HomeMy WebLinkAbout52-Planning
CIT~OF SAN BERNARDIIO - REQUEQ FOR COUNCIL ACTJN
Date: May 23, 1986
uptown Redevelopment proj'ect Plan,
Subject: Report on the Plan, and
Environmental Impact Report
Mayor and Council Meeting of
June 2, 1986, 2:00 p.m.
Frank A. Schuma
From: Planning Director
Dept: Planning
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
February 20, 1984 -- Community Deve10pmept Commission adoptes the Prelim-
inary Plan for the Uptown Redevelopment Project,
(Resolution No. 4579).
Previous Planning Commission action:
At the meeting of the Planning Commission on May 20, 1986, the Commission
adopted Resolution No. 86-3 and made the following recommendations:
That the Mayor and Council approve and adopt the Uptown Redevelopment
Plan, and the Report on the Redevelopment Plan, and that the Mayor and
Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the
uptown Redevelopment Plan. Vote: 3-2, 4 absent.
Recommended motion:
That the Mayor and Council approve and adopt the uptown Redevelopment
Plan, and Report on the Redevelopment Plan, and
That the Mayor and Council certify the Final Environmental Impact
Report prepared for the Uptown Redevelopment Plan.
~~
Signature Frank A. Schuma
Contact person:
Frank A. Schuma
Pllone:
383-5057
Supporting data attached: Yes, Staff Report
Ward: 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount:
Sou rce:
Finance:
Council Notes:
Am,nrb I,pm Nn~L.
. .
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2S
26
27
28
c
:)
::)
RESOLUTION
86-3
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN
BERNARDINO APPROVING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE UPTOWN
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND REPORTING AS TO CONFORMITY WITH
THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
WHEREAS, the Community Development Commission of the
City of San Bernardino (the WAgency) has heretofore taken
certain actions
with regard to the adoption of
the
Redevelopment Plan for the Uptown Redevelopment Project (the
wRedevelopment PlanW); and
WHEREAS, the
Planning Commission and Agency has
selected the Redevelopment project Area (the WProject AreaW)
within the previously established survey boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the Project Area, as selected by the Planning
Commission, generally consists of two subareas: Subarea wAw
- generally those properties fronting on and/or adjacent to
Highland Avenue and Baseline Street between 1-215 and
Waterman Avenue and along wEw Street from 8th Street to 23rd
Street; and Subarea wBw - generally property that is located
between Third Street and Rialto Avenue, and 1-215 and Mt.
Vernon Avenue.
WHEREAS, the Agency has
submitted the following
documents for consideration by the Planning Commission:
(1) The Redevelopment Plan;
<-
(2) The draft of the Report to the Mayor and Common
Council on the Redevelopment Plan; and
3) The Final Environmental Impact Report for the
Uptown Redevelopment Project (SeH 183101007); and
WHEREAS, The
Agency has requested the
Planning
Commission to review the Redevelopment Plan for consistency
--
. .
,
I
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2S
26
27
28
r
'-
~
,
,j
San Bernardino and
in accordance with
with the General Plan of the City of
render a report thereon to the Agency
Government Code Section 654021 and
WHEREAS, a memorandum, dated May 20, 1986 has been
prepared for review by the Planning Commission regarding the
above referenced documents, and at said request of the
Agency a public meeting has been conducted thereon, and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED
BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby approves
the Redevelopment Plan.
Section 2. The draft of the Report
the Common Council on the Redevelopment
approved.
to the Mayor and
Plan is hereby
Section 3. The Planning Commission hereby reports
that the Redevelopment Plan conforms to the General Plan of
the City of San Bernardino. The Planning Commission further
reports that the redevelopment of the Project Area ,
conforms with the policies and goals of the General Plan of
the City of San Bernardino.
Section 4. The Planning Commission hereby recommends
'0
that the Redevelopment Plan be adopted by the Agency and the
Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino.
I I II II I I II I II I I I I II I II I II III III
I I IIII I II I I II I I I I I II I I I I I IIIII I
II I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I II I II III III
I I II II I III III I II I II I II I I I IIIIII
..
. .
C
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2S
26
27
28
c
.:)
..J
S..c~ion S.
The Planning Commission hereby recommends
Environmental Impact Report of the Uptown
Project (SCa 183101007) be approved and
that the Final
Redevelopment
certified.
Section 6. The Planning Commission hereby adopts the
memorandum dated May 20, 1986, as referenced to in the
recitals of this Resolution, as the Report of the Planning
Commission in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section
33346.
Section 7. The Secretary of the Planning Commission
is hereby authorized and directed to transmit a copy of this
Resolution to the Mayor and Common Council of the City of
San Bernardino and to the Agency.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was
duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of San
Bernardino at a regular meeting thereof, held on the ~
day of May , 1986 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
Flores, Knowles, Lopez,
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Cutler
ABSTAIN: Lightburn
Brown, Nierman, Watson, Shaw
.
~~!\...,..... \I..... ~(\.;~~~~"~
secretaiy
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I II I I I I II I III II II I III IIII IIII
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
]3
14
IS
16
17
)8
19
20
21
22
23
24
2S
26
27
28
".,1
(
I'"' ,......
'-" -..)
The foregoing resolution No. 86-3 is hereby approved
this ~ day of Mav , 1986.
C
the Planning
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
."
,
..
~ITY OF SAN BEfQARDINO Q.. MEMORANDU~
To Planning COUIDlission
From Planning Department
Subject Uptown Redevelopment Plan, Report on the Date May 20, 1986
Plan, and Final Environmental Impact Report
Approved
Date
The Planning Commission is being requested to approve and to
recommend to the Mayor and Common Council adoption of the
Uptown Redevelopment Plan and Report on the Plan. ~he
Commission is also requested to recommend certification of
the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that analyzes the
effects implementation of the Plan would have on the
environment. Although this is not a public hearing item, the
Commission may accept public testimony on the Plan, Report,
and EIR in order to make a recommendation. The Mayor and
Common Council have scheduled a public hearing on June 2,
1986 to consider all items according to State Redevelopment
Law.
In February, 1983, the Council adopted Resolution 83-49
designating the Uptown Redevelopment Project Survey Area
boundaries. The Planning Department prepared a Preliminary
Plan and, upon its approval by the Council on February 20,
1984, began preparation of the Redevelopment Plan, Report on
the Plan, and EIR.
Subsequently an election of members to the Uptown
Redevelopment Citizen Advisory Committee was held on July 11,
1984. Since August of 1984, the Committee has been holding
regular meetings regarding the development of the Plan,
Report on the Plan, and EIR.
The Uptown Redevelopment Project Area contains approximately
433 acres and is located in the central portion of the City
of San Bernardino. The Project is divided into two (2)
Subareas. Subarea "A" generally is comprised of those
properties fronting on and/or adjacent to Highland Avenue and
Baseline Street between Interstate 215 and Waterman Avenue
and along "E" Street from 8th Street to 23rd Street. Subarea
"B" generally is those propertiea~ located between Third
Street, Rialto Avenue, Interstate 2l~ and Mt. Vernon Avenue.
The Project Area contains only 37 acres or 8.5' vacant land
in accordance with Redevelopment Law.
Following is a synopsis of the three
consideration at tonight's meeting.
items
under
REnEVELOPMENT PLAN
The Plan, as
Redevelopment
written, meets
Law. It provides
the requirements of State
a legal description of the
.
CITY Oil TH.~~
, -
,-
c
.~
~- )
uptown Redevelopment Plan,
Report on the Plan, and Final
Environmental Impact Report
May 20, 1986
Page 2
Project Area as well as goals and objectives adopted by the
Citizens Advisory Committee.
The Plan enumerates specific land use categories proposed
within the Project Area and establishes design standards and
controls for development and redevelopment of structures and
land. The Plan describes in detail the proposed
redevelopment actions including property acquisition,
relocation, owner and tenant participation, and the
disposition of real and personal property. The proposed
methods of financing the Project are also described. The
Plan would be in effect for forty (40) years and allows the
Agency to incur a tax allocation bonded indebtedness
(outstanding at anyone time) of up to twenty million
($20,000,000) dollars.
The Plan allows for those urban land uses permitted by the
existing General Plan or as might be amended in the future.
Additionally, the Plan pays particular attention to tbose
aspects, i.e., standards which will physically improve the
visual image of the Project Area.
The Plan, as recommended by the Citizen Advisory Committee,
includes modifications to three standards proposed by staff.
The following compares the recommendations made by the
Committee and staff:
Pa9~ 17. It.em 5:
C~mmi~~~e RecnmmAndA~inn:
Parking spaces visible from streets shall be screened
with a thirty-six (36) inch decorative wall (masonry,
wrought iron, or similar materials) and/or landscaping
as necessary to prevent an unsightly or barren
appearance. Vehicle sales or display areas shall be
excluded from this thirty-six (36) inch wall and
landscaping provision.
'C
S~8ff Recnmm~nda~ion:
Parking spaces visible from streets shall be screened
with a thiry-six (36) inch decorative wall (masonry,
wrought iron, or similar material) and/or landscaping as
necessary to prevent unsightly or barren appearance.
.'
, .
-"""" ""-'""
,- v .....,; ....~,;/
Uptown Redevelopment Plan,
Report on the Plan, and Final
Environmental Impact Report
May 20, 1986
page 3
Comm~nt::
The provision of a landscaping buffer as a screen for
parking areas is an effective means to improve the
visual image from the street. Automobile sales
organizations have expressed concern that such a
provlslon would obscure critical sight of their
merchandise from vehicular passersby.
Page 18. Item 13
Committee Recommendation:
Signage shall be in conformance with the existing
provisions of the City Municipal Code. In designated
target areas for which development funds have been
specifically designated, signage shall be in conformance
with any applicable standards established by the Agency.
Staff Recommendation:
Signage shall be in conformance with
provisions of the City Municipal Code and
standards established by the Agency.
the existing
any applicable
Comlli~nt::
All signage throughout the Project Area needs to come
under stricter control. The Committee felt that only
those areas where the Agency assistance is provided in a
large project or target area should be further
regulated. Staff contends that a piecemeal approach to
signage control will unnecessarily delay the improvement
of the overall image of the area.
Page 18. Item 15:
Committee Recommendation:
New development in all other areas shall have a mlnlmum
five (5) feet landscaped front setback measured from
property line.
Staff Recommendation:
New development in all other areas shall have a minimum
, ,.
.......
....."''-
I..,.,
:)
-"./
Uptown Redevelopment Plan,
Report on the Plan, and Final
Environmental Impact Report
May 20, 1986
page 4
ten (10) feet landscaped front setback measured from
property line.
Comment:
All other redevelopment projects adopted by the City
have a provision for a ten (10) foot landscaped setback.
Such a provision produces a dramatic improvement in the
esthetics of an area. The Committee felt that any
additional setback requirements above that already
mandated by Ordinance would be excessive and present an
uneven appearance along the streets. The Plan allows
for discretion where a pedestrian oriented environment
is presently established. However, the forty (40) year
life of the Project will in all likelihood see the
recycling of a majority of the structures and
development presently found.
Staff recommends the retention of the standards as
originally proposed.
The Agency anticipates providing a wide array of programs to
encourage and assist revitalization efforts throughout the
Project Area. Assistance will be made available as tax
increment funding is achieved over the life of the Project.
The following types of programs in the form of loans, grants,
subsidies, and direct expenditures:
1. Developmental Assistance
2. Code Compliance, Property
Inspection and Rehabilitation
3. General Clean-up and Trash Removal
4. Marketing Research and Promotion
5. Feasibility Analysis
6. Engineering Studies
7. Project Identity and Directional Signage
8. Project Administration
9. Sign Amortization
10. Facade Improvement
11. Employment Linkage
12. Streetscape Improvement
13. Storm Drain Improvement
14. Residential In-fill
15. Public Facilities
16. Land Acquisition and Assembly
17. parking Improvements
18. Small Business Loans
..
'"
.'........
"-"
-....;
,j
Uptown Redevelopment Plan,
Report on the Plan, and Final
Environmental Impact Report
May 20, 1986
Page 5
19. Utility Undergrounding
20. Structural Demolition
21. Resident Relocation
22. Business Relocation
23. Freeway Widening and Off-ramp Improvement
REPORT ON THE PLAN
The Report on the Plan, as written, meets the requirements of
the State Redevelopment Law. It lists the reasons for
selection of the Project Area, accurately documenting the
existence of blight by describing the existing physical,
social, and economic conditions in detail. The Report also
describes the methods of financing the Project and the method
and plan for relocation. The "Neighborhood Impact Report" is
an important section required by law. Said "Impact Report"
provides information as to; the numbers of low- and moderate-
income households presently found in the Project Area, the
number of low- and moderate-income housing units in
substandard condition, the number of housing units found in
non-conforming zoning status. Finally, an estimate of the
number of low- and moderate-income households likely to be
displaced as a result of Agency action is made. The Report
includes an analysis of the Preliminary Plan and various
other reports and appendices including a summary photolog.
Finally, this staff report, along with the resolution
approved by the Commission at this meeting, are included by
reference.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The EIR, as written, meets the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Final EIR being
considered at this meeting consists of the Draft EIR,
comments on the,c Draft EIR received dur ing the 45-day public
review period, and responses to the comments. The Final EIR
has been reviewed by the City's Environmental Review
Committee and found to comply with the provisions of CEQA.
The Committee recommended on May 8, 1986, that the final EIR
be "certified" by the Mayor and Common Council. The purpose
of the EIR is to provide decision-makers (staff, the
Commission, and the Council) with a detailed analysis of the
environmental consequences of approving and implementing the
proposed Redevelopment Plan.
The Commission should be aware that approval of the proposed
Redfvelopment Plan would result in certain impacts as
..
--
-
'-
o
,,-,#
Uptown Redevelopment Plan,
Report on the Plan, and Final
Environmental Impact Report
May 20, 1986
Page 6
described in the Report on the Plan and the EIR. Certain
mitigation measures are proposed in the EIR which would
reduce those impacts to an insignificant level.
The EIR analyzed the proposed land use option as well as two
additional alternatives for the Redevelopment Project Area.
In addition, an analysis was conducted on the environmental
impacts for two General Plan Amendment study areas containing
the Redevelopment Project Area. Two land use alternatives
for each as well as the existing land use and General Plan
scenarios were reviewed. Concurrently two Changes of Zone
proposals were also included in the analysis so as to provide
consistency between zoning and General Plan designations
should either of the General Plan Amendments be instituted.
At the present time, no amendments to the existing General
Plan are proposed in order to divorce land use issues with
those of redevelopment. It is staff's intent at a future
date to study and propose amending the General Plan so as to
avoid the impacts indicated in the EIR analysis.
Although not required by CEQA, an analysis of fiscal
has been prepared and is shown in Appendix D
Environmental Impact Report.
impact
of the
RECOMMENDATION
The proposed Redevelopment Plan appears to be beneficial to
the City in general and to the Uptown Project Area in
particular. The actions proposed would greatly assist in
revitalizing an area which is characterized by physical and
economic blight. Staff recommends that Resolution be adopted
by the Planning Commission.
Respectfully Submitted,
FRANK A. SCHUMA,
Planning Director
..
c
-
"""
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
AGENDA
ITEM #
LOCATION
CASE E.I.R. for Uptown
Redevelopment
HEARING DATE OS/20/86
16
..
-~ -..--.-
LEGEND:
IZZI U~BAN LAND USES
INCLUDING COMMERCIAL.
INDUSTRIAL. RESIDENTIAL.
PUBLIC FACILITIES.
PUBLIC PARKING. ETC.
SUBAREA "A"
, .~
-:;:- ~ ll~i~ ~ff1r~~
:: -~-=~~~ ~r::rr [R{[E[Q)[EW[E~jQ)~~[E~lJ
~4'~=-:C'Oc~ ; rrr [i2J1Rl@J[E~r
~ \ THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
t, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
SUBAREA "B"
..