Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-15-1989 Minutes . . . City of San Bernardino, California March 15, 1989 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 the Adjourned Regular Meeting held at 9:12 a.m., Monday, March 13, 1989, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. The City Clerk has caused to be posted the Notice of Adjournment of said meeting held on Monday, March 13, 1989, at 9:12 a.m., and has on file in the Office of the City Clerk an affidavit of said posting together with a copy of said Notice which was posted at 4:00 p.m., on Tuesday, March 14, 1989, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. The Adjourned Regular Council of the City of San Mayor Wilcox at 9:12 a.m., Room, Fourth Floor of City Bernardino, California. Meeting of the Mayor and Common Bernardino was called to order by in the Redevelopment Agency Board Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San ROLL CALL Roll Call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Reese following being present: Mayor Wilcox; Council Estrada, Flores, Maudsley, Minor; Deputy City Attorney Deputy City Clerk Reese, Acting City Administrator Absent: Council Members Reilly, Pope-Ludlam, Miller. with the Members Empeno, Robbins. MAYOR/COMMON COUNCIL, PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORKSHOP _ DISCUSSION ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT GENERAL PLAN This is the time and place set for discussion on the Administrative Draft General Plan Document. (1) Planning Director Kilger explained that this workshop had been set to provide an opportunity to the Mayor and Council to review the Administrative Draft text of the General Plan. He stated that the purpose of this meeting is to discuss the overall structure of the plan and answer questions relative to planning law, philosophies and requirements of the document, and to define areas that should be focused upon in reviewing the plan. COUNCIL MEMBER MILLER AR~IVED At 9:15 a.m., Council Member Miller arrived at the Workshop Meeting. Valerie Ross, Senior Planner distributed proposed Planning Commission Public Hearing copies of Schedule. the She - 1 - 3/15/89 . explained that a joint Planning Commission/Mayor Council presentation had been scheduled for Saturday, April 1, 1989, in the Council Chambers. and Common 9:00 a.m., Ms. Ross explained that locations for the meetings on April 3, 1989 and April 17, 1989, had not been established. A discussion ensued regarding the use of Chambers for the public hearings and the possible scheduling because of regularly scheduled Council the Council conflict in meetings. Planning is preferred material. Director Kilger stated that the Council Chambers in terms of showing maps and other audio-visual Valerie Ross, Senior Planner, answered questions regarding public notification, stating that only the first meeting date, April 1, 1989, will be in the newspaper, pursuant to legal requirements. The schedule of subsequent meetings will then be available. . Deputy City Attorney Empeno answered questions, stating that the first meeting scheduled on Saturday, April 1, 1989, is a public hearing of the Mayor and Common Council and Planning Commission, and should be labeled as such. Public testimony will probably not be permitted at that meeting because it will involve a presentation by staff to the Planning Commission and Council. The proposed meeting schedule will be distributed at that time and include topics and dates of the remainder of Planning Commission hearings. Mr. Empeno answered questions regarding noticing only the first hearing date, stating that the notice has to be published ten days prior to the hearing, and it may be that all the details of the subsequent meetings, such as time and location, would not have been confirmed. A complete schedule can be distributed at the hearing to all those in attendance. Planning Director Kilger answered questions, stating that in addition to noticing the initial hearing, there could be press releases which do not require the ten day time frame. Deputy City Attorney Empeno stated if dates, places of the public hearings are published in notice, then that schedule has to be adhered to State law. times, and the legal pursuant to COUNCIL MEMBER POPE-LUDLAM ARRIVED At 9:30 a.m., Council Member Pope-Ludlam arrived at the Workshop Meeting. . Planning Director Kilger explained that the the meetings of the Mayor and Common Council will later in the meeting. (See page 18) schedule for be presented - 2 - 3/15/89 . . . Council Member Minor made a motion, seconded by Council Member Miller and unanimously carried, that the Proposed Planning Commission Public Hearing Schedule for the General Plan Adoption Process be adopted as follows: Date Event Time & Place Sat., April 1, 1989 Joint Presentation to Planning Commission & Mayor and Common Council 9:00 a.m. Council Chambers Mon., April 3, 1989 Public Hearing: Environmental Resources and Hazards 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers Thurs., Apri 1 6, 1989 Public Hearing: Community Development (Housing, Historic, Economic) 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers Sat., April 8, 1989 Public Hearing: Infrastructure 9:00 a.m. Counci 1 Chambers Mon., Apri 1 10, 1989 Public Hearing: Land Use 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers Thurs., April 13, 1989 Public Hearing: Land Use 6: 30 p.m. Council Chambers Sat., April 15, 1989 Deliberations 9:00 a.m. Council Chambers Mon., April 17, 1989 Deliberations (if needed) 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers Planning Director Kilger explained the purposes of the maps displayed on the wall, which included overlays regarding existing and future noise, hazards and biological factors. He also referred to the original Interim Policy Document (IPD) which was adopted in May, 1988, and explained the continuous process of changes that have occurred since that date. Deputy City Attorney Empeno stated that the meeting today is not a public hearing, it is only a workshop to provide an opportunity for the consultant and staff to present the Administrative Draft of the General Plan, and receive questions and comments from the Mayor and Council. No action should be taken and no direction given to staff. Changes will be made to the plan prior to the Planning Commission hearings and a - 3 - 3/15/89 . recommendation made to the Mayor and Council for presentation at their hearings. He explained that the General Plan document under consideration at the hearings will be very different from the Administrative Draft. Planning Director Kilger the General Plan considered document as recommended by Commission is responsible for answered questions, stating that for final adoption will be a the Planning Commission. The reviewing all the changes. Woodie Tescher, General Consultant with Envicom, explained the document being reviewed today is the complete text of the administrative version that will be the Draft General Plan. This document is the result of more than a year-and-a-half's effort of the CAC, which has reviewed draft goals, objectives and policies for all of the elements except for "Wind". Mr. Tescher stated that there is one policy statement out of 600 where the consultant and staff have made a slightly different recommendation than the CAC on a relatively minor item. The CAC has reviewed 90% of the document. An effort has been made to make sure that everything required by State law has been covered. COUNCIL MEMBER REILLY ARRIVED At 9:55 a.m., Council Member Reilly arrived at the workshop meeting. . Mr. Tescher explained the basic philosophy of the document as presented by the CAC. That group took a very strong approach to the wording of this document and felt it should be as precise as possible. Therefore, there will be a great deal of mandatory language, making it as commitment oriented as possible. Planning Director Kilger explained that approximately 50% of the implementation measures are as interpreted by the consultant regarding the intent of the City. There wasn't input from staff, departments, or the CAC in some instances. Deputy City Attorney Empeno stated that the City Attorney's Office had strong concern about some of the language in the Administrative Draft and the implementation measures in terms of using mandatory language such as "shall" vs. "should" or "may". He stated that with the use of more mandatory language, there are several issues to consider, such as potential liability, feasibility, costs and other factors. . He stated that the City is required by State Law to evaluate the implementation measures every year after the General Plan is adopted. There is also a requirement to evaluate the General Plan every five years, or perhaps more often. With those evaluations, there could be arguments that the City hasn't fulfilled requirements because direction was - 4 - 3/15/89 . given in mandatory language to do certain things and during the time frames those things were not accomplished. That may bring about a potential lawsuit. Mr. Tescher suggested a partial solution would be that if the budgetary resources are not available, then it shall not necessarily be implemented, because the budget in two or three years may be different in terms of constraints. INTRODUCTION Mr. Tescher stated that there are seven elements required by State Law: (1) Land Use; (2) Housing; (3) Circulation; (4) Conservation; (5) Open Spaces; (6) Noise; and (7) Safety. In addition to those seven, the State indicates that the City can proceed with six "per~issive" elements which are important to the objectives the City wants to achieve. These are: (1) Urban Design; (2) Historical Resources; (3)Economic Development; (4)Infrastructure/Utilities; (5)Public Services; and, (6) Parks and Recreation. Mr. Tescher explained that the Housing Element goes to the Department of Housing of the State for review adequacy prior to public hearings. intact of its . He explained that Section "C" page 2 "Policy" is the heart of the Plan. The policy document is divided into sections: (1) Overview of Plan Policy; (2) Goals; (3) Objectives; and (4) Policies, and (d) Implementation Programs. Mr. Tescher briefly explained the purpose of each of these items. Mr. Tescher explained that the document being studied today is not the entire General Plan, but will be incorporated into it along with other documents, which include (1) City of San Bernardino General Plan Update, Technical Background Report; (2) City of San Bernardino General Plan Update, Land Use Alternatives Working Paper; (3) City of San Bernardino General Plan Fundamental Land Use Issue Policy Statements. In addition, a separate Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the Plan in accordance with the substantive requirements of the CEQA. GENERAL PLAN RELATIONSHIP TO SAN BERNARDINO'S QUALITY OF LIFE Mr. Tescher explained the key concept in this section relates to achieving a higher quality of life for San Bernardino's residents with such factors as educational life, adequate housing, recreation and parks, cultural operations, more jobs and freedom from excessive noise. LAND Mr. Element, USE AND URBAN DESIGN Tescher explained the Land Use starting on page 16. This element and Urban Design regulates how land . - 5 - 3/15/89 . is to be utilized. Most of the issues and policies contained in all other plan elements are integrated into and synthesized by this element. Planning Director Kilger also clarified portions of the Urban Design Element. Mr. Tescher reviewed 32, which addressed the land use, and is the key the summary on land use issues on page problems and opportunities regarding to the chapter. Mr. Tescher reviewed Table 3, page 42, which designates a specific mix of uses, and indicates what type of businesses go into a certain area. He stated this is primarily a function of the Development Code. The list of principle uses is to provide a full sense of the overall character of the area. Mr. Kilger answered questions regarding various land uses in the City, zoning designations, and changes in the Interim Policy Document. He stated that the changes merely made the designations more discreet. . Deputy City Attorney Empeno stated the General Plan Task Force had a concern that after the General Plan had been adopted, someone may want to build a structure which is consistent with the zoning, but inconsistent with the General Plan. He explained that the City Attorney's Office is studying the possibility of adoption of an interim urgency zoning ordinance immediately after the General Plan is adopted to provide consistency with the General Plan. Council Members expressed concern over apparent changes in the land use designations since earlier Council action on those designations. Mr. Tescher explained the changes may not be as substantial as it seems. Some changes were made through the audit trail with the CAC and Planning Commission where there was an attempt to recommend a specific, different land use in specific locations. In some cases more discreet definitions were made on the same decision made by Council. Mr. Tescher explained that the term "discreet" is used to give a more specific designation and character to certain sub-areas, such as the ethnic theme village on Mt. Vernon, and a special designation to an area near the State University. . Planning Director Kilger explained the process of development of the General Plan, starting with the adoption of the IPD in May, 1989, which was used during the interim planning period and is the point of beginning. Goals and policies were written in August of last year and were used as an extension of the ones that were developed in May. - 6 - 3/15/89 A discussion ensued regarding changes of designations. . Mr. Kilger stated that the recommendations being considered have not been adopted yet. The IPD is still in effect and will continue to be followed until otherwise changed. These are recommendations based on the CAC's evaluation of more detailed goals and policies. Mr. Tescher answered questions regarding principal uses in various areas of the City and what the supporting uses could be that would not detract from the integrity of that area. Principal Planner Bautista answered questions regarding zoning designations. Planning Director Kilger explained that property owners had come in and specifically requested amendments to the IPD, so the language may be different. The CAC will make recommendations referred to as refinements, clarifications and extensions of the goals and policies that have been prepared. He emphasized that the work put in by the Mayor and Council had not been ignored, but was a point of beginning. Consultant Woodie Tescher answered questions regarding the feasibility and economic impact on Redevelopment project areas. He recommended that information regarding the economic impact be obtained from the Redevelopment Agency prior to the public 4It hearings. Mr. Tescher and Mr. Kilger answered questions regarding the corridors along Mt. Vernon and Baseline. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES Mr. Tescher explained the Section entitled "Goals, Objectives, and POlicies, on page 48, and stated that it is divided into twelve separate sections dealing with different issues, and addresses the fundamental question mandated by State Law regarding kinds of land uses which will be permitted in the City. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS Mr. Tescher referred to page 122, which introduces the Implementation Programs. He explained the numbering system that referred the policy in an earlier section to the implementation in this section. He stated that every policy in this plan has either one or more references to an implementation program. It is important for the Mayor and Council to be aware that as public testimony is received regarding a a change in policy, that change will impact the implementation programs, and vice versa. 4It Mr. Tescher stated that will cover the that a "User's Guide" will be prepared General Plan and list all kinds of - 7 - 3/15/89 . potential development actions. It will be available to anyone, including City staff, developers or individual builders. HOW SHOULD LAND USES Mr. Tescher reviewed distributed throughout stated the chief issue uses, how much, and how BE DISTRIBUTED THROUGHOUT THE CITY? the Section on How should land uses be the City? beginning on page 55. He in the plan indicates what kinds of shall they physically be distributed. WHAT SHOULD BE THE FUNCTIONAL ROLE, USES PERMITTED, AND PHYSICAL FORM AND CHARACTER OF THE CITY'S LAND USE DISTRICTS? Mr. Tescher reviewed this section, which begins on page 62 and answered questions. He explained the section that covers the Inland Center Malls and adjacent properties region-serving retail centers of the City. Central City and as the principal Planning Director Kilger answered questions. . Deputy City Attorney Empeno expressed concern regarding the Design and Development Code being included in the Administrative Draft, and questioned whether the total development guidelines should be included in this document. One of the problems in having design and development guidelines in this document is the specificity that it shows and the problem of changing that, since the City is limited to four General Plan amendments per year. Mr. Tescher read Subsection 1.16.16 on page 77 which refers to a requirement that a minimum of 30% of the ground floor of the first fifty feet of building depth of all commercial and office structures incorporate "pedestrian-active" retail uses (restaurant, florists, gift shops, bookstores, clothing, shoe repair, etc.) He stated an attempt has been made to make downtown a pedestrian oriented area. A discussion ensued regarding the four General Plan amendments that are allowed each year. Mr. Tescher referred to Subsection 1.16.33 that requires that all cOde-required parking be located to the rear, below, or above the ground floor of the street-facing commercial/office structure. . WHAT SHOULD BE THE FUTURE ROLE AND CHARACTER OF NORTON AIR FORCE BASE? Mr. Tescher referred to page 109 which deals with Norton Air Force Base. He explained that this issue came in at the last minute, and it would not be used as an economic base. However, there is a lot of economic potential. The basic policy was something that came out in the Fundamental Land Use - 8 - 3/15/89 . Policy statements that there should be a plan developed for the area. This is an area that should not only have the specific plan, but also adjacent properties should be studied. Consideration could be given to commercial aviation facilities, cargo aviation, etc. It is an important area for further consideration by the City. HOIV SHOULD DEVELOPMENT BE RELATED TO THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND HAZARDS? Mr. Tescher referred to page 116 that relates to environmental issues. This section indicates that the City should manage land uses in key sensitive and key hazard areas, such as the northern foothills and the Santa Ana River and Lytle Creek in which there are significant species of wild life. Any development in these areas should have a minimum impact on those resources. MAYOR WILCOX EXCUSED At 11:25 a.m. Mayor Wilcox left the Workshop Meeting. RECESS WORKSHOP MEETING - LUNCH BREAK At 11:30 a.m., the Workshop Meeting recessed for a lunch break. . RECONVENE WORKSHOP MEETING At 12:00 Noon, the Workshop Meeting reconvened in the Redevelopment Agency Board Room, Fourth Floor, City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. ROLL CALL Roll Call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Reese with the following being present: Mayor Pro Tempore Miller; Council Members Reilly, Flores, Maudsley, Minor, Miller; Deputy City Attorney Empeno, Deputy City Clerk Reese. Absent: Mayor Wilcox; Council Members Estrada, Pope-Ludlam; Acting City Administrator Robbins. HOW SHOULD DEVELOPMENT BE RELATED TO THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND HAZARDS? Discussion continued regarding environmental issues. Mr. Tescher pointed out overlays depicting fire hazard line and high wind hazard line. Mr. Tescher referred to a map on page 118 which portrays overlays with appropriate development standards and those regarding the seismic areas of the San Andreas and San Jacinto fault systems. Mr. Tescher explained that there are restrictions on the kinds and sizes of uses that can be located within these areas. The areas of liquefaction are also identified. He explained there is a third overlay map relative to the 100 year flood plain. . - 9 - 3/15/89 . . . Mr. Tescher referred to a map on page 473 that outlines liquefaction susceptibility. Mr. Kilger public view. basis. stated that these maps will be available for The information will be refined on a regular IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS Mr. Tescher referred to page 122 which relates to the Implementation Programs, which are the fundamental implementing tools for land use and the sets of codes and ordinances that have been discussed. On page 125 there are subsections that deal with regulations and codes which are going to need revision to reflect the map, and standards and policies contained therein. He also pointed out other tools, such as development agreements as outlined on page 127. Mr. Tescher answered questions regarding the IPD. A discussion ensued regarding the process required for a zone change. Planning Director Kilger explained the one map system which combines the General Plan Map with the Zoning Map. Deputy City Attorney that the Land Use Map to resolution. He also stated being considered. Empeno answered questions, stating the General Plan will be adopted by that an interim zoning ordinance is Mr. Empeno answered questions regarding the process for an individual to obtain a zone change, stating that if it is consistent with the General Plan, it can be done with a zoning ordinance amendment. If it is not consistent with the General Plan, it will have to be done through a General Plan Amendment. A discussion ensued regarding the change of zone process and notification. Mr. Kilger stated he will report back on amending the notification procedures. Mr. Tescher referred to page 129 Subsection 11.10 which states that the City "shall" review and update all General Plan Elements at least once every five years. Legally, the Housing Element has to be updated every five years, and this places the rest of the General Plan in that process. Revisions can be made more often than every five years. There may be economic changes in the community which would cause the City to consider updating certain portions of the Economic Development Element every two years. - 10 - 3/15/89 . Mr. Tescher explained that a specific plan has to be consistent with what is in this document. If the specific plan in inconsistent, the General Plan would have to be amended prior to actually enacting that specific plan. There are a number of specific plans called for in this document, i.e., Norton Air Force Base. Mr. Tescher referred to page 133 and the item entitled "Data Base". He stated that is a way to facilitate the monitoring of what is happening in the community and also for the establishment and continued maintenance of a data base. It is a system to indicate what is happening to uses, development, and the kinds of information that the City is constantly working with. A discussion ensued regarding whether or not the City has a data base system that can handle all the potential uses. It was pointed out that the data base system is essential for maintaining proper records. Deputy City Administrator Richardson answered stating that the present data system will not be without additional software, hardware and personnel. questions, adequate . It was suggested that the needs for the data base system be included in the City's budget that will soon be considered by the Mayor and Council. Planning Director Kilger stated that since the budget preparation period is so close, that many departments will not be able to make changes in their budgets this year, but should make recommendations on what they consider feasible in handling these implementations. He stated he will be making recommendations. Deputy demographics census in information. City are 1990 Administrator Richardson stated that going to be very important because of the which will provide economic development HOUSING Mr. Tescher referred to page 135, which relates to the Housing Element. He stated this is the one element that has full text because of State requirements. He explained that population numbers and residential units here are different than in earlier sections of the Plan. The reason for this is that the housing element deals only with what is contained within the City's juriSdictional boundaries. In contrast, the Planning area includes Muscoy, and other pockets that are not jurisdictionally part of the City. . - 11 - 3/15/89 . Mr: Tescher answered questions regarding the SCAG figures. He referred to Table 8 on page 155, which indicates potential units of 23,206 within the City limits. SCAG's projection was basically 10,000 in the next five years which would be one-half of that number times four because of the 20 year planning, so instead of having 23,206, you would have 40,000 units. Principal Planner Bautista answered questions, stating that the City figure is not consistent with SCAG numbers. However, there will be a staff report from the Planning Department on the Council Agenda of March 20, 1989, which explains what the outcome was regarding the challenge the City made to SCAG. The City was denied. SCAG did say the City could take its concerns to the State Housing and Development Department in Sacramento. They also said in their letter they would support the City. Mr. Kilger explained that the seeming inconsistency in SCAG's action is due to certain constraints under which they work. He stated that almost every city had challenged SCAG's projections. Mr. Tescher pointed out problems in documenting population and housing needs due to the fact that last census was in 1980. He stated that when 1990 census figures are available, the City can amend the Housing Element. . GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES Mr. Tescher referred to page 171, which describes the goals, objectives and policies dealing with how to provide additional housing units. There is a statement regarding finding housing for the upper end of the housing spectrum which was recognized as being absent in the community. Most of the focus is on providing housing for the low and moderate income households, as required by the State, as well as preventing deterioration of housing stock. Mr. Tescher explained that on pages 186 and 187, there are details of the City's commitment for participation in a Five-Year Action Program, as written in cooperation with Ken Henderson, Director of Community Development. . HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Mr. Tescher referred to the Historic and Archaeological Resources Section. There are recommendations on page 217 dealing with a series of key steps for the City to pursue: a survey of resources, which is a relatively low cost item because this can be done by volunteers. It was suggested that once the survey is completed, that a preservation ordinance be prepared, which would implement the guidelines and provisions provided by the State Historic Preservation Office and the Federal Register. There are also guidelines that will allow the City to create districts, as well as designation of - 12 - 3/15/89 . landmark structures. This could provide a series of economic incentives. However, there is also a potential for conflict because many historical structures are unreinforced masonry. There is also a suggestion for a historical preservation commission within the City. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Mr. Tescher referred to page 230 regarding Economic Development. He stated that the primary focus on this element is on maintaining and strengthening San Bernardino's competitive role within the regional market. It was suggested that an economic, marketing "guru" be appointed who would have a great deal of authority. He would be evaluated on the success of actually getting economic development in the City. Mr. Tescher referred to page 255 which sets forth the goals, objectives, and policies for economic development. He stated a target should be created to bring 27,000 additional diversified jobs into the area. In the following pages there are issues dealing with attracting new kinds of industries in the City. . URBAN DESIGN FOR PUBLIC SPACES ELEMENT Mr. Tescher referred to page 271 which deals with the urban design policies that are not in land use. These include the City's environment, buildings, open spaces, streets, and infrastructure. These elements and the manner in which they are brought together, referred to as "urban design", relate to the natural environmental factors, and define the image of the City. The goals, objectives and policies of this section are listed on page 292. Mr. Tescher explained that the first issue deals with the establishment of clear entrances to the City. There are suggestions relating to freeways, major arterials, some other streets as well as specific intersections. The section also refers to landscaping, signage and other improvements. Mr. Tescher referred to page 296 on which are suggested components to improve urban design and visual quality of the streetscape improvement program. There are suggestions for the key activity areas, such as downtown, Tri-City area, Highland Avenue, and Mt. Vernon. Some of the suggestions were street trees, street lighting, streetscape elements (sidewalk/ crosswalk paving, street furniture), public signage. Mr. Tescher stated that Waterman Avenue is north-south corridor and has been given a new designation of Office-Industrial Park, with the create a new corporate office kind of environment. a major land use intent to . - 13 - 3/15/89 . CIRCULATION Mr. Tescher referred to page 309-1. He stated that the key policy revolves around what is needed in terms of streets and highways to accompany any uses that are being developed, and explained other components of this section. Mr. Tescher answered questions regarding the Harrison Freeway. He stated that the DKS analysis indicated that it was not a freeway standard road. He explained that the traffic generated in the mountains would require a maximum of a four- lane road. Planning Director Kilger stated the new Master Plan does not include this road. The recommendation of the traffic analysis was that it not be included. A discussion ensued regarding a potential need for the Harrison Freeway because of the anticipated industrial growth at the site that is presently Norton Air Force Base and the additional traffic it would generate. . Mr. Kilger answered questions regarding the State's interest in the proposed Harrison Freeway. He stated he had not talked directly to anyone from the State, but had heard they are considering funding a feasibility study. He stated that it would be appropriate to study this issue after the initial adoption of the Plan. Members issue and concerned. of the didn't Council stated that this want Cal Trans to think was an important they were not Mr. Kilger stated that they would evaluate the status with the State and come back with a recommendation. Senior Planner Valerie Ross explained that the Harrison Road is on the existing circulation map which was done in 1964 with the original General Plan. She explained that a memorandum from Cal Trans indicated it had been deleted. San Bag wanted it to stay on. The CAC and the Planning Commission gave staff direction that they didn't feel the route was necessary, based on the traffic consultant's recommendation. It was pointed out that members of the Council felt that they didn't wish the decision to be solely on traffic count, as they are trying to generate something new. The picture has changed, as the pending change at Norton Air Force Base hadn't been considered when decisions were made. . Mr. Tescher recommended that the Specific Plan would be the proper technic to consider the Harrison Freeway, because if the City makes a decision now and can't justify it because the uses of this site aren't known, then it would be hard rationalizing - 14 - 3/15/89 . it because of traffic volume: It could be included as part of the language dealing with Norton Air Force Base by considering appropriate routes. It was this item Freeway. suggested that to indicate the a footnote or italics be added to interest in regard to the Harrison Mr. Tescher referred to page of the policies dealing neighborhoods. 309-13 which relates to some with traffic patterns in DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY EMPENO EXCUSED At 1:15 p.m., Deputy City Attorney Empeno was replaced by Deputy City Attorney Wilson. UTILITIES Mr. Tescher referred to page 313. the utility systems. This section deals with Mr. Tescher answered questions regarding the possibility of the City operating utilities on its own. He stated there was nothing in this document that precludes the City from operating utilities. . PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES Mr. Tescher referred to page 345, which introduces the section on Public Facilities and Services. The section is divided into three sections: Police; Fire; and Education. He stated that the primary focus is on linking the provisions of those services with land use. More fire, police and school facilities will be needed with new developments. Mr. Tescher referred to page 403 which relates to Goals, Objectives, and Policies for parks and recreation. He stated that subsection 9.1 states that the objective of the City is to provide park facilities to meet the needs of existing and future residents, including 182 acres to offset the current deficit and an additional 325 acres for projected population growth. Subsection 9.1.2 refers to the recommendation that the City develop a Master Plan for parks. Mr. Tescher reviewed other subsections and suggested that areas such as the Santa Ana River, Lytle Creek, and similar areas could be developed as park sites with different types of recreational facilities, such as fishing, golf and other outdoor types of facilities. . Planning Director Kilger stated they had met with Annie Ramos, Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services, who indicated interest in meeting future park needs through a possible assessment district or other creative planning. - 15 - 3/15/89 . NATURAL RESOURCES Mr. Tescher referred to page 414 which relates to Natural Resources. This Section is divided into several subsections: Biological Resources, Mineral Resources, and Climate and Air Quality. He explained that the key components on pages 421 and 422 relate to the establishment in those areas shown on the maps of a Biological Resources Management Area and what should occur within that area. This includes the review and establishment of an Environmental Review Board. Page 424 deals with the policies and standards of a protectorate within riparian corridors and expresses concern regarding the preservation of certain species, including the Santa Ana River Wooly-star. Planning Director Kilger stated the review procedures and filing requirements in certain areas of the City will probably have to be amended, and additional reports submitted as part of the development process should this be adopted. In some areas a biological report will have to be submitted. Mr. Tescher referred to page 435 which deals with policies for mineral resources in areas that are basically sand and gravel resource areas. This provides strategies which are consistent with the State Mining Reclamation Act. . Mr. Tescher referred to pages 441 to 454, which deal with climate and air quality. The authority for policy and standards is the South Coast Air Quality Management District, and it is suggested that the City cooperate with this entity and incorporate pertinent local implementation provisions of the Air Quality Management Plan. ENERGY AND WATER CONSERVATION Mr. Tescher referred to page 460 which relates to energy and water conservation. It points out ways that the City can conduct energy audits and make City buildings more energy efficient. The section promotes recycling programs and other kinds of programs to insure conservation of energy and water within the City. GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC Mr. Tescher referred to the Section beginning on page 465 relating to geologic and seismic concerns. There are references to the issue of fault ruptures and the importance of the use, size of the facility and relative ease of evacuation of occupants if the building is damaged by fault rupture. There are implementing programs that are defined and provide a mechanism for the geologic trenching of areas within those fault zones. . This section liquefaction, and emergency service also contains policies dealing with stressed the importance of the safety of agencies, such as police, fire and medical - 16 - 3/15/89 . facilities. There are restrictions as to locations of new uses of these facilities in reference to liquefaction and fault hazard zones. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/USES Mr. Tescher referred to the section dealing with hazardous materials, which is a subject that has gotten a great deal of attention at County and State level. There are provisions included for the City's role in dealing with hazardous materials. NOISE Mr. Tescher referred to page 526 relating to the Noise Element, which deals with compatibility of land uses to various sources of noise. The goals and objectives on page 539 indicate that the goal is to ensure that City residents are protected from excessive noise, and that land uses are compatible with existing and future noise levels. It provided that noise levels can be reduced by siting, insulation, use of walls or berms or other technique to 45 dB(A) or less. WIND AND FIRE Page 549 presents an overview relative to wind and fire. Page dealing with design, construction and relative to safe buildings and spaces of existing conditions 555 sets forth policies review of those policies within those areas. . Page 556 sets forth requirements relative to the high fire hazard area, such as adherence to development standards specified in the Foothill Communities Protective "Greenbelt Program" for protection of property and maintenance of open space buffers (greenbelts) and vegetation in hillside management areas. FLOODING The last the land use dealing with standards. explains and flooding. element, flooding, would be an overlay map onto map. There are special policies in this section untouched flooding areas, policies and appropriate It also refers to the 100 year flood plan and addresses potential planning issues relative to APPENDICES The appendices section is basically an evaluation noise element and its effect on residents of the City. noise control ordinance was presented. of the A model Mr. Tescher answered questions, stating that it is not mandatory that the City adopt the ordinance. It is a model ordinance which recently has been updated and is what the State Department of Health Office of Noise Control recommends. . Deputy City Administrator Jim Richardson reviewed the schedule of meetings for the Mayor and Common Council. - 17 - 3/15/89 . Council Member Minor made a motion, seconded by Council Member Flores and unanimously carried, that the Proposed Mayor and Council Hearing Schedule for the General Plan Review and Adoption Process be adopted as follows: Date Event Time & Place Wed., Apr il Public Hearing: Presentation 9:00 a.m. 26, 1989 of PC Recommendations Council Chambers Wed., May Public Hearing: Hazards 9:00 a.m. 3, 1989 Environmental Resources Council Chambers Sat. , May Public Hearing: 9:00 a.m. 6, 1989 Infrastructure Council Chambers Mon., May Public Hearing: Community 9:00 a.m. 8, 1989 Development Council Chambers Wed., May Publ ic Hearing: Land Use 1:00 p.m. . 10, 1989 Council Chambers Sat. , May Public Hearing: Land Use 9:00 a.m. 13, 1989 Council Chambers Wed., May Public Hearing: Land Use/ 1:00 p.m. 17, 1989 Deliberations Council Chambers Mon., May Deliberations 9:00 a.m. Z2, 1989 Counc i 1 Chambers Wed., May Public Hearing: Final 9:00 a.m. 24, 1989 Environmental Impact Report Council Chambers Wed., May Deliberations. Certification 9:00 a.m. 31, 1989 of Environmental Impact Report Council and Adoption of General Plan Chambers . - 18 - 3/15/89 . . . ADJOURN MEETING At 1:55 p.m., Council Member Minor made a motion, seconded by Council Member Reilly and unanimously carried, that the meeting be adjourned to 9:00 a.m., March 20, 1989, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "0" Street, San Bernardino, California. /IJ&UaJ ~ Deputy City Clerk No. of Items: 1 No. of Hours: 5 - 19 - 3/15/89