Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout23- Planning and Building Services CITY OF SAN BERN,..uRDINO - REQUEST FJR COUNCIL ACTION From: Al Boughey, Director Subject: General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 - To change the land use designation from RS to IL on the west side of "I" Street Oept: Planning & Building Services south of Congress. Date: December 9, 1992 Mayor and Common Council Meeting January 11, 1993 Synopsis of Previous Council action: No-previous action. Recommended motion: That the hearing be closed and the resolution be adopted. Signature Al Boughey Contact person: Al Boughey Phone: 384-5357 Supporting data attached: Staff Report, Resolution Ward: 3 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount. $25.00 Source: (Acct. No.) 171-53150 Acct. Description) Professional & Contract Services i Finance: 66 Council Notes: MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 Mayor and Common Council meeting of January 11, 1993 REQUEST AND LOCATION The applicant is requesting a change in the land use designation from RS, Residential Suburban to IL, Industrial Light for a parcel of approximately 8119 square feet located on the west side of "I" Street, approximately 180 feet south of Congress Street. The site contains an existing machine shop. Staff expanded the study area to include two adjacent parcels totalling 16, 000 square feet, adjacent to the site on the site. These two parcels are vacant. The total amendment site consists of three parcels for a total of approximately 24,000 square feet. Refer to the Planning Commission staff report (Exhibit "A") for a complete discussion and analysis. OWNER/APPLICANT Owners: Elia and Mareta Lata (APN 137-091-56) David Cohn (APN 137-091-16, 57) Applicant: Jack Strickler ENVIRONMENTAL The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the Initial Study and recommended preparation of a Negative Declaration. The public review period was from April 16, 1992 through May 6, 1992. No comments were received. MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OPTIONS 1. The Mayor and Common Council may approve General Plan Amendment No. 91-22. 2. The Mayor and Common Council may continue General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 for additional information. 3. The Mayor and Common Council may deny General Plan Amendment No. 91-22. GPA No. 91-22 MCC January 11, 1993 Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal on August 4, 1992 at a noticed public hearing and recommended adoption of the Negative Declaration and approval of General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 . STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council adopt the resolution which adopts the Negative Declaration and approves General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 . Prepared by: Valerie C. Ross For: Al Boughey, AICP, Director Exhibits: A - Location Map B - Planning Commission Staff Report dated July 21, 1992 Attachments: A - Finding of Fact B - Initial Study C - Resolution i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AGENDA AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ITEM CASE GPA 91-22 LOCATION HEARING DATE 1-11-93 L-!u Liu u L E T .w T _r+u y l -k? _ - --p-q r E, ST� -- r T0►!s• I ( .p i.■T. PC QAIJLta• TANGS C C X T 4 l t I � -1 ` C! T T f 4 � � ■r .T `� 6=mj It - i i S�TE � . LA Go CA i �f 71.Ki1 S P�.nnc a s ..aw i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT :21-AGENDA ITEM . SUMMARY HEARING DATE 7- 92 WARD APPLICANT: Elia & Mareta Lata W 740 Pennsylvania Ave . Redlands, CA 92374 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT Q OWNER: Elia & Mareta Lata V NO. 91-22 David Price David Cone A proposal to change the land use plan from RS, Residential N Suburban to IL, Industrial Light designation on 3 adjoining W parcels consisting of approximately . 55 acres . WThe site is located on the west side of south "I" Street, UJ approximately 180 feet south of Congress Street. W Q Q EXISTING GENERAL PLAN PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION Subject Industrial Bldg & Vacant RS Residential Suburban North Church RS Residential Suburban South Industrial Bldg IL Industrial Light East Industrial Bldg IL Industrial Light West Vacant & Residential RS Residential Suburban GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC ❑ YES FLOOD HAZARD ❑ YE=ZONE HAZARD ZONE: NO ZONE: NO ❑ NO HIGH FIRE ❑ YES L XX AIRPORT NOISE/ ❑ YES REDEVELOPMENT YES HAZARD ZONE: NO CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA: NO entral Cit ❑ NO J NOT ❑ POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z C�XAPPROVAL Q APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH F- MITIGATING MEASURES W NO E.I.R. C I] CONDITIONS LL M Z ❑ EXEMPT ❑ E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO LL Z Z Q SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS Q W ❑ DENIAL OZ WITH M M MEASU ESATING N ❑ CONTINUANCE TO Z Z{NO SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS V LLI EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. W MINUTES Cffy OF CWTPALwwrw ces PLAN-9.02 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90) J General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 Agenda Item• 2 Hearing Date: 8-4-92 Page 1 REQUEST AND SITE LOCATION The applicant is requesting a land use designation change from RS, "Residential Suburban to IL, Industrial Light for a parcel of approximately 8119 square feet located on the west side of Street, approximately 180 feet south of Congress Street. Staff expanded the study area to include two adjacent parcels totalling 16,000 square feet that are adjacent to the site on the south. The total amendment site consists of 3 parcels (APN 137-091-56, 57 and 16) for a total of 24 , 000 square feet. (See Attachment "C") . Directly south of the amendment site is a parcel of approximately 8000 square feet (APN 137-091-51) that is split with the RS and IL designations. General Plan Policy 1.7. 3 permits the adjustment of land use classification boundaries to coincide with legal parcel boundaries if it doesn't create conflicts with adjoining parcels. Based on the discussion that follows, staff determined that IL, Industrial Light was the appropriate designation for this parcel and it is not included in the amendment proposal. AREA CHARACTERISTICS The northernmost parcel is developed and used as a machine shop. The two adjoining parcels are vacant. The site and surrounding area is relatively flat with vacant land, residential and light industrial uses. The adjoining properties to the south are designated IL, Industrial Light and are vacant. East across "I" Street is designated IL, Industrial Light and contains various light manufacturing and related industrial uses. West and north of the site is designated RS, Residential Suburban and is developed with single family homes. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT STATUS An Initial Study was prepared to address all potential impacts with an IL designation. The Environmental Review Committee recommended adoption of a Negative Declaration at their meeting of April 9, 1992. The public comment period extended from April 16, 1992 through May 6, 1992. No- comments were received. General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 Agenda Item• 2 Hearing Date: 8-4-92 Page 2 ANALYSIS General Plan Goal 1G addresses the retention and enhancement of established residential neighborhoods and the development of new residential neighborhoods. The two vacant parcels are separated from the residential neighborhood by the northern parcel which contains the industrial use. The existing neighborhood to the north fronts on Congress Street, whereas these three parcels front directly on "I" Street. Therefore, they are not a part of the established neighborhood to the north. It is also unlikely that the three parcels would ever be developed as a distinctive residential neighborhood due their small size, collectively, their location along a secondary arterial and different ownership. The IL, Industrial Light land use designation permits low intensity manufacturing, warehousing and research and development uses within enclosed structures. Limited outside storage and display is permitted with screening. The General Plan addresses the need to provide for the development of new light industrial uses along major vehicular routes serving the City (Objective 1. 31) . The area proposed for the land use designation change is an expansion of an existing light industrial area along "I" Street. "I" Street carries commercial and industrial truck traffic as well as automobile traffic to and from the businesses in the area. Although there are a few residences that front on "I" Street to the northeast of this site, the majority of residential uses have direct access to east/west streets that intersect "I" Street. Changing the site to IL will not substantially increase the traffic levels on "I" Street over what is existing. The General Plan contains policies that ensure that proposed uses do not adversely impact surrounding uses, both aesthetically and physically. Because the General Plan requires the primary use to be conducted within a building, conflicts are reduced. Screening, fencing, setbacks, landscaping and other required development standards help to further reduce and eliminate conflicts between adjacent land uses and land use designations. While the northernmost parcel contains a use that was developed under previous requirements and it may not meet today's requirements, expansions of the existing use and/or additional development on the parcel would compliance with current development standards. General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 Agenda Item• 2 Hearing Date: 8-4-92 Page 3 CONCLUSION The site is suitable for industrial uses based on its location adjacent to existing industrial uses along a secondary arterial. It will not encroach into or negatively impact the residential neighborhood to the north. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the Mayor and Common Council that: 1. The Negative Declaration be adopted; and 2. General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 be approved based on the Findings of Fact (Attachment "A") . Res p c fu ly u mitted, Al Bo a ire tor Pla in nd Building Services Valerie C. Ross, Acting Principal Planner Attachments: A - Findings of Fact B - Initial Study C - Specific Location D - Location Map General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 Agenda Item• 2 Hearing Date: 8-4-92 Pane 4 ATTACHMENT "A" FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan in that it further implements the goal of providing for industrial development along a major arterial. 2. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City in that a Negative Declaration of environmental is proposed as addressed in the Initial Study. 3 . The proposed amendment would minimally affect the balance of land use in the City, due to the relatively small size of the area in question. 4. The subject parcels are physically suitable in terms of size, location of access, provision of services and utilities and anticipated development both singly and collectively. Attachmen� ,: Now CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT I INITIAL STUDY 4, Initial Study for Environmental Impacts For GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. - 91-22 Project Number Project Description/Location—To_change the land use designation from RS Residential Sub r an to IJ,. Industrial Light on 4 parcels of land comprising 25 701 square feet ( . 59 acres) located on the west side of "I" Street approximately 180 feet south of the centerline of Congrefl Street Date March 30 1992 Prepared for: .'applicants_ Elia Lata c/o Jack Strickler l.ddress 1416 E.2 Highland Avenue San Bernardino CA 92404 Prepared by: Name Paul G. Scroggs Title Assistant Planner City of San Bernardino Planning and Building Services Department 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 C2 MIIW MWIYq Y11NC( PLAN-6.07 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-M CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING,AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST 7A. CKGROUND Application Numbers GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 91-22 Project Descriptions To change the General Plan land use designation from RS, Residential Suburban to IL, Industrial Light of 4 adjoining parcels comprising a 'X total 25,701 square feet ( . 59 acres) . Locations The . 59 acre site is located on the west side of ovIll Street with a total frontage of 167 feet for the 4 parcels and approximately 18o feet south of the centerline of Congress Street. The site i,s further identified as 188 South "III Street and is within the Central City South Redevelopmeltt Area. Environmental Constraints Areat The subject site is located in a designated high liquefaction area and within an historical/archaeological potential cultural resource area. 8. 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 1111)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 SpeL.lal Studies Zone as defined In Section 12.0-Geologic 8 Seismic, Figure 47,of the City's General Plan? X d. Modification of any unique geologic or physical x feature? e. Development within areas defined for high potential for is water or wind erosion as identified In Section 12.0- Geologio 3 Seismic, Figure 53,of the City's General X Plan? I. Modification of a channel,creek or river? X PWd.YAB PAGE 1 OF JA (11-913) g. Development within an area subject to landslides, Yes No Maybe mudslides,liquefaction or other similar hazards as Identified In Section 12.0-Geologic 3 Seismic, Figures 48,52 and 53 of the City's General Plan? X h. Other? X 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 d Fire,Figure 59,of the City's General Plan? X 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 Impermeably 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? x d. Change In the quantity of quality of ground water? k s. Exposure of ppeeople 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 82,of the City's General Plan? X f. Other? x 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 •. Other? X S. Nolsa: Could the proposal result In: a. Devebpment 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? k Puw.oae P,�GEZac re ,,,�„ 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? _ c. Other? X d. Land Uss: Will the proposal result In: a. A change In the land use as designated on the X General Plan? 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 d B,or C as Identified on the Land Use Zoning District Map? d. Other? ?G T. 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 substances? ' c. Expose people to the potential heafth/satety hazards? _ d. Other? X 6. Housing: Will the proposal: a. Remve existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? _ 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? X b. Use of existing,or demand for new,parking Iacilities/structures? �( c. Impact upon existing public transportation systems? K d. Alteration of present patterns of circulation? a. Impact to rail or air traffic? x I. Increased safety hazards to vehicles,bicyclists or pedestrians? X g. A disjointed pattern of roadway Improvements? X h. Significant Increase In traffic volumes on the roadways or Intersections? X _ I. Other? -^ -- __ X Pl�u.nK ere Inc /A ...ww, 10. Public Services: Will the proposal impact the following Yes No Maybe beyond the capability to provide adequate levels of service? a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? _ c. Schools(Le.,attendance,boundaries,overload,etc,)? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X e. Medical ald? X f. Solid Waste? X g. Other? 11. Utllltles: 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? 2. Electricity? 3. Water? X 4. Sewer? X 6. Other? b. Result In a disjointed pattern of utility extensions? c. Require the construction of new facilities? X 12. Aesthetics: a. Could the proposal result In the obstruction of any scenic view? k b. Will the visual impact of the project be detrimental to the surrounding area? Y c. Other? k 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 site,structure or object as listed In the City's Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey? K c. Other? X PI I/J.ana 0—,nr Jw i I i i 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 popular: +to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare ur endangered plant or animal or eliminate Important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term,to the disadvantage of long-term,environmental goals?(A short-term Impact on the environment Is one which occurs In a relatively brief,definitive period of time while long-term Impacts will endure well Into the future.) X 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? X C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Attach sheets as necessary.) SEE ATTACHED SHEETS Amendment site and Surrounding Area Characteristics: The site is comprised of 4 adjoining small parcels, the northern most is presently improved with an older metal ware- house utilized previously as a tool shop and related repair type facilities. The remaning 3 parcels to the south are vacant lots. All parcels to the south of the subject site and to the east are designated as IL, Industrial Light and are mostly developed and presently used for light manufacturing and related warehouse uses. However, there are a few, scattered remaining single- family homes located along the east side of rift Street northward of the subject site on up to Rialto Avenue. The areas west of the subject site and northward are designated RS, Residential Suburban and are mostly improved with single—family homes. There is also an existing church located directly adjacent to and north of the subject site. PLAN•2M PAnc Rnc iw CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES DISSCUSSION 1. EARTH RESOURCES - 1g. High Liquefaction Area - The subject site is located in a City designated area of high liquefaction susceptibility. The 4 parcel site is presently improved with an existing warehouse and otherwise vacant. The proposed General Plan Amendment change from the current RS, Residential Suburban designation to IL, Industrial Light in of itself will not pose an impact either to the subject site or to surrounding properties in that any future development planned for the site can be structurally designed to most and/or exceed code requirements for construction within these designated zones. 2. AIR RESOURCES -2a.6 b. Potential Air Emissions, Odors Creation The proposed General Plan Amendment to change the 4 subject parcels to IL would permit light industrial uses that have the potential for air emissions and creations of odors typical to outlets utliized for a variety of light manufacturing, vehicle repair and :elated industrial warehouse uses. The subject site, itself, has been used previously for such businesses, most recently a machine and tool shop occupied the existing metal warehouse. As such, it is expected that future permitted IL, Industrial Light operations may result in occasional air emissions related to the use and handling of solvents and/or oils typical to vehicle repair outlets as well as from the presence of larger trucks utilized in other IL permitted warehousing and light manufacturing businesses. Project reviews and approvals are required for all such perspective IL uses, with compliance of all City Development Code Standards, including the requirement for conducting all proposed repair work within enclosed structures as well as adherence to all CAL-OSHA and San Bernardino County Health services requirements in regards to handling, storage and disposal of potential hazardous materials. All access to the four subject parcels will be off south "I,, Street, an existing, major north-south busii.ess arterial that will not pose any impacts to adjoining residential properties to the north and west. By following proper procedures and with approved permitting and project reviews such future air emissions should remain minimal and reduced to within acceptable levels as to be determined non-significant. 3. WATER RESOURCES - 3a A 3b. Absorption Rates, Runoff i Discharge The northern most of the 4 parcels is presently improved with an existing warehouse and adjoining asphalt paving. The other 3 parcels to the south are vacant. Absorption rates will likely decrease along with increased runoff during periods of occas- ional heavy precipitation once development occurs on these southern parcels, as a result of increased hardscapes and other impermeable surfaces. Absorption rates and runoff are not likely CITY OF SAN BERNAriJINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES DISCUSSION CONT. i 3. WATER RESOURCES Cont. - to increase substantially for the developed northern most parcel with itis existing warehouse and adjoining paved hardscape areas. If the GPA to change the land use designation to Industrial Light is approved project specific conditions require that all discharges into public sewer and/or other storm drain facilities shall be free of any hazardous or other waste type products detrimental to underground water tables. S. NOISE - 5b. Subject Property Abuts Residential The site area of the proposed General Plan Amendment has itis western and northern property lines abutting RS, Residential Suburban designated land use districts whose properties are for the most part improved with single-family residences. Both this residential area and a large area directly to the south and east of the subject site which is designated IL, Industrial Light are long-established adjoining properties uses and, as such, noise emissions are not likely to increase substantially from the proposed GPA to change the four, small subject parcels also to a light industrial land use designation. No large truck or other heavy vehicular traffic should impact these adjoining residen- tial areas, as all four subject parcels have frontages and take all access of south III,$ Street, an established City business artery. Noise reducing conditions of approval can also be imposed on any future permitted IL use for the subject sites to further buffer any potential impacts to nearby residences. 6. LAND USE - 6a. Land Use Designation Change - General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 proposes to change the land use designation of four (4) small parcels comprising a total 25,701 square feet or a .59 acre site from RS, Residential Suburban to IL, Industrial Light. 7 . MAN-MADE HAZARDS: - 7a. Hazardous Wastes - General Plan Amendment No. 91-22, if approved, would result in the some type of future permitted IL, light industrial use. As such, it is likely that some amounts of oils and/or other types of typical cleaning solvents will be utilized, stored and require a means for safe disposal. For any such proposed future uses, project applicants shall be required to adhere to all CAL-OSHA and San Bernardino County Health Services requirements, including proper permitting, and following approved handling, storage and disposal techniques. #,. ° : PLAN-8.12 PAr.F J0F/a i' CITY OF SAN BERNAnDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES DISCUSSION CONT. 9. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION - 9c. i h. Site Access All four subject parcels have present access only off south "III Street, an established, major north-south business arterial within this portion of the City. General Plan Amendment No. 91-22, if approved, will not change access or circulation patterns to the site for any project specific future IL, Industriial Light proposed uses. As such, the smaller, local residential streets to the north and west of the site Should remained non-impacted by the proposed land use designation change. Future project specific proposals could be conditioned to futher insure no heavy truck traffic being allowed into these adjoining residential areas. 13. CULTURAL RESOURCES: - 13c. Historical/Archaeological Area - The northernmost of the four subject parcels is developed with an existing, older metal warehouse/garage and &djoining asphalt pavement. The other three small adjacent lots are vacant, though they appear to have been previously disked for weed abatement over the years. All four parcels are within the southwestern edge of a City designated potential Historical/Archaeological cultural resource area. while the proposed General Plan Amendment, itself, if approved does not pose any immediate impacts to the presence of any possible remaning archaeological or historical cultural resources, future projects will require clearance from Dr. Ross of the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center prior to any specific project proposal approval. pgs GPA 91-22 ins GWFAL PLAN•8.12 PAGESOF 10 N D. DETERMINATION On 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 Larry E. Reed, Assistant Director Name and Title -zett Signature Date: April 9, 1992 PLAN-946 PAGIE g OF (»001 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AGENDA AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ITEM # LOCATION CASE HEARING DATE STREET „C _ .III' If1.11 ` �1 a T i s s 3 Y / ® j► -l� --- --- - MK wr Ir 7 1t Est » 4 Zo rI zz ri z4 ` e ie 19 ® ® 4 4 COWEW STREET Z I—'CENTRAL) �. 1':CNBRESS S7Rt'ET t4 14D 27 1 39 31 51 T V- 35 zs r• 3 s - 25 12 ]! 40 3T ® ® 24 38 23 HENDERSON I LANE— �` ' r t ©0 AC. INA IS N 1 09 oil ' I it 93 ; *s' DELTA_ LAW- 1 PI.AW4.11 PAGc40F j Q app) CITY OF -D • PLANNING AGENDA LOCATION AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ITEM# CASE HEARING DATE Mel r - _ __ _� � _ , iii■ ■ Mr. ` . ���• N . Attachment "C" J CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AGENDA AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ITEM# CASEGPA 91-22 LOCATION 2 HEARING DATE 8-3-92 MK Lor® !' ' 41 ' 1t 1l.tt s k 1 • SnMr g ,00, Z.. I-rMNTRAt1 i. -- ' GRESSf STRM . 34 27 'Of L000, ® Js 2s < < ]! 40 37 24 1� ® J• L23] HENDERSON 1 4. c 2.30 AC. WA ® 1� I Q N � T t! tJ to 0 --�--- DELTA_ LANE- «rOF GAN CENTRAL PFWnM@ERW" _ PLAN-8.11 PAGE t OF t (4.90) Attachment "D" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AGENDA AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ITEM LOCATION CASE GPA 91-22 2 HEARING DATE 8-4-9 2 [;3 7' U!U lfU U U IT ,. I r' _ T 4 w r r•���..i I •_._ to ST � 1 Torts• I .Ap rA rt R.II>..t YANG$ Ctv T *A l CI 1 T u w� IT of t ' I I I D S TE r "`.i I cull .1 u/ A 44 y L T N Tr r wwr�w.nr.awn�v P416-CI1 PAGiNOFOO ��1 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. 91-22 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. 91-22 to the General Plan of 11 the City of San Bernardino was considered by the Planning 12 Commission on August 4 , 1992 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 March 30, 1992 and 16 reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee and the Planning 17 Commission who both determined that General Plan Amendment No. 91- 18 22 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 April 16, 1992 through May 6, 1992 and 22 all comments relative thereto have been reviewed by the Planning 23 Commission and the Mayor and Common Council in compliance with the 24 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and local regulations. 25 e) The Mayor and Common Council held a noticed public 26 hearing and fully reviewed and considered proposed General Plan 27 28 1 j Amendment No. 91-22 and the Planning Division Staff Report on 2 January 11, 1993 . 3 (f) The adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 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 proposed IL, Industrial Light land use designation is 18 internally consistent with the General Plan in that such a 19 designation is not in conflict with the goals, objectives and 20 policies of the General Plan, and will facilitate the 21 continued and orderly expansion of the area pursuant to 22 General Plan Objective 1. 31. 23 B. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public 24 interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City 25 in that traffic and circulation impacts can be mitigated and 26 the visual impacts associated with IL, Industrial Light, 27 development can addressed through development standards. 28 2 I C. The proposed amendment would maintain the appropriate balance 2 of land uses within the City in that the proposed amendment is 3 supported by the mix of uses in the area while a sufficient 4 amount of viable, residentially-designated property is 5 available in surrounding areas. 6 D. The amendment area is physically suitable for the requested 7 land use designation and anticipated land use development in 8 that the size and location along a major arterial is able to 9 support a light industrial development. 10 SECTION 4 . Amendment 11 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council that: 12 A. The Land Use Plan of the General Plan of the City of San 13 Bernardino is amended by changing approximately 24 , 000 square 14 feet from RS, Residential Suburban to IL, Industrial Light. 15 This amendment is designated as General Plan Amendment No. 91- 16 22 and its location is outlined on the map entitled Attachment 17 A, and is more specifically described in the legal description 18 entitled Attachment B, copies of which are attached and 19 incorporated herein be reference. 20 B. General Plan Amendment No. 91-22 shall become effective 21 immediately upon adoption of this resolution. 22 SECTION 5. Maio Notation 23 This resolution and the amendment affected by it shall be 24 noted on such appropriate General Plan maps as have been previously 25 adopted and approved by the Mayor and Common Council and which are 26 on file in the office of the City Clerk. 27 28 3 1 SECTION 6. Notice of Determination 2 The Planning Division is hereby directed to file a Notice of 3 Determination with the County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino 4 certifying the City's compliance with California Environmental 5 Quality Act in preparing the Negative Declaration. 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 1 RESOLUTION. . .ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 91-22 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 ABSTAIN 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 1q of 1993 . 20 W. R. Holcomb, Mayor 21 City of San Bernardino 22 Approved as to form and legal content: 23 JAMES F. PENMAN, 24 CityrAttorney 25 By: 26 27 28 5 CITY uF SAN 6ERNPARDINO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO . 91-22 [TITLE MAP ® ter• .r• "-------- . - MK wr or ; 7 �qS r Ilk"Ilk" . t 81 f I—T 1--WORDS QRDS STFaMT . N NO YI � K (A . 10 jr my Tot 70 ® 0 � ® 1s is • �rtr U23 a—HENOERSW 1 LA ME 23o A& WA it 23 da► t0 y • �p i- OtUA_ LAW- ATTACHMENT A rCITY OF SAN BERNARDINO GEENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO . 91-22 LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE LAND SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL NO. 1: THE SOUTH 50 FEET OF THE NORTH 230 FEET OF THE EAST 160 FEET OF LOT 3, BLOCK 13, RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 7 OF MAPS, PAGE 2, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL NO. 2: THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 131, RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 11, PAGE 12, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTH 50 FEET OF THE NORTH 230 FEET OF THE EAST 160 FEET OF LOT 3 , BLOCK 13 , RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO, SAID POINT BEING A NAIL AND TAG LS 23801 IN THE SIDEWALK, THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 50 FEET OF THE NORTH 230 FEET OF THE EAST 160 FEET A DISTANCE OF 2 .02 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTHERLY ON A LINE PERPENDICULAR TO SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 2 . 50 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ON A LINE PARALLEL TO SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 60. 50 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY ON A LINE, SAID LINE PERPENDICULAR TO SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 2.50 FEET TO SAID SOUTH LINE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. i i i ATTACHMENT B