The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-Planning , . CI,o OF SAN BERNARDI()O - REQUE()r FOR COUNCIL AC'C)oN Frank A. Schuma Subject: Amendment to S.B.M.C. - Wa 11 Hei ght From: Planning Director Separating Commercial/Industrial Dept: Pl anni ng Uses from Residential. Mayor and Council Meeting of Date: April 8, 1985 April 15, 1985, 9:00 a.m. Synopsis of Previous Council action: Previous Planning Commission action: At the meeting of the Planning Commission on April 2, 1985, the following recommendation was made: The Amendment to the San Bernardino Municipal Code, Sections 19.22.090.A., 19.36.080., 19.36.080., 19.20.070.A., B., C., D., and 19.56.390., regarding wall height separating com- mercial/industrial uses from residential uses, was unanimously recommended for approval with the following modifications: The wording "decorative block wall" to be used in lieu of "six-foot block wall," and reference to a "timber barrier" in proposed wording of Section 19.56.390 be deleted. The Negative Declaration for environmental review was also recommended for approval. Recommended motion: To approve the responses to comments and to adopt the Negative Declaration for environmental review which has been reviewed and considered. To approve, modify or reject the findings and the recommendation of the Planning Commission and to direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. Q~ Signature Frank A. Schuma Contact person: Frank A. Schuma Phone: 383-5057 Supporting data attached: Yes, Staff Report Ward: City-wide FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: Sou rce: Finance: Council Notes: 75-0262 Agenda Item No. JI . 0;11 Y UI-. :SAN ts~~AHUINUO ME:MUHANUU~ To Planning Comnission Code AmendnEnts -- Wall height separating c~rcial/industrial uses fran residential From Planning Department Subject Date April 2, 1985 Approved Itan ~. 15 Date The proposed Code amendments to Title 19 reflect an increase to the current minimum wall height requirement of five feet to six feet; to seperate commercial and industrial zones from residentially designated areas. The proposed amendments would be consistent with the current require- ment of a six-foot high wall as specified in the City adopted standard development requirements. The proposed increase in wall height would provide a more effective noise and visual screen between residential and commercial/industrial land uses. Since the average human height is over 5 feet 6 inches, the exi sti ng mi ni mum requi rement for a fi ve-foot hi gh wall is i nsuf- ficient to effectively screen residential properties from adjoining incompatible land uses or reduce noise levels from traffic and pedestrian movement within adjoining parking areas or the operation and activities of either commercial or industrial uses. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends adoption of the proposed Negative Declaration and approval of the proposed Code amendments. The proposed amendments are as follows: 19.22.090 Fences, hedges and walls. A. There shall be a six-foot block wall on all side and rear lot lines reduced to three feet in height at the required front yard setback of the abutting residential district. No walls are required when property abuts other commercial, administrative- professional or industrial districts; four-inch by six-inch raised bumper guards or the equivalent shall be so placed to prevent encroachment onto abutting private or public property. 19.36.080 Fences, hedges and walls. There shall be a six-foot block wall on all side and rear lot lines, reduced to three feet in height at the required setback of the abutting residential district. ...2 CI'Y' ON 'H.::;M~ - . o Code Amendment Apri 1 2, 1985 Page 2 o o o 19.36.080 Walls. Wherever a lot or parcel in the M-1A district sides on or backs to a lot or parcel in any R District, a minimum six-foot high solid masonry wall shall be constructed along the property line separa- ting the M-1A district from the R district or along the alley right-of-way line on the M-1A district side of the alley; provided, that such wall shall not be more than three feet in height in any front yard or street side yard area. Such wall shall not be re- quired until the lot or parcel is occupied by a permitted use. 19.20.070 Additional requirements when used for parking. A. A site plan shall be submitted to the commission for review and approval. B. The area shall be graded and paved wi th an all weather type pavement, either concrete, asphaltic concrete or similar material acceptable to the commission. C. When a transitional district consists of property siding on a commercial district and has frontage lying along a residential street, there shall be a six-foot high masonry wall erected along the property line abutting the residential district. Said wa 11 sh all be reduced to th ree feet in hei ght at the 1 i ne of the front yard of the abutting residential district. There shall also be a three-foot high masonry wall on the street frontage, which wall shall be set back from the property line a distance not less than six feet, except driveways. O. When a transitional district extends from the rear of a commercial district to the street fronting on a residential district, there shall be a wall not less than six feet in height and set back from the front property line a distance not less than six feet. The wall on the side street shall be not more than six feet in height and set back not less than six feet from the side street property li ne. 19.56.390 Separation from residential districts by wall. A. Where a public parking area or a private parking area immediately abuts property zoned or used as residential, or where such parking areas and property are divided only by an alley or driveway, such parking area shall be comletely separated from the property zoned or used as residential by a solid masonry wall six feet in height, provided that such wall shall not exceed three feet in height where it is in the front yard area of an abutting residential use or district. Where no fence or wall is required along a boundary of an area covered by this section, there shall be a concrete curb or timber barrier not less than six inches in height securely installed and maintained as a safeguard to abutting property or public right of way. The barrier shall not be less than three feet from a property line. .. .3 . Q o o o Code Amendment Apri 1 2, 1985 Page 3 B. Upon application to the Planning Commission by the owner and occupant of any affected residence, the requirements of this section shall be modified as seems reasonable to said Commission where the Commission finds that the wall required by this section will constitute an unreasonable interference with the circulation of air, the receipt of light or the security of any residential structure wi thi n ten feet of sai d wall. The provi si ons of thi s section are not to be interpreted as constituing the creation of or recognition of any easement for air, light, or view. Respectfully submitted, FRANK A. SCHUMA Planning Director d~ ;:Zt::- DAVID ANDERSON Principal Planner . c>ll y Ut- :SAN tJl:.~AHUINU a- MI:.MUHANUU~ To FRANK A. SCHUMA Planning Director Subject Walls Adjacent to From Approved Parking Areas ~ JUl 0 z 1964 Date JOHN F. WILSON Deputy City Attorney July 2, 1984 Date 700.30 CITY PlANNfNti OEPAIUMl:HT SAR BEB!lA!'.C:OO. 1:1 Below please find proposed language for inclusion in the Municipal Code, which language will allow to the appropriate authority the discretion to set different requirements with respect to the wall to be placed between a parking area and adjacent residential property. The request for amendment received from the Council, is apparently an outgrowth of Building Moving No. 84-3 and Variance No. 84-7, and is in response to standard requirement number 2(C) of the report from your staff, made a part of the workup on those applications. The language of that requirement is reflected in Section 19.56.390 of the Code. It is therefore proposed that any Code amendment with respect to this matter be made in that section. Please note that the recommended height of any required wall is five feet. This is at odds with the requirement of a six foot wall set forth in your standard requirements. A six foot wall imposes an additional expense on the erector for engineering fees. The burden will be on the Planning Department to justify the need for the additional one foot as a standard requirement for the type of wall addressed by this ordinance. The proposed modification to the amendment of the section is as follows: "Section 19.56.390 Separation from residential districts by wall. A. Where a public parking area or a private parking area immediately abuts property zoned or used as residential, or where such parking areas and property are divided only by an alley or driveway, such parking area shall be completely separated from the property zoned or used as residential by a solid masonry wall five feet in height, provided that such wall shall not exceed three feet in height where it is in the front yard area of an abutting e.ry 011 'H.~O" , o o o o Frank A. Schuma July 2, 1984 Page 2 residential use or district. Where no fence or wall is required along a boundary of an area covered by this section, there shall be a concrete curb or timber barrier not less than six inches in height securely installed and maintained as a safeguard to abutting property or public right of way. The barrier shall not be less than three feet from a property line. B. Upon application to the Planning Commission by the owner or occupant of any affected residence, the requirements of this section shall be modified as seems reasonable to said Commission where the Commission finds that the wall required by this section will constitute an unreasonable interference with the circulation of air, the receipt of light or the security of any residential structure within ten feet of said wall. The provisions of this section are not to be interpreted as constituting the creation of or recognition of any easement for air, light, or view." 7/-' - OHN F. ~ILSON eputy City Attorney JFW:dp