HomeMy WebLinkAbout37-Planning and Building ServicesCITY OF SAN BERN[ _IDINO -REQUEST F~ ~ COUNCIL ACTION
Development Code Amendment No. 94-02 --
From:.Al Boughey, Director Subject: To remove the building height
restriction of 150 feet in the CR-~2,
Dept: Planning & Building Services Commercial Regional (Downtown), land
use district.
Date: June 30, 1994 MCC mtq. of 07/18/94 @ 2 o.m.
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
06/02/89 -- Adopted the General Plan.
05/91 -- Adopted the Development Code.
Recommended motion:
That the hearing be closed; that the Mayor and Common Council adopt the
Negative Declaration; approve the Development Code Amendment; waive the
first reading; and that the Ordinance be laid over for fina/1"~doption.
AL
Contact person: Al Boughey Phone: 5357
Supporting data attached: Staff Report; Ordinance yya~;
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A
Source: (Acct No )
(Acct Description)
Council Notes:
Finance:
.. .7 1
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO -REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) NO. 94-02
REQUEST/LOCATION: This City-initiated amendment modifies Chapter 19.06, Section
19.06.030(2)(E) of the San Bernardino Municipal Code (Development Code) to remove the
height restriction of 150 feet, in the CR-2, Commercial Regional (Downtown) land use
designation.
KEY ISSUES: The key issues are as follows:
• The Mayor and Common Council adopted the General Plan June 2, 1989.
• In May of 1991, the Mayor and Common Council adopted the Development
Code, previously Title 19 of the City of San Bernardino Municipal Code.
• General Plan Policy 1.16.20 states that no height limit shall be defined for the
CR-2 land use district. The General Plan also sets the Floor-Area-Ratio (FAR)
for the CR-2 land use designation at 3.0.
• Development Code Section 19.06.030(2)(E) establishes the maximum height for
structures in the CR-2 land use designation at 100 feet. It allows up to 150 feet
in height subject to additional project amenities and approval by the Planning
Commission.
• This amendment will provide wnsistency between the General Plan and the
Development Code by removing the maximum height of 150 feet, subject to the
current requirements, in the CR-2 land use designation. The FAR will remain
at 3.0.
Please see the analysis and attachments contained in Exhibit 1, Staff Report to the Planning
Commission.
Attachment "B" to Exhibit 1, depicts the wording as shown in the amendment for Section
19.06.030(2)(E).
ENVIRONMENTAL: An Initial Study was prepared by staff and presented to the
Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on April 15, 1994. The ERC determined that no
significant environmental impacts would result from the project and recommended a Negative
Declaration. The Negative Declaration was advertised and available for public review and
comment from April 28, 1994 to May 19, 1994. No comments regarding environmental
concerns were received during the public review period.
PAGE 1
Development Code Amendment 94-02
Mayor and Common Council meeting of
July 18, 1994
Page 2
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission reviewed
Development Code Amendment 94-02 on June 21, 1994, and voted 8-0 to recommend to the
Mayor and Common Council adoption of the Negative Declaration, approval of the Development
Code Amendment and adoption the Ordinance, based upon the attached Findings of Fact
(Attachment A of Exhibit 1). Planning Commissioners in attendance: Affaitati, Cole,
Melendez, Romero, Stone, Strimpel, Thrasher and Traver.
OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO TAE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL: The Mayor and
Common Council may:
1. Approve Development Code Amendment 94-02 as proposed; or
2. Approve in concept and return to staff for specific revisions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council
adopt the Negative Declaration, approve the Development Code Amendment and adopt the
Ordinance.
Prepared by: Jeffery S. Adams, Assistant Planner
For: Al Boughey, Director, Planning & Building Services
EXHIBITS: 1. Planning Commission Staff Report
Attachments:
A. Findings of Fact
B. SECTION 19.06.030(2)(E)
C. Initial Study
2. Ordinance
PAGE 2
S 1 CTTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION
CASE: Agenda Item_1
Hearing Date /6 21194
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 9402 Wazd 1
APPLICANT: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO OWNER: VARIOUS
REQUEST /AREA
The request is for an amendment to Chapter 19.06, Section 19.06.030(2)(E) of the San Bernazdino
Municipal Code (Development Code) to remove the height restriction of 150 feet, in the CR-2,
Commercial Regional (Downtown) land use designation.
EXISTING LAND USE
PROPERTY LAND USE DESIGNATION
Subject VARIOUS CR-2, COMMERCIAL REGIONAL
North VARIOUS
South "
East "
West "
GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC YES ^ FLOOD HAZARD YES ^ SEWERS: YES ^
HAZARD ZONE: NO ^ ZONE: A,X NO ^ NO ^
HIGH FIRE HAZARD YES ^ AIRPORT YES ^ REDEVELOPMENT YES ^
ZONE: NO ^ NOISE/CRASH NO ^ PROJECT AREA: NO ^
ZONE:
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS:
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
^ Not Applicable ^ E.I.R. Req'd, No
^ Exempt Significant Effects W/
^ No Significant Mitigating Measures
Effects
^ Potential Effects, ^ Significant Effects,
Mitigating See Attached E.R.C.
Measures, Minutes
No E.I.R.
EXHIBTT 1
^ APPROVAL
^ CONDITIONS
^ DENIAL
^ CONTINUANCE
TO:
PAGE 3
Development Cade Amendment 94-02
Mayor and Common Council meeting of
July 18, 1994
Page 4
REQUEST:
The request is for an amendment to Chapter 19.06, Section 19.06.030(2)(E) of the San
Bernazdino Municipal Code (Development Code) to remove the height restriction of 150 feet,
in the CR-2, Commercial Regional (Downtown) land use designation.
CALIFORNIA ENVIItONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) STATUS:
An Initial Study was prepazed by staff and presented to the Environmental Review Committee
(ERC) on Apri121, 1994. The ERC determined that no significant environmental impacts would
result from the project and recommended a Negative Declaration. The Negative Declaration was
advertised and available for public review and comment from Apri128, 1994 to May 19, 1994.
No comments were received during the public review period.
BACKGROUND:
The Mayor and Common Council adopted the General Plan June 2, 1989. Approximately two
yeazs later in May of 1991, the Mayor and Common Council adopted the Development Code,
previously Title 19 of the City of San Bernardino Municipal Code. The purpose of the
Development Code is to regulate development according to the policies and objectives of the
General Plan. The General Plan establishes Floor-Area-Ratios (FAR) for each of the land use
desingations. The FAR is the total floor azea of the structure divided by the total lot area. The
FAR for the CR-2 land use designation is 3.0 with no height restriction.
ANALYSIS:
PROPOSAL
The proposal is to remove the height restriction of 150 feet, in the CR-2, Commercial Regional
(Downtown) land use designation. The height restriction is listed in Section 19.06.030(2)(E),
Land Use District Specific Standazds and are as follows:
"E. BONUS HEIGHT
Proposed structures within the CR-2 land use district shall have a maximum
height limit of 100 feet. This section provides a special incentive to increase the
maximum allowable height limit up to 150 feet through a program which
encourages such additional amenities as deemed desirable by the Commission.
These amenities may include, but not limited to, the following:..."
PAGE 4
Development Code Amendment 94-02
Mayor and Common Council meeting of
July 18, 1994
Page 5
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The current Development Code (§19.06.030(2)(E) is not consistent with the General Plan in that
Policy 1.16.20 states that no height limit shall be defined for the CR-2 land use district. The
FAR for the CR-2 land use designation is 3.0 with no height restriction.
The proposed amendment will bring the Development Code into compliance with the General
Plan, in that additional building height may be allowed and will not be limited to 150 feet.
The changes to the Development Code included in this amendment are shown as follows:
SECTION 19.06.030(2)(E), (SEE ATTACHMENT "B")
"E. BONUS HEIGHT
Proposed structures within the CR-2 land use district shall have a maximum
height limit of 100 feet. This section contains provisions pFevide~-a~speeit~l
ineenfive to increase the maximum allowable height ~13A-€eet through
a program which encourages such additional amenities as deemed desirable by the
Commission. These amenities may include, but are not limited to, the
following:..."
Note: The Bold text indicates the proposed additions.
The Sf~ike-fir indicates delefions.
CONCLUSION:
The request is to amend the San Bernardino Development Code to remove the overall building
height restriction in the CR-2, Commercial Regional General Plan land use designation. An
Initial Study was prepazed, and the ERC determined that no significant environmental impacts
would occur as a result of the proposal. The Development Code and General Plan are currently
inconsistent with each other regazding the regulation of building height in the CR-2 land use
designation.
The amendment will remove the building height limit of 150 feet, while retaining the addition
of amenities as approved by the Planning Commission, and bring the Development Code into
compliance with the General Plan.
PAGE 5
Development Code Amendment 94-02
Mayor and Common Council meeting of
July 18, 1994
Page 6
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff proposes that the Planning Commission recommend that the Mayor and Common Council
adopt the Negative Declaration and approve Development Code Amendment No. 94-02 subject
to the attached Findings of Fact (Attachment "A").
Prepazed by: Jeffery Adams, Assistant Planner
Prepazed for: Michael Hays, Assistant Director -Planning and Building Services
Attachment: A -Findings of Fact
B -SECTION 19.06.030(2)(E)
C -Initial Study
PAGE 6
Development Code Amendment 94-02
Mayor and Common Council meeting of
July 18, 1994
Page 7
FINDINGS OF FACT
Development Code Amendment No. 94-02
1. The amendment to remove the building height restriction in the CR-2 land use
designation is consistent with the General Plan in that General Plan Policy 1.16.20 states
that no height limit shall be defined for the CR-2 land use district.
2. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety,
convenience, or welfare of the City in that approval by the Planning Commission is still
required for any building height greater than 100 feet in the CR-2 designation. In
addition, all other Development Code requirements are applicable.
ATTACHIVIIIVT A
PAGE 7
COMN 'CIAL DISTRIC'T'S -19.06
E. BONUS HEIGHT
Proposed structures within the CR-2 land use district shall have a maximum
height limit of 100 feet. This section contains provisions to increase the
maximum allowable height through a program which encourages such
additional amenities as deemed desirable by the Commission. Theca amenities
may include, but are not limited to, the following:
i. Mixed Use Developments (i.e., residential above commerdal
office and retail uses, restaurants, theaters, etc.);
2. Enhanced pedestrian activities;
3. Improved signage and additional landscaping;
4. Additional parking;
5. Ground level and second floor plazas;
6. Outdoor cafes;
7. Artistic sculptures and aquatic amenities; and
8. Day care fadlities.
F. CONVENIENCE STORES
The retail sale of groceries, staples, sundry items and/or alcoholic -
beverages where the gross floor area is less than 5000 square feet is subject
to Conditional Use Permit review, and shall be constructed and operated
in the following manner.
1. The minimum site area shall be 10,000 square feet.
2 The site shall have direct frontage along a major or secondary
street. The site shall not have direct access on a local residential
street.
3. One access drive may be permitted for each street frontage.
The design and location of the access drive(s) shall be subject to the
approval of the DRC.
4. No convenience store shall be located less than 1000 feet from
an existing or previously approved convenience store, or an exist-
ing elementary, junior high school, or high school, as measured
from 1 property line to another.
II-98 1/92 PAGE 8
ATTA('AMFNT R
INITIAL STUDY
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 94-02
Project Description/I.ocation: The proposal is to remove the height restriction of 150 feet, in
the CR-2, Commercial Regional (Downtown) land use designation. This amendment affects the
CR-2 land use designation.
Date: April 15, 1994
Applicant:
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
300 North "D" Sheet
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Prepared by:
Jeffery S. Adams
Assistant Planner
City of San Bernardino
Planning and Building Services
300 North 'D' Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
PAGE 9
ATTACHMENT C
INITIAL STUDY FOR
Development Code Amendment 94-02
INTRODUCTION
This Initial Study is provided by the City of San Bernardino for Development Code
Amendment 94-02. It contains an evaluation of potential adverse impacts that can
occur if the proposed Amendment is adopted.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the preparation of an
Initial Study when a proposal must obtain discretionary approval from a
governmental agency and is not exempt from CEQA. The purpose of the Initial
Study is to determine whether or not a proposal, not exempt from CEQA, qualifies
for a Negative Declaration or whether or not an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) must be prepared.
The following components constitute the Initial Study for Development Code
Amendment 94-02;
1. Project Description
2. Location
3. Environmental Impact Checklist
4. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation and Mitigation Measures
5. Conclusion/Environmental Determination
Combined, these components constitute the complete Initial Study.
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is a proposal to amend the Development Code to remove the height
restriction of 150 feet, in the CR-2, Commercial Regional (Downtown) land use
designation.
2. LOCATION
The amendment will apply to the area within the City of San Bernardino
designated as CR-2. See Attachment A.
3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
See Next Page
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
A BACKGROUND
Application Number.
Project Description: Rar.n ~/G Ttk+% - ' ~ .
~~ Fv1-fT- RP~~fy~ICffOJ
LOC8tI0n:
R 0
/LGi ~A~~' _~Gv l~ ~~~ .. ~ ~ROnI
ErwironmenLl Constrairds A-eas: _tJ/A
General Plan Des4n~• ~1~- 2 Lc1dlM ~ i ~ P~fn ~ p, I pA
Zoning Designation:
B. ENVIROI~IENTAL IIiPACTS ExpWn annwro, whero appropriate, on a aeparan anadwd short
1. Earth Resourps VIN tlw proposal resu4 in: Yes No
1i~tys
a. F_arth mowAmem (pn andhr 1®) d 10.000 cubic
yams or moray
b. Dewbpmera arKlAor pradep on a slops proemer
than 15% natural prsdeq ~!
a Dawbpnam within 11w Aqu'st-Prbb Special
Studies Zwre as defined in Section 120 - Geobpic
i Seismic. Fgun 47, of 1M Chy's General PIanT
X
d. tdodMication of any ~4w peolo0ic or physical
teature4
e. Dewbpnwra wgtdn aroas defned for high potential for
wanr or wind erosion as identified in Seolion 120 -
G~ bpc i Sesmic. Faun 53. of tfw CYy's General
P X
t. AAodNieation of a ctrannel, onNc or riwfr
:.Kt :+S~
P~AN.epr PAGE tOF_ ryt-w~
p. Development within an eras subject to landslides, Yes
mudslides, liquefaction or other similar hazards as No Maybe
iderttl(ied ~ Ssdion 120 - Gadapic & Seismic,
Fguros 48.52 and 53 of the Ciry's General PIan7
h. OtitsR ~(
2 Alr Reaourps: wtll the proposal result in:
e. Sutwterdiel air emissions or an effect upon ambient
air quality as defined by AQMD? ~_
b. The rfeation of objectionable odors? ~_
G Dsvebpmam within a high wind hazard aroa as identitied
in Section 15.0 - ward 3 Fire, Fgure 59, of the City's
General Plan? X
9. Wabr Resourps: WUI the proposal result in:
a. Charges n absorption rates, drairwpe psttems, or the
rob and amamt ct surface nmoff due to
inpsmtsable surtaoes7
b. Charges in the oounte or Ilow of flood waters? _~
c Disct
wrps ~stafaoe waters or arty alteration
~
q _~
d. Charge M the gwntlty of quality ct Around wateR _~
e• of People or propery b Rood hazards as
idsntlfied h the Federal Emsrpent,Y Mwpsnrsrtt
Apertcy's Rood Irwtaarros Rate Map. ComnwtNy Panel
Nrartber 007181 - and Section 7 B.0 -
Roodnp, Fgue 82. of the Giya Gertsral Plan?
X
f. Otirf! x
4. fiibbpkal RMOUrow: Could the proposal result in:
~ DsvNoPmsrtt wdfWt the Biolopiral Resources
Mwpemsnt Oredsy, as identified it Section 70.0
- Naanl Reaaans, Fgue 47, of the City's
Oerreral Plan? ,,
b. Chanps In the number of arty tarigtw, rare a
erdargered spades a pWas orths'e habitat ttdudinp
startle of tress? x
a Charge in the nuetbsr of cry tatique, rare or
.rtd.rg.red spades a arrmvs or tnefr tr.bitan ~_
d. Removal d viable, nta0ss tress? (8' or proater) _~~
e. Odtert
S. Nolan: Could fie proptwal result h
a. Dewbpnrent of houdnp. hp8h oars hr~tiet, :cttocle
,
lbraris, relipoue fadYtiu tx outer lnoias' sensitive twos
rn areas whore existing or hmae rrcias Ietrek exceed an
Ldn of es dB(A) a>aerior and.n Ldn a 4s de(7) lmpior
as iderugied ~ Sapion 74A - Noip, Fguns S and
58 d Ur Chy's General plan? Y
_[L
C,°.~.5... m
n~wass r~aetar_ m+a
b. Dewbpmerd of new or expansion of existing industrial, Yes No Maybe
commareial or otMr uses which generate noise levels on
areas conghtirg housing, schools, heakh taro faalkies
or otiwr aenskiw uses above an Ldn at 65 d8(A) exterior ~
or an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior?
a OtherT _~
6. Land Ua: Win the proposal rosuk in:
a A charge in tIW land use as despnated on the
General PIan7 _~
b. Dewbpntent wkhin an Airport D'sUict as identkad in the
Art InatalWlDn Compstide Uae Zone (AII.UZ) Report and
tM Lend Use Zoning District Map? _~
Dewbpment wkhin Foothik Fns Zones A ti B, or C as
identified on ttw Land Use Zoning District Map? ~_
d. Otlwr7 _~
7. IMan~lade itmrds: win tiw projeet:
a Use, atom, transport or dispow d hazardous or
toxie mabrials (indudinp but not kmked to 011,
peatiades, cMmiealc or radiation)? _~
b. Involve tls rslsne of hazardous substances? ~
O. Expae people b the potential heakh/eately hazards?
d. OtheH
L ~Mg: Win 1M proposal:
a Remove exitug housing or seals a demaM
- for addkbnal housing?
b. ah.n
p. Tranaportatlort / grwlaUon: Could the proposal, in
mmparson wkh the Ciralation Plan as iderttlfied in Section
ti.0 - Cirwhtion of 1M Cky's Genteral PMn, molt in:
a M incrow in traffic that it preaaer than the lard
uw designated on tlw General PIan9
b. the of existing, or demand for new. parking
fadlYiea/strtrclum9
e. YnPeet upon exhtinp pubic traroponation syatems4
d. Akerakort of prperd patterns a oiradtlion7
e. Ynpact b rai or air tralfie4
L safely hazards to vehiolss, bioycifts ar
g. A d'sjokded pdtem of roadway knprovements?
h S«ipniy in tra?fio voWntas on the roadways
L Olhar't
X
wwsn rasaoF_ n+arn
10. Public t~arvloss: Will the proposal impact the tolkwving Yes No Maybe .
bsyorW the capabllky to Provide adequate kwis of service?
a Fire protedion7
b. Pokoe protection? _~
a Schools (i.e., attendance. boundaries. owrbad, etcJ? _~
d. Parks or other recreatbnal fadikies? _~
e. Medical aid? ~_
t. Solid Wash? ,.
g. Otlwr7 _~
11. utntti.a: win the proposal:
a Impacl the tOnOWlrp beyond the Capabllky t0
provide adequate kwals of service or requiro the
eonatruetion d new fadkties?
1. Natural pas? ~(
2 EkiWicily7 _ J~
3. WateA ~_
1. Sawrr? _ ~
5. Othar7 _~
b. i9asrrk in a dgjoiMad patNm d utinty rrxbnsions7 _~
a Raquiro the oorutnrctlan of new hcnkiac7 _~
12 Aastlratlos:
a tfrav PropoaalProP~~ rowk In IM obstruaion d any
b. Win tlw viawl impact of tlr project ba dabinrartW
b the atrrroundirp .ro.7 _~
G l>tlrr- _~
19. CukrMal Raaouroas: Could 1M proposal rpWt in:
a The akaratian or daatna:tbn of a prohistodc or
fds0orie tuehaaolopial ska by dawlopnrark wkhin an
arC11aa01Dpit:al Nnalbw anN as identlfisd in Section
3A - Niatorieal. Fpuro 8. of 1M Cky`s t3anarol Pbut7 X
b. Akaradon or dptruelion of a hfatorial eke. struauro
o-~ S ~Cky's Nwodo Raaouraas
_~
G txlt.r7 _~
s:. ~~-~
PIAW-9L8 PILiE~OF_ (t1-~7~
14. ilstidatory Fktdings of Slgnttbana (Sectbn 15065)
The Caifomia Ernrironnwntal l]uaiy Ap states that k any of the following can be answered yss or
maybe, tlw project may haw a signiicam effect on the environment and an Envirommerdal Impact
geporl shall be prepared.
Yes No Maybe
a. Does the project haw tfw potential to degrade the
quaity of the environrrwM, substantleiy reduce the
habkat of a fnh or widike speaes, cause a fish or
widile popuWion to drop bebw wk sustaining levels.
Mresten to eiminate a plant or animal community,
rodtrce the number or rostrict the tarps of a rare or
endarperod plard or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods d Caliomle history
or prohletory4 _~
b. Does the project haw the potential b achieve short-
term. to tlw disadvantage of bng-Urm. emrironmerRal
goale7 (A short-term impact on the emironnwnl le one
which omuro in a roiatiwly brief. definitive period
of time whie brp~erm impeGS wii enduro well into
the Itduro.)
a Does the project haw impacts which aro individwly
imked, but wmuletiwy oonsiderableT (A project may
knpact on two or moro separa4e rnourws whero the
ttw~iflect~ot~ tot.lm th :: ~ ~a,t wiwr.
ernironmeM le spniiard.) ~_
d. Does ttw project have ertvirortmental efieels which an'A
awe substanid adverse eflects on human beirps,
ektrer d'npy w irrdireWir4
R DISCtISSIOW OF ENVIRONA~NTAL EVAWATbIi AND YTICiAT10N iffASUREB
(Attach sheets as rrsosssary.)
msr~p
f'l/111ee1 ~AOE eOF~ ntaW
.. 4. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND
MITIGATION MEASURES
1. Earth Resources
a-g. The proposed amendment to the Development Code has no potential to
directly impact any of the earth resources. The amendment will remove the
height restriction of 150 feet in the CR-2, Commercial Regional
(Downtown) land use designation. No potential for significant negative
impacts has been identified, and no mitigation is required.
2. Air Resources:
a-c. Removing the height restriction for buildings in the CR-2 designation will
not impact air resources. No potential significant negative impacts have been
identified, therefore no mitigation is required for this amendment.
3. Water Resources:
a-f The proposed amendment has no potential to directly impact any of the
water resource issues. Changing the allowed building height in a specific
designation will not create any impacts to water resources. The review
process will require a conditional use permit and will continue to address
future development in order to protect people and property from flood
hazards and address issues relating to water. No potential for significant
negative impacts has been identified, and no mitigation is required.
4. Biologigl Resources:
a-d. The proposed amendment does not alter the amount or location of any
biological resources or natural habitat. The level of review a development
project is required to undergo will not be reduced due to this amendment.
No potential for significant negative impacts has been identified, and no
mitigation is required.
5. Noise:
a-c. Removing the building height restriction will not create potential noise
impacts, in addition, standard development review for noise impacts will
continue and remain unaltered. No potential for significant negative impacts
has been identified, therefore no mitigation is required for this amendment.
.. 6. Land Use:
a-d. The amendment affects only the CR-2 land use designation and does not
change any other land use designations. The amendment will not create any
negative impacts to existing land uses within the Airport Districts nor within
the Foothill Fire Zone, therefore no mitigation is required.
7. Man-Made Hazards:
a-d. The use, transportation, storage or disposal of any hazardous substances will
be controlled during the review process of a specific project. The
amendment will not reduce the review criteria nor thresholds at which a
project is required to maintain. Therefore, no potential for significant
negative impact has been identified, and no mitigation is required.
8. Housing:
a-b. The proposed amendment does not have any identified potential to remove
existing or create a demand for additional housing. Therefore, no potential
for significant negative impact has been identified, and no mitigation is
required.
9. Transportation/Circulation:
a-i. The proposed amendment does not have the potential to increase the land
use intensity, or create a greater traffic load beyond that which is already
permitted for the CR-2, Commercial Regional land use designation.
10. Public Services:
a. The proposed amendment does not alter access to public services in any
manner. All projects are required to provide access to public services.
b. The amendment may increase the potential for impacts to Fire services due
to the potential height of buildings in the Downtown area. However, There
are currently buildings in the Downtown area which exceed 100 feet in
height and have addressed fire concerns through conditions of approval.
The minimum requirement for the approval of a Development Permit prior
to the establishment of a project mitigates any potential impacts to Fire
services due to the ability of the City to review and condition individual
projects. No mitigation measures are required for this Development Code
Amendment
c-g. There are no potential impacts to other public services created by this
amendment beyond those forecasted in the City's General Plan . Therefore,
no potential for significant negative impact has been identified, and no
mitigation is required.
11. Utilities:
a-c. The amendment will not alter the requirement to demonstrate adequate
access to, or service by public utilities. The amendment will not create the
demand for construction of additional utility infrastructure, nor has any
significant negative impact been identified as a result of this amendment.
Therefore, no mitigation is required.
12. Aesthetics:
a. The removal of the 150 foot height restriction could potentially obstruct a
portion of a scenic view of the San Bernardino Mountains. However, any
potential impact would only be for that portion of a building rising above
150 feet, since the Development Code currently allows buildings up to 150
feet under special circumstances. Only those buildings of comparable height
would be affected by this Amendment, since shorter structures would be
deprived of a view by buildings of l50 feet and shorter. In addition, any
obstruction of view would be on a very limited basis, the width of the
building, while the remaining view would still exist.
b,c. Physical aesthetics are addressed during a review of the project at the
development phase by the City. This amendment will not alter the review
process nor the City's ability to evaluate the aesthetic impact of a project.
Therefore, no potential for significant negative impact has been identified,
.. and no mitigation is required.
13. Cultural Resources:
a-c. This amendment has no potential to directly impact cultural resources.
Standard review requires an evaluation of cultural resources on a project by
project basis and will not be altered as a result of this amendment.
Therefore, no potential for significant negative impact has been identified,
and no mitigation is required.
doc:969(ju)
.. 5. CONCLUSION/ENVIItONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this Initial Study,
~ The proposed project couLD NoT have a significant effect on the environment and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
^ The proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, although there
will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described
above have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
^ The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
Sandra Paulsen. Senior Planner
Name and Title
ss~4~-
Sigoature
~-02/- ~~
Date
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
LOCATION
CASE DCA 94-02
HEARING DATE
AGENDA
ITEM #
~""`"~"°°° ATTACHMENT A vw+a„ nnoE,oF, wa
1
2
3
4
5
s
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING CHAPTER
19.06, BECTION 19.06.030(2)(E) OF THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE
(DEVELOPMENT CODE) PERTAINING TO THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION OF 150
FEET, IN THE CR-2, COMMERCIAL REGIONAL (DOWNTOWN) LAND IISE
DESIGNATION.
THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The first paragraph of Development Code Section
19.06.030(2)(E), is hereby amended to remove the 150 foot height
restriction in the CR-2, (Commercial Regional-Downtown) land use
district and to read as follows (see Attachment A, Development Code
Page II-98, attached and incorporated herein by reference):
"E. BONUS HEIGHT
"Proposed structures within the CR-2 land use district
shall have a maximum height limit of 100 feet. This section
contains provisions to increase the maximum allowable height
through a program which encourages such additional amenities as
deemed desirable by the Commission. These amenities may include,
but are not limited to, the following:"
////
////
////
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19~
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING CHAPTER
19.06, SECTION 19.06.030(2)(E) OF THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE
(DEVELOPMENT CODE) PERTAINING TO THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION OF 150
'FEET, IN THE CR-2, COMMERCIAL REGIONAL (DOWNTOWN) LAND USE
DESIGNATION.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing ordinance was duly
adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
Bernard ino at a meeting thereof, held on the
day of 1994, by the following vote, to wit:
Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT
NEGRETE
CURLIN
OBERHELMAN
DEVLIN
POPE-LUDLAM
MILLER
City Clerk
The foregoing ordinance is hereby approved this
of 1994.
Approved as to
form and legal content:
JAMES F. PENMAN,
City ttorney
By:
day
Tom Minor, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
z