HomeMy WebLinkAbout41- Planning CIT% OF SAN BERNARDII - REOUL ,;T FOR COUNCIL AC ;ON
R. Ann Siracusa
From: Director of PlanhJn Subject: Change of Zone No. 87-9
t�,_�;���,p„
Dept: Planning Mayor and Council Meeting of
January 19 , 1988 , 2: 00 p.m.
Date: January 6 , 1987
VF
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
Previous Planning Commission action:
At the meeting of the Planning Commission on January 5, 1988 , the
following recommendation was made:
The application for Change of Zone No. 87-9 was unanimously
recommended for denial .
Recommended motion:
To approve, modify or reject the findings and the recommendation
of the Planning Commission.
u-
Si ature R. Ann Siracusa
Contact person: R. Ann Siracusa Phone: 384-5357
Supporting data attached:_Staff Report Ward: 3
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: Source:
Finance: _
Council Notes:
low
A
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
AGENDA ITEM 1 5 88
SUMMARY HEARING DATE
WARD 3
APPLICANT Concept Environmental
Sciences
W 3684 N. Broadmoor Blvd.
N Change of Zone No. 87-9
Q OWNER1 San Bernardino, CA 92404
U Frank A. & Maddalena
U M,�t-i I rl;:i Ma r I a MA 7 7a r ,00
Smiderle 626 West "(3- St
Ontario, CA 91762
W The applicant is requesting to change the zoning district from
dR-1-7200 , Single Family Residential , to P .R.D. -7 , Planned Resi-
W dential Development, on approximately 19 . 3 acres .
Q The site is located on the southerly side of Rialto Avenue ,
W approximately 1 , 380 feet west of the centerline of Rancho Avenue .
Q
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION
Subject Vacant R-1-7200 Medium Density, 8-14
North Mobile Home Park C-3A General Commercial
South Mobile Home Park R-3 Medium Low Den . 4-7
East I Mobile Home Park C-3A & R-2 Medium Density, 8-14
West Vacant R-2 Medium Density, 8-14
I
LGE L 061C EISMIC ❑YES FLOOD HAZARD ❑YES ❑ZONE A YES AZARD ZONE 14 NO ZONE ONO []ZONE B SEWERS YES
NO
HIGH FIRE ❑YES AIRPORT NOISE/ ❑ YES REDEVELOPMENT DYES
HAZARD ZONE ENO CRASH ZONE ENO PROJECT AREA ®NO
J ❑ NOT ❑ POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z ® APPROVAL
Q APPLICABLE EFFECTS O
�- WITH MITIGATING H- ❑ CONDITIONS
Z N MEASURES NO E.I.R. Q
Z11 EXEMPT ❑ E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO LWL W ❑ DENIAL
Z Ei SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
0 ?WITH MITIGATING (" ❑ CONTINUANCE TO
_ MEASURES y
O
5 W
Z ® NO ❑ SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS U
W SIGNIFICANT SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. W _
EFFECTS MINUTES Ir
NOV 1981 REVISED JULY 1982
SKY
. 0
CITY OF BAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE CZ No. 87-9
if OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM S
HEARING SATE
1/5/88
PAGE 2
1 . OBSERVATIONS
The request is for approval of a change of zone under
authority of San Bernardino Municipal Code Section
19 .06 .060 from R-1-7200 , Single Family Residential to
P.R.D. 7 , Planned Residential District , 7 units per
acre.
2 . LOCATION
The 19 .3 acre site is located on the south side of
Rialto Avenue, approximately 1 ,380 feet west of the
centerline of Rancho Avenue (See Attachment "C" ) .
3 . MUNICIPAL_CODE/GENERAL_PLAN CONFORMANCE
The subject site is currently zoned R-1-7200 , Single
Family Residential . Approval of proposed Change of Zone
No. 87-9 is consistent with the letters dated June 11 ,
1987 , July 3 , 1987 , and August 18 , 1987 , from the State
Office of Planning and Research to the City of San
Bernardino which stipulate that " . . . .land uses proposed
during the period of the extension will be consistent
with the purpose of the updated general plan provisions
"
4 . CEQA_STATUS
The required Initial Study, was presented to the Envi-
ronmental Review Committee for review (See Attachment
"A" ) for the date December 10 , 1987 . The Environmental
Review Committee accepted the initial study and it was
advertised for public review from December 17 to Decem-
ber 31 , 1987 . No comments were received . The Environ-
mental Review Committee recommended adoption of a
Negative Declaration for the project .
5 . BACKGROUND
The applicant filed Change of Zone No . 87-9 on April 3 ,
1987 with the City Planning Department . The application
was proceeding when the Moratorium commenced . For
several months the case was placed "on hold" pending
further consideration by the State of California . The
case was reactivated in October , 1987 .
T j
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE CZ No. 87-1
OBSERVATIONS AGENDA ITEM 5
HEARING DATE 1/5/88
PAGE 3
6 . ANALYSIS
The subject site is surrounded by mobile home parks to
the north, south and east . The area to the west and
subject site are vacant; surrounding zoning includes ,
C-3A, Limited General Commercial and R-2 , Two Family
Residential District to the east ; C-3A, Limited General
Commercial to the North, R-3-2000 and R-3-1200, Multiple
Family Residential to the south; and R-1-7200, Single
Family Residential and R-2, Two Family Residential to
the west (See Attachment "B" ) .
If the Change of Zone is approved, approximately 135
single or multiple family residential units could be
built on said site.
7 . COMMENTS
Comments received to date include a comment from Coun-
cil . Council feels the issue should be reviewed and
considered during the revision process of the General
Plan .
8 . CONCLUSION
The proposed Change of Zone meets the State of Cali-
fornia, Office of Planning and Research letters of June
11, 1987 , July 3 , 1987 and August 18 , 1987 .
9 . PFCOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission:
1 . Approve the Negative Declaration;
2 . Approve Change of Zone No. 87-9 .
Respectfully submitted,
R. ANN SIRACUSA
Director of Planning
Attachment A - Initial Study
MICHAEL NORTON Attachment B - Site Plan
Associate P l a n n e r Attachment C - Location Map
i
A=014MU A
C
i
dI.
I
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
I
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
S
9
S
s
i
Initial Study
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 87-9
For
Change of Zone
From R-1-7200 , Single Family Residential District
To PRD-7 , Planned Residential Development
Seven Units Per Acre on 19 .3 Acre Site
Located on the South Side of Rialto Avenue ,
Approximately 1380 Feet West of the
a Centerline of Rancho Avenue
December 3 , 1987
Prepared by: Michael Norton
Planning Department
300 North D Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1 .0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1
2 .0 Executive Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
2 .1 Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
2 .2 Project Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
3 .0 Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
3 .1 Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
3 .2 Site/Project Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
3 .2 .1 Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
3 .2 .2 Project Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
4 .0 Environmental Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
4 .1 Environmental Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
4 .2 Environmental Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
4 .2 .1 Transportation/Circulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
5 .0 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1
6 .0 Exhibits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1
Exhibit A - Location Map. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-2
Exhibit B - Environmental Impact Checklist 6-3
Exhibit C - Traffic Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-11
1 .0 INTRODUCTION
This report is provided by the City of San Bernardino as an
Initial Study for the proposed Change of Zone No . 87-9 . The
Zone Change was filed April 3 , 1987 with the City Planning
Department . The processing of this case was delayed due to
the moratorium. The case was determined to require a Traffic
Study by the Environmental Reviw Committee . The applicant
has submitted the traffic report accordingly (see Exhibit A
and C) .
As stated in Committee Section 15063 of the State of
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 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
a Negative Declaration;
2 . Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a
project , mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR
is prepared, thereby, enabling the project to
qualify for a 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. Identifying the effects determined not to be
significant ,
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 .
1-1
I3
0 0
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY for Change Of Zone 87-9
December 3 , 1987
2 .0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2 .1 Proposed Project
The request is for approval of a change of zone from R-1-
7200, Single Family Residential District to PRD-7 , Planned
Residential District , 7 units per acre.
2 .2 Project Impact
The impact identified in the attached Environmental Impact
Checklist (see Exhibit B) is presented:
(9) Could the proposal result in:
a . an increase in traffic that is greater than the
land use designated on the General Plan?
2-1
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY for Change Of Zone 87-9
December 3 , 1987
3 .0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3 .1 Location
The proposed site for Change of Zone No . 87-9 is located on
the south side of Rialto Avenue approximately 1380 feet west
of the centerline of Rancho Avenue . (See Location Map,
Exhibit A) .
3 .2 Site/Project Characteristics
The site consists of three (3) parcels totaling approximately
19 .3 acres . The site is relatively flat with no outstanding
geological features .
3 .2 .1 Existing Conditions
The site is currently vacant with wild grass growing in
place . A gopher mound was observed on the site . The site
has no unique geological or geomorphic features .
3 .2 .2 Project Characteristics
(Refer 3 .2 .1 listed above. )
3-1
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY for Change Of Zone 87-9
December 3 , 1987
4 .0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS
4 .1 Environmental Setting
The current setting is depicted by mobile home parks to the
east , south and north (across Rialto Avenue) . To the
immediate west are vacant fields, (one appears to have a
single family residential structure located on it) . Rialto
Avenue is classified as a "secondary street" at this point on
the City of San Bernardino General Plan Map. The on-site
zoning for the parcel is R-1-7200 , Single Family Residential .
Zoning in the immediate area is as follows: to the north, C-
3A, Limited General Commercial; to the east , C-3A, Limited
General Commercial and R-2, Two Family Residential ; to the
south R-3 , Multiple Family Residential ; to the west R-1-7200 ,
Single Family and R-2 two Family Residential zoning . The
site lies within flood zone C .
4 .2 Environmental Effects
The Environmental Impact Checklist mentioned one area of
concern regarding this particular project :
- Possible traffic/circulation hazards and/or congestion .
The Environmental Impact Checklist is attached as Exhibit B
of this study. The item noted on the checklist is idenfified
below, followed by the recommended mitigation measures .
4 . 2 . 1 Transportation/Circulation
9 . Traffic
An increase in traffic that is greater than the land
use designated on the General Plan?
The Environmental Review Committee requested a traffic
study to review traffic congestion and hazard due to
this project .
It is the position of the City Engineering Department
upon review of the study that this project should con-
tribute its share of the cost of signalization at the
intersection of Mill and Macy Streets upon filing of
subdivision map and/or development of the property.
4-1
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY for Change Of Zone 87-9
December 3 , 1987
5 .0 REFERENCES
Person Contacted:
Mr . Michael Grubbs
Sr . Civil Engineering
City of San Bernardino
5-1
t
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY for Change Of Zone 87-9
December 3 , 1987
6 .0 EXHIBITS
Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Environmental Impact Checklist
Exhibit C - Traffic Study
clj/csj
12/3/87-12/28/87
DOC:MISC
ISCZ879
6-1
EX' BIT A
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT AGENDA
ITEM #
CZ 87-9
LOCATION CASE
HEARING DATE
i00TMILL BLVD
t R-I
C 3A C 3A I R-1 R-I C-M
c o �
C-3A C 3A R-1 C-M a . � M 2
3RD ST. R-I --
s
R•1
.- M-I = M-I
P.R.D. ,c,
14u/ac RI R-I M-1
C•3A '
R-I
PRD I R-1 M-1
R•3 R•3 14u/cc
R-I M-1 M-2
M-1
M-1
M-1 M•2
C 3A R-I R-1 R-I C-3A C-3A
C- M
R-I
R•I —
_ _ RIALTO AV E.
- - M-1 C-3A
C-M
P.RD. R-2 R- C-3A
12u/oc R 2
_ R•1 R
p MTR
R-I
W R-1 R-I
R-i R-2 a T
R-I R-I R-I d
R-I R-I .4_ ° R•I
R-I R-2 u
Z R-1
R 1 ¢R-I
R-I R- I n M-1
R1 R-3
R-3- -.
R-I 2000 R- I
R-I R"2 ct cr -R-I R-3
R-2 R • 2 L
R-I R- I
R-2 =--F- I C3
3
MILL ST.
MILL
-R.3- cz
R-I R-1 R-I R-I ---S.e CITY LIMITS
M-1 CpL�pN
ST. R-I R- I
EXHIBIT
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
F ACKGROUND
pplication Plumber : Change of Zone 87-9
roject Description: Change of zone from R-1-7200 Single Family
Residential District to PRD-7 , Pinned Residential District
7 units per acre.
Location : South side of Rialto Avenue approximately 1380 feet
west of Rancho Avenue .
Redevelopment Area, Enterprise Zone or other Special District : —
General Plan Designation: 4-7 and 8-14 residential units per
__a.cre
Zoning Designation:
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? X
b . Development and/or grading on
a slope greater than 15%
natural grade? X
C . Development within the
Alquist-Priolo Special Studies
Zone? X
d . Modification of any unique
geologic or physical feature? X
REVISED 10/87 PAGE 1 OF 8
COZ 87-9
Yes No Maybe
e . Soil erosion on or off the
project site? X
f . Modification of a channel ,
creek or river? X
g. Development within an area
subject
to landslides, mudslides,
liquefaction or other similar
hazards? X
h. Other? X
2 . AIR RESOURCES: Will the proposal
result in :
a. Substantial air emissions or
an effect upon ambient air
quality? X
b . The creation of objectionable
odors? X
C . Development within a high wind
hazard area? 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 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? X
d. Change in the quantity or
quality of ground waters? X
e . Exposure of people or property
to flood hazards? X
f . Other? X
REVISED 10/87
PA(:(- 9 nF A
M
COZ 87-9
Yes No Maybe
13IOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Could the
proposal result in:
a . Change in the number of any
4 . y
unique , rare or endangered
species of plants or their
habitat including stands of
trees? X
b. Change in the number of any
unique, rare or endangered
species of animals or their
habitat? X
c . Other? X
5 . NOISE: Could the proposal result
in:
a. Increases in existing noise
levels? X
b. Exposure of people to exterior
noise levels over 65 dB or
interior noise levels over 45
dB? X
c . Other? X
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? X
c . Development within "Greenbelt"
Zone A,B, or C? X
d. Development within a high fire
hazard zone? X
e . Other? X
REVISED 10/87 PA(;F I OF A
COZ 87-9
Yes No Maybe
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 substances? X
C . Expose people to the potential
health/safety hazards? X
d. Other? X
8 . HOUSING: Will the proposal :
a. Remove existing housing or
create a demand for additional
housing? X
b. Other? X
9 . TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION: Could
the proposal 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 facilities/
structures? X
C . Impact upon existing public
transportation systems? X
d . Alteration of present patterns
of circulation? X
e . Impact to rail or air traffic? X
f . Increased safety hazards to
vehicles , bicyclists or X
pedestrians?
REVISED 10/87 PAGE 4 OF 8
r s
COZ 87-9
Yes No Maybe
g . A disjointed pattern of
roadway improvements? X
h. Other? X
10 . PUBLIC_SERVICES Will the proposal
impact the following beyond the
capability to provide adequate
levels of service?
a. Fire protection? X
b. Police protection? X
C . Schools (i .e . attendance,
boundaries , overload, etc . ) ? X
d . Parks or other recreational
facilities? X
e. Medical aid? X
f. Solid waste? X
g . Other? X
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?
2 . Electricity? X
3 . Water? x
4 . Sewer? X
5 . Other? X
b . Result in a disjointed
pattern of utility x
extensions?
C . Require the construction of
new facilities? X
REVISED 10/87 OAI'C r rnZ 0
� r
0
COZ 87-9
Yes No Maybe
. AESTHETICS:
a. Could the proposal result in
the obstruction of any scenic
view? X
b . Will the visual impact of the
F 12 e
project be detrimental to the
surrounding area? X
c . Other? X
13 . CULTURAL RESOURCES: Could the
proposal result in :
a . The alteration or destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site? X
b. Adverse physical or aesthetic
impacts to a prehistoric or
historic site, structure or
object? X
c . Other? X
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 .
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 self 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
REVISED 10187 PAGE 6 OF 8
COZ 87-9
Yes No Mavbe
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. )
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 . )
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 . )
9 . a. ERC requested traffic study (applicant has complied with
the submittal of same to City) .
RFVICGn in/ 7
COZ 87-9
F DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation,
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
Name and Title
Signature
Date:
REVISED 10/87 PAGE 8 OF 8
EXHIBIT C
a
r. 109 EAST THIRD STREET AREA 714 884-8217 SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA 92410
A CORPORATION
CIVIL ENGINEERING:SURVEYING
December 4, 1987
_ Zi- C
Mr. Mike Grubbs
/X,
Senior Civil Engineer
Public Works Department
City of San Bernardino
300 N. "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
RE: Zone Change, Smiderle
Macy and Rialto
Dear Mike:
The traffic analysis for the proposed tract has been
re-analyzed for 135 single family units at the request of
the City of San Bernardino. Please refer to the original
report for the location map and other base data.
PROJECTED TRAFFIC FROM THE TRACT
The traffic from the 135 single family units estimated
for the tract was developed using ten trip-ends per unit per
day. The total number of trip-ends per day is equal to
1 , 350 . The peak hour traffic is changed to 85 trip-ends
inbound and 50 trip-ends outbound. The peak hour tract
traffic on Rancho Avenue, north of Rialto Avenue, now
consists of about 25 vehicles .
RIALTO AVENUfs AND NRRIDIAN AVENUE
At Rialto Avenue and Meridian Avenue, the revised volume at
the two-way stop intersection becomes about 1 , 085 vehicles
with the tract included. The intersection is operating at
level of service "C" , and, with the revised tract traffic
added to the intersection, the traffic level of service does
not change.
6-11
r
RIALTO A VENUE AND PROPOSED MACY STREET
At Rialto Avenue and the Proposed Macy Street , the
revised tract traffic is expected to continue to experience
LOS "A" in the p.m. peak hour.
RIALTO AVENUE AND RANCHO AVENUE
Without the tract traffic, the Rialto and Rancho Avenue
signalized intersection remains at level of service "A" and
a V/C ratio of 0. 50 . When the revised traffic is added to
the intersection, the level of service remains at LOS "A"
and the V/C ratio remains about the same, with about 25
additional vehicles .
IMPACTS AND SUMMARY
Based upon the data available and the estimated tract
traffic, it appears that there are no significant ,
measurable impacts which would require specific mitigations
for the tract . The tract under study is now expected to
provide about 3. 1 percent of the existing peak hour traffic
at Rialto Avenue and Meridian and about 1 . 8 percent of the
peak hour traffic at Rialto Avenue and Rancho Avenue. The
revised traffic contribution to the intersection of Mill
Street and Macy Street is now about 6. 5 percent of the
existing p.m. peak hour traffic.
We hope that this information meets the requirements of
your request for a larger number of units as the basis for
the traffic analysis .
Respectfully,
E: Swee Jr . '
Manager - Transportation Division
Traffic Engineer CA 0205
ATTACHMENT B
i,
•. ►. R. R.
C 3 A I
wlA WO ILE HOME PARK)
r~ W
Q
S Gu[T. "Loll'ou T[rt•i/W
' ...
RIALTO .14' riot �IkI:� AYENUL
T I i,R�W tKlit i•CONC.
a....r. n«K WALL
q NACANT) C -3- A Z�
1 -?200 a
Y (VACANT) (MORILE HOME PARK)
9.34 AC..
3
Y t to [n1T i C L.
R-1-7P00 AC R-I-7200 /[NCE
R-2
(VACANT) (VACANT) (MODILE HOME Pang)
3 TTS At
R-1-7 00
j �
R-i-T2Mf _ _'tL,st w`[aTtucq' •o eo CAL-[N914
12111 i CL?INC[
R-3-1200
�.� .LOCK u
WAL
R-3 2000
I.-
i / �/ t[t1T CU1i,iUT i fro. 01.81L HOME (APARTMENTS)
i
(M064E NOME PARK) } I ItE 3-2000 FAMILY
I ( RESIDENTIAL)
E MILL STREET PROPERTY MAP
APN. 142- 112-21
142- 131- 03
N2- 361- 01
e ,
3
t �
H'1"1 Hl:Hl°lr;l`J'1' L
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT AGENDA
ITEM #
LOCATION CASE Change of Zone No . 87-9
5
HEARING DATE 1/5/88
isuo rmiu. BLVD.
R-I
C-3A C-3A I R-1 R-I C M
C-3A ]T. T W U a7
C-3A L_ R-1 j C-M a M-2
-' 3 P.D- st R-1 - - -- "
R I s
P.R.D.
14u/oc RI R-1 ¢ •�
M-1
R•I -
PR.D t R-1
R R-3 14 u/oc
m
1r-- R-1 R-1
i C3A -
1 R-i � C-3A C-3A,
C-M
R-1
RIALTO AV E. T-
L AVE- I - C-3A.- M-1
1 l2u/uc R•2 R-2 R- C-3A
R-1
1
1 - _ I
R-1 _
/ r! R•1 R-I
R-i R-1 R-1 P
'R-1 R-I i = _ R•1
u
-,
R-2
R-1 - ¢R� R 1
R-1 R-
.,, M-1
R I .- R 3 - - -
" R-3-
R I ¢ 2000 _ _ --- R-1
V
R-1 R-2 a - ct cr -- .. .:
R-I R-3 _ - -- --
R-2 R- 2 R-1 R- I t _
R-2 �- I C3 _.
--MILL ST.
R-I R-1 R-I R-1 .5.8 C TY LIMITS -
L ON
M-1
R-1 R- 1 I I 1 t
CES
Concept Environmental Sciences
3684 NORTH BROADMOOR BLVD.
SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92404
PHONE (714) 887-8877 -n
January 11,1988
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
City of San Bernardino. ON =?
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
On January 5, 1988, the Planning Commission for the City of
San Bernardino denied Change of Zone 87-9 . The owners of the
property wish to appeal that decision to the City Council.
Proposed project ;
Change of Zone 87-9, will change the present zoning of R-1-
7200, to P.R.D. 7, on 19.3 acres . The General. Plan designation is
Med. Low Density 4-7 units per acre . The proposed project is a
Planned Residential Development, sigle family detached homes, approx.
6 units to the acre and is in compliance with the City of San Ber-
nardino General Plan. The proposed Change of Zone has Staff approval.
Reasons for appeal;
The Planning Commission acted too hastily to inadequate and
false testimony given by the opposition, one speaker and three
letters .
Request ;
To reject the findings and the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve Change of Zone 87-9 .
Please advise on the next possible meeting.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
CONC PT ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Oscar Montez