Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-21-1990 Minutes City of San Bernardino, California March 21, 1990 This is the time and place set for an Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at their regular meeting held at 8:40 a.m., on Monday, March 19, 1990, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North"D" Street, San Bernardino, California. The City Clerk has caused to be posted the order of adjournment of said meeting held on March 19, 1990, and has on file in the office of the City Clerk an affidavit of said posting together with a copy of said order which was posted at 2:30 p.w., Tuesday, March 20, 1990, on the door of the place at which said meeting was held. The Adjourned Regular Meeting of thee Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino was called to order by Mayor Pro Tempore Pope-Ludlam at 2:00 p.m., Wednesday, March 21, 1990, in the Kellogg Room, Feldheym Library, 555 West Sixth Street, San Bernardino, California. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Copeland with the following being present: Mayor Pro Tempore Pope-Ludlam, Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Flores, Pope-Ludlam; Deputy City Attorney Empeno, Deputy City Clerk Copeland. Absent: Mayor Holcomb; Council Members Maudsley, Minor, Miller; City Administrator Julian. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ( 1) DEVELOPMENT CODE PRESENTATION In a memorandum dated March 20, 1990, Sandra Paulsen, Senior Planner, distributed to the Council a schedule of the remaining development code workshop sessions. Revisions to the preliminary draft Development Code will require approximately six weeks to complete. She stated that the public hearing draft should be available the first week in June and the first public hearing before the Planning Commission has been tentatively scheduled for June 26, 1990. (3 & 4) Commercial Districts John Montgomery, Principal Planner, introduced Chapter 19.06 Commercial Districts page II-53 of the draft Development Code. A listing of the individual commercial land use districts can be found on pages II-53 through 56. 1 3/21/90 Under the provisions of Section 19.06.020, Planned Development Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Uses, is a table of uses in the commercial/industrial land use districts which are subject to a planned development permit (D) or conditional use permit (C). A table of the commercial and industrial districts can be found on page II-56 (A-H). Principal Planner Montgomery requested direction from Council regarding the land use designation for adult entertainment businesses. He stated that the Draft Development Code proposes that adult entertainment businesses be permitted in the CG-I (Commercial General) and CR-2 (Commercial Regional- Downtown) districts. A discussion ensued regarding other locations within the City that would be more appropriate for adult type businesses. John Montgomery stated that careful consideration should be given not to entirely exclude adult type businesses from within the City. Henry Empeno, Deputy City Attorney, stated that adult type entertainment is considered a legitimate business and is permitted within the City. He suggested, however, that adult type businesses be allowed in the Commercial Heavy "CH" zones within the City. COUNCIL MEMBER MILLER ARRIVED At 2:10 p.m., Council Member Miller arrived at the Council Meeting. Council Member Flores made a motion, seconded by Council Member Reilly, that adult type businesses be removed from the CG- 1 and CR-2 districts and that adult type businesses be allowed in the Commercial Heavy "CH" zones. Deputy City Attorney Empeno answered questions regarding legal challenges of placing adult type businesses too far out of the City. Valerie Ross, Senior Planner, referred to a map in answering questions regarding locations within the City that are zoned "CH" Commercial Heavy. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Members Estrada, Reilly, Flores, Pope-Ludlam, Miller. None. Absent: Council Members Minor, Maudsley, Council Noes: 2 3/21/90 DEVELOPMENT CODE IMPLEMENTATION In a memorandum dated March 12, 1990, Larry Reed, Director of Planning and Building Services, requested that a policy be established to implement the Development Code. He stated that upon adoption and implementation of the Development Code, it is anticipated that there will be approximately 100 applications in the planning process. It is necessary to establish a policy as soon as possible to process these applications and enable staff to inform developers of any changes that may affect a proposed project. (2) Sandra questioning Development Paulsen, Senior Planner, stated that developers what will happen to their projects if Code has not yet been implemented. are the Ms. Paulsen presented two proposals that would provide direction to staff in processing the anticipated 100 applications that are in the planning process. She also distributed to the Council a memorandum dated March 21, 1990, from Larry Reed, Director of Planning and Building Services, containing two revised motions regarding implementation of the Development Code. Deputy City Attorney Empeno explained that the previous memorandum dated March 12, 1990, had been revised because of legal reasons. He stated that the Council and Planning Commission have been meeting as a workshop and that a workshop is not the proper time to make final decisions or changes to the General Plan. Changes to the General Plan should not be made until the Development Code has had final public hearings, public notices, and environmental review. Mr. Montgomery answered questions regarding whether or not the proposed motions are consistent with the General Plan. A discussion ensued regarding the developers would be required to adhere to if is not approved by the Mayor and Council. Deputy City Attorney Empeno stated that in the General Plan there is a clause that requires all projects which have not received final planning approval prior to the date of implementation of the Development Code, shall be subject to the regulations and standards contained in the Development Code. type of standards the Development Code Sandra Paulsen answered questions regarding the procedures staff would use to approve development projects without an approved Development Code. 3 3/21/90 Larry Reed, Director of Planning and Building Services, explained why staff recommended approval of motion one. He stated that motion one provides for a better cut-off period for staff to use, otherwise, staff would be trying to implement two different standards at the same time. He further stated that motion two would create a rush in which developers would try to submit projects for approval under the old standards. Courtney Buse, 3808 N. Osbun Road, spoke in favor of motion two which requ~res all projects that have been accepted as complete, prior to the implementation of the Development Code, must be processed in accordance with the standards and regulations in effect at the time the application was accepted as complete. John Lightburn, a resident of San Bernardino, also spoke in favor of motion two. He felt that the sooner the developer knows exactly what is expected, the better the project will be. Larry Reed explained receive final approval even have approved the project. why a developer's project may not though the Planning Commission may Mr. Courtney Buse presented an option that would prevent the unscrupulous developer from rushing projects through to receive preferential standards. He suggested that a condition be added to motion two that would require a developer to obtain a construction permit within six or nine months. After the six or nine month waiting period, the developer would automatically start over with the approval process. Council Member Reilly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Miller and unanimously carried, that the Mayor and Common Council direct staff to include a section in the ordinance adopting the Development Code regarding implementation that requires all projects which have been accepted as complete pursuant to California Government Code Section 65943 by the Department of Planning and Building Services prior to implementation of the Development Code, be processed in accordance with the standards and regulations in effect at the time the application was accepted as complete; and that an extension of time will not be approved until after a one-year waiting period before applying for permits. Council Member Reilly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Estrada and unanimously carried, that the Planning and Building Services Director be directed to meet with various city departments including Public Works, Parks and Recreation, and Fire to review the standards proposed by the consultants, and where there is disagreement, attempt to reach a consensus prior to the start of the public hearings on the Development Code. 4 3/21/90 Fabricated Metal Machinery and Transportation Equipment Deleted in OIP Districts Principal planner Montgomery stated that fabricated metal machinery and transportation equipment uses are allowed with a conditional use permit under the designations of OIP, IL, and IH. He stated that an applicant in the State College area has requested that fabricated metal machinery and transportation equipment uses be removed from the OIP designation. Valerie Ross answered questions regarding the location of office industrial parks in the City. Miscellaneous Retail Allowed in OIP Districts Mr. Montgomery explained the intended uses allowed under OIP districts. He requested direction from Council regarding miscellaneous retail uses being allowed in "OIP" districts. A listing of miscellaneous retail uses can be found on page "H" of Table 06.01 Commercial and Industrial Districts List of Permitted Uses. patricia Green, Vice President, The Sunset Group, 225 West Hospitality Lane, Suite 100, presented a proposal for a high-tech type office light industrial park along Waterman Avenue. She stated that a more mixed land use designation incorporating research and development uses, light industrial, commercial office, and supporting retail services would insure the revitalization of Waterman Avenue before the next twenty years. The Planning and Building Services Director expressed concern regarding separate buildings of miscellaneous businesses being allowed in the OIP zone. Ms. Patricia Green answered questions regarding the types of businesses found in OIP districts. She stated that by having miscellaneous type business such as cleaners, dress shops, barbershops, etc., would provide a much needed service to employees working in the area and would discourage the use of automobiles, thus reducing air pollution and traffic congestion. Valerie Ross stated that the General Plan supports retail services, but it was not the intent was not to have separate buildings that would encourage the use of automobiles. The Mayor and Council discussed designating Waterman Avenue as a "specific plan" area. 5 3/21/90 Principal Planner Montgomery proposed that an asterisk be placed next to each of the miscellaneous retail uses listed on page "H" of Table 06.01, indicating that a conditional use permit be required under the OIP designation with a notation that these retail services must be located within the corporate offices industrial park structure as opposed to free-standing structures. No formal action was taken. RECESS MEETING At 3:10 p.m., Mayor Pro Tempore Pope-Ludlam declared a ten- minute recess. RECONVENE MEETING At 3:25 p.m., the joint Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Common Council and Planning Commission reconvened in the Kellogg Room of the Feldheym Library, 555 West Sixth Street, San Bernardino, California. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken with the following being present: Mayor Pro Tempore Pope-Ludlam; Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Flores, Pope-Ludlam, Miller; Deputy City Attorney Empeno, Deputy City Clerk Copeland. Absent: Mayor Holcomb; Council Members Maudsley, Minor. Food Stores Patricia Green referred to her memorandum dated March 21, 1990, addressed to Sandy Paulsen, Senior Planner, requesting that food stores be allowed in the CR-3 (Commercial Regional- Tri-City/Club) District with a conditional use permit. She stated that if food stores are allowed in the CR-3 designation, many regional warehouse type food stores would consider moving to San Bernardino area. A discussion took place on allowing food stores (Commercial Regional-Tri-City/Club) designations south Freeway. in CR-3 of I-10 Mr. John Montgomery requested that food stores be allowed in the CR-3 designation with a conditional use permit. No formal action took place. Mr. John Montgomery summarized the topics to be discussed at the next Development Code meeting scheduled on March 28, 1990. 6 3/21/90 ADJOURNMENT At 3:45 p.m., Council Member Miller made a motion, seconded by Council Member Flores and unanimously carried, that the meeting be adjourned to Wednesday, March 28, 1990, at 1:30 p.m., at the Feldheym Library, 555 West Sixth Street, San Bernardino, California. (5) SHAUNA CLARK City Clerk by ~. ~; / C. ~epu{~'~i ";UC~k/ No. items: 5 No. hours: 1 hr. 45 min. 7 3/21/90