Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout31- Planning & Building Services CITY OF SAN BERNA( 31NO - REQUEST FOL. COUNCIL ACTION From: Al Boughey , Director Subject: GPA No . 91-16 to change the designation from RM to CO-2 on Dept: Planning & Building Svcs . approximately 1 . 7 acres on the northwest corner of Palm Avenue and Atlantic Date: March 30 , 1993 Avenue . Mayor & Common Council Meeting April 19 . 1993 Synopsis of Previous Council action: Recommended motion: That the hearing be closed and the resolution be adopted that adopts the Negative Declaration and approves General Plan Amendment No . 91-16 . L; i Al Boug C Contact person: Al R n u g h o�, Phone: 5 3 5 7 Supporting data attached: Staff Report , Resolution Ward: 4 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: 525 .00 Source: (Acct. No.) 001-171-53150 (Acct. Description) Professional & Contractural Services Finance: Council Notes: 75-0262 Aqenda Item No. 0 0 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT SUBJECT General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 Mayor and Common Council Meeting of April 19, 1993 REQUEST AND LOCATION This General Plan amendment is City-initiated and proposes to change the land use designation from RM, Residential Medium to CO-2, Commercial Office on nine parcels of land comprising a total of approximately 1.7 acres. The project site is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Palm Avenue and Atlantic Avenue on the north side of the State Route 30 presently under construction. JOEY POINTS - The site is designated for multi-family use but is an isolated single-family neighborhood. - The site is developed with eight residences that collectively constitute an architecturally unique neighborhood. - The CO-2, Commercial Office, designation permits the conversion of single-family residences for low-intensity office use without loss of architectural integrity. - The single family uses remain permitted uses under the CO-2 designation. - The retention of the multi-family designation (RM, Residential Medium) could not ensure preservation of the unique neighborhood setting. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the Initial Study which was prepared to evaluate the redesignation to CO-2, Commercial Office and recommended a Negative Declaration. No comments were received during the public comment period. No changes in the environment have occurred since the preparation of the Initial Study. © 0 GPA NO. 91-16 MCC Mtg. of 4/19/93 Page 2 MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OPTIONS 1. The Mayor and Common Council may adopt the Negative Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 based upon findings in the resolution. 2. The Mayor and Common Council may deny General Plan Amendment No. 91-16. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The amendment request was considered by the Planning Commission at a noticed public hearing on March 3, 1993. The Planning Commission recommended the adoption of the Negative Declaration and approval of General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 to change the land use designation from RM, Residential Medium to CO-2, Commercial Office on the project site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council adopt the resolution, copy attached, which adopts the Negative Declaration and approves General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 as presented. Prepared by: John R. Burke, Assistant Planner for Al Boughey, Director Planning and Building Services Attachment 1: Location Map Attachment 2: Staff Report to Planning Commission Attachment A - Initial Study Attachment 3: Resolution Attachment A - Location Map Attachment B - Legal Descriptions CITY OF - . • - . .ITE D BUILDING CASE LOCATION $ � ATTACHMENT 2 - CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 4 SUMMARY HEARING DATE 3-3-93 WARD 4 APPLICANT:City of San Bernardino W GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N Q NO. 91-16 OWNER: Various V To change the land use designation from RM, Residential NMedium to CO-2, Commercial Office on approximately 1 .7 W acres containing 8 residences on the northwest corner of State Route 30 and Palm Avenue. W 2 Q W 2 Q EXISTING GENERAL PLAN PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION Subject Residential RM Residential Medium North Residential RM Residential Medium West Residential RM Residential Medium East Residential RM Residential Medium South State Route 30 , under N/A N/A Construction & City of Highland C 3GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC ❑ YES FLOOD HAZARD ❑ YES ❑ ZONE A SEWERS: X$YES HAZARD ZONE: X$ NO ZONE: XX NO ❑ ZONE B ❑ NO HIGH FIRE ❑ YES AIRPORT NOISE/ ❑ YES REDEVELOPMENT ❑ YES HAZARD ZONE: ®XNO CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA: NO NO J ❑ NOT ❑ POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z 135X APPROVAL Q APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH Q H MITIGATING MEASURES LU Cal NO E.I.R. Q ❑ CONDITIONS 2 Z ❑ EXEMPT ❑ E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO LL LL 0 Z ❑ Z SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS Q W DENIAL OZ WITH MITIGATING F 2 CC - MEASURES N � LL O ❑ CONTINUANCE TO Z NO SIGNIFICANT ❑ SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS V W EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. yJ MINUTES PLAN-9A2 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90) - o - ® General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 Agenda Item No: 4 Hearing Date: 3-3-93 Page 1 REQUEST & LOCATION This is a City-initiated General Plan amendment to change the land use designation from RM, Residential Medium to CO-2, Commercial office on a site comprising approximately 1. 7 acres on the northwest corner of Atlantic Avenue and Palm Avenue. AREA CHARACTERISTICS The amendment site consists of nine developed parcels containing eight residences. It has approximately 500 feet of frontage on Palm Avenue and each property is about 150 feet in depth. The site is bounded on the north by 20th Street, Palm Avenue on the east, an alley on the west and State Route 30 (SR30) on the south. Palm Avenue is 80 feet wide between 20th Street and Atlantic Avenue and widens to 100 feet to the north and south of the site. The possible future widening of Palm Avenue would encroach on the front yards of the residences and would also require reconstruction of the culvert along Palm Avenue. West bound Atlantic Avenue will terminate at Palm Avenue when SR30 is completed. Palm Avenue contains two drainage channels at this location. The channel on the east side of Palm Ave. is an open "V" channel and the one on the west side of the street, adjoining the amendment site, is a box culvert that runs beneath the sidewalk and curb. The site contains eight single-family residences which are estimated to have been built in the 1920's and 19301s. They represent a variety of architectural styles and collectively constitute a unique neighborhood. Each of the structures could be considered a contributing resource to the neighborhood setting which is worthy of preserving. The purpose of the amendment is to ensure that the neighborhood can be preserved in a manner to retain its uniqueness and provide a viable reuse mechanism for the individual property owners. The land to the west and north contains a multi-family residential development. North of the multi-family units is an area of commercial uses on Palm and Highland Avenues. The land to the east, across Palm Avenue, contains a church and vacant land and that to the south is part of SR30 and its right-of-way. o General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 Agenda Item No: 4 Hearing Date: 3-3-93 Page 2 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT (CEOA) STATUS The General Plan amendment is subject to CEQA. The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (Attachment A) on October 10, 1991 and determined that the proposed amendment would not have an adverse impact on the environment and recommended a Negative Declaration. There was a public review period from October 17 , 1991 through November 6, 1991 to review the Initial Study and no changes have occurred to the environment since the Initial Study was prepared. COMMENTS RECEIVED No comments have been received. ANALYSIS Land Use The land use designation is RM, Residential Medium, for the site and the areas to the north, west and east. This designation permits a density of up to 14 dwelling units per acre as per General Plan Policy 1. 13 . 10 and 12 units to the acre as per the Development Code, Table 04 . 02 . The land to the south of SR-30 is in the City of Highland. The area slightly north of 20th Street is designated CG-1, Commercial General and is part of the commercial corridor along Highland Avenue. The development along Palm Avenue to the north and south of the amendment site is for commercial or multi-family residential uses. The continuation of this could jeopardize the existence of this small pocket of single-family residential units by the conversion of the structures to multi-family use. In addition, individual structures could be demolished if they become uninhabitable due to neglect. These single-family structures are a permitted use in the RM designation and would retain their permitted status if the area is redesignated to CO-2 (Development Code Section 19 . 06. 010, 1. I. ) The CO-2 , Commercial Office designation was established to permit the conversion of residential structures for low-intensity administrative and professional office use (General Plan Policy 1. 29. 10) . This, and other General Plan policies, will help to ensure that the architectural styles of the residences can be retained which in turn will help to preserve the unique neighborhood setting. O General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 Agenda Item No: 4 Hearing Date: 3-3-93 Page 3 Development Code, Section 19 . 06. 030 2 .R, allows for single-family residence conversion to low intensity office use and contains design standards to ensure viable commercial use. Standards such as reciprocal parking agreements with adjoining properties, reduced landscaping requirements and rear property parking are permitted to assist in the development of innovative design concepts to ensure reuse of the properties as commercial enterprises without loss of the resource. At some future time the widening of Palm Avenue will require the dedication of an additional 20 feet from the front of the residential properties. Widening the street will require reconstruction of the culvert and alignment of the sidewalk and curb much closer to the front of the residential structures. Cultural Resources The amendment site contains eight single-family structures that predate 1940 and appear to exhibit architectural features of styles such as California Bungalow, Queen Anne Cottage, etc. Although the site was not included in the City's Historical Resources Reconnaissance Survey the residential structures are, collectively, resources of potential historical significance. If the site retains the current RM, Residential Medium designation, the structures can only be used as residences. They could be remodeled or demolished so as to build multi-family structures. This designation gives no assurance that the resources will be preserved with their unique architectural styles intact. General Plan Goal 3A is provided "To protect, preserve, and restore the sites, structures and districts which have architectural, archaeological and/or cultural significance. . . 11 . The CO-2, Commercial Office designation will provide a means to adaptively reuse the structures when their residential life span has been expended. Circulation Palm Avenue is a major arterial presently handling approximately 15, 000 average daily trips (ADT's) . A land use designation of CO-2 could potentially increase the daily trips by 600. The City Traffic Engineer advises that this increase is not anticipated to adversely impact the traffic on Palm Avenue. Atlantic Avenue is a local street having an ADT count of approximately 6, 000. However, with its termination as a through street to the west, this number will decrease and the amendment will not impact traffic on this street. f? General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 Agenda Item NO: 4 Hearing Date: 3-3-93 Page 4 Access to the properties is from Palm Avenue and from the alley in the rear and possible future widening of the street will require a dedicated twenty feet to be taken from the front yards. On-site parking may be provided by a design plan utilizing the Development Code chapter 19. 06 provisions of reciprocal access and parking, access via the rear alleyway or street tandem parking or any combination of these, if deemed appropriate at the time of project development. CONCLUSIONS The site contains structures of potential historic and architectural significance. The present land use designation does not sufficiently provide measures to ensure their preservation. The CO-2 , Commercial Office designation will allow the residences to remain as permitted uses and to be adaptively reused while protecting the architectural integrity of the structures and the neighborhood setting. FINDINGS The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan in that a CO-2 designation will provide a means to retain and reuse the structures for purposes other than residential if the need arises. A CO-2 designation is compatible with the surrounding uses and the site configuration because of its low intensity uses. The amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City as addressed in the Initial Study. This amendment will minimally impact the balance of land uses within the City. The subject land is physically suitable for the CO-2 , Commercial Office land use designation and any anticipated future development on it. o - o General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 Agenda Item No: 4 Hearing Date: 3-3-93 Page 5 RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the Mayor and Common Council : 1. That a Negative Declaration be adopted in accordance with Section 21080. 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act for General Plan Amendment No. 91-16. 2. That General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 be approved. Respectfully submitted ed Al Beey, irector, u -y J 3 K� Department of Planning and Building Services Department ,/John R. Burke Assistant Planner Attachment A: Initial Study ATTACHMENT A s � CITY OF SAN BERNARDINU PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT INITIAL STUDY General Plan Amendment No 91-16 Project Description: To change the land use designation on nine Parcels of land comprising approximately 1.7 acres from RM, Residential Medium to CO-2 , Commercial Office. Project Location: The amendment site is located on the west side of Palm Avenue between Atlantic Avenue and 20th Street. Date: September is, 1991 Applicant: City of San Bernardino Owner: Various Prepared by: John R. Burke Assistant Planner City of San Bernardino Department of Planning and Building services 300 N. "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 � . PUN-947 PAGE 1 OF 1 µ.pp) INITIAL STUDY for GPA91-16 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Initial Study is provided by the City of San Bernardino for City-initiated General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 which proposes to change the land use designation from RM, Residential Medium to CO-2 , Commercial Office on approximately 1.7 acres at the southwest corner of Palm Avenue and Atlantic Avenue. As stated in Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines, the purposes of an Initial Study are to: 1. Provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an EIR or Negative Declaration; 2 . Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, the enabling the project to qualify for Negative Declaration; 3 . Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is required, by; (A) Focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant, (B) Identify the effects determined not to be significant, and (C) Explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not be significant. 4 . Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project; 5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the finding in a Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment; 6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRS; 7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. INITIAL STUDY for GPA91-16 2 .0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed City-initiated amendment is to change the General Plan Land Use Plan designation from RM, Residential Medium to CO-2 , Commercial Office on a 1. 7 acre area at the northwest corner of Atlantic Avenue and Palm Avenue. The site contains eight single-family residential structures, and represent a number of historical architectural styles. The purpose of the project is to provide a mechanism by which this unique San Bernardino neighborhood can be retained and/or adaptively reused without loss of the potential historical significance. 2 .1 AMENDMENT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA CHARACTERISTICS The site is rectangular in shape and developed with eight homes on a total of nine lots. The site is bounded by 20th Street on the north, Palm Avenue on the east, Atlantic Avenue on the south and an alley on the west. (See Exhibit A. ) The site is approximately 500 feet at the frontage on Palm Avenue and approximately 150 feet deep between the frontage and the alley. In addition to the eight residences, the site contains a number of garages, sheds, fences, walls, hedges and other types of landscape material. A line of fences, walls and hedges runs along the alley at the back of the parcels on the west side of the site. Some of the existing landscape material includes a number of large, mature trees and shrubs. Two small drainage channels run along Palm Avenue on both sides of the road. The channel located on the east side is an open "V" channel . The channel on the west side and adjacent to the site is a box culvert that runs beneath the sidewalk and curb. The existing land use on the site is single-family residential. There is a multi-family residential development to the west and north of the site. North beyond that development is a commercial center on Highland Avenue. East of the site and across Palm Avenue is vacant land and a church with extensive grounds. The land south of the site is under construction as State Route 30. The land use designation on site and immediately north, east and west of the site is RM, Residential Medium. North of the site and north of the multi-family development is an area designated CG-1, Commercial General. At the southeast corner of Palm Avenue and Atlantic Avenue there is a small area designated CG-1. (See Exhibit A. ) INITIAL STUDY for GPA91-16 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 3.1 Environmental Setting The site lies along the west side of Palm Avenue which is a major arterial. The State Route 30 freeway, which is in the process of construction at this time, abuts the site on the south. The other streets in the area are local streets. There are no seismic or geologic concerns. The homes on the site were built between 1920 and 1935 and display the characteristics of a number of architectural styles. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING,AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND Application Number: 6'4%! ,444 Project Description: - �z �2 Location: SF� , D Environmental Constraints Areas: General Plan Designation: Q/hr �ES/p,ENi'7'9G /i/60/G!/79 Zoning Designation: N�A B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explain answers,where appropriate,on a separate attached sheet. 1. Earth Resources Will the proposal result in: Yes No Maybe a. Earth movement(cut and/or fill)of 10,000 cubic yards or more? b. Development and/or grading on a slope greater than 15%natural grade? X c. Development within the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone as defined in Section 12.0-Geologic &Seismic, Figure 47,of the City's General Plan? X d. Modification of any unique geologic or physical feature? x e. Development within areas defined for high potential for water or wind erosion as identified in Section 12.0- Geologic&Seismic,Figure 53,of the City's General Plan? X I. Modification of a channel,creek or river? PIANM PAGE10c_ (11-W) g. Development within an area subject to landslides, Yes No Maybe mudslides, liquefaction or other similar hazards as identified in Section 12.0-Geologic& Seismic, Figures 48,52 and 53 of the City's General Plan? X h. Other? 2. Air Resources: Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or an effect upon ambient air quality as defined by AOMD? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X c. Development within a high wind hazard area as identified in Section 15.0-Wind& Fire, Figure 59, of the City's General Plan? 3. Water Resources: Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns,or the rate and amount of surface runoff due to impermeable surfaces? x b. Changes in the course or flow of flood waters? x c. Discharge into surface waters or any alteration of surface water quality? _ d. Change in the quantity of quality of ground water? )! e. Exposure of people or property to flood hazards as identified in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel Number 060281 - , and Section 16.0- Flooding, Figure 62,of the City's General Plan? X f. Other? 4. Biological Resources: Could the proposal result in: a. Development within the Biological Resources Management Overlay,as identified in Section 10.0 -Natural Resources, Figure 41,of the City's General Plan? X b. Change in the number of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants or their habitat including stands of trees? X c. Change in the number of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals or their habitat? X d. Removal of viable, mature trees? (6'or greater) X e. Other? 5. Nolse: Could the proposal result in: a. Development of housing, health care facilities,schools, libraries, religious facilities or other'noise'sensitive uses in areas where existing or future noise levels exceed an Ldn of 65 dB(A)exterior and an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior as identified in Section 14.0-Noise, Figures 14-6 and 14.13 of the City's General Plan? PI OM P,1GE20G_ (11-00) b. Development of new or expansion of existing industrial, Yes No Maybe commercial or other uses which generate noise levels on areas containing housing, schools, health care facilities or other sensitive uses above an Ldn of 65 dB(A)exterior or an Ldn of 45 dB(A)interior? X c. Other? 6. Land Use: Will the proposal result in: a. A change in the land use as designated on the General Plan? X b. Development within an Airport District as identified in the Air installation Compatible Use Zone(AICUZ) Report and the Land Use Zoning District Map? X' c. Development within Foothill Fire Zones A&B, or C as Identified on the Land Use Zoning District Map? X d. Other? 7. Man-Made Hazards: Will the project: a. Use,store,transport or dispose of hazardous or toxic materials(including but not limited to oil, pesticides,chemicals or radiation)? X_ b. Involve the release of hazardous substances9 x c. Expose people to the potential health/safety hazards? d. Other? S. Housing: Will the proposal: a. Remove existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? k' b. Other? 9. Transportation/Circulation: Could the proposal, in comparison with the Circulation Plan as identified in Section 6.0-Circulation of the City's General Plan, result in: a. An increase in traffic that is greater than the land use designated on the General Plan? _ b. Use of existing,or demand for new, parking facilities/structures? c. Impact upon existing public transportation systems? d. Alteration of present patterns of circulation? X o. Impact to rail or air traffic? x' f. Increased safety hazards to vehicies,bicyclists or pedestrians? i G. A disjointed pattern of roadway improvements? X h. Significant increase in traffic volumes on the roadways or intersections? D X L Other? Pn4Kr,)4 FenQ l-urykE 1<aygly n �"LL'��B1M" PWJ-pD6 P,1GE]OG rrr-m� 10. Public Services: Will the proposal impact the following Yes No Maybe beyond the capability to provide adequate levels of service? a. Fire protection? X b. Police protection? c. Schools (i.e., attendance, boundaries,overload, etc.)? X d. Parks or other recreational iacillties? X' e. Medical aid? X 1. Solid Waste? X g. Other? 11. Utilities: Will the proposal: a. Impact the following beyond the capability to provide adequate levels of service or require the construction of new facilities? 1. Natural gas? x 2. Electricity? X 3. Water? a. Sewer? k 5. Other? b. Result in a disjointed pattern of utility extensions? _ ( c. Require the construction of new facilities? S� 12. Aesthetics: a. Could the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic view? b. Will the visual impact of the project be detrimental to the surrounding area? X c. Other? �ESLRdiP!/LZ✓Uf EXIST%.✓S�E/L/ ?iYI,Y/d JC 13. Cultural Resources: Could the proposal result in: a. The alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site by development within an archaeological sensitive area as identified in Section 3.0-Historical,Figure B,of the City's General Plan? X b. Alteration or destruction of a historical she, structure or object as listed in the City's Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey? c. Other? mnww�n�ou�ua PL11.9M PAGE40r_ (11A 14. Mandatory Findings of Significance (Section 15065) The California Environmental Quality Act states that if any of the following can be answered yes or maybe, the project may have a significant effect on the environment and an Environmental Impact Report shall be prepared. Yes No Maybe a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below sell sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term,to the disadvantage of long-tens, environmental goals?(A short-tens impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small,but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) X d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Attach sheets as necessary.) SEi A7T//f/if.d c5 19fE TS vuwoas nwesoc_ 0+-901 - o - o INITIAL STUDY for GPA91-16 3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 3 .2 . 1. Earth Resources 1. a thru e, g. Since the site is already developed future grading of quantity is unlikely. Future reuse as permitted within the CO-2 designation will most likely create a need for additional parking/access. The site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone and contains no unique geologic or physical features. The site is not subject to wind or water erosion. 1. f. The U.S. Geological Survey's Harrison Mountain 7. 5 Minute quadrangle indicates that there is an intermittent blueline stream parallelling the west side of Palm Avenue. City records indicate that the stream has been channelized and is now contained within a concrete box drainage culvert that runs beneath the sidewalk and curb in that area of Palm Avenue. The stream does not exist in its natural state. 3 . 2 .2 Air Resources 2 . a, b, c. The site is developed and redesignation will have minimal effect on air quality. Future reuse of the site will not lead to an increase in emissions that are significant. The CO-2 designation does not permit uses that create objectionable odors. The site is not within the high wind hazard area. 3 .2 . 3 Water Resources 3 . a thru e. Since the site is developed, it already contains impermeable surfaces. Improvements to or reuse of the site/buildings could lead to changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the amount of runoff, especially as a result of the need for additional parking and access. The potential for change of impermeable surface area would be minimal due to the small size of the amendment site. The site is not within a flood hazard area as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. - o - INITIAL STUDY for GPA91-16 3 . 2 . 4 Biological Resources 4 . a thru c. All natural vegetation that may have existed on this site was removed when development occurred. The site is not located in the Biological Resource Management Overlay and no unique, rare or endangered plant or animal species are known to exist in the area. 4 . d. This amendment proposal will not impact any trees, however, there are a number of large mature trees on the site and proposals to remove/ relocate them will be addressed at the project review stage of future development. 3 .2 . 5 Noise 5. a, b. The noise associated with the site is that generated on Palm Avenue. The proposed CO-2 designation does permit uses that are somewhat more intense than the present use, however, future development is not anticipated to generate noise of significance. The site is close to the future SR30 freeway and noise impacts, if any, will be addressed at the time of future development. General Plan, figure 58, Future Noise, shows the noise contours of the proposed SR30 and impacts are not anticipated at the site. 3 .2. 6 Land Use 6. a. The project is to change the City's General Plan Land Use Plan designation from RM, Residential Medium to CO- 2 , Commercial Office. 6. b, c. The site is not within an Airport District nor within any of the Foothill Fire Zones. - o INITIAL STUDY for GPA91-16 3 . 2 . 7 Man-Made Hazards 7. a thru c. The existing development does not use, store, transport or dispose of any measurable hazardous materials. Future commercial office uses of the site could involve the use of hazardous materials. A proposal would be evaluated to determine if there were project specific impacts. 3 . 2 .8 Housing 8. a thru c. The proposed amendment will have no direct impact on existing housing nor create a demand for additional housing. The possible future conversion of the homes to office use would remove them from the City's inventory of housing stock. This will have minimal impact on the overall availability of existing housing. 3 . 2 . 9 Transportation/Circulation 9. a thru h. The City Traffic Engineer indicates that the proposed land use designation change will not adversely impact the circulation in the area and that a traffic impact study is not required. 9. i. In the event that Palm Avenue is widened, future office use could have difficulty providing adequate on-site and/or street parking. The issue of parking will be addressed at future design review for any proposed projects. 3 . 2 . 10 and 11. Public Services and Utilities These sections are not impacted by the proposed General Plan amendment. INITIAL STUDY for GPA91-16 3 . 2 . 12 Aesthetics 12 . a, b. No view will be obstructed nor will any visual change impact the surrounding area. 12. c. The amendment would provide a mechanism for preservation of the aesthetic quality of the existing neighborhood. 3 .2 . 13 Cultural Resources 13. a, b. Neither the alteration nor destruction of any archaeological or historical site will occur as a result of this project. The development trend along Palm Avenue is to commercial or multi-family uses and the absence of this land use designation change could lead to the loss of potentially historic residential structures and their associated architectural styles. This General Plan amendment is to provide an appropriate land use designation to allow for adaptive reuse in the future. The site area was not included in the area covered by the City' s Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey. The residences appear to exhibit architectural features associated with the California Bungalow, Queen Anne Cottage, Neoclassic Cottage and other historical architectural styles. A historical preservation consultant who meets the qualification standards described in the Federal Register should be contracted to perform a full evaluation upon a decision to modify or reuse any of the structures. 3 .2 . 14 Mandatory Findings of Significance The site is developed with a residential use and redesignation from RM to CO-2 will not create any significant environmental impacts. D. DETERMINATION ' _ O 1 the basis of this initial study, ' The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARA- TION will be prepared. E] 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 LaV !2 �6- Reed QS 5tahf ArLhy-,, �(4111 Lt "��avu �w(C1AVJ CSPVUI<-t Name adle ZW�-7 Signature Date: PL F PAGE—OF— Itta01 ATTACHMENT 3 O 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN 3 AMENDMENT NO. 91-16 TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO. 4 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 5 SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: 6 SECTION 1. Recitals 7 (a) The General Plan for the City of San Bernardino was 8 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council by Resolution No. 89-159 on 9 June 2 , 1989 . 10 (b) General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 to the General Plan of 11 the City of San Bernardino was considered by the Planning 12 Commission on March 3 , 1993 , after a noticed public hearing, and 13 the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval has been 14 considered by the Mayor and Common Council. 15 (c) An Initial Study was prepared on September 18 , 1991 and 16 reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee and the Planning 17 Commission who both determined that General Plan Amendment No. 91- 18 16 would not have a significant effect on the environment and 19 therefore, recommended that a Negative Declaration be adopted. 20 (d) The proposed Negative Declaration received a 21 day 21 public review period from October 17 , 1991 through November 6, 1991 22 and all comments relative thereto have been reviewed by the 23 Planning Commission and the Mayor and Common council in compliance 24 with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and local 25 regulations. 26 (e) The Mayor and Common Council held a noticed public 27 hearing and fully reviewed and considered proposed General Plan 28 1 0 0 1 Amendment No. 91-16 and the Planning Division Staff Report on April 2 19, 1993 . 3 (f) The adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 is 4 deemed in the interest of the orderly development of the City and 5 is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the 6 existing General Plan. 7 SECTION 2 . Negative Declaration 8 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND AND DETERMINED by the Mayor 9 and Common Council that the proposed amendment to the General Plan 10 of the City of San Bernardino will have no significant effect on 11 the environment, and the Negative Declaration heretofore prepared 12 by the Environmental Review Committee as to the effect of this 13 proposed amendment is hereby ratified, affirmed and adopted. 14 SECTION 3 . Findings 15 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE 16 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO THAT: 17 A. The change of designation from RM, Residential Medium to CO-2 , is Commercial Office for the proposed amendment will change the 19 land use map only and is not in conflict with the goals, 20 objectives and policies of the General Plan. 21 B. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public 22 interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. 23 C. All public services are available to the study area. Any 24 development permissible under the CO-2, Commercial Office 25 designation proposed by this amendment would not impact on 26 such services. 27 D. The proposed amendment will minimally affect the balance of 28 2 0 0 1 land uses within the City. 2 E. The amendment site is physically suitable for the CO-2 , 3 Commercial Office land use designation. Anticipated future 4 land use has been analyzed in the Initial Study and it has 5 been determined that the existing development on the nine lots 6 of record may continue in accordance with Development Code 7 Section 19 . 04 . 010 2 .E. 8 SECTION 4 . Amendment 9 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council that: 10 A. The Land Use Plan of the General Plan of the City of San 11 Bernardino is amended by changing approximately 1. 7 acres 12 consisting of 9 parcels from RM, Residential Medium to CO-2 , 13 Commercial office. This amendment is designated as General 14 Plan Amendment No. 91-16 and its location is outlined on the 15 map entitled Attachment A, and is more specifically described 16 in the legal descriptions entitled Attachment B, copies of 17 which are attached and incorporated herein by reference. 18 B. General Plan Amendment No. 91-16 shall become effective 19 immediately upon adoption of this resolution. 20 SECTION 5. Mao Notation 21 This resolution and the amendment affected by it shall be 22 noted on such appropriate General Plan maps as have been previously 23 adopted and approved by the Mayor and Common Council and which are 24 on file in the office of the City Clerk. 25 SECTION 6. Notice of Determination 26 The Planning Division is hereby directed to file a Notice of 27 28 3 0 0 1 Determination with the County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino 2 certifying the City's compliance with California Environmental 3 Quality Act in preparing the Negative Declaration. 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 A. 0 0 1 RESOLUTION . . .ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 91-16 TO THE GENERAL 2 PLAN OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO. 3 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly 4 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San 5 Bernardino at a meeting therefore held on the 6 day of 1993 , by the following vote to 7 wit: 8 Council Members AYES NAYS ABSTAI ABSENT 9 ESTRADA 10 REILLY _ 11 HERNANDEZ _ 12 MAUDSLEY 13 MINOR 14 POPE-LUDLAM 15 MILLER 16 17 City Clerk 18 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day of , 1993. 19 20 W.R. Holcomb, Mayor 21 City of San Bernardino 22 Approved as to form and legal content: 23 JAMES F. PENMAN 24 City ttorney 25 By e 26 27 28 5 ATTACHMENT A CK ! OF SAN BERNARDINO "*ro GPA 991-16 STREET 1 v I Kyle a� yy Dyl i V � � mm � alp ®®� F ® • y^ • ®n o` 'wa n ' OAry1.�py LYUI� I \® 4®H�I�M+M1iG�vll ° m0 p a S ® e a A a I � n I �i® ®�w ro ® • �o By -- nn ea ro ss d6 mu5 o Vµ. ' �j:::�: ::M: :!' eo'1 ::�'.:::`.��.:::: .:::: ::::':: • Como qo ..ro . ::� :.f•:::r . 5::.. ::4: � 'se.9s t w m 1 000 O CITY OF SAN BERNARL) INO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO . 91-16 TITLE LOCATION and LAND USE DESIGNATIONS /P F N I ri ♦ E PIEpMCMT 4 4 - G w .IEISYI* MALL y ' Q vlrTo# OSwIIwO Q T Q Q Q Q Q O N K7 Qo ads. Mi M M rlMIGHI•V•^ I e�wM _ p M . 3� . Ku � I EXHIBIT A ATTACHMENT B CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 91-16 LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS 287-056-57 The following described real property in the County of San Bernardino, State of California: That portion of the southeast 1/4 of the northeast 1/4 of the northeast 1/4 of Section 32 , township 1 north, range 3 west, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, according to Government Survey, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the east line of said Section 32 , which is 134 feet south of the northeast corner of the southeast 1/4 of the northeast 1/4 of the northeast 1/4 of said Section 32 ; thence continuing south along the east line of said Section to a point which is 114 feet north of the easterly extension of the north line of Lot 1, Palm Avenue Square Tract 1745, recorded in Book 25 of Maps, Page 32, thence West 150 feet; thence north to a point 134 feet south of the north line of the southeast 1/4 of the northeast 1/4 of the northeast 1/4 of said section 32 ; thence east 150 feet to the point of beginning. Excepting therefrom that portion lying within Palm Avenue. 287-056-58 The following described real property in the City of San Bernardino County of San Bernardino, State of California: That portion of the north half of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 32, township 1 north, range 3 west, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, according to Government survey, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the east line of Palm Avenue, being 60 feet from the northeast corner of Lot 1 Palm Avenue Square, Tract 1745 as per plat 0 Attachment B GPA No. 91-16 April 19, 1993 Page 2 recorded in Book 25 of maps, page 32 ; Thence west 150 feet; Thence north 54 feet; Thence east 150 feet to the west line of Palm Avenue; Thence south 54 feet to the point of beginning. 287-056-59 All that certain real property lying and being in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, particularly described as: That portion of the north 1/2 of the southeast 1/4 of the northeast 1/4 of then northeast 1/4 of Section 32, township 1 north, range 3 west, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, as per Government survey, described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of Lot 1, Tract No. 1745, Palm Avenue, square recorded in book 25 of Maps, Page 32 ; thence west on the north line of said Lot 1, 150 feet to the northwest corner thereof; thence north 60 feet; thence east parallel with said north line of Lot 1, 150 feet to the west line of Palm Avenue, as shown on the above mentioned map of said Tract 1745; thence south on said west line of Palm Avenue, 60 feet to the point of beginning. 287-056-60 Tract 1745, Lot 1, Palm Avenue square as recorded in Book 25 of Maps, Page 32, County of San Bernardino, State of California. 287-056-61 Tract 1745, Lot 2, Palm Avenue square as recorded in Book 25 of Maps, Page 32, County of San Bernardino, State of California. 287-056-62 Tract 1745, Lots 3 and 4, Palm Avenue square as recorded in Book 25 of Maps, Page 32, County of San Bernardino, State of California. 287-056-63 Tract 1745, Lot 5, Palm Avenue square as recorded in Book 25 of Maps, Page 32, County of San Bernardino, State of California. 287-056-64 Tract 1745, Lot 6, Palm Avenue square as recorded in Book 25 of Maps, Page 32, County of San ' Bernardino the land particularly described as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the centerline of p O Attachment B _ GPA No. 91-16 April 19, 1993 Page 3 Atlantic Avenue and Palm Avenue, said point also being the Corporate City Limit Line of the City of San Bernardino as it now exists; thence westerly along said centerline and said Corporate City Limit Line, a distance of 52 .00 feet, to the true point of beginning; thence continuing westerly along said centerline and said Corporate city Limit Line, to its intersection with the southerly prolongation of the west line of Lot 6, Tract No. 1745, as per Map recorded in Book 25 of Maps, Page 32 , Records of said County; thence north 58° 04 ' 50" west to its intersection with the westerly prolongation of the south line of said Lot 6; thence easterly along said prolongation and the south line of said Lot 6, to a point 52. 00 feet west of the centerline of said Palm Avenue, as measured at right angles; thence southerly along a line parallel to the centerline of Palm Avenue, 20.00 feet to the true point of beginning. Excepting the easterly 13 feet of Lot 6, Tract No. 1745, Palm avenue Square, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, as per plat recorded in Book 25 of Maps, Page 32, Records of said County. 287-056-65 The following described real property in the county of San Bernardino, State of California: The west 30 feet of the east 180 feet of the south 82 feet of the north 216 feet of the north one half of the southeast 1/4 of the northeast 1/4 of the northeast 1/4 , Section 32, township 1 north, range 3 west, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, according to the official plat of said land approved by the Surveyor General, dated August 30, 1878.