses. 9. Transportation/Circulation a., h. The proposed CCS-2, Regional Entertainment and Office, designa- tion can be reasonably expected to attract development that would serve a wide regional market. With the exception of the seasonal mountain resorts, there are relatively few regional entertainment draws between L.A./Orange and San Diego Counties. If the market is recognized, there could be severe traffic impacts to the Central City South area, as well as to the City at large. Road improvements have already been approved by the Mayor and Council on May 7, 1990 (Public Works Project No. 90-i1) to extend Valley and "G" Streets, which would significantly improve circulation patterns in the Study Area. Additionally, Policy No. 6.1.1 of the General Plan requires the annual review "of the street system as part of the Capital Improvement Program to identify problems" and the "implementation of improvements as needed in a timely manner." In addition to reviewing aggregate impacts and trends in circulation patterns, project specific impacts will be reviewed and mitigated as development occurs. 12. Aesthetics b. Certain development proposals, such as gasoline stations and auto repair garages, may have a negative visual impact to the respective surrounding areas. The design of all projects in the CCSOD shall be subject to General Plan, Development Code and RDA development standards. Additionally, to ensure that projects do not create negative visual impacts, their designs shall be determined to be compatible with the overall character of development within their respective surrounding areas. ~tN ~ ~p~L ~,;~ Y 5VU 1 H VVE~iLAY DISTF~ICT M ~ J AML ~V N r 9 ~Ti1 Q N 9 '~ S ~ M m ,~ H v, ~~•, r . ~1 M r PROPOSED DESIGNATIONS .~'.~' CCS-t GENERAL COMMERCIAL CCS-2 REGIONAL ENTERTAINMENT 8 OFFICE CCS-3 LIGHT 3 ~ INDUSTRIAL ~ _ .-~~ ~ ~ `=''~~ CCS-4 FLOOD z 9 CONTROL • o. Dr-rERbgNAnAN On the basis of this initlal study, O The proposed project COULD NOT haw a significant offset on the environment and a NEGATVE DECLARA- TION will be prepared. The proposed project could haw a signfieard effect on the environment, although there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mrogation measures dsscrmed above have been added to the project A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be propared. The proposed project MAY haw a sgnifieant effaet on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMfTTEE CfTY OF SAN BERNAROINO, CALIFORNIA ~- ~e,v? r?~rr~,.,~~cs- . /~ar~cd.~ /~~.,wae~ Name and Titleq ~ S' re Date: / ~ /0 - ~/ vuwaae n~}Q oc io 1,+~ v ~ © ATTACHMENT B _ ^ 5 Planning Commission ~ ~ = "~ - - ~J City of San Bernardino ~ FEB 0 7 1991 300 North D Street San Bernardino, Ca. 92418 February 7, 1991 ~;??,: ;_`~~~;,_••°_•Y~9:,~:0 Deer Honorable Members, We are writing you on behalf of our client, Mr. George Roberts, regarding the Central City South Overlay District. It is our understanding that the Planning Commission wilt be considering lend use changes in the Central City South Study Areo on February 19, 1991. Currently, Mr. Roberts is in the process of establishing a retail fashion outlet at the former Unisource building, located at 787 West Milt Street. In conjunction with this project, Mr. Roberts is preparing a development plan and proposal for additional commercial retail uses, affecting properties adjacent to the Unisource site. The project boundries are: Mill Street, on the North; Cresent Street, on the East; College Drive, on the South; and H Street, on the West. Please see enclosed project area site plan. The current General Plan land use designation for the area South of Mill Street and'rlest of the Flood Control Channel is General Industrial. Based on our evaluation of the area, the properties adjacent to the I-215 corridor would be better served by having acommercial/retail designation in order to maximize the highest and best use of the lend. Several Caltrans alternatives for widening I-215 show o frontage rood along I-215, between Inland Center Drive and Mill Street. A frontage road, if developed, wilt result in the taking of properties between I-215 and H Street, thus, eliminating any future development potential. All things considered, we contend that the highest end best use of the properties identified in our pion would be commercial with a retail orientation. We believe this type of development will enhance the tax base, create more jobs, increase soles tax revenue end be more esthetically pleasing than industrial or warehouse types of development. Commercial and retail uses along 1-215 and the frontage road would make an excellent buffer between the freeway and the existing industrial end warehouse uses: The type of development and uses proposed by Mr. Roberts would be consistent with and supportive of the following goals of the Central City ® South Study Areo Plan by: • Establishing the Study Areo as a cohesive end functional mixed use district, k?`TAGNM EA/ ~ t3 + ~ Page Two -Central irtty South Study Area O • Maximizing the growth potential of the Study Areo, • Encouraging retail and entertainment uses which will attract local and regional patrons, • Creating a pedestrian scaled environment with high levels of amenities for workers, shoppers and visitors, • Encouraging and providing for efficient traffic movement, • Establishing a clear and unifying image, identity and theme, • Establishing high design standards, • Creating a highly landscaped, attractive and safe environment which will serve as o magnet for appropriate land uses, • Striking the best balance between current market forces and the overall development needs and potential of the Study Area. Therefore, we ore requesting that the Planning Commission designate the properties indicated in our project area site plan to CCS-1, General Commercial. Very Sincerely, Jo n Lightbu P t Office Box 1622 n Bernardino, Ca., 92402 cc: George Roberts y. /\ a J [~/] v e ~ ~ ~ j r i O r s r. ^--- --~ .0 ~ ;, Ir •, ''1 e! w C ~ ~ ~ w ~ O ~ . .7 z a ~ n '; 1. ~ 1 s i ', > 8 O /~ e ~ w V ~ ~ r O ~ • O ~ ~ w s > i ~ i i G ~ a I 7 n 1 ~I ~ o ~I s ` ea --~ ~ ~, 'e i r casscaNT st > x Z ~ +t Z 3 [4 w . . . . . . p O a N = G G ~ ~ r r ~ > a ~ ~ • S ~ ~ 2 Q O D Q w > ~ e• w s n• s ~ ~ D p~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ 7 7 ' ~ ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ > tt ~' N s i l i DF. v li LO?M 1! N7 AREA ?LAN DORI?L'D J. ~~w~r srYws ~ ( fer ML. CBOR68 D. BOB8R23 +a .er.. e.u+nww~+ A RCNITaCT rYr ;n«r~.w+ i +~+~Y~Fa 4 ` ~ ~EAL ESTATE SERVICES uos saran acoxica Bomsvann, sctrrE zoo, tos nricB,FS, cn sao~oz7 February 14 , 19 91 ~ FA7[ (213) 651~SB8e Mr. Michael Lindseth, Chairman' Planning Commission San Bernardino City Hall 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Subject: Opposition to Land IIse Designation, Central City South Plan Dear Sir: This letter is written because the property I own at 740 So. "H" Street APN #0141-191-29, is locate8 within the above subject Central City South Plan. I will be unable to attend this meeting because of a prior commitment. I would like this letter to serve as my notice that I am vigorously appose to the proposed CCS-1 zoning and strongly request a CCs-3 designation. When I acquired this property I was specifically looking for property that had a C-M Zone which would allow Light Industrial uses. The above subject proposed revision and change in land use would change my property's zoning designation from c-M to CCS-1 which would be General Commercial. This Proposed Plan is inconsistent since the property located on the opposite side of "H" Street are proposed to remain CCS-3 Light Industrial. When we constructed the building approximately eight (S) years ago, it was designed for use as light manufacturing, warehouse and business services in reliance on the current C-M light industrial zoning. The elevation of Interstate 15E at the rear of my property is approximately 20 feet below ground level. All the joining properties were developed during the same period i developed my property. The use designation for all the land fronting my both sides of "H" Street in this area should continue to have the land use designation of CCS-3 Light Industrial. This would allow all property owners in this specific area to maintain the future consistent usage of their property. ReJ//,,////ect//f//ully, ~ i.rl~a~~~~bson~ I WJ:hl cc: Valerie Ross, Senior Planner f~~A~HMFUT G ATTHCHMENT D CITQOF SAE BEYE?YDIEQ ~ DBVffi.OPMEEi DEPAY7'lDIIrr MRDYAEDD2! T0: Larry Yeed, Director Planning & Building Services FYOM: E7DAPETH J. HEBDEYSOE, Ezecntive Director Development Department SIIBJECT: CEE77iAL CITS 5007$ PLAE DATE: February 18, 1991 COPIES; Development Division Manager Hoeger S mior Project Manager Morales; File The Development Department is currently gathering additional iaformatioa oa proposed uses which may be helpful in your consideratim of the Central City South Plan. It ie, therefore, requested that on February 19, 1991, the Playing Commission continue their recosmeadationa to the aezt regularly scheduled meeting. Thaak you for your cooperation is this matter. ESA~TE J. HEBDEY. OE, Ezeentive Director Developsient Depar mt KJH:SMM:3630H A1T~4(,~1MpJT D